Saturday, October 31, 2015
Trick or Treat: Bernie and Hillary?
I had a couple of what I thought were kids dressed as Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton walk up to my door for Trick or Treat.
Long story short: They are actually an 80 something year old couple in my neighborhood looking for their lost dog.
It was dark.
I've been drinking.
Long story short: They are actually an 80 something year old couple in my neighborhood looking for their lost dog.
It was dark.
I've been drinking.
RadioActivity: War Of The Worlds (Oct 30, 1938)
The War of the Worlds was an episode of the American radio drama anthology series Mercury Theatre on the Air. It was performed as a Halloween episode of the series on October 30, 1938 and aired over the Columbia Broadcasting System radio network. Directed and narrated by Orson Welles, the episode was an adaptation of H. G. Wells' novel The War of the Worlds.
The first two thirds of the 60-minute broadcast were presented as a series of simulated "news bulletins", which suggested to many listeners that an actual alien invasion by Martians was currently in progress. Compounding the issue was the fact that the Mercury Theatre on the Air was a 'sustaining show' (it ran without commercial breaks), thus adding to the program's quality of realism. Although there were sensationalist accounts in the press about a supposed panic in response to the broadcast, the precise extent of listener response has been debated. In the days following the adaptation, however, there was widespread outrage. The program's news-bulletin format was decried as cruelly deceptive by some newspapers and public figures, leading to an outcry against the perpetrators of the broadcast, but the episode secured Orson Welles' fame.
The first two thirds of the 60-minute broadcast were presented as a series of simulated "news bulletins", which suggested to many listeners that an actual alien invasion by Martians was currently in progress. Compounding the issue was the fact that the Mercury Theatre on the Air was a 'sustaining show' (it ran without commercial breaks), thus adding to the program's quality of realism. Although there were sensationalist accounts in the press about a supposed panic in response to the broadcast, the precise extent of listener response has been debated. In the days following the adaptation, however, there was widespread outrage. The program's news-bulletin format was decried as cruelly deceptive by some newspapers and public figures, leading to an outcry against the perpetrators of the broadcast, but the episode secured Orson Welles' fame.
Friday, October 30, 2015
Republican Candidates Unite
by J.R. Holmsted
The dust has finally started to settle from the calamity
that was the 3rd Republican Debate on CNBC Wednesday. Some
conclusions are obvious. The moderators were ludicrously biased and even many
other in mainstream media admitted so. We know Reince Priebus, RNC chair, is
seething and has pulled future NBC debates. (Maybe.) We know the
candidates aren’t holding anything back in their criticism after the fact. Everybody's mad, mad, mad.
So what else can we take away from this debacle?
In the last 2 elections, Republican candidates have been
baited into attacking each other, defending against ridiculous accusations, and
sucking up to a media that will never have any love for them. The beginning of this
debate seemed to be heading in the same tired direction when Donald Trump was
asked if he was running a “comic book version” of a presidential campaign. Gov.
John Kasich was asked to attack Trump and Dr. Ben Carson. Gov. Jeb Bush went
after Sen. Marco Rubio, who took the high road and said he wasn’t going to engage
in such personal assaults. Carson was accused of not being able to do math.
Then suddenly something magical happened. Sen. Ted Cruz
stood up. In an epic lashing, he took the moderators and the mainstream media
to task. Rubio followed his lead. Trump, Christie, and Huckabee weren’t far
behind. Shortly the entirety of the large Republican field stood on the main
stage and took back the control. They formed a united front and refused to be
bullied into backing down.
It was truly awesome to behold. I found myself out of my
chair and fist pumping before I could help myself. They finally did what so many of us have been furiously shouting, blogging, and tweeting. Hell, I was ready to take to skywriting. Finally. Finally. FINALLY.
Calling out the media and the atrociously snarky, biased
CNBC moderators specifically, undeniably impressed the debate audience. It
seems the effect was just as great on those watching on TV. The pointed assault
launched on the moderators by Cruz registered with the highest favorability ever
in Frank Luntz’s 15 years of focus groups.
Yet one question begs to be answered. Though his debate
performance was well-received, will the candidates’ solidarity hurt Trump?
He has been outspoken in fighting political correctness, but also giving the
proverbial middle finger to the media. It has been a major part of his appeal.
Now that most, if not all, candidates have hopped on board that ship, will it prove
to slow his popularity? Time will tell.
Is there any political principle the GOP won't cave on?
By Rob Janicki
John Boehner's parting "gift" was to once again cave in on another GOP principle. Apparently Boehner did not even try to maintain at least some modicum of fiscal responsibility in the budget process. Instead, Boehner said he was "clearing the deck" for Paul Ryan's ascension to the position of Speaker of the House.
Boehner went on to indicate that going along with Obama's wishes simply kept government working into March of 2017, thus allowing Paul Ryan some flexibility to work on other issues. My question is simple. What issue is more important than keeping the Obama administration from further outrageous spending?
By agreeing to signing off on a Continuing Resolution, which raises spending limits with gimmicks of questionable outcomes, the Republicans are giving Obama a blank check worth hundreds of billions of dollars in spending, if not even more, thus exploding the federal debt to even further astronomical levels.
Like him or not, Senator Rand Paul is trying to warn America about all the pitfalls of this Boehner "deal with the devil" before it's too late. Senator Paul is conducting a Senate filibuster on the Continuing Resolution to give more time to publicize all the glaring pitfalls of signing off on the CR.
Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell, however, will attempt to end Senator Paul's filibuster with a cloture vote. McConnell is experienced in caving in to get along with the Obama administration.
It will take 60 senate votes to invoke cloture and shutdown the filibuster. If Senator Paul can round up 41 Senate votes, the filibuster will continue and America may well find out just how far GOP leadership is willing to go to sell out Republican principles of fiscal responsibility.
