Due to both an Internet outage and an ongoing computer problem, my usual Sunday post will be delayed until tomorrow.
Here's the discussion at Steve Sailer of the crime wave gaining momentum since the ridiculous Ferguson protests pretending the thug who was shot for reasons other than the entirely appropriate one that the cop issued orders that were disobeyed, and he legitimately feared for his life.

The graph is quite useful. Unlike the sharp rises in the homicide rate in cities like Milwaukee, Chicago, St. Louis, Baltimore, etc., Detroit has had only a modest increase.

Some one out there will connect the dots. The black police chief in Detroit has become a vocal advocate of CCW: civilians possessing legal concealed weapons. It's part of the equation to tilt the scales against the criminals.

There'll always be the bad news stories, like the Gran Torino guy, well, an elderly Polish man living alone in Detroit, being beaten and killed and then his body set ablaze by a 17-year-old hoodlum rate. But Detroit is bucking the trend.

And it's all CCW. Thanks, Chief James Craig! His position reflects a change of heart. Earlier, he had thought disarming everyone was the way to go. Gangbangers hate the idea of people being able to shoot back. You know, the inalienable right to self-defense.
Interesting case from Camp Lejeune, NC, where a female Marine had a verse I'm not familiar with taped up in three locations in her cubicle workspace, to emulate the Trinity. Her superior told her to take them down. She refused. Then her superior began taking them down herself, only to have the subordinate re-print and -post.

It eventually led to her being court-martialed, a decision that has been upheld.

It's a case that is wending its way through the military courts. HT: Behind the Black
I like to listen to Granite Grok podcasts. They are pessimistic but still tilting against the windmills. A waste of time. Why expect to change elections to a state of secular twits who treat "diversity" as the new religious icon?

Looking at self-identified Christian conservatives county by county across the US, one can see the Northeast is doomed.

HT: Cri de coeur at Faith and Heritage.

Living For The Past

| | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
How many times have we heard someone say "Don't worry about tomorrow, just live for the moment"? I know I've heard it more than once during six of the seven different decades I've been on Earth, and quite often over the last ten years or so. It sounds profound, doesn't it?

Too bad it's a crock. There are many reasons why this is so and why we should stop listening to this nonsense.

Most lifestyle "gurus" have sold us on the idea of living for the moment -- that right now is all that exists -- and that we should only do that which makes us feel good.

Although this advice is alluring and justifying, it often fails to produce desirable results in the real world. Actually, in many cases, it ruins people's lives.

Living for the moment is the reason people leave marriages, lose control over their health, and why America is trillions of dollars in debt.

Does the above sound a little over the top? At first glance it might. But when you think about it, particularly that first sentence, you come to realize there's a lot of truth there. There's nothing with living in the moment, but only if you apply all you have (hopefully) learned and understand that the trope of " only do that which makes us feel good" is a trap, and is an insidious trap at that. As the linked post states, much of that 'feel good' crap is what has whittled away at our morals and ethics, diminished the concept of self-control, and has fooled many people into believing the "living in the moment, feel-good" meme also implies that there are no consequences for doing so. Too bad for them and the rest of us that they're tragically wrong.

Unless "living in the moment, feel-good" is reined in with some heavy caveats, we should strive to show those who believe it that it is trap, one they will not realize they have sprung until it's too late.

As the saying goes, Read The Whole Thing.
He was hiveminded by the liberal folks for his inaccurate tweet. However, as I learned from Heather MacDonald at the Manhattan Institute and written about here and here, hispanics* and blacks account for 98% of all criminal shootings in the Big Apple. Actually, this was a datum given by the NYPD that the NYT begrudgingly included deep in an article about the stop-and-frisk policy that had people up in arms. It truly is a case of not wanting to report the truth, but since a spokesman used such a fact as an apology for the controversial policy, they were _forced_ to include it.

Newspapers lie. One of the main reasons the Daily Mail out of the UK is the most popular newspaper in America is the fact it doesn't shy away from certain crimes that might make white people angry. No one wants to be targeted for violent assault or death based on his or her skin color.

As Jared Taylor shows using unimpeachable sources, an all-white NYC wouldn't need such gestapo tactics. It would be a wonderland, with a 91% decline in the murder rate! See for yourself.

Sort of like the city in the forties and fifties, where young children could safely ride the subway.

