This Sounds Ominous....

"I felt a great disturbance in the Force... as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. " - Obi Wan Kenobi, Star Wars Episode IV, 1976. 

Blogetery.com, a little-known WordPress platform used by more than 70,000 blogs, was shut down by its Web hosting company more than a week ago and nobody seems willing to say why or who is responsible.

In addtion to that:

Blogetery, ... went dark on July 9, less than a week before Ipbfree.com, a service that helped users create Web message boards, went offline. No one has said these situations are linked, but they nonetheless possess intriguing similarities.

• Each of the services host loads of user-generated content.
• Operators at both Blogetery and Ipbfree said they were shut down and aren't coming back.
• Both said they obeyed copyright law.
• In each case, those with knowledge of who ordered the closures or the reasons why said they are legally required not to disclose that information.

Source  and source -

The site was shut down after FBI agents informed executives of Burst.net, Blogetery's Web host, late on July 9 that links to al-Qaeda materials were found on Blogetery's servers, Joe Marr, chief technology officer for Burst.net, told CNET. Sources close to the investigation say that included in those materials were the names of American citizens targeted for assassination by al-Qaeda. Messages from Osama bin Laden and other leaders of the terrorist organization, as well as bomb-making tips, were also allegedly found on the server.

We have no particular reason to believe this story; it's entirely possible it's a story that someone felt would cause the least amount of hassle.  Like kiddie porn, eliminating this sort of material is likely to be accepted by the population at large.  We will have to wait to learn what really happened here.

About a month ago, I wrote about this topic in So The Gov Has Shut Down Internet. Now-What?  Is this the first round of such shut downs (not the big kill switch)?  It is hard to know, but it is still worth starting to prepare.  In the mean time, go get the old DOS version of PGP, ver 2.62 or so.  Go here.  Do not go to the new Windoze based PGP versions at PGP.com.  Use your favorite search engine to round up some information on how to use it, like this. 

You put your checks to pay bills in an envelope, right?  That's what PGP is.  Only it's a very secure envelope.  

I Write Like Who??

One of my top-of-the-pile reads is Borepatch, who writes some erudite stuff.  Today, he posted this story: about a site called "I Write Like", which appears to analyze some aspect of your writing to tell you, well, who you write like.

So naturally I had to try it. 

Now Mrs. Graybeard has read, and liked, some Vonnegut.  I have read and not thought a whole lot of some Stephen King.  But neither of us really knows who Cory Doctorow is.

Borepatch thinks the software is analyzing content, not style.  I did four different posts; the previous one on a day at the range, one on the atomic bomb of rhetoric, financial reform has the votes, and meet your executioner.  I think. 

Speaking of the post on the atomic bomb of rhetoric, I passed a milestone with that.  I got my first SPAM.  Autogenerated, I assume.  It found my use of the name  "candidate Halit0sis" (no sense doing that again) and posted one of those sincere "I had this problem until a friend told me about gargling with velociraptor urine" or whatever.  This blog has been here since around the end of February and this is my first SPAM.  Well, except for the one from the Wolf 359 system saying it would increase my tentacle size. 

Arsenal of Freedom

Alvie D. Zane, over at the Cliffs of Insanity posted about a wonderful score he just made.  Worth a look.  I gotta get me one of those, too, one of these days. 

Things are not static here, either.  Last weekend at our local gun show, I was able to score a good used Remington 700 with a nice Leupold scope.  I don't have anything that shoots the .30-06 that my new Remmy and his Garand shoot, so no ammo on hand, but that was easy to fix at the show, as well. 

Despite the summer heat, this demanded a trip to our gun club's 200 yard range to sight this baby in.  Here you can just about count out the box of 20 rounds as I adjusted the Leupold for this 100 yard target.  The stuff to the right of the Caldwell target are the first shots, and later shots move in toward the center.  Those are mostly shot two at a time. Stopped adjusting with those two just over the 10 ring.  That one at the 6:30 position was a flier on the final settings, but I knew it was "my bad" as the shot went off.  

Plain ole Federal Power Shok, soft point 150 grain .30-06.  Not match-grade ammo. I'm happy with the new toy.

The next learning experience was to try my DPMS LR-308B at 200 yards.  I first tried shooting some MagTech .308 Win that I bought when I first got the gun, to see if it was as bad as the first time I tried shooting it at 50 yards.  First off, almost every round failed to eject.  Second, after 10 rounds, I couldn't find a hole in the target at 200 yards.  (A semi-automatic, AR-10/M1A-clone does not make nice when you try to run it bolt action).  I got annoyed and stopped shooting the MagTech, switching over to some Remington UMC from Walmart.  See that shot just "southwest" of the bulls-eye?  That was my first shot with the UMC after shooting over 10 rounds of MagTech and not even hitting the whole 12" target. 

After these 11 shots, the lovely and deadly Mrs. Graybeard did a few shots at 100 yards to get a feel for it, putting a nice group just below center of the target.  We didn't even finish off the box of 20 UMC .308, mostly because another shooter wanted the range to go cold so they could go change a target.   

I will note that today is only the second time in our lives we've shot from 100 and 200 yards.

My lessons learned today are the obvious ones - since semi-automatics can be fussy about ammunition, don't buy a lot of any brand until you know you can cycle it in your gun.  Anybody want to buy some MagTech .308?  There were some guys there who shoot 200, 300 and 600 yards regularly, and they were mostly shooting lighter stuff, like .243 and .223.  I understand.  I have a strawberry on my shoulder.  Time for an anti-recoil pad or shooting shirt (if I can bear the heat).

Summer is my least favorite time of year around here.  It was 92 by the time we left the range at 11 AM, with humidity nearly 90%.  But that's a whole 'nother post right there!  

The Atomic Bomb of Argument

In the world of the Internet, a law of argument has been recognized, called Godwin's law of Nazi Analogies, which says that any argument long enough leads to an invocation of Hitler or Nazis.  As usually stated, "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."  The idea is that the accusation of being a Nazi is so outrageous, and Nazis are so socially unacceptable, that when charged with being one, the accused will drop whatever they are arguing to counter that they are not a Nazi.

