The advertising above is just a source of revenue, and sometimes, I don't know what will appear there.
Unique grips and accessories for your 1911!
Relocating to Boise? Use my realtor, neighbor, and friend, Cindy Smith csmith@1realtyone.com.
Magazines for cheap!
PayPal members: to make a contribution
Email me at blogmail at claytoncramer dot com. Sorry to be so indirect, but all spambots must die! But they haven't died yet! Include the word spamIamnot in your subject line to make sure that my spam blocker lets you through.
Labels: history [Luhrmann] veers from earnest drama to brisk comedy and then tries to hold it together with awkward voiceover narration. Within five minutes, Australia seems headed for trouble. It gets there and stays there. Labels: film reviews Labels: gun technology Labels: cars Labels: 2008 presidential candidates But it's actually somewhat worse even than Scherer suggests. According to Mark Mazzetti and Scott Shane, who wrote the article, Feinstein and Wyden are just two of the "senior Democratic lawmakers" who have "seemed reluctant in recent interviews to commit the new administration to following the Army Field Manual in all cases" -- despite the fact that both Feinstein and Wyden said throughout the year that they emphatically favored such a measure and even co-sponsored legislation requiring it. From the Times article: "in an interview on Tuesday, Mrs. Feinstein indicated that extreme cases might call for flexibility." And: "'I think that you have to use the noncoercive standard to the greatest extent possible,' she said, raising the possibility that an imminent terrorist threat might require special measures." Wyden's comments were even worse: Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, another top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said he would consult with the C.I.A. and approve interrogation techniques that went beyond the Army Field Manual as long as they were “legal, humane and noncoercive.” But Mr. Wyden declined to say whether C.I.A. techniques ought to be made public. What makes this so notable is that, for the last year, Feinstein and Wyden were both insistent that the only way to end torture and restore America's standing in the world was to require CIA compliance with the Army Field Manual -- period. But as long as George Bush was President, it was cheap and easy for Feinstein and Wyden to argue that, because they knew there was no chance it would ever happen. As they well knew, they lacked the votes to override Bush's inevitable veto of any such legislation. So as long as Bush was President, it was all just posturing, strutting around demanding absolute anti-torture legislation they knew would never pass. Who is Eligible to Apply for an Amended Certificate of Birth? 1. has become legally adopted, or 2. has undergone a sex change operation, or 3. a legal determination of the nonexistence of a parent and child relationship for a person identified as a parent on the birth certificate on file has been made, or 4. previously recorded information in relation to the person’s surname and/or the father’s personal particulars has been altered pursuant to law. Labels: 2008 presidential candidates Labels: homosexuality Labels: gun technology In Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged, the novel’s hero John Galt leads a secret strike of the most productive citizens in an America where productivity and freedom is no longer valued. The strike is an act of rebellion and self-preservation, fueled by Galt’s crucial insight that their enemies’ only weapons are the ones the strikers produce for them. By recruiting more and more strikers, Galt precipitates the ultimate collapse of American society. We in the US are living in precarious times. Productive men and women should be taking a good hard look at the sort of government and society they are being forced to support with their taxes. They should also honestly assess the likelihood of freedom’s fortune improving. Labels: economics Labels: film reviews The myth of the small donor is even more important. Most political observers did not attack Obama for his breaking of his pledge to accept public financing because of our belief that he was funding his campaign by a massive outpouring of small donations. We felt that he was single-handedly accomplishing campaign finance reform and did not mind that he opted out of the public system. Indeed, we cheered as he amassed a $600 million war chest as it signified the clout of the small donor and showed the vulnerability of the old fat cat/PAC network that others used to raise money. But we were fooled by Obama’s propaganda. In a story by Fred Lucas, CNSNews reports that the Campaign Finance Institute (CFI) found that only 26% of the donors to Obama’s campaign gave $200 or less, compared to 25% for President Bush’s campaign in 2004. How did Obama fund his campaign? The old fashioned way, from fat cats. CFI found that he got 80% more money from large donors (over $1,000) than from those who gave less than $200. Obama did benefit from small donors slightly more than other campaigns, but not enough to make the historic statement it appeared at the time that was taking place. CFI notes that 47% of Obama’s total fund raising came from large donors, compared to 60% for McCain, 60% for Bush in 2004, and 56% for John Kerry. This trend represents a movement in the right direction, but hardly the revolution that has been mythologized. These revealing stats are more than a footnote to history. They represent the denouement of a carefully cultivated myth. Obama sold America on the idea that his campaign was animated by hordes of small donors who we’re attracted online. It now appears that this line was nothing more than a convenient smoke screen to mask his dependence on the traditional forces that have always funded presidential campaigns. And it puts into a new perspective the massive amount Obama raised and his brazen reversal of his public pledge to accept the limits imposed by public financing of campaigns. Now that we know that Obama funded his campaign the old way – from rich people and special interests – it is reprehensible that he did so to the tune of over $600 million. When it looked like he was using the money of small donors to buy the election, it was excusable. But now that it becomes clear that he was getting money the same way other politicians always have done so, his vast outspending of McCain, all based on his chicanery in not taking public financing, puts his victory into a sharply more negative light. Labels: 2008 presidential candidates
Never forget!