And after the recent horrific home invasion, rape and murder of Amanda Blackburn--Didn't hear about that, did you?--in Indianapolis, Paul Kersey has the known racial breakdown in murders in that unfortunate city. He asks why the media avoids discussing this readily available information, the pronounced violent criminality of blacks in a city long dominated by Republican mayors? (I say this last point, because cuckservatives like to blame liberal policies as the main reason for cities declining like Detroit.)

At some point, it needs to be openly discussed in the liberal media the unacceptable black-on-white crime wave that looks to be only growing bigger.

*N.B. According to the AP Stylebook, which is the bible for journalists, I was instructed to capitalize certain ethnic or racial groups' names. But not others. You got it. It was white, Black, Hispanic, Asian, etc. Total B.S.
As the decent into the absurd continues on our college campuses, one has to ask why the series of incredibly dumb and trivial 'causes' has come to the forefront. Between the "safe spaces" and "trigger warnings" being demanded by the mentally fragile snowflakes, and the progressively ridiculous claims of "racism", "sexism", and "cultural appropriation" being made by their brainless brethren, is it any wonder why we have to worry about our society?

Of the most recent silliness, the silliest has to be the cultural appropriation obsession that has infected our college campuses. It goes something like this:

Just when you thought uptight, fun-dodging, thought-policing millennials couldn't get any worse, they go and brand yoga as racist. Apparently, when white people bend themselves bonkers while humming or thinking happy-clappy thoughts, they're not only being self-punishing saps: they are also 'culturally appropriating' a practice that has 'roots in Indian culture'.

That's according to student leaders at the University of Ottawa, who put pressure on a yoga teacher at the uni's Centre for Students with Disabilities to call off her yoga classes. She was told 'there are cultural issues of implication involved in the practice'. In these people's minds, in which the Offence-Seeking Antenna is forever turned to High, a white person doing yoga is not that different to a white person donning blackface and singing 'Mammy'.

I think these folks are overlooking one important point: almost every western nation 'appropriates' portions of the cultures of those who have come there from other nations. It is inevitable.

America has been called a melting pot, hopefully taking the best of other cultures to add to our own and making it better. But that doesn't interest these idiots. They want to balkanize every cultural aspect of our people, natural born or immigrant, creating ethnic, racial, and cultural enclaves. It will be Jim Crow writ large, with the divisions being more numerous. That is what the Perpetually Offended are striving for, not realizing they sow the seeds of their own destruction. Such segregation never works, leaving more strife and division in its wake and stifling many of the freedoms we hold dear.

There's another aspect of this as well, that being by working to deconstruct Western social values we will have no base for making moral and ethical decisions. When that base is gone any action can be justified, even genocide. We saw that in places like Germany, where the Nazi Party filled a gap left by the devastating terms of the Treaty of Versailles which bankrupted that nation, financially and morally. We also saw it in the old Soviet Union, where normal morality and ethics were replaced by those of the Party, none of which allowed the freedom of thought and expression many of the present day 'Progressives' take for granted. They mistakenly think such freedoms would apply only to them and not the rest of us. Unfortunately for them, history shows that they will end up being proles just like the very ones they look down upon.

Of course much of this could be attributed to the fact that many of the major social issues that drove the late 50's, 60's, and 70's have been resolved, leaving only these trivial and, in the end, totally unimportant 'issues' as the only things the Perpetually Offended have to justify their existence.
I delight in listening to Alan Tonelson on the John Batchelor Show Podcast. He is the common sense guy with a great blog who argues that our manufacturing base has been hollowed out by supposed free trade.

Others counter that our manufacturing is as strong as ever. Um, maybe in porn, airplanes, and EPA-inspired red tape.

UPS drivers' clothing now is made in China. Just a few years ago the Teamsters union demanded it be U.S. made.

But Tonelson argues in irrefutable ways that a pair of journalists at the New York Times can't be bothered to find experts who refute the pro-immigration stance the newspaper is undeniably pushing. Bias is on full display, but it takes some digging to show, which Tonelson is more than able to do.

Great job, Mr. Tonelson! I especially agree with the coverage of the Syrian invaders--that's the word Israel uses for unlawful immigrants--and the dubious prospect that they can ever be adequately vetted. Much of the discussion by the left is based on lies, which you demonstrate.

Thoughts On A Sunday

| | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
Preparations for Thanksgiving continue apace, with the WP clan going to be spread out all over New England and rural New York on that day. Deb will be working that day and I'll be holding down the fort here at The Manse, so our celebration will take place on Friday. Such are the vagaries of work schedules.