This idea, while not specifically the Nazi allegation, is widely used in domestic politics and is the part of the reason behind negative attack ads.  If candidate Phlegm says that candidate Halitosis has done some negative thing, Halitosis generally has to issue an ad showing how he hasn't done it.  For Phlegm, it's a win-win scenario.  He gets Halitosis to spend money and time on the made-up charge, and it gets the opponent "off-message".  Halitosis is not talking about what he really wants to talk about, but is instead talking about what Phlegm wants him to talk about.  As for the dumb voters, who don't really pay attention anyway, they become vaguely aware that Phlegm and Halitosis are both talking about this negative thing and learn the association that Halitosis is the bad guy ("where there's smoke, there's fire!"). 

If the Nazi charge is the WMD of online argument, the charge of Racism is the atomic bomb of daily discourse.  So when the NAACP raised the charge of racism against the Tea Party, this was the purpose.  It made people trying to reduce the insane government spending get off their message and address the fact that they aren't racist.  It made some people waste time and money to respond to it.  It made headlines that stupid voters will notice without reading any details to, and may influence them.  It's a blatantly transparent political move in what has become simply a "wholly-owned subsidiary" of the Democratic Party.

This may shock some people, but I don't really believe there is such a thing as race.  I believe there are nationalities, and people from different areas of the world look different, but those differences are superficial and go away as cultures blend.  As I was doing my little research to help gel my thoughts for this article, I was surprised to see PBS (of all places) basically doing a program that sums up where I am, to about the 75% level - Race - the Power of an Illusion.  I'll add a few notes in this edited summary from that web site, and I remove things that I think are just PBS being the liberal spin machine they are. 

1. Race is a modern idea....The English language didn't even have the word 'race' until it turns up in 1508 in a poem by William Dunbar referring to a line of kings.

2. Race has no genetic basis. Not one characteristic, trait or even gene distinguishes all the members of one so-called race from all the members of another so-called race.

3. Human subspecies don't exist. ....Despite surface appearances, we are one of the most similar of all species.

4. Skin color really is only skin deep.  Most traits are inherited independently from one another. The genes influencing skin color have nothing to do with the genes influencing hair form, eye shape, blood type, musical talent, athletic ability or forms of intelligence. Knowing someone's skin color doesn't necessarily tell you anything else about him or her.

5. Most variation is within, not between, "races." Of the small amount of total human variation, 85% exists within any local population, be they Italians, Kurds, Koreans or Cherokees. About 94% can be found within any continent. That means two random Koreans may be as genetically different as a Korean and an Italian.

6. Slavery predates race. Throughout much of human history, societies have enslaved others, often as a result of conquest or war, even debt, but not because of physical characteristics or a belief in natural inferiority. Due to a unique set of historical circumstances, ours was the first slave system where all the slaves shared similar physical characteristics.

7. Race and freedom evolved together. The U.S. was founded on the radical new principle that "All men are created equal." But our early economy was based largely on slavery. How could this anomaly be rationalized? The new idea of race helped explain why some people could be denied the rights and freedoms that others took for granted.(Graybeard: but you do know that the whole 3/5 of a person thing was intended to end slavery, right?  To put pressure on the deep south to free their slaves, and get more representatives right?)

8. Race justified social inequalities as natural. As the race idea evolved, white superiority became "common sense" in America. (Graybeard: not anymore, and not for my life)

9. Race isn't biological, but racism is still real.  Race is a powerful social idea that gives people different access to opportunities and resources. (liberal bullsh*t diatribe deleted)  

item 10 deleted.  I think it's complete bullsh*t, and is there simply because PBS can't shake their liberal mentality.

Rather than the item 10 PBS used, I would much prefer to envision the world Martin Luther King did, in his famous, "I Have a Dream" speech.  I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. - Martin Luther King, August 28, 1963 

Are there really racists?  Undoubtedly - as I've said before, if 5% of the people don't believe we went to the moon, some small percentage are going to believe anything.  Are there any in the Tea party?  If the Tea party is a random sample of the population, there would be some, sure.  I would bet there's at least as many racists in the NAACP itself. 

Job Creation - Real vs. Imaginary

I don't know if you're familiar with the name Andy Grove, but he is one of the co-founders of Intel.  Intel is one of the most successful companies in the electronic age.

As a guy who has helped create thousands of jobs, he has some interesting things to say about the state of manufacturing, job creation, outsourcing/offshoring and other interesting things.

Go read.  It's worth it.  Some nice commentary on it from Electronic Design (industry insider magazine), too. 

Honestly, I can't say I agree with or like everything he has to say, but when a guy like Andy talks like this, it's worth our time to read it.  

Financial "Reform" Bill Has the Votes

It apparently took more than the usual amount of pictures from the office party and horse's heads left in select beds - er... negotiation - to get the 60 votes needed to clear the senate for the financial reform bill. 

Reform?  Not really.

Those fine folks over that Economic Collapse blog fisk it pretty thoroughly, and it's worth a read. 

But U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is making this sound like this is some kind of history-changing legislation....
"We’re cleaning up Wall Street."
Oh really?
Charles Geisst, professor of finance at Manhattan College recently had the following to say about this absolutely toothless bill....
Like health-care reform, this bill is being drawn up to grab headlines but its details betray it as nothing more than a slap on the wrist for Wall Street. It is true that Wall Street can commit grand theft and apparently get off with nothing more than community service.

Does anyone really expect the same people who wrote the laws that screwed up everything in the first place to do better now?  When they are concurrently running investigations into what happened?  Out here in fly-over country, we don't try to fix something until we know what broke.  Just sayin...

The financial reform bill creates a new Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection at the Federal Reserve that is supposed to help prevent abusive lending by mortgage and credit card companies.  (Wait a second - this bill gives the Federal Reserve more power?  Who came up with that grand idea?  Yeah, let's give the fox more power to guard the hen house.  The truth is that the Federal Reserve is one of the core problems with our economic system)

Oh, great.  The Federal Reserve's whole reason for existence is supposed to be to prevent bubbles.  Instead they have caused every bubble, every recession and depression since 1913. 

The financial reform bill does nothing about the horrific bubble in the derivatives market.  Originally it was believed that some tough regulations were going to be imposed on derivatives trading, but the Wall Street lobbyists were all over those provisions like rabid dogs.
So now there is loophole after loophole in the bill and the "derivatives problem" still ominously hangs over Wall Street.  Not that there is any way to fix it.
Nobody actually knows the true total value of all the derivatives in the world, but estimates place it at somewhere between 600 trillion dollars and 1.5 quadrillion dollars.
When the derivatives bubble pops, and it will, there won't be enough money in the entire world to fix it.

