The "man-made" warmer crowd continues, in the face of all reality, to claim its people in cars causing the planet to warm up. Nevermind that planetary temperatures have remained fairly constant for over a decade. Nevermind that the Industrial Revolution of the late 1800s spewed out far more C02 (among other pollutants) in 25 years than we saw during the second half of the 1900s. Nevermind that the models have been proven irreconcilably wrong (we've passed the 10 year mark that was supposed to doom the planet, and we're no where close to the tragedies predicted) We still have glaciers, and while some are melting, others are growing.
I wont address all the terrible crimes against science and humanity committed by the IPCC and the man-made warmers in general; too many others have done a far better job. Instead, Id like to look at several factors the warmers refuse to acknowledge as having any bearing on the topic. Which is why their opinions cant be trusted.
First off, they dont factor in any solar activity; flares, sun spots, and other phenomena. If you want to discuss temperature, you should start with the heat source, right? Logically, that should be a significant factor in the data. Except they still havent done any models factoring in the sun and its known effects.
Next would be another factor we already know causes massive changes to the climate world-wide. Volcanoes. True, we cant predict them, but the computer models left off the effects of the ones already erupting and effecting gthe atmosphere, and the models were never corrected for further volcanic activity. We have reliable records of 2 "Year(s) of no Summer" the first in 535-536, and the second in 1816, where volcanic ash blocked enough Solar radiation from getting to the earth that crops failed, and there was snow in July and August in most places. We know, through both science and history, of the massive impact, and how it lasts for some time, when a volcano erupts. We also know of how much (and what kind of) gas pours out with the eruptions. And yet, none of these men thought to include such data, even when trying to update their computer programs.
The next few possible factors are pure speculation on my part, I will admit.
Its seems every year for the last 20, there have been massive forest fires on the West Coast. The laws of environmentalists forbidding the clean-up of underbrush were well intentioned, but make the perfect tinder to start monsters that tend to take hundreds of miles before the fires is put out. Anyone who's worked with fire will tell you it does crazy things: It can cause gale force winds to form, pushing the air in front of it,or a back-draft can suck air to a near-vacuum. It can form a vortex going up or down, literally a tornado of flame and heat. I find it curious that all this heat, over all that area, shifting the air so much, doesnt affect the climate?
Move on to the power companies; towers extend a quarter mile in to the air for nuke, coal, or natural gas. The super-heated steam rises another quarter to half mile before it cools enough to stop being visible. That much heat should be affecting climate as well, especially with how common they are.
Solar farms are even worse, though much more rare, thank God. The air over a solar farm can reasch over 1000 degrees. That has to be affecting things.
Personally, I doubt humans are capable of harming the planet significantly. But I cant take seriously any claim to be a "scientific" study when I can thing of so many factors, right of the top of my head, that can skew the results that werent accounted for.
Wednesday, June 22, 2016
Tuesday, June 21, 2016
When enumerated rights are ignored
One of the officers of Baltimore is facing his third trial over the death of the criminal on the way to lock-up last summer. Thats "Double Jeopardy" (actually, Triple Jeopardy) and blatantly unconstitutional in the Bill of Rights. But in order to appease the the ghetto dwelling animals that will burn down their own neighborhoods in protest, he must keep being tried until they can find him guilty.
Then again, the other officers, at least the ones not acquitted or exonerated, were "found guilty by reason of being cops" rather than any actual evidence of misconduct or wrong-doing. It becomes painfully obvious that this is all theater to give legitimacy to kangaroo courts when you see even black officers being charged with "hate crimes" of racism against a black man caught red-handed who then resists arrest.
Oddly, while everyone attacks the cops and demands their blood, no one bothers to suspect the other convict in the back with the man, who was fine before the second convict was picked up, but dead when both are dropped off at lock-up. What should be tyhe prime suspect immediately was declared the star witness for prosecution against the police, before any statements or investigations even started. And this isnt setting off alarm bells anywhere?
This is what happens when you let feelings and political correctness supersede equality and the Constitution.
Then again, the other officers, at least the ones not acquitted or exonerated, were "found guilty by reason of being cops" rather than any actual evidence of misconduct or wrong-doing. It becomes painfully obvious that this is all theater to give legitimacy to kangaroo courts when you see even black officers being charged with "hate crimes" of racism against a black man caught red-handed who then resists arrest.
Oddly, while everyone attacks the cops and demands their blood, no one bothers to suspect the other convict in the back with the man, who was fine before the second convict was picked up, but dead when both are dropped off at lock-up. What should be tyhe prime suspect immediately was declared the star witness for prosecution against the police, before any statements or investigations even started. And this isnt setting off alarm bells anywhere?
This is what happens when you let feelings and political correctness supersede equality and the Constitution.
