Flashlights

So theres an interesting flashlight thread going on over at Kims forums.

Now, I happen to have a lot of flashlights (something over a dozen), including seven MagLites; which is the brand most folks think of when they thing "good flashlight", and a few Brinkmans; probably the best of the low end brands. Oh and of course a few assorted random others.

On the MagLight side, I've got a 6D cell light, a 4d cell light, a 3C cell light, two AA mini MagLites, and two MagLight Solitaires (one on my keychain).

There are a LOT of accessories available for flashlights, from differnet switches and lenses , to different bulbs and batteries, to entire new lamp assemblies that can convert your standard light into something ultra bright, or that can run twice as long etc...

These accessories correct some of the flaws of various designs. For example, the biggest irritation with the MiniMagLite (other than it being slightly dim in comparison to other premium lights), is that it's switch is very inconvenient to operate with one hand, and hasa tendency to come on when it's in your bag. To turn the light on you actually rotate the head of the light.

Well to address the brightness, and the switch problem, I have the momentary endcap switch, and I’m running lithiums in it. I’m thinking about switching the head to one of the one watt LED’s available for it, because the standard wheatgrain bulbs just arent doing the job, and have shitty runtime to boot. Oh and one of the glass lenses as well. You wouldn't think the plastic lenses were all that bad, but the glass ones make a HUGE difference.

Of course at that point, is it really a MiniMagLite anymore? It's more of an al new flashlight with a minis tube in the middle of it.

I also have a SureFire A2 aviator, and an E1L outdoorsman.

The Aviator is a bloody great flashlight. It has two modes (momentary, and steady on), and two different light sources; either a 3 led cluster, or a very bright MA02 (50 lumens for about an hour, and then a steep falloff for another hour) type incandescent lamp. The LEDs are available in several colors (mine are red), and they run damn near forever (about 15 hours at full bright, and another 30 hours from 50-25%) on the two CR123A lithium batteries the light takes.

I love the light, it's a great light for a flight bag, or any kind of kit, or for being tacticool; but it's a bit bulky to ride in the jeans all day every day.

I bought the E1L because it was so small, yet so bright; and it’s great, but it’s actually too small. The head is actually larger than the body of the light, and so the light is unbalanced. The E2 uses the same head and tail, with a longer two bettery body, and I’m wondering if I can just buy the body as a spare part from SureFire.

Oh and I’m totally lusting after the SureFire U2, but it’s $300. A bit much for a pocket flashlight (though my aviator as almost $200 with tax)

Now, what is the appeal of a $200 A2, or a $100 E1; when you can buy a maglight for between $10 and $50?

With my E1L, which is less than 4” long, and weighs about 3oz, I can illuminate my entire field of view/work area for 60 minutes, at near daylight light levels, and 3 hours more at the same light level as a “normal” flashlight. It throws a useful beam out to about 25 yards; and a beam you can read a book by out to about 10.

That’s with one single CR123a battery, which cost about $1.50 in bulk packs (about twice as much as a D-cell in bulk), and which weigh less than a AA.

It takes a 4d cell MagLite, which is more than 14” long and weighs about 2 pounds, to do the same thing.

On the 2 cell version of the same SureFire I can do the same thing, a little bit brighter for twice as long; OR I can switch out to the 5 watt head, and be TWICE as bright for just as long.

There are two advantages for being twice as bright

1. You can blind someone if necessary
2. The light throws farther (and from farther away is wider) allowing you to usefully illuminate out further, and to light a wider working area by holding the light further away.

Oh and the two cell SureFire is 5 inches, and 3.5 ounces. The brightest standard MagLite (the 6D cell), which is only just about as bright as the SureFire, is almost 20” long, and weighs almost 3 lbs (note it's twice as bright with the higher power lamp assembly).

The only advantage to the Mag is that you’ll have from two to five times the useful illumination time from a single set of batteries (depending on the exact models and lamps you are comparing). Of course that single set of batteries takes up 12 times as much space, and about 24 times as much weight as the pair of CR123as in the SureFire.

Oh and you CAN get a double powered xenon lamp for the MagLite, that runs at full power for about half to 2/3 as long for the same set of batteries, but will urn at reduced power for much longer (about 12 hours). The MagLites are MUCH better with that lamp.

Personally, I always thought the 6D MagLite was more useful as an impact weapon than a lighting device.

Now, if you think I'm bad; there are some HARD CORE flashlight geeks out there. There's one particular guy who goes by the name of Mr. bulk; and this guy is the flashlight guru. He takes standard flashlights and modes them from here to tomorrow; as well as manufacturing his own line of superpremium lights.

Are they great lights? Hell yeah. But they may be jsut a bit too much flashlight geekery for me.

