Saturday, October 23, 2010
You really have to read the whole thing, there's no way to excerpt it. Though I will borrow two parts, as display of pure, petty bullshit malice on the part of LVPD:
When the Sig finally arrived, the slide was jammed open, intentional damage requiring repair, more money imposed on the Scott family by Las Vegas authorities. All of these items could have been returned directly to Sterner, incurring no expense for the Scott family, but Sterner had to remain, to the authorities, a non-person who had no interest in the home or its contents that she shared with Scott.
A particularly disturbing pattern has recently emerged. Sterner has, in the last two weeks (circa late October, 2010), received two traffic tickets from Metro Police, and several friends and supporters of Sterner and the Scott family have been followed, several for great distances, distances that would eliminate the possibility that such following was mere coincidence, by the Police. In each case, there was a common factor: Each vehicle displayed the distinctive red, white and blue remembrance ribbon distributed in memory of Erik Scott to the rear.
While it is possible that Ms. Sterner has merely had an unusual run of bad luck in her driving habits, this too, like so much about this case, is unusual, questionable. Most people can drive for many years, even decades, without a single citation. But the unusual has become the commonplace in this case. What is most disturbing about this Police behavior is that it is counter to common sense and to professional Police practice, again, as so many of their actions in this case seem to have been.
Just flat effing disgusting.
News that Juan Williams' contract with NPR was terminated over comments he made about Muslims while appearing on Fox News shines a spotlight on the radio network's evergreen controversy: Its continued affiliation with Fox News. Specifically, NPR's Mara Liasson and her long-running association with Fox News has often raised questions. This might be the proper time for NPR to finally address that thorny issue.
I'm not suggesting Liasson has said anything as offensive as Williams, or that she has that kind of track record while appearing on Fox. I'm just saying that if you look at NPR's code of ethics, there's simply no way Liasson should be making appearances on Fox
Translation: "She hasn't actually done anything we can hang her for, but just showing up on Fox should be enough for NPR to fire her, too. That way we can cleanse NPR of people willing to not toe the line."
Interesting, isn't it? Lefties and 'progressives' who like to scream about 'free speech' and 'tolerance' and 'inclusiveness' doing everything they can to silence liberals who'll show up on a network the lefties don't like...
And as for them constantly calling conservative people racist,
"Juan Williams’ firing did not happen in a vacuum. It happened in the context of him having been the official Fox NewsOh, he did a strike-through, so he didn't really mean it and it's not a firing offense, right?
lawn jockeystooge for years."
Note: Based on the comments over there, it appears the strike-through was added only after people complained, so yes, the author did intend to call Juan Williams a "lawn jockey," and yes, as one of my readers commented, the folks who run Balloon-Juice also are the first to call conservatives racist.
Friday, October 22, 2010
'Course, it's possible Mr. Huffman is right; there's a mental defect involved...
A bill introduced by Representative Dan Boren has firearm owners and gun control supporters in a shootout.
The bill would begin a study into firearm microstamping.
Rep. Boren, you suck. I don't care what the NRA thinks of you, crap like this we don't need; and you pushing it means we don't need YOU.
Added: saw this over at SiH, which says about the same thing Sigivald says in comments. I know sometimes I'm too quick to react to things; boils down in this case to
Boren is a Democrat who's voted with Obama on some things that make me distrust him,
When it comes to possible threats to the 2nd, I just have no damned trust anymore.
I need to work on the latter.
On the current bigoted idiocy, if you haven't heard about the firing of Juan Williams by NPR/PBS, go look it up; won't be hard.
Back? Ok, so Williams went on a Fox show and basically said when he sees some muslims on an airplane, acting certain ways, post-9/11 it makes him nervous. For that he was fired(it gets better) for 'not meeting their standards'. 'Standards' of a bunch who had no problem with this, and similar crap. We know exactly why he was fired, he stepped outside the allowed limits of what the NPR assholes consider 'proper' free speech. Disgusting, and their excuses are just as bad.
And THEN, just to make it even more fun, the CEO of NPR came out with this crap as part of her justification:
“Juan Williams should have kept his feelings about Muslims between himself and his psychiatrist or his publicist.”
My first thought when I read this: "Oh, you really paid attention to the Soviets, didn't you? "Obviously someone who says such a thing has mental problems and needs help." So you go out and make that idiot statement; were you planning to report him for the kind of involuntary commitment your Soviet friends used on people who said unapproved things? Or isn't that available to you as yet?
