You're not crazy.
The Obama Administration will just keep GASLIGHTING you until you think you are.
Obscure much lately?
Go watch the video.
*(H/T: The Ace of Spades)
Friday, May 16, 2014
"Gaslighting"
Bill Whittle: Gaslighting @ AMERICAN DIGEST:
Obscure much lately?
Go watch the video.
*(H/T: The Ace of Spades)
Obscure much lately?
Go watch the video.
*(H/T: The Ace of Spades)
Thursday, May 15, 2014
Hey' Y'All, Watch this! ("Go ahead and shoot, Honey; I'm covered!)
[H/TL "Guns Save Lives"]
(Unfortunately .. not always.)
[Video] SC Female Teenager Fatally Shoots Friend While Testing Bullet Proof Vest: [Video]
Let me make this perfectly clear: when y'all are determined to test the efficacy of a (previously untested) "Bullet Proof Vest", the best thing it not to drape said vest over the person of yout (ex) Best Friend!
FOX Carolina 21
(Unfortunately .. not always.)
[Video] SC Female Teenager Fatally Shoots Friend While Testing Bullet Proof Vest: [Video]
Let me make this perfectly clear: when y'all are determined to test the efficacy of a (previously untested) "Bullet Proof Vest", the best thing it not to drape said vest over the person of yout (ex) Best Friend!
FOX Carolina 21
I talked to my daughter today, and ...
Long: Personal:
My daughter phoned me this afternoon. She lives in San Diego, and she told me that the fires are both frightening and fearsome.
But she is driving toward them, anyway.
She is "working" a golf tournament in Carlsbad, because the extra money is worth the effort; she and her family are planning to move to Northern California in a couple of months, and they need the money for the move.
She assures me that the fires are nowhere near the country club, and "they haven't cancelled the tournament, so there it must be safe, there". She may be right; country clubs are the last bastions of American society, right?
She assures me that she will be in no danger; I told her to lock her car. She replied that there's nothing of value in the car, and if it gets burned up the "only thing of value in that car, Dad, is me".
What you are thinking, is what I said. I hope that she understands that when I say "Lock Your Car", I meant "Keep Your Escape Options Open".
So I phoned her back, this evening. Worried that she might be at risk..
She's having fun at the event. She said she met a lot of celebrities, including one guy who was her "teen-age heart throb" (No, I never heard of him and didn't recognize the name .. apparently he's at television star from the nineties) and otherwise having a grand time .. although her job doesn't warrant any "tips".
But she says she is not in danger.
She's still working for The American Dream: a few extra dollars to finance the next step toward moving to a better place. It's not exactly 'financial independence' in the next step, but perhaps it's a place to go where the salary is higher, and where the jobs are better and the future of her children is more assured. They have A Plan, and she and her husband .... they aren't afraid of hard work.
And her mother needs her, due to medical 'sithuations', so next month my daughter is going to where she can provide support in turn. She's moving to Central Californa, "where life is beautiful all the time"
I'm very proud of my children. Her brother is "Davy, who's still in the Navy, and probably will be for life". He's working steady in Puget Sound; they will soon both be within six or seven hours travel time of where I live, so I'll probably get to see my children, and my grandchildren, more often. That's important to me.
For tonight, I'm worried about my daughter's safety. But I .. I was about to say "I'll never let her know".
Too late, she already knows that. I wish I could phone her again, without making her feel self-conscious.
Maybe she'll go home early.
11:12 pm ..
Yeah, she called. She's fine. I feel better.
Never mind.
My daughter phoned me this afternoon. She lives in San Diego, and she told me that the fires are both frightening and fearsome.
But she is driving toward them, anyway.
She is "working" a golf tournament in Carlsbad, because the extra money is worth the effort; she and her family are planning to move to Northern California in a couple of months, and they need the money for the move.
She assures me that the fires are nowhere near the country club, and "they haven't cancelled the tournament, so there it must be safe, there". She may be right; country clubs are the last bastions of American society, right?
She assures me that she will be in no danger; I told her to lock her car. She replied that there's nothing of value in the car, and if it gets burned up the "only thing of value in that car, Dad, is me".
What you are thinking, is what I said. I hope that she understands that when I say "Lock Your Car", I meant "Keep Your Escape Options Open".
So I phoned her back, this evening. Worried that she might be at risk..
