Actually they are mere indulging in their private political prejudices. Law is a body of rules, written down. Moses showed the way. Just ten commandments, chiseled into stone tablets by the hand of God. And law is limited. Ten was the starting number. We have a lot more now. but if it isn't written down, it isn't law.
Judges are supposed to know the law, and apply it to the specific case before them. And there is always room for interpretation. Even "Thou shalt not kill" (from KJV) has been interpreted to read "Thou shalt not commit murder." a much narrower reading. It's up to judges to look at the law, look at the facts of the case, and render a judgement, using pure reasoning.
When this is happening, a majority of judges (or for that matter a majority of reasonable men) will come to the same judgement in the same case. That is, if they are looking at the law, and reasoning from the facts of the case. If they are judging from personal prejudices, anything can happen.
Since the unfortunate death of Justice Scalia, it has become clear that he eight survivors on the court are judging from personal prejudice rather than from the law. Hence the number of four to four ties. How the eight top lawyers in America can fail to come to a majority opinion is a scandal. These clowns aren't practicing law, they are setting themselves up as kings.
Sunday, July 3, 2016
Saturday, July 2, 2016
Franconia Old Home Day Parade.
By the way, the Blogger people have been messing with the photo uploader again. At least it still uploads although I had to do it twice before it worked.
Friday, July 1, 2016
DEC makes the market, adapts to a changing market, finally fails and dies
Digital Equipment Company moved into the big time when it invented the minicomputer, back in the early 1960's. The legendary PDP 8 wasn't much of a computer, only 12 bits wide, the largest number it could handle was only 4096, not much. And it could only address 4096b words of magnetic core memory, RAM had not been invented yet. But it was a computer, it was small compared to the only other computers available that year, namely mainframes costing in the millions and filling an entire room.
The PDP8 only cost $8000 (1960 dollars) and was smart enough to do a fair number of things. A whole bunch of automatic test sets were built, with a PDP8 built in and running the show. So many were sold that DEC became rich and famous. All looked well until the micro processor came on the scene in the early 1970's. One of my first projects coming out of engineering school was to design a microprocessor board to run a test set. My board had plenty of punch and only cost $200, parts. That pretty much killed the $8000 PDP8 for that role.
DEC recovered, they juiced up their minicomputer and sold it for timesharing. A PDP11-35 could support a couple of dozen timesharing terminals, enough to run a small company. The later PDP11-70 and the VAX were even stronger. And the timesharing rig, with disk drives and mag tapes might cost $100,000. Still cheap compared to a mainframe. This kept DEC going thru the 1980's.
Then the desktop computers appeared. The IBM PCs, and the Compaqs. These sold for $3000 or so, and were every bit as good as the the DEC minicomputers, and they were cheap enough for every engineer to have one for his very own.
And that was the end of DEC. Compaq bought them up, and then HP bought Compaq, and now there is hardly a trace of DEC left.
The PDP8 only cost $8000 (1960 dollars) and was smart enough to do a fair number of things. A whole bunch of automatic test sets were built, with a PDP8 built in and running the show. So many were sold that DEC became rich and famous. All looked well until the micro processor came on the scene in the early 1970's. One of my first projects coming out of engineering school was to design a microprocessor board to run a test set. My board had plenty of punch and only cost $200, parts. That pretty much killed the $8000 PDP8 for that role.
DEC recovered, they juiced up their minicomputer and sold it for timesharing. A PDP11-35 could support a couple of dozen timesharing terminals, enough to run a small company. The later PDP11-70 and the VAX were even stronger. And the timesharing rig, with disk drives and mag tapes might cost $100,000. Still cheap compared to a mainframe. This kept DEC going thru the 1980's.
Then the desktop computers appeared. The IBM PCs, and the Compaqs. These sold for $3000 or so, and were every bit as good as the the DEC minicomputers, and they were cheap enough for every engineer to have one for his very own.
And that was the end of DEC. Compaq bought them up, and then HP bought Compaq, and now there is hardly a trace of DEC left.
Thursday, June 30, 2016
Wall Street Futures Contracts
Gambling? Or shrewd investment? The Wall St futures market is big enough for NPR to report on it. Like Friday, when the Brexit vote was counted and announced, NPR said that Wall St futures had dropped a lot before the market opened. At any rate, a good deal of money is invested in "futures". Does this money do anything to encourage economic growth, employment, new product development, in short, good things for America as a whole, or just some profits to lucky gamblers?
I have never dealt in futures, and a quick Google didn't say just how stock market futures work. Let's assume they work like commodity futures. Two parties reach a deal, sign a contract, to deliver so much of something, or buy so much of something, for such and such a price, on a date in the future. If the market price of what-ever-it-is changes before the due date, one party makes money, and the other party does not.
Does this kind of deal make sense for the larger economy? Hard to tell. Certainly the money spent on futures contracts does not go to a company in return for stock. Companies print and sell their stock, for cash, to obtain money to run the company, grow the company, pay the workers, lots of things that create jobs. And the stock market makes people willing to buy stock. With an organized stock market, open for business five days a week, a stock holder knows he can sell his stock holdings when he needs some cash. And the trade will go thru, and he gets a check, within a day or two. This is a goodness, it gives companies a fine way to raise money.
But I don't see how a stock futures contract does anything good for the economy. It surely doesn't funnel money to companies. I don't see it increasing market liquidity. I think it's just plain gambling, of no benefit to anyone except lucky winners.
I'm not an economist, I'm just a plain engineer. I've never read anything about the economic effect of futures trading. I wonder what the economics community thinks about them.
I have never dealt in futures, and a quick Google didn't say just how stock market futures work. Let's assume they work like commodity futures. Two parties reach a deal, sign a contract, to deliver so much of something, or buy so much of something, for such and such a price, on a date in the future. If the market price of what-ever-it-is changes before the due date, one party makes money, and the other party does not.
Does this kind of deal make sense for the larger economy? Hard to tell. Certainly the money spent on futures contracts does not go to a company in return for stock. Companies print and sell their stock, for cash, to obtain money to run the company, grow the company, pay the workers, lots of things that create jobs. And the stock market makes people willing to buy stock. With an organized stock market, open for business five days a week, a stock holder knows he can sell his stock holdings when he needs some cash. And the trade will go thru, and he gets a check, within a day or two. This is a goodness, it gives companies a fine way to raise money.
But I don't see how a stock futures contract does anything good for the economy. It surely doesn't funnel money to companies. I don't see it increasing market liquidity. I think it's just plain gambling, of no benefit to anyone except lucky winners.
I'm not an economist, I'm just a plain engineer. I've never read anything about the economic effect of futures trading. I wonder what the economics community thinks about them.
Wednesday, June 29, 2016
NAFTA, pro and con
According to Wikipedia (a reasonably impartial source) NAFTA dropped tariffs between the three countries to zip in nearly all cases by now. It took President Bill Clinton's best efforts to get NAFTA ratified over the dead bodies of US unions. NAFTA did increase trade between Mexico, Canada and the US by a lot, perhaps 50% over the years since 1993 when NAFTA was ratified. It also did contribute to US job losses of maybe 500,000 jobs. These numbers can be controversial, but Wikipedia is the most balanced source I am aware of.
We had The Donald on TV yesterday trashing NAFTA up one side and down the other. He promises to "renegotiate" the NAFTA treaty. He claimed that NAFTA is a US job killer. In this, he has, or ought to have, the warm support of US unions who have been anti NAFTA since the beginning.
We had the "three amigos) (Obama, Trudeau, and I can't remember the name of the Mexican president) on TV today. All saying nice things about NAFTA, and the need to keep it going.
Nobody said anything about admitting the UK to NAFTA.
We had The Donald on TV yesterday trashing NAFTA up one side and down the other. He promises to "renegotiate" the NAFTA treaty. He claimed that NAFTA is a US job killer. In this, he has, or ought to have, the warm support of US unions who have been anti NAFTA since the beginning.
We had the "three amigos) (Obama, Trudeau, and I can't remember the name of the Mexican president) on TV today. All saying nice things about NAFTA, and the need to keep it going.
Nobody said anything about admitting the UK to NAFTA.
Tuesday, June 28, 2016
Why we need President Trump
Best reason. If elected, The Donald might actually do something in office rather than just going with the flow. The polls have 70% of the population saying America is on the wrong track. Trump might get us back on the right track. Hillary won't. She is totally owned by Wall St and special interests (who paid $40 odd million for her). She thinks things are just fine, and is promising not to change anything.
Of course, it would be nice to know just what Trump might do in office. So far his campaign promises have been either vague, or improbable. He needs to work on that. At least he isn't owned by any one.
Trump is loyal to the United States and to its people. Hillary is only loyal to Hillary. I really do think The Donald will act in the best interests of the country. He may not always get it right, but he will try. Hillary is more interested in lining her own pockets.
Trump does know something about business in the real world. He has survived, and even prospered in the New York real estate business, a very tough business. He knows how to read a balance sheet, he knows the difference between income and expenses, he knows what it means to meet payroll. I doubt that Hillary even knows how to balance her checkbook.
Trump might even fix the federal income tax. Close every loophole, lower every rate. Hillary won't do that.
Trump won't try and take everyone's guns away. Hillary will.
Trump will sign an Obama care repeal. Hillary won't. Obamacare is such a drag on business that it has sucked our GNP growth down to less than 1%.
Trump will nominate decent Supreme Court justices. Hillary will pack the court with lefties.
Of course, it would be nice to know just what Trump might do in office. So far his campaign promises have been either vague, or improbable. He needs to work on that. At least he isn't owned by any one.
Trump is loyal to the United States and to its people. Hillary is only loyal to Hillary. I really do think The Donald will act in the best interests of the country. He may not always get it right, but he will try. Hillary is more interested in lining her own pockets.
Trump does know something about business in the real world. He has survived, and even prospered in the New York real estate business, a very tough business. He knows how to read a balance sheet, he knows the difference between income and expenses, he knows what it means to meet payroll. I doubt that Hillary even knows how to balance her checkbook.
Trump might even fix the federal income tax. Close every loophole, lower every rate. Hillary won't do that.
