Leave if you can

Found at Bryan Hyde's site

Over the years I've been hard on Scott Adams. Especially his bad takes on guns.

As I've pointed out several times, he's usually right about things, and when he's wrong, it's invariably because he has taken the government supremacist position. That's just always going to be automatically wrong, even if it's popular.

His latest mess wasn't due to government supremacism, and not coincidentally, he isn't wrong. 

If you discover that a lot of people among some identifiable group don't like you-- don't even respect your right to exist-- why would you linger in their presence if you are able to leave?

Hating, and canceling, him for saying this is ridiculous. Probably evil.

And, as he pointed out, the advice would be the same no matter who you are or who it is that doesn't like you. Get away if possible. Shunning is always the ethical move.

I've noticed that most of those who have a problem with it didn't hear what he actually said, but are going by what someone incorrectly claimed he said. In other words, fake news. Maybe even a hoax, depending on whether it's intentional.

Found on Twitter

-

I'm doing this for you.

Consider subscribing or donating. 

Offering an alternative to "national divorce"

There's been a lot of recent talk about a "national divorce". In other words, secession.

I am unwaveringly in favor of secession. In every instance, down to the level of the individual. I do not believe a bigger government is ever good for liberty, mainly because smaller governments might be easier to resist in the long run. It's also good to pit governments against each other so that liberty can thrive in the spaces between. 

All political governments must be resisted if liberty is to survive. That's just the way it is.

The anti-secessionists are practically having a meltdown over the idea even being discussed. One part of this faction wants everyone subjected to the tyrannical rules they want to impose. The other seems to be the "We're number 1!" club, vicariously feeling relevant because of the US government's power and influence, and they fear losing that feeling. Both are just run-of-the-mill government supremacist types.

However, I am willing to offer them an alternative to secession-- at least a temporary compromise until they can adjust to the idea of secession (which they will because it is inevitable in the long run).

The alternative to secession— a national divorce— is to roll back the power and influence of the US feral government to the point where it’s no longer tyrannical, nor relevant to the daily life of any resident of America. Make it so weak it is safe for most people to ignore it.

The entire reason a national divorce is necessary is that the feral government has become too overbearing. It has intruded into every facet of life, and reasonable people find this intolerable. There is a solution, but government supremacists will find it unthinkable. Make them think about it.

-

I'm doing this for you.

Consider subscribing or donating. 

Irrelevant concerns

I don’t care what color someone’s skin is, where they were born, or what language they speak. 

What I do care about is if they embrace a culture of archation. Wherever that culture is based. Those cultures are found all over the world, with a high concentration in inner cities and in every government office. But those aren't the only places they exist.

Such cultures are worse than worthless. And membership in one is what makes the biggest difference in whether someone will make a good neighbor or not.

-

I'm doing this for you.

Consider subscribing or donating. 

Carrying weapons a human right

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for January 29, 2023)

Politicians and their allies who want you unable to defend yourself from violent attackers are at it again.

They are pushing for more anti-gun rules. I don't say "laws" because they can't be laws-- the U.S. Constitution makes all such rules illegal. You can't have an illegal law. Even the Supreme Court has admitted this, although they apparently try to play both sides.

Even those supposedly on the side of liberty fall into the trap of using the enemies' words, sometimes calling standard semi-automatic rifles "assault rifles". They aren't. An assault rifle is capable of firing automatically; it continues to fire bullets with only one pull of the trigger until the trigger is released or the ammunition runs out. An assault rifle is a machine gun-- which, by the way, is something everyone has a natural right to own and to carry, in spite of what politicians claim.

A semi-automatic rifle shoots only one bullet with each trigger pull, no matter how fast or hard you pull the trigger.

At least assault rifles are real, unlike "assault weapons". Those don't exist except in the minds of anti-liberty activists. The term can be traced back to 1988 when anti-gun activist Josh Sugarmann wrote that this term should be used because it would confuse people who were clueless about firearms and would increase public support for anti-gun rules. It was a calculated lie from the start.

Well-meaning people argue over which weapons the Second Amendment covers, and by doing so demonstrate they've missed the point. The Second Amendment doesn't "cover" any weapons-- not just firearms, either-- because the entire purpose of the Bill of Rights is to tell the people what government is not allowed to do. Making up rules about weapons is one of those explicitly prohibited things.

It doesn't make exceptions if you believe something is "too dangerous" or unpopular.

Proposing an anti-gun rule and pretending it is law is a serious crime. It should be treated as such... and would be if more people understood what is going on.

The good news is no matter what rules the political criminals impose, the natural human right to own and to carry whatever types of weapon they choose, everywhere they go, without asking permission from government, will forever remain unchanged. It doesn't hinge on constitutions or politicians' opinions and it never will.

-

Consider subscribing or donating.

