I don't have a mailing list, pop-ups, click bait or advertisements. I do plant a tracking cookie, only related to this site.

This is an Opinion site. Unlike Leftists, I back up my opinions with verified facts and the consistent application of personal morals. I do not do "current events" as I like to wait until facts come out and I have to grok on it until fullness is achieved.

This is a one-man operation that I get to after my day job and family. Currently posting only sporadically due to the time it takes me to make a post vs. the demands on my non-computer life. All comments are approved before posting to prevent spam. Coherent comments of differing opinions are welcome.

Trying to post pertinent articles on Mondays, Economic Left mockings on Thursdays.

Fixing trans sports

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

It is scary amazing what comes out of my brain sometimes…

This started when I got into a discussion with a former acquaintance who went trans. She stated “Trump was a transphobe” and I asked for evidence. I’m willing to look at anything and if she had made her point, I would have altered my support for Trump, and not for the better. She ultimately gave me a video of Trump lamenting the win by Lia Thomas, who is a transwoman and who smoked the race to win. The acquaintance became quite hysterical when I pointed out the fact that he didn’t say anything transphobic, other than making the observation that performance-wise, Lia was just as strong and fast as when she was a man (not supposed to deadname).

But this got me thinking, and finally a coherent thought (I know, I know) popped out of my head on the best way to end this whole argument. Instead of having Men’s sports and Women’s sports, let’s combine them together. Men, women and trans, all in the same place.

Now, hear me out. For every sport, figure out 2-3 physical tests that is a crucial skill to the sport. For anyone who wants to participate, you perform these tests to determine the “Tier” you’d compete in. Someone smarter than me can figure out a better name. These would be set criteria, not adjusted by gender, age, whatever.

You would have 6-10 Tiers or whatever you’d call them. Once placed in a Tier, you would compete at that level, regardless of the male/female/trans mix. After a sanctioned competition, the first and second place winners of that competition would be promoted up to the next Tier. The two lowest players would be demoted to the next lower Tier.

This way we would have players stratified by ability, rather than gender. This way, if a female player could match or beat male players, they should compete against male players.

This would actually solve the issue (that only Conservatives seem to see) where a mediocre male athlete could announce they are transitioning genders and once on the women’s side of things, totally dominate the field. It would solve the issue because if we ignore the persons’ gender status, their physical abilities would determine the level of competition, not which pronouns they use.

One last thing. All records are now team only. No more “fastest female swimmer” or whatever. Each athlete is measured against their prior performances. Hey, no system is perfect.

Write comment (0 Comments)

The Bifurcation Continues

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

Warning: I have an alcohol level in excess of 0.2% Barriers are down, spicy content is ahead. You have been warned.

Bifurcation, as in "the point or area at which something divides into two branches or parts."

Growing up, I was a voracious consumer of Sci-Fi fiction. The Big Three of Asimov, Bradbury, Clark, certainly. E.E "Doc" Smith, Pohl, LeGuin, Crichton, frequently. Series such as I, Robot, Lensman, Venus Equatorial, Foundation, Dragonriders of Pern, you betcha. Not so much once I became an adult, but as a teenager, it was rare to see my full face, as it was usually buried in those books.

I am also an avid player of a miniature wargame known as Battletech. Not going to go into the particulars of the game, because it's not germane to this article. One of the most prolific writers of the lore of the universe for this game is Blaine Lee Pardoe. He is a major contributor to the lore of the Battletech universe (every time you say "fluff" a kitten dies) and is responsible for a large part of the "lore bible" (a book for writers who want to write stories for this universe that details fixed events, major characters and their personalities/habits to provide a consistent world to the reader across multiple authors). As long as there has been lore about Battletech, Blaine (BLP for short) has been there. I personally don't read any fiction anymore, so I know next-to-nothing about BLP.

The other day, BLP spouted off against a poor review about his latest book. All I can figure was he caught BLP just right between what the guy said and where BLP was at the time, and everything in the world BLP was (might be) angry at became focused on this hapless creature, much like a magnifying glass on an ant during a sunny day. BLP took the reviewer to the woodshed and verbally beat him like the proverbial red-headed step-child. It seems the "reviewer" had an issue with which military unit was used in a given situation. In the grand scheme of things, this "issue" was about as important or earth-shaking as a bear shitting in Alaska north of the Artic Circle.

UPDATE: After delving deeper into this issue, I learned that this "reviewer" had been stalking BLP for a long time, and had made physical threats against him. The company attempted to mollify this angry person, which did not apparently succeed. It then progressed to "several people" to complain (sock-puppet accounts are hard to verify) to the company, and as an attempt to make the whole matter go away, simply ended their relationship with BLP. I am not blaming anyone (other than the stalker), however I need to point out that any attempt to mollify screeching banshees like this (the stalker, not BLP) only embolden them. You give an inch, they take a league.

