Friday, April 28, 2006- - -
Greedy damn fools..
Washington - Congress considered billions of dollars in new taxes on oil companies today, looking for ways to punish the cash-rich industry and soothe growing anger over high gasoline prices.
Senate Republicans also proposed a $100 fuel-cost rebate for millions of taxpayers, and Democrats talked of suspending the 18.4-cent federal gasoline tax for two months to ease Americans' pain at the pump.
[...]
Still, lawmakers scrambled today to put together legislative packages they hoped would - if at times only symbolically - demonstrate their sympathy for the nation's motorists and their willingness to stand up to Big Oil. Boneheads. A $100 fuel-cost rebate? Wow, that will buy me a couple tanks of diesel. And suspending the 18.4 cent gas tax for two months? Geez, Thanks. Both measures would indeed be symbolic, because it's proposed that the revenue lost to the government would be made up by removing some oil-company tax breaks. Instead of taxing the consumers directly these measures would be taxing the consumers indirectly because, sure as I'm born*, the energy companies will pass on any increased cost to us. And billions of dollars in new taxes on oil companies? How will that help cut the cost of gas at the pump?
If Congress suspends the gas tax and makes up for it by increasing taxes on the oil companies, the cost of gas at the pump won't change a nickel. But if they hit the energy companies with billions in new taxes it will be a matter of hours before the price of gas at the pump goes up accordingly. Boy, that'll show those greedy oil companies!
If this happens the oil companies ought to put a sticker on every gas pump telling consumers that the price of gas now includes xx cents per gallon added thanks to Congress' dicking around.
*Some in my family claim that I crawled out from under a rock, but I think they're kidding.
@7:40 AM
Wednesday, April 26, 2006- - -
 Santa never had a workshop like this!
On my way home this Monday I stopped in at Sound to Earth, the nice folks in Logan, Montana who make Weber mandolins and guitars, to pick up a new case for my Weber Beartooth. Mine was made in 1999, only a couple years after they first set up shop, and it came in a "Canadian" case that is more than a little oversized, leaving the instrument rattling around like a pea in a can. While the old case certainly provided excellent protection, the sloppy fit offended my delicate sensibilities, especially after I learned that Sound to Earth now provides their own custom-made, fitted cases.
When I arrived I was greated by Mike Bartow, eminently affable sales manager, who treated me to a tour of the facility. Sound to Earth began business in Belgrade, Montana, but have since moved about 10 miles down the road to Logan and set up shop in an old two-story red brick school house (yes, their address says "Manhattan, Montana" but that's because Logan isn't a wide enough spot in the road to rate its own post office). Their new digs give them plenty of room to spread out and the place has huge windows, allowing in plenty of natural light -- the very best way to do fine woodwork.
And fine woodwork it is! Each instrument startes out being roughed out on one of their three CNC milling machines, but from there it's all careful handwork. Mike walked me through the entire process and gave me a whole new appreciation for their instruments. They work in assembly line fashion, with each person having a specialty. The product of an assembly line is only as good as the poorest workman on the line, and the quality of Weber instruments indicates that every person in that building is a master craftsman.
I even got to sample their wares, picking out a couple of tunes on a brand new custom octave mandolin made with an arched top guitar body. An absolutely choice, one-of-a-kind instrument. I didn't ask what it cost, but I can guess that it's more than this boy can afford. Funny, I seem to have spent quite a bit of time lately playing with things I can't afford. Ah well.
The folks at Sound to Earth should also be commended for making "adaptive reuse" of an old school building that would otherwise most likely sit empty until it mouldered away. They could have thrown up a big, modern steel building, but they chose to save a choice piece of historic architecture. Now all they need is knee britches, shoes with big silver buckles, and pointy red hats with white fur trim.
@6:48 AM
Tuesday, April 25, 2006- - -
 No such thing as too much fun..
But if there were, this would be it. Sunday was sunny but a bit cold and windy, which only made a couple rounds of sporting clays that much more interesting. We drove down to Big Sky Sporting Clays in Polson, Montana and burned up a few boxes of ammo.