My first thought about the original event- the firing- was "Mr. Williams, you've now been called a bigot etc. for speaking unapproved thoughts; welcome to the damn club, and how do you like it?" From a couple of things I've read he does appreciate the situation, which is nice.
Screw NPR and PBS; get their hand out of the public purse, especially since they've openly shown this kind of bias and desire to squelch free speech.
Quote I found over at Classical Values:
Williams' firing is a clarifying moment in media mores. You can be Islamophobic, in the form of refusing to run the most innocuous imaginable political cartoons out of a broad-brush fear of Muslims, but you can't admit it, even when the fear is expressed as a personal feeling and not a group description, winnowed down to the very specific and nightmare-exhuming act of riding on an airplane, and uttered in a context of otherwise repudiating collective guilt and overbroad fearmongering.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
The Police have asserted that the Ruger .380 ACP pistol reportedly found in Erik’s pocket by firefighter/medic Chris Thorpe constituted a crime, but the evidence of that “crime,” the pistol itself, was already in the hands of the police if their account of the incident is accurate. It may not be. All available evidence--to say nothing of common sense and constitutionally sound police procedure--indicates that Erik’s home had nothing whatever to do with any crime, nor did any of its contents. It was the home of a man the police shot and killed. That home was under the lawful control of Sterner, his joint tenant. The police knew this. Deputy Public Administrator Grodin knew this. The police had no lawful reason to enter or search Erik’s home or to take any property within. I am aware that I have repeated this point more than once. As Shakespeare said, there is method in my madness.
Experienced investigators listening to the voice of the PA Deputy Grodin on the You Tube recording would hear what I heard: A man running a bluff and running it badly. Unless he was incompetent (or under pressure?), Grodin would surely know the limits of his authority, and would also know, as has been admitted, that being accompanied by the police was unusual. He would have known that he had no authority to enter Erik’s home despite his bluff to the contrary, to say nothing of seizing his property, and would have understood that he could never, absent committing blatant perjury on an affidavit, have obtained a warrant. Realistically, he would likely have had no idea how to find and complete an affidavit to obtain a warrant as this is, in all probability, not a usual requirement of his daily duties.
The police would know how to obtain a warrant. They would know without a doubt that they had no legitimate reason and no lawful authority for a search and that obtaining a warrant would require a perjured affidavit, an original affidavit bearing their false assertions and an officer’s signature that would be on file with the court, difficult or impossible to control. In addition, as previously mentioned, the warrant return would have to specify each item seized which would then have to be entered into the police evidence system. All or any of these documents, if indicative of perjury or any other crime, would point directly at them and could lead to dismissal, prosecution and incarceration.
So why did the police contact the PA’s Office? Why did they enlist their aid? Why were they desperate to enter Erik’s home and seize property despite knowing that Sterner had joint tenancy and that they had no reason to be there and no lawful authority to conduct a search?
Go read all of it, but I warn you it's pretty much more of a RCOB piece. Especially with the next paragraph:
Part of the answer is suggested by the fact that after illegally searching the house and illegally removing property, they changed the locks and kept the key, locking Sterner out of her home until Kevin Scott was able to obtain the key at least a day later. The services of the PA’s office and the locksmith cost Erik’s family hundreds of dollars. Scott’s family were billed for the arguably illegal actions of PA Deputy Grodin and the Metro Police. Why did they believe it necessary to keep Sterner out of her home, to have unrestricted, unobserved time alone in that home before she was allowed to return to it?
And, Mr. Steve Grodin, it appears you are a shit. A miserable little shit, and I hope the family sues you for everything you have or ever will have for your part in this.
Combination of reasons. I never intended this to be a political blog, but it's turned partly into one. Partly because there's just not enough time to write about all the things that either outrage or delight me. And because, when you get down to it, my primary feeling toward politics tends to be "Would you people just LEAVE ME THE HELL ALONE?!?"
