It looks like I need to go out and get me some Daewoo.
It looks like I need to go out and get me some Daewoo.
You know what I hate? I hate it when I conduct business in an online auction (Ebay, Gunbroker, etc.) and after I win the auction and pay for the item the seller does not leave me feedback. Many times they will wait until after I receive the item and then leave them feedback first before leaving comments for me. Seriously, as a buyer, after I pay for the item my portion of the transaction is complete—you should immediately leave positive feedback for me. Not play passive-aggressive games and wait until I write something nice about you first. When I am selling something online the minute I get paid I drop positive feedback—the buyer has completed their part of the bargain in a satisfactory manner and therefore I will comment on that right away and not wait for them to go first. This seems to be the logical and polite way of doing it. The other way smacks of holding my positive feedback hostage until they get theirs first.
This irritates the shit out of me.
We’re getting ready to celebrate our nation’s 239th birthday today and we’re on an elevated security footing and getting ready for an anticipated terrorist attack on our shores. Do you feel safer than you have in the past?
Thanks a lot Obama for all you’ve done for our great nation. Having us hide under our beds in the face of the rabid animals of the world instead of hunting them down and killing them.
I feel sick to my stomach.
If it is proper to ban the Confederate Battle Flag for one event, there is no principled reason not to also ban the Mexican flag.
If it is plausible that the Confederate flag can cause a spree killing, then it is plausible that very many other crimes are caused by display of the Mexican flag.
The Confederate flag may symbolize the murdering Democratic Party’s pointlessly destructive treason, but the Mexican flag symbolizes a sadistic regime of mass murder.
The eagle with a snake on a cactus represents the Aztec Triple Alliance.
As a lifelong conservative Republican snrk Sorry, I couldn’t keep a straight face anymore. I acquired language well after the start of my life. Without language, I cannot be said to have had politics. A zygote or blastocyst doesn’t have any noticeable opinions.
Shortly before I was old enough to vote, I finished an analysis of my views, and found a significant agreement with conservatism and the Republican Party. I have mostly voted such ever since. (I tend to vote straight Republican tickets, partly due to enmity over the civil war, but cannot speak for the candidates being reliably conservative.)
My perspective on the political history of the United States since the middle of the nineteenth century consistently favors the Republicans and opposes the Democrats. I do grant Truman some regard for dropping the bomb on Japan.
I think the Confederate cause was stupidly futile. I think the estimates of Southern badassery and Northern pussiness should be considered insanely optimistic, maybe even without the benefit of hindsight. I think the inevitable consequences of the Confederacy forcing the Union to terms would have been nasty enough that Sherman might have been justified in acting more harshly than he did. I tend to see the American Civil War as the Democrats throwing a hissy fit, and Reconstruction as them being spanked for it. (I strongly dislike Andrew Johnson. I think he was a terrible president.)
All that is my bonafides for saying that this current round of banning the Confederate battle flag is entirely without merit.
The Democrats agitating for this are perfectly happy keeping symbols of white supremacism that are still useful for them. They still keep the Donkey, which was used in the nineteenth century. They haven’t rid themselves of Woodrow Wilson. They haven’t rid themselves of Lyndon Johnson or his policies. There are very many other examples. (Did I mention that I think the historic Democratic Party was a white supremacist terrorist organization, I oppose it for this reason, and I’m unconvinced the modern Party is any different?)
You might as well ban anime, because it rarely paints the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings in an entirely positive light, and hence must be propaganda supporting Imperial Japan. ‘Dear Wal-Mart/Amazon/Apple, Your stocking of “My Neighbor Totoro” is obviously an endorsement of the Rape of Nanking. I am deeply troubled by this, and will not purchase anything from you until this issue is resolved. With love, Dumbass’
Paying attention to how Roof was in legal trouble for playing with psychiatric drugs might actually lead to a way to minimize future occurrences. People in our society don’t realize that stuff which can mitigate psychiatric conditions will make some fraction of healthy people using it nuts.
Tor Obsidendus Est
Salafi Necandi Sunt
I’d refrained from commenting, on the grounds I might figure out something I shouldn’t publicly say.
This new scandal continues to get worse.
In hindsight, it looks like vulnerabilities in our nomination system may be the easiest way to compromise Federal security.
