I wrote earlier about attitudes toward firearms, and there's something I've never understood.
I used to play in the Society for Creative Anachronism a lot, did both heavy-weapons and light. I knew people who kept axes, swords and/or knives by the bed in case of burglars. One of the most popular stories was about a guy in Houston who met a group of burglars with a katana and cut them up. But many of these people professed to dislike (loathe, in many cases) guns.
I've never understood the apparent (to them) moral distinction between sharp steel and a bullet. Slice someones guts open with a sharp edge? Stick a point through them? Hey, no problem! But shoot them?!?! How could you hold such disgusting ideas? How could you do that?
Partly it was due to lots of people in the SCA being very PC in many ways, but it also seemed to be rooted in the ideal of 'honorable combat' and distance weapons being 'less honorable'. Which I thought was idiotic then, and still do. Honorable combat in a duel has not one damn thing to do with dealing with an attacker in your home. But it really seemed to be important to those who insisted on it. Myself, I reiterate; anyone who deliberately lets an attacker within arms-reach of themselves, when they have a choice in the matter, is a fool. Especially when you have others to protect.
Sunday, December 05, 2004
More on self defense in Britain; changes coming?
Clayton Cramer links to an ar
ticle in the Telegraph on proposed changes to give homeowners an 'unqualified right of self-defense'.
It's a good start for a major paper to be pushing for this, but at best they've got an uphill fight with the brakes on. The British government is mostly headed by people who don't think individuals should do much of anything without government approval, and they don't approve of the peasants taking such action.
And they have a further problem. As I mentioned before, all the BS aside, the best weapon for most people for self-defense is a gun; and the British government has spent years making it damn near impossible for anyone to own them. Especially when it is wanted for self-defense.
But at least it is a start. With the way the British crime rate keeps going, and with home-invasion burglaries at better than 50 percent guaranteeing more people injured, crippled and dead, there should be more pressure to make some changes.
IF they can force their government to make the changes.
ticle in the Telegraph on proposed changes to give homeowners an 'unqualified right of self-defense'.
It's a good start for a major paper to be pushing for this, but at best they've got an uphill fight with the brakes on. The British government is mostly headed by people who don't think individuals should do much of anything without government approval, and they don't approve of the peasants taking such action.
And they have a further problem. As I mentioned before, all the BS aside, the best weapon for most people for self-defense is a gun; and the British government has spent years making it damn near impossible for anyone to own them. Especially when it is wanted for self-defense.
But at least it is a start. With the way the British crime rate keeps going, and with home-invasion burglaries at better than 50 percent guaranteeing more people injured, crippled and dead, there should be more pressure to make some changes.
IF they can force their government to make the changes.
Saturday, December 04, 2004
Ways things change
I've been thinking about some of the ways things change, and the things that drive the changes.
Right at the moment, firearms are in mind. Lots of people get hung up on the 'guns are bad' idea and either cannot or won't see it any other way.
Once, armies were a core of nobles and attendants, supported by lots of peasants and slaves. When going to war they often took a lot of peasant levies along, but they were mostly for work parties and to get in the way of the enemy.
Then the gun arrived.
When they stopped being clumsy, unreliable toys, they became essential. First cannon, then individual arms. And they changed armies, and the society they were supported by/created by. It takes years to learn to use a sword and shield well; add in a horse and lance, longer, it's best to grow up learning it(nobles). The bow is the same, years of practice to become skilled enough to be useful. And able to handle a bow strong enough to be really useful in a fight. Think Welsh, and Mongol, growing up with stronger bows every year. /side note: it would be interesting to find out how many people wound up with repetitive-stress injuries; sword and bow and axe practice means a lot of the same motions/
But you can train someone to the point of useful skill with a musket in a few weeks. You don't need untrained peasants to wave sticks now, you need people who can take and follow orders and train to be steady under fire. Long term, that means more than changes in an army, it means changes in the society as well.
A gun means you don't have to be big and strong, or spend at least an hour a day practicing, to be able to protect yourself. Yes, bad guys used guns; they've always used the weapons available. Now you had a weapon that made you able to fight a big bad guy even if you were small. /side note: I don't care what people say about empty-hand martial arts, and stun guns, and batons; anyone who lets a bad guy get within reach, if you don't have to, is a fool. The idea is to protect yourself; leave ideas like 'honorable combat' where they belong, which is not in your head when someone attacks you in your home, or a parking lot, or wherever/
Much has been made of the Japanese being the people 'who gave up the gun' because it didn't suit their warrior ethic. Horsecrap. The Samurai used guns, and very effectively, when it suited them. Where the gun did not suit them was in the hands of peasants; it's hard to be a noble samurai, lopping the heads off insolent peasants, if the peasant can shoot you before you're in reach of your sword. They had already banned peasants having weapons of war, firearms were just included in the ban.
Especially as guns became more generally useful, you could tell more about the relative freedom, and respect for the individual, in a society by the attitude toward them. Many places, only military/police/nobles were allowed them most of the time(peasants; Britain, in contrast, pretty much integrated them as more of the arms a subject was supposed to have/know how to use in time of need (yes, I know they did have some restrictions, especially as to religeon of owners; it was still generally expected that a loyal subject of the crown had the right to arms and self-defense. It wasn't until the 1900's that British law began restricting the ownership of arms from honest subjects)
For a lot of people who emigrated to North America, it was a given that you would possess arms, and practice with them. It was considered important enough that when the 2nd Amendment was first proposed, most states though it unnecessary; the right of free men to arms seemed so basic to them that they thought it didn't even need to be mentioned. A couple of states insisted they would not ratify the Constitution unless it was, and so- thank you, founders- we have the 2nd Amendment. Otherwise we might well have gone the way of Britain and Canada and Australia.
This is a short & dirty bit of thought on the matter, but I think it holds true.
I may add to it later.
Right at the moment, firearms are in mind. Lots of people get hung up on the 'guns are bad' idea and either cannot or won't see it any other way.
Once, armies were a core of nobles and attendants, supported by lots of peasants and slaves. When going to war they often took a lot of peasant levies along, but they were mostly for work parties and to get in the way of the enemy.
Then the gun arrived.
When they stopped being clumsy, unreliable toys, they became essential. First cannon, then individual arms. And they changed armies, and the society they were supported by/created by. It takes years to learn to use a sword and shield well; add in a horse and lance, longer, it's best to grow up learning it(nobles). The bow is the same, years of practice to become skilled enough to be useful. And able to handle a bow strong enough to be really useful in a fight. Think Welsh, and Mongol, growing up with stronger bows every year. /side note: it would be interesting to find out how many people wound up with repetitive-stress injuries; sword and bow and axe practice means a lot of the same motions/
But you can train someone to the point of useful skill with a musket in a few weeks. You don't need untrained peasants to wave sticks now, you need people who can take and follow orders and train to be steady under fire. Long term, that means more than changes in an army, it means changes in the society as well.
A gun means you don't have to be big and strong, or spend at least an hour a day practicing, to be able to protect yourself. Yes, bad guys used guns; they've always used the weapons available. Now you had a weapon that made you able to fight a big bad guy even if you were small. /side note: I don't care what people say about empty-hand martial arts, and stun guns, and batons; anyone who lets a bad guy get within reach, if you don't have to, is a fool. The idea is to protect yourself; leave ideas like 'honorable combat' where they belong, which is not in your head when someone attacks you in your home, or a parking lot, or wherever/
Much has been made of the Japanese being the people 'who gave up the gun' because it didn't suit their warrior ethic. Horsecrap. The Samurai used guns, and very effectively, when it suited them. Where the gun did not suit them was in the hands of peasants; it's hard to be a noble samurai, lopping the heads off insolent peasants, if the peasant can shoot you before you're in reach of your sword. They had already banned peasants having weapons of war, firearms were just included in the ban.
Especially as guns became more generally useful, you could tell more about the relative freedom, and respect for the individual, in a society by the attitude toward them. Many places, only military/police/nobles were allowed them most of the time(peasants; Britain, in contrast, pretty much integrated them as more of the arms a subject was supposed to have/know how to use in time of need (yes, I know they did have some restrictions, especially as to religeon of owners; it was still generally expected that a loyal subject of the crown had the right to arms and self-defense. It wasn't until the 1900's that British law began restricting the ownership of arms from honest subjects)
For a lot of people who emigrated to North America, it was a given that you would possess arms, and practice with them. It was considered important enough that when the 2nd Amendment was first proposed, most states though it unnecessary; the right of free men to arms seemed so basic to them that they thought it didn't even need to be mentioned. A couple of states insisted they would not ratify the Constitution unless it was, and so- thank you, founders- we have the 2nd Amendment. Otherwise we might well have gone the way of Britain and Canada and Australia.
This is a short & dirty bit of thought on the matter, but I think it holds true.
I may add to it later.
Status of the world
Well, Bambi is still in the forest, little bugger evaded me this time. (But wait 'till next time, hahahahahhaa)
We've now had several days of below-freezing lows, so hopefully I won't have to mow again. This does mean getting some gas stabilizer to keep the carb in the mower from gumming up over the winter. I may add some to the bike also, just to be on the safe side.
Interesting thing about Oklahoma, in the middle of winter you can get days where, with jacket & gloves, you can ride comfortably; sometimes chaps help. So I don't like to take it out of commission for the season, since I may get some chances to ride.
Cats are insane (see TwoLumps) A dog might decide "I'm gonna go check out the other room" and wander off to do it. A cat jumps up and screams "I've gotta be somewhere else RIGHT NOW!!!" and takes off like you just stuck a stun gun to their tail.
I wrote about the baby-killing in the Netherlands. There's probably no country more steadfastly opposed to the death penalty, for any crime, than the Netherlands. But they can quite calmly write a protocol for how to kill infants and children. Oh, those sophisticated Europeans, why can't we be like them?
The U.N. is trying to push new rules ordering /ORDERING, I SAY!/ that no country can take any kind of military action, no matter what, without U.N. approval. This from an organization that won't take action to stop actual genocides. "We won't do anything about the murder of your citazens, but we won't approve you doing anything, either!" This is one of the reasons why any U.S. politician who says we should subordinate ourselves to the U.N. should be thrown out of office- possibly at the end of a rope.
Further on this, the U.N. has been trying for years to totally ban the ownership of 'small arms' by private citazens of any country. They include all handguns, rifles and shotguns in that category. A big part of their reasoning is that this would keep insurgents from acting against existing governments.
Think about that; no matter how corrupt, cruel, oppressive a government is, the U.N. would rather have it 'stable' than see people have a chance to rebel against it. Oh, no, you have to to through the U.N. to do something about it! We won't act, especially if there's money in not acting, but they damn sure don't want the peasants to do anything about it.
Personal opinion, you have two things at work here. One is the attitude of an organization to gather power to itself no matter the consequences to anyone else. And I think the other is the carryover from a lot of European/royalist/communist attitudes that you cannot let the commoners do anything without approval. The mess in Bosnia was one demonstration of this, I think; remember all the countries that wanted someone(else) to do something, but at the mention of giving arms to people to protect themselves they practically gave birth to purple cows? They'd rather have seen that go on for years than actually 'allow' anyone arms with which to defend themselves. The U.N. has that attitude and is continually trying to make it impossible for anyone to do anything without their approval.
Screw the U.N.
I've got a big holly bush at each front corner of the house, practically covered with berries. I need to prune them back, but I'll wait 'till spring; the berries make the birds happy.
Have you ever actually moved through a house with a sword, seeing how you'd use one in the event of a burglar? I'll take firearms, thank you.
We've now had several days of below-freezing lows, so hopefully I won't have to mow again. This does mean getting some gas stabilizer to keep the carb in the mower from gumming up over the winter. I may add some to the bike also, just to be on the safe side.
Interesting thing about Oklahoma, in the middle of winter you can get days where, with jacket & gloves, you can ride comfortably; sometimes chaps help. So I don't like to take it out of commission for the season, since I may get some chances to ride.
Cats are insane (see TwoLumps) A dog might decide "I'm gonna go check out the other room" and wander off to do it. A cat jumps up and screams "I've gotta be somewhere else RIGHT NOW!!!" and takes off like you just stuck a stun gun to their tail.
I wrote about the baby-killing in the Netherlands. There's probably no country more steadfastly opposed to the death penalty, for any crime, than the Netherlands. But they can quite calmly write a protocol for how to kill infants and children. Oh, those sophisticated Europeans, why can't we be like them?
The U.N. is trying to push new rules ordering /ORDERING, I SAY!/ that no country can take any kind of military action, no matter what, without U.N. approval. This from an organization that won't take action to stop actual genocides. "We won't do anything about the murder of your citazens, but we won't approve you doing anything, either!" This is one of the reasons why any U.S. politician who says we should subordinate ourselves to the U.N. should be thrown out of office- possibly at the end of a rope.
Further on this, the U.N. has been trying for years to totally ban the ownership of 'small arms' by private citazens of any country. They include all handguns, rifles and shotguns in that category. A big part of their reasoning is that this would keep insurgents from acting against existing governments.
Think about that; no matter how corrupt, cruel, oppressive a government is, the U.N. would rather have it 'stable' than see people have a chance to rebel against it. Oh, no, you have to to through the U.N. to do something about it! We won't act, especially if there's money in not acting, but they damn sure don't want the peasants to do anything about it.
Personal opinion, you have two things at work here. One is the attitude of an organization to gather power to itself no matter the consequences to anyone else. And I think the other is the carryover from a lot of European/royalist/communist attitudes that you cannot let the commoners do anything without approval. The mess in Bosnia was one demonstration of this, I think; remember all the countries that wanted someone(else) to do something, but at the mention of giving arms to people to protect themselves they practically gave birth to purple cows? They'd rather have seen that go on for years than actually 'allow' anyone arms with which to defend themselves. The U.N. has that attitude and is continually trying to make it impossible for anyone to do anything without their approval.
Screw the U.N.
I've got a big holly bush at each front corner of the house, practically covered with berries. I need to prune them back, but I'll wait 'till spring; the berries make the birds happy.
Have you ever actually moved through a house with a sword, seeing how you'd use one in the event of a burglar? I'll take firearms, thank you.
Friday, December 03, 2004
Stick that fork in Britain again
Check out Nanny Knows Best, for the latest in how the all-knowing minions of government are making sure the British subject is properly controlled- er, taken care of.
Can't trust peasants to change their own light bulbs, you know.
Can't trust peasants to change their own light bulbs, you know.
Thursday, December 02, 2004
Up-to-date European Healthcare
At Wizbang, found this.
I am at a loss. That a society can slide to this and simply take it in stride...
Both my kids were premature. Both of them might well have been murdered by these 'doctors' because of their health problems. They are 22 and 20 now, and doing quite well.
If some doctor had informed me that he killed my child because 'their health problems would have kept them from having a proper life', or I found out about it later, said doctor better have his will made out. Because I would have killed him. No question.
Someone once pointed out that if a government does not/refuses to protect citazens from crime, the citazens have a right to take the law into their own hands. Well, if doctors/government decide they can kill your child and you have no say because
"A parent's role is limited under the protocol. While experts and critics familiar with the policy said a parent's wishes to let a child live or die naturally most likely would be considered, they note that the decision must be professional, so rests with doctors"
then a parent has the right to take what actions are necessary to protect their children. And other's children.
Yes I'm writing this in the heat of the moment. I hope I never lose that heat at the idea of such things being done.
I am at a loss. That a society can slide to this and simply take it in stride...
Both my kids were premature. Both of them might well have been murdered by these 'doctors' because of their health problems. They are 22 and 20 now, and doing quite well.
If some doctor had informed me that he killed my child because 'their health problems would have kept them from having a proper life', or I found out about it later, said doctor better have his will made out. Because I would have killed him. No question.