If the GOP leadership caves in on this consequential fiscal issue, is there anything that they won't cave on? I'm beginning to think not and that is sad. When your own political party surrenders to the enemy for no other obvious reason than to make life easier for the GOP leadership, it's easy to understand why conservative voters are willing to look to a despot like Donald Trump to save them from their own party leadership.
God save our republic if GOP leadership caves in once again and shuts down the filibuster to let America know just how bad this budget deal really is.
Karma In Action: Hoodie-Wearing Black Guy Armed With A Glock Gets Pulled Over...
 |
| Steven Hildreth, Jr. |
Arizona author and veteran Steven Hildreth, Jr., pretty much knew why a Tucson Police Department cruiser turned around and started following him. One of his headlights was out.
"The lights go on and I pull over," Hildreth wrote on his Facebook page Tuesday (10/27/2015) regarding the encounter.
“The officer asks me how I’m doing, and then asks if I have any weapons.” Hildreth replied, “Yes, sir. I’m a concealed carry permit holder and my weapon is located on my right hip. My wallet is in my back-right pocket.”
The officer explained that for his safety, he needs to disarm Hildreth for the stop. Hildreth said he understood, unlocked the car, and told the officer what type of holster he was wearing (7TS ALS).
The 2nd officer couldn't reach the holster, so the lead officer asked Hildreth to step out of the vehicle. Hildreth stepped out of the car, slowly, and one of the officers takes the Glock from the holster, complimenting the X3000U tactical flashlight attached to it. He also noticed Hildreth's military ID, and Hildreth told him he's with the National Guard.
The lead officer then pointed out that his registration card is out of date, and went back to the cruiser to check Hildreth's license. At this point, Hildreth writes in his Facebook post, "I know he’s got me on at least two infractions. I’m thinking of how to pay them." ("Maintenance of Lamps" and "Failure to Present Documents" (which includes expired documents), AFAIK.)
But as it turned out, he had nothing to worry about The officers gave Hildreth back his Glock, “locked and cleared” in an evidence container, and let him go with a warning to get his headlight fixed as soon as possible.
No "police brutality", nobody got thrown to the ground, not even a ticket.
Why? “Because you were cool with us and didn’t give us grief,” Hildreth recalled police telling him. “I smile. ‘Thank you, sir,’” he added.
Hildreth's Facebook post concludes:
“I’m a black man wearing a hoodie and strapped,”
“According to certain social movements, I shouldn’t be alive right now because the police are allegedly out to kill minorities.”“Maybe…just maybe…that notion is bunk. Maybe if you treat police officers with respect, they will do the same to you.
Police officers are people, too. By far and large, most are good people and they’re not out to get you. I’d like to thank those two officers and TPD in general for another professional contact. We talk so much about the bad apples who shouldn’t be wearing a badge.
I’d like to spread the word about an example of men who earned their badges and exemplify what that badge stands for.
#BlueLivesMatter
#AllLivesMatter" Here's a screencap of Hildreth's post:
As of Thursday (10/29/2015) night, Hildreth’s Facebook post received over 440K likes, over 42K comments and over 238K shares.
I'm sure having a military ID helped, and I'm really sure Arizona cops are a bit more professional than the ones in a certain East Coast state that shall remain unnamed, but there are certain things to do and not to do, during a traffic stop, that could mean the difference between a verbal warning or a ticket - or worse.
Keeping in mind that cops are people too, and being concerned for their safety as well as being clear about your intentions and actions, can go a long way.
There's a whole list of "do's and dont's" for traffic stops, but, that's a topic for another post.
Thursday, October 29, 2015
Encouraging Words from @SpeakerRyan - Let's See if Actions Back His Rhetoric
by Kim D.
"To me the House of Representatives represents what's best of America, the boundless opportunity to do good. But let's be frank; the House is broken. We are not solving problems; we're adding to them. And I'm not interested in laying blame. We are not settling scores; we are wiping the slate clean." ~ Speaker Paul RyanEver since Rep. Paul Ryan lost his bid for the White House alongside Mitt Romney, he has long been the presumed and groomed replacement for Speaker John Boehner. Now that he has been coronated, he has the chance to set the tone for a new era for Republican leadership in Washington.
"America does not feel strong anymore because the working people of America do not feel strong anymore . . . They do not sit in this House; they do not have fancy titles but they are the people who make this country work, and this House should work for them." ~ Speaker Paul RyanWe too often complain that the people we send to Washington are not listening to "we" the people. But, as Ryan has just proven, they have heard us. The sad truth is that they have deliberately chosen not to do as we have asked. I joined Twitter after the Republicans had won the House and not much had changed. So, I along with millions of other frustrated Americans fought for and gave the GOP what they asked for - the Senate majority. The result - nothing has changed.
"They're working harder than ever before to get ahead and yet they're falling further behind. They feel robbed. They feel cheated of their birthright. They're not asking for any favors; they just want a fair chance, and they're losing faith that they'll ever get it. Then they look at Washington and all they see is chaos . . . How reassuring it would be if we would actually fixed the tax code, put patients in charge of their healthcare, grew our economy, strengthened our military, lifted people out of poverty, and paid down our debt. . . . No more favors for the few; opportunity for all. That is our motto." ~ Speaker Paul RyanWith this, Ryan has checked almost every box for the conservative right, and, rightly, these comments received a standing ovation from his colleagues. But, sitting at home and listening on the radio, skeptical Americans are wondering are these more empty promises? Now that the House has new leadership, will anything productive get done?
Politicians talk about tax reform, but do nothing. https://t.co/Z7TSI1epCJ
https://t.co/JeViiwCUTb
— Carly Fiorina (@CarlyFiorina) October 29, 2015
The way I see it, put a fork in Jeb Bush, because he is done.
