MaxRedline

And They Say Congress Is Incapable Of Moovement

The House and Senate agreed to a whopping one-year extension of the farm bill, so you won't have to worry about paying $7 for a gallon of milk. But it looks like your taxes will increase by about $3500. For some reason, $7 milk seems the more appealing of the two.

It's Not Too Late

Remember the Cratchits? What'd they have for Christmas dinner? That's right - a small goose. Actually, pretty much everybody in Scrooge's day had goose, if they could afford one. Being among the most inexpensive sort of meat around at the time, though the head of a hog laid in at a fairly close second, goose was What's for Dinner. Probably because they were larger than ducks or chickens - and ducks and chickens were more reliable egg-layers than geese. In any case, it made for a welcome break from the standard fare of boiled root vegetables and bread. 

If you dig down further in memory, you may remember that after Scrooge had the goose-droppings scared out of him and came around, one of the first things he did was buy that big turkey that was still hanging in the butcher's window. Those, being from the New World, were tremendously expensive in the Old World at the time. So Scrooge's gesture was a huge deal, feathers and all.

But tradition is a big deal there, and so despite the increasingly widespread popularity of turkey and hams over the centuries, goose is still a signature dish for the holidays - along with that horrid flaming bread "pudding" that the Cratchit missus dragged out for dessert. The Brits do seem enamored of their grease-laden, dark-meated goose and pudding; then again, what passes for cuisine there might well gag a maggot elsewhere. Aside from their generally decent fish&chips, they tend to cook everything until it is well and thoroughly dead, and then they cook it some more.

If you'd like to enjoy a taste of merry olde Britain, however, you can still likely pick up a goose at a specialty meat shop (or barring that, snag one of the omnipresent Canadian geese likely crapping all over a nearby golf course at the moment). Best of luck with all that. Don't forget the pudding!

Related articles

Christmas cooks are plumping for goose

How to Serve a Dickensian Christmas Dinner

Goose making comeback as Christmas dinner

Mrs. Cratchit's Christmas Pudding

Celebrating Diversity

It may seem hard to believe, but in parts of America, government is taking a strong stance against cultural values and traditions; in this case, the cultural values and traditions of Latinos. Who would ever have thought such a thing could happen?

After all, back home, many Latinos celebrate by firing guns into the air - but in Los Angeles, that tradition may carry a $10,000 fine, and the mayor there has issued a sternly-worded warning against such displays of cultural diversity.

Apparently, this is one area in which assimilation is required, and celebrating diversity will not be tolerated. How curious!

In any case, when it comes to assimilating, Asian immigrants are evidently far outpacing our Latino compadres by virtually every measure: educationally, Latinos rank near the bottom; Asians near the top. In general, Asians also exhibit more success in business endeavors and technological skills. It's all the more interesting in view of their obvious handicaps; most of them, upon arrival here, can't even speak Spanish.

Related articles

Skills gap prevents organizations filling STEM positions with diverse candidates

Potty-Training For University Students

Chill

That's the British way, and it will very likely become the American way if the Leftists here are able to achieve their ends - though naturally, our Leftist politicians will retain their armed guards. But for the rest of the populace, the "little people", as it were, the advice handed out to anyone finding themselves under attack will be succinct: chill. Try not to defend yourself too strenuously. And if you witness an assault, do not rush to the aid of the victim.

“The BBC offers this advice for anyone in Britain who is attacked on the street: You are permitted to protect yourself with a briefcase, a handbag, or keys. You should shout ‘Call the Police’ rather than ‘Help.’ Bystanders are not to help. They have been taught to leave such matters to the professionals. If you manage to knock your attacker down, you must not hit him again or you risk being charged with assault.”

Fear not, citizen; government is there. And the media, as well.

Small wonder that gun and ammunition sales are skyrocketing here.

Related articles

Guns kill people, in one chilling graph

Bill Ayers to University Students: America's 'Game Is Over' and 'Another World' Is Coming

The Tao Of Left

President John F. Kennedy would never recognize his former country today, as it's now run largely by a deranged mix of resolute Leftists and the poverty industry.