Activists are a plague on our society
People often ask me why I hate activists so much. Even the ones that supposedly side with me, I dislike, and my friends dont understand. Well, only activists, with their polarized, ridiculous views, could come up with the things Ive seen:
A black woman whined how unfair it was that she had to eulogize the Orlando gays infront of a crowd that was "too white" for her tastes. And the non-whites in the crowd agreed. Apparently, only minorities are allowed to give a damn now when a national tragedy happens. Then again, for activist bigots like her, national tragedies only occur when minorities die. And it must somehow be blamed on "whitey craka". And then they wonder why they are treated with contempt and disgust.
Another dumb liberal twit blasted out a message about how she was glad that the 2 year old boy was eaten by gators in Orlando, and somehow, it was again "ebul whittey crakka's" fault. Even though she is white herself.
We're not supposed to assign guilt to the jihadist who swore allegiance to ISIS even as he was telling 911 what he was about to go do; we're supposed to blame the guns he legally had instead. And we're supposed to overlook the fact that he legally was able to get them due to bigots in the obama administration giving special treatment because of his nationality and religion; you know, basic bigotry.
But its not just liberal activists that burn me up. Twice now Ive seen stories about women who had to face the hardest choice in the world. They had late stage cancer while pregnant. Hell of a choice: get treatment that will cause an abortion, or Carry the kid and hope you live long enough to safely give birth. I lost a lot of respect for the "pro-life" movement when I heard them complaining that there shouldnt even have been a choice offered. I figure if you really want to kill yourself, you have the right. But you dont have the right to kill another. Nor demand they die to appease your conscience. That horrible choice those poor ladies had to face is a matter for them, their doctors, God, and their significant other. And no one else has the right to say a word. Oddly, for some reason, many "pro-lifers" try to throw flak my way for that stance.
When the average people of America get together, the divides are rarely so vast that compromise cant be reached. Even people with polar opposite views can agree that "my rights end at my finger-tips, just like yours." But once you get activists involved....Its like they work to drive every discussion to the stupidest possible conclusion, and then keep it there, to cause as much pain, grief, and suffering as possible. And that is simply intolerable. Which is why I cant stand them.
A black woman whined how unfair it was that she had to eulogize the Orlando gays infront of a crowd that was "too white" for her tastes. And the non-whites in the crowd agreed. Apparently, only minorities are allowed to give a damn now when a national tragedy happens. Then again, for activist bigots like her, national tragedies only occur when minorities die. And it must somehow be blamed on "whitey craka". And then they wonder why they are treated with contempt and disgust.
Another dumb liberal twit blasted out a message about how she was glad that the 2 year old boy was eaten by gators in Orlando, and somehow, it was again "ebul whittey crakka's" fault. Even though she is white herself.
We're not supposed to assign guilt to the jihadist who swore allegiance to ISIS even as he was telling 911 what he was about to go do; we're supposed to blame the guns he legally had instead. And we're supposed to overlook the fact that he legally was able to get them due to bigots in the obama administration giving special treatment because of his nationality and religion; you know, basic bigotry.
But its not just liberal activists that burn me up. Twice now Ive seen stories about women who had to face the hardest choice in the world. They had late stage cancer while pregnant. Hell of a choice: get treatment that will cause an abortion, or Carry the kid and hope you live long enough to safely give birth. I lost a lot of respect for the "pro-life" movement when I heard them complaining that there shouldnt even have been a choice offered. I figure if you really want to kill yourself, you have the right. But you dont have the right to kill another. Nor demand they die to appease your conscience. That horrible choice those poor ladies had to face is a matter for them, their doctors, God, and their significant other. And no one else has the right to say a word. Oddly, for some reason, many "pro-lifers" try to throw flak my way for that stance.
When the average people of America get together, the divides are rarely so vast that compromise cant be reached. Even people with polar opposite views can agree that "my rights end at my finger-tips, just like yours." But once you get activists involved....Its like they work to drive every discussion to the stupidest possible conclusion, and then keep it there, to cause as much pain, grief, and suffering as possible. And that is simply intolerable. Which is why I cant stand them.
Monday, June 20, 2016
Current events
So, Lynch, Head of the Dept of Justice (which no longer qualifies for that title) now wants to destroy evidence and tamper with facts to hide the motivations of the shooter in Orlando, "in order to determine [his] motives." Removing and destroying the 911 tape where he swore loyalty to ISIS doesnt change the fact he did it, or remove it as a reason.
Lynch (and the rest of the obamination administration) want this to be about guns and gays and crazies. Well, ISIS and its supporters are crazy, but ojackwagon has sided with the muslims; a point he made in his autobiographies before he got into politics, and has kept.
There's no evidence the shooter was gay, except from liberals, who claim everyone is gay a little, at various points in their life. Rather reminds me of Siggy Freud, the whack-job shrink who figured that just because he wanted to bang his mom, it must be normal. He whipped all his BS into garbage no one could prove was wrong, even though everyone knew it was. Just like modern democrat politicians; especially hillary and obama.
And then there's the guns...Democrats cant declare martial law and turn the Republic into an Empire, Roman style, as long as the civilian populace has the fire-power to resist. Why do you think democrats are so dead-set on stealing your guns from you? Laws we've had on the books since the 1930s should have prevented the jihadist from buying his guns.