Someone once pointed out that if a government does not/refuses to protect citazens from crime, the citazens have a right to take the law into their own hands. Well, if doctors/government decide they can kill your child and you have no say because
"A parent's role is limited under the protocol. While experts and critics familiar with the policy said a parent's wishes to let a child live or die naturally most likely would be considered, they note that the decision must be professional, so rests with doctors"
then a parent has the right to take what actions are necessary to protect their children. And other's children.
Yes I'm writing this in the heat of the moment. I hope I never lose that heat at the idea of such things being done.
Wednesday, December 01, 2004
Life do keep things busy
The weather has now dried out a bit, no rain for a few days, but with temperatures bouncing between 20's-30's for lows and 40's & 50's for highs, alternating dry north winds and humid southerly winds, the ground isn't going to dry out anytime soon. This means, among other things, that the grass will keep growing /I may have to mow again/ and the ground will remain soft, making it hard to mow in some places. Most of the time I could get out to chase deer, it was wet enough, or another front coming through, that the critters were bedded down and not moving. And the jacket that feels so nice in the morning may be damn hot in the afternoon.
I have a niece who in the past has had liver trouble. She's now basically in liver failure, as I understand it, and they're setting up to transfer her to Pittsburg. There's a world-class transplant center here in town, but the doctor they want to use is in Pittsburg, so...
So far, grocery shopping hasn't been too bad; either I've been there before/after the crowd, or the crowd is at the other end of the store. It won't last, but it's nice while it does.
I was going to send in a target for Neanderpundit's postal match, but with the above stuff combined with work, there won't be time/weather to get to the range. Dammit.
At least Day by Day is back up.
I have a niece who in the past has had liver trouble. She's now basically in liver failure, as I understand it, and they're setting up to transfer her to Pittsburg. There's a world-class transplant center here in town, but the doctor they want to use is in Pittsburg, so...
So far, grocery shopping hasn't been too bad; either I've been there before/after the crowd, or the crowd is at the other end of the store. It won't last, but it's nice while it does.
I was going to send in a target for Neanderpundit's postal match, but with the above stuff combined with work, there won't be time/weather to get to the range. Dammit.
At least Day by Day is back up.
Monday, November 29, 2004
"Can I search your vehicle?"
Kim du Toit has a link to a story about a Brit who was asked if the cops could search his vehicle for 'training purposes'. They arrested him for having a Swiss Army knife in his case. That's in Britain, where owning damn near anything is illegal anymore, but similar things happen here.
A lot of agencies/cops are real big on "Do you have any guns/drugs/whatever in your car? Can I search it?". If you say yes, anything- ANYTHING- they may find can be used against you. A lot of them don't care if you're traveling through, and your offense is not having a legal firearm cased properly according to local/state law, they'll bust you.
And if you say no...
I've heard far too many stories- including from people in the law enforcement community- about how they bully/threaten people to push them into saying yes. And they can make you sit on the side of the road for a time while they summon a drug dog to sniff around the car, and if he alerts on anything- including prescription meds- they'll use that as cause to take the car apart. And from what I've heard, they'll use the various criminal history databases in ways they're not supposed to be used to try to find 'cause' for a search.
There's far too many people with badges out there who have gone completely into the "us vs. them" attitude toward EVERYONE; and it's costing all the way around. The cops look with distrust/contempt on anyone not a member of the club; citazens treated with obvious contempt tend to return it; and someone who gets their vehicle taken apart because they dared say 'no' to a search are going to have a bad attitude toward law enforcement ever after in many cases. Doesn't do to tell them 'it was just one jerk', because after that the attitude of other cops that they may have glossed over in the past now becomes obvious and resented.
In some ways the Patriot Act has made it worse. Yes, I know there's no record of it being actually abused(that I know of), but the fact that some agencies can do damn near anything and blanket it under that- even theoretically- really pisses a lot of people off. The actions of a lot of the TSA people at airports is a good example; they can do something really egregious, and if you object you can be arrested. Doesn't matter that they were wrong, WE'RE THE TSA, PEOPLE, and you better put up with anything we do or else! And it is abused, and people rightly resent it, and that takes things further downhill.
Personally, I would never agree to a search of my vehicle. If they think they have legal reason to search my vehicle- or house, for that matter- they can damn well get a search warrant. I know I'm not a legal scholar, and there's so many complications in this/one of the damn problems/ that there's probably ways they can search without a warrant. But I'll not agree to help them, and if they go outside the bounds I will file a complaint, or get a lawyer if I think it's warranted.
I keep remembering Martha Stewart went to prison for "lying to a federal investigator". She wasn't under oath, wasn't in a courtroom, but they were able to convince a jury that she 'lied' to an investigator in an informal interview about a crime they can't prove she committed.
Ain't all this wonderful?
A lot of agencies/cops are real big on "Do you have any guns/drugs/whatever in your car? Can I search it?". If you say yes, anything- ANYTHING- they may find can be used against you. A lot of them don't care if you're traveling through, and your offense is not having a legal firearm cased properly according to local/state law, they'll bust you.
And if you say no...
I've heard far too many stories- including from people in the law enforcement community- about how they bully/threaten people to push them into saying yes. And they can make you sit on the side of the road for a time while they summon a drug dog to sniff around the car, and if he alerts on anything- including prescription meds- they'll use that as cause to take the car apart. And from what I've heard, they'll use the various criminal history databases in ways they're not supposed to be used to try to find 'cause' for a search.
There's far too many people with badges out there who have gone completely into the "us vs. them" attitude toward EVERYONE; and it's costing all the way around. The cops look with distrust/contempt on anyone not a member of the club; citazens treated with obvious contempt tend to return it; and someone who gets their vehicle taken apart because they dared say 'no' to a search are going to have a bad attitude toward law enforcement ever after in many cases. Doesn't do to tell them 'it was just one jerk', because after that the attitude of other cops that they may have glossed over in the past now becomes obvious and resented.
In some ways the Patriot Act has made it worse. Yes, I know there's no record of it being actually abused(that I know of), but the fact that some agencies can do damn near anything and blanket it under that- even theoretically- really pisses a lot of people off. The actions of a lot of the TSA people at airports is a good example; they can do something really egregious, and if you object you can be arrested. Doesn't matter that they were wrong, WE'RE THE TSA, PEOPLE, and you better put up with anything we do or else! And it is abused, and people rightly resent it, and that takes things further downhill.
Personally, I would never agree to a search of my vehicle. If they think they have legal reason to search my vehicle- or house, for that matter- they can damn well get a search warrant. I know I'm not a legal scholar, and there's so many complications in this/one of the damn problems/ that there's probably ways they can search without a warrant. But I'll not agree to help them, and if they go outside the bounds I will file a complaint, or get a lawyer if I think it's warranted.
I keep remembering Martha Stewart went to prison for "lying to a federal investigator". She wasn't under oath, wasn't in a courtroom, but they were able to convince a jury that she 'lied' to an investigator in an informal interview about a crime they can't prove she committed.
Ain't all this wonderful?
Sunday, November 28, 2004
This ain't dissent
Insty has a link /no, I'm not going to put it up/ to a post saying the goal for the left is to make sure we lose in Iraq.
This clown is specifically wanting to see the terrorists and mideast Nazis win.
As somebody put it, there's a big difference between dissenting and being on the other side.
This clown is specifically wanting to see the terrorists and mideast Nazis win.
As somebody put it, there's a big difference between dissenting and being on the other side.
Ok, this is amazing!
This article tells about a woman who is walking, years after a spinal cord injury, after therapy using umbilical cord stem cells.
If this pans out to be more than a one-time thing, it's bloody wonderful. I've read that fetal stem cells have not really worked out well, but umbilical cells are a different matter. They seem to work much better, and don't involve the ethical problems with fetal cells.
I hope this works out.
Found at Instapundit
If this pans out to be more than a one-time thing, it's bloody wonderful. I've read that fetal stem cells have not really worked out well, but umbilical cells are a different matter. They seem to work much better, and don't involve the ethical problems with fetal cells.
I hope this works out.
Found at Instapundit
Saturday, November 27, 2004
Evening thoughts
It's turning cold again after a nice day and-a-half, and there's a chance of more rain tomorrow afternoon. Oh joy. At least I got the yard mowed this afternoon before it got too dark, though I hope it'll be dry enough tomorrow to let me use the weedeater around the stone edging I built around the beds in front.
A cat in the lap is warm, but can make it damn hard to type.
The dog loves a thick bed of straw in the house, but drags a lot of it out as she enters and exits. Good thing I have the rest of the bale.
James Doss is a good writer, and Charlie Moon is a fine character. So is his aunt Daisy.
I could go broke in an evening on Half.com. Or Brownells. Or Museum Replicas. Or...
I'm so glad I got the furnace taken care of BEFORE it turned cold. And wet.
I got rid of a lot of stuff when I moved eight years ago, and again when I moved here. Ever notice how the crap multiplies?
I need to put a shed in the back yard for various tools. And I'd like to have some kind of storm shelter; sometimes the wind doesn't just sweep down the plains here, it vacuums too.
Celtic Crossing, just a shot or so, goes very well in pecan pie.
And I need to get to the range. It always burns off some stress, and I enjoy it.
I STILL want to see a good picture of Sondra K. Hey lady, I gave you one of me! How 'bout it?
That's it for now.
A cat in the lap is warm, but can make it damn hard to type.
The dog loves a thick bed of straw in the house, but drags a lot of it out as she enters and exits. Good thing I have the rest of the bale.
James Doss is a good writer, and Charlie Moon is a fine character. So is his aunt Daisy.
I could go broke in an evening on Half.com. Or Brownells. Or Museum Replicas. Or...
I'm so glad I got the furnace taken care of BEFORE it turned cold. And wet.
I got rid of a lot of stuff when I moved eight years ago, and again when I moved here. Ever notice how the crap multiplies?
I need to put a shed in the back yard for various tools. And I'd like to have some kind of storm shelter; sometimes the wind doesn't just sweep down the plains here, it vacuums too.
Celtic Crossing, just a shot or so, goes very well in pecan pie.
And I need to get to the range. It always burns off some stress, and I enjoy it.
I STILL want to see a good picture of Sondra K. Hey lady, I gave you one of me! How 'bout it?
That's it for now.
Interesting stuff
One of the odd things that's always interested me is the subject of poisons, and how they work. Lots of stuff in movies and books- most of that of little or no accuracy- and lots of folklore.
Barking Moonbat Early Warning System found an article about a poison old in its region, new to everyone else(which is often how it works). From a tree, effects much like foxglove, but not detected the same way. Next edition of 'Deadly Doses' is going to have to add this in.
Also at BMEWS, Christmas Controversies
Barking Moonbat Early Warning System found an article about a poison old in its region, new to everyone else(which is often how it works). From a tree, effects much like foxglove, but not detected the same way. Next edition of 'Deadly Doses' is going to have to add this in.
Also at BMEWS, Christmas Controversies
The Wisconsin hunter murders
Gunwatch has some more info on the mess, and it adds a whole new dimension to it. Go there, and read the whole thing.
Hate crimes
Having finally digested the Thanksgiving dinner that some friends forced upon me/you don't think I'd eat that much all on my OWN, do you?/, I want to put some thoughts down.
Ann Althouse has a piece about a show 20/20 was doing about the Matthew Shepard murder. Basically, it points out that it was a lot less due to the supposed hate of homosexuals, and a lot more to do with simple robbery and murder related to drugs. And about all the screaming by people who've used the 'approved version' of the murder to push their political vision, and don't want their tear-jerking fund-raising story challenged.
For a lot of people, it's not enough that it be a horrible murder; it has to be a horrible murder committed for the 'right' reasons, so it can be used to push an agenda. Which is another reason I don't like the idea of hate-crimes laws.
This was, no mistake, a terrible act. But it's supposed to have been worse because, in the way it was originally put forth, it was committed because Shepard was homosexual. He's no more dead because the reason for the act was one thing or another; it was no more or less horrible a way to die; but we're supposed to be especially outraged because of what the murderers had in their minds when they did it.
This would mean that a: we're supposed to figure out exactly what someone was thinking when an incident happened, and b: that there are classes of victim that are more important than others. The one is usually impossible, and the other is despicable.
Someone punches another guy; turns out the guy punched was gay; therefore it's a worse crime than if a straight guy was punched? Horsecrap. Besides the fact that he's no more damaged than anyone else, how the hell to you prove what the puncher was thinking? He may have punched for some reason that has nothing to do with with sex, but it will be automatically assumed by many that it did. Especially by those who stand to gain; a prosecutor making a reputation as a 'defender of minorities', activists who need someone new as a victim to trumpet, and so forth.
There's a reason our laws are based on what you do, not what you think. Thinking about something is not a crime; actually planning an act can be. There's a big difference. If you commit an assault or murder, I don't really care what was in your mind, I care that the crime be punished, the punishment being for the act, not for your supposed thoughts.
Yes, I know that someone can plan to do something for a stupid/evil reason. Doesn't make what they did to someone any worse. If someone plans to torture someone to death because of something they are, it doesn't make the act any worse than if they picked someone at random. It can show that the actor had premeditated the crime, and that should affect punishment. But to me, that should be the extent of it.
For what it's worth.
Update: Althouse says the 20/20 piece was less than convincing to her. I didn't see it, so I can't say. Doesn't affect my opinion on the matter of 'hate-crime' legislation. Whether as part of a robbery or because Shepard was homosexual, or a mix of both, he's dead. And the ones who did it are in prison with the maximum penalties a jury would give. Saying their state of mind at the time of the crime was unapproved wouldn't change either the death or their punishment.
Another thing that bothered me was that when it was announced that 20/20 was going to do this segment, they caught a lot of grief from people, basically for daring to put out something that challenged the 'approved' version of the story. Happily, they went ahead. If their information is bad that'll come out, and if they put out information people should know about this, that's to the good. I do not like news being censored either by screaming or by people in a newsroom more concerned with being PC than with getting facts out.
Further update: Clayton Cramer has some more on this, and saw the 20/20 piece a bit differently than Althouse.
More: forgot about this article at Reason on the Shepard case
Ann Althouse has a piece about a show 20/20 was doing about the Matthew Shepard murder. Basically, it points out that it was a lot less due to the supposed hate of homosexuals, and a lot more to do with simple robbery and murder related to drugs. And about all the screaming by people who've used the 'approved version' of the murder to push their political vision, and don't want their tear-jerking fund-raising story challenged.
For a lot of people, it's not enough that it be a horrible murder; it has to be a horrible murder committed for the 'right' reasons, so it can be used to push an agenda. Which is another reason I don't like the idea of hate-crimes laws.
This was, no mistake, a terrible act. But it's supposed to have been worse because, in the way it was originally put forth, it was committed because Shepard was homosexual. He's no more dead because the reason for the act was one thing or another; it was no more or less horrible a way to die; but we're supposed to be especially outraged because of what the murderers had in their minds when they did it.
This would mean that a: we're supposed to figure out exactly what someone was thinking when an incident happened, and b: that there are classes of victim that are more important than others. The one is usually impossible, and the other is despicable.
Someone punches another guy; turns out the guy punched was gay; therefore it's a worse crime than if a straight guy was punched? Horsecrap. Besides the fact that he's no more damaged than anyone else, how the hell to you prove what the puncher was thinking? He may have punched for some reason that has nothing to do with with sex, but it will be automatically assumed by many that it did. Especially by those who stand to gain; a prosecutor making a reputation as a 'defender of minorities', activists who need someone new as a victim to trumpet, and so forth.
There's a reason our laws are based on what you do, not what you think. Thinking about something is not a crime; actually planning an act can be. There's a big difference. If you commit an assault or murder, I don't really care what was in your mind, I care that the crime be punished, the punishment being for the act, not for your supposed thoughts.
Yes, I know that someone can plan to do something for a stupid/evil reason. Doesn't make what they did to someone any worse. If someone plans to torture someone to death because of something they are, it doesn't make the act any worse than if they picked someone at random. It can show that the actor had premeditated the crime, and that should affect punishment. But to me, that should be the extent of it.
