I have a magnet on my frig. Its got a cartoon character (Bill the Cat, for those old enough to know who that is) in a straight-jacket, with the caption "some days it isnt worth chewing through the straps."
I usually get a chuckle out of it, and think "todays better than that."
But today, after reading a headline in the news......
Radioactive material keeps being stolen from lab.....
So our dear Uncle Sammy isnt just being robbed of radioactive materials, but "KEEPS" as in they know its happening and cant stop it. Then I read in the article that there have been 76 thefts discovered just this year. Now, call me silly, but in this day of terrorists and crackpots and everything, I would think that this should be ...I dont know..... one of the major items you'd bury under so much security people couldnt even talk about it without the NSA's super secret ninja spy commando squirrels parking a full team of completely legal wire-tapping stealth poodles in your back pocket for "surveillance".
So finding out that the "master thief" was just dumping contaminated radioactive stuff in the bushes outside the fence of the facility to pick up later is kinda ....well..... depressing. I mean, I was in the Military, so I know how low to expect the standards to be, but...... wow. Really? Hillary gets better security for her fund-raising dinners.
No, today the magnet won. But there's always tomorrow.
Saturday, October 31, 2015
Thursday, October 29, 2015
And the fallout starts
So, a few weeks ago I said that there was going to be a war between the Feminists and the Trans community for who won "victim" status.
The New York Post had an article yesterday showing that its starting:
This Germaine Greer, who has made a career of being a "victim" feminist, is saying that trans arent women. When told that hurts the trans' community's feelings, the lady who made a very lucrative career cashing in on her supposed mistreatment (being treated like a man, ei: like crap) and screaming women are constitutionally protected from hurt feelings, started singing a different tune: “Try being an old woman. For goodness sake, people get hurt all the time, I’m not about to walk on eggshells.”
The bigger laugh? She blames misogyny and "teh ebul patri........blah blah blah blah blah" I tend to tune out the stupid repeated rants after 50 years of repetition. Yep, its mans fault that these men think they're women, and the media, in its drive to sell more, is pushing the fake women are "better" than the real thing. While we should blame the media for this idiocy, they're just trying to make money. Thats why they pressured the Psychiatric Community to remove what used to be a recognized mental illness from their medical manuals. The controversy of presenting this as a "normal" acceptable alternative lifestyle draws attention, which means money and power in the media world.
I especially like this segment from the NY Post article, as it sums up much better than I can the real battle that will be fought between these two liberal democrat voting blocks:
It’s more than just a rival victim group, but one that threatens to expose feminists’ contradictions when it comes to sex differences.
Feminists typically deny that meaningful gender differences exist between men and women, while allowing that there are some areas in which women are superior to men.
[snip]
Yet what happens when transgender women start competing against plain old women in other areas of life? Say, in tennis matches and swim meets?
Or how about for slots on corporate boards and in top universitieslooking to meet targets for gender balance? Feminists may find their cause stalled and themselves forced to acknowledge that biology plays a bigger role than they care to admit.
Indeed what does happen? These transgenders are claiming that Feminists are wrong. That for 50 years, all the science and the studies Femenist organizations have sponsored; its all wrong. Trans say that there is a very large difference between men and women; there are women's tastes, colors, preferences, hobbies, jobs, and so on. That women are just plain different from men, and in very meaningful ways. So meaningful that it requires years of medication, counseling, and surgery to correct.
We know what happens when a man, be it cross-dresser, dude with boob-job, or full post-op transgender, competes with women in sports. Thats why they test at pro athletic events; because its been done before, and men dominate over the women to an unfair (and sometimes dangerous) advantage.
But what happens when they start competing for job slots? CEO positions? When the real woman has to take3-6 months off because she's having a child (last month or two of pregnancy plus the first few of it life) andJohn Jane doesnt?What happens when a portion of your "Female" work-force wants to end the traditionally preferred benefits of actual women in favor of benefits actual women cant use?
The author of the NY Post article is saying that Feminism may have received the fatal blow, and may be doomed to die because of this. Most feminists I know never give up a fight, even after its obvious they've lost. And they dont let minor things like reality or facts get in the way of their arguments. Like the old bag at the start of this article, they'll claim its all mens' fault, and they're victims, again. :roll: And they will use all the political influence, power, and money to make sure they win, even if that means getting transgenderism declared an insanity again.
The question is, is the Gay lobby large enough, and committed enough, to stop them?
The New York Post had an article yesterday showing that its starting:
This Germaine Greer, who has made a career of being a "victim" feminist, is saying that trans arent women. When told that hurts the trans' community's feelings, the lady who made a very lucrative career cashing in on her supposed mistreatment (being treated like a man, ei: like crap) and screaming women are constitutionally protected from hurt feelings, started singing a different tune: “Try being an old woman. For goodness sake, people get hurt all the time, I’m not about to walk on eggshells.”