That said, I WOULD however love to modify my current MagLites. In particular, I love the lithiums in my mini Mag Lite, and I love the LED in my SureFire, so I'd like to convert my minis to LED. Also, I'd like to take my milti D cell models and replace the lamp assembelies with 3 or 5 watt LED lamps, and switch to rechargeable lithium batteries. They are expensive, but they don't outgas, they are more temperature stable (good thing for a car trunk in Arizona), and they don't have a memory effect.

Going to the lithiums and the LED bulbs will give me more light, greater run time, AND greater reliability. The only downside is, the batteries are about $5 a piece, and the LED's are about $30 for the 3 wattt, and $50 to $70 for the 5 watt (oh and they get hot as hell).

Oh, and I need to replace the MagLite Solitaires I've got with something brighter, and that doesn't go through batteries as badly (and yes you can do it), but is still approximately the same size (or smaller).

I don't care for those photon (or copies) Keychain lights, because they jsut have the bare LED with no lens assembly etc... and they arent very easy to aim or use. I

'm thinking one of the mini .5 watt LED lights that use stacked lithium hearing aid batteries is the way to go there; I just havent found one I like yet.

Heres a semi-random list of links to flashlight resources:

Flashlight Reviews

LED Flashlight lamps and glass lenses

CR123A Batteries in bulk

Mr Bulk's Flashlight MOD site

Birthdays and Bastards

It was our older girls 4th birthday today. She spent most of the weekend with Grandma, then came home for her birthday dinner (home made macaroni and cheese, and nathans hot dogs - her favorite).

Unfortunately, it wasnt a happy day for her. In fact it's been a sad couple of weeks. See her biological father is a bit of a useless ass. He's supposed to call them every other day, but since they got back in mid December he's only called TWICE. We had to call HIM on christmas, and even then he wasn't there.

He didn't call today either.

We finally called him, just before her bed time. He talked to her for maybe three minutes. Then he asked to talk to Mel and layed some bullshit on her, trying to guilt her.

He swears up and down how much he loves his kids; how he's miserable that they're gone; how he can't live without them.

He's called twice in a month. He didn't call on Christmas, he didn't call on her birthday.

Rosie loves me. She gives me spontaneous hugs for no reason and crawls up to cuddle with me. She comes to me when she's hurt, or scared, or when she wants something done, or just to play. It's the sweetest thing in the whole world.

She wants me to be like her daddy, but she knows I'm not. She also feels guilty, because she loves me, AND her biological father, and she feels like she's betraying her real daddy; and so sometimes she won't hug me at all, and sometimes she says mean things to me, or throws things, or otherwise acts out.

All I can do is watch her go through the same hurt and disappointment I went through with my father (Hell I still am considering the old bastard never answers the phone or returns messages) and it just kills me.

Brilliant!

Or at least, pretty damned funny in a cynical kind of way (and isn't that the best kind of way)...

"What I mean is, Americans don't generally take well to tyrants. We hate them so much, we'll travel thousands of miles overseas just to depose one or two of the nasty bastards. Can you imagine what we'd do if we ever got one here at home?

Give us a leftwing dictator, and soon enough every rightwing wacko would be up in the hills with his rifle collection and enough ammo to sink the Titanic. (Not that the Titanic needed any help sinking, but you get the idea.) If things got worse, it wouldn't take long before the wackos were joined by their center-right comrades. The only difference between them would be the price of their guns."

Hmm, well I know a few folks who think Henry Bowman is a piker, so yeah. 'cept I'm not a hard right winger by any stretch of the imagination, and I'd be one of the boys trying to get within 600 meters of our glorious leader in the first few days.

Judging a man by his enemies, and his associates

So I'm looking through my logs, and theres another bunch of referrals from Patriotboy, referencing this comment:

"You've heard our dear leader previously refer to the "Axis of Evil." I have a group of conservative people who are more powerful than this pathetic Axis.

Without further ado, I introduce to you "The Arc of Stupidity."

Here are the four charter members:

Atlas Shrugs

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/

Emperor Misha

http://www.nicedoggie.net

Anarchangel

http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/

Kim du Toit

http://www.theothersideofkim.com/index.php/tos/9012/

Check out anarchangel and Du Toit's brillant recent posts on how non-peniled people should stay at home and raise the kids. These guys make Aristotle and Plato look like Yogi fucking Berra.

Beware the power of the arc!!"

--Bart
Bartholemew Throckmorton IV | 01.12.06 - 5:53 am

I love it. Personally I'm proud to be included in the "Arc of Stupidity", I mean look at who I'd be associated with. I count Kim and Misha as friends, and I rather like some of what I've read at Atlas Shrugs. Patriotboy on the other hand...