One professor quipped "the banks have won". 

Also, the way I figure it, with health care at about 20% of the economy, the automobile sector, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac holding virtually all of the mortgages in the country, the takeover of AIG (big insurance) and now the financial sector, I do believe this puts the government in direct or indirect control of over 60% of the economy. 

Congratulations, you now live in a socialist country. All hail the collective.  I, for one, welcome our insect overlords. 

Wait.  Wrong movie. 

Finally, let me leave you with a fun fact, from this excellent column, The 50 Ugliest Things About the US eCONomy. Did you read that the US debt went over the $1 Trillion dollar line earlier this month? 

#47) In fact, if you spent one million dollars every single day since the birth of Christ, you still would not have spent one trillion dollars by now.

In an early college class in Physics, in the early days of calculators in class (really...) we calculated the number of seconds in a year.  It's a handy number to know, and is within 1% of pi *10,000,000.  Call it 31,540,000 seconds in a year.  That means if you sat at a window throwing out a dollar bill every second of every day, 24/7/365, you would only throw out $31.54 million dollars.  At that rate, it would take you over 31,700 years to throw out a Trillion dollars. 

Don't Be Talking No "Double Dip Recession"

For it to be a double dip, there has to be a real recovery starting and there is no such thing.  The GDP has not recovered, so there can't be a double dip.  Denninger at Market Ticker addressed some of this last Friday, July 2.  He makes the case that the only way we can get out of this mess is to cut the Federal Government by 60%(!).  In the administration of someone who wants to grow the government enormously, that is not going to happen.  Can you imagine 2 out of every 3 government employees going home?  Can you imagine Dr. Berwick, who obviously doesn't understand economics 101, successfully improving the health care sector.  Can you imagine the financial industry takeover that's going down right now making anything better?

In addition to this, a massive problem is looming.  The so-called "Bush tax cuts for the rich" which really helped the lowest incomes the most*, are expiring at the end of the year.  Economist Art Laffer predicts a further collapse of the economy as those tax penalties start hitting.  People only have so much money.  Money they send the government cannot go to the business sector, thereby slowing the growth of jobs. It can't be any other way. 

You may have been led to believe that only individuals in the top two brackets will face higher federal income taxes when the Bush cuts go bye-bye. Not true! Unless Congress takes action and President Obama goes along, rates will go up for everyone -- not just a sliver of the wealthiest Americans. The current six rate brackets of 10%, 15%, 25%, 28%, 33% and 35% will be replaced by five new brackets with the higher rates of 15%, 28%, 31%, 36% and 39.6%. Just a few months ago, it seemed like a safe bet that Congress would make a fix to keep the existing 10%, 15%, 25% and 28% rate brackets to help out lower and middle-income folks. That bet is now looking iffy.

*Note that the lowest bracket tax rate goes from 10% to 15%, or a 50% increase in their taxes.  The highest bracket goes from 35 to 36.9%, or 5.4%.  The lowest income people will be hit the hardest.  In this analysis from the Tax Foundation, you can see how the share of tax liability went up for the top quintile, and down for the others under the Bush cuts. 

The Really Beautiful Sport

Around Castle Graybeard we are watching the Tour de France as we do every year that Versus (and before, OLN) have been carrying it.  For the last month or so, as the World Cup hype machine has gone into overdrive, I've heard a lot of references to soccer as "the Beautiful Sport".  IMAO, that's just not right.  The Tour de France, and grand cycling tours in general, are the real beautiful sport.  And - is it just me? - but I'm not half as annoyed by the sound of those "Vuvuzelas" as I am at hearing and seeing the word "Vuvuzela" everywhere.  Mrs. Graybeard and I are fans of Lance Armstrong, but would be shocked silly to see him win.  He is an incredible athlete, but is over the peak of the sport.  He may be more fit than any other 38 year old out there - but he's 38.  Chances are, last year's winner, Alberto Contador, will repeat. 

What is le Tour de France?  (Same applies to the Tour of Italy, Switzerland, Spain, and other grand tours)  How is the winner determined?  Simply, the guy who rides the route around France in the lowest total time wins.  The tour typically last 3 full weeks, 21 days, around 2300 miles or so.  There's two days off, so while the average is over 100 miles in a day, there are short days that might measure 10 to 30 miles.  Grand Tours are a mixture of individual sport and team sport.  Because of the potential (and reality) of enormous crashes, times are usually given to groups where bikes overlap length, so if you finish last in the group, you get the same time as the first, and if you crash in the last 3 km of a stage, you get the same time as the last in the group.  This allows for a bad, bike-breaking crash to not cost you the minute to get a replacement bike and get to the finish line.  There is a great deal of strategy and tactics, making it an event that combines aspects of intellectual strategy with athletics; chess, poker and racing.

Field sprints feature this sort of carnage a large percent of the time.

One of the aspects that always impresses me is how the route is lined with spectators, sometimes in random spots along these 100 mile routes.  They get a few seconds of riders going by, then go home.  In the major stages, crowds grow to over a hundred thousand fans.  They may camp out for days to watch the riders go by, and wait days to get off the mountain.  It's as if it's a Super Bowl every day for 3 weeks, and the game comes to you, instead of you going to the game. 

Typical crowds spread along the sides of a mountain stage

On a typical day, there is a breakaway of a handful of riders away from the main group of riders (the peloton), mostly to get their sponsors names on TV, but to take that once or twice every tour chance of winning the day.   It may surprise non-cyclists that a stage that's 120 miles long over flat terrain is considered too easy for the big names to try and get ahead; they wait for much harder stages.  Perhaps the most interesting part of bicycle racing, and what sets it apart from other sports, is that competitors must cooperate.  Because the physics of riding a bicycle at the speeds they ride is so brutal, you must take turns riding in front, breaking the wind, so that you can keep the required speed up.  Riders shelter each other from the wind, saving 20% of their energy and more in big groups, allowing their bodies to recover.  If the breakaway is to succeed, the members of different teams must cooperate.  But, the guy who is in second place, or farther back, has an advantage as the race approaches the finish line.  I have seen the leader literally stop in place to get the second guy to go around him and stop trying to stay behind him.  One of the most intense events to witness is a bunch sprint, where all of the teams put their fastest sprinters up front, protecting them from the open wind until the last few hundred meters.  Then the sprint specialists take off, achieving speeds of over 40 mph. 

