Category Archives: Crap For Brains

People and especially governments do some incredibly stupid stuff. This is about those stupid actions.

Security theater must make people stupid

Posted on by

David Perera must have gone through the scanner a few too many times and his brain turned into crap. He claims that just because someone has a security clearance that doesn’t mean they should be allowed to go through airport security without being subjected to TSA scrutiny:

First, if the ability to go through the expedited line is given to all secret holders regardless of the purpose of their travel, clearance holders would be the recipient of an unfair perk relative to the rest of society. Clearance holders receive access to classified documents – not a badge that permits them to cut in line at the gas station, take 20 items through the 15-item supermarket checkout line or buy 3.2 beer in an Arkansas convenience store on a Sunday.

Just what does he think TSA security is for? It’s not a line at a gas station.

I kept expecting him to explain that the only purpose TSA serves is to harass and desensitize people to illegal searches. If some people don’t go through the desensitization process then TSA effectiveness is drastically reduced. After all, TSA has been insisting that pilots and the rest of the flight crew be searched so what purpose could that serve other than desensitization? Do they think that unless they search the pilot for box cutters he would be able to hijack the plane he was already flying?

But that doesn’t appear to be the case. As near as I can tell he really believes what he says. I can only conclude he has crap for brains. I expect that soon he will insist Air Marshals also go though TSA screening. After all their badges don’t enable them to take 20 items through the 15-item supermarket checkout line either.

Quote of the day—Dr. Tim Ball

Posted on by

There are several misconceptions about CO2, most created because proponents tried to prove the hypothesis rather than the normal scientific practice of disproof.

Dr. Tim Ball
November 9, 2011
Whether It Is Warming or Climate Change, It Cannot be the CO2.
[There is lots of other interesting data in this post. As Ry summarized when telling me about this, “North America and Europe are net absorbers of CO2. South America and Africa are net producers. And it’s all due to natural causes. Human CO2 production is in the noise of measurement error of the natural sources.”

Beyond the point the CO2/global-warming/climate-change fraud I wanted to point out that the “normal scientific practice of disproof” is what has been tripping up the anti-gun people. Their hypothesis that gun control will decrease crime is so easy to disprove that they expose themselves as a religious faith. Their deeply held beliefs persist in the absence of and in despite of evidence. I have no problem with them exercising their First Amendment rights to exercise the the religion of their choice but they do not have the right, nor should they have the power, to force others to worship the same god(s) they do.

If you only need a couple of talking point so to put them in their place point out that since the gun ban in Washington D.C. was thrown out the number of murders (the murder rate would be lower still) has dropped to the lowest in 46 years. Since the gun ban in Chicago was overthrown the number of murders is the lowest in at least 20 years. The gun bans reduce crime hypothesis cannot survive exposure to the normal scientific practice of disproof. This has been well known since at least the mid-1980s when Rossi and Wright published their book.

The Brady Campaign, The Violence Policy Center, and the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence are nothing more than fading religious cults whose beliefs have killed tens of thousands of people and put millions of lives at risk. They are no more credible and should be given no more political voice than a cult advocating castration to reach an alien spacecraft.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Jeffery D. Sachs

Posted on by

The new progressive era will need a fresh and gutsy generation of candidates to seek election victories not through wealthy campaign financiers but through free social media. A new generation of politicians will prove that they can win on YouTube, Twitter, Facebook and blog sites, rather than with corporate-financed TV ads. By lowering the cost of political campaigning, the free social media can liberate Washington from the current state of endemic corruption.

…

Those who think that the cold weather will end the protests should think again. A new generation of leaders is just getting started. The new progressive age has begun.

Jeffery D. Sachs
Director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University
November 13, 2011
The New Progressive Movement
[As SebastianSH said, “This is a lot of crap.” First off, our current economic situation is not due to insufficient “progressive politics” (actually Marxism is very old and hence regressive, Libertarianism would better be called “progressive” and/or “liberal” but left-speak requires that words be redefined to suit their purposes). It is the result of progressive politics.

Second, “social media” and the Internet in general tends shine the light of truth and the progressive rats and sidewalk scum wither in that light.

Third, the corruption in Washington is because Washington has the power to pick winners and losers. As long as the power exists there will be people and companies who find it necessary to see that power is exercised in their favor or at least not used against them. It will only be by the elimination of that power, as the Constitution was intended and written, that the corruption will fade.

