Here’s a non-political rant, for a change.

Spam callers.

Otherwise known as assholes.

Being on the do-not-call list (either at the state or federal level) is a joke.  It’s a lot like gun control (OK, sorry, I did say this wouldn’t be political, but it is actually relevant), in that the do-not-call lists place restrictions only on the law-abiding.  Anyone who wants to run an illegal boiler-room call center that uses spoofed numbers to get around “unknown number” call blocks and so forth is not going to be stopped by a silly list of people who don’t want them calling.

Lately it seems that a lot of spoofed calls are coming “from” numbers in our own area code.  On our cell phones, the usual approach seems to be even more granular, with the numbers matching both area code and exchange (as if I would pick up a call simply because it came from the same exchange; I got my cell number from a vendor in Noblesville, many years and two carriers ago, and I can’t think of anyone I know who has a cell number in that exchange.

It seems to me that there are two things that need to happen.

First, phone companies have a duty to ensure that the information coming through CallerID is not spoofed and is accurate.  Unfortunately, it is all too easy to take a modern phone system and program whatever number you like into it.  This actually has a legitimate purpose — it is done to provide for direct-inward-dial systems where it is preferred to broadcast the main switchboard number of the company rather than the individual’s extension, and that makes sense.  But in turn, the phone company should be vetting the CallerID information being sent against a list of numbers registered to the phone “line” in question.  And yeah, with VOIP not using physical copper like the old POTS systems, that may be difficult to do, but I’ll bet it’s not insurmountable.  If a phone company can determine that the CallerID being sent by one of its customers is not on the list of authorized numbers for that line, it can either substitute the known main switchboard number for the line, or simply refuse to place the call at all.  I’m sure this is all a SMOP*, but nothing is impossible if you throw enough money at the problem.  And if the phone companies courteously excuse themselves from fixing their broken systems, then the Feds should step in and force them to do it.  There is no point in creating law and having a regulatory system if you’re not going to use it.  That is hardly the libertarian point of view that I would prefer, but since I’m enjoined from going after these spamming bastards with a shotgun, the gummint needs to get on the ball.

Second, the FTC needs to start actively cracking down on boiler-room operations.  Which is like asking the FCC to start actively cracking down on bad hams.  It happens once in a while for some of the more egregious violators, but even then, the regulatory agencies have no law-enforcement authority and for anything more than a proposed liability (otherwise known as a fine), they have to get the DOJ involved.  So, OK, do that.  Or call on local law enforcement.  But stop pretending to enforce the law by having people send in complaints that (so far as it seems) rarely end up with spammers in hot water.  (That goes for junk fax laws and the CAN-SPAM act for email, too.)

There is simply no sense in having these laws if they aren’t enforced.


*SMOP [Simple (or Small) Matter of Programming] 1. A piece of code, not yet written, whose anticipated length is significantly greater than its complexity. Used to refer to a program that could obviously be written, but is not worth the trouble. Also used ironically to imply that a difficult problem can be easily solved because a program can be written to do it; the irony is that it is very clear that writing such a program will be a great deal of work. “It’s easy to enhance a FORTRAN compiler to compile COBOL as well; it’s just a SMOP.” 2. Often used ironically by the intended victim when a suggestion for a program is made which seems easy to the suggester, but is obviously (to the victim) a lot of work. Compare minor detail.

At least Trump isn’t politics as usual.

Bobbi has a post up today musing about the Trump presidency as a “yawner” compared to, say, Johnson’s and Nixon’s.  I can’t disagree with anything she said.

I’ve no problem stating that I was a never-Trumper until Cruz fizzled. You can easily search this blog and see where I said I’d never vote for Trump.  I said I’d vote Libertarian if I had to.  But when Gary Johnson picked the egregious anti-gunner Bill Weld for VP, that put paid to that idea. And I had the sense at that point to drop my never-Trumpism like a hot rock when it was clear that it was a choice between either Trump or Hillary. Some on the right haven’t gotten to that point yet, and probably never will.  I feel sorry for them, because they are pushing back against history, and history never, ever loses.

