Smart-ass Remarks Come Into My Head, Unbidden

Yesterday, I was some 9 miles into an 11 mile run and finishing on the bike path. Ahead of me a ways, was a woman who had a lab and was towing a child's bike which had training wheels on it. There was no child in sight. I thought of saying, once I got to her, "That is so ambitious, We can barely get our dog to sit on command". Before I got to her, I thought of a better one, "If you had a border collie, you wouldn't need training wheels".

But I said neither thing. She toppled the bike a little before I caught her and she was distracted from righting it.

This morning, my wife and I were shopping and really, it is a one-person job. But things happen which make it nice to have a compatriot handy. The PA system came on and asked, "Please check if you have your own cart and if you have someone else's, please take it to the courtesy desk". This is so stupid: If your cart has been taken so completely that you don't recover it right away, then it probably has more of the other guy's stuff in it than your stuff--just start over! Why would you waste your time complaining to management? Nobody is going to return it. They will go back to their own cart and off-load into it. At that point they now have two and are not going to be able to bring both anywhere.

Soon after that, in the produce section, I saw an Asian guy put some vegetables into a cart and another Asian woman say, "Excuse me, that is my cart". My wife came over and I told her what I witnessed and added, "You see, to Asians, all carts look alike".

Yes, I am a bad person.

My Back-Of-The-Envelope-O-Meter Seems Fully Functional

Two Examples:

1. I was musing in my morning shower that I have reached the point where one half of my remaining life will be working and the other half retired. I am 56 and had earlier determined that I will need to work till 70. According to actuarial tables here: I am 14 years from retirement and 70 year old males have a life expectancy of 14 more years. Bear in mind that the older you get, the higher your total lifespan expectation. Since I have avoided death for 56 years, I am likely to have a longer lifespan, in total years--not remaining years, than a newborn.

2. After picking up Dahlia at UVM, we decided to get some breakfast before making the 3-hour drive back to Chelmsford MA. On the Church Street Mall, a random man let us know of an inspiring story of a guy trying to break his own single season total altitude record. I made a note of the name so that I could look it up later. Ken Jones, Whitefish MT. While we were walking, I did a little calculation based on my own experience: When I worked in Sun Valley, I made 60 ski days in one season. Bear in mind, I was working and so did not ski every possible day--my record was 13 straight days, each of which were also work days (I worked a night shift). In addition, I was in the Marine Reserves and this took 4 days per month. I figure, with no job and a decent snow season, 100 days would be reasonable. Further, on my last ski day in Sun Valley, I decided to get as much altitude as I could. I did 25 top to bottom runs at 3,000 vertical feet each. But, as the last day; the lifts opened an hour late and closed an hour early. Also, the conditions were icy in the morning and slushy at the end. Most winter days have perfect conditions all day long. Finally, even on that day, I could have done more--I got bored with high speed cruising on groomed runs and ended up doing about half the runs on moguls. I think a normal ski day at Sun Valley could reasonably give 100 thousand feet. 100 days times 100k is 10 million vertical feet in a season. So, Ken's goal of breaking his 8 million ft record is pretty solid, but I think it could easily be surpassed. Maybe when I turn 70, I will move back to Sun Valley for a season or two.

If Life Was Like a Nihilistic Movie, I Would Have Died Yesterday.

Foreshadowing:
I had to go out and run an errand--pick up a Christmas tree for the season, no less and the dog "asked" to be taken for a walk while I was at the back door putting on my coat and shoes. She is old and sedentary, so it is kind of a thing to take her when she is willing, but I had a lot to do and so promised to take her later, if I could.

Lead-up:
When I got home from getting the tree, I was good as my word and set out on a walk as the bright sun cast rays at a sharp angle. I was about to enter the bike path but delayed a bit, waiting as a biker went past. He inexplicably bade me good morning as he glided by. It was two in the afternoon! I didn't make too much of it--some people are just so used to "good morning" that they stray into non-morning times of the day, no big deal. I say good day sir. Well, just in my mind. The sun was in my eyes and I was still musing about the whole "good morning" fiasco, when another walker approached from ahead.

The big scene:
There was something not right about him. In the movie version, the sun and my general befuddlement would prevent me from seeing his face. The camera would show the audience how creepy he looked, but I would not see it. Nor the knife he suddenly pulled from nowhere and used to stab me to death. In actuality, the only odd thing was that I was having such thoughts on a sunny day, having a stroll with our cute Cavalier King Charles Spaniel.

Coda:
The pathetic and useless (for protection) dog, left whimpering--she wants to go home but also does not like to leave one of her people behind.

Ranking The Last Four Presidents

The final results are not in yet for this mid-term election, but we know the general outcome. Here is a ranking of the last four presidents by how they did in the first midterm after their first term win:


1. George W. Bush 2002 Gained seats in the House +8 and Senate +2 keeping both in Republican hands

2. Donald Trump 2018 Lost enough seats in the House to give control to the Democrats, But Gained seats in the Senate.

3. Barack Obama 2010 Lost enough seats in the House to give control to the Republicans, AND Lost seats in the Senate -6

4. Bill Clinton 1994 Lost enough seats in the House AND Senate to lose control of BOTH

2nd Amendment Conditional Clause

This is what the 2nd would look like if the first part was conditional:

As long as Sally agrees that, A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, then and only then shall the right of the people to keep and bear arms, not be infringed.

