Just purchased . . .
Rocky and Bullwinkle's first season on DVD.
Update: Firstborn adores it.
20030917
20030908
Awesome coverage
e-Claire posts some nice coverage of the California gubernatorial recall slash campaign. The first debate and a radio interview of Peter Ueberroth.
e-Claire posts some nice coverage of the California gubernatorial recall slash campaign. The first debate and a radio interview of Peter Ueberroth.
20030905
Something I don't see every day
I'm becoming somewhat attached to a German restaurant here at Undisclosed Remote Location. This is the first time I've seen it busy. A wedding rehearsal party took half the dining room. But at a table next to mine I saw something truly beautiful: four generations dining together. A girl, maybe five years old, then the mother, a blonde six-footer, her mother, also tall, and the great grandmother, stooped with age but alert and proud.
I wanted to say something to them, about how remarkable it was to see them together in one place, but how to say it, without being taken for a lunatic who can't mind his own business?
As they left, I overheard that Great-Grandma was visiting from Germany.
Sadly, my in-laws will never see such a day. Barbaloot and I married later in life, and are raising children later too. My parents are already gone, hers are in their seventies. There's little hope our kids will have kids before the ir grandparents, my in-laws, pass away. Maybe that's why I had this urge to say something to them---to try to share their moment because I will probably not be participating in such a moment of my own.
I'm becoming somewhat attached to a German restaurant here at Undisclosed Remote Location. This is the first time I've seen it busy. A wedding rehearsal party took half the dining room. But at a table next to mine I saw something truly beautiful: four generations dining together. A girl, maybe five years old, then the mother, a blonde six-footer, her mother, also tall, and the great grandmother, stooped with age but alert and proud.
I wanted to say something to them, about how remarkable it was to see them together in one place, but how to say it, without being taken for a lunatic who can't mind his own business?
As they left, I overheard that Great-Grandma was visiting from Germany.
Sadly, my in-laws will never see such a day. Barbaloot and I married later in life, and are raising children later too. My parents are already gone, hers are in their seventies. There's little hope our kids will have kids before the ir grandparents, my in-laws, pass away. Maybe that's why I had this urge to say something to them---to try to share their moment because I will probably not be participating in such a moment of my own.
Lizard cavalry
(This post has been brewing longer than this blog is old. Thanks to Alphecca, who pointed me to Bill Dennis's HeinleinBlog, where was posted a quote by James Pinkerton, who noted that Starship Troopers foresaw the cybernetic future of infantry. Thanks also to James Rummel, who reminded me of the older material in an offhand mention of powered armor. Sometimes I feel like James Burke.--Ed.)
This article in Wired discusses the development of robots for military roles. The difficulty remains in integrating sensor inputs and connecting them to motor outputs, i.e. all of those tasks that human brains seem to do easily and quickly. The developers estimate that it still takes 4 people to manage 1 robot, and DoD's goal is 1 soldier to manage 4 robots. We humbly submit that they're solving the wrong problem, and ignoring the damned good soon for the uncertain future best.
What might shorten their development time, and result in some useful weapons platforms in the meantime, is to develop larger robots that carry soldiers inside them. Miniaturizing the motors, computing, sensors, and so forth is already done, so use it and perfect it while the numbercrunching improves. Work on just the locomotion, for example, and focus on numbercrunching locomotive control systems that have already been debugged by evolution. When the computing power matures to the point that machine "awareness" and vision are feasible, put it into the robot and take the soldier out. Menawhile, serious computing power will still be needed to make the robot respond smoothly to the soldier's commands, and that in itself will advance immensely the technology needed to field the objective unmanned versions. Heinlein's protagonist in Starship troopers described "feedback loops" to guide the powered armor. Feedback loops aren't fast enough.
Meanwhile, other DoD projects seek to armor a soldier to create some kind of Frankenstein---not genetically modified, just a stronger and harder human-shaped platform, like Ripley in the Caterpillar loader in Aliens. The problem there is that the human shape is not optimized for strength or speed, but for use of the forelimbs for grasping instead of locomotion, and gaining height for distance vision. We're on our hind legs instead of all-fours not because it's inherently stronger or faster. If you want stronger/faster/carry-more-weight, you'll have to give back some of the bipedal compromise.
For example, the allosaurus weighed about 3 tons, was about 5 meters from tooth to tail, and could move at a burst of about 30 kilometers per hour, regular stride at 15. It won't keep up with an M1A1, or even a HWMMV, but it's not supposed to. And it will prevail in terrain or among obstacles that get these other two platforms killed. So borrow the blueprints.
Merge these two initiatives, the battle robot and the powered-armored soldier, making sensible tradeoffs. Get the first iteration into the field and tweak it while the computing power catches up.
The operator sits like a cyclist in a close-fitting compartment centered inside the lizard's hips. His legs extend into the lizard's legs. The lizard's head puppets the operator's head and neck movements; its legs move as the operator's legs move. The tail is animated to keep the lizard balanced whether it's in a dead run, or turning, or jumping, and it's where fuel is kept and hydraulic fluid is cooled off. The first numbercrunching problem to solve is animating the tail to balance the rest of the lizard's body while it runs, turns, corners, jumps, ducks, and cranes.
We will have a platform that could go where only infantrymen could go today, but carrying weapons that infantrymen cannot use on the move. It could clear obstacles that are death traps for infantry today, specifically those found in MOUT.
{salespitch}
Colonel, got your fire team pinned down in a parking lot by snipers on the roof? Two lizards can run in to offer cover fire and escort them out.
Need to flush a squad out of a warehouse? Two teams of three lizards will fit through a loading dock door, split up and manuever inside. They might even be able to ride a freight elevator.
Want to interdict a supply route? A Chinook full of lizards can catch the column from behind, trash it, and run away to board the flight home.
The supply route is on canoes across a swamp? This lizard can move through water or mud a meter deep, and still shoot and salute. And it can hide with only its "eyes" above water, waiting for the boats to slip nearby.
Sarin on the battlefield? With the right climate-control package, the human inside works in shirtsleeves. Bio or chemical contamination will not affect the lizard's speed or manueverability. If the operator is unhorsed, he pulls his chem gear on before climbing out, and he's in no worse shape than an armor crewman on foot.
{/salespitch}
Sure a tank round or even an RPG will take it out. Train the riders like we train our Abrams tankers and they'll be fine. Fire on the move, and move constantly. And have the sense not to take on tanks if you're not a tank.
That's the first generation. When and if the sensor-integration problem is solved, remove the human, push the size to 3 meters nose-to-tail and 750 kilos weight, and kick the land speed up to 50 kph. Then you're delivering Jurassic Park IV to the DoD. Ride the freight elevator? Sheeeee-it. It could take the stairs.
Teach these lizards to hunt in packs, and always employ them in packs, because machine vision will benefit from having more eyes. They'll beam video to each other so all of them will "see" more than any one of them alone.
We offer this concept merely as a patriotic duty. We ask only that two be set aside for an occasional ride by Emergent Behavior and myself (ask 'Merge how much he likes motorcycles). We'll bring them back gassed up and washed off. Promise.
(This post has been brewing longer than this blog is old. Thanks to Alphecca, who pointed me to Bill Dennis's HeinleinBlog, where was posted a quote by James Pinkerton, who noted that Starship Troopers foresaw the cybernetic future of infantry. Thanks also to James Rummel, who reminded me of the older material in an offhand mention of powered armor. Sometimes I feel like James Burke.--Ed.)
This article in Wired discusses the development of robots for military roles. The difficulty remains in integrating sensor inputs and connecting them to motor outputs, i.e. all of those tasks that human brains seem to do easily and quickly. The developers estimate that it still takes 4 people to manage 1 robot, and DoD's goal is 1 soldier to manage 4 robots. We humbly submit that they're solving the wrong problem, and ignoring the damned good soon for the uncertain future best.
What might shorten their development time, and result in some useful weapons platforms in the meantime, is to develop larger robots that carry soldiers inside them. Miniaturizing the motors, computing, sensors, and so forth is already done, so use it and perfect it while the numbercrunching improves. Work on just the locomotion, for example, and focus on numbercrunching locomotive control systems that have already been debugged by evolution. When the computing power matures to the point that machine "awareness" and vision are feasible, put it into the robot and take the soldier out. Menawhile, serious computing power will still be needed to make the robot respond smoothly to the soldier's commands, and that in itself will advance immensely the technology needed to field the objective unmanned versions. Heinlein's protagonist in Starship troopers described "feedback loops" to guide the powered armor. Feedback loops aren't fast enough.
Meanwhile, other DoD projects seek to armor a soldier to create some kind of Frankenstein---not genetically modified, just a stronger and harder human-shaped platform, like Ripley in the Caterpillar loader in Aliens. The problem there is that the human shape is not optimized for strength or speed, but for use of the forelimbs for grasping instead of locomotion, and gaining height for distance vision. We're on our hind legs instead of all-fours not because it's inherently stronger or faster. If you want stronger/faster/carry-more-weight, you'll have to give back some of the bipedal compromise.
For example, the allosaurus weighed about 3 tons, was about 5 meters from tooth to tail, and could move at a burst of about 30 kilometers per hour, regular stride at 15. It won't keep up with an M1A1, or even a HWMMV, but it's not supposed to. And it will prevail in terrain or among obstacles that get these other two platforms killed. So borrow the blueprints.
Merge these two initiatives, the battle robot and the powered-armored soldier, making sensible tradeoffs. Get the first iteration into the field and tweak it while the computing power catches up.
- Set aside about 200 kilos for a human operator and climate control for him, then budget:
- 350 kg for frame and joints 500 kg for scales: elastomer armor sheating with ceramic hard plates that overlap so the "skin" flexes as the lizard moves, and maybe a titanium tub for the human operator;
- 500 kg for multiple small powerplants to provide pneumatic and hydraulic force to operate "muscles";
- 300 kg for the muscles and lines to deliver force to them, and to radiate waste heat from the working fluids;
- 200 kg for fuel
- 100 kg for communications, vision, and sensors;
- remaining weight for payload and additional fuel.
The operator sits like a cyclist in a close-fitting compartment centered inside the lizard's hips. His legs extend into the lizard's legs. The lizard's head puppets the operator's head and neck movements; its legs move as the operator's legs move. The tail is animated to keep the lizard balanced whether it's in a dead run, or turning, or jumping, and it's where fuel is kept and hydraulic fluid is cooled off. The first numbercrunching problem to solve is animating the tail to balance the rest of the lizard's body while it runs, turns, corners, jumps, ducks, and cranes.
We will have a platform that could go where only infantrymen could go today, but carrying weapons that infantrymen cannot use on the move. It could clear obstacles that are death traps for infantry today, specifically those found in MOUT.
{salespitch}
Colonel, got your fire team pinned down in a parking lot by snipers on the roof? Two lizards can run in to offer cover fire and escort them out.
Need to flush a squad out of a warehouse? Two teams of three lizards will fit through a loading dock door, split up and manuever inside. They might even be able to ride a freight elevator.
Want to interdict a supply route? A Chinook full of lizards can catch the column from behind, trash it, and run away to board the flight home.
The supply route is on canoes across a swamp? This lizard can move through water or mud a meter deep, and still shoot and salute. And it can hide with only its "eyes" above water, waiting for the boats to slip nearby.
Sarin on the battlefield? With the right climate-control package, the human inside works in shirtsleeves. Bio or chemical contamination will not affect the lizard's speed or manueverability. If the operator is unhorsed, he pulls his chem gear on before climbing out, and he's in no worse shape than an armor crewman on foot.
{/salespitch}
Sure a tank round or even an RPG will take it out. Train the riders like we train our Abrams tankers and they'll be fine. Fire on the move, and move constantly. And have the sense not to take on tanks if you're not a tank.
That's the first generation. When and if the sensor-integration problem is solved, remove the human, push the size to 3 meters nose-to-tail and 750 kilos weight, and kick the land speed up to 50 kph. Then you're delivering Jurassic Park IV to the DoD. Ride the freight elevator? Sheeeee-it. It could take the stairs.
Teach these lizards to hunt in packs, and always employ them in packs, because machine vision will benefit from having more eyes. They'll beam video to each other so all of them will "see" more than any one of them alone.
We offer this concept merely as a patriotic duty. We ask only that two be set aside for an occasional ride by Emergent Behavior and myself (ask 'Merge how much he likes motorcycles). We'll bring them back gassed up and washed off. Promise.
20030902
Packing on private property
One of the thorny issues we struggle with in our examination of lawfully-regulated concealed carry of a weapon is what happens when the person carrying crosses some boundary between public property and private.
As a libertarian, I would agree as a matter of course that the owner of the private property has a right to decide whether to allow other persons to carry concealed on his property. That boundary blurs, though, when the private property happens to be a business open to the public, such as a video rental, grocer, department store, and so forth.
There's no expectation that the property owner will know each person, even a significant fraction of the people entering the property. And the owner per se is very likely a body of shareholders spread across the United States. I can't call it private property for the purpose of delineating who's allowed on the property, and whose presence armed or unarmed constitutes trespass.
Many state with licensed shall-issue concealed carry address this problem by requiring those places that want to exclude CCW to post a notice at each entrance. At least one state, hoping to reduce the number of businesses who would post such notices, specified the signage so it is big enough, and obnoxious enough, that few businesses would go to the trouble.
The gun-nut's wet dream is a civil suit against a business who posts, making the business jointly responsible for any injury or death suffered by a person who would have carried but didn't because the business told him or her not to. This approach leaves me cold, of course, because somebody is going to have to suffer an attack for the suit to go forward.
I propose instead the Courthouse approach. Courthouses and other government buildings are required in many States to provide secure storage for weapons.
Your video rental outlet doesn't want CCW on premises? OK fine, where's the locker? State law says you need one locker, 8 by 8 by 14 inches, for each 200 square feet of store space, and it has to be accessible to both the entrance and exit doors. You may charge a deposit for the locker key of no more than ten cents. A Target could handle it, piece of cake, because of how their doors are arranged.
One of the thorny issues we struggle with in our examination of lawfully-regulated concealed carry of a weapon is what happens when the person carrying crosses some boundary between public property and private.