I couldn't do this without your support.

Reject all governmental poisons

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for January 22, 2023)

Why can't most of the public see how ridiculous it looks to fight over the various forms of government? They argue over whether to be ruled (and to rule each other) with socialism or capitalism, communism or theocracy, by a dictator or by the mob through democracy. It’s like arguing with others over what kind of deadly poison to add to your soup.

The right choice is to rule your own life and not try to rule anyone else; to not add any sort of poison to your soup.

Each of these government options is antisocial because all political government is inherently anti-liberty. Liberty and the state-- political government-- are mutually exclusive. Yes, that includes constitutional republics.

You should still accept that some poisons or forms of government rule are worse than others. Of course they are, but none of them are good and none should be intentionally added to your life. To fight and argue over which one you want instead of kicking them all out of your life is insane.

Consider how many millions of people have been murdered in wars, and how many more will suffer this fate in the future, all because people want to impose their own preferred brand of evil government on people who prefer a different brand of evil government. Think how close civilization has come to nuclear annihilation on the altar of which government is best.

In spite of patriotic noises to the contrary, it's not even a matter of conflicting principles. Just look at the past century of American history if you don't believe me.

The conservative faction is constantly fighting against the policy changes pushed by the progressive faction. The "right" versus the "left".

Yet, when leftist policies, even actual socialism such as Social Security, get entrenched enough that they are part of a historical legacy, conservatives start wanting to "conserve" them as well; to keep them around. As the saying goes, the left wants exciting new evils while the right prefers traditional evils.

In the former Soviet Union, I'm sure it's the conservatives who want the return of Communism. The progressives are probably the ones who are pressing for more democracy, without realizing they are promoting mob rule; might (through superior numbers) makes "right". Pick your poison? I reject them all.

I'll keep pushing for liberty while those who want to add poison to society keep fighting for which type of poison they prefer.

-

Consider subscribing or donating.

I couldn't do this without your support.

Do what works

As much as I dislike pragmatism, I may have to use it.

No matter how hard I work, or how many hours I put in on my various projects, they never pay off very well. I usually end up losing money. 

(If you're still reading by this point, you're probably unusual.)

Writing this blog comes the closest to "paying off". I'm kind of ashamed of how little it comes to per hour, especially if you include the newspaper column as part of the blog, but at least it continues to bring in something. If money were the only reason I write, it wouldn't be worth it, but it isn't.

On the other hand, asking for donations pays off about a quarter to a third of the time. It has also cost me-- how much, I don't know-- because I've had people leave in disgust because I asked for money.

Perhaps they were like my first wife and were just looking for an excuse to leave and that gave them one. I'll never know.

So, to be pragmatic for a change, I'm asking for donations and subscriptions. Because it has a decent chance of working. 

If you don't want to see me asking in the future, don't donate. Maybe even berate me for asking. If it completely stops working or draws too much hate I'll stop asking.

.

Is communication impossible?

No one understands anything. Myself included.

I had someone tell me, using words, that words are meaningless. I asked why he used words to try to communicate this idea to me, then. He said he could have used GIFs. I'm skeptical. How could he be sure I would interpret the GIF as he intended? He couldn't.

Then, I had someone disagree with me that "conservative" and "liberal" are both incompatible with liberty. He claimed to be a "classical liberal" who is also an anarchist. I said I can't be a classical liberal since I don't believe in the "night watchman" state. He replied that he doesn't believe in that either, so I asked in what sense is he a "classical liberal" since (my understanding is) that this is the defining characteristic of the group. He said he believes that definition is outdated, but when asked, he couldn't give me his updated definition. He said he'd have to think about it.

You may not agree with me, but I think I can at least explain my position-- using meaningless words, unfortunately. Words which I can also define (using more meaningless words, I suppose).

In another instance I said there are no "good cops" for exactly the same reason there are no "good rapists"-- the actions they choose to take are not actions a good person would take. Someone demanded to know if I was comparing all cops to all rapists. I said, "I’m saying it’s legitimate to judge a group of people by the actions they choose to commit." Of course, the message couldn't get through his conditioning.

The current Scott Adams/Dilbert mess is also based on a breakdown in communication. He used words that people interpreted to mean what they wanted them to mean (and take out of context).

It makes me wonder-- and I know I've expressed this before-- if communication between people is possible beyond a simple "Me Tarzan. You Jane." information exchange. I guess these days, even that breaks down. What a mess.

Maybe it's time to revert to a pre-linguistic state and just grunt and point and whack each other with sticks.

-

I'm doing this for you.

Consider subscribing or donating. 

Don't be hobbled by unfortunate people

Over the decades I've heard some of the dumbest well-meaning people proclaim: “Don’t waste money on space (travel, exploration, commercialization, etc.) while there is poverty and suffering here on Earth.”