What it really has is:

A statement of fact: You may disagree that it is a fact, but it is intended to state something they thought was obvious:

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,"

Followed by a rule:

"the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

Quoting Niemoller

First they came for the pro-life activists, and I did not speak out--because I was pro-choice.

Then they came for the Tea Party, and I did not speak out--because I did not agree that we are "taxed enough already"

Then they came for the Little Sisters of the Poor, and I did not speak out--because I really have no problem with government forcing people to participate in things that they (foolishly but sincerely) believe are evil.

But now I quote Niemoller in the hopes you will vote for the people who did all of these things.

Okay People, Get a Grip

Having spent the weekend on a fairly liberal US University campus--Parent's weekend, LOL, there really wasn't much commotion. Other than posters all over the place, all promoting exactly the side one would expect them to promote, the place was very quiet.

For those outraged by it all, here are a few facts:

A conservative justice was replaced by...a conservative justice. What!

1. Yes, it is true: Anthony Kennedy was nominated by Ronald Reagan and sure, he was a swing vote on some key cases, but (and this is really important) he chose to retire while Trump was president.

2. What did you expect would happen? Republicans control the Senate and the White House. Did you think they would put a liberal into the Supreme Court?

3. "But Kavanaugh is a rapist"! is what I have heard many times from opponents of the pick.

"How do you know that"? I ask.

They always reply, "Women don't lie about things like that"

"Really"? "There are exactly two people on the planet who know what happened, Ford and Kavanaugh".

"This is true". They will reluctantly agree. "And yet you are a woman, who stated with some degree of certainty just now, that a man you never met is a rapist". Are you still sure women never lie?

College Days

Scene: A teen aged boy is in his dorm room at Yale. The only illumination is a desk lamp, by the lamp, in the light, is a US History book. Brett Kavanaugh is outlining chapters.

There is a knock on the door:

Brett: Enter! The door is open.

Mike (a friend who is also in the history course) enters: Still studying for that quiz on Monday?

Brett: I'm not sure why I am bothering, I studied with Steve Kantrowitz a couple of days ago and I think I have it all down.

Mike: Yeah Steve is really into history, I bet he will end up majoring in it.

They both laugh dismissively.

Mike: So Brett, were you messing with Steve?

Brett: Of course, always. But what do you mean specifically?

Mike: He said that you, quote: are a "deflowerer of multitudes".

Brett: Y'know that old Robert Heinlein saying about lying by telling the truth unconvincingly?

Mike: Yeah, I remember you mentioning it sometime...

Brett: Well, I've been experimenting with telling a lie, so outrageously, that the person has no excuse for not knowing it is a lie. It's my attempt at humor.

Mike: Well, I think Steve is dense: He is repeating the story and is acting like you're some sort of God, and not a Man, here at Yale.

Brett: Snort! Save the comedy for the professionals, Mike. I will let Steve continue in his obtuse way, he will probably end up a history professor at some Midwestern state U. He will never need a functional BS detector.

End of scene.
‏

The Mind, She Do Wander...

A few days back, the car radio had on a Chicago tune and I only heard snippets of it but when I got the chance I looked it up and played it: Make Me Smile

Children play in the park, they don't know
I'm alone in the dark, even though
Time and time again I see your face smiling inside

I'm so happy
That you love me
Life is lovely
When you're near me
Tell me you will stay
Make me smile

Go to YouTube or Spotify and play it. You will thank me.

This came out in 1970. The 1970's come in for a lot of well-deserved ragging due to, just about everything. But the music from that decade was phenomenal! Established bands like The Rolling Stones, The Who and Led Zeppelin came out with much of their best work--in the latter case, the vast majority of their total output was in that decade. Variety too: Steely Dan got started and put out at least 90% of their best work and punk got its start, which spawned new wave and alternative.

People often remember Chicago as the epitome of soft rock, which they arguably became--sometime in the 1980's. Anyway, if you listened to the song, like I suggested, you will hear heart and edge and trumpet. They are a trumpet playing band and they are rock and roll in 1970!


Which naturally made me think of Dire Straits:

And a crowd of young boys, they're fooling around in the corner,
Drunk and dressed in their best brown baggies and their platform soles.
They don't give a damn about any trumpet playing band.
It ain't what they call rock and roll.
And the Sultans,
Yes the Sultans play Creole.
Creole baby

Mark Knopfler was not thinking of Chicago when he wrote the song, but I can't help but think of them.

Added: There is an interesting dialectic going on in the Sultans of Swing On one hand, they are making fun of a dowdy jazz band with that name. But in the song, Knopfler sings in first person:

"We are the Sultans,
"We are the Sultans of Swing."

So, they are not rock and roll, but they are--because we hear Dire Straits playing. And yet they are a trumpet playing band but no trumpets are being played in the song.

Makes my head spin.

Twilight Of The Idols.

Every once in a while, you are watching when something historic happens: An unseeded player beats a living legend. It is tough, but inevitable. Maybe the younger player thinks, "could I have beaten him in his prime"? The veteran may be thinking along the same lines, but sucks it up and is gracious in defeat.

What to make then of the fiasco that was the Ladies US Open final?

Osaka gushed about how she loves Serena in the post-semi final interview. All her life, Ms. Williams was a legend. In the match, Osaka was better, she won the first set and was even in the 2nd. Then Serena had an epic melt down. It is one thing to see your idol defeated, age takes us all, but to see her act so classless. Wow!

This was no tennis god, she was all too Human.

Not in a good way!

I Am Not Okay With The Assault On Clear Communication

The thing is, I don't think it is an assault on debate per se. It is more of a, we want certain things and the fact that it harms clear communication does not matter.