As a libertarian, I would agree as a matter of course that the owner of the private property has a right to decide whether to allow other persons to carry concealed on his property. That boundary blurs, though, when the private property happens to be a business open to the public, such as a video rental, grocer, department store, and so forth.
There's no expectation that the property owner will know each person, even a significant fraction of the people entering the property. And the owner per se is very likely a body of shareholders spread across the United States. I can't call it private property for the purpose of delineating who's allowed on the property, and whose presence armed or unarmed constitutes trespass.
Many state with licensed shall-issue concealed carry address this problem by requiring those places that want to exclude CCW to post a notice at each entrance. At least one state, hoping to reduce the number of businesses who would post such notices, specified the signage so it is big enough, and obnoxious enough, that few businesses would go to the trouble.
The gun-nut's wet dream is a civil suit against a business who posts, making the business jointly responsible for any injury or death suffered by a person who would have carried but didn't because the business told him or her not to. This approach leaves me cold, of course, because somebody is going to have to suffer an attack for the suit to go forward.
I propose instead the Courthouse approach. Courthouses and other government buildings are required in many States to provide secure storage for weapons.
Your video rental outlet doesn't want CCW on premises? OK fine, where's the locker? State law says you need one locker, 8 by 8 by 14 inches, for each 200 square feet of store space, and it has to be accessible to both the entrance and exit doors. You may charge a deposit for the locker key of no more than ten cents. A Target could handle it, piece of cake, because of how their doors are arranged.
20030831
Another try at the Pinnacle
Firstborn took another climb at the REI pinnacle this weekend, getting a good two meters off the floor before chickening out and being lowered by the belayer. Middlechild gave it a shot too, sorry no pictures.
20030830
An idea of mine stolen yet again
Date Patrol is coming to TLC. I wouldn't have noticed it except that Barbaloot enjoys watching Trading Spaces, hosted by Paige Davis, and, well, she's hot. So I was half-watching Paige---er, Trading Spaces with her, and what did they announce but the continuing theft of another of my ideas.
Anyway, if dating is an acquired skill set clearly some will acquire it better than others, and some will never get it without some formal coaching. TLC Network agrees with me, at least enough to give it a try as oxymoronic "reality television." It will not carry the baggage of a school operated by a distillery or a university.
To the show's producers' credit, it appears they will be examining and finishing "her" skills as well. That will make the show more interesting to us guys. But a pitfall awaits: the date arranged between the two of them is far less likely to fail, and will offer much less educational value to its viewers, because the finishing teachers will be unconsciously guiding him and her together. That does not occur in the real world. Even arranged marriages are put together by people who couldn't give a rat's *ss whether he can strike up any chemistry with her.
A better test will come when the poor yub tries these newly-acquired skills on someone randomly chosen from the same pool that he would have chosen from if the TLC cameras had never shown up. But by then the cameras will be gone, and countless other poor yubs will not have the benefit of learning from his mistakes. And there will be mistakes.
Good luck. It's a jungle out there.
Date Patrol is coming to TLC. I wouldn't have noticed it except that Barbaloot enjoys watching Trading Spaces, hosted by Paige Davis, and, well,
Anyway, if dating is an acquired skill set clearly some will acquire it better than others, and some will never get it without some formal coaching. TLC Network agrees with me, at least enough to give it a try as oxymoronic "reality television." It will not carry the baggage of a school operated by a distillery or a university.
To the show's producers' credit, it appears they will be examining and finishing "her" skills as well. That will make the show more interesting to us guys. But a pitfall awaits: the date arranged between the two of them is far less likely to fail, and will offer much less educational value to its viewers, because the finishing teachers will be unconsciously guiding him and her together. That does not occur in the real world. Even arranged marriages are put together by people who couldn't give a rat's *ss whether he can strike up any chemistry with her.
A better test will come when the poor yub tries these newly-acquired skills on someone randomly chosen from the same pool that he would have chosen from if the TLC cameras had never shown up. But by then the cameras will be gone, and countless other poor yubs will not have the benefit of learning from his mistakes. And there will be mistakes.
Good luck. It's a jungle out there.
One in the oven
The sonogram below is of our next child, at 17 weeks gestation.
We've withheld announcement until now because we've lost fetuses in the first trimester, even later, several times before; the odds of full delivery on this tadpole are pretty good now. Even though Barbaloot is now 40 years old.
Names have been chosen, both pink and blue, and we prefer to find out which at birth. "Accident" was peremptorily rejected.
We've withheld announcement until now because we've lost fetuses in the first trimester, even later, several times before; the odds of full delivery on this tadpole are pretty good now. Even though Barbaloot is now 40 years old.
Names have been chosen, both pink and blue, and we prefer to find out which at birth. "Accident" was peremptorily rejected.
Upgrade season
We are dropping our AT&T mobiles, and switching to Verizons. Moving our long-distance calling to the mobiles and saving ten bucks a month in the bargain.
Update: mtpolitics is going farther down this route, contemplating the dropping of land-lines altogther.
We've noticed that the Verizon phone works very poorly on the first floor of our house, but OK upstairs, so going long-distance is still a player; it also works at the church, so Barbaloot will get calls from the sitter (or me) on Thursday night choir practice. I've noticed that mine pukes directly beneath the lone rural tower here in Undisclosed Remote Location. Cadre says, "they all suck here."
We are dropping our AT&T mobiles, and switching to Verizons. Moving our long-distance calling to the mobiles and saving ten bucks a month in the bargain.
Update: mtpolitics is going farther down this route, contemplating the dropping of land-lines altogther.
We've noticed that the Verizon phone works very poorly on the first floor of our house, but OK upstairs, so going long-distance is still a player; it also works at the church, so Barbaloot will get calls from the sitter (or me) on Thursday night choir practice. I've noticed that mine pukes directly beneath the lone rural tower here in Undisclosed Remote Location. Cadre says, "they all suck here."
20030824
We need you to do something
The organization that is coordinating pressure on the TSA to train pilots to be armed is staging simultaneous press conferences at several major airports. I need you to go to their site, and if you live near one of the airports, get your ass over there on the proper date and time. Bring some sammiches for the pilots.
Another blogger and I differ, respectfully, about the wisdom of armed pilots (versus armed passengers). I truly believe that if we can achieve a critical mass of armed pilots, we can turn a corner with public opinion about concealed carry by ordinary citizens, both on the ground and eventually in the air.
I doubt that armed passengers can be a reality before Earthbound citizens can go discreetly armed. And I believe that Earthbound permit-free, or "Vermont-style" concealed carry can spread to most of the US until we penetrate those few holdouts like New York state and California with "shall-issue."
The organization that is coordinating pressure on the TSA to train pilots to be armed is staging simultaneous press conferences at several major airports. I need you to go to their site, and if you live near one of the airports, get your ass over there on the proper date and time. Bring some sammiches for the pilots.
Another blogger and I differ, respectfully, about the wisdom of armed pilots (versus armed passengers). I truly believe that if we can achieve a critical mass of armed pilots, we can turn a corner with public opinion about concealed carry by ordinary citizens, both on the ground and eventually in the air.
I doubt that armed passengers can be a reality before Earthbound citizens can go discreetly armed. And I believe that Earthbound permit-free, or "Vermont-style" concealed carry can spread to most of the US until we penetrate those few holdouts like New York state and California with "shall-issue."
20030823
Swen was talking about this one . . .
in a post here, describing it as the Colt IMP.
Bushmaster commercialized it briefly as the ARM Pistol. It is a bullpup design that rotates the whole weapon, minus the grip, about the barrel, so when fired right-handed it ejects to the right; fired left-handed, it ejects to the left, either way, it threw empties away from the shooter's body. It fired the full five-five-six from AR15 magazines. As the photo suggests, it borrowed many other parts as well from the AR15. Not so long ago, Bushmaster's catalog listed some few parts left for it, their website today does not.
When I was ready to get one in the pre-'94 AW Ban days, I had the three-hundred or so dollars that Shotgun News said the distributors wanted, and a dealer ready to order it for me with his nominal cut, but he could find none. I got a 9mm MAC-11 instead, and promptly regretted it.
Because the grip, with its trigger, moves with respect to the rest of the weapon and is also dislocated, so to speak, well forward of where it usually is put, it is difficult to make the trigger crisp. Maybe a solenoid affair can be made. Or hydraulics?
in a post here, describing it as the Colt IMP.
Bushmaster commercialized it briefly as the ARM Pistol. It is a bullpup design that rotates the whole weapon, minus the grip, about the barrel, so when fired right-handed it ejects to the right; fired left-handed, it ejects to the left, either way, it threw empties away from the shooter's body. It fired the full five-five-six from AR15 magazines. As the photo suggests, it borrowed many other parts as well from the AR15. Not so long ago, Bushmaster's catalog listed some few parts left for it, their website today does not.
When I was ready to get one in the pre-'94 AW Ban days, I had the three-hundred or so dollars that Shotgun News said the distributors wanted, and a dealer ready to order it for me with his nominal cut, but he could find none. I got a 9mm MAC-11 instead, and promptly regretted it.
Because the grip, with its trigger, moves with respect to the rest of the weapon and is also dislocated, so to speak, well forward of where it usually is put, it is difficult to make the trigger crisp. Maybe a solenoid affair can be made. Or hydraulics?
Verse of the day
Courtesy of The Military Series of the Declaration of Jihad.
The hearts of freemen are the tombs of secrets.
Courtesy of The Military Series of the Declaration of Jihad.
Land of a Thousand Pricks?
I drove my partner, Advon, to the MSP airport today. He goes home, I stay at Undisclosed Remote Location to roll up all of the workshop results and insert them into a new scenario for Cadre.
Took a delay en-route to the Mall of the Americas. While trying to merge with traffic to get into the West parking garage, two vehicles, not one but two, would not allow me to merge.
Side note on Mall of the Americas: it would be phenomenal if every store were something different. But there were at least three Victoria's Secret stores, for example, on separate levels. And nowhere for me to buy a bigger HD for the Clandestine Mobile Media Access Platform.
While leaving aforementioned huge repetitive Mall, another prick didn't realize that I was on the on-ramp, accelerating to highway speed, and that he should either accelerate so I could merge behind him, or decelerate so I could enter ahead of him, or change lanes so it would not matter.
I've driven this stretch of I-494 before; I used to report to headquarters of a beeg telecom company in Minnetonka. I just don't recall idiots on the road, though.
Please note, many of my best friends are from Minnesota. But a thousand pricks can go a long long way towards ruining it.
I drove my partner, Advon, to the MSP airport today. He goes home, I stay at Undisclosed Remote Location to roll up all of the workshop results and insert them into a new scenario for Cadre.
Took a delay en-route to the Mall of the Americas. While trying to merge with traffic to get into the West parking garage, two vehicles, not one but two, would not allow me to merge.
Side note on Mall of the Americas: it would be phenomenal if every store were something different. But there were at least three Victoria's Secret stores, for example, on separate levels. And nowhere for me to buy a bigger HD for the Clandestine Mobile Media Access Platform.
While leaving aforementioned huge repetitive Mall, another prick didn't realize that I was on the on-ramp, accelerating to highway speed, and that he should either accelerate so I could merge behind him, or decelerate so I could enter ahead of him, or change lanes so it would not matter.
I've driven this stretch of I-494 before; I used to report to headquarters of a beeg telecom company in Minnetonka. I just don't recall idiots on the road, though.
Please note, many of my best friends are from Minnesota. But a thousand pricks can go a long long way towards ruining it.
20030819
Guardbumming update
Our present undisclosed remote location is 15TYU20136769; we're here working with Cadre, to debug new USAF doctrine on how to operate an airbase after it has been attacked. Interesting work, with some of the best people in the business.
Our present undisclosed remote location is 15TYU20136769; we're here working with Cadre, to debug new USAF doctrine on how to operate an airbase after it has been attacked. Interesting work, with some of the best people in the business.
20030815
Well, Mister President, it's the Bees and Spiders again! They stole my food stamps and sol'em to the Rats!
I'm surely not the first blogger to observe this, but: deregulation is being blamed for the capital-w-worst capital-b-blackout in US capital-h-history, or as Scott Chaffin directs, the Great Northeastern Blackout of Ought-Three. At least I'm the first to use a Firesign Theater line as the title for it. I hope it's apropos.
Bush-adorers: watch how he handles this one. Blue-ribbon committee? Thorough inquiry? Donk-apologists: watch how your party's leaders try an En-run around the facts. Is this a tar-brush to apply to the GOP?
FoxNews, to their credit, hosted a talking head from Cato today, explaining that if there's a problem with deregulation behind this blackout, it's one of not having enough deregulation. Without the freedom of prices to reconcile supply with demand, nobody has the incentive to build and maintain generation capacity within his own market, and relies more heavily on drawing power from neighbors (across regulatory boundaries) during peaks. There's too much source-sharing (transmission) among markets.
The technical cause of the blackout will be ascertained quickly, probably before this post is even timestamped. It may indeed be a relay the size of Glenn Reynolds's fist, or a serial cable the diameter of Mr. Untel's urethra. Whatever.
The solution, the measure or set of measures that keeps this from happening again, is not technical but economic and political. It will not be found by any of the parties holding the power necessary to put it in place, because solving it does not deliver benefits to those parties. "Paging, uh . . . the Usual Suspects. Usual Suspects, please meet your party at the Committee Hearing in 2123 Rayburn."
Our Macs and dual-boot Linux/Windows boxes are on UPSes, I have five gallons of bitters to rack, and we're celebrating my wife's 40th birthday tomorrow. Have a wonderful weekend, be back Monday from Undisclosed Remote Location. Relax and have a homebrew.
I'm surely not the first blogger to observe this, but: deregulation is being blamed for the capital-w-worst capital-b-blackout in US capital-h-history, or as Scott Chaffin directs, the Great Northeastern Blackout of Ought-Three. At least I'm the first to use a Firesign Theater line as the title for it. I hope it's apropos.
Bush-adorers: watch how he handles this one. Blue-ribbon committee? Thorough inquiry? Donk-apologists: watch how your party's leaders try an En-run around the facts. Is this a tar-brush to apply to the GOP?