By Rob Janicki
The only thing worse than Jeb Bush's performance in the Republican debate was the disgraceful partisanship exhibited by the CNBC's moderators. The entire thrust of virtually each and every question from the moderators was to start an MMA cage match among the Republican candidates. CNBC's reputation, such that it was previously, managed to find its way closer to total cable TV obscurity.
Back to Jeb for the moment, since it will only take a moment to describe his fall into political oblivion. Not once, but twice, Jeb tried to attack Marco Rubio. Not once, but twice, Rubio skewered and then eviscerated Jeb for his effort to smear and denigrate Marco. Jeb demonstrated a pettiness and petulance that surely will turn off his campaign financiers. Face it, Jeb is a policy wonk and when he tries to come across as some rough and tough political tiger, he comes across as plain silly, if not weak, in trying to be someone he's not.
Moving on, in my opinion Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz sparkled, despite the idiotic CNBC moderators and their shameful performance. Rubio and Cruz took it to CNBC and the MSM as the Democrat's largest PAC, much to the delight of the audience. Rubio has always demonstrated an equanimity in all the debates as has Ted Cruz. who actually began to assert himself and his political policy positions. I think Rubio helped himself with his performance which was again, solid. I think Cruz actually did a little better, but then again, Cruz had more to prove in the debate, since his polling numbers have not been anything to brag about up to now.
Actually, Chris Christie came across very well for the time he had and most certainly helped himself for the future of his campaign. Much the same can be said of Mike Huckabee, but Huckabee seems to be "old school" with a limited appeal to evangelical voters. The problem for Christie and Huckabee is that they are so far behind in the polling that they have to reach up just to touch bottom in the polling.
On to Dr. Carson. Dr. Carson did not seem to help himself a lot in the debate, but he didn't particularly hurt himself either. I expect that Dr. Carson will do well in comparison to Donald Trump, who, with each debate, reveals more of his lack of understanding of the political issues of the day and simply has no substance to back up his outrageous attacks on everyone, Republican and Democrat alike.
Mr. Trump has always been long on telling people what he would do, while failing miserably in telling anyone how he will effectuate the changes he envisions in such rhetorical flourishes as he throws out on a daily basis.
Essentially, Trump's appeal is to those who feel disenfranchised, and rightly so, but are oblivious to the political realities of what can or can't be done by someone like Donald Trump. We call these people low information voters who operate on a visceral and emotional level, rather than substantive facts that correspond to a consistent political philosophy.
Carly Fiorina had a very good debate, but the problem is that Republicans don't seem to be ready for a woman as their presidential nominee, unlike liberal progressives, who salivate at the prospect of Hillary wining the Democratic nomination and facing off against whomever the Republicans nominate to face her.
In conclusion, we come to the angry John Kasich and Rand Paul. Kasich has sound political credentials, which are broad and have proven to be successful at the federal level and, most recently as governor of Ohio, demonstrating a genuine turn around in the state's fortunes in streamlining state government. Kasich still comes across as angry.
Finally, we have Rand Paul, resident Libertarian leaning conservative. Paul comes up short for most Republicans on those issues dear to the hearts of Libertarians, which seem to be isolationism in foreign policy and unlimited individual freedom, especially in regard to drugs. I would be surprised to see Rand Paul around beyond the first two primaries next February.
Wednesday, October 28, 2015
Hillary is Coocoo for Coconuts
Is the Free Beacon trying to get into the Halloween spirit or do they just really enjoy creeping us out? You be the judge.
Tales from a Munich Hospital #MuslimRefugees
by Kim D.
Germany has opened its borders to Muslim refugees and received tons of problems as thanks for its humanitarian help effort. Rarely reported, due to restrictions on the press, German hospitals have been overrun by Muslims bringing diseases that doctors simply were not prepared to treat. To add insult to injury, the situation is further complicated by the fact that these refugees believe treatment and medications should be free and that receiving said treatment from female doctors is unacceptable.
Below is a letter (transcript provided by The Right Scoop) from a Czech doctor working in a German hospital. Her story is quite amazing and disgusting.
Germany has opened its borders to Muslim refugees and received tons of problems as thanks for its humanitarian help effort. Rarely reported, due to restrictions on the press, German hospitals have been overrun by Muslims bringing diseases that doctors simply were not prepared to treat. To add insult to injury, the situation is further complicated by the fact that these refugees believe treatment and medications should be free and that receiving said treatment from female doctors is unacceptable.
Below is a letter (transcript provided by The Right Scoop) from a Czech doctor working in a German hospital. Her story is quite amazing and disgusting.
Texas Student Either Denies God Is Real or Fails
by Kim D
What would you do if faced with the choice of denying God exists or standing up for beliefs and taking a failing grade? One seventh grader in Katy, TX has been forced to deal with such a situation and recently shared her experience at a school board meeting. The controversy began with a reading assignment which appears to have been used by the teacher to try and indoctrinate students with atheist beliefs.
What would you do if faced with the choice of denying God exists or standing up for beliefs and taking a failing grade? One seventh grader in Katy, TX has been forced to deal with such a situation and recently shared her experience at a school board meeting. The controversy began with a reading assignment which appears to have been used by the teacher to try and indoctrinate students with atheist beliefs.
Will Paul Ryan make matters worse for House conservatives?
By Rob Janicki
Contrary to Ryan's well scrubbed middle west boy next door looks, lurks a politician as cagy as they come. Why do you think it has taken Ryan so long to decide whether to actually run for the Speakership of the House? Ryan is not what he may appear to be, despite the fact that he's from the Wisconsin dairyland. He is not a consistent conservative and that is obvious from his voting record in recent years.
It's being reported that Ryan wants to make lobbyist David Hoppe his chief of staff, should he be elected Speaker of the House. Granted that Ryan's choice is a personal friend and also from Wisconsin, Ryan's home state, but the optics of having a lobbyist as chief of staff should be a warning to all.