Well, I am here to say it does matter. The term "homophobic" is a great example: It is a term that on the surface is used to stand in for anti-gay bigotry. And even if that is all it ever was, is still pretty bad. Bigotry and intolerance are moral failures not forms of mental illness! But of course, it has gone much, much further than that. It has become a way of calling whoever is against the latest thing--Don't ask don't tell, civil unions, gay marriage, trans-gender rights--a bigot. It is a weapon which stands in the way of making useful distinctions. To my way of thinking, anyone who uses the term unironically, is telegraphing that they are a simpleton and it is a waste of time debating them. Or, they are cynically using language as a cudgel rather than having to engage in the work of using reason to change minds.

There are lots of others:

Illegal Alien. A simple term, which means exactly what it says. We can't have that! It makes too clear, the distinction between legal aliens, like tourists, foreign students, legal resident aliens, etc. And people who came here without such permissions. The thing is, the replacement phrases are inexact mush. Undocumented Immigrant. The first word is wrong in a couple of ways. It assumes that they could have been documented and possibly will be and brushes-off the fact that they are in violation of the law. And second, maybe a lot of them are wanna-be immigrants but surely not all of them plan on staying for ever. Illegal alien makes no such assumptions--you are here illegally, we neither know nor care what your plans are

African American: Semi-Okay, but it does lead to hijinks when referring to say a black German or to a white person who immigrated from Africa to the US, etc. Otherwise, it is much like saying Italian-American. The thing is that most people don't use that kind of term once they are pretty far removed from the immigration. Both of my grandparents on my father's side,came from Italy. I sometimes say I'm half Italian, never Italian-American. Black Americans have been here significantly longer.

The okay hand-sign: I have to put my foot down. The okay sign meaning white power was a hoax--you can look it up. Now they are going to take away, what? One of the two or three hand signs that are not vulgar?

Added: And don't even get me started with how my kids (and presumably their coevals) use the word "literally". Suffice it to say, they use it in place of "figuratively". I acknowledge that this has become common, but reject its use on the grounds that there is no good substitute for "literally" which has the original meaning.

Don't Deserve To Drive A BMW And (apparently) Have Little Use For Rear-View Mirror

BMW claims to be, "The ultimate driving machine" and while I haven't driven one in a while, they are very good. When I owned one, I felt a responsibility to drive it rigorously. Naturally, mine was a stick-shift. I looked at BMW when I went to replace the one I had and the salesman indicated that most of what they sell now are automatics and then gave me some malarkey about how they are actually faster and more efficient than manuals now. Well, I like the fastness but the reason for owning a car like that is to be engaged while driving.

On the way home from work, I fell-in behind a new BMW. This alone was not a gripe, since the speed limit on that road is a ridiculous 30 MPH and I usually go between 35 and 40. So, the BMW driver could have been going the speed limit and I would have caught up to him. Once I got behind him, I noted his speed at 20-25.

He gradually stopped at an intersection. The side-roads had stop signs, but the main road we were on did not, so there was no reason to stop. He didn't signal, but kind of angled to the right--like he wasn't sure if he was supposed to turn here or maybe the next side road.

I wasn't going to just sit behind him while he figured out how to dislodge his thumb, so I swung widely around him on the left to pass. There was no oncoming traffic and he was clearly a moron, so even though I thought he would go right, it seemed best to give wide berth. Good thing I did: As soon as I was abreast of him, he started forward and to the left. I gunned it and swung further left, avoiding a collision.

Two notes: As I continued on, I looked in my rear-view and saw that he had no turn signals going and was stopped in the middle of the intersection. The road has no lines and no signage, indicating that it is legal to pass.

Final note: I was driving a GMC Yukon XL and always have my headlights on. How do you not see that in your rear-view mirror?

Gell-Mann And The So Called Conclusions Of The Intelligence Community

17 Intellegence agencies all conluded...let me stop you right there champ:

The Myth That 17 Intelligence Agencies Were Involved In Russian Interference Analysis Will Not Die

Okay, maybe it was only 4:

the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Agency. The assessment was not approved by all 17 organizations in the American intelligence community.

The report itself is here, if you care to read the whole thing. The most important fact is on the first page and I will just spoil the surprise:

"6 January 2017"

Just in case you don't remember: Trump was inagurated on the 20th of Jan, 2017. So, two weeks before it was too late: Obama holdovers drop a stink-bomb on the president elect. And we believe this is solid, why?

First of all, they lied that 17 agencies all came this conclusion. Second, the Obama administration politicized pretty much every agency in the federal government:

The IRS: IRS Apologizes For Aggressive Scrutiny Of Conservative Groups

The FBI:

a stunning conclusion. And 63 percent of polled voters in a Harvard CAPS-Harris Poll believe that the FBI withheld vital information from Congress about the Clinton and Russia collusion investigations.

The EPA:

Etc. It is like, we all know that every agency was doing the bidding of the administration and yet we somehow have full-faith in a document dumped on us by the outgoing gang?

I'm not buying it.

Added: JustOneMinute gets it perfectly:

Try to set aside the cognitive dissonance of watching the Blame America First crowd pose as uber-hawks. Try to ignore the years of "Bush lied, people died" morphing into "The CIA said it so it must be so.

Why Are We Using The Word "We", So Stupidly?

I've been seeing it all over the place lately and I think it has been happening for a while: The headline of an article is in the form of "Why Do We, or Why Are We X" where X is the problematic thing they want to talk about.