FoxNews, to their credit, hosted a talking head from Cato today, explaining that if there's a problem with deregulation behind this blackout, it's one of not having enough deregulation. Without the freedom of prices to reconcile supply with demand, nobody has the incentive to build and maintain generation capacity within his own market, and relies more heavily on drawing power from neighbors (across regulatory boundaries) during peaks. There's too much source-sharing (transmission) among markets.
The technical cause of the blackout will be ascertained quickly, probably before this post is even timestamped. It may indeed be a relay the size of Glenn Reynolds's fist, or a serial cable the diameter of Mr. Untel's urethra. Whatever.
The solution, the measure or set of measures that keeps this from happening again, is not technical but economic and political. It will not be found by any of the parties holding the power necessary to put it in place, because solving it does not deliver benefits to those parties. "Paging, uh . . . the Usual Suspects. Usual Suspects, please meet your party at the Committee Hearing in 2123 Rayburn."
Our Macs and dual-boot Linux/Windows boxes are on UPSes, I have five gallons of bitters to rack, and we're celebrating my wife's 40th birthday tomorrow. Have a wonderful weekend, be back Monday from Undisclosed Remote Location. Relax and have a homebrew.
Quote of the day
From e-Claire.
There are 135 candidates for Gov[ernor of California]. I'm not sure I want to be governed that badly.
20030814
I guess they don't like it
The new USAF tiger-stripe utility uniform is thoroughly dissed at Sgt Stryker, and mildly ridiculed there as well.
I admit, changing to new AF-unique camouflage uniforms is sending good money after bad---I need replacements for the Scope Shield radio and PSN-11, for example. If the AF wants a distinctive look in a uniform, go back to khakis, and save the BDUs and DCUs for bases and climates where they make sense. But as other commenters at Stryker have noted, USAF seems to have already decided on a new uniform, and seeks user comments just to cement the decision. So we might as wellcomplain abouttry to add some functionality to the uniform they've already committed themselves to.
Pity if I'm just hip-shooting. I already wear BDUs, and I don't need to wear the tiger-stripes or work next to someone who does, to guess at how they will or won't work, and what should be improved about them. But then I'm a proponent of bringing back warrant officers, having worked for a few of them. So you can take my suggestions with more than the usual dose of salt:
Pin-on rank insignia, in a pattern distinguishable at very short distances from that of officers.
Cargo pockets that will hold an LMR comfortably.
Buttons arranged not to snag on camouflage netting.
A pattern other than Solar-Absorption-Maximized Black (that goes for the T-shirts too).
The new USAF tiger-stripe utility uniform is thoroughly dissed at Sgt Stryker, and mildly ridiculed there as well.
I admit, changing to new AF-unique camouflage uniforms is sending good money after bad---I need replacements for the Scope Shield radio and PSN-11, for example. If the AF wants a distinctive look in a uniform, go back to khakis, and save the BDUs and DCUs for bases and climates where they make sense. But as other commenters at Stryker have noted, USAF seems to have already decided on a new uniform, and seeks user comments just to cement the decision. So we might as well
Pity if I'm just hip-shooting. I already wear BDUs, and I don't need to wear the tiger-stripes or work next to someone who does, to guess at how they will or won't work, and what should be improved about them. But then I'm a proponent of bringing back warrant officers, having worked for a few of them. So you can take my suggestions with more than the usual dose of salt:
Pin-on rank insignia, in a pattern distinguishable at very short distances from that of officers.
Cargo pockets that will hold an LMR comfortably.
Buttons arranged not to snag on camouflage netting.
A pattern other than Solar-Absorption-Maximized Black (that goes for the T-shirts too).
The TIC awareness of premature death by congestive heart failure . . .
encourages me to run. A good 28 to 32 minutes, four times a week, over a course that gradually expands through my neighborhood.
This course takes me past a backyard fence on which grows a vine with deep green leaves, and large, soft-green conical flowers. Could it be?
Yes. Hop flowers. Charlie Papazian describes them in the Complete Joy of Homebrewing as developing tiny yellow capsules of lupulin at the base of each petal as the flowers ripen, from mid-August into September. Boy and I walked there today and popped a flower off the vine, and found the lupulin. I rubbed the flower between my palms and smelled it. It's the real stuff.
Homebrew: just what I need to reduce my triglycerides.
This course takes me past a backyard fence on which grows a vine with deep green leaves, and large, soft-green conical flowers. Could it be?
Yes. Hop flowers. Charlie Papazian describes them in the Complete Joy of Homebrewing as developing tiny yellow capsules of lupulin at the base of each petal as the flowers ripen, from mid-August into September. Boy and I walked there today and popped a flower off the vine, and found the lupulin. I rubbed the flower between my palms and smelled it. It's the real stuff.
Homebrew: just what I need to reduce my triglycerides.
20030812
I am growing old, I am growing old, I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled, continued
Your humble blogging correspondent chose his grandparents poorly.
Earlier this year, I was diagnosed with gastro-esophageal reflux disease, and was prescribed with Aciphex so I no longer felt like an alien was clawing its way out of my chest. Today, the Aciphex was switched for milder and less expensive Zantac.
Between deployments for Operation Enduring Freedom, my cholesterol was found to be high, and triglycerides even higher. This Spring, diet and exercise had reduced them considerably but not brought them down to levels acceptable for my doctor('s insurers). Doc said I drilled down the levels as much as diet and exercise are ever likely to do; the rest is genetics. So we try Gemfibrozil for six weeks, and another blood draw to see if I need to eat it forever.
Your humble blogging correspondent chose his grandparents poorly.
Earlier this year, I was diagnosed with gastro-esophageal reflux disease, and was prescribed with Aciphex so I no longer felt like an alien was clawing its way out of my chest. Today, the Aciphex was switched for milder and less expensive Zantac.
Between deployments for Operation Enduring Freedom, my cholesterol was found to be high, and triglycerides even higher. This Spring, diet and exercise had reduced them considerably but not brought them down to levels acceptable for my doctor('s insurers). Doc said I drilled down the levels as much as diet and exercise are ever likely to do; the rest is genetics. So we try Gemfibrozil for six weeks, and another blood draw to see if I need to eat it forever.
The WUTT Model for Concealed Carry Laws
A friend of mine is seeking a CCW license in Maryland. I took notes on our discussion of the pros and cons, and invite him to guest-post here about the experience when it's concluded. He is concerned, as many others are, that seeking a license to carry, in a way undermines our collective position that concealed carry is a right.
I'm ambivalent about this, and here's why. For your examination is my model for how, or where, CCW may be a privilege rather than a right. I'm not a Constitutional lawyer any more than I'm a nuclear physicist, but I firmly believe that constitutions, big and little "c", were written to be accessible to the layman, and that Occam's rule applies to their interpretation. Of course, all 18 of my readers are free to email me or comment below that I'm full of shit and ought to shut up.
I have a pdf of Colorado's CCW application on my desktop and have been toying with filling it out and walking it into the Sheriff's office. Colorado's constitution specifically denies that there is a right to concealed carry, which to me means that the legislature has the power regulate it (as long as the US 14th and 2nd are not violated, there's equal protection, etc) but may not outlaw it completely.
The regulation of concealed carry is a legitimate State power when Constitutionally reserved and when impartially carried out, considering that States should have relative freedom in legislating against crime, to find the best results and compare them with those of their neighbors---the "laboratories of democracy" argument.
States' rights don't exist: "As our Constitution is written, governments have 'powers' but no 'rights.'" (see Kozinski's dissent, page 5991, second paragraph in Silveira v Lockyer, and my brief comment on it).
In comparison, Vermont not only doesn't have a CCW permit law, Alphecca (who is not a lawyer either) explains that it can't, by her own Supreme Court's interpretation of her constitution. In Vermont, concealed carry is a right, out of the reach of Vermont's police power. This is how it ought to be with all states, except those whose constitutions explicitly deny a right to CCW, such as my present home Colorado. Last summer it looked like Ohio might end up like Vermont, swinging from one pole, no concealed carry by private citizens, to the other pole, a right to carry concealed simply because their Constitution protects an RKBA and doesn't reserve a power to regulate CCW, and their legislature has failed to pass a CCW law. I'm not following this matter (James, any news?). Alaska legislated both a CCW license system, and unlicensed carry in a very broad range of circumstances (scroll down to "Carry without a permit").
By this model, if a state has reserved the power to regulate but her legislature fails to or chooses not to regulate it, it is still not a right but it can't be prosecuted either. Colorado has a "traveling" exception to the permit requirement (CRS 18-12-105.2(b)).
Lest anyone think Colorado's constitution's CCW clause is unjust and violates the US Constitution's RKBA clause, well, Kentucky's has a CCW clause, and no less of a gun nut than Thomas Jefferson held the KY Constitution up as a model for the rest.
By my reckoning, if a state's constitution does not reserve to that state the power to regulate concealed carry, they can neither require permits nor prosecute those who CCW without them. The state's RKBA amendment or clause rules, statewide; if the state's constitution doesn't have an RKBA amendment or clause, then the Federal one suffices, and it is mute about CCW, unless you want to split hairs about the right to "bear" meaning "in plain view." Then you can run up against rulings that the RKBA does not apply to persons openly bearing arms in terrorem populi. The populi of Denver, Boulder, Colorado Springs, and a few other Front Range cities seem to be easily terroremed, and are frantically passing laws against open carry.
I ask these bozos: which would you rather have, because you have to allow at least one: open carry, or concealed? If both are outlawed, then the "bear" part of the Federal RKBA is violated.
So the foregoing is my model of how CCW ought to be. Of course that's not how it is.
This is one reason I'm toying with the app for Colorado: under their constitution, I see less problem with the new system than with the old (how can discretionary permits be legal under an equal protection clause?).
Take that same law to a state whose constitution doesn't reserve a CCW-regulating power, and does guarantee an express RKBA for the purpose of defending self (Pennsylvania?) and I get heartburn again. The blow was softened somewhat by the low cost, $13.50 for 5 years, and that it was ready in a week (this was 1993, much can have changed since then).
Don't get me started on New York.
So then, EB, don't kick yourself for duplicity in the System Breaking Us Down. Go for your CCW in Maryland and good luck, your constitution does not guarantee an RKBA so you have the Fed guarantee to rely on.
Many thanks to packing.org for concise and well-organized reference material.
A friend of mine is seeking a CCW license in Maryland. I took notes on our discussion of the pros and cons, and invite him to guest-post here about the experience when it's concluded. He is concerned, as many others are, that seeking a license to carry, in a way undermines our collective position that concealed carry is a right.
I'm ambivalent about this, and here's why. For your examination is my model for how, or where, CCW may be a privilege rather than a right. I'm not a Constitutional lawyer any more than I'm a nuclear physicist, but I firmly believe that constitutions, big and little "c", were written to be accessible to the layman, and that Occam's rule applies to their interpretation. Of course, all 18 of my readers are free to email me or comment below that I'm full of shit and ought to shut up.
I have a pdf of Colorado's CCW application on my desktop and have been toying with filling it out and walking it into the Sheriff's office. Colorado's constitution specifically denies that there is a right to concealed carry, which to me means that the legislature has the power regulate it (as long as the US 14th and 2nd are not violated, there's equal protection, etc) but may not outlaw it completely.
The regulation of concealed carry is a legitimate State power when Constitutionally reserved and when impartially carried out, considering that States should have relative freedom in legislating against crime, to find the best results and compare them with those of their neighbors---the "laboratories of democracy" argument.
States' rights don't exist: "As our Constitution is written, governments have 'powers' but no 'rights.'" (see Kozinski's dissent, page 5991, second paragraph in Silveira v Lockyer, and my brief comment on it).
In comparison, Vermont not only doesn't have a CCW permit law, Alphecca (who is not a lawyer either) explains that it can't, by her own Supreme Court's interpretation of her constitution. In Vermont, concealed carry is a right, out of the reach of Vermont's police power. This is how it ought to be with all states, except those whose constitutions explicitly deny a right to CCW, such as my present home Colorado. Last summer it looked like Ohio might end up like Vermont, swinging from one pole, no concealed carry by private citizens, to the other pole, a right to carry concealed simply because their Constitution protects an RKBA and doesn't reserve a power to regulate CCW, and their legislature has failed to pass a CCW law. I'm not following this matter (James, any news?). Alaska legislated both a CCW license system, and unlicensed carry in a very broad range of circumstances (scroll down to "Carry without a permit").
By this model, if a state has reserved the power to regulate but her legislature fails to or chooses not to regulate it, it is still not a right but it can't be prosecuted either. Colorado has a "traveling" exception to the permit requirement (CRS 18-12-105.2(b)).
Lest anyone think Colorado's constitution's CCW clause is unjust and violates the US Constitution's RKBA clause, well, Kentucky's has a CCW clause, and no less of a gun nut than Thomas Jefferson held the KY Constitution up as a model for the rest.
By my reckoning, if a state's constitution does not reserve to that state the power to regulate concealed carry, they can neither require permits nor prosecute those who CCW without them. The state's RKBA amendment or clause rules, statewide; if the state's constitution doesn't have an RKBA amendment or clause, then the Federal one suffices, and it is mute about CCW, unless you want to split hairs about the right to "bear" meaning "in plain view." Then you can run up against rulings that the RKBA does not apply to persons openly bearing arms in terrorem populi. The populi of Denver, Boulder, Colorado Springs, and a few other Front Range cities seem to be easily terroremed, and are frantically passing laws against open carry.
I ask these bozos: which would you rather have, because you have to allow at least one: open carry, or concealed? If both are outlawed, then the "bear" part of the Federal RKBA is violated.
So the foregoing is my model of how CCW ought to be. Of course that's not how it is.
This is one reason I'm toying with the app for Colorado: under their constitution, I see less problem with the new system than with the old (how can discretionary permits be legal under an equal protection clause?).
Take that same law to a state whose constitution doesn't reserve a CCW-regulating power, and does guarantee an express RKBA for the purpose of defending self (Pennsylvania?) and I get heartburn again. The blow was softened somewhat by the low cost, $13.50 for 5 years, and that it was ready in a week (this was 1993, much can have changed since then).
Don't get me started on New York.