She's having fun at the event. She said she met a lot of celebrities, including one guy who was her "teen-age heart throb" (No, I never heard of him and didn't recognize the name .. apparently he's at television star from the nineties) and otherwise having a grand time .. although her job doesn't warrant any "tips".
But she says she is not in danger.
She's still working for The American Dream: a few extra dollars to finance the next step toward moving to a better place. It's not exactly 'financial independence' in the next step, but perhaps it's a place to go where the salary is higher, and where the jobs are better and the future of her children is more assured. They have A Plan, and she and her husband .... they aren't afraid of hard work.
And her mother needs her, due to medical 'sithuations', so next month my daughter is going to where she can provide support in turn. She's moving to Central Californa, "where life is beautiful all the time"
I'm very proud of my children. Her brother is "Davy, who's still in the Navy, and probably will be for life". He's working steady in Puget Sound; they will soon both be within six or seven hours travel time of where I live, so I'll probably get to see my children, and my grandchildren, more often. That's important to me.
For tonight, I'm worried about my daughter's safety. But I .. I was about to say "I'll never let her know".
Too late, she already knows that. I wish I could phone her again, without making her feel self-conscious.
Maybe she'll go home early.
11:12 pm ..
Yeah, she called. She's fine. I feel better.
Never mind.
Gun Control Poll Results
Gun Control Poll Results
This is an interesting poll conducted by an organization that I'm not familiar with ... isidewith.com.
The results of this specific poll are automatically accessible by several poll-taker criteria, including state, major city within state, political affiliation, ethnicity, income level, and education level. It's worth taking a look at.
Interesting, the 'general' question was a clear decision. Broken down by state (Oregon), it also seemed clear. But when you look at the responses from the "major city" (Portland) ... the results were reversed. Portland residents did NOT feel obliged to support the Second Amendment rights of all Americans. In point of fact, they rather liked the idea that the State might abrogate the Constitution, as long as the state of Oregon continued toimport overlook illegal immigrants as long as the grape harvest was completed in a timely manner.
(Yes, I am projecting. Sue me.)
Tentative conclusion: residents of Portland are less concerned with "Gun Control" than other issues; among them the social issues of immigration, birth control, and public support of loafers and other "In Need" individuals.
When it deals with broad questions, it does all right. So I took the poll myself. And .. there were a plethora of other questions besides Gun Control, and I took those questions, too.
Unfortunately, the polls are generally simplistic and do not offer enough choices for a reasoned response; there were issues in which I seemed in turn to agree with the Conservatives, Republicans, Democrats, Green Party, and Libertarians. No, I'm not making this up.
I think I'm getting a sick headache.
PS: Oh, they were clear that I don't agree with "Gun Control". Glad we got that straightened out!
This is an interesting poll conducted by an organization that I'm not familiar with ... isidewith.com.
The results of this specific poll are automatically accessible by several poll-taker criteria, including state, major city within state, political affiliation, ethnicity, income level, and education level. It's worth taking a look at.
Interesting, the 'general' question was a clear decision. Broken down by state (Oregon), it also seemed clear. But when you look at the responses from the "major city" (Portland) ... the results were reversed. Portland residents did NOT feel obliged to support the Second Amendment rights of all Americans. In point of fact, they rather liked the idea that the State might abrogate the Constitution, as long as the state of Oregon continued to
(Yes, I am projecting. Sue me.)
Tentative conclusion: residents of Portland are less concerned with "Gun Control" than other issues; among them the social issues of immigration, birth control, and public support of loafers and other "In Need" individuals.
When it deals with broad questions, it does all right. So I took the poll myself. And .. there were a plethora of other questions besides Gun Control, and I took those questions, too.
Unfortunately, the polls are generally simplistic and do not offer enough choices for a reasoned response; there were issues in which I seemed in turn to agree with the Conservatives, Republicans, Democrats, Green Party, and Libertarians. No, I'm not making this up.
I think I'm getting a sick headache.
PS: Oh, they were clear that I don't agree with "Gun Control". Glad we got that straightened out!
Wednesday, May 14, 2014
‘We Have 500 Days to Avoid Climate Chaos’
French Foreign Minister: ‘We Have 500 Days to Avoid Climate Chaos’ | CNS News:
(May 13, 2014)
(H/T: Say Uncle)
We are so screwed!
No, it's not the latest "climate chaos" scare mongering that we have to worry about.