Just go to a place like Medium and I guaranty you will find at least one story like that. Here is one I found just now:

MEMBER FEATURE STORY

We’re Having The Wrong Debate About Pronouns
Let’s talk about how we talk about ourselves

Go to the profile of Ben Freeland
Ben Freeland
Jul 3

Why does this irritate me?

I am not having, nor do I care to have a debate about pronouns. I suppose that if I had an interest in the article, then the headline might accurately reflect some true thing about me. But the headline exists to get me to read the article. In this case, the presumptuousness of it makes me rather less willing to read it.

Here is a more egregious example:

there are literally so many trans actors that could’ve been cast in this role. why do we keep casting Scarlett Johansson in roles where she doesn’t fit the criteria? https://t.co/nnD7PKH5Gc

— anthony amorim is lo:st (@AnthonyAmorim) July 3, 2018

"why do we keep casting Scarlett Johansson in roles where she doesn’t fit the criteria?"

The decision for Ms. Johansson to play this role came down to a very small group of individuals: At least two, Johansson and the casting director, but maybe a few others like a producer or director.

This is taking the use of "we" to psycotic levels.

The only way it is sane is if Mr. Amorim was involved in the casting. Then why is he bringing us into this discussion: If he wants to bring us into it, he should say,

"What the hell was I thinking when I recommended Scarlett Johansson for this role? Please comment in the thread, so I know where to turn for mental health counseling.

Small Coincidences, Noticed

I had to fly down to Fort Worth (life is too short to live in Dallas*) for business. Both the flight down and the flight back were full, I don't mean mostly full, I mean--There was not a single empty seat on the plane.

Both the way down and back had the same arrangement: Isle, a young man, middle, me (naturally), window, a young woman.

Another coincidence (which might not really be one). The person ahead of me ordered two Tito's and then the young lady (who looked under aged to me. but evidently looked old enough to the server she didn't ask for ID) also ordered two Tito's. She might have got the idea from the guy ahead of us, but I don't think so:

1. She had headphones on and running--I could hear her music. So, I don't think she heard the guy ahead of us.

2. She seemed really prepared: She also asked for a glass with ice and cut up limes. When she got the glass, she put in a packet of Emergen-C and then topped it off with the Texan vodka.

*An actual t-shirt worn by our waitress in in a Fort Worth bar which had giant $1.89 beers in heavy frozen glass chalices.

Wednesday "day off" Activities

1. Took Jemma to school. Dahlia has been a graduate for a few weeks and has been kind enough to keep driving her sister to school, but we feel like it is only fair to give her a day-off now and again.

2. Stopped at Walmart on the way back (It is in the same general area as the HS). We needed a new wiper blade for the Subaru, which I had noticed on the way back from UVM last weekend and we were fresh-out of dishwasher detergent. I had put the last dregs in for the load I got going this morning.

3. While I was at Walmart, I looked at our grocery list (a phone app with the list shared by the whole family) and we needed a few other things. I got the things Walmart had.

4. Installed the new wiper in the parking lot: I had taken off the old one to bring into the store as an aid to getting the right replacement one. Every time I buy a wiper blade it seems like they change the design from the old universal fit, to a new universal fit. Hence, it always takes 5 minutes to figure out how it works.

5. Once home, I ran the wipers while spraying the window with a hose. This is an easy way to get off tough baked-on bug guts.

6. Took a morning shower.

7. Drank some leftover coffee.

8. Ordered 40 Lbs of green coffee beans from Burman Coffee Traders.

9. Trimmed a bunch of overgrown shrubs in front, back and a few other places around the house and cleared away the debris.

10. Went for a 6 mile run. Early-on I thought I would handily break 9:00 per mile--for years I averaged around 8:00 but suddenly 9:00 is the new 8:00--but then I must have been wool-gathering and slowed a lot. I came in at 9:10/mile.

11. A feast of left overs: Three left over lamb chops with tandoori spice and charcoal grilled, left over salad with left over blue cheese dressing from some take-out, left over Italian garbanzo stew AND a fresh Budweiser in a frosted glass.

12. Emptied the dishwasher.

13. Went out to pick-up Jemma.

14. Super glued a belt that was coming apart and a pair of shoes where the leather foot-bed had come loose.

15. Drove Jemma to dance--she actually drove herself, but she has a learner's permit, so I had to accompany her.

16. Packaged the leftover spaghetti sauce which had been frozen into pucks in a muffin tin.

17. Cleaned up the kitchen from all of the afternoon meals the girls made for themselves.

18. Picked up Jemma from dance.

19. Changed the battery in the Saab--It worked for picking Jemma up from HS and taking her to dance but the 3rd time was not the charm. After I put the freshly charged battery in, the car started.

20. Wrote this post.

ADDED:

4.1 Dropped off Jemma's Birkinstock return shipment at UPS.

Incel Intide

That was the joke:

Intel Corporation had just spent untold millions on their "Intel Inside" ad campaign and then it was reported that there was a flaw in their latest chip (of the time) which could give math errors

28 years later and there is an Incel movement, which is different but is related in some ways. Incel stands for involuntary celibate, by the way.

It is different since it is not a software bug, but more like a wetware bug. There are guys who rail against the "unfairness" of being unable to attract a mate, even though they do absolutely nothing to remedy the situation. Gallons of pixels could be spent on this, but to sum-up: What I would tell an Incel.

