Who am I supposed to see as the enemy this week?

It's so inconvenient not paying attention to the mainstream "news". I can't remember who I'm supposed to hate right now!

Who is the enemy?

Is it Russia or Ukraine? Putin, Zelenskyy, or that rogue bald Russian mercenary? They all seem sketchy to me.

Is it the Supreme Courtjesters, Congress, or the President? Why not all of them?

Which "race", sexuality, or ethnic group? Which religion?

Am I supposed to be hating Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos or George Soros? (Well, obviously Soros!)

It's all just so confusing.

Wait... I think I should probably hate the mainstream "news" and the archators of every sort they keep promoting and shoving in my face for me to fawn over. They are the real enemies. 

That keeps things easier since it is based on what someone is doing, not who they are or where they were born.

-

My surgery fund. 

Thank you!

Politics won't solve water problem

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for May 28, 2023)

It's going to take either climate change or a technological breakthrough to keep this region liveable, as far as water is concerned.

Drilling more wells into a shrinking aquifer or relying on pipelines connected to vulnerable reservoirs, which in turn depend on unreliable precipitation, isn't a viable long-term strategy. Neither approach is a solution; only a temporary patch. Maybe patching the problem can get us far enough into the future for a proper solution to be found. Be prepared either way.

This isn't a problem which can be solved by politics. I'd argue that no problem can be.

It's not a popular topic, unless you're pretending one of the proposed patches will serve as a solution. Which I can't do. I don't oppose either approach, even though I oppose government involvement and tax money being spent on them.

So what is the answer? I don't have one. Neither does anyone else, even if they pretend they do.

It's always assumed climate change can only make things worse. This is a bad assumption. Any change in the climate will be a problem somewhere for someone or something. Almost any climate change would also make things better for someone, somewhere. Many places on the planet are inhospitable now. Only a change in climate that decreased the total amount of habitable space would be completely negative. At least from the human perspective. The positive possibilities of climate change are never discussed. Those don't invite government intervention or increased power and control so they aren't useful for politicians to talk about.

An increase in average annual rainfall in areas where it could help the Ogallala Aquifer would be good for us, here, but might be bad for people trying to live and farm in those areas where rainfall amounts suddenly increased enough to have an impact. At least until they could adapt.

I'm suspicious of any technological weather manipulation. I think the potential for disaster is too high.

Perhaps industrial-scale water manufacturing could become a solution. Water is a simple molecule, easy enough to make at home if you have hydrogen to burn. This wouldn't be economical today, but we aren't desperate yet.

The point is, don't give up. With the right incentives, humans are pretty good at finding solutions. Keeping government out of the way would probably help. Often, humans manage in spite of government "assistance". Betting in favor of humanity over the long term is a safe bet.

-

Consider subscribing or donating.

I couldn't do this without your support.

To "pro-2A" politicians

A note for politicians of every/any political party:

If you are in favor of government at any level having any power to make any rules whatsoever about weapons you are the opposite of "pro-Second Amendment". You are completely anti-Second Amendment without any wiggle room.

Worse, you don’t understand that the natural human right to own and to carry weapons doesn’t come from any document. Documents (and legislation) can neither give rights nor take rights away. The two available options are to respect rights or to violate rights, If rights are touched in any way, they are being violated.

No one can have a "right" to preemptively disarm another person. Such a "right" doesn't exist because it can't exist. 

If you make up rules that make it less convenient for every human to be armed at all times, you are the problem. You are the villain. You can dislike the idea of people being armed all you want, but as soon as you act to do something about it you're on the wrong side. You're on the side of mass murderers of all kinds.

The cop who approaches an armed individual and orders him to hand over his gun "so we can both be safe" doesn't have your safety in mind and is doing something he has no right to do. He only wants to make sure he maintains a position of power over you. Why? So it's easier to control or murder you if he decides to do so.

The same goes for anyone, anywhere, who says you aren't allowed to be armed when you've made no credible threat to archate.

And, since politics makes people stupid, I'll spell something else out to try to help politicians understand: The natural human right to own and to carry weapons doesn't mean anyone has the right to attack innocent people with those weapons, nor to make a credible threat to do so. Bye-bye, straw man.