The pattern of the multi-Tour winners, especially Lance, and Miguel Indurain, has been to stay in the group (peloton) most of the time, saving energy for the individual time trials and mountain stages.  The Tour categorizes mountains as 4 (easiest) to 1 (hardest) and then throws in some climbs that are so difficult they are "beyond categorization" or HC.  The most famous climbs in the Tour are these HC mountains, almost always with a mountain top finish.  Names like Alpe d'Huez, Mont Ventoux, and Col du Tourmalet are the places where tour legends have been made.  As a Lance Armstrong fan, I will always remember his performance on Sestriere in the first tour he won, as well as the Alpe d'Huez time trial. 

The Alpe D'Huez time trial: Lance in the alley of noise.

So find the VS channel on your cable or satellite system and check it out.  I'm recording the 2 hour version every afternoon and watching in the evening.  Tomorrow, Monday, July 12, is the first rest day.  The coverage will be a summary of the first days of this years race.

Shifting Gears - A Little More Fun Stuff

When I started this blog, I envisioned talking about things I consider fun.  I have a ton of interests and hobbies, from bicycling to shooting; from saltwater fishing to photography; from woodworking to metalworking, along with hiking, radio and others.  Looking back on my first few months, I see way more politics and nowhere near as much fun as I envisioned. 

If you asked me to describe myself, the last word I would use would be "serious".  Of course I want to be good at my job, but I would much rather people not remember me so much as a good engineer but as the funniest guy they ever worked with.  I once told people working with me to expect me to be serious 10% of the time. 

So I'm going to take some of the zeitgeist floating around over at WSRA today - about trying to get a better balance of awareness of what's coming while not being overwhelmed by it as much as possible.  As John Lennon is quoted as saying, "life is what happens while you're busy making other plans".  No matter what else comes in the next 10 years, we have lives to lead.  We will go to work as long as we can, provide for ourselves and families as best as we can, and have as much fun as we possibly can. 

If you've read this blog much this won't be a shock: I think really bad times are coming.  I can't predict that there will be open civil war in the US, but I can't express how surprised I'd be if I looked up one day in 2020 and everything was peachy and all the major problems we face today have been solved.  As others have said, I really don't think a new set of elections will fix the structural problems we face; problems like the deficit and the 100+ trillion dollar unfunded liabilities have been brewing for a century.  The realization that the money is gone is going to cause social unrest like we have never seen.  I understand Goldman or one of those big banks has started arming their employees and getting them CC permits.  When you think of things like the SEIU protests outside the banker's home, and where that could have gone, you have to respect them for that. 

So at least for a while, I'm going to beat on that drum less, and talk about fun a bit more.  So let's talk about home defense guns.


Gun nuts are just as big a group of debaters and arguers as any other specialized hobby.  There is never a shortage of things to talk about, from cartridge stopping power to the "best" handgun for everyday carry to tactics to, well, you name it. 

One of the recurring topics is what type of weapon to use for home defense.  There are just as many opinions as authors, so here's a few ideas that I've distilled and adopted in my world.

First off, it is hard to beat a shotgun as man-stopper with anything you can wear in a holster.  I have heard of people being shot over 30 times with 9mm handguns before they stopped being a threat but I can't say I've ever heard of someone being hit by shotgun more than twice.  Consider this: at self defense distances (almost always under 10 yards) a 9mm jacketed hollow point has an impact energy of around 330 ft-lbs.  A 12 ga buckshot load hits with around 1890 ft-lbs.  It's hard to compare those two.  (All ballistics data from the Federal Premium ballistics calculator, download here).  Even the vaunted 45 ACP won't go over 420 ft-lbs (230 grain JHPs).

Springfield Armory XD Subcompact 9mm

There are, of course, shotgun snobs who say only a 12 ga with 00 ("double-ought") buckshot will do.  A 20 ga shooting #3 buckshot hits with 1435 ft-lbs of energy.  Over three times the energy of your potent 45 ACP.  As famous gun writer Massad Ayoob says, the only difference to the home invader hit by a 20 ga or 12 ga is how much work the coroner has to do to find all the pellets.  The important thing in favor of a 20 ga is that a smaller man or small woman or adolescent in the home might find a 20 ga shotgun fits better and is easier to handle. 

Mossberg Tactical 20 gage

A shotgun is harder to move around in cramped spaces inside your house than a handgun is, but that can be practiced (with the gun unloaded!!) to get used to it.  Some real training, or watching of TV training with lots of copying, helps no matter what you use. 

There's two more reasons to give the nod to the shotgun, especially for a friend or relative that has no other plans for self-defense.  First; a shotgun is legally treated differently than a handgun; in most places (every one I know of) you don't need a cooling off period to buy one, or a permit of any kind to own it.  You walk into your local Bass Pro, Cabela's, Gander, etc., etc., plunk down your money and walk out with it.  Yeah, you have to fill out the instant crime check form, but that's usually about it.  Second, your shotgun is likely to cost less than a good handgun.  Maybe much less.  A pump action shotgun like a Mossberg 500 series or Remington 870 series, will typically be around $300 or so; less if used.  I have seen perfectly good used Mossberg 500s for $200 and less.  A good handgun, will probably be $450-ish new, and used handguns hold their value quite well.   

Now a shotgun typically holds 5 shells, while a full-sized 9mm will hold as many as 19 rounds.  That is probably going to be a disadvantage, so spending some time at a range learning to do tactical speed reloads is a really good idea.  You don't need expensive buck shot (around .75 to $1 per shell) to do this.  Get a box of cheap Walmart bird shot for this.  

Let me address another couple of points.  Remember that while you may be legally justified in shooting someone in your house, "a lawyer goes down range with every round" and you want to be aware than any type of round capable of stopping an attacker will penetrate most any wall.  One of the rules of gun safety is to always know where you are shooting and what's behind the target, and there are no exceptions when you need to defend yourself.  While a fired round will lose energy going through walls, becoming less and less dangerous, you especially don't want to shoot through windows into a neighbor's house.  All that said, in tests I have seen, buckshot actually penetrated less than a 9mm round. 