So then, EB, don't kick yourself for duplicity in the System Breaking Us Down. Go for your CCW in Maryland and good luck, your constitution does not guarantee an RKBA so you have the Fed guarantee to rely on.
Many thanks to packing.org for concise and well-organized reference material.
20030807
More on the waycool new USAF uniform
Follow this link or this one. Both have photos.
Question that remains unanswered: are they contemplating pin-on rank insignia? Can't see any on the photos.
Follow this link or this one. Both have photos.
Question that remains unanswered: are they contemplating pin-on rank insignia? Can't see any on the photos.
He could have used an ought-six but he didn't
In Publicola's thorough follow-up on one Mr Gates in South Carolina, a correspondent asserted that discharging a shotgun at criminal trespassers would endanger Gates's neighbors. Don't buy the argument.
At a moment when lethal force is being exchanged recklessly by criminal trespassers, you would be a fool to use less-than-lethal force to disabuse them of it. You will use lethal force, and you'd better bring enough of it.
Now that you've taken the decision to use lethal rather than less-than-lethal force, you can choose which type, platform, caliber, and so forth to minimize the risk to any innocents nearby.
The shotgun fits this bill better than anything else. Its ratio of PKintended to PKunintended is very high.
Summary:
Mr Gates was duly diligent in his choice of a shotgun for the application, compared to other firearms he could have chosen.
Erratum: nobody posted in reply to Publicola about the potential of Mr. Gates to endanger any of his neighbors by discharging a shotgun at said trespassers. Of course, homeowners are responsible for where their bullets fall, and the choice and employment of firearms to defend homes must include such calculations.
Reading about this incident and how Mr. Gates was treated by the authorities caused me to remark on those risks and how the shotgun firing shot (versus slugs, or the choice of another firearm) mitigates them. This would be a valid point to make to anyone inclined to second-guess him, especially those who have the power to indict him or seize his property.
It is an indication of the quality of readership that this point was not raised---gunbloggers know better. I apologize for the error, and thank Publicola for bringing it to my attention.
In Publicola's thorough follow-up on one Mr Gates in South Carolina, a correspondent asserted that discharging a shotgun at criminal trespassers would endanger Gates's neighbors. Don't buy the argument.
At a moment when lethal force is being exchanged recklessly by criminal trespassers, you would be a fool to use less-than-lethal force to disabuse them of it. You will use lethal force, and you'd better bring enough of it.
Now that you've taken the decision to use lethal rather than less-than-lethal force, you can choose which type, platform, caliber, and so forth to minimize the risk to any innocents nearby.
The shotgun fits this bill better than anything else. Its ratio of PKintended to PKunintended is very high.
Summary:
Mr Gates was duly diligent in his choice of a shotgun for the application, compared to other firearms he could have chosen.
Erratum: nobody posted in reply to Publicola about the potential of Mr. Gates to endanger any of his neighbors by discharging a shotgun at said trespassers. Of course, homeowners are responsible for where their bullets fall, and the choice and employment of firearms to defend homes must include such calculations.
Reading about this incident and how Mr. Gates was treated by the authorities caused me to remark on those risks and how the shotgun firing shot (versus slugs, or the choice of another firearm) mitigates them. This would be a valid point to make to anyone inclined to second-guess him, especially those who have the power to indict him or seize his property.
It is an indication of the quality of readership that this point was not raised---gunbloggers know better. I apologize for the error, and thank Publicola for bringing it to my attention.
20030805
Give them back now
Thanks to Publicola, who forwards Rachel Lucas's post regarding a man whose firearms were seized by police after he shot gunfighting trespassers in his front yard. Police seized all of them, not just the shotgun actually used to quell the affray, though they concede that no crime was committed. Publicola also ably dispels the notion that some forensic evidence could be collected from the shotgun's seizure, or that it would even be worthwhile.
They seized not just the shotgun he used in the shooting, but all of them.
Cut this the hell out. Give them back now, with an apology to him and termination for whoever made the decision to disarm him.
On second thought: whoever moved to disarm the homeowner, it's now your turn to sit on his porch with nothing but a cordless phone and a flashlight for the next 72 hours. No hardshirt either, asshole. If you live through that, then you're fired.
If this happened to me
I would hope to have the kind of balls this guy has. My first action would be, as G Gordon Liddy has advised, don't hand them over to the cops. If the cops insist that I must be separated from my weapons, I'm transferring them to my lawyer for safekeeping. Possible outcomes:
Thanks to Publicola, who forwards Rachel Lucas's post regarding a man whose firearms were seized by police after he shot gunfighting trespassers in his front yard. Police seized all of them, not just the shotgun actually used to quell the affray, though they concede that no crime was committed. Publicola also ably dispels the notion that some forensic evidence could be collected from the shotgun's seizure, or that it would even be worthwhile.
They seized not just the shotgun he used in the shooting, but all of them.
Cut this the hell out. Give them back now, with an apology to him and termination for whoever made the decision to disarm him.
On second thought: whoever moved to disarm the homeowner, it's now your turn to sit on his porch with nothing but a cordless phone and a flashlight for the next 72 hours. No hardshirt either, asshole. If you live through that, then you're fired.
If this happened to me
I would hope to have the kind of balls this guy has. My first action would be, as G Gordon Liddy has advised, don't hand them over to the cops. If the cops insist that I must be separated from my weapons, I'm transferring them to my lawyer for safekeeping. Possible outcomes:
- Worst: I am officially identified as a Bad Person and lose the right to own them. The lawyer sells them and I get the proceeds.
- Bad: the lawyer returns them when the bullshit is over.
- As if we have an RKBA: the lawyer pushes back hard enough that I don't give them up.
Update on the so-called sexist singular
Your humble correspondent found the following notice refreshing, in Multiservice Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures for
Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical (NBC) Protection, Air Force TTP(I) 3-2.46:
Visible in the properties box for this pdf, the author of the document is a woman.
Your humble correspondent found the following notice refreshing, in Multiservice Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures for
Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical (NBC) Protection, Air Force TTP(I) 3-2.46:
Unless this publication states otherwise, masculine nouns and pronouns do
not refer exclusively to men.
Visible in the properties box for this pdf, the author of the document is a woman.
20030727
I brazenly seek and would humbly accept
a nomination for the position of Director of the Transportation Security Administration, under a Reynolds/Lucas ticket.
a nomination for the position of Director of the Transportation Security Administration, under a Reynolds/Lucas ticket.
- E-tickets from API 250 will be honored as the sole necessary qualification for commercial pilots under the Federal Flight Deck Officer program.
- FFDOs will use their own sidearms. None of this locked-cabin-box bullshit either; you're trained to shoot it, you wear it.
- Uniform alterations to prevent printing will be expensed to the airline.
- Passengers: you're getting your Gerber E-Z-Outs back. And your crochet hooks, and any other implements that have been seized. You're not taking your shoes off any more either.
- Other reasonable proposals will be entertained.
20030722
introducing Anduril
Anduril
is a Remington Model 600 Mohawk, in .308 Winchester.
It wears a black-and-white laminate stock from an outfit in Los Angeles, an aluminum trigger guard from the former Numrich, a Burris ScoutScope base, and Burris two-and-three-quarter X ScoutScope. The mount looks a tad high for a gen-yoo-wine Scout Scope.
We're still looking for three Millett ball-bearing type sling swivel sockets, and then we'll fit the sling.
Maybe this week, I can find out how this thing shoots . . .
is a Remington Model 600 Mohawk, in .308 Winchester.
It wears a black-and-white laminate stock from an outfit in Los Angeles, an aluminum trigger guard from the former Numrich, a Burris ScoutScope base, and Burris two-and-three-quarter X ScoutScope. The mount looks a tad high for a gen-yoo-wine Scout Scope.
We're still looking for three Millett ball-bearing type sling swivel sockets, and then we'll fit the sling.
Maybe this week, I can find out how this thing shoots . . .
20030721
Overnight outing
We sneaked away last night to a campground I've been meaning to stay at since I found it last October, while looking for a place to shoot with a bud from Colo Spgs.
It's in Pike National Forest, West of Woodland Park, North of US 24, on the way to Tarryall Reservoir. Try 13SDP 68628 18183.
Happy Meadows Campground consists of about 10 campsites nestled in a sort of hogsback, right along the Middle Fork of the South Platte River. Most campers come there to fish, and half of the sites are right on the banks of the Platte. Slip through some tall grass and step into the water.
Here's Middlechild and Firstborn on the banks:
At least two of the campers there had hummingbird feeders out, right on the picnic tables, and hummingbirds were veering in and out, availing themselves of the feast.
I did not realize how fearless hummingbirds are. I almost had to pick one out of my eye at breakfast this morning. Nor did I realize how loud they are; they woke us up this morning with a chatter like that of crickets.
It's in Pike National Forest, West of Woodland Park, North of US 24, on the way to Tarryall Reservoir. Try 13SDP 68628 18183.
Happy Meadows Campground consists of about 10 campsites nestled in a sort of hogsback, right along the Middle Fork of the South Platte River. Most campers come there to fish, and half of the sites are right on the banks of the Platte. Slip through some tall grass and step into the water.
Here's Middlechild and Firstborn on the banks:
At least two of the campers there had hummingbird feeders out, right on the picnic tables, and hummingbirds were veering in and out, availing themselves of the feast.
I did not realize how fearless hummingbirds are. I almost had to pick one out of my eye at breakfast this morning. Nor did I realize how loud they are; they woke us up this morning with a chatter like that of crickets.
20030719
What does it take?
Go read Publicola's post on what constitutes the last straw. What would yours be?
Go read Publicola's post on what constitutes the last straw. What would yours be?
20030715
20030714
Rumor mill
. . . has it that USAF, envious of the Marines' waycool camouflage pattern, is pursuing its own unique camouflage uniform. The pattern was described as the Vietnam-era tiger stripe, weaving the "urban" colors blue, gray, and tan, mimicking the concrete, dirt, and buildings of airbases.
Sounds cool, but, uh, guys? Can you angle the chest pockets on the jacket, like on the MARPATs? And attach the cuffs inside out like theirs too---the cuff buttons hang up on camouflage netting.
And for Pete's sake, let's convert to a pin-on subdued enlisted chevron---just one, on the flap of the jacket covering the placket buttons, at the level of the chest pocket flaps. Or provide a flap to carry the subdued cloth chevron from the GoreTex parka, like on the CADPATs. Officers would continue to wear rank insignia as on the current uniform.
Speaking of the jacket front button flap, since we all carry pens tucked in there anyway, why not just widen it a bit and put a pen pocket inside there?
One last thing: leave oversize pen slots or big buttonholes in the pocket flaps for the big bellows pockets on the trouser legs. When you put an LMR in the pocket, you need a handy way for the antenna to stick out. Better yet, put a sturdy belt loop in the pocket, attached to the leg sideways, to clip the LMR on to. Otherwise, the LMR flops around in the pocket.
Another last thing: attach the seat pockets on the outside of the trousers. Ask why, if you must.
Yet one more last thing: follow the Marines and convert to a single, quality, brown suede safety-toed boot. Single, as in, the same boot for temperate or desert climates.
. . . has it that USAF, envious of the Marines' waycool camouflage pattern, is pursuing its own unique camouflage uniform. The pattern was described as the Vietnam-era tiger stripe, weaving the "urban" colors blue, gray, and tan, mimicking the concrete, dirt, and buildings of airbases.
Sounds cool, but, uh, guys? Can you angle the chest pockets on the jacket, like on the MARPATs? And attach the cuffs inside out like theirs too---the cuff buttons hang up on camouflage netting.
And for Pete's sake, let's convert to a pin-on subdued enlisted chevron---just one, on the flap of the jacket covering the placket buttons, at the level of the chest pocket flaps. Or provide a flap to carry the subdued cloth chevron from the GoreTex parka, like on the CADPATs. Officers would continue to wear rank insignia as on the current uniform.
Speaking of the jacket front button flap, since we all carry pens tucked in there anyway, why not just widen it a bit and put a pen pocket inside there?
One last thing: leave oversize pen slots or big buttonholes in the pocket flaps for the big bellows pockets on the trouser legs. When you put an LMR in the pocket, you need a handy way for the antenna to stick out. Better yet, put a sturdy belt loop in the pocket, attached to the leg sideways, to clip the LMR on to. Otherwise, the LMR flops around in the pocket.
Another last thing: attach the seat pockets on the outside of the trousers. Ask why, if you must.
Yet one more last thing: follow the Marines and convert to a single, quality, brown suede safety-toed boot. Single, as in, the same boot for temperate or desert climates.
Greatest hits
This blog continues to get hits from Erosblog's mention of a post that discussed the romantic possibilities of a weekend away from the kids.
Second, searches for St. Pauli Girl costumes. Close third for the same post, but searching for girls on trampolines.
Note, these are the most frequently recurring search terms, not the biggest-hitting referrals. We can claim only two Instalanches, one kicked my way by James Rummel after he read my comments at Scott Chaffin's, and the other shamelessly self-promoted.
This blog continues to get hits from Erosblog's mention of a post that discussed the romantic possibilities of a weekend away from the kids.
Second, searches for St. Pauli Girl costumes. Close third for the same post, but searching for girls on trampolines.
Note, these are the most frequently recurring search terms, not the biggest-hitting referrals. We can claim only two Instalanches, one kicked my way by James Rummel after he read my comments at Scott Chaffin's, and the other shamelessly self-promoted.
20030713
20030629
Idea 272, or Visualize Seething Rage
Idea 272, or Visualize Seething Rage
Since driving a few tollroads during this summer trip, I am reminded of the costs of collecting tolls. The Federal income tax, in comparison, seems very cheap to collect, because the Feds themselves don't collect it, they make employers collect it for them. The Feds don't want to do it themselves and they're worried that private collection agencies would be heavyhanded. Employers are stuck with the job.
Taxpayers aren't excited about someone else collecting from them either. They like the Christmas-y feeling of getting their overpayment rebated to them, which can only happen with a system that withholds during the year. They won't be sold on the notion of making out the check for the whole tax year's amount unless they see the real opportunity cost of payroll withholding---they need to see a little Christmas every paycheck. And they won't get agitated about high tax levels unless they not merely understand the opportunity cost, but feel it like the proverbial boot in the face.