What Jeffery D. Sachs advocates will only make the problems worse. Just read New Deal or Raw Deal?: How FDR’s Economic Legacy Has Damaged America to get a clue. But even if given motivation with a clue-by-four Sachs will probably always remain clueless.—Joe]

Because That Would Make Him a ‘Gay’ Basher

Posted on by

That’s the answer to Billy Beck’s question.

I’ve criticized your religion, certainly your politics, and the inconsistency behind the idea of women’s equality.  Why not criticize your thoughts on homosexuality?

We’re not supposed to talk about it, right?  It’s a taboo subject.  For one thing we’re supposed to shut up out of fear– fear of being ostracized as a ‘gay’ basher or a homophobe.  So when a man sees another man raping a boy, he clams up.  If he’d beat the shit out the rapist as he should have done, he’d be the one charged with a crime and no one would say anything in his defense for fear of being labeled a ‘gay’ basher.  Same as when a black, homosexual, Democrat man in Congress (probably the most protected class of humans, unless you’re talking of a black, lesbian Muslim extremist) running a homosexual prostitution ring in his basement.  What?  I suppose you’re a racist homophobe with a political agenda.  Shut up.  You Suck if you criticize this hard-working American who cares about kids, the poor, race relations, union workers and the environment, you racist homophobe.  Neanderthal!

Sure; the witness should have done the right thing and kicked the rapist’s ass, even if he knew full well that he’d be the one prosecuted.  But our cultural insanity makes doing the right thing just that much more difficult.  And that, I submit, was the whole purpose of what I will call the insanity movement the first place– what’s good is bad and what’s bad is good.  What’s wrong is right and what’s right is wrong.

How else do you get 300 to 400 million people to tolerate being treated like sheep?

I put the word “gay” in scare quotes because it doesn’t mean what most people today think it means.  I try to use the language properly, so using “gay” to mean homosexual requires the quotation marks.  He’s a bit “queer” is of course a euphemism.  Lots of things are queer, but we’ve lost track of the word’s meaning.  “Gay” is the same sort of euphemism, as is “fag”, as applied to a homosexual.  If we’re going to use the terms in their true meanings, or understand them when we encounter them in classic literature, we have to be aware of this, and talk about it.  So there you have it.  Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to suck on one of the nice faggots I usually keep with me right now.  And by the way; I suppose I could sue you if you criticize me for smoking.  If it’s an addiction, or a disease, you’d be harassing or “bashing” a person with a disability.  Shut up.  You have no right to talk about it unless you give me lots of money.  Oh, and stop taxing me because of my disease.  Would you propose a tax on “gays” who get AIDS?  Shut up.  Now I’m thinking of closing comments because no one is supposed to talk about any of this stuff.  Shut up.

Women’s ‘Equality’ and the Offendedness Movement

Posted on by

We’re not even supposed to talk about this, I guess, because it proves we’re sexist.  Too bad.

When the Flappers painted the town red in the 1920s, we were told women had achieved equality.  When women hit the factories during World War Two, we were told women had achieved equality (see the trend yet?).  When women burned their bras in the 1960s, we were told women had achieved equality.  When the pill came out, we were told that women had finally achieved equality.  Women’s suffrage happened somewhere back there too.

A hundred years of non-stop achievement of equality later, we’re being told how sexual harassment is a problem in the workplace, and it’s 99.999% men doing the harassing and women, still, are the victims.  Because they haven’t achieved equality I guess.  What’s the message to men with ambitions?  If you’re going to be running for high office ten or twenty years later, you better keep women out of your workplace so they can’t come back when the time is right and destroy your campaign.  Don’t hire women.  Don’t work with women, because all it takes for a women to destroy you is for her to point a finger at you.

If men and women were equal, there’d be roughly the same number of men complaining about harassment by women as the other way ’round, or at least it wouldn’t be so overwhelmingly one-sided.  A high school aged male I knew was getting rather steamy text message from a far older, married woman employer.  It was fairly apparent that sex was happening between them.  An experienced  lawyer said that maybe he should count himself the luckiest kid in school.

That’s the double standard and it’s everywhere.  At the same time we’re being told that women are strong, that they can not only take care of themselves they’re capable of doing anything a man can do at least as well as he can do it, we are simultaneously asked to believe that the slightest gesture can turn a strong, capable, professional woman into a quivering blob of dysfunctional, sobbing, frightened, victimized jelly that only huge sums of money, or certain political outcomes, or both, can cure.