I should suppose Obama learned about it in the papers, is just as angry as I am, and honestly thinks Bush is really at fault. Perhaps he thinks Bush should have arrested all the Democrats and hung them as traitors.
Tor Obsidendus Est
Salafi Necandi Sunt
Peter Grant announces the formal boycott of Tor, for failure to respond to questions and complaints about offensive statements made by high level Tor employees.
Personally, I cannot boycott what I do not buy. I also cannot speak for anyone else here.
Tor Obsidendus Est
I hadn’t known that the executive amnesty stuff had gone to the point that the IRS is telling congress that they are giving out rebates.
If this is proper, there is no principled reason why a President cannot a) refuse to prosecute those who kill anyone with drugs in their system b) offer the killers a cut of funds from Civil Asset Forfeiture of the estate.
On a personal note, this seems to have shifted my evaluation of the IRS lower. All this extra-legal special privileges stuff now makes filing and paying taxes slightly more vexing.
Palette swap is a technique used in video games. An art asset is reused for different entities by making a few cosmetic changes in how the file is displayed. Ken and Ryu from Street Fighter were one example. It is also very often used in CRPGs.
Tell me if you have heard this before.
A political faction has control over an area, and is not happy with the status quo. Maybe people are getting uppity, maybe it just needs to flex its muscles. It has had time to do some prep work, pass convenient laws and cultivate police officials. First the faction’s tame newspapers fan the outrage of an incident all out of proportion. Next, a pet mob goes to minority neighborhoods and burns property. This creates terror and inflicts long term harm on the neighborhood.
Same playbook, same party, some pretty similar policies enabling things. The Leftists now insist this is movement towards the correct ordering of society, as the Racists did then.
What makes Leftism different from a palette swap of Racism?
I neglected to track the date for this, and have been busy.
After recent events I knew I needed to come up with something effective, and actually do it this year.
Clearly I wasn’t invited for my graphical art skills. This is one of those projects where I realize how badly I screwed up, but don’t quite care enough to go back and do it right.
The most significant thing we know now that Bush did not is that the Democrats would be stupidly partisan to the point of being traitorous and disastrous.
Three fundamental factors which drove his decision are still the same. A power that does not reprise invites further attack, and cannot prevent them from continuing. The only means for this, beyond nuclear weapons, is to kill people by battling them with conventional force. Iraq is a better fighting ground, because the logistics lets us kill enough using conventional force.
WWI saw the earliest large scale use of chemical weapons on the battlefield. In WWII, both sides had fairly ample stocks of chemical agents. Hitler did not use German stocks of chemical and biological weapons because he knew Churchill would happily gas him given an excuse.
During the Cold War, the United States of America had a two part policy to keep these weapons from being used. The saner powers were deterred from using them by the threat of retaliation, and by minimizing any practical benefit. The crazier powers were prevented from having the ability to use them, and additionally weakened wherever possible.
Democratic policies have resulted in widespread chemical warfare and nuclear proliferation in the middle east. Any Monday morning quarterbacking can incorporate the likelihood of general nuclear war in the middle east.
What options amounted to more than sticking one’s head in the sand and wishing?
1. Invade conventionally and liberate
2. Invade conventionally and set up a tractable dictatorship
3. Invade conventionally and massacre
4. Extort for prisoners and nuke those powers which are not cooperative
Democratic ability to interdict conventional invasion and sabotage NBC control policy, in hindsight, substantially increases the practicality of option 4.
Written on 5/13
Time for another round of blame game fallacy bingo.
Today I heard that Democrats are trying to blame the recent train crash on the GOP by way of the budget fights. More cynically, they are trying to capitalize on it as part of their efforts to defeat what they see as unreasonable GOP austerity measures.
What role could budget shortfalls play in a train traveling in excess of twice the speed the turn was rated for?
One possibility is that the machines are not technically sound. Given the maturity of the technology, this would have required professional engineers and managers to have signed off on falsified technical reports, for profit, with nobody resigning in protest or blowing the whistle. An organization which can get all of its ‘engineers’ to do that is not going to fix things given all of the money in the world.
Another hypothetical is that they didn’t have the money to hire and train competent people. For example, pot smokers should not be doing critical work on trains, which requires paying extra to attract more valuable workers and to run a solid drug testing program. The problem with this argument is that management should know when key employees cannot meet safety standards, and in this case, not run the train if they can’t find the people. Which means again management is either ignorant, restricted in firing, restricted in operating or fraudulent in ways that money cannot fix.