I don't LIKE writing about corrupt, vicious little bastards like Barney Frank, and arrogant fools like John Effing Kerry, and very often flat stupid people like Maxine Waters. And when some tool like Trent Lott mouths off about how 'these tea party people will need to be properly controlled by the Party', and Corker starts talking about 'Oh no, we won't really try to get rid of Obamacare!', and some other Stupid Party tool talks about how friendly and helpful the Democrats will be... Sometimes I do scream at the screen. And have thoughts involving ropes with thirteen loops, or just a nice, simple firing squad. I'm effing sick to death of ALL these people who want to run my damn life. And my kids lives, and everyone else's. And if they'd just leave us alone, I'd let them kiss each others' asses and make deals and whatever all day long.
But they won't leave us alone. Some are socialist assholes who demand everyone be controlled by the state- with themselves in charge, of course- 'for our own good', some are just plain greedy powerbrokers who want to be in charge. And all of them want our money and our devotion and our lives. I am heartily fucking sick of them all.
And I flat hate the God-damned crap from various supporters. I've got a friend who can almost excuse almost ANYTHING done by a Evil Party member, but a Stupid Party member says or does almost anything, and it's "You dirty politician! You're crooked!", etc. Which wouldn't bother me as much except for his tending to consider me 'one of his Republican friends', despite my pointing out I've been giving 'R' party bastards harsh words for longer than he has. I'm sick to death of liberals and 'progressives' who think that if you don't agree with them, it means you're actually evil, that you hate, that you somehow want people to die. Preferably in poverty and misery.
And I really, truly deeply hate the fact that I can't trust one damned word that comes out of the major media. Movies, tv, actual(supposed to be) NEWS shows. I wrote once about what really got my attention about the hoplophobes; before that, when I was a kid and heard something on the news, or pushed by some tv show character that I flat KNEW was not true, I just didn't know what to think: "But that's not true, why are they saying it?" Far worse when it was a Professional News Reporter doing it; it took a long time to fully realize that, understand that, these people- supposed to be devoted to reporting news- would metaphorically and literally look you in the face and lie to you; to support their personal views, to help a politician they liked, whatever. And you know what? It still rouses me to actual fury when they do it.
Back when Rush Limbaugh first came on the radio in this area I'd never heard of him(on KTOK, if you're interested). Started listening, and it was incredible; here was a guy with a NATIONAL show actually saying a lot of the things I thought and- far more important- giving me more information than I'd had before. As in lots of parts of stories that I didn't hear anywhere else(pre-internet days for me), filling in holes; I'd have heard a news story about some incident or bill that I knew was leaving something out, or just didn't sound right, and now I got the parts ABC/NBC/CBS had left out, without having to wait a month or two for some magazine article to mention it. Which both enlightened me about a lot of news, and once again rubbed my nose in the fact that these people like Dan Rather and Peter Jennings and such were often flat lying to us, either directly or by omission. A lot of you know firsthand just how that destroys your previous trust in the 'news'; it makes you suspicious of EVERYTHING that comes out of their mouth.
The internet is both blessing and curse in all this: it allows you to dig up information the former gatekeepers don't want you to know, it allows you to cross-check what you hear and read, which is good; it also shoves right in your face the disdain and contempt these people, often referred to as 'elites', have for us. Also educational, and in some ways even more enraging than simply being lied to.
Speaking of which, a few days ago I read about the Democrats plans for a lame-duck session, some of the things they would like to do, including stealing peoples' pension accounts so they can use the money to pay off various unions and increase the government's control over us. And theft it is: seizing private property just because they want to.I have to wonder, what's in their minds? Do they actually believe everyone will yell a while and then quietly accept it? Or do they think that when some people do act that the security forces(EffingBI, Secret Service, etc.) will stomp on anyone who does and cow everyone else? At this point it would not surprise me in the least to find that some of these bastards WANT that to happen, WANT some excuse to order government agents to imprison and kill some people 'to encourage the rest of us' to behave properly. Do you have any idea how far these people have pushed me that I'm willing to believe this of some of them? For that matter, do the various LE agencies understand just how low their star has fallen that people like me believe- know in some cases- that they would simply accept their orders and trot off to carry them out? You've got cops in Maryland shooting people's dogs 'as a threat' even when they have to chase the dog down to kill it; think these sorry excuses for lawmen would hesitate to carry out orders from their political masters? I lost a lot of my confidence in the National Guard when I saw NG troops helping hold people at gunpoint in New Orleans because the mayor and police chief had decreed that the peasants could not be trusted with arms, not to mention the sight of an old lady being beaten by a couple of shits in police uniforms just for having a gun. I grew up around LE people, and it really hurts to have my confidence in them as generally good guys ripped up. Not to mention the fact that I cannot trust the good cops to hold the bad ones to account when they're corrupt or screw up("Yes, the officers killed an innocent person when they raided the wrong address, but they were following use of force guidelines so no action will be taken against them. Sorry about the dogs, too, but it's procedure.")
