Reader NYCTrack sent me this obit. We mere mortals can only wish to be so fondly remembered.
Me, I nearly peed my pants laughing. Wish I could have met the guy.
Reader NYCTrack sent me this obit. We mere mortals can only wish to be so fondly remembered.
Me, I nearly peed my pants laughing. Wish I could have met the guy.
…as you will be when you watch this video.
Basically, when government cannot or will not do its job, ordinary Americans will just step in and do it.
Then of course when government tries to stop them (by threatening arrests and what have you), the ordinary Americans tell them to go pound sand and do the job anyway.
I wish I could go there to help out, but I can’t — I’d just be adding to the problem — so the best I can do is post pieces and links like this.
Here’s some news that cheered me up over the weekend:
A girls’ field hockey team from Dighton-Rehoboth (D-R) Regional High School in Massachusetts has forfeited a planned game on September 17th because their opponent, Somerset-Berkley, has a male on their team.
Dighton-Rehoboth cited its new policy, approved on June 25, that allows players and/or coaches to opt out of competitions if the opposing team includes a member of the opposite sex.
And they’re aware of the consequences:
“We understand this forfeit will impact our chances for a league championship and possibly playoff eligibility, but we remain hopeful that other schools consider following suit to achieve safety and promote fair competition for female athletes.”
I actually know a lot about this topic.
You see, back in high school I played for the 1st XI hockey team for most of my time there — I was reasonably skilled but the fastest runner on the team, and speed made up for a lot of shortcomings.
Just for the hell of it, the coach arranged for a match against two girls’ high schools on consecutive Sundays, played on our field. Both were considered top in the field, perennial competitors for the girls’ area championship. We, in contrast, were no more than mediocre (we only had forty-odd boys to draw from, as most of the school played rugby).
So we approached the first match with some trepidation, because of course we’d never played against girls.
After the first five minutes we realized that our opposition was hopelessly outclassed. We were faster, more skilled and more game-savvy, and we scored three goals in the space of a few minutes. Thereafter we decided that we would only run backwards, and the flow of goals slowed to only a couple by half-time.
At that point, the respective coaches decided to split us up, five each of either gender per side (the goalies were irrelevant).
Only then did everyone start enjoying themselves, but even then we boys had a tacit agreement to slow down and make most of our passes to the girls (“to” not “at”, you bad people) rather than just playing to win.
And it was great fun. But make no mistake, there was absolutely no comparison between the sexes. Had we boys not altered the format and played like we were playing one of our bitter rivals, there’s no telling how badly we would have beaten the girls.
So I can tell you that having even one boy playing on a girl’s team is going to make a huge difference, especially if that boy plays aggressively, like the boy in the linked article did. (Shame on him, by the way. Even at my advanced age, I’d love to play against him and show him what real –but quite legal — aggression is like when you have it inflicted on you*.)
Some things cannot be changed, no matter how many “valid” arguments are made in favor of the change.
And good for the folks at Dighton-Rehoboth for acknowledging that fact.
*That’s a tale for another time, but someone remind me to tell the story of Kim And The Beauty Queen some day.
The State (i.e. governments large and small) can always find ways to stifle individuality, especially when that individuality manifests itself in young people. Here’s a recent example:
Bored and looking for something to do this summer, Danny Doherty hatched a plan to raise money for his brother’s hockey team by selling homemade ice cream.
But a few days after setting up a stand and serving up vanilla, shaved chocolate and fluffernutter to about 20 people, Danny’s family received a letter from the Norwood Board of Health ordering it shut down. Town officials had received a complaint and said that the 12-year-old’s scheme violated the Massachusetts Food Code, a state regulation.
No surprises there, this being Massachusetts. (My only question: who complained? Some goody-goody, or someone fronting for the local ice cream shop? Either way, they need a swift slap.)
Back in the late 1980s/early 1990s, I lived in in one of the Chicagoland suburbs — Palatine, a modest middle-class neighborhood of the kind that’s so Norman Rockwell it’s almost a caricature. And while my house itself was small, it sat on just over a quarter-acre, which meant a large lawn in the backyard. Said lawn took well over two hour to cut and edge, and in the short but warm, fecund Chicago summers, the grass grew quickly, meaning it had to be cut at least weekly; actually, I would cut it about five times a month. And it was a hot, sweaty business: Chicago’s summers can be sticky, especially when contrasted with its icy winters.
At that point I was working from home (long before it became the cool thing to do) because the company was based near Fort Lauderdale. And I really couldn’t afford to spend the time doing the lawn. Anyway, one afternoon I was just about to go out and cut the thing when the doorbell rang. When I opened it, there were two boys standing there, aged about ten.
“Cut your lawn for ten bucks?”
Hell, yes.
Whereupon these two little buggers (each had their own, okay, most likely Dad’s lawnmower) cut the lawn — good grief, they ran behind the mowers, and the grass was cut to almost professional standard in just about fifteen minutes. They didn’t do edging (“Our Dads won’t let us because they say it’s dangerous”) but that was really just a half-hour job, and easily done after 5 o’clock.
“See you again next week, boys?”
They actually sounded surprised. “You want us to come back?”
Hell, yes. And over the next couple years, I never cut my own lawn again. And nor did a lot of my neighbors, once I told them about these kids at the next block party. These boys made an absolute fortune, and worked their tails off.
And if the local council gauleiters had ever tried to stop these kids from earning some money from good, honest hard work, I do believe that the neighborhood dads would have burned down their offices. They didn’t interfere, of course, either because they never learned about these budding entrepreneurs or because they just ignored them (as they should).
Now I’m not suggesting that whenever Gummint does what they did to young Danny Doherty above, the neighborhood dads should torch their offices or tar and feather the bastards. That would be incitement, and I’m never going to do that no sirree not me not ever.
But I sure as hell wouldn’t try to stop those irate folks if they did. I would offer to hold their coats, however, just as a good neighbor should.
I stumbled on these two little doodads while scraping the bottom of Teh Intarwebz.
Frozen Ball and High Pressure espresso.
Just to make a small (okay, tiny) cup of overpriced coffee that’s too strong to actually drink and in the case of the first, lukewarm to boot.
Marketing at its finest.
In similar news, the other day I saw a new Corvette getting smoked from light to light (over a long block, too) by a Honda Civic R. True story. $85k Murkin V8 smoked by some $45k Jap rice rocket.
Also, my $400 Tissot manual wind watch keeps time as well as a $5,800 Grand Seiko over 24 hours.
Oh yeah, and the other day at the range I saw a $650 Springfield Operator shoot more accurately than a $3,000 HK Mod 23 — and I mean a LOT more accurately. Same shooter (not me), different gun, same .45 ACP ammo.
There’s a lot of overpriced marketing-driven bullshit out there, folks. Feel free to add your examples in Comments.