Error Message?

25 December, 2019

This evening on “The Five,” Dana Perino confessed her desire to cage and kill peaceful potheads.   I doubt that she would put it in such terms, but the consequences of her (presumably sincere) campaign to not send “the wrong message” to “the cheeeel-drun,” by not ending cannabis prohibition, are inevitable.

It makes no difference what she wants. 

“Good intentions” are a poor excuse for bad behavior. 

Maybe the Bubback Hussein Walker Bushes (43 and 44) were just trying to secure the F’eral Reserve’s parasitic “dollar” hegemony as they murdered thousands of Iraqis, Libyans, and Yemeni. 

And Cotton Mather was just trying to “save souls” as he murdered “witches.”

Employer Prerogatives

25 August 2019

Is it OK (sic) for the boss to make employees mix business with politics?

In spite of threats of reprisal (in the form of boycott. divestiture, or sanction perhaps?) from established terror groups like GrabYourWallet® et al, employers are sticking to their guns. They’ll continue to kiss up to politicians by offering venues filled with enthusiastic PAID audiences. Responsible employees will continue to suck it up and accept the “easy” money, predicated only on their civil presence.

It is a comfort to learn that “legal experts” agree that employers have a right to use their resources as they wish, but in the ethical argument such learned opinions are irrelevant.

It’s very simple:
If you work at McGreasetrap’s® ya gotta wear the paper hat or ya gotta hit the door.
If you play for the Queen City Looters’n’Pillagers® and the coach says you stand for the national anthem, you stand or you walk.
If you take the boss’ money you do the boss’ bidding.
How complicated is that?

Flintlocks and Moveable Type

12 August 2019

The mere printing of an opinion piece should never be construed as either an endorsement by editorial or a disavowal of the sentiments expressed therein. However, there are certain signals that editors may employ to imply one or the other. Placing a letter at the end of a column without editorial comment, allowing the correspondent the last word, is one plus sign. A parodical header or accompanying graphic is an effective minus. Bold type echoing the theme of the letter at the top of the column is a big plus.

That big plus was found in Friday’s Enquirer, in which the editors seemed to endorse correspondent JH’s antiquarian interpretation of the Bill of Rights. In her narrow view of Eighteenth Century technology and social intercourse, the only protections the Second Amendment would offer those of us in the Militia (the general citizenry, again using 18th century terminology, or “the people”) would be in our use of sticks, knives, pitchforks, and flintlocks. No Colt 45s or AK 47s or AR-15s for us!

Applying this narrow logic to the First Amendment I must wonder whether she and the Enquirer’s editors would likewise restrict the Enquirer et al to block-printing, cuneiform, and movable type, and outlaw all electric means of mass communication along with those dreadful “assault weapons” and “Saturday Night Specials.”

book review: Inside the Heart’s Walls

Inside the Heart’s Walls — poetry, 125 pages
printed in Columbia, South Carolina; usa — June, 2019

excerpts are the work and property of the author,
used without permission

O frabjous day, callou callay, a book of verse has come my way!

Nathan Tav Knight has an especial gift for constructing tight and rigorous works of rhythmcraft that are packed with evocative imagery. The author does not betray the reader with his choice of title, nor does he avoid risking embarrassment. Many of these pieces are personal and painful. There is as much of the maudlin as we might expect from a “slim volume of verse,” but there is also a sufficiently playful tone that would have supported selecting Two-Seater with the Top Down as his title piece instead.

We’re getting a bit of a range with this book. For comparison’s sake I would try to put the author in the same camp as cummings or Kipling or Seuss. Though some of his work is more “free form” most are strictly metered. Within these constraints Knight breaks free of convention, and illustrates lives of brilliant triumph, desperate struggle, joyous fellowship, rapturous solitude, and bitter loneliness. To wit, genuine and original lives. Probably mostly his own lives, though some might be invented.

Some personal favorites of this reviewer include:.

No Cigar (pg 6)

Such a thankful word is ‘close’
Injected with a potent dose
Of beaming joy and giddy cheer
Churned within from passing near
The zooming car or thund’ring truck
How great it feels to not be struck!

Just This (pg 67)

If love is a god then just who am I
To love ’til I break and make myself cry?

If we once were one then just who are you
To pull out our soul and tear it in two?

If life is just this then just who are we
To fall out of love and call ourselves free?

The Scarcity Principle (pg 69)

We see something as more desirable
Whenever it is less acquirable.

Love is so valued because it is rare.
Desperately hoarded, none free to spare.

The desire for love is forever connected
To always expecting of being rejected.

How magic to feel should a day countervail
That normalcy break and old order fail?

What puzzle, what mystery would then take shape?
How lost would we be in that strange new landscape?