Now, Trump was not my ideal candidate by any stretch of the imagination.  The truth is that Trump is neither left nor right, neither conservative nor progressive, neither fish nor fowl. He’s a businessman first and a populist second. He got tired of the constant anti-business attitude that emanates from Washington, under both Dem and GOP leadership, and decided to do something about it. Of course, as a billionaire, he could muse, like many of us do, “If I were president…” — and then actually suit action to words. By abandoning the politics of political correctness, and by enunciating a message that resonated with the American electorate — making America great again, subtext “after the disasters known as Clinton, GW Bush, and particularly Obama” — he clearly tapped into the psyche of the silent majority, because he beat the polls, not handily, but in sufficient numbers in sufficient states to win the Electoral College. (I’m minded of Joe Kennedy and the statement attributed to him regarding Jack’s first run for the Senate: “Don’t buy a single vote more than necessary. I’ll be damned if I’m going to pay for a landslide.”) Of course he also benefited from poor campaign decisions by Hillary, like her not campaigning in Wisconsin and probably losing there because of it.

Since the election?  Reagan was the Teflon president, I don’t know what they ought to call Trump, possibly the force-screen president, because all of the turds the Dems AND the GOP have thrown at him have either vanished into the ether or bounced back onto the throwers.  Trump’s base doesn’t care.  They somehow have the ability to tell the truth from the lies.  And most of it’s been lie after lie after lie, starting with the “Russia thing”, which was clearly made up out of whole cloth the day after the election to “explain” Hillary’s surprise loss.

Trump doesn’t care about party as much as he cares about restoring balance to the political environment and getting Washington out of things in which it has no business meddling. Like, gee, business, which has been slowly asphyxiating to death under the last three administrations. People can say that is selfish on his part because he’s a businessman, but like Reagan said, a rising tide floats all boats. Fix how government treats business, and everybody benefits.  The entire entrenched political class hates him for this — Dems and GOPes alike — because it threatens their little fiefdoms built up over the past half-century and more.  And you wonder why the GOPe won’t get behind Trump when the rank and file of the party seem to be willing to give him a chance?

Like Glenn Reynolds says, “Worst political class ever.”

And it doesn’t hurt that Trump’s a patriot at the same time, and willing to flex a little military muscle to put a stop to things like Daesh,* and Lil’ Kim’s megalomaniac drive to nuke the world.  Don’t think for a minute that he’s bluffing.  I don’t think Trump bluffs about anything.  The fat boy is going to find this out if he ever manages to loft a real nuclear weapon into the air — and maybe before.  The Chinese already have a strong inkling of it, and the mad mullahs in Iran would be well warned to have it on their radar, too.  The Russians?  The Russians are a joke, if a nuclear-armed one, because no matter what Putin does, the US can bankrupt them by simply opening the fracking taps wide.  We’re already on course to do that with our new ability to export natural gas and oil.  (Now if we could just get rid of the Jones Act…)

Then there’s the border wall.  I got to thinking the other day about Trump’s insistence that the Mexicans would pay for it, and their huffy rejoinder that they wouldn’t pay a dime for it.  The more I think about that, the more I think the left got it wrong (as usual) and so did the Mexicans (also as usual).  Hell, even the GOPe has gotten it wrong.  If you look at the recent ICE statistics on illegal border crossings from Mexico, they are way, way down.  And some re-crossings are happening in the other direction.  This is because the illegals here and the potential illegals there are more and more concerned about just how serious Trump is about rounding them up and sending them back.

The upshot of this is that I think the wall has already been built.  It’s a metaphorical wall built by a constant drumbeat of policy from the administration that says we aren’t going to put up with this any longer.  You don’t need concrete and steel and millions of dollars’ worth of labor (and graft — don’t forget the graft) to simply lay down a strong policy and then start enforcing it.  If Mexicans are afraid of what might happen if they cross illegally and get caught, they won’t cross.  And that’s a wall if I ever heard of one.

And as for the Mexicans paying for this metaphorical wall?  Can you say that they aren’t paying for it?  Somebody has to feed those people, clothe and house them, find them jobs, etc.  Remittances from the US back to Mexico are also dropping.

For once, it’s not Uncle Sucker paying Mexico’s welfare bill.