In short, popular support for a drastic reduction (do not use the term "reform") in Federal income taxes will not materialize unless we can convert at least some employer withholding into employee investment. Let's transpose the little-pain-every-paycheck with the Santy-Claus-in-April, into a little Christmas every paycheck and the big pain in April.
We can show the opportunity cost, in real dollars and cents, using commercial, off-the-shelf systems available now, and we can make it politically palatable to practically all of the stakeholders by aiming it at lower-income brackets first. Because women are more prevalent in the lower-income brackets, or so I am told, the remainder of this post refers to the taxpayer in the feminine gender.
End employer withholding, by replacing it with employer withholding, er, with a twist. Instead of the Federal income tax withheld, the exact same amount is directed to an employer-administered savings account, much like a 401(k). Surely many good vehicles are available to receive these monies, with the understanding that they will be cashed out on a known date; the problem will be choosing vehicles where the monies will be out of the reach of tampering and won't crash during the tax year.
The employee owns the dividends and income this money generates, tax-free now and forever, as it waits for April. The employee also gets periodic spreadsheets showing the dividends and income that the money makes, and the taxes she paid in prior tax years.
At income tax return time, the employee gets one check, which she must write from that account, payable to Uncle Sugar for whatever amount the 1040 says. It's like a Christmas Club, but the gift is for Uncle Sugar.
This is important: the check must be written in longhand. Mechanically printed checks and electronic transfers are prohibited. I want to see the salty stains of sweat and tears on that paper check from the effort of writing out the date, then Pay to the Order Of, the amount in digits, the amount in words, watching those dollars going away, away. Not because I'm a brutal prick, but because this program must brew seething rage to be successful at its long-term goal.
If she owes less tax than she saved, she keeps the difference. Roll it into a Roth or waste it.
If she didn't have enough withheld, she has dividends and interest to soften the blow. Maybe she owes more than that. Pay closer attention next tax year, which is already in progress. And remember: "seething rage." Who'd you write that check out to?
To make the proposal easier to slide past a reluctant Congress, the program has to be narrowly aimed at a small group to start. Let's say that only taxpayers whose total tax (line 40) was less than three thousand dollars for each of the last three tax years can escape employer withholding and join the Anti-Christmas Club.
It's for the Children! The real "fat cats," so to speak, have already escaped withholding the hard way: they're making quarterly payments to the IRS so this program doesn't benefit them. By Democrat Party logic, proponents of this withholding-escape plan can claim it would help single mothers and their kids because it wouldn't benefit "the rich."
Gradually ratchet this threshold figure upward, by indexing it against the Federal minimum wage and first-class postage. Every time the bastards increase either one, multiply the increase by one hundred and add that increase to the threshold (minimum wage increases by a buck, the threshold goes up by one hundred bucks).
OK, seriously, I'd rather index the threshold against the local cost of living or median income. Rising tide lifting all boats, and all that.
Sweeten the deal for the employers, since we're still saddling them with compliance costs. I'm not sure how to do this, do please visit the comment box below if you have a suggestion. Maybe, every employee enrolled in the Anti-Christmas Club is counted as a member of the 401(k) for the purpose of admitting "highly compensated employees." Most companies seem to struggle for the low-end participants so they can include more high-end ones. Throw them a bone.
April is the cruelest month As an added benefit, this proposal gives many more taxpayers the perverse incentive to wait until the very last minute to file their returns, further congesting the IRS and Postal Service. Since the money never really leaves her until she writes that painful check (visualize seething rage), it doesn't matter whether she owes or not---she'll sit on the bucks and let them earn until the last possible moment.
"I've got the owner of Motorola aboard this bus!" Many stocks take a price dip in April because enough of their holders have to sell something to cover their tax liability. Wouldn't it be cool if single moms, with their 1040's made out to the cent, go cruising for stock bargains at about that time?
Editor's note: I choose not to number this idea "666"---an Anti-Christmas Club plan, anti-Christ, number of the Beast, six six six, get it? It just wouldn't have worked.
20030625
Bless me, Father, for I have sinned. It has been at least ten weeks since my last Carnival.
I have a post in this week's Carnival of the Vanities, hosted at Single Southern Guy.
I have a post in this week's Carnival of the Vanities, hosted at Single Southern Guy.
20030623
Idea number 43, or Thank you for flying Redneck Express
Indulge me in a daydream.
Commercial airline travel was never that pleasant when I did it often. Flying with wife, three children, and their assorted stuff makes it far less so. Now that airport security has been improved from an expensive sham (rent-a-cops) into an extremely expensive sham (Federal law enforcement officers); airline passengers are now accorded the same customer courtesies as felony suspects, and complaining about it only aggravates the treatment; the metal detectors have been cranked up so high the staples left behind from my splenectomy routinely trigger them, and now they kinda tingle; and my United miles are exhausted and my Red Carpet Club membership has expired---we simply won't fly the family on airlines any more.
So when the time came for us to make our trek back East, we packed ourselves like the Beverly Hillbillies into our van and drove.
When night fell, we ramped off the Interstate, looked for a vacant room and took it. In the morning,we took continental breakfast (if offered) then refueled and repeated.
Kids are exhausted and fighting one another, and have listened to the same Hank the Cowdog audio book for the fifth time. Barbaloot can get 3 good hours behind the wheel at one stretch, I can get about 5. AM radio coverage in flyover country is remarkably sparse. Police radar coverage, however, is quite thorough. Gasoline was affordable but that's not a sure bet either. If a petroleum-eating strain of monkeypox rears its viral, er, head, we're screwed.
I want better choice as a transportation consumer. I am not alone, I cannot be. There's a market segment in the void between long-haul Winnebago-istas and 30-day-in-advance Priceline airfare, going utterly unserved. We'll pay more for the speed and convenience but not to the point we'll pop for commercial airfare and/or the humiliations and fine print that come with it. We'd like the opportunity cost to fall somewhere in the middle too, between the twelve hours parking lot to parking lot for flying, to the n days of a cross-country drive.
Now why can't some smart-ass MBA:
The business case for FedEx was probably more complex than this.
It is not really my idea. A German firm plans to fly huge airships for freight, in those areas poorly served by rail, or for those cargoes that don't fit on rail or truck. Figure, a service like this would be faster than rail (well, duh) and truck. Rail hasn't been courting ex-air travelers with lower fares either.
Kilo for kilo, most of the airship business would be freight, but some space would still be available for passenger cars and their passengers, just to maximize revenue for each flight.
Perpetual whiners over the dearth of mass transit can rejoice that a new form of it is available; the car is optional and the service would take Segways, bicycles and even llamas. Tell all your perpetual mass-transit whiner friends to buy stock in the company, or shut the hell up.
This service would not operate from existing airports, which are Nationalized and wrapped in counter-terror anality. Instead, airship service would have to be staged from the towns that today are little more than truck stops. Airship terminals as proposed here would look like big ferry queues with truck scales, a convenience store, a liquor store, and no need for TSA screeners. The large cities and the commercial airlines don't want this kind of traffic near them anyway.
So the elevator story goes like this:
Hell, I'd even blow a day waiting for a standby slot or an alternate route, just to get us within a four-hour drive of our destination and save us two days of driving. Ashland's canceled by a storm? OK, uh, there's space on Beckley, West Virginia, loading in two hours. Or you could dash down to Pueblo and catch the six-forty-five to Charlottesville. Great. We'll take the Beckley.
If you were in my shoes, what would you pay for this service? If you were on the chamber of commerce for a town with a rail head and fair-to-middlin' highway access, what would you do to entice an airship terminal to move in?
If you're the transportation minister in a country emerging from decades of central planning and you need to extend infrastructure to your rural markets right now, would you plow (more) government money into an international airport, or offer tax and regulatory incentives for freight airships?
If you manufacture aircraft, and you were not awarded the contract for the latest fighter, your military helicopter is under a cloud, and jumbo jet orders are down, would you bid on a STOL heavy-lift airship?
I rest my case, and return you to your normally scheduled blogging.
Indulge me in a daydream.
Commercial airline travel was never that pleasant when I did it often. Flying with wife, three children, and their assorted stuff makes it far less so. Now that airport security has been improved from an expensive sham (rent-a-cops) into an extremely expensive sham (Federal law enforcement officers); airline passengers are now accorded the same customer courtesies as felony suspects, and complaining about it only aggravates the treatment; the metal detectors have been cranked up so high the staples left behind from my splenectomy routinely trigger them, and now they kinda tingle; and my United miles are exhausted and my Red Carpet Club membership has expired---we simply won't fly the family on airlines any more.
So when the time came for us to make our trek back East, we packed ourselves like the Beverly Hillbillies into our van and drove.
When night fell, we ramped off the Interstate, looked for a vacant room and took it. In the morning,we took continental breakfast (if offered) then refueled and repeated.
Kids are exhausted and fighting one another, and have listened to the same Hank the Cowdog audio book for the fifth time. Barbaloot can get 3 good hours behind the wheel at one stretch, I can get about 5. AM radio coverage in flyover country is remarkably sparse. Police radar coverage, however, is quite thorough. Gasoline was affordable but that's not a sure bet either. If a petroleum-eating strain of monkeypox rears its viral, er, head, we're screwed.
I want better choice as a transportation consumer. I am not alone, I cannot be. There's a market segment in the void between long-haul Winnebago-istas and 30-day-in-advance Priceline airfare, going utterly unserved. We'll pay more for the speed and convenience but not to the point we'll pop for commercial airfare and/or the humiliations and fine print that come with it. We'd like the opportunity cost to fall somewhere in the middle too, between the twelve hours parking lot to parking lot for flying, to the n days of a cross-country drive.
Now why can't some smart-ass MBA:
- commission a tilt-rotor airship, capable of ferrying about 30 passenger vans at an airspeed of 180 kph,
- schedule service from various Interstate truck-stop outposts, such as Limon, Colorado, to others, such as Warrenton, Virginia. A mixture of express and multiple-stop routes would be fine.
- price it somewhere between the net costs of driving, feeding, and lodging a family of five for four days on the one hand, and five hub-to-spoke airfares and the rental car on the other. Charge by weight: we'll bring the sedan instead, or pack lighter.
The business case for FedEx was probably more complex than this.
It is not really my idea. A German firm plans to fly huge airships for freight, in those areas poorly served by rail, or for those cargoes that don't fit on rail or truck. Figure, a service like this would be faster than rail (well, duh) and truck. Rail hasn't been courting ex-air travelers with lower fares either.
Kilo for kilo, most of the airship business would be freight, but some space would still be available for passenger cars and their passengers, just to maximize revenue for each flight.
Perpetual whiners over the dearth of mass transit can rejoice that a new form of it is available; the car is optional and the service would take Segways, bicycles and even llamas. Tell all your perpetual mass-transit whiner friends to buy stock in the company, or shut the hell up.
This service would not operate from existing airports, which are Nationalized and wrapped in counter-terror anality. Instead, airship service would have to be staged from the towns that today are little more than truck stops. Airship terminals as proposed here would look like big ferry queues with truck scales, a convenience store, a liquor store, and no need for TSA screeners. The large cities and the commercial airlines don't want this kind of traffic near them anyway.
So the elevator story goes like this:
Log in to get a fare quote, and either confirm a space or get on standby. Then pull up, weigh in, pay up, drive aboard. The guys in the blue coveralls will chain your car to the deck. We don't give a fiddler's damn if you brought your pocket knife aboard. You didn't? Here, have one of mine.
Take a nap in your own car. Reheat Firstborn's hot cocoa in the microwave upstairs. Barbaloot can get out her knitting basket, complete with TSA-verboten lethal crochet hooks. Didja know cell phones work just fine at 10,000 feet? WiFi is an extra five bucks.
Triple-A highly recommends the view of the Missouri River from the passenger lounge.
The restrooms are forward of the lounge. There's no place to take a leak over the side, don't even try it.
Set a foot on the flight deck or mess with the engines, and you'll be croaked by Lester over there with the twelve-gauge. Ask him if he gives a damn about your pocket knife. To him, "air marshall" is some kind of sneaker.
Leave your luggage in the car. If it gets lost, it's your own damn fault.
Enjoy your flight, you and your car will be in Ashland, Kentucky, in twelve hours. Thanks for choosing RedEx.
Hell, I'd even blow a day waiting for a standby slot or an alternate route, just to get us within a four-hour drive of our destination and save us two days of driving. Ashland's canceled by a storm? OK, uh, there's space on Beckley, West Virginia, loading in two hours. Or you could dash down to Pueblo and catch the six-forty-five to Charlottesville. Great. We'll take the Beckley.
If you were in my shoes, what would you pay for this service? If you were on the chamber of commerce for a town with a rail head and fair-to-middlin' highway access, what would you do to entice an airship terminal to move in?
If you're the transportation minister in a country emerging from decades of central planning and you need to extend infrastructure to your rural markets right now, would you plow (more) government money into an international airport, or offer tax and regulatory incentives for freight airships?
If you manufacture aircraft, and you were not awarded the contract for the latest fighter, your military helicopter is under a cloud, and jumbo jet orders are down, would you bid on a STOL heavy-lift airship?
I rest my case, and return you to your normally scheduled blogging.
20030622
I'll give you two Fr Buerhle's for an Alphonse Gampp
My wife's aunt passed awayvery suddenly last December. She was a spinster, who lived with my inlaws throughout my wife's life. Since we could not break away then for the funeral, Barbaloot insisted that we trek back East for vacation, to help round up the aunt's possessions.
The aunt was a packrat. Her room is not being organized, it is being excavated. One box Barbaloot emptied last night consisted entirely of mass cards, probably one for every funeral the aunt had ever attended during her adult life. We sorted through them only to save those of relatives, including members of Catholic religious orders: at least two Jesuit priests and two nuns.
One card dated to 1934, printed in German. We're talking collectibles here.
Mother-in-law burst out laughing when I compared them to baseball cards.
My wife's aunt passed awayvery suddenly last December. She was a spinster, who lived with my inlaws throughout my wife's life. Since we could not break away then for the funeral, Barbaloot insisted that we trek back East for vacation, to help round up the aunt's possessions.
