28 February 2008
A Reason I Have Not Seen Listed
for the invasion of Iraq: 17 May 1987. More than enough reason for me, I weep that is insufficient for the masses.
25 February 2008
Another Modest Proposal
Again, I am going to repeat myself a little bit. This is refining an earlier idea.
If you call for US military intervention, we own the land we take in combat when the war is done. Don't want a brand new US territory there, don't ask for our military assistance.
If you call for US humanitarian assistance, be aware you are asking to become a US territory. If you do not wish to become a US territory, then starve, I don't care.
The US will ignore you and your problems. We will not intervene in corrupt elections and do not care what form your government takes or how you treat your citizens. We do care how you treat ours. If you grant US citizens visas to enter your nation, we demand that they be safe. If they are not, we demand the perpetrators so that we may try them according to our custom. If you refuse to hand them over, we will invade and make you a US territory, and then try the perpetrators. If you wish to avoid this, simply refuse to issue visas, any American who then travels to your nation is an illegal alien and on their own.
Should your problems get so large that they affect us directly, such as your citizens taking over a commercial aircraft and flying it into a building here, we will invade you and make you a territory of the United States. If you don't want this to happen, keep your people under better control.
The official language of the United States is English. While we do not require you to speak it, all documents and official proceedings will be conducted in English. We are under no obligation to hire a translator and it is your responsibility to be able to understand the documents or official proceedings.
Territories of the United States get 30 years as a territory to become states. That's more than enough time to get the idea of being an American across. Refusal will be considered insurrection and dealt with accordingly. Luckily, being part of the US is a pretty good deal.
Illegal entry into the United States will be dealt with summarily by any level law enforcement, including the militia. Execution is allowable, but deportation is preferred. Second offenses will result in execution.
To be considered a natural born citizen of the United States your parents must have been legal residents or citizens of the US at the time of your birth. Persons born to illegal aliens will be considered citizens of their parents country, but will not be charged with illegal entry.
If you call for US military intervention, we own the land we take in combat when the war is done. Don't want a brand new US territory there, don't ask for our military assistance.
If you call for US humanitarian assistance, be aware you are asking to become a US territory. If you do not wish to become a US territory, then starve, I don't care.
The US will ignore you and your problems. We will not intervene in corrupt elections and do not care what form your government takes or how you treat your citizens. We do care how you treat ours. If you grant US citizens visas to enter your nation, we demand that they be safe. If they are not, we demand the perpetrators so that we may try them according to our custom. If you refuse to hand them over, we will invade and make you a US territory, and then try the perpetrators. If you wish to avoid this, simply refuse to issue visas, any American who then travels to your nation is an illegal alien and on their own.
Should your problems get so large that they affect us directly, such as your citizens taking over a commercial aircraft and flying it into a building here, we will invade you and make you a territory of the United States. If you don't want this to happen, keep your people under better control.
The official language of the United States is English. While we do not require you to speak it, all documents and official proceedings will be conducted in English. We are under no obligation to hire a translator and it is your responsibility to be able to understand the documents or official proceedings.
Territories of the United States get 30 years as a territory to become states. That's more than enough time to get the idea of being an American across. Refusal will be considered insurrection and dealt with accordingly. Luckily, being part of the US is a pretty good deal.
Illegal entry into the United States will be dealt with summarily by any level law enforcement, including the militia. Execution is allowable, but deportation is preferred. Second offenses will result in execution.
To be considered a natural born citizen of the United States your parents must have been legal residents or citizens of the US at the time of your birth. Persons born to illegal aliens will be considered citizens of their parents country, but will not be charged with illegal entry.
Deleting Bookmarks
I read a lot of political blogs. Recently, I have discovered that I just cannot stand to read some of them.
Hugh Hewitt got nuked because I got so damn sick of reading about how tasty the Romney shit sammich was. Rah rah rah, RINO!
Kim DuToit got nuked today because I am sick of reading about how RIGHT he is and how WRONG I am. It must be nice to be that CERTAIN. His wife's comments in one thread were the final straw. More than once with them I have seen them rant about how unconstitutional something is and then say that the war on drugs is OK because so many people want it. The recent comment thread was about exactly that. I believe it was Tamara explaining that Prohibition was legal because an amendment was added giving the Feds the power to do what they did and the war on drugs is illegal because no such power is found in the Constitution, nor has an amendment granting that power been added.