If that’s your standard, nothing worthwhile will ever be accomplished. You'll be trapped by the existence of unfortunate people, never to escape. Unfortunate people will never be totally eliminated by spending money on them. Since they'll always be around, you'd never be able to spend money on anything else. Not even those things which might have a long-term positive impact. Such as opening up a whole new frontier full of options and opportunities.

Why only complain about space? Don’t waste money on art, either. Or anything else that makes life better or more colorful in the long run.

I agree governments shouldn't be spending money on space (or on anything else), since governments have no money to spend without stealing it or counterfeiting it. But if you have the money and that's what you want to spend it on, go ahead. Then, if you have some left, you could even send a little my way.

-

I'm doing this for you.

Consider subscribing or donating. 

Losing the ability to violate others (without consequence)

Would it scare you to lose your ability to violate other people’s rights and get away with it? 

Or would that anger you?

I'm betting if you're reading this, it would do neither.

I think the vast majority of people have one reaction or the other. They believe they are entitled to violate the rights of others, and they have a negative reaction when something makes that harder to get away with.

Most people take the slimy path of dishonestly violating others through political government rather than doing the hard work themselves, but there's no ethical difference. And they don't like it one little bit when their ability to get away with violating others gets hobbled in some way. Is it fear or anger?

Sometimes fear and anger look the same to an observer, so I'm not ever quite sure which I'm seeing. Sometimes it looks like anger and other times it looks like fear. It always looks negative.

Imagine being this addicted to violating others. Who would want to live like that? Statists, that's who.

-

Please support the Tobbles Memorial Project on Patreon

"You don't care"

Many times in online discussions, someone will scold me that I "don't care". It might be because I am against mandatory shots or masks or shutdowns, because I am against censorship, or because I am against anti-gun rules.

"But Grandma/children/I might die!"

The fact that this "argument" doesn't sway me is used as evidence to my critic that I don't care.

Well, looked at a certain way, they are right. I don't care to impose "safetyness" tyranny on people; to violate their liberty for imaginary "safety".

Life isn't safe. No rules will ever make it safe. You and I aren't going to avoid death. I would rather live free than live as a slave to people who hallucinate that they know how to keep everyone (and their feelings) safe from the real world.

If "caring" means enslaving everyone for some psychotic karen's fears and feelings, then I don't care. I can't care.

If "caring" means respecting your liberty, and helping you if I can-- without taking away your autonomy-- then I care a lot.

I care, I just don't care to make you a slave. If that's not good enough, then you're out of luck.

-

I'm doing this for you.

Consider subscribing or donating. 

Tolerating the pro-slavery coalition

Imagine a group of politicians who could be counted on to submit bills every year to reinstate chattel slavery. No matter how badly their bills failed, they'd keep trying every year like clockwork just because they can't take "No" for an answer. They will keep trying, hoping for a favorable political climate where their pro-slavery agenda can be pushed through.

Should these criminals be tolerated?

Well, that's the situation, only it's a group of congressvermin who keep submitting anti-gun bills every year. They will keep trying and trying until or unless they are decisively stopped from ever trying again.

I don't have an answer as to how this can be accomplished.

No, I'm not under the impression that any legislation they manage to force through has any "authority". No one is obligated to obey any such rule. It is unethical. It is illegal (if you care about that). It is anti-liberty and anti-human. 

And they keep trying to impose it anyway. It's time to stop tolerating these criminals.

-

I'm doing this for you.

Consider subscribing or donating. 

Statist speech

I'm a free-speech absolutist. One good reason for this is to allow bad people to expose their badness in public. I want bad people to feel free to tell me exactly who they are so they can be dealt with appropriately.

This is why I encourage people to talk all they want, without limits, so I can identify statists or government supremacists without any doubt remaining as to who and what they are. Just like you want to know if a dog is rabid, you need to know if the virus of statism has a foothold in a person's brain.

There are unambiguous signals to be found in their speech. Here's what to listen for:

If they call politicians "leaders", that's a clear tell for government supremacism. It takes a fool to be led by a politician.

"Our" or "my" when applied to a government, president, congress, supreme court, "laws", etc. is the same sort of signal. If they want to claim the criminal gang as their own, that's their business, but it reflects poorly on their personal ethics.

Calling anything which is government-funded or controlled "public" is another statist lie. It's not public,

Of course, any support for government's legislation enforcers ("Back the Blue"), even claiming there can be such a thing as a "good cop", is a loud signal for government supremacism.

If they try to justify taxation as "the price we pay for a civilized society", they've shown their hand. The truth is, civilized society is something humans sometimes manage to create in spite of uncivilized acts such as taxation. Only an unrepentant statist could believe otherwise.

If they conflate government and society (or civilization), don't trust them. If they are unaware of the difference, how can you trust anything else they say to have any value?