I haven’t even mentioned how Trump has the hapless, partisan press on the run.  I hate the fact that nobody took his Twitter account away from him after the inauguration, but what the hell, it makes the press go cuckoo for coco-puffs.  They spend so much time worrying about his latest tweet that substantive change being made by the White House goes right over their heads.  And now CNN has damn near committed suicide over a stupid YouTube video retweeted by the president.  Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of assholes.

Having a Grand Master Patriot Troll as president?  Yeah.  I can live with that.  Winning is good.


* I like calling them Daesh because apparently they hate it.  It’s an acronym for their name in Arabic, and apparently the acronym is close to the Arabic word for “shit” or something like that.  Anything that pisses those bastards off is OK with me.

Something to think about

Speaking of lying liars and the liars who speak lies, I just ran across this Forbes article about Microsoft lying back in January about how “insecure” Windows 7 is, to scaremonger people into upgrading to Windows 10 lickety-split.  This, despite the fact that Microsoft is committed to extended support for Windows 7 until January 14, 2020.  (Note:  Forbes dislikes ad-blockers, so you’ll have to either give them a one-time pass or use a browser without an ad-blocker.)

I have one machine that auto-updated to Windows 10 about a year ago, and given what I use it for, I intend to roll it back to Windows 7 at some point when I have a clear weekend to run all the Windows Updates it will need for a scratch re-install.  I also have an Intel ComputeStick that came with Windows 10 and (as I understand it) can’t be downgraded.

I don’t like the new interface, even when all the stupid panes are disabled and it goes back to looking more like Windows 7.  I don’t like the fact that configurations you could make easily to the OS configuration in Windows 7 are now hidden away under layers of obfuscation, or simply can’t be made anymore at all.  And I definitely don’t like the privacy approach (which is to say the non-privacy approach) that Microsoft has taken with Windows 10.

The fact that the current generation of processors doesn’t play well with Windows 7 doesn’t really bother me.  I don’t have any machines with current processors 🙂  And well, as long as eBay is around, it won’t be hard to find fast CPUs and motherboards that still support Windows 7.

The boss just suggested that some of the interface problems go away with a cheap add-on called Start10.  For $4.99 it’s worth a try, but I still think that one machine is going back to Windows 7.

Obligatory FTC Disclaimer:  I have no connection to StarDock or the Start10 software.


And the response from the left? *crickets*

You know what irks me more than anything else about the Scalise assassination attempt?

None of my liberal friends have explicitly disowned or condemned what happened yesterday. Except for a few non-specific posts about sadness that people can be evil, I’ve seen nothing on the left like the posts I’ve seen on the right.

No human being should be anything but outraged about what happened on that ball field yesterday. I used to think that was a universal moral imperative. Now I’m not so sure the other side believes in moral anything anymore.

If the left wants to be taken seriously in the future, it needs to step up, condemn this violence, and start disowning antifa and BLM and all the other lefty hate groups they’ve allowed to spring up.

The left can spend all day pointing fingers at what they claim is a neo-Nazi, neo-Fascist fringe right (which is hilarious, because real Nazis and Fascists were socialists, as I have pointed out numerous times on this blog), but the fact is that nobody on the right is going around tearing up college campuses, play-acting presidential assassinations, and now shooting politicians for no reason other than that they are Republicans. We’re on a slippery slope to escalation right now, and all the left is doing with their hippie tears is greasing the ways to general insurrection. Hope they can live with that when it matures into open warfare.

And if any of my left wing friends read this and become angry, tough toenails. You own this mess because you couldn’t accept the results of an election that proved the country really didn’t want your fundamental transformation. Don’t try to shift the blame off on people who just want to be left alone and get on with their lives.

My biggest problem with the left at the moment, though, is that they don’t seem to realize how much damage they’re doing to their own party’s legitimacy. They need to consider very carefully what is going on in the hearts and minds of the silent majority who were responsible for Donald Trump’s election. The actions of the left — or more to the point, their inaction in stopping the political and actual violence taking place in their name — only cements the desire in the hearts and minds of the silent to throw more of them to the curb. While some may consider that a good thing, I don’t. Tension between left and right is healthy in a democratic republic. The actions of the fringe left coupled with the inaction of the soi-disant “moderate” left threatens that tension and thereby threatens the very fabric of the Republic. For that reason alone, the left has a vested interest in controlling their run-wild fringe before they bring down all before them.

