Latest Posts

The Forgotten Communist Traitor

History, Marxists

…forgotten, that is, except by people like this guy.  And me.  But along the way, in reading about this bastard, we see the following:

Leftism in America isn’t really a political commitment, though of course the left takes and supports a recognizable range of political positions. Leftism is, first and foremost, a fashion accessory that indicates a certain type of social status, similar to a Gucci handbag or a Rolex watch. It is a way to define oneself, and proclaim one’s solidarity with a self-conscious elite, and one’s social superiority to a hated group of outsiders. In America, the higher one rises in position, wealth, power, and status, the more leftward one’s political commitments move. This is counterintuitive at first glance, but it is nevertheless true. All their rhetorical arm-pumping about equality, revolution, income-redistribution, and hatred of Wall Street notwithstanding, left- liberals are primarily the representatives of the ruling class in America. They are not an absolutely dominant ruling class, but that is not for want of trying. They very strongly believe that they have the right and duty to govern all the rest of us.

More importantly:

The defense [of Hiss by the Left] is perfectly understandable if we read it as a claim to aristocratic privilege: Hiss is a member of the governing elite; by definition he can do no wrong! This is the same claim made by any mandarin class, whether the Prussian Junkers in Wilhelmine Germany, the landed gentry in Victorian England, the nomenklatura in the Soviet Union, or the upper-level managerial class in American corporate life today. People in such aristocracies sincerely feel that they have an inherent right to rule, and cannot be brought to book; they are a protected class immune from prosecution.

What happened in the Alger Hiss case was really important per se.  But what it reveals about the Left — then and now — is more important still.  Read the whole thing.  (It’s quite long, but if you read nothing else today…)

Marxist Economics

Elections, Marxists

From POTUS-wannabe Pocahantas comes this policy proposal:

Democrat presidential hopeful Elizabeth Warren wants to use federal excise taxes to reduce gun and ammunition sales.
Her gun control, made public in August on Medium, shows Warren believes the current ten percent excise tax on firearms is too low. She wants to raise that tax to 30 percent while increasing the tax on ammunition to 50 percent.
Because excise taxes are paid directly by the consumer–the taxes are added to the price of the goods–this means a $500 gun would immediately cost $515 and the price for a $20 box of ammo would immediately rise to $30.
Warren claims this taxation policy would “bring in new federal revenue” that can used for “gun violence prevention.” And she simultaneously suggests the tax would raise the price on guns and ammo to a level sufficient to stifle sales.

So using her “economics”  it would go something like this:

  • Currently, 1,000 rounds of 7.62x39mm (eeevil AK ammo) @ $300* yields $33 (@11%) in excise tax revenue

So therefore Madame Marxist suggests that with her plan:

  • 1,000 rounds of eeevil AK ammo @ $300 would yield $150 (@50%) in excise tax revenue… whoopieeeeee a net gain of $127 stolen taxed by the gummint.

Except of course that in the real world, AK ammo sales would fall to 100 rounds and yield only $15 in excise taxes (a 50% loss in revenue).  “Yay yay yay, but ammo sales have fallen!” she would pronounce.  But why  would sales fall so precipitously, she asks?  Because of the higher tax?

Because, you Commie coksucquer, during the months before you could enact this poxy tax increase, we AK owners would buy countless millions  of rounds of ammo, so that we’d have enough stored for the lean years — just like we did before the term of that other socialist asshole Barack Obama — and resume buying once an actual American became president again.

Ditto all those eeevil AR-15s and AK-47s you hate so much:  we’d buy so many before you could touch them, the gun factories would have to institute 365-day / 24-hour shifts just to cope with the demand.

I swear, I’m a huge fan of the First Amendment and I like to hear politicians spell out their proposed policies;  but I would also propose that anyone using idiotic economics theory (like the above) to create policy should be forced to wear a dunce cap and be beaten with wet spaghetti — just because of their naked stupidity.

And this phony bitch wants to run things?

* (example) Wolf Performance (WPA) is $304 / 1,000 at Cheaper Than Dirt at time of writing.