For what it's worth.
Update: Althouse says the 20/20 piece was less than convincing to her. I didn't see it, so I can't say. Doesn't affect my opinion on the matter of 'hate-crime' legislation. Whether as part of a robbery or because Shepard was homosexual, or a mix of both, he's dead. And the ones who did it are in prison with the maximum penalties a jury would give. Saying their state of mind at the time of the crime was unapproved wouldn't change either the death or their punishment.
Another thing that bothered me was that when it was announced that 20/20 was going to do this segment, they caught a lot of grief from people, basically for daring to put out something that challenged the 'approved' version of the story. Happily, they went ahead. If their information is bad that'll come out, and if they put out information people should know about this, that's to the good. I do not like news being censored either by screaming or by people in a newsroom more concerned with being PC than with getting facts out.
Further update: Clayton Cramer has some more on this, and saw the 20/20 piece a bit differently than Althouse.
More: forgot about this article at Reason on the Shepard case
Thursday, November 25, 2004
And a politician admits it
Next time you read something about how the media is prejudiced toward conservatives, remember this. Wizbang has the link to a Democrat politician saying this:
SANCHEZ: I agree with Jesse. I agree with my colleague. I believe that we made mistakes. The media certainly is not in our hands any longer, and, in particular, radio talk shows where that is completely in the opposition's hands, and they use it effectively against us.
BLITZER: But, Loretta, when you say the media -- when you say the media is not in your hands, are you saying that ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN are hostile to Democrats?
SANCHEZ: No, that's not what I said. I'm saying that -- if you would let me finish -- that the majority of people are now receiving a lot of their information out of radio. And the radio isn't in the hands of the Democrats anymore.
"The media is certainly not in our hands any longer". Here's a Democrat politician stating flatly that it was in their hands up 'till now.
As they say, 'Read the Whole Thing'
SANCHEZ: I agree with Jesse. I agree with my colleague. I believe that we made mistakes. The media certainly is not in our hands any longer, and, in particular, radio talk shows where that is completely in the opposition's hands, and they use it effectively against us.
BLITZER: But, Loretta, when you say the media -- when you say the media is not in your hands, are you saying that ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN are hostile to Democrats?
SANCHEZ: No, that's not what I said. I'm saying that -- if you would let me finish -- that the majority of people are now receiving a lot of their information out of radio. And the radio isn't in the hands of the Democrats anymore.
"The media is certainly not in our hands any longer". Here's a Democrat politician stating flatly that it was in their hands up 'till now.
As they say, 'Read the Whole Thing'
Rabies
is one of the diseases that tends to bring out the horror in people. It's one of the nastiest ones, with no real treatment.
'Till now.
Ann Althouse links to an article about a girl who was successfully treated for rabies after she had developed gross symptoms. Which is amazing; up until very recently, if you developed any symptoms before getting the vaccine, you were dead. In this case, she being too far along for the vaccine, they induced a coma to help her survive while the disease ran its course.
The vaccine for animals is now much better, there's even a form that can be given orally; I've read that they put it in bait and air-drop in areas to treat the wildlife in areas where it is/is becoming a problem. The vaccine given to humans before symptoms show is 100%. Some things are definately getting better.
'Till now.
Ann Althouse links to an article about a girl who was successfully treated for rabies after she had developed gross symptoms. Which is amazing; up until very recently, if you developed any symptoms before getting the vaccine, you were dead. In this case, she being too far along for the vaccine, they induced a coma to help her survive while the disease ran its course.
The vaccine for animals is now much better, there's even a form that can be given orally; I've read that they put it in bait and air-drop in areas to treat the wildlife in areas where it is/is becoming a problem. The vaccine given to humans before symptoms show is 100%. Some things are definately getting better.
Wednesday, November 24, 2004
Hard to hunt when you're sinking
Into the ground, that is. It's STILL raining off & on here, and the woods are as soggy as a sponge just taken out of the water. Was able to spend a few hours out yesterday. I can take wet, and I can take cold; when they combine, it gets to be a little too much. When the mist and the occasional drop or two turned to rain, I gave up and hiked in.
There's some real nice hunting rain gear out there, but it's a bit expensive, like a couple of hundred dollars. I don't have enough chance to use it to be able to justify paying that. Besides, when the weather kicks up like that the deer bed down, and unless you trip over one, you'll never see them. Woods that are normally alive with stuff, I saw one squirrel.
Well, the season continues for a bit, so there should be more chance to get out. And it's actually supposed to stop raining this afternoon, at least for the next few days. Damn time, too, according to what I've read we are now either tied or have surpassed some records for November rainfall.
There's some real nice hunting rain gear out there, but it's a bit expensive, like a couple of hundred dollars. I don't have enough chance to use it to be able to justify paying that. Besides, when the weather kicks up like that the deer bed down, and unless you trip over one, you'll never see them. Woods that are normally alive with stuff, I saw one squirrel.
Well, the season continues for a bit, so there should be more chance to get out. And it's actually supposed to stop raining this afternoon, at least for the next few days. Damn time, too, according to what I've read we are now either tied or have surpassed some records for November rainfall.
Tuesday, November 23, 2004
Dan Rather is going!.....
eventually.
Just heard on the news that he's going to step down- in the SPRING- but will stay on 60 Minutes.
Ok, so after one more piece of BS reporting, this involving counterfeit documents and coverups, there's still no investigation by C BS that we're aware of, and he's stepping down from the evening news in SEVERAL MONTHS but staying on the payroll on a NEWS SHOW.
To be blunt, I call bullshit. It's more 'now all you peasants go away and shut up'.
Just heard on the news that he's going to step down- in the SPRING- but will stay on 60 Minutes.
Ok, so after one more piece of BS reporting, this involving counterfeit documents and coverups, there's still no investigation by C BS that we're aware of, and he's stepping down from the evening news in SEVERAL MONTHS but staying on the payroll on a NEWS SHOW.
To be blunt, I call bullshit. It's more 'now all you peasants go away and shut up'.
Monday, November 22, 2004
Ah, encouragement from your 'friends'
The neighbors of Iraq are saying they need to decide if the Iraqi elections will take place on time. Including the comment that "Dates are not sacred. What is sacred is the process.".
Number one, dipsticks, it's not YOUR decision to make, it is the decision of the Iraqi interim government.
Second, there's nothing 'sacred' about the process you want to follow, which is basically telling the Iraqis how they will run their country. Screw you.
Lastly, "If the elections took place but were boycotted, there would be a lack of equilibrium in the Sunni representation," he warned. That was from an arab delegate who requested anonymity. Again, screw you. If a bunch of the Sunni boycott the election, then they won't get to vote. Period. The people calling for the boycott are the same ones who support the terrorists who think torturing and murdering aid workers shows their devotion to God (and their devotion to staying on top of the country, let's not forget that part). They don't want to vote? Fine. They'll let the Shia and Kurds and Christians and Jews and whoever else select the national government.
And you think that government will be real tolerant of the crap the Sunni troublemakers are causing? Somehow, I don't think so.
Number one, dipsticks, it's not YOUR decision to make, it is the decision of the Iraqi interim government.
Second, there's nothing 'sacred' about the process you want to follow, which is basically telling the Iraqis how they will run their country. Screw you.
Lastly, "If the elections took place but were boycotted, there would be a lack of equilibrium in the Sunni representation," he warned. That was from an arab delegate who requested anonymity. Again, screw you. If a bunch of the Sunni boycott the election, then they won't get to vote. Period. The people calling for the boycott are the same ones who support the terrorists who think torturing and murdering aid workers shows their devotion to God (and their devotion to staying on top of the country, let's not forget that part). They don't want to vote? Fine. They'll let the Shia and Kurds and Christians and Jews and whoever else select the national government.
And you think that government will be real tolerant of the crap the Sunni troublemakers are causing? Somehow, I don't think so.
Sunday, November 21, 2004
Motorcycles...
...are one thing I do truly enjoy. At least when the weather allows.
I'm fairly flexible on weather. I don't like getting caught in rain- I have issues with traction- and hail is definately not fun. Too cold keeps me off; coldest I've ridden in is about 25F, had to get to work and the bike was my only transport, and yes, I DID freeze my bahoogies off(or at least it felt like it). I wouldn't like a serious highway trip below, say, 45; even with chaps, boots, etc., it gets too damn cold. But above that, not too bad, just put on the chaps, gloves, etc. Not going too far? Can do without the chaps, then.
I admit I'm a bit chicken about riding in cold anymore, may hands stiffen up. But cool is a delight. One of the finest mornings I ever had was coming back from Dallas. At highway speeds before the sun came up was a touch cool, almost uncomfortable. But the sun did come up and after that... it was wonderful. The wind was light, traffic on the interstate was light, no black&whites around, I repeat, wonderful. Especially going through the Arbuckle Mountains. Curves, uphill & down, and nobody in the way. I found that a Vulcan 750 will cruise at 80 through this with no strain, and on the level ground a throttle lock is very nice to have.
I've never had a Harley. Most of them, used in good condition or new, cost too much, and I haven't really cared for the styling; also, up 'till the last few years they tended to leak. I've owned Hondas and now a Kawasaki, the above-mentioned Vulcan, and they've all worked well. Now that Harley has solved the leakage problems I may look at one for my next bike; most of the cruiser-style bikes at other makes are big, heavy, and I don't really care for their looks.
I've been real happy with the Vulcan. In cool-cold weather, the liquid cooling lets it warm up better than air-cooled bikes I've ridden. The shaft-drive is very nice, no chain or belt to adjust and lube. The only problems I've had were a:, the seat and b: the charging system.
After one trip to Texas I swore I was going to replace the factory seat, and it now sports a Mustang; much better. And the charging system, especially in cold weather, doesn't seem up to keeping the lights running and the battery at full charge. I've found a site that has a fix for the electrical problem, but haven't gotten around to it yet.
I do wish more after-market parts people made stuff for the 750; I'd really like some hard saddlebags, but the Kawasaki ones are small and won't hold much, and I haven't found any others that I can be sure would fit without a lot of fiddling.
Come spring, I'll be putting on new radiator hoses and a new clutch, and with any luck next summer will find me at Sturgis. I'd like to see that rally.
I'm fairly flexible on weather. I don't like getting caught in rain- I have issues with traction- and hail is definately not fun. Too cold keeps me off; coldest I've ridden in is about 25F, had to get to work and the bike was my only transport, and yes, I DID freeze my bahoogies off(or at least it felt like it). I wouldn't like a serious highway trip below, say, 45; even with chaps, boots, etc., it gets too damn cold. But above that, not too bad, just put on the chaps, gloves, etc. Not going too far? Can do without the chaps, then.
I admit I'm a bit chicken about riding in cold anymore, may hands stiffen up. But cool is a delight. One of the finest mornings I ever had was coming back from Dallas. At highway speeds before the sun came up was a touch cool, almost uncomfortable. But the sun did come up and after that... it was wonderful. The wind was light, traffic on the interstate was light, no black&whites around, I repeat, wonderful. Especially going through the Arbuckle Mountains. Curves, uphill & down, and nobody in the way. I found that a Vulcan 750 will cruise at 80 through this with no strain, and on the level ground a throttle lock is very nice to have.
I've never had a Harley. Most of them, used in good condition or new, cost too much, and I haven't really cared for the styling; also, up 'till the last few years they tended to leak. I've owned Hondas and now a Kawasaki, the above-mentioned Vulcan, and they've all worked well. Now that Harley has solved the leakage problems I may look at one for my next bike; most of the cruiser-style bikes at other makes are big, heavy, and I don't really care for their looks.
I've been real happy with the Vulcan. In cool-cold weather, the liquid cooling lets it warm up better than air-cooled bikes I've ridden. The shaft-drive is very nice, no chain or belt to adjust and lube. The only problems I've had were a:, the seat and b: the charging system.
After one trip to Texas I swore I was going to replace the factory seat, and it now sports a Mustang; much better. And the charging system, especially in cold weather, doesn't seem up to keeping the lights running and the battery at full charge. I've found a site that has a fix for the electrical problem, but haven't gotten around to it yet.
I do wish more after-market parts people made stuff for the 750; I'd really like some hard saddlebags, but the Kawasaki ones are small and won't hold much, and I haven't found any others that I can be sure would fit without a lot of fiddling.
Come spring, I'll be putting on new radiator hoses and a new clutch, and with any luck next summer will find me at Sturgis. I'd like to see that rally.
Neat sites & links
Just ran across FreedomSight, if anyone's out there they ought to take a look. It includes the following quote:
"Foolish liberals who are trying to read the Second Amendment out of the Constitution by claiming it's not an individual right or that it's too much of a public safety hazard don't see the danger in the big picture. They're courting disaster by encouraging others to use the same means to eliminate portions of the constitution they don't like."
Alan Dershowitz
and a link to the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, Inc.
He also had a nice takedown of one of those clowns who claims to be for gun ownership, and then goes on to say all the guns he thinks should be banned.
I'm sitting here adding these because it's raining lightly- again- and the fog has developed, and it's the fifth or sixth day in a row with some level of rain, and the bloody grass is going to have to be mowed again /if it ever dries out/ and I can't fire the forge, and .... to quote somebody, "Just Damn!"
Froggy Ruminations, a blog by a former SEAL and customs agent. Good stuff here.
"Foolish liberals who are trying to read the Second Amendment out of the Constitution by claiming it's not an individual right or that it's too much of a public safety hazard don't see the danger in the big picture. They're courting disaster by encouraging others to use the same means to eliminate portions of the constitution they don't like."
Alan Dershowitz
and a link to the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, Inc.
He also had a nice takedown of one of those clowns who claims to be for gun ownership, and then goes on to say all the guns he thinks should be banned.
I'm sitting here adding these because it's raining lightly- again- and the fog has developed, and it's the fifth or sixth day in a row with some level of rain, and the bloody grass is going to have to be mowed again /if it ever dries out/ and I can't fire the forge, and .... to quote somebody, "Just Damn!"
Froggy Ruminations, a blog by a former SEAL and customs agent. Good stuff here.
Saturday, November 20, 2004
What language in a country?
Clayton Cramer has a link to an article about the European Union calling for all immigrants to learn the local language and customs, and go by them. Which is reasonable. In fact, should be required.
If you came to the U.S. from another country, and with family & friends want to speak the old language, go ahead. You run a business and a lot of customers also know, and want to speak, that language, no problem. You're with friends in a restaurant and speak to each other in that language, doesn't bother me.
BUT, when you are doing any kind of official business- city/county/state paperwork, licenses, that should be done in English. You don't like that? Tough shit.
If I moved to Mexico, I'd be expected to learn Spanish. To Germany, German, and so forth. That so many come to the U.S. and expect all documents, business, etc., to be done in their language so they don't have to learn English, is disgusting. You should not get to take a drivers license test in any other language, and for damn sure a voting ballot should be in only one language.
If you want to live and work in this country, learn the damn language.
Or leave.
If you came to the U.S. from another country, and with family & friends want to speak the old language, go ahead. You run a business and a lot of customers also know, and want to speak, that language, no problem. You're with friends in a restaurant and speak to each other in that language, doesn't bother me.
BUT, when you are doing any kind of official business- city/county/state paperwork, licenses, that should be done in English. You don't like that? Tough shit.
If I moved to Mexico, I'd be expected to learn Spanish. To Germany, German, and so forth. That so many come to the U.S. and expect all documents, business, etc., to be done in their language so they don't have to learn English, is disgusting. You should not get to take a drivers license test in any other language, and for damn sure a voting ballot should be in only one language.
If you want to live and work in this country, learn the damn language.
Or leave.
One more reason to like Condoleeza Rice
She has a firsthand understanding of one of the reasons for the Second Amendment. Smart, tough-minded, capable...
If not for Prez in 2008, then soon.
If not for Prez in 2008, then soon.
