Your suggestions in Comments.
Latest Posts
Hatin’ On The Feds
Wah wah wah the FedGov alphabet agencies, after despising us and treating ordinary citizens like criminals and scum for decades, are suddenly waking up to the fact that we hate them back, and they’re all butt-hurt about it:
Many arms of government are unpopular with large swathes of the American population, and people are not shy about expressing their contempt.
For those of us who want a smaller, much less intrusive government, that should be viewed as a trend to nurture and encourage. And what a trend it is.
Remember a few years back when Martha Stewart was tossed in jail for lying to a federal agent? They’d tried for years to get her on tax evasion charges, and failed dismally. So when they couldn’t get her for that, they lied to her about some information they claimed to have, and demanded a statement. When she couldn’t remember the details and relied on faulty memory, they nailed her for it — and it was all because she was a high-profile target (which they love because it brings attention to their untiring efforts to keep the country safe [eyecross] ). So the feds can lie to you, about anything, but get one detail wrong and they can bend you over the desk. That’s why they don’t record interviews — unlike local police forces, which have to — which means that there’s no evidence that they lied or tried otherwise to entrap you. (Which is why President Trump refused to be interviewed by the Robert Mueller Gestapo, by the way, when those assholes wouldn’t give him written questions to answer — hint: paper trail.)
And of course, the feds, be they the FBI, IRS or any of the other alphabet soup minions can have it both ways if they don’t want to prosecute, by asking softball or irrelevant questions of the accused, then just ignoring any which might have been incriminating. Which is why Hillary “Illegal Private Email Server” Clinton isn’t wearing orange overalls as we speak.
Let’s not even mention Ruby Ridge or Waco.
So yeah: put me in the camp of those who don’t trust, believe or support most federal agencies… anymore.
And that’s the important point, here. For years — decades — after I came over as an immigrant, I always thought that these agencies were on the side of the right, and that justice was their goal in protecting us from criminals. Silly me, it isn’t. As the past decade has proved, they’re little different from the criminal enterprises they purport to be saving us from. When agents start talking about their targets’ families, and how their job prospects or college careers could be affected by their parents’ culpability, all I’m reminded of is that infamous Cosa Nostra phrase: “Nice little business you have here. Pity if something bad were to happen to it.”
Government agencies have been acting increasingly like petty gauleiters and thugs, and now they wonder why people loathe and distrust them?
No More Trophies For You, Matey
I usually email Mr. Free Market and / or The Englishman to tease them about the latest BritGov foolishness — it keeps me busy (because of the volume thereof) and I like getting the return emails, contents of which I cannot share because bloodthirsty / seditious / both. Here’s but one example:
Mr. FM’s response to this idiocy, however, was different:
The government could ban trophy hunting souvenirs after a huge spike in the number of bloodsport mementos being brought back to the UK.
Animal welfare minister Zac Goldsmith said the sport ‘turns my stomach’ as he revealed there will be an urgent consultation over the controversial imports.
It comes after a strong public backlash to trophy hunting after the deaths of animals such as Cecil the lion in 2015, as well as elephants and leopards.
We’ll leave aside the necessity for a government “animal welfare minister” for the moment, and concentrate on Mr. FM’s response:
“Excellent. Given the cost of taxidermy, not to mention the astronomical shipping costs, this ban will just leave me more money to buy tags to shoot more animals*.”
In other words:
Yeah, that’s going to work really well for the BritGov. It’s a classic example of what happens when you want to legislate against something but know fuck-all about the subject.
*I should point out that in most parts of Africa, there are few limits as to how much game you want to shoot; the degree of scarcity drives the price up or down. If you want to shoot another one, you just pay the additional tag fee — which by the way, are nosebleed (see here for typical per-animal tags).
Luddism
It began, as so many of these things do, with the French, over two centuries ago. Now we have this:
UK workers are sabotaging and assaulting workplace robots in an attempt to stop them taking their jobs, finds study.
…
But for some manual workers they have found their own ways of stopping the robots’ rise to world domination – by confusing them.
I predict that this is going to become more, not less common.
“But why, Kim,” you may ask, “is this happening at all? Aren’t robots / A.I. / Smart Stuff going to be the Way Of The Future? ”
Here’s a hint:
The report also predicted 20 million people will have been replaced by the machines in the work place by 2030.
That’s just in Britishland. And let’s not hear the tired old “buggy-whip maker” argument again. With the trend which is taking place, robots and A.I. will soon have the capacity to take over jobs which may now seem intrinsically human, but aren’t, e.g.:
A backlash is not at all out of the question.
As You Were
Oh, how nice:
There is no reason to cut back on red meat for health reasons, according to a controversial claim by a group of leading scientists.
Researchers in Canada, Spain and Poland have cast a shadow over eating advice adopted by health organisations around the world.
In a landmark paper, the academics analysed past studies of how eating meat affected the health of more than four million people.
They found no evidence that eating beef, pork and lamb could increase the rates of heart disease, cancer, stroke or type 2 diabetes – despite fears.
And the team also said they found nothing strong enough to signal that people should cut down on red meat, adding that the quality of evidence was too low for findings to be concerning.
And here’s where you can almost taste the tears:
The medical community is torn over the research, describing it as ‘very good quality’ but hesitating to
agree withstop telling people to cut back on meat.
Yeah, they’re so stuck on stupid, and they believe in their own bullshit so strongly that when someone points out they’ve been wrong all this time, all they can say is, “We can’t refute this data — but we’re still not going to allow people to eat meat because we’d look like a right bunch of idiots.”
Even though they are.
Never mind; next week there’ll be an even greater-quality study which says, “Oh no no no eating meat is doubleplusungood for you, promise!” and the International Vegan Set will be able to continue with their religion as before, smug in the knowledge that Meat Kills.
Until the study after that one.
Me, having had a tasty lamb vindaloo for dinner last night and a piece of boerewors for breakfast, I’m debating whether to go Full Carnivore tonight:
with the usual accompaniment:
…or else just have a light snack:
…with a couple-three snorts of this:
Mind you, I would have been thinking about doing all this anyway, because as Longtime Readers know full well, I don’t believe anything that so-called “health science” tells us anymore.
Another Irritant
Has that tiresome little climate scold Eliza Thornberry I mean Greta Thunberg left the country yet? Or does she still have to attend a few ticker-tape parades in places like Malibu and Portland?
FFS, having some child dictate global climate policy is as stupid as having children dictate U.S. gun laws.
Oh, wait…