David Starr offers his views on the GOP candidates and I have to say I pretty much agree with what he says.

While I agree with David that Ben Carson is a little soft spoken, I have to counter with Teddy Roosevelt's line - "Speak softly and carry a big stick." I'd rather have someone who speaks softly, means what he says, and is willing to back it up with the Big Stick.


While this article is not really new, being posted back in September, it is still germane to the discussion about Carly Fiorina and her time heading HP.

Was she a bad CEO? No, at least in regards to doing what was need to save HP. Those she laid off most likely see it differently, but a CEO's job is to do what's necessary to keep the company they lead viable, even if some of actions needed hurt some of the employees.

If the linked piece above isn't enough, here's a letter from a former HP employee that was published in one of our local papers. He was there prior to Carly taking the helm and dispels many of the conceptions of what HP was like pre-Fiorina.


Poor little fragile snowflakes!


Speaking of poor fragile little snowflakes, here's an example from Columbia University, where one has claimed she's "suffered severe emotional trauma from reading too many books by and about white people."

If she's so traumatized by this, it points to an underlying untreated psychological condition, not an uncaring university faculty or administration. This means she needs to withdraw from Columbia until her psychological disorder has been treated and she's deemed healthy enough to resume taking classes.


Somewhere, Jimmy Carter is celebrating being dethroned - Barack Obama: Worst. President. Ever.

Even people I know who have been staunch Obama supporters are now looking at him with new eyes and aren't liking what they're seeing. Quite a few of them have said they've felt betrayed because the promise of what might have been was nothing but a smokescreen meant to keep them in line. Now he's seen as a patronizing, sometimes annoyed and dismissive towards people who didn't see him as the new Progressive Messiah.

Welcome to the real world.

Even Jimmy Crater has been getting in on the act, placing the blame for ISIS squarely on the shoulders of Obama.


For a country that was supposed to be full of children who would never know snowfall again because of Global Warming, the UK is suffering its share of snow storms and icy blizzards.

I wonder how long it will be before the Thames River freezes from bank to bank?


This is one more I have to steal from Instapundit, and the subject does not surprise me in the least.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll shows us that a majority of Americans feel like strangers in their own country. I know I do.

We've gone from a "Can Do!" nation to one whose motto now seems to be either "Gimme Dat!" or worse, "You Didn't Build That!". Anyone showing a lick of innovative thinking is either marginalized, regulated, or sued to the point where they give up. That isn't what our nation was built on.

It doesn't help that both Democrats and Republicans are partly to blame for this, as are a large number of those sequestered away in the halls of academia, places that have rarely felt the effects of real life and continue to indoctrinate our young adults with 'progressive pablum' that has nothing progressive about it.

But what do you expect from a nation led by a man who has deep-seated hatred for the country he leads?


At least these masked bank robbers had a sense of decorum, declaring "Relax, we are not Isis. It is only a hold-up."

You can bet more than one bank patron said something along the lines of "Thank God!"


This is so effin' stupid that I admit I almost wasted a good cup of tea, being tempted to throw it at my monitor.

By way of Dr. Helen comes this Fox News story about a "PC bullying assembly" and how boys were asked to stand and make a pledge to "never ever hurt a woman, no matter what."

I can see if the girls were also asked to make a similar pledge to never ever hurt boys, but that wouldn't fit the narrative. Boys are always guilty, even when they aren't. That over a third of all domestic violence is committed by women is totally ignored, as is that the percentage is increasing.

I would never take such a pledge because I am a gentleman and it is assumed gentlemen would never hurt a woman. Nor would I take it because it is a totally PC piece of bulls**t and I will not in any way support political correctness, which is nothing more than yet another form of fascism.


And that's the news from politically incorrect Lake Winnipesaukee, where winter is peeking around hillsides and over mountaintops, snow tires are being mounted, and where we're making sure our snowblowers are good to go.
Ten years ago there was this incredible meltdown, one of many of the John L. Smith era:

Now we all saw in the same building of 108,000 fans a different breed of Spartans smash the Buckeyes in the mouth. And they bled. A bunch of coached-up three-star recruits clearly outplayed the five-star, me-first athletes that are in Columbus, Ohio, huddled around the heaters in the cold rain. Only two costly turnovers made it close.

A 41-yard field goal with no time remaining gave Michigan State the victory.