Solitude and loneliness slug it out repeatedly throughout the collection. Scribes of all Ages have tackled this conflict, of course, and Knight sums up the difference: “Solitude is having the time and space to work on your project until you get it juuuuuust right. Loneliness is wishing you had someone to show what a good job you did.” As long as we admire his work then, according to his own metric, Knight surrenders at least some claim to “loneliness.” Meanwhile, we can wish for him all the solitude that writers crave, and regular breaks at his discretion, with liberal doses of whiskey, weed, women, or whatnot.
190710

Knight’s publisher has not seen fit to include contact information, but we are prepared to intercede on your behalf. We will endeavor to make hard copy available post paid from Greigh Area Associates or Piracy Press for Twenty United $tates Legal Tender Federal Reserve “Dollars” (U$LT) in check or money order, or One Silver Dollar.  Send your U$LT to Gene Greigh, c/o Greigh Area Associates    //   401 Rio Concho Drive, #105; San Angelo, Texas; 76903 (If we are unable to secure copies your instrument will be returned or like products will be sent at your discretion.)

update 190711: correspondent DD points out that Knight’s book is also available at Amazon.dot.com, but the link provided is a little intimidating (at least to this primitive e-tard), so caveat emptor!

Guns, Gold, & Garden Tools

24 June 2019

In his paeans to price-fixing and central planning, Fed fan Justin Lahart (Wall Street Journal weekend edition 6/22-23) glosses over the Federal Reserve’s many failures, exaggerates the extent of alleged 19th Century panics, and ignores the F’eral Reserve System’s greatest crimes.

In addition to facilitating intervention in World War One, thereby spawning both Nazi and Soviet horrors, it has inexorably gouged out about 98% of the value of the US Dollar. Prior to its steady loss of value since 1913 the American Dollar gained purchasing power throughout the late 19th Century, as an unrestrained free market unleashed unprecedented improvements in manufacture, transportation, and hygiene.

The full extent of these banksters’ larceny has been largely disguised by continuing gains in productivity. Nevertheless, hapless savers are faced with the prospect of watching their life’s work evaporate, or be thrust into a speculative arena where many do not belong, or put their trust in a “certified financial planner.”

Nah… Give me guns, gold, and garden tools.

The Devil We Know

2 July, 2002 — Term Limits are a cheap gimmick designed to relieve voters of the responsibility to educate themselves on the issues and the records of office holders.
It is tantamount to telling Nanny, “Stop me before I vote again.”

“Thank You for Not Voting” (6 July 2002)
There’s no danger in alienating non-voters. What are they going to do? Not vote for me? When people tell me they don’t vote, I have mixed emotions. Part of me wants to say, “Hey! Come on, I need all the help I can get!” Another part wants to say, “Great! The fewer people vote, the more mine counts!” Still another part wants to say, “Fine. Go back to sleep. Leave these decisions to the grown-ups.”

“Why NOT Mess with Texas?” (11 May, 2005) — There seems to be no down side to it. From 1861 to 1865 the Neo-Whig Occupation messed with Texas big time, thoroughly squashing their efforts to assert their independence and sovereignty. Ever since they’ve been as docile a doormat and as servile a sycophant as Massa Lincoln could have hoped to find anywhere else in His Union.

1 September, 2019 — I hate to see Elizabeth (Dei Gratia Regina) and Boris (Populi Gratia Ministerium Primus) take heat for their “anti-democratic” suspension of Parliament. Their anti-pandering Anti-Democratic resolve may be among their most admirable of attributes.

“Magic Numbers” (7 January, 2020) — President Tjump, leftist pawn of the same cabal that brought you the Bushbamaton 2000® (models 41 through 44), cites 52 potential bombing targets in case Iran hassles more intruders in their neighbors’ houses. Why 52?  One each, he says, for the American hostages held in the US Embassy in Tehran lo these many generations ago.  But why stop there?  Why not 148, one each for the people murdered by the US government at Sand Creek?  Why not 300, one each for the victims at Wounded Knee?
Or perhaps I should be more modest than El Donaldo, AND more contemporaneously relevant. I would propose just two targets, one each for Sammy and Vickie Weaver, also murdered by the US government:  Langley and Quantico will do.
update 200108: If Hezbolah is Iran, Al Qaeda is America.

“Those Cockeyed Hawkeye Cauci” (4 February, 2020) —
The I.T. elites of Iowa’s Democrat party have taken it upon themselves to foist an unsolicited “upgrade” onto a hapless caucusing electorate.  Their sleek new app apparently wasn’t up to the task of meeting 19th Century tabulation procedures. 
Or so goes the party line.  Cynics suspect that an embarrassing Sanders Surge had to be buried in a blizzard of digital doubletalk, thereby conferring the inevitable endorsement onto Squeaky Pete, while simultaneously delivering a healthy kick in the slats to heir disapparent Quid Pro Joe.
I.T. weasels and party apparatchiks vow to address this epic failure by insulting Iowa voters and punishing accounting clerks.  Isn’t there a napp for that?

