Liberty is an inherently offensive lifestyle. Living in a free society guarantees that each one of us will see our most cherished principles and beliefs questioned and in some cases mocked. That psychic discomfort is the price we pay for basic civic peace. It's worth it. It's a pragmatic principle. Defend everyone else's rights, because if you don't there is no one to defend yours. -- MaxedOutMama

I don't just want gun rights... I want individual liberty, a culture of self-reliance....I want the whole bloody thing. -- Kim du Toit

The most glaring example of the cognitive dissonance on the left is the concept that human beings are inherently good, yet at the same time cannot be trusted with any kind of weapon, unless the magic fairy dust of government authority gets sprinkled upon them.-- Moshe Ben-David

The cult of the left believes that it is engaged in a great apocalyptic battle with corporations and industrialists for the ownership of the unthinking masses. Its acolytes see themselves as the individuals who have been "liberated" to think for themselves. They make choices. You however are just a member of the unthinking masses. You are not really a person, but only respond to the agendas of your corporate overlords. If you eat too much, it's because corporations make you eat. If you kill, it's because corporations encourage you to buy guns. You are not an individual. You are a social problem. -- Sultan Knish

All politics in this country now is just dress rehearsal for civil war. -- Billy Beck

Saturday, October 22, 2016

I Used to Joke...

I'm completely serious here.  I used to joke that if the Cubs won the pennant it would be the Seventh Sign of the Apocalypse.

Apparently that was taken as a challenge.

I need to load more ammo.

America, Fuck Yeah!

Two videos from Jay Leno's Garage that just make me feel good:

Tuesday, October 18, 2016

Nerd Humor

This made me laugh out loud - literally: The United Federation of "hold my beer, I got this". From the link, the part that kicked my gigglebox completely over (edited for clarity):
Klingons: "Okay, we don't get it."

Vulcan Science Academy: "Get what?"

Klingons: "You Vulcans are a bunch of stuffy prisses, but you're also tougher, stronger and smarter than humans in every single way. Why do you let them run your Federation?"

VSA: "Look, this is a species where if you give them two warp cores they don't do experiments on one and save the other for if the first one blows up. This is a species where if you give them two warp cores, they will ask for a third one, immediately plug all three into each other, punch a hole into an alternate universe where humans subscribe to an even more destructive ideological system, fight everyone in it because they're offended by that, steal their warp cores, plug those together, punch their way back here, then try to turn a nearby sun into a torus because that was what their initial scientific experiment was for and they didn't want to waste a trip.

"They did that last week. We have the write-up right here. It's getting published in about six hundred scientific journals across two hundred disciplines because of how many established theories their ridiculous little expedition has just called into question. Also, they did turn that sun into a torus, and no one actually knows how.

"This is why we let them do whatever the hell they want."

Klingons: "...Can we be part of your Federation?"
Hat's off to "roachpatrol," the author of that bit.  That's funny right there, I don't care who you are... And the rest of the thread is as well.  Especially:
There is a phrase in Vulcan for "the particular moment when you understand what the word 'fuck' is for."

Friday, October 14, 2016

So Costco is Selling Explosives Now?

Just got this via email:

 photo Costco_explosives.jpg

Somehow I don't think this offer is going to last long....

Another Quora Exchange

A question was asked over at Quora:
Should the British have the right to carry firearms in self defence like the Americans who have that right? I think Britain would be better off.
I responded:
Should they have the right? I think, personally, that it should never have been taken from them in the first place - but it was. However, there’s more than just the right involved. With rights come responsibilities, and Jonathan Phillpotts’ answer illustrates this very well. Because the British lost this right so long ago, by and large they no longer have the mental attitude necessary to exercise it. The Britain of the Tottenham Outrage no longer exists.
Mr. Phillpotts took some exception. Here's our comment exchange (so far):
JP:  I disagree. It's not that we don't have the mindset to use firearms in our own defence. If our history had parralled yours I would be voicing my whole hearted support for concealed carry. However what my original post is trying to convey is that we have a very different outlook as countries because we have very different histories. We can walk around in our daily life without even considering people around us are carrying. You can't. That very difference is why you need your guns, and we don't, to feel safe.

Different mindsets and actions leading to the same feeling of security.
KB: Most defensive gun uses here are against people not armed with a firearm. In the UK this would be considered a “not proportional” response.

Section 3 of the Criminal Law Act 1967, provides that “A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime…” and the question of reasonableness is subject to the amplifications contained in such cases as R v McInnes and R v Palmer. It has been held that "if a jury thought that in a moment of unexpected anguish a person attacked had only done what he honestly and instinctively thought was necessary, that would be most potent evidence that only reasonable defensive action had been taken." Normally only reasonable force is acceptable but if in the unexpected anguish of the moment excessive force is used it may still be acceptable, if the defendant honestly and instinctively believed it was necessary. It has been long established (prior to either the Criminal Law Act 1967 s 3 or AIDS) that a woman may take the life of a man attempting to rape her, though she may not generally carry a weapon to achieve this.

