Went shooting today

Thanks to our friend Landon (who can be seen prominently dissing the AK-47 in the comments of my previous posts), my dad and I had the opportunity to shoot the living daylights out of paper targets with a wide variety of weapons. I'm just going to run down the list and give my impressions of each one.

#1: 9mm Glock. Excellent, once I figured out how to hold it properly so that it doesn't jam after every shot. Fun to shoot.

#2: .357 Ruger revolver, 6-inch barrel. We tried this one with both .38 Special and .357 magnum rounds. Three words describe this thing: Simple and awesome. The magnum rounds just felt good to shoot, though the .38 Special rounds were extremely fun, as well.

#3: Mossberg tactical shotgun - not sure of the model: It's a pump-action 12-gauge shotgun. Do I really need to say anything else?

#4: Double-barrel shotgun: There's not really a lot to say about it, except that I managed to screw up loading it.

#5: Romanian WASR-10 AK-47: The performance was absolutely astounding - the rifle fired every shot accurately and without fail, despite the cheap, low-quality ammo and magazines we used. A perfect assault rifle if ever there was one.

Okay, so that was a lie. It literally jammed every second or third shot, in the end becoming a makeshift bolt-action rifle that ejected every other bullet. It consistently failed in a number of ways, despite being in apparently good condition for an AK-47. I was baffled. Landon, on the spot, disassembled the gun and found that there was a teeny-tiny piece of metal sticking out. Sorry for the poor terminology, but I don't remember the term that was used. Anyway, he filed it off with his knife, and the last 6 shots went perfectly. I am going to look for an opportunity to shoot a higher-quality AK, as the Romanian WASR-10s are not especially well-made, being some of the cheapest on the market. It was fun when it worked, though.

#6: Mosin-Nagant: Aaahh, the original Soviet weapon. It has a nasty kick, but it's fun as heck to shoot. Bolt-action. I somehow managed to jam it, as well as scraping my hand 5 times with the bolt before realizing that I was doing it the wrong way.

#7: K98 Mauser: Moving on from Commies to Nazis. The Mosin had a nasty kick - this was worse, sounded like a cannon, and was even more awesome. I somehow managed to jam this bolt rifle as well, but not as badly. Didn't scrape my hand, either. If I'm not mistaken, the specific rifle we fired was made in 1944, but it worked splendidly when we used it.

#8: AR-15: Along with the M-4, the current weapon of choice for the US armed forces. A fine weapon in its own right, this particular rifle was, for lack of a better term, very fancy, having enough add-ons and features that it is, in fact, superior to the ARs issued to the US Army. It looks cool as heck, and is pretty scary, though not quite to the level of terrifying as the AK-47. Sorry, Landon. Humorously nicknamed the EBR - Evil Black Rifle. Had a slightly odd grip, but it was actually rather nice once I got used to it. Having actually FIRED it, it's earned some more respect from me.

#9: Ruger 10/22: Yeah, I know. Anticlimactic. But it was fun to shoot, and a nice, light, low-recoil breather after the shoulder-breaking Mauser, the rather jumpy AR-15, and the AK-47, the barrel of which was nearly flying after the first shot. The 10/22 also provided relief for our ears, which had nearly been split by the Mosin and Mauser, which I assure you are extremely loud, despite earplugs.

Altogether, it was a pretty awesome day, and I now have a little experience in the guns most hated by liberals - semi-auto handguns, AR-15s, and AK-47s. So thanks, Landon, for giving me the opportunity to try some real power rifles!

Best Truck Salesman EVER.

Buy a truck, get a Kalashnikov. Does it get any better than that?

-----------------------------------------------------------

Buy a Truck, Get a Free AK-47

AOL News (Nov. 15) -- A truck dealership in Florida is firing up sales with the promise of a rapid-fire machine gun.

Customers have been streaming into Nations Trucks in Sanford, near Orlando, purchasing two dozen vehicles since the sale campaign began on Veterans Day last week. Each new truck owner also walks out with a free AK-47.

"We've tripled our business," general sales manager Nick Ginetta told AOL News. "We knew it would be controversial, but it's been a phenomenal response."

An image of the semiautomatic rifle is taped to the showroom's window to lure shoppers.


Buyers receive a $400 voucher good for one Kalashnikov at Shoot Straight, a weapons dealer with several locations in the Sunshine State.

All prospective gun owners must meet state and federal gun-control laws, but Ginetta has still drawn fire from anti-gun activists and alarmed neighbors.

"I've had calls from mothers who say, 'You're giving my son a machine gun.' But once I explain exactly how it works, people are understanding," he said.

If drivers don't want to bear arms, Ginetta will apply the money to the price of the truck or give them cash back. But he said most people opted for the Romanian-made AK-47 model, famous for its durability in extreme environments.

Gun-control activists criticized the marketing ploy at Nations Trucks.

"These aren't deer rifles that he's giving away," said Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. "He's saying here's a gun that bank robbers use."

There's been a bit of a backlash for introducing the promotion for a weapon manufactured by a Cold War enemy of the United States on Veterans Day.


"There are a lot of veterans that would like to take him up on that deal. I'm not one of them," Dana Rouch, a veteran of World War II, Korea and Vietnam, told local news station Channel 13.

But Ginetta said the decision was strictly an economic one.

"They're so many made that the cost of the weapon is so cheap," Ginetta said. "We would have loved to offer an AR-15 made in this country, but the cost is tremendous."

American-made vehicles are the bread and butter of the dealership, he added.

A Missouri auto dealer also threw in a complimentary AK-47 to customers last year, Fox News reported.

The discount expires at the end of November.

--------------------------------------------------------------

This is GREAT! More people get a great semi-auto weapon, the local economy improves, and the dealer gets more cash! What's not to love? Notice the hilarious cluelessness of the article. "Rapid-fire machine gun" they say. No, it's a semi-auto rifle. Notice the Brady Campaign guy's rant. "These aren't deer rifles" is what he says. Actually, they can be deer rifles. Very good ones, too. Roughly .30 caliber, very effecient at game-getting. Plus, ammo is cheap compared to other deer rounds. "Here's a gun that bank robbers use." So? Bank robbers also use knives, shotguns, Uzis, the occasional MP5 or AR-15, and a wide variety of handguns. What Mr. Gun Control is REALLY thinking is "Oh no! This is a Russian gun that looks scary and wet my pants! BANK ROBBERS!!!" It's big and scary, yes. But I know of a bunch of people who own these things and have never considered robbing a bank.