Thursday, November 18, 2004
The 'lifestyle' dodge
My daughter was telling me about a woman who runs a site with pictures of women currently suffering from or recovering from (my way of putting it) anorexia and bulemia. Apparently the lady said she had decided that these two things were not a 'lifestyle', they were an actual problem. Well, duh.
I've noticed that that word is used to excuse a lot of things. Someone doesn't have a problem, they're not doing something wrong, it's their lifestyle. Or even better, an alternative lifestyle. There, now you aren't allowed to criticize it, who are you to speak of my Lifestyle?
Got news for you. Repeatedly doing something stupid does not mean you have an alternative lifestyle; it just might mean you're stupid. As the man said, "Here's your sign".
I've noticed that that word is used to excuse a lot of things. Someone doesn't have a problem, they're not doing something wrong, it's their lifestyle. Or even better, an alternative lifestyle. There, now you aren't allowed to criticize it, who are you to speak of my Lifestyle?
Got news for you. Repeatedly doing something stupid does not mean you have an alternative lifestyle; it just might mean you're stupid. As the man said, "Here's your sign".
'Day of Destruction' part II
I taped the second half since I'd be out of the house when it was on, and I've rarely been so happy at being able to fast-forward through the crap. Which shortened the 2-hours to about 35-40 minutes. Yes, they were breaking for commercials about every ten minutes, and I could get through that, too.
As I said before, I like monster/critter/disaster movies, but I do require a fair amount of realism. One spot in particular; assistant says the highest recorded windspeed for a F5 tornado was 243mph. This is a new movie; you'd think they'd at least check for the information before writing something like this. Due to being at home wondering if the beast was going to turn right or come over my house, I kept close track on the May 3rd tornado outbreak in 1999, especially the F5 that came through town(note: there was more than one F5 that day, this is the one they got the readings from and that individually did the most damage). That was the first time the National Weather Service got doppler radar readings for windspeed-among other things- on an F5, and it read 319mph. Yeah, I'm something of a weather geek; however, I think a lot of people probably caught that, and it was one more inaccuracy added to the list.
Oh yeah, the Air Force pilot landing, picking up passengers and taking off IN THE EYE of the 'hurricane' that formed in the space of a day over the Great Lakes was another good one.
As Dax Montana says, "Just damn!"
Note: the doppler windspeed readings have a 7mph error factor. Therefore, the big one may have only been a lousy 312mph, or may have been a really nasty 326. Real difference there, y'know.
As I said before, I like monster/critter/disaster movies, but I do require a fair amount of realism. One spot in particular; assistant says the highest recorded windspeed for a F5 tornado was 243mph. This is a new movie; you'd think they'd at least check for the information before writing something like this. Due to being at home wondering if the beast was going to turn right or come over my house, I kept close track on the May 3rd tornado outbreak in 1999, especially the F5 that came through town(note: there was more than one F5 that day, this is the one they got the readings from and that individually did the most damage). That was the first time the National Weather Service got doppler radar readings for windspeed-among other things- on an F5, and it read 319mph. Yeah, I'm something of a weather geek; however, I think a lot of people probably caught that, and it was one more inaccuracy added to the list.
Oh yeah, the Air Force pilot landing, picking up passengers and taking off IN THE EYE of the 'hurricane' that formed in the space of a day over the Great Lakes was another good one.
As Dax Montana says, "Just damn!"
Note: the doppler windspeed readings have a 7mph error factor. Therefore, the big one may have only been a lousy 312mph, or may have been a really nasty 326. Real difference there, y'know.
Prince Charles gets it right
For the most part, I have little good to say about the future King of England, but in this he hits it.
Key quote: "People think they can all be pop stars, high court judges, brilliant TV personalities or infinitely more competent heads of state without ever putting in the necessary work or having natural ability. This is the result of social utopianism which believes humanity can be genetically and socially engineered to contradict the lessons of history."
When I first saw something in a headline about 'keeping to your station' I thought what has this idiot said now? But in the context of what he actually said, he's right.
If you want to be a fine guitarist, singer, writer, if you want to be a judge or whatever, you will have to work for it. And with all the work in the world, there's no guarantee you'll get where you want to be.
Talent is something you're born with, an innate ability to do something well. Skill is how you develop your ability to do something. I've known people with amazing talent, who never developed the skills to use that talent. And I've known people with no real talent for something, but they worked hard to develop the skills involved, and were pretty damn good. Talented people who aren't that good at whatever are fairly common; so are people who have no real talent, but work so damn hard that they're pretty damn good at it.
To reach the highest levels of most any field requires some degree of innate talent for it. And schools do not do kids any favors by telling them they can do anything as long as they wish it hard enough. They need to be taught that anything worth doing is going to require work- usually lots of it. The fact that they so often don't teach them that is one reason for a lot of the problems we have now.
Key quote: "People think they can all be pop stars, high court judges, brilliant TV personalities or infinitely more competent heads of state without ever putting in the necessary work or having natural ability. This is the result of social utopianism which believes humanity can be genetically and socially engineered to contradict the lessons of history."
When I first saw something in a headline about 'keeping to your station' I thought what has this idiot said now? But in the context of what he actually said, he's right.
If you want to be a fine guitarist, singer, writer, if you want to be a judge or whatever, you will have to work for it. And with all the work in the world, there's no guarantee you'll get where you want to be.
Talent is something you're born with, an innate ability to do something well. Skill is how you develop your ability to do something. I've known people with amazing talent, who never developed the skills to use that talent. And I've known people with no real talent for something, but they worked hard to develop the skills involved, and were pretty damn good. Talented people who aren't that good at whatever are fairly common; so are people who have no real talent, but work so damn hard that they're pretty damn good at it.
To reach the highest levels of most any field requires some degree of innate talent for it. And schools do not do kids any favors by telling them they can do anything as long as they wish it hard enough. They need to be taught that anything worth doing is going to require work- usually lots of it. The fact that they so often don't teach them that is one reason for a lot of the problems we have now.
How NOT to wake up all the way
Wake up(somewhat), stumble to kitchen, start water for tea. Decide you're conscious enough to feed the cat, and SMASH! The window in the laundry room smashes in. No cracks here, I mean glass all over the room.
Say something along the lines of "What the hell?!?" and check room. There's nobody in the back yard, so look at walls, halfway expecting to see a bullet hole. Nothing. Rock? You look down...
At the bird that flew through the window, and is sitting there with a "Uhhh" look on its face.
Bird of Peace my backside. Bird of pieces of glass all over the floor. Little feathered boob's lucky I didn't let the cat have him for breakfast.
Guess what I'm doing this evening?
Say something along the lines of "What the hell?!?" and check room. There's nobody in the back yard, so look at walls, halfway expecting to see a bullet hole. Nothing. Rock? You look down...
At the bird that flew through the window, and is sitting there with a "Uhhh" look on its face.
Bird of Peace my backside. Bird of pieces of glass all over the floor. Little feathered boob's lucky I didn't let the cat have him for breakfast.
Guess what I'm doing this evening?
Wednesday, November 17, 2004
Damn, it's wet out there!
It's been raining off & on for about four days now, with fog added in at night. My yard is so wet, the ground squishes when you step on it. If it weren't for the grass, you'd sink.
Upside, spent the morning scouting an area for deer season next week. Lots of sign, and some good places to set up. So, just maybe...
But it's still bloody wet out there.
Upside, spent the morning scouting an area for deer season next week. Lots of sign, and some good places to set up. So, just maybe...
But it's still bloody wet out there.
Tuesday, November 16, 2004
That shooting by a Marine in Fallujah
Caught some info about in on the NBC news last night- just happened to be in a place where it was on- and based on the incomplete information they gave, my first thought was, "So what?"
Among the things I don't know;
Were his hands in sight?
If so, were they open & empty, or closed?
Did he react at all to commands?
If his hands are out of sight, you have no idea what he may be holding, gun, grenade or detonator.
If his hands are in sight, but closed, you have to look for anything he may be holding, and/or any wires.
If he can obviously hear you and ignores you, that factors in with the above.
You're in a place where the bad guys are booby-trapping the bodies of their wounded and dead(hey, NBC, that's not a new tactic, it's been around a long time), and the wounded themselves may well use a weapon- gun, grenade or bomb detonator- to try and take a few infidels with them. You do not take chances with them, not if you want to stay alive and whole.
So, based on what I do know, big deal. We're dealing with people who think cutting people's heads off on camera shows what true believers in God they are, and they want to die- preferably while killing one of us. I know a lot of people are going to scream about how horrible we are, etc. Screw 'em. Those marines are alive, and the bad guys are dead. And that is the point of this.
There are, from what I understand, basically three ways to win a war. 1, you outmaneuver the other side so badly they realize they can't win and either surrender or sue for peace. 2, you smash them so badly in battle- maybe several battles- that they give up. 3, if 1 or 2 don't do the job, you kill them until either the survivors surrender, or there are none left to fight. It ain't pretty or nice, but that's the way it works. The Nazis fought until the very end. The Japanese were set up to do the same, hoping to bleed us so badly we'd negotiate a peace leaving that government in power... until Fat Man and Little Boy shocked them enough to end it. The people we're fighting here are just as bad, they'd rather see the whole world blighted than not see their beliefs in control; and since being dhimmi, converted or dead is not something most of us will tolerate, it's on until the end. And stopping people like this, things like this will happen.
Semper Fi, guys.
Among the things I don't know;
Were his hands in sight?
If so, were they open & empty, or closed?
Did he react at all to commands?
If his hands are out of sight, you have no idea what he may be holding, gun, grenade or detonator.
If his hands are in sight, but closed, you have to look for anything he may be holding, and/or any wires.
If he can obviously hear you and ignores you, that factors in with the above.
You're in a place where the bad guys are booby-trapping the bodies of their wounded and dead(hey, NBC, that's not a new tactic, it's been around a long time), and the wounded themselves may well use a weapon- gun, grenade or bomb detonator- to try and take a few infidels with them. You do not take chances with them, not if you want to stay alive and whole.
So, based on what I do know, big deal. We're dealing with people who think cutting people's heads off on camera shows what true believers in God they are, and they want to die- preferably while killing one of us. I know a lot of people are going to scream about how horrible we are, etc. Screw 'em. Those marines are alive, and the bad guys are dead. And that is the point of this.
There are, from what I understand, basically three ways to win a war. 1, you outmaneuver the other side so badly they realize they can't win and either surrender or sue for peace. 2, you smash them so badly in battle- maybe several battles- that they give up. 3, if 1 or 2 don't do the job, you kill them until either the survivors surrender, or there are none left to fight. It ain't pretty or nice, but that's the way it works. The Nazis fought until the very end. The Japanese were set up to do the same, hoping to bleed us so badly we'd negotiate a peace leaving that government in power... until Fat Man and Little Boy shocked them enough to end it. The people we're fighting here are just as bad, they'd rather see the whole world blighted than not see their beliefs in control; and since being dhimmi, converted or dead is not something most of us will tolerate, it's on until the end. And stopping people like this, things like this will happen.
Semper Fi, guys.
Monday, November 15, 2004
'Day of Destruction'; it's a turkey
Now, I like good monster and disaster movies, but I've become more critical over the years. Which means I have to dump on this movie.
Massive storm systems forming, ok. Two of them meeting, ok. The rest of this? Crap.
Where to start? The head of the Severe Storms Lab in Norman is blaming global warming. They show a display of the 'polar jet stream', except the video is a mesocyclone that could be anywhere. And a severe storm system doesn't just 'appear', not one of the sizes depicted.
The Evil Power Company Executive is screwing several state's power systems up for profit, AND causing fish-kills by working a nuclear plant above safety levels.
The Dedicated Public Servant is bitching how nobody will listen to her, she's been warning them for years, etc.
The Crusading Reporter can't get her boss to approve her Crusade Against The Evildoers.
And there is the obligatory 'we need alternate power sources, coal and oil are dirty, nuclear is bad for the environment', but nobody mentions what these other sources are.
Steven den Beste has written a number of times on the subject of power sources, and what amounts to magical thinking on the subject. "WE NEED THEM NOW" does not translate to something appearing, no matter how hard you wish it. If you can find a new system of power generation that can, cost-effectively, replace oil/gas/nuclear, more power to you. And you will become very, very rich. Which means that if someone had found it, they'd be very, very rich, and we'd be replacing the old plants.
So what we have is another disaster movie with lots of politically-correct bitching at the usual villains, and the usual portrayal of the PC heroes. And lots of scientific inaccuracies. Hey, I'm not a dedicated weather guy, but I can still spot lots of crap in this, and it really takes away from the movie.
At least for me.
Massive storm systems forming, ok. Two of them meeting, ok. The rest of this? Crap.
Where to start? The head of the Severe Storms Lab in Norman is blaming global warming. They show a display of the 'polar jet stream', except the video is a mesocyclone that could be anywhere. And a severe storm system doesn't just 'appear', not one of the sizes depicted.
The Evil Power Company Executive is screwing several state's power systems up for profit, AND causing fish-kills by working a nuclear plant above safety levels.
The Dedicated Public Servant is bitching how nobody will listen to her, she's been warning them for years, etc.
The Crusading Reporter can't get her boss to approve her Crusade Against The Evildoers.
And there is the obligatory 'we need alternate power sources, coal and oil are dirty, nuclear is bad for the environment', but nobody mentions what these other sources are.
Steven den Beste has written a number of times on the subject of power sources, and what amounts to magical thinking on the subject. "WE NEED THEM NOW" does not translate to something appearing, no matter how hard you wish it. If you can find a new system of power generation that can, cost-effectively, replace oil/gas/nuclear, more power to you. And you will become very, very rich. Which means that if someone had found it, they'd be very, very rich, and we'd be replacing the old plants.
So what we have is another disaster movie with lots of politically-correct bitching at the usual villains, and the usual portrayal of the PC heroes. And lots of scientific inaccuracies. Hey, I'm not a dedicated weather guy, but I can still spot lots of crap in this, and it really takes away from the movie.
At least for me.
'First' Americans?
Clayton Cramer has a post touching on the question of 'who got here first?'.
Interesting question. And the piece points out the hostility that tends to be directed at those who question the 'accepted wisdom' on scientific issues.
As I recall, Jenner and his vaccinations were mostly stomped on by various eminent scientists and doctors, and the germ theory of disease almost got its discoverer run out of medicine- again, by eminent scientists and doctors who didn't like their beliefs being questioned.
Read a book called "America B.C." some years ago, and it presented evidence of Celtic contact with North America. It struck me then that a lot of the criticism of the idea sounded a lot like "It can't be, I tell you! So shut up!".
Not a good way to reasearch anything.
There has to be skepticism of new ideas, I have no problem with that. When new ideas, new evidence, are dismissed out-of-hand simply because they break with or contrast with what we already 'know', there's a big problem.
Interesting question. And the piece points out the hostility that tends to be directed at those who question the 'accepted wisdom' on scientific issues.
As I recall, Jenner and his vaccinations were mostly stomped on by various eminent scientists and doctors, and the germ theory of disease almost got its discoverer run out of medicine- again, by eminent scientists and doctors who didn't like their beliefs being questioned.
Read a book called "America B.C." some years ago, and it presented evidence of Celtic contact with North America. It struck me then that a lot of the criticism of the idea sounded a lot like "It can't be, I tell you! So shut up!".
Not a good way to reasearch anything.
There has to be skepticism of new ideas, I have no problem with that. When new ideas, new evidence, are dismissed out-of-hand simply because they break with or contrast with what we already 'know', there's a big problem.
Sunday, November 14, 2004
Communism-lite
Was looking at a blog run by, surprise surprise, a guy working for tenure in social studies(no, I'm not linking to it). He says that the blue-state types need to ally with red-state types because militant Islam is such a threat that working with the fascist-lite Bushword types is a lesser evil.
This blog annoys me no end. Here's a teacher, planning on tenure(think he'll have anything good to say in class about anyone with a conservative bent?) who says neither Bush-fascism or left-communism can save us, only socialism is the answer.
