I Am Spartacus

I am Spartacus* because for all too long I stayed quiet.  I stayed quiet because baby needed shoes (often literally) and I needed work in a biased field that would blacklist me as soon as they knew my true self.

I allowed my loyalties and beliefs to be assumed from external appearances and origins – I allowed them to believe I must be extreme left because I’m female, of Latin origin, and have somewhat more than a Master’s degree in Modern Languages and Literature. (I would go back for the doctorate, I would, but I’m not willing to stay quiet anymore.)  Those years of festering silence weigh within me, and in the scales of eternal justice I’m afraid I’ll get counted with the enemies of Liberty, because I was quiet, I consented.

I am no longer quiet.

I am Spartacus writ small.  I am Spartacus praying that I never need to stand  physically facing the might of the largest power the world has ever known.  I can tell who would lose. Because of that I am battling in the mind, to avoid the evil hour as long as I can yet. Maybe, if a miracle occurs, to avoid it altogether.

I’m fully aware that even in this battle of the mind the consequences can be death or worse.  I’m fully aware that once you identify as an enemy of the utopia to come – or even if you just fall in a category they don’t like – there are a million ways for death to come: in the dark of night, with a bullet to the back of the head, like the Polish officers in the Katyn forest; in public trials like the people who thought “if only Stalin knew”; in the despair of an engineered famine like the victims of the holomodor.  No, we haven’t got there yet, but there are ways for a living death too: anyone know where Nakoula B. Nakoula is?  And we won’t talk of the unjustified hounding of the lady who runs True the Vote.  There are ways to drive you to darkness and despair, even now.  And if they can get away with it, it will only get worse.

I am Spartacus because they think a hellish mix of Brave New World and 1984 is a consummation devoutly to be hoped for.

I am Spartacus because I have two sons and might have grandchildren.  For the generations uncounted ahead, mine or others, with my blood or not, I am Spartacus so they don’t have to live with a boot stomping on a human face forever.

I am Spartacus because our institutions are being corrupted, our system of checks and balances ignored, and we’re being ruled by Imperial Dictate by a blind man who sees the world through instruments and his instrument is an ideology made of Hegelian dialectic and fury signifying nothing and leading to death.

I am Spartacus because our betters have decided that the national debt no longer needs to be reported and that it will now simply be copy pasted from the total about two weeks ago, forever.  And because they believe this can go on forever.

I am Spartacus because our media are palace eunuchs gazing avidly at the harem of power and stroking their impotent pens in time to the rape of our liberties.

I am Spartacus because Benghazi.

I am Spartacus because our voting system is corrupted beyond belief and the political elites have sewn themselves into a cocoon of fraud, via mail-in-ballots and voter fraud and fight against any attempt to clean the mess even minimally – because they know they’d never win another election again, if the elections were only as corrupt as they are, say, in India.

I am Spartacus because Fast and Furious.

I am Spartacus because a Rodeo Clown CAN laugh at the king.  As can we all.  As SHOULD we all.

I am Spartacus because of a bloodied handprint on the wall of an embassy in Benghazi.  I am Spartacus because four men were abandoned to die, and might have been set up to do so.

I am Spartacus because of 300 and some murdered Mexicans so the precious flowers in DC could prove their false-but-accurate inner truth in the ridiculous, vile plot that was Fast and Furious.

I am Spartacus because you can’t get blood from a stone or money from people who have been hanging on by their fingertips and because you can only run the printing presses so fast.

I am Spartacus because Fast and Furious.

I am Spartacus because political speech should not be punished with audits.

I am Spartacus because while the United States isn’t blameless – which human institution is? – it has nothing to apologize for, and a tour of apology should have been enough for a treason trial.  It gives aid and comfort to the enemy and endangers the Republic.

I am Spartacus because of the UNREAD Obamacare bill, passed by legalistic shennenigans and putting my life in the hands of bureaucrats.

I am Spartacus because the Founding Fathers are turning in their graves so fast that if we put leads in there, we’d solve all our energy problems – forever.

I am Spartacus because Benghazi.

I am Spartacus because summer of recovery 1, and 2, and 3, and 4, and 5… and?

I am Spartacus because at some point you have made enough money – AND THAT’S FOR YOU TO DECIDE, not bureaucrats.  And if you never think you’ve made enough money, that’s your decision.

I am Spartacus because Fast and Furious.

I am Spartacus because I want the government to leave me alone.

I am Spartacus because I DID build that.

I am Spartacus because our schools are horrendous, and now we don’t even have standards — or requirements — to learn American history or culture in the schools.  It’s permitted not to teach them at all.  Or to teach whatever crazy version you please.

I am Spartacus because the Feds have no business in education — none.

I am Spartacus because wise Latina does not qualify you for the most powerful law body in the land – no race, not ethnicity, no characteristic of birth or position SHOULD.  Only hard work and intelligence and devotion to the constitution.

I am Spartacus because Benghazi.

I am Spartacus because I’m tired of everything being “racist” or “sexist” as a means of stopping speech.

I am Spartacus because of insanity over brown bagging it, and women in chain mail bikinis — and these are my middle fingers at all that.

I am Spartacus because there are crimes so great, so heinous, so horrible that they scream to the ages for vengeance and cleansing and their horror cracks the vault of heaven.

I am Spartacus because Fast and Furious.

I am Spartacus because Benghazi.

I am Spartacus because Fast and Furious.

I am Spartacus because Benghazi.

I am Spartacus because Fast and Furious.

I am Spartacus because Benghazi.

To stop the crazy train, to preserve as much as I can of the greatest nation the world has ever known, I Am Spartacus.

To this end I pledge my life, my fortune and my sacred honor.

And no, I don’t think it’s a joke.  This has long since stopped being just a game.

*The Spartacus this refers to is the myth of the brave slave standing against the Roman empire and how everyone claims to be him in the climatic scene.  The original book, as written, was a lance thrust at the US by having Rome as a stand in, and made some sort of paradise out of ancient Germania.  We won’t go into that.  Rome was unspeakably vile, but withal, it was as much more civilized than its neighbors as we are from people who behead seven year olds in honor killings.

UPDATE: Welcome Instapundit readers and thank you Glenn Reynolds for the link!

1,011 thoughts on “I Am Spartacus

  1. Spartacus lost, when the time comes I’m not planning on losing. [Wink]

    1. The weird thing is, he nearly won. He led his army to the northern edge of Italy, right up to the Alps, then turned around and headed south. If they’d have crossed the Alps, they’d have been out of the territory Rome absolutely controlled, into lands that were at best federated with them at that time. They’d have been just a short march from where we believe Spartacus was born (and possibly of some rank)!

      The moral is, when victory is within your grasp, SEIZE IT! Don’t demand a larger victory, or more spoils, or whatever motivated them to head back down south.

      1. Most likely, Spartacus turned away from the Alps because civilization is so seductive–even if he was willing, perhaps his followers were not.

        Like the Iranian captor of the U.S. embassy personnel who asked if they might write him a reference on his application to a U.S. university. Like jihadis and their smart phones. Like ultra-green environmentalists and their North Face coats.

        Civilization is a hard thing to leave, especially when you’re winning.

      1. It’s a good thing we’re the side with the demonstrated tool that copes with plans going awry, namely freedom.

    2. Wow. Sarah A. Hoyt and everyone else here…you are all actual crazy people. There is no there there, folks. Not even just there, but anywhere. There is no there anywhere in the same ZIP code as this here there.

      You must know that, right? Deep inside?

      You must know this is all a frenzy jacked-up by a closed-feed information stream. You know that, right? You have all been talking yourselves into this one for too long. You’ve all been breathing the same putrid air for too long long and now it’s all turned to CO2 and your brains are burning a bit.

      You all get that, right? Down deep? That nothing here in the US is, in any way, this comically bad?

      There is no Spartacus here because none of you are oppressed.

      Now, gays are oppressed. Blacks are still oppressed, or at least the judicial system – and now the voting system too (again) – are stacked way against them. Latinos are routinely discriminated against. And Middle Easterners are looked at with a suspicion and a scorn hot enough to melt the sun.

      Poor people are way oppressed.

      Bankers are not.

      Fat, old, cranky white people (who live in places only accessed by Rush Limbaugh’s media and who cannot find the TV remote, apparently) are also not oppressed.

      Benghazi is not a thing.

      The IRS thing…no one’s political speech was audited. But political speech is not eligible for tax-exempt status. Groups were asked extra questions (which was a bad idea) and then mostly awarded the same tax-exempt status they were ineligible for in the first place.

      And it is well-documented now that it happened to groups from all over the political spectrum.

      You would know this if you changed the tv channel now and again. Or better still, turn off your crazee-radio and read:

      1: NYTimes
      2: Al jazeera English
      3: BBC

      That is all, crazy people. Thank you.

      PS – for the record, I take you all very seriously as most of you are armed to the teeth. Weaponry and (otherwise tragicomic levels of) ignorance are never funny together.


      1. Hey, guys, look! Chewtoy. Al Jazeera in English is a good news source. And the New York Times that covered up holomodor. And the BBC! Wow.
        And what makes him think we don’t listen to those? And investigate their claims. And dismiss them.

        We take you very seriously too, George. There are too many like you who turned in their heritage of freedom for government tit.

        1. Actually, yes. Al Jazeera. I know it has a scary name…at least it sounds scary to you people. And yes, the others, too. You all will disagree because, as I said, you have been breathing in the fumes of each others nitrous for years now. All the way from Birchers to Birthers, you get all your info from a hermetically sealed circuit of crazee-hate.

          You can laugh at me. I know you will. But you are not smarter than me. Some of you, maybe, yes. Inherently. Inevitably. But just believing what you believe, to the exclusion of all real-world evidence to the contrary, in no way makes you smarter. It makes you ignorant. And scary.

          Yes. Scary. the way funny-sounding words like Al Jazeera scare you, you scare the rest of the world.

          You are all very, sadly deluded.

          And armed, so scary.

          1. You sad, pathetic little man. Foreign words scare us? A good half of us or more are multi-lingual. Several of us live or have lived in other countries. A few of us are immigrants or foreign nationals. Having explained that: Vai danar-te, amaldiçoado. Cuspo em tua ignorância, em teu ódio, em teu orgulho, criança mal-criada. Que vivas no mundo que crias, sem nos, filho da perdição.*
            You have no arguments. You engage not, neither do you think. You’ve done nothing but throw ill-aimed rhetorical grenades at a room of people better educated, better mannered, and better informed than yourself. You assert things not in evidence, you make no support of accusations that have been thoroughly refuted. Proof through vigorous assertion is not a valid tactic for debate amongst the educated. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

            *I apologize for the language, but somethings are not to be borne.

          2. George, you silly goose. We don’t find Al Jazeera scary. Nor do we find it credible. You might have noticed that in our responses to your prior comment, such as the observation that Al Jazeera English and Al Jazeera Arabian frequently contradict one another.

            Clearly you’ve been sniffing your own farts too long and now believe them perfume. Your only evidence of our “get[ting] all your info from a hermetically sealed circuit of crazee-hate” is your own prejudiced assumptions. Prejudice which has blinded you to how much you’ve described your own information sources and own “crazee-hate.”.

            BTW, have you been following the Beeb reporting on how it has been a culture abetting pedophilia for nearly half a century? Put Jimmy Savile and BBC in your search engine of choice.

            Before you go too far out on a limb praising the NY Times, look up Walter Duranty. Try also: Herbert L. Matthews, Jayson Blair, Judith Miller or just read this

            Hassan Fattah, New York Times Abu Ghraib photos (2006)
            The New York Times in March 2006 ran a front-page interview by reporter Hassan M. Fattah with Ali Shalal Qaissi, who claimed he was the man hooded and hooked up to wires in the now-infamous Abu Ghraib prison picture. Salon quickly questioned the man’s claim, as did the U.S. military, and the Times soon discovered that the man was not really the person in the picture. Furthermore, the Times had run the actual man’s name in its own pages several years earlier.

            The Times admitted in the correction that it did not do enough to establish the man’s identity. Ironically, days later, the Times retracted the profile of a Hurricane Katrina refugee living in a Bronx hotel and criticizing the government’s handling of the crisis because she, too, was a fraud. She was arrested on fraud charges for allegedly attempting to get federal relief.

          3. No, Al Jazeera is just another so-called network with so-called news reporting that is just as slanted as any other out there. These networks don’t report impartially — none of them do. Funny that most of us get that and you don’t.

            The only reason we are scary to you is that we don’t buy into your crap. You come here and insult first the blog owner and then the regular readers. You don’t try to discuss or debate. You insult. Must make you feel really big to be able to do so behind the anonymity granted by the internet.

            Now, you’ve had your fun. You tried to kick sand in our eyes and pee in our sandbox and we didn’t let you. So go back to whatever corner of cyberspace you came from. You are a troll. Go find someone else to bother because we’re done with you.

          4. A Repeat… must have gotten caught in a grove. If you are really middle age, you’d know what I am saying … if not– well you aren’t

            1. If “grove” is a typo for “groove”, then even I know what you’re talking about, and I’m 34, not even close to middle age. Of course, I know this from my parents’ stories rather than from my own, but still.

              1. You’re thinking of the Bohemian Grove and George Bush era scandal mongering about nude cavorting (that ought increase the Google hits.)

                There’s absolutely nothing, nothing to it.

          5. She said Al Jazeera is a good news source, and it is. Try getting out of your echo chamber.

            She and I are both immigrants.

            She is Hispanic.

            If you assumed only “white people” could hold to certain positions…congratulations, you are a racist.

        2. 我是斯巴达克斯

          Actually, I do kinda like Al Jazeera English as a news source. Also Deutsche Welle and NHK and the French channel I can’t remember the name of right now. But not their English services. I’m limited to al Jazeera English because I’ve only got maybe 5 words or Arabic. But AJA is preferable to, say, MSNBC because there’s not so much insufferable preening.

          As to the rest, well, it’s become a cliche, almost a joke, to ask “What if this were a Republican administration?” but only because the answer is glaringly that the same people who want to say “meh, no story” would be wetting their pants at the fascists. Imagine, if you will, Dick Cheney soliciting “donations” from energy companies to a “nonpartisan nonprofit” run by RNC staffers to lobby for the Keystone project? Or announcing that by executive order it was suspending waiving the law on EPA regulations — for some companies that happen to also be big GOP contributors?

          Remember the fuss when someone on TV called George Bush a monkey? Well, no, of course you don’t — Erin Burnette apologized, it was dropped. Woe betide a rodeo clown who makes fun of Obama though.

          Over many years of watching politics in this country, I’ve learned that maybe the best single predictor of political behavior on the so-called Democrat side is to look at whatever horror they claim the GOP is up to, and figure we’d eventually hear that some Democrat was actually doing it.

          Political dirty tricks? Look up Dick Tuck.

          Corporate cronyism? See who the biggest contributors to the Democrats are — and see how the payoffs roll in later. Like GE. And the Sierra Club.

          Voter suppression and fraud? Google Melowese Richardson. And imagine if Focus on the Family had a 501(c)4 approved and Move On.org couldn’t get one.

          Remember “it’s not illegal if the President does it”?

          The list would go on for a long while if I had the time, but I’ve got columns to write this morning, and you’re not enough of a target to get pay copy from. But look at your litany — which is to say, your “ritual liturgical prayer in which a series of prayers recited by a leader are alternated with responses from the congregation” — of supposed oppressions and you’ll find a long list of assertions. not of reasonable beliefs, but of faith.

          Which fits the pattern: after all, the Democrats are known for regularly objecting to religious people in the Republican Party.

      2. Wow. You’re serious.

        I read at least half of this assuming that you were trying to be funny.

        On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 9:19 PM, According To Hoyt wrote:

        > ** > George commented: “Wow. Sarah A. Hoyt and everyone else here…you are > all actual crazy people. There is no there there, folks. Not even just > there, but anywhere. There is no there anywhere in the same ZIP code as > this here there. You must know that, right? Deep inside?” >

        1. Yes, he’s serious. And Al Jazeera is a creditable news source. In his mind. Though I grant you, they’re often more accurate than the NYT and its layers and layers of fact checkers (rolls eyes.)

          1. Eh, I’ve got a (very much NON-moonbatty) friend who uses Al Jazeera to keep up with news of what’s going on in the Middle East. (I don’t know if he watches AJ English or AJ Arabic — his Arabic is certainly good enough that he could manage the latter.) He says that on the subjects where they don’t have a strong agenda, they’re actually pretty good, and certainly much more informative about the Middle East than, say, CNN. Only when they start reporting about either: a) controversial stuff*, or b) America and/or American foreign policy that their usefulness rating slips into the toilet.

            I haven’t verified this for myself, but he’s a guy who tends to know his stuff AND whose political opinions generally agree pretty well with my own, so I’m inclined to trust him on this one.

            * And while a lot of events connected to the Middle East are controversial, it’s surprising how many AREN’T, according to my friend. Result: Al Jazeera can be a very useful news source if you understand, and correct for, their biases.

          2. “More accurate than the NYT” isn’t much of a compliment. Speaking as someone who had first hand experience in several of their stories and wondered what universe they were in.

      3. Oh dear– I want some of Wayne’s popcorn— here…here is a chew toy. *snort Oh I am dying of laughter oh… oh… oh… BTW I was repairing computers before you were born *crying with laughter tears

        1. No you were not fixing computers before I was born. I’m a good, decent way into middle age. And what does ‘fixing computers’ have to do with anything? You are, clearly, very much one of the people I described in my post. Go read it. Meet yourself.

          1. What does fixing computers have to do with anything, pendejo?

            It means that you are not a special snowflake, with knowledge no one else has. You are simply a drive by troll.

          2. Read it– gave it no credence- will not read it again. You spent much of your time making fun so I just taunted back– also… I am educated, and spent much of my adult life working outside the US, so no– I am not the caricature that you mention. *snort

      4. Benghazi is not a thing.

        I’m just going to play with this one.

        I come to bury Benghazi, not to praise it.

        Four people, including a serving Ambassador, are dead.

        But “Benghazi is not a thing”

        Several flag rank officers were, by coincidence I’m sure, dismissed that very night.

        But “Benghazi is not a thing.”

        For two weeks, Obama claimed that it was a spontaneous demonstration about a Youtube video, that just happened, by sheer coincidence, to occur on September 11th. I know he later claimed otherwise, but we have him on tape making those claims. We have his Ambassador to the UN repeating the claim. We have the claim all up and down his Administration. (Re the “on tape”: I wonder how that third debate would have gone if every time Obama made a statement, Romney could have said “Roll tape” and we’d see video of Obama saying something contradictory.) He lied to the American people about the cause. Then he lied about lying.

        But “Benghazi is not a thing.”

        To date, not one of the survivors of the attack have come forward to tell their story. Not even a “no shit, there I was” on the Tonight show. Nobody’s negotiating a book contract. Nobody’s doing the talk show circuit. The silence is unprecedentedly deafening.

        But “Benghazi is not a thing.”

        Mere months after the event, we are told “Benghazi was a long time ago” and we should forget about it, this from an administration that continues to blame all of it’s failures on a President who hasn’t been in office for five years. “Move along” we are told. “Nothing to see here.”

        But “Benghazi is not a thing.”

        This, we have been told, so this must then be true. Mustn’t it?

          1. I suppose I could make my allusion a little more close:

            “But George says Benghazi is not a thing, and George is an honorable man.”

            But, another forum would probably call that “hitting.”

              1. Advantages of having an interest in literature.

                Sometimes I think all the coolest speeches have already been written and the best we can do is adapt them to new subjects.

        1. Bravo! Well done.

          On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 9:43 PM, According To Hoyt wrote:

          > ** > thewriterinblack commented: “Benghazi is not a thing. I’m just going to > play with this one. I come to bury Benghazi, not to praise it. Four people, > including a serving Ambassador, are dead. But “Benghazi is not a thing” > Several flag rank officers were, by coincidence I” >

        2. See, everything you say here comes from that ridiculous clown car of a closed circuit media circus you people spend all your time engaged with. It’s like talking with scientologists. Nothing, and really and truly nothing, you have absorbed about Benghazi comes from anywhere but a deep dark pool of right-wingnut hate. It is not a thing in the way you ae experiencing it.

          Reading the comments on these sites makes me feel the way Patrick McGoohan must have felt in The Prisoner. Or, to quote (one of your heroes, I’m sure) Chuck Heston, “It’s a madhouse!”

          I will never understand it. Everyday, you will wake up, and the country will still be here. But you will, before the end of breakfast, have deluded yourselves into believing it’s end is nigh. And every next day, there it will be still.

          You are crazy people.

          1. You know I have heard it said that lunatics claim they are the only sane ones, and it is everyone else who is crazy. Now I have proof of it.

            If my ‘closed circuit media circus is a clown car’ what is your media circle jerk? You can’t get a much tighter closed circuit feedback loop than Al Jazeera to BBC to NYTimes.

            Let me point out that refusing to investigate and attempting to falsify evidence of the murder of an ambassador is ‘a thing’, that ‘thing’ is called treason.

          2. See, everything you say here comes from that ridiculous clown car of a closed circuit media circus you people spend all your time engaged with.

            As I noted above, there’s no better predictor of what’s going on on the Left than to look for what they accuse the Right of doing.

          3. You see, George, most of us here, rather than simply allowing the “news” sources to dictate our opinions to us, actually examine these things called, “facts”, and determine our opinion for ourselves. Some of us here specialized in this activity, usually in the Military, where coming to incorrect conclusions could cost people their lives.

            When you look out there and see the EXACT SAME story (not merely substantially the same information, though presented in different ways, but actually the same story, practically word for word) repeated on multiple news sources, that doesn’t mean that it’s got to be true. It actually means it’s suspect, because it’s either lazy reporting on the part of all the news outlets who simply copied from everyone else, or else it’s propaganda, handed down from on high.

            You’ll probably claim that the news on the Right does that, too, but you’d be wrong. Because, rather than lapping up the same jizz that the mainstream media does, and going out and spewing it to the masses, those who are on the Right, and wherever libertarians fall on the spectrum, don’t automatically agree with each other. Often we get into heated disagreement. The mere fact that we eventually often come to the same conclusions is an indication that there IS something there.

            Oh, and to see better reporting on the current administration? It’s been demonstrated numerous times that foreign news sources (not Al Jazeera English, though, as it appears to be turning into another arm of the American MSM) have consistently given more actual facts about happenings than the NYT.

            1. You see, George, most of us here, rather than simply allowing the “news” sources to dictate our opinions to us, actually examine these things called, “facts”, and determine our opinion for ourselves.

              B-but that requires THINKING and thinking makes George’s head hurt. George like news like pablum, pre-digested so George’s head not hurt.