If they talk as though government has rights, and your rights are secondary to government opinions, they are a government supremacist. Yes, government may have the power to violate your rights, but government is always wrong to do so.

If they start trying to shame and control you using the social contract, they've shown themselves to be a statist.

If they claim your personal views on the danger (physical or social) of something is the same as their advocacy to ban something they don't like, they are trying to bring themselves up to your level or pull you down to theirs. Don't fall for it. You can warn of the harm of something without looking for government to "save" you from it. They are not the same as you.

They are statists.

-

I'm doing this for you.

Consider subscribing or donating. 

Politics is picking fights in (socially) acceptable way

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for January 15, 2023)

Politics seems to appeal to people who are addicted to drama. How else can you explain two years of hand-wringing over an insurrection that never happened? Or the recent election disasters and fights over which side are the real fascists? Those flames are fanned by people who don't want the drama to end.

Political drama turned a new cold virus into a worldwide histrionic meltdown, undermining trust in medicine and related scientific fields. It was a goldmine of drama. Can the lost trust ever be regained? Not unless science and medicine can be separated from politics.

In truth, you could point to just about anything which happens in the political realm and see how it is drama for the fans of politics. Like a drug for an addict.

People like drama-- at least, most do. This is fine within limits and in the right circumstances, such as in fiction. Fictional stories without any drama would be boring and pointless. Many people take this desire for drama with them into the real world, which makes things worse for everyone in the long run. People who crave drama prefer politics over cooperation.

I've watched people pick unnecessary fights. They could have walked away at any time and no one would have thought anything about it. They chose to fight. They pick fights because they want drama. Politics is the act of picking fights in a socially acceptable way, by people who feel they are above fighting physically. Socially acceptable to some people; not to me.

If you want excitement and drama, don't pick fights, learn to skydive, instead. As long as you don't fall on someone, your hunger for thrills won't harm others. The wrong way to get more drama in your life is to impose your will on others. Taking hostages or using political power is exciting, but harmful to society because individuals are harmed. Politics is antisocial.

It doesn't matter if you chase drama democratically or by taking control in a coup. A coup might seem more dramatic looking back through history, but if elections keep losing credibility among those who feel elections are important, this may change.

Oh, and the fight over who are the real fascists? When you remember that fascism is authoritarian government controlling business through taxes, regulations, and special "public-private partnerships" you see clearly who the fascists are. This is why the fascists would like to redefine "fascism" as something else.

-

Consider subscribing or donating.

I couldn't do this without your support.

They aren't "public"

Government schools are not public schools because you and I can’t just walk in off the street, sit down at a desk, and start learning a subject. 

Calling them “public schools” is, and always has been, a dangerous lie.

Calling the gov-school monopoly an "education system" is also a lie. It may have once been true to some extent, but this hasn't been true in decades. Have you seen the recent reports of the gov-school graduates in some areas who can't read? And not just a minority of them, but all of them.

Schooling doesn't equal education. And making schools more dictatorial and cruel to the inmates isn't the answer, either.

I've known people who couldn't think their way out of a box, but who made great grades in school-- they were able to parrot what the "teachers" wanted to hear, and they were rewarded for doing so. 

That's not even the worst of it. The inmates are often miseducated and always indoctrinated into the religion of Statism. How could it be otherwise, seeing who controls the system? They are so indoctrinated they can't even imagine alternatives to the state-- as they imagine its natural order must be because that's what they were trained to believe.

Gov-schooling, and any alternatives that follow the same (Prussian) model, are worse than doing "nothing". Civilization needs less of this, not more.

-

I'm doing this for you.

Consider subscribing or donating. 

Misfit interests

I've never been one to be a slave to the clock. However, one of my quirks is that I love old non-electric/non-electronic timepieces. Everything from pocket watches, to the old "regulator" wall clocks, to grandfather clocks, to wind-up wristwatches. Even things like sundials. 

Clocks are a misfit interest for me-- they don't "fit" me, but I like them anyway.

During my stint in Pennsylvania, one of the best things to do (besides karaoke) was to visit the antique stores on practically every corner. And some of my favorite things to see there were the old clocks. (And the antique crank wall phones without dials-- another misfit interest of mine.)

I was in a thrift store yesterday and it looked like someone had dumped some antiques, and even though I knew I shouldn't, I bought an antique clock for $20. (I passed up some other interesting things.)

It's an E. Ingraham Company gingerbread shelf clock, "St. Louis Assortment" (is that the style or model?), and I think it was manufactured in the late 1880s to early 1890s. And it works!

I love old clocks in the same way I love old wood and steel guns. I especially love old stuff that still works.

I have always thought it was odd that I like old clocks so much even though I'm not that interested in "the time". 