Here my sister gets ready to shoot one of the more bizarre stations while the B-I-L looks on. We're standing on a bridge about 30 feet above the bottom of a deep, narrow ravine. Two traps throw a "true pair" (two clay pigeons simultaneously) with one coming from behind flying down the ravine while the other comes from the front flying up the ravine -- okay so far? -- the two pigeons pass each other about ten feet below the bridge we're standing on. That's just plumb difficult. Notice that the shooting position has a railing to keep you from shooting straight down between your feet and giving yourself a nasty limp, or leaning out too far and pitching head first into the ravine.
Several tons o' fun were had by all. If you get the chance try this place out. Van Voast Farms' Big Sky Sporting Clays is a very impressive facility in a gorgeous setting. I was most impressed by the layout of the stations, which were arranged such that you were always shooting away from all the other stations and pathways. Very well and very safely designed. And was it challenging? Well, I managed to break 14 of my first 50 targets and 13 of the next 50, which was about par. It's a game that could easily become very addicting. And, like most addictions, it's also a bit crippling. With another 50 or so non-scored practice shots I figure I fired close to 150 rounds of 12 gauge ammo in a 3-hour period, leaving me feeling just a bit gimpy.
@9:36 PM
Saturday, April 22, 2006- - -
 What a lovely rain!
It's been drier than a popcorn fart at home and just as bad up here in Montana, so we desperately need the rain. Still, I can't help but be a bit annoyed that it had to come today, considering the plan was to shoot sporting clays with the new brother-in-law. I was hoping to try out his fancy 28 gauge as I've been thinking of buying one. I hear they're just the thing for quail..
Update: Definitely a bit light for lawyers though.
Yes, the rain let up long enough to run out and shoot a couple of practice rounds. I'd never met the new B-I-L before this trip and wasn't quite sure how I'd relate to the senior VP of a middling-sized regional investment bank, but I've got to pronounce him a capital fellow [pun intended]. Especially when the 28 gauge he produced for my shooting pleasure was easily the fanciest gun I've ever fired, a fine little Browning, new, in-the-box, before I fired the first rounds through it. I'm relatively certain I couldn't handle sitting behind a desk all day handling large chunks of other people's money, but it has certain rewards that are becoming apparent.
Different strokes and all that, but I think I'll stick with a bit lower pressure job that buys less expensive guns, and the time to actually shoot them once in a while. That is one sweet-shootin' little smooth bore though. I'd guess it weighs about 6# so it handles and shoulders very quickly, and it actually needs its 32" barrels to make it swing smooth. I think I'll start saving my pennies. I don't know that I'd buy anything quite this fancy though, I'd feel bad throwing it in the canoe and tromping on it with my muddy boots.
@8:13 AM
 It's Alive!
Yes, there are signs of life at the Folk of the Wood web site! I visited them in Ruidoso back in January and enjoyed the chat I had with luthier Tradd Tidwell enormously. They've been in a rocky spot, and their past management hadn't made many fans among their retail competitors, but we don't have a great abundance of acoustic music shops that carry traditional folk instruments and provide internet service, so I'd hate to see them go down.
Since my visit I'd been watching their web site and it hadn't changed in many months, with many sections of the site simply not functioning. Now they have a nice new look to their main page and, while the site is still very much under construction, they're at least looking lifelike. I'd recommend giving them a call if you wish to order anything, as I suspect they've a way to go to synch their stock on hand with what's shown on their web site (also, online ordering has never been their strong suite). When I was there they had some nice instruments that aren't shown, and there's quite a bit on their site that's probably not in stock. Still, if you're looking for a musical instrument at a very good price give them a chance, they're good folks.
@7:40 AM
Friday, April 21, 2006- - -
 Painfully Scenic!