You want more Trump? Because…oh, you know the drill.

Well…that’s how you get more Trump.

Steve Scalise, aide shot in Virginia

Rep. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., told Fox News he left just before the shooting. As he walked to his car, a man asked DeSantis if it was Republicans or Democrats practicing. About three minutes later, at around 7:15 a.m. the shooting began, DeSantis said. It reportedly last about 10 minutes.

All y’all on the left really need to start policing your folks better. The violence and threats aren’t coming from our side, and even under your Anointed One, the right always promptly disavowed anyone who talked this kind of smack.

The left has never apologized for this kind of thing, though, or done much to prevent it from escalating, and I doubt it will start now.

If the left had an actual leader who would step up and vociferously condemn what is going on, that person might actually have a chance in 2020. But the “leaders” on the left are too busy trashing Trump and trying to find ways to block his agenda.

I have said it before and I will say it again: I am not a huge Trump fan, but this kind of behavior is precisely what got Trump elected, and to let it go on continues to damage the Democrats more and more. The silent majority is not happy right now, and as we saw in 2016, plenty of them vote, and they are pretty much unpollable because they won’t talk to pollsters, whom they tend to view as slanted and dishonest. And that’s how you get an election where it’s supposedly Hillary in a walk, and then instead you get Trump as a complete surprise to the media and the establishment — but not to the people who are sick and tired of the status quo in Washington.

Ben Sasse said it best in his maiden speech in the Senate: “The people despise us all.” And he was and remains 100% correct.

The folks out there who are whinging about how Weimar-esque the US is starting to look (and that includes some folks on the right — it’s a theme that comes up regularly at Instapundit, for instance) don’t seem to understand that, contra Santayana, history really doesn’t repeat itself; it merely repeats overarching themes.  There will be no American Hitler, because the silent majority remains well-armed and unwilling to kowtow to anyone who bids fair to take those arms (and the rights they protect) away.  There may be hard and bad times coming in America, but a true dystopia seems to me to be pretty unlikely.  And of course, it will never be as bad here as it will be in the rest of the world, given it’s still true that when America gets the sniffles, the rest of the world catches cold — or worse.

The American spirit still lives in a lot of Americans.  As much crap as I throw at GenX, GenY, and millennials, there are plenty of patriots in those groups as well.  These Americans may not speak out or make their true feelings known until the feces truly impact the turbine, but they will step up when their country needs them.  Count on it.

Despite the worst the Democrats could do to us, we shrugged off a Great Depression and won a World War.  What we have today isn’t nearly what our parents and grandparents had.

We can prevail — but we need to put a stop to the turbulence on the left that is being driven by a completely irrational hatred of Donald Trump, capitalism, and classical liberal conservatism.  Put bluntly, the left wants to destroy our country, or “fundamentally transform” it as their Anointed One put it.

But there’s still a lot of us out here who have no interest in being transformed, either fundamentally or otherwise.  The left should fear us.

That they don’t — yet — speaks volumes.

Green is about control, not about efficiency.

From an away game:

Efficiency is a wonderful thing, but eventually you reach the point of diminishing returns.

Our air today in the US is cleaner than it has been at any time in our industrial history. You simply can’t burn coal or petroleum products any cleaner without a huge investment in technologies that produce smaller and smaller returns with every new generation. Our water today is also cleaner than it has been since the Industrial Revolution, for similar reasons. (The main issue with water today is overuse, not purity. If we don’t start refilling aquifiers pretty soon, we’re going to be in trouble.)

Yet the rest of the world (particularly the developing part, and I’m looking at you, China) continues to use old technologies that pollute the air and the water at rates higher than the US did at any time in my lifetime.

If you want clean and green power, you’d better be considering nuclear, or you’re not serious about operating a high-tech civilization. Today’s nuclear power is not Three Mile Island (which accident, by the way, has always been overhyped by the green left anyway).