When I was interviewing a college-age woman for a bookkeeping position at my small business, she asked if there was enough work there to actually keep her busy full time.  Fair question.  In addition to telling her that although the business was small, it was complex, and that furthermore, being small, there were a lot of other things she could do besides keep books.  What I meant, and I expected it to be as obvious as the rather prominent nose on my face (she was a business major after all) was that total specialization is something a small business cannot afford, therefore we all have to pitch in with cleaning, stocking shelves, receiving shipments, answering phones, and hundreds of other tasks that are involved in keeping a business running properly that don’t warrant separate employees.  Her response caught me off guard.  I was accustomed to working in the real world, unaware of just how bat-shit insane the world of leftist political academia had become.  Condition white;

“WELL…just what’s THAT supposed to mean…?!!”  Gawd.  She’d apparently been to one of those “How-to-know-when-you’re-being-sexually-harassed” classes they offer to women on college campi these days as part of the “Women’s Studies” curriculum.  Interview over.  Don’t call us, we’ll (not) call you.  We have enough problems without having to deal with stupid shit like this.

Which is it, then, ladies?  Are you capable of standing up for yourselves, strong, and proud to play a vital and dynamic role in all the action, or are you perpetual victims, bent on being perpetual victims for social, financial and political gain?  Do you want to be taken seriously or do you want to be a poor little victim, ’cause it sure as hell can’t be both.  This bi-polar premise is running rather thin and I for one quit falling for it sometime back in the 1970s.

Quote of the day—Pam Neely

Posted on by

I am a very strong supporter of the second amendment, but there must be some common sense applied here. I can think of nothing worse than people attending an athletic event, living in a dorm, or sitting beside someone in a science class with a firearm strapped to their side or worse, concealed on their person.

Pam Neely
Prosecuting Attorney Berkeley County
County Prosecutor Wants Gun Law
October 25, 2011
[Really? Ms. Neely is smart enough to get through law school and get a job as a Prosecuting Attorney yet she “can think of nothing worse” that someone exercising a specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms? Has she never heard of the Virginia Tech massacre? That is something far worse that happens when people are forbidden from defending themselves.

And simultaneously she claims she is “a very strong supporter of the second amendment”?

Either Neely has crap for brains or she thinks we do.—Joe]

It Isn’t Complicated

Posted on by

It’s pretty common to get a response similar to; “I didn’t want to spend that much on an optic setup, since I only paid X for the rifle.”

A customer today said he has a WASR AK he keeps for defense, but can’t justify the price of a good optic.  That’s a contradiction in terms, see– you’re going to count on this weapon, possibly, to save your life but anything more than 60 or 75 dollars for a sight that you can rely on is just too much?  “I have another rifle that can put five rounds into a half minute or arc, so…[I don’t need a good optic on this one]”  He said.  So your 3 or 4 MOA Kalash doesn’t warrant an optic that will withstand a few knocks and hold zero, and has a battery life better measured in years than in hours?  Why not?  What is your life worth?

I don’t know if many people are aware of the number of thousand plus dollar scopes that are currently sitting on five hundred dollar rifles.

It’s not about matching the price of the sight to the price of the rifle.  It’s about the setup you want, and you should want something on which you can rely.  Reliable rifles with decent accuracy aren’t expensive, but good optics are.  If your optic costs multiples of the price of the rifle, so be it.  You have a good setup that didn’t have to include a super expensive rifle.  Be happy.

I recently saw an article about some AR or other and the writer had one of the new Leupold Mk 8 variables on it.  It seemed like just the thing I’ve wanted on my (700 dollar) Colt HBAR, so I looked it up.  Four Thousand Dollars!  Will I have to spend an additional 3,000+ dollars on a rifle only so I can justify a good optic?  That sort of “reasoning” doesn’t make any sense to this shooter.  It’s only a matter of coughing up the cash if you can (I do very much like the Trijicons too, and they’re not near 4K, but they don’t do all the same tricks).  Choices choices, but the price I paid for my rifle won’t even be thought of during the process.  I’ll only be thinking of what I can do with it once I have this rig setup nicely.

Disclaimer; …No– On second thought I don’t have to disclaim squat to anyone.  I’m sick and damned tired of the notion that we have to qualify ourselves, or document any aspect of our lives or explain our behavior.  If you can’t take my words at face value, or reject them purely on merits, that’s your own problem.  Live with it.  I’m not demanding anything of you, so stay out of my face and leave me the hell alone.  Or else.  This is the last discussion I will ever have with anyone on the matter of disclosure.