My dad and I drove up to Glacier National Park today to see the sites. You can't get very far into the park this time of year, the Going to the Sun highway is closed about 14 miles inside the west entrance, but what we could see was spectacular. It's not often that a lake the size of Lake McDonald is so mirror calm, but it sure was this morning, giving me the opportunity to take the obligatory mirror image photo. And to think that a little over two months ago I was taking pictures down in Big Bend National Park in South Texas. I do get around.
@5:40 PM
Thursday, April 20, 2006- - -
Greetings from the Great White North!
Okay, there's no great expanses of snow up here in Kalispell, Montana, but there are suspiciously large piles of snow in the shady spots. We prefer our snow remain up in the mountains where it belongs, but here in the shadow of Glacier National Park it would appear the snow doesn't always cooperate.
I'm up visiting my dad, who moved back up here to Kalispell last fall (good timing pop!). At least he lives in one of those "retirement communities" where someone else shovels the snow, but he'd better not be expecting any visits from me in the dead of the winter. Ah well, it is frightfully scenic. Western Montana has considerably more Range and less Basin than Wyoming and it is quite beautiful in a treey, mountainy sort of way. And then there's Flathead lake, which extends down the valley south from Kalispell. That's more water than we've seen in Wyoming for 55 million years -- there used to be some rather large lakes in Wyoming too, but they dried up awhile back.
We're planning a heavy schedule of loafing and site-seeing, so I'll be sure to report back on what we find. So far, I can say that Barley's brew pub serves an excellent IPA! (Yes, I do have a one-track mind. Eat, drink, and be merry - tomorrow you may be in Utah!)
@8:05 AM
Tuesday, April 18, 2006- - -
Scam Alert!
Looks like another phone scam is going around. I've gotten two calls in the last few days with a recorded message telling me that 'This is not a marketing call! We have critical information about your finances so please call Miss Whatzerbutt at 1-800-..." We fell for a similar scam a few years ago. When we called the 800 number it was rolled over to a 900 number and our phone was billed for.. I think it was only 12 bucks, a cheap lesson. We protested at the time and were told that this isn't illegal and there was nothing the phone company could do about it, despite the fact that they're acting as the collection agency for the scammers. Just be warned, don't call any 800 numbers where you don't have any idea who you're calling.
@8:41 PM
General Havoc
Interesting flap with the retired generals calling for Defense Secretary Rumsfeld's ouster. In this piece by the NYTimes, after extensively documenting the generals' complaints, the author blythely notes that these guys might, just might have ulterior motives. Like Thomas E. White, who was forced out of his job as Secretary of the Army by Mr. Rumsfeld in April of 2003. Or General Zinni, who is busy promoting a new book critical of the Bush administration. Or General Riggs, who left the Pentagon in 2004 after clashing with civilian leaders and then being investigated for potential misuse of contractor personnel. Naw, none of them have an axe to grind. Makes me wonder why the rest of these senior generals are retiring while their troops are still fighting. Apparently the Times doesn't wonder about that though.
Got to love the bit about Gen. Shinseki telling Congress that many more troops would be required to occupy Iraq, following a few short paragraphs after noting "... the toll that the war is taking on American armed forces, with little sign, three years after the invasion, that United States troops will be able to withdraw in large numbers anytime soon." Let's see, 'send more troops in for a bigger occupation force, but withdraw more troops faster. What's the matter with that Rumsfeld if he can't do both!' Clearly Rumsfeld simply isn't the miracle worker these guys were hoping for.
Ps. I should give a hat tip, or more appropriately a fanny wag in the general direction of Reason Express for starting me reading up on the retired generals. According to the thoroughly predictable Reasonoids the generals were grievously provoked: "... The precipitating event was clearly Secretary of State Condi Rice's counterfactual assertion that "thousands of tactical errors" have fouled up the Iraq campaign--a campaign that is otherwise strategically sound.
"Rice, who in all likelihood did not understand what she was saying, was squarely laying the blame for any unhappy outcome in Iraq on the uniformed military. It was only a matter of time before there was some sort of response.