Are you attracted to unemployed, fat women with unpleasant personalities? Yes? Okay, then why would you expect an attractive woman to want you? Lift some weights, get a good job (or try harder at the one you have so you get promoted) and don't dress like a slob. You will be amazed at how your fortunes change.

So, how does this all circle round? Intel itself may not really be a big employer of geeks, but that is the stereotype and hence, Incel Inside makes a lot of sense--inside the buildings are involuntary celibates. At least they make good money, now all they have to do is lift weights and learn how to groom and dress. The final link is that the internet, which is tied tightly to companies like Intel, is also where these malcontents are able to meet and feed each other with self pity.

I blame, to some extent, the snowflake ethos of our time. You are wonderful just as you are. This is BS. But think of the implication if it were true? If I am wonderful just as I am, then it must be the fault of the World that I am alone. That is all that makes sense. Nobody is just naturally wonderful. Have you ever been around infants? They are utterly selfish and undisciplined, that is why they need to be so cute. Through the help of adults, the infants learn to walk, use words, share and otherwise become much more pleasant to be around. Though they gradually lose their innate cuteness. The process of improvement is life-long, though I think a fair number of teens think the process is complete by 15 or so.

Who Are The "THEY" In This?

From The Hill:

Former Secretary of State and 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton accepted her defeat on election night by saying that Americans were never going to elect her president, according to a new book by a New York Times reporter.

"I knew it. I knew this would happen to me," Clinton reportedly said, according to excerpts from a new book published in The Daily Beast. "They were never going to let me be president."

Notice where the quotation marks are and where they are not: The claim by The Hill is that Hillary Clinton means "Americans" when she says "they". I find this implausible, though very charitable, compared with the more obvious answer. I say implausible because of the way American English works: We say and think American voters are choosing their representative, not letting somebody be president.

Hillary has the worst luck, but the best friends one could want in the MSM. It was just her luck that she invoked the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" in defense of her husband (in light of fresh sexual misconduct accusations against the president). A blue stained dress would cement the truth, Bill Clinton did indeed have sexual relations with that woman, Monica Lewinsky. A normal person would count her blessings that the MSM was so amnesia prone. A normal person would hope nobody would remember her hilariously wrong claim about conspiracy, but no, not Hillary. She invoked it in 2016! Is she trying to remind the voters of what a shameless liar she is? Or is she just that cynical and counts on the MSM to cover for her. they did

So Hillary Clinton had it right when she made her famous declaration that a “vast right-wing conspiracy” was out to get her and her husband. The opposition was and is passionate. It is well financed. It sees dark — sometimes preposterous — motives in nearly everything the Clintons do.

And counts on our lack of memory: But, we all remember TVRWC was a way of boldly placing a marker saying the sexual misconduct charges were false, but we all remember that the charges turned out to be correct. So, what conclusion can we come to: Hillary is either (for real) insane or she has discovered heretofore unplumbed depths of cynicism. Either way, it is clear that THEY in

"They were never going to let me be president."

Is that old and recurring bogyman, The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.

Satire Is Dead

Unless this interview was meant as comedy, in which case it is brilliant!

Watching DVR'd shows last night and the teasers for the Stephanopoulos/Comey interview were indistinguishable from an SNL parody. Former press sec for Bill Clinton lobbing softballs at the fired FBI director--super hard-hitting interview, that.

— David Pecchia (@dpecchia) April 13, 2018

Federal Judge Upholds ban on AR-15

I think the subhead should be either So What? or Be Careful What You Wish For

Why?

When the original assault weapon ban passed Congress in 1994, the law did not end due to a successful court challenge. The law expired after 10 years. So, this court decision didn't change anything.

The status of Congress when the Assault Weapon ban took place: Senate 57/43 House 258/176 Democrat/Republican, after the next election: 47/53 and 204/230. On one hand, I don't mind if the Democrats want to commit electoral suicide, on the other hand, I don't think their defenestration is worth the assault on basic Human rights.

Gun bans as Jim Crow. By Federal Law, blacks had the same rights as any other Americans after the Civil War. But Southern states passed laws which subverted this and it was only in the 1950s and 1960s that the Federal government dismantled this situation. Why not do this again, only with gun rights? States that have arbitrary bans on various fire arms, or require licences or registration are violating the Constitution. Congress should end-run this: Pass a law which states that US citizens may keep and bear certain types of fire-arm. The law should include the provision that possession is legal, as long as a background check is passed. Proof of such a check can be obtained at any Post Office for a nominal fee of $5, which includes a picture ID (suitable for voting) and is good for 5 years.

Note: Some absolutists hate the idea of a Federal permit to carry. I do too! That is why this is not a permit (the 2nd ammendment is your permit) it is merely proof that you have passed a background check. By law (the one I propose) you are permitted to keep, carry and purchase if you have passed a background check.

Why Debate This?

Over the weekend, my daughter accused me of being a troll, so this makes me think two things: She has never really encountered a troll and she stalks my twitter account. At the bottom is an exchange from last Friday about The Atlantic/ Kevin Williamson hire/fire event.

what that whole argument brought to mind is the concept of when or if ideas should ever be suppressed. It seemed to be the consensus of the mob who brayed until they got Mr. Williamson fired, that his ideas are so repugnant that they should not appear in The Atlantic. Please keep in mind that this is not a officially The proximate issue was his view (not published in any journal, but given in a debate) that women who have abortions should be hung. How outrageous is this? Something like 40% of Americans would like to ban abortion either completely or in almost all circumstances. Further, the death penalty is the majority opinion as the penalty for 1st degree murder. I think, by definition, if an opinion is held by a substantial part of the population, it is not fringe and should be debatable in a public space.