I've noticed that whenever the war on drugs vs prohibition legality thing comes up, conservatives immediately dive for the libertarian=drug smoking hippie line. I find this exasperating. What Tamara was trying to say is the Constitution defines the powers the government legitimately has and the power of making drugs illegal is not there. This position is reinforced by the 18th amendment, by the way. If the government had the power to ban liquor (or drugs) then an amendment would not have been required. The position that the power was always there and the 18th was not really required is squashed by the 21st amendment. If the government had the power to ban alcohol (or drugs) without the 18th amendment, then all of the laws passed during prohibition would still be valid and in place today. Saying so does not make me a hippie.
I've raged on this point before, the Constitution is a limiting document listing the powers of the Federal government in plain English. If a power is not specifically, and clearly, listed then it is forbidden to the Feds. The 9th and 10th amendments are reminders that this is so. This position demands quite a bit smaller and less intrusive Federal Government than we have today. Saying so does not make me a libertarian, anarchist or minarchist.
There's a lot of legitimate power in there. It mentions "the people" a lot. I don't think we needed special laws protecting women, blacks or gays because all three are PEOPLE! The people are protected. I do think that passing the laws protecting women, blacks, and gays means that as a straight white male I am less protected. Saying so does not make me a bigot, racist, sexist or homophobe.
Hugh Hewitt got nuked because I got so damn sick of reading about how tasty the Romney shit sammich was. Rah rah rah, RINO!
Kim DuToit got nuked today because I am sick of reading about how RIGHT he is and how WRONG I am. It must be nice to be that CERTAIN. His wife's comments in one thread were the final straw. More than once with them I have seen them rant about how unconstitutional something is and then say that the war on drugs is OK because so many people want it. The recent comment thread was about exactly that. I believe it was Tamara explaining that Prohibition was legal because an amendment was added giving the Feds the power to do what they did and the war on drugs is illegal because no such power is found in the Constitution, nor has an amendment granting that power been added.
I've noticed that whenever the war on drugs vs prohibition legality thing comes up, conservatives immediately dive for the libertarian=drug smoking hippie line. I find this exasperating. What Tamara was trying to say is the Constitution defines the powers the government legitimately has and the power of making drugs illegal is not there. This position is reinforced by the 18th amendment, by the way. If the government had the power to ban liquor (or drugs) then an amendment would not have been required. The position that the power was always there and the 18th was not really required is squashed by the 21st amendment. If the government had the power to ban alcohol (or drugs) without the 18th amendment, then all of the laws passed during prohibition would still be valid and in place today. Saying so does not make me a hippie.
I've raged on this point before, the Constitution is a limiting document listing the powers of the Federal government in plain English. If a power is not specifically, and clearly, listed then it is forbidden to the Feds. The 9th and 10th amendments are reminders that this is so. This position demands quite a bit smaller and less intrusive Federal Government than we have today. Saying so does not make me a libertarian, anarchist or minarchist.
There's a lot of legitimate power in there. It mentions "the people" a lot. I don't think we needed special laws protecting women, blacks or gays because all three are PEOPLE! The people are protected. I do think that passing the laws protecting women, blacks, and gays means that as a straight white male I am less protected. Saying so does not make me a bigot, racist, sexist or homophobe.
21 February 2008
Where Do These Guys Come From
I've been reading an AK vs AR vs H&K flame war in the comments to a blog.
One poster, who's worked for every AR maker in the universe, and knows more than we do, really, just ask him: He's on a tear about this and that and I'm smiling because I know better, I own a couple.
One thing that really pegged the BS meter was him talking about the M855 bullet. He says that it was designed for the M4 and its extended feed ramps. That would be, "Wrong Answers for 1000, Alex." The M855 was designed concurrently with the M16A2, and first issued in 1983. My tank was issued an M16A2 when I was in Germany in 1988. We had the green tipped M855 ammunition as well. The M4 is not issued until 1994. The round came long before the gun.
The extended feed ramps on the M4 are there because the action cycles faster than the M16 and the bullets don't have time to get all the way to the top of the magazine before the bolt grabs them when not in semi-automatic mode.
You'd think that someone who had designed the lefty upper for Stag would know that, wouldn't you?
I think this is the difference between a machinist and an engineer.