The aunt was a packrat. Her room is not being organized, it is being excavated. One box Barbaloot emptied last night consisted entirely of mass cards, probably one for every funeral the aunt had ever attended during her adult life. We sorted through them only to save those of relatives, including members of Catholic religious orders: at least two Jesuit priests and two nuns.
One card dated to 1934, printed in German. We're talking collectibles here.
Mother-in-law burst out laughing when I compared them to baseball cards.
20030620
Not false, just misleading
It's the kind of thing that sneaks up on me, slowly emerging in my consciousness.
The white-on-blue road signs posted along interstate highways, indicating which services are available at the next exit, use a fork and a knife resting on a plate to show that food is ahead.
Very rarely is that food served on a plate; more rarely still is it eaten with a fork and knife.
It's like how synthetic flavors have asserted themselves on our tastebuds---there's an artificial blueberry flavor, for example, that anyone can identify as "blueberry" even though real blueberries, with which the taster is perfectly familiar, are a completely different taste, also known as "blueberry." Perhaps a "blueberry one" and "blueberry two" or "blueberry (synthetic) and "blueberry (actual)."
It's the kind of thing that sneaks up on me, slowly emerging in my consciousness.
The white-on-blue road signs posted along interstate highways, indicating which services are available at the next exit, use a fork and a knife resting on a plate to show that food is ahead.
Very rarely is that food served on a plate; more rarely still is it eaten with a fork and knife.
It's like how synthetic flavors have asserted themselves on our tastebuds---there's an artificial blueberry flavor, for example, that anyone can identify as "blueberry" even though real blueberries, with which the taster is perfectly familiar, are a completely different taste, also known as "blueberry." Perhaps a "blueberry one" and "blueberry two" or "blueberry (synthetic) and "blueberry (actual)."
20030615
Life sciences lesson
Firstborn is becoming familiar with the plants and animals of the Eastern US. I've shown her plantain, burdock, tulip poplar, and sumac. She already recognizes poison ivy, creeping charlie, prickly lettuce, and lamb's quarters.
We are also visiting land that has enough wet spots that she hears peepers at night, and we can see lightning bugs. She saw one hit the windshield a few nights back.
Firstborn is becoming familiar with the plants and animals of the Eastern US. I've shown her plantain, burdock, tulip poplar, and sumac. She already recognizes poison ivy, creeping charlie, prickly lettuce, and lamb's quarters.
We are also visiting land that has enough wet spots that she hears peepers at night, and we can see lightning bugs. She saw one hit the windshield a few nights back.
Update on the notebook
The Clandestine Mobile Media Access Platform now bears 3 OS's, namely Lycoris, Win98, and Win2k.
Interestingly, when Lycoris is running, any USB device that I jack in causes the CD-ROM to rename to the manufacturer of whatever USB I plug in. The Samsung CD-ROM player becomes a Fujitsu when the digital camera is inserted, or an IOMega when the CD-RW is inserted.
And it stays that way until KDE is restarted.
Annoying.
The Clandestine Mobile Media Access Platform now bears 3 OS's, namely Lycoris, Win98, and Win2k.
Interestingly, when Lycoris is running, any USB device that I jack in causes the CD-ROM to rename to the manufacturer of whatever USB I plug in. The Samsung CD-ROM player becomes a Fujitsu when the digital camera is inserted, or an IOMega when the CD-RW is inserted.
And it stays that way until KDE is restarted.
Annoying.
Happy blogiversary to me
Sorry for the light posting of late. I fear that I've been dropped from some blogrolls, and that stings, but that is the nature of the beast. If I'm not producing enough to keep the hits coming, I am just taking up space.
I am also not willing to move from Blogger, despite several entreaties to do so. It's not an option, for one technical reason: I don't know the tech and haven't the time to learn it. As I travel (as now) Blogger is accessible to me practically anywhere, whether I am traveling with the Clandestine Mobile Media Access Platform or working from a morale desktop in a God-forsaken downrange location. I don't think other blogging platforms allow this. So I stay at Blogger for the time being, or I take WUTT dark.
Tomorrow will be the first blogiversary of Weck Up To Thees!
Thanks for the hits, the links, that strange cameraderie. And keep coming to visit, even if it isn't as often as it used to be.
Sorry for the light posting of late. I fear that I've been dropped from some blogrolls, and that stings, but that is the nature of the beast. If I'm not producing enough to keep the hits coming, I am just taking up space.
I am also not willing to move from Blogger, despite several entreaties to do so. It's not an option, for one technical reason: I don't know the tech and haven't the time to learn it. As I travel (as now) Blogger is accessible to me practically anywhere, whether I am traveling with the Clandestine Mobile Media Access Platform or working from a morale desktop in a God-forsaken downrange location. I don't think other blogging platforms allow this. So I stay at Blogger for the time being, or I take WUTT dark.
Tomorrow will be the first blogiversary of Weck Up To Thees!
Thanks for the hits, the links, that strange cameraderie. And keep coming to visit, even if it isn't as often as it used to be.
20030529
we're still just ahead of the replacement level of 2.1 live redneck births per breeding pair
In the contest of Wal-Mart versus Target, we do drop more dollars at Target than at Wal-Mart. They are within a few hundred meters of each other, neither is harder to get to than the other, both are right on our way to I-25.
But please allow your humble narrator to point out that Target's sporting goods section has Pilates accessories.
Wal-Mart's sporting goods sections stock Mini-14's. Target may be hipper, trendier, neater, and all that, but they can also be too "city mouse" for me---they can give me the same cloying sensation that accompanies an Old Navy commercial.
The Wal-Marts that feature "dingy aisles loaded with cast-offs and marked down boxes of cereal" (say, Dell Range Boulevard in Cheyenne, Wyoming), usually redeem themselves by including an aisle of reloading equipment, right down to blister-packed replacement decapping pins for RCBS dies.
Alas, Castle Rock's 24/7 Wal-Mart supercenter has no dingy aisles (Firstborn likes to coo over the live lobster tank). Instead of a reloading section, it has an expanded golf aisle. As best I can determine, the customers still have all of their teeth, normal or better-than-average body fat indexes (visualize trophy wives driving Escalades and Hummers), and no domestic violence convictions (one terrible incident in the parking lot, however). In short, a redneck level waaaay below the national average.
The clerk in Sporting Goods there today replied instantly, "no reloading", so quickly in fact that
So no RCBS decapping pins for Fuz today, grumble grumble.
When it came time to load up Linux for the new Clandestine Media Access Platform, to what reseller was Fuz referred by Lycoris? Wal-Mart.
I know that some fellow bloggers refuse to give Wal-Mart business because they import heavily from the People's Republic of China. Point well taken. Just remember that they sell Linux-equipped PCs too. Give them some credit---though they may be selling products of slave labor, they are also, in a sense, selling handcuff keys.
And the pissants who militate against the esthetics of Wal-Marts (excepting blogrolled comixho, of course) are often the same busybodies who form homeowners' associations, and whine over the decline of quote small private downtown shops unquote while kvetching over a recycled paper cup of something syrupy at Starbuck's. If they give a rat's ass about workers' rights, it will not be those of the Chinese who chafe in the PRC's collar.
In the contest of Wal-Mart versus Target, we do drop more dollars at Target than at Wal-Mart. They are within a few hundred meters of each other, neither is harder to get to than the other, both are right on our way to I-25.
But please allow your humble narrator to point out that Target's sporting goods section has Pilates accessories.
Wal-Mart's sporting goods sections stock Mini-14's. Target may be hipper, trendier, neater, and all that, but they can also be too "city mouse" for me---they can give me the same cloying sensation that accompanies an Old Navy commercial.
The Wal-Marts that feature "dingy aisles loaded with cast-offs and marked down boxes of cereal" (say, Dell Range Boulevard in Cheyenne, Wyoming), usually redeem themselves by including an aisle of reloading equipment, right down to blister-packed replacement decapping pins for RCBS dies.
Alas, Castle Rock's 24/7 Wal-Mart supercenter has no dingy aisles (Firstborn likes to coo over the live lobster tank). Instead of a reloading section, it has an expanded golf aisle. As best I can determine, the customers still have all of their teeth, normal or better-than-average body fat indexes (visualize trophy wives driving Escalades and Hummers), and no domestic violence convictions (one terrible incident in the parking lot, however). In short, a redneck level waaaay below the national average.
The clerk in Sporting Goods there today replied instantly, "no reloading", so quickly in fact that
- it was clear he knew what "reloading" was
- he knew whether any Wal-Mart anywhere would stock reloading merchandise
- this Wal-Mart, serving the Douglas County demographic, would rather stock velvet Elvis paintings, or Nine Inch Nails CDs, than reloading merchandise, and
- I should have known better than to ask.
So no RCBS decapping pins for Fuz today, grumble grumble.
When it came time to load up Linux for the new Clandestine Media Access Platform, to what reseller was Fuz referred by Lycoris? Wal-Mart.
I know that some fellow bloggers refuse to give Wal-Mart business because they import heavily from the People's Republic of China. Point well taken. Just remember that they sell Linux-equipped PCs too. Give them some credit---though they may be selling products of slave labor, they are also, in a sense, selling handcuff keys.
And the pissants who militate against the esthetics of Wal-Marts (excepting blogrolled comixho, of course) are often the same busybodies who form homeowners' associations, and whine over the decline of quote small private downtown shops unquote while kvetching over a recycled paper cup of something syrupy at Starbuck's. If they give a rat's ass about workers' rights, it will not be those of the Chinese who chafe in the PRC's collar.
20030528
honey-dews
Update on the Clandestine Media Access Platform: Lycoris runs the CD-ROM and the floppy just fine. The CD's must be ISO-9660 formatted, though, it reads no CD-R's left open by DirectCD, or burnt with a UDF reader on them. Unless there's a downloadable Linux widget for that somewhere . . .
Boy child can load and run his Putt-Putt games on the Mac clone without supervision, including smudged fingerprints on the CDs, and dropping the CD to the concrete floor when he switches from Putt-Putt to Pajama Sam. He has destroyed two games in the last two weeks. On the up-side, he can click through Save the Zoo in about 15 minutes.
Update on the Clandestine Media Access Platform: Lycoris runs the CD-ROM and the floppy just fine. The CD's must be ISO-9660 formatted, though, it reads no CD-R's left open by DirectCD, or burnt with a UDF reader on them. Unless there's a downloadable Linux widget for that somewhere . . .
Boy child can load and run his Putt-Putt games on the Mac clone without supervision, including smudged fingerprints on the CDs, and dropping the CD to the concrete floor when he switches from Putt-Putt to Pajama Sam. He has destroyed two games in the last two weeks. On the up-side, he can click through Save the Zoo in about 15 minutes.
20030521
Oh by the way, S.22 doesn't do a damn thing about
. . . identity theft other than to limit who can have or sell Social Security numbers, and specify harsher penalties. No reform of tying this number o' th' Beast to one's credit in the first place, which makes it so potent a weapon against its assignee (I hesitate to use the term "owner" or "bearer"). No pilot program to compel the military to return to a DoD-issued service number for all routine admin actions.
. . . identity theft other than to limit who can have or sell Social Security numbers, and specify harsher penalties. No reform of tying this number o' th' Beast to one's credit in the first place, which makes it so potent a weapon against its assignee (I hesitate to use the term "owner" or "bearer"). No pilot program to compel the military to return to a DoD-issued service number for all routine admin actions.
"I'm worried that, if this cleverly-named bill gets to the Senate floor, several Republicans might vote for it because it has a popular-sounding title."
This from a fundraising letter from the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
Your humble narrator would dispute that the name is clever: "Justice Enhancement and Domestic Security Act of 2003." Rather, that it is bland, general enough to be meaningless. All the better for pulling a fast one or making one's vote deniable.
It's also saying a lot that a lobbying organization will admit that some Senators will vote for something without even a superficial familiarity with its contents.
I've long agreed with a proposed Congressional rule that would require every bill to be read aloud, in its entirety, to the Committee of the Whole before it is put to a vote, as well as to the Committee that is responsible for sending it to the floor for that vote. It is one of those commonsense measures that will go nowhere. This Senate bill is the latest example I've taken the trouble to even skim. So be careful if you browse to that link up there in the title of this post, its fat ass spreads across 486 pages.
For Chrissakes, it's got a bit of everything: identity theft, telemarketing fraud, Nationalizing the Amber alert, protecting senior citizens from whatever distracts them from their oatmeal, and shielding whistleblowers. In addition, of course, to the usual suspects, ballistic fingerprinting and The Gun Show Loophole, whatever that is held to be in Senate bill 22.
It's a wholesale bid to overhaul Federal criminal law, including the laws of evidence and sentencing.
To your humble narrator, "Federal crime" is supposed to be an oxymoron anyway, with the exception of those few Constitutionally enumerated offenses such as treason and counterfeiting; and judges are supposed to have control of the sentencing process.
This from a fundraising letter from the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
Your humble narrator would dispute that the name is clever: "Justice Enhancement and Domestic Security Act of 2003." Rather, that it is bland, general enough to be meaningless. All the better for pulling a fast one or making one's vote deniable.
It's also saying a lot that a lobbying organization will admit that some Senators will vote for something without even a superficial familiarity with its contents.
I've long agreed with a proposed Congressional rule that would require every bill to be read aloud, in its entirety, to the Committee of the Whole before it is put to a vote, as well as to the Committee that is responsible for sending it to the floor for that vote. It is one of those commonsense measures that will go nowhere. This Senate bill is the latest example I've taken the trouble to even skim. So be careful if you browse to that link up there in the title of this post, its fat ass spreads across 486 pages.
For Chrissakes, it's got a bit of everything: identity theft, telemarketing fraud, Nationalizing the Amber alert, protecting senior citizens from whatever distracts them from their oatmeal, and shielding whistleblowers. In addition, of course, to the usual suspects, ballistic fingerprinting and The Gun Show Loophole, whatever that is held to be in Senate bill 22.
It's a wholesale bid to overhaul Federal criminal law, including the laws of evidence and sentencing.
To your humble narrator, "Federal crime" is supposed to be an oxymoron anyway, with the exception of those few Constitutionally enumerated offenses such as treason and counterfeiting; and judges are supposed to have control of the sentencing process.
