Notice how Putin's words and non-words are whipsawing the world's stock exchanges? What do you bet that Russian oligarchs with advance notice are raking in the moolah in those markets? The markets have these derivative betting instruments which are perfect for making money from the planned volatility. If there was ever a reason to ban derivatives trading, Putin is showing us why we should enact a ban now.
Tom Clancy wrote about it, back in the bad old USSR days. Those days might be coming back. The question to be answered in 20 minutes when the Russian ultimatum for Ukrainian surrender of all Black Sea military facilities expires.
We'll just have to wait and see. If we and Europe go with economic sanctions to kill the Russian ruble, we can expect a blow in return. The US Dollar isn't in much better shape than the Russian ruble, so any effort on the part of Russia to destabilize OUR currency might very well work like they want it to.
Are you ready?
I would take the usual steps: top off your fuel tanks, pull some dollars out of your bank account because if the currency wobbles badly enough, Obama will knee-jerk and close the banks. Be prepared for plenty of economic uncertainty.
One more thing. Now we will get to see if all those Russian computer hackers really ARE part of an organized army as some have warned. If they are, we're going to lose our commerce for a while. WE may lose the Internet for a while. All those smart-phones? Toast.
We might just get to see how ready the US populace is for a down-home, 21st Century war without bullets and bombs. A cyber-war.
I'm not betting on the US. In such economic war, we get to see how tough and resourceful we are. I'm betting that if there is such a cyber-conflict, the Free Shit Army will not have the patience to wait it out and take some level of privation along with the rest of us who might be more prepared. They will want what we have in the way of prepared stuff.
In most urban areas, the various Governments are not prepared for this, and Militia will be required to keep order.
Or, the USA will simply raise the White Flag. Actually, of all the scenarios, and considering the present leadership, I expect some level of surrender on the part of our Government. We aren't prepared to fight Russia. Europe used to be, but 22 years of no USSR has given them a soft belly the same as ours. The most likely communique from Washington DC and Brussels will probably be a joint surrender.
Just know that Vlady Putin won't have any KY jelly when he comes for us.
It took 20 minutes to write this. The Ukrainian deadline is now up...
Yep, I've been blogging for over 10 years now. I have 1.645 million pageviews. I've written over 4,300 posts, and I've accepted almost 6,000 comments. At the peak (in the bewb-blogging days), I had over 2,000 views per day, but average about a quarter of that today (most of the pageviews in the bewb-days were those using my blog as a source for soft-porn, and most of them from the Middle East).
I have shifted the direction of the blog twice, and I'm about to shift it again. It's about meaningful change, accent on the meaningful. When I started, I thought I was cutting-edge new: I had boob blogging, I had militia blogging, I had hard-edge conservative blogging. In the mid-late "oughts", it occurred to me that I was becoming a "nail that stuck up", and we all know that such nails attract hammer blows, just like trailer parks attract tornadoes. I toned down some of the more reactionary stuff, mostly the information on the best guns and ammo to kill people with. Politically, this was all during the Bush43 Regime, and if the dot-gov was snooping, we had no Snowden to tell us.
Now we are in the Obama Regime, and we have solid proof that extensive systems exist for the purpose of spying on US Citizens. I am likely on one or more lists of dissidents to be rounded up when "that day" comes, if it ever does. That doesn't bother me as much as it might others, because I have a plan for that day. It DOES bother me that my few regular readers might suffer the same fate though, and I have been wrestling with this thought for several weeks.
During this recent 3-week hiatus, I have vacillated between pulling the plug on the blog to ramping it back up to a full head-to-head opposition to the current Government. I still haven't decided, so I am going, for the moment, with a change of direction.
I believe that my most valuable role in conservative blogging is to illustrate the social issues of the day in terms of history, something you rarely find in the Main Stream Media. Today's other two posts, on the history of racial integration and the gay pride problem, offer a look at the new direction. If didactic isn't your thing, I'm not your blogger.