Sorry, guy. I think teachers like you are part of the reason we have some of the troubles we do, and I think socialism is, at best, communism-lite. I don't want you in control any more than the other nazis/communists/fascists(and don't yell at me about name-calling; all of them are socialist systems).
I have a number of disagreements with President Bush, but saying that he's pushing us into fascism does not come across a believable. I'm a lot more worried about various people in Congress and some judges than I am him.
This blog annoys me no end. Here's a teacher, planning on tenure(think he'll have anything good to say in class about anyone with a conservative bent?) who says neither Bush-fascism or left-communism can save us, only socialism is the answer.
Sorry, guy. I think teachers like you are part of the reason we have some of the troubles we do, and I think socialism is, at best, communism-lite. I don't want you in control any more than the other nazis/communists/fascists(and don't yell at me about name-calling; all of them are socialist systems).
I have a number of disagreements with President Bush, but saying that he's pushing us into fascism does not come across a believable. I'm a lot more worried about various people in Congress and some judges than I am him.
Just how good do we have it?
Every once in a while I think about how much easier we have it in many ways. I'm not talking about political stuff right now, but simply physically.
How many people do you know who died of tetanus? None for me. My parents knew some, my grandparents more. But in any place where you can get that one shot, it doesn't happen unless someone doesn't bother to get it. And if there's a nastier way to die than tetanus, I don't know what it is; it's right up there with smallpox and plague and ebola.
How often do you have to skip fresh fruits or veggies because they're not available? Not because the price is too high this week, but not there? They're always there, now. And canned or frozen if you're not insisting on fresh.
Fresh meat? Go to the store, it's there. Or you can take some frozen out of the freezer; unless you messed up storing it, it'll be good.
Medical troubles? Appendicitus (I speak from experience) sucks; appendicitus without surgical help/including anaesthesia/ would suck a LOT worse. Same for a variety of other things.
Yes, I know paying for medical help can be a problem. But the treatment is there, and payment can be worked out. Not that long ago, most treatments just weren't there.
You can argue about guns all you want; fact is, if someone breaks into your house and isn't waiting for the cops to show up, a firearm beats hell out of a knife or club, or nothing. Yeah, yeah, martial arts are great; somebody comes into my home and offers threat to me, I want a boomstick. Beats hell out of having to get in arms-reach of the bad guy(what if his reach is longer?)
Books. Lots and lots of books. Not rare, not priced out of reach. New books, used books, BOOKS!
Transportation? My parents, and older relatives, remember a trip to the store being something that took at least a day, from the farm to town and back. My great-uncle can make what used to be a day-there-and-day-back trip in an hour or so each way. Motor vehicles of all types, mass transit, bicycles, and all on good roads.
Not even getting into the internet and such, God, we are so much better off in many ways.
Yes, there are drawbacks, which I'll touch on later. But in so many ways... Go back to the medieval period? Visit yes(with a .45 in my tunic, thank you very much), but to live there? No bleepin' way.
How many people do you know who died of tetanus? None for me. My parents knew some, my grandparents more. But in any place where you can get that one shot, it doesn't happen unless someone doesn't bother to get it. And if there's a nastier way to die than tetanus, I don't know what it is; it's right up there with smallpox and plague and ebola.
How often do you have to skip fresh fruits or veggies because they're not available? Not because the price is too high this week, but not there? They're always there, now. And canned or frozen if you're not insisting on fresh.
Fresh meat? Go to the store, it's there. Or you can take some frozen out of the freezer; unless you messed up storing it, it'll be good.
Medical troubles? Appendicitus (I speak from experience) sucks; appendicitus without surgical help/including anaesthesia/ would suck a LOT worse. Same for a variety of other things.
Yes, I know paying for medical help can be a problem. But the treatment is there, and payment can be worked out. Not that long ago, most treatments just weren't there.
You can argue about guns all you want; fact is, if someone breaks into your house and isn't waiting for the cops to show up, a firearm beats hell out of a knife or club, or nothing. Yeah, yeah, martial arts are great; somebody comes into my home and offers threat to me, I want a boomstick. Beats hell out of having to get in arms-reach of the bad guy(what if his reach is longer?)
Books. Lots and lots of books. Not rare, not priced out of reach. New books, used books, BOOKS!
Transportation? My parents, and older relatives, remember a trip to the store being something that took at least a day, from the farm to town and back. My great-uncle can make what used to be a day-there-and-day-back trip in an hour or so each way. Motor vehicles of all types, mass transit, bicycles, and all on good roads.
Not even getting into the internet and such, God, we are so much better off in many ways.
Yes, there are drawbacks, which I'll touch on later. But in so many ways... Go back to the medieval period? Visit yes(with a .45 in my tunic, thank you very much), but to live there? No bleepin' way.
Stuff you should read
And stuff I don't want to forget where is
Smallest Minority has a lot of good stuff; self-defense, 'neckies', movie reviews, etc. Go there & work your way down.
And remember National Ammo Week! I got my first batch yesterday.
Velociman is one sick dude. Don't miss him.
And Cold Fury has a marvelous piece you should get to.
Smallest Minority has a lot of good stuff; self-defense, 'neckies', movie reviews, etc. Go there & work your way down.
And remember National Ammo Week! I got my first batch yesterday.
Velociman is one sick dude. Don't miss him.
And Cold Fury has a marvelous piece you should get to.
It's not just CBS a lot of people are mad at
And here's one of the reasons why.
When networks do stuff like this, and then insist that they have "no bias in what we report"... And then seem truly unable to understand why people don't believe them.
Found at Tim Blair's place
And by the way, what is CBS going to do about Rather and company? Or are they still hoping it'll go away?
When networks do stuff like this, and then insist that they have "no bias in what we report"... And then seem truly unable to understand why people don't believe them.
Found at Tim Blair's place
And by the way, what is CBS going to do about Rather and company? Or are they still hoping it'll go away?
Saturday, November 13, 2004
Belief
Was thinking about some things I saw over at Heterodoxy & Orthodoxy, brought something to mind.
All of the various stuff from Democrat commentators and leftist news weenies about 'you know, some of these religeous types actually believe this stuff' brought it up.
When someone does not themselves have any religeous beliefs, or when those they claim are just window-dressing, how do you discuss this with them? How do you explain an idea to someone who, down inside does not believe that anyone could take it seriously?
It's like talking to someone who simply cannot believe that a 'civilized' human could actually believe in a right to arms. There is simply no frame of reference they can place it in except "deluded fool who doesn't know what's good for him", so that's how they treat you.
So much of the commentary on moral and religeous beliefs from the above-noted is on the level of "talk nice to them and say you will respect them in the morning, and they'll see how smart and progressive you are and vote for you", and it is stupid. You do not get through to someone on any meaningful level with condescension; you just piss them off on one level, and make them pity you on another. (those more generous in outlook will feel pity or sorrow; everyone else will just get more pissed off at you).
The other part is the commentary on the lines that "Your beliefs are just being used, you are being fooled," and so forth; often from someone with no real religeous beliefs themselves. Or, from those who do have true beliefs, "MY religeon does not allow starting a war on lies", etc. There, it's down to "If you believed properly, you would not have voted for that man!"
It's the attitude that "You're not smart enough/sophisticated enough/caring enough to really understand" again.
And that won't get you anywhere.
All of the various stuff from Democrat commentators and leftist news weenies about 'you know, some of these religeous types actually believe this stuff' brought it up.
When someone does not themselves have any religeous beliefs, or when those they claim are just window-dressing, how do you discuss this with them? How do you explain an idea to someone who, down inside does not believe that anyone could take it seriously?
It's like talking to someone who simply cannot believe that a 'civilized' human could actually believe in a right to arms. There is simply no frame of reference they can place it in except "deluded fool who doesn't know what's good for him", so that's how they treat you.
So much of the commentary on moral and religeous beliefs from the above-noted is on the level of "talk nice to them and say you will respect them in the morning, and they'll see how smart and progressive you are and vote for you", and it is stupid. You do not get through to someone on any meaningful level with condescension; you just piss them off on one level, and make them pity you on another. (those more generous in outlook will feel pity or sorrow; everyone else will just get more pissed off at you).
The other part is the commentary on the lines that "Your beliefs are just being used, you are being fooled," and so forth; often from someone with no real religeous beliefs themselves. Or, from those who do have true beliefs, "MY religeon does not allow starting a war on lies", etc. There, it's down to "If you believed properly, you would not have voted for that man!"
It's the attitude that "You're not smart enough/sophisticated enough/caring enough to really understand" again.
And that won't get you anywhere.
Does anyone else want to see Steve Irwin chomped?
SERIOUSLY chomped?
First time I ever saw this boob, he was in Arizona chasing rattlesnakes. After about ten minutes I asked if anyone else was hoping one of the snakes would get him, and my dad and son both said yes. My opinion hasn't changed.
He's generally annoying, and after seeing the shots of him feeding the crocodile while holding the baby, I was willing to speed up the process by shooting him and then throwing him to the lizard.
Closely following him is Jeff Corwin. The actual critter stuff he does is pretty good, but then he either breaks into enviro-weenie-level lectures, or trying to do comedy with some beast for background.
Where's the serious man-eater-type beasts when you need them?
First time I ever saw this boob, he was in Arizona chasing rattlesnakes. After about ten minutes I asked if anyone else was hoping one of the snakes would get him, and my dad and son both said yes. My opinion hasn't changed.
He's generally annoying, and after seeing the shots of him feeding the crocodile while holding the baby, I was willing to speed up the process by shooting him and then throwing him to the lizard.
Closely following him is Jeff Corwin. The actual critter stuff he does is pretty good, but then he either breaks into enviro-weenie-level lectures, or trying to do comedy with some beast for background.
Where's the serious man-eater-type beasts when you need them?
Oh, this is wonderful!
Found a place called 'Orthodox & Heterodox' with a lovely little 'Red State/Blue State piece. Go thou, and enjoy.
Link found at Instapundit
Link found at Instapundit
Guards and grips and pommels
Guards on using knives have almost always been simple; flat cross-section, rounded ends that may have a bit of forward or back bend, no bigger than necessary. And many did not have a guard at all.
Grips were bone, wood or antler, either riveted to a flat tang, or with a hole bored or burned through to fit a narrow tang.
Many did not have a pommel, a piece that fits onto the back of the grip. Those that did, again they were generally simple, a round or flat piece the end of the tang fit into.
As you moved up the economic scale, of course, things got fancier. Guards of much more elaborate design and materials- bronze and brass and silver and gold instead of iron and copper- with carved or wire-wrapped grips, pommels of many different designs.
I've always liked antler and wood best. Antler has a texture just as it is, you just have to find a piece that fits the piece you're making. A good piece of many woods have a grain that can be breathtaking, though some are so soft they may not hold up well(cedar, for instance). I've never used ivory; too expensive. Horn can be lovely stuff. Hard, pretty much weatherproof, it can be carved and inlaid and polished.
Note about horn: when polished, glues don't hold very well. Not even epoxy. You have to rough up the glueing surfaces if you want it to hold.
I'm going to figure out how to post pictures on this, will have some examples then.
Grips were bone, wood or antler, either riveted to a flat tang, or with a hole bored or burned through to fit a narrow tang.
Many did not have a pommel, a piece that fits onto the back of the grip. Those that did, again they were generally simple, a round or flat piece the end of the tang fit into.
As you moved up the economic scale, of course, things got fancier. Guards of much more elaborate design and materials- bronze and brass and silver and gold instead of iron and copper- with carved or wire-wrapped grips, pommels of many different designs.
I've always liked antler and wood best. Antler has a texture just as it is, you just have to find a piece that fits the piece you're making. A good piece of many woods have a grain that can be breathtaking, though some are so soft they may not hold up well(cedar, for instance). I've never used ivory; too expensive. Horn can be lovely stuff. Hard, pretty much weatherproof, it can be carved and inlaid and polished.
Note about horn: when polished, glues don't hold very well. Not even epoxy. You have to rough up the glueing surfaces if you want it to hold.
I'm going to figure out how to post pictures on this, will have some examples then.
Friday, November 12, 2004
National Ammo Week Starts Tomorrow!
National Ammo Week is nice and simple; buy at least 100 rounds of ammo. .22's, centerfire, rifle or shotgun, whatever.
It keeps, it's good for holiday gifts, and you'll irritate the right people by getting it.
Let's see, Academy here has Federal Lightning .22's for $6.95/brick right now...
It keeps, it's good for holiday gifts, and you'll irritate the right people by getting it.
Let's see, Academy here has Federal Lightning .22's for $6.95/brick right now...
What is sexy about looking like a concentration camp victim?
A the store the other day, some magazine had a picture of Renee Zellweger, having lost the weight she put on for the 'Bridget Jones' movie. I'd been hearing commercials for the program she followed, the 'you can look just like her!' stuff, but after seeing the pictures, I wondered why the HELL you would want to?
Dammit, she looks like hell. Skinny arms, face with the skull showing through. This is NOT what a woman is supposed to look like.
I have seen women who were lean almost to the point of skinny, and looked great. I've see women who were, by most definitions, fat, and looked great. I have not, despite the beliefs of Hollywood and the fashion industry, seen a women with stick-legs and arms and a ribcage like a xylophone who looked like anything but a victim. Of themselves or some idiot who told them that was great, but a victim.
I've a friend who used to spend all her spare time worrying about losing 'that last five pounds'. She looked good, she was healthy, but if you told her that you heard the litany of "I'm fat, I need to lose that last five pounds, I'm flabby", etc. And since she was at a good weight, and was overall healthy, she couldn't lose it. So she started taking diet pills. That worked really well.
The rebound from that mess was a collection of problems and putting on a lot of weight. So now she's depressed about that, and the medication she's on causes her to sleep a lot so she doesn't exercise, and if she did lose weight she'd get to a nice size and obsess about the 'last five' goddamned pounds again...
THERE IS NO UNIVERSAL GOOD WEIGHT/APPEARANCE. For women or men. Be healthy, understand that the people the entertainment industry keep shoving in our faces aren't the ONLY way to look, and be happy.
By the way, the Body Mass Index sucks. If I weighed what that says I should, I would look like I'd escaped from a camp before things got too bad.
And ladies? I've never personally met a man who, in real life, preferred a female who looks like she'd break if you touched her to one with curves. Not implants, curves on her body.
Dammit, she looks like hell. Skinny arms, face with the skull showing through. This is NOT what a woman is supposed to look like.
I have seen women who were lean almost to the point of skinny, and looked great. I've see women who were, by most definitions, fat, and looked great. I have not, despite the beliefs of Hollywood and the fashion industry, seen a women with stick-legs and arms and a ribcage like a xylophone who looked like anything but a victim. Of themselves or some idiot who told them that was great, but a victim.
I've a friend who used to spend all her spare time worrying about losing 'that last five pounds'. She looked good, she was healthy, but if you told her that you heard the litany of "I'm fat, I need to lose that last five pounds, I'm flabby", etc. And since she was at a good weight, and was overall healthy, she couldn't lose it. So she started taking diet pills. That worked really well.
The rebound from that mess was a collection of problems and putting on a lot of weight. So now she's depressed about that, and the medication she's on causes her to sleep a lot so she doesn't exercise, and if she did lose weight she'd get to a nice size and obsess about the 'last five' goddamned pounds again...
THERE IS NO UNIVERSAL GOOD WEIGHT/APPEARANCE. For women or men. Be healthy, understand that the people the entertainment industry keep shoving in our faces aren't the ONLY way to look, and be happy.
By the way, the Body Mass Index sucks. If I weighed what that says I should, I would look like I'd escaped from a camp before things got too bad.
And ladies? I've never personally met a man who, in real life, preferred a female who looks like she'd break if you touched her to one with curves. Not implants, curves on her body.
The magma-risin' boogie in WA
According to this article, Mt. Ranier is showing signs of doing something. This is a good news/bad news thing; while the thought of possibly two volcanos making the landscape dance in one area delights me, it would truly, truly suck for a lot of people if Ranier cuts loose.