Let me be clear, I am an apologist to nobody. I am only explaining from my perspective and insight non-evident thoughts and feelings about these or other events. My opinion and $7.85 will get you a cup of hot flavored water at a Seattle-Based caffeine dealer.  Was this a good and proper response by BLP? I doubt it. Was it appropriate? In a personal setting, maybe. as a professional, no. Was it cathartic for BLP? I'm sure it was, I can feel the anger dissipation from here. If it had been me, let's just say the only thing that would have been left by this idiot would have been a smear of something like tomato paste. The fallout from this was entirely predictable because it's been replicated ad nauseum too many times in the past few years.

And due to the squealing and whining of less than five people, the owners of the Battletech IP have decided to part ways with BLP. The numerous works of BLP has entertained thousands of young adults and "adult" adults since the 1980's with his writing. Not to mention earning the owners of Battletech bucket loads of money through building that following.

As such, we have the latest example of the bifurcation of the US economy. Half of the country gets pissed off about something that happened (or didn't happen) and have decided to go off on their own. And because many of the largest tech companies are sympathetic to Leftist causes (Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, et.al.), it has taken many brave souls to break out the saw and bifurcate themselves from the Leftist corporations. Thanks to Facebook and Twitter going Woke, we now have platforms such as Locals, Parler, Rumble, ThinkSpot, TrueSocial and so on. We have The Daily Wire getting into producing movies in direct competition of Hollywood. We have news websites such as 1440, Bongino Report, The Daily Wire, Not The Bee, and more trying to provide Conservative (or at least balanced) reporting of the news.

This is the interesting part, and a major difference between Leftists and Conservatives: Leftists get all outraged and angry, march with signs and protest. A couple of months later, the anger dissipates and they tend to go right back to the offender. Conservatives don't "hate" (dislike) quick, but when they do, they "hate" hard. Once they make the change away from a company, it will be a long time, if at all, before the come back. Conservatives vote with their wallet. They don't complain, they don't raise a ruckus, Conservatives just stop buying from whatever Woke Company and they find an alternative and not come back.

A good example is Disney. Here's the stock value history I just grabbed from Business Insider:


Since Going Woke, they have been going Broke. This is a good example why its a bad idea for businesses to involve themselves in social or political issues. Their purpose is to provide a wanted good or service at a price point the desired consumers can afford.

I am terrible at predicting the future. While many Battletech players are heavily into the "gnashing of teeth and rending of clothes" over this issue at the moment, they are basically stuck, as no other game system is as good (IMO). That being said, they will be most likely purchasing less Battletech lore from now on. BLP gets the last laugh. Blane has diversified his writings into several avenues that are all returning money. He will still get royalties from what he has written. The assholes who told him to bug off will still have to cut a check to him every month for a long time to come. No better payback than that. As a sign of support, I just bought his techno-thriller, Blue Dawn. I bought it cold, just to support him. I haven't read a techno-thriller since Clancy. When I get to reading it, I will give you an honest review.


Write comment (0 Comments)

What Uvalde could have been

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

The event last month that put Uvalde, Texas on the map was horrific in more ways than one. While Uvalde will join names like Columbine, Parkland and Sandy Hook, it will stand on its own for what I’m going to discuss, and I sincerely hope the failings there will outlast the terror and heal the pain caused by those events.

I try to be consistent in my moral application of events, and this is no different. I explained this in a previous article, “The Why of the 2nd Amendment Part 1”,

“…what is the extent of their [Broward County Deputies] moral, ethical and human duties to those in the school? Undoubtedly to rush in, singly or as a team, find, engage and stop the shooter, even at the expense of their own lives. Those duties apply to LEO and legally armed citizen alike.”

The fact that the police waited an hour to charge in and engage the shooter is not what I’m wanting to talk about. The officers met their legal obligation and secured the scene to prevent the killer from leaving the scene. The officers failed in their human duty, and that’s still not what I’m talking about.

What I do want to talk about is the legal aftermath. While the police are immune from prosecution for not going into the school to engage the shooter in a timely manner, they may be open to civil and criminal prosecution for preventing private citizens from trying to rescue their children from said shooter. I’m no legal eagle, however I have heard this aspect talked about from a couple different sources. Again, I’m not a lawyer, I don’t play one on TV and I didn’t stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, so I don’t know the validity of such a claim either way. The fact that at least one of those parents is being harassed by the police seems to lend credence to this position: Police Are Harassing Mom Who Pulled Kids From Uvalde School Shooting, Lawyer Says.

