Monthly Archives: November 2010

A chilling effect

Posted on by

Via Say Uncle and Alan I found this:

The memo, which actually takes the form of an administrative directive, appears to be the product of undated but recent high level meetings between Napolitano, John Pistole, head of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA),and one or more of Obama’s national security advisors. This document officially addresses those who are opposed to, or engaged in the disruption of the implementation of the enhanced airport screening procedures as “domestic extremists.”

The introductory paragraph of the multi-page document states that it is issued “in response to the growing public backlash against enhanced TSA security screening procedures and the agents conducting the screening process.” Implicit within the same section is that the recently enhanced security screening procedures implemented at U.S. airports, and the measures to be taken in response to the negative public backlash as detailed [in this directive], have the full support of the President. In other words, Obama not only endorses the enhanced security screening, but the measures outlined in this directive to be taken in response to public objections.

The terminology contained within the reported memo is indeed troubling. It labels any person who “interferes” with TSA airport security screening procedure protocol and operations by actively objecting to the established screening process, “including but not limited to the anticipated national opt-out day” as a “domestic extremist.” The label is then broadened to include “any person, group or alternative media source” that actively objects to, causes others to object to, supports and/or elicits support for anyone who engages in such travel disruptions at U.S. airports in response to the enhanced security procedures.

For individuals who engaged in such activity at screening points, it instructs TSA operations to obtain the identities of those individuals and other applicable information and submit the same electronically to the Homeland Environment Threat Analysis Division, the Extremism and Radicalization branch of the Office of Intelligence & Analysis (IA) division of the Department of Homeland Security.

The way I read this is that people exercising their specific enumerated right of free speech will be reported to the Department of Homeland Security. Doesn’t that constitute a “chilling effect”? Can the entire chain of thugs all the way up to Obama be charged with violation of 18 USC 241  and/or 18 USC 242?

Quote of the day—John Richardson

Posted on by

The Brady Center is about as effective and relevant as TSA which doesn’t say much for either organization. They also share the small-minded trait of getting nasty after having been called out on their goofs. The Brady Center certainly doesn’t provide a very good example of how adults should behave.

John Richardson
November 24, 2010
The Brady Center Doesn’t Act Like Adults
[They are in a desperate situation and desperate people do strange things.—Joe]

Random rant of the day

Posted on by

I don’t expect but maybe one person out of a 1000 to remember the Quadratic Equation—even though my algebra teacher wrote in my yearbook that if I forgot everything else she wanted me to remember that one thing. I don’t expect but maybe one person out of ten to be able count change without a computer someplace in the process. But there is one “math thing” that is starting to annoy me. I’ve heard this one claim for decades and I have never heard anyone else point out the obvious fallacy. It’s like an urban myth that everyone believes even though nearly everyone with a room temperature I.Q. could demonstrate it is false.

What finally tweaked me enough to do something about it was listening to a podcast by someone who claims to be smart enough that he should know better. I’m withholding the name to protect the guilty, but what was said was something like, “80% of the population thinks they are better than average drivers. That’s mathematically impossible!” Grrr…

Try proving that without resorting to a far less common definition of “average”.

A year or two ago in a much different forum someone else made a similar statement about penis sizes. I politely explained they were full of it and it hasn’t come up again (pun intended).

Now, with a much larger audience, I will now explain the issue using different example  to (mostly) save you from thoughts about penis dimensions. I hope I don’t have to be subjected to this myth again, and if I am I will be able to just glare at them and send them a link to this post.

Imagine we have a sample of 50 male/female couples. All the people, except one, had their spouse as their one and only sex partner (I told you to imagine, remember?). It turns out that before the age of government education loans and grants Trixie earned her way through medical school the old fashion way—in bed. She had 1000 sexual partners prior to her spouse.

Lets compute the average (usually understood to be the arithmetic mean) number of sexual partners in this sample.

MeanSexualPartners = TotalSexualPartners/NumberOfPeople
MeanSexualPartners = ((99 x 1) + (1 x 1001))/100
MeanSexualPartners = 1100/100
MeanSexualPartners = 11

In this case 99% had 1 sexual partner and can truthfully and correctly state they have had fewer than the average number of sexual partners. Furthermore, 99% can correctly state they have had less than 10% of the average number of sexual partners.

I will leave the drivers and penis dimension examples as exercises for the reader.

