Wednesday, October 29, 2003- - -
Soldiers for the Truth
Cpt. J.M. Heinrichs sends a link to Soldiers for the Truth, a very interesting web site devoted to supporting our troops and critiquing our military's performance. Check it out for the many, many interesting links and commentary. Cpt. Heinrichs also sent a copy of a powerpoint presentation, essentially an after-action report on the M1A Abrams tank in Iraq. It takes awhile to download but it's fascinating stuff.
Incidentally, among the articles I found at SFTT.org is this one by Roger Moore arguing that the military should keep the M14 and deploy at least one per squad. Now the M14 is one of my all-time favorite weapons, But. As SFC Hubert Townsend has pointed out, if you can't shoot a decent group at 100 yards with the M16, forget 500 yards. I'd add, forget any rifle with greater recoil and blast than the M16 too. Issuing the M14 at line squad level would demand a commitment to training with the weapon that we simply don't seem to have.
@7:46 AM
Tuesday, October 28, 2003- - -
Bloodless, Soulless, and Clueless
Former economist and Malaysian advisor Paul Krugman accuses the Prez of "willful ignorance" in not understanding how poorly the war on terror is going. It's a battle for hearts and minds after all. Perhaps Krugman has simply never heard the HS Thompson dictum: Grab them by the balls. Their hearts and minds will follow. I would suggest that the volume of squealing from that rhelm suggests that they are feeling a certain pinch.
Along the way Krugman spends a good portion of his column inches defending his recent comments on that good ol' moderate Islamic leader Mahathir Mohamad, saying that he, Krugman, is not anti-Semitic (he's Jewish after all!), he's just trying to understand 'how others think'. He also characterizes the accusation that he's in Mahathir's pay as smear tactics, but with a Clintonesque flourish he doesn't actually deny it...
Personally, I have a hard time understanding how anyone could characterize Mahathir Mohamad as 'moderate', but then I've given up trying to figure out how Krugman thinks.
@8:07 AM
Bloodless, Soulless, and Clueless
It could stick! U.S. News takes the Deep Space Nine to task for pledging to skip the Florida straw poll.
They've also got a popup from NewsMax touting the latest in the playing card craze: The Deck of Hillary.
@7:13 AM
Richard Cohen, Master of Confabulation
In Today's WaPo, Cohen takes Dick Cheney to task for his 'exaggerations', along with a few unkind words for the rest of the Bush administration. Says he:
Cheney, of course, was not alone. He had Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and Condoleezza Rice on his side. All three, including on occasion Bush himself, made preposterous statements about Iraq's nuclear potential, Rice once saying, "We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud." No, and we don't want the national security adviser saying things that are not true, either.
Hmm… surely Cohen isn't saying that he does want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud? How else could you construe Rice's comment, as quoted by Cohen, to be 'not true'? As for the rest of his diatribe, Cohen is a perfect example of someone who seems almost eager to be set up for a reality check.
@6:29 AM
Illegal growing operation busted
It seems it's illegal to grow more than 15 kg of tobacco in Alberta.
You can grow tobacco in Alberta? Who'd a thunk it.
@5:48 AM
"Evolution is just a theory!"
Fellow archaeologist Brent Slensker takes the Creation Science nutters to task for their ignorance of scientific concepts in a letter to the editor at the Casper Star [scroll down to Ignore truth all you want]. I can certainly understand his frustration. We've been under a full court press to shoehorn Creation Science into the state's classrooms, and 'evolution is just a theory' has been one of their catch phrases, repeated loudly and often in letters to the editor.
I have resisted the urge to respond, as I doubt I'd change anyone's mind on the topic. Still, it is frightfully annoying to read one idiot after another who maintains that a scientific theory is the equivalent of a hunch, or just a commonly held opinion, and that we should be teaching all the competing 'origin theories'. I find this particularly irritating because, of course, they have no intention of including the many Native American 'origin theories', nor African 'origin theories', nor Hindu, Buddhist, Shinto, etc.
@5:34 AM
Monday, October 27, 2003- - -
Another vote for 'sandbaggin'
Back in June I wrote: Perhaps the donks have lost their minds, as the only way this 'where are the WMDs?' hootfest will work out in their favor is if no WMDs can be found. And of course, the release of any information on Iraqi WMDs isn't under their control, that card is in the Prez' hand to play when he sees fit. . . Like just before the election.
Geoff Metcalf at The Tocquevillian fleshes out the argument nicely, arguing that the Donks are in for a last-minute reality check when the Prez puts his cards on the table.
Ps. Incidentally, Geoff Metcalf also has a few words to say about the conflict between ideals and the realities of politics that I wish some Libertarians would take to heart.
PPs. Sigh. I can't believe I haven't blogrolled The Tocquevillian -- anything to save that poor kitty!
@5:25 PM
Sunday, October 26, 2003- - -
Gun control? What gun control?
According to today's WaPo, the Democratic presidential contenders are distancing themselves from the gun control issue. The Dems out here in Wyo got the message awhile back, and have been passing out bumper stickers that say "I'm a gun-totin' Wyoming Democrat." Unfortunately, as I've pointed out, even the Wyo Dems don't seem to be demanding a change to the National Party's platform plank on gun control, they only wish to 'de-emphasize' the issue during elections.
Alan Gottlieb and Dave Workman have an interesting take on the Dims new-found moderation:
Gun owners are not stupid, but Democratic Party leaders apparently think otherwise. The firearms community has been observing this gun policy debate unfolding in the party and on the pages of such anti-gun newspapers like the New York Times and Washington Post for many months, and we have noticed something.
Despite all the talk among ranking Democrat leaders and party strategists about "softening their image" and "toning down the rhetoric," there has not been one mention that the party will change its platform or repudiate its long-standing extremist philosophy. Despite the clever re-packaging of their agenda - from one promoting gun "control" to one that now promotes gun "safety" - it is all too obvious that the leopards have not changed their spots, and their ultimate goals remain the same. Their stalking methods have changed, but gun owners are still on the dinner menu.
Recently, the New York Times and Associated Press quoted Montana Democratic Party Chairman Bob Ream claiming that the party's anti-gun image has been "foisted on us by the NRA and by the Republicans." With all due respect to Mr. Ream, he knows better, and so do gun owners. Republicans and gun rights organizations haven't invented any anti-gun image for Democrats, they have accomplished that all by themselves, on Capitol Hill and in state legislatures across the country.
Republicans did not force Chuck Schumer to brag in 1993, "We're going to hammer guns on the anvil of relentless legislative strategy! We're going to beat guns into submission!"
And you can bet nobody in the gun community told Schumer to announce later that same year, "We're here to tell the NRA their nightmare is true."
Likewise, nobody at the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms ever begged Dianne Feinstein to tell the Associated Press that, "Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe."
Yet Democrats think now they can come back courting firearms owners, begging us to come to the prom or be their dates at a beach party. Well, the shooting community has not forgotten how Ted Kennedy treats his picnic companions.
Gottlieb and Workman certainly seem to have nailed the operational strategy of the Dems. Note from today's WaPo: "The gun issue is the silent killer" of Democrats, said Deborah Barron of Americans for Gun Safety, which is tutoring candidates on the gun issue. "Democrats will be extinct in red states unless" they change how gun owners view their party. Yes indeed. And this illustrates Gottlieb and Workman's thesis perfectly. Americans for Gun Safety is just Handgun Control, Inc. repackaged, and you will notice that there's no suggestion here that the Democratic Party should change, only that they should attempt to change people's perception of them. Cute. But, as Gottlieb and Workman point out, we're not that stupid.