Hey, maybe a three-star athletes from the Upper Midwest can play better in conditions like that than the five-star guy from the South.

The Spartans destroy their opponents' will.

Look at the stats, they remarkable.

Logical Fallacies

| | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
One of the issues we deal with every day in the blogosphere, the media, and real life is what are called logical fallacies. We hear them (and use them) all the time, be it in passing conversation, writing a blog post, debating with others, or commenting on news stories or articles/posts/screeds on the 'Net or the dead tree media. The problem is that most of the time we don't even realize we are using them, or worse, are being used against us. It's even worse when they're being used against us and the person using them is fully aware they're using such a fallacy as a weapon to either bash you or force you into defending a position you hold as if it is your opinion that is flawed even though it is perfectly valid and theirs holds no water.

But first, exactly what is a logical fallacy?

A logical fallacy is, roughly speaking, an error of reasoning. When someone adopts a position, or tries to persuade someone else to adopt a position, based on a bad piece of reasoning, they commit a fallacy.

We see them and are exposed to them all the time. Many are harmless, but others can be wielded as a weapon to force a shift in perception or opinions about topics of importance, even when the 'new paradigm' is woefully inaccurate or an outright lie. We've seen that time and time again throughout history, the two biggest examples being the rise and fall of both Nazi Germany and Communism, specifically as practiced in the defunct Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Logical fallacies were used to drive the people of both nations in the directions their leaders wanted, even if the outcomes were abhorrent and, dare I say, genocidal. We still see it today in places like Venezuela, where deliberate logical fallacies have been used to control the perceptions of the people until the point where they could no longer ignore them. The nation's economy is a shambles, caused by the ideological blindness of those in power. They used all kinds of logical fallacies to convince the people that on Chavismo, the Venezuelan version of socialism could 'save' them from the predation of the 'Capitalist Yankees', all while driving the population into wide spread poverty and taking control of the wealth for the 'good of the Venezuelan people'.

There are a number of different types of logical fallacies, all based upon the type of reasoning used to create and support them. They run the gamut from formal (deductive) fallacies, informal (inductive) fallacies, and logical/factual error fallacies. I could try to parse them here, but it would be easier if you go to the site linked above and read the various descriptions there.

Probably the two most common logical fallacies we run across are the Straw Man Argument and the Appeal to Authority. We see both of these an the 'Net, in the Letters to the Editor in our newspapers, and even in debates amongst acquaintances. We've certainly seen a large number of examples of both of these during the ongoing debate about climate change.

The first is used when one's position is weak in order to make it appear as if it is stronger. The second is used most often when there is no "there" there so the argument is redirected towards the opinions of an authority figure even if that person has little or no real expertise in the subject being debated or has been proven wrong.

If we understand logical fallacies we can both protect ourselves against those used by others and prevent ourselves from using them ourselves.

Mog's Christmas Calamity

| | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)
I'd thought to save this until some time in December, but it's so good that I couldn't wait.

Thoughts On A Sunday

| | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
While the weather has been nice, I haven't had the opportunity to finish the last of the yard work due to family and town commitments. That doesn't bother me as I have at least two more weeks to finish it and I figure all I really need is two days of decent weather to get it done before winter closes in.

One thing that needs taking care of is re-shodding the trusty F150 with new tires, preferably with something that has a slightly more aggressive tread. Not that the tires I've had on the F150 haven't been adequate for most of my driving, but there were more than a few times when I could have used the extra traction a more aggressive tread would have provided.


With the ISIS attack in France, a lot of people are wondering if there wasn't something that could have been done to prevent it.

Of course there was, but EU policies, lax immigration laws, and hubris finally caught up with the EU and a lot more people had to die.

I expect to see more of these coordinated attacks, but I doubt they will happening on a daily, weekly, or even monthly basis. Frankly, ISIS doesn't have the support or logistics to pull off numerous attacks without drawing the attention of numerous national and international intelligence operations.

As my dear brother opined to me last night, "In a head to head fight against a highly organized military, they lose."

There are a number of ways to fight and defeat ISIS, but I doubt the present occupant in the White House has either the stomach for it or the conviction that it's needed to bring the fight to an intractable enemy. One of the more effective means of doing so hasn't been used since World War II and I doubt anyone would get behind such a means, except maybe for the Russians, that being total war: flatten everything under ISIS control, then bomb the rubble, then bomb it again. Encircle ISIS held territory and move towards the center, destroying everything that moves.