"Further driving this response is the realization by senior commanders that the Bush administration is serious about doing something, although it's likely no one knows exactly what, to stop Iran's nuclear ambitions. The commanders understand that Iran would be several orders of magnitude more difficult for the U.S. to subdue than Iraq was and that no amount of wishful thinking from civilian war planners will change that fact. So sheathed within those complaints about the previous conflict is the demand that the next one be contemplated with something besides best-case scenarios in mind." Of course! That Condi is such a dunce. Any of the Reasonoids could out-think her with half their (remaining) brain cells tied behind their backs! That's why she's only Secretary of State while they write for the exhalted, if a bit obscure Reason. And those poor generals, what were they to do? Surely anyone who climbed the ladder to to pin two or three stars on their shoulder would be entirely unused to criticism and most certainly none of them ever made a tactical mistake. Ought to package that hogwash, there's a lot of hogs in Ioway what could use a bath.
Iran would be "... several orders of magnitude more difficult for the U.S. to subdue than Iraq ..."? Now there's an insightful, if unsupported assertion. Again, remember the dread "Afghan Winter"? Remember the "50,000 dead American troops at the gates of Iraq"? Afghanistan was going to be impossible, Iraq was going to be a blood bath, and predictably, Iran will be even more difficult. Or not. One big difference between Iraq and Iran: Iran doesn't have Iran on one side and Syria on the other to feed the "insurgents". Instead, Iran has Iraq on one side and Afghanistan on the other. Perhaps the Iranians are taking the attitude of Col. Anthony Herbert, who famously quoth something to the affect of "They've got us surrounded and outnumbered. Good. They can't possibly all get away now." But then, I've been told by a few senior NCOs who ought to know that Herbert was pretty much a nut too.
Update: Speaking of nuts, the InstaPundit links to this post at Reason's Hit & Run. The comments are priceless evidence of just how low the "Big L" Libertarians can stoop. The Reasonoids clench their fists and stamp their tiny feet and stop just short of calling the Prez and the InstaPundit Big Poopyheads. I suppose "free minds" aren't necessarily big minds.
Another Update: Today the InstaPundit links Rand Simberg, who paraphrases Ronald Reagan in referring to the Libertarians: "I didn't leave the party--the party left me."
I've enjoyed reading Reason and I think they have good points to make on the economy and on civil liberties. On the war.. well, how often does one have to be proven completely wrong before I start to suspect that their musing derive from an agenda rather than from analysis? As one of Simberg's commentors notes, 'it was better when Virginia Postrel was editor'. Indeed. The average IQ at Reason HQ would appear to have dropped about 25 points when Ms Postrel, and now Matt Welch, departed. Ideological purity will only get you so far and that not always in the right direction.
@8:08 PM
It's a puzzlement
If you define an archaeological site as "a locus of past human activity" -- the anthropology 101 definition -- what do you do when you discover that the entire world is, very literally, a vast archaeological site?
Reader George Byrd forwards a link to an Ann Althouse post that links a WaPo article on a battle brewing between professional archaeologists and relic collectors in Virginia. It seems that landowners are hosting "safari digs" where collectors can use metal detectors to search for civil war-era relics on their land. It's all perfectly legal but Virginia professionals are aghast and petitioning the state to stop the digs. Last year the Virginia General Assembly considered a measure that would have established that relics belong to the state, not any individual. The bill was "resoundingly crushed in committee." Historic preservation is what I do for a living, so I find this Very Interesting Stuff.
Yes, my first reaction is to cringe at the vision of relic hunters out rootin' & lootin', but on the other hand, I don't have much sympathy for the archaeologists who want to use the power of government to stop them. Declare that all relics belong to the state? Where does that stop? At present the federal government generally defines everything over 50 years old as "historic." Voila! That could make my house the property of the state.