Mail, I Get Mail

Funny Stuff

Every so often my Brit buddies send me mail that gets me going.  From Mr. Free Market:

“Sitting in the BA First Class lounge this afternoon.  Guess I’m going to make Greta cry again…”

And from The Englishman:

“I think the menu for a Defender launch event says all I need to know about the target customer…”

(From Kim:  No Full English Brekkie, nary a steak pie or sausage roll, and forget about a good bacon butty*.   My earlier post about this silly vehicle is quite appropriate, I think.  And WTF is a “frittata”?)

From Reader PaulG, who isn’t a Brit but could be:

And so say all of us.

Then Mr. FM gets serious:

The addendum to your post [yesterday] on 6.5mm should be along the lines of this:

6.5 Creed is ballistically better than the Swede but in the real world, not enough.
More critically it fails the “where do I get ammo?” test.  Sure sure in the US you have aisles dedicated to Creedmore:  not so in the rest of the world.
The first time I went to Africa there were 3 chaps from Texas there. They’d become detached from their ammo — but the real problem was they were all shooting some sort of WSSM & we were in a Safari camp!!!
If the Swede isn’t enough for you, shoot 270. Your PH or stalker will have a box of it in the glove box.

True dat.

*   “bacon butty” (for my Murkin Readers):

New Kid On The Block

The Gun Thing

Doc Russia astounded me the other night by telling me that next year (2020) he’s not going to use his custom Remington 700 in .300 Win Mag to cull Scottish deer with Mr. Free Market.  Instead, he’s downloading to (another) custom Rem 700 in 6.5 Creedmoor.

Okay, as any fule kno, I am hugely skeptical of new cartridges simply because, as some smart guy put it:

“Typically, this is how we get new cartridges. A gunmaker approaches an ammo producer­—which is sometimes part of the same parent company—and says, hey, we want to introduce a new round, and if you make it, we’ll produce several thousand rifles to support it. They then hype the hell out of it, cross their fingers, and hope shooters are drawn to it like raccoons to hot garbage.”

And after a couple years of frenzied excitement, the cartridge disappears as though it never existed, leaving gun owners with a rifle that’s as useful as tits on a boar hog.

However, this 6.5 Creedmoor seems to be the business, not only because it’s a good hunting rifle, but it’s also winning competitions for accuracy — delivering about the same impact  as a .300 Win Mag (!) but with considerably less recoil.  No wonder Doc is interested.

So with that said, read all about it.

As intriguing as it sounds, however, I’m unlikely to follow the trend (and not for the first time) because I’ve long known about the beauty of a 6.5mm bullet, in its incarnation as the 6.5x55mm Swedish cartridge, developed in the nineteenth century.  Granted, the 6.5 Creedmoor hits harder than the Swede, but I’m reminded of the trenchant response from a guy who had been shooting .270 Win his whole life when told how much better was the .270 Win Short Magnum cartridge that came on the scene:  “So what?”

Put me in his camp.  However, I can’t wait to see what happens when Doc hits the Angus Glens with his new death-dealer…

Why Bother?

Business

As Longtime Readers may remember, I was involved for many years with the “customer loyalty” business — specifically in the supermarket arena, but tangentially in a couple other industries — so I kinda know what I’m talking about when it comes to this stuff.  (As an aside:  if you use a Kroger Rewards card when you shop there, I’m at least partially responsible;  sorry.)

Back when I lived in Chicago, I used to fly in and out of O’Hare Airport about 50-60 times a year, and was a member of both the American AAdvantage and United Mileage Plus programs.

Once I even spoke to the head of one of their programs, complaining that my friend used to fly internationally once a quarter and accrued thereby a massive number of miles, whereas I flew rather fewer  miles and couldn’t get to his level of “SuperDuperPlusGoodPlatinum” level in their program.  This, despite the fact that he was making four purchase decisions a year to fly with them, while I was making that many purchase decisions every month.  But my flights were Chicago-Kansas City, Chicago-Minneapolis, Chicago-Des Moines and so on, while my friend’s were Chicago-Singapore, and I felt that I was being short-changed for my loyalty.  Rather to my surprise, the program director agreed with my logic, and although this had probably been planned anyway, about six months later the policy was changed to factor in the number of flights (“segments”) as part of the loyalty determinant.  Only then — and far too late — did my “status” improve.