It's that our Frenchified Secretary of State, the Right Honerable John [bleep] Kerry is openly cohabitating with The French.
It's probably A Good Thing that Mr. Kerry has openly come out as both a Francophile and a weasel ... not that everybody didn't already know that.
It's that Kerry And His Friends will be officially joined at the hip ... one way or the other .. next Winter:
So now, it is official. This is the first time in modern history in which any nation has surrendered to The French (may the fleas of a thousand camels infest their scrotums) rather than the other way around.
This is a sad day for America.
Say ... who actually signed the 1997 Kyoto Protocol for America?
(May 13, 2014)
The world has “500 days to avoid climate chaos,” French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said alongside Secretary of State John Kerry at the State Department on Tuesday.
“We have 500 days to avoid climate chaos,” Fabius said. “And I know that President Obama and John Kerry himself are committed on this subject and I’m sure that with them, with a lot of other friends, we shall be able to reach success in this very important matter.”
(H/T: Say Uncle)
We are so screwed!
No, it's not the latest "climate chaos" scare mongering that we have to worry about.
It's that our Frenchified Secretary of State, the Right Honerable John [bleep] Kerry is openly cohabitating with The French.
It's probably A Good Thing that Mr. Kerry has openly come out as both a Francophile and a weasel ... not that everybody didn't already know that.
It's that Kerry And His Friends will be officially joined at the hip ... one way or the other .. next Winter:
The organizers have high hopes for the Paris event known in U.N. jargon as the 21st conference of the parties (COP21) – the parties being the signatories to the 1992 U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change and the 1997 Kyoto Protocol.
“By the end of the meeting, for the first time in over 20 years of U.N. negotiations, all the nations of the world, including the biggest emitters of greenhouse gases, will be bound by a universal agreement on climate,” the French foreign ministry said around the time it offered to host the conference.
Invited to respond Tuesday to Fabius’ 500-day warning, White House press secretary Jay Carney pointed to the National Climate Assessment released last week which, he said, “made clear in the view of the science that climate change is upon us and the effects and impacts of climate change are being felt today.
So now, it is official. This is the first time in modern history in which any nation has surrendered to The French (may the fleas of a thousand camels infest their scrotums) rather than the other way around.
This is a sad day for America.
Say ... who actually signed the 1997 Kyoto Protocol for America?
Tuesday, May 13, 2014
"Dumb Guns": The new "Saturday Night Special"
Smart Gun Mandate Makes Gun Ownership Rich Man's Game:
(Breitbart, 11 May 2014)
(Breitbart, 11 May 2014)
Right now, an American can walk into a gun dealer and buy a brand new, ultra reliable Glock 19 or 26 in 9mm for between $480 and $530. Like Walthers and Rugers, the Glock line of handguns is one that families of all socioeconomic backgrounds can afford to purchase and use for self-defense. But that all changes when a state mandates that an $1,800 .22 pistol has to be sold in place of the $480 Glock. Once that mandate takes place, only the wealthy will able to afford guns, while the poor will be left to hope the locks on their doors are strong enough to keep home invaders out.The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Gun Nuttery
Mr. Cope’s Cave: The Stupid Things That Gun Nuts Do | Cobweb | Boise Weekly:
(May 12, 2014) [quote .. not Geek Words]
Unfortunately some people are unable to responsibly exercise this right.
This is also true of the First Amendment rights recognized by the Constitution. Some people are completely incompetent to speak in public, and for one simple reason:
They are idiots.
SPEAKING OF IDIOTS:
The First Amendment preserves the right of "The People" to express themselves freely, even when their speech addresses "unpopular" opinions. For example, burning the American flag is protected speach, according to the Supreme Court.
And I think the court was right, in this interpretation. You may not like the image of people burning the flag ... I don't either .. but the flag is a symbol. And .. well, they're idiots; what can you do?
Folks burn a flag in protest of the nation which is so free that they get away with it, and they don't even get a poke in the nose. At least, they are not harassed by jackbooted storm troopers sent by their government to stop protest which some people consider offensive.
By example, here's a guy who rails against the Second Amendment because it allows idiots to possess firearms, even when they are incompetent.
And it doesn't even make me want to poke him in the nose.
Because you know what? He's right.