I ran for Idaho state senate in 2008--didn't win
I've written a number of history books, as well as scholarly and popular articles, (see my web page).
Sorry, high pressure isn't included.
My nephew Shippy makes very pretty ceramic items. Click here to visit his online studio. Give someone one of these, and you can be sure that they don't already have one!
Click here to find out why the Amazon.com Honor System paybox is no longer here.
RSS feed
Other blogs you may enjoy:
My civilian gun defense use blog
My daughter's blog
Pete Drum's Web Page
Gun Laws Don't Work
instapundit.com
Dissecting Leftism -- By John Ray
A courageous Briton arguing for relaxing Britain's gun control laws
Right Thoughts
Final Protective Fire
Amitai Etzioni's Blog
Scrappleface -- Dangerously Clever Satire
Michael Williams -- Master of None
Another Conservative Blogger
A Group Blog By Iraqis
THE MESOPOTAMIAN: TO BRING ONE MORE IRAQI VOICE OF THE SILENT MAJORITY TO THE ATTENTION OF THE WORLD
Specializing in discussions of discrimination and affirmative action
An Iraqi dentist
Promoting children being raised by their own parents
A federal law clerk opines about the law
Michelle Malkin's blog
Impearls: a blog as electic and interesting as mine
Proving that the United States military does more than kill people and break things.
May not agree with this group on everything, but stopping the ACLU is high on my list
A conservative/moderate black blogger.
Another sensible American
Sex, Crime, and Corruption in the Democratic Party
Music, Politics, Motorcycles
Maggie's Farm: Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
A blog dedicated to "Documenting Saddam Hussein's support of Terrorism"
The blog of one of my fellow bloggers on the Civilian Gun Self-Defense Blog
J. Norman Heath's Blog--a circus rigger and Second Amendment scholar (really!)
Buckeye Firearms Association, for you Ohio gun owners and activists
Click here for a FREE NEWSLETTER on Ohio Gun Rights from Buckeye Firearms Association!
Another conservative.
Neocon Blues
Conservative Oasis
Other Idaho Bloggers
Bubbleheads is a retired submariner
An Idaho State University student. A Democrat. Someday, she'll start paying income taxes and change.
A retired Las Vegas stagehand, of all things.
archives
Search only this site: Click here and enter your search string at the beginning of the search field.
The N-Word As Pejorative
I was listening to an audiobook of James Fenimore Cooper's early novel The Spy (which is set in the Revolutionary period), and I was quite surprised to hear this exchange in so early a novel:For a moment the pedler hesitated ; his eye glanced towards Harper, who was yet gazing at him with settled meaning, and the whole manner of Birch was altered. Approaching the fire, he took from his mouth a large allowance of the Virginian weed, and depositing it, with the superabundance of its juices, without mercy to Miss Peyton's shining andirons, returned to his goods, and replied in a more lively tone--"He lives somewhere among the niggars to the south."
Cooper is clearly both showing that the house slave Caesar has taken offense at the term, and both whites involved recognize that the term is considered offensive. I confess that I was somewhat surprised to see the term recognized as such in a novel published as early as 1823.
"No more niggar than be yourself, Mister Birch," interrupted Caesar tartly, and dropping the covering of the goods in high displeasure.
"Hush, Caesar — hush — never mind it now," said Sarah Wharton soothingly, waiting with impatience to hear further. "
A black man so good as white, Miss Sally," continued the offended African, " so long he behave heself." "
And frequently much better," rejoined his mistress : "but, Harvey, who is this Mr. Sumpter?"