Anthony, who runs the archaeoblog, says that there's probably nothing to be done. It's private land and stopping these folks would run afoul of the Constitution, because "Private property is one of those sacrosanct aspects of American culture (and law)." Um, right. Remember Kelo? Eminent domain has been used for historic preservation. Don't tell the farmers who used to own the land that's now the Knife River Indian Villages National Historic Site that the government will never seaze their land, the government has already taken their land. Sadly, the sites to be preserved were pristine because they were in farmer's back yards. The Park Service moved the farmers off and replaced them with a site supervisor.. for awhile. When that became too expensive or priorities changed there was no one to keep an eye on these spectacular sites at least during some parts of the year. Want to bet they're still pristine?
So what do we do to protect sites we think are important? Several of Ms Althouse's other commentors wonder why the archaeologists can't work with the landowners and maybe even pay them to preserve sites if they're that important. Or enlist the aid of the local collectors to help investigate such sites. To this Anthony responds:
"It's a dilemma. If archaeologists go around paying people for artifacts they've dug up, that would just encourage more looting. Really just increasing the market for such objects. We certainly wish we had the time, money, and manpower (not to mention storage space and time, money, and manpower to analyze everything) to dig up everything that's out there. But the problem is, we don't want to dig up everything that's out there. As I mention in the post, the safest place for most artifacts is in the ground. There's little doubt that future archaeologists will be able to derive much more information from remains than we can, and seeing as the archaeological record is a non-renewable resource, the least we disturb it now the more will be left for the future.
Feel free to search for (and comment on!) other posts at ArchaeoBlog. It's a complicated issue and several people have argue for a market-based approach. I'm undecided but tend toward skepticism at the market-based ideas. Yes, a singularly unhelpful fellow (and if you think I'm picking on him it's because I am). He's correct, but misses the other commentor's point by arguing that archaeologists should not buy artifacts from collectors. The WaPo article has already stressed that archaeological materials taken out of context are pretty much useless for research and yes, buying such would only encourage more amateur collection. But that's not the point these people are making. The artifacts aren't being left in the ground, so what, if anything, can we do about it?
Well, we can wallow in our helplessness or, just perhaps, employ those market-based ideas about which Anthony is so skeptical. Oddly enough, quite a number of interested amateurs pay big bucks to participate in programs like Earthwatch. The vast majority of those folks wouldn't be out there in the hills of Virginia with their metal detectors if they weren't enormously interested in Civil War history. We professionals can demand that the government "do something!" like make it illegal to collect relics even on private land (it's been done on public lands with no noticable effect other than to drive the collectors underground), we can wring our hands and declare the situation hopeless, or, we can take advantage of the opportunities offered. It's been done, it works, and people eat this stuff up.
But of course, that would involve actual work on the part of the archaeologists involved. It's so much easier to demand that the government do something, even if we know it's likely to be wrong.
@7:52 AM
Friday, April 14, 2006- - -
It's the silly season!
Republican gubernatorial candidate Ray Hunkins says Wyoming needs to negotiate with the US Fish & Wildlife Service over wolf management rather than fighting it out in court as Democratic Governor Freudenthal is doing. And, of course, he's just the man to lead those negotiations.
A Casper Star editorial notes that Hunkins stance is a bit odd, since his supporters are mostly anti-wolf Republicans. The editors also point to a Casper Star-Tribune poll earlier this year which found that 65 percent of Wyoming voters support the state's "shoot on sight" wolf management approach. They go on to say:
"Asked why Hunkins would take a position that apparently has little public support, his campaign spokesman said: "That's the difference between political expediency and leadership." It was a not-so-subtle jab at Freudenthal, who some suggest has taken a hard-line position on wolves to make him more attractive to Republican voters." Finally, the editors agree with Hunkins: "It would be a mistake to continue trying to persuade the courts to force acceptance of Wyoming's wolf management plan."