Quote of the day–jdberger

Posted on by

Much like the Antis warnings of shootouts over parking spaces, violent gunfights in movie theatres and general “Dodge City” mayhem, Florida’s crime rate continues to fall, just like the crime rate of the other 39 States who have legislated Shall Issue Concealed Carry. 1.6 million Floridians with CCW permits – crime rates fall.

You’d think, with all that money, that Paul Helmke would be able to buy a clue.

jdberger 
November 17, 2010
Surprisingly, another one of Brady Campaign’s Warnings Falls Flat
[Maybe the problem is that Helmke and friends don’t have any money and can’t buy a clue. How else can you explain they are trying to revive dead issues?—Joe]

The Science is Settled

Posted on by

As we all now know, if you want to answer a question scientifically, you take a poll.  That’s the New Scientific Method.  Scientific American magazine took such a poll regarding anthropogenic Gluball Worming (that’s Kim Du Toit’s term, IIRC) and since they didn’t like the results, it would seem Reasoned DiscourseTM has kicked in.  I suppose the New Scientific Method will have to be amended – you take a poll of Open Society socialists only.  Then you’ll get the right results.

This from Hockey Schtick, which has ostensibly maintained a link to the unwanted results.  Take it for what you will.  Do your own investigation.  Myself, I find it hard to believe even though I know the left like the back of my hand and therefore such things should come as no surprise.  I heard of this poll on the Dennis Prager show last week, and figured I should share.

I used to subscribe to Scientific American, until I received the impression that desperate academics were using it merely as a vehicle for getting published.  I got tired of wading through so much evidence of non-inspiration, just to find the few interesting tidbits.  Still I’ll give them credit for being the only place I’d heard of superfluids, pre internet.

To me it’s not terribly important one way or the other.  The left has been crying “Wolf!” for generations now and it has worn thin, and worn out, for me decades ago.  The planet Earth was supposed to run out of oil in the 1980s, and so we were supposed to adopt more socialism.  The “Population Time Bomb” was going to get us by then too, we were told as elementary school students, and so we were supposed to adopt more socialism including forced population controls.  The planet was going to freeze up in a new ice age, we were told back in the 1960s, and then it became Glueball Worming, and now it’s “Climate Change”.  Those are just a few highlights, but this crap has been non-stop for what – about 150 years?  They’ve lost control of the narrative now.  What will happen as a result?

I figure it’ll have to get more down to the point – It’ll have to be plain old threats from the left at some point.  When the spoiled child’s attempts at lying and manipulation fall flat, the all-out tantrums come next.  The best we can do I suppose is ignore them, but when they start breaking things it gets difficult.

Google and privacy

Posted on by

Via email from Chet:

In the past I have said I don’t mind private business getting overbearing as much as I do the government doing so. But when an industry leader uses the invasion of your privacy to it’s advantage without repercussions the rest of the industry is almost forced to follow along or get left in the financial dust. And once the technology is deployed and a profit can be made selling it to the government someone will do that too. It won’t matter how evil it is (read IBM and the Holocaust), if the price is right, and with a government involved the price could be you (or your company) continuing to survive, the information will be abused.

There needs to be repercussion for companies who do this. The “noise” and the boycotts need to start before the information is abused.

I know a lot more than I am at liberty to say and it hurts to bite my tongue this hard…

Note: Full disclosure—I work for Microsoft who is a competitor of Google.

Security Theater gets attention

Posted on by

Via email from Kris comes this link and an image from Gizmodo which I continued following to find the artist here. This is the image:

http://assets.arlosites.com/stills/17587011/2a87999b00.jpg

Also from Kris is this collection of TSA bumper stickers:

On the more serious side is Bruce Schneier (via Chet) with my favorite section being:

There’s talk about the health risks of the machines, but I can’t believe you won’t get more radiation on the flight. Here’s some data:

A typical dental X-ray exposes the patient to about 2 millirems of radiation. According to one widely cited estimate, exposing each of 10,000 people to one rem (that is, 1,000 millirems) of radiation will likely lead to 8 excess cancer deaths. Using our assumption of linearity, that means that exposure to the 2 millirems of a typical dental X-ray would lead an individual to have an increased risk of dying from cancer of 16 hundred-thousandths of one percent. Given that very small risk, it is easy to see why most rational people would choose to undergo dental X-rays every few years to protect their teeth.