The problem with this type of warfare is that there is a lot of collateral damage. A lot of innocents die, and no one really wants that.

But if ISIS escalates, starts using weapons of mass destruction such as chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapons within Europe and the Americas, all bets are off. At that point they will have lost because all ISIS held territory will likely find themselves on the receiving end of nuclear strikes, and I doubt if a lot of attention will be paid to the so-called battle lines, particularly if Russia is involved. (Frankly, I wouldn't blame them.)


I find this to be an intriguing question: Could the US double energy efficiency?

Of course that is a rather misleading question because it's too general. There are a number of areas where increased energy efficiency is possible, but it would be incremental and the costs wouldn't be worth it because the return on investment would be a negative number and, in the end, likely to create inefficiencies in other areas.

While more gains can be achieved with better insulation of buildings, I doubt that we'd see a 50% cut in energy use without there being some negative side effects. We've certainly seen that in many super-insulated buildings where even though energy consumption decreased greatly, the health of people inside those buildings were negatively affected because the buildings were "too tight". To fix that problem better ventilation systems were needed which increased the energy usage and canceled out some of the benefits of the better insulation.

One of the few places where we could see some major gains in energy efficiency is transportation, specifically ground transportation. Internal combustion engines are still woefully inefficient, but much better than they used to be. If efficiency could be doubled, that could mean smaller engines to provide similar power to existing engines, but the cost of doing so shouldn't exceed the cost of doing nothing otherwise there's no incentive to do so.

And so it goes.


What happens when claims about the effects of global warming don't match reality? They disappear from the Internet.

But as more than one maven has stated, nothing really disappears from the 'Net...ever.


The New England Patriots managed to pull off a squeaker against the New York Giants, a team they've always had trouble beating. The Pats won it on a 54-yard field goal, leaving only 1 second on the clock at the end of the play. Now the Patriots are 9-0, but still only 1-3 against the Giants.


Moonbattery brings up a very important point in regards to the present occupant of the Oval Office:

Why only fools listen to Obama.

Obama makes a statement that is easily proven to be false, in this case shortly after the church shooting in Charleston, about "This kind of violence does not happen in other advanced countries."

The rebuttal: "If only France had rigid gun control, yesterday's bloodbath in Paris could have been avoided. Oh wait, France is run by moonbats and does have rigid gun control. That's why no one was in a position to fight back against the Muslims."



I think Smitty over at The Other McCain may have hit upon a brilliant idea for solving two problems plaguing America at the same time: Radical Islam in the Middle East and the increasingly fascist academia infesting our colleges.
1. Trump is making waves about mass-deportation of illegal aliens. Let's stipulate that, if they were packing the gear to get themselves here, they've already showed more capability than the current crop of college nitwits. Bear with me.

2. Instead of deporting illegal aliens, let's deport all of academia! (Hollyweird: you're on notice). Send all of these feckless administrators, Commie profs, and the minds they've polluted. . .to the Middle East.

3. I figure the encounter of Radical Islam and academia with be some sort of matter/anti-matter affair. Promises to be a jolly meltdown, but hey: haven't they all earned it?

4. We can give American education a fresh kickstart by. . .educating the illegal aliens (who should be quite attentive to Americanization, having seen what just happened to academia.)

5. And we all live maturely ever after.

Actually his suggestions solve three problems, the third being illegal immigration onto the US. Way to go, Smitty!


Modern Educayshun indeed. This would be hilarious if it weren't so true.

Hmm. Maybe we should apply Smitty's solution to correct this problem?


After seeing the endless failures of zero-tolerance policies in schools that have harmed far more kids than any that might have been caused by transgressors, I have to wonder what dope this dope has been smoking that makes him want to expand such a disastrous policy.

I guess he really hasn't thought about the unexpected consequences of such an expansion. I can tell you one of them - unending and very expensive lawsuits against any of the institutions that implement such policies, particularly where they violate someone's First Amendment rights. Considering the exponential growth of special and fragile snowflakes now infesting our institutions of higher learning, this is a policy that will ultimately destroy the very institutions they are supposed to 'protect'.

Too often zero-tolerance polices merely show us the weakness and/or cowardice of administrators who don't want to be bothered with having to actually make a decision. They are also yet another means of stifling our God-given rights, including the right to offend those with whom we disagree.