What this is all leading up to is I'm sick to death of all of it. I'm sick of not being able to trust a damned word that comes out of the major media; I'm sick of not being able to trust that LE officers will follow the damned law themselves; I'm sick at the knowledge that a lot of people in uniform will just follow their orders even when they know they're wrong; and I'm very deep-down-in-my-soul sick of corrupt, lying, condescending politicians. And I'm very very sick at heart that none of us can afford to NOT watch them and listen to all this and yell about it to make sure others know. Because we don't know when it might be some little bit of knowledge-spreading by someone out there that lights enough of a fire to keep something from going over the edge.
So if I'm not my usual sparkling self this past while, that's a large chunk of why.
This bitching session is now ended.
Congressman Frank has never hesitated to use his power ruthlessly. On one occasion, he threatened bankers with summoning them before his committee and forcing them to reveal their home addresses — which would of course put their spouses and children at the mercy of any kooks that might come along.
Meanwhile, Congressman Frank could piously invoke "social justice" in defense of similarly ruthless community activist groups like Acorn or National People's Action, which had in fact besieged the homes not only of bankers but also of public officials who dared to oppose their agendas.
In Frank's words, these groups were simply people who "cared about equity" and who were just "trying very hard to preserve some equity and some social justice."
Vicious, petty, vindictive little socialist bastard. And Congress has kept protecting his sorry ass every time he was caught at something, and MA has kept reelecting him.
To every jackass in MA who voted for him: Screw you. And if you're now unemployed or otherwise caught by the economic mess Frank had a hand in causing, well, my only wish is that it would only bite those who helped him cause it instead of everyone else.
But did she say that?
What she actually asked was:
"The First Amendment does [establish what you claim]? ... So you're telling me that the separation of church and state, the phrase 'separation of church and state,' is in the First Amendment?"
In other words, she makes it perfectly clear what she's questioning. Not that the Establishment Clause says what it says, but whether the phrase "separation of church and state" appears in the clause.
And of course, on that point, she's 100% right.
Don't believe me? Well believe the Washington Post, which now reports the exchange as concluding thus:
She interrupted to say, "The First Amendment does? ... So you're telling me that the separation of church and state, the phrase 'separation of church and state,' is in the First Amendment?"
Guess which article that appears in?
It appears in the original article, the one making the erroneous, damning misreportage of her question, or at least it does now. The article has been scrubbed and edited to now accurately report what she said and what she questioned.
The same URL I linked to yesterday now links to an edited, accurate version of the article.
There is no notification the article has been corrected, or that it got anything wrong in the first place, despite the fact that the reporter Ben Evans did in fact blow the quote 100% to suggest an entirely different meaning than the accurate meaning.So it appears that, KNOWING there was video and audio of the words, Ben Evans lied about what she said. And when it became obvious that a lot of people were noticing the article was edited to CHANGE WHAT HE REPORTED HER SAYING with no 'correction' notice or anything.
We're supposed to trust these people why?
But for Kelly Marshall, who has five children by four different fathers, the handout has never been about paying for nappies, food and other everyday expenses.
She saved her benefit money to help pay for breast enhancement.
And as many parents envisage tightening their belts after the Tories announced plans to cut the benefit for higher-rate taxpayers, she plans to save more of hers for liposuction and a tummy tuck.
Miss Marshall, who has never worked, rakes in almost £29,000 a year from benefits - and last year spent £4,500 to go from a 34A to a 34DD.
That means she's being handed almost $46,000 of other peoples' money.
She explained: 'I have wanted a boob job since I was a teen. But it wasn't until I had five children that I could afford it - with all the extra benefits I get. Now I hope to have liposuction, a tummy tuck and regular Botox.
'I thought having children would make my boobs bigger, but that never happened so I decided to do something about them.
'I saved money from my benefits for four months to cover half the cost and put the rest on a credit card, which I pay back with my benefits.