Well lets jsut say I will never cease to be amazed by how so many nominally intelligent folks can be quite so stupid. I suspect deliberate idiocy and/or ignorance is involved, but I can't quite comprehend that.

I mean, how can anyone mis-read Kim and my paeans to loving family AND saving money doing it, as somehow saying that the "non-peniled" should be kept barefoot and pregnant? Not only that but how on earth could they be so insulting to Mel and Connie unless it was through deliberate stupidity.

Tackling the Option

Warbs has a great post up on the option offense, spread offense, and the hybrid style coming into play these days:

The spread option is a whole new wrinkle on college football, and is effective if you have the following:

1. A quarterback with decent mobility who consistently reads the defensive players properly and makes the right decisions.
2. An elusive running back, able to make plays in the open field.
3. The ability to mix the pass in often enough to keep linebackers and defensive backs from leaving their pass coverage assignments to defend the run.

In football, the offense has the advantage of initiative, but usually the disadvantage of numbers and angles. To succeed, an offense has to not only execute plays well, but plays need to be designed to force defenses into making mistakes. The option is excellent at forcing defenses to make decisions, and once decisions are required, mistakes are inevitable. It is also designed so that when defended properly, it will still result in some positive yardage. The balance had swung to the defense, in that defenses were able to stop the option, not giving up yardage even when making slight mistakes in their defense. The spread changes that balance, by punishing those defenses for their mistakes, and slowing them down just enough when defending it well to gain positive yardage.

And NONE of this works, without excellent tackles, guards, and center.

I played three years of ball in Europe (Dublin Rebels - All Ireland and UK champion three years , all European Charleroi tropy winner three years), and in that time, as an excellent tackle (for that league - and the biggest tackle in the league at 6′2″ and 325-345lbs) I broke defensive plays and opened offensive plays (along with my guards and center) as my stock in trade. Kill the linebackers, kill the d-ends, stop the penetration, force the play up five yards.

My most frequent error? I would move my defenders back a step too far and get called for ineligible downfield (and no, I wasn't leaving holes in protection; the center and guard would pull and sweep back to protect the pocket in a pass or to wedge the D line and short screen for the rush with backs and ends coming in as forward and side blockers)

As usual, the analysis of how the ball moves is spot on, but again as usual (with almost all football commentators), there is almost no reference to what allows those plays to occur at all; how the play gets protected, and the defense get’s broken.

Plays are not made by ball carriers alone. This is part of the glory of football. It's not chess with violence, as some have called it; It is far more complex, because EVERY piece on the field is in play at once.

Without pass protection where are you? (the New England Patriots in the early 90s)

Without run blocking where are you? (the New England Patriots in the early 90s)

To my mind the offensive tackle is the most underappreciated position in the game; and not just because I was one. You can see it in the offensive performance of teams when their starting tackles are injured (which if frequently, the tackle is among the most injured player in the game. They also tend to have the shortest pro careers). A major hole in the O line completely throws off the rhythm of the offense as a whole, and the QB in particular.

My first major magazine link

Computerworld linked to Annoy, Abuse, Threaten, or Harrass today.

And I saw almost no increase in traffic.

Thus proving that no-one actually reads the main stream computer magazine web sites unless they are comparison shopping anymore.

Wives and Mothers

Kim has started a series, prompted by a book reviewing American history and culture from the 30's onwards. The first post is titled "Wives and Mothers", and addresses the issue of the change of gender roles away from motherhood, and now it's recent swing back:

I think that women will rather prepare themselves for a career as family managers than as factory managers.

Events seem to support this suggestion. Where women have gone into the full-time workforce, they’ve had children later in life (and fewer children withal), and in some cases, not had children at all. It’s also not surprising, therefore, that the generational replacement rate has fallen massively in societies where women have discarded their traditional role and become career professionals.

But what I say doesn’t matter. The plain fact today is that young women are returning to their traditional role, despite all the propaganda to the contrary. (Yes, I know that college enrolment among women is higher than ever: but college, today, is really no more than an advanced high school in terms of education standards, so that’s not a real indicator.)

More to the point: I think that young women under the age of 20 today have seen the effects of what working full-time has done to their own mothers—and I believe that they’re going to reject that path in higher and higher numbers.

This has a great personal significance to me, first because my mother was one of the women greatly harmed by the womens "working revolution", and as my fiance and I are going through this right now.

My fiance has two little girls, 4 and 2, from a previous marriage. We plan on having at least one more, and maybe up to three more kids (five is about the max either of us would ever want to take on). We aren't going to limit our kids based on a desired lifestyle or expense limit, we're going to limit them based on how many we think we can take care of.

She was working two jobs (one full time weekdays, one part time weekends) before she met me, and was going to continue doing so with a low income childcare subsidy. Without the subsidy, the cost of childcare would have been between $300 and $400 per week, which incidentally was her approximate take home pay.