But the obama administration hasnt bothered to enforce too many laws these last 8 years.At least they're consistent; consistently refusing to uphold the law, as per their oaths. And the "new" laws the democrats want to put in place wouldnt have stopped the chuckle-head from getting his guns either. They would only have prevented normal people from having access to the fire-arms that keep criminal, traitorous, cowardly would-be tyrants like obama and hillary in their place.
Our problem isnt mental illness, jihadists, guns, or terrorism. Its democrats that side with those across the world that want to destroy America. And there is a very simple and accurate word for people like that: traitor.
Lynch (and the rest of the obamination administration) want this to be about guns and gays and crazies. Well, ISIS and its supporters are crazy, but ojackwagon has sided with the muslims; a point he made in his autobiographies before he got into politics, and has kept.
There's no evidence the shooter was gay, except from liberals, who claim everyone is gay a little, at various points in their life. Rather reminds me of Siggy Freud, the whack-job shrink who figured that just because he wanted to bang his mom, it must be normal. He whipped all his BS into garbage no one could prove was wrong, even though everyone knew it was. Just like modern democrat politicians; especially hillary and obama.
And then there's the guns...Democrats cant declare martial law and turn the Republic into an Empire, Roman style, as long as the civilian populace has the fire-power to resist. Why do you think democrats are so dead-set on stealing your guns from you? Laws we've had on the books since the 1930s should have prevented the jihadist from buying his guns.
But the obama administration hasnt bothered to enforce too many laws these last 8 years.At least they're consistent; consistently refusing to uphold the law, as per their oaths. And the "new" laws the democrats want to put in place wouldnt have stopped the chuckle-head from getting his guns either. They would only have prevented normal people from having access to the fire-arms that keep criminal, traitorous, cowardly would-be tyrants like obama and hillary in their place.
Our problem isnt mental illness, jihadists, guns, or terrorism. Its democrats that side with those across the world that want to destroy America. And there is a very simple and accurate word for people like that: traitor.
Saturday, June 18, 2016
Jim Carrey's "Liar Lair"
So, this illegal immigrant, Francisco Aguirre, that hid in a church to avoid deportation (again) back in 2014, is working on getting current administration officials to help him keep from being deported. The idiot has the nerve to say he wants ICE and other authorities to "stop targeting [him] and [his] family."
And Im reminded of Jim Carrey's Brilliant legal advice from the movie "Liar Liar": "Then stop breaking the law!" I wouldnt think that would be too hard to understand. And if he cant speak English, it should be a piece of cake to find someone able to translate a single sentence onto mexican spanish for him. Personally, I believe it takes a special kind of stupid to not simply understand that simple principle from the beginning.
And Im reminded of Jim Carrey's Brilliant legal advice from the movie "Liar Liar": "Then stop breaking the law!" I wouldnt think that would be too hard to understand. And if he cant speak English, it should be a piece of cake to find someone able to translate a single sentence onto mexican spanish for him. Personally, I believe it takes a special kind of stupid to not simply understand that simple principle from the beginning.
The Orlando Embarrassment
The truths have come out., and the democrats must work extra hard to try spinning people's attention away from them:
The shooter was a muslim jihadist under FBI investigation. Twice. One investigation was ordered to be ended by Napolitano's Department of Homeland Security, the second ordered to be closed by Hillary's State Department. This started, happend, and tragically ended entirely under the watch of the obama administration; there's no one to blame.
The 9-1-1 call recorded his declaration of faith and loyalty, both to is;am and to ISIS, but both obama and hillary spent several days trying to deny the tragedy was islamic terrorism.
obama has now turned to blaming the guns, because inanimate lumps of metal somehow force people to become monsters, in his delusional world. Except that this crazed psycho bought all his guns legally.
Indeed, the laws we used to have on the books that would have prevented his purchase or access, arent gun laws, but rather intelligence-sharing laws obama chose to end. The same "walls" bill and hillary built in the 90s that led to the intel agencies not being able to share the information in time to prevent 9/11, that even bill and hillarey admitted were short-sighted, poorly planned and implemented, and needed to be ended in light of that tragedy..... obama has spent the last several years rebuilding.
Democrats from obama the failure on down are trying to spin this, because it shows, just as clearly as the 9/11 commission said, that weapons arent the issue. The dedication of the enemy, and the fact that most democrat ideology plays right into the enemy's hands, are the problem.
Wednesday, June 15, 2016
Man and Nature
Once, there was an inherent belief, so ingrained in society that it didnt even have to be said. The idea that man was intrinsically connected to nature was common sense; medicine men taught thatb man should spend time out-doors in the elements to maintain health.
we've seen through observation that our current scientific thinking that nutrition and health is simply a matter of getting the right vitamins, minerals, and chemical compounds is wrong. We need other things that science cannot even detect. But it does know a healthy diet and activity is the best medicine for a healthy life. The more man made pharmaceuticals a person turns to, the more they have to take to alleviate the side effects of other medications.