          4. So “george” which statement is untrue? Provide cites, please.

            Are the four people not dead? Is Ambassador Stevens just in hiding?

            Were the various flag officers not relieved? Are they still at their posts?

            I know, I know that Obama claimed that he never blamed the attack on the video, so which major movie studio (it’s really not something that can be done by a cut-rate operation) made the videos of him saying otherwise, with either the most remarkable body doubles ever or the most incredible CGI to never be used to make a motion picture?

            I’m sure you have links to the survivors being on talk shows? How about on Amazon for a preorder of someone’s “there I was” book?

            Was it another body-double, this one for Carnney*, that gave the “Benghazi was a long time ago” statement or are they simply using the earlier body double to continue Obama blaming Bush for everything? Or maybe you have a result from Relativity that says that 11 months is “a long time ago” but 4 years isn’t?

            So please, show us the evidence that these things are untrue. Provide cites.

            But the real question, since I feel no need at this point to pull punches on trolls, is: are you a liar or a fool?

            *”Carney” colloquial term for one who works in a carnival, including those who run those “you can’t win” con games.

          5. “… that ridiculous clown car of a closed circuit media circus you people spend all your time engaged with.”

            You mean the MSM – the “closed circuit media circus” that recently sent reporters to a press conference by Obama on the NSA at which the reporters asked no questions about the NSA. The regular news channels refuse to actually do any journalism for fear that they won’t be invited to Obama’s cocktail parties.

            You are the one that only gets news from an echo chamber.

            We recently saw a big controversy when Daily Caller sent a 16 year old intern to the White House …. where he offended everyone by actually asking a mildly tough question of Obama’s chief clown Jay Carney.

          6. Except I don’t watch whatever “media circus” you think I watch, and I’m not right wing, by any definition of right wing.

            I suspect you can’t actually identify a right wing position. Other than, “People who don’t think George is awesome.”

              1. Since Georgie, before I blocked his IP defaulted to calling me a f*cking stupid c*nt under various sock puppets, I’m going to assume that MMike is one two. YAY.
                BTW, there will be post — Wednesday, because Bill Reader gets tomorrow — about what I learned from this invasion. Like, it’s totally all right to call a woman names, if you’re a leftist.

                1. Not even glittery? The cad. The bounder. The mountebank. The poltroon. The scallywag.

                  Actually what it shows is that MSNBC isn’t improving his vocabulary from its 7th grade days.

                  Ah! How I loathe the Left! They are rough and common, and they give themselves the airs of noble lords.

                  1. And somehow, we’re the ones who oppress, degrade and dishonor women.

                    What can you say about such “sensitivity”? Party über alles? State over all?

                    What can men do against such reckless hate? > >

                2. … what I learned from this invasion. Like, it’s totally all right to call a woman names, if you’re a leftist.

                  Well, I already knew that one. I’ve seen it happen to several women online. In fact, it’s all right to call anyone names if you’re a Leftist, but women are the target of far more vitriol than men.

                    1. Pay no attention to the cheap Democrat trolls, who smell of garlic, smoke bad tobacco, get up early, and dine off one dish.

                    2. They condemn you because you are a gender traitor, an Auntie Thomasina, who dares deny that they speak for women. By contradicting their claim you undermine their moral standing, which above all they will not tolerate.

                3. San Diego’s Mayor Filner and Democratic Strategy
                  By Michael Bargo Jr.
                  The abusive behavior of Mayor Filner of San Diego toward women has provoked an interesting situation: while Democrats profess to be the party of women, so far no prominent male Democratic politician has condemned Filner’s actions. … There is much more going on here than just a double standard.
                  Understanding why Democrats and the media have a double standard requires an understanding of the strategy Democrats use to get elected. The rhetoric Democrats use is founded on one basic, overwhelming idea: that Republicans are immoral and are incapable of ruling the nation. Only Democrats, voters are told, have the moral fiber necessary to stand up to Republicans and defend the elderly, weak, sick, and poor. And only they, we are told, have the courage to stand up to the wealthy and demand more money to pay for the people-programs needed by the disadvantaged.

                  The reason they defend Democratic male politicians who abuse women, then, is not that they feel that Democrats are entitled to treat women in the traditionally abusive way of seeing women as playthings, but rather that criticizing Democrats on moral grounds could threaten the perception they have carefully groomed among the electorate that Democrats are the party of morality, not the Republicans.
                  [I]n all cases, the reluctance to criticize Democrats, while appearing to be a manifestation of a confused double standard, is nothing but a political strategy designed to keep Democrats in power. Female voters can decide for themselves if they feel that those in government should be examples of how all men should behave toward women — if they should vote for men who abuse women and get away with it.

                  In effect, the media use personal sexual behavior as a means of attacking Republicans, and since they wish to promote Democrats in office, ignoring their abuse of women is best understood as a manifestation of their desire to keep Democrats in power. As I have written here before, the media protect Democrats because Democrats control most of the big cities, which are also the largest media markets.
                  [T]his is not done out of moral hypocrisy but simply to protect Democrats in power. Everyone involved knows that Democrats use their “moral superiority card” to get elected. They will voice every type of denial, practice every kind of hypocrisy, and construct every double standard necessary not just to protect the individual involved, such as Mayor Filner, but to protect the moral image of the Democratic Party.

                  Since this position excuses and enables the abuse of women, it is in reality far worse, and a far greater moral infraction, than the abusive act itself. This is because it subjects all women to this double standard.

                    1. I heard a woman on radio today claiming it was the women’s fault; because there was 16 of them! Her reasoning was if the first, or second, or third (her words) woman would have reported him this wouldn’t have happened, so it was really the women’s fault because they waited until there was 16 or more (she allows that there could be more that are still avoiding the spotlight) before they took action against him.

                      If George used his standard default reply (that he was banned for here) to her, I might actually have to agree with him.

                    2. The woman bearcat mentions is assuming a fact not in evidence; specifically, that an allegation of sexual harassment against a Democratic politician will be taken seriously the first time it is made. Or even the second, or the third.

                      She might learn something if she asked Paula Jones how that one worked out. Which, of course, is why she won’t.

            1. I’m only right wing under the definition of “people who don’t think having a supreme ruler to whom we’re all subjected is a good idea” or perhaps “people who don’t believe we all belong to the government.” IOW under really twisted definitions. However if Georgie is left, I claim right. If he’s right I claim left. He was born tragically acephalic.

      5. George: You get your “news” from the BBC and Al Jezeera, with a heaping helping of the New York Times, and you think you know what’s going on?

        Where do I start.

        Just because somebody has a fruity English Public School ‘toff’ accent, doesn’t mean they understand what they’re reading. That’s why they’re called “NEWS READERS”. Because they’re not “news understanders” or “news gatherers”. Then you get your news from the modern-day equivalent of what Pravda was in the 40s and 50s – a propaganda outlet owned and operated by enemies.

        The New York Times just wants to be back in the 60s again, man.

        And these are your sources for “news” and “current events”.

        I don’t watch television news, and haven’t since the Democrats took over Congress in 2006. I haven’t listened to radio news since Bill Clinton was in office.

        So go ahead and throw those (I can only guess) darts. Has nothing to do with me.

        But any thinking human who limits him or herself to three sources of news, one of which is a propaganda organ of an avowed enemy of the Republic (You are a US citizen, tovarich? Or are you one of Komrad Putin’s stooges? No, I don’t think so. You’re not smart enough for that) – as I said, limiting yourself to two or three news sources is stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid. Guess where that puts you in the “people whose opinion I care about” list?

        Can hear you now, “This Ben Gayzee fellow is just not on the up and up, what? Has no breeding. Never went to any of the better schools. I don’t see why everybody is mentioning him all the time. Total non-story.”

        You are pathetic.

        1. We must be considerate of George as he has apparently suffered from an educational malfunction and believes that an “authoritative” news source is the same thing as an “accurate” news source. He does not understand that news is based on facts, not assertions.

        2. And Kitteh-Dragon, just because someone has a closet full of 52″ waist camo pants doesn’t give that person any authority about anything under the big blue sky. No matter how many yahoo hollow points they shoot up into it.

          I called those sites the best news sites and stand by that. They are not, however, my only sources. I do stay away from TV news altogether. But dollars to wingnuts 90% of the folk on this thread get news from:
          1. FOX
          2. Breitbart
          3. Limbaugh
          That is some sad pathetic huntin’ n gatherin’ going on there, friend. Very sad and noxious.

          1. /scratches head/ How would Kittehdragon’s waist size (which I’m pretty sure is incorrect, and was certainly uncalled for) have any bearing on this subject?

            Several of us here have called you dumb, but then you prove that every time you post, no one has called you fat and ugly however.

            It is pretty laughable that you consider your news sources superior to FOX, Breitbart and Limbaugh; even Limbaugh who is at best a second-hand news source provides cites for his facts, that is more than can be said for any of your ‘superior’ news sites.

            1. Limbaugh doesn’t provide cites for his facts, bearcub. He’d need, y’know, actual facts first. Oxycontin though….

              And the rest are not “my” news sites. They are the agreed-upon apogee for news ‘mongst those what traverse the reality-based, three-dimensional, evolutionarily-derived world.

              1. Really, George, ITRIYN? THE “agreed-upon apogee for news”?? According to who? The folks selling that news and those too naive to doubt their claims? You know, the “fake-but-accurate” news world.

                See elsewhere for myriad instances of NY Times falsifications, you haven’t earned the effort of my recapitulation of them.

                1. The NYTimes falsifications? Only if you treat Breitbart as anything other than the bitter chocolate in the Wonka factory.

                    1. Dang, we really need a fallacy bingo to play with trolls who show up. The only one I can think of off the top of my head that I haven’t seen yet is a kafkatrap.

                  1. NY Times falsifications: Walter Duranty, Herbert L. Matthews, Jayson Blair, Judith Miller … look them up, George, ITRIYN.

                    BTW: can you correctly name the state immediately West of Virginia? The NY Times tried and failed. Twice, in less than six weeks.

                  2. OK George, I just had the vision of the enforcers bursting in, the conveyors squealing to a stop, errant plumes of steam drifting around the rosy-colored lights while the oompa-loompas cower in fear; and from among the throng pinned in the cross-fire you hear:
                    “I’m the bitter chocolate in the Wonka factory!”
                    “No! I’m the bitter chocolate in the Wonka factory!”
                    “No! I AM”
                    “I am the bitter chocolate!”

                    We all are the bitter chocolate in the Wonka factory. Have a gobstopper?

                  3. George, you utter lackwit. The NYT has has several reporters in the last 10 years forced to admit they were plagiarizing and making stories up out of whole cloth.starting with Jayson Blair.

                    From their own mouth. And you cite _this_ as authoritative and accurate?

                    Sir, I am a journalist by trade. A pretty damned good one. I have broken major stories, ones that you’ve probably actually heard of. (Well I say that, I’m not certain as I’ve never met anyone with quite the case of cranial-rectal inversion disorder that you have, and I’m not at all sure that anyone with his head lodged quite so firmly up his third point of contact can actually _hear_.

                    Regardless, for you to cite the only news sources which happen to disagree with the Received Wisdom from the administration as “living in a ridiculous clown car of a closed circuit media circus,” is laughable at best. The dinosaur media, of which I happen to be a part, (go ahead google me, you’ll find me pretty easily,) is the largest echo chamber in the world. They report only what fits their agenda — and ignore anything which does not.

                    In point of fact, they’re known to violate the most basic ethical constraints of journalism on a regular basis. Leave plagiarism aside, the NYT and others of it’s ideological ilk are known to cite each other as primary sources. Which is strictly verboten.

                    But then, I wouldn’t expect someone of your obvious intelligence and sophistication to understand this.

                    1. I hate to do this, but I’m ban-hammered George. This is because this blog has been under attack by first comments “backing George up”, then by comments so stupid as to be obvious mobis, both seeming to support us, but true conspiracy theory nutters and bizarre, my favorite being the chick who was disappointed because this wasn’t a leather site. Now, it’s fanning up to other posts and displaying wit like “You stupid f*cking c*nt” I’m assuming from the quality of “George”‘s mind that this is one of two things. Either it’s Georgie Porgie himself, seething in impotent fury and wetting his pants for revenge because we didn’t bow down to his superior wisdom, or it’s George’s “Students” (Dogs who type, read all about it.) I’ve banned George. If the attack stops, great. If not, I’ll go through the trash and ban his playfellows too. Gee, don’t you hate it when we annoy the kindergarten class?

                    2. Hey! My dogs are insulted! They have the ability to learn and have learned more by the time their eyes are open than George has managed to learn is whole life.* What is more, they are capable of continueing to learn throughout their lives.

                      *Admittedly this mostly involves defecating without the help of their mother and the ability to find a teat on their own, but Georgie boy has failed to show that degree of competence.

                  4. Sample: Per the New York Toilet, an M1 Garand is “readily convertible” to full auto.

                    Other than the fact it feeds from an internal, en bloc-fed magazine, which means your ammo would run out in about .6 seconds, sure. If you have a machine shop and diagrams and are a trained gunsmith, sure. I could do it. It would be easier to make a new MG from scratch.

                    Should we discuss the AP claiming a .50 cal rifle can shoot holes in tanks at two miles?

                    They’re either liars or idiots.

                    Coverage of the Gulf War: I was a USAF engineer. I sat laughing at their strategic analysis, which would have been better had they bothered to interview any E3.

                    It’s catbox liner, not news, which is why it’s losing market share steadily.

                    But, you claim it’s best because the people who read it claim it’s best. This you call “logic.”

                    Add that to the ad homina, and you are a sad, pathetic excuse for a human being.

                    I almost wish we required background checks before logging online.

                    1. “Should we discuss the AP claiming a .50 cal rifle can shoot holes in tanks at two miles?”

                      Sure they will, if you can hit a gas tank at two miles a 50 BMG will punch neat holes in it.

                      “Sample: Per the New York Toilet, an M1 Garand is “readily convertible” to full auto.”

                      I haven’t studied the inner workings of a Garand, but I can convert a lot of semi-autos to fully automatic by filing the sear, it makes them pretty much useless in practical terms, and depending on the model likely more dangerous to the shooter than the target, but hey, it’s fully auto.

              2. George, you are simply a clown. And not a funny one. Limbaugh is a political commentator not a news reader.

                Meanwhile, you ascribe reliability to news sites that repeat silly islamic conspiracy theories that make JFK conspiracy loons look like paragons of sanity.

              1. How much sex you have and with whom, too. Gets very tiring to be called both flavor of homosexual, a slut, and a dried up old stick who’s never had intercourse… all while in my twenties, with my daughter on my lap.

                Lola-at-Large commented: “You know how this works. If the opinion is to be disagreed with, out come the cheap insults: fat, old, white are the most favorite of vile progs.”

                  1. That is because you are a double agent.

                    Possibly they thought you were a schizophrenic switch hitter with multiple personality disorders?

                  1. Frequently, in quite rude terms and as a clinical declaration.

                    It’s part of why I use my husband’s sketch of the werefox girl in a cheer outfit….

          2. What, not Beck?

            Is he off of the five minute hate ride since Romney wasn’t elected?

            We check back to as close to primary sources as we can get. You should try it some time.

            1. Hey, that reminds me. Is there still some interest here in setting up a bid-based translation site for foreign newspapers? I remember we discussed it months ago, and it sounds like a useful tool. I’m only trying to run four businesses right now, I figured I ought to add another straw to the camel. 🙂

              1. I was thinking about that the other day. I would be interested, since I seem to have an excess of time, but I have questions about copyright law and, of course, what sort of production volumes would be needed and how to determine what classes as news.

              1. ….you’re not very good at trolling, are you?

                I mean, folks here will respond because they’ve got an attachment to the truth, but my three year old does better with her “but I want to (exact opposite of whatever you just said)” shtick.

              2. George, just out of curiousity, can you tell the difference – without cheating and looking at the crawl on the bottom of the TV screen – between Rachel Maddow and Chris Hayes?

                Because I can’t.

      6. George forgot to mention the fact that we are all monitored 24 hours a day, 7 days a week in our phone conversations, website traffic and our E-mail. Even our snail mail is photographed. Crazy Idea, Tin Foil Hat stuff, right George?

        I am sure he is saying this is jest so that when they get him in a small room he will say, “No I never said anything like that! I LOVE Big Brother! No. Don’t DO that! Ahhhh!
        Some of us see the Stazi State differently than you, George.

        1. I’m just tired of this “you must be ignorant” because we don’t read the “approved news sources only” PFUI. I read EVERYTHING (yes, even the vile NYT. It’s okay, I have naturally too-low blood pressure.) I always have. I always will. When you read everything, you start seeing the cracks…

          1. The cracks are in your head, lady. That’s also a pretty cool double entendre I just made, no?

            Trade in some of the guns for meds, please.

            That’s it! “Guns for Meds.’ My new slogan for helping to bring the right back into the fact-based world.

            Guns for Meds.

            1. So, George, ITRIYN, you stoop to feeble gynophobic double entendre in lieu of argument?

              Pathetic. I am not surprised you mistake slogans for rational thought.

            2. Oh good. Now we’re up to down to straight out ad hominem.

              You might want to look it up, George: “ad hominem.” You’re really not very good at it.

            3. The cracks are in your head, lady. That’s also a pretty cool double entendre I just made, no? No, it isn’t. It doesn’t even manage to be a respectable single entendre. For someone who claims to teach, you have serious issues with the meaning of words.

              Trade in some of the guns for meds, please Ah, yes. The old Communist ploy to imply that anyone who disagrees with you must be mentally ill. Very handy, that one.

              the fact-based world Would this be the same world as the one the “reality-based community” is all about? The same “reality-based” community that seems to think it’s possible for government to support the entire population and not collapse? (Hint: something somewhere has to be produced. The stuff that’s produced has to be stuff that other people actually want to possess. This is reality. Services – including, yes, teaching – are luxuries when it comes down to the crunch. What matters is food and housing, followed by enough food and relatively secure housing. After that the services start to happen. When governments shut down the producers, the end is inevitable. The only thing in question is when it will happen.)

              Guns for Meds Sorry dude. I have meds and guns. I’m not the only one here that does. I happen to enjoy putting holes in pieces of paper now and again, and since my medical condition is ADA qualified, well… you wouldn’t want to discriminate against a disabled person now, would you, George?

          2. Exactly. I’ve read it all for so long, it’s become easy to spot the errors in logic and tell the difference between actual news and propaganda. What kills me is how well the left has integrated the things they used to deride, especially the logical fallacies. It’s almost always guilt-by-association, half-truths, and strawmen anymore.

        2. But it is okay because it is all supervised by a secret unaccountable court — except that court lacks resources to effectively police the NSA

          Court: Ability to police U.S. spying program limited
          The leader of the secret court that is supposed to provide critical oversight of the government’s vast spying programs said that its ability to do so is limited and that it must trust the government to report when it improperly spies on Americans.

          The chief judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court said the court lacks the tools to independently verify how often the government’s surveillance breaks the court’s rules that aim to protect Americans’ privacy. Without taking drastic steps, it also cannot check the veracity of the government’s assertions that the violations its staff members report are unintentional mistakes.

          “The FISC is forced to rely upon the accuracy of the information that is provided to the Court,” its chief, U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton, said in a written statement to The Washington Post. “The FISC does not have the capacity to investigate issues of noncompliance, and in that respect the FISC is in the same position as any other court when it comes to enforcing [government] compliance with its orders.”

          Walton’s comments came in response to internal government records obtained by The Post showing that National Security Agency staff members in Washington overstepped their authority on spy programs thousands of times per year. The records also show that the number of violations has been on the rise.
          Washington Post

          But hey, if Charlie Pierce over at Esquire says we’re crazy it must be true because (swoon) ESQUIRE!!! If a magazine focusing on men’s clothing can’t be relied upon for expert evaluation of foreign policy analysis, who can? I mean, he has years of experience as “an American sportswriter, political blogger, author, and game show panelist.” (Wikipedia)

          Charley is the guy who in 2003 told us “If she had lived, Mary Jo Kopechne would be 62 years old. Through his tireless work as a legislator, Edward Kennedy would have brought comfort to her in her old age,” so you know he is unbiased as all heck.

          1. Didn’t say Charlie Pierce was unbiased, RES (if that really is your name). I said you are crazy and hateful. And armed like a small country, probably, so also a serious threat to the public good.

            1. First of RES are initials which are as good as a first name (and if you want my name, both first and last just click through to my website, it is prominently posted there) and yes you did cite Charlie Pierce as a presumably* unbiased source.

              Believe me having citizens and especially patriots unarmed is a much more serious threat to the public good than having them armed. Ok don’t believe me, ask the unarmed visitors to Auschwitz.

              1. Right. Forgot. Gun argument always takes us to the Nazis. Ok. I’ll go with you.

                Here’s a nifty little article that should make you wanna try and find my little sister to beat up:

                Hold on to your hat. It’ll just make you mad.

                Guns for Meds, y’all.

                PS – Which is it? RES or Bearcub? Are you and me the only people on this site? Are you everybody? That’s kind of twisted.

                1. George, ITRIYN, you really ought learn to read more carefully. Bearcat (oh, you called him bearcub — ha-ha, how … infantile.) was answering your question about my cognomen and proffering information about his own to save you the trouble of having to ask about that. Tell us again how much smarter, better informed and more capable of deriving information you are. Eventually I am sure you will persuade yourself it is true.

                  After all, how bright can a person be if his arguments are reduced to insults, digressions, distractions, misrepresentations and mocking other’s names in less than six hours?

                2. An astonishing amount of fraud in that article, George. A lot of good, scholarly work has been done by Profs. Levinson, Volokh, Van Alstyne and my friend Clayton Cramer that reveals your link is brazen lies.

            2. George, if that really is your name, you cited Charlie Pierce as authoritative — and I pointed out he is so only in the mobius loop you call a data feed. If you don’t claim him as authoritative you shouldn’t have introduced him to the discussion.

              The effort to both use a source and discredit it is not indicative of a sound mind. Nor is the assumption that all posters here fit neatly into your prejudices. You are blind to the fact that all the behaviours of which you accuse commenters here are evident in your own comments. Denial is the first step to delusional. Before you criticize the mote in our eyes you might want to look in your mirror.

              1. “the mote in our eyes”????
                Is that biblical or something? I knew the bible would be making its way into this mess sooner or later.


                1. Why yes, George, ITRIYN, I sometimes employ biblical allusions. I also quote Shakespeare and many other writers.

                  As for your confusion, well, as Samuel Johnson said: “I have found you an argument; I am not obliged to find you an understanding.”