-

My surgery fund. 

Thank you!

Are troops pro-liberty?

One thing I’ve never understood is the people who understand and love liberty, hate and distrust government, and yet are fans of the military and “the troops”.

Everything about that seems inconsistent.

Yes, I have known several "anti-government" former military people. But I've known former Blue Line Mafia members who were also anti-government after they stopped being legislation enforcers. Some of them nearly make me look like a copsucker by comparison. Yet, they were on the wrong side all their career and only rejected that side once they were no longer employed by Big Brother. Once the theft-funded paychecks stopped coming.

What evidence is there that "the troops" will side with liberty instead of with government if it comes down to a forced choice? Or, is that not even the issue?

Is there something else that some supposedly pro-liberty people value above liberty? And does the military embody this higher value in their minds?

-

My surgery fund. 

Thank you!

That's not "defense"

There's a GunTuber I enjoy watching (he's way more libertarian than most of the others), "The Yankee Marshal" who called the police "government's first line of defense".

I would say he was slightly wrong on that point.

Police are the government’s first line of offense. The government’s loyal aggressors.

If they were truly defensive I wouldn't despise them. 

Since I have no intention of aggressing against any government employee, cops would never have any reason to interact with me. That's not what they do. Police seek out people who would be perfectly happy ignoring government, and proceed to zealously violate their natural human right to ignore government. 

That's offense, not defense. It is archation.

This is why there are no “good cops”.

-

My surgery fund. 

Thank you!

Donations reminder

Just a little reminder that my surgery fundraiser is still active. It's been a while since it got any attention. Or, PayPal works just as well (and is 4 days faster).

If you haven't yet donated, please consider it. If you have, just share the fundraiser.

Thank you!

Smug in rightness

I don’t like listening to people who are so sure of their rightness that they can't even listen to anyone else. Everyone else is an NPC, is quibbling over definitions, or is just "wrong" because they disagree with the speaker (and "reasons" aren't necessary).

Their smug attitude destroys any credibility they might otherwise have had. 

I try my best to not be one of them.

On anything other than the ZAP I'm willing to listen to alternative ideas. Well, I'm willing to listen to criticisms of the ZAP, too, but they are invariably so weak and flawed it's hard to take them seriously. I do try.

Following the ZAP where it leads… no one has ever been able to give me a realistic, rational justification for political government. For governing others. Every attempt to govern others goes badly wrong, sooner or later.

It’s hard to not feel more right as the years go by.

I always remind myself, with an inner voice running on a loop in my mind, that I might be wrong. I look for ways I might be wrong. I listen when people tell me I'm wrong-- at least I try to let them make a point.

No one has ever gotten close to convincing me that liberty is inferior-- for individuals and for humanity-- to the alternatives. That theft, aggression, superstition, and slavery are better than liberty.

If that makes me look smug in my self-assured rightness, I suppose I'll have to accept it.

-

My surgery fund. 

Thank you!

The sucking parasites are here

As much as I hate the Giant Mesquite Bugs that swarm my little mesquite bush every summer, at least I know when to expect them and when they'll be gone again. 

They showed up Monday, June 25th during the day. They'll be gone before Summer is past its hottest days, giving the mesquite a chance to recover somewhat before Fall.

I guess politicians, those other sucking parasites, are also predictable, They hang around 24/7, 365.24+ days per year. You can plan around their presence that way.

I wish politicians had the manners to completely die off and leave us unmolested for most of the year, like my enemies the Giant Mesquite Bugs do. That would be a service of sorts.

Of the two, I much prefer the Bugs, even as much as I hate them. To vent my frustration with the Bugs I can-- and have-- bought a can of bug spray and wreaked a holocaust on them. More swarm in to replace the dead by the next morning, but it feels satisfying to do this every few years anyway. 

For some unfathomable reason, it is frowned upon when you do the same to politicians. Go figure...

-

My surgery fund. 

Thank you!

The worst neighbor possible

Government is a really bad neighbor. The worst, really.

It is said that good fences make good neighbors. 

Not so with government. You often are told you must ask its permission to build a fence-- and it will tell you where and what kind of fence you are allowed to build, after you pay for permission. Not only that but government employees will claim to have the “authority” to ignore your fence if they want to come into your property and snoop around. Or rob, kidnap, or molest you.