As we study all the catastrophic environmental disasters we are facing from past environmentalist activism and knee-jerk reactions to observations without understanding and study, we should be exceedingly leery of any suggestion such fools make currently or in the future; they are the reason much of our planet is so polluted, a fact they cannot accept because they cannot admit the failure of their ideas.
But that should not prevent us from looking back at our grandfathers, our great grandfathers, the generations before us stretching back in time that didnt live as disposable consumers, and seeing what worked, and how to live in harmony with nature as they did.
we've seen through observation that our current scientific thinking that nutrition and health is simply a matter of getting the right vitamins, minerals, and chemical compounds is wrong. We need other things that science cannot even detect. But it does know a healthy diet and activity is the best medicine for a healthy life. The more man made pharmaceuticals a person turns to, the more they have to take to alleviate the side effects of other medications.
As we study all the catastrophic environmental disasters we are facing from past environmentalist activism and knee-jerk reactions to observations without understanding and study, we should be exceedingly leery of any suggestion such fools make currently or in the future; they are the reason much of our planet is so polluted, a fact they cannot accept because they cannot admit the failure of their ideas.
But that should not prevent us from looking back at our grandfathers, our great grandfathers, the generations before us stretching back in time that didnt live as disposable consumers, and seeing what worked, and how to live in harmony with nature as they did.
Tuesday, June 14, 2016
addressing the real causes
So democrats, in their usual incompetent way, are using the blood of innocents to push the tired old line that guns are evil.
Never mind the fact that this man had somehow passed Hillary Clinton's State department background check, and another from Each Sec of the Dept of Homeland Security, as well as two FBI investigations, ALL done during the Obama administration.
Was special preference shown because of his color, religion, heritage, or any of the other excuses democrats like to give for failing to do their job right? We may never know. But reporters arent having to dig too hard to find no doubts that this man was a proud jihadist with ties to ISIS and other terrorist groups, a fact obama and hillary are having a hard time admitting. An Afghan/Paki muslim with ties to the Taliban, basically the poster child of what we've been at war with for over 15 years now, and obama keeps ordering the US military to provide aid to, under obama's administration, in spite of the endless red flags going up, was allowed to buy fire-arms legally, even after he started saying what he intended to use them for. For (beep)'s sake, he called 911 to swear allegiance to ISIS just before the attack, and hillary still tried to say he wasnt a muslim terrorist.
But supposedly, it was the gun's fault.
I gotta admit, if thats the case, I am truly impressed.
Ive starved my guns, beat them, dropped them, thrown them against the wall, kicked them in the mud; just about every kind of abuse I could think of, and they still wont kill anyone FOR me. Nope, I gotta do the leg work myself, go to where the person is, and pull that trigger before anyone dies. That this paki can train a gun to kill for him; now thats an impressive trick I aint never seen successfully performed before. Id even volunteer to risk my life, to see how its done; how he can order that gun to kill me without anyone touching it.
Maybe we should stop worrying about the guns and spend more time worrying about the psychos, crazies, and sick (beep)s carrying them. The news doesnt report how many shootings are prevented by armed US citizens. Fact is, fire-arms were banned in that area; I dont know if it's city ordnance, state law, or just the rules of the club. But one veteran with a pistol could have saved a lot of lives.
Never mind the fact that this man had somehow passed Hillary Clinton's State department background check, and another from Each Sec of the Dept of Homeland Security, as well as two FBI investigations, ALL done during the Obama administration.
Was special preference shown because of his color, religion, heritage, or any of the other excuses democrats like to give for failing to do their job right? We may never know. But reporters arent having to dig too hard to find no doubts that this man was a proud jihadist with ties to ISIS and other terrorist groups, a fact obama and hillary are having a hard time admitting. An Afghan/Paki muslim with ties to the Taliban, basically the poster child of what we've been at war with for over 15 years now, and obama keeps ordering the US military to provide aid to, under obama's administration, in spite of the endless red flags going up, was allowed to buy fire-arms legally, even after he started saying what he intended to use them for. For (beep)'s sake, he called 911 to swear allegiance to ISIS just before the attack, and hillary still tried to say he wasnt a muslim terrorist.
But supposedly, it was the gun's fault.
I gotta admit, if thats the case, I am truly impressed.
Ive starved my guns, beat them, dropped them, thrown them against the wall, kicked them in the mud; just about every kind of abuse I could think of, and they still wont kill anyone FOR me. Nope, I gotta do the leg work myself, go to where the person is, and pull that trigger before anyone dies. That this paki can train a gun to kill for him; now thats an impressive trick I aint never seen successfully performed before. Id even volunteer to risk my life, to see how its done; how he can order that gun to kill me without anyone touching it.
Maybe we should stop worrying about the guns and spend more time worrying about the psychos, crazies, and sick (beep)s carrying them. The news doesnt report how many shootings are prevented by armed US citizens. Fact is, fire-arms were banned in that area; I dont know if it's city ordnance, state law, or just the rules of the club. But one veteran with a pistol could have saved a lot of lives.