Yeah. She was in such desperate need that she 'saved' enough of the OPM she was given to enlarge her tits. Wonderful. And she thinks she deserves the money:
'I know most people will think it is wrong I am spending taxpayers' money on my looks. But I deserve it because I am a good mum. Having children has taken its toll on my body. All mums should be able to have cosmetic surgery.
No, I think you're a dirtbag slut who lives of the labor of others and is so damn spoiled by your government that you think you DESERVE the money stolen from others.
'I don't care that it is at the taxpayers' cost,' she told Closer magazine. 'I am just proud of my looks and family - and it's my decision what the money is spent on.'
I'm not surprised you don't care; you LIKE having the government commit armed robbery to support you, you lazy bitch.
What doesn't help is she was TRAINED to be this way, by a government that LIKES people being dependent on the government. Well, Britain, you kept voting socialists into power; here's the outcome.
If you've got the stomach, go read what all she's bought the kids with OPM, and what else she thinks she and they 'deserve'.
Yeah, Palin is SUCH a dumbass...
President Barack Obama said Monday he is appearing on "Mythbusters," a television series that uses science to separate fact from fictionAwesome! Maybe he'll bring his birth certificate!
As far as 'cheap shot' goes, as I once told a lady "You expect me to pass up an opening like THAT?"
It’s Godzilla-smashing-through-a-city level of suck — but a really patronizing Godzilla who says you’re just too stupid and hateful to see all the buildings he’s saved or created as he smashes everything apart. Or, to use Obama’s favorite analogy, you have a car stuck in ditch, so you call the mechanic, but the only tool he brings with him is a sledgehammer. And then he smashes your car to pieces and charges you $100,000 for his service. Finally, he calls you racist for complaining. Obama and the Democrats have been so awful, it’s hard for the human brain to even comprehend.
People do remember how much the Republicans suck, and they know where it tops out … and that is nowhere near as bad as the Democrats are today. Like with the barking dog, it’s annoying, but you know it’s not going to cause the collapse of civilization as we know it. Not so with the zombie apocalypse; who knows how bad that could get if left to continue? Same with the Democrats and Obama; people have never dealt with anything this horrible their entire lives, and they aren’t that curious to see how much worse it can be.
I'd add: And the Republicans better remember we're all out of tolerance for suckage; they try going back to their pre-Speaker Pelosi suck, they'll be sucked right out of those offices at the next election, probably by the third party candidates that'll be running.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
To the U.S. Army soldiers and Marines serving here, some things seem so obviously true that they are beyond debate. Among those perceived truths: Tthe restrictive rules of engagement that they have to fight under have made serving in combat far more dangerous for them, while allowing the Taliban to return to a position of strength.
"If they use rockets to hit the [forward operating base] we can't shoot back because they were within 500 meters of the village. If they shoot at us and drop their weapon in the process we can't shoot back," said Spc. Charles Brooks, 26, a U.S. Army medic with 1st Battalion, 4th Infantry Regiment, in Zabul province.
Word had come down the morning Brooks spoke to this reporter that watch towers surrounding the base were going to be dismantled because Afghan village elders, some sympathetic to the Taliban, complained they were invading their village privacy. "We have to take down our towers because it offends them and now the Taliban can set up mortars and we can't see them," Brooks added, with disgust.
Some further thoughts, but they're a little garbled to put down right now.
Monday, October 18, 2010
At one of my very first breakfasts, while Berger and Cohen were engaged in a sidebar discussion down at one end of the table and Tenet and Richardson were preoccupied in another, one of the Cabinet members present leaned over to me and said, “Hugh, I know I shouldn’t even be asking you this, but what we really need in order to go in and take out Saddam is a precipitous event — something that would make us look good in the eyes of the world. Could you have one of our U-2s fly low enough — and slow enough — so as to guarantee that Saddam could shoot it down?”
The hair on the back of my neck bristled, my teeth clenched, and my fists tightened. I was so mad I was about to explode. I looked across the table, thinking about the pilot in the U-2 and responded, “Of course we can ...” which prompted a big smile on the official’s face.
“You can?” was the excited reply.
“Why, of course we can,” I countered. “Just as soon as we get your ass qualified to fly it, I will have it flown just as low and slow as you want to go.”
The official reeled back and immediately the smile disappeared. “I knew I should not have asked that....”