All very interesting, but they seem to forget that Governor Freudenthal has tried the negotiation route. Back last Christmas the Gov met with Paul Hoffman, The Department of the Interior's deputy assistant secretary for fish, wildlife and parks. Hoffman "... urged a spirit of cooperation on wolf management ..." which, coming from a highly placed federal official usually means "we dictate, you cooperate." Apparently that was the case in this instance as Governor Freudenthal concluded that he saw no sincere effort by the U.S. Interior Department to compromise with Wyoming.
"Wyoming's plan is to manage for a minimum of seven wolf packs outside Yellowstone and Grand Teton national parks; the Interior Department wants the state to maintain at least 15 packs regardless of whether they are in or outside the parks." As with the buffalo, wolves simply don't find Yellowstone Park and the high Absarokas terribly hospitable in the winter, which shouldn't come as a surprise. The Greater Yellowstone Area just isn't very good wolf habitat and, being wolves, the darn things just won't cooperate and stay in the park. There's the point of contention. While the USFWS's stated plan was to reintroduce wolves to the Greater Yellowstone Area, at some point it became obvious that that plan wouldn't work without redefining "Greater Yellowstone" to include the entire state, because the wolves would rather be just about anyplace than up in those snowy mountains.
In the mean time, we're approaching a population of 1000 wolves in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming, when this report says the original goal was a population of 300 in the three-state area. I seem to recall that the plan was for about 500 wolves, but still only about half as many as we've now got.
Silliest of all, the multi-million dollar wolf recovery program has been so successful that now we need a multi-million dollar wolf control program. Yes, we reintroduce wolves and then when they act like, you know, wolves, they are killed. This study makes that plan look just a bit lame. Seems that when you kill a "problem wolf" others move in and take its place. The study suggests that a better solution would be improved animal husbandry practices and compensation for lost livestock. So far as I know, no one has yet suggested putting out big pans of wolf kibble...
@12:56 PM
Perhaps geography just isn't their forte
Debra J. Saunders, that ol' conservative voice at the San Francisco Chronicle demonstrates why we poor bloggers will never be able to compete with the careful fact-checkers of the legacy media. The topic is the Plame/Wilson brewhaha and Saunders quotes those famous sixteen words from the 2003 SOTU address: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Niger." [emphasis added]
But wait! Is that right? Let's take a look at CNN's transcript of the address. It reads "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." [emphasis added]
Considering that it was these infamous sixteen words followed by Joseph Wilson's conflation of Niger with all of Africa that created the whole "Bush lied" meme, I'd have thought that Saunders and her editors would remember this wee detail. I'd apparently be wrong. Then again, I'd think that when providing a direct quote those careful professional journalists would copy the quote directly rather than working from memory. Again, apparently I'm wrong. After finding myself wrong twice in such rapid succession there's nothing to do but stand in humble awe of those amazing professionals at the San Fran Chrony.
@11:24 AM
 Caught in a Whirlwind!
We've been busy kids this week with no time for blogging. First, I received an email from reader Pete Weisbeck, who's moved from New York and is building a home just outside Thermopolis. Pete has been hiking the hills around his place and found some historic inscriptions, including a date that appears to be "1660". If it's for real it would predate the earliest know whites who probably visited Wyoming by 80 years and the earliest definite visitors by 145 years. That would be extremely cool.
According to T.A. Larson's History of Wyoming, a seventeenth century Spanish rapier blade has been found near Dayton in eastern Wyoming, and we know that various Spanish exporers visited Kansas (Coronado 1541), Nebraska (Villasur 1720), and Utah (Escalante 1776), but there's no record of the Spanish ever visiting Wyoming. The Verendrye brothers probably explored northeastern Wyoming in 1742, but didn't keep the spiffiest records of their trip, so the earliest definite white visitor was the French trader Larocque, who came up the Powder River in 1805. Of course,some folks on the Rez would say it's been all downhill since then.