Anyway, I want one of these guns. Big, scary, reliable, relatively powerful, and cheap. Tough to beat.

Joe Biden's Apparent Election Strategy

That is, open mouth, insert foot. This HAS to be the most inane, historically inaccurate statement EVER. Just read the article.

----------------------------------------------------


VPOTUS Joe Biden: Dems Will "Keep The Senate And Win The House" »
By Celeste Katz

Sorry for the delay -- had my hands a bit full with the meltdown at the NYC Board of Elections -- but here is the pool report filed by Newsday's Reid Epstein on Vice President Joe Biden's fundraising visit to Manhattan today:


.VPOTUS spoke Tuesday in a wood-paneled second-floor bar at the Helmsley Park Lane Hotel on Central Park South at a fundraiser for incumbent Democratic NY-1 Rep. Tim Bishop.

Wearing a blue suit and a bluer tie, VPOTUS reminded the 70 people who paid a minimum of $1,000 to hear VPOTUS's remarks and eat a menu of cold-cut sandwiches, salad and coffee that the nation’s economic malaise is the fault of the Bush Administration and is improving under Democratic stewardship.

“We’ve done a lot in the last 20 months,” VPOTUS said. “The economy has grown four quarters in a row, not what it needs to, but it’s growing, it’s not shrinking. Just since January, 860,000 private sector jobs, not nearly enough. But guess what? That’s more jobs than were created in the entire eight years of the Bush Administration. That’s factual.”

VPOTUS did not mention Bishop’s Republican opponent, businessman Randy Altschuler, by name, but predicted the federal government will grind to a halt if the House or Senate fall under GOP control. He predicted Democrats would “keep the Senate and win the House.”

“This is a real important election,” he said. “It’s more important than the one that got Barack and me elected, it literally is. Because there at least we would have continued to drift another four years, which would be bad. Now at least we’ve stopped the drift and are starting to head in the right direction. If we lose in the House or the Senate, we’re now in a position where we are in a stalemate and this thing is just going to go in reverse and our most powerful weapon will be a veto pen, and that’s bad.”

VPOTUS, who stood next to Bishop and grasped the four-term Democrat’s shoulder at several points during his remarks, waded into the audience as he discussed the nation’s need to compete with education and infrastructure investments made by nations like China and India, and Republican opposition to such spending.

“Every single great idea that has marked the 21st century, the 20th century and the 19th century has required government vision and government incentive,” he said. “In the middle of the Civil War you had a guy named Lincoln paying people $16,000 for every 40 miles of track they laid across the continental United States. … No private enterprise would have done that for another 35 years.”

Bishop, who represents the East End of Long Island, touted VPOTUS as “an adopted son of Southampton” - Bishop’s hometown - who spent time this summer at a home to which Bishop, as a teenager, delivered groceries.

VPOTUS replied: “When I die, I want to be reborn in Southampton… You’re the only Democrat I know in Southampton, well, that’s not quite true.”

---------------------------------------------------------------

Well. Every great idea in the last 200 years, huh? So I guess the following ideas aren't great:

The airplane
Air conditioning
Google
Replaceable parts
Automation in industry
The telephone
Electricity
The MP3 player
Countless medical advances

And dozens upon dozens of other ideas that I was under the delusion of thinking were great and useful. What a goon. Now, notice his ignorant little statement about the trans-continental railroad. He says private industry wouldn't have done that for another 35 years. Apparently, we live in different universes, since in this universe one James Hill did it well within 35 years of it, completing it in 1893. Construction on the "official" Great Northern began in 1889 from existing railways. Construction of the preexisting tracks, of course, began long before that. Interesting fact - the famed transcontinental railway went BANKRUPT, and right after being completed had to be closed again due to crappy workmanship, causing it to easily be washed away by floods. Since when was that thing a "great idea?" The Great Northern out-competed all of its Federally-aided rivals, and was laid on far more effecient routes. Proof positive that great ideas typically are killed by government aid.

Christine O'Donnell's Non-Gaffe

Just copy and paste the address; I can't get the link to work.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/19/christine-odonnell-church-and-state-gaffe

Really, she's ignorant of the Constitution? I have a copy of the Constitution and its amendments, and I see nothing about so-called "separation of church and state." The First Amendment does nothing but prohibit Congress from establishing a national religion. In fact, the States used to have their own official religions.

The Left (actually, the Right, too, on occasion) cracks me up sometimes. They know nothing about the Constitution besides little sound bits they've been trained to spew, yet accuse Christine O'Donnell of being "ignorant" of the Constitution. In her "gaffe" she demonstrates a greater understanding of it than most Americans.

These people are nothing but smear artists, and if anyone's ignorant of the Constitution and its associated history, it's these Establishment mouthpieces. Yet, this is all that many Americans hear. Bring up nullification: "SLAVERY! RACISM!" Dare to bring up secession: "NEO-CONFEDERATE! RACIST!' Defending the Constitution? "IGNORANT! EXTREMIST!" Or how about militias? "WHITE SUPREMACISTS! NEO-NAZIS! TERRORISTS!" Ever seen a discussion between a libertarian and the media goons? It's all the good guys can do to say anything over extended versions of these sound bits. It's an embarrassment to the country. I don't know how anyone maintains any degree of respect for these people.

Thoughts on schooling

I've recently been reading an excellent book, Weapons of Mass Instruction, by John Taylor Gatto, and it's gotten me thinking about what I've learned. As you probably know, I'm homeschooled, and I love it. Still, I've noticed something odd. The subjects that I know in-depth have not been a major part of our curriculum. Economics, for instance. Last year it was a part of our "official" school, but I knew most of what we learned already thanks to independent study.

Global warming, another subject I know fairly well, has not been in the curriculum at all. Almost all of my knowledge about it came from my own interests and spare time, and doing my own research. Then there's government. Again, it was a subject last year, but most of my knowledge about it was gained independently of the curriculum. Then, of course, there's Abraham Lincoln and the War for Southern Independence. That has never been a subject, but it's my specialty.

I'm not trying to bash our curriculum - I think it's great - but I can't help but notice that my best areas are not taught primarily in "school." This actually, as pointed out by Gatto, is the case with most successful people, whether statesmen or businessmen. School might be a good foundation depending on the curriculum, but it WILL NOT lead to success. Education is the key, not schooling, and there is a difference. What I've come to believe is that education is rarely provided by a school curriculum, rather it is provided by one's own studies and experiences. In fact, from what I can tell, most schools, especially public, are actually designed to SUPPRESS education, and instead create good, pliable, uncomplaining citizens. It's a propaganda machine. I, for one, am glad that we still have the freedom to homeschool!