Losers of Note (Omni 1/80 & 5/83)

8 June 2019

Photo-essayist and pink (generations before it was co-opted into service for breast cancer awareness) profiteer Bob Guccione, publisher of Penthouse, entered the growing “science faction” market in the late 1970s with OMNI. Presenting original fiction, speculative essays, and other sci-fi-geekery, the slick paper magazine also included games and contests and fun. Contest Editor Scot Morris invited readers to play, sweetening the inducement by offering cash prizes for “best entrants.” I frequently played, but never won, never got paid, and am STILL not a professional wordsmith.

Not that I wasn’t noticed. After disbursing the gelt to the elites, Morris saw fit to honorably mention some of the hoi polloi.
I made that cut twice.

In 1979, Morris invited readers to contribute “scientific graffiti” such as might be found on the bulkheads of spacecraft or in the halls o’ high learnin’, and deemed entrant Anthony Reynolds’ offering,
“Microwaves frizz your heir,” tops.
Lower he cites my own, “Entropy isn’t what it used to be.”

In 1983, he began assembling his “Fractured Dictionary” and asked for “redefinitions for up to three words” and then declared that the best trio came from Chris Doyle, to wit:
Circular saw: “A rose is a rose is a rose.”
Digger wasp: A preppy archaeology student.
Damnation: The Netherlands

Harrumph! Some sore losers might count FIVE words up there in the redefinition column, but that would be mingy and graceless. Even more mingy and graceless would be to point out that while an example is an example is an example, it is NOT a definition. Instead they’ll restrain themselves, and simply direct the reader to a more elegant (and honorable) entry which does not stray into ambiguous compound word territory but simply redefines three INDIVIDUAL words, so:
Ambidextrous: A sugar that is its own stereoisomer.
Analogy:
Overprotective response of the immune system to foreign protein.
Binary: Frugal fiscal policy.

Yeah, right…

27 May 2019

You probably don’t buy it either.

But so many of you anyway (“you” equals “those who are not me”) recite that nonsense. I’m sorry, there is no vaginal guarantee against mendacity. As it turns out, women are just like people! Some of them are brilliant, honorable, talented, charming, and delightful. And some of them are loathsome, stupid, parasitic, duplicitous lying scumbags. Cretins, creeps, and criminals come in all colors, speak all languages, worship all manner of gods or none at all, and come in two sexes (plus some very rare genetic malformations.) I get a little tired of reminding ya’ll, but I just keep seeing this leftist nonsense over and over and over again.

Believe tall handsome blue-eyed comic book geeks!
(If bullshitting one’s way to success actually works,
maybe I should try to cash in!)

Fiat Lucre!

26 May 2019

Let there be cash!

It’s very difficult to dredge up any sympathy for American snivelers who wail about “foreign currency manipulation” or “currenc[ies] that [are] artificially weak.” To make sympathy even harder, these pampered plutocrats propose to respond to foreign central banks aping the Federal Reserve’s schtick (and industrious foreign entrepreneurs offering us great deals) by siccing their pet legislators onto the American consumer with additional tariffs.

For a century the F’eral Reserve has been the king of currency manipulation, and as the century wore on other central banks realized that they too could foist such offenses onto their captive markets. Who do they think they are? Americans?

These comments are sponsored by The Confederate Mint (purveyors of metallic securities in gold, silver, copper, and lead).  For sample sheets of Metallic Certificates (total face value One Tenth Silver Dollar) send One Silver Dime plus a self-addressed stamped envelope; or Four United States Legal Tender Federal Reserve “Dollars” in scrip, check, or money order, to Greigh Area Associates, c/o Gene Greigh //  401 Rio Concho Drive, #105;  San Angelo, Texas;  76903

Sex v Gender

10 May 2019

Correspondent BH reminds us that “referring to people by their legal gender rather than their biological gender [is to give] the state authority that it doesn’t have.” His position has merit and I am grateful for the reminder. We should always avoid endorsing legal fictions, and endeavor to call all things by their proper names (theft, murder, boy, girl, label, object.) Conditionally adapting to Massa’s language may be a tactical advantage, but preserving our own integrity is a strategic necessity.

Still, I wish people would not say “biological gender.”
Words have gender (and there are only three),
organisms have sex (and there are only two),
and people have proclivities (and they are endless.)

Of course, I have no quarrel whatsoever with the term “legal gender” as the predicate adjective “legal” when referring to biology, physics, or most any other part of the real world means “meaningless nonsense follows.”

BH defends his use of the term, pointing out that “gender has always had a direct correlation with sex… [E]ven though it was a term reserved for grammar, and later legal things, that correlation wasn’t broken until recently.” Well, he is right, of course, and I can grasp the present usage (see caveat above in re Massa‘s language). Language evolves, sometimes capriciously, but sometimes sensibly, to better describe changing circumstances or contemporaneous phenomena. But when the changes ARE capricious, or unnecessary, or even contrary to common understanding (see “sick” “bad” or “bitchin‘”), then it does offend me. Maybe because I am retarded and have always had a very difficult time keeping up with slang.
(“Feet, say good-bye to rug. Face, say hello to concrete floor.”)