You may hear that "you don't need to aim your shotgun - just point and shoot".  Not true.  With no choke, smooth barrel shotguns (like most 12 ga self defense guns) you will get about one to two inches of shot spread for every 10 feet of range.  Your attacker would have to be quite far away to not have to worry about aiming to hit them.

Although this is a very introductory level article, here are some conclusions.

A shotgun is a little unwieldy, but the impact from a load of buckshot will hit an attacker many times harder than a handgun shot would.  The small number of shells a shotgun will hold puts a premium on your being able to run the gun (tactical reloads), but a pump action shotgun is very reliable. 

A semi-auto handgun is easier to keep running due to the number of rounds it carries and it's easier to maneuver around inside a house.  You need to practice with a handgun, too, especially overcoming jams and other problems a semiautomatic weapon can throw at you.

If you're only going to own one gun, a shotgun is probably more useful.  You can hunt with it, usually just by changing barrels (generally less than $100 new). 

Have a plan for what your family does in a crisis.  If you have a split plan house with kids on one side and adults on the other, be sure the kids know to get low and stay low until you tell them all's clear. 

This only touches on the subject, but it's a good start for now.

Meet Your Executioner

Meet Dr. Donald Berwick, recently given a recess appointment to be the Medicare/Medicaid czar.  Dr. Berwick is now in charge of a program with obligations of 95 trillion dollars (debt clock) - far, far higher than the GDP of every nation in the world.  As far as I can tell, he has zero experience with finances.  Of course, this administration has set a record for the lowest number of people from the private sector - that is, people who know what they're doing.

If you are an American citizen, your life or death in the medical system is in his hands.  If you're over 45, you are most at risk for having your life terminated by this "gentleman".

Dr. Kevorkian, er, Berwick was appointed by recess appointment yesterday (July 7).  As is always the case with this administration that never accepts any responsibility for anything, they said they used recess appointment because the other side would hold the appointment up.  Actually, what the other side wanted to do was make Dr. Berwick's views more widely known.  While I don't particularly like recess appointments in general, this one stinks more than most because the appointee stinks more than most.  

Excellent background pieces  here and here

You see, Dr. Berwick is a big fan of the British National Health System.  That's novel because most of the British people are not fans of the NHS, and you have to go a long way (apparently, all the way to Harvard) to find someone who is in favor of it.  In a speech marking the 60th birthday of the NHS, he praised the it for deliberately creating scarcity: "You [the NHS] plan the supply; you aim a bit low; historically, you prefer slightly too little of a technology or service to much too much and then you search for care bottlenecks and try to relieve them."  In a time when the largest wave of retirees in US history hits the Medicare system, the fed.gov has cut the budget for the system by half a trillion dollars ($525 Billion).  The only conclusion is that life will be worse for us than for those who were in the system before us.  This is in complete agreement with the trend of this administration, which (as far as I can tell) is completely dedicated to making all of our lives more miserable. 

For example, in an op ed in the NY Post in 1992, he waxed eloquent over his love for the NHS, including this gem, "At last, a nation where healthcare is a right and carrying a semi-automatic machine gun is a privilege."  Showing he knows just as little about weapons as he does economics. 

What's wrong with the NHS?  Pretty much everything.  Yes, you are guaranteed a certain level of care, but your odds of surviving anything: from routine hospitalization to cancer, are much worse than in the US.  How about 1200 patients killed in a UK hospital abused by staff, lying in filth:  How about a much better chance of surviving cancer in the US System, "Researchers found that USA has the best score with 5 years of survival rate for breast cancer at 83.9% and prostate cancer at 91.9%. …UK reported 69.7% survival rate for breast cancer, …, and 51.1% for prostate cancer."  In other words, in the US, your survival chances for the most common cancers (breast and prostate) are 120% (breast) and 180% of the UK chances.  Mrs. Graybeard is a breast cancer survivor and we know many others, as well.  From here.  Do you think it's just from screening?  Not really, "In the United States, 85 percent of women aged 25 to 64 years have regular PAP smears, compared with 58 percent in Great Britain.  The same is true for mammograms; in the United States, 84 percent of women aged 50 to 64 years get them regularly - a higher percentage than in Australia, Canada or New Zealand, and far higher than the 63 percent of British women."   source data

Photo taken in a UK hospital

But if the NHS system is designed to create shortages of care, how could it be otherwise?  What central planners always, always fail to realize is how good the market is at creating positive outcomes.  Berwick and other central planners think our system is too centered on the patient and should be more about social justice.  They think our system generates an over supply of medical care, raising costs.  Dr. Berwick, my wife and I went through the period when the mammogram shows something that needs to be removed and it needs to be removed now.  You can't get that surgery too fast.  How about you do us all a favor; why don't you head for Cuba or Venezuela or North Korea where your ideas will fit in much better? 

The quote most often associated with Dr. Berwick has to do with the concept of rationing healthcare. In an interview published in "Biotechnology Healthcare," Dr. Berwick said, "The decision is not whether or not we will ration care - the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open."  Remember back during the Obamacare debates, when Sarah Palin used the term "death panels" to describe the decisions that would be made to terminate some patients in order to save resources for others?  That is exactly what Dr. Berwick refers to here. 

I personally find his quotes praising socialism - the redistribution of wealth - at least as alarming.  "Any healthcare funding plan that is just, equitable, civilized and humane must, must redistribute wealth from the richer among us to the poorer and the less fortunate. Excellent healthcare is by definition redistributional," said Berwick. (see at 1:40 below)  Is health insurance redistribution?  I voluntarily pay into a system that will pay benefits to any member based on the money it collects from the members of the plan.  I fail to see that being socialist.  So if insurance isn't "just, equitable, civilized, and humane" what exactly is he advocating?  Taxing you to pay for other people.  Government, as Washington said, is force.  Try not paying your taxes, and if you're not a member of the administration (e.g., Timothy Geithner), how much do you want to bet that you eventually don't get a gun pointed at you?  No, this is not humane, it is theft. 



Our administration appears to be fans of the "whole lives system".  In this system, it's acceptable to let a 70 year old, die while giving care to a 25 year old, because their life is worth more to the collective - excuse me - worth more to society.  To paraphrase their quote, "it's not discrimination to deny care to the 70 year old and give it to the 25 year old.  Everyone who is now 70 was once 25 and the majority of those who are 25 now will be 70 some day".   In other words, "we can screw you now because we didn't screw you earlier; and if we're not screwing you now, wait until you're 70 and then you'll really be screwed."