She was spending between $50 and $100 a week in gas getting back and forth to her two jobs, and another $50-100 on fast food lunches and dinners because of timing.

So it would actually COST us an extra $100 to $200 per week for her to work; over and above any salary or wage she made. Then we looked at the tax numbers, and it gets even worse.

We calculated that she would need to make almost $40,000 a year for us to break even on her working; at least as long as we have young kids.

Not only that, but the kids would suffer for it, both of our time and energy and stress level would suffer for it…

Just in general, EVERYTHING IS WORSE when she works; so long as the family has a husband (me) who can provide for us.

At one time, most people understood that having both parents working in a family with small children was something negative. It is only something to be done when absolutely necessary, because everyone is worse off in every way, except the extra money coming in to the household; and when you factor other things, often that extra money is an illusion.

We decided that she would stay home, and that I would be the primary source of income, at least until the kids are all in grade school. She’ll go back to college when the kids are out of the house, and then when they are a bit older, she’ll go back to work.

In order to do this and maintain our current lifestyle, I need to make about $60,000 a year; which given my profession and my experience etc… I have no problem doing. It just means that I can't afford to go a few months between contracts anymore, and that I really should get a job with benefits. I'm more than willing to do this for my family.

This is going to be better for her, for me, for the girls, for the family as a whole. She knows this, and it is very definitely what she wants to do…

...and yet…

She actually feels guilty over this.

I guess it comes back to the Steinems of this world, and the myth of having it all

A Conversation of Questionable Content

I can just see this as a comic strip... say Questionable Content or Something Positive

Guy: I swear to you it's a conspiracy; it's trying to kill me.

Girl: It'll have to get through me first. No man who knows that much about oral sex should be allowed to die.

Now can't ya just see Aubrey or Dora saying that?

Annoy, Abuse, Threaten or Harass

"Whoever...utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet... without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person...who receives the communications...shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."

My god, how will usenet or blogs function when everyone is in prison?

Yes folks, congress has tried to make being anonymously annoying on the internet illegal.

In particular, Arlen Specter (who seems to truly hate the internet and electronic world in general given other bullshit he has sponsored before) re-wrote the language and included it in the "Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005", a must pass bill that provided funding for the justice department to continue operating.

Specter is also one of the senators (along with Fritz Hollings) who keeps trying to insert broadcast flag, and other DRM or copyright legislation into unrelated bills etc...; thus my saying he must really hate the internet.

The gist of it is simple. They took an existing anti-telephone harassment law, and re-wrote it to cover the internet directly, without changing the wording

Except there's a problem with that, the internet and the telephone, while both networks; are entirely different in nature; and are not, and can not be subject to the same type of rules, regulations, or management paradigms.

Oh, and this is a problem in conception that business people have had for almost three decades now, so it's only fitting that lawmakers will catch up.

The telephone is a unicast medium. It involves a point to point communication that must be acknowledged or significant damage to ones life or business will result. The internet is a broadcast medium (with regards to communication of ideas or speach anyway).

Effectively the internet AS A WHOLE is a public space (with private spaces connected to it, and a huge number of idiots who don't seem to understand the difference); and annoying speach in public is generally allowed, so long as that speach is not disturgbing the peace.

Well, how is something disturbing the public peace if you have to open a door and walk into a room to hear it? No matter how load and annoying it is, the sound cant leave the room you have deliberately entered of your own choice.

Not only that, but ones own sites, whether they are publicly accessible or not, ARE EFFECTIVELY PRIVATE SPACES, and annoying speach is ALWAYS allowed in your private spaces; unless that annoyance becomes harrassment.

The fact is, you jsut can't make annoying speach a crime. If I were forcing you to listen to it; yeah that'd be a crime; but just posting annoying speach, or even sending annoying emails (though that is a much grayer area, especialy as regards inboxes and other explicit infospaces, expectation of privacy, and ownership of virtual spaces, but that's another discussion entirely) can never be a crime.

The good news is, there is no way this provision will stand. Case law is already against it, and the ACLU will do one of it's rare good deeds and make sure this gets challenged and struck down right away.

The congresscritters just better hope they made the damn thing severable or the supremes will have to invalidate the entire bill.

Nawww, this has never actually happened

A little (lack of) Pressure

Conversation in early December:

Me: Honey, when you get the car washed, check the tires OK. I think They're a little low.
Her: Ok

Next day:

Me: Honey did you check the tires
Her: They were fine

Yesterday (January 9th):

Me: Honey, I'm gonna check the tires, I really think they're low.
Her: Ok
Me: Holy shit these are low! Remember when I said to check the tires because I thought they were low. They're supposed to all be at 40psi warm. They were at 29, 30, 31, and 32 respectively.
Her: Uhhhhhhhh oops. Sorry hon
Me: Well, that explains some of the squirminess and slight loss of mileage. We should see another mpg, maybe two, at full pressure.