In the rather interesting George Clooney movie Up In The Air, much is made of his goal to reach ten million air miles (with American, as it turns out), and the status that this conferred on him.  There’s no doubt that this gave him something  desirable (as far as he was concerned, anyway), but it’s interesting to note that had the movie been made today, those ten million miles would have made him rather less valuable a customer.

A new era of airline loyalty programs has arrived. United Airlines announced this week that the criteria for elite qualification in its MileagePlus loyalty program would change dramatically next year. Starting in January of 2020, United’s loyalty members will earn elite status based on Premier Qualifying Flights and Premier Qualifying Segments only. Flight miles, the traditional metric by which frequent flyers used to earn status, are no longer going to be considered.
It wasn’t too long ago that frequent flyers on American, Delta, and United earned elite status based solely on how far they fly. If a passenger flew 100,000 miles or 100 segments on any of the carriers, for example, top-tier (published) status was awarded, yielding perks such as upgrades, free checked bags, and free seat assignments.
In 2013, however, that formula changed when Delta introduced qualifying dollars to its equation for calculating for elite status. From that point forward, frequent flyers needed to earn a baseline number of miles or segments and also spend a companion amount of cash — up to $15,000 for the top published tier — to earn the same status as before. American and United quickly followed suit.

I should point out that for Oz’s Qantas Airlines, this has always been their policy because all their flights are long-haul, so it made sense to reward spending rather than just miles.

That’s not true for our local Murkin companies, of course, but it’s unsurprising that United (motto:  “We’re the Friendly Skies, until we have to break your nose“) and American (motto:  “We cancel flights, just for spite”) would make this change, because they’re a bunch of bastards.  (I can’t speak for Delta as I’ve only flown with them a few times.)

As I’ve said many times before, I know that to the airlines I’m just self-propelled cargo, but I don’t want to be treated  that way.  So they’re making flying even less attractive for people — and screwing up their programs in the process.

Needless to say, the Usual Suspects (i.e Gummint) are horning in on the action:

Air miles reward schemes should be banned because they ‘stimulate demand’ for excessive flying, according to a report commissioned by the Government’s climate change advisers.
The Committee on Climate Change (CCC*) commissioned report says that frequent flyers should also be hit by an ‘escalating air miles levy’ to put them off flying too much, but measures should not raise prices for people taking an annual holiday.
There [are] approximately 220 frequent flyer clubs with an estimated total membership of 200 million across the world, many of whom take additional flights to ‘maintain their privileged traveller status’.
The new suggestions are aimed at reducing air travel for the 15 per cent of the UK population estimated to be responsible for 70 per cent of all flights.

The latter would be people like Mr. Free Market, who don’t have any choice but to fly as their business is 90% international.  And gawd forbid people should actually be productive and, you know, earn salaries for themselves and profits for their companies — I think Marx had some ugly things to say about that — when they’re polluting the atmosphere and stuff.

I have an idea for improving our planet’s well-being, but as it involves rounding up all the the eco-loons and climate freaks and converting their bodies into fertilizer, no doubt someone’s going to have a problem with this.

I don’t know why they’re trying to kill off frequent flier programs, when the airlines are perfectly capable of doing it all by themselves.  But that’s Big Gummint for ya.

*Actually, that’s not what “CCC” stands for;  it’s “Climate Change Cunts”, i.e. all of them.

Follow-Up To The Follow-Up Post

The Gun Thing

A couple Readers (one assumes New ones) wrote me and asked (and I paraphrase):  “So what’s YOUR list of ten rifles everyone should own?”  Of course, keeping it down to ten is a little difficult — certainly for me, and I suspect for most others too — but I’ll give it a shot, so to speak, and confine it to center-fire chamberings (no rimfires) as the original article did, with mostly bolt-action types (and only one semi-auto).  Rather than advocate specific rifles, however, I’m going to classify them by category.  I understand that not everyone is active in every category, of course;  but it helped me crystallize my thinking.