If you want clean and green water, stop letting the EPA do things like what it did to the Animas River last year and then get away scot free. And if you want water at all in another couple of decades, start paying more attention to how water is used by farmers and industry, rather than making me flush a “low-flow” toilet four times where I could flush one of the old ones in my home once.

Remember, all these efficiencies are being forced on us by people who think they know better than we do, primarily for the purpose of obtaining and maintaining control, not because tiny improvements costing billions of dollars in new infrastructure and damage to the economy are actually doing us any real and lasting good.

Wringing your hands and restricting freedom is not the answer.

Headline in the WSJ this morning:  “Low Tech Attacks Hard To Thwart”

(In reference, of course, to the three recent terrorist attacks in London.)

The problem is not that Islamic terrorists have resorted to “low tech” attacks.  The problem is that England has removed from its citizens the ability to defend themselves.

Give Britons the right to carry concealed, and I’ll bet the “drive a truck into a crowd and then start knifing people” attacks would have been stopped in their tracks.  A couple of concealed carriers would quickly put a stop to the carnage at London Bridge.  This is not to say that there wouldn’t have been casualties, but years of reading “Armed Citizen” columns here in the US suggests that our generally-robust 2nd Amendment protections (at least in the non-stupid states) frequently have a significant effect in lowering the total body count.  I have in mind an attempted church massacre in Colorado Springs some years back where an alert security officer stopped the murderer in his tracks.  More recently was the attempt by radical Islamists to assassinate blogger Pamela Gellar and journalist Robert Spencer Dutch politician Geert Wilders when they appeared at a gathering in Texas.  But my all-time favorite was the Appalachian School of Law incident in 2002, where the two concealed carriers who ended up stopping the rampage had to go back to their cars to get their guns because of the school’s (obviously ineffective) gun-free zone policy.  Clearly, armed citizens can make a difference, and do when they can.

While it’s unlikely that armed citizens could have stopped or mitigated the Ariana Grande concert bombing, police profiling and bomb-sniffing dogs would likely have put paid to it, or at least would have seen the bomb go off outside of the arena.  Again, there likely would have been casualties, but significantly fewer of them.

The Mayor of London, whose response to the latest tragedy was yet another riff on “We need to get used to a certain level of violence”, is an ass.  So is the Prime Minister, whose first reaction was that more Internet regulation was needed (a typical statist response from a typical statist politician, one each).  Wringing your hands and/or clamping down on freedom of speech are not useful options in a putatively-free society.  You know where the problem is, why not admit it and focus the crackdown where it needs to be focused?  Stop whinging about civil rights applying to people who would take your civil rights away (and are succeeding admirably, to date).

Let your people defend themselves.  It’s a basic human right, whether Europeans want to believe it or not.  A lot of those people fought back.  Think how much more effective they would have been with concealed weapons and training in their use.  And then ask yourselves why we don’t tend to see this sort of thing happen in the US — at least where we aren’t hobbled by blue state gun restrictions and “gun-free zones” (AKA “victim-rich zones”).  The answer is because Europe is much easier pickings and the radical Islamics are already well on the way to taking it over.

Apologies to my European friends, but y’all need to take the blinders off and start fighting back.

[Edited to correct my misremembering of who was targeted at the Garland, Texas conference.]

What has Paris done for you?

A wise professor of mine once pointed out that if one wishes to make a treaty that is all smoke and mirrors and “feel good” but has no actual impact on the world, the thing to do is to get as many countries as possible to sign on to it, thereby diluting its effect.*

He was speaking in reference, of course, to the Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928 (officially the General Treaty for Renunciation of War as an Instrument of National Policy) which purported to outlaw offensive war.

And we all know how well that worked out.

There are 63 total signatories to the Pact, which (amazingly enough) remains in effect to this day — or perhaps we should say “in ineffect”.  This was never the intent of M. Briand, who simply wished for a friendly treaty of this sort between France and the United States.  Mr. Kellogg, in his wisdom or (more likely) lack thereof, flogged the idea of making it a general treaty, and it was then off to the races.  The League of Nations, already ineffectual (well, it was ineffectual from the day it started, but let’s be nice), had nothing to do with the treaty, sinking both the League and the treaty even farther into irrelevancy to the world at large.