I train people in firearms safety (in the USPSA context); now and then I see people who make me cringe because they are inadequately trained, or insufficiently skilled, to be safe shooters under pressure. It's never because they are actually idiots, but because they don't know how to safely handle their pistols. Yet they think they are ready to attempt to enter a stressful, moderated environment with limited skills.
I don't have time, during classes, to teach them how to handle their guns safely. So I try to correct the most egregious gun-handling habits. When they perform a maneuver in a manner which is unsafe to others (more often, unsafe to themselves), I stop them and give them immediate feedback. Then they try again, until they get it right.
The process is often frustrating to the shooter. We call it "Good Training". Wish we had time to give them more of it, but instead we just refer them to a Basic Handgun training program, which is designed to deal with
The good news is that this specific environment is self-regulating: those people who don't quickly develop good gun-handling skills are weeded out by the process of Match Disqualification. Some people process the feedback, and decide that they're not all that interested in being 'closely monitored'.
About half of the people who take the class never attend a match; a smattering of those who do, and who are disqualified at their first match (often during the first stage of the match), also seek to find less demanding competitive sports.
Actually, that's about 99% of the people who have not independently developed good gun-handling skills.
The good news is that this weeds out most of these unfortunate people, and may encourage them to seek training. The bad news is that not all of them are willing to accept the judgement given by their own experience. This doesn't mean that they are incompetent people; it only means that some people just shouldn't have a gun ... either because they are unwilling to learn the skills, or because their personality is not up to the grave responsibility.
They either learn, or they quit coming to matches. The feedback mechanism works, at least in the field of competitive marksmanship.
Getting back to the "gun owners are idiots" article:
Yes, the author is correct in saying that some people should not be allowed to own guns! It's just like "some people should not be allowed to drive cars", although the 'right to drive' is not on the same level as the "right to keep and bear arms".
But the author of the original article keeps coming back to his theme of depicting "gun nuts" as incompetents.
And this just pisses me off.
Why?
Mostly, I'm irritated because the person who wants to compete with a firearm is among the 90% ["they" can make up their statistics, I can make up mine] of shooters who are responsible gun owners. The cited article completely ignores the "good"; instead, it emphasizes the "bad", for the sole purpose of making a political point.
As long as we all understand that authorial bias, I have no problem with the article.
After all, I'm a Gun Nut. I'm not a Liberal!
(May 12, 2014) [quote .. not Geek Words]
Just this past Friday, I explained how I like to extend certain subject matter into open-ended series, if for no other reason than so often, the same stuff comes up again and again. Said another way, shit doesn’t just happen; it happens over, and over, and over.The Second Amendment takes notice that all Americans have the right to "keep and bear arms".
Nowhere is that more true than in the sphere of American gun nuttery [emphasis added], and it’s no mystery why. In fact, I consider it a guiding principle of human nature, as basic to understanding the behavior we see around us as knowing that those who abuse drugs often have addictive personalities, or that fat people have a tendency to eat more than slim people do.
As simple as I can make it, this guiding principle would read: Not only do stupid people do stupid things, they never learn to stop doing them.
As this principle relates to gun nuts, how many times do we have to hear of some guy showing his piece off to friends with the assurance, “Don’t worry... it’s not loaded,” seconds before he puts a slug through his ceiling—if he’s lucky—or his wife’s head (if he’s not)?
Unfortunately some people are unable to responsibly exercise this right.
This is also true of the First Amendment rights recognized by the Constitution. Some people are completely incompetent to speak in public, and for one simple reason:
They are idiots.
SPEAKING OF IDIOTS:
The First Amendment preserves the right of "The People" to express themselves freely, even when their speech addresses "unpopular" opinions. For example, burning the American flag is protected speach, according to the Supreme Court.
And I think the court was right, in this interpretation. You may not like the image of people burning the flag ... I don't either .. but the flag is a symbol. And .. well, they're idiots; what can you do?
Folks burn a flag in protest of the nation which is so free that they get away with it, and they don't even get a poke in the nose. At least, they are not harassed by jackbooted storm troopers sent by their government to stop protest which some people consider offensive.
By example, here's a guy who rails against the Second Amendment because it allows idiots to possess firearms, even when they are incompetent.
And it doesn't even make me want to poke him in the nose.
Because you know what? He's right.
