Friday, October 30, 2009
Duty...Country
Just so no one gets the wrong idea, I didn't catch that 187 pound Tiger Shark. My pizo cubano Furio did (more on Furio later). Still, that's my damn front yard they docked at and my damn danvit they're hangin' that booger off of. So, that's kind of like partial credit, right?
Actually, I'm in the midst of a lodging move right now, so all my shit's blown up like a TA-50 lay out in Dahlonega, and I've been doing zero angling, zero fighting, and zero blogging.
At some point, things'll settle down and I'll be able to begin to try to figure out why I gave this blogging thing a shot, and why I should keep at it, and where this blog should go now that I've repaired from Iraq.
In the meantime, there's sharks to catch. And--lucky for me--there're beers to be drunk whilst waiting for the guys who actually catch the sharks to come back in to the dock.
Actually, I'm in the midst of a lodging move right now, so all my shit's blown up like a TA-50 lay out in Dahlonega, and I've been doing zero angling, zero fighting, and zero blogging.
At some point, things'll settle down and I'll be able to begin to try to figure out why I gave this blogging thing a shot, and why I should keep at it, and where this blog should go now that I've repaired from Iraq.
In the meantime, there's sharks to catch. And--lucky for me--there're beers to be drunk whilst waiting for the guys who actually catch the sharks to come back in to the dock.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Running Is Bad For You, Still
What's the difference between a long-distance runner and a pronghorn?
...the husky and Arabian horse wouldn't run long distances if not pushed to do so. Animals run because they have to—to eat or avoid being eaten. Man is the only animal that runs simply to do it. Our large brains can convince our frail bodies to keep moving regardless of cost. We may not be the fastest animals, but we can run ourselves into the ground for sport, exhausting our food supply, and making ourselves susceptible to disease, injury and death. That's a feat no pronghorn can touch.
Jeffrey Dahmer and John Wayne Gacy Make The Case for Re-Defining "Serial Murder"
Okay, bit of a reach. But not much.
Going to see transvestites in Thailand is normal, the problem is whose money they used to go
Uh. Not sure any commentary is necessary. Is that Mao jacket getting a little tight around the collar?
Reap What You Sow, MFs (My Friends)
Looks like the Revolutionary Guards got a taste of their own medicine. Oh, and Iran is blaming us for either sponsoring or participating in the suicide bombing. Right.
So, Iran through its Hezbollah and AQ surrogates (AQ? How can that be? AQ is Sunni...) has turned suicide bombing into an art form. Then they bitch when the technique is used against them. Queue the itty-bitty violins. Reap what you sow, bitches.
So, Iran through its Hezbollah and AQ surrogates (AQ? How can that be? AQ is Sunni...) has turned suicide bombing into an art form. Then they bitch when the technique is used against them. Queue the itty-bitty violins. Reap what you sow, bitches.
Bureaucracy Brilliance, Installment #197
So, you're a public employee charged with managing the criminally insane. What sounds like good therapy for a homicidal maniac (I mean, that's actually not an epithet, that's a clinical description)? Why, take him to the county fair, let him loose, and provide little to no supervision. What could possibly go wrong?
Story has a "happy" ending, though. They got the guy back in the pokey before he managed to kill anyone. So, no harm, no foul? Right?
I love how the guy states that his escape was "unplanned." Who is more insane? The mad dog killer that got out, or the state authorities that provide an insane killer a "target of opportunity" for escape.
Story has a "happy" ending, though. They got the guy back in the pokey before he managed to kill anyone. So, no harm, no foul? Right?
I love how the guy states that his escape was "unplanned." Who is more insane? The mad dog killer that got out, or the state authorities that provide an insane killer a "target of opportunity" for escape.
Autumnal Clearing
Okay, lot's of stuff in the "blog holder" bookmark that hasn't been published because I was either working, re-deploying, or on leave (and far too drunk to blog). So, I'm cleaning out the bookmarks folder and throwing up all the stuff I've taken a pass on the last month or so. Bear with me. Or "bare" with me. Whichever you prefer. After all, it's almost noon, so I've already started knocking back the oilcans.
Media Mores and My Money
WSJ interview with Andrew Breitbart, the guy who strategerized the release of the ACORN videos taken by faux pimp and prostitute, O'Keefe and Giles. The videos caused a sensation, and did all the things Breitbart claims in the interview.
Of most concern to me, though, is the fact that Mr. Breitbart and his crew got the story when other news outlets couldn't (even if they had wanted to) because
I think that it is, in general, a good thing that newspapers will not lie to their sources--would that they had the same concerns about lying to the public (predominately, lying by omission). However, ACORN had accepted millions in federal funds, and my understanding is that they were programmed for billions more through the stimulus plan. That an advocacy organization is so replete with the most vile sort of corruption (facilitating the exploitation of underage sex slaves) is repugnant enough. That they were able to procure and manage millions/billions in federal largess is even worse. They were using our money to commit these criminal acts.