And when I say “ineffect” regarding this treaty, remember that there have indeed been no offensive, declared wars waged between powers since 1945.**  But there sure have been a lot of “police actions” and “interventions” and claims of national insult leading to invasion and occupation of another’s national territory (yes, I’m looking at YOU, Russia, and your sneaky military games in South Ossetia and the Crimea).  Then there was the whole ten-year Iran-Iraq intramural back before Saddam, invaded Kuwait over the claim that Kuwait was a stolen province of Iraq, and that whole ball game in the sandbox started.  And the list goes on, but always in self-defense and/or with pious pleas of “they started it!”

In fact, the only country in the world right now that seems to be bent on an eventual offensive war is North Korea, and even it (dubiously) claims provocation.  But exporting of a revolution once it goes flat has always been a Commie specialty, so it comes as no particular surprise that the fat boy is being belligerent.

Interestingly enough, Kellogg-Briand was yet another “Pact of Paris”.  But in this case there is no reason to disavow the treaty, since nobody pays any attention to it and dives through its huge loopholes on a regular basis.  And, after all, it was properly ratified by the Senate.

Parenthetically, I imagine humanity will never stop fighting amongst itself until aliens show up and invade.  Although even then I’d be skeptical.

As far as the Paris Accord is concerned, not only was it never brought to the Senate for ratification (which so few news outlets are pointing out, because it doesn’t fit their narrative), but it was nothing more than another “feel-good” pact among 130 nations, the major intent of which was to strike the world’s largest economy a crippling blow at the knees while everyone else sat back and laughed.  The dirty secret is that there was no enforcement mechanism, no penalty for missing targets, the worst polluter and purportedly second largest economy in the world (China) did not have the same obligations as the United States, and the United States was already voluntarily reducing emissions due to fracking and the steady replacement of coal with natural gas for peak demand power generation.

And then there’s the MIT assessment that even if the Paris Accord was fully executed, it wouldn’t succeed in its stated goal of “keeping a global temperature rise this century well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5 degrees Celsius”.  MIT’s assessment is that we’d be lucky if we didn’t get 3 degrees or higher even if Paris was fully implemented.  I tend to trust MIT a lot more than I trust a bunch of diplomats who are probably diplomats because they flunked out of their science classes and couldn’t get into MIT.

Say what you will, President Trump was absolutely correct to pull the US out of this unconstitutionally-implemented, economically-damaging treaty.  As Bjørn Lomborg,*** who is not even close to being an ideological brother to the conservative right, has said for many years, the solution to any warming problem is not to cripple economies by trying ineffectively to stop the warming, but to build stronger and richer economies in order to be able to react positively to changing climate and to any possible human or agricultural migration that might need to happen as a result.  In a rich world, there is no reason for humans to suffer.  In a world made bankrupt by ill-considered attempts to modify the climate rather than to simply get along with it, billions will suffer and die.  I know which outcome I prefer.

And on top of that, if other experts are correct and we are in a blip of warming that is just a pause in the overall cooling that has been happening since things warmed up after the last Ice Age, to fight warming might actually be fighting the wrong battle.  Any ham radio operator can tell you that this has been the worst solar cycle for radio in a long time.  That means solar activity is at a deep minimum, and projections for Cycle 25 have been pretty depressing.  It shouldn’t come as a surprise that the big nuclear fusion furnace in the sky is the biggest controller of climate, and when it gets the sniffles, Earth catches a cold.  But nobody in the “right-thinking” climate “science” community wants to admit that; they’d rather blame the industrial revolution and the CO2 it puts into the air, like the bunch of modern Luddites they are.

Got news for you:  I remember Mount St. Helens and Mount Pinatubo.  Both of those major eruptions pumped more junk into the air than (and I’m reaching a bit here, because I’m vaguely remembering what I read 20+ years ago) the entire output of mankind since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.  There were notable cooling regimes after the eruptions, and I for one remember walking out in the grass at my university not long after Pinatubo, coming back with my shoes covered with black yutz, and realizing that it was because of volcanic ash from Pinatubo traveling around the planet and falling out of the air here in the US.  Puny mankind’s got nothing on Mother Nature, the world’s biggest polluter.  (Take that, Gaia worshipers.)