And snooping is what it does. Government is the ultimate snoopy neighbor. If any other bad neighbor did even one trillionth the snooping government does, you'd rightfully shoot them. 

Government listens to your phone calls, reads your mail, watches everything you do, demands to know all your finances, and everything else about you and what you do. 

Government can't leave you alone. It meddles. It claims to have the "right" to tell you what you are allowed to own.

Government tells you how to landscape your property and how to maintain your landscaping. It tells you where to park your cars on your own property. And it demands a yearly ransom on that property-- one that will never be fully paid since each year brings a new ransom note with new demands.

Seriously, if any mere human neighbor acted like this you'd kill them and be well within your rights to do so. I'd cheer for you.

I have a couple of sort of bad neighbors-- they are no problem at all compared to the best government.

Government believes it is exempt from the consequences of its behavior. Maybe it is. For now.

-

My surgery fund. 

Thank you!

Pull yourself out of political quicksand

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for May 21, 2023)

The reality of not being trapped in the Republican/Democrat quicksand is that everything you say will upset one side or the other. Sometimes both. The side you upset will automatically assume you align with the other side. This is because they can't see another option. Their range of possibilities has been pruned to nothingness.

It's like believing every movie has to be either a Star Wars movie or a Marvel superhero movie; allowing no other option to be considered. If this were the case, where do you place Casablanca? On second thought, Casablanca is obviously a Star Wars movie, so maybe it's a bad example.

If you allow yourself to be manipulated into only seeing two artificial categories, you'll usually be mistaken. It will be as though you are blind.

This blindness has been manufactured for some purpose. It doesn't help you in any way, so who does it help?

It helps anyone who benefits from keeping the population divided; voting for Team 1 or Team A.

It helps politicians and government. If they can keep you sniping at your neighbors you'll pay less attention to the real enemy who's pushing you toward a police state, stealing your money through taxation, inflation, and central bank digital currencies, and plotting to watch-- and control-- every little thing you do or think about doing.

It helps the national mass media corporations who get better ratings if they can keep you angry. If you keep hoping the politician you love to hate will soon pay because "the walls are closing in" since his crime family empire has been exposed for all to see, you'll keep coming back for more. You'll be more engaged and invested in the success of your team.

Team sports, even when you aren't on the teams in question, can make you feel you're part of something. You might think it's something bigger than yourself, but I see it as something much smaller than you could be if you escaped the smelly political muck. When the teams are both working to see who can enslave you the fastest, cheering for one or the other doesn't seem like the best move. It looks to me like you are working against your best interests and against the interests of your children and grandchildren.

Are you building a world you'd really want them to inherit? Could you do better by dragging yourself out of the political quicksand?

-

Consider subscribing or donating.

I couldn't do this without your support.

A simple illustration of statism

Mosquitoes can illustrate the difference between a statist and the opposite.

We've had an unusual amount of rain recently. This has created a bumper crop of mosquitoes. (They don't like me; I'm a snack of absolute last resort.)

A desperate mosquito landed on my arm and thought about biting me. My first thought was "I need to be eating more garlic", and then I started considering getting some catnip oil.

I was at my parents' house when the topic of mosquitoes came up. They wondered aloud why the town wasn't spraying for mosquitoes yet. (They have been, but I guess my parents hadn't seen them doing so.)

It's the difference between what I can do about it? vs. what can government do about it?

-

My surgery fund. 

Thank you!

A "lesson" from the Titan tragedy

I'm sure you're aware of the Titan tragedy. I saw a video released just after the debris had been found, revealing the fate of the vessel and her crew, where the commenter said this shows the need to “improve regulation with these submersibles…”

Really? That’s what he took away from this tragedy? Not a need to improve their design or construction, but to "improve" the regulations. 

As if regulation would have been the answer. Or as though more regulations are ever an improvement.

Add this to the desire to have government tell rich people how they are allowed to spend their money, which we've all seen expressed a lot over the past few years.

Sigh. Statism…

Doing exciting, worthwhile things isn't often safe. Space tourists are going to die, just like Titanic tourists have now died. And, it's still going to be worth the risk to those who choose to go. 