The bigger laugh? She blames misogyny and "teh ebul patri........blah blah blah blah blah" I tend to tune out the stupid repeated rants after 50 years of repetition. Yep, its mans fault that these men think they're women, and the media, in its drive to sell more, is pushing the fake women are "better" than the real thing. While we should blame the media for this idiocy, they're just trying to make money. Thats why they pressured the Psychiatric Community to remove what used to be a recognized mental illness from their medical manuals. The controversy of presenting this as a "normal" acceptable alternative lifestyle draws attention, which means money and power in the media world.
I especially like this segment from the NY Post article, as it sums up much better than I can the real battle that will be fought between these two liberal democrat voting blocks:
It’s more than just a rival victim group, but one that threatens to expose feminists’ contradictions when it comes to sex differences.
Feminists typically deny that meaningful gender differences exist between men and women, while allowing that there are some areas in which women are superior to men.
[snip]
Yet what happens when transgender women start competing against plain old women in other areas of life? Say, in tennis matches and swim meets?
Or how about for slots on corporate boards and in top universitieslooking to meet targets for gender balance? Feminists may find their cause stalled and themselves forced to acknowledge that biology plays a bigger role than they care to admit.
Indeed what does happen? These transgenders are claiming that Feminists are wrong. That for 50 years, all the science and the studies Femenist organizations have sponsored; its all wrong. Trans say that there is a very large difference between men and women; there are women's tastes, colors, preferences, hobbies, jobs, and so on. That women are just plain different from men, and in very meaningful ways. So meaningful that it requires years of medication, counseling, and surgery to correct.
We know what happens when a man, be it cross-dresser, dude with boob-job, or full post-op transgender, competes with women in sports. Thats why they test at pro athletic events; because its been done before, and men dominate over the women to an unfair (and sometimes dangerous) advantage.
But what happens when they start competing for job slots? CEO positions? When the real woman has to take3-6 months off because she's having a child (last month or two of pregnancy plus the first few of it life) and
The author of the NY Post article is saying that Feminism may have received the fatal blow, and may be doomed to die because of this. Most feminists I know never give up a fight, even after its obvious they've lost. And they dont let minor things like reality or facts get in the way of their arguments. Like the old bag at the start of this article, they'll claim its all mens' fault, and they're victims, again. :roll: And they will use all the political influence, power, and money to make sure they win, even if that means getting transgenderism declared an insanity again.
The question is, is the Gay lobby large enough, and committed enough, to stop them?
Tuesday, October 27, 2015
Recommended Firearms
Granted, I live in Indiana, and we have a law saying that hunting rifles must use handgun caliber rounds. This is supposed to allow for the fact that there isnt anything between your house and the neighbor but a few hundred yards of cornfields. So, my list is somewhat biased for my area, I'll be the first to admit. But Im looking at power, reliability, versatility, and resupply-ability.
Lets look at handguns first: I like the .357 family. Several different firearms fall under an umbrella that allows you to set up the whole family with just a few guns.
Personally, having carried many semi-autos in the military, I dont care for them. I hear all the hype and brand love from the suckers convinced their chosen favorite is "perfect". But semi-autos jam, and usually at the worst possible time. It doesnt matter how well you clean it, how much you baby it, or the ridiculous a\mounts of money you spend pampering it, Murphy's Law runs free, and the more moving parts it has, the more likely it will screw up. And when those parts screw up, it usually takes a skilled professional to fix it. And the fact that the word "Glock" is printed on it doesnt change reality.
Revolvers dont have that problem. Like a computer mouse, just point and click. If it doesnt go "bang", point and click again. The gun-bunnies whine about a lack of ammo. I say learn to shoot correctly. Outside of their wet-dreams of zombies invading, you're not going to face more than 6 targets, especially after you put a round through the head or heart of the first one. Shoot. shoot alot. Be able to shoot all six rounds into a 2inch circle at 50 yards. (its entirely possible. Ive done it for many years at Army pistol quals) That way, when your life depends on it, you only need the one shot.
So, for the missus, who likely isnt as beefy and muscular, I recommend the .38; your choice out of the many different variations. Its over a century old, was used by the military and police for decades, and gives her a choice of aiming to injure or to kill, depending on threat level. The gun is very accurate, low recoil, cheap and easy to find, and easily customizable. The ammo is cheap and plentiful, plus its easy to reload if you feel the urge to pack your own ammo. Its the preferred back-up gun of most police even today because of these reasons.