I train people in firearms safety (in the USPSA context); now and then I see people who make me cringe because they are inadequately trained, or insufficiently skilled, to be safe shooters under pressure. It's never because they are actually idiots, but because they don't know how to safely handle their pistols. Yet they think they are ready to attempt to enter a stressful, moderated environment with limited skills.
I don't have time, during classes, to teach them how to handle their guns safely. So I try to correct the most egregious gun-handling habits. When they perform a maneuver in a manner which is unsafe to others (more often, unsafe to themselves), I stop them and give them immediate feedback. Then they try again, until they get it right.
The process is often frustrating to the shooter. We call it "Good Training". Wish we had time to give them more of it, but instead we just refer them to a Basic Handgun training program, which is designed to deal with
The good news is that this specific environment is self-regulating: those people who don't quickly develop good gun-handling skills are weeded out by the process of Match Disqualification. Some people process the feedback, and decide that they're not all that interested in being 'closely monitored'.
About half of the people who take the class never attend a match; a smattering of those who do, and who are disqualified at their first match (often during the first stage of the match), also seek to find less demanding competitive sports.
Actually, that's about 99% of the people who have not independently developed good gun-handling skills.
The good news is that this weeds out most of these unfortunate people, and may encourage them to seek training. The bad news is that not all of them are willing to accept the judgement given by their own experience. This doesn't mean that they are incompetent people; it only means that some people just shouldn't have a gun ... either because they are unwilling to learn the skills, or because their personality is not up to the grave responsibility.
They either learn, or they quit coming to matches. The feedback mechanism works, at least in the field of competitive marksmanship.
Getting back to the "gun owners are idiots" article:
Yes, the author is correct in saying that some people should not be allowed to own guns! It's just like "some people should not be allowed to drive cars", although the 'right to drive' is not on the same level as the "right to keep and bear arms".
But the author of the original article keeps coming back to his theme of depicting "gun nuts" as incompetents.
And this just pisses me off.
Why?
Mostly, I'm irritated because the person who wants to compete with a firearm is among the 90% ["they" can make up their statistics, I can make up mine] of shooters who are responsible gun owners. The cited article completely ignores the "good"; instead, it emphasizes the "bad", for the sole purpose of making a political point.
As long as we all understand that authorial bias, I have no problem with the article.
After all, I'm a Gun Nut. I'm not a Liberal!
Shooting at Jack in the Box
Gunman fires after victim says no to drugs at Jack in the Box - WKRN News 2:
*Posted: May 13, 2014 2:54 AM PDT
Ironic, though. Wouldn't you say?
[H/T: "GUNS SAVE LIVES"]
*Posted: May 13, 2014 2:54 AM PDT
NASHVILLE, Tenn. - A man was shot Monday night after he says a man approached him and tried to sell him drugs in the parking lot of a fast food restaurant. The incident reportedly happened outside of Jack In the Box located at 1504 Hampton Street, not far from West Trinity Lane northeast of Nashville. The 43-year-old victim told police he was walking across the parking lot when he was approached by a black male who offered to sell him drugs. The victim said he refused and got into a verbal argument with the gunman, an arrest report states. During the argument, the suspect pulled out a handgun and fired two shots. The victim was grazed in his right shin and sustained non-critical injuries.Not saying the man wouldn't have got shot if Jacques Dans le Boite hadn't established a 'no guns' policy post demo in Texas.
Ironic, though. Wouldn't you say?
[H/T: "GUNS SAVE LIVES"]
.22 LR
My friend The Hobo Brasser invited me to go hunt "Sage Rats" in the SE *(sagebrush)* part of the state next week, and so I mosied over to my local Bi-Mart to buy a couple of bricks of .22 LR
Well, they had seven bricks there, and sold me one. "Sorry, only one to a customer, per day" they said.
So I went back the next day, and they were out of stock. "Come back next week", they said.
When asked, they said that they wouldn't get any replacement ammo until their next stock shipment .. next Tuesday. "But I can't guarantee that we'll receive any then, either."
It has been four weeks, and I still can't find any more .22 LR ammo.
Well, they had seven bricks there, and sold me one. "Sorry, only one to a customer, per day" they said.
So I went back the next day, and they were out of stock. "Come back next week", they said.
When asked, they said that they wouldn't get any replacement ammo until their next stock shipment .. next Tuesday. "But I can't guarantee that we'll receive any then, either."
It has been four weeks, and I still can't find any more .22 LR ammo.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)