My favorite bit from the WaPo article: Rep. Richard A. Gephardt, a longtime gun control advocate, is careful to highlight his support for law-abiding gun owners. The Missouri Democrat said he is not interested in giving the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives more authority to investigate gun crimes, a top priority for the gun control activist. "They have enough," he said in an interview.
Don't give the BATF more authority? Jeez, that's nice of him. Remember Waco? When they can burn your house down with you in it because they suspect you might have an illegal gun, I'd say they have far too much authority already. Of course, to be fair, they had a bit of help from the FBI.
Funny, I don't find Gephardt's comment very reassuring, nor the Dims latest maneuvers very convincing.
Ps. Don't miss this little tidbit from the WaPo: Former Americans for Gun Safety spokesman Matt Bennett is now the communications director for retired Army Gen. Wesley K. 'It's all about Me' Clark.
@11:21 AM
EEeeeuuuwww!!
Robert Pickton, who operates a pig farm near Port Coquitlam, BC, is being charged with 15 counts of first-degree murder in the disappearance of several alleged prostitutes over the last two decades. Investigators are calling in Dr. David Sweet, a forensic dentist who specializes in collecting trace DNA samples, because 'teeth last so well'.
A quick google didn't answer the key question in this case: Was he feeding them to the pigs? Inquiring ghouls want to know!
@6:53 AM
Saturday, October 25, 2003- - -
Where's the Lone Ranger when you need him?
@9:31 AM
No liberal bias in the press?
Google "Andrew Cuomo" + "lost in time" and see how many of the major media have picked up on former Clinton Housing Secretary Cuomo's critique of the Democratic Party.
According to the NY Post: In a scathing rebuke to his own party, Andrew Cuomo is charging that Democrats are "lost in time," often appear "bloodless, soulless and clueless," and have "fumbled" their role in the post-9/11 world.
What's more, Cuomo is praising President Bush "for recognizing the challenge of 9/11 and rising to it."
Don't hold your breath waiting to see him quoted in the NY Times. A search of their web site for the last 30 days produces no indication that they're aware he exists.
Ps. [24 hours later] It appears that we can add shameless to "bloodless, soulless and clueless." FoxNews joins the NY Post with a brief mention of Cuomo's indictment of the Dims. Stony silence prevails elsewhere. Want to bet that his book would be front page news if it had heaped such scorn on the Republicans? … No, I didn't think you would.
Somehow, I don't think Cuomo's book, Crossroads: The Future of American Politics is going to make the NY Times Best Sellers list, no matter how many copies it sells.
PPs. Hmmm… Publishers Weekly, quoted in the Editorial Reviews at Amazon, makes it clear that Cuomo's book is actually a collection of essays by prominent Dems and Repubs with the general theme of 'bringing the Democratic Party back to prominence'. All the usual bland and empty rhetoric, but given that it contains essays by most of the current Democratic presidential candidates, I'm surprised that it's not being touted by the press. Apparently, no criticism, no matter how well meaning, will be brooked on this topic, another indication of just how far gone the Dims are at this point.
PPPs. SmarterCop weighed in with his comments on Wednesday, and adds a follow-up Thursday that includes a link to this NY Post article, worth perusal just for the picture of Charles Rangel.
Incidentally, SmarterCop is promoting a group fiction blog, worth checking out for all you aspiring fiction writers.
@9:19 AM
Well, no one ever said he was stupid
"I just thought [Rumsfeld's memo] was a candid statement of the facts … I think this is a big, long-term challenge. Whether you agree or disagree with the policy in Iraq, we are where we are, and I take it that almost a hundred percent of Americans believe we have to pursue the action against al Qaeda and any other terrorist cells that are or may in future plan to attack us in the future here in the homeland, and that we ought to be helping our allies to deal with some of the problems in their countries. In that sense, it was candid." Former President Bill Clinton
@9:04 AM
Do these guys read blogs?
The NY Post seems to have figured out what war bloggers have been saying for months. Today they editorialize:
Osama bin Laden - if, in fact, it was him - apparently crawled out of his remote Pakistani cave to do another audiotape for al Jazeera.
[snip]
There is one really interesting element in the taped message: Whoever made it claims that Iraq is al Qaeda's new battlefront.
This is actually good news.
Why?
Because it is obviously far better that Iraq be the battleground for the West and its al Qaeda enemies than New York City and London.
And it's obviously better that al Qaeda's fanatics hurl themselves at America's superbly trained and equipped soldiers and sailors than at civilians.
By Jove, I think they've got it! They say this is "obvious" and I must agree, but that only makes me wonder all the more at the rest of the major media, who don't seem to have figured this out.
@8:42 AM
Plucky Marlins?
Hey! I didn't watch Bullwinkle and Rocky for years without learning that squirrels are described as "plucky."
Ps. My wife says 'only flying squirrels are plucky!' … Whatever.
@8:24 AM
Losing touch with reality
The WaPo editorializes on the infamous Rumsfeld memo: For months, as security conditions have worsened in Afghanistan and as U.S. troops have fought a costly war against a stubborn resistance in Iraq, Mr. Rumsfeld's habit has been to insist in public that "the progress has been quite good," that "it's gotten better every week" and that nothing has happened that has surprised him or was not anticipated in the Pentagon's prewar planning. The stonewalling has cost him much goodwill in Congress, with even Republican committee chairmen chafing over the defense secretary's refusal to talk straight. More seriously, it risks having exactly the opposite effect from what might be intended: Faced with the gap between Mr. Rumsfeld's words and the obvious troubles in Iraq and Afghanistan, much of the public may conclude that the Bush administration has either lost touch with reality or has no clear sense of how to respond to the challenges it faces.
The chief complaint seems to be that Secretary Rumsfeld paints a rosier picture for Congress than he does for his subordinates, which makes me wonder who's losing touch here. How long have these folks been covering politics in Washington? Did they really think that every pol and bureaucrat who stands up in front of Congress paints the gloomiest picture they can of their programs and proposals? Could they really be that naïve?
If these guys had been around when Roosevelt made his "All we have to fear is fear itself" speech, would they have complained that he overlooked the threat from the Axis?
@8:15 AM
Change the Civil Service Laws?
This will have the Colorado Public Employees Union's panties in a wad.
@7:24 AM
Friday, October 24, 2003- - -
How did they know?
I get the damnedest catalogs. In this one, aimed at military and law enforcement, and the Walter Mitties of the world, are some marginally humorous T-shirts, including this timely takeoff on the classic: Kill 'em all! Let Allah sort 'em out!
My favorite: 9 Out of The 10 Voices in My Head Told Me To Stay Home and Clean My Guns Today. I should buy one of those for the next time my NYC SIL comes to visit, but I'd only be confirming her suspicions.
@3:48 PM
Things that make you go Hmm…
Cathy Young at Reason Online compares "… the reaction, left and right, to the allegations of sexual misconduct against Clinton and against California Governor-elect Arnold Schwarzenegger." She argues, correctly I think, that there are double standards at work on both sides of the argument, but seems to forget one crucial difference: faced with the accusation, Clinton perjured himself, Arnold apologized.
Personally, I find it easier to accept the apology than the perjury.
@12:08 PM
CIA-Leak Scapegoat Still At large
How could I resist that headline?