Sunday, June 12, 2016
Tough Love for graduates
Its graduation time, and the pundits and editorials are once again trying to sound "deep" by saying graduation cards are too soft and sugary. Well, gee, thats like saying water is wet. Whats more, they act surprised that no one is inspired and awed by their "brilliance" as they dispense what they consider is "Tough Love" advice.
Well, when your "toughness" amounts to: "no one will love you like mommy and daddy, and work is more demanding that your grade school teachers", umm yeah. Are you addressing the Kindergarten graduates, maybe? If you want "Tough love" try telling the truth about the world; the real, raw, simple truth:
In General
Tell them that everyone will be looking to use them as a step towards something, so they'd better be ready unless they like being a doormat.
On Family
Outside mommy and daddy's door, the only people that care if your dead are the cops and the coroner, and thats only because it means more paperwork for their work. The average person will lift exactly one finger to to help you; its the middle one. Ok, maybe two if they're feeling really ambitious about it.
On Girls
Talk to a girl 2 or 3 times before taking her out, and let her pick the place. Use a cab or an old beater, especially if you have a nice car. Dont let her know you have money until after you've decided you want to spend time on this girl. Oh yeah, in the real world, that phrase means at least a year commitment, maybe life. Dont waste time with feminists and "womens libbers", they will spend all their time trying to be more manly than you, and nothing will get done. Unless your into being the girl of the relationship; we're not here to judge.
On Work
If you arent getting stabbed in the back at least twice a day, you're not doing enough to advance your career. Unless your career is selling armored vests. Work sucks. If it didnt, they wouldnt have to pay you to do it. You think your boss doesnt "appreciate" you? Take a look at that check. If he really didnt appreciate you, he'd fire your ass and hire someone else for less. Got it?
On "finding yourself"
Hold up your hand. Slap your palm against your forehead. There you are. Now that you found yourself, dump the new age hippy mumbo-jumbo. That was garbage made up by stoners to sound "deep" while they were baked. You are what you do. Not your job, car, couch, bank account, or anything else. What have you done? Have you ran in the rain? rebuilt a car? juggled explosives? (am I really the only one thats done that?) What have you done? That is who you are. Anything else doesnt matter. nfortunately for most graduates, you havent done anything yet. Yes, that means your nobody, so far. And its up to you to get off your ass and change that.
No crying, no partying, no sitting around; the losers get ground down to be the steps of the ladder of success for the leaders. And may God have mercy on your soul, because the world is gonna do its best to break everything else in you.
Well, when your "toughness" amounts to: "no one will love you like mommy and daddy, and work is more demanding that your grade school teachers", umm yeah. Are you addressing the Kindergarten graduates, maybe? If you want "Tough love" try telling the truth about the world; the real, raw, simple truth:
In General
Tell them that everyone will be looking to use them as a step towards something, so they'd better be ready unless they like being a doormat.
On Family
Outside mommy and daddy's door, the only people that care if your dead are the cops and the coroner, and thats only because it means more paperwork for their work. The average person will lift exactly one finger to to help you; its the middle one. Ok, maybe two if they're feeling really ambitious about it.
On Girls
Talk to a girl 2 or 3 times before taking her out, and let her pick the place. Use a cab or an old beater, especially if you have a nice car. Dont let her know you have money until after you've decided you want to spend time on this girl. Oh yeah, in the real world, that phrase means at least a year commitment, maybe life. Dont waste time with feminists and "womens libbers", they will spend all their time trying to be more manly than you, and nothing will get done. Unless your into being the girl of the relationship; we're not here to judge.
On Work
If you arent getting stabbed in the back at least twice a day, you're not doing enough to advance your career. Unless your career is selling armored vests. Work sucks. If it didnt, they wouldnt have to pay you to do it. You think your boss doesnt "appreciate" you? Take a look at that check. If he really didnt appreciate you, he'd fire your ass and hire someone else for less. Got it?
On "finding yourself"
Hold up your hand. Slap your palm against your forehead. There you are. Now that you found yourself, dump the new age hippy mumbo-jumbo. That was garbage made up by stoners to sound "deep" while they were baked. You are what you do. Not your job, car, couch, bank account, or anything else. What have you done? Have you ran in the rain? rebuilt a car? juggled explosives? (am I really the only one thats done that?) What have you done? That is who you are. Anything else doesnt matter. nfortunately for most graduates, you havent done anything yet. Yes, that means your nobody, so far. And its up to you to get off your ass and change that.
No crying, no partying, no sitting around; the losers get ground down to be the steps of the ladder of success for the leaders. And may God have mercy on your soul, because the world is gonna do its best to break everything else in you.
Shooting in Florida
My prayers for the families of the 20 poor souls lost last night. The cops have said jihadist, domestic jihadist, and the investigation is still ongoing, so we probably wont be certain until tonight.
We really should be grateful. Guy walked into the club full of 300 with an AK, and only 20 died. That may sound callus or cold, but consider that a trained man with a 30 round clip will see 80-90% of rounds fired are lethal, and its obvious the death count could have been much higher. Thank God for even the small miracles.