So I pressured up the tires, and yeah, it was two MPG more, and proper road feel (though a somewhat harsher ride on an already tightly tuned suspension).

I've also instituted a maintenance and operations log. Any time one of us fills the gas, checks the oil, checks the tires etc.. the results get written into the log.

It's something I ALWAYS do for multi driver vehicles, but didnt bother with my car this time since I was the only driver, and it was my only car so I just remembered all that crap (and yes, I very distinctly remember the last pressure check, oil, my exact average fuel economy given driving conditions etc... Any experienced driver should).

Is it anal? A bit, but then you avoid issues like running around town with tires down 10psi; which reduces your fuel economy, and increases your chances of losing a tire if you hit a curb or pothole.

Eden on Education

Eden Gardner is an interesting lady, and this article in Reason (a magazine I frequently disagree with, but you have to read it frequently to disagree with it frequently; and it is worth doing so), has inspired her to share a personal story about friends making educational decisions for their child

Here's the 'graph that I like the most though:

"In Alice's world, K-12 education would be standardized on a federal level. All schools would teach exactly the same thing, with flexibility for some units about local history and issues, and all schools would be clean and safe, with devoted, brilliant, motivational teachers who are paid like rock stars. The happy, excited students would spend two years in required community service, then trounce off to affordable colleges where they could study Plato and Newton and Chaucer (preferably segregated by sex so as to not distract the young adults with sex when they should be learning). Then, they would proceed to grad school for professional training or be welcomed into high-paying jobs -- though not with greedy multinational corporations -- where their open and well-informed minds would quickly catch onto the skills required. It's like a freakin' science fiction novel and she thinks it's all possible if schools were simply given more money.

Allow me to pause for laughter."

This has fairly quickly become a major issue in my life, since I now have a four year old (actually her fourth birthday is next Sunday), who is, horror of horrors, pretty damned smart.

I think we all know how I feel about so called education for "the gifted" at this point, having been through the wringer myself and barely come out the other end sane and functional.

Worse, Arizona public schools, even in my high dollar neighborhood, are almost universally bad. In fact, in my estimation ALL public schools are universally bad; but Arizona schools are particularly bad, consistently ranking in the bottom ten in the nation.

So we're looking at options right now, and from our estimation we're looking at the following:

1. Private School: Not a lot of non-religious options, and expensive, but a decent education. We're seriously considering the local catholic schools, which accept non-catholics and have a non-proseletyzing educational policy. The Jesuits (now anyway) believe in educating everyone to think and reason and learn; and that if offered, the educated mind will come to faith on it's own.

2. Charter schools: Still stuck with the public education monstrosity, but at least we get a real choice of teachers, policies, and even curricula (here in AZ anyway). This I think is our most likely option.

3. Home Schooling: Mel is going to be staying home, so we would, but it's unlikely the custody situation (their dad is a Canadian) is going to allow anything non-government sanctioned; at least for now. In general I'm a big supporter of home schooling, basically because I don't think any public school, and most private schools, can properly educate anyone, except in how to be a socialist drone.

We've got a few months left to decide (actually depending on what we decide to do she could enter this september, or she may have to wait til next); and it is just kindegarten, but still...

Dude, How'd he know?

Transmetropolitan Your world is 64% Sophisticated, 53% Unconventional, and 79% Intense!

You, my friend, have one hell of a ride ahead of you. You've landed yourself in the futuristic earth of Transmetropolitan. The City is an... interesting place to live, full of opportunity and brutality, bliss and suffering, intelligence and depths of ignorance unimaginable. You'll only believe what you see, and you'll see things so weird, so incomprehensible, so fucked up that you'd probably go mad if you didn't so crave such things. But they'll all make their own sort of sense and fit in with the big, crazy picture. Want to try on a new body for a day, or a week? Want to drink and smoke and do drugs beyond your wildest dreams without any real negative effects (think "anti-cancer prescriptions")? Want to fight the establishment and find the Truth with only a weekly opinion column? Then you're in luck. Personally I recommend becoming a Foglet.

My test tracked 3 variables How you compared to other people your age and gender: You scored higher than 63% on Sophisticated You scored higher than 76% on Unconventional You scored higher than 98% on Intense

Link: The Which Imaginary World Fits You Test written by Azurain on OkCupid Free Online Dating, home of the 32-Type Dating Test

Ummm, yeah pretty much

Curvy and Naughty Raw score: 48% Big Breasts, 54% Big Ass, and 40% Cute!