                  Which is fortunate for me, as you have given no evidence of being able to understand any thought that is novel. Perhaps if you used a search engine to look up “mobius loop” and “metaphor” you would eventually work it out for yourself, but I haven’t much expectation.

            3. I said you are crazy and hateful.

              Please stop projecting and bother to make arguments, with some sort of authority beyond your own claims.

            4. Public good– now that is a terrifying phrase—
              Who decides what is good for the public? So many many people have been murdered for the public good– I give you Cambodia (Pol pot), North Korea, and Russia (Stalin).

              Here, we want the good life for the individual and for the family… not for a government who decides that the public good tramples on individuals no matter their creeds or religion (or if you want to go there–skin color).

              1. I do believe the public good is a valid goal— but it has to be strictly limited.

                Roads: OK.

                Draft: OK.

                Enslaving every fourth person because all that free labor would improve the average good: not OK.

                Note: “OK” means “at some point,” not “anything you can justify with this.”

                Cyn Bagley commented: “Public good– now that is a terrifying phrase— Who decides what is good for the public? So many many people have been murdered for the public good– I give you Cambodia (Pol pot), North Korea, and Russia (Stalin). Here, we want the good life for th”

                1. In the mouth of libs, public good is never limited. 😉 I do agree with roads and some other common items… but, limited …very limited. Did you know that in the West, the Feds own most of the land? I find that public good… not good at all. 85 percent of NV.

                    1. Oh yea– I have heard about what Forestry has done to the cattle business. I saw it start in the 80s as I was leaving my area in Utah.

                    2. The blankers introduced wolves. Lied about it, but it’s pretty obvious on ground level– especially since the reports of missing pets only start in a nearby valley they surveyed for ability to support a pack, rather than all along the path they claim the wolves took.

                    3. To bearcat–btw

                      Also– as you can see Forestry (how it was taught in the 1950s and 1960s) is not taught in the same way. In consequence we are having more wildfire/urban interface problems and fiercer fires. We deal with them every year in the West. Right now Idaho, California, and Nevada have major fires. Colorado and other places have had some really bad fires. The undergrowth is not being cut or trimmed… etc, etc…

                    4. I actually don’t have a problem with public lands if they are actually there for the public to use. National Parks and Wilderness I have a huge problem with, as I do with USFS employees who act like THEY own the land. Really I would rather see it be all handed over to the state than be controlled by the Feds, but even owned by the Feds it wouldn’t be that bad if it wasn’t controlled by a bunch of tree huggers.

                      The USFS used to be a rather significant revenue source for the government, but now that they shut down virtually all the logging (and all the profitable forms of it, which also happen to be the most beneficial to wildlife and to wildfire management) and do there best to shut down grazing and any forms of recreation on that land, they are just a hung money sink.

                      Don’t get me started on the wolves unless you really want to see me frothing at the mouth.

                    5. I am against the FEDS owning any land unless they pay rent/or lease to the States. The State should own the parks and have a use charge imho. 😉 The money from leasing lands to the cattle ranchers should go to the States. The Federal government has taken power by becoming a broker of public lands … and money from it. Should I remind you of who started many of the parks? T. Roosevelt.

                    6. Look at what they did with the “wild” horses– my dad knew folks who would regularly go out to harvest young horses out in the high desert, and it was a standard thing to shoot the herd stallions in your area and turn loose a well bred one (which incidentally wouldn’t be as likely to be violent to humans) so that the results the next spring would be high quality.

                      Took over the herds, leached off of the residual high quality animals for a while, and now it’s all gone to heck. And the locals still have to deal with the damage from feral animals, but don’t get anything out of it and can’t shoot the dangerous ones.

                    7. “Should I remind you of who started many of the parks? T. Roosevelt.”

                      Yep, kind of interesting isn’t it? A lot of areas that he went and hunted like Yellowstone and Zion National Park he later made into National Parks, makes one wonder what he was thinking. To give him his due he wasn’t the one who decided there would be no hunting in them, that came later. He did lay the foundations, though.

                    8. Depends on how specific we choose to be in attributing group decisions to any one man. But consider the Kaibib overpopulation disaster that followed

                      On November 28th, 1906, President Theodore Roosevelt created the Grand Canyon National Game Preserve to protect the “finest deer herd in America.”

                      ….. The first step to protect the deer was to ban all hunting. In addition, in 1907, The Forest Service tried to exterminate the predators of the deer. Between 1907 and 1939, 816 mountain lions, 20 wolves, 7388 coyotes and more than 500 bobcats were killed.

                      Signs that the deer population was out of control began to appear as early as 1920 – the range was beginning to deteriorate rapidly……..Hunting was reopened, and during the fall of 1924, 675 deer were killed by hunters. However, these deer represented only one-tenth the number of deer that had been born that spring. Over the next two winters, it is estimated that 60,000 deer starved to death. ….

                      this date Biologycorner.com;
                      Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License.

        3. I don’t know who is listening to your phone calls Sgt Slaughter, but they have meds for that. Also, our snail mail is PHOTOGRAPHED?? Ok. Whatever. And yes. Tinfoil hat for realz.
          But as for the (what I think you are trying to say) meta-data collected by the NSA? Blame the morons who cheered on and pushed thru the Patriot Act a decade ago. None of that stuff started on the new guy’s watch. You have your own paranoia (terrorists under all the beds!!! ARGHH!!) to thank for that one.

          1. So the pen register / metadata stuff isn’t an issue. Okay.

            Some day, maybe in three years, maybe seven, maybe eleven, who knows. Some day, a Republican will again be in the White House.

            If so, you’ll be perfectly content with the pen register / metadata tracking?

            And assuming that content is being recorded – not actively surveilled, but kept, so that when a person of interest is identified they can go back over that information with a fine tooth comb, will that be all right also? Because the capability certainly exists.

            One would think that if you were truly against the Patriot Act then, and are against it now, your reaction to those who may have been for it then and are coming around to your ostensible point of view might be closer to “well, finally they’re getting it!” as opposed to “they’re all a bunch of crackpot paranoid delusional lunatics.”

            And if you were against the Patriot Act then, but aren’t now… What changed your mind? > >

            1. Listen Rickets, did you hear me say I was ok with it? No. I didn’t. I hate it. What I did say was put the blame for the whole stinking mess where it belongs; on a country stooped so deep in its own paranoia about the “other” that we allow more and more of our civil liberties to chucked in the wood chipper each time some opportunist screams “Mosque!”

              How in all the planets did you come away from my post with the idea I was ok with any of it?

              Honestly, people. I think this is why you hold the world views you hold. You read, but consistently miss the point.

                  1. You know, the Kilted One outlined that lovely little cycle for our usual grade of troll earlier today, and I thought, “Yeah, that’s basically how it goes here”. Turns out, it was too optimistic by half when it comes to this boychik.

              1. Great. So I was right about that, and we do agree that the Patriot Act should be sunsetted or revoked. To that end, name-calling, non sequiturs, and failure to read English is helpful in building a coalition around that point because why now?

                The Patriot Act should go away. This is something we agree on. But I guess that’s not as important as being right on the Internet. So you purposely misread what I wrote and respond with insults and stereotypes.

                And somehow we’re the ones with “closed information loops”. Ah well. Hang on a second, I think I saw someone here write something apropos… Oh, yeah. Here it is.

                Honestly, people. I think this is why you hold the world views you hold. You read, but consistently miss the point. – George

                Look, maybe you realize this, maybe you don’t, but it’s obvious you’re here to a) poke people in the eye, b) stroke your own ego, and c) maybe even hope a little that you’ll get banned from the site because it’ll make a good story in the comments on someone else’s blog. “Oh, it was dreadful! They were such horrible people! So ignorant. So paranoid. So…” And so on and so forth.

                Have fun with that.

                1. Actually, I’m here because I honestly believe that, every now and then, the hermetically-sealed conspiracy theorists need to hear a voice from beyond the talk-radio. I hold no illusions that it’ll make even the tiniest dent. I don’t expect it to do anything but make people angry (though that is more of a tertiary effect).
                  The world is not as you have all convinced yourself it is. You need to hear that more often. No one is in control of the right-wing’s id right now. And it is a very, very dangerous beast. It’s always been there. But it used to be, there were powerful interests- monied interests – keeping that id in check. Now it is a runaway, Louie-Gohmert-driven freight train and it’s heading into the station and what a mess we’re gonna have on our hands when it slams into that safety barrier at 200mph.
                  Again, I know I will change nothing. But someone’s got to get control of this thing. it’s too big, too unreasonable, and too heavily armed. I’m just here hoping against all experience and reason that someone will get the message before it’s too late.

                  Enjoy your night. I teach a class in at noon.

                  1. Aw, look at that, will you? It thinks it’s a hero! A martyr! Plowing in amongst the benighted rubes of flyover country to stem the tide of violent, racist, heavily armed rednecks by showing them the truth they’ve been denied by their own stubborn refusal to accept the enlightened yoke of their betters. Repent! Repent you god-bothering sinners! Accept that George is your savior from the nonsense of facts and experience! Drink from the delicious waters of the charnel houses of truth enshrined in the holy threesome of the NYT, the BBC, and that terrifyingly foreign Al Jazeera! Freedom is slavery! War is peace! Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!

                    *wipes tears of laughter away* Oh man, George, I needed a laugh like that something awful. You come ’round here any time, sonny. We could use the abdominal workout, yes we could. Bless your heart.

                  2. Actually, I’m here because I honestly believe that, every now and then, the hermetically-sealed conspiracy theorists need to hear a voice from beyond the talk-radio.

                    All studies done show that conservatives hear, understand and can state in a manner acceptable to liberals what liberals believe; those same studies show that liberals have little to no knowledge, understanding, or ability to acceptably state what conservatives think.

                    Most of the major media being echo chambers which are contradicted by primary sources will do that…..

                    1. Talk radio?

                      Well, I am pretty hermetically sealed if I stick only to Finnish language news sources, so that bit would be kind of accurate for me, personally. The guy is a clairvoyant.

                      Pity I was a bit too busy to start following this on real time. Highly entertaining.

                  3. George, ITRIHN, teaches a class? Now that is the scariest thing I’ve seen him post.

                    Of course, what kind of class meets at noon on a Saturday? The kind Bob Filner and Anthony Weiner attend?

                    “I know I will change nothing.” Not without learning how to present information to somebody who has gotten past fifth grade, George, ITRIYN. But it nice of you to wrap up with a point on which we can all agree. Enjoy your night’s rest and always remember to use a cotton swab when you awake to clean the feces from your ears.

                  4. Need I say I fear for your students if you teach the way you came here and did nothing but insult? You offered no facts or proofs. When we tried to have discourse, you resorted to more insults and then name calling. And folks wonder why there is a problem with our education system.

                    BTW, upthread you commented that we needed to be able to read and understand what you said. Consider that it isn’t us who need to read and comprehend what was written but you. You have yet to respond with a well-thought out or well-argued comment to anything anyone has posted, starting with Sarah’s initial blog to any of the comments that followed. Critical thinking obviously isn’t one of your fortes.

                    So please do us a favor. Go away and stay away until you can actually read and engage in a discussion without insults and name calling and spouting of party lines.

                  5. Sarah, this comment may cross the line for your comment section. If so, delete it. I’m writing this because I’m God Almighty sick of drive by trolls who want to pretend that they are courageous commandos for freedom poking the Krazy Konservative Killbots.

                    George, if you truly believed that we are all crazy right-wing killbots, then you wouldn’t be on this blog at all. It is trivially easy to track someone back to their real-world address from the visitor’s log, and as “crazy”, “scary” people, why would you think we would be restricted to the legal system? Why would you think we would restrain ourselves at all?

                    Unless you are simply lying, have an IQ lower than room temperature, or both, that is.

                    I’ll take “Both”, for a thousand, Georgy.

                    Because I’m also sure you’ve pulled this act on other blogs, which means that the pool of potential suspects is vast. And I suggest you Google up the statistics for the clearance rate on homicide where there is no direct relationship between suspect and victim. Hint: it’s really low.

                    You’re not brave in the least, simply ignorant and dishonest and not worth the effort to whack. Now go away, you silly Libtard, or we shall taunt you once again,

                    1. It would be interesting if someone set up a clearinghouse for bloggers to post IP addresses of trolls. Even if it were mainly a relatively private database, which didn’t post anything until it detected multiple entries from different sites of the same IP being posted. That way, repeat (and possibly paid) trolls could be identified.

                    2. WordPress seems to have unbanned all my trolls out of the blue, so for what I know Georgie might be from one of those ten addresses I’d banned, which kept us troll free.
                      Just let me know when you want the hammer guys. I, or a deputy will be monitoring, but I’m pretty busy today.

                  6. Actually, I’m here because I honestly believe that, every now and then, the hermetically-sealed conspiracy theorists need to hear a voice from beyond the talk-radio. I hold no illusions that it’ll make even the tiniest dent. I don’t expect it to do anything but make people angry (though that is more of a tertiary effect).

                    Precisely where did you get the notion that the folks here are “hermetically-sealed conspiracy theorists”? I personally subscribe to the view that if there’s a choice between conspiracy and stupidity, go for stupidity every time. Multiple stupid people with the same basic beliefs will get you to the same place as a conspiracy anyway.

                    As for talk radio, I don’t listen to it. Never have. Nor do you make me angry. Sad, and decidedly worried that blind ideology is teaching, but not angry. I reserve that for malicious incompetence – and I don’t give squat what the politics of the perpetrator happen to be.

                    Now, given that I have yet to see anything resembling a reasoned argument from you, I have to presume that you teach one of the “soft” fields. There’s no evidence that you’re capable of the logic required for any of the hard sciences or for anything requiring practical implementation.

                    Worse, you seem to be implying that your position teaching places you above us ignorant peons. It doesn’t. NO position anywhere places any person above any other except in the limited command sense. If you are incapable of grasping this you have no business trying to educate anyone. Badly taught is much worse than untaught because the unfortunates who have been badly taught believe the tripe they were handed.

                    Kindly stop accusing us of the sins you commit with each post you make. That’s hardly going to convince anyone to change – even if you were correct (which you aren’t, and what’s more it’s trivial to demonstrate this even using your preferred authoritative references).

                  7. George: If you really want to reach people and convince them to change, a) stop insulting them, and b) learn to make simple, clear arguments. If you lard up your arguments with all sorts of extras, like hot-button names and extraneous facts, you look like you are trying to paper over the cracks in your own argument and it makes anyone with half a brain start poking around your logic to see what you are hiding. As to the first point, if I call you a dishonest, bigoted, self-important fool, well I’d make points with people who agreed with me, but you don’t agree with me, and you’d just think it was abuse. I would only have influence over you if for some reason you gave me sufficient moral standing in your life to make those judgments.

                  8. You are an idiot. The “moneyed intetests” own the Democrats more than the “right wing”. Obama is fully deeded to wall Street.

                    1. Do you suppose George’s last name is five letters, starts with “s”, ends with “s” and is full of Spanish gold in the middle?

              2. “What I did say was put the blame for the whole stinking mess where it belongs…”

                Don’t you understand it makes no difference who started what, when the current administration has had 4.5 years to dismantle what they didn’t like and haven’t done so?

          2. Please bother to inform yourself about the differences between the original Patriot act and the amended one, and the ongoing “discussion” about if even that has been violated.

          3. The USPS started out scanning mail when it was returned “not at this address” or otherwise sent back. It was done originally so the clerks responsible for printing up and slapping on the forwarding address stickers would have more time to do data entry and less time getting up to move around trays of letters to handle individually. From there it was a small step to scanning the letters at the production and distribution centers and processing the ones possible by OCR and doing the clerk-based data entry at a central facility instead of at the regional facility. This would guarantee a regular flow of work coming in from all over the US instead of rather seasonal and irregular flows from just a single regional sorting facility area. This information was recorded, of course, since the USPS likes to be able to explain why they redirected mail in case someone is offended and complains. Since OCR is the same process used to scan and direct the mail in the automated OCR sorters and the Database Letter Sorters (DBCS) it would be a short step to recording this information for all mail. I’m pretty sure that the original idea was to keep it for quality assurance of process – the DBCS program was just initiating in the 90’s and the USPS wanted to be sure they could show their massive investment in new technology was worth it. After 9/11 and the Anthrax and Unabomber issues I’m sure someone got the idea that this was useful information to help combat terrorism. So, yes they do scan mail. In fact, if they didn’t scan mail they would have to go back to the 1950’s technology they used up to the 90’s

      7. Well said, slave. Well said. Go eat a bag of dicks and lick your master’s ass for all eternity. Be gone, slave, our Republic has erased you for all time.

        1. A short piece I did some time back:

          David L. Burkhead

          ©2010 David L. Burkhead, all rights reserved.

          Wear your chains lightly, about neck and legs and wrists.
          They are not so heavy these chains, not now anyway.
          But chains they remain.

          Dress up your chains in fine designs and smith-wrought filigree
          Paint them gold and call them gorgeous jewelry.
          But chains they remain.

          Exhort others to share your chains, every man and woman and child.
          For how could they be chains, if shared all equally?
          But chains they remain.

          Raise your voice in anger, at those who deplore your chains.
          Say they are not chains you’ve taken on willingly.
          But chains they remain.

          Take pride in your chains. Stud them with rhinestones. Polish them with care.
          Rejoice in your chains, in raucous revelry.
          But chains are not for me.

            1. While I am most definitely not a poet, speaking of poetry, commenting, and stealing from Shakespeare, they are all involved here.

      8. George, George, George, George, George. So sad, so misinformed. Benghazi is “not a thing”? How many US ambassadors have been killed since WWII? Why has the Administration stone-walled investigations if this is “not a thing”? Why has the Administration been playing three card monte with witnesses if Benghazi is “not a thing”? If Benghazi is “not a thing” why have those witnesses been compelled to sign non-disclosure agreements?

        You have the IRS story wrong, as well. Political education activities are legitimate tax exempt speech, and groups were not “mostly awarded the same tax-exempt status they were ineligible for in the first place” — many of them have had their applications left pending for years, precluded the opportunity to appeal denials. Many of the people applying for the tax exempt status to which they are legitimately entitled have further suffered the travails of tax audits.

        “And it is well-documented now that it happened to groups from all over the political spectrum.”?? I guess it depends on how you define “well documented” Groups with “TEA Party” and “Progressive” in their name were flagged for special IRS attention, that is true, with only the minor difference that Progressive applications were green-lighted while TEA Party applications were red-lighted. But yeah, aside from that they were treated identically. With the minor distinction that TEA Party groups had their private donor information leaked to ideological opponents.

        As it happens, I do read the NY Times, daily, and have for about thirty years now. I also have been reading the Washington Post every day for twenty years. Both have excellent sports coverage, although the NY Times tends to get shirty about trivialities like who holds memberships in Augusta National Golf Club. The NY Times’ OpEd page has degenerated into self-parody and as for their news coverage … what can you say about a paper that has TWICE in slightly over a month had to publish corrections about the state just North of Tennessee and West of Virginia?

        Correction: July 25, 2013
        A map with an article on Tuesday about the discovery of a 16th-century fort last month near Morganton, N.C., labeled incorrectly a state that borders Virginia to the west. It is Kentucky, not West Virginia.

        1. RES (if that really is your name), this:
          “Groups with “TEA Party” and “Progressive” in their name were flagged for special IRS attention, that is true, with only the minor difference that Progressive applications were green-lighted while TEA Party applications were red-lighted.”
          is patently untrue. The only way you could come to such a conclusion is if all your news is coming from the closed loop I was laughing at a couple hours ago. You are underscoring my thesis.

          “How many US ambassadors have been killed since WWII?”
          I dunno the answer, but I do know that the entire Benghazi “scandal” amounted to naught. Every stone, including many that plain decency suggested should have never been touched, was turned over in the hopes of destroying President Obama. Let’s us recap:
          Birth certificate thing – 0
          Death panels – 0
          Fixed elections (ACORN, etc) – 0
          Benghazi – 0
          IRS – 0

          There is no there there, friend. Heck, if this was a baseball game, I’d be sending the entire wack-a-do-wing-nut buch of you back down to single A ball. You keep striking out. And no, not because “the media argle-bargle!!!!!” The media would love, LOVE a presidential scandal. Are you kidding? The money??? Bring it on, say NBC!

          These things get no traction in the reality-based world because reality.


          1. “Every stone, including many that plain decency suggested should have never been touched, was turned over in the hopes of destroying President Obama.”

            Except, you know, allowing Congress access to any of the survivors or operative involved in the incident. And placing gag orders. CIA operatives are being polygraphed to ensure they don’t talk to Congress says that crazy right-wing network CNN.

            1. It’s over, clamshell. It, whatever it was, didn’t work. The black guy is still president. The earth still spins on it’s axis.

              It was a tragic thing, what happened at that embassy, but the only crime here, and it’s a downright sick, putrid crime, was to turn it into sunday-talk-show political theatre the way McCain, Cruz and Issa did.

              It’s science fiction. The whole crazy premise. It’s a political game and you are all stoned on the hate fumes passing for breathable air inside the wingnut box.

              Get out of there while you still can.

              1. You know, I’m really sick and tired of the “You guys hate that there’s a black guy in the White House” meme. Besides the fact that there are plenty of blacks who disagree just as much with this administration as any white person, I can’t imagine anyone here giving a hot damn about someone’s race as part of their qualifications. There are so many respected scholars on the Right who are black that your assertion simply boggles the mind, although many of your fellow-travelers dismiss them as house niggers (and yes, we have all seen those very words used when the Left have been attacking blacks on the Right).

                1. What??!! There’s a black guy in the White House? I hadn’t noticed. I recall reading that Bill Maher had said he wanted a black guy in the White House who would go all gangster on Republicans, but I dismissed that as a symptom of Maher’s lameness.

                  I suppose it would be too much to hope that the black guy in the White House is Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, JC Watts or perhaps Kenneth Blackwell? Allen West, perhaps? I am sure it couldn’t be Zo Rachel, dang it.

                  I s’pose it would be unfair to accuse George, ITRIHN, of looking first at the skin and then at the politics. To idiot like him the politics are required for the person to be authentically the skin. Because treating people of color as individuals is raaaaacist or something. And they would know, because their party has been playing the race card for over 200 years.

                  1. Zo Rachel as President? Oh, my. The heads exploding would be heard around the world.

                    Now, if he was just there doing a concert, the mess from exploding liberal heads wouldn’t be so bad.

                    1. I have it stuck in my head his “they’re sheep, they’re babies. They’re shabbies.” So now when I run into a thing like Georgie I want to go “Shabbie, Shabbie.”

                2. Well, what’s the alternative? They elected a black man for the color of his skin and not the content of his character. If they admitted that his policies are hated, and he is totally ineffectual — accomplishing less with both houses of Congress than many presidents have with neither — they would have to admit that was not only racist and evil on their part, it was STUPID.