S - 510 Terror

Okay, I'm sorry I haven't posted in so long. I'll try to post more regularly after this. However, this article from Lew Rockwell demands to be posted here. If you doubted that things are going DRAMATICALLY downhill, you won't after this.

S. 510: 12 Reasons Why the Food Safety Bill From Hell Could Be Very Dangerous for the U.S. Economy
Economic Collapse Blog





As you read this, there is a bill before the U.S. Senate that has the potential to change the U.S. food industry more than any other law ever passed by the U.S. Congress. In the name of "food safety", the U.S. government would be given an iron grip over the production, transportation and sale of all food in the United States. Hordes of small food producers and organic farmers could potentially be put out of business. If this bill becomes law, the freedom to grow what you want, eat what you want and to share food from your gardens with your neighbors could be greatly curtailed. It would give the FDA unprecedented discretion to regulate U.S. food production. A version of this bill was already passed by the U.S. House of Representatives last summer, and now S. 510, also known as the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, is in front of the U.S. Senate and it is expected to pass easily.

Because of how vaguely it is written and because of how much discretion it gives to the FDA, it is potentially a very, very dangerous law.

So who is actually in favor of it?

Well, big food corporations and big agriculture are actually very much in favor of this bill.

Why?

Is it because they are so concerned about food safety?

No.


In fact, virtually every major case of food contamination in recent U.S. history has come from large-scale industrial agriculture or large-scale industrial food production.

The real reason why they are backing S. 510 is because it will devastate their primary competition – small food producers and organic farmers.

In recent years, the demand for organic food has skyrocketed as the American people have learned the truth about how our food is actually made. Big agriculture and the giant food producers are losing profits as Americans increasingly vote with their wallets.

So now the food giants are using "food safety" as a way to get market share back. It is an open secret that many of those involved in drafting this bill and in pushing it through Congress have ties to food industry giants.

Thousands of small food producers and organic farmers will have their very existence threatened by this bill. It imposes a bureaucratic nightmare on all food producers that the big corporations will be able to handle easily but that will cripple much smaller operations.

Already, many farmers can see the writing on the wall. One small farmer recently described the mood among her fellow small farmers to the Wall Street Journal....

"I know people who have been small farmers for 25 to 30 years who are looking to get out of the business because food safety is becoming so alarmist."

But the bureaucratic nightmare is just the tip of the iceberg. To get an idea of just how dangerous S. 510 could potentially be to the already staggering U.S. economy, just check out the following quote from one opponent of this bill....


"If accepted [S 510] would preclude the public’s right to grow, own, trade, transport, share, feed and eat each and every food that nature makes. It will become the most offensive authority against the cultivation, trade and consumption of food and agricultural products of one’s choice. It will be unconstitutional and contrary to natural law or, if you like, the will of God."

~ Dr. Shiv Chopra, Canada Health whistle blower

It would be hard to understate how dangerous this bill potentially could be. This bill gives the FDA the ability to exercise a ton of discretion. The FDA could end up exercising that discretion in a very reasonable way, or they could use it to shut down small food producers left and right.

When it comes to S. 510, the question that you need to ask yourself is this....

Do you trust the FDA?

If not, then there are some very real reasons for you to be concerned.

The following are 12 reasons why S. 510 could be absolutely disastrous for small food producers and for the U.S. economy....

#1 All food production facilities in the United States will be required to register with the U.S. government. No food will be allowed to be grown, distributed or sold outside this bureaucratic framework unless the FDA allows it.


#2 Any food that is distributed or sold outside of U.S. government control will be considered illegal smuggling.

#3 The FDA will hire an army of new inspectors to enforce all of the new provisions in the bill.

#4 The FDA will be mandated to conduct much more frequent inspections of food processing facilities.

#5 The fees and paperwork requirements will be ruinously expensive for small food producers and organic farms.

#6 S. 510 would place all U.S. food and all U.S. farms under the Department of Homeland Security in the event of a major "contamination" or an "emergency". What exactly would constitute a "contamination" or an "emergency" is anyone's guess.

#7 S. 510 mandates that the FDA facilitate harmonization of American food laws with Codex Alimentarius.

#8 S. 510 imposes an annual registration fee on any facility that holds, processes, or manufactures food. It also includes draconian fines for paperwork infractions of up to $500,000 for a single offense. Just one penalty like that would drive a small food producer out of business.

#9 S. 510 would give the FDA tremendous discretion to regulate how crops are grown and how food is produced in the United States. Basically, small farmers and organic farmers will now be forced to farm exactly how the federal government tells them to. It is feared that the U.S. government would soon declare that many organic farming methods are "unsafe" and would outlaw them. In addition, there is the very real possibility that at some point the U.S. government could decide that the only "safe" seed for a particular crop is genetically modified seed and would require all farmers to use it.


#10 S. 510 will give the FDA the power to impose a quarantine on a specific geographic area. Basically the FDA would have the power to stop the movement of all food in an area where a "contamination" has been identified. This would be very close to being able to declare martial law.

#11 S. 510 will give the FDA the power to conduct warrantless searches of the business records of small food producers and organic farmers, even if there has been no evidence at all that a law has been broken.

#12 Opponents of S. 510 believe that it would eliminate the right to clean and store seed. Therefore, control of the U.S. seed supply would be further centralized in the hands of Monsanto and other multinational corporations.

As mentioned above, this bill gives the FDA a ton of discretion. It is written very broadly and very vaguely. It opens the door for all kinds of abuses, but that doesn't mean that the FDA will behave unreasonably.

So should we trust the FDA?

Is there a viable future for small food producers and organic farmers in America?

Or is the handwriting already on the wall?

"If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny."

~ Thomas Jefferson

Lincoln's Humanitarianism at Work

The first group of pictures in this montage are rather graphic, not to mention depressing, but it really gets the message through.



Long live the American Union. May its bayonets never grow dull.

Tea Partier Blasts the NAACP

This man is a hero. He provided the best ever description of the Nation Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) ever, in a highly quotable context.



Tea Party Express spokesman Mark Williams delivered a startling, and accurate, response when asked to tell racists that they are not welcome at the Tea Parties. He said, "Racists have their own movement. It's called the NAACP." He then described them, accurately, as "a bunch of old fossils looking to make a buck off skin color."

I never would have expected such a brutally frank comeback.