Visions

Posted on by

Brady Campaign acting President Dennis Henigan says (YouTube video with only 311 views and the comments disabled) the Brady Campaign has a vision of American safe and secure with firearms prohibited from most public places.

It’s nice to have dreams Dennis but it’s just a dream. You long for something that never was and can never be. You might also have visions of American with unicorns, pixie dust, and manna falling from the sky but rational people do not share your delusions.

When self defense is prohibited safety and security are beyond reach.

Random thought of the day

Posted on by

The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence is concerned about states’ rights:

“National concealed carry reciprocity legislation is a terrible idea for public safety and a huge affront to states’ rights,” said CSGV Executive Director Josh Horwitz.

I guess that means we can count on their support for The Firearms Freedom Act, states that wish to ban abortion, and even the reinstituting of slavery should some state desire it.

What these people don’t understand (or more likely just don’t want to acknowledge) is that states’ rights/powers only extend as far as the people rights. There are certain individual rights that are guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution that no state, county, or city may infringe upon. The right to keep and bear arms is one of those rights.

Dusting it up with the TSA

Posted on by

For the near brain-dead supporters of the TSA that still exist out there I would like them to think about how the TSA could possibly stop a dust explosion such as this one on an airplane in flight. Compare the size and shape of the grain elevator in that picture to an airplane fuselage. Compare the strength of the materials (reinforced concrete versus a thin aluminum skin with window) used in the construction.

A few pounds of powdered sugar, flour, or powdered milk can make enough dust to take out a grain elevator and it is more than enough to take an airplane out of the sky. And just how is the TSA going to scan for that when everyone that has eaten a powdered sugared doughnut since they last changed their clothes is going to test positive?

The TSA is nothing but A Security Theater and only the most ignorant and stupid don’t know and understand that.

Quote of the day—Henry C. Wright

Posted on by

The moment a man claims a right to control the will of a fellow being by physical force, he is at heart a slaveholder.

Henry C. Wright
April 7, 1837
The Liberator
[Irony alert.

I found this on The Virginia Center for Public Safety (an anti-gun group) web site. Apparently they don’t research or think through the content of their web site any more than they do their policies.

When they advocate for restrictions on firearms ownership they themselves are advocating to “control the will of a fellow being by physical force” via the government.

Furthermore Henry C. Write claimed:

That it is the right and duty of the slaves to resist their masters, and the right and duty of the people of the North to incite them to resistance, and to aid them in it.

Isn’t it better for the people to posses arms and never be slaves than to become slaves and require arms from others to free yourself?

There is a reason no one ever accuses anti-gun people of being too consistent or too smart for their own good.—Joe]

Don’t enable that tool

Posted on by

Sebastian says this is Help We Don’t Need. Say Uncle says this is How not to win. I’ve upload the 67 second MP3 here. It has received nearly 80,000 views on YouTube.

This is not about whether the firearms instructor has the right to say what he did or refuse his services to anyone. I fully agree he was within his rights to do what he did. I just don’t think it is a good idea.

Yes, there are some Muslims in this country who are actively trying to murder as many Americans as they can. Yes, there are Obama supporters who are actively working to destroy our freedoms.

But one of the basics of our country is that an individuals actions and character not their religion or who they voted for (we have secret ballots for a reason) should determine their status. There are certain specific enumerated rights which are guaranteed to everyone but those that have proven themselves completely untrustworthy.

The right to keep and bear arms is a specific enumerated right. It is a fundamental natural right. What does this look like to people who are undecided on the issue of gun owner rights?

Think of it how it would look if a teacher refused to teach someone to read on the basis of religion/voting-record/skin-color. Or a lawyer that refused to represent someone on that basis. Or someone that refused to sell books or newspapers to someone on that basis. Or a police officer that refused to arrest the attacker of someone who was “the wrong type of person”.

I once had an Arab Muslim student for my NRA Personal Protection class. I didn’t think it was that big of a deal. He was married to an American woman and studying architecture at a nearby university. He wanted to be able to get an Idaho concealed weapons license and that required proof of training.

A few years later after I stumbled across some more information about him I initiated a long conversation with the FBI about him. The FBI agent I talked said they knew of him but, naturally, wouldn’t tell me much more. I don’t know that he was really anything to be concerned about and I don’t know that the FBI or any other government agency ever did anything beyond keep a file on him and watch him a little closer than they would most people.