Hoppe is affiliated with the Bipartisan Policy Center, which is reported to lean left. The BPC is funded by a cadre of wealthy left wingers, including the president and co-founder of the Bipartisan Policy Center. Regardless, it's not a conservative think tank and may well account for at least some of Ryan's crossover political policy initiatives in recent years.
The point to be made is that Ryan is not all that his public persona may appear to be and that will be revealed very early in his Speakership. By that time, however, it will be too late and that's when an explosion of nuclear proportions could easily occur. Such a conflagration in the current presidential election cycle could be catastrophic to Republican hopes to capturing the White House in January 2017.
Remember when Congressional Republican leadership said they needed to have majorities in both house to do anything? Then it conveniently became a matter of having super majorities in both houses. Now the Republican mantra is that they must also concurrently hold the presidency to do anything. Where will this procrastination and obfuscation end with Republicans and their leadership actually doing something that is consistent with their much heralded conservative political principles?
Perhaps Republicans actually do deserve a Donald Trump to bring them down from their lofty elitist positions. Unfortunately, America's political system, as we have known it in the past, would crash and not likely survive such a lesson that Republican leadership needs and so richly deserves.
“Thrust Per Squeeze”, Gun-Free Zones, And Other Assorted Idiocy
By Anton Kaplenko (@akaplenko on Twitter)
The phenomenon of clueless people spouting uninformed opinions on every possible topic is a common occurrence in today's society, especially on social media.
One of the worst offenders its the #gunsense crowd - check out that hashtag on Twitter any day of the week, and you'll see an incredible variety of uninformed opinions, wild conjectures, outright lies, and emotional exclamations unsubstantiated by the slightest shade of fact.
There's no shortage of gun-control advocates who ignore every historical precedent and consequence, as well as basic logic, and use spurious statistics to drum up support for "even more laws", without regard to the enforcement problems of existing ones.
Sometimes, the lunacy reaches incredible proportions and people start flat-out inventing things that don't exist, such as Piers Morgan's infamous ".233-caliber bullets" and "AR-15 magazine clips". (Morgan was put in his place by the inimitable Dana Loesch (@Dloesch on Twitter), but not before his shrill defence of these "ideas" enshrined them as permanent memes, that people still joke about, years later).
A little lesson in weapons engineering: A clip, or "stripper clip", is a device that holds ammunition for purposes of organization and faster reloading. It's removed after loading the ammo, and is not part of the weapon while firing. Speed-loaders fall into the same category: you use the device to shove ammo into the gun, then remove the device.
A magazine is a spring-loaded (or, rarely, gravity-fed) container that is an integral part of the weapon while firing.
With the exception of the M1 Garand (1936-1957), whose loading mechanism allowed for the clip to be left in the weapon while firing, and thus could be considered a clip and a magazine - 1 design out of millions - there's no such thing as a "magazine clip". Certainly not for the modern AR-15!
Magazine clips don't exist in the modern world... unless you're referring to these:
Piers Morgan's level of idiocy is a tough act to follow.
So, let's have a round of applause for this precious snowflake on Twitter, who somehow managed to beat it:
Putting aside the arrogance of declaring what's "necessary" and "unnecessary", counter to the opinion of the millions of lawful firearms owners and the accumulated technical knowledge of firearms manufacturers... let's delve into the factual errors of this pile of drivel.
Now, on Earth, the purpose of a barrel shroud is to dissipate heat, and prevent the user from getting burned if the barrel is accidentally touched. The secondary benefit of a shroud is to keep the barrel from warping due to repeated heating & cooling cycles. It's a safety device, if anything.
In whatever universe Ms. Snowflake occupies, a barrel shroud gains additional capabilities far beyond anything that human firearms engineers have imagined.
Not only does it convert a manual or semi-automatic weapon into an automatic one - a feat that ordinarily requires modifying the sear, trigger mechanism, and/or receiver (and risking 10 years in federal prison, BTW - hello, Firearms Acts of 1968 and 1986), but it also increases the velocity of the bullet!
Usually, in order to increase thrust/velocity, you'd have to pack more propellant into the cartridge, make the propellant more efficient, and/or increase chamber pressure. How a perforated metal tube wrapped around a barrel could accomplish any of those, is a little unclear. But laws of physics are for suckers, right?
Not content with demonstrating a complete lack of understanding, Ms. Snowflake also invented the term "Thrust Per Squeeze", which is sure to send gunsmiths into a collective "What The Actual F**k?" head-scratching tizzy.
Thanks to a lack of physics and/or engineering education, we now have a generation of people without a basic understanding of how some tools work... but thanks to a culture of entitlement, these same people skip right over the question of "do I even have the slightest clue what the hell I'm talking about?" and go right into "I'm completely uninformed, but lemme tell you why my opinion trumps your Constitutional rights". (And as a bonus, imply that all shooters are 'killers', regardless of their actual intent. Nice attitude.)
These are also the same people who ignore basic gun-safety rules such as
"unless you can clearly see the chamber, or there's a chamber flag, treat every weapon as loaded",
"do not put your finger on the trigger unless you're intending to shoot",
"do not trust safety switches", and
"never, EVER, point a weapon at anyone or anything unless you're intending to shoot them",
and proceed to spout nonsense about guns while doing this:
Yes, we have Senators making laws regarding devices that they are demonstrably uninformed about. But, what else is new? After the "Internet is a series of tubes" statement, I'm done being surprised at Congressional Cluelessness(TM).
...Meanwhile, back when people were actually taught gun safety and proper firearms handling, we didn't have this level of paranoia, rabid fear of anything that resembles a gun (including Pop-Tarts), and utterly ridiculous "inventions" like magic barrel shrouds.
That's a High School Rifle Club, circa 1974. Yes, there were guns in schools. Yes, kids were taught how to properly handle them. No, there weren't mass shootings back then. Certainly, there single-shooter/single-victim incidents, but those were overwhelmingly due to revenge or racism. It was only in the late 80's that random shooters, unprompted by personal vengeance, and with multiple victims, started cropping up.