What about other issues which elicit strong emotional response? Should we debate people who think the Holocaust was fake? Depends on how many think this way: If it is a percent or two, that is a very different thing from 40% believing this way. In such a latter case, I think it gets toward mandatory. This would be even more so for people who think vaccines should not be given--large numbers of people who refuse vaccines could result in serious public health issues. How about really fringe ideas like Moon landing truthers or flat Earth types? I say, "debate them if you feel like it". But really, what significance does it have? These seem like relatively harmless delusions with no real significance.
--------------------------------------------------
I don’t think people who own guns should be hanged, but I also think National Review and Fox and Heritage are unlikely to ever extend me job offers based on my well-documented political views, and if I whined about that as if it were some kind of oppression, everyone would laugh.

David Pecchia

One of these things is unlike the others: Heritage and National Review are openly conservative--they publicly call themselves conservative. Fox is news and does hire liberals. Does The Atlantic call itself a journal of leftist opinion?

aislinn
‏
Is the position that executing women is acceptable a mainstream conservative view?

David Pecchia
‏
I don't think there is such a thing as an unacceptable position: There are positions I agree with and those I don't agree with.
One position I disagree with is suppressing obnoxious ideas rather than defeating them on the battlefield of reasoned debate.
‏
No Pardons

Is that what you think is happening on the battlefield? Half the population can barely read, let alone debate ideas

David Pecchia
‏
Not sure if I agree with that, but it doesn't change my opinion: Debate ideas or don't. Suppression of ideas is abuse of power--terms like "acceptable position" are just a way to feel virtuous when one is too lazy to fight for what they believe in.

No Pardons
‏
No one is suppressing his ideas. This isn't some beat reporter who was thrown out of the newsroom for reporting on the boss's friends; it's a national pundit with decades of experience and 300K Twitter followers losing one writing gig for publishing some putrid opinions

David Pecchia
‏
Well, he published those "putrid" opinions, BEFORE HE WAS HIRED! My "The mob won" template is looking closer to reality. Or, what? The Atlantic hired him while entirely ignorant of his past output? Then how did they know he existed?

Apropos of Nothing

If you are an adult, here are minimal steps you will take whenever you have deliberately wronged someone:

1. Admit what you did and apologize for it.

2. (Optional) You may think that your reasons for doing it were compelling. To you, yes. To the person you wronged, not so much. But they may be curious.

3. Promise not to do it again.

4. Offer to make amends.

In Honor of Stephen Hawking

Go here.

Then enter this text to hear what he would have sounded like:

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn. This is the creed of all faiths even the atheistic.

Props to H.P. Lovecraft & Dr. Stephen Hawking

The Error Of Mis-Aggregation

Hillary is back! Reminding us of how it is possible to lose the presidential race to a man like Trump:

"I won the places that represent two-thirds of America's gross domestic product... So I won the places that are optimistic, diverse, dynamic, moving forward. And his whole campaign, 'Make America Great Again,' was looking backwards. You know: 'You didn't like black people getting rights, you don't like women, you know, getting jobs, you don't want to, you know, see that Indian-American succeeding more than you are, whatever your problem is, I'm going to solve it.'

There is a hidden error in Her-Self's claim: She is laying claim to the whole GDP of the states she won, but she didn't win every single vote in the states she won, nor lost every vote in the states she lost. Take the deep blue state of Connecticut: Hillary won 55% of the vote to Trump's 41%. Her votes come mostly from public employees, minorities and a good slice of the very wealthy. Trump wins with everyone else. Not sure where to find the data, but I would bet that the taxes paid by Trump's 41% exceed what was paid by Hillary's 55%.

Similarly, a reoccurring complaint by the left, is that the Red states take in more in Federal benefits than they pay in taxes. Again, who is getting these Federal Dollars? A lot of it is that there are military bases, or big Federally funded agencies in red states. But the larger and certainly the intended impression, is that all these Republicans are on welfare or food stamps but vote for the people trying to gut these programs. Again, look at vote totals: Take Alabama: Hillary 34%, Trump 62%. Who can doubt that most of Hillary's votes in Alabama came from poor people and minorities? Heavy users of welfare.

Thoughts And Prayers

Friend: My Mom died last night from lung cancer, she was a lifelong smoker...

Me: I'm sorry for your loss.

Friend: Hypocrite!

Me: ???

Friend: You haven't tried to get cigarettes banned, so you obviously don't care about my Mom!

Me: Are you saying it is impossible for me to care that your Mom died and for me to simultaneously believe that adults should be free to smoke if that is what they want to do?

Ref.

"We've had enough of thoughts and prayers...we are coming after every single one of you and demanding that you take action, demanding that you make a change." - Delaney Tarr, Stoneman Douglas High School senior https://t.co/cRvLyvk1v5 pic.twitter.com/w4454z3FXN

— ABC News (@ABC) February 21, 2018

Who Is The Master of Mansplaining And Why Does The Left Love Him?

Mansplaining is an invention of and complaint made primarily by the left. This is not to suggest it isn't real, though the validity of irritation can be obvious or disputable, depending:

The area of controversy is in situations where an explanation is asked for and then given. A woman may feel insulted by the condescending tone of the explanation, while the man may feel entrapped since he was asked and merely answered the question. I consider such situations to be resistant to simple answers, since it comes down to tone and degree. But there are areas where we can all agree.