Randy Barnett Hates Australia
The movie--not the country:Avoid Australia--not the continent, the movie. To see why, go to this link on Rotten Tomatoes and read all the negative reviews--something I did not do before wasting 3 hours of my life.
I had actually planned on going to see it, but after reading some of the reviews, maybe not. My favorite excerpted negative reviews:Never boring but often exhausting, Australia finally pulls itself together for an emotionally satisfying ending. Or six. Pass the gravy.
Australia is so damnably eager to please that it feels like being pinned down by a giant overfriendly dingo and having your face licked for about three hours: theoretically endearing but, honestly, kind of gross.
It's an endurance test that ends in moans of recognition as characters seem to be acting out scenes from other, better movies. Really, you don't want to sit through this.
Australia strains to do it all, and finally all you can see is the strain.
"You Obviously Watched Goldfinger At An Impressionable Age"
A flashlight that turns into a submachine gun, Transformer-style.
Studded Tires for the Corvette?
Winter is coming--and if last winter is any indication, I need a solution. The Corvette was unable to leave the garage for three months last year because of snow. We have paved our driveway (725 feet cost almost $14K), and this should help a bit, but from our driveway to the nearest paved road is another half mile. Worse, the Corvette couldn't handle the snow on the state highway as I approached the summit last year. Adding to the frustration, I am currently working in Bend, Oregon every other week, and the natives tell me that I should plan on seeing some serious ice in town.
So, there are four possibilities:
1. Buy a 4WD to use three months of the year. (Expensive.)
2. Rent a 4WD to use three months of the year. (VERY expensive.)
3. Trade my 2000 C5 in on a 2007 Jaguar X-type, which has full-time 4WD--and enough power and cornering not to feel like I am not giving up too much.
4. Studded tires?
The source of the C5's problems with traction on snow and ice is the combination of rear wheel drive and very, very wide tires. As the tires get wider, the amount of force per square inch declines. There's roughly 700-750 pounds of force per rear tire--and with the standard tires of the Corvette, this spread over an enormously wide piece of rubber. My measurements suggest that the contact patch is about 30-40 square inches--so roughly 19 psi of pressure. At a certain point, the down force is so little that the tires simply have no hope of getting any grip on either snow or ice.
The way that chains work, and studded tires, is by concentrating the roughly 750 pounds of force per tire into a relatively tiny area--perhaps as little as three square inches for chains--so 250 psi, or a square inch for studs (so 750 psi). That's enough to break a hole in the surface of the ice, and allow you to move forward. Ditto for brakes.
So, how many of you have used studded tires on a C5? And what has been your experience?
My Daughter And Her Daughter
Click to enlarge
Olivia has a bit of her father's face, but definitely much the same coloring and hair that Hilary had at this age--and that I had at that age, I suspect. (I don't remember myself at three days old, for some reason.) I'm not sure if that's the Italian genes or German-Jewish genes popping out.
When I hold Olivia, I find myself remembering holding Hilary at this age. Could she ever have been this tiny?
"Playing To My Base"
A couple of days back, I mentioned a curious find concerning the suit Berg v. Obama that is now under discussion by the U.S. Supreme Court. Another blogger asked if I really believed that there was anything to this suit, or if I was just "playing to my base."
I don't "play to my base." I post stuff that I either believe to be true, or that I find interesting, or that I think some of you might interesting. I occasionally post stuff that I find hard to believe (and I usually say so), but that I think is worth looking at because of either who said it, or because if true, the consequences might be so worrisome that we should be thinking about it.
In the case of Berg v. Obama, what makes the case so interesting is not Berg's claims--which have almost no hard facts behind them--but the way in which Obama and the Democratic National Committee have responded. If there was anything to this claim of Berg's, why wouldn't Senator Clinton's campaign have run with it? It's not like she's too nice to do so. Why wouldn't the Republican National Committee have run with it (aside from the fact that they are too dumb to do so)?
What made me take notice of this absurd lawsuit is the willingness of Obama and the Democratic National Committee to spend money arguing standing rather than produce the original, long form birth certificate. They could have spent $50 to have someone overnight a certified copy of the original, long form birth certificate, and stopped Berg's suit cold. There would be no arguing with that. Hiding behind questions of standing makes it look like there's something to hide--all the more reason for the candidate who claimed to stand for openness to open up.
I don't buy the claim that once they produced the birth certificate, there would be lawsuits asking Obama to produce school records. Whether Obama was a good student or a bad student has nothing to do with his legal qualifications to be President of the United States. Whether Obama was a natural born citizen has everything to do with it.