I haven't totally sheathed the sword, but I have moved it from here to Facebook. You can find my public timeline under George Schneider. It has a local Northwest flavor, but I post in the TEA party circle hereabouts, and keep up on the 2A scene in my posts. Look for my timeline here.
Another thought I have had is to declare EMCON. Under that condition, I would presume that hostilities with the Government are imminent (or that they have already begun), not just possible or probable. If I go to EMCON, all my social media (including this blog) goes dark. I would advise all readers to give serious thought to what it would take for YOU to declare your personal EMCON. Analyze how you will make that determination. EMCON would likely be followed by mustering of Militia. Also give some thought to how you would respond to a Militia call-up.
The big news this week has been over a Bill in the AZ Legislature which would have allowed businesses to act as individuals and claim religious "rights" to discriminate based on their chosen religious tenets. It was a bad bill, and deserved veto, for no other reason that the Founders granted INDIVIDUALS certain rights, and corporations only the right to exist. Making corporations legally equal to individuals leads to corporate oligarchy, and needs to be fought at every turn.
So, huge pressure was put on the conservative Governor of AZ, Jan Brewer, and we had to again witness the ugly spectacle of "gay pride" being paraded before the cameras. When the Federally-protected corporation known as the NFL chimed in with dark threats to cancel the next Super Bowl, scheduled for Glendale AZ, Gov. Brewer knuckled under and vetoed the bill.
This got your blogger to thinking, and posing himself a "what-if":
What if the early attempts to integrate the races in the USA had proceeded on the "gay pride" model, instead of the model of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr?
Let's look at this.
The "gay pride" model tell us that gays are SOOOO different, and this is accentuated by the outlandish clothing, the dyed hair, the suggested or actual sexual contact before the cameras. It's all "in your face", and it sends the INTENDED message of "we're here, we're queer, get used to us". I, like most other conservatives, don't give a rip what you do in the privacy of your homes, but I also believe that ANY conduct on the order of what passes for "gay pride" should not get public exhibition in a civilized society.
Dr. King's model. Having the exact same problem of selling a skeptical public on the acceptance of "different" people, Dr. King said: MINIMIZE THE DIFFERENCES, ACCENTUATE THE SIMILARITIES to the majority society.
Dr. King succeeded with his message, and the queers have failed with theirs.
Consider: What do you think would have happened if the blacks of the 1950's had used the "gay pride" model to get their desire for integration heard? Malcolm X and Huey Newton tried with this model and failed, BTW.
Answer, we would still have Jim Crow laws, that's what. Our society would not have made the last 60 years of racial-acceptance progress.
Another Black History Month comes to a close. During the Month, like many other Februaries since this Month was declared by the black student union at Kent State University in 1970, we have had a steady diet, predictably, of the good works of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Every "movement" has to have a hero, and for those chronicling the achievements of blacks in the USA, Dr. King is the obvious choice.
There's just one problem:
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr didn't give blacks the biggest push towards equality, the US Army did, led by GEN. Dwight D. Eisenhower. In the late stages of WW2 in Europe, US Army units had a severe problem replacing soldiers taken out of action by battle casualties. Eisenhower, the CIC in Europe, had a surplus of black troops, which were, up until then, segregated in certain units, mostly construction/engineering battalions and logistics units. There were no blacks in front-line combat outfits, the Tuskeegee Airmen being a notable exception (a pet project of FLOTUS Eleanor Roosevelt at the time). In 1944, Eisenhower ordered the integration of the entire Army, including front-line units. In 1948, President Truman issued an Executive Order to formally integrate the military, but it was the press of casualty replacement again, in the Korean War, that drove the integration to the reality we find it at today. As time went on in the Fifties, senior black NCOs began leaving the Army, and they were snapped up by business and industry.
That was the start of racial integration in the USA, folks. You won't see it discussed on "sound-bite" TV, it's much easier for TV producers to slap up a vignette of Dr. King, and his good works led to many such vignettes, but the US military led the way to break the color barriers in this Nation. Every thing that followed was basic mop-up.