One poster, who's worked for every AR maker in the universe, and knows more than we do, really, just ask him: He's on a tear about this and that and I'm smiling because I know better, I own a couple.
One thing that really pegged the BS meter was him talking about the M855 bullet. He says that it was designed for the M4 and its extended feed ramps. That would be, "Wrong Answers for 1000, Alex." The M855 was designed concurrently with the M16A2, and first issued in 1983. My tank was issued an M16A2 when I was in Germany in 1988. We had the green tipped M855 ammunition as well. The M4 is not issued until 1994. The round came long before the gun.
The extended feed ramps on the M4 are there because the action cycles faster than the M16 and the bullets don't have time to get all the way to the top of the magazine before the bolt grabs them when not in semi-automatic mode.
You'd think that someone who had designed the lefty upper for Stag would know that, wouldn't you?
I think this is the difference between a machinist and an engineer.
Covers A Lot Of Ground This Does
There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him. — Robert Heinlein
A Wee Little Test
Get thee hence!
I answered 55 out of 60 correctly — 91.67 %
Average score for this quiz during February: 70.6%
Average score since September 18, 2007: 70.6%
22Nov14 Update:
A retake (and it's a different test) I got 31 of 33 right -- 93.94%.
Are you more knowledgeable than the average citizen? The average score for all 2,508 Americans taking the following test was 49%; college educators scored 55%. Can you do better? Questions were drawn from past ISI surveys, as well as other nationally recognized exams.
A Modest Proposal
The thing with Berkeley and the Marine Corps recruiting station has me thinking of a solution...
Any jurisdiction that feels that it cannot morally tolerate the existence of a US armed forces recruiting office may instead be subjected to the draft.
Seems an easy choice to make, either put up with someone you don't like (who's offering to remove other people who you probably won't like either from your fair city) or people you probably do like get sent someplace they don't want to go and perhaps be changed into someone just like that recruiter.
Seems fair to me.
Any jurisdiction that feels that it cannot morally tolerate the existence of a US armed forces recruiting office may instead be subjected to the draft.
Seems an easy choice to make, either put up with someone you don't like (who's offering to remove other people who you probably won't like either from your fair city) or people you probably do like get sent someplace they don't want to go and perhaps be changed into someone just like that recruiter.
Seems fair to me.
20 February 2008
Hero
The word has been cheapened of late, so I am going to link to a story about a real hero.
When soldiers put a zoomie up for the Silver Star, he probably deserves a Medal of Honor.
Here's the story. Repeated below.
When soldiers put a zoomie up for the Silver Star, he probably deserves a Medal of Honor.
Here's the story. Repeated below.
19 February 2008
A Note To Jhadis
When US troops back up out of rifle range and start staring intently at you, many holding cameras, there's something huge and explosive on its way.
I suggest prayer.
I suggest prayer.
16 February 2008
Iowa Bill HF2092
It's shall issue conceal carry for Iowans! All you Iowa people should get to calling you state congress critters and get them on this! There are still some warts, but all bills do.
Then, if it passes, get on their asses to get reciprocity with Florida so I can carry when I visit the in-laws.
Then, if it passes, get on their asses to get reciprocity with Florida so I can carry when I visit the in-laws.
15 February 2008
Repeated In Its Entirety
Taken from here: http://www.aspentimes.com/article/2008198091324
In election 2008, don’t forget Angry White Man
There is a great amount of interest in this year’s presidential elections, as everybody seems to recognize that our next president has to be a lot better than George Bush. The Democrats are riding high with two groundbreaking candidates — a woman and an African-American — while the conservative Republicans are in a quandary about their party’s nod to a quasi-liberal maverick, John McCain.
Each candidate is carefully pandering to a smorgasbord of special-interest groups, ranging from gay, lesbian and transgender people to children of illegal immigrants to working mothers to evangelical Christians.
There is one group no one has recognized, and it is the group that will decide the election: the Angry White Man. The Angry White Man comes from all economic backgrounds, from dirt-poor to filthy rich. He represents all geographic areas in America, from urban sophisticate to rural redneck, deep South to mountain West, left Coast to Eastern Seaboard.
His common traits are that he isn’t looking for anything from anyone — just the promise to be able to make his own way on a level playing field. In many cases, he is an independent businessman and employs several people. He pays more than his share of taxes and works hard.