I am offended by the idea that I posted about this because I was "playing to my base." I sometimes post stuff that I know will not "play to my base," because I consider it important. For example, I have posted frequently about the Christian commonwealth obligation to care for the poor--even though I know that many libertarians and some conservatives in my readership don't agree.
I post stuff about deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill, even though the most doctrinaire of libertarians won't agree with it.
Of late, I have argued that cutting marginal income tax rates really shouldn't be the Republican Party strategy of the future. Partly this is because of pragmatic considerations (high incomes breed Democratic contributors and voters), and partly because a fair number of affluent people aren't showing much responsibility with the extra money in their pockets already. This isn't going to make some of my readers happy--but they do need to think about it.
I post stuff about intelligent design because I believe that some of the evolutionists are too arrogant in their certainty. I post stuff about the problems of very, very early life on Earth (like 3.6 billion years old) partly because it raises some interesting problems for the evolutionists, and because I think Young Earthers need to think harder about these issues.
I post stuff about homosexuality that I suspect rankles some of my gay readers. (And yes, I have gay readers.) I post stuff about how divorce is probably the biggest threat to marriage today, because some of my readers want to think that homosexuality is the biggest threat.
I post stuff about abortion that is all over the map, because I want both pro-life and pro-choice readers to think a bit harder about the very real problems associated with abortion. Banning it will certainly reduce abortions--but not as much as some would like to think. And leaving it freely available creates some horrors as well, that pro-choicers need to think about, and confront.
And I suspect that my willingness to challenge my readers, instead of "playing to my base" sometimes limits my readership. But if you are part of this elite, pat yourself on the back for being willing to accept some challenges, without getting upset.
Democrats Suddenly Discovering That Waterboarding May Be Necessary
Glenn Greenwald, who is part of the hard left that helped get Obama elected, is shocked, shocked! to discover that Senators Feinstein (D-CA) and Wyden (D-OR) who were inflexible opponents of flexibility when it came to interrogation techniques for terrorists--are suddenly changing their tune, now that a Democrat is on the way to the White House:
I'm not going to attack Feinstein and Wyden for what they are saying now. There are extraordinary circumstances that may call for extraordinary actions--ones that could only be justified by the potential loss of life that might come from the use of WMDs against civilians. I don't think that this sudden "flexibility" is because Feinstein is planning to send NRA's leadership to Gitmo for waterboarding. But the hypocrisy of taking one position when a Republican was in charge and another position when a Democrat takes over really shows how much of Democratic opposition to Bush's policies was simply partisan politics.
Thanks to Jonathan Adler at Volokh Conspiracy for pointing me to this one.
Astonishing Confirmation From Hawaiian Government Website
The December 3, 2008 Houston Chronicle carried an article about the Supreme Court's possible hearing of the suit demanding that Obama prove that he is a natural born citizen of the U.S. Amidst all the comments I actually found something of value: a link to a Hawaiian government website acknowledging that you can get a birth certificate from Hawaii even if you weren't born there!
Look that over carefully. The first bullet point lists four situations where you can have your Hawaiian birth certificate reissued--and the second bullet point allows you to get a birth certificate issued even if you were not born there.
As provided by law (HRS §§338-17.7, 338-20.5), the following persons may apply for an amended certificate of birth:
I've long wondered why Obama has been stonewalling on turning over the original long form birth certificate--you know, the one that was actually issued when he was born in Hawaii in 1961. The "Certification of Live Birth" that his campaign keeps showing is recently printed, and at least according to the Hawaiian Department of Health, is not necessarily proof of having been born in Hawaii. We know that Obama was adopted at one point by someone named Sotero. Was Obama adopted in Hawaii by Sotero?
Obama really needs to stop stonewalling and provide the original long form certificate. The longer he delays this, the more it looks like he has something to hide.
UPDATE: More information here. It would appear that if he was adopted in Hawaii and issued a birth certificate, it would clearly state country of birth.
Firing People For Thinking Differently
A woman working for the University of Toledo (a state institution) has been fired for expressing disapproval of homosexuality. The comments from liberals over there defending why this is not just okay, but required, are pretty appalling, but unsurprising.
Can I Get a Prescription For That?