@11:44 AM
But I will miss all my friends
Via Drudge, a poll by the Barna Research Group says "Most Americans do not expect to experience hell first-hand: just one-half of 1% expect to go to Hell upon their death." Of course I'll go to heaven...
@11:18 AM
Tall Tales
I spent last weekend plus a bit (Friday 'til Monday) up in the Bighorns hunting muleys, staying first with Cal in his tipi at the upper crossing of Leigh Creek, and then moving into Sperry's cabin when Cal had to leave to return to work. It's tough duty either way, but martyr that I am, I'll gladly take it on. And it is tough duty, a few days of that scenery and I feel like moving to Gary, Indiana, to rest my eyes.
With all the hunters tearing up and down the roads since the 15th and the opening of the elk and deer gun seasons, I figured my best bet was to bring a brush gun and search the deepest, darkest woods I could find, so I filled the Guide Gun with Cast Performance' rendition of Lead Bullet Technology's 405 gr. Wide Long Nose Gas Checks loaded over 41 gr. Of H4198. This is a suggested starting load for 'modern rifles' in the .45-70, but the Marlin shoots it well and another 100 fps isn't going to make this stubby carbine into a cross-canyon shooter.
I've fitted the Guide Gun with a Williams Foolproof receiver sight, an Ashley post front sight with vertical white line insert, and a Marble's folding leaf rear sight to fill the rear sight dovetail slot, and copied this setup on my Mountie, the better to practice my levergun handling. I've used a front post/receiver rear sight combo for years and like them for speedy sighting, but I've occasionally had problems seeing the black front post in poor light, so I'd decided to try the white line front post this year and I have to say this is one of the best little innovations that's come along lately. You get a good clean, square post in good light that fades into a bright white line that really jumps out at you in low light, very handy for the places I've been hunting the last few weeks. It really, really works well and for less than $20 bucks the cost is negligible compared to many of the other trick low-light sights that are available.
I've tramped over the countryside all around Leigh Creek for several years now and thought I was pretty familiar with the country, but this last week I found something that even Cal, who'd grown up hunting that area, didn't know existed. There is a "sink" at the lower crossing on Leigh Creek! The best known sink, at least around here, is in Sinks Canyon just west of Lander, Wyo. These are a fascinating phenomenon where a stream 'sinks' into the ground and then re-emerges down-stream. The sink on Leigh Creek occurs where the stream crosses a bed of gravel and boulders and slowly turns from a brook to a trickle, finally swirling around the base of a large rock and disappearing into the ground about ¼-mile upstream from the lower crossing. Then about a couple hundred yards below the crossing the stream comes flowing out from under a low rock face and continues merrily on its way. It's obvious from the well-flushed stream channel between these two points that the stream only completely disappears during low water, probably why Cal had never seen it (and I've been down there before and seen water in that channel every time, too). It's also way down in deep, dark Leigh Canyon, a steep scramble that folks don't make too often.
I've still to see a single legal deer in that area, but I know they've got to be there somewhere, so I think I'll see what Cal is up to this weekend. After all, he hasn't seen the sinks!
@9:51 AM
Thursday, October 23, 2003- - -
Gone fishin'
David Bernstein, Juan Non-Volokh, and Jacob Levy at the Volokh Conspiracy have been having an interesting discussion of the Darwin Fish -- 'is it offensive?' -- pro and con. Having admitted to asking myself "What Would Machiavelli Do?" and being the proud owner of not one but two Darwin Fish, I think it's pretty obvious which side of the argument I'll come down on.
I don't intend my Darwin Fish to mock Christians in general, but I do very much intend to mock those who would suppress modern scientific thought in favor of teaching the less than perfect understanding of the natural world expressed by fishermen and sheepherders two thousand years ago. It might be more revealing of my opinion of that later group that I've never put a Darwin Fish on my vehicle for fear of vandalism. Such humor would be lost on that largely humorless group.
I suppose what I find most interesting about the discussion at the Volokhs is the underlying discussion of what is and is not offensive. I find it interesting that David Bernstein finds some of these fish offensive, while I find all of them quite amusing.
Of course, I'd argue that asking "What Would Nixon Do?" is entirely over the top! If I were ever to get a tattoo I'd have to get two: Nixon on one shoulder and G. Gordon Liddy on the other. You'd have to read Liddy's autobiography Will to understand that choice.
Ps. I was just watching the Oilers and the 'lanche when I caught an interesting commercial from Subway: What Would Jared Do? My wife says 'no, they couldn't have meant that as a take off on the WWJD meme' but I find I'm not the only one who thinks otherwise. Now I think it's funny, but I've got to wonder if Subway didn't just lose a certain small and humorless segment of their customer base.
@5:41 PM
It's not what we find, it's what we find out
Here's a strange and twisted little tale. Pothunters have looted a rockshelter just north of here that was being excavated by archaeologists from the U. of Wyo. That happens occasionally and it can be a dreadful blow to the researchers who have devoted years of their lives to studying the site's contents. They are understandably more than a bit miffed.
However, the story takes a strange twist: The BLM maintains that "… judging from what was left behind and what has previously been discovered at the rockshelter, whatever the looters decided to take has great historical and monetary value. … The value of what the site might have yielded in scientific information is estimated at $4.8 million ..."
These figures are strange for two reasons: First, Wyoming's prehistoric inhabitants were hunters and gatherers who didn't form sedentary villages and rarely used pottery at all. They most certainly didn't manufacture the extraordinary sorts of pottery that can fetch many thousands of dollars on the market. The most monetarily valuable artifacts to be found in Wyoming are projectile points, which are generally only valuable to collectors if they are complete, and then only the very oldest are worth more than a few dollars. In fact, most archaeological excavations in sites such as this yield nothing of any monetary value. This makes the looting of the site doubly tragic, in that it is likely the looters destroyed a portion of the site for nothing. [And to my knowledge all this rockshelter had produced were a few broken projectile points of relatively common types.]
Second, and more significantly, by suggesting that the looters made off with something of great monetary value -- both highly unlikely and enormously speculative -- the BLM can only be encouraging future looters. The reaction I've gotten from most of those I've spoken with since this story broke in the Northern Wyoming Daily News [article not on-line] a couple of days ago has been Say What? What could possibly have been so valuable? Unfortunately, I'm sure there are a few folks out there who don't know any better, and the lure of finding something 'of great monetary value' in a few hours digging shouldn't be discounted. Giving folks inclined to get rich quick schemes an idea on how to get rich by potting archaeological sites would seem contra-productive to the BLM's mission of historic preservation.
To make matters worse, the original article in the Daily News stated that 'artifacts worth $4.8 million had been taken', a figure sure to set the nose pickers to sharpening their shovels. At least the Star Tribune article states that it was 'scientific information worth $4.8 million', although that too seems a gross exaggeration. I would like to know what calculus was employed to place a monetary value on a few bits of esoteric information, which is usually considered to be both monetarily valueless and scientifically invaluable. Placing a monetary value on archaeological data is certainly novel.
Given the problems we already have with looting and vandalism of archaeological and historic sites, exaggerating the monetary value of the artifacts to be had for a bit of illicit digging seems to me the height of irresponsibility. If the BLM wanted to set off a later day archaeological gold rush they may have just gotten their wish.
Ps. HeHe. The spousal unit saved the original Daily News headline: Looters take estimated $4.8 million in artificats from dig site near Shell Yes, you read that right, artificats.