As widely anticipated, free-spending president Barky has plans for 2013; most of which involve repeated assaults upon American citizens - to be largely carried out by designated subordinates in order to afford him more time on the golf course. This is known as "leading from behind". A top priority in the coming year will involve dismantling of specific constitutional rights; beginning with the Second Amendment. Barky fully expects there to be some resistance, but has already begun bathing in the blood of the recent Newtown victims in order to justify his plans.

And in terms of Foreign Relations, Barky will draw upon the expertise of an individual who claimed that

It was one thing to defeat Nazi Germany, but that didn’t mean America had to try to win the Cold War too.

To the Ketchup Boy, human rights and human liberty take a back seat - if, indeed, they're allowed a seat at all. Ketchup's policy views trend not toward engagement, but to accommodation; should that fail, he favors a slow, steady retreat similar to the progressive flow of quality condiments from the bottle.

On the national front, Barky's NLRB can be counted upon to continue to repay the union thugs that have been so critically important to the success of Democrats around the country:

In the steamrolling style that is now the hallmark of the Obama administration and its extensions, the NLRB voted 3-1 to gut the Supreme Court’s 1988 Communication Workers of America v. Beck decision, whereby union workers in non-right-to-work states were able to withhold the portion of their dues that unions spend on political activism. The NLRB now allows that unions no longer are required to provide proof, through audits of their finances, to so-called “Beck objectors” that their money is not spent on union politics.

This is actually less ominous than it appears, as unions have never been required to provide such proof; requests that forced extortion payments not be used for political purposes have routinely been met with assurances from the thugs that only other "brothers and sisters" pay for that.

However, it's worth noting that smooth sledding is ahead for the unionistas, as all three remaining members of the NLRB are Democrats who were appointed by Barky after He declared that the Senate was in recess.

Down The Memory Hole

(NaturalNews) The reports are absolutely true. Facebook suspended the Natural News account earlier today after we posted an historical quote from Mohandas Gandhi. 

Here's what the flap was about:

Facebook saw no problem with people calling for the assassination of the head of the NRA, but this apparently violated their "terms of service".

The account has since been reinstated, evidently in an effort to head off bad PR.

On the other hand, they've created enough already, so they really didn't need any more. I do visit FB on occasion because it's so widespread, but I prefer greater privacy.

No Surprise There: Lefty Wants To Toll I-205

Bob "still ain't dead yet" Stacey, who (thankfully) failed in his shot to be Metro President, nonetheless made it onto the Metro Council, so Portland and the region can expect the same sort of crapola that outbound Councilor Rex Burpholder could always be counted on to support. Sure enough, before he even gets into orifice, the former head of 1000 Fiends of Oregon is pushing for imposing tolls on the I-205 bridge between Oregon and Washington.

Evidently, it hasn't occurred to him that since the bridge is paid for, it can't be tolled. Or perhaps he thinks that Oregon can just unilaterally impose tolls on a federal freeway. In any case, that's his "plan"; deep thinker that he is. Bobby should get along famously with inbound Porkland mayor Charlie, who campaigned on a "back to basics" approach that involved filling in pot-holes and repaving roads, but who now suddenly wants more bike paths.

Meanwhile, a career politician who failed in her bid to oust Portland City Councilor Amanda Fritz has been fast-tracked toward a $200,000-a-year job for which she's eminently qualified: Mary Nolan, a walking, talking poster who serves, by her mere presence, to illustrate why so many favor abortion, is a contender for the CEO slot at Planned Parenthood of the Columbia-Willamette. The organization, part of the nationwide chain of the most prolific providers of abortion in the USA and founded by a eugenicist who believed that it was in the best interests of the country to eliminate the inferior elements of our species (notably, blacks - who to this day still constitute the majority of their clientele), seems a perfect fit for Nolan. The only downside is that she won't be eligible for additional PERS benefits.

 

Related articles

Bob Stacey: Babs Can Be My Metro Seat-Warmer

The Nut-Cracker Sweet

The nominally sane American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals demonstrated ponderously poor judgement a dozen years ago, when it joined with the known animal "rights" nuts in a lawsuit against Ringling Brothers Barnum and Bailey Circus, alleging elephant abuse (among other things). For twelve long years - although ASPCA has largely remained silent - the nutjobs at Humane Society of the United States, the Fund for Animals, Animal Welfare Institute, Animal Protection Institute United with Born Free USA, and half a dozen other whackos have been peddling their allegations, complete with faked videos, to gullible nutballs around the country.

