Never let facts get in the way

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Probably you've heard that Melissa Bachman, a TV personality and hunter, has killed a lion in Africa. If not, you've now heard.

A good trophy for Ms. Bachman.

The first news I got of this was a screaming headline stating Bachman "killed a lion on Facebook and Twitter." I am not kidding. You might be able to imagine my amazement. Huge predator cats are now stalking in Facebook and Twitter and can be hunted there? SIGN ME UP!

Snark aside. Not really, more on the way. I just felt like saying that.

In case you wonder, I do not want to kill a lion. Just not my thang. I do want to kill a Cape Buffalo and a warthog.

Bachman killed a lion. Parts of the world are now outraged. Why? This guy and some others called Bachman a coward. You'll note all these people said this from a vehicle or another place of safety. None of them got out of the vehicle and approached a lion on foot. You can tell they've never done this because they are still alive.

Lemme just note also - when you resort to insulting the other side in a debate, you lose.

You can see repeated videos of lion hunts on YouTube. These vids do spark outrage from anti hunters. But nothing like the furor over Bachman. Why the outrage? I really do not know. Baffled, I am. Why aren't all these people raising hell about all the other lion hunting? Aside from complaining, what are they doing to protect the lions and help the people who live in lion territory?

Ah so.

You may be one who decries lion hunting. I then ask again what are you doing to protect these beasts? "Whenever I donate a hunting trip for the Children's Leukemia Foundation, Ronald McDonald Cancer House, all these children's charities, I offer the anti-hunters an opportunity: if you donate more to the children's charity than the hunters donate we won't go hunting." Ted Nugent. So far Ted has yet to cancel a hunt. Why?

Does hunting lions actually protect them? Some in Africa say yes. I personally find it very hard to argue with someone whose feet on are on the ground being discussed and who has far far far more knowledge about the situation than I do. "If you want to save a species, simply decide to eat it. Then it will be managed - like chickens, like turkeys, like deer, like Canadian geese." Ted Nugent.

Habitat loss. And where do YOU live?

I can't find hard numbers of the number of lions killed every year. I can state killers are hunters who pay big bucks for the privilege, natives who protect their livestock, ritual killings, each other, starvation and natural causes. Lions are killed by poisoning by ranchers, BTW. In every article I read about lions, killing and their decline, loss of habitat and human-lion conflict were mentioned every time.

Hrm.

Humans and wildlife can coexist. There's two ways to do this. 1) When the wildlife is managed per human wishes. This means killing 'em when they "get out of hand." Wildlife does not reason and cannot be reasoned with. Wildlife is interested in procreating and eating. 2) According to an unmodified natural order. I have yet to meet a human willing to live according to the wildlife's way of life. In other words, a human would have to accept an unmodified place in the food chain. Everyone who complains about lion hunters is hereby cordially invited to live with wild lions on the lions' terms. There won't be enough left of you to bury. You're lunch.

There is no third option. Ideas like birth control, sterilization and so forth are part of Option 1 and when it does not work, the guns and bows and poison come out.

In another thing I don't understand, the anti hunting crowd is threatening to kill the hunters. Anti's have on several occasions threatened to kill me. I am not kidding. This is bizarre. The anti's are opposed to killing and yet are threatening to kill? Further, they generally have little to no idea how to use weapons and they claim to want to tangle with people who know how to kill. Huhn? Color me confused. Meantime, if you're one of this crowd, tell me when and where you'd like to meet to settle this.

Some facts, which I am SURE the haters will not let get in the way:

Lions kill people. I am not complaining. Merely stating facts. Lions eat meat. While the Bible says the Lion will lay down with the Lamb, getting the big cats to eat grass and survive on it ain't gonna happen short of a miracle. While big cats occasionally "adopt" a prey animal, they do eat it within a few days.

You can buy lion meat. Purty 'spensive, but hey, you can do it. I'd eat it. If you eat meat and you object to this, I must ask why.