PPs. Rumor has it that these news articles are a badly mangled rendition of the BLM's press release. Funny isn't it that the media can't get the story right even when it's written for them? I'll be waiting for a correction to appear in either paper, but I won't hold my breath.
Supposedly, what the BLM meant was that it would cost $4.8 million for the university archaeologists to excavate a similar volume of the site. Having seen how they've been going at it I can believe that. That's also why a private industry exists for dealing with archaeological and historic properties on federal lands -- even the feds won't pay that kind of money for archaeological investigations. No matter how you look at it the figures given are purely pie-in-the-sky, existing only in the dreams of academics and bureaucrats. As Doc Frison once said of the same bunch: 'they spent $500,000 to prove that the Indians sat around a fire and threw the bones over their shoulders'.
Here's an example of what I mean by 'valueless but invaluable': What would you pay for a dried up human turd? Except for a few produced and autographed by famous 'personalities' I can't imagine they'd sell well on eBay, but if I found an old one I'd be ecstatic. By analyzing the content of the deposit it might be possible to learn a considerable amount about human diet and health that can't even be guessed at from other evidence. Yet, what is it worth to know that the depositor had eaten a porridge of packrat and ricegrass, and that he had head lice? Would that information be worth $10,000? $50,000? How about $500,000? It's fascinating information that's invaluable for our understanding of prehistoric life, but it's ridiculous to place a monetary value on it.
@8:14 AM
Tuesday, October 21, 2003- - -
Down on The Boondocks
The WaPo's official apologist ombudsman explains why The Boondocks comic strip was pulled last week.
@12:15 PM
Friday, October 17, 2003- - -
"Heh"
The InstaPundit asks: Is Dowd too dumb to write a column for the New York Times? Or too dishonest?
Dumb and dishonest, yes, but that only makes her one of the peas in that pod.
@9:10 AM
Off to the hills!
I'm packing my gear and heading back to the Bighorns today, after abandoning the field to the gun hunters for Opening Day, the 15th. By now, I suspect, most will have driven up and down every road and either shot one of the poor little forkies or given up.
Opening Day is a major event hereabouts, with mass participation. The wife and I went to the gym Wednesday and had the place almost entirely to ourselves. Then Thursday and Friday are "Hunting Days" at the local schools -- the schools close for two days so all the kids can go hunting too. Gotta wonder how many schools in those blue states close for hunting season…
Cal and I set up his tipi at the upper crossing on Leigh Creek last weekend, cut wood, hauled water and spent the weekend scouting and working the bugs out of the tipi, and freezing our heinies off. It was quite the weekend. Driving up the mountain we drove into the clouds, and arrived at the upper crossing in fog so thick we could barely see to set up. We had just gotten the tipi set up, installed the liner, and built a small fire when the temperature dropped like a rock and it started to snow. About which time we found that all the 'well seasoned' wood we'd gathered was much too wet to burn properly in a tipi -- it would have been fine in a stove, or in a larger fire, but it was a struggle to keep the fire going without having a blaze that threatened to burn the tipi down. After dinner we simply gave up and turned in.
We woke Saturday morning to a skiff of snow and temperatures barely above 0°F, and had an extended discussion of whose turn it was to get up and light the fire -- it was bloody cold! Finally, I inch-wormed my way over between the wood pile and hearth, sleeping bag and all, and lit our smokey little blaze, about the time that Cal erupted from his bag and dashed outside to lose what remained of his dinner. A 24-hour bug hit him hard and fast, keeping him moaning by the fire for the rest of the morning. Luckily it had passed by noon and he could finally keep some liquid and food down. I found later that this bug has been going around town for the last week, usually just making people pukey for a few hours, but hospitalizing some children and old folks.
Once again I'm reminded how very nocturnal elk are. We saw one beautiful 6 x 6 bull with about a dozen cows and calves, but we laid in bed all night listening to the bulls whistling and cows barking as the herds worked their way through our valley. Come morning all that remained were the tracks of what we estimated to be 100-200 head that had crossed Leigh Creek overnight. It would be great fun to sit on the ridge and watch the migrations through a night vision scope or on a brightly moon-lit night -- except that by the time the elk start to migrate it's too darn cold to want to be out after dark for any reason.
Cal just had to blow his elk bugle to see the reaction from the one bull we did see, and the reaction was interesting. The bull whipped around to look in our direction and then placed himself between us and his harem while herding them off into the timber as fast as he could. What he didn't do was answer the challenge with his own bugle.
I'd suspected a reaction of this sort, as the elk bugle Cal was using is billed as having 'big bull sound' or some such -- it's loud and deep-toned. At least to me it stands to reason that only a very big bull would answer that challenge, while any of the smaller, squeaky bulls would take their harems and run before the 'big boy' could come take their cows away. It's just my conjecture on elk psychology, but I want my elk bugle to be as high and squeaky as possible so every other bull that hears it comes running to see if they can steal my cows. At any rate, whatever Cal said to that bull didn't impress him much.
Scouting up and down Leigh Creek, I was impressed by the number of brookies hanging in all the little pools, but I probably didn't see one much over 6 inches long. I don't know if it's a lack of feed or a too small stream, or both, but I never have seen a fish in Leigh Creek that excited me enough to break out the fly rod.
I did find another dead hawk, which makes four I've found this year, dead for no apparent reason. I'm beginning to wonder whether it might be West Nile, which has hit the raptors here hard.
What I did find all along Leigh Creek canyon was sign of hundreds of elk moving through the timber, staying back in the thickest stuff they can find and very seldom exposing themselves even in the smallest clearing. I've a feeling a person could watch and glass all day and never see them while hundreds wandered by. Of course, you'd hear them bugling and crashing through the timber if you were close enough. And they do crash through the timber -- it sounds like a herd of domestic cattle crashing and blundering through the deadfall, far from the stealthy critters one might suppose.
Sans elk license this year, I'll take my deer license up the mountain and see if I can find a hoary old buck back in that thick timber, which would be about the only place for them to be after three days of every honyack in northern Wyoming cruising the mountain. Wish me luck and, as the Governator would say: 'I'll be back'.
@8:57 AM
Thursday, October 16, 2003- - -
Deaf, Dumb, and Blind?
Steve Den Beste surely nailed it back on July 22nd, when he wrote: Within a year, the argument will no longer be about whether we should have gone in [to Iraq]. It will be about what we should do next. Less than 3 months later, even Nicholas Kristof at least partially fulfills that prediction, saying we should hold our noses and stay the course in Iraq.
Of course, Kristof still argues that we were wrong to go in in the first place. [One is left to wonder if he would argue that we were wrong to stop the torture and mass killings, wrong to open the children's prisons, indeed wrong to put an end to a bloody tyrant. With due apologies to Banks, Jackson, and Hampton, if doing that was wrong, I don't want to be right.]
What puzzles me about Kristof is that he actually visits the places he writes about, whether it's his beloved Yamhill, Oregon, being dragged down the tubes along with the rest of the state after 30 years of sometimes violently opposing any industry that didn't deal in organic tofu, or the ANWR, which he believes to be the last bit of wilderness in all the arctic.
I've suggested, only partly tongue-in-cheek, that Kristof was sleeping while his plane flew him over all those thousands of square miles of wild country on his way to the ANWR, but really, either he's been sleeping for 30 years, or the poor man is deaf, dumb, and blind. Times Watch votes for 'dumb', calling Kristof Baghdad's Useful Idiot, pointing out that he, like CNN's Eason Jordan ".. knew firsthand the nature of Iraq's totalitarian regime."