What I do know is every officer involved in that debacle, from the chief to the officers on the scene doesn’t deserve to ever wear a badge again, even if it’s from a box of cereal. There must exist a certain level of trust from the citizens toward the police, in order for the police to perform their duties effectively. I see that trust has evaporated for that community.

Now we come to the title of this article. This happened on June 13th, 2022: Police in Texas kill a man who fired his weapon inside a gym hosting a children's summer camp. I’m going to guess this was a “gun-free zone” as no staff returned fire. That being said, the police were on scene in two minutes and ended the threat. There’s really nothing more to say about that, which is why when everything goes right, it’s a short local story that never goes national.

I am not saying “this is how it should be” either. Someone somewhere should pay attention to events like these, investigate into the “why” it happened, then figure out how they might be prevented from happening at all, so these people don’t start rampaging in the first place. The mechanism for that is way above my pay grade however. I’m smart enough to know I don’t know how to go about it, only that it needs to be done.

Write comment (0 Comments)

Knowledge, time, and heart

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

The other day, we were greeted with the terrible news that the Prime Minister of Japan, Shinzo Abe, was assassinated. This shows several glaring truths, which I will discuss in detail with you.

First, knowledge cannot be “un-invented.” Tools, be they screwdrivers, firearms or nuclear weapons, cannot be just “gotten rid of.” The fact that the concept exists, means any reasonably intelligent person can reverse-engineer the actual tool, or something similar. The concept leads to the physical tool.

An example would be the Manhattan Project, which developed the first nuclear devices. It took over $2 Billion ($36 Billion in 2022 dollars), four years and the construction of a couple of cities to make it happen. The greatest physicists alive at the time had to develop the physics and mathematics to understand and control its use. They then had to design and build the machines to process the fissile material, then machine it and so on. Today, someone with a Masters in Physics could lay the theoretical work necessary, and the processing equipment can be procured on the open market. The only hard part is obtaining enough of the proper fissile material that can be refined into “weapons grade.”

So this man, armed only with a basic knowledge of firearms, built a double-barreled black-powder shotgun out of what is available at any hardware store. Pipe, wood, duct tape, charcoal, saltpeter, sulfur, screws/washers (the projectiles) and a device to create an electronic spark to set off the powder. Building a “pipe shotgun” in the US is way easier because we have access to actual shotgun shells.


The second point is evil, as in the intent to hurt other people. This is a horribly mangled quote, I’ll update it when I find it:

“Evil can never be defeated. It is merely driven back, where it changes form and waits to strike again.”

Evil will always be with us. It cannot be legislated, willed away or defeated. It is just as much a part of us as our heart. Evil is just as essential as well. Why you ask? If things were all good all the time, how would you know that’s a “good” thing? It is by the contrast of Evil that we can understand the real beauty of love, happiness, joy and so on.

My third point is about time. Evil acts occur only when it’s the best circumstances for it. Good is almost always caught flat-footed when Evil acts. This is why Good has to conceptualize how Evil can manifest itself, devise how to act against the threat, then train and practice to do just that. Evil can plan and take its’ time until they have everything they need and the conditions are just right, Good must go with what it has then and there.

All this leads to point #2,419 that we cannot create Utopia. We cannot reach that, and it is dangerous to even try.

Write comment (0 Comments)

Abortion alternatives

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

For once, no politics in this post. One of my core moral values is maximum personal freedom and accountability. This is one of those moments where my thoughts and views on a subject come into direct conflict with my morals. I have rewritten this a dozen times because my personal views keep sneaking in and bring my sarcasm with it, and this subject is not a time or place for it.

If you are a sexually active woman of childbearing age who decides that you have had all the children that you want to have (which is a whole number between Zero and ‘Leventy ‘Leven), here is a Google docs spreadsheet sheet of OB/GYN doctors who will perform a “no questions asked” sterilization procedure on you. Many women have related to me that it is nigh-impossible for them to convince their OB/GYN that they are happy with the number of children that have now.

While this is aimed at women, guys, if you like “dipping your wick” in every hole that’s amenable, but you don’t want to pay child support, there’s the Bimek SLV, basically an “on/off” sperm switch. The caveat is, it takes a month or so to “purge the queue” and get the sperm count from full to zero and vice versa.

The context for this is in the recent climate since Roe v. Wade was overturned we now have women who are sexually active and either do not want to use birth control, or they are afraid the birth control they do use might fail, rendering them pregnant with an unwanted child. Since abortion as a post-coital birth-control method has been taken off the table in many parts of the country, sterilization becomes a reasonable choice.