Trump won't try and take everyone's guns away. Hillary will.
Trump will sign an Obama care repeal. Hillary won't. Obamacare is such a drag on business that it has sucked our GNP growth down to less than 1%.
Trump will nominate decent Supreme Court justices. Hillary will pack the court with lefties.
Benghazi, more stuff they won't talk about.
I posted about the firing of US general officers shortly after Benghazi. Right here.
Benghazi, what they don't talk about
We have Trey Gowdy on TV right now, and as you might imagine, what he is saying isn't very complementary to Hillary. He is urging everyone to read his 800 page report. Whew.
Trey never talked about air support, or the lack of air support. We should have had fighters over Benghasi within two hours. We have plenty of fighter bases and aircraft carriers in the Mediterranean. They should have had alert birds standing 5 minute alert. That's what my old USAF fighter squadron did 50 years ago. We kept two birds, fully armed and fueled, on five minute alert 24/7. Pilots sitting in the ready room. Occasional scrambles, just to make sure everything works.
I will grant that supersonic fighters are not my first choice for defending a consulate on the ground. But having fighters overhead would be a tremendous morale boost for the defenders on the ground. A low level pass, supersonic, is very discouraging to attackers. Even more discouraging when you do a little strafing on the way. And the fighters can get there faster than anything else.
Along with the fighters, we should have dispatched armed troops by air. Helicopters if they are close enough, fixed wing if not. For fixed wing, the troops parachute in, or the aircraft lands on the closest airport. Surely Benghasi has a city airport. C-130's have been landed on aircraft carriers, which means they can get into any imaginable airfield, no matter how puny.
Finally, Trey Gowdy did not talk about the two US general officers who were relieved of duty that very night. These two officers were canned for preparing to send relief forces to Benghazi.
Trey never talked about air support, or the lack of air support. We should have had fighters over Benghasi within two hours. We have plenty of fighter bases and aircraft carriers in the Mediterranean. They should have had alert birds standing 5 minute alert. That's what my old USAF fighter squadron did 50 years ago. We kept two birds, fully armed and fueled, on five minute alert 24/7. Pilots sitting in the ready room. Occasional scrambles, just to make sure everything works.
I will grant that supersonic fighters are not my first choice for defending a consulate on the ground. But having fighters overhead would be a tremendous morale boost for the defenders on the ground. A low level pass, supersonic, is very discouraging to attackers. Even more discouraging when you do a little strafing on the way. And the fighters can get there faster than anything else.
Along with the fighters, we should have dispatched armed troops by air. Helicopters if they are close enough, fixed wing if not. For fixed wing, the troops parachute in, or the aircraft lands on the closest airport. Surely Benghasi has a city airport. C-130's have been landed on aircraft carriers, which means they can get into any imaginable airfield, no matter how puny.
Finally, Trey Gowdy did not talk about the two US general officers who were relieved of duty that very night. These two officers were canned for preparing to send relief forces to Benghazi.
Monday, June 27, 2016
What's the difference between Brits and Scots?
An election map of the Brexit referendum shows everywhere in England except London, voting Leave, whereas every place in Scotland voted Remain. The dividing line between Scottish Remain and British Leave is very sharp and follows the old border between England and Scotland.
The TV newsies have been yacking about how the Leave voters were all working class blue collar people and the Remain voters were all London financial system operators. Maybe. But why does all of Scotland want to remain, whereas most of England wants to leave? I haven't heard any TV newsies pontificating about that.
The TV newsies have been yacking about how the Leave voters were all working class blue collar people and the Remain voters were all London financial system operators. Maybe. But why does all of Scotland want to remain, whereas most of England wants to leave? I haven't heard any TV newsies pontificating about that.
Sunday, June 26, 2016
The McLaughlin Shouting Hour
There were on for their usual half hour this morning. And not a word was said about Brexit. I guess the show was taped sometime before Friday, when the British referendum results came out. They did talk quite a bit about Venezuela's collapse. The liberal members of the show (most of 'em) tried to explain the Venezuela problem as anything but socialism. Yeah right.
The also talked about NATO's plan to station ONE battalion (1000 men) in Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and Poland. Total 4000 troops. This is nothingness. Four divisions, 40,000 men would be more like it. Hitler launched a hundred divisions in 1941. Then there was some yellow belly talk about how the Baltic states don't really matter and we should not be risking war with Russia over them . I'll admit that war with Russia is a real downer, but letting the Russians take over free and independent countries sticks in my craw.
The also talked about NATO's plan to station ONE battalion (1000 men) in Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and Poland. Total 4000 troops. This is nothingness. Four divisions, 40,000 men would be more like it. Hitler launched a hundred divisions in 1941. Then there was some yellow belly talk about how the Baltic states don't really matter and we should not be risking war with Russia over them . I'll admit that war with Russia is a real downer, but letting the Russians take over free and independent countries sticks in my craw.
Who is Tim Kaine?
I never heard of him. Beat the Press was pushing him as Hillary's VP this morning. They had him on the show. He sounded like a perfectly ordinary middle aged pol from Virginia, nothing outstanding. But he surely has a name recognition problem. I'm a political junkie, and I never heard of him before.
Good luck Tim. You will need more support than just NBC to make it.
Good luck Tim. You will need more support than just NBC to make it.
Saturday, June 25, 2016
Let's Drive ISIS/ISIL/IS off the internet
Radical Islamic Terrorists use the internet for propaganda, radicalizing, recruitment, fund raising, and communication. ISIS/ISIL/IS is the worst of 'em right now, but there are plenty of others. Al Quada, Boko Haram, the Wahabis, and more.
We (the US and it's allies) ought to make a serious effort to drive them off the Internet. Their web sites ought to just disappear, their email should be intercepted, read, and discarded. Like wise their text messages. Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Blogspot pages ought to self destruct. Plus anything else we can detect.
This is censorship, but I submit that censoring murderous terrorists is better than getting shot by them. And more effective than trying to take guns away from law abiding citizens.
We (the US and it's allies) ought to make a serious effort to drive them off the Internet. Their web sites ought to just disappear, their email should be intercepted, read, and discarded. Like wise their text messages. Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Blogspot pages ought to self destruct. Plus anything else we can detect.
This is censorship, but I submit that censoring murderous terrorists is better than getting shot by them. And more effective than trying to take guns away from law abiding citizens.
Friday, June 24, 2016
The Brits did it.
The polls had it close, and it was. The London bookies were wrong, they were quoting 84% to remain. American investors didn't think Brexit would happen, and yesterday they were happily buying stocks on the assumption that Brexit would not happen. Today, with the US market opening in a few minutes, I, and the TV newsies, expect a wave of selling. European markets, already open, have taken a nosedive.
The interesting question, after the first ripples settle out, it what happens to Britain in the long term. Something like 50% to 60% of Britain's exports go to the EU. Right now, or at least yesterday, those exports go duty free. The EU may decide to force Britain to pay full EU tariffs, which will hurt a lot. They may decide other things. There are a couple of countries like Norway and Switzerland that are not EU members, but enjoy tariff free entry to the EU market. I don't see why the EU would cut Britain any favors, but what do I know? The Brits may seek entry to NAFTA, and I have no idea how that would work out.
The EU has it's own troubles, the Euro is shaky, they are still paying off the Greeks, and they have the humongous refugee problem. Britain was the second strongest member (after Germany) and a lot of Europeans will miss the Brits. They served as a counterweight to the Germans, who are the biggest and richest country. With the Brits out, Germany will pretty much run the EU.
Brexit surely hands the whole European unity project a big setback European unity got started right after WWII, with the object of welding Europe together into a single country to prevent another World War from breaking out. It's been on a roll ever since. All of Western Europe joined up, they started up the Euro, and all the Russian satellite countries joined right up as soon as the Russian's iron grip slacked off. What happens next is hard to predict.
What the EU ought to do is tighten up their financial system, tell the dead beat countries like Greece no more handouts. Create bank deposit insurance, and come up with a uniform set of banking regulations to prevent setting up banks in places with no regulations, that proceed to do all sorts of shady deals. And loosen up labor laws, permitting lay offs when business drops off, fewer holidays, less vacation, and a 40 hour work week.
Whether the EU will do this is anybody's guess.
The interesting question, after the first ripples settle out, it what happens to Britain in the long term. Something like 50% to 60% of Britain's exports go to the EU. Right now, or at least yesterday, those exports go duty free. The EU may decide to force Britain to pay full EU tariffs, which will hurt a lot. They may decide other things. There are a couple of countries like Norway and Switzerland that are not EU members, but enjoy tariff free entry to the EU market. I don't see why the EU would cut Britain any favors, but what do I know? The Brits may seek entry to NAFTA, and I have no idea how that would work out.
The EU has it's own troubles, the Euro is shaky, they are still paying off the Greeks, and they have the humongous refugee problem. Britain was the second strongest member (after Germany) and a lot of Europeans will miss the Brits. They served as a counterweight to the Germans, who are the biggest and richest country. With the Brits out, Germany will pretty much run the EU.
Brexit surely hands the whole European unity project a big setback European unity got started right after WWII, with the object of welding Europe together into a single country to prevent another World War from breaking out. It's been on a roll ever since. All of Western Europe joined up, they started up the Euro, and all the Russian satellite countries joined right up as soon as the Russian's iron grip slacked off. What happens next is hard to predict.
What the EU ought to do is tighten up their financial system, tell the dead beat countries like Greece no more handouts. Create bank deposit insurance, and come up with a uniform set of banking regulations to prevent setting up banks in places with no regulations, that proceed to do all sorts of shady deals. And loosen up labor laws, permitting lay offs when business drops off, fewer holidays, less vacation, and a 40 hour work week.
Whether the EU will do this is anybody's guess.
Thursday, June 23, 2016
Words of the Weasel Part 31
"Sexual Assault". The proper, long established word is rape. That's a felony in every state that I am aware of. Rape is forced sexual intercourse. And, it has been a felony for a couple of thousand years. Law enforcement should be called in the event of rape. There are standards of evidence that must be met to secure a rape conviction.