In response to mass shootings, the "We Must Do Something!" crowd came up with the brilliant idea of "Gun-Free Zones", because as we're all aware, the only thing that stops a mentally unbalanced person who's already decided to commit multiple acts of murder, is a poster. The genius thinking apparently went along the lines of "the maniac will see a sign, turn around, go home, and re-evaluate his life choices. Ta-daaa!" ...and we can see how well that turned out in Aurora and Newtown.
Brian Cates (@drawandstrike on Twitter) wrote an excellent exposure of the reasons behind "Gun-Free School Zones", and why they simply don't work. It's in the form of a Twitter rant, but thankfully, there's Storify to assemble the pieces into an easy-to-read stream: https://storify.com/akaplenko/brian-cates-epic-exposure-of-gun-free-zones(There's an F-bomb in every other Tweet, and some of them are a little out of order, but it's a good read nonetheless).
Until basic education regarding guns, their principles of operation, and most importantly, their safe handling, is available again, and until our lawmakers stop proposing terrible ideas that do absolutely nothing to reduce crime while massively infringing on the Constitutional rights of law-abiding Americans, mass shootings will continue. So will gun violence in Chicago, Baltimore, Los Angeles, and other gang-infested major cities.
I'm not holding my breath, though.
***
The phenomenon of clueless people spouting uninformed opinions on every possible topic is a common occurrence in today's society, especially on social media.
One of the worst offenders its the #gunsense crowd - check out that hashtag on Twitter any day of the week, and you'll see an incredible variety of uninformed opinions, wild conjectures, outright lies, and emotional exclamations unsubstantiated by the slightest shade of fact.
There's no shortage of gun-control advocates who ignore every historical precedent and consequence, as well as basic logic, and use spurious statistics to drum up support for "even more laws", without regard to the enforcement problems of existing ones.
Sometimes, the lunacy reaches incredible proportions and people start flat-out inventing things that don't exist, such as Piers Morgan's infamous ".233-caliber bullets" and "AR-15 magazine clips". (Morgan was put in his place by the inimitable Dana Loesch (@Dloesch on Twitter), but not before his shrill defence of these "ideas" enshrined them as permanent memes, that people still joke about, years later).
A little lesson in weapons engineering: A clip, or "stripper clip", is a device that holds ammunition for purposes of organization and faster reloading. It's removed after loading the ammo, and is not part of the weapon while firing. Speed-loaders fall into the same category: you use the device to shove ammo into the gun, then remove the device.
A magazine is a spring-loaded (or, rarely, gravity-fed) container that is an integral part of the weapon while firing.
With the exception of the M1 Garand (1936-1957), whose loading mechanism allowed for the clip to be left in the weapon while firing, and thus could be considered a clip and a magazine - 1 design out of millions - there's no such thing as a "magazine clip". Certainly not for the modern AR-15!
Magazine clips don't exist in the modern world... unless you're referring to these:
Piers Morgan's level of idiocy is a tough act to follow.
So, let's have a round of applause for this precious snowflake on Twitter, who somehow managed to beat it:
Putting aside the arrogance of declaring what's "necessary" and "unnecessary", counter to the opinion of the millions of lawful firearms owners and the accumulated technical knowledge of firearms manufacturers... let's delve into the factual errors of this pile of drivel.
Now, on Earth, the purpose of a barrel shroud is to dissipate heat, and prevent the user from getting burned if the barrel is accidentally touched. The secondary benefit of a shroud is to keep the barrel from warping due to repeated heating & cooling cycles. It's a safety device, if anything.
In whatever universe Ms. Snowflake occupies, a barrel shroud gains additional capabilities far beyond anything that human firearms engineers have imagined.
Not only does it convert a manual or semi-automatic weapon into an automatic one - a feat that ordinarily requires modifying the sear, trigger mechanism, and/or receiver (and risking 10 years in federal prison, BTW - hello, Firearms Acts of 1968 and 1986), but it also increases the velocity of the bullet!
Usually, in order to increase thrust/velocity, you'd have to pack more propellant into the cartridge, make the propellant more efficient, and/or increase chamber pressure. How a perforated metal tube wrapped around a barrel could accomplish any of those, is a little unclear. But laws of physics are for suckers, right?
Not content with demonstrating a complete lack of understanding, Ms. Snowflake also invented the term "Thrust Per Squeeze", which is sure to send gunsmiths into a collective "What The Actual F**k?" head-scratching tizzy.
Thanks to a lack of physics and/or engineering education, we now have a generation of people without a basic understanding of how some tools work... but thanks to a culture of entitlement, these same people skip right over the question of "do I even have the slightest clue what the hell I'm talking about?" and go right into "I'm completely uninformed, but lemme tell you why my opinion trumps your Constitutional rights". (And as a bonus, imply that all shooters are 'killers', regardless of their actual intent. Nice attitude.)
These are also the same people who ignore basic gun-safety rules such as
"unless you can clearly see the chamber, or there's a chamber flag, treat every weapon as loaded",
"do not put your finger on the trigger unless you're intending to shoot",
"do not trust safety switches", and
"never, EVER, point a weapon at anyone or anything unless you're intending to shoot them",
and proceed to spout nonsense about guns while doing this:
Yes, we have Senators making laws regarding devices that they are demonstrably uninformed about. But, what else is new? After the "Internet is a series of tubes" statement, I'm done being surprised at Congressional Cluelessness(TM).
...Meanwhile, back when people were actually taught gun safety and proper firearms handling, we didn't have this level of paranoia, rabid fear of anything that resembles a gun (including Pop-Tarts), and utterly ridiculous "inventions" like magic barrel shrouds.