So. Could it be? I talked with Pete and got a good verbal description of the location of the inscriptions and then visited the records of the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office to see what, if anything, was known about the area. [The records of site locations are considered sensitive information and aren't available except to us perfessionuls, but the SHPO does have a very interesting web site.] There was no record of the inscriptions, however the records did indicate that the old freight road that was the main access to the Bighorn Basin from the south came through Mexican Pass and then followed Owl Creek to the Bighorn River, passing right by the foot of the high ridge where the inscriptions were found. The basin was first settled ca. 1870, the railroad reached Thermopolis in 1907 or 1908, and the modern highway was pushed through the Wind River Canyon in the 1930s. Prior to the railroad's arrival this was the main freight route into the southern basin, and it remained the main route for travelers from the south until the modern highway was built. The route was abandoned when the highway was built and there's only a faint goat track extending up Owl Creek now. Given these dates one might expect the inscriptions to date mostly between 1870 and 1930. Not spectacularly old, but still pretty neat, at least to me.
So we mounted an expedition last Saturday, rendezvousing at Pete's house -- and getting the nickel tour, Pete's been building houses for 30 years, he's a serious craftsman and it really shows -- then bumping the Jeep up Owl Creek to the base of the ridge and scrambling up to the top. Seriously scenic. In the upper photo we have Pete and my wife, Sherri, chatting at the base of the sandstone outcrop that bears the inscriptions.
 The most visible dates are 1907 and 1917, with various initials and other incomplete or weathered dates that I haven't yet puzzled out, bearing out my expectations. Not a lot of dates, and no full names to prompt further research, but these things are always intriguing. And then there's the mystery date, very faint and hard to decipher. Was it more faint because it was more weathered? Could it really be 1660?
Well, here's the tricky part. Through the magic of digital photography I've learned that I can sometimes enhance a photograph to make inscriptions and rock art much more visible than they were in the field. In this case I lowered the overall brightness of the photo and then increased the contrast, making the date considerably more distinct. It's still not really clear, but it looks like it reads "11-1-17". Darn. You sure can see where you might think it was 1660 though. Kind of depends on how you hold your beer when you're lookin' at it. But then we forgot to bring the beer so it was time to scamper back down the hill.
 An entertaining trip and any day spent hiking in the hills should be considered a success. Plus, we got to meet Pete and his wife and tour his home. He'll be on sabatical building his place for another year or so. Then he'll be ready to start work on your house, so get on out here and pick a spot!
@7:36 AM
Sunday, April 09, 2006- - -
 What a relief!
Our family had always assumed that my great-grandfather Thorkel Nelson was Swedish, hence the 'son' rather than 'sen' spelling. Now my cousin writes that he's tracked down old Thorkel in the 1865 Norwegian Census. His father, Mads, was born in Parish Kvinnherad, his mother, Marthe, was born at Varhaugen, on the Island of Tysnes (Tysnaes). In this 1865 census, the family had moved from Tysnes Island to Blaenes, where Mads was 'Spelleman' or town fiddler [and probably storyteller*]. We also learn that Thorkel's patronemic should have been 'Madssen'. Interesting things they did with names at Ellis Island.
So: a) I'm not Swedish on that side of my family after all, and b) I come by my penchant for fiddling about and storytelling honestly..
Update: It's a small world! I went searching for photos of a traditional Norwegian Hardanger fiddle and found several at the website of Jerry Everard, who plays the Hardanger fiddle with the Full Circle Band, who produce "exciting Celtic-Australian folk" music in Canberra. Look closely and you'll note that the Hardanger fiddle is not only elaborated carved and inlaid, but also has eight strings, four of which run under the fingerboard. Now that's bizarre. The photo here is from the Hardanger Fiddle Association of America website.
*Interestingly, not only were folklore and music closely entwined, but the Norwegians sometimes attributed supernatural powers to the spelleman, similar to those attributed to the harper in England and Ireland. It would appear that the ability of music and dance to 'cast a spell' is old indeed.
@8:46 AM
Thursday, April 06, 2006- - -
Oh, if we only had a fence!