The Judge on the Oil Spill

Here's Judge Andrew Napolitano blowing up the statists again.



By the way, how many Congressmen does it take to stop the oil spill?

Only three or four, if they're wedged in just right.

Somalian Gun Stupidity

I just happened to find that video on Youtube. Did you hear what he said? The cause of anarchy was being able to buy a gun so easily. Right. He clearly has never been to the famously stable State of North Carolina. Anyone 18 or older can stroll to a gun show and buy an AK-47, M-16, Uzi, and any other non-explosive gun you can think of. I even saw a .50 caliber machine gun for sale. That's right, the big guns you put on tanks and armored cars. Also, genius guy, there's this country called Switzerland. Nearly everyone there has a military-grade assault rifle in their home. Last I checked, there wasn't violence in the streets.

The cause of Somalia's trouble is a combination of Islamic culture, an inept government, and other factors too numerous to name here.

So, Youtube guys, I appreciate your bravery walking into what amounts to a war zone, but you have it all wrong. Like the NRA says, guns don't kill people, people kill people. The Somalis would kill each other with swords and spears if they didn't have guns.

*EDIT

I'm sorry the video won't show all the way, just click it to watch on Youtube.

Oh, Goody...

Tensions between North and South Korea are heightening. Apparently North Korea torpedoed a South Korean warship, and the two Koreas are starting up with more irritating saber-rattling.

At this point, US citizens reading this will likely ask, "Does this really matter to the United States?" Well, no, but if there's war, we'll probably get involved anyway. Heck, why don't we just go ahead and simultaneously attack North Korea and Iran? It's glaringly obvious that Peace-Prize Obama is hungry for war with these two nations.

Some Thoughts on Iran and Nukes

The guy above is a psycho dictator who is disarmingly likable in interviews. That's well established. However, this post is not about psychotic mini-Lincolns.

Alright, we've all heard how a nuclear Iran is BAD. In my opinion, a nuclear ANYONE is BAD, but that's another topic. The thing is, how do we know that the 2 tons of uranium that Iran has is for weapons? I somehow doubt that what borders on a third-world country has the technology to refine the stuff to weapon capacity. Anyway, here's what really bothers me. Tehran (Iran's capital) is on the verge of agreeing to ship half of its uranium to Turkey and have it refined into fuel rods for treating cancer patients. That would leave Iran just one ton of uranium, not exactly a huge stockpile. This is almost identical to a proposal by the Obama administration last year, but now they're up-in-arms about this. Huh? It seems glaringly obvious that the Peace-prize winner is hungry for war. It's funny, but there's nothing like a pointless war to boost your approval ratings as president.

The following is an excellent article by Pat Buchanan.

Take the Deal, Mr. President
by Patrick J. Buchanan




If Barack Obama is sincere in his policy of "no nukes in Iran – no war with Iran," he will halt this rude dismissal of the offer Tehran just made to ship half its stockpile of uranium to Turkey.

Consider what President Ahmadinejad and the Ayatollah himself have just committed to do.

Iran will deliver 1,200 kilograms, well over a ton, of its 2-ton stockpile of low-enriched uranium (LEU) to Turkey. In return, Iran will receive, in a year, 120 kilograms of fuel rods for its U.S.-built reactor that produces medical isotopes for treating cancer patients.

Not only did Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey and President Lula da Silva of Brazil put their prestige on the line by flying to Tehran, the deal they got is a near-exact replica of the deal Obama offered Iran eight months ago.

Why is President Obama slapping it away? Does he not want a deal? Has he already decided on the sanctions road that leads to war?

Has the War Party captured the Obama presidency?

If Iran ships the LEU to Turkey, she would be left with only enough low-enriched uranium for one test explosion. And as that LEU is under U.N. surveillance, America would have a long lead time to act if Iran began to convert the LEU to weapons grade.


How is the Iranian program then an "existential threat" to anyone?

Israel has hundreds of nuclear weapons – America thousands.

Critics say Iran still refuses to shut down the centrifuges turning out low-grade uranium. But if Iran stops the centrifuges, she surrenders her last bargaining chip to get sanctions lifted.

Critics say Iran is trying to abort Hillary Clinton's campaign to have the Security Council impose a fourth round of sanctions. Undeniably true.

But if the purpose of sanctions is to force Iran to negotiate its nuclear program, they are already working. Tehran's latest offer represents real movement.

Critics say Iran will weasel out if we take up the deal. Perhaps. Internal opposition caused Ahmadinejad to back away from Obama's original offer, after he had indicated initial acceptance.

But, if so, Iran will be seen as duplicitous by Turkey and Brazil.

To the world today, the United States appears enraged that Iran is responding to America's own offer, that it is we who do not want a peaceful resolution, that we and the Israelis are as hell-bent on war and "regime change" in Iran as George W. Bush was on war and regime change in Iraq.

While the Brazilians and Turks have surely complicated Hillary's diplomacy, their motives are not necessarily sinister or malevolent.


Lula may be trying to one-up Obama and win a Nobel Prize as he leaves office. But what is wrong with that? Bill Clinton had a Nobel in mind when, in his final days, he went all-out for a Palestinian peace.

And Erdogan leads a country that cannot wish to see Iran acquire nuclear weapons. For Shia Iran shares a border with Sunni Turkey, and the two are rivals for influence in the Islamic world and Central Asia.

Moreover, an Iranian bomb would force Turkey to consider a Turkish bomb. Erdogan thus has every incentive to seek a resolution of this crisis, to keep Iran free of nuclear weapons, and avert a war between yet another neighbor and his NATO ally, the United States.

If Obama refuses to take the Iranian offer seriously, it would appear a sure sign that the War Party has taken him into camp and he is departing the negotiating track for the confrontation track that leads to war.

Months ago, Time's Tony Karon asked the relevant question: "What if Ahmadinejad is serious?"

And there are obvious reasons why he might want a deal.

First, Iran runs out of fuel this year for its reactor that produces medical isotopes. And despite Tehran's braggadocio about making fuel rods itself out of its existing pile of uranium, there is no evidence Tehran is technically capable of this.

Iranians dying of cancer because Ahmadinejad failed to get those fuel rods would create enmity toward him, as well as hatred of us for denying them to Iranian cancer patients.

Second, as the U.S. intelligence community yet contends, there is no hard evidence Iran has decided to go nuclear. For this would instantly put Iran in the nuclear gun sights of the United States and Israel. And what benefit would Shia and Persian Iran, half of whose population is non-Persian, gain by starting a nuclear arms race in a region that is predominantly Arab and Sunni?