“No, you should not have,” I strongly agreed, still shocked at the disrespect and sheer audacity of the question. “Remember, there is one of our great Americans flying that U-2, and you are asking me to intentionally send him or her to their death for an opportunity to kick Saddam. The last time I checked, we don’t operate like that here in America.”
I'll make a modification to that, General: honorable people do not operate like that, but you were not dealing with honorable people.
If you have the stomach to look at the Salon comments, you'll find lots of people explaining how Bush is ultimately to blame for all problems, knew the 9/11 attack was coming and did nothing, etc. But take some antacid and remove the breakables first.
"I speak as a 26-year-old woman," McCain said on ABC's "This Week." "And my problem is that, no matter what, Christine O'Donnell is making a mockery of running for public office. She has no real history, no real success in any kind of business. And what that sends to my generation is, one day, you can just wake up and run for Senate, no matter how [much] lack of experience you have."
Hmm. I do have to wonder just what the micro-brain of said celebritute considers suitable experience; but mostly I don't care. May be a surprise to the dumbass, but ANYONE CAN RUN FOR OFFICE. It's one of the specific things set up a couple of hundred years ago, party to keep idiots like McCain from being able to 'pre-qualify' people.
I don't know if she was dropped on her head as a baby, or the makeup fumes got to her brain.
Honda VFR800; few years old, low miles. Being used, along with a couple of factors I won't go into right now, made it affordable.
Not the style I'd have really looked at, but son checked it out and said "You ought to try it out", so I did. MUCH more upright and comfortable riding position than his sport bike, very nice handling, flat flies when you twist the go-handle. And the factory pipes are very quiet, which was one of the things that took getting used to: you can hear every engine sound*, you can hear the chain hiss. Disc brakes front and back and ABS. The engine is a 'de-tuned version of the 800cc racing engine', and if this is de-tuned the original must be a flat bastard.
It'd be real easy to get in trouble on this thing, as it delivers so smoothly you don't realize quite how fast you're going; it gives you that urge to yell "SCREW THE SPEED LIMIT!" and grab a handful of throttle. About a week after I bought it I took the curve from I40 to I44 northbound about twenty mph faster than every before and it didn't feel like that was pushing it at all, Deity knows what a really good rider could do on it.
So that's the new machine. Found a Givi trunk for it which'll be very handy(on a very BIG sale, or wouldn't have been able to), and need to find some bags later on. Won't be factory, have you ever seen the PRICES they want on those? They're bleepin' fiberglass boxes with a bracket, dammit! So some soft bags I think it'll be. When weather and the job allow, I need to take a trip.
* I flat effing HATE bikes with ear-piercing pipes that make it sound like an asthmatic chainsaw with an amp.
Sunday, October 17, 2010
It is now evident to most of the VFW leadership, both National and especially the
departments, that the VFW has been subjected to extreme negative publicity throughout
the nation, and the recent endorsement decisions have, in fact, harmed the VFW’ s
reputation and future ability to fulfill our mission.
I cannot let this erosion of public support for our great organization continue. The
apparent lack of the committee to address these concerns will lead to a proposal by me,
as Commander-in-Chief, to amend the by-laws at the 112th National Convention for
the purpose of dissolving the PAC. Meanwhile, under the authority granted to me as
Commander-in-Chief in section 619 of the VFW National By-Laws and under section
620 of the Manual of Procedure, I am withdrawing all PAC appointments effective
October 15, 2010.
Accordingly, I’ m asking the council for a vote of “ no confidence” in the VFW PAC as
indicated on the enclosed ballot.
A good start. Now the question is "How and why the hell did you people sit around while the PAC did this and say NOTHING until people screamed and took money away from you?
Take a tuna can, or something about that size(extra points if you used one of the openers that lets you use the lid). Cleaned out, of course. Cut some strips of cardboard wide enough that a piece inside will let the lid sit in place, and coil them up so you have a can full of cardboard. Then melt some wax and pour it in; let it sit a minute or two so the cardboard can soak it up, then pour out any excess and let cool. When lit the cardboard acts as a wick for burning the wax.
It does take a flame to ignite it, no flint & steel here, but it gives a hot fire in a small area
Besides covering it up for transport, and smothering the fire, you can use the lid to control the size of the burning area
Remember, both the can and the lid will get hot, so for use it needs to be on a much better surface than what I used here(JUST long enough to take the pictures).