Statist control-freaks need to stay out of the way. They are free to cower under the bed if that's what they prefer. Others should be free to make other choices,

-

My surgery fund. 

Thank you!

Stolen honor

Ewww! You are not my parent! You’re nothing but violent thieves— disgusting parasites. Don’t you DARE try to pose as a parent figure and pretend you are anything more than the lowlife you are. All of you.

-

My surgery fund. 

Thank you!

My birthday weekend

This past weekend my daughter had a comic-con to attend. As it was my birthday weekend, I would have much preferred to stay home with the cats, but that wasn't to be.

So, while making the best of it in the big city, I drove to various stores (& spent too much money), went to the shooting range to burn some ammo, caused trouble at a gun store, visited the prairie dogs, and sat in a hotel room and read. 

Mostly-- other than the driving in town, which I hate-- it was relaxing.

I had never been to this shooting range alone. Normally I go with my son, but he was in Denver last weekend (so I looked in on his cats). I had fun anyway.

I discovered I shoot a lot more when I'm alone. I'm not sure whether that's a good thing. I only took one gun, so there wasn't any time wasted swapping out guns, I didn't have to wait around for anyone, and the pistol range wasn't busy that morning. I only took a .22lr plinker, so it wasn't painfully expensive to shoot. And I needed the practice anyway.

It ended up being a fairly enjoyable weekend after all.

-

My surgery fund. 

Thank you!

Respecting some rights but not others

Saturday I went to a gun store to replace some .22lr ammo I had used that morning. I chose a store I’ve been to many times. I’ve bought ammo and a firearm there, and my son has bought multiple firearms from them.

Beside their front door is now a sign that says something to the effect of "If you smell like [Cannabis] this isn’t the gun store for you". I almost left without going in, but decided to say something.

I went ahead and bought the ammunition I needed, figuring they'd be more likely to listen to a paying customer, and after I paid I told the guy at the register that it’s not a good idea to pick and choose which rights you’ll respect. He looked confused so I pointed to the sign.

I told him once you start saying some rights aren’t worth defending, where does it stop?

I said I don’t even use marijuana but I respect the right of people to choose for themselves. And that it is a human right to use it.

He said it’s not a good idea to shoot if you’re high. I agreed but said that doesn’t only apply to marijuana, and that's not the point of the sign.

He said, “It’s not legal in Texas”. I shrugged and said there are many things government regulates but has no business regulating. I pointed at the boxes of ammo I had just bought, as an example of things government regulates but has no actual authority over.

I told him it’s just not a good look for a business that relies on respect for rights (rights which are unpopular with some) to pick and choose when it comes to rights that are important to other people. And I left. 

I doubt I’ll spend any more money there unless that sign comes down. I may not be welcome there now, anyway.

-

My surgery fund. 

Thank you!

Misguided blame

"Quarterly profits"? You're barking up the wrong tree, Bunky. These are not the droids you are looking for. 

It's not the fault of those who seek profit, but of those who plunder. Those who counterfeit "money" through the Federal Reserve [sic]. Those who tax.

As long as they can keep you blaming the wrong people, they can keep getting away with it.

-

My surgery fund. 

Or send a gift.
Thank you!

Liberty better than imaginary safety

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for May 14, 2023)

There is a common weapon of mass murder on our streets; nearly everyone has at least one sitting around. They've probably been used to kill more people in total than any other weapon. They are routinely left in yards, on the streets, and scattered around town; unattended and often unlocked.

One was used to kill my older daughter.

Knowing this, do I believe they should be banned or regulated? No, because I'm not an idiot. 

I'm talking about cars.

The argument to ban guns or more heavily regulate gun owners-- and let's be honest; gun owners are the target, not the guns-- is just as ridiculous. You are being lied to from every angle to make you accept the fake narrative.

Some claim that you can't compare cars and firearms because cars are used for a variety of purposes, but a gun's "only purpose is to kill people". These people couldn't be more wrong if they were doing it on purpose. It tells you more about their inner shortcomings and ignorance than it does about reality.

Cars are used to harm and kill innocent people, but the benefits outweigh the risks, The same is true for guns.