If you want to save a species, simply decide to eat it. Then it will be managed - like chickens, like turkeys, like deer, like Canadian geese.
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/t/tednugent189511.html#G9JJORbvAbre3jK5.99

If you want to save a species, simply decide to eat it. Then it will be managed - like chickens, like turkeys, like deer, like Canadian geese.
Ted Nugent
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/t/ted_nugent.html#RJl3x816Oic8BX5F.99

If you want to save a species, simply decide to eat it. Then it will be managed - like chickens, like turkeys, like deer, like Canadian geese.
Ted Nugent
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/t/ted_nugent.html#RJl3x816Oic8BX5F.99

If you want to save a species, simply decide to eat it. Then it will be managed - like chickens, like turkeys, like deer, like Canadian geese.
Ted Nugent
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/t/ted_nugent.html#RJl3x816Oic8BX5F.99

Lion hunts ain't cheap. A lion like Bachman killed is gonna run more than $20,000. This website lists ONLY the cost of the hunt package. It does not list the tips you are expected to pay and other fees not included. The lion feeds local villagers who also get to partake of the license fees and earn tips for helping with the hunt. Photo safaris run less than $2,000 per person. I'll also betcha the guide on these trips packs a gun just in case. And, I have yet to see anyone on a photo safari get within 30 yards on foot of a wild lion. It's dangerous.

You can say a lion can be photographed over and over again, generating fees each time while a lion kill results in a one-time payment. Yup. I again point you to the lion poisoning, livestock protection killing and ritual killings. No fees are generated by this and a lion is still dead. As long as Africa's population grows, lions are going to be in increasing conflict with humans. See Options 1 and 2 above.

The simple truth is when human and wildlife collide, wildlife dies.

Some after a deer hunt ramblins

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Feel free to skip this as you won't miss much. But every time I say that, people say the post is truly amazing. Oy.

Yet another post I made on FB got me to thinking several thinks at once. Not things, thinks. So in no particular order:

Before you decide to run off at the mouth or keyboard about someone and what they did, why doncha try to understand why they did it? By you, I mean everybody. You, me, the guy hiding in the bushes outside your bedroom window, the clown in the closet, the crackhead presently laying unconscious in the ditch at the railroad track across the road.

Item the first: In my bidnez, I hear a substantial amount of complaining about how much people pay in taxes. At a meeting some years ago a local gent proceeded to rip the County Commissioners apart because his taxes were too high, he couldn't get his dirt road scraped, there were too many deputies and he never saw a deputy patrolling and so on.

This went beyond cognitive dissonance. When I attempted to asked him what all he meant, he quickly cut me off and told me "I know what you're going to say." I was only slightly amazed at his precognitive capabilities. I've found that when I show up, everyone within hearing distance is an immediate expert on me and can predict the future. Everyone but me knows what I'm going to do and say and everyone knows where I'm going.

I interrupted his interruption and asked him what he knew about the County budget. Aside from his taxes being too high and he couldn't get the services he felt he deserved, he knew nothing. Furthermore, by his express stated opinion he did not want to know.

That's a special kind of stupid.

Item the second: What makes you an expert on someone else? (See above definition of you). A good example: I have no idea what it's like to give birth to a child from a pain perspective. Or do I? I have far too much experience with what kidney stone pain is like. The nurse who took care of me when I had my first kidney stone said she'd had both kinds of pain. She said it was exactly the same. Kidney stones were worse. Labor pain came and went but the kidney stone pain hung around.

I can't experience labor pains, for which I am glad.

There are many many many many many (add many until you feel there's enough) things you cannot experience and will not experience. So what makes you an expert on them? There is no difference, in my mind, to an ill-informed opinion and stupidity.

Item the third: Our folks in public safety catch all kinds of hell when something goes wrong. Some of 'em catch hell when things go right. Firefighters are routinely complained at because "they used too much water to put the fire out and now everything is ruined." Ahhhh, what? You'd rather have fire damage than water damage?