That's a High School Rifle Club, circa 1974. Yes, there were guns in schools. Yes, kids were taught how to properly handle them. No, there weren't mass shootings back then. Certainly, there single-shooter/single-victim incidents, but those were overwhelmingly due to revenge or racism. It was only in the late 80's that random shooters, unprompted by personal vengeance, and with multiple victims, started cropping up.
In response to mass shootings, the "We Must Do Something!" crowd came up with the brilliant idea of "Gun-Free Zones", because as we're all aware, the only thing that stops a mentally unbalanced person who's already decided to commit multiple acts of murder, is a poster. The genius thinking apparently went along the lines of "the maniac will see a sign, turn around, go home, and re-evaluate his life choices. Ta-daaa!" ...and we can see how well that turned out in Aurora and Newtown.
Brian Cates (@drawandstrike on Twitter) wrote an excellent exposure of the reasons behind "Gun-Free School Zones", and why they simply don't work. It's in the form of a Twitter rant, but thankfully, there's Storify to assemble the pieces into an easy-to-read stream: https://storify.com/akaplenko/brian-cates-epic-exposure-of-gun-free-zones(There's an F-bomb in every other Tweet, and some of them are a little out of order, but it's a good read nonetheless).
Until basic education regarding guns, their principles of operation, and most importantly, their safe handling, is available again, and until our lawmakers stop proposing terrible ideas that do absolutely nothing to reduce crime while massively infringing on the Constitutional rights of law-abiding Americans, mass shootings will continue. So will gun violence in Chicago, Baltimore, Los Angeles, and other gang-infested major cities.
I'm not holding my breath, though.
***
- "Magazine Clips" image credit: http://ohmyfreakingoodness.com/tag/modern-magazine-rack/
- "1974 Rifle Club" image credit: http://www.arlingtoncardinal.com/2013/12/reflections-on-the-dumbing-down-of-america-high-school-in-1957-and-high-school-in-2013/
- School shootings data: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States
Tuesday, October 27, 2015
Campaigning Against the NRA
by J.R. Holmsted
Democratic front runner, Hillary Clinton, has taken to
frequently attacking the National Rifle Association on the campaign trail. She’s
called for gun owners to hold them accountable (for what we aren’t sure), and
form a new group to “take back the Second Amendment from these extremists.”
With admitted socialist Bernie Sanders in the race, Clinton
has few opportunities to tap into his ultra-progressive base. However, his
record on guns is more moderate than many of his supporters, leaving an obvious
void in his otherwise solidly liberal agenda. Clinton is certainly trying to
capitalize by cuddling up to the far left and gun control groups.
Will this work? Can she campaign against the NRA and win?
While making an adversary of the NRA may help her in the short term versus Bernie, were
she to win the nomination this would likely work against her in the general
election. A recent Gallup poll shows that 58% of Americans have a favorable
view of the NRA.
FIFTY EIGHT PERCENT.
Very few politicians enjoy favorability ratings that high.
In fact, as National Review pointed out today, that number is
significantly higher than both Hillary Clinton’s and Barack Obama’s.
Dear @HillaryClinton -- @NRA is waaaay more popular w/ Americans than you are. Full graph: https://t.co/jCoHcILWr1 pic.twitter.com/XoqagJj7tD
— National Review (@NRO) October 27, 2015
So while calling the NRA your enemy may get some whistles and cheers at a Democratic debate, Clinton should take caution declaring war on such a powerful organization carrying the approval of nearly 3/5 of the nation.
Don't Start Nuffin, Won't Be Nuffin #AssaultAtSpringValleyHigh
by Kim D.
In 1818, Londoners began reading Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus by an anonymous author who would eventually reveal herself as Mary Shelley on the second published edition. At the heart of the story is Victor Frankenstein, who is obsessed with understanding the secret of life. Armed (and warped) by a wealth of knowledge, Dr. Frankenstein fashions a creature out of body parts which he brings to life. His success horrifies him and he is further traumatized when the monster kills his brother (revenge toward his creator) and subsequently haunts the doctor's every waking moment.
A modern day translation of Frankenstein might include the monster vehemently spewing at the good doctor, "Don't start nuffin, won't be nuffin." This is the state in which we find ourselves in this country. We have created monsters with hardly any values and basically no moral accountability, and we are left to wonder why our culture has been so perverted.
The drivers of American culture knew the secret to an excellent life and regulated what they saw was a deterrent and promoted what they thought would be liberating. The Millennials and Generation Z have run with it (how could they escape it), and with the lack of solid, moral guidance in the home, they are miserable and angry. We are guilty of creating Frankenstein's monster and then look to scapegoat those who have to deal with cleaning up our mess.
Thus brings us to the latest case of #BlackLivesMatter outrage and police demonization with the assault at Spring Valley High:
We can all sympathize with the student even though she was creating a classroom disturbance. If she had been taught to respect her teacher and classroom rules, this incident wouldn't have happened at all, but, alas, she most likely has been warped by the culture which has promoted and condoned such disruptive behavior.
According to _the.kidd on Instagram, the student had it coming:
Excuse the spelling and grammar issues - evidently Common Core hasn't kicked in yet at this school. But, the point is rather clear - this student was given multiple chances to comply with classroom rules. When she refused, the police were called in to remove her. When she didn't willingly leave, she was forced to. She started it and the police ended it in rather an unpleasant way.
In 1818, Londoners began reading Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus by an anonymous author who would eventually reveal herself as Mary Shelley on the second published edition. At the heart of the story is Victor Frankenstein, who is obsessed with understanding the secret of life. Armed (and warped) by a wealth of knowledge, Dr. Frankenstein fashions a creature out of body parts which he brings to life. His success horrifies him and he is further traumatized when the monster kills his brother (revenge toward his creator) and subsequently haunts the doctor's every waking moment.A modern day translation of Frankenstein might include the monster vehemently spewing at the good doctor, "Don't start nuffin, won't be nuffin." This is the state in which we find ourselves in this country. We have created monsters with hardly any values and basically no moral accountability, and we are left to wonder why our culture has been so perverted.