The victimhood syndrome buzzwords — “disenfranchised,” “marginalized” and “voiceless” — don’t resonate with him. “Press ‘one’ for English” is a curse-word to him. He’s used to picking up the tab, whether it’s the company Christmas party, three sets of braces, three college educations or a beautiful wedding.
He believes the Constitution is to be interpreted literally, not as a “living document” open to the whims and vagaries of a panel of judges who have never worked an honest day in their lives.
The Angry White Man owns firearms, and he’s willing to pick up a gun to defend his home and his country. He is willing to lay down his life to defend the freedom and safety of others, and the thought of killing someone who needs killing really doesn’t bother him.
The Angry White Man is not a metrosexual, a homosexual or a victim. Nobody like him drowned in Hurricane Katrina — he got his people together and got the hell out, then went back in to rescue those too helpless and stupid to help themselves, often as a police officer, a National Guard soldier or a volunteer firefighter.
His last name and religion don’t matter. His background might be Italian, English, Polish, German, Slavic, Irish, or Russian, and he might have Cherokee, Mexican, or Puerto Rican mixed in, but he considers himself a white American.
He’s a man’s man, the kind of guy who likes to play poker, watch football, hunt white-tailed deer, call turkeys, play golf, spend a few bucks at a strip club once in a blue moon, change his own oil and build things. He coaches baseball, soccer and football teams and doesn’t ask for a penny. He’s the kind of guy who can put an addition on his house with a couple of friends, drill an oil well, weld a new bumper for his truck, design a factory and publish books. He can fill a train with 100,000 tons of coal and get it to the power plant on time so that you keep the lights on and never know what it took to flip that light switch.
Women either love him or hate him, but they know he’s a man, not a dishrag. If they’re looking for someone to walk all over, they’ve got the wrong guy. He stands up straight, opens doors for women and says “Yes, sir” and “No, ma’am.”
He might be a Republican and he might be a Democrat; he might be a Libertarian or a Green. He knows that his wife is more emotional than rational, and he guides the family in a rational manner.
He’s not a racist, but he is annoyed and disappointed when people of certain backgrounds exhibit behavior that typifies the worst stereotypes of their race. He’s willing to give everybody a fair chance if they work hard, play by the rules and learn English.
Most important, the Angry White Man is pissed off. When his job site becomes flooded with illegal workers who don’t pay taxes and his wages drop like a stone, he gets righteously angry. When his job gets shipped overseas, and he has to speak to some incomprehensible idiot in India for tech support, he simmers. When Al Sharpton comes on TV, leading some rally for reparations for slavery or some such nonsense, he bites his tongue and he remembers. When a child gets charged with carrying a concealed weapon for mistakenly bringing a penknife to school, he takes note of who the local idiots are in education and law enforcement.
He also votes, and the Angry White Man loathes Hillary Clinton. Her voice reminds him of a shovel scraping a rock. He recoils at the mere sight of her on television. Her very image disgusts him, and he cannot fathom why anyone would want her as their leader. It’s not that she is a woman. It’s that she is who she is. It’s the liberal victim groups she panders to, the “poor me” attitude that she represents, her inability to give a straight answer to an honest question, his tax dollars that she wants to give to people who refuse to do anything for themselves.
There are many millions of Angry White Men. Four million Angry White Men are members of the National Rifle Association, and all of them will vote against Hillary Clinton, just as the great majority of them voted for George Bush.
He hopes that she will be the Democratic nominee for president in 2008, and he will make sure that she gets beaten like a drum.
In election 2008, don’t forget Angry White Man
Gary Hubbell
February 9, 2008
February 9, 2008
There is a great amount of interest in this year’s presidential elections, as everybody seems to recognize that our next president has to be a lot better than George Bush. The Democrats are riding high with two groundbreaking candidates — a woman and an African-American — while the conservative Republicans are in a quandary about their party’s nod to a quasi-liberal maverick, John McCain.
Each candidate is carefully pandering to a smorgasbord of special-interest groups, ranging from gay, lesbian and transgender people to children of illegal immigrants to working mothers to evangelical Christians.
There is one group no one has recognized, and it is the group that will decide the election: the Angry White Man. The Angry White Man comes from all economic backgrounds, from dirt-poor to filthy rich. He represents all geographic areas in America, from urban sophisticate to rural redneck, deep South to mountain West, left Coast to Eastern Seaboard.