                  So they have to fudge up SOME reason that doesn’t bring the truth to bear.

          2. Re: ACORN, you do realize that the organization was shut down after they were prosecuted for fraud in several states? And caught on camera (in uncut footage) offering to help facilitate and support money laundering, smuggling, fraud, and sex slavery?

            1. They were not prosecuted for fraud. They lost their funding. And mostly because of a doctored-up video made by some punk too stupid to destroy the source material, which then leaked and proved him to be a fraud.

              But still, black people voting…so it got defunded.

              1. They lost their funding after several of their state-level subsidiaries were prosecuted. No, the national level was never prosecuted; that’s what compartmentalized incorporation and plausible deniability are for.

                “a doctored-up video”
                *laughs* You pathetic ignoramus, I watched the uncut footage. It showed exactly what the cut version did, but with more ums and ahs and crosstalk. You’ve been drinking your masters’ ink too long, little man. Projection is such an ugly thing.

                This troll is getting repetitive and boring. Can we get one that actually debates, rather than throwing unsupported assertions and ad hominems? I still believe there are well-educated leftists out there, we have a few that make appearances here from time to time. Pity this one is so sub-par. *shakes head sadly*

          3. George (if that really is your name), your flailing isn’t even stirring up much breeze.

            Your denial of the IRS abuses is patently unfounded, as testimony under oath has demonstrated. If you aren’t reading about that testimony in the NY Times it says more about the Times’ willingness to carry water for this administration and your closed data loop than it does about the falsity of the charged abuses. If you are as old as you have claimed you ought understand the distinction between rebutting an assertion and denying it.

            The answer to the question of how many US ambassadors have been killed sine WWII is easily searched out, and the number is six — and only one since 1979. Which ought establish the event as a rare occurrence, worthy of investigation — and, apparently, cover-up.

            If you weren’t living in a hermetically sealed info bubble you would have by now sussed that “what [you] know” and what happened have very little in common. Plugging your fingers in your ears and muttering “neener-neener” is not a good information analysis technique.

            As for your list — Birtherism was a product of the Left. You could look it up (in similar vein, “Willie Horton” was Al Gore’s attack before it was George H W Bush’s.

            Death Panels? Have you read the Affordable Care Act? Or are you just relying on the assurances of the man who told you that if you like your present health care, if you like your doctor, you can keep them?

            Fixed elections? (a misnomer — I am surprised somebody so “well-informed” as you doesn’t realize that the actual complaint is invalid voters.) Given the total lack of controls, how would we know? I note that since the 2012 election a number of people have been convicted of casting multiple votes. If you can figure out how to use a search engine I encourage you to look it up. I am not interested in trying to divine what news sources you deem credible.

            I believe it has been amply established that you are in denial about the Benghazi and IRS scandals.

            1. And that was admitted recently by that exemplar of right-winger-dom, Howard Dean.

              Damn, this twit is dumber than dirt.

              1. Thanks for the reminder.
                Howard Dean wrote a column denouncing the Independent Payment Advisory Board (aka, Death Panels) just last month. As Gorge, ITRIYN, seems search engine challenged I will provide this handy clew: type “Howard Dean”, “IPAB” into search engine. Chose from Slate, Maddow, but NOT NY Times or BBC (they won’t yield any hits.)

                Oops – Gorge, ITRIHN, won’t read this because he has a class to teach at noon. I understand he will be covering how to sit up and beg.

          4. Don’t you understand that the things you mentioned aren’t “things” to you because you are in agreement with this administration and all it does? I’d be willing to wager quite a bit that if an administration with which you weren’t in agreement did the same things, you might consider them to be “things.”

      9. This has to be satire. No one could possibly be dumb enough to come on here and seriously hit every stereotype about trolls…could they?

        1. It seems to be real. And thank you for posting, Would you believe I forgot how to spell your last name and therefore couldn’t send you the guest post. (THIS is how my mind has been. No, I wasn’t ignoring you.)

        2. Yes they can. There are some people who have not only drunk the kool aid, they’ve mainlined it!

        3. Yes, Run DMC, I suppose I am. But really, the satire is all yours, friend. You people are right out of central casting. It’s too, too predictable.

        4. Maybe you’re right – Sarah was recently complaining about the sad state of troll-whacking on the page. Maybe one of her alter-egos took over and penned that to stir up some better responses.

          Oh… uh… HI, Sarah! Uh, I wasn’t talking about you or anything, really! (puts on innocent face – $3.98 at the costume store)

      10. “I take you all very seriously as most of you are armed to the teeth.”


        Got evidence for that George, or are you just making assumptions based on your prejudices?

        How many weapons and what sort are required to be “armed to the teeth”?

        1. I think it means that if you stacked all your weapons in one pile would the pile reach as high as your teeth.

          I’m only armed to maybe mid-calf.

          MadMike, on the other hand….

          1. Um… depends. do my knives count? The switchblade? How about the heat gun I use for stripping furniture — heck, most of my furniture refinishing tools with the possible exception of the bucket for the scrapings (and even that…) if we’re going firearms only, I’m armed to about mid-foot. Sigh. I don’t have that much money!

            1. While I am armed with naught but facts. logic, my wits and innate intelligence … which, when matched against George, who apparently possesses nothing comparable …

              But he beats me on arrogance, I will concede him that.

            2. Heat guns are not weapons, as such. They are torture implements (I’m sure you have gotten too close at least once). Please keep your tools properly segregated. 🙂

              1. Uh-oh! I said, “segregated”. I must be racist! Time to go for re-education, I guess. Again.

              2. If my friend Charles is reading this — Hi CHARLES! — he’ll remember when I was helping him refinish something, went inside to answer the phone, and while I was doing so, Charles stepped back to look at his work and while looking, SLOWLY turned the heat gun towards his crotch. I screamed into the phone and ran out on the patio JUST in time to stop him setting his pants on fire. It was … interesting. Yeah, I’ve burned my hands and leg…

                1. Heh. Yes, I know that you almost cannot use a heat gun for any significant length of time without burning yourself at least once. I had to use one to strip the bathroom door in the house I used to live it, because even after taking it off the hinges and laying it on sawhorses, then coating it with paint remover (and covering THAT with aluminum foil to keep it from drying) and leaving it overnight, it barely took one layer off. And one of the layers was almost too tough even for the heat gun. I kept it down to three or four burns between the door and the windowsill, though.

          2. Depends on which way you stacked them, if stacked horizontally I doubt I am armed to the brisket, but then I’m fairly tall, it would take a lot less weapons to arm some of the ‘altitude challenged’ commenters here to the teeth.

            1. Uh… I count my husband as a weapon, and he’s head and shoulders taller than I am.

              I rather favor Sarah’s “do you mean dedicated weapons, or stuff I can use as weapons?” comment.

              I cannot stand the TV trope of women being cornered “defenseless” in the kitchen.

              1. That’s one scene I really enjoyed from Flint and Drake’s Belisarius series: Belisarius’s wife gets wind of the assassins after her just soon enough to duck into a nearby restaurant and start making preparations: lots of flour in the soup to make it nice and sticky when she pours it over them, various kitchen knives lined up neatly where she can grab the handle of each next one if the previous one is wrenched out of her grip, and a nice solid ladle employed as a club. Result: eight assassins either dead, or disabled and dead shortly thereafter.

                Defenseless in a kitchen, indeed.

                1. Possibly the worst example of Foxfier’s complaint above has been watching a woman back herself past the knife block, from which the intruder takes a knife and uses it to menace her.

              2. If I have ANYTHING in my hand, I am not unarmed. Certain objects are better than others. Using a good Old Fashioned would be alcohol abuse, but I’d commit that sin in a pinch. Hot coffee is a good one. Jello, not as much. Sure, corner me in the kitchen. I’ll hate to clean up the blood.

                1. Asymmetrical warfare – see e.g. Between Planets for dual use in the kitchen but a messy sift the ashes cleanup.

                2. An apartment with a kitchen and a bedroom. I have a couple of decorative, old axes, two sickles, some old logging implement I don’t know what to call but it does kind of look like a not sharpened hook thing, those things you use to move logs which work a bit like scissors I also don’t know the name for, lots of different knives, hammers, a rock hammer (Finnish version, long handle), and oh yes, a sword, not sharp but since it’s meant to be used in shows it is solid, you could hit something with it without it breaking or bending, and it’s fairly heavy. And a couple of oak staffs. And some small stuff. Some flammable liquids, I like oil lamps and have one of those ethanol burning decorative tabletop fire-somethings, although I’m not sure I’d like to start playing with those liquids here unless in a really very, very bad spot, very risky in a place as small as mine.

                  But no firearms, since I see not much point as they are expensive and regulated to the death in this country.

                  Maybe I would be armed to about my ankles.

                    1. I have used a pike pole, probably very similar to what you have on your wall, I had actually never seen a truly modern one (as in made in the last thirty to forty years) until I googled that to look for pictures.

                      My dad actually stuck his boss with one when he worked in a plywood mill, I can’t imagine doing that nowadays and not getting fired.

                    2. Peavey still makes Peaveys in Maine in a triumph for the entrepreneur. Of active or recently active SF authors John Dalmas probably spent the most time in the woods for folks who want an excuse to read somebody.

                    3. Ah, I didn’t realize they were still in business, Peavey is the standard term I am used to, but specifically didn’t use it because it is a brand name and I assumed wouldn’t be familiar on the other side of the pond.

                3. I am always armed as, well, there’s this T-shirt I saw for Judo:

                  “Avoid confrontation, but if you must fight, hit your enemy with the largest weapon you have, the planet.”


          3. “I’m only armed to maybe mid-calf.”

            Alas… which body part is an inch and a half from the ground? Armed to the arch? Big toe?

          1. You haven’t defined your terms, so I don’t know what you consider a weapon. Until you do that there is no way for me to answer. If it helps, I don’t even own a steak knife, although I have a chinese cleaver I use for mincing ginger.

            Do you count butter knives as being armed?

      11. Could we please, just once, get a chewtoy that was intelligent enough to string two sentences together? Oh I forgot, if they are that intelligent they wouldn’t believe the line the Administration is feeding them about Benghazi, or the IRS.

        Now I will admit to very seldom reading Al Jazeera (actually only when it is quoted or linked to by someone else) and since I can only read English, the English version would have to be what I read. But I have it on authority from people I trust, who do read Arabic, that what is printed in the English translation often does not coincide with what is printed in the Arabic version.

        I realize that you take everything you are told by the ‘news’ sources you listed as the gospel truth, but for myself, if someone is repeatedly caught lieing to me, blatantly and unapologetically, I have problems believing what they say without facts or confirmation by anyone else except other proven unreliable and/or malicious sources.

        1. Hey, I take offense to this. I can string two sentences together. Well, that is my limit though. I can go hirer if you don’t count grammer & spelling.

          I was never this bad…. was I? If so, Sorry.

          Here I thought you guys on this blog, of Sarah’s, (for the most part) were overly optomistic & hopeful about the future of the US.

          Who new, that you were these crazed radicals bent on the destruction of the US. Wow! Allinzki would be pround.

          Thanks! Goerge for opening my eyes. My eyes to the crazy on this blog.


      12. To respond to your interesting rant, dear George,
        You are all actual crazy people. This is not true. I for one have the documentation to prove it. Not to mention, you are apparently not aware that the USSR routinely locked up dissenters as “insane”, and the rhetoric, reported in your sainted NYTimes, coming from this administration is not that far off the Soviet line.

        You’ve all been breathing the same putrid air for too long and now it’s all turned to CO2 and your brains are burning a bit. This is factually inaccurate. Excess CO2 in the air one breathes does nothing more than make a person sleepy. Too much of it and the person doesn’t wake up – which is not the fault of the CO2: it’s the lack of O2 that does it. Putrid, of course, is in the nose of the besniffer (and I don’t care if WordPress says that’s not a word. It totally should be).

        nothing in the US is, in any way, this comically bad George, dear, this is the blog of a science fiction writer, frequented by a great many science fiction fans. Extrapolation from minimal data points is what we do. In addition, all of us are well aware that the “bad” is there, it simply has not been deployed against the average person. Yet. I would suggest asking yourself why police departments need APCs and why the number of SWAT-style police actions has increased by 1500% or thereabouts since the 1970s. I would also suggest you consider a legal code that is so immense and convoluted that not only does it criminalize damn near everything, it does so in ways that make compliance impossible. The tax code is no better.

        gays are oppressed. Blacks are still oppressed. This is in fact true, but not so much in the USA. Blacks in Africa are busily oppressing each other as we speak, and oppressing gays like nobody’s business there, but somehow I doubt that’s what you mean. Here, most people don’t give a damn what color someone’s skin is or who they sleep with so long as they’re a decent person. The poverty trap of welfare and the poisonous cultures that actively discourage any kind of effort to break out of the trap are a different matter.

        Latinos are routinely discriminated against Not where I live they’re not. They’re treated just like anyone else. If they have the qualifications or the skills, they get employed, if they do the job they’re employed for they keep the job, and get promoted if they do well at it. This is discriminatory how, exactly?

        Middle Easterners are looked at with a suspicion and a scorn hot enough to melt the sun Really? George, George, you do know that Israelis are Middle Easterners, too. I’m sure you also realize that Israelis have attacked US civilians without provocation precisely zero times where persons adhering to Islam have been responsible for close to 100% of unprovoked attacks on US civilians in the last 20 years or so. Ethnic origin of those persons is irrelevant except as a cue to the chance that they will be adherents of a belief system that says the USA is Evil.

        Poor people are way oppressed. In that case I have been way oppressed many times in my life. So have many of the commenters here. Funny that none of us ever noticed it.

        Bankers are not I doubt you’d find any disagreement here on that front. Of course, most of the major banks in this country are in bed with the current administration, too.

        You have a lot of research to do, George. I haven’t even gone halfway through your rant and I’m finding major factual errors all over the place. Do try to show your work next time.

        1. The government support system for poor people where I live is kind of oppressive, since it operates on all or nothing base – either you live on it, or you find a work which allows you to get off it, but if you take something which does not pay well enough that you could live on that you may still lose all of it, at least for a while, so it can make people stay on the full support rather than try lifting themselves off of it piece by piece…

          (Whines) Oh yes, I have been oppressed.

          Besides, I’m a minority, I am. Three, actually. Left-handed, blood type AB- and that Mensa thing. How many people can claim three? And I am officially poor too. So I am undoubtedly still being oppressed. (Sniff)

      13. Al Jazeera America just started up – using the mostly dead network they bought from Al Gore.

        Who was their first guest? Stephen Walt. Noted anti-semitic “professor” from the infamous paper with Mearshimer in ’07 about the “Jewish Lobby” in US politics.

        1. I was amused they put their commercials on with flippin’ Nicktoons— and that I couldn’t tell it wasn’t an Obama ad (what, the fonts and style are the same!) until the end….

        2. Al Jazeera America make George cry:

          Al-Jazeera is accused of pro-Muslim Brotherhood broadcast of fake street death
          By Cheryl K. Chumley – The Washington Times

          Al-Jazeera, the Qatar-owned news station that just launched in the United States, apparently was caught airing the death of a Muslim Brotherhood-backed protester in the streets of Egypt — but it was faked.

          Pooray for Pallywood!

    3. Also, via Charlie Pierce over at Esquire:

      And if this isn’t the final evidence (here he links to THIS VERY article) for what John Cole calls Peak Wingnut, may I never live to see it.

      “I am Spartacus because Benghazi.”

      Ladies and gentlemen, your 2016 Republican platform.

      The mind, she boggles.

      1. BTW, Georgie, most here aren’t Republican. Most here are also WAY more educated than I am, and I am a year short of a PHD in foreign languages (five — how many do you speak) and literature. I’ve also lived abroad half my life. So, you — what’s the view from mom’s basement? AND Al-Jazeera? Cute, oh so cute, son.

        1. I’m sorry, but I don’t believe you have half the credentials you claim to have. And if you do, why all the crazee-hate? Why not use a bit of that fabulous brain? Take it out for a stroll, throw a ball around. Otherwise, it gets restless. Starts chewing on the couch. Imagining Benghazi and IRS and death panels and agenda 21. Then you need to get a new rug…Just go get the thing some fresh air and exercise already.

          Really, that article is simply the craziest bit of nonsense I have ever read. Except for all the comments that follow. They make it look almost sane.

          If you are that smart and that educated, you owe it to the world to use those tools properly. Start, as one should always do, with a little rational skepticism. And maybe, I dunno, some fact-checking here and there.

          1. “If you are that smart and that educated, you owe it to the world to use those tools properly. Start, as one should always do, with a little rational skepticism. And maybe, I dunno, some fact-checking here and there.”

            She has already taken your advice, now maybe you should take it yourself.

            By the way, her credentials are pretty easily checked, then again so are all the facts that you believe are craze right-wingnut conspiracies.

          2. George, if that really is your name, given what you do believe, without any evidence in support, I doubt many here are concerned with what you don’t believe.

            The only thing in your comment worth response (ignoring all the “you’re the crazee ones, not me” desperation) is the idea that anybody owes the world a damn thing beyond paying one’s way through it. By what basis do you presume to demand more?

          3. Sarah, can I have his IP address? Remember what I said about stupidity being painful? Georgie-poo here needs to be lit on fire. I promise to put him out. Eventually.

              1. I wonder if he’d more more or less concerned about our level of armament if he knew what I could do to him with things picked up at the hardware store.

                1. Is why I asked George, ITRIHN, to define weapon. I think he could be taken out with a shoelace or a strand of dental floss. I buy dental floss in bulk, so maybe I AM armed to the teeth.

                  1. Well certainly when you use it, unless you have some kind of contraption that allows you to floss hands-free.

                    The fact is there is only one weapon, the human mind. Everything else are just tools. Of course that idea requires a level of abstract thought completely beyond the capabilities of the most intelligent of the Left, which means Tweedle-dumissimo up there is way out of his depth.

                  2. In the middle of all this, a drive-by punning!?

                    Well, I suppose one has to entertain one’s self somehow, and the troll has gone from comedy to farce in fairly short order. > >

                  1. Let’s see.

                    I start with a Brown Belt in Judo (a martial art that is trained “full contact” from the first _day_).

                    I have flint napping as a hobby. (Did you know the techniques work really well with glass and porcelain?)

                    And from there? Well, let’s just say that chemistry and I are on better than speaking terms. When I got the Army training manual on improvised weaponry my reaction was “you mean there are people who don’t know that?”

                    Then there’s MadMike’s old article: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=175

                  2. Bare hands is runs the risk of damaging your manicure or causing discomfort. There is a reason we invented power tools.

            1. Jeff, see my comment above. George seems determined to prove the proposition that “The only reason no one has killed you is that you haven’t made yourself worth the time and trouble.”

      2. Oooh, and what a wonderful source for news and information that is (rolls eyes).

        Sorry, I might take you and those like you a bit more seriously if you weren’t so busy denying that Benghazi is a “thing”. Of course, you are more worried about the fact some poor rodeo clown wore an Obama mask. THAT is what is truly important.

        Or maybe I’d take you guys more seriously if you quit blaming Bush for everything. The man’s been out of office for more than a term and your side of the aisle still blames him for everything that goes wrong. When you aren’t doing that, some of you are demanding that he die. But that’s okay because he isn’t the One.

        You don’t like what is written here, that’s fine. Go play somewhere else. It is obvious from not only the tone of your comment but it’s content that you aren’t interested in entering into a discourse. You’d much rather look down your nose at those who don’t agree with you or who don’t see the world through the same weirdly distorted lenses that you do.

        So, unless you like being a chew toy for those folks who love a good game of whack-a-troll, go back to whatever politically correct rock you were living under and let the adults try to figure out how to make this country great again — without sending us into the crapper to do it.

      3. Oh dear George– you have a female mind 😉 *snort oh dear oh dear oh dear… no wonder you are confused (male body, female mind)…. dearie

        1. Cyn, you have no evidence that George has a male body. Or a mind. Assumptions based on facts not in evidence is generally imprudent.

            1. Reasonable enough, but …

              prods George.

              slaps a paw against George.

              Sarah? Merooow? It’s broken.

              1. I’m going to guess George is out drinking and telling people how he showed those wingnutters. he’s be dismayed when he comes back to his computer and by morning we should have batch of drunken and even less coherent comments.

                1. Shucks. I wanted to point out that an oppressive government oppresses all and that it is only by reining it in that we can actually address problems. When people turn to the Federal State to redress oppression they forget that they are increasing their dependence on the state, enhancing the State’s power over them. A State powerful enough to give them everything they want is a State powerful enough to make them dance for its benefits.

                  Of course, I doubt George will listen to me since I don’t blog for Women’s Wear Weekly.

                  1. I haven’t replied to him directly, and I’m not going to because I’m sure he (she?) would not take me seriously (besides I’m of course late to the game since I just got to reading this). People like him are always very sympathetic to us poor blue-collar workers provided we don’t talk back after which we are usually dismissed as irrelevant (no official credentials, which I freely admit I do not have). They prefer to talk for us, not listen to us. So probably no point trying. Leave him to you heavy-hitters.

                    1. People like him are always very sympathetic to us poor blue-collar workers provided we don’t talk back …

                      The idiomatic English phrase for that attitude is “provided you know your place.”

            2. Now my brain is trying to remember which story I read where a character named George, not seen “on-screen” for several chapters, turns out to be a woman named Georgette or Georgina or something, and all her friends call her George but forgot (not “conveniently” forgot, just plain forgot) to mention her sex to the protagonist. If it’s a real story and not some constructed memory my brain is making up for me, I’m sure someone here will have read it and know what I’m talking about.

                1. You are undoubtedly thinking of George Eliot

                  Mary Anne (alternatively Mary Ann or Marian) Evans (22 November 1819 – 22 December 1880), better known by her pen name George Eliot, was an English novelist, journalist and translator, and one of the leading writers of the Victorian era. She is the author of seven novels, including Adam Bede (1859), The Mill on the Floss (1860), Silas Marner (1861), Middlemarch (1871–72), and Daniel Deronda (1876), most of them set in provincial England and known for their realism and psychological insight.

                  She used a male pen name, she said, to ensure her works would be taken seriously. Female authors were published under their own names during Eliot’s life, but she wanted to escape the stereotype of women only writing lighthearted romances. An additional factor in her use of a pen name may have been a desire to shield her private life from public scrutiny and to prevent scandals attending her relationship with the married George Henry Lewes, with whom she lived for over 20 years.