Edit: since I wrote this, its been confirmed 50 dead and 53 injured.A third of the patrons. Light a candle, burn some incense, or whatever you do to send the dead on their way in peace; take a moment to be grateful you're not one of those 103, and go commit some random act of kindness tomorrow. Thats the only true and useful way to negate such tragedy.
Its interesting to note that we have our first acknowledged muslim attack on gays in the US. We've known for decades that gays in the Middle East are routinely killed in brutal ways for the "crime" of being homosexual, but our liberals and democrats have said for years "that could never happen here. Its a slippery slope fallacy to think that our muslims might act like other muslims!" Well, humanity tends to treat "Slippery Slopes" the way 5 year olds treat a "slip & slide", not just going down it repeatedly, but trying to invent new ways as they do.
Its funny to me how many of these "atheist" gays started praying the moment the bullets started flying. I love the old joke about "no atheists in fox-holes" ; Ive sen so many converts because they lived when they knew they shouldnt have, and they know the only reason that makes sense.
In the end, we do only what we can. Its time to light a candle for the dead, and offer support to the living. We mist review how this happened to see if there's a way to prevent it next time. And, of course, we must silence the insanely moronic fools that try to blame the inanimate lumps of metal being carried instead of the monster that pulled the trigger.
We really should be grateful. Guy walked into the club full of 300 with an AK, and only 20 died. That may sound callus or cold, but consider that a trained man with a 30 round clip will see 80-90% of rounds fired are lethal, and its obvious the death count could have been much higher. Thank God for even the small miracles.
Edit: since I wrote this, its been confirmed 50 dead and 53 injured.A third of the patrons. Light a candle, burn some incense, or whatever you do to send the dead on their way in peace; take a moment to be grateful you're not one of those 103, and go commit some random act of kindness tomorrow. Thats the only true and useful way to negate such tragedy.
Its interesting to note that we have our first acknowledged muslim attack on gays in the US. We've known for decades that gays in the Middle East are routinely killed in brutal ways for the "crime" of being homosexual, but our liberals and democrats have said for years "that could never happen here. Its a slippery slope fallacy to think that our muslims might act like other muslims!" Well, humanity tends to treat "Slippery Slopes" the way 5 year olds treat a "slip & slide", not just going down it repeatedly, but trying to invent new ways as they do.
Its funny to me how many of these "atheist" gays started praying the moment the bullets started flying. I love the old joke about "no atheists in fox-holes" ; Ive sen so many converts because they lived when they knew they shouldnt have, and they know the only reason that makes sense.
In the end, we do only what we can. Its time to light a candle for the dead, and offer support to the living. We mist review how this happened to see if there's a way to prevent it next time. And, of course, we must silence the insanely moronic fools that try to blame the inanimate lumps of metal being carried instead of the monster that pulled the trigger.
Monday, June 6, 2016
A Different kind of "Buffet" Law
The democrat candidates are talking about a "Buffet law", named after Warren Buffet, that sets an alternate minimum tax limit, "so that the rich will never pay less than the middle class in taxes again!"And, of course, the vast majority of democrat voters, who live off government assistance, like that idea, dreaming that there will be enough for them to have even more. (There wont be. The math proves it)
Personally, I have a different kind of "Buffet Law" - Warren Buffet hasnt paid taxes in over a decade. So of course his secretary paid more than he did. Anyone who paid at all - paid more than he did. Hell, anyone that filed paid more than he did.
Then there's Charlie Rangle. Hadnr paid his taxes in three years. He was "punished" by being made head of the committee that writes tax laws.
Then there's John Kerry and his yacht. The mooring fees (taxes) are around $4 million dollars. He keeps claiming to each state trying to collect the taxes that he's mooring in a different state, so he doesnt pay any taxes.
No, if I was writing laws, I wouldnt be worrying right now about the idjit claiming to pay less than his secretary. Id be too busy going after the hypocritical bastards demanding "the Rich" (who are less wealthy than them) "Pay their fair share" while not paying at all. And my solution would be the confiscation of all assets. People like Rangle, Kerry, Buffet, and Pelosi, who havent paid taxes for years, but demand others pay, and pay more, would have everything taken from them as punishment for not paying.
That seems fair to me, anyway.
Personally, I have a different kind of "Buffet Law" - Warren Buffet hasnt paid taxes in over a decade. So of course his secretary paid more than he did. Anyone who paid at all - paid more than he did. Hell, anyone that filed paid more than he did.
Then there's Charlie Rangle. Hadnr paid his taxes in three years. He was "punished" by being made head of the committee that writes tax laws.
Then there's John Kerry and his yacht. The mooring fees (taxes) are around $4 million dollars. He keeps claiming to each state trying to collect the taxes that he's mooring in a different state, so he doesnt pay any taxes.