Get yourself a .357. While her gun can knock down baddies, your gun can punch through the car he's hiding behind and STILL drop the bad guy. Plus it will eat that .38 ammo when you go to the firing range for plinking cans. As a marriage should be, her tools can get the job done, and yours are there for the really hard or big work.
Now, Henry Rifle company makes the sweetest .357 "Big Boy" lever action rifle you could ever ask for. And it will drop a 300lb deer at 150 yards, as long as you know how to shoot. (Heart and lungs) You can pretty it up or strip it as plain as you like; me personally, I use it purely stock, out-of-the-box.
So, you now have protection for your family and yourself, and your hunting rifle, and only two calibers, which actually use the same die if you're reloading. Of course you need a 12 gauge shotgun for hunting as well; the brand is up to you. I find that discussing Shotgun brands is like debating what car company is best: everyone has their own opinion, and ultimately, it really is only opinion.
Next, your going to need a long distance gun. I recommend the Mosin Nagant. The expensive ones are still under $100, and the range is limited only by field of view; shots of a mile or more with the right scope are considered normal. I recommend spending the extra cash on US brass ammo, so you can reload it; there may be (literally) tons of 7.62x54 just sitting around right now, but every year, that amount gets smaller as ammo gets shot or destabilizes.
Next is your Varmint gun, unless you happen to like making red mist out of squirrels and raccoons with that .357 or 7.62 ammo. But if you actually want birds and small critters for food (and other general household uses) you'll need a good "critter gun". This goes one of two ways, and it really is preference. If you dont already have an AR, arent already trained on an AR, and dont fantasize about being Rambo or Red Dawn or any of that moronic bull, then the Ruger 10/22 really is the best, most popular, all purpose .22 you can get, and will meet all your needs. I only recommend the AR if
1) Like me, you already have one. Then there's no sense in buying a second gun that does all the same work.
2) Like me, you're already trained on the AR platform (cops, military, and so on, who spend their entire careers with it)
3) You're an idiot with more money that sense who loves having a bajillion guns for no reason and is delusional enough to believe that zombies are real, North Korea could actually attack us, and thinks Rambo was a liberal wuss.
The last toy in the cabinet isnt a firearm. I recommend the Lee Anniversary kit and the shotgun reloader kit. Now that you have only four types of ammo to worry about (three if your using .22, since you cant reload that) it doesnt hurt to be prepared and have the ability to repack your empties. Depending on how you want to look at it, you can claim you're recycling, saving money, or both. Hey, either's a good excuse, right?
Lets look at handguns first: I like the .357 family. Several different firearms fall under an umbrella that allows you to set up the whole family with just a few guns.
Personally, having carried many semi-autos in the military, I dont care for them. I hear all the hype and brand love from the suckers convinced their chosen favorite is "perfect". But semi-autos jam, and usually at the worst possible time. It doesnt matter how well you clean it, how much you baby it, or the ridiculous a\mounts of money you spend pampering it, Murphy's Law runs free, and the more moving parts it has, the more likely it will screw up. And when those parts screw up, it usually takes a skilled professional to fix it. And the fact that the word "Glock" is printed on it doesnt change reality.
Revolvers dont have that problem. Like a computer mouse, just point and click. If it doesnt go "bang", point and click again. The gun-bunnies whine about a lack of ammo. I say learn to shoot correctly. Outside of their wet-dreams of zombies invading, you're not going to face more than 6 targets, especially after you put a round through the head or heart of the first one. Shoot. shoot alot. Be able to shoot all six rounds into a 2inch circle at 50 yards. (its entirely possible. Ive done it for many years at Army pistol quals) That way, when your life depends on it, you only need the one shot.
So, for the missus, who likely isnt as beefy and muscular, I recommend the .38; your choice out of the many different variations. Its over a century old, was used by the military and police for decades, and gives her a choice of aiming to injure or to kill, depending on threat level. The gun is very accurate, low recoil, cheap and easy to find, and easily customizable. The ammo is cheap and plentiful, plus its easy to reload if you feel the urge to pack your own ammo. Its the preferred back-up gun of most police even today because of these reasons.
Get yourself a .357. While her gun can knock down baddies, your gun can punch through the car he's hiding behind and STILL drop the bad guy. Plus it will eat that .38 ammo when you go to the firing range for plinking cans. As a marriage should be, her tools can get the job done, and yours are there for the really hard or big work.
Now, Henry Rifle company makes the sweetest .357 "Big Boy" lever action rifle you could ever ask for. And it will drop a 300lb deer at 150 yards, as long as you know how to shoot. (Heart and lungs) You can pretty it up or strip it as plain as you like; me personally, I use it purely stock, out-of-the-box.