                  1. I’d always heard the first part of why she called herself George Eliot (wanted to be taken seriously), but nobody ever mentioned the second part (carrying on an affair with a married man) to me. My cynical mind leads me to believe that the former was a lot more of an excuse than Mary Anne Evans would ever have admitted, and that the latter was a lot closer to the truth of the matter. But the former plays well with the press, so it’s the one that everyone hears.

              1. Well, I don’t know if Ilona Andrews pulled the stunt of not telling the POV character that “George” was female, but they do have a female character who wants to be called “George”. Since George (and her parents) are were-Grizzles, nobody argues. [Wink]

                By the way, Ilona Andrews is a husband-wife writing team so the “they” above is correct.

                1. In Gunnerkrigg Court, George Parley is a girl. Her father filled out her birth certificate before she was born, and having gotten everything else right, refused to relent on the name.

                  She goes by Parley.

      4. Democrats actually put forward the theory that Bush deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen and you can perfectly reasonable inferences about the dishonest behavior and incoherent lies of the Obama administration about the Benghazi terror attack “peak wingnut”?

        Frankly, you are showing peak wingnut yourself.

      5. Peak Wingnut?

        What a stupid term.

        I’m sure there are a few people here who vote Republican, doesn’t make them Republican.

        See, the problem with pathetic little trolls like you George is that you come in, drop a few lines of garbage with no facts to back it up, then proceed to insult everyone because you don’t have an original thought in that sad little brain of yours.

        You can’t think for yourself and you’ve drank the kool-aid for so long that you have permanent brain damage.

        In the end George, it is you and yours who are going to lose. People are starting to wake up to all the bullshit and lies and abuses of power by the Progressive scum in both parties and they are getting sick of it.

        A reckoning is coming and it is going to be wonderful to watch.

  2. “The Spartacus this refers to is the myth of the brave slave standing against the Roman empire and how everyone claims to be him in the climatic scene.”

    From what I’ve read, the historical Spartacus had a VERY modern view of liberty. He wasn’t just against slavery for himself, but against it for EVERYONE. That couldn’t be said for most in his actual “army”. It can’t even be said of many people living today.

    The thing is, what do we do? How do we ensure the next Lois Lerner wets herself in fear over thoughts of what will happen if she tries to turn the law against her political opponents?

    1. Theoretically, we have the right to poke into their business to a greater extent than they poke into ours. But we do not exercise that right and we let ourselves be overwhelmed by scandal fatigue. It doesn’t have to be that way.


        1. One form of action is to gather intelligence about the personal lives of the Washington scumbags–and even the state and local equivalents wherever one lives. Intelius–if you have the cash–does and excellent background check for about $60.00, that will tell you where the subject has lived, what they’ve ever been arrested for, sued by, divorced from etc. This will lead you to the names of other individuals who may have even MORE interesting dirt about them. Knowledge IS power. All you need is the name of the subject and their home state…

        2. “Places we can go to take action”?

          You mean like this:

          SATURDAY, AUGUST 17
          1:30-3:00 PM
          Centennial Hall, El Paso County Commissioner’s Chambers, 200 S. Cascade, Downtown Colorado Springs

          For your Federal Rep?

          Don’t bother with your senators, one is useless, and the other is actively against you.

          MARK WALLER
          Minority Leader
          State Representative – District 15
          Office Location: 200 East Colfax
          Denver, CO 80203

          Which is a bit more of a hike, but I bet you could find his home address if you tried.

          We don’t need *more* ways to “take action”–that’s part of the problem, people want to twitch their pinky and have it mean something.

          You show up on their doorstep–even to their office, and they take you seriously.

          1. This, this is true which is why one of the most important things to know is the names and territories of all the governments and their addresses, along with their faxes and emails.

          1. Page liked and shared. Thanks for the tip. Shared with comment: “Investigations and censure are made of those who make fun of dictators in tyranny, not Presidents in free countries. Which do you want this to be?”

            1. Oh there was a cute comment I didn’t let through, because like I need another active troll — I have a chapter to write, a basement to clean from the floods, a column to turn into PJM, a war with Gilda to start, my wife to kill … I’m swamped — was that Nakoula B. Nakoula was guilty, I mean he was on parole and went and used computers. Right… and he’d have been picked up if the administration didn’t need a scapegoat. As for the lady who runs true the Vote she violated OSHA — as we all do, every day, if we live in the US — I was going to let it through and answer “yes, and in Hitler’s Germany Jews were manipulating the markets and had got them into world war one. A totalitarian state can ALWAYS justify its orders of arrest. When they come for you, you too will be guilty of a crime.” — So, forgive my digression ad-hitlerum. But I’m not letting that critter through. We already have three chew toys in the comments, and they might be troll hammered just because I’m tired, and p*ssy and have the French revolution in my head which is not good company.

        3. The tag line above was a site reference. Here’s the link:

          From you, I’d like publishing advice. I’m assembling a data warehouse and will be selling slices of it as ebooks under the working title “Prerequisites: the stuff you should know before you fix the government”. It’s a horrible title and I know it so something better would be helpful.

          These will be little directories of all the governments of the United States along with bits of advice and a call to organize the blocking and tackling of the task to bring our governments under control.

          I can slice it in state form, county form, or both. I’m inclined towards both.

            1. I’ve read the articles and am torn on whether to wait for the finish of the 2013 edition of to buy the older 2012. What do you advise?

            1. Yes, I do. There are special issues since the data is overwhelmingly public domain and must remain transparent both as to source and process for it to be trusted. If you have a solution to that…

  3. This was very moving. I’m rarely outspoken, because I feel like no-one is listening any more. But I’m sharing this, and hoping for real change, not the faux promises of the professional politician, in our future.

  4. Generally I am without hope, but today I am watching the inauguration of the president of Paraguay online. A country with a history of a repressive military dictatorship and attendent corruption, that after the coup elected a revolutionary theology ex-bishop, (supported by Peronist and other types of socialist neighboring countries), and then impeached him and wound up electing a conservative.
    How it turns out, only time can tell, for example they still apparently have the corruption, but no-one would have called this outcome.

    1. Anyone paying attention could have called the outcome of the Paraguay election. Fernando Lugo was placed by foreign speculators. When Lugo tried to remove farmers to make way for foreign corporate agricultural interests, resistors among the farmers created violence. Lugo was impeached for mishandling the violence and for attempting illegal land transactions on behalf of foreign interests. After he was removed, the IMF did a study and found that Paraguay was ripe for infrastructure. They published a report that said the GDP of the nation could rise by more than 8% if the nation were to accept IMF money to fund the projects. Now, Cartes, facing DEA investigations and ongoing money laundering allegations is being offered a carrot. He agrees to take IMF money and allow foreign corporations to rape the nation of Paraguay and all of the investigations will go away. Today, for the inauguration of President Cartes, there were guests in the audience. 150 foreign corporate executives representing IMF funding nations (mostly USA) who will be siphoning the IMF money…. not hiring Paraguayan people…. suppressing farmers through the DEA…. Paraguay’s economy won’t improve… Paraguay won’t be able to pay back the IMF money…. Cartes will be impeached or step down (richer than he came in with some of that IMF money in his wallet)…. the USA will forgive their portion of the IMF debt and the nation of Paraguay will be owned in the UN by the USA. This is not simple conjecture. This is the same pattern that happens over and over and over. Conservative or Liberal makes no difference whatsoever. They are all owned by the banks and corporate multi-nationals.

      1. Please take your tablets. Thank you. The world thanks you. (Look, I grew up in a Latin country. “It’s the US and the corporate interests” keeping us down is a great excuse for endemic corruption, kakistocracy, kleptocracy AND a culture that encourages two hour lunches. No, don’t argue. I LIVED it.)

        1. I appreciate a first-hand account and I don’t pretend to dispute your insight. The shortcomings of the regional political culture in Latin America, however, don’t excuse the reprehensible behavior of global greed run amok. (I’m not attacking capitalism, I adore it and hope that one day the USA will actually attempt to exercise it.) People who place the value of the dollar above human lives need to be called out. To my larger point, liberal and conservative politics make no difference when all things are considered.

          In response to your blog, I enjoyed reading it. You clearly have a gift for moving people. However, Benghazi and F&F seem like flimsy events for declaring a revolution. If more than ten thousand American lives lost and hundreds of thousands of foreign civilians dead and $5 Trillion of debt don’t upset you….

          1. I generally make it a point not to argue with idiots on the internet any more.

            I hope you have a nice weekend.

            1. I see. I’m really making an effort to be civil and discuss the blog post. I want to believe that there are people on here who also prefer to discuss rather than vent. If I am wrong, I will find another medium with open minds.

              The initial post, yes, painted me as some tin-foil-wearing conspiracy theorist. If my second post portrayed me as a liberal, I apologize–but I stand by my assessments. I really am a moderate independent. If Obama has committed crimes, let him pay for it. If Bush/Cheney committed crimes (they did) I’m not going to put blinders on. The idea that there are only two camps in American politics is what is dividing us. I believe the two sides are much closer in ideology than career politicians would have us believe.

              If you honestly have a point, feel free to let me know. If there’s something I’m missing, tell me about it. But don’t be offended if I have a counter-point. And name-calling just lowers the quality of the forum and reflects poorly on your position. Attacking a person rather than their argument causes people to become defensive and less amenable as a matter of pride.

              1. You put a lie to your claimed goal in paragraph #1 in para #3, and arguably in para #2.

                You are no more a “moderate” than the former friends who claimed that they were “right wing” because they view Obama as a moderate, rather than a hard-right winger.

              2. I really don’t understand why so many people seem to think they can make a claim to wanting civil discussion and then insult people in the same paragraph by telling them that they are close-minded.

                In the second paragraph, you show your leanings with this sentence: “If Obama has committed crimes, let him pay for it. If Bush/Cheney committed crimes (they did) I’m not going to put blinders on.” You only allow for the possibility that Obama has committed crimes, when there have been numerous examples, even, that the media never thought to cover up, including his apology tour, which Sarah mentioned, which is arguably Treason. Yet you add in a definitive declaration that Bush & Cheney DID commit crimes, without any indication of what you might consider to be one.

                Regarding your ideology statement: It’s the Career Politicians who have ideologies closer than we would like, not the actual members.

                1. You know what my “open-minded” means? Every tin-pot theory can lodge in the mind w/o research… ummm zombies *SWAT get that story out of my mind.

                  1. I thought open-minded meant “you agree with whatever I say–or else!”

                    On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 9:35 AM, According To Hoyt wrote:

                    > ** > Cyn Bagley commented: “You know what my “open-minded” means? Every > tin-pot theory can lodge in the mind w/o research… ummm zombies *SWAT get > that story out of my mind.” >

              3. You still here?

                You can make any claims you like, but based on your initial posts your sources of information–which betray your world view–do not even rise to the level of being wrong, they are flat out propaganda.

                We cannot have a discourse because your mind is more closed than an Evangelical Fundamentalist.

                All that is left is a shitfight, and as I indicated, I don’t do that with idiots anymore.

          2. When all things are considered, 50 million years from now none of this will make any difference.

            In the matter of how we start to find our way out of the current cul-de-sac the question of conservative or liberal politics does matter somewhat. But if you are blind to that I am not on this earth to enlighten you (absent a handsome fee for my time.)

            1. I have a nagging sense that humanity has a finite amount of time to get off-planet in a self-sustaining way before the next existential threat appears: runaway global warming, an ice age, supervolcano, asteroid, natural or artificial plague, etc etc.

              My guess is that we have a few decades to a century or two, but I could be wrong wrt either side of the range.

              1. I also agree with Lord Keynes on the desirability of a good breakfast. There may be other things on which we agree in general with significant disagreement on the specifics. IIRC, Lord Keynes liked poached eggs while I prefer country ham.

          3. ” If more than ten thousand American lives lost and hundreds of thousands of foreign civilians dead and $5 Trillion of debt don’t upset you….”

            Guessing your implying the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq here? If so I would like to see some references for ‘hundreds of thousands of foreign civilians dead’ I won’t even bother to argue the definition of civilians.

              1. If I thought you had the intellectual capacity to understand it I would recommend you read Sherman’s letter the people of Atlanta. It isn’t terribly long or complicated and it succinctly illuminates why your position is unmitigated bilgewater.

              2. Well I gave you a chance to back up your ridiculous, patently false statement so that we could have a ‘civil discussion.’

                Now I’ll lower the quality of this forum by calling you a worthless, lieing, leftard, commie cull.

              3. Arguably, yes. Civilians are going to die in armed conflict. There’s no way around it. If the collateral damage is kept down to 1 per hostile target (tens of thousands), it is, while still regrettable, still within the realm of expectation. If, however, the number reaches 10 per (hundreds of thousands), then clearly the tactics are not producing accurate enough targeting of hostiles, and should be reexamined. The notion that there can be zero civilian casualties is a shibboleth of the Left, and only used to beat Conservatives and Republicans over the head when they have no other arguments to throw.

                And the notion of never having armed conflict is laughable. The only way for that to happen is for us to roll over and allow them to do whatever they want. Not going to happen.

                1. Remember that the overtly fraudulent nonsense published in The Lancet (and subsequently disowned by The Lancet) never distinguished between civilian casualties inflicted by US forces, those inflicted by insurgent forces or those inflicted by Iraqi government – Saddam or post invasion Iraqi – and that is the most obvious of the dishonesty. The whole point of the study was that everything was our “fault” regardless of the truth.

                  1. Notice that current reports of death tolls in Egypt typically include police and civilian deaths as one number, and generally ignore that the Muslim Brotherhood foot soldiers have fired upon the police with automatic weapons.

                  2. Also (if we’re talking about the same “paper”) the error bars on the study were between 18 thousand and 120 thousand killed. Something like p value of .5 (yes, .5. Not .05).

                    The same tards refused to acknowlege that deaths during the time when the coalition were enforcing peace were lower than when Sadam was killing Kurds, Shites and marsh arabs.

                    Because in their mind it’s ok when the King kills his people, after all, they’re *his*.

              4. I’ll give this a shot: you appear to be following a pattern of behavior consistent with trolls that have shown up here in the past. It goes about like this:
                An Untamed Poster appears! “Hi, *inserts unprovable thesis*”
                Huns demolish unprovable thesis with malice aforethought.
                Untamed Poster: “well, what about *unrealistic thesis*”
                Huns bring out big guns and start calling names.
                Untamed Poster: “wait a sec, I’m a reasonable person, you’re all being mean to me” *backpedals* *throws “evidence”*
                *Herself unleashes Banhammer of Righteous Smiting*

                Now, this is a common pattern we see here at ATH. Everything you’ve done thus far falls into that pattern. The repeats in the above pattern typically involve more in the way of trollish behavior. The problem is where you segued from conspiracy theory to viewing human lives as widgets. When the top leaders in a state do nothing and less than nothing when their personal emissaries to other nations are killed with impunity, that weakens the state. When those leaders repeatedly blame one faction within their state for the troubles they don’t deal with, that weakens the state. When they pile false responsibility on the head of the previous leaders, that weakens the state. When they purposefully circumvent some of the most stringently enforced laws in the state in order to hurt a group with whom they don’t agree, that weakens the state. Our armed forces, as all armed forces through history, understand they’re putting their lives in harm’s way, simply by signing up. Ambassadors are – historically – sacrosanct. There are good and appropriate reasons for this. If someone kills your ambassador, this is technically casus belli. For the paramount leader to turn around and blame it on THEIR OWN NATION is tantamount to treason. On the world stage, this is presenting your throat to the wolves.

                So, please, moderate your behavior. We are a jocular bunch, here. We like debate.

                Incidentally, blaming Bush is a non-sequiter, a comparable debating tactic to the ad hominem you dislike.

                    1. You’ll need to ask Melvin. I, myself, am unfamiliar with Troll anatomy. I’ve got a solid handle on Trollish behavior, but I’m not getting that close to ’em to find out where they keep what.

                1. Yes, ambassadors are supposed to be sacrosanct, they aren’t always. Ambassadors have been killed in the region before, obviously they have forgotten the lesson about doing so that Genghis Khan taught them, after Benghazi we should have retaught them that lesson, instead we have a treasonous President who attempts to blame our nation and our citizens living in our nation (which incidentally has a little body of water called the Atlantic Ocean separating us, for the terrorists murdering our ambassador.

              5. The point? Just four people so Benghazi is a non-issue? Have you heard that we don’t “leave people behind?” even when they are dead? Does this NOT scare you? Geez…Does it have to be thousands of people before you get upset? I bet that is not true though… if one person in you immediate family was killed in such a manner you wouldn’t be forgiving. We think of those four men (were there more?) as a member of the American family.

                1. The day after we lose an American city (and I quake at this, because I have friends in all major ones. Good friends of the “like family” type) these idiots will immediately go to “We had it coming.” George Bush was in many ways a lousy president, but I will never talk him down for ONE reason only: after 9/11 he didn’t cower, he didn’t apologize and he didn’t BLAME US. Yes, he called for war on a tactic and he kept talking about our friends the Saudis. But my standards are low. The first US president I remember was Carter.

                  1. Same tactics they used after the 9/11 (when we came out of the shock). Yep… dumb *sses

                    Plus George Bush did show better colors after 9/11 than a certain PreZ after Benghazi.

                  2. Plus I remember Carter as president and then the complete turn around under Pres. Reagan. I was also a child when Nixon was president, but I don’t remember much about it– I was trying to not get BORED in school.

                  3. The major cities are where the “we had it coming” crowd are concentrated. The more of them they take out, the harsher the response will be .

                    1. My impression is that Mary was saying that if enough of the “it’s the US’s fault” folks were killed, then the Islamics would get a harsh response from the pro-USA types who would now out-number the “it’s the US’s fault” types.

                    2. After 9/11 I wanted to sing The Battle Hymn of the Republic, but it seemed that everybody went for America the Beautiful.

                      Maybe it would be different if terrorists took out a city. Maybe.

                    3. I confess to taking fiendish amusement at post-9/11 performances which included the fifth & sixth verses:

                      In the beauty of the lilies Christ was born across the sea,
                      With a glory in His bosom that transfigures you and me:
                      As He died to make men holy, let us live to make men free;
                      [originally …let us die to make men free]
                      While God is marching on.
                      Glory! Glory! Hallelujah! Glory! Glory! Hallelujah!
                      Glory! Glory! Hallelujah! While God is marching on.

                      He is coming like the glory of the morning on the wave,
                      He is wisdom to the mighty, He is honor to the brave;
                      So the world shall be His footstool, and the soul of wrong His slave,
                      Our God is marching on.
                      Glory! Glory! Hallelujah! Glory! Glory! Hallelujah!
                      Glory! Glory! Hallelujah! Our God is marching on.

                    4. I have read a fiery gospel, writ in burnished rows of steel:
                      ‘As ye deal with my contemners, so with you my grace shall deal;
                      Let the Hero, born of woman, crush the serpent with his heel,
                      Since God is marching on.’

                    5. Ah. It would be interesting to know whether it was taught in response to 9/11 or whether it was in the curriculum all along. If the latter, at least in wasn’t removed in deference to…certain…delicate sensibilities.

                    6. Yeah, it does depend on the wipe-out. Not, unfortunately, on how little we would like it to happen.

                  4. I don’t know Sarah. I fear that if someone does manage to set of a nuke or something of that nature in one or more American cities, they will awaken a terrible monster.

                    The world will know what total war is once again, instead of the constrained actions we have been taking.

                    1. Possible. It’s our pattern isn’t it. And I’m afraid that’s inevitable. The fool on capitol hill thinks if he gets us attacked he’ll get the caliphate… At least that’s the only reason I can figure for what passes for his foreign policy.

                    2. Yeah, then that is when he sees the officers in the military move into D.C. with adequate forces to place him under “protective” custody, if D.C. is still there and unleash hell on those that attacked us.

                      Sometime later, we have elections and whichever candidate is the most vociferous about completely eliminating that threat will be elected.

          4. “and $5 Trillion of debt don’t upset you….”

            Boy, I remember the days when that sounded like a lot of debt … before Obama.

            1. yes. 17 trillion have got me right down irked. AND we don’t know the latest figures because we shouldn’t worry our pretty heads about it, our betters say.

              1. Well, and the fact that this troll falsely ascribed all of that debt to the Iraq/Afghanistan wars was brazenly mendacious.

                1. Yes. he reminded me of the friend who said — I SWEAR TO G-D — we were spending a trillion a day in Iraq. I don’t know where she got that figure, but I couldn’t convince her it was a) wrong. b) insane.

            2. Yes. This just got me to realize something. Bush added $5 Trillion in debt over 8 years (although arguably the Democrat-controlled Congress could be blamed for over a third of that), and Obama has added $8 Trillion in 5 years. Mirror images!

              1. Some time back I calculated that Obama was adding as much debt every month as Bush did every year. While Barry has improved (sequester apparently ain’t such a bad idea for kids what won’t leave the cookie jar be) that improvement is more on the order “of every six weeks” instead of every month.

                The relative silence of those who denounced Bush’s profligacy (let’s not even address “culture of corruption” or contrast the hissies thrown over Valerie Jarrett with present administration behaviours) says all you need to know about their agendas and their integrity.

              2. If you watch Democrats, they will “brag” about Obama reducing debt (when they should be referring to “deficit” ). But what they do is ascribe FY09 to George W. Bush. Normally this is not unfair, the FY budget was supposed to be adopted in October of the previous year ie., October 2008 while Bush was still in office. But that year, Democrats delayed the budget and appropriations bills for a big stunt, having Obama sign them the first week in office in January of 2009. With the bulk of the faux “stimulus” package later added to it, the FY09 deficit was very large. FY09 deficit is entirely Obama’s responsibility.

          5. I would suggest that you adopt better friend-or-foe procedures or be prepared to get yelled at a lot.

            “Global greed run amok” is an interesting phrase. There’s a legitimate application of that, but it is far more commonly used by thieves and scoundrels to steal from us so those using it should be prepared for a strong negative reaction (I see below you’re already getting it with both barrels).

            As for the actual, proper, use of the phrase, I would refer you to a very nice blog covering the subject of dead capital:

            The failure in 3rd world countries to adjust their governing processes to real world conditions on the ground as the US adjusted in its own history is a horrible failure and a real injustice and it’s costing the world trillions of dollars right out of the very limited reserves of the poor.

            One of the markers which is getting you yelled at is that $5T in debt. I hope you realize that in one term, President Obama exceeded Bush’s “unpatriotic” (Obama’s word) increase in debt. He has set up this country’s finances for a frightening fall that is, at this point, unavoidable. He has also done tremendous damage to american civil liberties by extending, normalizing, and institutionalizing temporary emergency measures that were barely tolerable in a nation just caught in a surprise attack and scrambling for security.

            President Bush is not in power. He is not a present danger. President Obama is.