"Sexual Assault" is a new phrase which can mean anything from unwanted touching, to stealing a kiss, up thru rape. College administrators are judging cases of "sexual assault" and universally finding the man guilty, and expelling him from the college, in kangaroo courts, where the accuser is not required to be present, and where the accused is denied a lawyer, and denied a chance to confront his accuser.
By my lights, the entire concept of "sexual assault" should be discarded. In cases of rape, the accuser should go to law enforcement. The college should offer transportation to and from the police station. College administrators are incompetent to deal with rape, and mostly too biased to give a fair hearing, even if they were competent. Rape should always be handled by law enforcement.
"Sexual Assault" is a new phrase which can mean anything from unwanted touching, to stealing a kiss, up thru rape. College administrators are judging cases of "sexual assault" and universally finding the man guilty, and expelling him from the college, in kangaroo courts, where the accuser is not required to be present, and where the accused is denied a lawyer, and denied a chance to confront his accuser.
By my lights, the entire concept of "sexual assault" should be discarded. In cases of rape, the accuser should go to law enforcement. The college should offer transportation to and from the police station. College administrators are incompetent to deal with rape, and mostly too biased to give a fair hearing, even if they were competent. Rape should always be handled by law enforcement.
Wednesday, June 22, 2016
Selling cars with pussy cats
Land Rover is running a TV ad for their Range Rover. Said ad features a large white pussy cat as a sort of mascot/symbol/hood ornament/whatever. Used to be, back in the day, cars that couldn't run strong, were called pussy cats. Guess the Range Rover ad team didn't know this.
Words of the Weasel Part 30
"investigation" or "under investigation" What cops say when they don't want to answer a reporter's questions. Work too. The reporters always back off and drop the subject.
"Investment" Hillary speak meaning "spending".
"Investment" Hillary speak meaning "spending".
Tuesday, June 21, 2016
Is it a two man (two person?) race now?
Not really for The Donald. He has Hillary to trash, Sanders voters to woo, women voters to pacify, his base wanting more red meat speeches, some backstabbing inside his own campaign (Cory Lewandoski and the Republican establishment), and a number of way out campaign promises (get Mexico to pay for the wall, ban Muslim immigration, and others) that will be very hard to make good on. That seems like a pretty full house of troubles needing dealing with.
For real amazement, the newsies are reporting that Hillary has been spending millions on TV ads. The Donald is spending zip on TV. The last poll they showed on TV had The Donald pretty much even with Hillary despite the wide difference in TV ad spending.
Can The Donald pull it off? Or are we doomed to a Hillary presidency?
For real amazement, the newsies are reporting that Hillary has been spending millions on TV ads. The Donald is spending zip on TV. The last poll they showed on TV had The Donald pretty much even with Hillary despite the wide difference in TV ad spending.
Can The Donald pull it off? Or are we doomed to a Hillary presidency?
Monday, June 20, 2016
Do you believe in Evil?
I do. I believe there is evil in the world, and evil people out there doing evil. Many people do not believe in the existence of evil.. Scratch a multi cultural liberal, and you will find someone who believes that all people are good, and evil doers are simply misinformed. Or misunderstood.
Me, I believe that evil exists, and that it is good to oppose evil. The most effective opposition comes from the use of firearms. Certainly in the United States, the availability of firearms deters a lot of crime. The would be robber has to worry about the storekeeper with a handgun in the cash drawer. The would be house breaker has to worry about the homeowner with a shotgun. The would be carjacker has to worry about a piece in the glove compartment. And even the American police are usually quite polite, partly because they know the citizen they offend might be armed, and might do something about it.
And so, I believe in the private ownership of firearms. And I want my firearms to be as deadly as possible, within certain limits. Once firearms are displayed, I want to win the ensuing gunfight. The biggest limit is the prohibition on private ownership of machine guns. This was made law back in Al Capone's time. It seems reasonable, and the law is still on the books and still enforced.
The AR-15 (and lookalikes from SIG Saur and others) has been Army issue since the Viet Nam war. Most guys were trained on this rifle in the service. After they leave the service and go out to buy a deer rifle, they often choose the AR-15 'cause they are familiar with it. It's enough gun for deer, it doesn't kick much. Ammunition is cheap and widely available. There are a LOT of them out there, and taking them away from that many owners would be VERY difficult indeed.
The current Democratic push for more gun control (more ways to take citizen's guns away) leaves me cold. Ordinary citizens ought to have a gun around the house, just in case ISIS come calling, or the house breakers turn up.
Me, I believe that evil exists, and that it is good to oppose evil. The most effective opposition comes from the use of firearms. Certainly in the United States, the availability of firearms deters a lot of crime. The would be robber has to worry about the storekeeper with a handgun in the cash drawer. The would be house breaker has to worry about the homeowner with a shotgun. The would be carjacker has to worry about a piece in the glove compartment. And even the American police are usually quite polite, partly because they know the citizen they offend might be armed, and might do something about it.
And so, I believe in the private ownership of firearms. And I want my firearms to be as deadly as possible, within certain limits. Once firearms are displayed, I want to win the ensuing gunfight. The biggest limit is the prohibition on private ownership of machine guns. This was made law back in Al Capone's time. It seems reasonable, and the law is still on the books and still enforced.
The AR-15 (and lookalikes from SIG Saur and others) has been Army issue since the Viet Nam war. Most guys were trained on this rifle in the service. After they leave the service and go out to buy a deer rifle, they often choose the AR-15 'cause they are familiar with it. It's enough gun for deer, it doesn't kick much. Ammunition is cheap and widely available. There are a LOT of them out there, and taking them away from that many owners would be VERY difficult indeed.
The current Democratic push for more gun control (more ways to take citizen's guns away) leaves me cold. Ordinary citizens ought to have a gun around the house, just in case ISIS come calling, or the house breakers turn up.
Friday, June 17, 2016
What did the founding fathers mean by the word "militia"?
Something different from what we moderns think it means. In the eighteenth century there were two kinds of armed force. Regulars, well drilled, uniformed, paid, and used by the king to suppress his political enemies. And militia, amateur, not uniformed, little training. In a standup fight, regulars could beat militia every single time. But, in colonial America, it was the militia that stood to arms in the event of Indian raids, pirate attacks, French attacks, Spanish attacks, and plain old banditry and cattle rustling. The militia may not have been as effective as regulars, but in roadless heavily wooded America, the militia were there when they were needed. Where as it might take a month for a regular force to march up from barracks and engage the enemy. And, the militia were politically reliable. You didn't have militia out enforcing the king's taxes, the king's press gangs, arresting smugglers and political enemies. Being members of the community, the militia wasn't going to oppress their own community like the way regulars were happy to do.
And so, the founding fathers, setting up a democratic government over a vast territory, decided the militia were the obvious solution to the defense problem. Militia would not become a Praetorian Guard, making and unmaking presidents and Congresses. Militia didn't get paid, a great savings on the public purse. And you could have a really big militia, essentially every able bodied man in the country. Hence the second amendment, "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state...."
The militia principle was effective as late as 1940 when Japanese admiral Yamamoto said " To invade the United States is impossible. There would be a rifleman behind every blade of grass."
And so, the founding fathers, setting up a democratic government over a vast territory, decided the militia were the obvious solution to the defense problem. Militia would not become a Praetorian Guard, making and unmaking presidents and Congresses. Militia didn't get paid, a great savings on the public purse. And you could have a really big militia, essentially every able bodied man in the country. Hence the second amendment, "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state...."
The militia principle was effective as late as 1940 when Japanese admiral Yamamoto said " To invade the United States is impossible. There would be a rifleman behind every blade of grass."
Thursday, June 16, 2016
Finding Neverland 2004
It has a great cast, Johnny Depp, Kate Winslet, Dustin Hoffman. It's set in Edwardian London, sets and costumes are superb. Charming London horse drawn cabs, equally charming turn of the century automobiles. The story is that of J.M. Barrie creating Peter Pan as a stage play on the London stage. Barrie is married, but for the duration of the movie, he neglects his wife, and hangs out with a charming widow and her four boys. All that said, the movie doesn't click.
First off, it suffers from the curse of the soundman, probably as bad as it gets. I could not hear the dialog. The actors whispered, spoke in thick dialect, and mumbled. No names were ever mentioned. I had to check IMDB this morning to learn the widow's stage name.
And it is slow moving. Takes forever to get to the point. Plot is weak. For instance, we never see how Barrie manages to bring such an unconventional play as Peter Pan to the stage. Is he independently wealthy and financed it himself? Is Barrie enormously effective in selling the concept to dubious theater owners and backers, kind of like Peter Jackson in our own time? something else? We never know. The nameless widow, comes down with something, and dies in the last reel. For no good reason I could see.
Too bad. It could have been cool.
First off, it suffers from the curse of the soundman, probably as bad as it gets. I could not hear the dialog. The actors whispered, spoke in thick dialect, and mumbled. No names were ever mentioned. I had to check IMDB this morning to learn the widow's stage name.
And it is slow moving. Takes forever to get to the point. Plot is weak. For instance, we never see how Barrie manages to bring such an unconventional play as Peter Pan to the stage. Is he independently wealthy and financed it himself? Is Barrie enormously effective in selling the concept to dubious theater owners and backers, kind of like Peter Jackson in our own time? something else? We never know. The nameless widow, comes down with something, and dies in the last reel. For no good reason I could see.
Too bad. It could have been cool.
Wednesday, June 15, 2016
Do you want to let the FBI cancel your 2nd Amendment rights?
The Democrats are pushing for it. They are making a fuss in the Senate right now about a bill to prevent gun sales to anyone on the FBI's no-fly list. Scary. The FBI runs the no-fly list. They can put anyone on it, no evidence required. There is no way to get off it. Once on, you are stuck on.
Right now, only conviction by a judge in a real court, with a jury, a defense lawyer, and an appeal process gets you on the cannot-buy-firearms list. The Democrats want to hand that authority down to rank and file FBI agents. I think that's a bad idea. We ought to leave citizen's rights with the courts, not the cops.
Democrats love the idea.