In addition to pleading for donations to fatten their administrators' bank accounts, they urged the gullible to "act locally" - with predictable results. Even in relatively remote Clatsop County, Oregon, local nutballs there pushed for a County-wide ban on exhibition of elephants and an assortment of other favored species, citing the talking points derived from the litigants' organizations. Those efforts crashed and burned, as well they should have.

It has been my experience, in talking with some of the self-styled "elephant watchers" - who actually have an informal gossip network along the Oregon coast - that facts are irrelevant to them. They're True Believers in the Gospel according to HSUS, or PEtA, or whomever, and nothing will change that.

Even this news will not:

Courts later found that the animal rights activists had paid a former Ringling barn helper involved in the lawsuit at least $190,000, making him "essentially a paid plaintiff" who lacked credibility.

Two courts agreed the former barn helper, Tom Rider, wasn't credible and didn't have a right to sue.

Five years ago, Feld Entertainment, which owns RBB&B among other properties, sued them all right back - including Rider and the various lawyers involved - alleging racketeering, collusion, and litigative abuse, among other charges. Twelve years after first siding with the nutballs, ASPCA has now bailed; noting in their press release that

this litigation has stopped being about the elephants a long time ago. After more than a decade of litigating with Feld Entertainment, the ASPCA concluded that it is in the best interests of the organization to resolve this expensive, protracted litigation.

Well, that's one way to spin it. Curiously, they don't mention that in addition to costs of litigation, ASPCA, while admitting no wrongdoing, nonetheless paid heavily - and it's cash that could have gone toward their avowed purpose for existence. As Feld put it:

VIENNA, Va., Dec. 28, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- Feld Entertainment, Inc., the producer of Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey^® Circus, announced today that the company has reached a legal settlement with the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) in connection with two federal court cases. Under the settlement, ASPCA has paid Feld Entertainment $9.3 million to settle all claims related to its part in more than a decade of manufactured litigation that attempted to outlaw elephants in the company's Ringling Bros.^® Circus.

$9.3 million equals one huge nut-cracker. HSUS, Rider, the various lawyers, and the remaining eleven organizations remain vulnerable under claims associated with Feld's RICO suit.

"These defendants attempted to destroy our family-owned business with a hired plaintiff who made statements that the court did not believe. Animal activists have been attacking our family, our company, and our employees for decades because they oppose animals in circuses. This settlement is a vindication not just for the company but also for the dedicated men and women who spend their lives working and caring for all the animals with Ringling Bros. in the face of such targeted, malicious rhetoric," said Kenneth Feld, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Feld Entertainment.

For many years, I've warned against taking these animal "rights activists" seriously; noting that in addition to manufacturing "evidence", their allegations are inarguably false, and in fact contrary to all common sense: when ones' livelihood depends upon animals, what benefit would be derived from mistreating them?

So-called "activists" claim that the elephants are "beaten into submission" and "made to perform tricks". Stop for a moment and consider: there are exactly two things that you can "make" an elephant do. You can make them get away, or you can make them kill you. With psychology and training, you can get them to do many things that are within their physical capabilities. It's done by capturing and extending normal behavior.

As for "beating them into submission": see above, on what you can make an elephant do.

The settlement with ASPCA was announced yesterday; it will be interesting to see how the remaining litigants react.

 

Related articles

ASPCA pays Ringling Bros. $9.3M

Ringling Bros. awarded $9.3 million in elephant case

Animal rights group settles lawsuit with Ringling

Animal activists to pay

Clatsop County To Ban Exotic Animals?

Smokin' Hot Unionistas

Philadelphia: Quakers building a new meeting center had the temerity to hire a non-union contractor for the job. Four days before Christmas, arsonists torched the place and associated equipment.

Employees arriving for work Dec. 21 said they found the site in disarray. The cab of a large, mobile building crane had been completely burned. Vandals had also used the torch to shear off the steel bolts on nearly a dozen columns. Three others were hacked halfway through at the base, as if someone were trying to cut down a tree.