So, you now have protection for your family and yourself, and your hunting rifle, and only two calibers, which actually use the same die if you're reloading. Of course you need a 12 gauge shotgun for hunting as well; the brand is up to you. I find that discussing Shotgun brands is like debating what car company is best: everyone has their own opinion, and ultimately, it really is only opinion.
Next, your going to need a long distance gun. I recommend the Mosin Nagant. The expensive ones are still under $100, and the range is limited only by field of view; shots of a mile or more with the right scope are considered normal. I recommend spending the extra cash on US brass ammo, so you can reload it; there may be (literally) tons of 7.62x54 just sitting around right now, but every year, that amount gets smaller as ammo gets shot or destabilizes.
Next is your Varmint gun, unless you happen to like making red mist out of squirrels and raccoons with that .357 or 7.62 ammo. But if you actually want birds and small critters for food (and other general household uses) you'll need a good "critter gun". This goes one of two ways, and it really is preference. If you dont already have an AR, arent already trained on an AR, and dont fantasize about being Rambo or Red Dawn or any of that moronic bull, then the Ruger 10/22 really is the best, most popular, all purpose .22 you can get, and will meet all your needs. I only recommend the AR if
1) Like me, you already have one. Then there's no sense in buying a second gun that does all the same work.
2) Like me, you're already trained on the AR platform (cops, military, and so on, who spend their entire careers with it)
3) You're an idiot with more money that sense who loves having a bajillion guns for no reason and is delusional enough to believe that zombies are real, North Korea could actually attack us, and thinks Rambo was a liberal wuss.
The last toy in the cabinet isnt a firearm. I recommend the Lee Anniversary kit and the shotgun reloader kit. Now that you have only four types of ammo to worry about (three if your using .22, since you cant reload that) it doesnt hurt to be prepared and have the ability to repack your empties. Depending on how you want to look at it, you can claim you're recycling, saving money, or both. Hey, either's a good excuse, right?
Wednesday, October 21, 2015
Lessons learned; the Tea Party and Hippies
The Baby Boomer generation; a time the social sciences start in 1946 that continues to the end of the 1950s, to describe the people born during that time. A generation that transformed America in almost every way. A generation that has always been a study in contradictions. The generation that brought us bra-burning also brought us the Wonder Bra. The War on Drugs was started by the same generation that spent two decades stone out of their minds. People that once advocated "free luvvv" have come to oppose premarital sex.
This is a generation that has been proud of their distrust for decades. "Dont trust anyone over 30!" Well, that was back when they were teens and early twenties. Now they joke "Dont trust anyone under 60." Dont trust corporations, dont trust the government, dont trust religion, dont trust your parents; the list goes on forever of who we werent supposed to trust. And when it was just them, it wasnt such a problem. But then they started having kids.
What happens when your kids see you throw grandpa in a nursing home and deliberately forget he exists? What lesson do you think they learn? What are they learning when they hear "old folks cant understand"? When you suggest that age makes one incompetent, even when there isnt a disease, dont be surprised when your kids do the same. They are just acting as you taught them.
For decades, Generations X and Y were told we couldnt trust our government. It was evil, it lied, and was guilty of every wrong you'd care to name. We were told this by liberals and conservatives, republicans and democrats, hippies and beatniks as well as the blue collar republicans and the war vets. We were told the media is the enemy of the public, lying for the rich and the powerful. We were told that our history, indeed most our education, was distorted lies. That corporations were giant faceless entities cheerfully poisoning us and utterly indifferent as long as they made a profit. The unions were accused of being no better than organized crime, if not actually taken over and ran by organized crime.
So, now that "The Greatest Generation" is mostly died, and the Baby Boomers are the main power in our government, they are wondering why there is a large contingent shouting "We cant trust you!" Those
same hippies that protested against the corporation rhey now govern cant understand why their children and grandchildren see the company as the cancer on society the Boomers always taught it was. They cant understand how or why a large percentage of the population is repeating and believing the rhetoric the Boomers shouted for more than 2 decades.
Where did Rand Paul, Rubio, and the rest of the Tea Party come from? Look at what Hillary, Pelosi, and the other liberal Democrats were chanting and carrying on about in the 60s and 70s. To misquote the old drug commercials, "parents who distrust the government will have kids who distrust the government."
This is a generation that has been proud of their distrust for decades. "Dont trust anyone over 30!" Well, that was back when they were teens and early twenties. Now they joke "Dont trust anyone under 60." Dont trust corporations, dont trust the government, dont trust religion, dont trust your parents; the list goes on forever of who we werent supposed to trust. And when it was just them, it wasnt such a problem. But then they started having kids.