Bad guys use both to hurt and kill. Hopeless people use both to end their own lives-- it probably happens more often than is recognized where cars are concerned. Accidents happen. And normal, everyday people use cars and firearms to save lives, and as a hobby, for sports, and for every other legitimate purpose. To claim firearms are only used to kill is to admit you don't know what you're talking about.

Legislation targeting gun owners is popular. Those who hate us seem almost delighted anytime an evil loser goes on a shooting spree; it makes their pro-slavery opinions seem relevant to the most gullible people in society.

The right to own and to carry the proper tools for self-defense isn't subject to majority opinion. It doesn't come from any document and can't be eliminated by abolishing the Second Amendment. Any politician who makes up a rule violating this right is a criminal. It doesn't matter what excuses are used.

Liberty is more important than imaginary safety, or even life. As some will point out, without life you have no liberty-- but you won't care. Without liberty life is a nightmare. This is why slavery is wrong. This is why I oppose all legislation concerning weapons.

-

Consider subscribing or donating.

I couldn't do this without your support.

What did they think would happen?

People don’t consider consequences.

For years, residents of this town have wanted an overpass so we won't be trapped when trains are blocking the railroad crossing-- cutting us off from emergency services and being generally inconvenient. My mother was even interviewed by a news crew doing a report on this several years ago.

The problem is, about half the time when you cross the tracks, you'll have to wait for a train or two. Sometimes you get caught by three trains, and sometimes a train will stop, blocking the crossing for half an hour or more. And if one crossing is blocked, pretty often the other crossing is also blocked. Our trains are long. So, we are trapped. If you need to be somewhere it can be a real problem.

The main bureaucratic roadblock is that the overpass would cross the state line, half being in Texas and half in New Mexico, and neither state has wanted to be bothered with it. An overpass would benefit the Texas residents more since the nearest town with shops, services, and emergency medical facilities is in New Mexico. The Texas side is the side that gets cut off from the world (not that this is necessarily a bad thing in all cases).

Something may have finally changed. They are having a governmental "meeting" in town to discuss such a project. And suddenly, residents are realizing such a project will require the destruction of many businesses and houses.

Did they think an overpass would suddenly materialize out of nothing, and simply replace the current highway's footprint? Did no one actually understand what they were asking for? It sure seems that way to me. 

I have long believed the best solution-- but one the railroad would never agree to-- is to rebuild the railway to incorporate a bridge over the existing highway. Yes, it would be expensive, requiring miles of gradual grade on both sides of the crossing to get the tracks high enough. Yes, it would be necessary to divert trains around the construction for as long as the construction takes. Maybe years. But I think it is the only way it could be done without taking private property.

Or, the residents can just live with things as they stand.

-

My surgery fund. 

A (Big) birthday is coming Sunday-- if you want to send a gift.
Thank you!

I don’t need…

…but it would be nice.

To have a bit of money for this weekend. I have things to do that a little extra money would make more pleasant.

Thanks. 

(Update: I spent irresponsibly.)

-

My surgery fund. 

A (Big) birthday is coming Sunday-- if you want to send a gift.
Thank you!

Statism is human sacrifice

Enlightened modern people look down upon barbaric primitive cultures, such as the Aztecs and multiple others, for practicing human sacrifice.

Yet human sacrifice is absolutely foundational to statism. 

Statism is built on war and legislation enforcement (which always results in death).
Statism requires that human rights-- liberty-- be treated as optional. Violating liberty kills innocent people.
Even that other pillar of statism-- property violation (taxation, property codes, zoning rules, eminent domain, etc.)-- sacrifices human life to prop up the failed cult of statism. When you violate property rights in any amount you damage the ability of people to stay alive. You're making the case that you value The State over human life.

Maybe the ancients and modern statists are right that human sacrifice is somehow necessary to keep society unified and functioning. If so, that's a strike against society, not a reason to embrace human sacrifice.

Statists have no grounds for feeling superior to Aztec priests ripping the hearts out of thousands of victims when they refuse to disavow statism and all its gory facets.

-

My surgery fund. 

A (Big) birthday is coming Sunday-- if you want to send a gift.
Thank you!