In a similar vein, I know people who aren't brainwashed by politics, and don't imagine it is legitimate, who still enjoy keeping up with politics. As a sport or hobby. It seems really strange to me, but when I think of my enjoyment of old clocks, it kind of makes sense in a way.

I guess you can like the mechanics of a thing without becoming a slave to it.

-

I'm doing this for you.

Consider subscribing or donating. 

When you have nothing else to fall back on

Someone was arguing against liberty, using every justification for political government she could think of (probably with the help of years of statist indoctrination). 

She kept having every objection shot down by everyone she was engaging with. So, having lost the debate, she played the "race" card:

“Others” will be able to choose who they help. “Others” always choose to help the people they think deserve help, which won’t be people who are not white. So I’m not name calling, I’m calling it out. And I’m not interested in asinine alternate perspectives, thanks.

This is a standard statist perspective- both the assumed racism of others and admitting a disinterest in "alternate perspectives".

I have never once used "race" as a deciding factor for whether or not I'd help someone. Not once. Even when I easily could have. This is beyond the comprehension of those indoctrinated into statism. They assume "race" matters as much to others as it apparently does to them. 

It's not the first time I've run across this-- I remember old "academic" Robert Lindsay, before he got shot down and deleted his entire blog after claiming libertarianism is racist and throwing a hissy-fit when presented with evidence that he was wrong.

It shouldn't be shocking that government supremacists are bigoted in other ways as well.

Me? I don't care about anything but whether you're going to archate. Anything else is insignificant. I don't care who you are, I care what you do. And statists archate, by definition.

-

Please support the Tobbles Memorial Project on Patreon

What does it cost you?

To stand back and let people steal from you or your business (or in your presence) does something bad to your humanity. I still suffer emotionally from one such event from around 35 years ago-- because I chose not to act.

To allow people to dictate the words you use also does something bad to your humanity. To participate in a lie degrades you.

Sure, I understand those who say just let it go. If you can just let it happen without getting worked up over it, you might have an easier time of things.

So what if a shoplifter (or a violent mob of them) is blatantly stealing from your place of business? Insurance will probably cover it and it's not your property they are taking (unless you own the business). It's best (we are told) to just stand back and let "the professionals" (refuse to) handle it later. What does it cost you to stay uninvolved?

Why care what words you are told you must use? Truth is subjective, right? You might hurt someone's feelings if you don't go along or if you insist on using the correct terms for people or things. What does it really cost you?

What does it cost?

I think it costs plenty. There's something lost if you allow yourself to be cast aside and trampled by the current thing. Be it the acceptance of theft or participation in dictated lies. I understand why some good people might choose to not make a scene. I also understand why some might put a foot down and refuse to go along no matter the cost to themselves.

Sometimes there is a cost either way and you've got to decide which one you're willing to pay.

-

I'm doing this for you.

Consider subscribing or donating. 

Statists hate Team Liberty

Imagine how it must feel to be on one of the popular "teams".

I'm constantly astounded by the stupidity and evil of the Left-Statists and the Right-Statists. If it's not one brand of authoritarian monster stunning me with its attempt to control people, it's the other.

How would it feel to be cheering on one of those teams?

I'll never know. Even when one side does something I kinda like, they generally manage to poison it somehow. 

Something along the lines of ending (some) prohibition, so the substances can be regulated and taxed. No, no, no!

You were so close, but you still managed to screw it up!

It's the same story over and over, on every issue the government supremacists touch. Because they hallucinate legitimacy for political government, they don't seem able to let go and just respect liberty.

I'm on Team Liberty, so those on the Right and the Left will never stop trying to fight against me and the values I hold. I've come to accept it, but I'll never like it.

-

I'm doing this for you.

Consider subscribing or donating. 

A "TruthTeller" tells lies

A liar on Twitter using the facetious handle "LJTruthTeller" didn't like my above meme, which I had sent to California's top political criminal in response to some anti-gun bigotry he'd posted.

The liar said "Your meme is a meme of lies and distortions of the 2nd Amendment. This is the TRUTH about it..." and posted this:

This is what the anti-gun bigots imagine is true? No wonder they keep getting everything wrong.

I would invite anyone with historical literacy and the ability to think rationally and logically to compare what I posted to what they posted and judge which one is honest and which is the lie.

And that's ignoring the fact that the liar skipped right over the truth that rights don't come from documents or governments, but are inborn in individual human beings-- which is shorthand for saying no one has a right to stop you from doing these things.

Again, I am left wondering, are these people really this ignorant or are they simply evil?

-

I'm doing this for you.

Consider subscribing or donating.

Less government means more liberty

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for January 8, 2023)

You probably hear a lot of complaints about government corruption these days-- especially over these past several years. I don't see any corruption; I see government acting as it was designed to work.