Third, Ahmadinejad leads a nation that is united in insisting on all its rights under the Nonproliferation Treaty, including the right to enrich. But his nation is deeply divided over his regime's legitimacy after last June's flawed, if not fixed, election.

If the United States were to accept Iran's counter-offer, it would be a diplomatic coup for Ahmadinejad.

Maybe that's the problem. The powers that be don't really want a deal with Iran. They want Iran smashed.


May 21, 2010

The Gulf Oil Spill

I know, I know. This is fairly old news. I'd like to share my thoughts on it, though. First, I've noticed a disturbing tendency in articles about the spill. It's almost always in this vein: "Oh, no, the animals! Oh, no, the environment! Oil is evil! Oh yeah, some people got killed in the blast, too. But the ANIMALS!" Please tell me I'm not the only one who finds this disturbing. Why is the massive economic damage ignored? Why are the lost lives drowned out by cries of "OH MY GOSH, THERE ARE PELICANS GETTING COVERED IN OIL!" You know, those are some pretty stupid pelicans. Question: Does anyone actually care about a bird that's stupid enough to land on an oil spill? Natural selection at work.

By the way, I wouldn't be too concerned about the fish. They will be almost completely unharmed by the spill. Also, NOAA estimates that one third of the spill has already evaporated. Go figure.

Something else that bothers me: I have now seen several people attacking our use of oil. Okay, great! Now go get rid of your car and halt all electricity use. Geez. Oh, yeah, and Obama and co., in their infinite wisdom, have decided to halt all future coastal drilling indefinitely. I usually don't say things like this, but only an economic moron would do that. Dang it, there's oil reserves abounding in Alaska, and likely some in Antarctica, but drilling is not permitted in those areas. In fact, I've read that there's oil off the Carolina coast. Wouldn't more drilling provied more, um, JOBS? Yeah, aren't we trying to fix the unemployment problem? Halting expansion of an industry ain't gonna do that.

By the way, global warming caused the Iceland eruption.

Happy Earth Day!

Oh, wait, it's not Earth Day, it's Vladimir Lenin's birthday. Wait, no, it IS Earth Day. Hold on, it appears to be BOTH! Yes, folks, Earth Day is on Lenin's birthday. You know, Communist, mass-murderer, all that good stuff? If this wasn't so disturbing it would be hysterically funny. Apparently, when Earth Day was started, the ones who started it said, "What better day than Lenin's birthday, since capitalism destroys the environment?"

Riiiiiiight. And Communism has such a sterling track record. Frankly, I don't feel like going on a long rant (I know what you're thinking: "Drake doesn't feel like ranting?! Take cover, the world is ending!") so I'll just recommend a great book.

The Really Inconvenient Truths: Seven Environmental Catastrophes Liberals Don't Want You To Know About-Because They Helped Cause Them

If you just want quick proof of socialism's environmental record, Google "Aral Sea Dried Up."

Defense of the Confederacy is racism

At least according to this guy.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Southern Discomfort
Sign in to Recommend
Twitter
Sign In to E-Mail
Print

Share
CloseLinkedinDiggFacebookMixxMySpaceYahoo! BuzzPermalink By JON MEACHAM
Published: April 10, 2010
IN 1956, nearly a century after Fort Sumter, Robert Penn Warren went on assignment for Life magazine, traveling throughout the South after the Supreme Court’s school desegregation decisions. Racism was thick, hope thin. Progress, Warren reported, was going to take a while — a long while. “History, like nature, knows no jumps,” he wrote, “except the jump backward, maybe.”

Last week, Virginia’s governor, Robert McDonnell, jumped backward when he issued a proclamation recognizing April as Confederate History Month. In it he celebrated those “who fought for their homes and communities and Commonwealth” and wrote of the importance of understanding “the sacrifices of the Confederate leaders, soldiers and citizens during the period of the Civil War.”

The governor originally chose not to mention slavery in the proclamation, saying he “focused on the ones I thought were most significant for Virginia.” It seems to follow that, at least for Mr. McDonnell, the plight of Virginia’s slaves does not rank among the most significant aspects of the war.

Advertently or not, Mr. McDonnell is working in a long and dispiriting tradition. Efforts to rehabilitate the Southern rebellion frequently come at moments of racial and social stress, and it is revealing that Virginia’s neo-Confederates are refighting the Civil War in 2010. Whitewashing the war is one way for the right — alienated, anxious and angry about the president, health care reform and all manner of threats, mostly imaginary — to express its unease with the Age of Obama, disguising hate as heritage.

If neo-Confederates are interested in history, let’s talk history. Since Lee surrendered at Appomattox, Confederate symbols have tended to be more about white resistance to black advances than about commemoration. In the 1880s and 1890s, after fighting Reconstruction with terrorism and after the Supreme Court struck down the 1875 Civil Rights Act, states began to legalize segregation. For white supremacists, iconography of the “Lost Cause” was central to their fight; Mississippi even grafted the Confederate battle emblem onto its state flag.

But after the Supreme Court allowed segregation in Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896, Jim Crow was basically secure. There was less need to rally the troops, and Confederate imagery became associated with the most extreme of the extreme: the Ku Klux Klan.

In the aftermath of World War II, however, the rebel flag and other Confederate symbolism resurfaced as the civil rights movement spread. In 1948, supporters of Strom Thurmond’s pro-segregation Dixiecrat ticket waved the battle flag at campaign stops.

Then came the school-integration rulings of the 1950s. Georgia changed its flag to include the battle emblem in 1956, and South Carolina hoisted the colors over its Capitol in 1962 as part of its centennial celebrations of the war.

As the sesquicentennial of Fort Sumter approaches in 2011, the enduring problem for neo-Confederates endures: anyone who seeks an Edenic Southern past in which the war was principally about states’ rights and not slavery is searching in vain, for the Confederacy and slavery are inextricably and forever linked.

That has not, however, stopped Lost Causers who supported Mr. McDonnell’s proclamation from trying to recast the war in more respectable terms. They would like what Lincoln called our “fiery trial” to be seen in a political, not a moral, light. If the slaves are erased from the picture, then what took place between Sumter and Appomattox is not about the fate of human chattel, or a battle between good and evil. It is, instead, more of an ancestral skirmish in the Reagan revolution, a contest between big and small government.