On the subject of abortion, I will always speak for “that clump of cells” that if left alone, will grow into a baby. I fully agree, “my body my choice,” as you must have full autonomy over any cells that have 100% of your genetic DNA. Except that zygote/embryo/fetus only has half of your DNA, so while it might be in your body, it might affect your body, it is not your body.

And if there is no baby, what you do is none of my business.

Write comment (0 Comments)

Trump’s True Legacy

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

June of 2022 has shown the true legacy of Donald Trump. The three Justices he was able to seat on the Supreme Court have drastically altered the legal landscape of this nation. The rulings they sent down on the First and Second Amendments, the limitation of federalism and the bureaucratic state are figurative and almost literal ideological earthquakes.

Kennedy v. Bremerton School District That a man may pray and give thanks to his Creator on his own during a public event, without suffering drastic negative results, was and is a bedrock of the ideals this country was founded upon.

New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen That a right of a citizen to defend themselves and their families in the face of a sudden and violent act be unfettered, be it in methods, tools or places and to loudly proclaim “this is not a second-class right.”

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization That the rights of each of the fifty states exist, that they may set laws as they see fit for their own citizens, without a federal mandate rending them provinces, rather than independent countries.

West Virginia v. EPA That reduces the ability of the Executive Branch to write regulations as they see fit, to fulfill their political agenda based upon indistinct and poorly-written laws passed by the Legislature. The Legislature passes such laws so they are “not responsible” that such laws are interpreted for the benefit of an agenda and not to advance the interests of the people.

All of these decisions, and the philosophical basis used to reach these decisions will have rippling effects on our laws for decades to come.

The evil that men do lives after them, the good is oft interred with their bones. - Shakespeare (Julius Caesar)

I am glad to see the reverse happen for once.

Write comment (0 Comments)

What the government gives, it can take.

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

One of my Markisms is by Barry Goldwater,

"A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away."

In 1973, for the case Roe v. Wade, the SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) in a 7-2 decision found the (small "r") right for women to have an abortion in the Constitution. I, however have not been able to likewise find it. And I've tried several times to find any rights relating to health care, or abortion, or any other Leftist talking points in the Constitution.

Five of those seven Justices were appointed by Republican Presidents, two by Eisenhower (Brennan and Stewart) and three by Nixon (Blackmum, Burger, and Powell).

What this ruling did was take away the authority of the states to set abortion laws within their borders. Up until then, the states set the rules for themselves. Because, you know, the Tenth Amendment, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

You need to remember, a federal government is meant to be a "government for governments." The ordinary citizen was meant to have zero to very little day-to-day interaction with the federal government. If you actually read the Constitution, all eight Articles and at least the Bill of Rights, these described the structure of the federal government and its’ declared powers. If the power isn't in the Constitution, the government does not have the authority to do it. Like the authority to transfer trillions of dollars to individual citizens. The hook they hang their hat on for those is, "promote the general Welfare" is in the mission statement, not a declared power. The federal government is meant to regulate the interactions between states, and protect the country as a whole. Other than limiting the federal governments’ ability to infringe on the individual citizen, we’re not in the Constitution.

Because SCOTUS made up a "right" out of whole cloth, all it took was another SCOTUS (last week's in this case) to state that this "right" does not, in fact, exist. And I blame the Democrats for this. They had 50 years to pass a bill or Constitutional Amendment codifying abortion into law, however they decided not to. Because of that, all it took was a Conservative, Strict Constitutionalist SCOTUS and the right case to undo everything. Which is exactly what happened. I will admit, they made a half-hearted attempt to do that after the draft decision was leaked, which failed spectacularly, since the Democrats have razor-thin margins in both houses and it didn't take a lot of effort on the part of the Republicans to kill it.

And because Leftists don’t think or reason beyond their assigned talking points, there is no true understanding of the particulars of this issue. All this ruling did was return the power and authority on how to regulate abortion to each state. And because Leftists don’t understand, this is what happened: Abortion rights activists continue protests across Los Angeles on Sunday. I hate to tell them this, but the abortion rights in California didn’t change, and if they do change, it will only get better for them, as the California State government no longer has to worry about the federal government interfering.

Now, some states like Mississippi, Texas, and Missouri with very restrictive laws on the books, things will change. If you live in these states, I’m sure California will start offering “abortion holiday packages” soon, where you fly to California, get an abortion, then spend a week or two on vacation before heading home.

Write comment (0 Comments)

About "What is a Woman?"