His common traits are that he isn’t looking for anything from anyone — just the promise to be able to make his own way on a level playing field. In many cases, he is an independent businessman and employs several people. He pays more than his share of taxes and works hard.
The victimhood syndrome buzzwords — “disenfranchised,” “marginalized” and “voiceless” — don’t resonate with him. “Press ‘one’ for English” is a curse-word to him. He’s used to picking up the tab, whether it’s the company Christmas party, three sets of braces, three college educations or a beautiful wedding.
He believes the Constitution is to be interpreted literally, not as a “living document” open to the whims and vagaries of a panel of judges who have never worked an honest day in their lives.
The Angry White Man owns firearms, and he’s willing to pick up a gun to defend his home and his country. He is willing to lay down his life to defend the freedom and safety of others, and the thought of killing someone who needs killing really doesn’t bother him.
The Angry White Man is not a metrosexual, a homosexual or a victim. Nobody like him drowned in Hurricane Katrina — he got his people together and got the hell out, then went back in to rescue those too helpless and stupid to help themselves, often as a police officer, a National Guard soldier or a volunteer firefighter.
His last name and religion don’t matter. His background might be Italian, English, Polish, German, Slavic, Irish, or Russian, and he might have Cherokee, Mexican, or Puerto Rican mixed in, but he considers himself a white American.
He’s a man’s man, the kind of guy who likes to play poker, watch football, hunt white-tailed deer, call turkeys, play golf, spend a few bucks at a strip club once in a blue moon, change his own oil and build things. He coaches baseball, soccer and football teams and doesn’t ask for a penny. He’s the kind of guy who can put an addition on his house with a couple of friends, drill an oil well, weld a new bumper for his truck, design a factory and publish books. He can fill a train with 100,000 tons of coal and get it to the power plant on time so that you keep the lights on and never know what it took to flip that light switch.
Women either love him or hate him, but they know he’s a man, not a dishrag. If they’re looking for someone to walk all over, they’ve got the wrong guy. He stands up straight, opens doors for women and says “Yes, sir” and “No, ma’am.”
He might be a Republican and he might be a Democrat; he might be a Libertarian or a Green. He knows that his wife is more emotional than rational, and he guides the family in a rational manner.
He’s not a racist, but he is annoyed and disappointed when people of certain backgrounds exhibit behavior that typifies the worst stereotypes of their race. He’s willing to give everybody a fair chance if they work hard, play by the rules and learn English.
Most important, the Angry White Man is pissed off. When his job site becomes flooded with illegal workers who don’t pay taxes and his wages drop like a stone, he gets righteously angry. When his job gets shipped overseas, and he has to speak to some incomprehensible idiot in India for tech support, he simmers. When Al Sharpton comes on TV, leading some rally for reparations for slavery or some such nonsense, he bites his tongue and he remembers. When a child gets charged with carrying a concealed weapon for mistakenly bringing a penknife to school, he takes note of who the local idiots are in education and law enforcement.
He also votes, and the Angry White Man loathes Hillary Clinton. Her voice reminds him of a shovel scraping a rock. He recoils at the mere sight of her on television. Her very image disgusts him, and he cannot fathom why anyone would want her as their leader. It’s not that she is a woman. It’s that she is who she is. It’s the liberal victim groups she panders to, the “poor me” attitude that she represents, her inability to give a straight answer to an honest question, his tax dollars that she wants to give to people who refuse to do anything for themselves.
There are many millions of Angry White Men. Four million Angry White Men are members of the National Rifle Association, and all of them will vote against Hillary Clinton, just as the great majority of them voted for George Bush.
He hopes that she will be the Democratic nominee for president in 2008, and he will make sure that she gets beaten like a drum.
In All Seriousness
I am something of a callous bastard. I'm sure you've seen the scene in a hundred movies, the bad guy has the good guy's loved on held hostage; he tells the good guy to drop his weapon or he'll kill the loved one. In the movies, the good guy drops the weapon and then somehow saves the day. Deux ex machina is real in movies.
Here in the real world, that would get the loved one and the hero killed.
That means that I cannot ever surrender my weapons to "save" my loved hostage. That's probably going to mean a dead loved one. Let it be known now, however, if you take my loved ones hostage, you have committed suicide. You might still be moving around and talking, but you are as dead as if you had swallowed Pu239. Your best hope is get to the cops before I get to you, and then hope I die before you get parole.