We cannot allow the story of the emancipation of a people and the expiation of America’s original sin to become fodder for conservative politicians playing to their right-wing base. That, to say the very least, is a jump backward we do not need.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Let's discuss this loopy idea. Let me address his, quite frankly, stupid next-to-last paragraph first. In this paragraph he acts as if the war was originally about the fate of the slaves. It was not, it was not, it was not. My gosh, how historically clueless can this man be? If it was actually about slavery somebody PLEASE explain the bizarre phenomena known as "border States." The most prominent of them is Kentucky, and these had slavery and yet sided with the dang Yankees. Also, how on earth do you explain the generals? Lee and Jackson (CSA) were both anti-slavery. Lee freed all his slaves, and Jackson helped run, illegally, a Sunday school for slaves, in which they taught them how to read. Yet these two sided with the Confederacy. Grant, meanwhile, owned slaves but fought for the freakin' Yanks.

Now let's look at his little talk about Confederate symbols. Let's see... Yes, the KKK does use Confederate imagery. They also use Christian imagery, but are clearly not representative of Christians as a whole. Mississipi putting the CSA flag into its State flag? It's called "defiance," buddy. Ever heard of it? Conquered people tend to not accept the conquerer. Also, he does not demonstrate -at all- that the flag-waving in the 60's had anything to do with racism. It was the War's centennial, for Heaven's sake. This "point" of his needs no further discussion.

Why don't we take a look at the history of Virginia and slavery now? After all, the article was inspired by its governor decreeing Confederate History Month. Let's look at the Old Dominion's past. *Ahem* Before Independence from the British Empire, the State made no less than TWENTY-EIGHT attempts to abolish the slave trade, but all were struck down by the Brits. Afterwards, in the mid-1800's, the Virginia legislature nearly passed a compensated emancipation measure, however Nat Turner's Slave Rebellion pretty much killed that. Earlier that century, Thomas Jefferson, a Virginian and a slave owner, actually created a plan for emancipation that -sadly- never made it to the legislature.

Heck, the Confederacy itself wasn't near as racist/slavery-oriented as this guy makes it out to be. Up to 8% of the Confederate Army at any given time was composed of blacks, including combat troops. I know of several stories about black Confederates, and I'll share one here. During one battle, a shotgun-wielding black Confederate cornered a Yankee cavalryman. The Yank wrote in his diary, "Here I was fighting to free this man [this was after the Emancipation Proclamation] and if I had made one false move on my horse, he would not have hesitated to blow my head off." Doesn't exactly fit the mold, does he? Also, the CS Constitution actually banned the slave trade. Sorta yanks the moral high ground from the North, doesn't it?

This entire post can be summed up in one sentence: This guy doesn't have the vaguest idea what he's talking about.

NASA gets a spanking of epic proportions

Some British dude spent $747 and got excellent space photos and videos. NASA has been put to shame with its gigantonormous budget.

Article: http://www.ktla.com/news/landing/ktla-balloon-home-photos-space,0,5393976.story

Photos and video: http://www.flickr.com/photos/30721501@N05/collections/72157621244472915/

We're done for...

I'm sure you already know about this, but the health "care" bill passed. It was a somewhat close vote, and good 'ol Virginia didn't let me down. To nobody's surprise, North Carolina had mostly "Yes" votes. Where does it all end?! Souther States voting FOR this horrible, unconstitutional expansion of government? What has the world come to? Curse the Radical Republicans and their Reconstruction. Oh well. The one positive thing about this is it will help bankrupt the Feds. Once they can no longer keep States restrained with funding, maybe we'll start seeing a secession movement getting somewhere. After all, nullification movements are making real progress, and the next step is a successful nullification of the HEALTH CARE BILL. This bill may have some unpleasant and unforeseen consequences for Washington... I can't remember which State, but one or more has a bill under consideration nullifying the health bill if it passed. Y'know, this bill is sorta like a kidney stone. It sits there for what seems like ages, but inevitably passes. Next up, I guess, is cap-and-trade.

Random Babbling About Various Random Things

Sorry I haven't posted in so long. This is just an assortment of things that I meant to post weeks ago. Brace yourself.

CHICKEN PICTURES!!!
These are our four-egg-a-day hens.

Here we have a chicken captivated by the camera...

...And here we have one terrified of it.


In other news, here's this funny video.



And here's something funny and completely random. I recently bought the video game, The Conduit, and it has lots of unintentional humor. First, as you play through one level, you discover a neuro-toxin that turns people into mind-controlled "puppets." The guy giving you orders, John Adams (yes, as in the 2nd president) tells you that if the toxin enters the water supply, it could infect the entire DC area. Think about that for a minute. DC area full of mindless puppets. Apparently the toxin has already gotten into the supply, just look at Congress. Second, you find out that Adams is evil and leads an organization called "The Trust," which is behind the toxin. Turns out, there IS an actual "Trust" in real life, except that it is nongovernmental and has to do with government schools. Funny, both "Trusts" involve manufacturing drones and mindless puppets.

Further randomness. What is my opinion on conspiracy theories? I don't think the government caused 9-11, but it is entirely possible that they ignored warnings about the attacks. Don't say our government is above that, it happened on December 7, 1941 as well. I believe that global warming is a HOAX. I think Abraham Lincoln engineered the Fort Sumter incident. I don't think HAARP is some kind of weather-altering superweapon. I don't believe in 2012 doomsday. I don't think the world is run by shapeshifting alien lizard people. I don't know anything about the JFK murder. Area 51 doesn't hold aliens. I don't have a clue why I listed all these conspiracies, except that I had been planning to do an in-depth analysis of some of them a few weeks ago. Sometime I'll go on a rant about the atom bomb.

Chris Matthews hates freedom

He doesn't like states' rights. Of course, anyone who says "nullification" is a racist. Good grief.



Allow me to tear his amusingly silly arguments to pieces.

First off, he says "Who does she think she is, John Calhoun?" I wish! He'd come in handy right now.

Apparently, Martin Luther King Jr. is an authority on what nullification means. Riiiight. Hey, Matthews, all these "firearms freedom" acts are nullification. Last I checked, the second amendment wasn't racist. This guy is utterly clueless. So what if some freakshow racist governor said favorable things about nullification 40 FREAKIN' YEARS AGO?! That doesn't make it racist.