"We" have decided that organizations receiving federal funds are susceptible to having its compensation and payroll capped, and that the investment of federal dollars warrants federal organs monitoring and meddling in the private sector to "micromanagement" levels. I think that anyone accepting federal dollars should expect a corresponding level of scrutiny from the press.
Were every recipient of federal funds aware--"afraid," " leery," and "suspicious" are good, too--that every conversation about the possible illicit use of those funds could be a media "sting" operation, we might find fewer cases of this kind of corruption and abuse.
All federal employees are aware that, as pubic servants, they are subject to scrutiny far more invasive than that of the private citizen. Receipts and reconciliation documents for the expenditure of public funds have to be maintained--and are subject to inspection and inquiry--for years after the transaction occurs. Government computers, phones, and other IT are used with the understanding that there is little to no expectation of privacy. Why should a private sector organization or business accepting public funds get a pass?
The current tsunami of federal spending will spawn a corresponding storm surge of waste, fraud, and abuse. A free, independent press willing to ferret out the bad actors by any means necessary would only strengthen our republic.
Of most concern to me, though, is the fact that Mr. Breitbart and his crew got the story when other news outlets couldn't (even if they had wanted to) because
The approach Mr. O'Keefe and Ms. Giles used—lying to prospective sources or subjects—is grossly unethical by the standards of institutional journalism. Almost all major news organizations, including the Journal, strictly prohibit it. To be sure, there is a world of difference between employing such tactics and reporting on the results when others have used them. And there is no question that the pair's findings were newsworthy. But journalistic discomfort with their methods is a sign of integrity, not corruption.
I think that it is, in general, a good thing that newspapers will not lie to their sources--would that they had the same concerns about lying to the public (predominately, lying by omission). However, ACORN had accepted millions in federal funds, and my understanding is that they were programmed for billions more through the stimulus plan. That an advocacy organization is so replete with the most vile sort of corruption (facilitating the exploitation of underage sex slaves) is repugnant enough. That they were able to procure and manage millions/billions in federal largess is even worse. They were using our money to commit these criminal acts.
"We" have decided that organizations receiving federal funds are susceptible to having its compensation and payroll capped, and that the investment of federal dollars warrants federal organs monitoring and meddling in the private sector to "micromanagement" levels. I think that anyone accepting federal dollars should expect a corresponding level of scrutiny from the press.
Were every recipient of federal funds aware--"afraid," " leery," and "suspicious" are good, too--that every conversation about the possible illicit use of those funds could be a media "sting" operation, we might find fewer cases of this kind of corruption and abuse.
All federal employees are aware that, as pubic servants, they are subject to scrutiny far more invasive than that of the private citizen. Receipts and reconciliation documents for the expenditure of public funds have to be maintained--and are subject to inspection and inquiry--for years after the transaction occurs. Government computers, phones, and other IT are used with the understanding that there is little to no expectation of privacy. Why should a private sector organization or business accepting public funds get a pass?
The current tsunami of federal spending will spawn a corresponding storm surge of waste, fraud, and abuse. A free, independent press willing to ferret out the bad actors by any means necessary would only strengthen our republic.
As If S. Florida Isn't Creepy Enough
Okay, we've got gators and crocs. We've got sharks and 'cudas. We've got (biting) bugs of a quantity and quality most people can't even imagine. And now we've got snakes. Big. F'ing. Snakes.
Mass Cal in the Motor City
I've said before that running is da devil. Apparently I'm on to something; three died at the Detroit Marathon.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Best Headline, Ever.
Even a devotee of the Jerry Springer Show couldn't dream this one up.
H/T to somebody, I forget because I was inebriated when I bookmarked it.
H/T to somebody, I forget because I was inebriated when I bookmarked it.
Why Hearts and Minds Are More Than Just a Sight Picture
The main reason to woo hearts and minds: because the populace gets a vote.
Looks Good To Me
The newest, most recently declassified recruiting video for the USMC. In true Devil Dog fashion, it is short, sweet, and to the point.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
So, does MMA work as Street Defense?
Well, yeah, if you're dressed in drag and wearing heels in Swansea. Man, those dudes must really, really be secure.
Funniest though, is if you watch the video report at the end of the linked article, was the information that "the two men attacked the cage fighters in drag after attacking a man dressed as Spider Man.
What the hell goes on in Swansea?
H/T AoS
Funniest though, is if you watch the video report at the end of the linked article, was the information that "the two men attacked the cage fighters in drag after attacking a man dressed as Spider Man.
What the hell goes on in Swansea?
H/T AoS
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)