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

I’ll admit right up front that I have not seen What is a Woman? By Matt Walsh in its entirety. I have seen clips. I’m sure it would be cringey and entertaining at the appropriate parts, however in essence, it’s a MOTS (Man On The Street) documentary. A very classy and dignified MOTS, but still a MOTS.

A MOTS is where the interviewer and crew occupy a street corner and ask people to talk with them on camera, then ask them questions on the subject the interviewer is assigned to cover. In an hour or two they might interview twenty to thirty people. When the video gets edited, there’s one smart person who’s very knowledgeable on the subject, and 3-5 people whose knowledge of the subject is best represented in negative numbers that make the cut to be in the video, thus “proving the point” the interviewer was trying to make from the start.

I am moderately sure that Matt interviewed more people than appeared in his video, and he chose the most extreme examples of the Leftists he interviewed. This is not praise or criticism, it is an observation based on prior personal experience. And if I were commenting on a Leftist who had made a similar documentary, the comments and points I just made would be identical. That’s how Conservatives roll.

Personally, in the current political climate and “gotcha journalism,” agreeing to participate in something that is the polar opposite to your beliefs is always a bad choice. To believe that you will beat them, convince them or otherwise win, well Londo Molari from Babylon 5 said it best:

Now let’s get on with the content itself.

Matt, in each interview that I saw, metaphorically dropped a coil of rope between himself and the interviewee, then instructed the person on how to fashion a hangman’s noose, suspend it from the ceiling and hang themselves. Matt didn’t have to coerce, threaten or anything. These Leftists literally hung themselves by their own words, not only willingly, but gleefully. The look in the eyes of these people, going from smug, to confused, to the “awshit” moment when they realize what kind of situation they were in, then fear, and finally a transition to total panic is priceless.

Here’s my main point about Leftists in this video and Leftists in general. They hear a “sound good” idea (as opposed to a “good, sound” idea) and not only agree, believe and proselytize it, they accept it into themselves like it’s an additional vital organ that they can’t live without. These talking points become an integral part of themselves, and to admit the idea is factually wrong, counterproductive, and destructive to their psyche and so on, is to deny themselves. Which is why when forced to see and admit to irrefutable evidence where they are patently, factually and totally wrong, they have a mental (and sometimes physical) grand-mal-like seizure.

The fact that it must be this way with zero variance is another hallmark of Leftists. An action or event assigned to Trump generates a split-flinging apoplectic tantrum, yet the same exact story with “Biden” instead of “Trump” doesn’t even elicit a “so what” response. Their reaction is based on the name or the party, not the act itself.

It also makes perfect sense that when a person has incorporated such blatantly stupid ideas into themselves, any challenge to these beliefs can only be seen as an existential threat against themselves, which warrants the visceral hatred and physically aggressive responses we have come to expect.

This has also brought me to the realization that Leftists are children, emotionally speaking. They latch onto the idea of their choice, much like a six-year-old believes in Santa. And has pretty much the same temper-tantrum reaction as that child who runs to the tree on Christmas morning, only to find no presents and Mom and Dad telling them Santa is not real.

Leftists have nothing outside themselves to measure against. What feels good, right and proper at this moment is accepted as fact, without the foresight that will not necessarily be so in a week or a month.

What I am looking for now is a method to deprogram the knee-jerk reaction and restart an unbiased thought process in my Left-leaning friends and acquaintances. This is a good start.

Write comment (0 Comments)

How it could have happened, Vindicated

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

Part one is here.

After finding this video, I consider myself as dead on in my assessment. This gentleman took the county election results, ran a hidden program and altered all of the votes in the county. Without setting off any alarms, without anyone noticing. The only way to discover this change would be to go to every polling location's master tabulation and recount the votes.


Just like I said:

So, if you wanted to hack a machine, which would it be? How about the one that combines all of the precincts?

You were saying?

Write comment (0 Comments)

Changing hearts

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

I get a lot of “windshield time” in my job, which means I usually drive 1-2 hours between calls. It is during this time I think. For most of my articles here, their first draft is in a speech-to-text app on my phone.

One of the thoughts I mulled over in one of my many 100+ mile trips, was, “What would I do to straighten everything out in this country,” kind of like the 4th book Executive of the Piers Anthony series “Bio of a Space Tyrant.”

I got pretty deep into it, like the abolishment of the 17th Amendment, elimination of most of the bureaucracy, permanently banning all current members of the House and Senate from serving in public office, Freezing the federal budget, etc.

And then I stopped cold.

I have repeatedly said, “The only way to end mass shootings is to change the heart of people doing them.” Well, it hit me, cutting the cancer out of a patient only buys time if you don’t get the whole thing. It will regrow and present the same threat, or even worse.