        2. re ” kakistocracy” – which Wikipedia describes as “1. Government under the control of a nation’s worst or least-qualified citizens.”

          Huzzah! Descriptive vocabulary which hits the target like a Star Wars laser. Thanks for broadening my vocabulary.

      2. I won’t argue your deeper understanding of the subject, but I will point out that the sequence is out of whack; traditionally in South America it runs dictator->elected Socialist->Socialist dictator->coup->repeat: while the economic and social problems are never addressed with anything other than riot police and foreign wars, and all the IMF and development grants get siphoned off to the cronies and supporters of the regime while the donor nations vie to get an armlock on the economy until the default comes. Cartes may get a way out if the Chaco oil reserves are proven, and if he can arrange for favorable positions for trade.
        I found it interesting that the news commentators in Paraguay were talking about Paraguay’s place in the South American Common Market, (Mercosur) and in the same breath were referring to Paraguay’s partners, Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay, as “The Triple-Alliance”, as in Paraguay’s opponents in the (eponymous) war of 1864-70 that cost Paraguay probably 60% of its population. I think there may be some grassroots resistance to outside interference indicated by that, and there may be some hope. In 1989, in the coup that ended Stroessner’s military dictatorship no-one could have said that today’s inauguration with children singing and representatives from any respectable country or multinational would have happened.

      3. “the USA will forgive their portion of the IMF debt and the nation of Paraguay will be owned in the UN by the USA.”

        That’s weapons grade crazy.

        1. no, no, no. It’s passed weapons grade and is firmly in bat guano crazy. You know all the people whose debts we forgave? Every nation we helped? We OWN them, yes indeed. This is why the UN does exactly what we wa– what do you mean they don’t? But Joe-boy knows the truth. He read about the secret conspiracies of the illuminati. Who are we to disturb his insanity.

        2. …the nation of Paraguay will be owned … by the USA

          Because that’s just what the USA has decided it needs to fix everything – A Paraguay!

          And as for the “in the UN” part, I’ll just defer to Sarah, adding if the US really wanted to “own” some proportion of the General Assemby votes, especially in recognition of the nature of the majority of governments represented int he UN General Assembly, the process of acquiring said ownership would be more along the lines of direct personal payments than international high finance involving the IMF and World Bank.

            1. Kind of like buying a car that has been proven a lemon, it doesn’t matter how little you pay for it, all you are going to end up with is an unreliable money sink.

  5. Lovers of liberty, take heart. Liberty is an evolutionary inevitability. Even Marx caught distorted glimpses of it — warped by his own bigotry and astigmatism, but still — the state will wither away. Government is an assault, and affront to liberty, and daily ever more people are coming to realize it. We who have not come late to this party need to start acting like we believe that the future is ours, instead of hanging our heads and slinking off like whipped dogs. WE’RE RIGHT, DAMMIT! Start acting like it!


    1. I’m not just right, I’m furious. The whole seventies people gave communism the higher moral ground because they BOUGHT the propaganda.
      I don’t buy the propaganda. We’re MORALLY right. AND the totalitarians and wanna be totalitarians can have my middle fingers. BOTH of them.

      1. This might hearten you a bit.

        A fairly close friend of mine through high school, who lived near me in the university district years later, and who was a card-carrying member of the CPUSA…

        We sat in his garrett listening to the news of the fall of Saigon, and, later, the fall of Pnom Penh. In those moments, he had an epiphany (that I’d been working to bring him to for years) and fell away from the Revolution, expressing sadness and disappointment at the savagery of what was supposed to be a joyous moment for The People. You might say the scales fell away from his eyes.

        And I see that moment as a microcosm of what is happening today in America WRT the Obamacare atrocity. The pebble that starts the avalanche. Just don’t go around whining, “There’s nothing we can do.” Yes there is. And the first thing is to act and speak confidently as to the superiority of the liberty agenda.


        1. Realizing I didn’;t make this explicit, I’m speaking through the fourth wall, there in the last paragraph, not at you, Sarah. Sorry.


            1. That is a good point (that comic is a favorite of mine), but at the same time encryption can be useful. Rubber hose cryptography is terribly effective, but it only comes into play if you individually come to someone’s attention. Encryption would still keep your communication out of the automated data-parsing that the NSA et al are employing en masse. And that (as the good captain says) ain’t nothin’. If you use it selectively (ie only for secretive things) then it becomes a warning flag in its own right. But if you use it for everything, you’re just one more crypto-geek.

              1. Using encryption on public networks is a moderately good way of drawing attention to yourself.

                No one encrypts files and email except crackpots, a narrow range of professionals, and people with something to hide.

                I don’t need to rubber hose your password out of you to find out if you’re a person of interest, all I have to do is use pen register information to build a social network (and “I” don’t have to do that, it can be automated). As soon as you’re some number of hops from a person of interest (and especially if you intersect that person’s network in more than one place) you and the intermediaries are now persons of interest, and a flag gets through.

                That flag would cause some bored government functionary to spend a day digging through whatever web fora and unencrypted (or poorly encrypted) traffic you or people in your social network generate (twitter, facebook, etc.) and either close the file on you as “harmless crank” or you become a target of investigation.

                That’s how *I* would do it if I was an immoral bastard in charge of the NSA, CIA or FBI.

          1. I saw that XKCD comic too, and it is pretty funny.

            I still think making the NSA work for a living is preferable to simply handing them all your communications via g-mail or facebook. (So they can blackmail you later if you ever give them trouble) If they want to see my innermost thoughts, they can get a warrant. If they come to the door with a rubber hose and a wrench, I’ve got bigger problems than communications privacy!

            Unfortunately, securing your communications requires that the people you talk to also want to take the time to do it. 😦

            1. Back when I was in the AF, there was an article in one of the enlisted person’s magazines about the Soldier’s Code, specifically the bit about giving name, rank, and serial number and “resist answering other questions to the best of my ability.” There were several “tricks” to use to avoid giving up important information, especially if you really knew classified information. (Being able to keep them to “unclassified trivia” and away from important stuff is a win.) But this point was made: “Yes, they can probably beat it out of you. But make them beat it out of you. Don’t just give it up because you expect, or even know, they can.”

              1. Amen – make them work for the info they want. Don’t just roll over and give it to them. I think I may have seen the same briefing/article.

            2. I had a friend who was working for a large employer who was monitoring his office emails in a ploy to intimidate him and find basis for firing him for cause.
              When he found out about that, unofficially, he asked that I help him out by giving them a larger volume of emails that they had to go through so they would have less time to get between him and his work. I started typing up the last four numbers of phone numbers from entire random pages of the phone book and emailing them to him. I had read somewhere that was a fair approximation of a random number generator and it tickled me to think someone might attempt to decode it.

              1. I once used about 1,000 digits of Pi as a random number generator for generating random starting passwords for a website. The code used the millisecond value in the time of the request to determine which number to start with, then it took six pairs of digits starting from there to turn into characters. You can get well over a million digits from various websites. That would have probably worked well, too.

    2. 80+ percent of the population are peasants and *WANT* the boot on their neck.

      They want it lightly on their neck, but they want it there.

      Who are you to deny them?

        1. Agreed. They mostly want everyone *else* in slavery.

          They’re getting there. Economic slavery? Proceeding. Intellectual slavery? Have you seen the public school system? Political slavery? Watching Obama….

          It’s short sighted, lazy, and passively cruel to take from those who actually work and produce in order to allow a privileged class to live in ease.

        2. The founders were wrong–man is not free, he’s bound tightly to his genes, and genetically *most* people are fit to be followers, peasants, hoi-polloi. They want freedom, but not the way “we” think about it. They want particular, narrow freedoms, most of which center around tingling certain nerve endings, ingesting certain chemicals, or having someone else deal with the consequences of their actions.

          They don’t want–and they’re not equipped–to make good, thought out, long term decisions–witness the success of US Rental Center and Pawn Shops. Witness the continued success of the Democrat party.

          Not that as Dan indicates, even those on the nominal right want folks chained, just in a different way.

          Bugger that noise. The pirate flag is flying.

          1. True Freedom/Liberty is like a man sit at the edge of a cliff with no safety net.

            This analogy is better with a picture, and for the pic you can view it here: http://twitter.com/Joshkie/status/360645674632622080/photo/1

            If you viewed the pic, was you first though that guy is crazy, or man what a view? But if not, imagine how does sitting at a great hight makes you feel.

            For me there are two types of people those who want security; which is a pipe dream as there is only one guaranty in life. So they settle for the allusion of safety and call them safety nets.

            And the other are those that understand there is no guaranty that you will never fall/fail. That life is risk. That you might not get a tomorrow.

            So, it boils down to Ben Franklin’s eternal question: Safety or Liberty.

            1. Illusion — sorry, but I view it as my duty to polish your last quirks in English. English teachers never die — but here’s the thing… I wouldn’t bet against the founders. I’m not deifying them. They were men. But they were better read and smarter than even this group (part of it was the times.)
              Betting against them is like betting against a one eyed man named Ace who smiles a lot.
              Also, liberty might suck as a system… except for everything else.

              1. And when it all falls to consequences, there are always choices. Therefore always freedom, and that is what I see the founders embracing. Rather than limiting those choices to join or die (a sucky choice is still a choice), they gave us the freedom to rise or fall on our own.

                Even those who “want the boot on their neck” are allowed this choice. But, because of a damned wise decision (back in July 1-4 1776 if I remember correctly) by smarter men than I’ll ever be, those who want the boot do not automatically get to make that decision *for* me. The founders gave us a Republic, not a bloody Democracy. The Republic is hanging on by bloody fingers, but she’s still with us.

                And, like our host said, the system has flaws. But compared to anything else I’ve seen tried, or heard of, we’re better off with the freedom (and the terrible responsibility inextricably intertwined) that we have.

                1. Dan,

                  But compared to anything else I’ve seen tried, or heard of, we’re better off with the freedom (and the terrible responsibility inextricably intertwined) that we have.

                  Tried! That is the rub with me that leads to a central question of, “Should we try for a reset of ‘The Republic’ or Boldly venture farther down the path of Liberty?”

                  Fear is a double edged sword. It led us to where we are at, and can motivate us to change or try something new. It can be motivating or parilizing.

                  Some think that when I say “Safety Net” I’m talking about the social ones. But what is government, but the ulitment represintation of that ideal. It was fear that the Union would colapse that lead to some of FF’s feeling that what was needed was a stronger Central Government. Rightly fearing this they tried to put into place controls to limit this new Government. Knowing future generations would forgete the hard learned truths.

                  All I get when I bring up this Idea of moving past the Constitution is fear responses. “It will never work.” “That’s crazy.” “What if someone does something ‘dangerous’ to himself,  how would we stop or prevent them?” Not in the manner of finding solutions, but as reasons not to try.

                  I do believe the US Constitition was/is a good socond attempt, but does that mean it should be the only great bold experiment in Liberty?

                  Have? Maybe once we did, but no longer. And saying we are still freer than the rest of the world, as some do, is little comfort for me and makes me sad that our standards have dropped so low.

                  Some would call Spartacus crazy for what he attempted. So then should a fear of the future, of failing, of falling stop us from daring greatly?

                  The FF’s new that the US Constitution was a flawed and imperfect document, so should we then be holding it to a higher standard than they would theselves? 

                  FF’s themselves tried Articles of Confederation and then the US Constitution as their second attempted. I don’t believe they would want us to hold it sacrosanct, it is the ideals behind it that we must hold dear; not the document itself!

                  My 2 Cents.

            2. was you first though that guy is crazy, or man what a view?

              That guy is crazy; he can get the same view (and man, what a view!) in a much safer posture.

              1. Joel,

                And you are free to feel that way; as long as you don’t feel the need to protect him from himself. Because he might just feel the need to stop you from trying.


  6. >>I am Spartacus because a Rodeo Clown CAN laugh at the king. As can we all. As SHOULD we all.>>

    When that mockery becomes a hue and cry and hope that the King is summarily injured or killed, though, then you lose me. As the Missouri State Fair and its participants lost me, at that point. You mock the King, yes, but you don’t suggest that the King should be harmed or killed. And you don’t rile up a crowd to encourage that sentiment and feeling. Not unless you are gunning for the King, right then. And even then, preaching anarchy and revolution has consequences.

    1. REALLY?
      A) America has no kings — just a little reminder.
      B) So, everyone who called for George Bush’s death should have been punished?

      I stand corrected.

      UNLESS you have force to bring, you can call for the death of anyone you want. SUPPOSING you are an American, of course. It’s that first amendment thing.

      I see word press decided to unban you. Or did you sneak in under a false name. I also see you’re still working at the same level as before. Good to know.

          1. He’s not worth “raising my Blood Pressure” so I’m ignoring any further comments of his.

      1. Indeed. Given the outcry over the rodeo clown, I would like to round up the former co-workers with their “Putsch-Chicanery” “Kill Bush” and “McChimpy-BushHitler” bumperstickers and introduce them to the Roman justice for those who criticized the rulers. (Tom Kratman refers to it as “Christianizing.”)

      2. We did once have an Emperor, though – remember Norton I? Fascinating fellow, and definitely better than most in the monarchical line of work…

        1. I adore Emperor Norton — but he was only Emperor of California, as I recall. Nuttier than Aunt Ethel’s fruitcake, but in a very entertaining way.

          To bring it around to current politics, while he did print his own money he tried to redeem it when he was in (legal) funds again. Perhaps we should point out to the Circus on the Potomac that they are acting crazier than an acknowledged loon?

          1. ‘Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico’ was his title. He ordered Congress to disband at one point, which would have been decidedly ultra vires for a mere Emperor of California. (Don’t worry, he eventually relented and allowed Congress to go on meeting unofficially.)

            1. Even the dwarves think Aunt Ethel should put warning labels on her baked goods. One of her first fruitcakes was recently unearthed near the Somme, and they had to call in an emergency combat baker squad to defuse it.

              1. One wonders what the heck it was doing near the Somme, but possibly that was as far away as her relatives could afford the postage to send it?

                1. It think the thinking was that no-man’s-land was the one place the fruitcake couldn’t ruin.

                  1. Couldn’t ruin? All that artillery fire was a screen. They were trying to destroy it. That fruitcake *caused* the wasteland.

      3. We did once have an Emperor, though – remember Norton I? Fascinating fellow, and definitely better than most in the monarchical line of work…

    2. I have yet to hear anything from that fair that isn’t standard president-mockery.

      That most of those who are outraged have no clue about it just goes to show….

          1. To misquote the greater Marx:
            I once shot the president of Paraguay in my pajamas.
            How he got in my pajamas I’ll never know.

    3. … preaching anarchy and revolution has consequences.

      As does practicing tyranny and oppression.

      N.B. – nobody suggested “the King” should be harmed, unless your contempt for rodeo attendees is so great that you believe them to be endorsing regicide. In which case, you need to address the timber of intolerance in your own eye.

      1. Actually, it was one of our founding fathers, or to be more PC, one of our founders, who stated that Tyrannicide is not a crime. But, as one of my facebook friends asked when I stated that the second amendment gives the people the power to overthrow the government, “Who decides when it’s necessary?” I replied, “The people. If you are all alone, then you are not the people.” Who decides when/if a president becomes a tyrant?

        1. I’ve been reading about the French revolution. That is one of the big differences. In the US the people own the nation (or at least that’s our funding belief.) In France, the nation owns the people, as per their constitution. (In Portugal too.) Bah. A pox on all their houses.

          1. A nasty one, with fevers and itching and sores in uncomfortable places. Oh, and may they live in the mess they made, without us. Ad astra, my people! Today, Sao Tome; tomorrow, orbit; next week, Mars!

    4. Fool.

      We HAVE no king.

      We have an elected SERVANT of the people, who we trust to take manage the country as a figurehead, and grant him authority and RESPONSIBILITY to make decisions in our stead.

      As such, if the incompetent boob proves he’s an incompetent boob, then it’s incumbent on us to NOT deify the incompetent boob and elevate him above all reproach – but to first attempt to gently correct him, and when that fails vote him out of office, and when THAT fails to change the pathetic sap’s course – ridicule his worthless hide.

      “but you don’t suggest that the King should be harmed or killed”

      See my first two lines.

      If you want a King – find a country that’s got one and move there.

      1. And all the people complaining now would laugh their heads off at a Jesus Christ mask on a clown.

    5. I’m sorry you got lost at the Missouri state fair. You know, if you hold onto your Mommie’s hand in a crowd that won’t happen any more,

      1. Good advice, Bob. In that same line:
        PW: you probably wanna avoid the deep=fried, Twinkie. It’s laden with fats and sugar and Michelle would put on her frownie face.

          1. The difference between her frownie face and her ethics is that she has a frownie face.

    6. “When that mockery becomes a hue and cry and hope that the King is summarily injured or killed, though, then you lose me. ”

      You realize the clown is a professional at NOT letting the bull gore him, right?

    7. So I’m sure you were out objecting to all the calls for Bush’s death? For when Bush (or, for that matter, Hillary_ were the subject of Rodeo Clown “shows”? When a TV Movie was centered around the speculative assassination of a citing President. When Bush was hanged in effigy? When a certain vice-presidential candidate was hanged in effigy?

      Unless you were objecting equally vociferously to all of those then please spare me your protestations now.

      1. Don’t forget the late night “comedian” with the “Snipers Wanted” title card.

        1. Hell, I remember a lapel button, common during the reign of LBJ, that read, “Lee Harvey Oswald: Where Are You Now That We Really Need You?”


    8. Man, what would have happened if rodeo clowns had threatened George H W Bush (the elder)?
      NOTHING. A brief, amused little aside in a story about the rodeo, 100% outrage free. Because while H.W. was a lousy president, he wasn’t a vain pissant little punk like Obama. W too; how many times was he burned in effigy?

      Speaking of which, it is perfectly legal to publicly wish for the president’s death.

      1. Charles…”Perfectly legal?” You still think the “law” applies equally to Progressives and Americans?

        That’s so cute…in a sad way. 😦

    9. F*em if they can’t take a joke.

      I really like the double standard, the rodeo clown is banned from the Missouri state fair for life, but the comedian who called for Sarah Palin to be raped is still on air.

      And for the record I do hope that anyone who attempts to exert the powers of a monarch* in America is summarily injured or killed.

      *Your the one that titled Obama a King, not me.

    10. If you applauded when Bill Mahur called Sarah Palin a c*nt.
      If you laughed at depictions of Bush as a chimp.
      If you said nothing when the ‘Assassination of George W. Bush: A Love Story’ was aired.
      If you looked the other way when a sixteen year old Bristle Palin was dragged through the mud.
      If you repeated the mantra ‘binders of women’ as ridicule while not understanding their true significance.
      If any of these are true for you, then you have no other option than to shut up, sit down and take it! Otherwise you’re a hypocrite; a mouthpiece of hate and intolerance. Obama has proven himself incompetent and a liar. It is his turn to take the ridicule that comes with the office of the President of the United States.
      He is a man, not a god.
      He is a citizen, not a king.
      He is bound by the laws that hold us together, not above them
      He needs to be ridiculed to keep him humble (all the presidents do).
      He is the servant of the people, not our master.
      And it is our duty to remind him of that everyday.

  7. I just processed a couple of Howard Fast novels for the store, but I haven’t seen “Sparticus.” He had some ridiculous inventions in that, the Romans ATE the rebels for dinner in Fast’s version

      1. I am Spartacus because every time I opened my mouth in defense of the Constitution, I was mocked and taunted. It shut me up enough that I only talked politics to friends that I knew were on the same side as me. Now I laugh when someone says I am ignorant and uneducated (since I graduated as top student in a liberal arts degree even though I was obviously conservative.)

        I am hearing stories that certain people from a certain party resign from churches, clubs, etc when they hear certain political speech against the current Prez and his policies from people in those churches, clubs, etc. (not from the administration etc… from people) These folks area calling it hate speech against their Prez and Country. So if you are from that political persuasion, then you can have political speech, but the rest of us can’t?

        I had to live with that kind of speech against my beliefs for years–

          1. I was never the kind to keep things to myself. “Damn the torpedos, Gridley, you may fire when ready” or something like that*.

            I’d like to think that that’s why I had only a bit over a half dozen stories and articles published over the period I was writing most actively but, well, I’ve also looked back at some of the stuff that wasn’t published and can’t take that comfort. 😉

            *Just in case anybody doubts, I know I’m mixing up quotes. It’s deliberate.

              1. As I’m retyping my published works (getting them back in electronic format for further use) I find that I actually enjoy them as stories. The stuff from that period that didn’t get published? Not so much. There really was a difference that I was unable to see at the time between what “made the cut” and what didn’t.

                Also, my published fiction, except for the one fantasy piece in the late Marion Zimmer Bradley’s Fantasy Magazine which was a lot less PC than some other venues, being kind of on the “outside” itself and “looked down on” by those in the other magazines (even though its sales numbers were higher than anyone except the late Omni, which had the backing of the Guccione empire) so….

                But then I entered college and writing had to take a back seat. And after college there was getting married, getting a job, and raising a family. It’s only recently that I got serious about writing again. And now I’m finding getting back “in the groove” again. (Although I do have a new fantasy short for which I’m about to start looking for beta readers.)

          2. Quote from a friend while I was in college:

            “I can’t believe you don’t believe in global warming.” (with the intonation that all ‘intelligent people’ should)

            This was in 2006, when the temperature was still on a downward trend instead of flattening out.

    1. Sorry – I don’t usually comment on web cognomens, but now I have this image of James Marsters in bondage and there isn’t enough mental floss to prevent my inflicting that on the world.

      1. Does the mental image of Oprah Winfrey, Micheal Moore or Hillary Clinton in bondage help chase that out of your head?

      1. I’d pay to see that (~_^)
        Or maybe chew on the above tool although he’d likely leave a very bad taste

                1. okay, so I slept all freaking day, Maybe that is a better than yesterday, but I had plans….
                  Conga Rats on the twofer Insty links!

      2. Only if it produces more books to read. if not then no. And if so don’t read the article about how the EPA is going to do all sorts of things about climate change despite a complete lack of laws permitting it to do so

      3. If you do, try to be sure to have Dan or one of the boys record it. It would make good base footage for a remake of The Exorcist.

  8. I am Spartacus because politicians can flaunt their infidelity and lack of morals and be accepted as long as they are the right political flavor.

    I am Spartacus because those who express true *moral* outrage are laughed at by those with no morals.

    I am Spartacus because people with no morals fake moral outrage at those who *do* exhibit morals.

    I am Spartacus because people with no morals speak of forcing Christian churches to capitulate and “get with the times” while rolling over and capitulating to the most violent, immoral, degenerate false religion on the face of the Earth.