The great majority in folks in law enforcement are there because they want to help. Yes, there are a few screwups who give the rest a bad name. But think about your own profession. Do you want to be judged based on what a few idiots have done in the same job you have? Idiots abound and can be found everywhere.

Item the fourth: I need to kill a deer. I am not kidding.

Item the fifth: If something is so wrong, what are you doing to change it? I suggest that if you are not resisting or attempting to change things with all your abilities and might, then you are complicit in the wrongness continuing. Put up or shut up, in other words.

Item the sixth: I do not support any of the current wars the United States is engaged in: Korea, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, various S. American countries etc etc. I no longer know how many wars the US is currently fighting. In case you wonder, if we have US troops in a country and they are shooting other people, that's my definition of war. The US has been at war my entire life.

I do not support the wars. I do support the troops. You may see this as a disconnect. Refer back to point 2. I also say bring all our troops home. This does not need Congressional approval. Bring 'em home. Blow up everything that can't be brought home or loaded on a plane with 24 hours.

I do not believe that the wars on most of these fronts is necessary for the security of the United States. However, I then refer myself back to point 1. To wit: Those in leadership positions may have information I am not privy to. However, as our elected leaders I also believe they have a responsibility to share this information with us to convince us of the need for military intervention.

They have not. They will not. I must therefore conclude there is not legitimate reason for these wars.

Item the last: As posted on my FB feed just a bit ago by Wyatt's mom: "You must have made quite an impression on Wyatt the other day. He just ran through the living room randomly and yelled, "Ben Baker! Ben Baker! Ben Baker!" Kids are crazy."

Nope. My plan to take over the world by creating minions in the new generation is proceeding apace.
Wyatt is 3, I think. I thought y'all needed to know how I am influencing the next generation.

Conclusion: I really believe that if we take the time to understand each other, this world will be a much better place.

Of opinions, fact and people who read 'em

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Just like every other newspaper in the world, the paper I work for is roundly damned by the people who live in this community.

Robert Williams, publisher of The Blackshear Times, has this to say about newspaper and its critics: Loved by many, cussed by some, read by all.

Truth. Every newspaper I have ever worked for and every newspaper editor I have ever talked to reports the same thing. The local people claim to despise the paper, while praising papers in other communities.

Kinda like Congress except in reverse. YOUR congressman is doing a pretty good job but the rest of those bastards need to be replaced. Newspapers are a definite case of "the grass over yonder is greener."

In case you wonder, the newspaper I work maintained its reader base subscribers in the time I have been here, if you consider the population decline which has also hit my community. In other words, our population is down more than 2,000 since I came here. Sales have stayed nearly steady.

With this in mind, I recently made this post to FB:  

 

It was recently pointed out to me that some people do not read the newspaper I work for because they do not like "arrogant opinions."

Thank you. I can mark you off the list of people I need to offend.

It is extremely easy to offend someone by insulting them. I do not do this. It is far harder to offend someone by telling the truth and standing up for your own convictions.

If the truth hurts, yer living wrong.
My friends and followers, whom I treasure, had this to say:

Mike: Arrogant opinions? Would the phrase be defined as, "any opinion other than the one you have at that moment?"

 

To which I replied: Rather, "any information that is not exactly the same as the opinion you have at the moment."

 

Vicki: If they don't read because of an opinion, they are just missing out on everything else in there.

 

Maggie: Although I appreciate the full intent of your maxim, "If the truth hurts, yer living wrong," it hints at Absolutism. It is not possible for people to live "perfectly." For example: people who are essentially "green" quite likely do not have the wherewithal to live fully green and live in today's modernity. (Not saying it is not do-able; just saying it means a radical 'fully off the grid' move). 

 

Howard: "... still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest..." Paul Simon

 

Lori: I submit that if a person spends his life putting his opinion in a town paper every week, a blog, various social mediums and in printed books, chances are there's a smidgen of arrogance. Would there not have to be? The confidence it takes to do the before mentioned activities would often be met with backlash that would drive a person to cross to arrogance now and then. The problem is that most people confuse confidence with arrogance and see a great deal more of it than there is.