20030514
Guard bummer
My trips to Cheyenne are coming to an end. I will spend a few weeks this summer to read Hank the Cowdog to my girls, take a few road trips, work with a few rifles, and start job-hunting.
I will be temping for another entity beginning midsummer, on a military pay status known as MPA (translation not available at this writing). That means a new Schlumberger combined access card with all the bennies, and a new stack of business cards. The insiders' term is Guard-bumming, or working on a succession of active duty or manday periods rather than holding down a continuous job.
During that time, though, I will be sleeping in my own bed, continuing to read Hank to Firstborn and Middlechild, and developing the resume.
My trips to Cheyenne are coming to an end. I will spend a few weeks this summer to read Hank the Cowdog to my girls, take a few road trips, work with a few rifles, and start job-hunting.
I will be temping for another entity beginning midsummer, on a military pay status known as MPA (translation not available at this writing). That means a new Schlumberger combined access card with all the bennies, and a new stack of business cards. The insiders' term is Guard-bumming, or working on a succession of active duty or manday periods rather than holding down a continuous job.
During that time, though, I will be sleeping in my own bed, continuing to read Hank to Firstborn and Middlechild, and developing the resume.
Clandestine Mobile Media Access Platform update
The Dell notebook's 6GB drive has been scrubbed clean and reloaded with Lycoris.
Am blogging through Mozilla at the moment.
A few hardware items remain to be cleared up, namely the CD-ROM and the detachable floppy. All else seems to be tits.
Then a repartition and an installation of Win98 or 2k to run the stuff I really bought this platform for in the first place.
The Dell notebook's 6GB drive has been scrubbed clean and reloaded with Lycoris.
Am blogging through Mozilla at the moment.
A few hardware items remain to be cleared up, namely the CD-ROM and the detachable floppy. All else seems to be tits.
Then a repartition and an installation of Win98 or 2k to run the stuff I really bought this platform for in the first place.
20030511
While I'm at it
Hearty agreement with Will Baude about attempts to amend Senate rules governing the filibuster.
Emphasis mine. The Senate as a legislative body is supposed to put a specific minority, the population of a smaller state, on equal footing with those of larger states. The filibuster is one form of leverage to accomplish that end.
The filibuster ain't broke.
Hearty agreement with Will Baude about attempts to amend Senate rules governing the filibuster.
. . . after nine days, any filibuster can be broken by 51 votes. Even if the time limit were double or triple that, I think that this completely obliterates the purpose of the filibuster rule. Let us be clear about something. The filibuster was not designed to ensure "full and fair debate".
Emphasis mine. The Senate as a legislative body is supposed to put a specific minority, the population of a smaller state, on equal footing with those of larger states. The filibuster is one form of leverage to accomplish that end.
The filibuster ain't broke.
Less than optimistic
In fact, I'm full-blown ambivalent about the prospects of Silveira v Lockyer if it goes on to the Supreme Court.
If conflicting Circuit court rulings on the Second Amendment force the Supremes to rule on the question of whether it protects an individual right, they will probably find a way to answer that yes, the Second Amendment is an individual right, but that it can be so thoroughly circumscribed by State and Federal law as to have no meaning.
The ruling would have to discuss the purpose of the Second Amendment, which is a reset button. Judge Kozinski's description of the right protected (not granted) by this amendment, necessarily puts a choice before any other judge who must rule upon it. What judge would rule that a person has a right to challenge with force a hypothetically tyrannical government that might be paying that judge's salary?
What judge would rule that a person has a right that therefore pre-exists the government?
What judge would rule that people should be allowed to make arrangements today, in case of a possible tomorrow "where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees"? What judge would admit that he or she could someday be cowardly or irrelevant?
What judge would rule that the great unwashed masses have an explicit right to access a reset button that could put all them out of their robes, their chambers, their jobs?
I admit that I know few judges, and only a handful of attorneys. Like most people I've had unkind things to say about them as a class, until I needed one, and since recanted on those unkind utterances. But are there many more judges whose opinions agree with Kozinski's? Are there many judges and lawyers who can visualize a time or a circumstance wherein a Doomsday provision would be needed?
If there are, I owe them apologies and gratitude. And pose a further question: what would it take? what would make a judge reach for that reset button himself? I know, I know, courts examine specific real cases and will not rule on hypotheticals.
Side note: Kozinski's dissent is also the first place I have seen a convincing distinction between a State's power and so-called States' rights.
In fact, I'm full-blown ambivalent about the prospects of Silveira v Lockyer if it goes on to the Supreme Court.
If conflicting Circuit court rulings on the Second Amendment force the Supremes to rule on the question of whether it protects an individual right, they will probably find a way to answer that yes, the Second Amendment is an individual right, but that it can be so thoroughly circumscribed by State and Federal law as to have no meaning.
The ruling would have to discuss the purpose of the Second Amendment, which is a reset button. Judge Kozinski's description of the right protected (not granted) by this amendment, necessarily puts a choice before any other judge who must rule upon it. What judge would rule that a person has a right to challenge with force a hypothetically tyrannical government that might be paying that judge's salary?
What judge would rule that a person has a right that therefore pre-exists the government?
What judge would rule that people should be allowed to make arrangements today, in case of a possible tomorrow "where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees"? What judge would admit that he or she could someday be cowardly or irrelevant?
What judge would rule that the great unwashed masses have an explicit right to access a reset button that could put all them out of their robes, their chambers, their jobs?
I admit that I know few judges, and only a handful of attorneys. Like most people I've had unkind things to say about them as a class, until I needed one, and since recanted on those unkind utterances. But are there many more judges whose opinions agree with Kozinski's? Are there many judges and lawyers who can visualize a time or a circumstance wherein a Doomsday provision would be needed?
If there are, I owe them apologies and gratitude. And pose a further question: what would it take? what would make a judge reach for that reset button himself? I know, I know, courts examine specific real cases and will not rule on hypotheticals.
Side note: Kozinski's dissent is also the first place I have seen a convincing distinction between a State's power and so-called States' rights.
20030510
Spam haiku
Found on the Gunsite email list. More at www.spamhaiku.com.
The other white meat
square meal in a can
The raven quietly contemplates
Found on the Gunsite email list. More at www.spamhaiku.com.
20030503
Viddy well, O my brothers
This passage caught my eye, in an article describing the impact of the massively multiplayer online game:
So I offer some observations.
Put these all together and what might they spell? Massively-parallel multiplayer games have evolved to the point that a player's actions have consequences that the player may not notice immediately. Among those consequences, a bad reputation. People who do not value, therefore do not cultivate, a good reputation will become life's losers.
By engaging in role-play on this scale, with real people at the millions of distant ends of the game, he will learn real-world values, but in a way that he can afford to lose a few times, come to understand why he lost, and not suffer (or cause) real violence or hardship. She would learn that by giving someone else enough rope to hang himself, she fastens the other end of the rope to herself.
The kid may also learn what many ordinary adults (including many therapists) have not: cultivating and protecting one's reputation by serving others is not tantamount to kissing ass, castration, or selling out. It demands bravery, singlemindedness, and an erotic drive; if more adolescents and teens saw this, they would perhaps be more enthusiastic about growing up and being responsible.
The "unpacking of the face," can make this game therapeutic, can intervene with those troubled juveniles who misinterpret the face. As a game, the kid will likely stay with it longer than he would with interacting with real people. As the game unfolds, the kid learns better to interpret others' emotions and intent, and to work towards longer-term goals; he or she might also benefit from a choreographed "replay" of the poorer decisions and the consequences that they precipitated.
A massively-parallel multiplayer approach is preferable to one manipulated by few people or only one person, even if that one person is a credentialed therapist, because it would better mirror the real world the kid will (re)join. Even some bad actors should be admitted, because we can't keep them out of the real world. Let the therapist moderate, not create, this world.
This is just a thought, of course, and I do not claim it as my own. Many libertarians would find the idea chilling, like the Lodovico Technique made warm and fuzzy by hiding it behind a StarWars videogame, and handing the joystick to the subject. But as a parent, I can sympathize with parents who somehow failed to intervene in the right way, at the right time.
This passage caught my eye, in an article describing the impact of the massively multiplayer online game:
Unlike single-player games, these virtual environments don't go into cryogenic suspension in your absence. Events transpire. Battles are fought. Rivalries flare. Alliances are formed. In a world that can't be flicked on and off, actions have lasting consequences, both narrative and social.
As players build ther characters, accruing strength and skill with experience, they also build reputations and relationships. Survival depends on whom you know, and how much they trust you, rather than simply on the weapons you're carrying. Success depends less upon combat skills than on social interactions.
So I offer some observations.
- Parents of children who have immersed themselves in Dungeons and Dragons fear that role-play games are corrupting them. Even those who dispute that role-play games corrupt children strongly agree that role-play can modify behavior.
- Children who misinterpret facial expressions tend towards violence and delinquency. They perceive threats where there are none, making them more prone to violence; they receive stress and dissatisfaction from human company. Prenatal exposure to alcohol is a culprit, though I suspect that other, non-organic causes exist, and under controlled circumstances it may be unlearned, even if organic in origin.
- The free market relies as much on one maintaining one's reputation, as on one having recourse to unfair dealers through the courts. Businessmen who deal unfairly or without goodwill get fewer and less valuable deals, even if they operate well within the boundaries of the law. To prosper, one must be trusted and one must trust.
Put these all together and what might they spell? Massively-parallel multiplayer games have evolved to the point that a player's actions have consequences that the player may not notice immediately. Among those consequences, a bad reputation. People who do not value, therefore do not cultivate, a good reputation will become life's losers.
By engaging in role-play on this scale, with real people at the millions of distant ends of the game, he will learn real-world values, but in a way that he can afford to lose a few times, come to understand why he lost, and not suffer (or cause) real violence or hardship. She would learn that by giving someone else enough rope to hang himself, she fastens the other end of the rope to herself.
The kid may also learn what many ordinary adults (including many therapists) have not: cultivating and protecting one's reputation by serving others is not tantamount to kissing ass, castration, or selling out. It demands bravery, singlemindedness, and an erotic drive; if more adolescents and teens saw this, they would perhaps be more enthusiastic about growing up and being responsible.
The "unpacking of the face," can make this game therapeutic, can intervene with those troubled juveniles who misinterpret the face. As a game, the kid will likely stay with it longer than he would with interacting with real people. As the game unfolds, the kid learns better to interpret others' emotions and intent, and to work towards longer-term goals; he or she might also benefit from a choreographed "replay" of the poorer decisions and the consequences that they precipitated.
A massively-parallel multiplayer approach is preferable to one manipulated by few people or only one person, even if that one person is a credentialed therapist, because it would better mirror the real world the kid will (re)join. Even some bad actors should be admitted, because we can't keep them out of the real world. Let the therapist moderate, not create, this world.
This is just a thought, of course, and I do not claim it as my own. Many libertarians would find the idea chilling, like the Lodovico Technique made warm and fuzzy by hiding it behind a StarWars videogame, and handing the joystick to the subject. But as a parent, I can sympathize with parents who somehow failed to intervene in the right way, at the right time.
20030424
Aaahhhh, much better
Your correspondent has upgraded the Clandestine Mobile Media Access Platform, aka notebook computer, from a Jurassic-era Compaq Pentium at 66 to a refurbished Dell Latitude, PIII at 500, thanks to a quick drive to Fort Collins. Was leery about the Windows XP, but it seems not to have stolen my soul just yet. It's busy deducing my Social Security number for later upload to its Master.
Aaaaarrrrghh, WTF?
The URL for my blog today returns a web page for Aaron's Bible. Maybe they found Raed . . . .
Your correspondent has upgraded the Clandestine Mobile Media Access Platform, aka notebook computer, from a Jurassic-era Compaq Pentium at 66 to a refurbished Dell Latitude, PIII at 500, thanks to a quick drive to Fort Collins. Was leery about the Windows XP, but it seems not to have stolen my soul just yet. It's busy deducing my Social Security number for later upload to its Master.
Aaaaarrrrghh, WTF?
The URL for my blog today returns a web page for Aaron's Bible. Maybe they found Raed . . . .
20030418
Unintended mirror site
With a tip of the hat to Swen, your correspondent has found that WUTT, among other blogs, has a mirror site in Japan.
With a tip of the hat to Swen, your correspondent has found that WUTT, among other blogs, has a mirror site in Japan.
David Brin, please call your office
A proposal for ubiquitous webcam surveillance reminds me of Brin's Transparent Society.
Found via Instapundit.
A proposal for ubiquitous webcam surveillance reminds me of Brin's Transparent Society.
Found via Instapundit.
20030416
Bigger than my britches
Your correspondent is inserting Weblog Meta Data Initiative meta tags into WeckUpToThees! just for grins. Wish me luck, hope I don't munge the template again.
Your correspondent is inserting Weblog Meta Data Initiative meta tags into WeckUpToThees! just for grins. Wish me luck, hope I don't munge the template again.
20030415
Could this be the beginning of a personnel reform?
Rummy suggests reforms in the assignment policies of military officers. Did he read, was he influenced by, Path to Victory?
Mmmmmmmaybe.
We'll know for sure if, some years onward, the policy of "up-and-out" is replaced by "up-or-stay." I see the spectacle weekly, of effective, determined, fit professional men and women who can't juggle themselves into a "slot" that allows them to make lieutenant colonel, even slots in units or responsibilities they do not enjoy, and consequently are contemplating retirement. These are people my age, hell, even younger than I am. We ought to find a way to keep these people in uniform, doing what they like and what they do well.
Rummy's apparent distaste for zero-defects philosophy is also refreshing.
One possible downside:
Rumor has it that Rummy has some "issues" with Reservists. They are harder to mobilize because they, er, have civilian jobs and commitments and mortgages and such. Most of us would have no quarrel with a restructuring that takes us away from private life less often than has been the case for the last decade.
But the DoD's present heavy dependence on reservists is intentional, a lesson learned from Vietnam. If mobilization incurs a widespread social and economic impact, our leaders will be less prone to overseas adventurism. Our experience in Iraq seems to bear this out, that in Kosovo far less so. Would the United States be safer or richer if it were "easier" to go to war?
Found via Donald Sensing.