Indeed, like Krugman, Kristof seems to have trouble with the whole concept of 'truth'. Back in May, in an OpEd titled Why Truth Matters Kristof wrote: Consider the now-disproved claims by President Bush and Colin Powell that Iraq tried to buy uranium from Niger so it could build nuclear weapons. As Seymour Hersh noted in The New Yorker, the claims were based on documents that had been forged so amateurishly that they should never have been taken seriously. Times Watch has already hammered Kristof for his blatant misrepresentation of the Prez' infamous 16 words, pointing out that he fails to mention that his 'retired spooks' are closely associated with wild-eyed leftist Alexander Cockburn. In that article and others, Times Watch has concluded that Kristof's credibility on the whole Iraq issue is highly questionable.
Yes, Mr. Kristof, the truth does matter. Try not to forget it again.
@9:17 AM
Whoo! Whoo!
For the first time in months, I've just succeeded in republishing my entire Blogger archives and everything is available, all the way back to day one! I assure you this is through no effort of mine, so it appears Blogger is getting its act together.
@8:37 AM
Michael Moore expresses hope for democracy
INDIANAPOLIS -- Author, filmmaker and activist Michael Moore told more than 2,100 people at Butler University Monday night that last week's California recall election provided hope President Bush could be defeated.
"Anytime you have an angry mob of voters, that can't be a bad thing," he said. He voiced hope that voters would summon the same kind of anger next year to elect a new president.
Why yes, after the Democrat's stunning win in California I can see why Moore might be optimistic. [If he were spinning any harder the dizzy shit would fall down.]
@8:31 AM
Wednesday, October 15, 2003- - -
My favorite haunts
The Knob Creek Gun Range, just east of West Point, Ky, has made the WSJ!! Sounds like it's still a fun place to spend an afternoon.
@6:43 PM
Hidious Hypocrisy
I've never been a Limbaugh fan -- he's far too much of a blindly partisan party-line ideologue for my taste and I rarely listen to his program. On the other hand, not giving a damn about him one way or the other, I haven't felt compelled to comment on the latest.
Now though, I couldn't let you miss this post by Francis W. Porretto, who raises the question I've wondered: What would ol' Rush have had to say if some other unnamed individual had been caught popping illegal pills? Would he have said 'Oh, the poor guy'? Or would he have screamed 'Off with his head!'? But what if the offender was a prominent right-winger? Would Rush defend him then, or damn him twice for his hypocrisy? We can't know the answer to that of course, but I think we can guess. After all, if there ever were a set of laws that were selectively enforced only on the powerless 'other', the drug laws are it.
It sickens me to see kids jailed for smoking a joint while this prick waltzes over to visit Betty Ford [or wherever he went] -- and let's not forget how the Betty Ford Clinic got its name. Equal treatment under the law should be the absolute standard. The fact that it patently is not is just one more reason to abhor the War on Drugs.
@9:26 AM
Cheap Government Employees?
I just noticed an on-line rendition of a recent editorial from the Red Star-Tribune that's worth a quick Fisk:
Leave our forests to Forest Service employees
In June, the Bush administration ordered nationwide studies to see if private contractors could do the complex work of U.S. Forest Service employees more efficiently and less expensively.
In the five studies of national forests completed so far -- including the Bridger-Teton National Forest -- agency employees have been shown to save the American taxpayer more money than outsourcing their jobs would.
Gosh, what a surprise. Did anyone really think that they'd come back and say 'yep, we're unnecessary, we'll file our resignations immediately'?
The wide array of duties and responsibilities which belong to each Forest Service employee cannot be turned over to the cheapest bidders without jeopardizing our national forests -- and in the long run, the lowest bidders may end up costing the taxpayers more money.
Here, I think, the good folks at the Red Star are correct. Blindly hiring the lowest bidder isn't a good idea in the public or private sector. You're only asking for shoddy work and/or cost overruns. Unfortunately, this is a lesson that government contracting officers seem incapable of learning. They hire the same low-balling asshats over and over, and they get burned over and over. However, I don't see how this is the fault of the honest private contractors. This is the fault of a bureaucracy incapable of learning from its mistakes, and/or too inflexible to change.
Agency records recently released by the National Federation of Federal Employees (NFFE) and Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) show that hiring private contractors to help fight fires in national forests has been a major factor in the high cost of suppressing wildfires. For instance, contract hand crews receive a daily rate of pay that is approximately twice that of the Hot Shots, the agency's best in-house firefighting crews. Outsourcing Forest Service firefighting has been an expensive proposition.
Hmm… Yes, I'm not surprised that contract firefighters cost more by the hour than in-house crews. The contract crews get paid to fight fires. When the fire is out they are gone. The in-house crews get paid to sit at the local malt shop and wait for a fire to break out -- drawing their salaries -- even when there's no fire to fight. The question they should be asking here is: What would it cost to hire all the additional hands they need and pay them to sit around the malt shop waiting for a fire? I suspect it would be a lot more than they pay for the combination of in-house and contract crews they have now.
But the "bottom-line dollar" doesn't get to the central issues involved. Forest Service employees are professionals. In general, working in our national forests isn't just a job to them, it's a commitment to a way of life.
This is a common theme expressed by government employees among themselves: 'We're professionals. We can't be bought. Blah, blah, blah'. Needless to say, this is grossly insulting to all their private sector colleagues and you won't hear this sentiment expressed very often at professional society meetings, for obvious reasons.
For many, a deep concern for the unique values of vegetation, land, water, fish and wildlife brought them into the U.S. Forest Service.
And for many more, the lure of a guaranteed pay check, a 40-hour week, and government benefits and pensions overweighed the attractions of private enterprise. Government jobs attract incompetents because they can't be fired, demoted, or disciplined without great difficulty. I've worked in government jobs and found that, personally, the job security wasn't worth putting up with all the idiots.
In addition to their professional responsibilities, Forest Service employees have collateral duties: law enforcement, firefighting and emergency responses. They have the experience and the training to react swiftly to forest emergencies, including events and situations that put the public and private property at risk.
Forest Service employees form rapid deployment teams when forest fires threaten small communities nearby. Forest fires caught early can be controlled, saving lives, homes and businesses.
Um, yes… This is why they pay those seasonally hired in-house firefighters to sit at the malt shop. They do need someone who can react immediately. But those cross-trained firefighters they draw from their non-firefighter staff? There we're talking full-time staff that commonly pull down $50,000+, plus hazard pay and overtime when they get called out. Those folks are the last resort, way more expensive, I suspect, than contract firefighters.
The American people are having a love affair with their national forests. The number of recreational visitors each year has grown, so that it is estimated that more than 214 million people visited a national forest in 2001.
And your point here is?
While private contractors may be appropriate in many areas of endeavor, it would be best to leave the national forests, a public resource, in the capable hands of agency employees.
Gee, why aren't the good folks at the Red Star complaining about all the private contracts that the feds give out now? Perhaps they aren't aware that there is a whole industry devoted to government contracting, but to pull a Krugman, I might suggest that it's because they don't see it as a problem unless it is dictated by the hated Bush.
@7:19 AM
Tuesday, October 14, 2003- - -
Bill Quick is back!
@2:03 PM
Monday, October 13, 2003- - -
The Royal WEenie
Last Thursday James Taranto wrote:
Bloggers on the Take
In an article on Howard Dean's fund-raising, The Hill, a newspaper that covers Congress, offers the interesting revelation that as part of his effort "to maximize his online fundraising punch," Dean has been "paying 'bloggers' or professional Internet surfers to keep the enthusiasm up on his website."