So let’s imagine that you must have at least one rifle per category, just to make this interesting.  There are nine categories, so you only get an extra rifle in one of them. And the finalists are:

1)  High-capacity (10+ magazine) semi-automatic combat rifle.  I don’t really care whether it’s an AR-15 type or AK-47 — and for the old-timers, the M14/M1A and even the M1 Carbine can be acceptable — but everyone should own at least one of these because
a.)  the Socialists want to take them away, and
b.)  you never know if a random Pantifarian / BLM uprising may occur in your neighborhood.  (And I don’t have to tell you that you need LOTS of ammo for this category, do I?)  Here’s a pic of some choices, as an example.

2)  Mauser 98k-type.  This category exists because in the domain of Emperor Kim, everyone has to own at least one Mauser.  Once again, the choice of which one is up to you. Personally, I favor the CZ 550/557 type because of its set trigger:

…but should you want to go all traditional 98k in this category, you won’t get any arguments from this  side of the keyboard:

Caliber is up to you;  the CZs offer just about any chambering you wish, while the actual 98k comes pretty much only in 7x57mm or 8x57mm.  Not that this would leave you disappointed, of course.

3) All-Purpose Bolt-Action.  As the name suggests, this should be the rifle that in a pinch you can grab and use for just about any application.  It could also be called “My Last Rifle” (last to be let go, last to be purchased, last gun to be taken from your cold dead hands, whatever).

4)  A vintage battle rifle. These old ladies are desirable for pure nostalgia reasons, and because I think it behooves every rifleman to be aware of and appreciate our rifles’ heritage.  I will leave the actual rifle up to you, because far be it for me to be all judgey when it comes to my favorite class of rifles of all time.  (And if you picked the 98k above, then feel free to drop it in here.)  Here are just a couple of obvious choices that were not covered in the Great War Rifles  post:

Krag-Jorgensen

M1 Garand

5)  Deep-woods hunting rifle.  I already covered a part of this earlier, in recommending the wonderful Savage 99 (here).

But if you want to keep it to “traditional” lever rifles such as Marlin, Henry or Winchester, then have at it:

6)  Reach Out And Touch (a.k.a. “sniper”) rifle.  This is for when your quarry is further out than a city block, for example.  It doesn’t have  to look all “urban-SWAT-y”, but whatever.  Here I’m going to get specific, because you need several characteristics to make this shot more than a “by guess or by God” proposition, as seen below.  Any one of these would be an excellent choice.

Savage 110 FPS

CZ 557 UCS

Note that each of these rifles has a honking great scope on it — don’t skimp on your glass:  Nightforce, Zeiss, Swarovski, Steiner, Minox etc. should be your standards.

Now as I said, it doesn’t have to be a “sniper” rifle as above.  But whatever it looks like (see below), you need to be absolutely confident that you can make a sideplate-sized grouping at 500 yards minimum with whatever you choose.  Here’s an idea of what I’m talking about:

Remington 700 VTR

Winchester Mod 70 Extreme Weather

Remington 700 AAC-SD

They could also be older rifles (e.g. pre-’64 Winchester Mod 70), but they must be dependably accurate.

With this type of rifle, chambering is very important.  My choice would be 6.5x55mm Swede (simply because I know the cartridge so well), but .308 Win, 6.5mm Creedmoor and .300 Win Mag are also excellent choices.  (Watch out for exotic cartridges like .338 Lapua and such:  they’re expensive and scarce on the ground.)  Lighter bullets will get blown around a lot, so be very discriminating in your selection.