Now that you're briefed, let's think about the implications, something most ordinary folks don't do, and it's why the culture is going down the drain.
I'm taking the side of the Government in this case, even though Secretary Sebelius is on my Top Five list of people I would like to see removed from the employ of taxpayers.
This case is NOT about Obamacare, as much as the punditocracy would like you to believe that ("OMG, they're attacking the Law of the Land, these religious nuts are"). No, this case is about whether or not a CORPORATION may establish religion and require all it's employees to follow that religion.
If Hobby Lobby, a corporation employing 16,000 people, is able to deny it's employees ANY part of a Federal benefit, and do that in the name of the religion of the CEO (and Board of Directors, presumably), then Religion has been Established.
The First Amendment, and the "Establishment Clause" within it, says:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Okay then, does Obamacare "establish" a religion? No, it doesn't (except for that pesky provision exempting Islam and followers of it from some of the law's restrictions).
Does Obamacare prohibit the "free exercise" of religion? Hobby Lobby says it does, and insofar as the provision of birth control is concerned, Obamacare seems to go against the corporate diktat of Hobby Lobby, the Corporation.
Okay, it would appear that the crux of this matter will revolve around who the Founders were protecting when they wrote the Establishment Clause. Were they protecting classes, or were they protecting individuals? I'm in over my head divining Constitutional law here, but I've been told that the freedoms of the Bill of Rights were and are meant to protect individuals, not groups or classes, except as those classes have been proven to be victims of discrimination per se, as in racial discrimination.
The CEO of Hobby Lobby is claiming, by the fact of his lawsuit, that he has the right to speak for all the people working for the corporation, and thereby control their religious choice which is permitted, nay mandated, under the First Amendment. Of course, if the SCOTUS agrees with that, they have just established corporate slavery as de jure law.
All the Government has to do to defend Obamacare in this case is find a couple of Hobby Lobby employees who don't want their birth control rights proscribed by the CEO, and the Government wins, IMHO. If I am the Chief Justice, I communicate with the US Counsel, and ask him to present an order to require Hobby Lobby to poll their employees, all of them, as to their choice, and when the Government presents that request for injunction, I grant it. In granting the injunction, I warn Hobby Lobby, the Corporation, that the polling carries the weight of a Federal Order, and any interference with it would be considered obstruction of justice.
Back to my readers.
Why, you ask, would a blogger such as myself, having taken on the Government as many times as I have, be siding with them and encouraging their case?
The answer is simple, if you look very far beyond our borders. What is the biggest threat to the culture? If you said Socialism, you are wrong, dead wrong. The biggest threat is the ascendancy of the culture of Islam. Islam is far, far more of a threat to our form of Western Civ than Socialism. No, I'm not downplaying the threat of Socialism to our Constitution, but just look at the European nations which fall all over themselves to accomodate Islam. In doing so, they have knuckled under to the establishment of Islam's claim of "right" to rule it's adherents by Sharia Law. In France, for example, the Government drew lines on maps around all the Islamic ghettoes, and told the Imams therein that they could run those ghettoes by Sharia Law as enclaves beyond French control, except in matters of public safety, but in reality, public safety issues also are left to the Islamic religious hierarchy.
In other words, the Frogs have given away significant parts of their big cities to the mullahs to run.
Readers, do we want that here? No, I'm not saying that the Hobby Lobby CEO is a screwy as a mullah, or that his Christianity compares inany way to the inhumanity of Islam, but if he wins his case, people, we have started down France's road. We need to be fair in our application of the Bill of Rights, and I have a dollar to your dime that says that the day Hobby Lobby wins this case, a new case to require allowing Sharia Law primacy over local and/or Federal Law gets filed in a Federal Court somewhere in this Nation.
...does not translate into more blogging, only the blaaahs. Four days of winter storm now....
In other news, my favorite squish, Bill O'Reilly, just got taken to the woodshed, here. O'Reilly is an unabashed Christie-hugger, and has adopted the Christie-squishy Obama bromance as his own. No one knows whether O'Reilly is actually a Republican, so it may not be accurate to call him a RINO, but it's certainly accurate to call him a CYSTO - Conservative Yankee, Self Titled Only. In other words, an ass-loving boil on the posterior.