More importantly for our purposes, assuming that the radiation in a backscatter X-ray is about a hundredth the dose of a dental X-ray, we find that a backscatter X-ray increases the odds of dying from cancer by about 16 ten millionths of one percent. That suggests that for every billion passengers screened with backscatter radiation, about 16 will die from cancer as a result.

Given that there will be 600 million airplane passengers per year, that makes the machines deadlier than the terrorists.

Nate Silver on the hidden cost of these new airport security measures.

According to the Cornell study, roughly 130 inconvenienced travelers died every three months as a result of additional traffic fatalities brought on by substituting ground transit for air transit. That’s the equivalent of four fully-loaded Boeing 737s crashing each year.

Hidden costs… That is something that is difficult to get across to many people. Just like gun control. Ban all the guns and the total crimes committed with firearms will probably go down but the crime rate may actually increase because having unarmed or poorly armed victims enables crime. It appears that is just too difficult of a concept for some people.

I’m not sure how to handle this problem. If they didn’t have (or threaten to have) the force of government behind them it would be fairly easy to ignore them and let Darwin take care of them. But that isn’t the way it works. They can use government to force us all to back over the cliff trying to avoid a nut case in front of us who pops up and says “Boogie! Boogie!” once every few years. We should just allowed to carry our guns and put a bullet in his head when he shows himself.

It seems people are beginning to realize the price they are paying for the security theater but will they be willing to embrace freedom and self-reliance?

Whatever the outcome it makes things worse for gun control. We should be able to draw the parallel between security on an airplane and security in schools, office buildings, and college campuses. If this is what it takes to make things safe on an airplane why should it take any less to make a dorm room “safe’?

How many people do you think will be tolerate this sort of “security” every time they enter a building or any other “gun free zone”? I don’t know the answer but we should start asking the question.

Update: I forgot about Rob’s email that I had saved away:

And from Mike:

Quote of the day—Tamara K.

Posted on by

What you mean “us”, Kemosabe?

The day you’re standing there watching while some anonymous McDonald’s washout of a rent-a-cop is giving Michelle and the girls a full TSA probulation at Andrews AFB before y’all jet off to Martha’s Vineyard or Madrid is the day you will show a shred of leadership on this issue.

Until then, you can put a sock in it. Until the Presidential Junk gets a fondlin’, you’re just talking out your teleprompter.

You first, Barry; you first.

Tamara K.
November 21, 2010
Step up and show some leadership, Mr. President.
[Today is privacy day at The View From North Central Idaho. I received email about stuff that I just had to share. It will be up in a few minutes. Tamara sets the tone.—Joe]

Ammo test

Posted on by

About a month ago I received an email from Steven Otterbacher at BulkAmmo.com:

Hi Joe,
I really appreciate your posting about our opening a few weeks ago (https://blog.joehuffman.org/2010/08/30/bulk-ammo/) ; things are going well and I appreciate your help!

I have an idea I wanted to run past you:

We just started carrying Fiocchi ammo and are trying to get the word out about it.  If we shipped you a box, would you be willing to give it a fair try and post a review about it?

As long as you link back to the category page on our website (i.e. http://www.bulkammo.com/handgun/bulk-.40-s-w-ammo – maybe with anchor-text like “Bulk 40 cal ammo” or “bulk 40 S&W ammo”), not the product page, we are 100% fine with a positive or negative review – whatever is truthful based on your experience – we just want you to give it a chance!
If you are interested, which product/caliber do you prefer:

•         http://www.bulkammo.com/bulk-9mm-ammo-9mm158fmjsubfiocchi-50
•         http://www.bulkammo.com/bulk-223-ammo-223rem40hvmaxfiocchi-50
•         http://www.bulkammo.com/bulk-40-s-w-ammo-40sw180jhpxtpfiocchi-50

If you are interested, just confirm you are on board, let me know which caliber you prefer, and then give me your shipping information (and confirm that you meet are terms of sale – i.e. you are over 21, are legally able to own this ammo, etc, etc) and I will get this ammo shipped out to you ASAP!

If this goes well, we might even be able to do a few more as time goes on!

I appreciate your time and look forward to hearing from you soon!

Thanks,
Steven

I accepted his offer and asked for the .40 S&W 180 grain ammo. I was on vacation at the time and there were various things like blowing up pumpkins that kept me from getting to the ammo testing until today. I don’t have a good place to do this type of testing in the Seattle area and had to wait until I could get out to the Boomershoot site.