Update: A good tip from comments:
I learned to keep it warm and get as much wax as possible in it before allowing it to cool from Gerry. You could use the oven on warm to keep it liquid until the cardboard is saturated.
And something I remembered: you can either make a couple of the pieces a bit wider than the others or stick some small pieces in between coils; a bit that sticks up above the rest makes it easier to light.
I will mention that I am once again the owner of a two-wheel powered conveyance, which is very nice. And a new helmet. One was by choice(knocked a hell of a hole in the checking account, one reason for the job), the other necessity; the helmet was actually overdue to be replaced, then about two weeks ago it slipped out of my hand leaving a store and merrily bounced across the pavement. Add age to impact and the hinge not working right anymore, and it's new helmet time. If you're curious, it's a HJC IS-MAX; the modular style with the pivoting chin bar is the only full-face helmet I've found that fits comfortably over my glasses, and this new model has a slide-down sunshield that means I don't have to worry about sunglasses while riding.
On to the news-type stuff, I agree with Uncle on this: did they or did they not break the law? If they did, what's this civil-penalty crap instead of criminal charges? If they didn't, then they've basically been blackmailed into giving a bunch of money to the government so they won't keep saying bad things about them. And I won't get into the "Satisfy the gummint that you're not a criminal before you're allowed to buy something for your sinus or cold problem" bullshit.
Good piece on liberal elitism, ending with this:
One last note about my own brushes with liberal elitism. In the summer of 1973, as an 18-year-old anticipating college that September, I worked in a biology lab at Princeton University. My duties including mopping the floor, feeding the rats, emptying the trays of fecal matter and, once the students were finished with their animal experiments, disposing of the critters. One afternoon, I had to dispatch a bunch of monkeys and cats—using chloroform—outside the building near the garbage containers. It caused a stir among students milling about, and a number of them harassed me, yelling, “Animal killer!” It was a very weird moment: young men and women, just a few years older than myself, attacking a minimum-wage worker for doing his job, rendered further ironic by the fact that some of the protesters were, in fact, the very same people who were conducting the experiments on the animals. That’s elitism.
Oh, for bleep's sake,
Dexter Meyer says he recently returned to Denver International Airport after a trip and went to retrieve his car from the airport’s parking lot. After nine days, Meyer said he found that his car would barely start. A trip to the dealership revealed the problem: rodents had eaten through the car’s wiring.
According to Meyer, the dealership explained that small critters like rabbits and mice like to much on the car’s new wiring made up of a soy-based compound.
Who the hell had the bright idea of making wiring insulation of organic compounds that pests will eat? And I wonder how much he's getting paid?
A 'bacon attack' on a mosque. Discussion of 'we should be more sensitive' vs. 'I'm sick of a lot of muslims whining and threatening death whenever they're feeling unloved'.
TOTALLY unrelated to any of the above,
On the subject of video, ran across this a while back; found it again today here, and it should be seen:
Kevin has a fine example of the kind of idiot who votes for Barney Frank and Friend of Angelo Dodd and Ma'am Boxer:
In today's USA Today was a letter from G. Bruce Hedlund of San Andreas, California. Mr. Hedlund said this:
Think of our country as a society made up of children and a government made up of adults. It is up to the adults to weigh all the options and provide services in the best interests of the children.There is so much wrong with this, I don't even know where to start, but I will say that this attitude is responsible for the US receiving the government we've voted for.
I'm going to close this with something from Uncle:
The other difference I find in dealing with folks with whom I mostly disagree politically is the concept of need. Why do you need a 50 caliber? Why do you need a car that gets to 60 in under 5 seconds and gets shitty gas mileage? Why do you need this or that? And my response is always the same: What’s need got to do with it?
And this throws them for a loop. Literally. They feel the need to justify their desires, wants, views and goals so that they’re palatable to other people. They expect you to do the same. I have no such predilection toward that. I do things because I want to. And when I explain to them that my supposed need has fuck all to do with anything, I can literally watch their eyes glaze over in what I presume is disbelief. I think it’s hard on them to be told that they don’t have a say. And I’m not justifying any thing to them.
Amen. It's one thing to think to yourself "Ok, do I NEED this, or want this?" and decide what to do; it's a whole 'nother thing to have some jerk tell you you have to justify your decision- to HIM or the gummint- or it's not a valid or 'good' decision.
And now I shall attempt to get some stuff done here at the house. I'd rather go shooting, but...