Thanks for taking the T and A and C test! Based on your selections, the results are clear: you show an attraction to larger breasts, larger asses, and sexier composures than others who've taken the test. Note that you like women overall curvier than average. My third variable, "cuteness" is a mostly objective measure of how innocent a given model looked. It's determined by a combination of a lot of factors: lack of dark eye makeup, facial expression, posture, etc. If you scored high on that variable, you are either really nice OR you're into deflowering teens. If you scored low, you are attracted to raunchier, sexier, women. In your case, your lower than average score suggests you appreciate a sexier, naughtier look. Kudos! Recommended Celebrities: Supermodel Laetitia Casta and Actress Angelina Jolie.

My test tracked 3 variables How you compared to other people your age and gender: You scored higher than 50% on tit-size You scored higher than 65% on ass-size You scored higher than 9% on cuteness

Link: The Tits, Ass, and Cuteness Test written by chicken_pot_pie on Ok Cupid, home of the 32-Type Dating Test

Only 81%

Master/Mistress You scored 81% Kinkiness!

Whether you are a top or bottom, you have Mastered the kink. Maybe a bit too much for most people. You know about everything I covered and much, much more. If you have a critique or would like to talk to me more about Fetish/BDSM/taboos, please feel free. Congratulations, you've peaked my interest.

My test tracked 1 variable How you compared to other people your age and gender: You scored higher than 96% on Kinkiness

Link: The How Kinky Are You Really Test written by monkeyqueen9 on Ok Cupid, home of the 32-Type Dating Test

Only 81%? I'm dissapointed... well the test was a bit biased towards subs and women, and since I am the opposite of those two things I guess that skewed it.

God Speed Gary

That is all

Stupid, Evil, Tolerant, Necessary

One of the lefty trolls who's comments I have been deleting finally asked why I was deleting them. I directed him to the post above; and he responded with this:

"And I think you are a liar because anyone with the education and intellect that you claim most certainly wouldn't have done something so childish, moronic and insulting.

It wasn't a political statement. It was a public display of how shallow and foolish you and your buddies are.

Feel free to delete. You're still a fool."

Ahh that comment at least, though insulting, was not vulgar.

No Dan, I'm not lying, and I'm not evil, and I'm not stupid, I'm not ignorant, I'm not a racist, I'm not a nazi ... I could go on but I think you should get the point by now.

I disagree with you very strongly.

You see, smart people, nice people, good people, they disagree with you.

Smart, nice, and good people agree with you too, but I happen to think they are wrong. This does not make me ignorant, evil, or stupid.

I think that just about every political and economic idea you have is wrong (along with most of the social ideas, but not all).

That doesnt make me ignorant, evil, stupid... maybe it makes me a bit of an asshole, but I can live with that.

Why do you think we did it Dan?

Did you even read the page I wrote on why?

Did you even know about the false stories about the Koran being flushed down the toilet , or the riots that ACTUALLY KILLED PEOPLE because of them?

Or did you simply act like an ignorant, small minded, shallow, fool (using the words of commenters including yourself) and have an immediate, violent, unjustified, intolerant, bigoted, stupid emotional reaction... funny enough just like those muslim rioters.

I mean honestly, do you really think that those who disagree with you are automatically bad because they disagree with you?

Do you believe that we are all ignorant, misguided, stupid, or evil?

I mean we must have good reasons for what we do, what we believe in jsut as you do? Or are we all just stupid or evil?

I want to bring up two more comments; both well thought out, but again, I believe; thought out from incorrect first principles:

The Bible pisses all over itself. You gentlemen are proof of that.
-- Renard 01.05.06 - 12:14 am

I must apologize for what I just wrote. I was acting in blind a stupid anger and I realize upon looking at the rest of your site that my comment was based on stupid, broad incorrect generalizations.

Please accept my apology, but please also realize that even though I am in no way a fan of Islam (quite the contrary, I am very much against almost all religions) your videos and comments were very offensive and "rednecky" in that they made it seem very much like you share the view of all Arabs being terrorists.

I also find it strange and sad that a lover of reading, as you describe yourself elsewhere on your site, would approve of book burning, a time honored tradition of fascists and close minded extremists.
-- Renazzle 01.05.06 - 12:57 am

This commenter, who I suspect I would like if given the chance, had the same initial reaction that Dan did, then he thought about it, and he looked at it, and he looked at my site, and he thought about it some more; and wrote something thoughtful and considered.

I understand the initial reaction. The videos ARE OFFENSIVE, if you believe that symbols are as important as reality; if you believe that people have a right not to be offended; if you believe that everyone should seek to understand and appreciate "other cultures" no matter what they are, or what they believe.

I don't believe any of that.

I believe that a book is just a book, no matter it's content; and the only symbols I have any particular attachment to are the american flag, and the ones tattooed into my arms.