The problem you see is US, you and I. We did it. We let things slide, content in our lives. The cultural turn was imperceptible at first, very slight. Because no one of any importance raised the alarm, the course change became greater, and the rate we were turning increased. Which leads us to where we are today.

As V in the Movie V for Vendetta said,

“…And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn’t there?
Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those who are more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror.”

No one man, even with the total and enthusiastic power of our federal government, can change the hearts or the minds of the half of this country who have surrendered most of their cognitive abilities to the group. To inexorably tie their ego and identity to ideals that sound good at first glance, but evaporate like the morning dew under any examination, let alone intense scrutiny. And because these people have incorporated these ideals so deeply into their psyche, to deny what they have been told is the truth is like denying their own existence. Not gonna happen.

This is why Trump failed. This is why anybody in that position would fail. He held that mirror up to their faces and the shame and realization was so great they couldn’t gaze into their own eyes and admit it. So anyone who couldn't face themselves, attacked the one trying to help them.

No governmental power can change a person’s mind or heart. No government should have that kind of power in the first place. And even if they did, it would take just as long to get things right as it took to get here. Pray whoever has the helm then doesn’t oversteer and we go off the deep end in the other direction.

I know I don’t have all of the answers. Hell, I don’t even have most of the questions. I do know this: each of us must at least try to wake (not “woke”) these people up, one at a time.

If we fail, we don’t lose just the United States. We will lose America, which is the ideal that all men are free by default.

Write comment (0 Comments)

Stop mass shootings

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

With the recent events in Buffalo, NY and Uvalde, TX, we have people on both side of the gun-control issue lining up for their moment in front of the microphone to shout their outrage and cry for their solution to be enacted. And, like the true politicians they are, it’s a “vote for me and I’ll fix this” kind of thing, but it never does get fixed, they just get reelected.

I will say this plainly, NO GOVERNMENT CAN FIX THIS. There is evil in this world and all each of us can do is be ready to meet it head on when it surfaces. No law can stop evil, it can only punish the actor after the fact. We are the only ones who can stop evil. We do something about it when we see it.

For you IDIOTS who think "If we take away the guns, this won't happen," I have two words (since I don't mention the killers' names), "Oklahoma City."

Here’s my suggestions.

1. Deny the shooter their fame. I understand a mass killing is news. I am saying don’t show their picture, don’t say their name. Don’t interview their mother or family member about how they were “a good, sweet kid.” The president says nothing at all or names the victims.

2. End gun free zones. All they do is become magnets for events like this. Every active shooter rampage is stopped when they meet resistance. Either the police/armed citizen shoots them right then and there, or cause the shooter to retreat and end their own life. Allow parents with CCWs “known to the school staff” on campus. Allow staff who have a CCW to also carry on campus.

3. Harden soft targets. These will slow or stop the shooter, giving time for the staff and police to react and counter the shooter, trading speed for time. Make “airlocks” for schools. You get buzzed through one door, then after you’re in there, a second door must be buzzed to get you all the way in, or back out. Keep classroom doors closed and locked while occupied. No child has died in a school shooting if they were on the other side of a locked door from the shooter. We have kids practice fire drills, we need to have them practice active shooter drills.

4. Bring back the nuclear family. That means a mother and father in the home. Kids with adult males in their lives as positive role models, especially the biological dad, do way better in every measurable aspect of their lives than those without dads.

5. Return morals to kids’ lives. In church, in school, I don’t care. Instill the last six of the Ten Commandments into them. Honor your elders, don’t lie, don’t steal, don’t murder and the rest. Give them guard rails when they’re young. Think the gutter bumpers we use at a bowling alley for young kids that are put away when they’re older.

No one thing will fix this. Well, changing the heart of the shooter so they don't want to kill innocents is the one thing that will end all shootings, however we haven't figured out how to so that yet. Until then, we need to do the five things above.

Write comment (0 Comments)

Why Policy Wonks shouldn't run things

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

A “Policy Wonk” is a government official/consultant who is “very knowledgeable” on a single subject. I refuse to use the term “expert” because that title is usually-self-declared.

Before I get into this, I need to clarify the difference between "Authority" and "Responsibility," which the Navy pounded into me every day. Authority can be delegated, responsibility cannot. The Captain of a ship can delegate the authority to helm the ship as the Officer of the Deck to an Ensign. It is the job of the captain  to make sure the Ensign has the knowledge, skills, wisdom and judgement to safely steer the ship and stay within the rules of navigation and the Captain's general orders. If the Ensign runs the ship aground (or into another ship, etc.), the Captain pays the price for the act. The Ensign will get yelled at by the Captain, but will not get yelled at by the Admirals. Back to the subject at hand.