What happens when your kids see you throw grandpa in a nursing home and deliberately forget he exists? What lesson do you think they learn? What are they learning when they hear "old folks cant understand"? When you suggest that age makes one incompetent, even when there isnt a disease, dont be surprised when your kids do the same. They are just acting as you taught them.
For decades, Generations X and Y were told we couldnt trust our government. It was evil, it lied, and was guilty of every wrong you'd care to name. We were told this by liberals and conservatives, republicans and democrats, hippies and beatniks as well as the blue collar republicans and the war vets. We were told the media is the enemy of the public, lying for the rich and the powerful. We were told that our history, indeed most our education, was distorted lies. That corporations were giant faceless entities cheerfully poisoning us and utterly indifferent as long as they made a profit. The unions were accused of being no better than organized crime, if not actually taken over and ran by organized crime.
So, now that "The Greatest Generation" is mostly died, and the Baby Boomers are the main power in our government, they are wondering why there is a large contingent shouting "We cant trust you!" Those
same hippies that protested against the corporation rhey now govern cant understand why their children and grandchildren see the company as the cancer on society the Boomers always taught it was. They cant understand how or why a large percentage of the population is repeating and believing the rhetoric the Boomers shouted for more than 2 decades.
Where did Rand Paul, Rubio, and the rest of the Tea Party come from? Look at what Hillary, Pelosi, and the other liberal Democrats were chanting and carrying on about in the 60s and 70s. To misquote the old drug commercials, "parents who distrust the government will have kids who distrust the government."
Saturday, October 17, 2015
Preppers
So, these preppers keep talking about the end of the world, and how they are the only ones who will survive it. But for every strategy or plan you see, you see two more preppers saying its a bad idea. Every gadget is nothing you couldnt get from a hardware store for a few bucks, or tweak yourself from clutter around the house, but they want you to pay top dollar for it. Hell, they cant even agree on what to prepare for; earthquake, fire, famine, government collapse. Some fools claim they're prepping for it all, which is impossible. Many of the preparations you make for one disaster are useless and can actually be harmful in other cases. And the preppers all forget several basic facts:
1) You need lots of non-related people to survive. All this movie bullshit about "the last six people on earth"; yeah, if they're related, sterile, gay, or the same sex, then the species is dead anyway. It takes something like a thousand people or more (all unrelated) to maintain a safe gene pool that guarantees no inbreeding defects; 80 of each gender is the smallest, and you need VERY careful bookkeeping then to prevent accidental cousin-f*cking.
2) "But the rioters and looters are gonna..." Yeah. right up until the people that actually care about living in society (unlike preppers) step up and do something about it. Which takes less time for a more civilized population; in African shitholes, the longest it lasts in a few months. As civilized as we are, well, The cops get a few days to settle that shit before people start stepping up.
3) "No one but me is gonna know how to..." Ok. Assuming you're the only prepper for a hundred miles in any direction, and there are no veterans, former boy scouts, farm boys, or any other outdoorsy type people, we still have libraries. Row upon row of books telling us how to do all this stuff. A disaster doesnt create mass amnesia and make people forget how to read or where to look up information.
4) Man abhors a vacuum more than nature, and I aint just talking about a vacuum cleaner. Someone will rise to power if the current order really cant cope (which is highly unlikely) Mankind functions best when someone else is in power. Too many people just dont feel right unless they are being "governed" by someone else. Study history, no matter how noble or criminal, all governments end up around the same place before they collapse; the population pushes for certain rights, the rulers demand certain powers, and the game goes on until it topples and resets.
5) Civilizations reset. The ancient Greeks had a mechanized computer. The ancient Egyptians could recognize malignant and benign tumors, and surgically remove them. The Romans could pump water uphill. The Indus Valley Civilization had flush toilets and sewers at 2500BC. This we know from physical things we found; who knows how much knowledge was lost with all the book burning over the centuries. Sometimes the old has to fall to make room for new. Not saying new is better, but the only constant in the universe is change.
6) As a species, we are nearly impossible to kill. If you're a Biblical Literalist, we've got 6000 years of recorded proof. If you prefer science, we have millions of years of proof. Mankind survives almost as well as cockroaches. We've survived ice ages, floods, volcanoes, meteor strikes, earthquakes, global depressions, world wars, bad Mexican food; short of a solar supernova (at which point everything inside the asteroid belt is ash) whats left that we havent already survived several times before?
I get it, preppers. You're scared. This is your security blanket, like a three year old's woobie. You feel tough and strong and ready now. Except that every actual disaster or collapse that you claim to be preparing for has shown that what you're doing is actually detrimental, both to you and to society. Look at Russia of the 90s, look at Venezuela, look at East Germany; see what was really needed. Then, if you want to prep, prep to be an aid, instead of "bugging out". Like the hippies of the 60s that decided to "drop out" of society, the only one you'll hurt is yourself.