Michelle Oddis, in her Human Events blog entry has this quote:

“I think anyone who is close to this understands this debate is really not about Don Berwick, but the opportunity to re-litigate the underlying health care reforms," John Rother, executive vice president for policy and strategy at the AARP told McClatchy Newspapers. "In ordinary times, the nomination of somebody with Don's record and standing in the field would not be controversial."

In ordinary times, we wouldn't have a socialist being given the reigns over 95 trillion dollars.  The AARP sold out their members in this fight and they continue to.  I assume they intend to make lots of money selling insurance to cover the shortfalls in Medicare coverage.  The take home point, though, is the vast majority of the country wants this repealed.  The vast majority would love to see it honestly litigated for the first time.

More On NASA

Pretty busy today, so more linky than thinky.

Michelle Malkin has a bunch of good stuff on the NASA Islamic Outreach Inanity. 

NASA - No Americans in Space Anymore

Catchy acronym credited to commenter Dyspeptic Curmudgeon on Alpheca


So NASA has apparently been ordered to make its primary mission outreach to Muslim nations.

Charles Bolden, head of NASA, tells Al Jazeera that the "foremost" task President Obama has given him is "to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with predominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math, and engineering." Thus, NASA's primary mission is no longer to enhance American science and engineering or to explore space, but to boost the self-esteem of "predominantly Muslim nations."
Exploring space didn't even make the top three things Obama wants Bolden to accomplish. The other two are "re-inspire children to want to get into science and math" and "expand our international relationships,"  source Powerline Blog

Bull crap.  First off, the contributions of ancient Arab and Persian civilizations are duly noted - but there haven't been any noteworthy innovations out of that part of the world since Islam took over.  There are no great contributions to Science, Mathematics or Engineering since then.  Islam has destroyed that culture.  Again, to quote another commenter:

Paraphrasing the address given by the Prime minister of Malaysia to a conference of Moslem heads of state around 29th December 2004. The gist of it was, original thinking has been haram (forbidden) to Moslems for the past 1200 years.

Got an exception?  If the Muslim world is so great, why is it that when a leader gets sick, he comes here?  Why is it they send their students here to learn engineering?

Former NASA Administrator  Michael Griffin joins us in disgust:

The former head of NASA on Tuesday described as "deeply flawed" the idea that the space exploration agency's priority should be outreach to Muslim countries, after current Administrator Charles Bolden made that assertion in an interview last month. (Fox News) 

The administration is backpedaling on this like a four year old caught with both mitts in the cookie jar. 

....Bob Jacobs, NASA's assistant administrator for public affairs, ... said that Bolden was speaking of priorities when it came to "outreach" and not about NASA's primary missions of "science, aeronautics and space exploration." He said the "core mission" is exploration and that it was unfortunate Bolden's comments are now being viewed through a "partisan prism."

When in doubt, blame everything on the Republicans, right?

Look, I'm one of those who think the moon landings were one of the pinnacles of human history. It pains me deeply for us to be throwing out our heritage in space.  In light of this, it's noteworthy that Bolden also said:

... the United States is not going to travel beyond low-Earth orbit on its own and that no country is going to make it to Mars without international help.

In other words, we have completely lost our vision, and our ambition.  We have no desire to explore any more and would rather contemplate our navels.  Exploration's too hard.  It costs too much.  He's saying we can't even recreate technology we had 45 years ago and improve on it.  Even knowing the answer, as if from the back of the book, we can't re-create it.  He's telling the Chinese, the Indians, the Japanese and every other nation with a space program that they can't do it, either.  What a bunch of myopic crap. 

So the answer is that instead of taking on challenges, let's all just sit around and be proud of something our ancestors did over 2000 years ago.  Thanks, but if I'm proud of anything, it will be of things I've accomplished - anything my ancestors did was for them to be proud of.  

Pic shamelessly ripped from Weasel Zippers, who seem to have shamelessly ripped it from The Nose on Your Face

In a way, Glenn Beck hit on a very good concept a few weeks ago.  You may not have noticed it or it may not have stuck with you, but it's good. Think of the summer of 1969.  Two big things happened that summer.  The first moon landing in July, and Woodstock, a few weeks later.

The first was a tribute to hard working men and women: engineers, technicians, assemblers, and tens of thousands of hard working people who undertook a task that many viewed as impossible.  "To land a man on the moon and return him safely to earth by the end of this decade".  It was hard work, it was risky work.  Men died: outstanding men you'd be proud to have known or worked with.  It was a triumph of intellect, done with slide rules and calculators that your Smart Phone out classes by a factor of thousands.  Even today, it is thought of as so hard to do that about 5% of the population thinks we never did it.



The second was a bunch of kids having sex in the mud while drugged out of their minds, listening to singers and musicians drugged out of their minds.

The first group was dedicated to doing things others can barely only imagine - bending the universe to their will through sheer intellect and power.  They are "can do" people. 

The second group was dedicated to rubbing body parts against each other with no effort of will and no character.  Their entire focus in life is their genitals.   

The second group is now in charge of the country.

Which kind of person are you? 

...and lest you forget what Woodstock was like, Mrs. Graybeard and I laughed until we hurt at this ...

Ok - That's It - Move Along - Nothing to See Here - You Can Go Home

Prince says the Internet is completely over.  That's all.  You can go home, now. 

Wait.  I am home, through the miracle of paid holidays. 

Disclaimer.  I like Prince.

Our Despicable Congress

Despicable. Deceptive. Dishonest. Criminal.  

It's last Thursday.  Holiday weekend coming.  I don't know about where you work, but where I work, we push until the last minute, then everyone wishes each other a nice, refreshing weekend and we head home. If you're Nancy Pelosi, you figure "no one's watching - time to push some shit through!". 

Last night [note: 7/1], as part of a procedural vote on the emergency war supplemental bill, House Democrats attached a document that "deemed as passed" a non-existent $1.12 trillion budget. The execution of the "deeming" document allows Democrats to start spending money for Fiscal Year 2011 without the pesky constraints of a budget.