I don't beleive that a book is, or can be, sacred.

I believe that private property IS sacred, and that one ought be able to do whatever one pleases with their private property, so long as it doesnt harm others; EVEN IF IT IS PROFOUNDLY OFFENSIVE TO OTHERS.

Burning books to deny knowledge, now that's wrong. Burning a particular book as a counter protest against terrorism... well, that's irony; at least if you have any sense of history.

Which brings me to the last comment I want to highlight:

"Homo Sapeins has been around for about 100,000 years. For all that time, we've struggled to build better lives, create civilizations, better understand our world and our Creator, and achieve something like peace with one another.

Your action detracts from this effort.

The book you men have destroyed is, like most human intellectual and spiritual achievements, imperfect, but is nonetheless a high pinnacle of human civilzation. Some passages in it speak to the yearning of the human soul for union with God in almost inexpressibly beautiful poetry. To destroy (or approve the destruction) of such a thing of spiritual beauty is the act of lunatics or beasts, not civilized men.

By this barbarous act you (and by their approval, your supporters) have joined your intellectual forebearers, the Nazi bookburners of Nuremburg, in an attempt to corrupt and nullify man's intellect, his soul, and his relationship with God. To say your acts are misguided would assume you have the humilty to attempt to learn from your betters to begin with, and since you evidently lack such humility, I am left to assume you, and everyone that thinks like you, is sunk either in hatred or genuine insanity to a pitiable degree.

You should be ashamed of yourselves."

-- John Fries 01.02.06 - 9:04 am

Yes, I have a somewhat dark sense of humor.

If you are offended by the Koran being burned, I ask you why? Would you particularly mind if it was Mein Kampf that was being burned? Or if it was a daily newspaper?

They are all of equal value as far as I am concerned. They are ink on a page. I bought them, I can piss on them, shoot them, burn them, blow them up... wait a sec, I already did.

They are symbols. Symbols mean nothing unless you make them. If I burn a symbol of your faith, is it the same as burning your faith? Have I harmed you in any way? Have I changed you in any way? Have I done anything at all wrong; except by the tenets of your own faith, which I am under no obligation to subscribe to.

Ahhh wait, there's the thing. Many of you want us to accomodate them. To accomodate anyone who is offended, or hurt, or shocked by anything. To accept others beleifs and act on them, because we must be "respectufl" or "tolerant".

I am sure than Mr. Fries believes what he has said. I'm sure some of you agree with him. I believe those of you with that belief are wrong; in fact you are fools.

Tolerance is not equal to acceptance, and even if it were I do not tolerate many muslim beliefs. I do not tolerate that women are evil, inferior to men, to be beaten to keep them in line, beheaded if they commit adultery. I do not tolerate that people who do not believe as I do should be killed.

I have destroyed my own private property. Some believe this is attacking their faith. Some believe it gives them the right to threaten me, and my family. I do not tolerate this belief.

If you buy a bible, you can do the same thing. If you buy a flag, you can do the same thing. I don't have any problem with the first, and my problem with the second lies entirely in the intent (if you're doing it because you're an Amrican citizen who hates America, well I've got a problem with that), but I still support and defend your right to do it.

You can do these things, because we do not live in a theocracy. We do not live in a fascist dictatorship (where burning the flag would almsot certainly be punishable by death). We live in a nation, and a society that does still believe in private property, and freedom of thought, word, and deed (Kelo, McCaiun Feingold, and the "war on drugs" notwithstanding).

It is not necessary that we tolerate the beliefs of muslims when they interact with our society. It is necessary that muslims in America, and the west, accept the laws and customs of our society.

It is necessary that those muslims who live in islamic countries do not do war upon us for being unbelievers. It is necessary that they accomodate and tolerate OUR beliefs, and OUR laws, and OUR cultures while outside of islamic countries; or it is necessary that they be conquered or killed.

Perpetual Revolution against the Dark Gods

Fran Poretto has some interesting thoughts, inspired by the Mark Steyn essay I linked t'other day:

"I've proclaimed the necessity of an ideological revolution. The essentials to any revolution, including an ideological one, are education, communications, and weaponry.

Education is obvious. Our young are being miseducated as we speak. We must snatch their minds back from those who would infuse them with the relativistic, nonjudgmental creed and introduce them to the principles of the Founding. Equally as urgent, we must induce them to acquire strength and skill, the only sound foundation for pride. A man who can catch and cook his own dinner is unlikely to bow before any other man, nor will he accede to self-immolation at the behest of any god.

Communications is equally obvious. Americans who see the necessities outlined here must be able to find one another, pool information, exchange ideas, and offer mutual support. When we are isolated, we're easy targets: easy to silence and safe to ignore. When we know we're not alone, that there are others willing and able to support us, we have the strength of ten.