Right now, only conviction by a judge in a real court, with a jury, a defense lawyer, and an appeal process gets you on the cannot-buy-firearms list. The Democrats want to hand that authority down to rank and file FBI agents. I think that's a bad idea. We ought to leave citizen's rights with the courts, not the cops.
Democrats love the idea.
Tuesday, June 14, 2016
More thoughts about Orlando
This horrible event has completely dominated the TV news since Sunday. They don't talk about anything else. Here are some things that are true but the TV newsies don't talk about it much.
1. Two senior American Muslim clerics denounced the killings, in strong terms. That's the first time I have ever heard of that. It is a good thing.
2. The dead all bear Hispanic names, yet the newsies talk about the killer bearing a grudge against gays. From the evidence, the killer might as well have born a grudge against Hispanics.
3. There are no objective differences between "assault rifles" and deer rifles. Objective differences are things you can measure with a ruler. The anti gun people are calling for an "assault rife" ban hoping that all rifles will be declared to be "assault rifles" and thus banned.
4. The FBI interviewed the shooter TWICE and decided that they didn't have enough evidence to charge him with a crime. What should have happened, and did not. The FBI agents should have evaluated the shooter as a violent nutcase, a homicidal maniac. They should have been able to initiate proceedings to confine the shooter to a mental hospital, before he flipped completely out and killed 50 people.
5. The United States has 5000 miles of land border, much of it running thru roadless wildness. Anyone with a pair of decent hiking boots can just walk across the border. Plus we have 4000 miles of seacoast, studded with marinas, boat launches, yacht clubs and docks. Any small boat coming in from the sea is just another yachting or fishing party coming back to port at the end of the day. You can't keep 'em out, you have to find 'em and catch 'em after they get here.
1. Two senior American Muslim clerics denounced the killings, in strong terms. That's the first time I have ever heard of that. It is a good thing.
2. The dead all bear Hispanic names, yet the newsies talk about the killer bearing a grudge against gays. From the evidence, the killer might as well have born a grudge against Hispanics.
3. There are no objective differences between "assault rifles" and deer rifles. Objective differences are things you can measure with a ruler. The anti gun people are calling for an "assault rife" ban hoping that all rifles will be declared to be "assault rifles" and thus banned.
4. The FBI interviewed the shooter TWICE and decided that they didn't have enough evidence to charge him with a crime. What should have happened, and did not. The FBI agents should have evaluated the shooter as a violent nutcase, a homicidal maniac. They should have been able to initiate proceedings to confine the shooter to a mental hospital, before he flipped completely out and killed 50 people.
5. The United States has 5000 miles of land border, much of it running thru roadless wildness. Anyone with a pair of decent hiking boots can just walk across the border. Plus we have 4000 miles of seacoast, studded with marinas, boat launches, yacht clubs and docks. Any small boat coming in from the sea is just another yachting or fishing party coming back to port at the end of the day. You can't keep 'em out, you have to find 'em and catch 'em after they get here.
Sunday, June 12, 2016
Pulse nightclub massacre, Orlando. Nobody shot back.
My deepest sympathies to the victims and their families. Newsies are still not fully up to speed on this one. Question nobody is asking: Howcum in a crowded club, several hundred patrons, nobody was carrying? Just one little pocket pistol might have stopped the bastard before he killed so many.
Saturday, June 11, 2016
Teacher Training
Cover story in the Economist. Their shtick is teacher training this week. We can solve all our education problems with radically more effective teacher training, so says the Economist. Good teachers are not born, they are trained. No discussion of phonics vs whole word method of teaching reading. No discussion of Common Core. No numbers anywhere.
Me, I'm not so sure. To teach public school in the US, you have to suffer thru the education major in college. Four years of meaningless blather. Those who survive and go on to teach, either were highly motivated, or totally dull, to put up with the total boredom of the ed major.
I went thru nine years of public school, three years of a very good prep school and four years of a good college. In this sixteen year educational odyssey I encountered quite a few teachers, most decent, some extra ordinary, and some worthless. Then I went into the Air Force, and took a few classes from the Field Training Detachment (FTD in USAF speak). The instructors in FTD were uniformly excellent, as good as any teacher I'd ever had. These instructors were just ordinary enlisted men, pulled right off the flight line, no college, on their second hitch in the Air Force. And they were good. Their students were all teenage guys, of prime trouble causing age, but they never had any trouble. And the students learned the stuff. They paid attention, did the homework, passed the tests.
What made the FTD instructors so good? First of all, they knew their subject matter, backwards and forwards, standing on their heads and underwater. Then the subject matter was interesting, jet engines, machine shop work, hydraulics, aircraft instruments, guided missiles, radar, autopilot, sheet metal work, avionics and more. For young guys with a day job doing aircraft maintenance, all this stuff was interesting. It really helps the instructor to be teaching something his students care about.
And the instructors were motivated. They knew that the teenagers they were instructing were the future of the Air Force, and they were all career Air Force men, who deeply cared about the Air Force. They gave their best, and it worked.
Bottom line, I don't think good teachers are born or trained. Good teaching happens when the teacher knows his subject thoroughly, and cares about his students. And it really helps to teach subjects that the students care about. .
Me, I'm not so sure. To teach public school in the US, you have to suffer thru the education major in college. Four years of meaningless blather. Those who survive and go on to teach, either were highly motivated, or totally dull, to put up with the total boredom of the ed major.
I went thru nine years of public school, three years of a very good prep school and four years of a good college. In this sixteen year educational odyssey I encountered quite a few teachers, most decent, some extra ordinary, and some worthless. Then I went into the Air Force, and took a few classes from the Field Training Detachment (FTD in USAF speak). The instructors in FTD were uniformly excellent, as good as any teacher I'd ever had. These instructors were just ordinary enlisted men, pulled right off the flight line, no college, on their second hitch in the Air Force. And they were good. Their students were all teenage guys, of prime trouble causing age, but they never had any trouble. And the students learned the stuff. They paid attention, did the homework, passed the tests.
What made the FTD instructors so good? First of all, they knew their subject matter, backwards and forwards, standing on their heads and underwater. Then the subject matter was interesting, jet engines, machine shop work, hydraulics, aircraft instruments, guided missiles, radar, autopilot, sheet metal work, avionics and more. For young guys with a day job doing aircraft maintenance, all this stuff was interesting. It really helps the instructor to be teaching something his students care about.
And the instructors were motivated. They knew that the teenagers they were instructing were the future of the Air Force, and they were all career Air Force men, who deeply cared about the Air Force. They gave their best, and it worked.
Bottom line, I don't think good teachers are born or trained. Good teaching happens when the teacher knows his subject thoroughly, and cares about his students. And it really helps to teach subjects that the students care about. .
Friday, June 10, 2016
House passes Puerto Rico bill.
The Hill, usually a pretty good source, is fairly clueless on this one. They give a good discussion of the back and forth tugging to pass it. Nothing about what's in it. They give one brief quote from Paul Ryan to the effect that there is no taxpayer money going to Puerto Rico, but that's it. I hope that's true. There was talk a few weeks ago, about setting up a special board/commission/bureau in Washington to supervise Puerto Rico's government and it's spending habits. The Hill didn't say anything about that.
Such a bill ought to offer Puerto Rico protection for law suits while a bankruptcy court sorts out the island's finances. Without the customary protection from lawsuits, Puerto Rico and the courts would be swamped as every lender and every supplier, and every union, and every body else sues Puerto Rico for the money they think they are due. You gotta shut all that off to get any where.
Was I the bankruptcy judge, with full powers, I would tell the lenders to suck it up. It's been obvious to anyone for the past 20 years that Puerto Rico had no way, and never would have a way. to repay the loans. For making dumb loans, the lenders deserve to loose. I'd review all the island pensions, and chop them back to barely enough to live on. I'd review the government payroll, I understand that a third of the island's residents are on it, and lay off a lot of 'em. I'd shake up the island's tax collection department and drive them to collect all the taxes owed, by everyone.
Such a bill ought to offer Puerto Rico protection for law suits while a bankruptcy court sorts out the island's finances. Without the customary protection from lawsuits, Puerto Rico and the courts would be swamped as every lender and every supplier, and every union, and every body else sues Puerto Rico for the money they think they are due. You gotta shut all that off to get any where.
Was I the bankruptcy judge, with full powers, I would tell the lenders to suck it up. It's been obvious to anyone for the past 20 years that Puerto Rico had no way, and never would have a way. to repay the loans. For making dumb loans, the lenders deserve to loose. I'd review all the island pensions, and chop them back to barely enough to live on. I'd review the government payroll, I understand that a third of the island's residents are on it, and lay off a lot of 'em. I'd shake up the island's tax collection department and drive them to collect all the taxes owed, by everyone.
Thursday, June 9, 2016
Does it matter if Republican apparatchniks dislike Trump?
TV news this morning is full of serious Republicans saying that they cannot support The Donald. Well, it's understandable. The Republican party establishment, elected officials, party workers, pundits, activists, people whose day job is politics, never liked Trump. They did their best to stop Trump. But the voters do like Trump, they voted for him, and there are a lot more voters than establishment types.
So, does it really matter if the establishment types still don't like Trump and refuse to support him? Trump communicates with the voters thru TV and Twitter, not endorsements from prominent politicians. In fact, Trump's voters are mad at the political establishment for the miserable state of the country, and they tune in to Trump's TV appearances. They don't have any respect for the opinions of politicians, most of whom they call RINO's.
So, does it really matter if the establishment types still don't like Trump and refuse to support him? Trump communicates with the voters thru TV and Twitter, not endorsements from prominent politicians. In fact, Trump's voters are mad at the political establishment for the miserable state of the country, and they tune in to Trump's TV appearances. They don't have any respect for the opinions of politicians, most of whom they call RINO's.
Wednesday, June 8, 2016
Election Results. Nada
Polls closed in California about 11 hours ago. So I'm listening to NPR talking about the results on the clock radio this morning. In an hour, they never mentioned the election results. They had a lot of happy interviews with Hillary people saying how wonderful Hillary's victory was, but never in an hour of NPR talk did I hear any real results, like how many votes cast, how much the winner won by, size of Republican and Democratic turnout. Just an hour of happy talk. So I got up, turned on the TV to Fox, and not much better. I did learn that Hillary beat The Bern by 11% in California, which is solid, but that's it.