I ask you: How is a woman to resist to the point of lethality a sexual assault against a (most probably larger, stronger) man without a weapon?

No, you don’t have to worry about considering other people around you carrying. Guns. What about Knives? Chisels? Multiple assailants? What if you’re disabled or with your kids and you can’t run?

In the UK the law requires a “proportionate response.” This is insane. It asks the assault victim to read the mind of his (or her) attacker, to ask the question of whether that person or persons intends to inflict bodily injury or possibly death so that they can respond proportionally. And the victim’s actions will be judged by a dispassionate court after the fact. That mentality exists throughout your population - that’s how it ended up in law. I’d say the overwhelming majority of gun owners in the UK don’t believe in using a firearm defensively given my interaction with a number of Brits on the subject.

The American mindset (and law) is considerably different, and well described by this quotation from Col. Jeff Cooper:

"One bleeding-heart type asked me in a recent interview if I did not agree that 'violence begets violence.' I told him that it is my earnest endeavor to see that it does. I would like very much to ensure — and in some cases I have — that any man who offers violence to his fellow citizen begets a whole lot more in return than he can enjoy."
JP: I can’t deny anything you have said. Especially proportionate response, or reasonable force as it’s called over here, that law, in it’s execution, is a joke. However that doesn’t justify this country arming itself. All that would do is increase the amounts of problems, not reduce them. See the likelihood of being stabbed or assaulted is very low and mostly they just want your wallet or phone. Hardly worth killing, or worse being killed, over. Raise the stakes and the robberies get more violent as the criminal is even more nervous than before. Not to mention that without the right level of training you're more likely to have the gun taken off you by multiple assailants.

All of that being said; I would like the ability to defend myself (not necessarily with guns though) and have the law back me up if I needed to do so, but that isn’t how our country works. It puts the presumption of guilt on to a person carrying a weapon and wants the Police to enforce the law. And let’s not forget that the majority of our police aren’t even armed with firearms and they actively seek out criminals. If they don’t need guns then the vast majority of civilians don’t either.
KB: I rest my case....

Wednesday, October 12, 2016

Read This

Found it over at The Feral Irishman.  The blog is new to me, Taxicab Depressions.  The post is entitled "What's On The Ballot."  Excerpt:
* 20 trillion dollars in debt

* 120 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities

*Insurance companies withdrawing coverage or doubling premiums for millions as Obamacare collapses

*North Korea developing and testing land-based and submarine ballistic missiles

*Iran fast-tracked to nuclear weapons

*Billions of dollars and pallets of shrink-wrapped cash shipped to Iran

*Pakistan threatening India with nukes

*Venezuela collapsing under socialism

*Iranian gunboats and Russian fighter jets harassing US Navy vessels in the Persian Gulf

*Russia installing missile batteries in Syria and Eastern Europe

*China building airstrips in the South China Sea

*Police officers targeted for murder across the country

We are so screwed.

Tuesday, October 11, 2016

Embracing the Suck

After a great deal of thought and study, I've come to another uncomfortable conclusion I can no longer put off:  Short of an untimely death or disabling medical event, Hillary Clinton will be our next President.

I concluded in 2012 when the Republicans nominated Mitt Romney and then the voters reelected Barack Obama that the public education system had exceeded its Progressive mission and produced a majority electorate unwilling or unable to rub two brain cells together, and the United States as we knew it was essentially finished.  It was my hope that what Aaron Clarey terms "the Decline," what Billy Beck terms "the Endarkenment," would at least be slowed by avoiding this outcome, but it is not to be.  Iceberg?  What iceberg?  All Ahead, Flank!

So I am free to vote "None of the Above."  And I won't feel the need to shower with battery acid and a Brillo pad afterwards.

Robert Heinlein wrote, “The worst thing about living in the declining era of a great civilization is knowing that you are.” Sometimes I really wish I drank alcohol.

As Professor Reynolds is fond of saying, "Something that can’t go on forever, won’t. Debts that can’t be repaid, won’t be. Promises that can’t be kept, won’t be. Plan accordingly."  Yeah.  Our "austerity riots" are going to be spectacular.

Plan accordingly.

UPDATE, 10/14/16: Scott Adams concurs, for the same reason. And he's been predicting a Trump landslide for months.

Sunday, October 09, 2016

Debating Hillary, Pt. 6: Provocations

Last one from the previous debate:

Debating Hillary, Pt. 5: Fighting ISIS

Bill continues his dissection of Hillary's debate statements:

I wonder if he'll do the same to tonight's performance.