The music is starting: the drip-sounds of the thaw. Here's the visual prospect:
I'll just listen to the winter sounds of my yesteryears....
The GOP got part way to the nuts and bolts that the failure in Benghazi represents, then they stopped when the (D)onks erected their stonewall.
The problem is this: prior to Obama, the United States Marine Corps protected our embassies. 230+ years of protecting our embassies. Generally doing a fine job, too. Along comes our Muslim-appeasing President, decides that the USMC presents too much of an "old-days" image, and orders them replaced with security "contractors". Well, that wouldn't be TOO bad if those "contractors" were of the usual make-up, that is to say, mostly ex-military, young Western hard men who know a thing or two about security and handling bad guys.
But no. These "contractors" were locals hired directly onscene by the State Department. The person in charge of security for the State Dept? A retired Army General or Colonel, maybe?
Not bloody likely, mate. The person in charge back in DeeCee was Eric Boswell, a career diplomat with two years or less of military service, none of it current, and his military time was served during the Vietnam War, 1968/1969, when he was 21 years of age. Sounds like a Private to me; had he been an officer with leadership training, he would have had a minimum 4 or 5 year committment to the Army, not a two-year committment. His military "experience" means nothing. Unless he had Pentagon officers kissing up to him during his career, he was not likely to have been involved with the military at all.
The Benghazi "contractors" had already shown their lack of value in the weeks prior to the attack, being notable more for their failure to appear for duty than anything else. There WERE a few attentive men in that crew, but it turned out that they were front-men for Al-Q's operation. They provided the details to enable the attack.
The GOP desperately wants to derail Hillary's expected candidacy (or so they say), and they have a ready-made issue with which to do it: that issue is NOT Benghazi per se, that issue is why she either agreed with Obama or suggested the de-militarization herself, we don't know which.
Senator McConnell, this hot potato is in your hands (or is it a turd in your pocket?).
The GOP either needs to give up trying to derail Hillary because their heart's not in the game, or they need to set Benghazi aside for the moment and attack the larger embassy security issue. I suggest that the GOP call on retired USMC GEN Mattis, who can speak to the use of Marines to guard embassies. In fact, if the GOP could get GEN Mattis to act as their military advisor, they would be miles ahead of Obama, who has to make do with the mess of a military that he and Gates created.
The 2A-stomping, Mafia-acting Governor of New Jersey, our favorite large bully, has done another stomping of the Constitution.
This hasn't made the MSM yet, and probably won't, considering said media are in bed with the homosexual lobby, but you can read it in World Net Daily, right here.
You have to RTWT, because this Christie turd is in the next-to-last paragraph.
To sum up, Chris Christie has now stomped on the First AND Second Amendments, his staff has adopted Mafia tactics to help their Godfather get re-elected, and the Godfather/Governor has yet to account for billions in Federal hurricane relief funds (not spent, not returned to the Treasury, and the moolah doesn't show on the Joisey books).
Is there ANYONE outside of NJ, who dares to call themselves an American, who would vote for this lump of a rumpkin?
I'll answer that: a lot of Democrats would. Maybe the real reason the Hildebeestie won't declare for POTUS is that the (D)onkeys are going to draft Christie...
I have decent amounts of Speer, Remington, Winchester, & WCC (military). Lesser amounts of Federal. Can anyone rank these according to longevity and case strength? I'll be loading some up at/near max (+P). This stuff is all range-floor brass, but all once fired.
This will be my first time reloading this caliber.
I have an attitude because this URI won't go away and I'm probably a silly millimeter away from developing pneumonia. Prevention requires me to stay indoors and not breathe any cold air for long. This sucks, and has for two weeks now.
The attitude causes me to feel sorry for myself and to take a critical approach to the world. Sorry, that second part is the normal me, the attitude is the first part, and I don't usually snivel about myself.