So I got in the net. To bad, Fire fox was unable to connect to anything. So, I trudged down to the basement, found my cable modem and my router. Unplugged both for the count of ten. Plugged back in, and voila, internet connectivity was back. So I decided to post on my blog. Next I'll see if we have any election results on the net.
So I got in the net. To bad, Fire fox was unable to connect to anything. So, I trudged down to the basement, found my cable modem and my router. Unplugged both for the count of ten. Plugged back in, and voila, internet connectivity was back. So I decided to post on my blog. Next I'll see if we have any election results on the net.
Tuesday, June 7, 2016
Day After D-Day
I know I am a day late. Success of the D-day landings was crucial to the defeat of Hitler. It was a humungus enterprise, thousands of landing craft, all built just in time, a million soldiers, tanks, floating harbors, fuel pipelines laid across the channel, and a zillion other things cranked out by British and American industry.
It was extremely dangerous. It might have failed. It was so chancy that Eisenhower, the supreme commander, and the man with the best information, penned a press release announcing defeat of the invasion. Fortunately he never had to use it. With a little more luck, and a better German command structure, Rommel might have been able to throw German armor into the battle on the day of the landings instead of a day later.
Defeat would have been a disaster. It took all of 1942 and 1943, and half of 1944 to build up for D-day. After a defeat on the landing beaches, it would have taken at least another year to build up to a second try. Hitler would have been able to move all the troops guarding France against invasion to the Russian front and that surely would have slowed the Red army down, perhaps even defeated it. It would have given Hitler time to bring secret weapons, V1, V2, jet fighters, guppy submarines, even nuclear weapons into action.
It was extremely dangerous. It might have failed. It was so chancy that Eisenhower, the supreme commander, and the man with the best information, penned a press release announcing defeat of the invasion. Fortunately he never had to use it. With a little more luck, and a better German command structure, Rommel might have been able to throw German armor into the battle on the day of the landings instead of a day later.
Defeat would have been a disaster. It took all of 1942 and 1943, and half of 1944 to build up for D-day. After a defeat on the landing beaches, it would have taken at least another year to build up to a second try. Hitler would have been able to move all the troops guarding France against invasion to the Russian front and that surely would have slowed the Red army down, perhaps even defeated it. It would have given Hitler time to bring secret weapons, V1, V2, jet fighters, guppy submarines, even nuclear weapons into action.
Monday, June 6, 2016
Payday loans.
The Diane Reams show was whining about pay day lenders this morning. Lender's are accused of making very high cost short term loans to borrowers who cannot actually pay off the loan off, they just keep rolling it over, at horrible rates of interest, and get skinned.
Elizabeth Warren's Consumer Financial Protection Bureau wants to increase paperwork, and make the lender learn the borrowers income , expenses, and calculate his chances of repaying the loan. Does not sound very effective to me, although it will furnish work for bureaucrats.
They used to have laws against usury, usually defined as loans at 35% per year or worse. The payday lenders are charging more like 350% per year, which is really really bad. Usury laws used to be a business of state law. I understand that the payday lenders have managed to get usury laws repealed, or watered down in many states to allow them to operate. The payday lenders claim that they cannot do business at 35% and allowing the really poverty stricken access to loans is a social good.
I'm thinking that an old fashioned usury law, criminalizing doing loans at more than 35% would clean up the payday lender situation. It would deny credit to people on the bottom, no income, no assets, no job. These people are not good credit risks, and mostly don't have the money to pay off a payday loan. I think it's better for such people to do with out, rather than lend them money that they will be unable to repay.
Elizabeth Warren's Consumer Financial Protection Bureau wants to increase paperwork, and make the lender learn the borrowers income , expenses, and calculate his chances of repaying the loan. Does not sound very effective to me, although it will furnish work for bureaucrats.
They used to have laws against usury, usually defined as loans at 35% per year or worse. The payday lenders are charging more like 350% per year, which is really really bad. Usury laws used to be a business of state law. I understand that the payday lenders have managed to get usury laws repealed, or watered down in many states to allow them to operate. The payday lenders claim that they cannot do business at 35% and allowing the really poverty stricken access to loans is a social good.
I'm thinking that an old fashioned usury law, criminalizing doing loans at more than 35% would clean up the payday lender situation. It would deny credit to people on the bottom, no income, no assets, no job. These people are not good credit risks, and mostly don't have the money to pay off a payday loan. I think it's better for such people to do with out, rather than lend them money that they will be unable to repay.
Fair Point phone book fail.
So I need to renew my drivers license. I know there is or was (haven't checked lately) a DMV office on US 302 in Twin Mountain. Decide to give them a call, just to see if they are still there, and if there is any paperwork I might need to bring.
Open the Fairpoint phone book. Check the Government Offices, State section. No phone number there. Call the Littleton State Police office thinking they might have the number. They didn't, although the officer was very polite on the phone. Check the town of Franconia website, looking for a phone number for Franconia police. No phone numbers on the website. Finally dial 911. Convince the 911 person that it is not an emergeny, I just need a phone number. She finally comes up with a number. I call it. They give me another number, which finally works.
Save your old Verizon phone books, the Fairpoint one is mostly useless.
Or is it the death of phone numbers?
Open the Fairpoint phone book. Check the Government Offices, State section. No phone number there. Call the Littleton State Police office thinking they might have the number. They didn't, although the officer was very polite on the phone. Check the town of Franconia website, looking for a phone number for Franconia police. No phone numbers on the website. Finally dial 911. Convince the 911 person that it is not an emergeny, I just need a phone number. She finally comes up with a number. I call it. They give me another number, which finally works.
Save your old Verizon phone books, the Fairpoint one is mostly useless.
Or is it the death of phone numbers?
Sunday, June 5, 2016
Agencies shall make no law...
Right now federal agencies, IRS, FDA, EPA, FHA, FAA, FCC, FEC, NRC, BATFE, NSA, BLM. et cetera, ad nausium, issue regulations, lots of regulations, all of which have the force of law, and are binding upon us poor citizens. Regulations that can favor one company over another, regulations that tear a man's house down, regulations that can shut a business down arbitrarily, and regulations that make every thing more expensive.
I think we ought to take the power of regulations away from all agencies. The only laws a citizen should have to respect are real laws, passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the president.
Should an agency want to bind the public to something, they can try and get Congress to pass a real law. If perchance, Congress fails to pass the agency's little brain child, then it means it's a bad idea.
And while we are at it, no agency should have it's own private police force, with badges, guns, and the power of arrest. Should an agency want some law enforced, they can jolly well call the regular police, just like us citizens have to do.
In a real democracy, laws are passed by the legislature, not written by bureaucrats in secret.
I think we ought to take the power of regulations away from all agencies. The only laws a citizen should have to respect are real laws, passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the president.
Should an agency want to bind the public to something, they can try and get Congress to pass a real law. If perchance, Congress fails to pass the agency's little brain child, then it means it's a bad idea.
And while we are at it, no agency should have it's own private police force, with badges, guns, and the power of arrest. Should an agency want some law enforced, they can jolly well call the regular police, just like us citizens have to do.
In a real democracy, laws are passed by the legislature, not written by bureaucrats in secret.
Trump figures out the media
The Donald figures that the media are Democrats to a man, and out to get him, and elect Hillary. So, rather than the usual shtick of trying to placate them, which is what the usual pol does, Trump is trashing them, figuring that it gets him air time, and the media is so hostile now, that good solid trashing won't make things any worse than they already are. Plus the voters like watching the Donald trashing the media.
I predict more solid anti-media words coming toward the media. If Trump gets elected, he will have the bully pulpit and at least four years to let 'em have it. Fun fun fun.
I predict more solid anti-media words coming toward the media. If Trump gets elected, he will have the bully pulpit and at least four years to let 'em have it. Fun fun fun.
Saturday, June 4, 2016
SpaceX wants to go to Mars. Year after Next.
SpaceX is creating a manned vehicle to take astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS). Essentially they are adding life support equipment, an air plant, and retro rocket engines to the existing ISS resupply carrier. And doing 50,000 pounds of NASA paperwork to "man rate" the vehicle.
SpaceX wants to send one, unmanned, to Mars in 2018. They have a signed agreement with NASA regardng intellectual property for SpaceX and NASA support for the mission. The vehicle ("Red Dragon") would make a jet landing on Mars, under control of the autopilot. SpaceX has been able to jet land the Falcon booster on a raft in the ocean which seems like a harder job than landing on Mars with it's lesser surface gravity.
"Red Dragon" has impressive engine power. Eight engines, burning nitrogen tetraoxide and hydrazine, produce 33,000 pounds of thrust, call it 16 tons of thrust. The vehicle only weights 15 tons on earth. If the fuel holds out, it has plenty of thrust to slow down and even hover briefly before touchdown.
Takeoff will be atop a Falcon Heavy booster which is three Falcon Nine boosters, strapped together. That will be 27 rocket engines, producing 5.1 million pounds of thrust. Design goal is deliver 15 tons to Mars surface. Straight thru, no earth orbit rendezvous.
SpaceX wants to send one, unmanned, to Mars in 2018. They have a signed agreement with NASA regardng intellectual property for SpaceX and NASA support for the mission. The vehicle ("Red Dragon") would make a jet landing on Mars, under control of the autopilot. SpaceX has been able to jet land the Falcon booster on a raft in the ocean which seems like a harder job than landing on Mars with it's lesser surface gravity.
"Red Dragon" has impressive engine power. Eight engines, burning nitrogen tetraoxide and hydrazine, produce 33,000 pounds of thrust, call it 16 tons of thrust. The vehicle only weights 15 tons on earth. If the fuel holds out, it has plenty of thrust to slow down and even hover briefly before touchdown.