From what I've read, the big threat with it isn't considered to be explosive eruption, it's lahars- mudflows. The top of the mountain has been slowly rotting into clay over the years due to sulphur dioxide leaking to the surface, mixing with water to form sulphuric acid, and soaking into the rock. I don't have the book handy, but the Osceola mudflow /name?/ some hundreds of years ago traveled for many miles from the mountain and left deposits many feet deep; deep enough to fill in rolling hills and make a plain. And since such a flow, and landslides, can travel more than 100 mph... I forget how many towns/cities are in the risk area, but it includes a lot of people. And since there might be little or no warning of the actual event, this could truly be an "Oh S**t " moment as you look out the window.
An amazing thing, but definately one to see from a distance.
From what I've read, the big threat with it isn't considered to be explosive eruption, it's lahars- mudflows. The top of the mountain has been slowly rotting into clay over the years due to sulphur dioxide leaking to the surface, mixing with water to form sulphuric acid, and soaking into the rock. I don't have the book handy, but the Osceola mudflow /name?/ some hundreds of years ago traveled for many miles from the mountain and left deposits many feet deep; deep enough to fill in rolling hills and make a plain. And since such a flow, and landslides, can travel more than 100 mph... I forget how many towns/cities are in the risk area, but it includes a lot of people. And since there might be little or no warning of the actual event, this could truly be an "Oh S**t " moment as you look out the window.
An amazing thing, but definately one to see from a distance.
Thursday, November 11, 2004
How not to manage a crime problem
The British are now wanting to ban 'assault knives', among other things, in response to rising crime rates. I guess since restricting/banning firearms has worked so well, huh?
Guys, it's not a knife problem, it's a criminal problem. This article presents all the usual stuff; greater police 'random stop and search' powers, restricting sales of 'non-household' knives, etc. It also has this: "photographs of makeshift weapons, including scissor blades taped to a broom handle, to demonstrate the extent of the problem.". Which points out the problem, but not in the way they think it does.
I can take a piece of metal, a hacksaw, a vise and a file and turn out a working knife in a few minutes. People in prisons do it all the time with less. The problem is not the object, it is the people using them. Same with firearms; an honest citazen with an automatic weapon is not a threat, a criminal with a zip gun is. And all the laws in the world won't change that.
And as long as they keep thinking that adding more laws will solve the problem, the problem will continue to get worse.
Guys, it's not a knife problem, it's a criminal problem. This article presents all the usual stuff; greater police 'random stop and search' powers, restricting sales of 'non-household' knives, etc. It also has this: "photographs of makeshift weapons, including scissor blades taped to a broom handle, to demonstrate the extent of the problem.". Which points out the problem, but not in the way they think it does.
I can take a piece of metal, a hacksaw, a vise and a file and turn out a working knife in a few minutes. People in prisons do it all the time with less. The problem is not the object, it is the people using them. Same with firearms; an honest citazen with an automatic weapon is not a threat, a criminal with a zip gun is. And all the laws in the world won't change that.
And as long as they keep thinking that adding more laws will solve the problem, the problem will continue to get worse.
Liberal condescension
"You know what? Just let me make one point. You were talking about the map before. If indeed all those blue states all got together and seceded from the union, think what would be left for those red states, nothing. There would be no educational system. You would have nothing. What would be left to you? I mean, where is all of this talent in this country? It's on both sides, the Northeast corridor." -Geraldine Ferraro to Sean Hannity on Hannity and Colmes, November 6.
Oh, yeah, no talent, no working brains, no schools, no manufacturing, no nothing except around the Northeast Corridor. Can you belive this crap? This is one of the the most blatant examples imaginable of how the 'liberal' upper reaches of the Democrat party view the rest of the country. And they wonder why they're losing voters?
Just think about that nonsense. She apparently thinks that if half-a-dozen states went away, the whole rest of the country would fall apart. Apparently all the local schools, all the community colleges, all the universities, all the businesses, all the everything would just collapse. This woman, and those who think like her, have a massive disconnect from reality.
And she might have been vice-president? Thank God people saw her for what she is.
Found at Acidman's place
Oh, yeah, no talent, no working brains, no schools, no manufacturing, no nothing except around the Northeast Corridor. Can you belive this crap? This is one of the the most blatant examples imaginable of how the 'liberal' upper reaches of the Democrat party view the rest of the country. And they wonder why they're losing voters?
Just think about that nonsense. She apparently thinks that if half-a-dozen states went away, the whole rest of the country would fall apart. Apparently all the local schools, all the community colleges, all the universities, all the businesses, all the everything would just collapse. This woman, and those who think like her, have a massive disconnect from reality.
And she might have been vice-president? Thank God people saw her for what she is.
Found at Acidman's place
Veteran's Day
We've got people at the sharp end fighting the bad guys- and winning- while flags fly over the graves of those who died doing it, or after years of physical or mental handicaps from the terrible doings of battle.
If you're religeous, say a prayer for those out there now, and for the repose of those who died. If you're not, give due respect and honor to them.
I had two great-uncles who went through WWII, one in the Navy as a diver in the Pacific, the other in 3rd Army Infantry, from somewhere in France through to the end. The Navy uncle died a year ago, the Army uncle was recently treated for cancer and seems to be doing well. In all the times I was around them over the years, I never heard either of them speak of those days, with two exceptions.
The Navy uncle, when Clinton was making noises about invading Iraq and looking stunned when people he expected to support him asked hard questions, talked a little bit about his tour of Pacific vacation spots like Iwo Jima and Tarawa and about dead Marines in the water and on the beaches.
The Army uncle spoke a bit about a couple of souvineers he has hanging on the wall; nothing about the fighting, just some bits about those things. They went to do a dirty job, survived, and as much as possible put it behind them while building their lives here.
To those who made it back and to those who did not, and to those out there now, thank you.
Note: I think it fitting in a way that Yassir Arafat, that murderous dirtbag, finally and officially kicked the bucket today. As someone wrote, I'll pray for his soul with all the honest fervor of a French diplomat.
If you're religeous, say a prayer for those out there now, and for the repose of those who died. If you're not, give due respect and honor to them.
I had two great-uncles who went through WWII, one in the Navy as a diver in the Pacific, the other in 3rd Army Infantry, from somewhere in France through to the end. The Navy uncle died a year ago, the Army uncle was recently treated for cancer and seems to be doing well. In all the times I was around them over the years, I never heard either of them speak of those days, with two exceptions.
The Navy uncle, when Clinton was making noises about invading Iraq and looking stunned when people he expected to support him asked hard questions, talked a little bit about his tour of Pacific vacation spots like Iwo Jima and Tarawa and about dead Marines in the water and on the beaches.
The Army uncle spoke a bit about a couple of souvineers he has hanging on the wall; nothing about the fighting, just some bits about those things. They went to do a dirty job, survived, and as much as possible put it behind them while building their lives here.
To those who made it back and to those who did not, and to those out there now, thank you.
Note: I think it fitting in a way that Yassir Arafat, that murderous dirtbag, finally and officially kicked the bucket today. As someone wrote, I'll pray for his soul with all the honest fervor of a French diplomat.
Wednesday, November 10, 2004
More on books
One of the versitile authors is John Maddox Roberts. He's done sci-fi and historical fiction and fantasy, and does all pretty well. I think my favorites are the 'SPQR' books. Mysteries set in ancient Rome, and he must have done boatloads of research, his people, places and things all ring true. There are eight of them now, I believe, with another coming out soon. And I now have all of them, he he he.
I wrote earlier about other authors I like, one I don't much care for is L. Sprague de Camp. Not a bad writer, but two things prejudiced me against him. One, he's the guy who 'edited', rewrote in some cases, Robert E. Howard's Conan stories. And two, in a collection of short stories called 'Rivers of Time'- about a man leading hunting trips into the past- he wrote enough bullcrap about firearms that it fairly permanently ticked me off. So there.
I wrote earlier about other authors I like, one I don't much care for is L. Sprague de Camp. Not a bad writer, but two things prejudiced me against him. One, he's the guy who 'edited', rewrote in some cases, Robert E. Howard's Conan stories. And two, in a collection of short stories called 'Rivers of Time'- about a man leading hunting trips into the past- he wrote enough bullcrap about firearms that it fairly permanently ticked me off. So there.
Cooking
Having been inspired by Steve, I have done a bit of cooking the last couple of days, beyond my usual efforts. The first produced leftovers, the second some more, so I also have lunch tomorrow.
Yesterday, browned a pound of Jimmy Dean Italian Sausage. While that cooked, I dumped two bottles of Wal-Mart green pepper & mushroom spaghetti sauce in a pan and added some garlic and a couple of bits of other stuff. Yes, Wal-Mart sauce. I'm che-, uh, fiscally responsible, as I once mentioned. Also, it's easier than making sauce from scratch; I wasn't quite that inspired. Drained and added the sausage to the sauce and made pasta, and it was good.
Tonight I put some olive oil in a pan, sauteed a little garlic, then browned two chicken breasts in it, then added some of the sauce and simmered. While that was going heated up the leftover pasta and the rest of the sauce. When the chicken was done, put some pasta on a plate, then a breast, sauce, some chopped green onion and sprinkled with mozzarella. Not bad.
And there's enough pasta and sauce for lunch at work tomorrow. I need to do stuff like this more often.
Yesterday, browned a pound of Jimmy Dean Italian Sausage. While that cooked, I dumped two bottles of Wal-Mart green pepper & mushroom spaghetti sauce in a pan and added some garlic and a couple of bits of other stuff. Yes, Wal-Mart sauce. I'm che-, uh, fiscally responsible, as I once mentioned. Also, it's easier than making sauce from scratch; I wasn't quite that inspired. Drained and added the sausage to the sauce and made pasta, and it was good.
Tonight I put some olive oil in a pan, sauteed a little garlic, then browned two chicken breasts in it, then added some of the sauce and simmered. While that was going heated up the leftover pasta and the rest of the sauce. When the chicken was done, put some pasta on a plate, then a breast, sauce, some chopped green onion and sprinkled with mozzarella. Not bad.
And there's enough pasta and sauce for lunch at work tomorrow. I need to do stuff like this more often.
It's November, for God's sake, what's with the tornados?
Let's see, mid-November and we're under a severe thunderstorm watch for another couple of hours, and there was a tornado this afternoon a few miles east of here.
The high tomorrow is supposed to be 45.
Have I ever mentioned the weather can be schizophrenic around here?
The high tomorrow is supposed to be 45.
Have I ever mentioned the weather can be schizophrenic around here?
Self-defense in Britain, continued
There is a movement in Britain to change their law to allow citazens to use whatever force necessary to protect themselves and their families from intruders. The forces of Law and Government are having conniptions at the thought, but people aren't backing off. Smallest Minority has hookups into two articles from the Sunday Telegraph, here and here, as they keep the noise up. And they'll have to. Any government, any agency, that has taken a power, a right, away from the citazen is generally loathe to give it up; it means they lose power and control over people. And as bad as things have been there, it'll take lots of kicking and screaming to get their government to even pretend to do something about it..
Warning: the second article has pictures of two old ladies who were beaten by burglars, and they're ugly. That there are two-legged things out there that would do this is all the reason needed to change that law. And why we need to make sure that the gun-grabbers and social-controllers in our government don't get to do the same things to us.
Warning: the second article has pictures of two old ladies who were beaten by burglars, and they're ugly. That there are two-legged things out there that would do this is all the reason needed to change that law. And why we need to make sure that the gun-grabbers and social-controllers in our government don't get to do the same things to us.
Tuesday, November 09, 2004
It's not sci-fi anymore
Belmont Club has a post on the current fighting in Fallujah
The description of a bunch of the stuff our guys are using reads like stuff out of both old and new sci-fi books. GPS and laser-guided artillery rounds as well as bombs, munitions to blow a hole in a wall so you don't have to use doors or windows to move through, each man with a radio that works hands-free so people and units are in constant communications, drones that allow instant feedback on the effect of an air or artillery strike... Give it a while for someone to bring out the prototype Armored Combat Suit and we're in Heinlein's worlds.
Think about this: infantry and armor with rifles, machine guns and cannon push the enemy back and force them to concentrate in one area, and they become artillery targets. Only instead of a mass of fire to blanket an area, one or two guided shells fall right on top of them.
They can't just duck around a corner from one unit and be gone, because that unit is talking to the others so everyone knows where the bad guys are going. If they concentrate in a small building, not worth heavy artillery, rockets or heavy machine guns take the building- and the bad guys- apart; it's quite a few years old now, but the Browning Heavy Machine Gun, .50 caliber, can still take a building apart, and anti-armor rockets will blow through a wall quite nicely.
And around the edges, the light infantry units and sniper teams are waiting, so the bad guys have Marines on one side, the Black Watch on the other, and death in the middle. They are screwed.
I once read that what slaughtered the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese regulars in the Tet Offensive was that they came out to fight in a manner U.S . forces had trained for for years; and this allowed artillery and air strikes to be used to fullest effect. What's happening now in Fallujah is the evolution of that. The Marines have trained for years for this kind of combat, weapon systems and communications systems that were ideas a few years ago are operational tools now, and the enemy has no place to hide.
The description of a bunch of the stuff our guys are using reads like stuff out of both old and new sci-fi books. GPS and laser-guided artillery rounds as well as bombs, munitions to blow a hole in a wall so you don't have to use doors or windows to move through, each man with a radio that works hands-free so people and units are in constant communications, drones that allow instant feedback on the effect of an air or artillery strike... Give it a while for someone to bring out the prototype Armored Combat Suit and we're in Heinlein's worlds.
Think about this: infantry and armor with rifles, machine guns and cannon push the enemy back and force them to concentrate in one area, and they become artillery targets. Only instead of a mass of fire to blanket an area, one or two guided shells fall right on top of them.
They can't just duck around a corner from one unit and be gone, because that unit is talking to the others so everyone knows where the bad guys are going. If they concentrate in a small building, not worth heavy artillery, rockets or heavy machine guns take the building- and the bad guys- apart; it's quite a few years old now, but the Browning Heavy Machine Gun, .50 caliber, can still take a building apart, and anti-armor rockets will blow through a wall quite nicely.
And around the edges, the light infantry units and sniper teams are waiting, so the bad guys have Marines on one side, the Black Watch on the other, and death in the middle. They are screwed.
I once read that what slaughtered the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese regulars in the Tet Offensive was that they came out to fight in a manner U.S . forces had trained for for years; and this allowed artillery and air strikes to be used to fullest effect. What's happening now in Fallujah is the evolution of that. The Marines have trained for years for this kind of combat, weapon systems and communications systems that were ideas a few years ago are operational tools now, and the enemy has no place to hide.
Monday, November 08, 2004
General goings on
It was nearly 70 today, supposed to be 65 tomorrow and Wednesday, and then the bottom drops out with a front coming through. So today was partly yardwork. Finish mowing, run the weedeater, and finish a carport repair. The carport is double-wide, very nice, but it leaks. At some point in the past part of the span between the supports started sagging. That let water pool, which made it sag worse, which sprung the seam between panels, so water builds up there and leaks through the seam- badly, in heavy rain.
So during the summer I got some long angle-iron, and some guttering. Cut to length and bend tabs on the ends of the angle-iron, drill and bolt to the supports, making sure there's a little bit of tilt toward the low side (I'm on a hill). Then, along the center, drilled holes through the bottom of the channels in the panels. Then mount the guttering to the angle-iron under the holes, and put a drain at the low end. Now the rain drains through the holes, into the gutter and out the low end, much better. But I didn't get the gutter hooked into the downspouts 'till today. Now, it's done.
There's a shop called Outdoor America that's having an inventory-reduction sale, so ran by there. Among other things, Streamlight flashlights 20% off. Hot damn! Their 'low-end' model G2 thus became more affordable, and is now on my shelf. As the Geek said, don't look into it! (no, I didn't. I just waved it into the edge of my vision, thank you very much).