7)  Trunk rifle.  Generally speaking, a trunk or “truck” rifle should be able to be abused and handle extreme temperature changes, and still be able to fire.  It should also be cheap enough that if it’s stolen, you won’t be out serious money.  From my perspective, if it’s got to be cheap, ugly and effective, it’s gotta be Russian.  Like this one:

Mosin-Nagant M44

It’s uglier than Hillary Clinton’s backside and will kick you around worse than a drunken rugby player, but it will do everything you ask for, and then some.
I do know an old boy who has an ancient Marlin .30-30 lever action stashed in his car, but then he has at least a half-dozen other  Marlins in his safe, so that’s to be expected.

8) Varmint rifle.  Think “prairie dogs” or similar, and that’s what I’m talking about.  It’s a variation on the “reach out and touch” principle, but in a much smaller caliber like .223 Rem, .22-250, or even .22 Mag or .17 HMR.  Given that you’re going to be hunkered down, it doesn’t have to be an especially light rifle, but you’ll know best how heavy a rifle you can handle comfortably.  I have a Marlin 882 in .22 Mag for this purpose:

…but you’d probably need something with a little more legs / oomph than .22 Mag, like the Cooper Mod 21 in .22-250 Rem:

9)  “Safari / Dangerous Game” rifle. This is going to be the least-necessary category for most riflemen, unless you have a thing for Kodiak bears, African lions and such.  And in this category, you can’t think that your trusty .30-06 will do the trick — well, not in Africa or Alaska, anyway.  (Doc Russia once shot a warthog with a .30-06, absolutely nailed  it with a heart/lung shot, and he finally caught up with it over half a mile  from where it was shot.  For his Cape buffalo, he went to .375 H&H and it still took more than one shot to kill the thing.)  There are only a few rifles to choose from in this category, but the go-to rifle — the one which when you uncase it, the PH will nod approvingly — is the venerable Brno 602 (nowadays the CZ 550 Safari).  But there’s also the Mauser 98 Magnum, which is offered in .375 H&H, .416 Rigby and .450 Rigby:

 

So after looking at all that, here are Kim’s Top 10 Rifles, in category order as listed:

“Pantifa Repellent”:

SAR-1 (AK-47) (7.62x39mm)

“All-Purpose Bolt-Action”:

Mauser M12 (6.5x55mm)

“Heritage Rifles” / Mauser 98k type:

Mauser M48 (98K) (8x57mm)

SMLE No1. Mark III (.303 British)

Browning Hi-Wall (.45-70 Govt)

“Deep-Woods Hunter”:

Savage Mod 99 (.243 Win)

“Reach Out and Touch”:

Mauser Mod 41b (6.5x55mm Swede)

“Trunk / Truck Gun”:

SKS (7.62x39mm)

“Varminter”:

Cooper Arms Mod 21 (.223 Rem)

“Lion-Killer”

CZ 550 Safari (.375 H&H Magnum)

You all knew  I was going to be heavy on the “Heritage” rifles, didn’t you?

But let’s say that you disagree with all the categories (and it’s a valid argument), and just want to see the rifles I want to own*.  In that case, Kim’s Top 10 Rifles (uncategorized and unranked) are:

  1. Mauser M12 (6.5x55mm) — do everything
  2. M1 Carbine (.30 Carbine) — because it killed Nazis and Commies
  3. SMLE No1 MkIII (.303 British) — smooth action, kept the Empire going
  4. SAR-1 (7.62x39mm) — Swalwell and Beto, eat your fucking hearts out
  5. CZ 550 Safari (.375 H&H) — just in case I’m ever invited to hunt grizzlies
  6. Browning High Wall (.45-70 Govt) — sentimental reasons
  7. Savage 99 (.243 Win) — ditto
  8. Cooper Arms Mod 21 (.223 Rem) — in case I’m ever invited to a varmint shoot

and the last two (not on the list above):

9. CZ 527 Carbine (7.62x39mm) — my idea of a “cabin” rifle

10. Marlin 1894 CB (.357 Magnum) — companion piece to my .357 revolver

Those are my top 10… this week.  Choices may be subject to change without prior notice.

*I don’t own any  rifles, ever since that canoeing accident on the Brazos lo those many years ago… wait, I do have a bolt-action .22 rifle, but it’s old and rusted, can barely shoot.