More than a few people complained when the latest Democrat debate was scheduled for an evening when very few people were expected to actually watch. Whose great idea was this? If it was Debbie Wasserman Schultz, then she should be fired.

How bad was it?

CBS ended coverage 7 minutes before the scheduled end of the debate. That's how bad it was.

More people were interested in the college football games than this drivel, hence the opinion that it was an awful time slot. Who the heck is going to watch three white socialists, two if which who are really getting up there in years and none who actually have any new ideas, debate of stuff no one cares about when they can watch a diverse and stimulating college football game?


Speaking of old white socialists, three young adults stopped by The Manse today to talk to me about Bernie Sanders, asking if I'd support him.

I will admit that I had a brief impulse to let them have it with both barrels of my rhetoric shotgun, but decided they might be examples of some of the previously mention special fragile snowflakes and I didn't want to cause them to go catatonic. So I listened politely, told them I am nowhere near close to supporting anyone, and that I am not going to commit to anyone at this point, and sent them on their merry way.


And that's the news from Lake Winnipesaukee, where the last of the leaves have fallen, the winds have died down (for now), and where Thanksgiving is getting closer.
We all have our blind spots. Some of us less than others. Some of us know we have blind spots. Like Socrates, though, it's those who purport to know when they don't who cause the problems.

Like the superintendent at West Point (the smiling Eagle Boy Scout with his chest covered by merit badges and ribbons) not willing to give up on our failed Iraq Attack while simultaneously declaring that since the warriors do the fighting they hate war most of all.

It's a lie. One crafted into statecraft by the dubious Douglas MacArthur, the popinjay who accepted a Distinguished Flying Cross from a sycophant for flying in a commercial aircraft to a war zone.

You can see it, if one pushes aside the hero worship we give the square-jawed members of the military like the three-star Robert Caslen. How else is he going to advance but for war? It's his bloody profession. They covet what allows them to shine and fulfill their destiny: sending young men to be killed or maimed.

I realized this as a cadet at West Point during the 1980s.

Of course much of our thankless sacrifices were and are in vain; the trillion dollars and thousands of casualties for Iraq were, in hindsight, an almost unmitigated disaster. The only positive that I can see--like the metric system being born out of the hideous French Revolution--is the efficiency and cheapness of death by hanging when done properly. Saddam Hussein killed with the breaking of his neck, instantaneously. But we reject that in our embrace of the antiseptic.

Here's Col. Mike Mammay, a West-Pointer from Merrimack, NH, a member of the 1990 class, "The Proud and Mighty," handing 18 set of keys to new tractors to a corpulent sheikh in 2009 in a city south of Baghdad. How will the tractors help in a desert is a problem Westerners rarely concern themselves with. Nebraska works; the Sahel and other deserts, no, it doesn't. Here's the same city on Google maps (Oct 2015). Hey, it's still a desert, a god-forsaken hellhole. Who'd want to stay there when there is California?

Our role as the world's policeman happened by happenstance. We were victorious after WWII, yet our allies were reduced to rubble. We had no choice. But in doing so, our republican institutions, as Pat Buchanan writes about so effectively, were trampled down to the dust by the military-industrial complex. 

The future ain't pretty.

What Iran wants to do is acquire nukes, miniature them into a warhead, and then launch them  from offshore ships into the atmosphere several hundred miles above the continental United States to initiate an IMP attack. First, knock off The Big Satan. Second, concentrate on the little satan, Israel. (For the Sunnis, it's the other way round.) Is it so hard for you clueless Americans to get what's coming? Or are you too drug-, medicated-, or Kardashianed-down?

Liberalism, too, has tremendous blind spots. One such pattern it can't countenance is the presence of evil. Lawrence Auster explicates brilliantly on 'em all.

Jet Pack Flies In New York

| | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I watched the GOP debate last night and more than any other statement made by the candidates, this one by Ted Cruz stood out because, quite frankly, it hit the target dead center. The topic?

Illegal immigration.

Said Cruz:

When the mainstream media covers illegal immigration they do not see it as an economic issue, but I can tell that for millions of Americans watching this at home it is a very personal economic issue.

I will say, the politics of it would be very, very different if a bunch of lawyers or bankers were crossing the Rio Grande. Or if a bunch of people with journalism degrees were coming over and driving down the wages in the press, then we would see stories about the economic calamity that is befalling our nation.