When an institution is built on a foundation of theft, power, and coercion why act surprised when those things happen?

Even the Constitution is at fault, so you can't fix it by "going back" to the Constitution. As abolitionist Lysander Spooner once said, the Constitution “has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case it is unfit to exist.”

No one in politics wants the Constitution followed-- other than the parts they agree with. Modern conservatives want immigration control and modern liberals want "gun control", both of which are violations of the Constitution.

If government employees feel they are entitled to some of your property because taxation has been declared legal, why wouldn't they keep trying to take more? A little legal theft justifies a little more. Why stop at taking your money when they can get your house through eminent domain, your guns through new gun bans, and your car by passing "climate change" regulations? It's not corruption, it's government.

Were you surprised to discover the FBI is a tool of one of the big political parties? When you give a group power they will use it for their benefit. The FBI was never authorized to exist by the Constitution, yet here they are. The same goes for the CIA, the BATFE, and every other alphabet agency used against the liberty of Americans. How could this happen? It may look like corruption, but it's just government being government.

You can't turn poison ivy into a rose by picking off the aphids and dead leaves. You've got to dig it up by the roots. Yet, even a rose has thorns and will need to be dug up when it grows old, too large, and diseased. Keeping an old, twisted tangle of dead branches and thorns around for sentimental reasons isn't wise. Recognize government for what it is and stop imagining corruption when it doesn't work like you wish it would.

Instead of focusing on what you see as corruption, focus on taking away the power of government employees to do anything to people or their liberty. It would be more useful in the long run.

-

Consider subscribing or donating.

I couldn't do this without your support.

Defeat the defeatists

I came across what may be the best description I've ever encountered of the control freaks among us in a book I'm reading: 

"...the centralizers, the closet statists, the we-have-no-choice defeatists for whom freedom is a mere trinket to be sacrificed to some 'practical' end."

And he was talking about people in a stateless society!

I'd use the word "liberty" rather than "freedom" in this context, but still, doesn't that just hit the nail on the head?

Some evil loser murders people. "Ban guns!"

Some liars fool lots of people. "Ban their speech!"

"Oh, no! Something bad happened! We need to ban something to make sure it never happens again!"

"We have no choice! We must act! For the children!" 

Yes, they are defeatists. They don't feel like arming the potential victims. They don't think they are able to counter lies with truth. The bad things didn't defeat them-- they surrendered without even trying. They want the state to save them from whatever they feel powerless against.

Liberty for these people only matters if it seems safe enough. If it aligns with what they want people free to do. The moment the dangers of reality rear their head they want liberty smashed "just a little". It's not that important to them; it's a mere trinket to be admired as long as it is comfortable. 

That's evil.

-

Consider subscribing or donating.

I couldn't do this without your support.

UFO invasion

It's a lie. Why are governments lying about this, now?

These UFOs being shot down are only UFOs because political criminals are keeping their identities secret. You know they know what they are. They just don't want you to know-- they want the story to stay alive.

They haven't claimed they are alien craft, but it seems like they'd like for people to make that assumption. And see the military that shoots them down as fearfully powerful.

If they were alien craft (spacetime craft, dimensional craft, etc.), Earth military craft wouldn't be successfully shooting them down unless they wanted to be shot down. Decoys? Toys? Anything with technology that advanced probably wouldn't even need to fight back-- just let the pursuing craft destroy themselves while trying to take them down. It wouldn't even be a contest.

These UFOs are probably a big nothing. Just ordinary Earth hardware (or trash). Maybe from the Chinese government gang-- maybe from the US or some other criminal government gang. That's if they even exist at all. So why are they being focused on? What are governments wanting to distract you from?

-

Consider subscribing or donating.

I couldn't do this without your support.

Cops and guns

Guns aren't a problem. The problem is bad guys with guns. A cop is a bad guy with a gun. A public nuisance. A threat to you.

In fact, you can forget about guns altogether. Bad guys are a problem. Guns are an effective way to handle bad guys, whether the bad guys have guns or not. No decent person will ever do anything to stand between good people and their guns. If someone is trying to make it harder for anyone to own and to carry guns, no matter their justification, they are not a good person. Any rule aimed at making it harder for bad guys to get a gun will affect good guys more. Good guys have a silly desire to obey even unethical rules; bad guys don't.

When anti-gun bigots go on and on about "kids and guns" not going together, they are focusing on the wrong people. Cops and guns don't go together. Cops aren't going to give up their guns, so the rest of us don't dare give up ours.

Kids and guns need to go together a lot more than they are encouraged to do so in today's society.

-

Please support the Tobbles Memorial Project on Patreon

Hope you can make best of new year

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for December 28, 2022)

As seems to happen more and more frequently, the curtain is dropping on yet another year. Rather than looking back at the year as it winds down, I want to look ahead without trying to predict anything.