Takeoff will be atop a Falcon Heavy booster which is three Falcon Nine boosters, strapped together. That will be 27 rocket engines, producing 5.1 million pounds of thrust. Design goal is deliver 15 tons to Mars surface. Straight thru, no earth orbit rendezvous.
Thursday, June 2, 2016
The Norks and their nukes
The Economist ran a cover story about the need to do something about North Korea's nuclear program. They went on about weakness and craziness in the Kim regime. Like it might be so crazy as to not be deterreable. The Norks have a missile operational today with enough range to hit all of South Korea and all of Japan. They have missiles under development with enough range to hit the western US. They managed to launch a satellite which means they have a missile that can reach anywhere in the world. Might not have the throw weight to loft a nuclear warhead, yet.
The Economist claims that the Bill Clinton administration considered an air strike on the Nork's nuclear facilities, but Clinton backed off,. fearing that it would touch off a second Korean war. I never heard that story before. There has been some talk that the Norks have dug in so deep that even our 15 ton Massive Ordinance Penetrator bomb couldn't take 'em out.
The Economist does acknowledge that non-military ways of pressuring the Norks pretty much don't exist, especially as the Chinese like having the Norks as a buffer state between them and the South Koreans. The Chinese are sending enough food and fuel to North Korea to keep 'em alive. The Chinese fear the Kim regime is shaky, and that any serious pressure might cause it to collapse. The Chinese don't want that to happen, cause the likely result is the South Koreans take over from the Kim regime, giving the Chinese a pushy, industrialized competitor, who is hand in glove with the Americans, right on their border.
Best the Economist can suggest is installing anti missiles, THAAD and Patriot. They compute that such a two layer defense, each layer having a Probability of kill (Pk) of 70% would yield an overall effectiveness of 90%. Not bad, but not very reassuring when you think about how bad just one nuke can be.
Of course Aviation Week doesn't see things quite that way. They have reported that each of the Nork nuclear tests had a yield of about one kiloton of TNT. That's so weak that most people call it a fizzle. So maybe the Nork's don't really have nukes, yet.
The Economist claims that the Bill Clinton administration considered an air strike on the Nork's nuclear facilities, but Clinton backed off,. fearing that it would touch off a second Korean war. I never heard that story before. There has been some talk that the Norks have dug in so deep that even our 15 ton Massive Ordinance Penetrator bomb couldn't take 'em out.
The Economist does acknowledge that non-military ways of pressuring the Norks pretty much don't exist, especially as the Chinese like having the Norks as a buffer state between them and the South Koreans. The Chinese are sending enough food and fuel to North Korea to keep 'em alive. The Chinese fear the Kim regime is shaky, and that any serious pressure might cause it to collapse. The Chinese don't want that to happen, cause the likely result is the South Koreans take over from the Kim regime, giving the Chinese a pushy, industrialized competitor, who is hand in glove with the Americans, right on their border.
Best the Economist can suggest is installing anti missiles, THAAD and Patriot. They compute that such a two layer defense, each layer having a Probability of kill (Pk) of 70% would yield an overall effectiveness of 90%. Not bad, but not very reassuring when you think about how bad just one nuke can be.
Of course Aviation Week doesn't see things quite that way. They have reported that each of the Nork nuclear tests had a yield of about one kiloton of TNT. That's so weak that most people call it a fizzle. So maybe the Nork's don't really have nukes, yet.
Wednesday, June 1, 2016
Snowflakes on NPR
The morning story is from an NPR chick. She had a flat tire, and 5:30 in the morning. Rather than opening her trunk and breaking out the jack and the spare, she started off by finger stroking her smart phone. She found out she was not a member of AAA, and AAA memberships would not be effective for 48 hours. But she did find some obscure web site that offered road service. It took service better than an hour to get there, and only three minutes to change her tire. She closed the piece by raving about clever new websites.
She would have done better just changing her own tire, all by her little snowflake self.
I can remember insisting that my teen age daughter change a tire right in our driveway before I allowed her to drive herself to school.
She would have done better just changing her own tire, all by her little snowflake self.
I can remember insisting that my teen age daughter change a tire right in our driveway before I allowed her to drive herself to school.
Tuesday, May 31, 2016
Sorry about the Gorilla
On the other hand, I know nothing about gorilla's, and I know nothing about the specific gorilla that got shot. I am not going to second guess the zoo personnel who had to deal with the situation. I'm sure the zoo people feel terrible about killing their gorilla, and did every thing they could to avoid it. They clearly did the best they could in a bad situation. And, the life of a four year old boy is more important than the life of a gorilla. I'm glad the boy lives.
A question that the newsies have been too ignorant to ask. . How does a small boy get into an enclosure stout enough to hold an adult gorilla? If the enclosure can keep gorillas in, why did it not keep small boys out?
Something for all parents to consider. Small children think live animals are cute and huggable. In the Disney movies all the animals talk and act like people. There was a time when a wild black bear strolled by my NH house. All the small children playing on my deck dashed down after the poor bear. They wanted to pet it. The bear, seeing what was coming for him, increased his pace smartly and disappeared into heavy woods before the kids got too close. Fortunately that bear did not have any cubs with it, or things might have gotten very ugly.
Parents ought to make sure their children understand that wild animals are dangerous, and should NOT be pursued. Wild animals are safe as long as you keep your distance. I have wild bears strolling about up here all the time. I keep my distance, the bears keep their distance, and we all stay very happy.
A question that the newsies have been too ignorant to ask. . How does a small boy get into an enclosure stout enough to hold an adult gorilla? If the enclosure can keep gorillas in, why did it not keep small boys out?
Something for all parents to consider. Small children think live animals are cute and huggable. In the Disney movies all the animals talk and act like people. There was a time when a wild black bear strolled by my NH house. All the small children playing on my deck dashed down after the poor bear. They wanted to pet it. The bear, seeing what was coming for him, increased his pace smartly and disappeared into heavy woods before the kids got too close. Fortunately that bear did not have any cubs with it, or things might have gotten very ugly.
Parents ought to make sure their children understand that wild animals are dangerous, and should NOT be pursued. Wild animals are safe as long as you keep your distance. I have wild bears strolling about up here all the time. I keep my distance, the bears keep their distance, and we all stay very happy.
Xmen Apocalypse
Spent Memorial Day weekend at youngest son's brand new house. Since it rained Saturday, we went to the movies. This is the newest Xmen flick, just out. It might as well have been titled "Xmen versus the Mummy".
Lotta CGI special effects. Explosions, fires, collisions, Magneto's strange powers destroying whole cities. According to the rather weak plot, an God/Demon/Evil Sorcerer from Egypt of 3600 BC comes to life in fairly modern times and starts doing evil. Never mind that First dynasty Egyptian Old Kingdom didn't get started until about 2900 BC. This is the prequel Xmen, set in the 1970s or 1980's. Whole new cast, all younger. The guy playing a younger Charles Xavier isn't as good in the role as Patrick Stewart was. Nice costumes, the chicks look sharp and sexy, the guys look hunky, mostly. Hugh Jackman gets a brief (5-10 minute on screen) part. He never gets to speak a line, he just kills a bunch of soldiers, and the last we see of him he is dashing off into a snow covered forest, bare foot, and wearing only Bermuda shorts. Does adamantium warm a body as well as make it bulletproof?
Nobody has a line as good as Storm's line in the first Xmen, "Have you ever seen a toad struck by lightning?"
OK for kids, or dyed in the wool Xmen fans, but not as good as the first two Xmen flicks.
Lotta CGI special effects. Explosions, fires, collisions, Magneto's strange powers destroying whole cities. According to the rather weak plot, an God/Demon/Evil Sorcerer from Egypt of 3600 BC comes to life in fairly modern times and starts doing evil. Never mind that First dynasty Egyptian Old Kingdom didn't get started until about 2900 BC. This is the prequel Xmen, set in the 1970s or 1980's. Whole new cast, all younger. The guy playing a younger Charles Xavier isn't as good in the role as Patrick Stewart was. Nice costumes, the chicks look sharp and sexy, the guys look hunky, mostly. Hugh Jackman gets a brief (5-10 minute on screen) part. He never gets to speak a line, he just kills a bunch of soldiers, and the last we see of him he is dashing off into a snow covered forest, bare foot, and wearing only Bermuda shorts. Does adamantium warm a body as well as make it bulletproof?
Nobody has a line as good as Storm's line in the first Xmen, "Have you ever seen a toad struck by lightning?"
OK for kids, or dyed in the wool Xmen fans, but not as good as the first two Xmen flicks.
Friday, May 27, 2016
Nuking Hiroshima was the right thing to do
The Japanese started WWII by attacking Pearl Harbor, in time of peace, without a declaration of war. They sank the Pacific Fleet battle line, which gave them naval supremacy thruout the Pacific, at least by the thinking of 1942. They inflicted several more humiliating defeats upon us and upon the British. They treated our prisoners of war like dirt, many of them died in Japanese captivity.
The Japanese fought hard. Guadalcanal, Saipan, Okinawa, Io Jima, Tarawa. Based upon bitter experience gained on Okinawa and Saipan, we figured invasion of the Home Islands would cost us a million casualties, and the Japanese far more. By 1945 US submarines had blockaded Japan, nothing big enough to be worth a torpedo was getting in or out of the Home Islands. The Air Force had total air superiority, and were fire bombing every city in Japan. Even at this low point, with their backs to the wall, the Japanese refused to negotiate.
Offered a chance to end the war, Truman took it. And it worked. The first nuke on Hiroshima shook 'em up, but not enough to bring them to their senses. The second nuke on Nagasaki finally did the trick. The bitter end generals were pushed out of government, and some rational men took over and ended the war.
The Japanese fought hard. Guadalcanal, Saipan, Okinawa, Io Jima, Tarawa. Based upon bitter experience gained on Okinawa and Saipan, we figured invasion of the Home Islands would cost us a million casualties, and the Japanese far more. By 1945 US submarines had blockaded Japan, nothing big enough to be worth a torpedo was getting in or out of the Home Islands. The Air Force had total air superiority, and were fire bombing every city in Japan. Even at this low point, with their backs to the wall, the Japanese refused to negotiate.