One of the other folks with him talks about the "racial aspect" of secession/nullification. What racial aspect? It has nothing to do with race at all! Unless you count the fact that for some obscure, probably silly reason certain people associate states' rights with racism even though it is purely political. The New England states in the 1800's favored secession. Last I checked, they didn't have slaves. Another claim was that if Democrats were running around screaming "SECESSION!" they would be denounced as anti-American. Wrong. It's called Vermont. Y'know, little obscure state in the Northeast, trying to secede, filled with, um, FLAMING LIBERALS. And yet, by most secessionists, they are admired despite their liberal ideas. And to top the insanity off, Matthews, a liberal and major Obama worshipper, comments that people who support secession/nullification think they are more American than people who want to abide by the Constitution. My response: Hey, genius, where ya been for the past 250 years? You're the one who is abusing the Constitution. Nullification and secession are specifically to GET RID OF unconstitutional laws. Frankly, secession is fully justified as of right now. Nullification is nice, but secession is better.

Finally, I would like to make one last statement. Hey, Matthews, ever heard of these neat little things called the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions? By Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. What? Never heard of 'em? How 'bout the Declaration of Independence? It's a document of secession, and arguably the most American document ever written. Stop making silly blanket statements. I'm not racist, nobody I know personally who supports secession is racist. Do your research next time.

As an amusing side note, somebody pointed out that one of the guys says that the Texas voters aren't a diverse crowd. He says this while on a show with two other white, liberal, middle aged guys. Go figure.

This is supposed to be a good thing...?

Oh. My. Gosh. The freaks who made this commercial are portraying "green police" as a good thing. Yes, I called them freaks. That wasn't harsh enough. Fascist, Communist loopy environmentalist maniacs! There. I feel better now.



Yes, I am aware that this is a car commercial. That doesn't take away from the fact that they're freaks. Seriously, this is disturbing even as a joke. The fact that most Americans wouldn't be infuriated by the mere suggestion of "green police" scares the living daylights out of me.

Interview with Thomas Jefferson

Good afternoon, everyone! For anybody from Challenge 1 who was wondering about those questions for Jefferson, this is what it was all about. After completing the time machine and bringing Jefferson up to speed on what has happened since the early 1800s, he has agreed to do this interview, in which he will answer YOUR questions! At least, I hope he will. Anyway, here he comes now. Welcome to the twenty-first century, Mr. Jefferson.

Me: Let's start off on a light note. Brent*, a friend from my homeschool group asks, "What do you think of the future?"

Jefferson: Well, I must say first of all that I am very impressed by the advances in medicine and other sciences. I find it hard to believe the incredible prosperity achieved in just over 200 years. However, I am quite shocked at the overbearing government.

Me: Well, we're the freest country around.

Jefferson: That's rather sad. We didn't fight the British just to install another form of dictatorship, you know. I am also greatly disturbed by the erosion of states' rights. After all, I myself was a proponent of nullification.

Me: Yes, it is really sad. If anyone today talks about states' rights, secession, or nullification you generally get a bunch of angry looks. But on to other questions. Mr. Bowman, my Challenge tutor, asks, "Did you really believe in the Constitution?"

Jefferson: No, not really. I made it perfectly clear that I am an "anti-Federalist," and opposed the Constitution, it being a great expansion of government power. What particularly concerned me were the "general welfare" and "necessary and proper" clauses.

Me: I'm thinking we should have listened to you.

Jefferson: Indeed. However, I still thought that the Constitution could effectively restrain the government, but it appears that I was wrong. I am greatly disturbed at the way so many sections of it have had their obvious meanings changed.

Me: I know, it's pathetic. Anyway, Alex, also from Challenge, asks, "What do you think about the deficit?"

Jefferson: It's horrifying.

Me: If I'm not mistaken, your administration went into debt from the Louisiana Purchase.

Jefferson: Yes, but I believe that would be far easier to pay off than several trillion dollars. Not to mention, that was a vast amount of territory and would help pay off the debt. Would you have turned it down?

Me: Of course not, that would be downright stupid. Now, Christian asks, "What is your religion?"

Jefferson: I consider myself a Christian.

Me: But you reject the divinity of Christ and question a number of biblical events, correct?

Jefferson: Correct.

Me: Then in today's terms, I think you would fall under the "Deist" category.

Jefferson: Well, definitions have certainly changed.

Me: True enough. Now then, Ashley-

Jefferson: Wait, who? You also never stated who "Christian" was.

Me: Both from my homeschool group. Anyway, Ashley asks, "If you could give any advice to President Obama, what would it be?"

Jefferson: Well, if it had to be short, I would say that it all boils down to this: Do not overstep your constitutional boundaries. The same could be said for Congress.

Me: I strongly agree. Now, the last viewer question is another from Mr. Bowman. He asks, "Why did you take a slave as your mistress?"

Jefferson: *Sighs* I cannot believe that this is still being brought up. That was a false accusation made in a newspaper in 1802 by some fellow named James Caller. In his accusation, he included absolutely no evidence, and later changed the details and the number of children supposedly produced. Besides, my moral standards are far above that.

Me: Then why didn't you reply to it publicly?

Jefferson: I felt that if I did, it would give the accusation more credibility than it deserved.

Me: That's interesting. Funny how the press will take a story and run with it. Now, I would like to know how you feel about the wars that America has been in since the War Between the States.

Jefferson: I think that the Second World War was, at least mostly, justified, but World War One and the "wars" after that were most certainly not! Particularly the Korean "war" and afterwards, since Congress didn't once actually declare war. The other wars, there is very little written about them.

Me: What do you think about the War Between the States, and which side would you have fought on?

Jefferson: Absolutely horrific. It's sad that the Union broke apart, but I would have fought for the Confederacy, of course. The precedents set in that war were truly chilling. Unilateral declaration of war, suspension of habeas corpus, and the worst by far, total war, all are disgusting, but unless I'm mistaken, they seem to have become rather common over the past century.

Me: Sadly, that is very true. Now, I would like to know your opinions on the Patriot Act, suspension of habeas corpus, and the war on terror.

Jefferson: The Patriot Act is completely unconstitutional. Congress's powers are enumerated for a reason. Article I, Section 8 lists, specifically, every single power Congress should have. Spying on its own citizens is not in there. As for the suspension of habeas corpus, the Constitution specifically says that it is permitted only in the cases of rebellion or invasion.

Me: But doesn't habeas corpus only apply to citizens?

Jefferson: Most certainly not! The writ of habeas corpus is a natural right that applies to every single human being. Just like everyone has the right to bear arms, to peaceably assemble, and many others, everyone has the right to due process. Unless, of course, they are an enemy soldier captured in combat. The idea that our rights only apply to our fellow citizens is, in essence, saying that the government gives the rights, instead of simply protecting them.