 

Maggie (again): And if we spend our lives concerned with offending others we don't accomplish as much as we might wish. 

 

Lori (again): The greatest consolation is that those who are offended by all they do not agree with appear to be the dang unhappiest people in general. The world in general will not get in step with their beliefs and this bothers them to no end.

 

Rebel: Thank god I am never guilty of arrogant opinions! Was that thunder?

 

Maggie (again): Yes. But it keeps them occupied.

So tell me what you want, what you really really want

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
http://www.rolereboot.org/culture-and-politics/details/2013-11-how-locker-room-behavior-hurts-us-all


Normally this is the kinda thing I'd leave to Merle, but I'm tackling this one.

To start with the author starts out with a rant on football players, pro players at that. She then leaps into a completely different discussion, which is exactly the same thing I do in too many of my blogs.

To follow the path she's laid down:

1) This is PRO football. To pull a quote from her article, "This is a game of high testosterone, with men hammering their bodies on a daily basis. You are taught to be an aggressive person, and you typically do not make it to the NFL if you are a passive person. There are a few, but it’s very hard. Playing football is a man’s job, and if there’s any weak link, it gets weeded out. It’s the leaders’ job on the team to take care of it."

Unlike the article's author, I do not believe, for an instant, that what happened to the football player who quit was an attempt to weed him out. It was nothing more than what very strong men, amped on testosterone and so on do to each other. Weeding out happens on the field and is done by the coach, not the locker room.

What the player who quit heard is exactly what'd he'd hear on the field from opposing players. Yes. It is. It's called psychology.

I give you an excerpt from my all time favorite movie, M*A*S*H:

Cpl. Judson: Bastard, 88, called me a coon.
Spearchucker: Called you a what?
Cpl. Judson: Coon.
Spearchucker: OK, that's an old pro trick, to get you thrown out of the ball game.
Cpl. Judson: Well...
Spearchucker: Why don't you do the same thing to him?
Cpl. Judson: What, call him a coon?

The statements hurled at Jonathan Martin are exactly what I'd expect to hear in pro football.

Some may believe you can have a quality football team without this kind of activity. Sure. Just ask former UGA Head Coach Ray Goff about the light-handed approach to football and football players. Goff was fired. When my own late sainted grandmother said of Goff,  "He's just not mean enough" then you know something was off. Still don't believe me? Ask Steve Spurrier what it takes to be a successful football coach and player.

Suit up or shut up.

Some people will still say it doesn't have to be this way. How many of them played pro football? How many played football at all? In case you wonder, I played football in school, one year. I played what amounted to rugby a lot longer.

"It still doesn't have to be that way."

Play football and come back and talk to me.

Furthermore, show me ANY professional activity with the same team esprit de corps and the same amount of violence and I'll show you the exact same activities taking place.

Next point. The author's true colors come shining clear with this statement: "In a society largely controlled by property-owning, land-stealing, vote-wielding, and law-making white men, we’ve shaped our culture to revere brutal and subjugating behavior, especially when it comes from white guys." Whew. I wish she wouldn't hold back.

She then goes on to make some almost logical points. I'ma use this sentence by way of example: "Or politicians who visit strip joints on fundraising outings, use profanity and name-calling when dealing with female co-workers (including the First Lady), and even our own President who only invites men to chummy pick-up basketball games at the White House."

GASP! Women do go to strip clubs.

Point 1: Why don't women visit strip joints? Sure they do, but in less numbers than men. Why? Furthermore, what's wrong with going to a strip club? I'm sure she has answers, all of which are man-bashing. I wonder what she had to say about Georgia's major embarrassment, Cynthia McKinney.