I still think this was the proper course of action. Sort of an innocent until proven “guilty” policy.

Based on the information I had at the time it was entirely appropriate to teach him to defend himself with a firearm. Later information led me to question that conclusion. But I knew that I did not have as much information as needed to draw the correct conclusions. The people responsible for drawing the correct conclusion and had access to far more information than I did probably would be interested in this student seeking out firearms instruction. My usual policy is to not keep records of my students and even to destroy the list of previous Boomershoot participants after I send out an email to them announcing the next event. But this guy was memorable and I violated that policy only after spending a lot of time thinking about it and urging from wife Barbara.

When I was getting my instructor credentials I was told, and I followed this advice, to ask every student why they were taking the class. Any hints that they were intending to break the law would have been sufficient to refuse my services to them. I still think that refusing to teach someone on the basis of their religion alone, even Islam, is not a good idea. There are far, far more Muslims in our country who are friendly to our culture and form of government than are hostile.

I believe that in most cases there are going to be indicators other than religion (or voting record) that can be used to appropriately deny firearm instruction services to someone. In the case of the Muslim student I had he was married to a U.S. citizen and all appearances were that he was friendly to our country.

Also, there are (or at least was) terrorist training camps available. If the guy merely getting training to acquire the license rather than because he had near zero training that would probably show up during the class. The FBI guy repeatedly asked me about this. As near as I could tell he was truthful in telling me he had no previous training. Looking for those sorts of signs could be useful should you decide he needs the attention of the authorities.

If this is someone who is really serious about causing us harm then far better training is probably easily available to him.

Think of this issue another way, as a percentage of the population people with dark colored skin are overrepresented in prison. One could reasonably conclude that people with dark colored skin are less likely to be trustworthy with a firearm because they apparently are more likely to commit crimes. But this denies a basic human right to an entire class of people most of which have done nothing wrong.

Treat people as individuals not as part of some “class”. Isn’t that one of the basic tenets of our form of government and our society? Isn’t the promotion of “class warfare” a major tool of the people who desire the destruction of our form of government? Don’t enable that tool for them.

Cajun intelligence

Posted on by

Via email from my sister-in-law (the one who isn’t a democrat):

Subject: Direct Quote from “Larry, the Cable Guy”

“Even after the Super Bowl victory of the New Orleans Saints, I have noticed a large number of people, implying with bad jokes, that Cajuns aren’t smart. I would like to state for the record that I disagree with that assessment. Anybody who would build a city 5 feet below sea level in a hurricane zone and fill it with Democrats who can’t swim is a damn genius”.

You should not depend on comedians for accuracy. They sometimes stretch or gloss over the the truth a little to make things funnier. In this case Larry, the Cable Guy is wrong. My sister-in-law should know better than to send me something like this. I’ve been to New Orleans and she knew this.

The elevation of New Orleans is not a constant -5’. It varies depending on the location from -6.5’ to +20’ relative to sea level.

Quote of the day–pete x tp

Posted on by

The main hindrance to rational regulation of firearms is almost entirely driven by frightened idiots who, apparently, know deep in their hearts that they wouldn’t meet the standard.

pete x tp
Comment to The Media’s Narrow Definition Of “Gun Control”
October 26, 2011
[Either this “Einstein” has never heard of the 2nd Amendment or doesn’t consider the Bill of Rights an obstacle to his agenda.

H/T to Sebastian.—Joe]

Obama to instigate a revolution

Posted on by

Someone has their tin-foil hat on way too tight:

The Obama regime is preparing to instigate a revolution for the purpose of their being able to hold on to power and complete the enslavement of the American people.

According to this report the “Occupy Wall Street” protests that began in New York City nearly a month ago have now spread to at least 25 other US cities and show no sign of abating any time soon.

From what I have seen in Seattle there isn’t that much going on and what is going on isn’t the material of a revolution.

Good Point

Posted on by

About Pres. Reagan.  I recall that he added an extra 5 cents tax per gallon on our fuel, ostensibly to repair the failing highway system, because the gazillions they were already collecting and wasting weren’t enough.  Reagan then held that extra tax money over the state of Idaho’s head, saying we had to change our drinking age from 19 to 21 or we wouldn’t see any of the money they were taking from us.  Idaho caved.