Quote of the Day: Political Hypocrisy Edition

From Alan Andrews on Facebook:
I think it's refreshing that the Democrats have finally decided that sexual abuse of women disqualifies you from holding a political office. I'll just sit over here and wait for them all to resign...
Don't hold your breath, Alan.

Friday, October 07, 2016

"Good News, Everyone!"

</Professor Farnsworth Voice>

There will be a 2016 Punkin' Chunkin' World Championship! It will once again be held in Bridgeville, DE, November 4-6.  I look forward to it being covered on the Science channel.

I love this stuff.

Debating Hillary, Pt. 4 - Cyber Security

This should leave a SCAR.

Debating Hillary, Pt. 3 - Energy and Climate Change

Trump needs to hire Bill:

Wednesday, October 05, 2016

Bill Whittle: Debating Hillary Pt. 2 of 6

Go, Bill, go!

Make the Rubble Bounce

I have stated from very early in the history of this blog that America's public education system is responsible for the mess we're in right now, and that it cannot be "reformed."  (See the posts on the left sidebar under "Education.")  The phrase I've used is "Nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure."

I've been challenged on that, asked "What do we replace it with?"  I think this guy has figured it out.  Worth your 20 minutes.

Edited to add:

Here Dr. Mitra talks about what he did with the TED prize money:

Also worth your time.

Monday, October 03, 2016

Saturday, October 01, 2016

Who Could Have Seen This Coming?

Near ‘Collapse,’ Minnesota to Raise Obamacare Rates by Half
Minnesota will let the health insurers in its Obamacare market raise rates by at least 50 percent next year, after the individual market there came to the brink of collapse, the state’s commerce commissioner said Friday.

The increases range from 50 percent to 67 percent, Commissioner Mike Rothman’s office said in a statement. Rothman, who regulates the state’s insurers, is an appointee under Governor Mark Dayton, a Democrat. The rate hike follows increases for this year of 14 percent to 49 percent.
Oh, yeah. We did.

Friday, September 30, 2016

But What Happens When There Are No Old Men?

From Instapundit:
Gangs of young men strutting and killing people is the default state for humanity. Civilization is what puts that under control. Until it doesn’t.
I was reminded, as I often am, by something I posted here many years ago -
I was reading an article the other day, in the local newspaper, about an elderly Korean gentleman who has moved into town and opened a martial arts studio. He chastened the reporter who had come to interview him not to suggest that the martial arts were 'all about fighting.' "No!" he said. "The purpose is social harmony."

That is exactly right. The secret of social harmony is simple: Old men must be dangerous.

Very nearly all the violence that plagues, rather than protects, society is the work of young males between the ages of fourteen and thirty. A substantial amount of the violence that protects rather than plagues society is performed by other members of the same group. The reasons for this predisposition are generally rooted in biology, which is to say that they are not going anywhere, in spite of the current fashion that suggests doping half the young with Ritalin.

The question is how to move these young men from the first group (violent and predatory) into the second (violent, but protective). This is to ask: what is the difference between a street gang and the Marine Corps, or a thug and a policeman? In every case, we see that the good youths are guided and disciplined by old men. This is half the answer to the problem.
But what happens when there aren't enough (or any) dangerous old men to guide the young ones?

Chicago. New Orleans.  Detroit.  St. Louis....

Nice to Know Thomas Sowell and I Agree

His recent Investor's Business Daily column entitled Our Political Predicament -- A Big Risk Vs. A Certain Disaster spells it out in detail. Excerpt:
There is no point denying or sugar-coating the plain fact that the voters this election year face a choice between two of the worst candidates in living memory. A professor at Morgan State University summarized the situation by saying that the upcoming debates may enable voters to decide which is the "less insufferable" candidate to be President of the United States.

My own take on this election is that the voter is in a situation much like that of an American fighter pilot in World War II, whose plane has been hit by enemy fire out over the Pacific Ocean and is beginning to burst into flames.

If he bails out, there is no guarantee that his parachute will open. But even if he lands safely in the ocean, he may be eaten by sharks. If he comes down on land, he may be captured by the Japanese and tortured and/or killed.

In other words, there are huge and potentially fatal risks. But, if he remains in the plane, he is doomed for certain. To me, Donald Trump represents multiple and potentially fatal risks. But Hillary Clinton is a certainty of disaster. Her vaunted "experience" is an experience of having repeatedly made decisions that turned out to be not merely wrong but catastrophic.
I think I said pretty much exactly that below.


Thursday, September 29, 2016

Well, THAT Data Point is Interesting

So my last post, Build-Your-Own Überpost! is apparently very popular, but I have no idea where the link(s) to it are coming from. It's had over 7,700 views since it went up, mostly in big chunks.

 photo Build-your-own.jpg

So, to whoever linked it, thanks!