The drivers of American culture knew the secret to an excellent life and regulated what they saw was a deterrent and promoted what they thought would be liberating. The Millennials and Generation Z have run with it (how could they escape it), and with the lack of solid, moral guidance in the home, they are miserable and angry. We are guilty of creating Frankenstein's monster and then look to scapegoat those who have to deal with cleaning up our mess.
Thus brings us to the latest case of #BlackLivesMatter outrage and police demonization with the assault at Spring Valley High:
A South Carolina sheriff’s deputy is under investigation after videos were posted online Monday showing him violently throwing a high school student from her desk in a classroom.
Students who were in the classmate say the girl was asked by the teacher to get off her cell phone, but refused, and then would not leave the class room when asked by an administrator, so police were called. She allegedly refused the deputy’s requests to get up from her desk, and that is when the videos begin.
We can all sympathize with the student even though she was creating a classroom disturbance. If she had been taught to respect her teacher and classroom rules, this incident wouldn't have happened at all, but, alas, she most likely has been warped by the culture which has promoted and condoned such disruptive behavior.
According to _the.kidd on Instagram, the student had it coming:
Excuse the spelling and grammar issues - evidently Common Core hasn't kicked in yet at this school. But, the point is rather clear - this student was given multiple chances to comply with classroom rules. When she refused, the police were called in to remove her. When she didn't willingly leave, she was forced to. She started it and the police ended it in rather an unpleasant way.
Liberals Just Don't Get it - #NoSyrianRefugees
by Kim D.
Governor Greg Abbott recently tweeted this . . .
Proving, yet again, that liberals just don't get it. There is no way, let me repeat no way, to thoroughly screen people coming from a region where ISIS has implicitly stated that its goal is to infiltrate refugees and travel with them to host countries in order to implement more successful terrorist attacks.
Governor Greg Abbott recently tweeted this . . .
BREAKING: Texas will not accept any Syrian refugees & I demand the U.S. act similarly. Security comes first.
https://t.co/uE34eluXYd
— Greg Abbott (@GregAbbott_TX) November 16, 2015
. . . to which a more liberal-minded Tweeter responded with this:
Why Bacon Is Also Good for You
by Kim D.
The World Health Organization [WHO] has caused quite the controversy in regard to pork products and processed meats. According to WHO, these food products cause cancer and the organization has likened eating pork delicacies to smoking cigarettes.
My grandmother ate bacon crumbled up in grits almost every morning of her very long, 96-year life. She was a bitter clinger and fryer of bacon and never suffered for her dietary choice. However, to be fair, she probably didn't have family history with colon cancer. If people do, they need to up the screenings because they have a greater chance of contracting the disease whether they eat bacon or not.
Eating a pound of bacon every day wouldn't be good for anyone but eliminating it completely from the diet seems like a step too far. When it comes to issues like this, I always refer back to the famous words of Ben Franklin who advocated for "moderation in all things." He also declared that "Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." I'm pretty sure Ben would also approve of bacon consumption in moderation.
According to the blog Bacon Is Magic, bacon has had a bad rep for years but, surprisingly, bacon does have nutritional value.
#1 - Bacon has healthy nutrients:
The World Health Organization [WHO] has caused quite the controversy in regard to pork products and processed meats. According to WHO, these food products cause cancer and the organization has likened eating pork delicacies to smoking cigarettes.
@RogerStapp Was that filtered or unfiltered bacon they were smoking? @JBaileysMom
— Ecklebob Chiselfritz (@RotNScoundrel) October 27, 2015
Hmmm . . . that's a good point and so are these:
@NewDay @WHO the sun gives you cancer too. I haven't moved underground and I haven't given up bacon either.
— Ambassador of Bacon (@bacon_guru) October 27, 2015
Everyone who eats bacon will die.
Also, kale.
#EasyChoices
— Church Curmudgeon (@ChrchCurmudgeon) October 27, 2015
My grandmother ate bacon crumbled up in grits almost every morning of her very long, 96-year life. She was a bitter clinger and fryer of bacon and never suffered for her dietary choice. However, to be fair, she probably didn't have family history with colon cancer. If people do, they need to up the screenings because they have a greater chance of contracting the disease whether they eat bacon or not.Eating a pound of bacon every day wouldn't be good for anyone but eliminating it completely from the diet seems like a step too far. When it comes to issues like this, I always refer back to the famous words of Ben Franklin who advocated for "moderation in all things." He also declared that "Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." I'm pretty sure Ben would also approve of bacon consumption in moderation.
According to the blog Bacon Is Magic, bacon has had a bad rep for years but, surprisingly, bacon does have nutritional value.
#1 - Bacon has healthy nutrients:
Bacon contains thiamin, vitamin B12, zinc and selenium, which are all vital nutrients the body does not naturally produce.#2 - Bacon has no trans fats:
Bacon does contain fat, but the amount is exaggerated. A single serving of bacon has less fat than many consumers assume. According to Boss Hog on the website BaconToday.com, bacon has less fat and cholesterol than many popular cuts of beef and chicken.#3 - Bacon is a mood enhancer:
The meat is surprisingly nutritious and good for mental health. Bacon is a natural mood enhancer that helps encourage positive mental states.#4 - Bacon is heart healthy:
A surprising fact is that bacon is healthy for the heart. Bacon contains omega-3 fatty acids, which are the same nutrients found in fish. The healthy benefits of omega fatty acids are the reduced cholesterol and improved overall health in the heart.#5 - Bacon has choline which is good for the brain:
A diet that contains choline on a regular basis will show reduced rates of memory loss over time. It is used in treatment for mental impairments, including Alzheimer’s Disease and similar dementia diseases. Studies have shown that choline improves memory, intelligence testing and reduces the speed of damage to the brain from dementia.So before we go off the deep end and modify all of our recipes to eliminate bacon, let's pause and take a deep breath. Bacon might not be the healthiest food choice, but it certainly isn't the worst, ranking somewhere between butter and soda.