1) You need lots of non-related people to survive. All this movie bullshit about "the last six people on earth"; yeah, if they're related, sterile, gay, or the same sex, then the species is dead anyway. It takes something like a thousand people or more (all unrelated) to maintain a safe gene pool that guarantees no inbreeding defects; 80 of each gender is the smallest, and you need VERY careful bookkeeping then to prevent accidental cousin-f*cking.
2) "But the rioters and looters are gonna..." Yeah. right up until the people that actually care about living in society (unlike preppers) step up and do something about it. Which takes less time for a more civilized population; in African shitholes, the longest it lasts in a few months. As civilized as we are, well, The cops get a few days to settle that shit before people start stepping up.
3) "No one but me is gonna know how to..." Ok. Assuming you're the only prepper for a hundred miles in any direction, and there are no veterans, former boy scouts, farm boys, or any other outdoorsy type people, we still have libraries. Row upon row of books telling us how to do all this stuff. A disaster doesnt create mass amnesia and make people forget how to read or where to look up information.
4) Man abhors a vacuum more than nature, and I aint just talking about a vacuum cleaner. Someone will rise to power if the current order really cant cope (which is highly unlikely) Mankind functions best when someone else is in power. Too many people just dont feel right unless they are being "governed" by someone else. Study history, no matter how noble or criminal, all governments end up around the same place before they collapse; the population pushes for certain rights, the rulers demand certain powers, and the game goes on until it topples and resets.
5) Civilizations reset. The ancient Greeks had a mechanized computer. The ancient Egyptians could recognize malignant and benign tumors, and surgically remove them. The Romans could pump water uphill. The Indus Valley Civilization had flush toilets and sewers at 2500BC. This we know from physical things we found; who knows how much knowledge was lost with all the book burning over the centuries. Sometimes the old has to fall to make room for new. Not saying new is better, but the only constant in the universe is change.
6) As a species, we are nearly impossible to kill. If you're a Biblical Literalist, we've got 6000 years of recorded proof. If you prefer science, we have millions of years of proof. Mankind survives almost as well as cockroaches. We've survived ice ages, floods, volcanoes, meteor strikes, earthquakes, global depressions, world wars, bad Mexican food; short of a solar supernova (at which point everything inside the asteroid belt is ash) whats left that we havent already survived several times before?
I get it, preppers. You're scared. This is your security blanket, like a three year old's woobie. You feel tough and strong and ready now. Except that every actual disaster or collapse that you claim to be preparing for has shown that what you're doing is actually detrimental, both to you and to society. Look at Russia of the 90s, look at Venezuela, look at East Germany; see what was really needed. Then, if you want to prep, prep to be an aid, instead of "bugging out". Like the hippies of the 60s that decided to "drop out" of society, the only one you'll hurt is yourself.
Friday, October 9, 2015
So now toilets are "islamophobic"
http://www.thesunflower.com/news/article_72f08792-5767-11e5-98d2-131537e6b7fc.html
I shit you not (pun intended) Wichita State University last year gutted their on-campus church to make it "faith neutral" so it would accommodate Muslims. Which means that anything other that Islamic paraphernalia was removed, clear down to removing the pews.
So now the Muslim students on campus are filing a petition for bidets, because they dont like regular toilets and toilet paper. “WSU talks about diversity and likes to have rights for international students, so I believe we should have one or two in each public building, but especially in central places,” one female student said. Yeah, because nothing says "Oppression" and "bigotry" like not having bidets in every stall.
Ive seen these, when I was in Iraq. Middle Easterners wash their ass with their bare hands after doing their business, and that's supposedly cleaner. Thats why they never touch anything with their left hand, because thats the one they use to scrub their ass after taking a dump.
I know college is that time when morons get to be completely self-absorbed and make mountain ranges out of prairie. And I know that this generation of idiots is desperate to claim any excuse they can to try and convince the world they are "victims". But Damn! There has to be a limit on the stupidity somewhere.
I shit you not (pun intended) Wichita State University last year gutted their on-campus church to make it "faith neutral" so it would accommodate Muslims. Which means that anything other that Islamic paraphernalia was removed, clear down to removing the pews.
So now the Muslim students on campus are filing a petition for bidets, because they dont like regular toilets and toilet paper. “WSU talks about diversity and likes to have rights for international students, so I believe we should have one or two in each public building, but especially in central places,” one female student said. Yeah, because nothing says "Oppression" and "bigotry" like not having bidets in every stall.