Me: Once again, agreed. Sadly, it appears that we are out of time. There were a number of other things I would have liked to ask you. It has been an honor talking with you, Mr. Jefferson.

Jefferson: Well, it has certainly been a pleasure talking to you as well. Hopefully this will correct your sloppy historians and politicians.

Me: *Laughs* Sloppy indeed! Well, folks, that's all for now. Next time I will be interviewing the "Father of the Country," George Washington! Feel free to leave your questions in the comments.

*Full names have been omitted.

About that paranoia mentioned earlier...

This is how big tefillin are. Bomb, indeed.

I sense a high paranoia level...

Seriously, I understand the fear of terrorism, but this is way over the top.

Jewish teen’s prayers spark jet security scare
Flight is diverted after religious item is mistaken for a bomb, police say

PHILADELPHIA - A Jewish teenager trying to pray on a New York-to-Kentucky flight caused a scare Thursday when he pulled out a set of small boxes containing holy scrolls, leading the captain to divert the flight to Philadelphia, where the commuter plane was greeted by police, bomb-sniffing dogs and federal agents.

The 17-year-old on US Airways Express Flight 3079 was using tefillin, a set of small boxes containing biblical passages that are attached to leather straps, Philadelphia police Lt. Frank Vanore said.

When used in prayer, one box is strapped to the arm while the other box is placed on the head.

"It's something that the average person is not going to see very often, if ever," FBI spokesman J.J. Klaver said.

The teen explained the ritual after being questioned by crew members of the flight, which had left LaGuardia Airport around 7:30 a.m. headed for Louisville and was operated by Chautauqua Airlines, authorities said.

Officials with the airline, however, said crew members "did not receive a clear response" when they talked with the teen, according to a statement issued by Republic Airways, which owns Chautauqua.

"Therefore, in the interest of everyone's safety, the crew decided to land in Philadelphia, where a more complete investigation and follow-up with authorities would be possible," the statement said.

The flight landed in Philadelphia about 9 a.m. without incident and was met by police, bomb-sniffing dogs and officials from the FBI and Transportation Security Administration.

‘They were more alarmed than we were’
Authorities said the plane was searched and passengers were questioned. The teen, who is from White Plains, N.Y., and was traveling with his 16-year-old sister, was very cooperative, Vanore said.

"They were more alarmed than we were," Vanore said.

Klaver said the teen and his sister were never in custody and were cleared to continue their travels.

The teen's grandmother, who was waiting for him at Louisville International Airport, said the early flight left no time to pray before leaving New York.

"He hadn't had the opportunity to pray, so that is why he did it on the plane," Frances Winchell said.

She said the episode was traumatic for the boy, whose mother requested that he not give interviews.

"But in any event," she added, "all's well that ends well, and maybe some good will come to the world because of it."

The teen, who belongs to the congregation Young Israel of White Plains, is "a brilliant student" from "the sweetest family," said Shmuel Greenberg, the synagogue's rabbi.

The morning prayer ritual is supposed to take place within a few hours of sunrise, so it's understandable that the teen was doing it on the plane, Greenberg said.

‘Aware of ignorance’
Binding the boxes of holy scrolls to the arm and head serves as "a reminder for the person that their actions during the day, and what they think about during the day, should be on a level of holiness and should inspire them to do productive, good things," he said.

The rabbi said he could see how someone unfamiliar with the tefillin could be alarmed.

"Security today is a serious issue. You can't become educated up in the air," Greenberg said. "I can definitely see a pilot or a crew that never saw it before in today's environment be very, very concerned."

Another rabbi, however, said tefillin have been used for thousands of years and he found it hard to believe no one recognized it. Benjamin Blech, an assistant professor of Talmud at Yeshiva University in New York, said he found the incident "both humorous and outlandish" and called it a "wake-up call" for religious sensitivity.

"We should be aware of ignorance just as much as we should be aware of terrorism," he said.

Concerns about passengers carrying bombs have been heightened since a Nigerian man was accused of trying to blow up a Detroit-bound Northwest Airlines flight using explosives concealed in his pants on Christmas Day.

The Republic statement said the airline would use Thursday's event "to further strengthen our commitment to both security and customer service."

The flight was carrying 15 passengers and three crew members; travelers were rebooked on other flights, US Airways spokesman Morgan Durrant said.

My rifle

Yes, you read that right. I have a brand new, old, .22 rifle. This is really old news to anybody who knows me, but I haven't thought to post about it until now. While at my grandparents' house for Thanksgiving, my grandpa gave me a rifle that his dad had given him. Needless to say, I was feeling very thankful! It's fairly old, but it shoots like it's brand new. Below are two pictures that were taken this morning.


In this one, sadly, I am not actually shooting anything. Does anyone know of any shooting ranges near me?

Whoo! First egg!!!

FINALLY! Those dumb birds have finally started paying their rent. I was checking on their food this morning, and looked to see if we had any eggs. Before I looked closely, however, I thought, "Nope. No eggs again." Then I actually looked closely, and, amazingly, there was an egg sitting among the poo. Here are the photos of it after being cleaned off.


This is the photo I took.


This is the photo my sister took... She posed the egg.

National Geographic... Again

Wow, National Geographic has lately been giving me lots to talk about. In this issue, there are two, no, three articles I want to discuss. First, there's a great article on bionics. It's really cool, the advances in artificial limbs. Second, there's the article on illegal wildlife trafficking. It goes through the usual, "People are -gasp- using endangered species! Even worse, they're making a profit! How horrible!" It then talks with dread about the possibility of raising tigers for profit, farming basically. Personally, I would prefer having a huge range in Africa for the tigers to breed in, but also allow adventurers and thrill seekers to go on safari and hunt the beasts, then selling the product. For a price, of course. But no, farming tigers is somehow horrible, despite the fact that it would save the species from extinction. As one book put it, the environmentalist thinks, "Tigers going extinct: bad. Capitalism: worse." That about sums it up.
The last article I want to talk about is their article on Singapore. You know, the tiny little country off the coast of Southeast Asia that is unbelievably prosperous compared to its neighbors? Well, the folks at NatGeo attribute its success to the tight regulations on personal liberties. Obviously, they think that the prosperity of Singapore is thanks to socialism. Minor problem: The article mentions not one economic regulation, and Singapore is actually more capitalistic and economically free than the USA. The lack of personal liberty is wrong, of course, but as far as economics goes, Singapore is a shining example of capitalism run wild. Not as scary as some people would have you think, is it?