Color me skeptical. The Latest on the border fence from Hugh Hewitt: I interviewed a Customs agent yesterday who again confirmed the obvious: Fencing along high traffic areas of the southern border will greatly reduce illegal immigration into the country, thus bringing control to the enduring problem and greatly enhancing security against terrorists and narco-criminals.
The House bill passed provisions authorizing 700 miles of real fence for those high traffic areas.
The new version of the Senate immigration bill does not appear to include any fencing (and spare me the talk of "virtual fences." Israel isn't building a "virtual fence.") First, not one of the 9/11 terrorists entered the country over our southern border. Nor is there any talk of building a fence along the 3000 miles of our northern border where terrorists might ice skate across at any moment. Will 700 miles of fence stop determined terrorists or drug traffickers? I wouldn't count on it.
And will it stop illegal aliens? Frankly, I have a hard time imagining what sort of fence is going to keep people out unless it's heavily guarded. If those 700 miles of high traffic areas along our southern border were heavily guarded a fence might help. However, if those high traffic areas were heavily guarded I don't think we'd have quite the problem with illegals that we do. I get the distinct impression that this fence is largely a dodge.
Whether it gets built or not it's a win/win for politicians, giving them something to point to and say "See, we built a fence to deal with the problem!" or "We tried to build a fence to deal with the problem so don't blame us!" while steering away from the inconvenient questions like "Why aren't the borders better guarded?" and "Why are the people who hire illegals so rarely prosecuted?"
Ps. Don't get me wrong. I'm becoming convinced that illegals are a real problem and I agree with Jeff Goldstein that assimilation is an idea worth re-promoting (I also agree that Bill O'Reilly is a putz, although I've been known to use stronger language). I'm just not at all convinced that the folks in DC are serious about doing anything, or that those "fancy pants government acronyms" who can't get their computer systems to work or make their fingerprint databases interconnect are going to be any more effective at guarding our borders in the future than they have been in the past. I'm not opposed to a border fence, I'm opposed to building a useless fence and I'm very much afraid that is what it would be.
Update: Speaking of useless, Michelle Malkin has a long rant today on the Department of Homeland Security and the INS that reenforces my misgivings. I've never heard of a government agency that actually tracked their workers' performance and rewarded hard work, so it figures that the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services would be the first. It seems CIS has a massive backlog, so they've established quotas and incentives: Review enough immigration applications each day and they get extra time off. So on one hand we want to build a big fence, while on the other we have bureaucrats rubber-stamping immigration applications and being rewarded for it.
Remember, this is the same INS that notified a Venice, Florida, flight school that the student visas of Mohamed Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi had been approved six months after they flew planes into the World Trade Center. Good to know they're clearing up that backlog, eh?
@4:00 PM
It's time for the Frozen Four!
My old alma mater, the University of North Dakota, will be there for today's semi-final game. UND's Fighting Sioux hold a record seven NCAA hockey championships and we're hoping to make it eight. After all, they have a natural advantage: Ice grows wild up there 10 months out of the year.
@8:31 AM
Wednesday, April 05, 2006- - -
 Tough and Smart
Iron General Nancy Pelosi unveils the Democrat's ``Real Security Plan to Protect America.'' Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid appeared in a loincloth..
Okay, so I'm about four days late with this, but then so are they.
@7:55 AM
Tuesday, April 04, 2006- - -
A momentous occasion!
Dr. Danny forwards the following interesting observation: At two minutes and three seconds after 1 am tomorrow the time and date will be 01:02:03 04/05/06. That doesn't happen very often.
Update: Danny has collected a lot of road kill over the years but I'd never noticed the Green Bay fan before. Must be new.
@11:17 AM
Consider it a bribe
The Star-Tribune editors float an interesting idea for economic development: Relocation grants to help businesses and workers move to Wyoming. As a rule I'm pretty much opposed to government handouts, but I don't think the Wyoming Business Council is going away any time soon, and this would certainly be a better use for their funds than grants for infrastructure improvements, which generally translate to creating ever more jobs for bureaucrats and public employees.
@8:17 AM
|
|