Point 2 and 3: Make up your FREEKING MIND! Men use profanity and name-calling when dealing with each other! It's WHAT WE DO! If you want to be treated equally, GET USED TO THE IDEA Of BEING CALLED NAMES! It's been going on for millennia. If you don't want equal treatment, then do not bitch about being treated unequally. Of course the president only invites men to the basketball court. Can you imagine what would be said if he popped a woman in the boob on the court? Egad. The press busts (heehee) a guy in the chest and the guy grins and gets payback a bit later.

Make up your mind. Men, real men and responsible men, will treat women the way women ask to be treated. As soon as the women figure it out. Which is no doubt going to be called a sexist remark. G'head. I'm not the one who says "Nothing" when someone asks me, "What's wrong?"

GAAAAAAAAAAH!

Next quote: "Men, in every profession, should be expected to operate off of more than emotions and instincts. They should be expected to be professionals." Professionals. Ms. White is a college journalism instructor who wrote "But I’m over this “boys will be boys” shit." That appears at the lead sentence in the very paragraph in which she demands men be professional.

Play football. Then talk to me. And then when yer at it, apply the same code of standard to yerself Khadijah Costley White. Yassee the very things she accuses men of doing, she does in her profanity-sprinkled tirade lambasting the XY chromosome crowd.

Parity does not live in Ms. White's column.

'Nother quote: "America’s history is built on the destruction and exploitation of others." Lemme let a grand idiot, Axl Rose reply:

"Welcome to the jungle, we got fun 'n' games
We got everything you want, honey we know the names
We are the people that you find, whatever you may need
If you got the money, honey we got your disease."

Here's where she and I do agree. Neither of likes a society ruled by powerful amoral types. "I believe that you can win a football game without being racist, sexist, and homophobic." She and I also agree. But you can't win football games without having enough attitude to be a winner on the field. Ask any pro football coach who has won the Super Bowl.

But we have a fundamental disagreement that cannot be resolved. She is definitely female, probably of recent African descent and a liberal. I am a male composed of so many nationalities any time war is declared on the planet. I beat myself up in a nationalistic fervor and a libertarian realist. She cannot know what it is like to be a male, nor can I know what it is like to be a female.

Unlike Ms. White, I ain't making excuses. I'm stating facts.

Unlike Ms. White, I also know what it takes to be a football player.

And probably exactly like I have done with Ms. White's article, this one will be vastly misunderstood. But WTH, I'm only professional journalist making a living at it for 28 years now. Betcha Ms. White couldn't.

Asking an open-ended question, getting some interesting answers

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I recently posted this question on FB:  If you had an employee who continually made promises and failed to deliver, what would you do?

I had nothing specific in mind. Sort of throw the grenade and see what happens. It generated 4 likes. Eh. It also generated a number of answers from folks, some of which are quite thought provoking. Answers in order with commentary from me as I see fit.

J: Is this a trick question? Warn once with suitable instruction on how to fix the situation, official reprimand if no progress made and, then, removal (firing).


 

I am reminded here of something Don Imus said. To paraphrase, he said he gives so many people a second chance over and over again because he was given a second chance over and over again.



R: It's rhetorical and he's being clever. If I had an employee who was trying to deliver but kept being badgered by assholes, I would understand and get rid of the assholes.


R frames this as a political question. I can see that. If you take it to the president, then yeah some of his promises have been blocked by others. Plenty of his promises he's had the power to keep and didn't. I trust Politifact because all sides use it when it supports their view and blast it when it opposes their view.

R and I are, much to the surprise of people who see our political debates on FB, in agreement far more often than we disagree. However, we do have fundamental differences. 



R (again): Your message is the one the KKKoch Brothers are pushing, by the way.


I have only a vague idea of what she means here.
 I also replied twice, once accusing R of a subject change and once thanking her for calling me clever.
MAB: I for one will take "clever" over "educated beyond my intelligence" anyday!!!!



J: Depends on the company - in some, it all depends on how good he is at dodging the blame.


Toooooo true. I recommend reading The Peter Principle.