I am reminded of an episode of The West Wing, where President Bartlett was facing the looming probability of a recession. He spends the episode talking with a multitude of his policy wonks on how to avoid this recession. Their answers were unanimous, “The last guy you talked to is an idiot. His ‘solution’ will cause long-term problems here, here and here, making things worse. What I suggest is you hammer hard on the one aspect of the economy I am an expert on and that will fix the problem." President Bartlett, as all good leaders do, said, “Maybe the answer is not to hit one part hard, but to hit all of them gently and at the same time.”

Trump screwed up big time when he let a single medical policy wonk dictate economic policy. I can see the furrowed brows from here. Making people stay home and not go to work when a new infectious disease we "know nothing about" *cough*BULLSHIT*cough* might be a reasonable medical policy, but it carries grave economic consequences that Fauci does not have the training or knowledge to consider fully. That being said, there's the "superpower" called "common sense" that should have entered into Fauci's calculations. Obviously Fauci lacks that superpower. And because any economists Trump may have consulted deferred to Fauci, rather than provide Trump the context and ramifications on a possible course of action. Or, it is possible Trump ignored the economists or never even consulted them.

MAKING POLICY AND DECISIONS IS WHAT POLITICIANS ARE SUPPOSED TO DO. THAT'S THEIR JOB. Politicians are elected to office because a majority of the people believe this person to be the best candidate out of those provided to make good and proper decisions in a timely manner. While the politician should consult with a multitude of advisors before making any decision, the decision must ultimately be made by the politician.

The job of the wonk is to advise, then follow the directives of the politician, for good or bad. To tell a single wonk “Take care of this as you see fit” is the worst decision the politician can make. Because the wonk, pounding on one thing, will make so many other things go bad, and the politician gets all the blame when things go sideways.

Write comment (0 Comments)

Another small r right

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

Again, the Economic Left parrots Leftist idiocy, without any consideration or cognitive effort. California Mayor Fights For A “Right To Housing” Ordinance To House Every Single Resident. The story that he references (but has broken links to) is here, This Northern California mayor wants to give everyone a right to housing.

This is a wonderful example of the difference between Rights and rights. A Right (big R) exists without the presence of government. A right (small R) requires government to enact it, usually by compelling a third party to provide the service the government is paying for. And it's rather magnanimous of him to "give everyone a right to housing," isn't it?

As someone who has worked with (and been) homeless, I have a little personal authority to speak on this subject. First of all, people lose their stable place to sleep for a thousand specific reasons. The general categories that they fall into are these:

  • Economic no fault of their own (job loss, catastrophic injury, etc.)
  • Economic by their own fault (substance abuse)
  • Mental health issues (debilitated to the point they cannot take care of themselves and have no family support)

Living on the streets is very hard. You have to learn skills that will keep you alive that don't translate well in "normal" society. You have to constantly hustle to get what you need for the day, be it cash, in line at the soup kitchen, or to the shelter for a bed to sleep in.

I used to work for a wonderful woman who's job and personal mission was to house the homeless. She worked to get funding to build apartment complexes, ranging from a 10 studio apartment building to a 25 family unit complex. She worked with HUD to get the funding, local contractors to build them, HUD some more to get them set up as "Section 8" housing, where you paid 25% of your income as rent. She also got them furnished. She then worked with the local mental health agencies to screen clients to become residents. The complex office was also a therapists' office, where these people could get the emotional support and resources they needed.

And what did these people do with these apartments? Mostly, they kept off the streets. Some would relapse into substance abuse and would have to vacate, some stayed there a while before moving on to bigger and better things, Most would stay there until something forced a change. One guy I knew, it took over six months for him to sleep in the bed in his apartment. Those first few months, until the "you are safe now" light came in in his head, he slept on the floor, curled up in the corner of the room, with all of his possessions stuffed into the corner behind him, because that's how you slept on the street to protect yourself and to keep your stuff from getting stolen.

And what government giveth, government can taketh away. Programs like this are never more than one spending cut away from disappearing. You know, that "running out of other peoples' money" thing. So you depend on the largesse of government, being subtly (and not so subtly) reminded of, "you're here because we want you here, and you couldn't have gotten here or stay here without our help."