Damages are estimated at half a million dollars; although police currently have no identified suspects, they've stated with certainty that it was union sabotage.

And while unions have been battling to keep Boeing's 737 Max airliner construction work in Renton, Washington, the company has moved ahead with expansion plans at its facilities in North Charleston, South Carolina. They've agreed to purchase nearly 600 acres of land, with an option on nearly 500 additional acres.

The decision does suggest that Boeing may be entertaining the possibility of another assembly plant at the site, perhaps if a mostly-composites successor to the 737 or 777 models is eventually built.

Bet the machinists unionistas aren't happy. Be a real shame if something was to happen over there in North Charleston.

Related articles

Boeing Just Bought A Ridiculous Amount Of Land In South Carolina

Rise Of The Mutants

Forget The Bionic Man, and don't be worrying about anthrax. The future of warfare is evolutionary, and it's a lot closer than you'd think - if, indeed, it hasn't already begun:

The most realistic future biomods apocalypse is one in which a hostile foreign government or terror group finds ways to subtly change a lot of people. “The worst-case scenario is people could start doing things that wouldn’t be recognized,” Herr says. “At least you can do something about if if you know it’s happening.”

But that's hardly the only approach currently underway; the term, "biomods", involves exactly what the truncation implies: biological modification, using neurochemical enhancements derived from pharmacological and genetic manipulation - along with neurological manipulation - to produce the next generation of troops. Biologically enhanced, or mutant - however one wishes to categorize them - the new version is anticipated to exhibit enhanced cognitive and teamwork skills, together with somewhat superhuman physical attributes.

While mechanical and computational implants presently remain a future possibility (though progress in machine-mediated visual augmentation and auditory processing has been made), biological enhancements are now well within the realm of application.

The military could select troops and their officers for their unique, inborn ability to cope with stress. Or it could directly tweak a soldier’s body functions — re-balancing the normal hormonal cocktail so the soldier doesn’t panic, doesn’t retreat and keeps on fighting, even when the odds are against him and any normal person would just give up.

Natural selection, however, is time-consuming, tricky, and occasionally messy. Why bother with that when you have the ability to biologically modify every recruit? And what, exactly, is to stop it from happening?

Americans, especially, tend to have deep reservations about changing people’s biology, Herr points out. That doesn’t mean they won’t do it. He points out increasing acceptance of cognitive-enhancing drugs among American college students. “Seventy to 80 percent of upperclassman have at least once taken these drugs illegally to get better grades,” he says. “If the younger generation in our country is more comfortable with this, then that would make the use of these kinds of things in society, and by extension the military, very different.”

Moreover, the exigencies dictated by confirmation from American and allied intelligence communities that other countries are already advancing such technologies likely would serve as impetus for acceleration of similar programs and attendant research into both agonistic and defensive implementations. The latter approach would appear to carry a low probability of success; it seems more likely that efforts to enhance military personnel would gain priority.

After all, the "worst-case scenario" as decribed above is exceptionally unlikely at present; it is much more likely that hostile agents would target particular individuals for biomod at first, introducing alteration of biochemical makeup by stealth, then, by suggestion, influencing behavior.

Is it possible, for example, to accomplish this in such a way as to direct the target to - for example - engage in mass murder, and subsequently commit suicide? What reactions can be observed in the host country following repeated successes? If such a series of events could be orchestrated in the United States, might the populace be persuaded to voluntarily relinquish their weapons?

Assuming that such a scenario could occur, and assuming that the hypothetical enemy country had advanced not only in military weaponry, but in biological enhancement of their troops even as the USA has reduced military strength and fallen behind in the race toward biomodification, it becomes relevant to consider the likely outcome of any subsequent confrontation.

At present, Western attitudes regarding biological modification are generally negative; overwhelmingly so in the European Union and to a somewhat lesser degree in the USA - especially where GMO foods are concerned. It seems reasonable to extrapolate from that aversion to a more generalized aversion toward human biomodification in western nations, but scant evidence exists to support such aversion in other countries. Moreover, as western nations have arguably become increasingly wary of technology in the face of "man-made" global warming and other environmental causes, other nations are investing in energy and technology even as they call upon western nations to divest themselves.

It sems prudent to suggest that they aren't doing so in order to help us.