That radically changed the economies of all Idaho border towns.

No one seems to have learned anything from that– when our drinking age was lower and our sales tax far lower than bordering states, we got tons of business from those states.  We don’t have that so much anymore, so now our idiot Republican Governor has his thooper thpecial “Hire One” program– you’re supposed to call the state apparatchik and see if your business qualifies to be part of a state government jobs program.  Oh goody.  To call him a fool is being generous.  Right– I want to put my capital at risk, create new products, bring them to market and worry my ass off the whole time while getting robbed by this mutherfucker, so he can take credit for my work.  I think I’d rather die.

Kind of like our country as a whole.  Some educated kid from Germany was complaining to me recently about the “Fat Cats” sheltering their money in other countries (other than the United States, where he lives).  Those dirty bastards who won’t hold still and let us rob them…how dare they?  I asked him if our country shouldn’t be the place people from all over the planet come to secure their property rights.  That’s what we were supposed to be.  Remember?  He stood up and left, saying he didn’t want to get himself in trouble.  Good riddance.  I have that effect on a lot of people.

Quote of the day—Seattle Anti-Imperialist Committee

Posted on by

Corporate greed, racial discrimination and oppression, and police brutality and murders are among the many guaranteed products of the capitalist system of production. But exploitation, injustice and oppression inevitably give rise to resistance struggles, with each of these struggles needing to be patiently built in its own right around its particular demands. Yet these seeming separate struggles are greatly strengthened when they fire each other up in united actions against the common class enemy. This is what will happen this Saturday at Westlake, and it will be another small step toward building a revolutionary movement that can win everything.

Seattle Anti-Imperialist Committee
October 19, 2011
Join the October 22 march against police brutality!
[I stopped by work today and was handed a piece of paper by the Occupy Seattle crowd. It appears to be word for word the web page linked above.

You might ask, just what is it that they want to win? From the same web page, “We demand everything!” So they want a revolution to win everything? I see…

Since I walk by the Occupy Seattle crowd every day to and from work I have taken a few pictures. This should give you an idea what it is like, minus the chanting:

WP_000275Corrected
October 10, 2011. Lots of tents.

WP_000293Corrected
October 7th, 2011.

WP_000301Corrected
October 7, 2011

WP_000301Cropped
Cropped version of the picture above.

WP_000318Corrected
October 10, 2011

WP_000318Cropped
Cropped version of the picture above.

WP_000319
October 13, 2011

WP_000319Cropped
Cropped version of the picture above.

Yeah. They aren’t exactly coherent.

WP_000322
October 14, 2011

I think they are going to need a lot more people supporting them to have a successful revolution. It probably also requires a group of people capable of accomplishing something more than creating and carrying poorly made signs and pitching tents on the sidewalk.—Joe]

Clearing Some Old Files

Posted on by

I found this old letter to the editors of a local paper.  I don’t think I posted it here;

Dear Editors,

Regarding Mark Winstein’s letter entitled “Lets Not be a Big Box Town” printed in last weekend’s edition:  I will point out to your good and thoughtful readers that in Mr. Winstein’s opinion, the last people who should be making decisions about land use are the actual land owners, the last people who should decide what is and what is not a “sustainable approach to the economy” are those who have their own capital at risk in a given venture, and by rights, the very last people on Earth who should decide where to shop are the shoppers themselves.

Apparently, there is a new field of study at the U of I, known as “Helping Make the Economy More Reflective of Ecological Values”.  I might like to meet one of the Doctorate Professors in this new Helping Make the Economy More Reflective of Ecological Values Department.  However, between taking care of my family and minding my own business instead of advocating the use of force in minding other people’s business, it would be hard for me to justify the time.

Now I want to propose an entirely new concept– one that Winstein may not have ever considered:  Maybe we could advocate the protection of other people’s rights (even if we dislike them).  It might be interesting if people could make their own decisions in what I will call a “Free Society” (I might enjoy entertaining the Dean of a “Free Market Solutions to World Problems” College).  I understand that this is a new and terrifying proposal (for some) but it may be worth considering, given that if our neighbors have the Right to Choose, perchance it would follow that we too would be afforded the same right at some stage.

Sincerely,
Lyle Keeney

That was several years ago, and I had been accosted in a parking lot by a petitioner that same year, too.  The argument was; “Look how big it’s going to be.”  Big is bad, I guess.  People are supposed to be small.  Or else, and that reminds me of a bumper sticker quote from Dennis Preger; “The Bigger the Government, the Smaller the Citizen”.  Someone called the show to tell us that their car had been keyed after putting that sticker on it.