The procedural vote passed 215-210 with no Republicans voting in favor and 38 Democrats crossing the aisle to vote against deeming the faux budget resolution passed.

More story here. Quote of the Day from Rob Long

What spineless toads! What useless bags of bones! What inspirations of cowardice and feckless do-nothingism! Irrelevant, pompous, lazy, crooked, dishonest, shiftless lumps of animal turd! May they suffocate in their own sloth and flatulence! Thieves, each and every one of them. Frauds and mice, the 215 Democrats who voted for this criminally negligent piece of non-legislation. The entire sick, decrepit, on-the-take, creepy lot of them -- the human oil spill that is the Democratic House Majority -- should crawl on their scaly, reptilian bellies and beg forgiveness for their derelict, chicken-hearted shirking of the one damn thing they're supposed to do! And we shouldn't give it to them. No. Never. Never. Never. Never. Never. They're a craven, appalling, inexcusable insult to all Americans who do their jobs and pay their taxes. And especially to the men and women in uniform who do theirs.

Tarring and feathering always struck me as such a terrible thing.  Tar has to be hot, it must be extremely painful to go through.  Just seems like one of those things that we can be glad are in the past.  Then something like this comes along and I started looking at feather pillows and dreaming....

Wise Latina? Or Street Wise?

When Sonia Sotomayor was going through her kabuki theater nomination process, she repeatedly testified that Heller (the Supreme court decision overturning the District of Columiba's ban on gun ownership) was "settled law". 

Turns out that was just a street wise Latina lying to get what she wanted.  

In this week's McDonald ruling, Sotomayor joined the Breyer dissent which wrote that Heller was "wrongly decided" and "In sum, the Framers did not write the Second Amendment to protect a private right of armed self defense".  While I think the Framers intended the Second Amendment to take care of judges like her and administrations like this, I also think it was intended to allow armed self defense. 

To defend her requires we twist ourselves to Clinton-esque levels to say that really wasn't a lie.  She said it was settled, she just didn't say she thought it was settled incorrectly and needs to be overturned. 

This underscores how important it is to have honest people nominated to the court.  If they lie to the confirmation committee, how can the Senate fulfill its constitutional mandate to "advise and consent"?  Was she under oath?  Can we get her charged with perjury?  Does anybody believe Elena Kagan is being 100% truthful?  Yeah, me neither.

If you can read it, the NRA's magazine "First Freedom" has a special online issue devoted to this decision. 

Happy Independence Day!

Let's not just call it the 4th of July.  Let's remember what it really was - the day we declared our independence of tyranny. 

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776

The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

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. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.

He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:

For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing taxes on us without our consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:

For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:

For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies:

For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:

For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.

We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.


I would have highlighted portions that I think are particularly apt today, but the whole thing would be highlighted.

Enjoy your day.  To those who serve - and have served - to provide this gift of liberty for us.  Thank you from the bottom of my heart. 

The Decline and Fall of the Great Middle Class

John Robb, over on Global Guerrillas, shows why he's the thinking man's go-to guy as we prepare for the impending great economic collapse, with this article and links on the decline of the middle class.  It's an interesting read, and speaks for itself; I just have a few comments.

First off, the comments have the usual "Democrats started it!", "Oh yeah?  Republicans started it!" bull crap that has come to characterize political discourse in this country.  This polarization is a symptom of the very problem the article talks about. The highlights - well, lowlights -  of this are that anyone who thinks that union wages are a factor is racist; anyone concerned about undocumented workers is racist; open trade is good; open trade is bad; blah, blah, blah.

Can we talk some facts?

Everyone can't be rich.  Pretty simple isn't it?  You can no more have a statistical income distribution without a top than without a bottom (the war on poverty).   The US constitution does not guarantee outcomes, it guarantees access.  It doesn't guarantee your happiness, it guarantees your right to pursue happiness - however you perceive it.  The key to richness isn't in leaching off other people, it's in having a skill other people are willing to pay for. 

Unions have become as corrupt as the old companies they were founded to work against.  Can we talk SEIU?  Open thuggery of the worst kind.  How can a union of civil "servants" be set up to guarantee more pay and better benefits than the people who pay for those benefits have?  I'm not saying government and municipal employees should get slave wages, but they shouldn't be royalty who gets more pay and benefits than the folks who pay for them, either.




A union negotiating the price of labor is like a material supplier negotiating the price of components.  I sure don't have a problem with that negotiation, but it comes with a price.  If a manufacturer finds the supplier of its microprocessors, say, or its brake pads, or whatever, charges too much they either switch supplier or design out the part.  Seen Detroit lately?  As soon as the company paying abnormally high wages is able to, they are going to dump the workers (i.e., automate assembly more) or go offshore.  Labor unions complain about companies outsourcing work, when they are part of the cause of it.  Of course, the federal laws have forced additional costs onto companies that have led to the massive migration of jobs out of the country. 

When they talk about wages being higher in the US than in foreign countries, be afraid.  Doesn't it make sense that instead of bringing Bangladesh or Burkina Faso up to US wages, that our wages are going to be cut?  Maybe we come closer to meeting down at their end of the scale?  Also, don't think for a minute that companies outsource to the cheapest labor source; if they did someplace like Burkina Faso or Angola would have all the factories.  They offshore to the most optimum place; both in terms of the abilities/education of the workers, infrastructure, governmental friendliness (lower taxes), and so on.


The problems we have now are likely to lead to the collapse of states, and possibly the fed.gov.  California is basically bankrupt now (how about "the Governator" cutting state workers' pay to the minimum wage until the budget is fixed?)  Despite these problems being well known for a long time, they have not fixed them.  Doing so will hurt unions and other main constituency groups.  45 other states share the same bed. 

John's answer is Resilient Communities.   That's a topic that could take pages of its own.  Here's a good intro.

"This conceptual model creates a set of new services that allow the smallest viable subset of social systems, the community (however you define it), to enjoy the fruits of globalization without being completely vulnerable to its excesses. These services are configured to provide the ability to survive an extended disconnection from the global grid in the following areas (an incomplete list):

* Energy.
   * Food.
   * Security (both active and passive).
   * Communications.
   * Transportation. 

 Some other authors add in local, small-scale manufacturing, like the 3-D printing article I had a while back. 

Is It Really Our Fault?

