Dear Senators Wyden and Merkley,

After checking our budget carefully, my wife and I have decided to cut back on luxuries like movies, vacations and bribing the state of Nebraska. While we are sure that a generous holiday spirit impelled you to buy off the state so you could cram through execrable health care legislation, you might not be aware that our taxes are the coin you spent doing so. We are aware of this future tax burden, and since you were so generous with our money, we're getting quite worried about how we are going to make it through the coming years. My wife and I both work for a living in Oregon, which already has some of the highest taxes in the United States, and our jobs are dependent on being competitive in world markets. Making Nebraska more attractive to employers is not a Christmas gift we can afford.

By the way, did you know that Nebraska's state motto is “Equality Before the Law”? According to the latest poll data, it appears that most Nebraskans hold true to this motto, even if you and Senator Nelson have other ideas. You see, when Nebraska gets bribed by unfair legislation, they don't get to be equal any more. In your time in Washington, with all its many privileges accorded to Senators, you might well forget that Americans overwhelmingly prefer to be equal in the eyes of the law.

In the last year, you've spent our money more recklessly than ever before. Further, your legislation is paying off worse than if you'd spent the money on Powerball or video poker. We need you to be finding workable methods to help the economy, not throwing good money after bad. Or throwing our money at Nebraska.

Patrick S Lasswell
Portland, Oregon

Yesterday Representative Earl Blumenauer responded to my short note to him with a long defense of his playing 2,000 Card Monte with health care. Although we are used to Congress playing fast and loose with our taxes, we've never seen it on this scale of gamble with this large a paper shuffle. Hidden in that massive deck of law alterations and empire building is supposed to be a reward for everybody, and like any street hustler my representative is talking fast about how much I'm going to win. Only because Rep. Blumenauer is too much of a chicken to do so to my face (Rep. Blumenauer didn't risk actual Town Halls this summer, he had a telephone Town Hall), he sent an email. Since Rep. Blumenauer could be caught with a dead girl AND a live boy while driving an SUV through endangered species habitat and still get elected in Portland because he supports mass transit, fisking his excuses is all I can do.

“The debate over health insurance is not just about people currently without coverage. It's also about small business owners and their employees.”

Because small businesses thrive with massive additional government regulation? The small business software to keep track of this regulatory monstrosity is going to have greater hardware requirements than Windows Vista, and take weeks of otherwise productive time out for small business owners to figure out if they can stay in business.

“It's about the individuals who are losing their jobs (and health insurance) due to the ongoing recession, as well as people approaching the age for Medicare eligibility who want to make sure this popular, government run health insurance program is still around when they retire.”

Who created that recession exactly? Did it have anything to do with congressional practices of throwing money around like drunks at Mardi Gras towards unsafe loans? How will throwing more of other people's money around without sober reflection help us?

“Health care costs are spiraling out of control. This year, every insured American family will pay $1,017 in insurance premiums just to cover the emergency medical expenses of the uninsured. This "hidden health care tax," which totals approximately $42 billion annually, subsidizes the uncompensated health care costs of the uninsured and is a growing burden on the system as a whole.“

So we should instead spend $3,700 to get rid of this $1,017 problem? You didn't source your numbers, I ain't sourcin' mine!

“Without reform, the cost of health care for the average family of four is projected to rise $1,800 every year for years to come.“

Remember when you told us that without the stimulus unemployment would get so big, and then we got the stimulus and unemployment got two points bigger? We should trust your figures now because...

“Worse still, insurance companies will be increasingly responsible for health care decisions, limiting individuals' ability to make decisions about what care they receive. According to a recent study conducted by the Harvard Medical School, more than 45,000 Americans die every year due to lack of access to affordable healthcare. Without reform, this figure will only increase.”

So we should shift this all onto congress so that instead of insurance companies we can change being responsible for our health care decisions, government we cannot change will be. Or are you going to let Canada bid for our health care coverage?

“America's middle class deserves better. America's families need affordable, stable health care coverage that can't be taken away from them and that is why I was proud to join my colleagues in passing HR 3629, the Affordable Health Care for America Act. Here's what the Affordable Health Care for America Act means to you:”

Always important to bring class warfare to bear when talking about socialism. So, how does the middle class fare under socialist rule? By the way, if the stable health care coverage can't be taken away, doesn't that also mean that it is an offer I can't refuse?

“LOWER COSTS”

Because the government that brings us $1 billion dollar ships that were supposed to cost $350 million is so very good at lowering costs?

“GREATER CHOICE”

For values of “greater” meaning "lesser" and “choice” meaning "lack of choice.