M: Wait, do you work where I do? I have a co-worker I wanted to fire the third month she was here. It's been three years, I have multiple complaints filed with HR and she is still "coddled"


M works in NJ. Nuf said.



D: I get 3 performance reviews to solve the problem. Then I can be fired. Of course, there was that first year in which I could be fired for no reason. And the probational 3 year period which was any reasonable reason. Now it literally takes an act of Congress or 1 1/2 years, whichever comes first. I think everybody deserves a chance to change behavior and work performance. But how many chances should you be given? I think 1 1/2 years is a little too lenient myself. (but it does have peace of mind).


D (again): I heard of a couple of guys that actually threatened their bosses with guns (different locations/different bosses) and still didn't get fired.


J (different one): If we are talking about I think we are talking about, I think this is kind of like the things my Dad is always talking about with some of the people who have contracts with his company. He says that there are a bunch of people who don't perform all of the things they are obligated to do under their contract, but that the contracts the previous owner of the company negotiated with them were so poorly defined that he can't break the contracts without a whole lot of troubles so he just has to wait till the contracts end and then hope for better negotiations once the new contracts start. That is kind of what is happening now in the Government.

MacT as she is also known, has this ability to cut right to the heart of things. She nailed this one pretty good from several different angles.



B: Run for public office. LOL


Willis: Around here we generally promote that sort to some sort of public office where they can do no more harm.


Unfortunately when said people get "promoted" like this in the US, they do more harm.



P: For an employee, promises don't matter. Contracts do. Agreements do.

If an employee fails to deliver doughnuts he promised, I'd give him grief about it when he promised again, and let him know he's just hurting his credibility, but doughnuts are not part of his job (unless they are.)

If he fails to deliver on the functions of his job, he gets progressive warnings and then dismissal, promises or none.



P: (different one) Nominate them for president of the company?


H: They wouldn't drive the delivery truck anymore.



T: Not much of a corollary, BB, cause in the case of politicians, it takes consensus to get them gone. If I run a company and one of my hires isn't working out, they just get shown the door. Yep, they'll get a few chances and a couple warnings, but as boss, I'd have to do what's best for my company, and I wouldn't have to get anyone's agreement on it.



R (different one): If he or she works for the government, promote them to get them out of your department.


D (different one): I would go to see a movie... but that is just me.


Just when you thought it was safe to quit thinking...

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Item: SCOTUS is weighing in, again, on prayer. This time the High School is looking at prayer before council meetings. I  note, as has every other story on this subject, the Supreme Court daily sessions are opened with an invocation to God.

Nina Totenburg reports. She also points out some stuff a lot of people (me included) didn't know about when prayer is part of a public government gathering. One thing which prior SCOTUS decisions pretty much do is kick atheists pretty hard. If prayer, where allowed, offends atheists, tough.

Is this fair? Yep. There is nothing in the Constitution which protects anyone from being offended. The right to offend is greater than the right to not be offended. Rowan Atkinson.

Your rights are no greater nor less than my rights, that includes the right to free speech.

As an ordained minister in two denominations, I am frequently called on to give prayer before various elected board meetings in my county. Other ministers are also called upon. We're gonna keep doing this regardless of what SCOTUS decides.

It's my understanding that if SCOTUS rules against such prayer and we keep doing it, we'll be considered in contempt of the Supreme Court. I have no problem with that. I have held the High Court in contempt for quite a while now.

What would happen if a Satanist, Moslem, Buddhist, Flying Spaghetti Monsterist, Atheist etc wishes to pray? Lay on MacDuff. More power to 'em.

•••

Secessionist movements are gaining ground. I am not kidding. While this measure tanked, I can see it being tried in other places. I can also see it, eventually, winning. Just to be clear, such a movement would require approval of that state's legislature and Congress.

Here's the problem. It's an economic divide. Look at every state where this kind of discussion takes place. California, Florida, Georgia, Colorado. The part of the state wanting to break away is the rural part of the state. The most common given reasons are:

• Lack of representation

• Unresponsive to the needs of the rural areas

• Concentration of services in urban region

How true are these? 1) Not. Representation is divided among population. 2) See No. 1. 3) See No. 1.