No, if I was writing laws, I wouldnt be worrying right now about the idjit claiming to pay less than his secretary. Id be too busy going after the hypocritical bastards demanding "the Rich" (who are less wealthy than them) "Pay their fair share" while not paying at all. And my solution would be the confiscation of all assets. People like Rangle, Kerry, Buffet, and Pelosi, who havent paid taxes for years, but demand others pay, and pay more, would have everything taken from them as punishment for not paying.
That seems fair to me, anyway.
Saturday, June 4, 2016
Ali dies at 74
Muhammad Ali has died today. There are many books and movies of his life that pay a better tribute to the man than my words can, so I wont try. I will mere say that he was a man of principle, who lived his convictions without compromise, actively opposed bigotry in all its forms and was an amazing role model. And he was a pretty good boxer too. May he rest in peace.
Thursday, June 2, 2016
My cat
So, my cat was sitting, staring at the back door. She knows if she waits patiently enough, I will let her outside. As I look at the news, and all the people claiming thgey are "suffering", "oppressed", and how badly we need immediate change, I look at my cat. She waits in a sun beam shining through the window in the door until she can have what she really wants.... to go outside. She doesnt forget her main goal, but she's learned to be content and find the good in what she has until she can get better.
My cat teaches me a lot of good lessons.
My cat teaches me a lot of good lessons.
Wednesday, June 1, 2016
On liberalism
Ifv you want to know the ideas of Classical Liberalism, they are referenced in the Declaration of Independence so famously:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
They also pushed for set law, and equal application of the law. They sought an end to the common practice of the time (the 1700s and before) where a single judge decided if you were guilty and how to punish you, and a different set of punishments for the rich, famous or powerful than for the common man. And one of the foremost ideals was that freedom wouldnt last oif a man couldnt own property and have the means to defend it.
For centuries, "Liberalism" focused on individual freedom protected from a deliberately small, limited government. All authority not specifically given to the government was considered to be denied to it; any powers, rights, jurisdiction, or ownership that was not specifically stated was implied to be outside the power of the government. And then FDR and his followers came along.
Today, the United States associates liberalism with the welfare-state policies of the New Deal made cooked up by FDR. It should be noted here that almost 2/3rds of his programs were found unconstitutional and eliminated. So he added more judges to the Supreme Court to tip the balance in his favor and keep the rest from being declared unconstitutional as well. By this time, enough of the population was ignorant of history to allow him to get away with such a trick. (In fact, a Supreme Court Justice named Samuel Chase had been impeached for judging based on political beliefs rather than actual law already, but was not removed from his seat as there wasnt enough evidence; this gave precedence for removal of the extra justices, but no one thought of it at the time) Of course, the system was expanded considerably under LBJs "Great Society". The modern liberal believes the government should take care of you from cradle to grave. Apparently, they've never seen any of the documentaries they make on how badly the government cares for those already under its care, the military.
The modern American belief (polar opposite from the classical) is that a centralized government should have sufficient power to control just about everything, just as was done in the past. Part of this problem is that most nations of the past were the size of one American state, and not any of the big ones. Its easy to have a benevolent dictatorship that has absolute power over everything when your "nation" is the town and the few small farm the surround it. Even if you're England, it still only takes a few days to cross the island. All of Europe Is America east of the Mississippi River and Texas, and look how many countries its been divided into. Our nation is too big, with too many differences to be governed by a single central, all-powerful government. Our founding fathers knew this; that's why states were given so much power and freedom in the constitution. Just to add a few fast examples; that $150K income that barely makes minimum wage in California make the family in the Fly-over states qualify as "Well-off" to "rich". Pushing for everyone to get rid of their cars and either ride bikes or take public transit makes sense in the big cities, where the use offsets the cost and most people are (comparitively) close to their job. There are a significant number of towns and cities in America that are too small to even have a bus line. The environmentalist push to get everyone out of personal vehicles fails for that simple reason.
It is funny that a liberal will believe in the best about other people; their world-view is that people are essentially good and want to do good, and yet they believe that commerce, and the people involved in commerce are inherently evil. Liberals will talk about how so-and-so is a great guy, wondferful and generous, and make assumptions of his good will and nature....right up until they find out he's a business man. Now, it depends on the business, thats true; if he's involved in a business that supports or services one of their causes, he's still a hero, or at least a necessary evil. If he isnt aiding them, or from one of the near-endless list of things they hate, then he's just evil to be ended when convenient. But if his industry is on "the list", something they hate (and some days, that feels like almost anything that makes money or allows for modern society to exist) then they seek total destruction, and Im not exaggerating. They want the business closed, the owner impoverished, the man they met (assumong he isnt the owner) unemployed, and no possible option of recovery.
A modern liberal will fight for the rights of the en-vogue class. They dont really care about the cause, the people they are standing up for, or the results. All they care is that its popular, and they can claim to care. We see the proof in the current headlines: somehow, not letting a man use a bathroom meant for little girls is supposedly as bigoted as the Jim Crow laws, where blacks couldnt use the same drinking fountains or bathrooms as white. At all. A baker can refuse, for any reason, to make a cake for a heterosexual couple. But if that couple is gay? Against his will, against his beliefs (unless he happens to be of another protected class) he is forced into labor. We have several words for the act of forcing someone to labor against their will; all are synonyms of the word "Slavery" which was illegal in this country from 1865 until 2012. Since 2012, gays are allowed to practice indentured servitude (a form of limited slavery) and force anyone they want to do whatever they want with the government enforcement by claiming "discrimination".