The Republican's election cycle dilemma
By Rob Janicki
The Constitution gives the legislative branch of government the "power of the purse". In other words, Congress has the power to pass legislative spending bills or conversely, the power to reject legislative spending bills, all at their discretion.
Here's the problem for Republicans, who are now in control of both houses of Congress, albeit without veto proof majorities.
Republicans seem more concerned with the political "optics" of withholding certain legislative spending bills, then they are about exercising their constitutional mandate of controlling spending and the direction of government and all its agencies through the "power of the purse".
If Republicans are more concerned with their own political futures then they are in exerting their constitutional mandate, what use are they? Unless congressional Republicans begin to exercise their constitutionally mandated role to to check the Obama administration's often illegal actions by withholding funding for the offending Administration agencies, Republicans will suffer the pain of being turned out by voters.
Republican behavior is directly responsible for the rise of Donald Trump. Trump is hardly exceptional in anything, except making money in real estate. He is obnoxious, lacks civility, speaks at a level just above doggrel language that often lacks substance and has wavered all over the board on political and economic principles from conservative sounding thoughts to liberal principles. Any student of political science will tell you that Trump is not a conservative. That's just the reality of the situation.
But, Trump has hit the one chord, a populist one, that resonates with Americans on the right of the political spectrum. He preaches that old time gospel of America's exceptionalism and greatness and gives Americans hope that it can be returned with him as president.
Republicans don't need Donald Trump to stir up voters to vote for a Republican for president on November 8, 2016. Republicans need to step up to their long held conservatives principles and start living them on a daily basis beginning with doing what the Republican majority in Congress is supposed to do to check an out of control Obama administration and its liberal progressive sycophants in Congress.
Now, whether we see a new direction with Paul Ryan, as the new Speaker of the House, remains to be seen. However, if things don't begin to change in the House, and later in the Senate with Republicans, the Republican Party may as well write its own obituary, as history will record this coming election as a turning point of whether our system of government can and will endure going forward.
Monday, October 26, 2015
Could This Be the Reason GW Doesn't Like #TedCruz
by Kim D.
Raise your hand if you thought it strange that former President George W. Bush would select Senator Ted Cruz to be the first politician he would openly criticize? Not Barack Obama, who has thrown a heap of criticism toward his predecessor. Not Donald Trump, who of late has made it his mission to annihilate Jeb Bush's chance for the Republican nomination. Nope, according to "anonymous" sources, supposedly GW doesn't like Ted Cruz.
Knowing the crucial role Ted Cruz played in Bush's success in the 2008 election, battling the legal issue raised by hanging chads and the Florida recount, it appears strange that the former President would attack Cruz, whose background in constitutional law and familiarity with the Supreme Court were key to proving that when it was all said and done and the votes counted four times, Bush defeated Gore to win the presidency. Perhaps GW is still harboring ill will for the times Cruz bested the Bush administration before the Supreme Court (see Medellin v Texas and District of Columbia v Heller).
Or could it simply be that Cruz is capturing a large chunk of Texas donations and has just secured the backing of the most powerful name in Texas politics? "Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick - a one-time foe of the Texas senator - also will now serve as the Texas chairman of Cruz's presidential campaign."
So while Jeb! is hunkering down with the family to strategize his way forward in the contest to win the Republican nomination, Cruz is capturing the big Texas donors and supporters.
Knowing the crucial role Ted Cruz played in Bush's success in the 2008 election, battling the legal issue raised by hanging chads and the Florida recount, it appears strange that the former President would attack Cruz, whose background in constitutional law and familiarity with the Supreme Court were key to proving that when it was all said and done and the votes counted four times, Bush defeated Gore to win the presidency. Perhaps GW is still harboring ill will for the times Cruz bested the Bush administration before the Supreme Court (see Medellin v Texas and District of Columbia v Heller).
Or could it simply be that Cruz is capturing a large chunk of Texas donations and has just secured the backing of the most powerful name in Texas politics? "Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick - a one-time foe of the Texas senator - also will now serve as the Texas chairman of Cruz's presidential campaign."
So while Jeb! is hunkering down with the family to strategize his way forward in the contest to win the Republican nomination, Cruz is capturing the big Texas donors and supporters.
ISIS Experiments With Condoms...As Bombs!
By J.R. Holmsted
Have some pesky Russians in your airspace? Experiencing a shortage on anti-air craft missiles? Got a bunch of extra condoms from your Costco bulk buy? ISIS has an idea: MAKE CONDOM BOMBS!
Fill with helium, attach explosives, and release away! Sure, you can't control them, but hear a plane, let it go, and hope for the best!
This might be the most bizarre use of condoms the world has seen. I'll even assign points for creativity. Just ignore how obviously unstable these bombs must be to handle, in addition to the extreme ineffectiveness of this technique. But who cares?
Watch the video they purportedly made demonstrating their new explosive technology. You just can't make this stuff up.
Have some pesky Russians in your airspace? Experiencing a shortage on anti-air craft missiles? Got a bunch of extra condoms from your Costco bulk buy? ISIS has an idea: MAKE CONDOM BOMBS!
Fill with helium, attach explosives, and release away! Sure, you can't control them, but hear a plane, let it go, and hope for the best!
This might be the most bizarre use of condoms the world has seen. I'll even assign points for creativity. Just ignore how obviously unstable these bombs must be to handle, in addition to the extreme ineffectiveness of this technique. But who cares?
Watch the video they purportedly made demonstrating their new explosive technology. You just can't make this stuff up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)