We're all for free enterprise, but this does point up an advantage of "old media" over bloggers. Professional journalists may have their biases, but those of us who work for big-media outfits are bound by codes of ethics under which taking money in exchange for favorable coverage would be a huge no-no. Many bloggers, of course, genuinely are independent commentators, but there's no easy way of knowing which ones are on the take.
Then Friday Taranto wrote:
Blogger Ed Cone reports that in another item, we misinterpreted a statement in an article in The Hill newspaper that Howard Dean is "paying 'bloggers' or professional Internet surfers to keep the enthusiasm up on his website":
"I also asked Alex Bolton, the staff writer at The Hill who wrote the article, if he meant to imply that any blogger other than those appearing on the Dean campaign weblog is getting paid by the campaign. "No," said Bolton. "I meant people contributing to Dean's own site.""
We would like to point out that this is the most mealy-mouthed retraction -- if it is a retraction -- that we have ever seen.
Oh, and regarding the ethics of journalists. . . Well, see our last post for a fine example of just how self-serving those can be.
@1:24 PM
Thieves' honor
The Washington Post editors seem determined to have their cake and eat it too, today condemning President Bush for being honest in admitting that his administration may not be able to find the Wilson-Plame leakers, while maintaining that reporters are honor bound to protect their sources, even when that protection amounts to concealing knowledge of a crime.
I'm particularly unimpressed.
@10:06 AM
The economics of contraband
Colorado -- One pack of cigarettes now brings about $600 in Colorado's prisons, where smoking is banned, and tobacco smuggling is now the #1 crime among corrections officers. But by god, no one can complain about secondhand smoke!
@9:00 AM
Friday, October 10, 2003- - -
Forget Kyoto
Alex Singleton emails a link to this post on the Adam Smith Institute blog by Dr. Madsen Pirie, that recommends we forget about Kyoto and do something about the twin problems of malaria and bad water in under-developed countries.
I certainly agree that anything that improves the economy and living conditions in third world countries would be a better use of funds than Kyoto. I think it would have the added benefit of actually doing something to improve the world environment as well.
@10:00 AM
Excellent!
That's a particularly painful way to die.
@9:37 AM
The truth is indeed a slippery thing
From today's OpEd, Lessons in Civility, it would appear that Paul Krugman has read Arnold Kling's recent broadside. "Indeed, angry liberals can take some lessons in civility from today's right." Says Krugman. "And liberal pundits who may be tempted to cast personal aspersions can take lessons in courtesy from conservatives like Charles Krauthammer, who last December reminded TV viewers of his previous career as a psychiatrist, then said of Al Gore, "He could use a little help."" [Heheh. Thanks for reminding us of that one.]
My favorite bit: "It's impolite to say that Mr. Bush has damaged our national security with his military adventurism, but it would be dishonest to pretend otherwise." Yes. Don't you see? The evidence for this is right before our eyes, in the form of all the terrorist attacks we've sustained on American soil since September 11th, 2001. Why it's simply unbelievable how much less secure we are now than we were then, isn't it?
Krugman closes: "In the months after 9/11, a shocked nation wanted to believe the best of its leader, and Mr. Bush was treated with reverence. But he abused the trust placed in him, pushing a partisan agenda that has left the nation weakened and divided. Yes, I know that's a rude thing to say. But it's also the truth."
The poor man has become a parody of himself.
Ps. Sigh. Of course, just about the time I conclude that Krugman is entirely off his rocker, I read something like this: Homeland Security Probe Finds Baggage Screeners Were Given Test Answers. I think we are more secure than we were two years ago, but we certainly have a ways to go.
@8:29 AM
Not buying what they have to sell
Some one of the wags out there in the blogosphere has suggested that recalling Davis and electing Schwarzenegger would be worth it just for the horror it would cause in Europe. But we don't have to go all the way to Europe to get a good dose of schadenfreude -- as you've surely noticed, the editorial pages in the US have been in a complete flap since the election.
The recall certainly should be making politicians nervous, but the press should be a bit discomfited as well. After all, their power and prestige is based on people reading them, believing what they say, and acting on that belief. Many in the press have been telling us since day one what a horrible idea the recall is, yet that admonition doesn't appear to have had much effect on the good citizens of California. The voters didn't listen. And it's a short way from not buying their screed to not buying them period.
@7:41 AM
Thursday, October 09, 2003- - -
Whoa Nellie!
Someone firebombed the campaign offices of Sam Katz, who's running for mayor of Philadelphia against incumbent John F. Street. Now it's been discovered that the FBI has bugged the mayor's office. Strange doings in the City of Brotherly Love.
@8:46 AM
The recall has incumbents nervous
Good.
@8:35 AM
I Promised Tall Tales. . .
But I'm not much of a fiction writer -- well, except maybe in my professional publications. The beary scary tale I've just linked below does remind me of a recent run-in we had with the local wildlife. This happened a couple of weeks ago, but I've been busy.
We try to take our mountain bikes out for a ride in the hills at least once a week, and lately we've been exploring the badlands [the good lands and the mediocre lands -- Thanks, Dave Barry] west of town. On one of these rides recently my wife was cruising down a two-track, riding in one of the parallel ruts while I followed maybe 20 yards behind in the other rut. We were coasting down a gentle slope relaxing and enjoying the scenery when I spotted a tell-tale flash of tan and brown in the grass between the ruts just as the spousal unit went tearing by.
Without any conscious thought I slammed on the brakes, which was a good thing. Sherri had gone by the snake too quickly for it to react, but it was wound-up and ready to fight by the time I got there. As our Prairie rattlers go this was a whopper, about 2½-feet long and fat [Yeah, I hear all you Texans laughing, but that really is a big snake for around here.] I don't think he'd actually been run over as he didn't appear to be injured, but he was a bit ticked off.
Oddly enough, although the varmint had a good set of rattles and was shaking them furiously, he wasn't making much noise. I don't have the best ears -- too many years of loud noises improperly muffled -- but the sound of a rattlesnake usually gets through just fine. This one though was different. I could have easily stepped on him before I heard that pathetic little buzz. We didn't try to capture him to examine him more closely and I don't kill snakes unless they present a hazard (moving in under the porch for instance), so I have no idea why his warning was so curiously muted.
We kept our distance, and after a couple of minutes of coiling and buzzing the little fellow decided to make off, crawling down a rodent hole a few feet off the trail and ending our interview.
Lest you think the countryside is crawling with snakes [Eew, sorry], this was actually the first snake we've encountered all summer and it was the biggest snake I've seen in quite a while. But hey, how many bloggers can claim to have seen a rattlesnake ever? Just one more example of the exciting times to be had in Wyo!
@7:58 AM
Some days you eat the bear. . .
But, as these bozos discovered, living on a granola diet doesn't guarantee that the bear won't eat you. Just as in Alaska, we here in Wyo lose a few to the bears every year. But then we host at least 3 million tourists a year -- we can spare a few. What is terribly unfortunate is that when one of these incidents occurs the bear almost invariably dies as well, and we don't have any bears to spare.
@6:52 AM
Raelian Nation
Today's CalgarySun presents the first installment in a five-part series on the Raelians, based on the infiltration of the organization by a pair of Sun reporters. Fascinating stuff.