But I didn’t come here to laugh at climate science.  I came here to laugh at diplomats and politicians and movie stars and rich progressives and idiots who flunked science in high school who think that an essentially non-binding treaty can trump (no pun intended) Mother Nature, and her buddy the Sun.  To them I say, stop thinking with your emotions and start thinking with that mass of grey matter in your head.

If you have one.

Oh, and go read Niven/Pournell/Flynn, Fallen Angels, and Ringo, The Last Centurion, for a different view of what we might face in the future.  You might learn something.


* The dilution of effect comes from the idea that the more signatories to the treaty, the more vague the treaty obligations must become in order to encourage the reticent to sign on.  Thus the loopholes in Kellogg-Briand that one could drive a tank (or an armored division) through.

** And recall, WWII started in 1939 when Germany claimed Poland had violated Germany’s territorial sovereignty by sneaking across the frontier and killing German border guards — which of course was a false-flag job performed by Germans in Polish army uniforms, who’d violated Poland’s territorial sovereignty by crossing into Polish territory and then coming back to kill their own countrymen to create an excuse for an “aggrieved” Germany to invade Poland.  Declarations of war followed from France and England due to mutual defense treaty obligations with Poland.  Then Germany turned around and declared war on England and France.

*** Also, see Lomborg’s 2015 paper regarding the ineffectiveness of the Paris programme.  This is the source of the graphic in my previous post.

Thank you, Mr. Trump

for seeing the Paris Accord for what it is — that is to say, complete bullshit, and by the way irrelevant and invalid in the United States because it’s never been ratified by the US Senate.

And yes, it’s complete bullshit:

ETA:  Source.

Of course, this presumes that the climate scientists’ models are correct — and they aren’t, because they failed to predict the 18 consecutive years of stable temperatures we’ve experienced since 1998.  (Google that; it’s fun to see all the links thrown back screaming that the observations are bullshit, or cherry-picked, or fake science.  Google is not your friend.  Google, despite its motto, is evil.)

So bottom line, even if the climate frauds are correct and we really are experiencing warming, all those potential trillions of dollars would have been wasted no matter what.  And probably still will be, by the countries remaining in the accord.  But my guess is that most of them will quietly slink away from their commitments within the next few years, now that the US has said, “we’re out of this sucker game.”  And climate “science” will die a well-deserved death due to federal grant starvation.

A strange game.  The only winning move is not to play.

Trump understands that.  And the rest of the world can go to hell if they like.

Because they’re not the same thing, idiots.

So far today I’ve seen two variations on the same theme show up as Facebook memes.

First, “They give Narcan for free to drug users because it will keep them from dying.  So why don’t they give free insulin to diabetics?”

My response was

Because you only get Narcan when you OD? I mean, it’s not like you get Narcan every day. Because if you do, it’s amazing you’re not dead anyway.

My paramedic niece has related stories of being called out more than once to Narcan the same person and wondering what the point of the exercise is.

FWIW I’m going to guess that it isn’t actually free. Somebody is paying for it, if not the dopehead’s insurance (and there’s a laughable thought), then you and me when we pay our premiums and taxes.

Then I saw this one: “If methadone is free to addicts because they have a disease, why is chemo not free for cancer patients?”

I didn’t respond to that one, but it’s the same stupid question wrapped up in the same stupid logical fallacy.  You’re not talking about apples and apples here.  You’re talking about an attempt to modify an anti-social behavior versus trying to cure a fatal disease.

Plus, heroin addiction is not a disease, no matter how the proggy left wants to soft-shoe it.  Becoming a junkie required a positive (or negative, depending on your viewpoint) decision on the part of the junkie to become a junkie.  Becoming a junkie didn’t happen because of a virus or a bacteria.  Becoming a junkie isn’t like catching a cold or flu, or getting Ebola.*  And it happens regardless of any attitude on the proto-junkie’s part of “I’m strong, I can quit any time.”  Yeah.  Addiction doesn’t work that way.  The hell of it is, I was just sitting here thinking about alcoholism and how it’s considered a disease…but I don’t know of anyone who gives away free alcohol rehab the way, say, the city of New York hands out free methadone.**  And the consumption of alcohol is, at least, legal and accepted by society.