Since I was going to have everything set up for group and velocity testing I decided to test some other ammo at the same time.

The ammo I actually received was not the JHPs but FMJ. I didn’t realize that until I got out on the range with all the JHPs I was ready to compare to. I did the comparisons anyway.

Rounds fired: 10
Gun: STI Eagle 5.1 with a KKM Precision barrel.
Temperature: 30 F
Elevation: 3000 feet
Chronograph: CED Millennium
Distance to Chronograph: 11’ to first screen
Distance between screens: 2’
Distance to target: 25’
Bullet mass: 180 grains (except the Remington Golden Sabers which were 165 grains)

Here is my setup and the ammo used:

IMG_4246Web2010IMG_4247Web2010

The bag of lentils was torn by the muzzle blast on the first shot and I switched to a roll of paper towels to replace the leather sandbag I had left at home.

The handloads were assembled in 1998 for bowling pin shoots. I used Winchester cases with Rainer Restrike JHP bullets over 6.4 grains of VV N350 powder.

The following table describes the velocity performance at 12’ from the muzzle. If you want velocity at the muzzle add about 4.5 fps to the numbers below.

Manufacture

Product

Mean

High

Low

SDev

ES

BVAC

BV40-2N

962

981

948

9

32

Fiocchi

40SWD

1009

1038

975

15

53

Remington

Golden Saber

1120

1138

1093

15

45

Winchester

Ranger SXT RA40T

988

1016

961

18

54

Speer

Gold Dot

1044

1057

1030

8

27

Black Hills

JHP

1050

1075

1033

11

42

Handloads

Rainer Restrike JHP

1001

1033

941

24

91

Feeding was perfect with all ammo types.

Accuracy information can be derived from the picture below (click to enbiggen enough to see the bullet holes and the ammo names on the targets). The target on the top right is the BVAC. I didn’t label that target in the field because I couldn’t remember the name of the ammo. It was a bulk buy and I had transferred it from the original boxes (of 500 each) into ammo cans.

The accuracy was acceptable for everything except my handloads and perhaps the BVAC remanufactured FMJs. The Black Hills and the Fiocchi ammo did the best.

I was aiming at the bottom edge of the black to get the maximum contrast with the sights as that sliver of “white” disappeared into the black. The order in which the targets were shot is as in the table above.

IMG_4248Web2010

For self-defense ammo I don’t really care much if the group size is one inch or three inches at 25 feet. Nearly all self-defense shootings are at ranges less than that and the nearly all ammo is going to have enough accuracy to hit the target. The shooter is going to be the dominate factor.

What is important is the velocity of the bullet, the expansion diameter, and depth of penetration. The penetration depth is also affected by the covering of the target. Shirts, jackets, windshield glass, etc. all make a difference. I didn’t have the time or enough ammo to do a full scale test of everything but I planned to do an expansion test with water.

I put a concrete paving stone in the bottom of a old diaper container that was laying around in the garage and put five gallons of water on top of it. This gave me about 15 inches of water to shoot into. I put the paving stone in the bottom to make sure the bullet wouldn’t punch a hole in the bottom if the water wasn’t deep enough.

As I prepared to fire into the container I tried to remember what had happened when Myth Busters did similar tests. I remembered that the 9mm FMJ had surprising depth of penetration and that the water splash was impressive. I keep thinking there was something more I should remember… what was it?

I anticipated getting severely splashed with water but that wasn’t the thing I should have worried about. I fired from about four feet above the container and only my hand and the gun got a little wet. After firing I was pretty sure I just relearned with Myth Busters had learned. The outward pressure of the water is quite strong. The pictures below tell the story:

IMG_4253Web2010IMG_4255Web2010

Yes. The container was blown completely in two and split down the side. The bullet fully penetrated the water and impacted the paving stone.

The bullet jacket completely separated from the core. Here are the bullet pictures (click to see higher resolution versions):

IMG_4258Web2010IMG_4259Web2010

IMG_4261Web2010IMG_4262Web2010

IMG_4266Web2010

If you know your bullets the jacket in the first picture will tell you which bullet it was. If you can’t guess I’ll put the answer in the comments by EOD on Monday.

Quote of the day—Lyle Keeney

Posted on by

Victimhood is cherished by the left. As one of their media of exchange it is like gold to them. It is one of the highest forms of existence, for which they all long, to which they all aspire, and which they would have us all attain at their hands as payment in kind.