I don't know if the past year was a good one for you, but I hope it was. Either way, you've about made it through. This is no finish line; only a checkpoint. The good news is, you're still here and you're still going forward.

If you want this next year to be an even better year, you've got to make it better yourself. Don't ask politicians to do it for you. Life is homemade.

Your own choices always make a big difference in how your life goes. Even when things happen outside your control, how you respond is up to you. It will make all the difference in how you feel about life. If you respond like someone who has some power over your life you'll do better than someone who sees themself as a powerless victim of circumstances.

Just recognizing that you are in control of your responses gives you some power over your circumstances. Seeing yourself as a pawn isn't a good feeling. What will a pawn do to make his life better? Waiting for someone else to rescue you will usually end in disappointment, and may mean you've waited too late to help yourself as the problem grows bigger.

Which do you think would be better: a world where everyone is waiting for someone else to rescue them, or a world where everyone does what they can to solve their own problems? Which world has more people able to help others?

If a dragon approaches and corners you, you can cry for help, or you can pull your sword and stand your ground. I know which one feels healthier. It's OK to ask for help, too. Maybe someone else will show up to stand beside you, but pull your sword first, then yell. Make this the year you refuse to be an easy snack.

I don't know what the next year holds, but whether the circumstances are good or bad, make sure you do what you can to make it the best it can be, whatever comes at you. At the very least, don't do things to make life worse. I hope you're able to face down the dragons, too.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Update of updates, cat and human

Whiskers waiting for my daughter to come out of her room.
He doesn't realize she's not home.

I'll try to make this the last personal post for a while. Here's hoping nothing else crops up!

Whiskers the cat is doing better. He didn't have an intestinal blockage or a urinary blockage. Just a fever and signs of infection. That's concerning, since without a reason it brings up questions. I'll keep those to myself instead of worrying my daughter.

But he's on antibiotics and pain medication and got anti-nausea meds at the vet's office. He's back to acting normal again. Happy and loving. Not thrilled about the pill he's getting every 12 hours, though. I'm hoping he doesn't catch on to the schedule and start hiding when it's time for meds.

As for me, I'm still improving. Still coughing up whatever ended up in my lungs, but at least my throat is largely healed. It's a little sensitive, but it no longer hurts. Wednesday evening, I couldn't imagine the shredded remains of my throat ever feeling OK again. Even though I knew such tissues usually heal fairly quickly. Plus, I was just sure I would end up in the hospital with pneumonia. So far, so good.

So far I'm 50/50 at having rough complications after these procedures. I guess that could be worse.

But I also have the surgery hanging over my head, which really bothers me. I don't know if I mentioned it, but I now have a tattoo...inside my colon to mark the polyp so the surgeon will know which part to remove. I guess that makes it a temporary tattoo. In the long run, they are all temporary.

My daughter and her mom have headed off to the comic-con without me. Which is fine with me. I really still needed some time to recover. And now I'm on cat-medicating duty, giving Whiskers his antibiotics twice a day (at the same time I'm taking my antibiotics) and his pain medication once a day. They aren't staying two nights as originally planned, though. They were able to cancel Sunday night's reservation. My daughter is a little disappointed about that, but the cat is important enough to her that she was willing to give up something to make sure he got to the vet. They couldn't get a refund on tonight's hotel reservation or on the comic-con ticket anyway, so they might as well use them.

I borrowed the money for the vet visit, and I now have about enough donations to pay that back, so I thank all those who donated for their help.

.

Cat emergency

We have a cat medical emergency and are on our way to the vet. Whiskers seems to have an intestinal blockage. If anyone can donate toward this, my daughter (and I) would greatly appreciate it. Thank you. Use this link for donating.

I feel awful even asking but I don’t have a choice.

Update, updated

That didn’t go as well as it could have. Still not cancer, but surgery will be necessary. In 6 months or so. Plus, there were some complications that are really kicking my rear. I still may end up in the hospital. 

Don’t expect anything from me for a few days. I sent in my newspaper column this morning before I left for the procedure, so watch for that on Sunday. I’ll post it if I can, if not you should be score able to find the link using older columns. I‘ll post before that if I’m up to it. 

Exercise your liberty, my outlaws. I love you guys.

Update 2-10: I'm still alive and feeling better. Not there yet, but in a day or two... 

The doctor scheduled my colonoscopy as his last of the day so he could take his time. And he took a lot longer than usual. He was disappointed that he wasn't able to get it all and apologized for that. Anyway, during the procedure, I developed some sinus drainage that filled my throat (pharynx, I suppose) and they had to suction it out. My pharynx was torn up and was pure agony-- especially after the effects of the anesthesia wore off. The doctor was concerned that I may have aspirated some, and I think I did. In that case, he prescribed antibiotics but with the condition of my throat I couldn't swallow anything bigger than a water molecule, so I had to ask for the prescription in liquid form. Thank goodness texting is a thing because I had no voice at all from about an hour after the procedure until Thursday morning. I napped a lot yesterday and never got dressed. I'm still coughing up a lot of gunk from my lungs but they are clearing up somewhat. And I actually slept fairly well last night. So, I'm doing better. Not looking forward to the surgery, though.