By the way, how do you tell if the person next to you is an alien or human? Give them a flashlight; if they're human, they'll shine it in your eyes. Every damn time.
How to work up a new handload:
1. check your manual and find it doesn't list that bullet.
2. check your friend's manual, it doesn't list the powders you have.
3. spend a while on the net looking for something.
4. find something, and decide if the info is not going to turn your pistol into shrapnel.
5. Set up to load a few rounds.
6. get the cat off the table.
7. start loading
8. get the cat off the table.
9. finish and put the stuff away
10. get the cat off your chair. Furry little bugger.
Went to the range with a friend a couple of days ago, and I'm looking at the targets. We were, among other things, testing a couple of Martini target rifles with different ammo. Only problem is, they don't shoot badly with anything we tried. Mostly just a case of 'which is better?'. I just love problems like that. So easy to deal with.
I think I'm going to have some of my dad's home brew and relax now.
So during the summer I got some long angle-iron, and some guttering. Cut to length and bend tabs on the ends of the angle-iron, drill and bolt to the supports, making sure there's a little bit of tilt toward the low side (I'm on a hill). Then, along the center, drilled holes through the bottom of the channels in the panels. Then mount the guttering to the angle-iron under the holes, and put a drain at the low end. Now the rain drains through the holes, into the gutter and out the low end, much better. But I didn't get the gutter hooked into the downspouts 'till today. Now, it's done.
There's a shop called Outdoor America that's having an inventory-reduction sale, so ran by there. Among other things, Streamlight flashlights 20% off. Hot damn! Their 'low-end' model G2 thus became more affordable, and is now on my shelf. As the Geek said, don't look into it! (no, I didn't. I just waved it into the edge of my vision, thank you very much).
By the way, how do you tell if the person next to you is an alien or human? Give them a flashlight; if they're human, they'll shine it in your eyes. Every damn time.
How to work up a new handload:
1. check your manual and find it doesn't list that bullet.
2. check your friend's manual, it doesn't list the powders you have.
3. spend a while on the net looking for something.
4. find something, and decide if the info is not going to turn your pistol into shrapnel.
5. Set up to load a few rounds.
6. get the cat off the table.
7. start loading
8. get the cat off the table.
9. finish and put the stuff away
10. get the cat off your chair. Furry little bugger.
Went to the range with a friend a couple of days ago, and I'm looking at the targets. We were, among other things, testing a couple of Martini target rifles with different ammo. Only problem is, they don't shoot badly with anything we tried. Mostly just a case of 'which is better?'. I just love problems like that. So easy to deal with.
I think I'm going to have some of my dad's home brew and relax now.
Dipsticks in England
Raging Dave at Four Right Wing Wackos has a piece dealing with the ravings of one of the 'reality-based' people in England, name of Paul Routledge. He posts some of the article, and takes it apart.
The line from 'Quigley Down Under' comes to mind. "Well, lieutenant, we got rid of all our malcontents." /spit/ "We sent 'em back to England."
The line from 'Quigley Down Under' comes to mind. "Well, lieutenant, we got rid of all our malcontents." /spit/ "We sent 'em back to England."
Sunday, November 07, 2004
Law enforcement & private citazens
Gun Watch in Australia had a letter a while back from a sheriff's deputy in southern California that's a pretty bad picture of the attitude a lot of law enforcement officers have toward anyone not a member of the group.
A while further back, this post at Armed Females of America detailed the attitude of- especially- a lot of big-city cops as well.
This fits in with the increasing militarization of many law enforcement agencies. They act more and more like soldiers at war, less and less like cops on a beat. And in many cases seem to develop a less and less tolerant attitude toward the peasants- excuse me, plain citazens they deal with. They also tend to refer to people as 'civilians'. Now, if I'm not mistaken, a 'civilian' is someone who isn't serving, or has not served in the military. Tells something else about attitudes.
I said before, most cops are honest people working a job most of us would not want to do. But more and more are getting the attitude that anyone not in uniform is the enemy, or at least beneath consideration. And that's not good.
It also leads to more of the attitude that 'you should not do anything for yourself, you call us and let the official people take care of it'. Which in some areas is leading to the attitude in Britain; peasants should not act in self-defense, that's the job of the State, and if we're too late to save you, too bad.
And that's bad, too.
A while further back, this post at Armed Females of America detailed the attitude of- especially- a lot of big-city cops as well.
This fits in with the increasing militarization of many law enforcement agencies. They act more and more like soldiers at war, less and less like cops on a beat. And in many cases seem to develop a less and less tolerant attitude toward the peasants- excuse me, plain citazens they deal with. They also tend to refer to people as 'civilians'. Now, if I'm not mistaken, a 'civilian' is someone who isn't serving, or has not served in the military. Tells something else about attitudes.
I said before, most cops are honest people working a job most of us would not want to do. But more and more are getting the attitude that anyone not in uniform is the enemy, or at least beneath consideration. And that's not good.
It also leads to more of the attitude that 'you should not do anything for yourself, you call us and let the official people take care of it'. Which in some areas is leading to the attitude in Britain; peasants should not act in self-defense, that's the job of the State, and if we're too late to save you, too bad.
And that's bad, too.
Saturday, November 06, 2004
Good links
The Backseat Philosopher has a good breakdown of some of the communication problems between the sides.
Varifrank describes trying to explain some things to British and European coworkers.
Smallest Minority with more on self-defense in Britain, and some changes people are trying to make.
Weekly Standard on the other losers tuesday night.
Varifrank describes trying to explain some things to British and European coworkers.
Smallest Minority with more on self-defense in Britain, and some changes people are trying to make.
Weekly Standard on the other losers tuesday night.
Another nice site
The Diplomad is the place, a blog by foreign service officers, and their comments on the attitudes of their superiors sound familiar.
Ever read any of the 'Retief' books by Keith Laumer? You should. This sounds like the Terran Diplomatic Corps in real life.
Ever read any of the 'Retief' books by Keith Laumer? You should. This sounds like the Terran Diplomatic Corps in real life.
'Progressives'?
I've heard that word a lot over the last few years, mostly applied to themselves by people who- surprise, surprise/turn off Gomer voice/ think most people are too stupid/hate-filled/etc. to understand why they are right. Let's see, Soviet Union collapsed, check; People's Republic of China had to capitalize their economy in a lot of ways to keep from collapsing and still oppress everyone, check; Cuba is a basket case, has been for years, check; socialist governments all over are deeply in debt, have huge unemployment numbers and are going down the toilet, check; so why, when I read some 'progressive' plan for the world, does it read like excerpts or outtakes from the 'Communist Manifesto'? How is trying to do again a system that has failed everywhere 'progressive'?
'Course, I just learned there is a 'reality-based community' out there, which is /surprise, surprise/ mostly made up of 'progressives' who don't understand how the rest of the country can be so stupid as to not agree with them and is therefore not in touch with 'reality'.
Silly me. I thought reality had something to do with paying the bills, getting kids educated/REAL education, not indoctrination/, reading, shooting, making things, etc. Now I find that it means I have to agree with a bunch of people who think I'm a racist idiot if I don't.
Hey, folks? To quote somebody, "I do not think this word means what you think it does".
Update: I'm sure most of these people are progressive and reality-based as hell.
Link from Acidman
'Course, I just learned there is a 'reality-based community' out there, which is /surprise, surprise/ mostly made up of 'progressives' who don't understand how the rest of the country can be so stupid as to not agree with them and is therefore not in touch with 'reality'.
Silly me. I thought reality had something to do with paying the bills, getting kids educated/REAL education, not indoctrination/, reading, shooting, making things, etc. Now I find that it means I have to agree with a bunch of people who think I'm a racist idiot if I don't.
Hey, folks? To quote somebody, "I do not think this word means what you think it does".
Update: I'm sure most of these people are progressive and reality-based as hell.
Link from Acidman
This about sums it up
Blog called 'Power and Control' links to a post on another site wondering why Kerry lost that sums it up nicely:
"...some swarthy towel-heads are trying to kill us, and that Dubya is packin' heat."
I do believe that about covers it.
"...some swarthy towel-heads are trying to kill us, and that Dubya is packin' heat."
I do believe that about covers it.
Thursday, November 04, 2004
And today..
Steve notes how CNN is proving how pro-Bush they are.
Yasser Arafat is either dead or on the brink. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy. Normally I don't wish death on people, in this terrorist's case I'll make an exception.
Ann Coulter, she of the razor tongue and the body that needs a week on cheeseburgers, unloads on Kerry and Co. in her usual fashion.
And vairous and sundry people are linking to more of the "Americans are stupid" and "People who vote for Bush are stupid and bigoted" stuff being put out by various people. One woman is quoted as saying that she tells friends in Europe "New York is an island off the coast of Europe". As Reynolds points out, when you hold everyone else in the country in such contempt, you can pretty much forget about winning their votes.
Update: Instapundit has a note from CNN stating that it was some employee at
Netscape did the photo names:
"A web image and text disparaging President and Mrs. Bush currently circulating on the internet was not created, disseminated or posted by CNN at any time, as is alleged. It was done by an employee of Netscape and posted on Netscape.com. CNN had no knowledge of it until it surfaced on other websites."
So they may not have fallen completely through the grid.
Yasser Arafat is either dead or on the brink. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy. Normally I don't wish death on people, in this terrorist's case I'll make an exception.
Ann Coulter, she of the razor tongue and the body that needs a week on cheeseburgers, unloads on Kerry and Co. in her usual fashion.
And vairous and sundry people are linking to more of the "Americans are stupid" and "People who vote for Bush are stupid and bigoted" stuff being put out by various people. One woman is quoted as saying that she tells friends in Europe "New York is an island off the coast of Europe". As Reynolds points out, when you hold everyone else in the country in such contempt, you can pretty much forget about winning their votes.
Update: Instapundit has a note from CNN stating that it was some employee at
Netscape did the photo names:
"A web image and text disparaging President and Mrs. Bush currently circulating on the internet was not created, disseminated or posted by CNN at any time, as is alleged. It was done by an employee of Netscape and posted on Netscape.com. CNN had no knowledge of it until it surfaced on other websites."
So they may not have fallen completely through the grid.
The Day After
Is still good. Moonbats whining and screaming, etc.
I repeat from my previous post; if you run around calling anyone who disagrees with you a bigot, homophobe, murderer, etc., you ain't gonna get through to them. Correction: you will get through to them what contempt you hold them in for not being 'smart' enough to agree with you, and that does not make converts or polite conversation.
I know people I like, who I won't get into some conversations with, because we just cannot connect on them; they cannot understand how I can think the way I do, and vice versa. I know people who think violence is always wrong, no matter what. If your wife/mother/daughter/girlfriend is attacked by a rapist, she should not use violence to protect herself, because that makes her morally as wrong as the rapist. I cannot believe a rational human being can actually believe such a thing, that self-defense is as morally wrong as rape, but they do.
I know people who believe that the only reason anyone would own any firearm is because they intend to commit murder, probably on a minority-group member. To me that is so idiotic I'm not sure how to respond, but they do believe it.
I know people who think that if we don't take the opinion of the U.N. and the rest of the world into account, we have no right to take any action that *might* affect another country. And if other countries won't let you act, doesn't matter why because we should go by what they think. Point out that country B won't let you act because they have a business deal with the country causing you a problem, doesn't matter; you can't act without their approval! I think that's idiocy (see France/Germany/Russia and their Oil For Food Scam deals with Saddam) because you are trusting your safety to places that don't care if you live or die. But they think that's the only 'intelligent' way to act internationally.
I could deal with the arguments, but their attitude that I'm just not intelligent enough, not caring enough, not evolved enough, just makes me shut down. They just don't really give a crap about facts if they interfere with their feelings; in some cases if the facts show their idea wrong, well, that just shouldn't be, and that should be enough to change everything.
With some- not all, some- what makes it worse is that the U.S. is always wrong; it's always our fault, we should do everything differently, we should change, we should...etc. And I'm tired of it. I could more easily change lead to gold than get one of those people to admit that we didn't cause it/whatever 'it' is in this case/, or we didn't make it ok for some bunch of thugs to murder people.
A lot of those folks are very bothered by the idea of 'conservative Christians', or 'conservative/Orthodox Jews' carrying their beliefs into the political arena, but have no problem with their own, because they're different, they're right; some will object that theirs are not 'religeous' viewpoints, just 'right' beliefs. Doesn't matter they hold to them with the fervor of an Inquisitor strapping someone into a rack, no, they are just rational people with the 'right' beliefs. And if you disagree, you're back into the hater/bigot category.
This has gotten a bit out of my original intention, but it still covers some of this crap.
I think Bush has made some bad mistakes, both in things done and things not done; but when someone blows up into the 'Bushitler, chimp, raving drunk', crap, they're not dealing with facts, they're shoving a lot of emotion, mostly hate related into my face, and I walk away. It's not that I can't argue with them, it's that it doesn't matter what I say; anything that disagrees with their emotions on this is bad and wrong, and that's all there is to it.
Connected with this, after Bush was confirmed winner in 2000, a woman playing at an open-mike night at a local place made some commentary about how it hurt that 'her vote didn't count'. She's a lawyer, and says something like that. How do you argue with that?
I repeat from my previous post; if you run around calling anyone who disagrees with you a bigot, homophobe, murderer, etc., you ain't gonna get through to them. Correction: you will get through to them what contempt you hold them in for not being 'smart' enough to agree with you, and that does not make converts or polite conversation.
I know people I like, who I won't get into some conversations with, because we just cannot connect on them; they cannot understand how I can think the way I do, and vice versa. I know people who think violence is always wrong, no matter what. If your wife/mother/daughter/girlfriend is attacked by a rapist, she should not use violence to protect herself, because that makes her morally as wrong as the rapist. I cannot believe a rational human being can actually believe such a thing, that self-defense is as morally wrong as rape, but they do.
I know people who believe that the only reason anyone would own any firearm is because they intend to commit murder, probably on a minority-group member. To me that is so idiotic I'm not sure how to respond, but they do believe it.
I know people who think that if we don't take the opinion of the U.N. and the rest of the world into account, we have no right to take any action that *might* affect another country. And if other countries won't let you act, doesn't matter why because we should go by what they think. Point out that country B won't let you act because they have a business deal with the country causing you a problem, doesn't matter; you can't act without their approval! I think that's idiocy (see France/Germany/Russia and their Oil For Food Scam deals with Saddam) because you are trusting your safety to places that don't care if you live or die. But they think that's the only 'intelligent' way to act internationally.
I could deal with the arguments, but their attitude that I'm just not intelligent enough, not caring enough, not evolved enough, just makes me shut down. They just don't really give a crap about facts if they interfere with their feelings; in some cases if the facts show their idea wrong, well, that just shouldn't be, and that should be enough to change everything.
With some- not all, some- what makes it worse is that the U.S. is always wrong; it's always our fault, we should do everything differently, we should change, we should...etc. And I'm tired of it. I could more easily change lead to gold than get one of those people to admit that we didn't cause it/whatever 'it' is in this case/, or we didn't make it ok for some bunch of thugs to murder people.
A lot of those folks are very bothered by the idea of 'conservative Christians', or 'conservative/Orthodox Jews' carrying their beliefs into the political arena, but have no problem with their own, because they're different, they're right; some will object that theirs are not 'religeous' viewpoints, just 'right' beliefs. Doesn't matter they hold to them with the fervor of an Inquisitor strapping someone into a rack, no, they are just rational people with the 'right' beliefs. And if you disagree, you're back into the hater/bigot category.
This has gotten a bit out of my original intention, but it still covers some of this crap.
I think Bush has made some bad mistakes, both in things done and things not done; but when someone blows up into the 'Bushitler, chimp, raving drunk', crap, they're not dealing with facts, they're shoving a lot of emotion, mostly hate related into my face, and I walk away. It's not that I can't argue with them, it's that it doesn't matter what I say; anything that disagrees with their emotions on this is bad and wrong, and that's all there is to it.