Weaponry is fundamental, yet its full impact is almost always overlooked. It's been said that the Second Amendment is the sole guarantor of the First, and truly. But what's less apparent is that an armed and confident man is a model for other men. He draws admiration for much the same reason as does an articulate, educated man: he can do things others can't. Therefore, be armed, and be conspicuously armed. Shoot often. Make it a family activity. Invite your friends and neighbors to join you, and to bring their children, too. When the opportunity arises, add to the simple pleasures of sport shooting a measure of history: stories of the great men of arms, whose valor brought them honor, and their nations victory.

American birth rates are at replacement rates, true. If our numbers are not to increase, our strength and our confidence will have to suffice. But if history is any guide, they will."

Thats about 1/10th of the very long essay. I'm not with him 100%, but he's prolly got about 80 our of me.

More truth from Mark Steyn

Steyn lays it out in gory, and exhaustive detail here:

It's the Demography, Stupid

"The real reason the West is in danger of extinction.

BY MARK STEYN
Wednesday, January 4, 2006 12:01 a.m. EST

Most people reading this have strong stomachs, so let me lay it out as baldly as I can: Much of what we loosely call the Western world will not survive this century, and much of it will effectively disappear within our lifetimes, including many if not most Western European countries. There'll probably still be a geographical area on the map marked as Italy or the Netherlands--probably--just as in Istanbul there's still a building called St. Sophia's Cathedral. But it's not a cathedral; it's merely a designation for a piece of real estate. Likewise, Italy and the Netherlands will merely be designations for real estate. The challenge for those who reckon Western civilization is on balance better than the alternatives is to figure out a way to save at least some parts of the West. "

Go, read, now.

Lefty Trolls

So, for the past three days or so my blog has been inundated with lefty trollers redirected from the patriot boy (remember what I said about the videos resurfacing every few months with a different group).

I've deleted literally hundreds of comments filled with nothing but bullshit, vulgarity, rudeness etc... Of the total comments recieved from these referrals, there have only bee two I havent deleted, because they were critical; but civil (oh and I got a couple of decent emails as well)

Honestly though, this one is my favorite:

" Yall are a bunch of faggits You love Jeff Gannon and the rest of the homos. George and Cheny and the rest NEVER served when they supported Vietnam. They are cowards and hate God. They have stolen billions from USA and piss on the tax payers. You faggot ass texans LOVE taxes! You love spying on people! you love letting HOMOS take over our government! Repukes stole how many hundreds of billions? All on taxpayer credit cards? Don' t republikkkans know that we've got to pay all that back someday? Are you children? Don't you know how to balance a check book? You just love stealing tax money, it's all free for George and the Oil Barons. You hate the constitution and you hate Voting. You just love the dictator and cock slurping Fags in the WhitheHouse. Republican = FAT FAGGOTS "

I got this ten minutes ago, and I'm still laughing. I mean I could tear the anonymous idiot to shreds, but honestly, why bother?

A note to lefty trolls:

1. Yes I am fat. I am aware of that. I am amused by your continuing insults. Oh how they wound me so.

2. No I am not technically a bastard, but I frequently act like one

3. I am most definitely not either gay, or impotent. I am not socially dysfunctional. I am not a psychopath, and I am not compensating for something. I even have a family. That said, if I were gay, so what? I thought that was OK? Please save your pop psychology for your own inadequacies thank you.

4. I am not from Texas, a "redneck' as you would define the term, uneducated, racist, or ignorant. I am almost certainly more intelligent and better educated than you are. I have two engineering degrees, an I.Q. somehere between the top 1/100th and top 1/1000th of one percent, and I grew up in that most liberal of cities, Boston. I, unlike almost all of you, have in fact read the Koran; and just about every other major religious text.

5. I am not a republican. I don't care for Bush. I think the patriot act is the second worst piece of legislation ever enacted by our federal government. I am a liberatarian (note the small L).

6. I am not a christian; nor would I care if anyone did this to christian symbols, so long as they owned them.

7. Many of you say "why don't you go and serve if you want to shoot muslims" etc... One, I don't particuarly want to shoot muslims, and two I served eight years in the Air Force and reserves.

8. What we did was not just a little YEEHA!, it was a political protest. Something y'all are quite fond of when you happen to agree with the topic of the protest; but somehow dont support at all when you disagree

9. I will delete, ban, and report as spam anyone using crass vulgarity and insulting invective to no good end in my comments. Oh and while "anonymous" posting is allowed, remember I do have your IP addresses, and can easily contact the abuse adminsitrator at your ISP.

10. I am more than open to reasonable and civil discussion or debate with people who disagree with me. Please, feel free to comment if that is what you are interested in. All others will be deleted.

Have fun