@6:45 AM
Ouch
From Best of the Web Today:
The Moral Authority of the United Nations
"The UN has told the Canadian government to ban all forms of corporal punishment of youngsters--including even a light slap," reports the CanWest News Service. The Committee on Rights of the Child said Canada, as a signatory to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, is obliged to make spanking illegal. So if you're a Canadian parent and you want to discipline your children without running afoul of the U.N., you may soon have to hire a Palestinian to blow him up.
That seems a bit harsh. How about just hiring a couple of Ba'athists to torture him a little?
@6:41 AM
A direct hit
Via the InstaPundit, Arnold Kling at Tech Central Station levels a quiet and exceedingly well reasoned, but incredibly withering blast at Paul Krugman. I've blogged that at times it seems that Krugman has taken leave of his senses, but I think Kling captures the essence of Krugman's problem much more accurately than I have. It's simply infuriating to read someone who ignores facts and results, in favor of casting aspersions and questioning motives.
In KrugmanWorld results don't seem to matter -- you can have the best possible result, but still be damned if your motives aren't pure. Conversely, if everything you touch turns to crap you're still a cool dude if you meant well. Being firmly results oriented, I find this sort of reasoning bordering on insane, but given the wretched results of the last fifty years' experiment with the social welfare state I suppose I can see why the lefties would prefer to claim the moral high ground while ignoring the unintended consequences of their efforts. [Hey! You're resorting to questioning motives just like Krugman does! -- Ed. Yes, but then I'm not a famous big-time journalist, and I'll happily admit that I'm a crank who shouldn't be taken too seriously.]
I can't wait to read Krugman's response, but I rather expect that Krugman will stay true to form.
Ps. This, I think, is the response from KrugmanWorld, a rhelm that Lewis Carroll would surely have found familiar.
@6:33 AM
Wednesday, October 08, 2003- - -
A more appropriate allusion
There's a lot of buzz this morning about California's new Governator, but what they really seem to need is a Kindergarten Cop.
@9:03 AM
Well, like Duh, dude
Are gasoline and oil changes hidden costs of car ownership? Is the monthly phone bill a hidden cost of owning a phone? Are there no tradeoffs between buying an old cheap car and dumping money into maintenance, as opposed to leasing a new car with a maintenance contract? Only for the terminally naïve. Well, this dolt [or perhaps his editor, he probably didn't write the heading] thinks printer cartridges are a hidden cost of ink-jet printers. Of course the manufacturer will almost give you the printer to lock you into buying their cartridges, but this should come as no great revelation to anyone not born yesterday. He makes a good point that a laser printer is often the cheaper way to go for volume printing, but delivers this as if it were some profound revelation. I suspect that this guy has just bought his first home computer and discovered that the office supply pixies don't deliver to his home.
Hmm… Come to think of it, I've had a lot of employees over the years who seemed to believe in the office supply pixies, considering the number of perfectly good pens and pencils, tape measures, trowels, line levels, and such that I've exhumed from the backdirt pile.
@8:23 AM
The truth hurts
Offended by a story published in the Salt Lake Tribune last week, Wyoming head coach Joe Glenn lashed out at Utah president Bernie Machen during Tuesday's Mountain West Conference teleconference.
"He thinks we have a poor football team and he said it," Glenn said. "I thought he was out of line. I thought (he showed) a lack of class."
Let's see, Ewe Dub won 1 (one), yes one game last year. I suppose that rubbing it in might show a lack of class, but let's be honest, UW has (had? We can only hope.) a lousy football team. Joe Glenn and Phil Dubois might be wise to consider the effect this might have on attendance instead of whining when they don't like the established rules, or when someone points out their obvious shortcomings. That doesn't show much class either.
@7:52 AM
Here's a strange one
A National Weather Service meterologist who seems never to have heard of cloudbursts and flash floods. Granted a cloudburst is a very localized phenomenon and they usually occur out in the middle of nowhere, doing little harm, but cloudbursts causing flash flooding in town are far from unheard of. There was a flash flood on Horse Creek in Rock Springs, Wyo, back in 1987 or 1988 that caused considerable damage, including depositing a dumpy trailer I'd once rented upside down in the bottom of Bitter Creek. My wife and I were caught in a cloudburst that caused extensive flash flooding south of Rock Springs in the late '80s, but did little damage because it was in a rural area. A flash flood damaged the highway just south of Powell, Wyo, in the early '90s. And those are just from personal recollection and observation.
The cloudburst that caused the Kaycee, Wyo, flood struck in the middle of the night, which is unusual, but a cloudburst dumping 4-5 inches of rain in an hour is not at all unheard of, and in the Rocky Mountain west storms are frequently, if not always effected by topography, as described here. I really wonder where this meteorologist came up with the '100-year event dropping 3 inches or less of rain in 24 hours'. I rather suspect that the problem might be one of measurement -- cloudbursts are localized phenomena that rarely fall on a National Weather Service weather station, perhaps making them seem more rare than they are.
@7:34 AM
Freedom of Speech?
I don't quite understand the freedom of speech objections being raised in opposition to the do-not-call registry. I think the commercial telemarketers might have a valid complaint in being singled out for this ban while charities, political organizations and such are not governed by the rule, but this would seem to me to be more of an equal treatment issue than a free speech issue.
As for the freedom of speech of the telemarketers, I'll argue that their freedom of speech does not extend to using my personally owned telephone and the telephone service that I pay for. There are other mechanisms to deny telemarketers access -- is someone with an unlisted number infringing on their freedom of speech? How about someone who does away with a land line entirely, in favor of a cell phone (my cell phone at least seems largely immune to telemarketing)? In demanding their freedom of speech the telemarketers would seem to be saying that their audience should pay for the soapbox they want to stand on. Certainly a good deal for them, but I decline to contribute.
@7:03 AM
Tuesday, October 07, 2003- - -
America's Most Unwanted
I'd wandered over to Newsday from the Drudge Report to read what Mikhail Gorbachev had to say about Iraq -- a twisted little tale -- and I picked up an absolutely Hillaryous pop-up advertising a take-off on the 'Iraqi Most Wanted' card deck: The 52 Most Dangerous Liberals in America playing cards. The strip of pictures across the bottom of the pop-up includes photos of Jane Fonda, Ed Asner, and Rosie O'Donnell. If they had to dig that deep in the slop bucket to find 52 dangerous liberals, we're not doing too bad.
Click on over to Newsday and see if you can pick up this popup. The Hillary photo and quote ("I'm not going to have some reporters pawing through our papers. We are the President.") are priceless.
@8:09 PM
From the circular file
I usually don't pay much attention to spam, deleting it at first glance, but this one was just too funny. A dating service that promises to hook you up with Cheating Wives. No mention of whether you get to meet the husband. . .
@10:22 AM
Oh come on, think positive!
Today's totally unscientific but utterly entertaining CalgarySun on-line poll asks: Do you think Albertans live fun-filled lives of carefree joviality? So far, 73.4% of the party poopers say 'No'.
This strangely contradicts my personal observation that the only more jovial place to be found are the fun-filled halls of Appalachian State, home of the Happy Appy's.
@9:22 AM
God hates lobster-eaters!
The "Reverend" Fred Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas will be inflicting himself on the good people of Casper again this year, and now he's demanding that he be allowed to erect a "God Hates Fags" monument in a Casper public park. I'd often wondered why Phelps came all the way to Wyoming to spout his hate, but it appears that he's not terribly popular back in Topeka, where his fellows are figuring out how to deal with his disgusting antics.