Lyle Keeney
November 21, 2010
Comment to Quote of the day—Kurt Hofmann
[This is in regards to Virginia Tech gun control victim Colin Goddard representing the Brady Campaign.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Chris Cox

Posted on by

They might as well have put an arsonist in charge of the fire department.


Chris Cox
November 17, 2010
Executive director, NRA Institute for Legislative Action.
Cox is referring to the appointment of Andrew Traver as director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE). 　






[This statement indicates Cox is operating on the assumption that the ATF serves as valid a purpose as the fire department. I’m not at all convinced it does and I’m not convinced Cox believes that either.


I think a better analogy would be putting a KKK Grand Wizard in charge of the Bureau of Minority Regulation.–Joe]

Quote of the day—Kurt Hofmann

Posted on by

We are expected to accept Goddard as some kind of expert on our rights–as having some unique insight about how to legitimately infringe on that which shall not be infringed–not because of extensive study on his part of Constitutional law (his major was international studies), but because he was shot.  When he argues that continuing the mandated defenselessness policies on college campuses is necessary for safety (despite how poorly that worked at VA Tech and elsewhere), we are similarly asked to accept that he is an “expert” on the subject, not because of his extensive training in self-defense (which I have never seen claimed), but again because he was shot.  By that standard, I suppose everyone who survives a heart attack is now a cardiologist.

Kurt Hofmann
November 15, 2010
‘Gun control’ gets a new poster boy
[Oh! I like this game:

  • Everyone who has ever been in an automobile wreck is now a traffic safety engineer.
  • Everyone who has ever had their computer crash is now a software developer.
  • Everyone who has ever been divorced now is an expert on relationships.
  • Everyone who has ever failed a class is now a professor.
  • Everyone who has ever said something stupid is now a genius.

–Joe]

BATFE appointment

Posted on by

The NRA just released a statement saying they are strongly opposed to Andrew Traver being appointed to head the BATFE. They rightly point out that he is tied to anti gun organizations and has been involved in deliberate deceptions regarding firearms in common use and protected by the Second Amendment.

Sebastian elaborates further on some of these same points.

Say Uncle says, “We don’t need a guy from Chicago running an agency that deals with guns. We need Cletus and Bubba who like to blow stuff up.” But I disagree.

I’m in alignment with Rob who says, “There is no need for the United States to have the Committee for the Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice BATFE.”

Does it really matter who the head of the Bureau of Political Speech and Book Censorship is? Or how about the Bureau of Blacks, Jews, and Homosexuals? The answer is a very vigorous, “No!”

As long as the BATFE is a regulatory and enforcement agency instead of government surplus distribution center it doesn’t matter. The political goals and fight remains the same regardless of who the head is.

The entire organization should be abolished and most of the people involved with the organization, it’s formation, and funding prosecuted.

Quote of the day—Jack Donovan

Posted on by

It’s time to quit worrying and learn to love the battle axe. History teaches us that if we don’t, someone else will.

Jack Donovan
Violence is Golden
[Via Linoge and Hsoi.

I find the phrase “battle axe” somewhat jarring. It should be “gun”. But perhaps Donovan intended it to be jarring. A battle axe is far more messy than a gun. A gun is civilized. Referring to a battle axe instead of a gun brings the point into sharper focus (puns intended).—Joe]

TSA admits 4th Amendment violation

Posted on by

Via Alan we have this admission from the TSA:

“No one likes their Fourth Amendment violated going through a security line. But the truth of the matter is we are going to have to do it.”

I am reminded of a quote by William Pitt the younger, “Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.”

TSA, it’s time for all of you to go—preferably after having been convicted of 18 USC 242.

Moxie Media investigation

Posted on by

I haven’t read the entire set of documents but the basics appear to be that a group of people conspired to hide their true political backers, distributed political materials harmful to a pro-gun candidate, who then lost by 122 votes.

Here is a tidbit I found in the documents alleging demonstrating misconduct:

image

If you voted in the primary in her legislative district (Washington State 38th district—in or near Everett) you can help. Read the following and fill out the Declaration and send it to her.

Via email from Joe Waldron:

From: Joe Waldron
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 4:28 PM
Subject: GOAL Alert, 38th Legislative District

Dear GOAL listers:

GOAL is a political action committee (PAC) registered with the state Public Disclosure Commission (PDC) with the mission of supporting pro-gun candidates to elected office in Washington, primarily at the state level.  (Due to RCW 9.41.290, state preemption, most firearms-related legislation is limited to the state level.)