Aside: even the Gray Lady has a smidgen of difficulty with homonyms.
That would be "rein."
The armed services "make a terrible mistake" by "having so many people skip along the tops of the waves in a job and serve in it 12, 15, 18, 24 months and be gone," he said. "They spend the first six months saying hello to everybody, the next six months trying to learn the job and the last six months leaving. I like people to be in a job long enough that they make mistakes, see their mistakes, clean up their own mistakes before they go on to make mistakes somewhere else."
Rummy suggests reforms in the assignment policies of military officers. Did he read, was he influenced by, Path to Victory?
Mr. Rumsfeld has made no secret that he views his personnel decisions as equally significant to changes he may bring to weapons procurement strategic doctrine
Mmmmmmmaybe.
We'll know for sure if, some years onward, the policy of "up-and-out" is replaced by "up-or-stay." I see the spectacle weekly, of effective, determined, fit professional men and women who can't juggle themselves into a "slot" that allows them to make lieutenant colonel, even slots in units or responsibilities they do not enjoy, and consequently are contemplating retirement. These are people my age, hell, even younger than I am. We ought to find a way to keep these people in uniform, doing what they like and what they do well.
Rummy's apparent distaste for zero-defects philosophy is also refreshing.
One possible downside:
Reservists could opt for specialties that guarantee more active service time and mobilization if that fit their lives; others . . . would be confident of less time on active duty beyond the weekend a month and two weeks a year of training now.
Rumor has it that Rummy has some "issues" with Reservists. They are harder to mobilize because they, er, have civilian jobs and commitments and mortgages and such. Most of us would have no quarrel with a restructuring that takes us away from private life less often than has been the case for the last decade.
But the DoD's present heavy dependence on reservists is intentional, a lesson learned from Vietnam. If mobilization incurs a widespread social and economic impact, our leaders will be less prone to overseas adventurism. Our experience in Iraq seems to bear this out, that in Kosovo far less so. Would the United States be safer or richer if it were "easier" to go to war?
Found via Donald Sensing.
Aside: even the Gray Lady has a smidgen of difficulty with homonyms.
The idea of merging personnel, which was viewed by some officers as an attempt to reign in the independent analysis of the military's Joint Staff, is not in the proposed legislation.
That would be "rein."
20030414
some folks swear by 'em
Please sign a petition to convince Uncle Sugar to sell those piles of M14 rifles to the civilian marksmanship program instead of having Uncle pay contractors to cut them in half with torches and haul the scrap away.
Please sign a petition to convince Uncle Sugar to sell those piles of M14 rifles to the civilian marksmanship program instead of having Uncle pay contractors to cut them in half with torches and haul the scrap away.
unusual places for a Red Label ad
Has anyone else noticed that Sturm, Ruger and Company have been advertising in general readership publications?
OK, so American Spectator is not exactly as widely read as Time. Still, it's not a "gun" mag.
Has anyone else noticed that Sturm, Ruger and Company have been advertising in general readership publications?
OK, so American Spectator is not exactly as widely read as Time. Still, it's not a "gun" mag.
20030408
A government program to arm everyone
Megan Mcardle asks, "if guns are widely available in Iraq, how come they've got this nasty dictatorship?" Please read her post and the comments.
Please keep coming back to this: it did work the one time we tried it. We are as sure as we can be in retrospect that had we not been armed competitively with our rulers, we would not have achieved independence.
Iraq's experience does not disprove that assertion, nor those of the disarmament lobby.
Break break . . .
One more reason, if more were needed, to not allow the United Nations to administer Iraq after Saddam's fall: what civilian gun ownership exists there today surely would end.
Megan Mcardle asks, "if guns are widely available in Iraq, how come they've got this nasty dictatorship?" Please read her post and the comments.
- Civil arms are necessary, but not sufficient, for liberty. Megan and commenters conclude that people have to believe that armed struggle will have a chance to succeed before they'll try it.
- What constitutes "widespread" gun ownership is in the eye of the beholder. I don't agree that it's impossible to quantify gun ownership in Iraq in a meaningful comparison with that in the US or elsewhere. Of course, the news coverage of Iraqi gun ownership does not attempt honest quantification.
- Clearly the falling regime made sure that its friends had more, or better; this regime was also expert at knowing who its friends, enemies, and even fence-sitters, were. And where they were, and what they were saying.
Please keep coming back to this: it did work the one time we tried it. We are as sure as we can be in retrospect that had we not been armed competitively with our rulers, we would not have achieved independence.
Iraq's experience does not disprove that assertion, nor those of the disarmament lobby.
Break break . . .
The United Nations has drafted a confidential blueprint for administering [post-Saddam] Iraq.
One more reason, if more were needed, to not allow the United Nations to administer Iraq after Saddam's fall: what civilian gun ownership exists there today surely would end.
20030407
I have a dream, continued
Why have, or should, the United States undertaken this task of ending the nexus between Church and State power?
We may not have invented it, but we were the first to get it to work. We are the antithesis of the Church-State. Though we are disposed to leave people alone, our determination to be left alone places us naturally in opposition to Men of the One Book.
Why have, or should, the United States undertaken this task of ending the nexus between Church and State power?
We may not have invented it, but we were the first to get it to work. We are the antithesis of the Church-State. Though we are disposed to leave people alone, our determination to be left alone places us naturally in opposition to Men of the One Book.
Timeo hominem unius libri or, I have a dream
Agree or disagree:
The United States is, or ought to be, engaged in a campaign to defeat religious fanaticism where it wields secular power. This campaign has military dimensions as well as philosophical and political. The political dimensions will be articulated backward through time to roots that will include reverence and gratitude for Islam's turn as a custodian of Western thought, and forward to the day when any man or woman can claim Western thought as his or her birthright.
The military and philosophical dimensions of the campaign will demonstrate that the secular world functions according to rules that can be observed or deduced from it, and that those who ignore secular observations and deductions in favor of a One Book will fail or die, at the hands of those who master the rules rather than ignore them.
The present phase of the campaign appears then to be almost a violation of the overall campaign as framed here. Perhaps it is a mere stepping stone. Iraq is the center of gravity of the danger, and at the same time probably the most secular place in that center of gravity, where this campaign has at least a toehold, a snowball's chance of taking root.
The Men of One Book, though they and their Books are many, must be shown that they will not be tolerated as anointed, unquestioned holders of the reins of state power.
Extra credit for alert readers who can still see a shred of religious faith in the foregoing.
Agree or disagree:
- The United States is not engaged in a military campaign to liberate the people of Iraq from a hated secular tyrant. That may be a collateral benefit but it is not the goal of the campaign.
- The United States is not engaged in a military campaign to eliminate a first-tier source of weapons of mass destruction. That is also a collateral benefit but again is not the goal.
- The United States is not engaged in a military campaign to topple Al-Qaeda. Though these critters appear to be present in Iraq and have benefited from the regime that is about to topple, Al-Qaeda is mostly already toppled in their former seat of power. Fragments of their organization surely persist both in Afghanistan and scattered throughout the Islamic world, and they may still possess the resources and organization to mount an attack on the scale of the World Trade Center attack.
- The United States is not engaged in a military campaign to topple Islam. Devoted WUTT readers (both of them) may complete this paragraph as an exercise of their superb wits.
- The United States is not engaged in a military campaign to topple radical or fundamental Islam. Too much attention on the "Islam" part, to the extent that it distracts from the true and deserving goal.
The United States is, or ought to be, engaged in a campaign to defeat religious fanaticism where it wields secular power. This campaign has military dimensions as well as philosophical and political. The political dimensions will be articulated backward through time to roots that will include reverence and gratitude for Islam's turn as a custodian of Western thought, and forward to the day when any man or woman can claim Western thought as his or her birthright.
The military and philosophical dimensions of the campaign will demonstrate that the secular world functions according to rules that can be observed or deduced from it, and that those who ignore secular observations and deductions in favor of a One Book will fail or die, at the hands of those who master the rules rather than ignore them.
The present phase of the campaign appears then to be almost a violation of the overall campaign as framed here. Perhaps it is a mere stepping stone. Iraq is the center of gravity of the danger, and at the same time probably the most secular place in that center of gravity, where this campaign has at least a toehold, a snowball's chance of taking root.
The Men of One Book, though they and their Books are many, must be shown that they will not be tolerated as anointed, unquestioned holders of the reins of state power.
Extra credit for alert readers who can still see a shred of religious faith in the foregoing.
Quote of the day
Donald Vandergriff, The Path to Victory, p424.
Obviously, the army must strive to include a diverse population of Americans in its ranks, but forced diversity only polarizes the armed forces and the society they are sworn to protect. Diversity programs create an atmosphere of unfairness, which in turn undercuts trust. As part of the overall reform, the army must take a long-range look at diversity. Entrance into the officer corps, school and command selections, and promotions should be based on one standard: the need to win in combat.
Donald Vandergriff, The Path to Victory, p424.
20030406
The will of the voters is heard perhaps too damned often
Today's Denver Post opinion pages begin with two columnists arguing about the value of voter initiatives.
I'll be right up front. I like the idea of TABOR, which would never have happened if it hadn't been an initiative, but I hate hate hate voter initiatives. Voter initiatives constitute my paying twice for something that was supposed to be done right once. We already have a legislature that represents voter interests.
How exactly does a bad law, passed as an initiative instead of through the legislative process, get repealed? How does a bad initiative get improved, modified, adjusted for agreement with Constitutional protections or even with existing Colorado law, before it goes on the ballot? Even attempts to make the initiative process obey simple requirements such as "single subject" are circumvented, often drawing the courts effectively into the business of legislating.
I agree with Mr Briggs, that initiatives to amend the Constitution are worse than legislative initiatives. A Constitution needs an amendment process that places as many hurdles as possible in the path of each amendment, from each branch of government as well as direct voter will, much like the path that ordinary legislation must take, but more stringent.
Conventions are hotbeds of potential for abuse too; witness New York's Constitution, that allows a Convention to be voted up or down only every 20 years. Otherwise, individual amendments must be passed through two consecutive sessions of the legislature, one before and one after a general election, before it can be put to a popular vote. Even with such controls in place to avoid seeming random or bizarre amendments, their Constitution has come to resemble an encyclopedia. What other hurdle could be added to this process to weed out nonsensical amendments? Still they exist.
There is a limit to how much we can rely on processes to make governments behave, however one defines "behave" and however one agrees in the first place with the premise that governments are supposed to behave.
We may have reached that limit in Colorado, and are now dealing with problems that are created by the tinkering with processes itself. The unspoken assumption may be that it shouldn't matter who we elect, or what kind of people we elect, the outcome will be acceptable. Further tinkering with processes will only mask our failure to elect officials who understand and obey their Constitutional constraints, or failure to eject public officials who ignore them.
And our failure to accept some of the downsides, compromises, and consequences that laws always bring with them.
Today's Denver Post opinion pages begin with two columnists arguing about the value of voter initiatives.
I'll be right up front. I like the idea of TABOR, which would never have happened if it hadn't been an initiative, but I hate hate hate voter initiatives. Voter initiatives constitute my paying twice for something that was supposed to be done right once. We already have a legislature that represents voter interests.
How exactly does a bad law, passed as an initiative instead of through the legislative process, get repealed? How does a bad initiative get improved, modified, adjusted for agreement with Constitutional protections or even with existing Colorado law, before it goes on the ballot? Even attempts to make the initiative process obey simple requirements such as "single subject" are circumvented, often drawing the courts effectively into the business of legislating.
I agree with Mr Briggs, that initiatives to amend the Constitution are worse than legislative initiatives. A Constitution needs an amendment process that places as many hurdles as possible in the path of each amendment, from each branch of government as well as direct voter will, much like the path that ordinary legislation must take, but more stringent.
Conventions are hotbeds of potential for abuse too; witness New York's Constitution, that allows a Convention to be voted up or down only every 20 years. Otherwise, individual amendments must be passed through two consecutive sessions of the legislature, one before and one after a general election, before it can be put to a popular vote. Even with such controls in place to avoid seeming random or bizarre amendments, their Constitution has come to resemble an encyclopedia. What other hurdle could be added to this process to weed out nonsensical amendments? Still they exist.
There is a limit to how much we can rely on processes to make governments behave, however one defines "behave" and however one agrees in the first place with the premise that governments are supposed to behave.
We may have reached that limit in Colorado, and are now dealing with problems that are created by the tinkering with processes itself. The unspoken assumption may be that it shouldn't matter who we elect, or what kind of people we elect, the outcome will be acceptable. Further tinkering with processes will only mask our failure to elect officials who understand and obey their Constitutional constraints, or failure to eject public officials who ignore them.
And our failure to accept some of the downsides, compromises, and consequences that laws always bring with them.
Does this not make me green?
Contrary to Publicola's observation, I am not a manufacturer of death. I merely recycle it.
I am reloading brass empties that would otherwise go to a landfill---the firm that picks up my Number 2 plastic and clear glass does not provide a separate service to collect brass.
A businessman-hobbyist in Montana collects .22 LR spent cases, cleans them, and converts them into .224" bullet jackets. He probably sifts lead from the berms of his local ranges, and processes it to make the bullet cores. I buy from him, so not only am I recycling some of my own output, I'm supporting a local market for recycled content rather than buying from a gigantic multinational and helping to limit the spread of known environmental toxins.
Tools are also available, I hear, to convert .22 magnum cases into 6mm jackets. I'd rather have my kids doing that for pizza money than delivering newspapers.
Contrary to Publicola's observation, I am not a manufacturer of death. I merely recycle it.
I am reloading brass empties that would otherwise go to a landfill---the firm that picks up my Number 2 plastic and clear glass does not provide a separate service to collect brass.
A businessman-hobbyist in Montana collects .22 LR spent cases, cleans them, and converts them into .224" bullet jackets. He probably sifts lead from the berms of his local ranges, and processes it to make the bullet cores. I buy from him, so not only am I recycling some of my own output, I'm supporting a local market for recycled content rather than buying from a gigantic multinational and helping to limit the spread of known environmental toxins.
Tools are also available, I hear, to convert .22 magnum cases into 6mm jackets. I'd rather have my kids doing that for pizza money than delivering newspapers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