Good news for the hostage in those scenes. I can, while the bad guy is demanding I drop the gun, put a THIRTY round group in a head sized target at the less than 10 yard range these confrontations seem to occur at. Go ahead an monologue, I'm aiming...
Before someone says it, I do not consider my refusal to drop my weapon as murdering my loved on. I am not the one killing them, the bad guy is. And he is committing suicide by killing my loved one.
Here in the real world, that would get the loved one and the hero killed.
That means that I cannot ever surrender my weapons to "save" my loved hostage. That's probably going to mean a dead loved one. Let it be known now, however, if you take my loved ones hostage, you have committed suicide. You might still be moving around and talking, but you are as dead as if you had swallowed Pu239. Your best hope is get to the cops before I get to you, and then hope I die before you get parole.
Good news for the hostage in those scenes. I can, while the bad guy is demanding I drop the gun, put a THIRTY round group in a head sized target at the less than 10 yard range these confrontations seem to occur at. Go ahead an monologue, I'm aiming...
Before someone says it, I do not consider my refusal to drop my weapon as murdering my loved on. I am not the one killing them, the bad guy is. And he is committing suicide by killing my loved one.
10 February 2008
Analogy
I think this analogy of the presidential race works.
Our choices are between MacDonalds and Burger King (parties). MacDonalds says the Big Mac (McCain) is better than the Whopper (Clinton). While this might be true, I don't want a hamburger at all, I want a hot dog and I can't get one from either place.
The people who really like Big Macs, and or the people who don't mind a hamburger and or the people who don't like hot dogs at all are screaming at me, "Just order the damn burger!" I DON'T WANT A FUCKING BURGER! I want the menu changed and think that hot dogs will sell if only they were offered.
I am also not salved by the cries that Burger King has more not-burger choices under its roof. Um great, but my choice is not burger or chicken sandwich, but burger or burger.
PS: should Hillary not get the nomination then calling Obama "Whopper Junior" still works.
Our choices are between MacDonalds and Burger King (parties). MacDonalds says the Big Mac (McCain) is better than the Whopper (Clinton). While this might be true, I don't want a hamburger at all, I want a hot dog and I can't get one from either place.
The people who really like Big Macs, and or the people who don't mind a hamburger and or the people who don't like hot dogs at all are screaming at me, "Just order the damn burger!" I DON'T WANT A FUCKING BURGER! I want the menu changed and think that hot dogs will sell if only they were offered.
I am also not salved by the cries that Burger King has more not-burger choices under its roof. Um great, but my choice is not burger or chicken sandwich, but burger or burger.
PS: should Hillary not get the nomination then calling Obama "Whopper Junior" still works.
08 February 2008
The Generosity Of House McThag
The IRS is keeping $44k of our money this year. We HA! Thanks Mom!
With the $600 "incentive" that means that my household alone is funding 73 of those refund checks.
You're all welcome!
With the $600 "incentive" that means that my household alone is funding 73 of those refund checks.
You're all welcome!
07 February 2008
Lemme Try To Explain It...
I've been reading at Kim Du Toit, Rachel Lucas and Bill Whittle's pages about how not voting for McCain is stupid. We should vote for him even though we hate him because Hillary is worse.
That may be true. The Democrats are hard core socialists.
However, by voting for the lesser of two evils still gets us evil. And the Republicans are not going to get the message that we don't want RINOs until it costs them something. The only thing that matters to them is winning elections so the only thing we can cost them is that election.
I direct your attention to the Contract With America. LANDSLIDE win for the Republicans on that plank. If only they had actually done something to enact those promises, we likely wouldn't have gotten a second term with Bill Clinton. But the Republicans squandered the win and pandered to the people who hate them no matter what they do.
The Republican party needs to learn that being different from the Democrats is good, and wins elections. They need to learn that being like the Democrats is bad and tells us we might as well vote Democrat. A two party system only works if there are two distinct parties.
I grow more convinced that Bush Jr won not because we thought he'd be a good president, but that Gore and Kerry are such mind-numbingly bad choices. Now it looks like we have nothing but bad choices.
I got politically active when Bill Clinton and the Democratically controlled Congress passed Brady and the Assault Weapons Ban. Like Rachel Lucas, I do not care about gay marriage or abortions. I do care about lower taxes. I do care about guns. I do care about free speech. I do care that climate science has been hijacked by political agenda.