Offered a chance to end the war, Truman took it. And it worked. The first nuke on Hiroshima shook 'em up, but not enough to bring them to their senses. The second nuke on Nagasaki finally did the trick. The bitter end generals were pushed out of government, and some rational men took over and ended the war.
Thursday, May 26, 2016
Horatio Hornblower, The Mutiny
Good flick. Came to me thru Netflix. The Brits started a series of TV movies about Hornblower, starring Ioan Gruffyd, nice young guy, who looks the part and acts the part well. This one is maybe #5 or #6 in the modern series.
Horatio Hornblower is a Royal Navy officer, serving during the Napoleonic wars, invented by author C.S. Forester back in the early 1940's. Forester wrote half a dozen Hornblower tales over the years and they are still in print. The TV movies are all good. Costumes are really good. The naval officers, the petty officers, the seaman, the marines all wear different uniforms, nicely made. I'm not a real expert on period costumes, but they all look right to my eye. Most of the action is filmed at sea, on board ship. The ship[s] are convincing. Makes you think they took the trouble to find or build real sailing warships. Either that or the CGI folks are getting really good. The ships in this modern series are much more convincing that the ship[s] in the old 1950's Hornblower movie with Gregory Peck and Virginia Mayo.
Anyway, it's a good watchable flick, good camera work, good soundtrack. Lots of action, great scenery, excellent plot. The other Hornblower flicks are just as good. And the books are all good reads.
Horatio Hornblower is a Royal Navy officer, serving during the Napoleonic wars, invented by author C.S. Forester back in the early 1940's. Forester wrote half a dozen Hornblower tales over the years and they are still in print. The TV movies are all good. Costumes are really good. The naval officers, the petty officers, the seaman, the marines all wear different uniforms, nicely made. I'm not a real expert on period costumes, but they all look right to my eye. Most of the action is filmed at sea, on board ship. The ship[s] are convincing. Makes you think they took the trouble to find or build real sailing warships. Either that or the CGI folks are getting really good. The ships in this modern series are much more convincing that the ship[s] in the old 1950's Hornblower movie with Gregory Peck and Virginia Mayo.
Anyway, it's a good watchable flick, good camera work, good soundtrack. Lots of action, great scenery, excellent plot. The other Hornblower flicks are just as good. And the books are all good reads.
Wednesday, May 25, 2016
So what is Congress planning for Puerto Rico?
Puerto Rico is broke. They owe $70 billion on loans taken out in the past. Between pensions, welfare, lotta featherbedding, and plain old graft, the Puerto Rico government spends far more than it collects in taxes. They cannot make payments on the loans coming due.
Thru some quirk in the law, Puerto Rico as a US territory, cannot declare bankruptcy the way cities and towns, and possibly states can. The idea in bankruptcy is to prevent everyone and his cousin suing, which is more than anyone can defend against, and have an "impartial" judge divvy up the bankrupt's assets. For companies, the judge usually decides to keep the company going, and avoid laying off all the employees. To this end, the bankruptcy judges usually tells the lenders to just suck it up, cancels the debts, makes some company reforms and sets the company going again.
For places like Detroit and Puerto Rico, the path is less clear. No bank with two brain cells firing is going to loan a nickel to places like that. The unions, the pensioners, and everyone else will die in the trenches before allowing any cost cutting. Which leaves the cash strapped government to make payroll with IOU's.
Mean while, all the big New York banks, who made all the totally foolish loans are down in DC right now lobbying Congress to bail out Puerto Rico, i.e. have taxpayers pay off the loans, so the banks don't have to to confess how stupid they are. The banks are asking for $70 billion in comfort money. That's a lotta money.
There is some kinda Puerto Rico deal going thru Congress right now. Speaker Ryan is pushing it. Nobody knows what's in it.
A Puerto Rico deal should merely make it possible for Puerto Rice to declare bankruptcy and be protected from a zillion lawsuits while they work out the details. The bankruptcy court should have the power to cancel debts, cancel contracts, fire politicians, and raise taxes. It should NOT pay off the lenders. The lenders made stupid loans, anyone could tell Puerto Rico could not pay off the loans, even twenty years ago. For being stuck on stupid, the banks oughta take a $70 billion hit. Maybe it will learn 'em some.
And our noble MSM ought to find out what is going down in DC and clue us in. Perhaps the banks have bought them off?
Thru some quirk in the law, Puerto Rico as a US territory, cannot declare bankruptcy the way cities and towns, and possibly states can. The idea in bankruptcy is to prevent everyone and his cousin suing, which is more than anyone can defend against, and have an "impartial" judge divvy up the bankrupt's assets. For companies, the judge usually decides to keep the company going, and avoid laying off all the employees. To this end, the bankruptcy judges usually tells the lenders to just suck it up, cancels the debts, makes some company reforms and sets the company going again.
For places like Detroit and Puerto Rico, the path is less clear. No bank with two brain cells firing is going to loan a nickel to places like that. The unions, the pensioners, and everyone else will die in the trenches before allowing any cost cutting. Which leaves the cash strapped government to make payroll with IOU's.
Mean while, all the big New York banks, who made all the totally foolish loans are down in DC right now lobbying Congress to bail out Puerto Rico, i.e. have taxpayers pay off the loans, so the banks don't have to to confess how stupid they are. The banks are asking for $70 billion in comfort money. That's a lotta money.
There is some kinda Puerto Rico deal going thru Congress right now. Speaker Ryan is pushing it. Nobody knows what's in it.
A Puerto Rico deal should merely make it possible for Puerto Rice to declare bankruptcy and be protected from a zillion lawsuits while they work out the details. The bankruptcy court should have the power to cancel debts, cancel contracts, fire politicians, and raise taxes. It should NOT pay off the lenders. The lenders made stupid loans, anyone could tell Puerto Rico could not pay off the loans, even twenty years ago. For being stuck on stupid, the banks oughta take a $70 billion hit. Maybe it will learn 'em some.
And our noble MSM ought to find out what is going down in DC and clue us in. Perhaps the banks have bought them off?
Tuesday, May 24, 2016
Let the passengers carry heat. Safer that way.
Things have changed. Back before 9/11 passengers all understood that when hijacked, they should sit tight, don't give the hijackers any trouble, and they will come out of it alright. 9/11 changed all that. Now passengers all understand that if they let the hijackers take control of the aircraft, they will die a fiery death in the crash. Since then, a few "unruly" passengers have been subdued in flight by fellow passengers. In one case a fire axe was used as a pacifier.
If we just let the passengers carry heat, then Abdul the Hijacker has to worry about some little old lady passenger in economy taking a .38 out of her purse and splattering his brains all over the cabin ceiling. And certainly hijackers armed with box cutters aren't going to win over passengers with handguns. And if we say handguns are OK, then TSA can stop hassling passengers over the odd Swiss Army knife in some guy's pocket. And we can drop that stuff about liquid explosives. The liquid explosive is so touchy that Abdul the Hijacker is more likely to have the stuff go off in the taxi on the way to the airport than in flight. Real terrorists use Semtex, a plastic explosive.
If one in twenty passengers carries, then the hijackers will face a fusillade from five to ten armed passengers no matter what flight they try.
And we could solve the long security line problem that TSA is putting us thru. For that matter we could lay off TSA and save our selves a lotta hassle and a lotta money.
All we need for decent security is to X-ray all the checked bags to keep the terrorists from putting a bomb in the baggage compartment. And X-ray the hand luggage as well. We could solve the long line problem overnight.
If we just let the passengers carry heat, then Abdul the Hijacker has to worry about some little old lady passenger in economy taking a .38 out of her purse and splattering his brains all over the cabin ceiling. And certainly hijackers armed with box cutters aren't going to win over passengers with handguns. And if we say handguns are OK, then TSA can stop hassling passengers over the odd Swiss Army knife in some guy's pocket. And we can drop that stuff about liquid explosives. The liquid explosive is so touchy that Abdul the Hijacker is more likely to have the stuff go off in the taxi on the way to the airport than in flight. Real terrorists use Semtex, a plastic explosive.
If one in twenty passengers carries, then the hijackers will face a fusillade from five to ten armed passengers no matter what flight they try.
And we could solve the long security line problem that TSA is putting us thru. For that matter we could lay off TSA and save our selves a lotta hassle and a lotta money.
All we need for decent security is to X-ray all the checked bags to keep the terrorists from putting a bomb in the baggage compartment. And X-ray the hand luggage as well. We could solve the long line problem overnight.
Monday, May 23, 2016
The Donald is rising in the polls
My major objection to The Donald used to be national polls showing him losing to Hillary. Well, that seems to be turning around. This weekend the TV newsies began to cite new polls showing The Donald level, or slightly ahead of Hillary. The lead isn't decisive yet, but compared to where The Donald was a couple of months ago, it's a whole bunch better.
The Republic might be saved yet.
The Republic might be saved yet.
Ergonomic Fail. My Cell Phone
It's extremely small, it's black, which makes it hard to see. Set it down somewhere and you cannot find it. Inoffensive computer casework beige would be easier to see. And I would be happy to have one a tad bigger if it held a bigger battery.
Control of this miniature wonder comes from stroking the touch pad with your finger. The poor thing sports just two real physical buttons. One button is the "wake up" button. Press it and the phone comes to life, touch screen lights up. Press it again and all sorts of weird stuff happens, including missing my incoming call. The other button adjusts the loudness of the ring.
Should phone ring in my shirt pocket, I'm bound to press one or both real buttons while fishing phone out of my pocket. Which means ring loudness randomly changes from max to zero, and the incoming call gets lost.
For my simple needs, the ring loudness might as well be another "app" on the touch screen menus, I'm less likely to screw up the ring settings by just handling the phone. The wake up button ought to be a slide switch, so you cannot press it by accident.
My other gripe, the phone has TWO keypads, a numeric pad like a standard desk phone, and a qwerty keyboard. So, entering a new contact, it asks for contact name. And shows the telephone keypad. It takes four or five finger strikes to find the qwerty keyboard.
This is a lower end Trak Phone, no monthly contract. God help us from the smarter phones.