I have a feeling he's right. If it's their ox being gored we'd never hear the end of it and they'd be pushing for stricter enforcement of immigration laws and the wholesale deportation of the illegal immigrants who took their jobs.

Turnabout it fair play, media drones!
We've all heard the national and international reports of the anti-white violence perpetrated by blacks in Columbia, Missouri, right? Or was it about poop shaped in the design of an Egyptian symbol? I can't remember. But Colin Flaherty's video from 7 Nov is indeed troubling, showing what he calls "the biggest lie" of black victimization being the cause for the media whitewashing of the often gruesome, unprovoked attacks--dozens of them--on whites. You can be sure, like the totalitarian Black-Run America  we now live in, whites may whisper to each other in private on occasion. At some point, people will need to take concrete steps not to be a victim.

Thoughts On A Sunday

| | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
The warm weather we experienced over last week has fled, with daytime temps in the upper 40's and overnight temps below freezing. This meant we had to fire up the Official Weekend Pundit Woodstove to keep the chill off overnight.

The colder weather also brought a lot of gusty winds, meaning a lot of the leaves remaining on our trees came down over the weekend. The wind also meant it would have been futile to rake the yard, so no actual yard work was done.


Bird Dog points us in the direction of an old Yankee cuisine staple: Fluffernutters.


Oh, I like this!

Here's where you can find a list of gas stations in your state or province that sell ethanol-free gasoline.

Fortunately there's one in a town not too far from here that does so and I am up that way every other week or so.

I wish the US would end the stupid ethanol mandate because it doesn't do anything it promised it would do, particularly reduce our dependence on foreign oil and reduce carbon emissions. We have plenty of oil here in the US and if we chose to do so, would not have to import a single drop of overseas oil. Corn-based ethanol is a loser from the get-go, costing the taxpayers a lot of money, taking otherwise productive farmland out of food production to produce corn for ethanol, and actually causes more CO2 to be generated than if we did nothing.


Another DNC media organ admits to fabricating a story about one of the present GOP presidential candidates. Sound familiar?

Politico's Kyle Cheney admitted that he fabricated a negative story about Ben Carson. At least, according to his own standards, he admitted the grievous journalistic sin.

In a story published early on Friday, Politico's Kyle Cheney authored a piece headlined "Ben Carson admits fabricating West Point scholarship" with a subhed "Carson's campaign on Friday conceded that a central point in his inspirational personal story did not occur as he previously described."

There were at least five major problems with the story:

The headline was completely false
The subhed was also completely false
The opening paragraph was false false false
The substance of the piece was missing key exonerating information
The article demonstrated confusion about service academy admissions and benefits
I'm wondering how long before Politico borrows the CBS News justification: "Fake, but accurate."


David Starr makes a good case for repealing Dodd-Frank.

...we passed a law, Dodd-Frank, which makes bailouts policy.  Dodd-Frank  sets up which companies will get bailouts, how much.

The real problem with bailouts, is they urge on crazy behavior.  In no-bailout world, company management is pretty careful about the risks it runs.  If they do something really risky, and it fails, the company is toast, they and everyone in the company are out of work, the investors loose everything.  All around badness.

But when Uncle Sam says he will bailout companies, all bets are off.   Now management can do all those crazy things, and if they fail, the company survives, they keep their jobs, and the investors are untouched (mostly).  No pain.  And without pain, nobody learns anything. 

That's what happens when you privatize profit but socialize risk - Risk 'disappears' and the constraints on investments disappear with them. That's never a good idea.


You're kidding me, right?

As if we need more evidence that "much of the student body is mentally ill" at Yale, Glenn Reynolds points us to a Hot Air story reporting that Yale administrators have apologized for not creating enough "safe spaces" on campus.

Anyone requiring such safe spaces isn't competent to survive in the real world and, for the good of the rest of the student body, should be expelled until they can prove they are no longer mentally ill. It isn't fair to the rest of the students or the faculty to be forced to go out of their way to cater to someone who shouldn't even be there.


I think they're grading on a curve.

Obama earns a 'D' on handling the economy.

If he was being graded on how to weaken and/or destroy an economy, then he would deserve an 'A'.


Microsoft's "hit" OS, Windows 10, isn't much of a hit with a lot of PC support reps, with some of them discouraging their customers from upgrading to the new OS.

I know a lot of corporate customers are staying with Windows 7, seeing no good reason to abandon an OS that is stable and does what they need it to do.