What I think will happen is the Democrat candidate will get elected and we'll get two years of Hell. Then the 2010 mid-terms are going to return the GOP to power in Congress, and this time they will get their acts together and oppose the Democrats and make it known what is going on.
That may be true. The Democrats are hard core socialists.
However, by voting for the lesser of two evils still gets us evil. And the Republicans are not going to get the message that we don't want RINOs until it costs them something. The only thing that matters to them is winning elections so the only thing we can cost them is that election.
I direct your attention to the Contract With America. LANDSLIDE win for the Republicans on that plank. If only they had actually done something to enact those promises, we likely wouldn't have gotten a second term with Bill Clinton. But the Republicans squandered the win and pandered to the people who hate them no matter what they do.
The Republican party needs to learn that being different from the Democrats is good, and wins elections. They need to learn that being like the Democrats is bad and tells us we might as well vote Democrat. A two party system only works if there are two distinct parties.
I grow more convinced that Bush Jr won not because we thought he'd be a good president, but that Gore and Kerry are such mind-numbingly bad choices. Now it looks like we have nothing but bad choices.
I got politically active when Bill Clinton and the Democratically controlled Congress passed Brady and the Assault Weapons Ban. Like Rachel Lucas, I do not care about gay marriage or abortions. I do care about lower taxes. I do care about guns. I do care about free speech. I do care that climate science has been hijacked by political agenda.
What I think will happen is the Democrat candidate will get elected and we'll get two years of Hell. Then the 2010 mid-terms are going to return the GOP to power in Congress, and this time they will get their acts together and oppose the Democrats and make it known what is going on.
05 February 2008
Naming Revisited
My names have a bit too Germanic a flavor to them, my alternate conventions are...
My naming structure:
M1964 = M16 clone.
M1964A1 = M16A1 clone.
M1964A2 = C7 clone.
M1967 = CAR-15 clone.
M1967A1 = Light barrel C8 Clone.
M1967A2 = Light barrel M4 with A2 sights.
M1967A3 = Light barrel M4 flat-top.
M1983 = M16A2 clone.
M1983A1 = M16A4 clone.
M1994 = C8 clone.
M1994A1 = M4 clone.
M1994A2 = M4A1 clone.
I'm going to have a series of suffixes for sub variations, like M1983A1E1 for a free-float version.
Under the new structure, my XM177E3 would become an M1994A2. My rifle would become an M1983. The Lovely Harvey's carbine would become an M1967A1. Marv's would become an M1983A1. FuzzyGeff's would become an M1983A1E1. Bubba's would become an M1964A1.
I am wondering if I should make full-auto M and semi-auto C or make the auto an E sub. Opinions?
Geek Redux
GURPS 4e stats on the guns I made updated based on High Tech 4e.
Guns/TL8 (Rifle)
TL Weapon Damage Acc Range Weight RoF Shots ST Bulk Rcl Cost LC Notes
8 Laconic Arms XM177E3 (5.56x45mm 1:9) 4d+2 pi 4 750/2900 8.1/1 3 30+1(3) 9† -4 2 $729 3
with EOTech 552.A65/1 +0.7 +$459 [1]
8 Laconic Arms VKb.07 (5.56x45mm 1:9) 5d pi 5 800/3500 9.1/1 3 30+1(3) 9† -5 2 $851 3
8 Laconic Arms VKb.83/07 (5.56x45mm 1:9) 5d pi 5 800/3500 9.9/1 3 30+1(3) 9† -5 2 $922 3
with Bushnell Sportsman 4-12x40 Scope +3 +1.1 +$132
8 Laconic Arms VKb.83/07 (5.56x45mm 1:9) 5d pi 5 800/3500 9.1/1 3 30+1(3) 9† -5 2 $953 3
with HurricanE 553 and 3x Magnifier +1 +1.4 +$281 [2]
or with AimPoint 1000 +0.7 +$120 [3]
7 Laconic Arms VKb.64/67 (5.56x45mm 1:12) 5d pi 5 500/3200 7.2/0.7 3 20+1(3) 8† -5 2 $650 3
8 Laconic Arms VKb.67/07 (5.56x45mm 1:9) 4d+2 pi 4 750/2900 7.7/1 3 30+1(3) 9† -4 2 $728 3
Notes:
[1] Reflex sight.