Ive seen these, when I was in Iraq. Middle Easterners wash their ass with their bare hands after doing their business, and that's supposedly cleaner. Thats why they never touch anything with their left hand, because thats the one they use to scrub their ass after taking a dump.
I know college is that time when morons get to be completely self-absorbed and make mountain ranges out of prairie. And I know that this generation of idiots is desperate to claim any excuse they can to try and convince the world they are "victims". But Damn! There has to be a limit on the stupidity somewhere.
Thursday, October 8, 2015
Feminists vs Transgenders: Who's right and who's crazy?
So, Feminists have been saying for the last 50 years that theres no difference between men and women but the plumbing. Our brains are the same. We are equal in every way. To say that any form of thinking, or preferences, or habits are "feminine" is sexist.
Now you have transgenders claiming they are women trapped in a man's body. I'll skip the fact that Ive been hearing guys make that joke since 6th grade. But they claim that there are distinctly woman ways of thinking, female tastes and preferences. That there are more differences than just plumbing. That their brain is distinctly female, and somehow that is different from male.
Liberals are demanding we recognize the "freedoms and rights" of two groups that are claiming polar opposite arguments. This is an either/or decision, and society has to decide who (if anyone) to side with.
Frankly, let the two sides fight it out, and only come back when there's a victor. Then decide who gets what "rights".
Now you have transgenders claiming they are women trapped in a man's body. I'll skip the fact that Ive been hearing guys make that joke since 6th grade. But they claim that there are distinctly woman ways of thinking, female tastes and preferences. That there are more differences than just plumbing. That their brain is distinctly female, and somehow that is different from male.
Liberals are demanding we recognize the "freedoms and rights" of two groups that are claiming polar opposite arguments. This is an either/or decision, and society has to decide who (if anyone) to side with.
Frankly, let the two sides fight it out, and only come back when there's a victor. Then decide who gets what "rights".
Wednesday, October 7, 2015
The Argument with Atheists
So you tell me God doesnt exist.
First off, which god or gods are you
claiming dont exist? Is it just the Abrahamic god? Or are you
including the 10,000 Gods of India? What about the Taoist Spirits?
Buddhist? Asatru? Are you going to say gods dont exist but angels do?
What about ghosts? Before the stupid starts pouring out of your mouth
like a flash flood in the Arizona desert, how about you take some
time to define the terms you intend to use.
Second, You've supposedly “proved”
it. Unfortunately for you, Im also a man of science as well as
religion. So, show me what lab in the world did the research? I want
to look over all the data, both raw and aggregate, to see that the
only possible conclusion is “god doesnt exist”. Show me
the results that led to this conclusion and no other. Show me the
experiments that were both accurate (the results were repeatable
within a very narrow margin of error) and valid (they tested for only
one possibility, and no other explanation is equally plausible). Oh,
yeah. Science teaches that nothing is “proven” merely further
supported by evidence. You should have known that better that the
Christian you claim to be smarter than. And science also says you
cannot “prove” a negative. So it is impossible to “prove”
there is no god, according to science. Try again.
So you want to turn to logic. First
rule of logic is that you cant prove a negative. You are defeated
before you even start by the very rules of the system you chose.
Nope, the only truly scientifically or
logically supported answer to “Is there a god?” is “I dont
know”.
The Religion of Atheism
Science cant detect one way or the
other whether gods exist. Science can only deal in the detectable,
quantifiable, and testable. Science doesnt cover the supernatural,
by definition. Which means a strong belief held either way is simply
an opinion. And we have a word for this opinion held without any
factual basis (several actually, but most are rather rude): Faith.
Faith is not a part of science but it is the whole basis of religion.
So, at its most basic level, you are no different from any other
religion; you have your dogma, and you proselytize. You even use
the courts to try to force your religious beliefs onto the rest of
the nation, attempting to deny them the right to publicly practice
theirs. No, the biggest difference, from the outside, between you and
the Mormons is that you do more harm to my freedoms and rights with
your court cases than the Mormons do knocking on my door at 9am
Saturday morning to tell me about their holy book. That is a very big difference; if you're threatening peoples' civil rights, you are a threat to the nation as a whole.
The Hypocrisy of Atheism
Atheists love to attack Christians. It
is obvious why. When you attack Jews, they circle up, facing in-ward,
and wait out the attack, seeking to survive, just as they have for
the last 5000 years. How does that tactic work? See that part about
five thousand years. Very few
other cultures have lasted that long. Atheists cant get their jollies
picking on Jews because Jews dont fight back. Christians shout, quote
Bible verses, go to court, call names; Christians fight back, but
only with words. Christians are fun to bully.