My daughter has a comic-con scheduled for this weekend-- back in the same town I was just in. I am not up to it, but she's already paid for her ticket and made plans long before the colonoscopy was scheduled. All I want is to stay home and rest. If I can, I may buy a box of ammo while in the Big City since that's kind of a tradition when I can afford it-- and that would give me something to look forward to.

Posting from my phone isn't ideal. Auto-incorrect inserts strange word choices and the phone interface generally makes everything harder, but I wasn't going to get out of my chair to get the laptop Wednesday night, so you got what you got. I've edited the original post now.

I'll try to have something scheduled for tomorrow morning.

Here goes...

This is it. The next 24 hours are going to be monumentally unpleasant and stressful for me. As this posts, I am taking my first gag-inducing dose of intestinal drano. The "fun" begins.

The doctor has changed plans somewhat-- he's not scheduling a surgery for tomorrow "just in case", anymore. I'm going to ask why he changed his mind (if I remember to ask), since this means I'll have to go through all this again if surgery is necessary-- and that doesn't make me happy at all.

This is also likely to be a financial disaster, even with insurance. Due to deductibles and whatnot. And who knows what insurance-related nightmares I'll have to wade through before they even go through with the procedure. The thought makes me sick, especially with recent experiences in that regard.

Keep me in your thoughts and prayers.

-

A confluence of factors means I'm in a severe financial crunch, 

so if you would, please consider subscribing or donating.

"Rights aren't real"

In any conversation about rights, someone will always pop in with "Rights aren't real".

And they're correct.

When you say someone "has a right" what you're really saying is that others have no right to do something to that person.

There is no right to murder, to rape, to kidnap, to tax/steal, to trespass, to ban or regulate anything, or to govern others. However you wish to express this is fine.

Saying "You have a right to..." is just shorthand for saying "no one has the right to" do something to you. Some people get twitchy over shorthand. It doesn't make it incorrect.

You have the right to free speech (and "reee speech") because no one has any right to shut you up. No one has the right to archate in any way, for any reason. The imagined right to do so-- as an individual or a corporation/government-- is not real. It doesn't depend on the target having any rights whatsoever.

As long as those who say "Rights aren't real" understand this, they are correct. 

If they imagine rights aren't real because someone somehow "has a right" (that can't exist) to do something to other people, then they are being hilariously inconsistent and wrong. 

-

Consider subscribing or donating.

I couldn't do this without your support.

"Listen, Little Ogg, the Stone Age is ending next week..."

If the world had advanced from the Stone Age to what we live in today in five years, what advice could you give a Stone Age youth, if you were his parent, to prepare him to live in 2023? 

I’m not talking about a situation similar to someone living isolated deep in the Amazon today who could possibly know of the modern world out there somewhere, but a parent living in the actual Stone Age, trying to prepare their kids for a world that doesn’t yet exist. A world they can’t possibly imagine.

I suspect that may be the human situation today. 

In that case, the best education you can give your kids is how to be adaptable. Anything else will be obsolete before it is used.

This is almost the case with everything I was taught as a youngster. It's only going to get more true.

It’s possible that the next few years will bring changes we can’t even imagine. If so, how can you be ready? How can you help young people be ready? What you would consider a good education might be worse than useless. It's something to at least consider.

-

A confluence of factors means I'm in a severe financial crunch, 

so if you would, please consider subscribing or donating.

Shoot all balloons on sight!... no, don't do that

Next time I see a weather balloon, which happens once a decade or so, I'm going to assume it's a Chinese spy balloon. That seems a lot more fun than a boring old weather balloon out of Roswell or wherever ours originate from.

When I first heard about the one over Montana I thought "Seriously? No one in Montana has shot it down yet?" Then I heard that it was like a weather balloon and realized it would be out of range. 

I'd be willing to bet someone has shot at it already, though. Especially after the news came out that it was a Chinese spy balloon (not that this means that's what it really is-- I just wouldn't want to be flying in a balloon right now).

I saw someone asking who had "Chinese spy balloon" on their 2023 Bingo card. I didn't. 

I also saw someone else wondering why "our" government wasn't doing something to protect us from a spy balloon sent by "our existential enemy". But I thought it was sent by the Chinese government, not the US government. Maybe someone is confused about which government poses the greater threat to average Americans. It might be me, but I don't think so.

-

Consider subscribing or donating.

I couldn't do this without your support.