I started to argue with them, but it quickly became an obviously pointless exercise and I drifted away.

Today we have that Super Wal Mart the communists were trying to kick out of town by force of law (fairly and equitably of course).  I do a lot of shopping there.  It’s good to live near a big box town.  It’s the next best thing to living in a big box town.  The hippies pay something like eight dollars per gallon for milk at the Hippie Haus (our nickname for the local food co-op).  The supermarket Rosauer’s now has a hippie section, so you can pay three to four times as much for your food there too.  It’s for The Children, somehow, I guess.  And world peace.  And LSD, and stars per gallon.  When I was a kid, we bought milk directly from the farmers for next to nothing, and it wasn’t processed in any way except for already having been sucked from the cow’s teats.  When I was twelve years old or so, I’d take the family car several miles, usually running at ~0.5 Mach* along the narrow country roads, to get unpasteurized milk.  I suppose the hippies would be envious as hell to learn about that, until they realized that these farms were (gasp) private (gasp) businesses working for (gasp) profit on (gasp) private land, and (gasp) not charging us any tax for milk that was (gasp) never inspected by anyone except for the farmer, who (gasp) knew ten times more than any inspector ever will.  Poor communists– they never see anything that happens as a result of private initiative and free choice without getting all pissed off and bent out of shape (unless it’s an abortion or a pot party**).  I will feel sorry for them after we’ve crushed them into the dirt and no one else remembers them.  Maybe it’s because I have a soft spot in my heart for ignorant, vacuous, ridiculous, embarrassing hippies (i.e. hippies) having been one myself in a former life.

ETA;
* I believe that was the only time in my life I ever tested, and later verified, the actual top speed of a medium to lightweight, V8-powered motor vehicle on flat ground.  I suppose that may have something to do with why they don’t typically license 12 year olds to drive alone.  Back then though, I was only vaguely aware of the notion of “licensing” in any sense.  The subject of licensing was among the largely esoteric or academic (of no consequence) concepts in our lives then.  Any mention of it and we would have ignored you, not out of malice or disgust, but because it simply had no meaning for ordinary people who lived in the country unless a “fuzz” or a “putch” (a degraded abbreviation of the word “patrol”) happened by on the off chance, in which case we left.

** Jam sessions and music festivals come to mind, but those are a subset of “pot party” and so they are covered.  Protests where thought of, but ditto, and other than the very smallest protests that you’ll scarcely ever see and never hear of, hippie protests are not the result of private initiative.  “Hippie” and “private initiative” have only the very thinnest excuse to exist in the same sentence unless it be, “A hippie has almost no private initiative”.

Quote of the day—David Shuster

Posted on by

I thought Obama was brilliant. He’s so informed. He’s circumspect. He’s articulate. He’s thoughtful. Well, I think in my lifetime, there’s never been anything like it.

David Shuster
June 2009
[And how brilliant and thoughtful do people think he is now?—Joe]

Quote of the day—Legal Community Against Violence

Posted on by

As outlined in Petitioners’ brief, the Second Amendment is a limit on the national government alone and does not constrain the District of Columbia’s legislative authority. See Br. of Petitioners at 35-40. For analogous reasons, the Second Amendment does not serve as a limit on the States and their political subdivisions. Although the Court need not address this issue in this case—which does not involve a challenge to a law passed by a State or one of its political subdivisions—it is well established that the Second Amendment does not apply to the States.

Legal Community Against Violence
January 11, 2008
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND MAYOR ADRIAN M. FENTY,
Petitioners,
v.
DICK ANTHONY HELLER,
Respondent.
BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE MAJOR AMERICAN CITIES, THE UNITED STATES CONFERENCE OF MAYORS, AND LEGAL COMMUNITY AGAINST VIOLENCE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS
[Sometimes you have to just shake your head in disbelief. D.C. is under the control of the Federal Government! Congress can override any law or act of the D.C. politicians. How did these guys get through high school let alone law school without discovering that the District of Columbia is not a state or one of its political subdivisions? Maybe they are living in the alternate reality where D.C. of those 57 states that Obama said he has visited.

What is for certain is that anti-gun people have very little concern for facts. As near as I can determine they are lying, live in an alternate reality and/or are suffering from Peterson Syndrome.—Joe]