But
you notice......Atheists dont have the balls to go after Muslims. All
three religions worship the same deity, the god of Abraham. The
different names come from linguistic shifts over distance and time;
the “proper” pronunciation of Jehovah, Allah, and YHWH are
actually very similar, given the number of language shifts, and the
thousands of years. And yet, the same Atheist that just got done
pissing all over Christians and demanding the Biblical religion be
banned are demanding more “respect” for Islam. Why do you suppose
that is? (This next part is not my views, but the actual views of
Atheists, applied to Islam)
Have
an Atheist tell Muslims that they are delusional schizophrenic, like
the Atheist accuses Christians of being. Have the Atheist tell
Muslims that Allah is an “imaginary friend” that doesnt exist, a
figment of their delusional mind, proof that all Muslims are crazy.
See how well that goes. Have an atheist tell Muslims that their holy
book, the Koran, belongs on the same shelf as “Lord of the Rings”,
“Moby Dick”, and “Huck Finn”. That it deserves no respect,
and can be burned, or used as toilet paper. That it is nothing more
than a piece of fiction; the result of madmen and con-artists over
the centuries used to dupe Muslims into servitude, handing wealth and
power to these men. Go ahead, tell them. Tell them that their prophet
was nothing more than a paranoid delusional psychotic pedophile. That
their Sharia law is entirely without base or merit, founded entirely
on lies and insanities.
Atheists
dont pick fights with Muslims because the news currently is full of
just what exactly Muslims do to people who get in their way. Not even
people that piss them off, just “non-believers”, which atheists
would definitely qualify as. So, atheist, pick that fight; prove your
dedication to your beliefs. Be decapitated, crucified, burnt alive;
what ever the death of the week is among the extremists. Or shut up,
and stop with your hypocritical bigoted persecution of one specific
religion.
When
you attack the God of Christians, you attack the God of the Jews, and
the God of the Muslims. What you say to one, you say to all. As a
Christian, I will enjoy a rousing debate; Im happy to agree to
disagree, and show respect to your religion if you'll respect mine.
But the fact that you attack only my
religion shows me you dont really believe what you say. Nor do you
respect. I have nothing but contempt for hypocrites.
Tuesday, October 6, 2015
The Small House fad
I dont want to seem discouraging, or eternally pessimistic. Honestly, I love the idea and practice of the Smaller House, trying to use less space for a home. And some of these designs are amazing, cutting to a half or less of "standard" 1600' house. The theory is that you dont need 20 foot square rooms to do nothing in. I can agree with that. I even like the idea that they try to recycle shipping containers and all materials from the site while building.
However, these are not long term housing. People in their late 30s and 40s are building these houses, not thinking about the fact that in a decade or two, their knees wont like stairs anymore. Almost every design has a loft you reach by climbing a ladder, or outright two to three stories. While sexagenarians today are in far better shape than the "60somethin" age bracket anytime in the past, knee problems are still a very common problem, and like Po from Kung-Fu Panda, stairs become your arch-rival.
These houses are for young people. In Japan, they use them as apartments, letting you own your shipping container house and move from tower to tower of containers, hooking into the sewer and power grind of each as you go. In that use, its actually a very brilliant application for controlling housing costs and shortages. But it doesnt work well for the mobility impaired; the necessary ADA compliance methods (ramps, elevators and whatever) take up so much space, energy, and cost that it defeats the whole purpose of the Small house in the first place.
I dont see today's children being encouraged to want these small houses. They see Mtv Cribs and other such shows, and want the McMansions of the rich. Which means these will probably be just a fad, much like the earth houses and geodesic dome houses of the 70s; a great idea that wasnt properly thought out or implemented, and so died too soon.
However, these are not long term housing. People in their late 30s and 40s are building these houses, not thinking about the fact that in a decade or two, their knees wont like stairs anymore. Almost every design has a loft you reach by climbing a ladder, or outright two to three stories. While sexagenarians today are in far better shape than the "60somethin" age bracket anytime in the past, knee problems are still a very common problem, and like Po from Kung-Fu Panda, stairs become your arch-rival.
These houses are for young people. In Japan, they use them as apartments, letting you own your shipping container house and move from tower to tower of containers, hooking into the sewer and power grind of each as you go. In that use, its actually a very brilliant application for controlling housing costs and shortages. But it doesnt work well for the mobility impaired; the necessary ADA compliance methods (ramps, elevators and whatever) take up so much space, energy, and cost that it defeats the whole purpose of the Small house in the first place.
I dont see today's children being encouraged to want these small houses. They see Mtv Cribs and other such shows, and want the McMansions of the rich. Which means these will probably be just a fad, much like the earth houses and geodesic dome houses of the 70s; a great idea that wasnt properly thought out or implemented, and so died too soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)