Further compounding this problem is the distribute of tax dollars. If you look at the rural areas of these states, they get MORE tax money spent on programs, services and resources per capita than the urban areas.

If the rural areas do split off and become separate states, they will be forced to rely on their own resources. It's gonna hurt. A lot.

•••

Twitter, a company that has not made a profit since its founding, is going public. Apparently the Dot Com bust taught people nothing.

•••

The federal health care mandate, so touted and supported by people who believe in government-led redistribution of wealth, is sending people to for-profit companies to buy coverage. Insurance companies are, by and large, owned by rich people.

The federal mandate is going to make rich people richer.

The irony is magnificent.

•••

More states have joined the same-chromosomal-status-may-wed bandwagon. What has YET to be decided anywhere is the fundamental question. Is marriage a function of the state or is marriage a function of religion. SCOTUS has pointed toward it being a state function?

Those who point to the Separation of Church and State (Yo Mary), have a problem reconciling this, I image. A marriage license is the only state-issued permit I know of which may be authorized by someone who has not received government-sponsored or government-endorsed training.

•••

Jesse "You're A Racist" Jackson is saying Georgia's Stand Your Ground law is racist. He points to how he says the law has been unevenly applied in court. Ah. Call the law racist and forget it's juries, lawyers and judges who implement the law.

•••

Cognitive dissonance continues to climb. From this week's Wiregrass Farmer, an editorial:

Should someone who kills children be arrested? Prosecuted? Should someone who kills innocent adults likewise be arrested and jailed?

If someone threw a bomb into your house or your neighborhood, what would you do?
Should the person responsible for killing children, adults and dropping bombs in neighborhoods be allowed to lead a country?

"According to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, the CIA has conducted 378 strikes in the program’s 10-year history. Of those, 326 are classified as “Obama strikes.” The total number of people killed by drones is estimated at 2,528 to 3,648. Civilian casualties are estimated at 416 to 948, with 168 to 200 of those being children. As many as another 1,545 are estimated to have been injured in those strikes. "

Still have the same answers to the above questions?

•••

He has no beard...

In a continuing effort to keep up with the United States, Canada finally has a mayor caught on tape smoking crack. Canucks across the Great White North cheered massively as the stupidity gap between the two nations closed imperceptibly.

Upon noticing that Rob Ford and NJ Governor Chris Christie are each approximately the size of Rhode Island, Canucks cheered a bit louder, happy that poutine is responsible for closing yet another gap.

•••

In a continuing effort to avoid making decisions, citizens continue to hand the power of thought over to the government. Make no mistake. This is about the power of thought.

Rather than make a decision to shop places which pay their employees a good salary, Americans demand to shop at places which pay employees poorly. Then, they blame it on the companies and demand government intervene.

•••

Having legalized marijuana, Washington has seen the number of people hauled off to hospitals for a THC blood check zoom upward. The only people surprised about this are the ones hauled off to have blood drawn. Washington is expected to see a boost to taxes as weed now is legal and can be taxed.

Cats and dogs are fraternizing in the streets. Baptists are marrying Catholics and potholes are not being filled as the breakdown of the social order continues to accelerate. Canada is considering shipping in emergency supplies of Ron Ford.

•••

The joys of Socialized medicine. Georgia, where I live, has not agreed to participate in the federal health insurance insanity. As such the federal government is taking over a predicted expansion in Medicaid rolls. When the fed quits this and Medicaid payments plummet, more doctors are going to quit taking Medicaid. Many already don't take it because the payments aren't enough.

What will happen to the po' folks? Emergency room care. More importantly, what will happen to already overstressed and underfunded hospitals? They'll close the ER. Then what? What about communities with no hospital, like mine? The 6 Ps apply.

Prior planning prevents piss poor performance.