Another idea, proposed by the good people of Twitter, is that perhaps a systems update and overhaul could have kept human issues from mattering. Firstly, engineers do sometimes think it best to have humans in the loop, because they do not trust enough the reliability of the automatics. A governor that stops the engine from going faster than the lowest maximum speed is technically easy, but would tend to make running the train worthless. I have no knowledge whether a system that would do a proper job is technically feasible or desirable for a passenger train. The Federal government is notorious for facing challenges when procuring large innovative technical systems.
If it isn’t off the shelf, public rail could easily have had a dozen attempts at such fail, for all I know. If there is a solution on the market, and the Fed’s inherent budget, management, and procurement issues have prevented adoption, I doubt a few years of appropriations have made much difference. Furthermore, fancy automatic safeguards also ultimately rely on the people behind them.
The core fallacy is that if the budget could have induced an undetected bias towards running unsafe trains in Amtrak, Amtrak can never be trusted to safely operate trains. If low appropriations caused the accident, the only way to prevent future accidents is to shut Amtrak down.
Who would have thought last year that Hilary would overtake Barack in the chances they have sold their soul to the Soviets.
The Clintons made a lot of sense as domestic mobsters with sick paraphilias. The only possibility worse than them being compromised enough that this isn’t a greater risk, or them being ill enough to take an avoidable risk this size, is that they may get away with it.
The feminists will try and have you vote for a victim blamer, whose only real qualifications and accomplishments involve being married to the lying rapist who forever discredited the idea of feminist opposition to rape.
But, they interject, Senator and Secretary of State. We know well she was incompetent, and left the latter position in order to avoid liability for her enormous screw ups. The real sticking point is that the Clinton mafia got those positions for her, not her own competence. The major abilities she brought to the Clinton mafia were in silencing victims, and evading responsibility for crimes.
Did you see the survey about how few women would go back in time and shoot Hitler?
In 2067, women will make up 85% of the population. The GOP’s support for anti-Hitler and anti-NSDAP policies will prove suicidal when the electorate desires the opposite.
In other word’s ‘they will be your best friend’ is still as self impeaching an argument as it was during recess.
Let me see if I understand this. Obama is having his crack team of statesmen work with Iran on some sort of Middle East peace deal which gains the civilized world nothing and grants the Iranians free reign to develop nuclear weapons. And of course he’s coming up with this “treaty” without bothering with pesky details like ratifying said “treaty” in the Senate. You know, since he’s a former constitutional scholar and all, he knows that this cool and whatnot.
Now the Saudis are launching military operations in Yemen in response to Iranian-sponsored activities there and are now demanding that they get their own nuclear weapons as well. So now we are seeing the beginnings of an honest-to-goodness nuclear arms race in the Middle East.
Can somebody please explain to me how any of this is a positive development for the United States or for our allies?
Somebody please wake me up from this nightmare.
Looks like he’s going to run…
Fuck you establishment Republican Party!
The pants-shitting will continue and grow exponentially when Rand Paul announces his candidacy as well…
(Rubbing hands together menacingly)
Excellent… most excellent!
Viva la Tea Party!
I finally brought mine out to the range today and it functioned flawlessly. I cannot believe how easy it is to operate. Some of the videos online showed people struggling with it for a while until they got the hang of it, but that wasn’t my experience at all. It functioned great right out of the box.
This happy experience more than made up for my breaking the charging handle clean off my DSA para-rifle. So I guess I have a perfectly good reason to visit the gunsmith. Unless of course I am content with a $2,000 paperweight sitting in the safe.
I am fully prepared.
The simple fact of the matter is that likeability is extremely important in a Presidential election.
Bill Clinton has a lot of likeability. He has cultivated it diligently because he is a charm type sexual predator. He would not be near as effective at that sort of predation if he wasn’t able to disarm people with his personality.
Hillary has never cared about that, and it shows.
There is a decent chance Bill married her because of her proven willingness to cheerfully defend a rapist. It isn’t clear how they feed into her appetites, but the social strengths Hillary has most developed are discrediting others and intimidation.
Common wisdom is that she purely loves power. In this case, she simply does not care what Bill does to other women. The alternative model is that she enjoys it when other women are abused.