And how many refills? Certain gun control crazies have long argued that violence should be considered a medical problem, and treated like one. So will their brains explode when they see this new gadget that FDA has approved as a medical assistance device? Medgadget tells us:We recently reported about a new 9mm handgun that was designed for folks suffering from arthritis and other disabilities affecting the hands. Constitution Arms, the manufacturer of the firearm, is reporting that the FDA has formally designated the gun as a medical gadget.
Many years ago, I had a friend with severe arthritis in his hands--enough so that he couldn't operate a Colt Government Model without extensive modifications to the operating controls. I suspect that he was not alone!
"Going John Galt"
I hadn't heard this expression until quite recently. For those of you who have no idea what it means:
It is a very tempting idea to respond by withholding the one thing we can: our creativity and labor. We can't withhold our taxes, but we can earn less, and therefore owe less to the government. (Recently, another engineer told me that he was thinking of working part-time to reduce the taxes that they pay to fund Obama's plans.)
Obama could bring back the draft (as this "voluntary" national service plan that his campaign was discussing a while back really is), but that would just expose the fascist nature of the Democratic Party in a way that even the news media couldn't hide. As British MP Kenworthy explained, during debates in the House of Commons in 1919, in expressing his concern about the Firearms Act 1920:I do not know whether this Bill is aimed at any such goal as that but, if so, I would point out to the right hon. Gentleman that if he deprives private citizens in this country of every sort of weapon they could possibly use, he will not have deprived them of their power, because the great weapon of democracy to-day is not the halberd or the sword or firearms, but the power of withholding their labour. I am sure that the power of withholding his labour is one of which certain Members of our Executive would very much like to deprive him.[Parliamentary Debates: Official Report, House of Commons, 5th series, 1920, 130:658-9, emphasis added]
Of course, for many of us, it's easy too talk of "going John Galt" because the collapsing economy has taken away this horrible choice of whether or not to be shoved into a higher tax bracket. There is very, very little danger that I will make anywhere near as much next year as I made this year, because there is very, very little danger that I will end up with a permanent salaried job in this coming year, and once you get done paying both halves of Social Security, health insurance, covering vacation and sick time, it is astonishing how little you make. Unfortunately, I only have 30 years of experience as a software engineer, and that's just not enough to get a job in Boise anymore.
Like many ideas that come out of Ayn Rand novels, this one tells us much about an important concept without having much applicability to the real world. I am also skeptical of "going John Galt" (except as a post-economic collapse rationalization) having any widespread support for several reasons.
1. Many people aren't prepared to sacrifice the absurd lifestyles to which they have become accustomed. "What? Not drive a new Mercedes SUV? I couldn't do that! Not drive to the lake every weekend in summer, towing a ski boat? Impossible! What? Not spoil my kids rotten with $100 a week allowances? They would never love me!"
2. Many of those who labor and creativity would be the most missed by the Obamination aren't going to "go John Galt" because they approve of the way that Obama would like to take the United States. The high salary crowd went for Obama in a big way last month, as they usually do. Our best hope of getting the $200,000+ salary group to "go John Galt" will be pointing out that in many respects, Obama's actual tax and spending policies won't go anywhere near hard enough left to make them happy.
3. Those people who are most inclined to take actual steps to deprive the government of tax revenue by reducing their lifestyle and working less are, for the most part, least able to afford to do so. As much as some people want to believe otherwise, the average Republican just isn't that rich. That's why Bush won the majority of whites below $100,000 a year household income in 2004, while Kerry won whites above $200,000 a year household income. For those of you who have spent much time around the Libertarian Party, you already know this embarrassing fact: the party and ideology of rugged individualism is dominated by people that work for someone else.
There are some business owners involved, but precious few. My experience is that most businessmen are either uninterested in politics (until their own ox is gored), or find libertarian ideas so unrealistic as to be uninteresting. Sad to say, they aren't much more interested in conservative ideas. Businessmen, for the most part, are dyed in the wool liberals. Take a look at where the money came from to elect Obama.
My Daughter Has a Daughter
Oh do I feel old. My daughter gave birth this morning. Olivia is 8 pounds, 2 ounces, 21 inches long, and according to my son-in-law "beautiful" and "perfect."