    I am Spartacus because liberal continue to poke the bear, then run crying when the bear growls at them.

    I am Spartacus because those who stand *against* freedom do not realize that it is precisely because we stand *for* freedom that keeps us from doing all of the imagined wrongs that they accuse us of doing.

    I am Spartacus.

    I am also Captain Parker at Lexington Green: “If they mean to have a war, let it begin here.”

    (h/t Speaker and James C.)

    1. Another week, another new discovery about what’s in ObamaCare—long after we passed it.

      One of the things that’s in it is a massive exemption for religious medical-sharing arrangements.

      “It’s gotten little attention, but it’s true: The individual mandate in the Affordable Care Act requires all Americans to have health insurance or face penalties, but members of medical-sharing ministries are exempt from the individual mandate that will be enforced beginning in 2015.

      “It’s there because of the work of then-Congressmen Tom Perriello, a Virginia Democrat and Sens. Max Baucus, a Montana Democrat, and Republican Charles Grassley of Iowa, who fought to add the exemption to the law. It’s the same principle that allowed for the Amish to be exempted from the individual mandate—with the crucial difference that it’s a lot more practical to join Medi-Share than it is to become Amish.”

      Boy, conservatives are going to love this. They get to totally opt out of the hated individual mandate, and all they have to do is to profess to be Christians, which they hardly need any encouragement to do.

      And they really do get to opt out of everything.

      “Here’s how it works: To join Medi-Share, members must pledge their Christian faith and promise not to drink, take drugs, or have sex outside of a traditional marriage. A reference from a minister may also be requested. Certain pre-existing conditions render applicants ineligible, while chronic issues such as obesity sometimes lead to acceptance into the program contingent on undergoing wellness counseling.

      “The coverage doesn’t include products of ‘un-Biblical lifestyles,’ such as contraception or substance rehab, or some preventive medicine, including colonoscopies and annual mammograms. Those policies lead to lower costs for all members, Meggs said.

      “When you have a medical bill, you submit it to the organization. If it meets the eligibility requirements and your annual medical expenses have exceeded the threshold in the plan you signed up for, the bill is ‘shared’—that is, covered.”

      The catch is that this is technically not “insurance,” because Medi-Share is not legally required to cover anything. It will pay for your care if it has enough money in the till, but if the money isn’t there, your only appeal is to the Big Guy himself. Of course, you might say that the same is true of regular insurance, so the only difference here is that there is no government regulator monitoring Medi-Share to ensure its solvency.

      If you think that’s not such a great loss, considering the recent track record of regulators when it comes to ensuring solvency, then you can appreciate the positive side of the ledger. Medi-Share is an exemption, not just from the individual mandate, but from every important aspect of ObamaCare. There is no “guaranteed issue” for pre-existing conditions, the plan is allowed to “cherry pick” a healthier demographic with a relatively clean-living lifestyle, and they are exempt from regulations which mandate coverage for contraception and certain kinds of preventive screenings.

      Talk about a way to supercharge ObamaCare’s “adverse selection death spiral”: give one of the nation’s healthiest demographics—respectable, clean-living, middle-class folks—a way to completely escape ObamaCare and its insurance exchanges. And if anybody ever tries to shut it down, they can argue, quite plausibly, that it’s a violation of religious freedom.

      It almost makes me sorry I’m an atheist.

      It also makes me think it’s going to take a pretty big act of faith to believe that ObamaCare is going to work, when so many can take advantage of this kind of end run around it.

      1. Don’t you mean Muslims? That’s the one that calls for total abstinence from drink.

        1. Muslims are the only abstainers. Mormons and various flavors of (IIRC) Baptists do too. Let’s face it the original temperance movements were driven by all sorts of flavours of bansturbating fundamentalist christians

          1. But RES calls abstaining from drink “to profess to be Christians,” which is hardly saying that some Christians do indeed insist on that prohibition.

        2. If Christians can’t touch alcohol, does that mean Christ and the Apostles weren’t Christian? (along with most large denominations….)

          Heck, his first miracle was making wine….

          1. According to the highly fraught parsing of my grandmother’s hardcore church, it was really grape juice. Bad translation, middle-eastern heat, ebil Catholics, … whatever. They went to a lot of effort to convince themselves and anyone who would listen it was ONLY GRAPE JUICE.

            They didn’t think much of dancing or music either, and that’s Old Testament, even.

            1. This is amusing in the ghastly way that gross historical ignorance so often is. There was no such beverage as grape juice in New Testament times, or for centuries after — not until 1869, when Thomas Bramwell Welch developed a process to pasteurize the juice and prevent the fermentation that occurs naturally. Until then, it was all wine of one grade or another.

              1. When you ship EVERYTHING in porous clay vessels, EVERYTHING goes a bit bad in shipping. Wine wasn’t just a way to get alcohol; it was to preserve the calories from grapes long enough to consume them.

              2. Well, there was. But it gave you the runs. Sorry, when I was a kid I loved “sweet wine” — wine between pressing and fermentation. But since it was homemade and less than sterile the result was usually Montezuma’s Revenge. I am not, btw, implying you’re wrong. This existed for a day or two and then it “turned” into real wine.

                1. Well, there was. But it gave you the runs.

                  Please note, I did not say there was no such thing as grape juice. I only said there was no such beverage. The revenge you speak of, and the fact that there was no known way to retard the natural fermentation, meant that the raw squeezings of the grape were not considered potable in their own right.

              3. Technically there was — briefly — “new wine” which is grape juice that had yet to ferment for a lack of time. (Fun fact: you can use grape juice for Communion in the Catholic Church as long as it hasn’t been pasteurized, that is, is new wine that would become old wine in due course.)

                1. Yes, I was going to point this out. I have heard all sorts of arguments on why Christians should or shouldn’t drink, including the new wine one. Let me state that while I’m sure it was very true that Biblical Christians drank new wine, it was only available for a very limited time of the year, therefore it is fairly obvious that any time wine is mentioned being drank in the bible at times not close to harvest, IT WAS NOT NEW WINE!
                  That being said I do understand why many churches use grape juice for communion, I heard one pastor explain why the did much more articulately than I can, but it boiled down to the fact that grape juice is ‘new wine’ and therefore should be completely biblically acceptable, and was used rather than alcoholic wine in deference to any reformed alcoholics that might be present in the congregation.

                  Note that if you follow biblical teachings (which is what Christians should by definition do) we are NOT instructed not to drink but rather not to “become drunken.” There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a teetotaler, but neither is there anything wrong with having a glass of wine, or a beer, or a Rum and Coke for that matter.

                  1. Well– there is extenuating circumstances i.e. illness that can cause problems with certain individuals drinking wine or other beverages of the type you named including sodas. I know… I have been completely sober with very few sodas for over ten years.

                    1. Went to a parish for a while that had a note in its bulletin that people with celiac disease should contact the priests because normally the congregation received under one species; they would make special arrangement for them to receive the cup.

                    2. Sorry if I wasn’t clear, obviously there are reasons why certain people shouldn’t eat or drink certain things, what I meant was biblically (noting I am aware that Mormons have additional religious texts besides the bible that they follow) there is nothing wrong with having a drink, the bible states that you should not drink to excess (or ‘become drunken’ depending on translation). Nor is there anything biblically wrong with being a teetotaler, the wrong comes in when you start condemning others for their actions that are different than yours but still biblically acceptable.

                  2. I’m a practicing Mormon, and I’ve heard the “grape juice” thing myself.


                    The Jews at the time were not under a prohibition on drinking alcoholic beverages, just like after the resurrection of Christ, practicing Christians were not under a prohibition against bacon. Therefore, I don’t think it matters a whole lot whether it was alcoholic or not.

                    Members of the LDS church in good standing do believe themselves to be commanded to refrain from alcoholic beverages altogether, as well as coffee, tea, tobacco and illegal drugs. I personally regard it as a covenant I’ve made with G-d, but one that I recognize others have not made. But then again, Mormons don’t operate under only Biblical restrictions, have an open canon, and believe in the possibility of more commandments on the way. So we’re not exactly the most orthodox of churches in our view on commandments / scripture / etc.

                    Incidentally, one might also point out that since we are talking about WATER BEING TURNED INTO ANOTHER SUBSTANCE ALTOGETHER, the inherent chemical / bacteriological properties of said substance are immediately suspect. One cannot assume that Christ could make water into alcoholic wine but Christ could not and did not make water into pasteurized grape juice or at least grape juice that would not allow bacteriological growth in the length of time (which I take under the circumstances to be less than a couple hours on the outside) it took to be taken from the pots and poured into peoples glasses for reasons other than pasteurization. This may help to explain why everyone commented on the taste of it – “You’ve brought out the best wine at the end,” and so forth.


                    1. The secret dance on Youtu…!

                      I mean, ah, that looks pretty fun. (Note to self, pass word back to Salt Lake, need new secret dance.)

                      My daughter says she’s done that dance at church dances.

                    2. Yes, clearly the kid who passed it on (five years older than my kid) violated the secret codes — but the kids were adorable doing it!
                      (Marsh, we’re convinced, will soon get dragged to Mormon dances by his best-friend-adopted-brother-Jake. We’ve discussed it and as afraid as we are you’ll tempt him into your wild heathen ways of not drinking, smoking or taking caffeine, we’ll bite the bullet.)

                    3. Must be secret – I’ve lived in Utah for almost five years and I’ve never seen it before! It looks pretty du- hold on, there’s someone knocking on the door; I’ll be right back…

                    4. For anyone who had bad experiences growing up in a heavily LDS area, let me apologize now. Salon.com a few years ago did an article on my home town as it was apparently “the most Republican county in the United States” (a dubious honor at best, now accredited somewhere else in the country).

                      While the tone of the piece was just a teeny bit condescending, there was some legitimate criticism in the piece about people being closed-minded, judgmental, and exclusive of other groups.

                      Which goes to show that despite the not-drinking, etc, not even Mormons are perfect, though some like to claim to be so.

                    5. Did you ever grow up in Utah? ummm… I grew up in Utah from the time I was five until I was twenty-seven in mostly the Northeast corner. It is the most close-minded condescending place I have ever lived… and I have lived in five other Countries (outside the US) in my lifetime so far. 😉

                    6. I grew up in Rexburg, ID. Something like 98% LDS, small-town farming community, except for the (at the time) two-year college the LDS church ran. (Ah, good ol’ Ricks College, before they made it BYU-Idaho, and scrapped the football and basketball teams. The family says it’s a blessing they waited until my grandpa had passed away first, because scrapping those would have killed him. As it is, insert the joke about spinning in grave/insert leads/free electricity HERE)
                      So, all bets are off as to how it compares with, say, small-town Utah. We had a TON of college kids from across the country, but I did spend most of my time with my nose in a book, so… YMMV?

                    7. I have tons of family all through Southern Idaho especially in the Rigby, Rexburg, and Idaho Falls area. I heard stories from my parents, who grew up in those areas. I am related to the Bagley, Meservy, Allen, Bird, Benson, and the rest of the old families from that area. 😉 My great-grandmother (who I loved dearly) was buried in Wilford Cemetery in Saint Anthony.

                    8. “… closed-minded, judgmental, and exclusive of other groups.”

                      Unlike those wonderful folks living in NY City’s Upper West Side or in the Hollywood Hills.

                      I’d be willing to bet that any place where you find a high level of uniformity of opinion you will find that combination of traits. When everybody you know agrees with you the tendency is to become convinced that anybody thinking differently isn’t worth knowing.

                    9. I was raised Latter Day Saint before I apostacized (love that word) and began the journey that led to my current Asatru leaning agnosticism. Back then I went religiously (so to speak) to every “Young Adult” (teen years) and “Special Interest” (18+ singles) dance held. Mind you, I usually spent the dance sitting in the corner feeling miserable, but I went. (The Church very much wanted Mormons to marry Mormons and went to considerable effort on that part but, well, in my experience it didn’t handle introvert members very well in that context.)

                      So, yes, Mormons do dance.

                    10. We have a lot in common lol. Yep, before I did the aposo–thing I went to every dance they had. It was the only bright spot during some miserable times.

                    11. Strategically, I rather admire some of the stuff I’ve heard about the Mormon leadership encouraging marrying other Mormons– it’s a very good way to build a culture. (My favorite is the “go to college to find a mate” one, partly because it appeals to my notion of what should be…..)

                    12. It’s why Mormons joke about getting a tuition refund if they graduate from BYU unmarried.

                      (Which I did. Of course, I was out in December, and the wedding was set for January, but technically…) > >

                    13. No, wait, it was his year. He’s either in there and not visible in the back enough for me to identify, or he was in the pit doing righteous battle with the innards of the robot.

                    14. Thanks for the reminder that most people lack a good understanding of their own religion, much less do they have qualification to opine on the doctrines of other faiths. An informative comment, sir; thank-you.

                    15. Actually, given that the steward was asked why he didn’t get people drunk on Jesus’s wine before they had the lesser vintages, I think we can confidently state that it was alcoholic.

                    16. I’ve always read that as “best stuff”, and your interpretation of “best” can vary. Traditionally, yes, you start with the fancy stuff, and when people are too in their cups to a) notice or b) care, you bring out the bargain basement wine.

                      But as I said, it’s neither here nor there to me if it was alcoholic or not.

                    17. I’m a practicing Mormon too and I’ve always regarded the Word of Wisdom as binding on Mormons not anyone else. Nice to see another Studio C Fan. 😀

              1. Oh, I gotta tell it now.

                Why don’t Southern baptists have s__ standing up?

                People might think they were dancing.

                    1. I heard that about Christian Reformed. (Yes, that was my first thought, too. Reformed from what?)

                    2. I’m sure you know this, but “Puritan” came from the widely announced intention of the founders to “purify” the Bible by going back to the original Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic texts when they could find them.

                      “There is nothing new under the Sun….”

                  1. I was raised Southern Baptist, so I can sympathize. At the same time, my Sunday School teacher, who taught the teen boys, was a former Mormon. He and his wife (who taught the young women) used to have dances at their house about once a month, on Saturday nights.

                    At one time, I thought I wanted to be a minister. The problem was, the more I dug into theology, the more I discovered that most of what is practiced in just about any formal religion is designed to perpetuate that formal religion, not necessarily God’s Church on this earth. That’s why I profess to being a non-denominational Protestant Christian. As for dancing, drinking, or a particular food, I adhere to the admonishment of “all things in moderation, nothing in excess”, except professing my personal beliefs. Even there, I try to keep it to the appropriate venue.

                    BTW, my best friend is a Mormon. I don’t necessarily go along with what they believe, but most of the ones I’ve met have been truly good people.

                    1. While not religious myself, I have good friends of every religious variety (*) as well. From Mormon to Mennonite (the latter a fellow wargamer believe it or not). And I make fun of no one’s sincerely held religious faith … which is why the footnote.

                      * – I’m ashamed to admit that I even have Unitarian Universalists as friends. And all they believe in is a warm spot somewhere. I happen to believe that UU’s want all the benefits of religion – mainly potluck dinners – without the burden of believing anything.

                    2. Some of that sounds similar to my finally deciding that, while I don’t have a problem with most religions, I tend to have problems with religious leaders.

        3. I merely quoted the source — none of that was my wording. Sorry, I ought have been clearer by providing an introduction.

          I strongly suspect that any religious group can form a medical sharing ministry, in accordance with the tenets of their creed. Certainly Jews would not bar drinking the kiddush on shabbat, during the sedar or at weddings. Dionysians would probably be okay with wine as well — it would merely increase the necessary contributions.

          1. One of the benefits of a fraternal organization was that they would look after their own, either informally or with actual insurance type support, for both older members who were destitute and living dependents of a deceased member. This was important back when insurance was not available or not to be trusted. Generally they also ran the burial societies and cemetaries here, in the local area, in pioneer days and early statehood. Most societies do require an oath to afirm the existence of some sort of deity, (though I admit that getting an Elk or and Eagle to abstain from alchohol would be problematic) I wonder if any lodge or organization has considered this sort of thing. It might be a form of a membership drive.

              1. My reflexive response is that will probably require higher churchmembers’ “share” contributions or accepting the funding will run out sooner. It should not be for the government to decide what tenets a Faith organization should hold.

                Upon reflection, however, it strikes me that it would likely be a sin, an insult to Bacchus for the group to pay for alcohol related treatments. Sure as Hades they shouldn’t pay for your AA or Rehab.

                1. It is those for whom their god is Government who most distress me. If their prayers weren’t infringing my person I would mind less, but their faith-based initiatives demand everybody tithe (if only!) their church and live according to their creed.

                  1. …irreligion as the state religion would be the worst of all combinations. Its orthodoxy would be insistent and its inquisitors inevitable. Its paid ministry would be numerous beyond belief. Its Caesars would be insufferably condescending. Its majorities\when faced with clear alternatives\would make the Barabbas choice, as did a mob centuries ago when Pilate confronted them with the need to decide.

                    Neal A. Maxwell – October 1978 > >

          2. I’m really wishing right now that I had the time and energy to do the research on what such medical ministries entail and what hoops must be jumped through. I could totally see putting something like that together, but I’m utterly swamped. A blessing and a curse is this fallen mortal shell, with its constant demands for food and sleep.

        4. I’ve heard it said that certain sects of Muslims claim you can drink vodka, because it is fermented from potatoes, and that isn’t forbidden in the Koran. (the advantages to a barracks lawyer of having an OCD prophet write your holy book)

          1. “Honey! [mead]’s made from honey!” -13th Warrior

            And in certain middle eastern countries, slivovitz is very popular, because it’s made from plums.

            1. I thought about pointing out mead.

              There are things for which I thank Islam (more or less): coffee, probably. Preserving Aristotle. Al-gebra. Watered steel, though that’s technically Indian. Ok, damascus steel is off the thank-you list. Ahhhhh. Arabesque architecture. And providing Charles Martel a good reason to get nicknamed “the Hammer.”

              1. “Preserving Aristotle.”

                I think the Byzantines had more to do with that. When it became clear that THIS TIME Constantinople would fall, lots of libraries got moved/sold/looted.

                1. And the Persians invented Algebra. Islam seems to be an intellectually sterile religion. I’m not sure why, though I think it’s the fatal confluence of religion and political direction including how to live everyday life. We see the same in communism and Gaian worship. Your energies are dispersed through a kind of tartufferie that regulates everyday life and discourages thinking of the higher issues.

                  1. In his “What Went Wrong” (with Islam), historian Bernard Lewis remarks that during the Renaissance similar observatories were built in Turkey and Denmark.

                    Thereafter the Turkish observatory was destroyed by order of the Sultan. Tycho Brahe’s Danish observatory produced data which led to Kepler’s Laws, to Newton, and onward.

                  2. It has to do with the “Closing of the Gates of Inquiry” in the late 1100s. The major religious scholars of Islam decided that the questions had been answered, and that no more theological debate or discussion would be necessary, or encouraged. Although not specifically aimed at other fields of study, the Closing of the Gates had a chilling effect on other intellectual pursuits. The strain of fatalism and double-predestination in Islam also discourages research and curiosity, because the answer to “why” is “because G-d wills it so.” Individuals might venture out and study things on their own (the occasional Odd), but most people probably saw no need and the authorities didn’t encourage it. The rise of Wahabism in the 1700s made intellectual activity even riskier.

                  3. One thing that was settled was whether God was rational and acted rationally. That was settled the other way north and west of them, which explains a lot.

                    (We get the silly argument that God is chained if He acts rationally — but not if He acts irrationally. You can’t determined the freedom of an act by looking at its content.)

      2. Yanno if it covers the Amish and this medi-share could it also apply to other religions too? I’m thinking that maybe a group of flying spaghetti monster believers (or the Church of the Subgenuis or…) could also do this?

        Ideally we’d be the Church of Galt, but that might be harder to swing

        1. We’re just a little cult of Usaians, awaiting the return of the deliverer and our glorious entry into the mythical Republic that shall stand for a thousand years.

            1. you can only possibly achieve peace by carefully planning for war.
              Too many think once peace has arrived (always a temporary situation) they no longer need to remain vigilant.

          1. G-d Almighty, Writer be Thy name. Keep your plot twists far from me, and bring Thy try-fail cycles to the stories of mine enemies, according to Thy perfect outline. Amen.

            1. Dear God the Author,

              I ask that I may be a background character, not a main character, whose live must ever be interesting.

              Blessed be your name forever, amen.

      3. OK, I think we need a lawyer here to look at this contract – the quoted text says members need to: …pledge their Christian faith and promise not to drink, take drugs, or have sex outside of a traditional marriage.

        So as long as you only drink, take drugs and have sex inside traditional marriage, you’re golden, right?

      4. When I investigated Christian Medi-Share it a while ago, it appeared to stick to the Bible more tightly than the RealClearPolitics article would indicate, by forbidding drunkenness and excessive consumption of alcohol, rather than all consumption of alcohol. Forbidding all consumption of alcohol is quite unusual for Christians; there’s the Southern Baptists and some others, but such a provision would exclude most Christians from Christian Medi-Share.

      5. Interesting.

        I’m a Christian (definition: “confess with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart God raised Him from the dead”) and a Calvinist Orthodox Presbyterian, and I just finished a delicious Maker’s Mark bourbon — a distillation of the corn crop that would otherwise rot, invented by a Baptist minister. Go figure.

        Abstinence from alcohol as some weird sign of doctrinal purity should be reserved to Islam or quaint 19th century women marching against demon rum — which is also delicious, especially a 23-year old Ron Zacapa.

        1. The monks (blessing be upon the Trappists) referred to yeast as “Godisgood” for centuries. They didn’t know the mechanism of fermentation, and so attributed it to the Lord. I understand fermentation, and I still thank Him for His blessings.

          1. And this is genetic, right? Which is why my long ago practicing ancestors bequeathed it to me? If there isn’t alcohol, it’s not a party.
            (BTW it’s funny how the dietary prohibitions linger LONG after the religion is given up — even if by degrees, etc — my grandmother swore up and down that eel was poisonous. AGAINST all the witness of neighbors who ate it regularly. 😛 )

            1. In the case of marrano heritage (I assume that’s what you’re referring to) this would have been a deliberately-preserved tradition. Avoiding pork was too risky: the Old Catholic neighbors were taught to watch out for such Judaizing. But eel? Who knew that a lei de Moisés forbade that? Similarly with fast days: it was the more obscure ones (specifically, the Fast of Esther) that might be preserved.