So, I went back to my basic military training in USAF Officer Training School for the answer.
True story follows. Was caused by my problem of reporting to OTS with two left feet...
Scene: 1967. Medina Annex to Lackland AFB, TX, on the drill pad where we learn to march and to LEAD formations in marching movements: I had just screwed up and marched the Flight of 40-some Officer Trainees off the drill pad and into the weeds while trying to have them execute a double flanking movement:
Flight Training Officer: "OT, do you have an attitude?"
Officer Trainee (having been told at the first assembly to always tell the truth): "SIR, I do have an attitude!"
FTO: "OT, you have three seconds to get rid of it. If the Air Force wanted you to have an attitude, you would have been issued one. The entire Flight will now give me fifty pushups because OT Schneider has an unauthorized attitude."
Result: The entire flight will now know to watch OT Schneider very carefully for future development of unauthorized attitudes. Cooperate and graduate.
From the Coyote Kid, who notes that these environazis may be long on enthusiasm, but they are woefully short on smarts.
Environazi attack planning:
1. Pick the next four people in the cell seeking placement in the Environazi Hall of Fame.
2. Gather equipment: bicycle u-locks and chain to chain the protestors to the target, also some glue to create further mischief.
3. Transport selves to target, an eeevilll Fracking Energy Company gas station.
4. While proprietor is distracted, chain selves to the gas pumps, deploy the glue to further damage the equipment.
5. Smile for the cameras of the sympatico news media, read the official and obligatory statement condemming fracking and other non-socialist activities.
6. Wait for the constabulary, who had to spend a lot of time delicately cutting locks and chains off of protesters.
7. Declare a victory in the name of Gaia.
According to this report, the op plan was flawlessly executed, save for one thing: the gas station these environazis attacked didn't belong to the eeevilll targeted Fracking Energy Company anymore, it belonged to an individual private person, one Mr. Patel.
In one swell foop, these e-nazis have not only made laughingstocks of themselves and their cause, they attacked the property of a friendly foreign-born person. These Indian immigrants have sufficient numbers and cohesiveness in England to cause grave political consequences for any who attack them. They are the equivalent of our Latin voting bloc.
Sorry about the light blogging of late: I contracted a head cold this week and started taking Coricidin HBP for it. The resulting legarthies combine to keep the muse & I asleep. Now its time to get a grip on myself and lend my son a hand to move his household yet again...(sigh!). Hopefully, I'll be back at the helm of my Zepplin next week...
...but nevertheless, one which WILL impact you greatly.
I refer to the sea change in the politics of the American Medical Association. It is now reliably a liberal institution instead of the conservative institution it was a scant decade ago.
My evidence is here, and also I have direct anecdotal evidence as well because I have a young Doctor of Medicine in my family.
This will impact all of us who oppose Federal Socialized medicine, because without the Doctors' help and active opposition, it is unlikely that the HCA will ever be overturned and the practice of medicine returned to the arena of private enterprise. In fact, it will likely go the other way, with Doctors all becoming de-facto if not de jure employees of the Federal Government, with a Union and all, as well as a huge pay raise to insure their fealty. Merrie Olde Englande went that route a decade or so ago, and the STARTING pay for Brit Doctors in their National system is now $400K/yr in our money equivalent. The tag-along there is that the National system then began to use less Doctors, and delegated most of the physicians' previous work to Physician's Assistants or Nurses.
Since I have a Registered Nurse in my family as well as a Doctor, I can assure you that the machinery to implement the "de-Doctorization" of US Healthcare is beginning to grind. Not very fast at the moment, but when the call comes down from our Government, an actual Implementation Schedule will be posted and you will be far less likely to see a Doctor on your initial visit to a health-care facility after I-Hour.
The times, they be a-changin'.
That's the Progressive Movement. "Change to achieve the illusion of progress."*
*This particular, and very accurate, definition of Progressivism was brought to my attention in the mid-1970s by my police partner JGP. I believe he actually coined it to describe Police Management Progressivism, but it fits the political movement better.