Now another Reverend, who deserves the title, has written an entertaining letter to the editor of the Casper Star [that will hopefully be on-line soon] mocking ol' Fred most brutally. Throwing caution to the wind, I'll reproduce the whole thing here:
Lobster-eaters take heed
Editor:
I understand that my fellow prestigious Kansan, the Rev. "God hates fags" Phelps, wants to build a monument in your park in Casper to warn others from engaging in a "lifestyle" as did Matthew Shepard.
We here at the "Yes, We have no Lobsters, We have no Lobsters Today Foundation," would like to erect a similar monument to those who might be tempted to engage in a shellfish-eating lifestyle. Such is similarly prohibited by Leviticus (Lev. 11:10) and we believe that the Lord, having nothing better to do, has brought upon us a plague, paralytic shellfish poisoning, to teach us the error of our ways and to punish evildoers. Male mussels, on the other hand, just spray their sperm in the water, despite the Bible's warning against Onanism. Their young, "glochidia," are parasitic. Just as homosexuals may transmit hepatitis B between them, mussels may transmit hepatitis A to humans. You could look it up. Case closed.
Let me know when we can commence building and how much the permit fees might be. Would "lobster pink" marble go with the park's color scheme? Or would that clash with Fred's proposed décor?
Rev. Frank Smith, Bluff City, Kansas, Universal Life Church
Ps. Here's a brief article on Fred's most recent foolishness.
@8:57 AM
How apropos
With over 230 students currently enrolled at little UW's Law School, I'm not surprised that law school graduates are exploring 'innovative employment opportunities'. Somehow, making dog food seems strangely appropriate.
@7:52 AM
The hunting is great!
So far, for everyone including the game animals. I did shoot one blue grouse with the trusty Marlin Mountie, just to prove that I was really hunting and not having an affair somewhere, but other than that the game has been scarce and spooky. In a week of glassing I haven't seen a single legal buck deer, and I've only seen a couple of fresh elk tracks. I saw absolutely no fresh bear sign, with only a few rocks turned over that must have happened a year ago given the grass growing in the old depressions. I have seen some sign of lion and coyote activity, but less than I would have expected.
The drought has been tough on the critters large and small. Many of the springs in the south Bighorns are dried up and the rest are down to a trickle, concentrating the animals around the remaining water and making it just too easy for the predators. Luckily most human hunters won't figure this out and a lot of them will be searching dry country for game that isn't there.
Still, fall in the high country is spectacular and there's more to hunting than just killing something, so I consider the season a success -- well mostly. I did manage to dropkick my good 10x50s, now one lens looks straight ahead and the other looks up in the air at a cross-eyed angle. Naturally, I didn't bring a second pair of binoculars so my last couple of days of scouting were pretty limited. Oh, and that rubber armoring? It works great. There isn't a scratch on the outside of the binos.
@7:14 AM
Home from the hills
No, my muse didn't go fishing with Bill Quick, I've been totally preoccupied with a heavy work load, maintaining our broke-dick bicycles, hunting, and scouting for deer and elk. Not necessarily in that order. I've been spending a lot of time up at old Sperry's cabin on the Bighorns -- no TV, no newspaper, no mail and, well shucks, the phone batteries go dead after a few hours so far from the nearest cell tower. Given the state of world affairs, ignorance is indeed bliss, but it doesn't provide much grist for blogging. Sorry about that. I do have a font of tall tales, but most must wait until I've more time at the computer, which hopefully won't happen until hunting season is over, around the middle of January.
I couldn't let you miss this article by Hubert Townsend though. SFC Townsend has been called to active duty as a marksmanship instructor for the Army and after several months on the job his writing seethes with frustration. Says he:
Former Commander-in-Chief Ronald Reagan sure got it right: "The government is like a baby's alimentary canal, with a happy appetite at one end and no responsibility at the other."
And, I would add, no accountability.
Perhaps this is why I must tell you, from sad experience, that the emperor has no clothes. Our Army's marksmanship ability, both reserve and active duty, is truly pathetic, and until there is any command emphasis, my unit's fine work will just continue to be a drop in the bucket.
This appalling situation was recently re-emphasized when we were given the mission of training an "elite" combat unit bound for Afghanistan. We were to train designated marksmen of a combat division to shoot out to 500 yards (the maximum distance of their M4 .223-caliber rifles). We failed, in that if one can't shoot a decent group at 100 yards, don't even think about 500. We spent the three days dealing with just the basic fundamentals. We were also greatly hampered by their outdated policy that forbids soldiers, when shooting prone, to get more stability by placing the magazine on the ground.
I've commented several times on the sorry state of marksmanship and individual weapons training in the Army, but my basis for criticism had been only my 20-year-old experience and occasional anecdotes from younger friends. Sarge Townsend makes it clear that nothing has changed, except perhaps for the worse. Note that he had three days to train elite troops in marksmanship, less training time than kids get at summer camp. Townsend complains that there is always time for 5 am PT and sensitivity training, but never time for marksmanship. This is unfortunate, but it's also understandable -- marksmanship training is expensive. Range facilities are limited and often booked up. If drawing weapons from the armory is a hassle, imagine the hoops required to get ammo and, bottom line, most units aren't fortunate to have a Sergeant Townsend on their staff. Competent instructors are damned hard to find. Still, sending troops into combat who aren't even marginally competent with their individual weapons does indeed seem the height of irresponsibility. Please go read Sarge Townsend, it's an eye-opener.
For those puzzling over the policy against using the extended magazine as a rest, this comes from the days of the M14. With it's front and rear-latching magazine box and greater recoil, allowing the magazine to touch the ground during firing could peen the rear locking block on the mag, causing it to seat lower in the receiver, and causing failures to feed. Recoil against a solid object could also rip the magazine right out of the rifle, and persistently resting the rifle on the magazine could even damage the rifle's magazine retaining mechanism.
With the side-locking mechanism of the M16 and it's much lighter recoil I don't imagine that this is a problem and this policy is an anachronism that should have been changed 30 years ago. Unfortunately, this appears to be another case of going through the motions long after the reasons are forgotten, something the military is particularly good at.
Ps. Douglas Chandler writes:
This training decline has been going on for years. I don't know what to do about it,, maybe get congress to pass a law that you can't become an officer unless you can hit a man sized target at a 200 meters that you'd have to qualify on every six months and mandatory firing of a number of rounds per month? As for cost, why not initial training with .22's or even air rifles? You could even simulate wind drift with a fan for an air rifle.
While I'm dreaming here, why not qualification requirements for Congressmen. If you couldn't hit a man sized target at 100 meters your pay would be reduced until you could. " No Senator Boxer you may not use your bayonet !"
Good points. I wouldn't make that requirement of Sen. Feinstein though -- as anti-gun as she is she reportedly has a CCW, although I suppose that's no guarantee of marksmanship ability.
Back ... could it really be 25 years ago? ... we did do some small arms training with .22 caliber adapters in M16s. It certainly cuts down on the cost of ammo, but that's really only a small part of the problem. The big problem is a lack of truly qualified trainers. Scheduling ranges for National Guard and Army Reserve troops at Ft. Drum NY, I quickly found that most units didn't have anyone who was qualified to run a small arms range, much less actually teach anyone to improve their marksmanship. I was also the Post Safety Officer at the time, which probably explains at least a little of my gray hair.
@6:25 AM
|
|