In furtherance of this goal, GOAL has endorsed and given campaign contributions to candidates from BOTH major political parties, and occasionally to minor party candidates.  The determining factor is their position on the Second Amendment and Article 1, Section 24 of the Washington state constitution.

Once again in a Washington election, there are reports of inappropriate or even illegal activity conducted in support of or opposition to several candidates.  (Hard to believe, I know, but apparently Chicago-style politics has made it to the great Northwest.)

One of these allegations of illegal activity involves a group calling itself Moxie Media.  At the request of the PDC, state Attorney General Rob McKenna is investigating Moxie Media’s actions in the 2010 elections.  According to the PDC report, Moxie Media created several separate organizations to conduct attacks on candidates too conservative for their liking.  Moxie Media allegedly received its funding from several labor unions, among others.  .

One of the candidates they attacked during the primary election period was Senator Jean Berkey, a Democrat representing the 38th District (NW Snohomish county). 

Senator Berkey has been in the legislature since 2001, and a Senator since 2003.  Senator Berkey was given an A- rating by the NRA-ILA Political Victory Fund and was also endorsed by GOAL and recommended to its members by the Washington Arms Collectors.

Senator Berkey lost the primary election by 122 votes.

I recently received the below communication from Senator Berkey.  I believe she has a case.  And the individual elected, Democrat Nick Harper, didn’t even bother to return the Candidate Questionnaire.  That gives a pretty strong indication as to where he will stand on gun issues.

The GOAL list is a statewide e-mail list.  I have no idea who on the list lives in what legislative district, hence the general mailing.  This e-mail is intended for residents of the 38th District . 

If you live in the 38th and you believe your vote in the primary election may have been influenced by the Moxie Media mailing, please give Senator Berkey a hand.  She has been there for us, and deserves your support.

TIA,

Joe Waldron

Chairman, GOAL

Legislative chairman, WAC

Legislative chairman, WSR&PA

E-MAIL FROM SENATOR BERKEY:

Joe,

Thank you for your endorsement and your help with the Primary election in the 38th Legislative District.

I lost the Primary election by 122 votes and I believe some mail sent out by Moxie Media on behalf of some liberal Democratic groups cost me the election.

They designed the last minute mail to look like it was from Republicans (Cut Taxes PAC) to fool conservative voters. Unfortunately, it was well done and worked.

I believe the Attorney General may overturn the election and the liberal Democratic candidate that won the election may not be seated in the Senate.

I will send you this link to the PDC report (130 pages) that will shock you with the arrogance of these liberal labor and attorney groups. Every member of the Gun Owners Action League should read this report to see what we are up against.

www.pdc.wa.gov/archive/commissionmeetings/meetingshearings/pdfs/2010/11.015.pdf

Also, I will send this link to the editorial published by the Olympian.

http://www.theolympian.com/2010/11/10/1434238/maneuver-to-finance-political.html

I need help from your members in Everett and Marysville (the 38th Legislative District) and would like to ask them look at the attached Declaration (BerkeyDeclaration.doc–27 KB). If they voted during the last five days of the Primary election on August 17th, they may want to complete it and return it to me. If they have any questions, they should contact me at jeanberkey AT comcast.net.

It won’t cost them a penny and may prevent another gun control nut from being elected to the Washington State Senate.

Thank you for all your great help,

Senator Jean Berkey

Quote of the day—Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano

Posted on by

If there are adjustments we need to make as we move forward, we have an open ear.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano
November 16, 2010
TSA: Despite objections, all passengers must be screened
[I seriously doubt whether her ear can open wide enough because I think the entire TSA (A Security Theater) should be forcibly shoved into her ear and left there.—Joe]

Quote of the day–President Barack Obama

Posted on by

I believe it is a mistake for us to borrow $700 billion to make tax cuts permanent for millionaires and billionaires. It won’t significantly boost the economy and it’s hugely expensive, so we can’t afford it.

President Barack Obama
November 14, 2010
Obama Says He’s Committed to Middle-Class Tax Cut Extension
[Just the phrase “we can’t afford it” and the word “expensive” in reference to a tax cut tells you how out of touch with reality he is or desires to change your perception of it. The proper usage of those words is more like, ‘You can’t afford spending money on expensive items.” You use a different set of words to describe taking money from people at gun point.—Joe]