Familiarity Breeds Contempt
There is a widespread belief in gun control circles that ordinary people can't be trusted with guns--unlike police officers, who are highly trained. The evidence is quite clear that police officers really aren't anything special about gun safety--as incidents like this one, from November 29, 2008 Associated Press show:
I'm told that general aviation pilots have their highest rate of accidents at about 1000-2000 hours of flying, and for the same reason. Most people, when starting to do something mildly dangerous, recognize the danger, and are appropriately cautious. As experience rises, so does confidence--and sometimes overconfidence. Cops, because they carry guns regularly, suffer from this problem. As gun carrying becomes more common among civilians, there's probably some risk of this same overconfidence. Let's keep this in mind, okay? Never forget that with your freedom comes enormous responsibility.
Stargate (1994)
I've never watched the TV series--the previews looked rather stupid. But I'm sitting in this room in Bend, Oregon with not much to entertain me. The landlord is somewhat involved in the Central Oregon arts scene, and has a lot of friends in the movie business--and among the films sitting on the shelf, was Stargate.
This was better than I was expecting--quite a bit better than I was expecting. Once you accept the premise of a controllable Einstein-Rosen wormhole technology that allows movement across vast expanses of space, then the rest of it is pretty plausible science fiction--and a nice combination of action film, interesting ideas, and the human fight for dignity.
Richard Matheson's I Am Legend
If you haven't read this brilliant short novel written in 1954--and especially if you have seen the most recent film "version" (in scare quotes for a reason, from what my daughter tells me)--I strongly recommend that you go find it and read it.
Matheson is not just a great storyteller, but a great writer as well. (The two don't always go together, unfortunately.) Matheson took the supernatural idea of vampirism and turned it into science fiction. Our hero tries to unravel what has happened around him, and finds scientific explanations for all the apparently supernatural phenomena--an interesting idea. Unfortunately, the 1964 black and white film version, The Last Man on Earth, starring Vincent Price, emphasized the horror, and almost lost sight of what made I Am Legend so unique--its scientific rationalism. The 1971 version, The Omega Man, starring Charleton Heston, seems to have gone too far the other direction--almost missing the point of Matheson's novel.
I haven't read I Am Legend since I was in junior high or high school, and I found myself reading it again at my daughter's urging. (We share surprisingly common tastes in fiction.) I was surprised at how much I remembered, and how much I had forgotten. One aspect that I had completely forgotten was the parallel that Matheson drew between vampires and an oppressed minority group--clearly intended as irony. What made this so interesting to me was the Canadian TV series of the early 1990s, Forever Knight.
I don't know how many of you saw this show, but it was really well done. What I found so interesting about the show was that there were similar parallels between the vampires in Forever Knight and another minority group--parallels so strong that I found myself convinced that the writers were making that parallel intentionally.
1. The vampires congregated in vampire bars. You wouldn't necessarily know it was a vampire bar if you were one of the living, but you would certainly feel uncomfortable--and you probably wouldn't come back (unless someone decided that you were worth snacking on, and thus converting you).
2. Vampires, of course, kept their preferences to themselves.
3. The undead were sexually more active and promiscuous than the living--and there was a clear connection between being undead and erotica.
4. Many of the undead were quite wealthy, since they had centuries to accumulate wealth, and were incapable of having children.
5. Once victimized by a vampire, one became a member of the undead. They were convinced that they had no hope of returning--except for our hero, the undead Canadian cop, who throughout the series is undergoing transformation therapy in the hopes of becoming either living again, or at least, of having a real death leading to a vaguely Christian afterlife--unlike what the vampires face: an eternity of hell.
When Will The Left Realize It Got Taken?
Today's Cabinet post announcements is yet another reminder that it's easy to tell when a politician is lying: his lips are moving. All the rhetoric about ending the war in Iraq--and Obama is keeping Secretary of Defense Gates--and putting Hilary Clinton (one of the stauncher defenders of Bush's War on Terror, at least in broad outline, until the primary season started) at State! And as Michelle Malkin points out, for all the campaign rhetoric about their differences on foreign policy and the War on Terror, now he says that the media blew it out of all proportion:This is fun for the press to try to stir up whatever quotes were generated during the course of the campaign, and you’re having fun. And there’s nothing wrong with that. I’m not faulting it. But, look, I think if you look at the statements that Hillary Clinton and I have made outside of the heat of a campaign, we share a view that America has to be safe and secure, and in order to do that we have to combine military power with strengthened diplomacy.
What's this "were generated"? Passive voice constructions are a marvelous way for the speaker to avoid admitting that someone said something, as in this classic Matt Groening cartoon: "Mistakes were made."