A popular meme these days is that the awful leadership we have is the fault of the voters who elected them.  I have to say that I bought the idea at first, but I think I'm changing my mind. 

Yesterday, TV, radio, and several blogs covered how California congressman Peter Stark went completely offensive on one of his constituents who wanted to know what congress would do about the border. (click here if you haven't seen it)  Glenn Beck covered this on the show, was outraged by the lack of respect shown by the congressman, and did a bit of his trademark crying before saying, "it's our fault, America" (or something close to that). Stark, by the way should be on the ballots as Stark Raving Mad - he's the guy who told a constituent "I wouldn't dignify you by peeing on your leg" last September, so it's not like being an A-hole is something new for him.

We certainly did a bad job of hiring people to do our work for us.  But how different is it from hiring a contractor, yard worker, well digger, or any other worker?  You don't have an infinite choice of people to hire, and you pick the best one available - the "lesser of two evils".  Saying that it's our fault they're a bunch of arrogant douche bags like Stark, or corrupt criminals like, well, pretty much 90% of 'em  is like saying it's our fault the "least suck-o" of the contractors was incompetent.  We did the best we could with what we had. Why is it our fault?  If I hire a plumber because he seems the best of the guys I ask out to bid a job, and he steals something, that's my fault? 

There are lots of problems here.  The process candidates get dragged through is hellacious.  Who would undergo such a nightmare?  The press is beyond incompetent, they're malevolent.  They are part and parcel of the move to take away all liberties, from Walter Lippman, on down.  (Lippman believed ordinary people were "too stupid to decide for themselves" and needed journalists to "tell them what they need to hear".)  That's part of why the press is so awful today.  The two party system grinds up candidates - how many times, this year alone, have we seen the national or state party get behind truly awful candidates while the party voters wanted someone else?  Nikki Halley in S. Carolina, Sharron Angle in Nevada, Doug Huffman in New York...

Still, it's almost a cliche that third party candidates just lose.

It looks to me like the process is an awful mess, the incumbents are useless, the parties are virtually useless, and it's my fault as a voter?  For not "being involved", that is, for not hounding the people we hired to work for us?  I started voting in 1972 and may have missed a primary or special election one time since then.  Every election gets as thoroughly researched as I can.  OK, maybe we didn't pick the optimum candidate every time, and I'll accept some blame.  But  is it really all our fault? 

  
 

Worth Pondering

A while back, I asked Will You Recognize the World in the Fall of 2010?  I have written on this before that and quoted it in that posting. 

The most important pieces of that article were based on blog entries from Israel on Sense of Events.  They have a guest blogger today with more thoughts on the likelihood of war between Israel and the countries aligned against them. 

Like them, I pray I am wrong, but I fear I am not. 

The vast majority of America is not expecting this.  It will be a shock.  Consider that regular gas is around $3 per gallon now when oil is $75 a barrel.  Consider what happens if oil hits $250: the same percentage make it  $10/gal.  It's not just your cost to go to work; what about the fleet of trucks that supply your groceries?  The cost of your groceries won't necessarily go up by 3.33 times, but it will go up.  The cost of everything will go up.  Everything. 

Now consider you might still have months to prepare for this event.  If there really is a chance of it happening, shouldn't you do something to prepare?  Even if you bought a little extra food every week, what's the down side of that, other than a little expense now to possibly save a ton of expense later?  Lots of details on how to prepare here and here.

It Has Been a Busy Week

And it's only Tuesday!

We had the Supremes vote that the 2nd Amendment is covered by the 14th, by a 5-4 vote, throwing aside complete gun bans.  On the one hand, it's good we won.  On the other, it's a 5-4 vote and wasn't a sweeping set aside of state laws.  The definition of "reasonable laws" will have to be won in their court, too, I bet.  It means we have four morons on the Supreme Court who can't tell cause from effect.  Chicago residents, your "leadership" is bound and determined to keep you helpless in the face of armed criminals, and willing to spend all of your money going back and forth to courts.  I wouldn't live there or even visit that place if you paid me. 

We had Elena Kagan's hearings begin.  (Phlegm Fatale had the absolute best line on Kagan's appearance, "If Mike Meyers and Matthew Broderick had a love child...I mean that in the nicest way possible. Truly, I do") but we're too mature around here to make fun of  someone's looks.  Heh heh.  I thought she looked like Bob Costas after too much of a carbohydrate binge. 

With political views like this, though, it's easy to find fault with qualifications:



Yeah.  She'll get confirmed.  And in a year we'll still have four morons on the Supreme Court; they just won't be the same four morons.

We had the death of Senator Robert C. Byrd at age 92.  The "Foghorn Leghorn" of the Senate, someone who was well known for their racial bigotry over the years.  While I might side with Billy Beck, Borepatch has the right tone. But he brought the bacon home to West Virginia and that gets you elected.  You'd be amazed at the things named after him. 

A mere day after my posting on Sunday about the world's deepening economic troubles, the Royal Bank of Scotland warned their customers about monster inflation coming in the US, thereby adding to the number of major financial outlets trying to get their customers to prepare for the poop hitting the air moving device.  And Bloomberg News reports 46 states are on the verge of collapse.  Any doubt you'll pay for bailouts?

Still, I think the most important thing I've seen this week is from a new blog I read, New Zeal.  Watch this.  Consider how it goes with the blogging from Israel I reported on.  Consider what a small miscalculation from any of the (don't call me stupid) wise men involved could do.  If you're like me, you'll go stock up on beans, bullets and band aids.
 

It Isn't Really Going to Help...

..that whole "Obama is really a Muslim" meme to go away to call him "America's Educator-in-Chief on Islam".  Not when it can be construed to be supporting "anti-defamation" laws against Islam when you can get jailed (or worse) for merely having a Christian Bible in Muslim nations.  Or it can be construed that the US President is advocating for Sharia law in Europe (at the least).

...Hussain has now divulged that the U.S. will support the OIC (= Organization for the Islamic Conference) in the latter’s United Nations effort to criminalize “defamation of religion” – widely perceived as a measure to suppress criticism of Muslim practices that violate human rights.  “The OIC and the Obama administration will work together in the UN on the issue of defamation of religion, especially in Europe,” said Hussain.

No sir.  It really looks like he must be Muslim.  And it really reinforces Andrew Thomas' article on American Thinker

Hat tip to John at Improved Clinch.