It is irritating when an explanation is given where none is asked for. It is especially irritating when the explanation given is either wrong or is really just an opinion.

Enter the master mansplainer. Neil deGrasse Tyson. Feel free to take a break from this blog post and go to Neil deGrasse Tyson's twitter feed:

Not all his posts are mansplains, some are just facts:

Feb 18, 1930, Clyde Tombaugh discovered Pluto. The little ice-ball is so far away, it has barely finished 1/3 of its 248-year orbit around the Sun

— Neil deGrasse Tyson (@neiltyson) February 18, 2018

But of his most recent four posts, two are classic mansplains:

Evidence collected over many years, obtained from many locations, indicates that the power of Prayer is insufficient to stop bullets from killing school children.

— Neil deGrasse Tyson (@neiltyson) February 16, 2018

AND

Just an FYI: The proper word for someone from Venus, -- the planet of love, beauty, and its consequences — is “Venereal.” But medical doctors took the word before astrophysicists did. So we’re stuck with “Venusians”.

— Neil deGrasse Tyson (@neiltyson) February 14, 2018

I will dismiss this last one as NDT trying to be saucy and playful and take it as given that nobody really takes what he is saying as anything more than an opinion.

The one before this is really awful with many mansplaining problems packed into such a short statement:

1. The Straw man logical fallacy: When people offer prayer, they are not claiming it will save the victims of the latest outrage, they are trying to show their concern. This is especially bad when NDT holds himself out as a champion of logic.

2. It is just an opinion packaged as if it's a fact. There is no such study and if you think about it, you will quickly come to the conclusion that no such study is possible.

3. Condescending and superior: There are people who naturally, because of empathy, feel bad for the total strangers who have had such pain and violence visited upon them. They are just expressing that feeling.

4. One cannot help but note that while there are two general kinds of response to school shooting: Thoughts & prayers, Ban guns now! NDT did not go after the second type. Why? The second type, in contrast to the first, is claiming an answer to the problem rather than offering empathy. But here is the thing, there is no evidence that posting tweets in the wake of a tragedy has any effect on the law nor that, even if it did, that the new laws would have any positive effect.

But let's get back to the claim about prayer not being able to stop bullets. Did the football coach who shielded kids with his body have a character shaped by religion and prayer? I don't know and neither does Neil deGrasse Tyson. He might not admit it but I will say it: It doesn't take a wildly overactive imagination to consider that it is at least possible.

Ah yes, why does the left love Neil deGrasse Tyson? They say that don't like mansplaining, but when the butt of it is a conservative, well, you know, it is just a tool and is good tool when used for good things.

You should be careful though--the same thing could be said about guns.

My Dad Would Have Been 84 On The 17th Of This Month

My Mom wrote to me and let me know that she wants to honor her late Husband (who is also my late Father) with a mass on the 18th and would like to share some memories.

Of course there are lots of things I remember; Trips to see our grandparents, water skiing, huckleberry picking etc. These were not really personal memories though. After-all, my Dad was not specifically taking me on these trips; it was the whole family and as such, most of my interactions were with siblings and others my age, his were with my Mom and other adults.

There were not that many events which had just the two of us, though surely enough that I don't remember them all.

--One time we went deer hunting up North of Spokane. It was far enough that we flew up in his plane and landed in the hay field of his friend we were staying with. When you go hunting with someone, at least for deer, it does not mean you stroll through the woods together. It was more like: You go to the left and then hook around to the right, I will go to the right and slice to the left. We will meet at the top of the hill and hopefully one or the other of us will drive a deer toward the other of us. And by the way, don't accidentally shoot me! It ended well, my dad killed a nice little buck and we had some together-time dragging it back to the farm house.

--Another event a few years earlier was, I think, unplanned. We lived on Ardmore Drive in Spokane and had some family friends who lived in Brentwood--a development. I must have been 8 or 10 at the time. For some reason, just me and my Dad were stranded there--maybe my Mom had to take the car we all went there in, to run some errand, I really don't remember the circumstances. The upshot was that we decided to hoof-it home. We had a bit of an adventure. He thought it might be shorter to cut through the back of the development to the main road, this cut a lot off of the trip. As we got closer to home, we were in areas I knew from exploring and I guided us to another couple of short-cuts that got us home.

--One last event comes to mind. It was really nothing, but somehow stuck in my memory. I had just learned to tie my shoes but every time I untied them, I got a knot. Not an easy one either--at that age, I did everything with vigor and so when I got a knot in my laces, it was a tight one and very frustrating for someone in the lower single digits age-wise. My Dad happened along and showed me that if you pull both of the ends at once, there is never a knot. At that age, there really are few problems for a kid, he solved all of the problems I had.

"Milk Sandwiches"

Whenever there is any kind of major snow storm, people act like it is the apocalypse and buy-out all the food in the grocery stores. Well, not really all the food; it seems like the only isles which look Cuban or Venezuelan are the milk and bread areas.

Hence the joke about people making milk sandwiches.

But really, what is happening? My theory is not that people are going for the bread and milk as their prime items. Neither keep for very long and so are not best for an emergency. I think it is the deliveries: Stores can keep a long supply of dry goods since they essentially never go bad, so even if the deliveries are delayed, there is plenty in the back. Bread and milk need to be fresh, so there are daily deliveries.

A bit of delay in delivery and empty shelves.

Syncretistic Homer Simpson

There doesn't seem to be a similar constituency in politics: I would love to see most people having the attitude that politics can be the solution to some problems (national defense, protection of liberty and property), but can also be the source of problems.