The hated Bush tax cuts? Obama is going to let them expire, apparently, instead of trying to get them repealed. It is a good decision, considering the state of the economy, but after all the rhetoric about the evil rich people that Bush/McCain helped (but who funded Obama's campaign), Obama's dishonesty is beyond belief. And all this on top of a White House staff that reads like Clinton's third term.
What the left wanted that they are likely to get: Attorney General Holder will certainly focus his energy on disarming law-abiding Americans whenever and wherever he can, while downplaying prosecution of felon in possession laws. (And even here, Obama lied up a storm about not trying to disarm law-abiding Americans. He's batting 100% on this dishonesty thing.) And Obama's appointees to the Supreme Court will, unless the Republican Party suddenly decides to stop being gentlemen, interpret the Constitution as requiring states to recognize gay marriage and protect partial-birth abortion.
I've been waiting for someone to make the point, and Dick Morris did it well:
Obama is beginning to make Bill Clinton look like a paragon of honesty.
CDs For The Drive Over
My wife's TrailBlazer demanded an oil change this morning, and while waiting for Wal-Mart to do the job, I remembered that I needed some CDs to listen to in that huge empty space between radio stations in eastern Oregon. (And yes, it is a very long distance where there is no FM and surprisingly sparse AM choices.)
So being a cheapskate, I went to the music section and looked for some cheap stuff. I found a $5 2 CD collection mistitled 25 Best Disco Hits. I say "mistitled" because while there were some awesome disco hits that I remember from the era ("I Will Survive", "Disco Inferno", "Right Back Where We Started From"), there were a number of songs that I do not remember ever hearing in that fashion-challenged era--and hearing them for the first time reminded me of why I do not remember ever hearing them way back when.
Somewhat more disappointing is that while some of them were the original versions that I remember, quite a number of others are re-recordings by the original artists. In a few cases, I can't hear any difference. Maxine Nighingale's Right Back Where We Started From sounds identical to the version that I hear on the radio. Others were subtly different, but not necessarily worse. A few were very disappointing. They had a version of More, More, More by Andrea True that sounds like she was far weaker than when she recorded the version in Jamaica that we all remember.
It's rather interesting to listen to these disco songs and compare them to the vulgarity of some modern music. Some of them were regarded as a bit naughty because of their double entendre. (Yes, I'm thinking of the Pointer Sisters' I'm So Excited. And some weren't even double entendre; Disco Duck's background vocals, if properly separated, were clearly making a suggestion that rhymed with that, and fit rather well with the whole reason that discos existed.) Still, many of these songs were surprisingly sweet and monogamous, even when there was a suggestive edge to them, "I'm just a love machine, and I won't work for nobody but you."
One of the other CDs I bought, however, was a Lionel Richie/Commodores greatest hits collection--and wow! What a spectacularly romantic collection this is!
Ford Escape
The rental from Enterprise turned out to be a Ford Escape. Even though the back says "4WD" I see no controls that would suggest that there is a full-time 4WD system available, so I am guessing that it may be actually an AWD system. For my needs on this trip, that's probably sufficient.
This is a member of what has come to be called the CUV (Compact Sport Utility Vehicle) segment--not quite as big as the Chevy Trailblazer, but with a tall and large greenhouse, unlike Subaru's 4WD sedans.
Mileage is pretty decent: I averaged 25.3 mpg from Boise Airport to Bend, and while I wasn't driving quite as fast as the Corvette, I was moving pretty quickly. (Mileage definitely drops noticeably above 80.)
In spite of being taller than a sedan, with the lawyer-required warnings about handling, I was quite pleased with it. Body roll was really tiny, and handling was quite neutral, with only the slightest hint of understeer--far better than I am used to from anything with a Ford nameplate on it.
Acceleration was pretty respectable, especially considering that I had the overdrive on the entire time. It's not the Corvette, but for its intended purpose, it is darn respectable! I didn't have a chance to really put the brakes under any stress, but they did nothing to make cringe or get upset.
Unlike many Fords that I have been cursed with over the years, the ride is definitely in the well damped and controlled category. There was never any harshness over rough surfaces, but there was still enough road feel to know what is going on down there where the rubber meets the road.
While not luxury car quiet, it was decent, with one odd rattle in the back (perhaps from my luggage--I'll know in a day or two of driving around town).
The stereo, while nothing special, is so good that there is literally nothing that I thought needed improving.
Yes, I know that this is largely a Mazda with a Ford nameplate, but at least Ford didn't manage to screw it up!