Classical liberalism is a philosophy to be admired; an ideal that all people are born equal, and are free to live that life as best they can. Modern liberalism is really the same old Feudalism/Monarchism that Classical liberals fought so many revolutions to end. It is a shame that anyone would support such a thing as modern liberalism in today's world, especially in America.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
They also pushed for set law, and equal application of the law. They sought an end to the common practice of the time (the 1700s and before) where a single judge decided if you were guilty and how to punish you, and a different set of punishments for the rich, famous or powerful than for the common man. And one of the foremost ideals was that freedom wouldnt last oif a man couldnt own property and have the means to defend it.
For centuries, "Liberalism" focused on individual freedom protected from a deliberately small, limited government. All authority not specifically given to the government was considered to be denied to it; any powers, rights, jurisdiction, or ownership that was not specifically stated was implied to be outside the power of the government. And then FDR and his followers came along.
Today, the United States associates liberalism with the welfare-state policies of the New Deal made cooked up by FDR. It should be noted here that almost 2/3rds of his programs were found unconstitutional and eliminated. So he added more judges to the Supreme Court to tip the balance in his favor and keep the rest from being declared unconstitutional as well. By this time, enough of the population was ignorant of history to allow him to get away with such a trick. (In fact, a Supreme Court Justice named Samuel Chase had been impeached for judging based on political beliefs rather than actual law already, but was not removed from his seat as there wasnt enough evidence; this gave precedence for removal of the extra justices, but no one thought of it at the time) Of course, the system was expanded considerably under LBJs "Great Society". The modern liberal believes the government should take care of you from cradle to grave. Apparently, they've never seen any of the documentaries they make on how badly the government cares for those already under its care, the military.
The modern American belief (polar opposite from the classical) is that a centralized government should have sufficient power to control just about everything, just as was done in the past. Part of this problem is that most nations of the past were the size of one American state, and not any of the big ones. Its easy to have a benevolent dictatorship that has absolute power over everything when your "nation" is the town and the few small farm the surround it. Even if you're England, it still only takes a few days to cross the island. All of Europe Is America east of the Mississippi River and Texas, and look how many countries its been divided into. Our nation is too big, with too many differences to be governed by a single central, all-powerful government. Our founding fathers knew this; that's why states were given so much power and freedom in the constitution. Just to add a few fast examples; that $150K income that barely makes minimum wage in California make the family in the Fly-over states qualify as "Well-off" to "rich". Pushing for everyone to get rid of their cars and either ride bikes or take public transit makes sense in the big cities, where the use offsets the cost and most people are (comparitively) close to their job. There are a significant number of towns and cities in America that are too small to even have a bus line. The environmentalist push to get everyone out of personal vehicles fails for that simple reason.
It is funny that a liberal will believe in the best about other people; their world-view is that people are essentially good and want to do good, and yet they believe that commerce, and the people involved in commerce are inherently evil. Liberals will talk about how so-and-so is a great guy, wondferful and generous, and make assumptions of his good will and nature....right up until they find out he's a business man. Now, it depends on the business, thats true; if he's involved in a business that supports or services one of their causes, he's still a hero, or at least a necessary evil. If he isnt aiding them, or from one of the near-endless list of things they hate, then he's just evil to be ended when convenient. But if his industry is on "the list", something they hate (and some days, that feels like almost anything that makes money or allows for modern society to exist) then they seek total destruction, and Im not exaggerating. They want the business closed, the owner impoverished, the man they met (assumong he isnt the owner) unemployed, and no possible option of recovery.
A modern liberal will fight for the rights of the en-vogue class. They dont really care about the cause, the people they are standing up for, or the results. All they care is that its popular, and they can claim to care. We see the proof in the current headlines: somehow, not letting a man use a bathroom meant for little girls is supposedly as bigoted as the Jim Crow laws, where blacks couldnt use the same drinking fountains or bathrooms as white. At all. A baker can refuse, for any reason, to make a cake for a heterosexual couple. But if that couple is gay? Against his will, against his beliefs (unless he happens to be of another protected class) he is forced into labor. We have several words for the act of forcing someone to labor against their will; all are synonyms of the word "Slavery" which was illegal in this country from 1865 until 2012. Since 2012, gays are allowed to practice indentured servitude (a form of limited slavery) and force anyone they want to do whatever they want with the government enforcement by claiming "discrimination".
Classical liberalism is a philosophy to be admired; an ideal that all people are born equal, and are free to live that life as best they can. Modern liberalism is really the same old Feudalism/Monarchism that Classical liberals fought so many revolutions to end. It is a shame that anyone would support such a thing as modern liberalism in today's world, especially in America.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)