Control of this miniature wonder comes from stroking the touch pad with your finger. The poor thing sports just two real physical buttons. One button is the "wake up" button. Press it and the phone comes to life, touch screen lights up. Press it again and all sorts of weird stuff happens, including missing my incoming call. The other button adjusts the loudness of the ring.
Should phone ring in my shirt pocket, I'm bound to press one or both real buttons while fishing phone out of my pocket. Which means ring loudness randomly changes from max to zero, and the incoming call gets lost.
For my simple needs, the ring loudness might as well be another "app" on the touch screen menus, I'm less likely to screw up the ring settings by just handling the phone. The wake up button ought to be a slide switch, so you cannot press it by accident.
My other gripe, the phone has TWO keypads, a numeric pad like a standard desk phone, and a qwerty keyboard. So, entering a new contact, it asks for contact name. And shows the telephone keypad. It takes four or five finger strikes to find the qwerty keyboard.
This is a lower end Trak Phone, no monthly contract. God help us from the smarter phones.
Sunday, May 22, 2016
The Curse of the Cameraman
Newly fashionable among Hollywood cameramen, the under exposed shot. In a recent Bond movie (Skyfall) we have a furious hand to hand fight between to black silhouettes. I guessed one was Bond and the other was a Bond villain, but there was no way to tell one fighter from the other. Which makes the whole fight scene pretty meaningless. A recent Marvel comic book movie (Dark Thor) all the scenes are super dark. Ocasionally we can make out the actor's faces in an otherwise black scene, but some times not even that. These aren't the only ones.
This ultra dark fashion makes watching movies a real PITA. It's as bad as the fad for shake-the-camera shots of a few years ago.
And we still have the curse of the soundman out there. You know, the sound man allows the score or the sound effects drown out the dialog.
Hollywood used to get this right, well lit scenes with understandable dialog. But lately directors have been allowing cameramen and soundmen to screw things up.
This ultra dark fashion makes watching movies a real PITA. It's as bad as the fad for shake-the-camera shots of a few years ago.
And we still have the curse of the soundman out there. You know, the sound man allows the score or the sound effects drown out the dialog.
Hollywood used to get this right, well lit scenes with understandable dialog. But lately directors have been allowing cameramen and soundmen to screw things up.
Friday, May 20, 2016
EgyptAir Crash
It's a terrible story. My deepest sympathies to the victims and their families.
The TV newsies have been talking and talking about the story, mostly revealing their total ignorance of aviation. For instance I heard one of the saying the winglets (little upturned fins at the wingtips) were there to improve maneuverability. No way. Winglets reduce the drag caused by the wing tip vortexes. No body talked about the time the vertical stabilizer snapped clean off an Airbus departing New York, causing a crash that killed all on board. At the time, Airbus claimed the failure was caused by the pilot applying too much rudder. The newsies mostly let Airbus get away with this canard years ago. Real aircraft are built strong enough to withstand the force of hard over control surfaces. In an emergency the pilot needs to apply full control forces and not have to worry about the aircraft breaking up in mid air.
Lotta talk about terrorism. It's certainly a valid suspicion. So far there is no evidence (at least on TV) of terrorist action. Evidence like hearing "Take this plane to Mosul" on the cockpit voice recorder. Or flight data recorder showing massive failures all over the plane at once. Or some low life confessing that he put the bomb on the plane. Or intercepted phone or text messages, or email, or snail mail of the low lives gloating about their success. So far we don't even have any terrorist claiming the hit.
I got my suspicions, just like the rest of you, but so far, they are just suspicions. We need to find the wreck and recover the recorders before we know anything.
Also note, EgyptAir is a government of Egypt operation with a mediocre to poor safety record. The Egyptians have plenty of motive to blame the crash on terrorists, as opposed to shoddy maintenance or poorly trained aircrew. It was the Egyptians who first started crying terrorist within hours of the tragedy.
The TV newsies have been talking and talking about the story, mostly revealing their total ignorance of aviation. For instance I heard one of the saying the winglets (little upturned fins at the wingtips) were there to improve maneuverability. No way. Winglets reduce the drag caused by the wing tip vortexes. No body talked about the time the vertical stabilizer snapped clean off an Airbus departing New York, causing a crash that killed all on board. At the time, Airbus claimed the failure was caused by the pilot applying too much rudder. The newsies mostly let Airbus get away with this canard years ago. Real aircraft are built strong enough to withstand the force of hard over control surfaces. In an emergency the pilot needs to apply full control forces and not have to worry about the aircraft breaking up in mid air.
Lotta talk about terrorism. It's certainly a valid suspicion. So far there is no evidence (at least on TV) of terrorist action. Evidence like hearing "Take this plane to Mosul" on the cockpit voice recorder. Or flight data recorder showing massive failures all over the plane at once. Or some low life confessing that he put the bomb on the plane. Or intercepted phone or text messages, or email, or snail mail of the low lives gloating about their success. So far we don't even have any terrorist claiming the hit.
I got my suspicions, just like the rest of you, but so far, they are just suspicions. We need to find the wreck and recover the recorders before we know anything.
Also note, EgyptAir is a government of Egypt operation with a mediocre to poor safety record. The Egyptians have plenty of motive to blame the crash on terrorists, as opposed to shoddy maintenance or poorly trained aircrew. It was the Egyptians who first started crying terrorist within hours of the tragedy.
Thursday, May 19, 2016
NPR ran a story about a four year old being "transgendered"
Was on the FM radio yesterday. I was appalled. How can a four year old know any such thing? Could this be a case of the parents wanted a child of the opposite sex? And rather than having another child, they decided to warp the one they had?
And the pros don't approve either.
And the pros don't approve either.
JFK wanted to send a man to the moon.
Obama wants to send a man to the ladies restroom. Good slam. From Texas.
Wednesday, May 18, 2016
Third Party Presidential runs
In 1860, Democrat John Bell split the Democratic Party into Northern and South wings. He tipped the election to Republican Abraham Lincoln.
In 1912, Republican Teddy Roosevelt ran as the "Bull Moose Party" candidate. He tipped the election to Democrat Woodrow Wilson.
In 1968 Democrat George Wallace ran as a third party. He tipped the election to Republican Richard Nixon.
In 1993 Independent Ross Perot ran as a third party. He tipped the election to Democrat Bill Clinton.
Since the modern party system was created with the establishment of the Republican Party in 1856, these are the four "third party" campaigns that garnered enough votes to get into the history books. Just about every election had third party candidates but mostly they never garnered enough votes to matter. These are the four big third party campaigns that did well enough to matter.
In all four cases, the third party was a split off from either the Democrats (Bell and Wallace) or the Republicans (Roosevelt and Perot). In each case the presence of the third party campaign tipped the election to the other side.
So today we have unhappy Republicans talking up a third party campaign. If they get it off the ground, history says it will tip the election to the other party, Hillary.
I don't want Hillary as president. The Donald would be much better.
In 1912, Republican Teddy Roosevelt ran as the "Bull Moose Party" candidate. He tipped the election to Democrat Woodrow Wilson.
In 1968 Democrat George Wallace ran as a third party. He tipped the election to Republican Richard Nixon.
In 1993 Independent Ross Perot ran as a third party. He tipped the election to Democrat Bill Clinton.
Since the modern party system was created with the establishment of the Republican Party in 1856, these are the four "third party" campaigns that garnered enough votes to get into the history books. Just about every election had third party candidates but mostly they never garnered enough votes to matter. These are the four big third party campaigns that did well enough to matter.
In all four cases, the third party was a split off from either the Democrats (Bell and Wallace) or the Republicans (Roosevelt and Perot). In each case the presence of the third party campaign tipped the election to the other side.
So today we have unhappy Republicans talking up a third party campaign. If they get it off the ground, history says it will tip the election to the other party, Hillary.
I don't want Hillary as president. The Donald would be much better.
Tuesday, May 17, 2016
Supremes cannot decide. Both plaintiffs claim victory
The eight surviving Supremes have lost all ability to discuss issues among themselves. Four of them vote leftie, the other four vote rightie, they cannot reach agreement. In short, the eight top legal beagles of America cannot agree on what the law means. Good work law schools.
In the Little Sisters of the Poor case, where Obama is trying to force a Catholic order of nuns to furnish birth control to their employees, the Supremes just ruled that the case must be reheard in the lower courts.
Both sides, the nuns, and the Obama administration claim victory.
They cannot both be right, Can they?
In the Little Sisters of the Poor case, where Obama is trying to force a Catholic order of nuns to furnish birth control to their employees, the Supremes just ruled that the case must be reheard in the lower courts.
Both sides, the nuns, and the Obama administration claim victory.
They cannot both be right, Can they?
Slanting the news same-same Freedom of the Press
They have been all over Facebook and Zuckerman over the accusation of slanting the "Trending" column by dropping conservative stories. A Congressional hearing is promised.
Not that I approve, I'm conservative too, but the United States has been blessed with slanted news reporting since the founding of the Republic. Look at the New York Times. In the 1930's they supported Soviet communism. "I have seen the future and it works". In the 1950's they supported Fidel Castro, strongly enough to make him dictator of Cuba. In the 1960's they backed North Viet Nam. They published the Pentagon Papers in order to destabilize the Nixon administration. They published a leak from CIA about tapping Osama bin Laden's satellite phone, result, Bin Laden ditched the phone and went back to messengers.
I don't see much difference between want the Times does and what Zuckerman is accused of doing at Facebook.
Not that I approve, I'm conservative too, but the United States has been blessed with slanted news reporting since the founding of the Republic. Look at the New York Times. In the 1930's they supported Soviet communism. "I have seen the future and it works". In the 1950's they supported Fidel Castro, strongly enough to make him dictator of Cuba. In the 1960's they backed North Viet Nam. They published the Pentagon Papers in order to destabilize the Nixon administration. They published a leak from CIA about tapping Osama bin Laden's satellite phone, result, Bin Laden ditched the phone and went back to messengers.
I don't see much difference between want the Times does and what Zuckerman is accused of doing at Facebook.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)