              1. Yes — though marrano was er… a derogatory term… 😉 As I’m sure you know.
                And you just explained the very odd Hodge podge I grew up with, which makes both faiths a mess in my head. And which the kids have grown up with because some things are stronger than conscious thought. I found out a lot of the stories grandma told me to justify things were not… precisely Catholic, shall we say. And since grandma was law… well… it can’t be pulled out. It’s also weird because mom’s side preserved OTHER traditions (I mean, there’s bits they agree on, but not all.) So, tons of minor traditions, none of the big ones. I have books. I intend to study them. Time is a problem. (And btw, alheira — flour and chicken sausage designed to look like pork sausage (nowadays some versions are sold with pork in them. Perhaps they always were) — was a tradition in mom’s family, bought from the same butchers for years if not centuries — these days they attach a star of David in metal to the end of the sausage. I doubt they’re Kosher, but it’s interesting.)

                1. Whatever the meaning & connotations of the word in Spanish & Portugese, and no matter which meaning of the word came first, to us Ashkenazim the word marrano just meant “hero” of a particular tragic kind.

                  I’d never before heard of alheira, but I’ve heard and read about other such things. (E.g., a sentence said quietly upon leaving church—which turned out to be a disclaimer in Hebrew against the speaker’s participation.)

                  Three hundred years of Inquisition destroyed most traditions, but created others that have lasted another two centuries. If an SF writer wants to explore the idea of hidden beliefs & traditions, the history of the anusim would be a good place to do research.

                  1. This particular writer seems obsessed with shifters and secret identities. You figure it…. Possibly inexplicable. Some of the history I’ve discovered, at least of our family. Some is too far away and lost. And yes, after a while people forget they’re pretending which gives me a rather peculiar religious identity, which is why I don’t discuss MY religion on this blog. The boys might resolve it, and seem set to resolve it in divergent ways, which is … interesting and a bit odd, but then they are Americans and interesting and odd is our birthright. (Well, my nationalization right.)

                2. I think I was on the shadow side of my 20s before I found out there’s no actual Catholic order about giving up something for Lent……

            2. In per-1850 New Mexico, the only pigs were javalinas. No one seemed eager to import pigs or pork until the Anglos moved in. Part of it had to do with geography and the folly of trying to herd pigs through the desert, but I suspect part of it was the number of Conversos and descendents keeping quiet in the colony.

              To my surprise something like that popped up in the Colplatshki books, when I realized that people ate pork only out of necessity and considered it poverty food at best. They don’t know why, but everyone agrees that shahma and beef and fish are better than pork. (Shahma would quite likely not be kosher, since it is a chimera of sheep and llama, but again, the survivors don’t know that.)

    2. “I am Spartacus because those who stand *against* freedom do not realize that it is precisely because we stand *for* freedom that keeps us from doing all of the imagined wrongs that they accuse us of doing.”


      When you believe that just the “right” mix of laws will bring about perfection and harmony, it’s apparently easy to justify stifling speech and punishing Bad Think. I have no illusions that perfection and harmony are even possible, and openly admit that my beliefs are not perfect and thus subject to criticism. I don’t WANT to shut people up.

      So how do I deal with people who openly state they I should allow myself to be beaten by thugs, robbed in the name of “fairness”, enslaved for the supposed sins of my ancestors? I do like Lincoln’s prescription — that those who advocate slavery be subjected to it — but we ALL know that would never fly.

    3. I am Spartacus because politicians can flaunt their infidelity and lack of morals and be accepted as long as they are the right political flavor.

      You mean like Newt Gingrinch?

          1. Yes, but a vote doesn’t mean you approve of someone. I follow the Heinlein dictum and vote AGAINST someone. I never voted for Juan McCain, but I did vote against The One as hard as I could. It’s not the same. And the choices — OMG the choices!

          2. Well to be fair a large number of them voted for him despite his infidelity and lack of morals, not because of them.

            No, I wasn’t one of them, I’m just playing devil’s advocate. Politics usually boils down to voting for the lesser of two evils, I’ve never yet seen a politician that didn’t have something I didn’t like about them.

              1. You guys and gal do realize your making Rubio’s point for him.

                Instead of standing on principles; which I feel would appeal to the conservitive nature of Lainos, he has bought into this of idea that to get votes you have to give or promise what you think will win you votes.

                I’m sorry, but you can’t make everyone happy. You have to pick a side.

                All this lesser of two evil crap gets us is polititions that stand for nothing but what they think will get them votes.

                We need “I am Sparticus” politicians, not “I am for what ever you are for” politicians.

                We have to beable to say we have the solution. It will be painful, but we can do it, If we stick together.

  9. I don’t want to become resigned to a loss of greatness, like folks from the UK after WWII. I don’t want to lose anything at all, and I resent having to play Cassiodorus or an Irish monk, saving civilization instead of doing new things.

    And btw, I want to apologize about Obama. I’m the one who answered a telephone poll about the possible candidates that I didn’t know much about Obama, but when I knew more I’d surely find out what was wrong with him. The moral of the story is — never give advice to Democrats. 🙂

    1. I resent having to play Cassiodorus or an Irish monk, saving civilization instead of doing new things.

      Nobody on earth ever got to chose the time and place of his appointed vocation.

  10. Not to be a party pooper…but both Spartacus and the author of the “sacred honor” pledge followed it up with a plan of action. Do you have one? Or is this just another way of saying “Obama is bad”?

    1. I think you have missed the point – this is *way* less or more than “Obama is bad.” This is “Society has forced us into a silent role, and we will no longer be slaves to political correctness, situational ethics, immoral moral outrage, oppression in the name of so-called “freedom of expression” and a government that attacks us at every turn.

      The plan is to stop being silent. And if a fight is necessarily, as God is my witness, they will get the fight they deserve, and not the fight they want!

      1. It’s a valid point. We need to b*tch and moan publicly (because that helps other people speak up), but we also need to plot, plan, vote, put up candidates, and write nasty letters to Congress. Among other things.

        1. That’s not what he’s advocating– he wants violence, and if you don’t agree you’re part of the problem. *rude noise*

        2. Yes, but judging from Ken’s recent comments, he wants more pointy things. I do plan and plot and work for local elections — I have gone out of my way to help the recall.
          I don’t think we’re at the shooting stage yet, though, and I’d like us not to get there. (Which might be like wishing to fly unassisted, but hey, one can try.)

          1. We have the ballot box and we have the soap box; used properly there is no need for the cartridge box.

            The first step is to step forward and call Merde! on their proclamations (“Recovery Summer” my arse) and to demand answers to our legitimate questions. We can refuse to pay for “news” that makes Pravda look a bastion of journalistic excellence.

            When they shove us we can stand our ground and demand “Watch who you’re shovin’, pilgrim.”

            We can go Breitbart upside their heads.

            Compliance is not mandatory, and as Thoreau pointed out, when the law of the land is unjust, we need not comply.

                1. Doesn’t that mean Breitbart is Spartacus? Or is Spartacus Breitbart?

                  Then who’s Kirk Douglas?!

                    1. It’s RES. He’s been a commenter here so long people think he’s furniture. The other day I caught a newb slapping an antimacassar on RES’s shoulders. I almost told him not to, but the antimacassar was nice, and had a picture of Rudyard Kipling, so I let it be.

                    2. Sigh. Here I thought of myself as the slippery throw rug of Hoyt’s Den and it turns out I am the comfy chair with the sprung bottom.

                    3. Heh. If there were shorter clips I woulda used them.

                      Kirk Douglas and Burt Lancaster. Lawrence Olivier. George Bernard Shaw’s defense of General Burgoyne against charges of misconduct of the war to prevent American Independence. The sequence in which Kirk Douglas (in mistaken belief he is Burt Lancaster) is put on trial for treason against the Crown should not be watched while eating or drinking. (Jump to fifty-two minutes and a few seconds)

                      Major Swindon: I can only do my best sir, and rely on the devotion of our countrymen.
                      General John Burgoyne: May I ask, Major, are you writing a melodrama?
                      Major Swindon: No, sir.
                      General John Burgoyne: (sarcastically) What a pity! WHAT a pity!

                      General John Burgoyne: Martyrdom, it is where one achieves fame without ability.

                      Can’t be bought except from grey source.

            1. Unfortunately, RES, there are those who want to establish a process where the ballot box ALWAYS results in their winning. That’s what’s happened here in Colorado — they want to destroy the integrity of the secret ballot. If we’re unable to accomplish that using the normal tools of democracy, the only other option WILL be the cartridge box.

    2. A plan of action might include calling your local Congress critter to ask why they aren’t holding town hall meetings during recess (as one of my own Senators is so bravely doing after bravely signing a letter swearing to defund Obamacare then bravely backing away from that position. With extreme bravery.)
      A plan of action might include getting involved in the local school board and standing up for teaching “old-fashioned” math and literature, as opposed to deconstructionist critical theories.
      Or a plan of action might just include standing up and speaking out when someone mocks, derides, belittles, or offers a snide comment about people who happen to love the country.
      Mostly, I think it’s a matter of standing up and standing together on the things we agree with.

      Meanwhile, why look to Sarah, or anyone else, for a plan?

      You’ve got a brain and hands and feet, right? You have ideas on what you can do in your own community, don’t you? And if not, there are ways to find other people in your community who feel the way you do, aren’t there? Perhaps I might suggest the judicious use of Meetup.com?

      I realize that comes across a bit harsh, but dammit, man, if you’re someone who wants to live in the manner of men determined to be free, then get out there and DO SO. Waiting for a plan from someone else is only passing the responsibility from the current planners to someone you find a bit more palatable.

      Sorry, rhetoric Hulk is climbing down from the soap box now. (grumble, grumble, rant, rant)

      1. My state rep is having town halls, and my fed rep should be having them, except he’s up to his eyeballs in military stuff in D.C. He needs to retire (been reelected too often), but at least he’s still on the side of the angels for now.

    3. To each according to his abilities. There is more than one type of action. Sarah is providing a plan of action, it may not be the type of action that you want, but only a fool would be looking for a plan for that type of action from a mother and author with no military experience.

      We will need more than one type of action, and Sarah is providing both plans and a forum for several types, it is very possible that the type you would prefer will become necessary, and we should prepare the possibility (or likelihood) of that, but if it does I will be looking elsewhere for a designer of that particular plan. Sarah may very well be able to recommend and promote such a person, but she is not that person herself, and is intelligent enough to know it.

  11. None of what you posted is any surprise to me, considering your viewpoint.

    It also seems that in popular fiction, what the Left says you’re allowed to write about is ever more circumscribed, or you’re an -ist (they dream up new -ists all the time.) Thankfully, there are several novels, indie published and trad-published, Baen and non-Baen, that ignore the Leftist Hays Code as well.

    1. I am old enough to remember when “Banned In Boston” on a book cover enhanced sales. “Denounced By The SFWA” is a badge of honor that should do likewise.

      1. What can I say? They’re the Jerry Falwells of the digital age. The Moral Majority, reimagined for the 21st century and equipped with the latest dogmas. Puritan 2.0.

  12. Fret not. The U.S. is not Rome, and her enforcers won’t work for free. When the credit card is maxed and the economy tanks, the thugs will become prey. And would you NSA clowns be kind enough to pass this along to the Homeland Security? Thanks.

    1. LOL — we haven’t got half paranoid. I found myself yesterday transferring a novel over a link and fretting at it being late, going “Come on, NSA, if you must read Witchfinder can you capture it at some other time?”
      I just wish I were sure we weren’t right…

      1. When the fellow living under the bridge, who insists that the Federal government is monitoring his every move, ends up being proven correct in all essentials (but it’s only metadata!), that’s when you know things have gone too far.

        The saying should change to “You’re not paranoid if they’re really out to get you you live in the US.”

        1. …and once again my HTML-fu is bested by WP.
          Trying again:
          The saying should change to “You’re not paranoid if they’re really out to get you you live in the US.”

  13. I’m going right out and posting a link to this on my Facebook page. I usually don’t bring up politics, sex or religion in venues like … Facebook, but I’m tired of holding my tongue, too.

  14. Pingback: What She Said …
  15. I am Spartacus because I will not let Those Who Are No Longer Our Countrymen (TWANLOC) turn this country into a copy of the one my grandfather left after WWI (Lithuania/Poland/Russia).

    I am Spartacus because I believe in our Constitutional Republic.
    I am Spartacus because like Patriot Riders I stand with those who stood for us. Support our troops! They fight over there so that they don’t have to fight over here. Obama as CinC kept our troops from saving their own. He indeed forced them to leave their own behind. Look at what happened to our top field commanders in the wake of Benghazi, and what message it sends to our current commanders.

    Lastly, with respect to Mr David Weber, I do NOT want to live in the Peoples’ Republic of Haven or the Solarian Union.

    1. Why do you think David Weber thinks those are “nice places to live”? He has made it clear that the People’s Republic of Haven was the US gone bad (ie a US that went the “Welfare State” route).

      1. Actually, it appears to have been modelled on the French Revolution. Rob S. Pierre was a real give away.

        1. I think Drak referred to the shift in Havenite politics well before the books started. The Republic of Haven instituted the Dole, creating a permanent subclass of basically illiterate, worthless “voters” who were led by the nose by a newly created Legislaturist peerage. The PTB discovered that the only way to continue in their current power structure was to become overtly imperialist, and eventually became the People’s Republic of Haven.

        2. I’m going by the “Words Of Weber”. [Smile]

          Rob S Pierre (and others) IMO are more of a Weber joke on people who try “read things” into an author’s work.

          Mind you, he “got me” with McQueen. I was so sure that she was the Napoleon of the Honorverse up until David Weber killed her. [Embarrassed Smile]

          1. Amazingly I had the same feeling of seeing a ghost of Napoleon when Tom Theisman shot Saint-Just at the end of Ashes of Victory. Then it took David Weber 2 more years to show me I was wrong.

            And on a separate issue reading Donald Sensing’s post on the current resident of 1600 Pensylvania’s Avenues miscreant behavior is sure to drive your blood pressure up. This is because under the current congress we’re basically stuck with this situation until the next election when the LIV (Low Information Voters) will probably stick us with an even worse person.

            1. In a way, Tom Theisman *was* the Napoleon of the Honorverse. Napoleon could be said to have restored the Kingdom of France (with him as King). Tom Theisman restored the *old* Haven Republic that had been destroyed earlier.

              1. An Interesting view, I had never though of it that way. I had always viewed him as more like Cincinnatus, or that USAian mythopoetic figure George Washington. Of course Adm. Theisman avoids serving as president at all.

                1. I think of Theisman as the Napoleon of the Honorverse because he is Haven’s greatest military mind.

      2. I don’t think that Weber thinks that they are nice places to live. I was sort of apologizing for using his intellectual property.

    1. The scary thing is how it — and the Mithradatic Wars — laid the ground for the Civil War.

      I hope we’re not headed down that path, and can only remember that EVERYONE in the Civil War claimed to be restoring the Republic.

  16. I don’t think anyone is UNaware of my leanings, political, social, religious, or otherwise. I’ve always been rather blatant about them. I’m pretty vocal about both what I stand FOR, and what I stand AGAINST. I stand FOR personal liberty AND personal responsibility. I stand AGAINST “political correctness”, since it’s just a way to curtail freedom of speech. If you’ve read anything about the founding fathers, you understand why RELIGION was the first freedom mentioned in the Bill of Rights: they were FOR religion, but AGAINST a state-approved or state-sponsored religion. This whole thing about “separation of Church and State” is a 20th-century fabrication of the ACLU, and has no basis in the Constitution.

    We actually have a state-sponsored religion in this country, although no one wants to acknowledge it. That religion is “we’re in power, and we intend to stay in power, no matter what it takes”. The current behavior of the Establishment Republicans proves this beyond a doubt. That’s why I’ve begun to agitate for a new political party, based on the TEA Party doctrine.

    I’m sick to death of the race-manipulators and their racist attack upon the majority of people who don’t usually even THINK about race in their daily activities. I’m sick to death of hyphenated Americans — you’re either 100% American, or you should find somewhere else to live.

    I stand against intolerance, regardless of what is being stated or done. I especially stand against people who try to distort the conversation by demanding that something shouldn’t be talked about, because that’s “intolerant” behavior. There should never be anything that CAN’T be talked about. In the end, however, the will of the majority should be recognized of what SHOULD and SHOULD NOT be tolerated, accepted, or promoted. I also stand against those that manipulate language to manipulate emotion and discourse in order to “shape the debate”.

    I stand against those that choose NOT to honor the Constitution and the 225+ years of its guidance in the governance of this nation. I firmly believe those that want a “living constitution” truly want to manipulate people to satisfy the whims of a very small minority.

    I stand against the “war on poverty” and the “war on drugs”, and with the war against Islamic aggression.

    I think that’s clear enough…
    (apologies for the length)

    1. You do realize that half the Precinct Committeeman slots in the Republican Party are currently unfilled, right? If each person who feels as you do, filled one of those slots, joining those who have already become a PC and are Constitutional Conservatives, we would have the majority and take over the Party, right? You don’t need to start a TeaParty entity, you already have one for the activating!

  17. Welcome to the membership of the American unorganized subversive revolutionists. Not so much a group as a common way of looking at the world. I count as fellow travelers declared Tea Party members, small “L” libertarians, any and all rational anarchists, and anyone else who has asked the question “when will what they take be enough?” and realized that the true answer is never unless we put our collective foot down and stop them.
    I joined when I chose to believe my lying eyes over the honest and noble reporting of our media many years ago. I was validated by Ruby Ridge and Waco, two incidents where our government executed citizens during confrontations over tax license violations. Not to mention countless other less well documented obscenities committed on the citizens for no reason other than to instill fear of government in the majority of the rest of us.
    I ain’t Spartacus. What I am is the nameless guy who pumps your gas, who fixes your vehicle, who prepares your food, who delivers all your goods and services, who does the thousands of common every day tasks that make society function. Individually we can’t do very much, certainly not against the might of the Federal government. Collectively it’s a very different story.
    Couldn’t help but think of all the funny jokes Mycroft played on the lunar authorities during their revolution.

  18. In light of some of the… rash comments that have been bandied about in the last couple of days, I have this vehement counsel for all of the Huns, Hoydens, sympathizers, and lurkers, along with all of your kin, kith, vassals, minions, neighbors, and assorted livestock and experiments:

    No. Fort. Sumters.

      1. I doubt most of the Horde here need it spelled out – history tends to be one of our major interests ’round these parts. Heck, at least two or three of the Hoydens are historians in their own right!

        1. It is not just a history lesson, but a present lesson as well. It is good to know that not only do YOU understand history but those who might be in a much better position to repeat it understand it just as well. Of course on the other side of the boundary conditions we are playing in you also have the “No more free Waco’s / William Colby’s”:

          1. I believe that one of the causes of the Terror was the Assembly’s willing foray into hyperinflation by first inflating the Assignats(currency) , that were backed by siezed church property into infinity, and then doing the same with the Mandats that were supposed to revalue the whole system. Those two bubbles popping discredited the Assembly, destroyed the economy, stagnated industry, and threw a lot of angry starving people onto the street where they watched their betters, who got out of the market in time, eat off ermine plates – Just like the nobility did, eh?
            It was so bad that, according to Andrew Dickson White in his lovely little book, _Fiat Money Inflation in France_, the only reason there were not more men starving in the streets is because Napoleon conscripted so many of them into the army.
            (Book’s in Gutenberg, by the way. Very good book)

                  1. I have a handful of Argentine Australs.
                    Every once in a while I want to take them out and bang pots at them.

                    (and in explanation: in Argentina and other South American states, it is now common to bang pots and pans while protesting, it is called a Cacerolazo and it started in Argentina during protests against hyper inflation and bank holidays and devaluations)
                    ((Major snark warning): They bang pots and pans probably because the protesters are working and middle class people who don’t want to roll over cars and burn down neighborhoods, and not because rolling over cars and burning down neighborhoods was already taken for soccer riots)

                1. In automobile circles, “FIAT” means “Fix It Again, Tony”.

                  The relevance of this to “fiat money” is left as an exercise for the reader…. >:)

                  1. You know in my house at nighttime, Dad would shout to mom “Fiat Lux” and mom would shout back “automobile and soap, yeah, yeah.” And turn on the light.
                    I had a WARPED upbringing.

                    1. I used to go by a church that had “lux” and “pax” painted on the double doors. I always daydreamed they shipped soap. (I’m still warped)

        2. As for myself, I’m lousy on History, though I’m considerably better than a large number of people I talk to on a regular basis. I didn’t get the reference above, but I got the implication. I’m happy, though, that c_taylor added the link.

    1. Of course. Here in the Republic of Texas, I have heard a LOT of that kind of rhetoric. I’ve told others in the past, I’d like to save the whole country, and not just our little corner of it.

    2. Such is the commonly repeated council of Mike Vanderboegh, the North Alabama blogger who first made public the whole Fast and Furious clusterfisk. Makes perfect sense. When engaging in asymetrical warfare you never initiate violence. Doing so would cost you the moral high ground and put you on the same footing as any other terrorist.
      Mike is also fond of pointing out that in the first American revolution only about three percent of the colonists actively took up arms against the British. When one does the math based on a current estimate of some 80 million US gun owners that same three percent equates to 2.4 million strong of active armed citizens. No wonder civilian disarmament is a top priority for the left.

  19. This is getting shared on my Facebook.

    Regarding a plan of action, I’m hearing good things out of The Liberty Amendments by Mark Levin.

  20. Thank you for joining the fight. I’m proud to have you stand beside me, dear woman.

  21. On the one hand, I feel compelled to give the Big O credit for a smidgen of inadvertent truth. We have indeed decimated Al Quida. Trouble is, as the saying goes, I do not think that word means what he thinks it means. When the Romans decimated a village they lined up all males of fighting age, pulled every tenth person from the line, and killed them. Hence decimate, or reduce by ten percent. The term has unfortunately come in common use to mean create great harm and destruction, when in the strict definition it very precisely means to eliminate one tenth of your enemy.

    1. I have been trying to decide whether this was simply another instance of him displaying arrogant ignorance or if he knows the actual meaning and was engaging in another instance of slyly misleading verbiage.

        1. No, no: it was W who’s so stupid he keeps misusing words; O is one of the great American orators. Haven’t you been paying attention at all?

          1. Dangit, I was eating breakfast when I read that. Now I want to go regurgitate it.

    2. So that still leaves 90% behind, who all want revenge for the 10%? I don’t think decimation is as much of a deterrent ass he hopes.

      1. The usual subjects of decimation weren’t captured villages (who wants to kill off 10% of your valuable slaves?), they were Legion units that had showed cowardice. It was meant to encourage Legionnaires to hold the line. Stand together and you might win. Run and, if you managed to evade the enemy cavalry, you stood a 10% chance of dying anyway.

          1. When you realize how interdependent the Legion was in combat it doesn’t seem Draconian at all. Even a small number of people running could result in the unit losing cohesion and collapsing, exposing everyone to slaughter.