In Politics, the left believes that government is the solution to all of life's problems and conservatives believe government is the cause of all life's problems.

Obviously, I exaggerate. But not by much.

I have yet to see a problem so small that there isn't a Democrat willing to throw an offender in jail over it.

A Revolutionary Idea

In the news these days is the push to "fix" our "broken" immigration laws. Broken? How so?

Oh yes, I know; there are lots of innocent "dreamers" who were brought to the United States through no fault of their own and so it is unfair to deport them.

Some thoughts:

1. What is the point of changing the law? The current law is not being enforced. So why should anyone trust that a new, more favorable law for immigrants will be enforced either?

2. I reject the focus of the problem being on the "dreamers". Our focus as Americans should be, what is best for the United States?

3. It is not the fault of the United States that such "children" are here. They were brought here illegally by their parents.

4. Does anyone think that allowing this batch of illegal aliens to stay permanently will not encourage other foreigners to come and try to stay too?

5. The United States can benefit from immigrants. But they should be those we invite because they have useful skills. Every uninvited trespasser who is allowed to stay, takes the place of an invited one.

Oprah And Trump -- Similarities And Differences

Ed. Note: I will refer to Oprah Winfrey as Oprah, and Donald Trump as Trump. It is easier than writing first and last names for each and I am using the most commonly recognized name for each.

First, the similarities: Both are largely self-made. More so for Oprah, since Trump inherited vast wealth. He would not be and have been, a nationally known figure for decades had he lived comfortably off of his inheritance though. Both are almost universally known, due to decades-long media exposure.

The most obvious differences are in their public personas: Trump's is brash and confident, Oprah is also confident, but her most (to me) defining characteristics are being likable and comforting.

The whole point of this is to set the stage for a comparison of their political prospects:

A while before the last election, the main push for Trump seemed to come from Democrats. The idea being that he could disrupt the crowded field of Republicans and if he won the nomination, he would surely lose. I never got a good read on what they thought or if they even considered that Trump could win. I have to suspect that he would be quickly labeled as racist, sexist, anti-Semite and dim-witted/insane--because that is how they have labeled every Republican president in my lifetime.

What I see right now from Republicans is the opposite: Oprah seems more likely to win the presidency than any other Democrat out there. And Republicans hope she runs. To us, we would rather have a Republican president; but if we get a Democrat, Oprah would be a better president than any other Democrat who could win.

Major Shift In Luck

I stuffed my hat into the cup holder at the concert...

Wait, what?

Well, there was no drink to put in there. Because $13.50 is crazy for a beer and I would rather do without. Kind of; I would feel like not buying one, but would cave and get one anyway. Except, my wife and I are observing Dryuary. January, no alcohol. So the cup holder could serve to hold my vintage Bula jester hat.

I know, it looks stupid. But, I have never had a hat as warm, or as comfortable. I feel stupid now: I almost didn't buy it, because of the stupid thing. Now I wish I had bought one in every color they had. Bygones. Like 25 years ago and no longer made, bygones.

The concert ended (The Killers and it was amazing!), the lights came up and no hat! It wasn't on the floor either. We eventually found it about 6 feet away. All the lucky bastards, not doing Dryuary and so making multiple trips for more beer, had dragged it out of the cup holder and a fair distance away.

We were waiting for our daughter and friends to come up, from their standing area on the floor, to our seats and I spied a woman's clutch under a nearby seat. I locked eyes with an usher who was working his way through that section, as to say, "here is something you should collect. He went over to it and it was a concert T shirt. We communicated wordlessly, "It would be pointless to put something which is just like a thousand others sold tonight into the lost and found, right"?

He said, "Want a shirt"?

Sure!

From losing my irreplaceable hat to getting a shirt that sells for $40 for free!

The Stakes Are Low, The Lowest

There is a place on the way to work where two exit lanes merge into one lane on the ramp and then widen back to two after the ramp. The standard behavior, for 90% of the drivers, is that the cars weave together--one from the left, one from the right, one from the left, etc. But there is always some guy, it is always a guy, who wants to not let anybody in.

Why?

Chances are, the one car length gained will not matter: The car could end up choosing the same lane you choose when the road re-widens. But even if they choose the same lane, how much time is represented by one car? Quite possibly, none--one lane goes to an exit which widens into 5 turn and go straight lanes, the other goes to a 4-lane highway which is usually wide open. How much time is saved? A second, maybe if you are lucky? For this, you are going to try and bulldoze your way in?

This is on my mind because a guy tried this with me this morning.

Tried.

And failed.

Where Will The Stock Market Stabilize?

People with a PhD in Economics will be able to add a lot of detail, but what does basic Econ 101 tell us about the value of stocks due to the corporate tax reduction?

The old rate was 35% and the new rate will be 21%. If we assume that the value of a corporation is related to net profit* (after taxes), then the old value was 0.65x and the new value will be 0.79x. The change in the stock market should therefore be 0.79/0.65 or 1.215. The stock market should stabilize at 21.5% higher than before the tax cut.

*The idea is that net profit can be either distributed (dividends or stock buy backs) or invested in the business, which would result in greater future profits.

I Can Now Die Happy

Not only did I finally clean and jerk 165 lbs, I got replied to and retweeted by the legendary James Taranto!

Romney lost to Obama and Hillary also lost to Obama. https://t.co/GMDEmXI9C7

— James Taranto (@jamestaranto) January 2, 2018