Government builds apartments to be sturdy and low maintenance. Esthetics are not a significant consideration during design. One of my best friends ended up in one of these complexes. It was dank, dark and crowded. His apartment was a 200 square-foot studio. The elevators were not functional a good portion of the time, and his apartment was not comfortable to live in due to a lack of air conditioning during the summer when it's 90+ outside. The heat was on full blast all the time during the colder months and no thermostat to even slow it down. His neighbors were barely functional drug users, and/or had serious mental issues. Roaches and bedbugs were also prevalent. Given a choice between living in an apartment like his or the street, that would be a really hard decision to make.

The last point, people by and large do not appreciate what is given to them, especially if they don't have to worry about maintenance or repairs. Invariably, the more you give, the more they want. It never ends well.

Write comment (0 Comments)

Killing Butterflies Part 2

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

I've had some time to think on this, plus the recent developments in Florida to expand on my thoughts of Killing Butterflies in the wake of the push of school officials to “help” children transgender, let me offer this:

“Grooming” is one of those words where you need to apply context in order to determine if the act has positive or negative aspects. You can be groomed for a political office, groomed to be promoted in your job, or groomed to be abused. Grooming is more than training or teaching. I can train you how to do something, say some kind of management position. Or I can groom you for that position, which means extra work for me to make sure the person being groomed knows exactly what to do (and not to do), along with specific knowledge or skills.

Now let’s put it to the test. Remember when you were 6 years old. You had no experience, no moral compass, and every day you learned something new. You were a sponge, absorbing everything the authority figures in your life (parents, family, teachers, etc.) told you. You absorbed it without too much cogent consideration (remember, you’re still six years away from your pre-frontal cortex really beginning to develop) and took it at face value. “An adult said it, it must be true.”

Every day held new challenges. As you grew, you always felt unbalanced, too small or too big, constantly unsure about everything in your life, especially who you are.

I do oversimplify, and there are always exceptions to the rule here. That being said, trusting good adults is how children grow up and mature into adults who do good things.

Now let me introduce our groomer. The groomer has an agenda, or a personal belief held so deeply no amount of facts will shake their belief.

When a person decides to go on a quest to “help transgender children,” that quest will never end. They will look until they find one (or more) and sometimes what appears to be a borderline case is “close enough.” The appropriateness of this quest will never be questioned, for (as C.S. Lewis put it) "[F]or they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

Children and young adults as part of their nature question and try almost everything. Why else would a two-year-olds’ third word (after momma and da-da) is “NO!”? Because they try everything without any concept of it will hurt them or not. We, as the adults have to guide them properly.

When a groomer exploits a child’s questioning about themselves, the unsureness they have about who they are, this is when the groomer swoops in to steer the child to what the groomer wants.

I remember an episode of Diff’rent Strokes (Season 5, “The Bicycle Man” in two parts) where they showed exactly how a child molester works.

The methods for a child molester and a “transgender advocate” are exactly the same. Get the kid interested in something, get them to trust you. Then slowly push the kid further and further in the direction you want them to go until they get there.

When I put it like that, the concept is terrifying, is it not?

Write comment (0 Comments)

Something we agree on

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

I’m not here to incessantly roast Economic Left, just on the crap they get massively wrong. And like a blind pig, sometimes the get something right. Hey, it happens. Man Explains To Boss How No Raise For 2 Years = Low Effort On His Part.

First of all, there is a pay range for any job. That pay range is determined by how much revenue a person can generate at that job. That revenue caps how much that person can be paid. If a worker generates $8/hour in revenue, it makes no sense to pay him $10/hour, does it?

Next, this is not the Pre-80s, where a worker can expect to spend 25+ years of their life working for a single company. The bad news about today is, if you want a pay raise, the most efficient way to go about it is to improve your skillset and jump to another company that pays more.

Another thing is to consider is the Pareto Principle (also known as the “80/20” rule), which says “80% of your businesses’ output comes from 20% of your workforce." This means out of ten employees in a shop, two of them are producing 80% of the output.

The Great Resignation has been brought on by employers who fail to recognize and properly compensate that 20%. If the guy in the article really was the top performer, then the boss made a terrible mistake in not bumping up his pay. That can manifest itself by just him getting a raise, or maybe the boss letting the bottom guy go and the top performer gets the pay the boss was paying the other worker.

So, yeah, if employers want to keep the workers responsible for the most output, they should do what is needed or be prepared to lose that revenue. Employers in this "NOW HIRING!" signs everywhere environment no longer have the leverage in employee negotiations.

Write comment (0 Comments)

Memes to Consider

Warning: stristr(): Empty needle in /home/haveneri/public_html/libraries/src/Document/HtmlDocument.php on line 315


Contact Me

Give me an earful. I may not respond, but I read everything.

Markisms To Live By

A good novel tells us the truth about its hero; but a bad novel tells us the truth about its author. - G. K. Chesterton