Let’s think for a moment about anti-social behavior.  Being a junkie is definitely anti-social.  Being a junkie means that you probably lie, cheat, and steal for your next high.  By the time you need treatment, in most cases you’re probably diseased, have poor hygiene, and are probably living on the streets or damn close to it.  Even if you’re not that bad, you’ve probably assured that nobody can trust you, and you’ve probably let down everyone who knows you, including your family and closest friends.

Or you’re just a fucking clueless dickhead or cuntwaffle doing meth or whatever the fuck is the drug of choice down on the Ohio River these days.  And yes, I include the long-term unemployed who have given up and turned to drugs as an escape.  You’re a bunch of fuckheads.  Man (or woman) the fuck up and make the best of your situation.  Yeah, I know, easy for me to say.  So I’ll say it again:  Stop acting like an animal and stand up like a human being, look adversity square in the eye, and say to it, “Fuck you, I’m not letting you get the best of me.”

Where was I?  Oh, yes.

I question the morality inherent in handing out these drugs to junkies for “free” in an attempt to wake them the fuck up and set the on the right path.  The standard proggie claim is that it is our moral and ethical duty to help these people.  But I do not believe it to be either moral or ethical to make me pay for a heroin addict’s methadone treatment, or for the Narcan for the stupid fucks who OD on the latest tainted shit that came out of the local dealer’s drug lab.  Because it is not moral or ethical to force me or anyone else to pay to correct other people’s stupidity.  And it is willful stupidity! You cannot say that people in this modern age aren’t aware of the dangers posed by deciding to do drugs.

My generation grew up getting the “don’t do drugs” mantra pounded into us by parents, teachers, TV, radio, you name it.  “This is your brain, this is your brain on drugs.”  Who the fuck wants to go around with a scrambled egg for a brain?  Life is a raging bitch, but we are supposed to stand tall and DEAL, not resort to booze or drugs or any other stupidity to dull the pain and make the hours pass like minutes.  We were taught that it was stupid to hand your life over to drugs or anything like them, including alcohol.  And yet, so many stupid people refused to accept that lesson even when it was being beaten into their brains on a daily basis.  Why are we coddling these people with treatments when the record shows that they almost all backslide back into addiction?***  Why don’t we just let them take their exit?  Or if you prefer stark reality to metaphor, why don’t we just let them fucking die?  It’s clearly what they seem to want.

My sense of morality is not twinged by any need or desire to succor these people, because history and common sense indicate that they will simply go right back to what they were fucking up before.  We are told that we have to break the cycle in order to cure what ails them.  But there are two ways to break the cycle, and one of them is to simply let nature take its course.  You OD’d?  Bye.  You’re a junkie?  Go ahead and sedate yourself to death.  You pussified coward.

And now we have these memes.

Because the progressives are frantic to try to find a way to force us into single-payer, so they can have that much more control over our lives.  And as usual with progressives, they are lying through their teeth to try to win us over to their point of view.

Because progressives are a bunch of fucking cuntwaffles.****

Fuck them.  Taxation is theft, and control over my life is something they can’t have.


* It is, however, very much akin to contracting HIV if you indulge in the kind of anti-social behavior that gets you into a situation where you can contract HIV.  And by this I’m not including the people who contract it through no fault of their own, e.g., through blood transfusions, or sex with a partner who hasn’t been upfront with them about their own anti-social behavior, or any of the other ways that folks unknowingly manage to pick up HIV.  Or herpes.  Or gonorrhea.  Or syphilis.  Or chlamydia.  My, the list just goes on and on, doesn’t it?

** Yes, I understand that the methadone is handed out in a clinic situation and you have to go to the clinic to get the shot or pill or whatever, because they also don’t want you to end up addicted to methadone, which is just about as nasty a drug as heroin.  Before they figured that out, people did in fact switch from being hooked on heroin to being hooked on methadone.

*** Or go back on the streets to get another hit of what the fuck ever they did that made them OD in the first place, in the case of Narcan.

**** I just like the sound of “cuntwaffles”.

Older posts «