Connected with this, after Bush was confirmed winner in 2000, a woman playing at an open-mike night at a local place made some commentary about how it hurt that 'her vote didn't count'. She's a lawyer, and says something like that. How do you argue with that?
Wednesday, November 03, 2004
Post-election reactions
Scary ones. I can see being unhappy your guy lost, but some of the stuff linked to on Instapundit is scary as hell. TBogg (no, I'm not providing a link) had some of the following to say:
"Four more years of American soldiers being used as cannon fodder.
Four more years of scientific decisions being made by people who believe in a ghost in the clouds.
Four more years of racists and lunatics for judicial appointments."
and
"Four more years of fear and darkness and racism and hatred and stupidity and guns and bad country music."
ending with a quote from another guy:
"Good, Go Ahead, America, Choke on Your Own Vomit, You Deserve To Die".
That's just at one place. So according to these folks, if you voted for Bush you are stupid, superstitious, racist, full of hate and have a bunch of guns solely to terrify and kill anybody who disagrees with you.
I'm supposed to consider these people to be someone with 'just a little different viewpoint'? These people hate me. And from the sound of it, want me dead. If not dead, then at least controlled enough so as not to be a danger to their sensitive souls. Oops, excuse me, this one is an atheist so saying he has a soul proves how stupid I am.
Sorry, folks, I have no particular desire to extend a hand to people who want to break it off..
On the other side, Between Hope and Fear had a say about what the Democrat party needs to do. The first comment? "Go f*** yourself".
Yeah, nice, reasonable people.
"Four more years of American soldiers being used as cannon fodder.
Four more years of scientific decisions being made by people who believe in a ghost in the clouds.
Four more years of racists and lunatics for judicial appointments."
and
"Four more years of fear and darkness and racism and hatred and stupidity and guns and bad country music."
ending with a quote from another guy:
"Good, Go Ahead, America, Choke on Your Own Vomit, You Deserve To Die".
That's just at one place. So according to these folks, if you voted for Bush you are stupid, superstitious, racist, full of hate and have a bunch of guns solely to terrify and kill anybody who disagrees with you.
I'm supposed to consider these people to be someone with 'just a little different viewpoint'? These people hate me. And from the sound of it, want me dead. If not dead, then at least controlled enough so as not to be a danger to their sensitive souls. Oops, excuse me, this one is an atheist so saying he has a soul proves how stupid I am.
Sorry, folks, I have no particular desire to extend a hand to people who want to break it off..
On the other side, Between Hope and Fear had a say about what the Democrat party needs to do. The first comment? "Go f*** yourself".
Yeah, nice, reasonable people.
Who's in the White House?
BUSH, BUSH, BUSHBUSH!
I know but I can't help it. For a while early this morning, before I checked results, I had the same sick feeling in my middle I had when Carter won in 1976. And then I checked, and for a moment, I was in a state of grace.
Oh, yeah. Popular vote and electoral votes both. And Kerry/Edwards don't have the cojones or integrity to concede. But they will.
And, according to the news, the Republican party picked up seats in the House and Senate both. Hot damn! That this includes Tom Daschle being kicked in the short & curlies just makes it even better.
Note: the Republican party does not own my vote. Problem is, most conservative/libertarian politicians are there, so that's often who I wind up voting for.
Damn, on news like this, I should buy a new gun. Something with a bayonet lug, I think...
(and ammo, lots of ammo)
I know but I can't help it. For a while early this morning, before I checked results, I had the same sick feeling in my middle I had when Carter won in 1976. And then I checked, and for a moment, I was in a state of grace.
Oh, yeah. Popular vote and electoral votes both. And Kerry/Edwards don't have the cojones or integrity to concede. But they will.
And, according to the news, the Republican party picked up seats in the House and Senate both. Hot damn! That this includes Tom Daschle being kicked in the short & curlies just makes it even better.
Note: the Republican party does not own my vote. Problem is, most conservative/libertarian politicians are there, so that's often who I wind up voting for.
Damn, on news like this, I should buy a new gun. Something with a bayonet lug, I think...
(and ammo, lots of ammo)
Tuesday, November 02, 2004
Neat stuff!
Just watch a very cool setup. Neighbor had a portable storage building sitting in the driveway, and the man just arrived to pick it up. Flatbed truck, carrying a mobile lifting rig. Looks like I-beam structure, powered and on its own wheels. It can widen-narrow, all four wheeled legs lift and lower independantly. Lower them and drive it off the truck, adjust size and move it over the storage pod. Lower, hook up, then lift the pod. Back the truck under it, center it & set it down, the close the rig up to the sides of the bed, lift the legs up for clearance, lock it all down and drive away.
Someone did a find job designing this setup, and I hope they get rich with it.
Someone did a find job designing this setup, and I hope they get rich with it.
Back from voting
No, I'm not going to blog this election. I actually have things to do other than read somebody's post and scream.
Not too bad. My polling place was busy, about 30-35 minute wait. Oklahoma has a number of state questions on the ballot as well, including the one that pisses me off, a big jump in tobacco taxes with the proceeds 'going to health care'.
Let's see; you want people to stop smoking, so you raise the taxes, and say you'll fund health care programs with the money. So if you succeed, and people stop smoking, there'll be no money for those programs, so you'll have to raise taxes somewhere else to make up for it. No thank you. I occasionally smoke a pipe, and dislike cigarettes, and I'm sick of this crap. If these weenies actually thought tobacco was so horrible, they'd be trying to ban it, not increasing taxes on it. But they're greedy, they want that money. Which means they either don't believe it's so horrible, or don't care as long as they get a payoff. Screw 'em.
There was a guy in line from the fire marshall's office, and he was armed. I mentioned once before all the various government functionaries who get to carry, here's another.
As to the election, we'll see.
Not too bad. My polling place was busy, about 30-35 minute wait. Oklahoma has a number of state questions on the ballot as well, including the one that pisses me off, a big jump in tobacco taxes with the proceeds 'going to health care'.
Let's see; you want people to stop smoking, so you raise the taxes, and say you'll fund health care programs with the money. So if you succeed, and people stop smoking, there'll be no money for those programs, so you'll have to raise taxes somewhere else to make up for it. No thank you. I occasionally smoke a pipe, and dislike cigarettes, and I'm sick of this crap. If these weenies actually thought tobacco was so horrible, they'd be trying to ban it, not increasing taxes on it. But they're greedy, they want that money. Which means they either don't believe it's so horrible, or don't care as long as they get a payoff. Screw 'em.
There was a guy in line from the fire marshall's office, and he was armed. I mentioned once before all the various government functionaries who get to carry, here's another.
As to the election, we'll see.
Monday, November 01, 2004
Vote! Unless you don't know who to vote for,
in which case stay away from the polling place. Do not mark a ballot. By this time, if you don't know who or what to vote for, you shouldn't. But please, if you DO know, vote.
I will not say that crap about 'I don't care who you vote for', because I do. I obviously think Bush is better for us right now than Kerry can ever be. But if you really give a damn about this country, and have a real idea about how things should go, then vote.
I will not say that crap about 'I don't care who you vote for', because I do. I obviously think Bush is better for us right now than Kerry can ever be. But if you really give a damn about this country, and have a real idea about how things should go, then vote.
Sunday, October 31, 2004
Inventiveness
Sometimes, I'm amazed at the things people have discovered. Someone goes out to do one thing, finds something else and uses it. Sometimes the world changes because of it, other times it's just a better way to take care of the job at hand. Sometimes someone just finds an amazing way through a problem.
My son once was on a camping trip with a friend, and on the way back the fuel pump died. Twenty-five miles from home, secondary road. The friend had a gas can for the mower in the trunk, so my son a: disconnected the gas line at the pump and plugged it, b: pulled all the windshield washer lines and hooked them together, c: hooked them to the gas can and carburetor, d: held the gas can on the roof for a gravity-feed to the carb and drove home. Slowly, but drove home.
I would never in this world have thought of that. Not the only oddball way around a problem he's found. He's enrolled in auto mechanics classes, and eventually wants to do customizing work. Personally, I think he needs to get the engineering degree, I think he'd do well at it.
Odd discovery: the Kalahari Bushmen use a grub to poison their arrows. The grub is only found in certain kinds of places, about 2 or three feet underground. Roll the grub between fingers, then squeeze it's body juices onto the points; from what I've read, very lethal. Ok, someone had to a: find the grub, b: find out it was poison and could be used on arrowpoints. How the hell did someone come across it in the first place, and then how did they find out the damn thing was poisonous? But someone did.
I mentioned before the mix the Anglo-Saxons used to case-harden iron. Pigeon droppings, bone meal, leather scraps, various other things mixed into a paste. How did someone come to try any of these things, let alone work up the mix? And it works.
Our constitution says 'all men are created equal'. As history shows, that's created with equal chance to try; God knows in different ways, different people are far more capable than others.
Probably a damn good thing, too.
My son once was on a camping trip with a friend, and on the way back the fuel pump died. Twenty-five miles from home, secondary road. The friend had a gas can for the mower in the trunk, so my son a: disconnected the gas line at the pump and plugged it, b: pulled all the windshield washer lines and hooked them together, c: hooked them to the gas can and carburetor, d: held the gas can on the roof for a gravity-feed to the carb and drove home. Slowly, but drove home.
I would never in this world have thought of that. Not the only oddball way around a problem he's found. He's enrolled in auto mechanics classes, and eventually wants to do customizing work. Personally, I think he needs to get the engineering degree, I think he'd do well at it.
Odd discovery: the Kalahari Bushmen use a grub to poison their arrows. The grub is only found in certain kinds of places, about 2 or three feet underground. Roll the grub between fingers, then squeeze it's body juices onto the points; from what I've read, very lethal. Ok, someone had to a: find the grub, b: find out it was poison and could be used on arrowpoints. How the hell did someone come across it in the first place, and then how did they find out the damn thing was poisonous? But someone did.
I mentioned before the mix the Anglo-Saxons used to case-harden iron. Pigeon droppings, bone meal, leather scraps, various other things mixed into a paste. How did someone come to try any of these things, let alone work up the mix? And it works.
Our constitution says 'all men are created equal'. As history shows, that's created with equal chance to try; God knows in different ways, different people are far more capable than others.
Probably a damn good thing, too.
Self-defense, here and there
Instapundit linked to an article by Joyce Lee Malcolm contrasting the right of self-defense in the U.S. and Britain.
Short version, in Britain you can't.
Or you can, but you'll probably go to jail for it. Even if they attack you in your home, or with a weapon and you're unarmed, etc. Hurt your attacker, and you're screwed. Scare your attacker badly, you're screwed.
I repeat from Smallest Minority, "Stick a fork in Britain, they're done".
Short version, in Britain you can't.
Or you can, but you'll probably go to jail for it. Even if they attack you in your home, or with a weapon and you're unarmed, etc. Hurt your attacker, and you're screwed. Scare your attacker badly, you're screwed.
I repeat from Smallest Minority, "Stick a fork in Britain, they're done".
Scary stuff
Not the Halloween party, which was good. What's been happening in the press.
Just One Minute has a pretty good roundup of the nonsense on the Al QaQaa ammo dump story. And it all makes me pretty damn mad. I grew up with the idea that the nice man on the evening news, and the newspapers, gave you the facts so you knew what was going on. You could trust them on that. Yeah, the papers had editorials, and would generally come out for one candidate or the other in an election, but the basic facts you didn't need to worry about. Turns out, you do.
Starting long before the Rathergate story, and continuing with this, we've got a solid pattern of mainstream media knowingly putting out false, or doubtful at best, information with the express idea of affecting the election. The NYT has been getting whacked on the bias in their work for years now, so have many of the bigshot Evening News newsreaders, but this is so blatant that it's sickening. I don't expect reporters to be totally unbiased; they're human. I DO expect them, as professionals, to put their bias aside when they're covering a story and dig up the facts. And if the facts mean the story they were handed is crap, well hell, there's a story right there! Possibly a big one. But that's not the story some of these clowns wanted, so it doesn't count.
Look as this mess. Two major media outlets, the NYT and CBS, took a cooked-up story/that they could have known was cooked with a little research, assuming they wanted to find out/ and planned to put it out about 36 hours before the election, which you cannot but think was done deliberately so the Bush campaign couldn't have time to properly answer it. They broke it early because some bloggers caught wind of it and started talking. So they broke a badly flawed report early. As Powerline put it, "When the Times runs a false, half-baked story, it isn't their fault: they had to do it lest people get wind of the false, half-baked story from some other source first".
And CBS? Oh, God, what is their damn problem? They stick their nads firmly in a pencil sharpener and cranked firmly with the Texas Air National Guard story, made it worse, lied and stonewalled until beaten into submission. Still they're at it; the investigation will wait 'till after the election 'so they aren't seen as trying to influence it'. That didn't bother them one damn bit before, but they sure got sensitive all of a sudden. And then they jump into this;
a BS story pushed by a U.N. official pissed at Bush, and it doesn't really matter how truthful it is, doesn't it just fit so nicely? So they do it again, and get caught again, and act like it's not their fault.(burgler: What am I doing here? What are you doing here at 2 a.m.?)
As someone put it a couple of days ago, how long has some of this been going on? How many big stories in the past were crap like this, but there wasn't a really good way to check it and get the word out? How long, and in how many ways, has the 'profession' of journalism been screwing us, and telling us we should thank them for it?
This just about ruins the damn day.
Just One Minute has a pretty good roundup of the nonsense on the Al QaQaa ammo dump story. And it all makes me pretty damn mad. I grew up with the idea that the nice man on the evening news, and the newspapers, gave you the facts so you knew what was going on. You could trust them on that. Yeah, the papers had editorials, and would generally come out for one candidate or the other in an election, but the basic facts you didn't need to worry about. Turns out, you do.
Starting long before the Rathergate story, and continuing with this, we've got a solid pattern of mainstream media knowingly putting out false, or doubtful at best, information with the express idea of affecting the election. The NYT has been getting whacked on the bias in their work for years now, so have many of the bigshot Evening News newsreaders, but this is so blatant that it's sickening. I don't expect reporters to be totally unbiased; they're human. I DO expect them, as professionals, to put their bias aside when they're covering a story and dig up the facts. And if the facts mean the story they were handed is crap, well hell, there's a story right there! Possibly a big one. But that's not the story some of these clowns wanted, so it doesn't count.
Look as this mess. Two major media outlets, the NYT and CBS, took a cooked-up story/that they could have known was cooked with a little research, assuming they wanted to find out/ and planned to put it out about 36 hours before the election, which you cannot but think was done deliberately so the Bush campaign couldn't have time to properly answer it. They broke it early because some bloggers caught wind of it and started talking. So they broke a badly flawed report early. As Powerline put it, "When the Times runs a false, half-baked story, it isn't their fault: they had to do it lest people get wind of the false, half-baked story from some other source first".
And CBS? Oh, God, what is their damn problem? They stick their nads firmly in a pencil sharpener and cranked firmly with the Texas Air National Guard story, made it worse, lied and stonewalled until beaten into submission. Still they're at it; the investigation will wait 'till after the election 'so they aren't seen as trying to influence it'. That didn't bother them one damn bit before, but they sure got sensitive all of a sudden. And then they jump into this;
a BS story pushed by a U.N. official pissed at Bush, and it doesn't really matter how truthful it is, doesn't it just fit so nicely? So they do it again, and get caught again, and act like it's not their fault.(burgler: What am I doing here? What are you doing here at 2 a.m.?)
As someone put it a couple of days ago, how long has some of this been going on? How many big stories in the past were crap like this, but there wasn't a really good way to check it and get the word out? How long, and in how many ways, has the 'profession' of journalism been screwing us, and telling us we should thank them for it?
This just about ruins the damn day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)