[2] Reflex sight when magnifier is removed; no Acc bonus. Change weight to +1.0 without magnifier.
[3] Collimating sight.
My naming conventions are kinda messed up. The XM177E3 is a "what if" they had kept the designation when they made the M4 carbine. The VKb stands for VolksKarabiner or People's Carbine with the year of design after, major changes get a year after a slash, redesigns get a new year.
My naming structure:
C7 = VKb.84
C8 = VKb.90
CAR-15 = VKb.67
CAR-15 update = VKb.67/07
M16 = VKb.64
M16A1 = VKb.64/67
M16A2 = VKb.83
M16A4 = VKb.83/07
M4 = VKb.94
M4A1 = VKb.94b
My VKb.07 was ordered as a flat-top thus should have been a VKb.83/07, but I intended to put a C7 upper on it, so things were fine. The Lovely Harvey's liking of the C7 changed the upper to an A2, so it should really be a VKb.83 now. The Lovely Harvey's adoption of the C7 upper should change the name of her carbine to VKb.90, but since it's the only example we're not going to worry about it.
Eventually I intend to get the manufacturing license to make guns for sale instead of buying Anvil's lowers and assembling guns for personal use. If I manage to get a license to make full-auto, then the automatics will get an StG designation instead of VKb.
03 February 2008
Voting
Last Tuesday I held my nose and pulled the Romney lever.
In 1988 I voted for Bush Sr because Dukakis really offended me with his tank stunt.
In 1992 I voted for Perot. Sure seemed like a good idea at the time.
In 1996 I voted for Dole. I was sick of Clinton.
In 2000 I voted for Bush Jr, because I was sick of Clinton and Gore was a continuation of that.
In 2004 I voted for Bush again because I Kerry is seriously offensive to me as a veteran.
I will not vote for Hillary because I am sick of Clinton. I will not vote for McCain because he seriously offends me. I think I could survive a Romney or Obama presidency. Not going to vote for any of the four, but I think I can survive two of them.
This time I will not vote for a candidate I don't really like to prevent a candidate I really dislike from getting in. The Republicans have used up all my fear of the Democrats by doing pretty much all of the things they warned me the Democrats would do if elected.
I remember saying at the time that I sort of hoped that Gore would win so they could really ruin the country and we could get the bloody revolution over with sooner.
I know a lot of people who don't live and breathe politics, and they are constantly commenting on how things are "wrong" with our government. These are people who are asking me about what kind of guns (note the plural) they should be getting. I am getting the impression that this is the real majority out there, politically unaware but willing to ignore DC as long as DC left them alone.
Immigration pandering and the stupidity about lightbulbs woke quite a few up. Most of them have noticed that there's hardly a difference in the two party's candidates.
This could be very good for America that they are waking up, but it could also be very dangerous. They have noticed that nobody represents them and they are asking about guns. Didn't this nation start on a similar note?
In 1988 I voted for Bush Sr because Dukakis really offended me with his tank stunt.
In 1992 I voted for Perot. Sure seemed like a good idea at the time.
In 1996 I voted for Dole. I was sick of Clinton.
In 2000 I voted for Bush Jr, because I was sick of Clinton and Gore was a continuation of that.
In 2004 I voted for Bush again because I Kerry is seriously offensive to me as a veteran.
I will not vote for Hillary because I am sick of Clinton. I will not vote for McCain because he seriously offends me. I think I could survive a Romney or Obama presidency. Not going to vote for any of the four, but I think I can survive two of them.
This time I will not vote for a candidate I don't really like to prevent a candidate I really dislike from getting in. The Republicans have used up all my fear of the Democrats by doing pretty much all of the things they warned me the Democrats would do if elected.
I remember saying at the time that I sort of hoped that Gore would win so they could really ruin the country and we could get the bloody revolution over with sooner.
I know a lot of people who don't live and breathe politics, and they are constantly commenting on how things are "wrong" with our government. These are people who are asking me about what kind of guns (note the plural) they should be getting. I am getting the impression that this is the real majority out there, politically unaware but willing to ignore DC as long as DC left them alone.
Immigration pandering and the stupidity about lightbulbs woke quite a few up. Most of them have noticed that there's hardly a difference in the two party's candidates.
This could be very good for America that they are waking up, but it could also be very dangerous. They have noticed that nobody represents them and they are asking about guns. Didn't this nation start on a similar note?