I know my company has a few PCs running Windows 10, but mostly to help us ensure our software will work when run on a Windows 10 platform. All of the rest of our computers are running Windows 7 Enterprise and corporate has no plans to make the switch to 10 any time in the near future.


To make space more accessible we need a better way to get spacecraft into orbit. The old tried-and-true method works, but it's hellaciously expensive and inherently unsafe as compared to driving a car or taking a flight in a plane.

While some companies have been working on making spaceflight less expensive, too many of them are merely using a variation of the system we've been using since the late 1950's. Companies like Scaled Composites and Xcor are on the right track, but they aren't there yet and their existing systems are only good enough for sub-orbital flights. Others, like Reaction Engines Ltd, are working on better systems that work little different than existing airliners, albeit with a lot of upgrades to make orbital flight possible.


And that's the news from Lake Winnipesaukee, where the last of the boats are being pulled from the lake, summer cottages are now closed up for the winter, and where the smell of woodsmoke is becoming more prevalent.
I'm not going to address an issue of vital national interest, at least not in this post. Instead, I'm going to address an issue of vital local interest (though it applies all across America...or at least rural and semi-rural America).

What is it that I find so compelling that I feel the need to express it here? What drives me to tackle this subject...yet again?

Personal experience.

On more than one occasion over the past 13 years of blogging I have written about life in a small town along with the ups and downs that go with it. One of the more insidious factors that can have negative effects on any small town is what I call drawbridge mentality. It can be a complex subject, so rather than boring everyone with a long and convoluted definition of the term, let me try to simplify it for you and explain it thus:

It is an attitude most often held by newcomers to a town that now that they have found their perfect little piece of Americana, they want to 'raise the drawbridge', let no one else in, and most often, don't want there to be any change ever. Call it a more subtle version of "I got mine, buddy, so screw you!"

While this is an attitude most often held by newcomers, it isn't limited just to them as I've seen a number of towns where life-long residents fall into that same trap. I know of at least one town down in southwestern New Hampshire where the residents have done that and now they wonder why no new families are moving in, why their elementary school is closing, and why what few businesses that used to be located in town have either closed their doors or relocated to another town.

I mentioned earlier that personal experience has driven me to address this topic, in this case a battle here in my little home town that pits a newcomer (the family has only been here for a few years) against a local business that has been run by the same family for generations. This in turn reminded me of a situation in a small town northwest of here where I once resided where a retired couple bought their 'dream home' near the town green.

Not once did they give any thought to the working farm that was across the road from them...until their first spring in their new home when the farm owners started their annual preparations for the coming growing season. Between removing the winter crop of rocks from the fields, plowing, seeding, fertilizing, and a lengthy list of other activities that take place on a working farm, there was noise and interesting 'aromas' emanating from the farm, something to which they took exception. It didn't matter to them that the farm had been in the same family and operating since the late 1700's, they wanted all of the activities that bothered them to stop. It didn't matter to them that the farm was the family's livelihood, how they made their living. They wanted their "peace and quiet" and were willing to do anything to get it. However they got nowhere with their complaints and found no sympathy in the town because they were, after all, flatlanders. They even made threats to sue, but from my understanding they couldn't find a lawyer willing to take their case because they all knew it was a loser right out of the gate.

In the end they stopped trying to shut down the farm operation and eventually settled in, acclimating to their new environs. I'd like to think they came to the point where they rarely even noticed the farm operations anymore...or perhaps they just shut off their hearing aids.

This situation has occurred in one form or another in small towns all across America. It's disheartening, disruptive, and at times, destructive.

The only other type of behavior that can cause havoc in small towns are when newcomers decide they want the same services and amenities to be made available as the place they fled, finding that small town life isn't everything they thought it would be. If they succeed they then complain about how much their property taxes have gone up, not making the connection between increased services/amenities and increased taxes. The level of this type of disconnect can be amazing, even when it is pointed out to them that they are the cause of the constantly rising property taxes.

I am not one who believes any town can become static and survive just as I do not believe a town's character can survive if it becomes just another clone of the places everyone has left. Towns will change with time. They always do. The towns that survive adapt with the times and do well if they can make any necessary changes while also maintaining its character. It's not easy, but it can be done and has been done. It's also worthwhile.

New Finds

Expatriate New Englanders

Other Blogs We Like That Don't Fit Into Any One Category


Monthly Archives


Powered by Movable Type 4.1