“HIGHER QUALITY”

As long as you do not have any quality now. Also, for values of "quality" meaning "not controlled by the government."

“FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY “

From congress? Like the fiscal responsibility we got with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? Or like the fiscal responsibility we get in Rep. Murtha's district/feudal domain?

“STABILITY & PEACE OF MIND”

Wait, didn't you just say I'd have greater choice? How can I have greater choice and greater stability? While there is some truth to the notion that “Oh, we are so very screwed” is a kind of peace of mind, fatalism isn't what I'm looking for regarding my health!

“There are a lot of myths and outright lies about health care reform still being spread by people who want to keep the status quo. While it's important to have an honest debate about how much government should be involved, how we get the best value for our dollar, and what regulations are put in place to make sure the insurance companies don't end up gouging the American taxpayer, we need to reject the divisive tactics and rhetoric from those who have no interest in making our country healthier.”

If it was so important to have an honest debate about anything, why did you pass this bill out of the House late on a Saturday evening instead of in the middle of the week in the middle of the day?

“On that note, I want to take this opportunity to address some concerns I've heard and clear up some misconceptions regarding HR 3269:” “This bill does NOT raise taxes on low and middle-class families. A small surtax on millionaires will cover most of the cost of health insurance reform. Furthermore, this increase will not occur during a recession, but is set to be implemented in 2011, long after economists predict the recession will end. “

What happens if the millionaires use their money hiring better accountants than the IRS can afford to hide their wealth and income? Like they already do? Why haven't you gone to this well ever before? What if the millionaires leave and take their money with them? I have it on very good authority that many rich people do not keep their wealth in giant Scrooge McDuck vaults just so they can take money baths, although apparently your economists believe differently.

“This bill does NOT cover anyone who resides in this country illegally. H.R. 3269 specifically forbids federal dollars from going towards health insurance for undocumented workers.”

Unless it gets changed in conference committee. Or the wind changes. Or there are little codicils someplace that allow it that nobody's found because the bill is far too large for reasonable discussion.

“This bill does NOT create "death panels" or euthanize our senior citizens. The Affordable Healthcare for America Act simply allows Medicare to reimburse health professionals for a voluntary conversation about end-of-life decisions between a patient and a doctor, at the patient's behest. Like all Medicare benefits, this is a voluntary benefit! If patients don't want to discuss their health care wishes, they don't have to.”

Except for where it will, like cutting back on mammograms for women in their 40's which will increase deaths to save costs. And all the other ways it will because the economic criteria is based on remaining time of life available instead of need for care.

“This bill does NOT use taxpayer money to fund abortions. HR 3269 prohibits federal funds for abortion services in the public option. It also prohibits individuals who receive affordability credits from purchasing a plan that provides elective abortions. This bill also maintains federal conscience protection laws and does not supersede state laws restricting abortion.”

Unless it gets changed in conference committee, yada, yada, yada...

“This bill does NOT exempt Members of Congress and other government employees from following the same guidelines as everybody else. Any health care plan used by a federal employee or elected official will be subject to the same reforms as all other private plans.”

So this means you've decided to go ahead and screw the troops out of their medical because going in harm's way is an excessive lifestyle choice?

“This bill does NOT cut Medicare coverage. This bill does include Medicare reforms designed to lower costs and increase efficiency, but NOT at the expense of caring for enrollees.“

Wait, I thought you just said that all health care systems would have the same reform inflicted on them.

“This bill does NOT abolish the private health insurance system in this country. Under the bill, patients would be able to keep their private insurance, and there would be no mandate to switch plans or join the public insurance option. This bill is all about giving people options and letting them choose the type of care that best works for them.”

So how is making private health care insurance utterly insolvent different from abolishing it?

“Since the start of this debate, opponents of reform have repeatedly claimed that the process has not been transparent, or that it has been rushed and the details of the proposed bill are not well understood. These claims are not true. Since 2007, the House has held 100 hearings on health care, and this year alone we have held close to 3,000 health care events in our districts. Three House committees have spent 160 hours in public hearings and markups of health care legislation, and much of HR 3269 has now been available for public review and comment for more than three months. The full text of the bill was available for Members of Congress, the media and all citizens to read and consider long before the vote.”

If that was true, why did you refuse to face your constituents, Rep. Blumenauer? Why won't you look us in the eye and tell us this? Why don't you dare come home and see the people who elected you in a public forum? Can you tell us you actually read the bill before you voted on it?

How transparent is 160 hours of public hearings for more than 2,000 pages of law? Did they really give serious consideration at a rate of 12.5 pages an hour? Why is this law different than street hustlers fast talking their way through the simple fact that they aren't standing on the corner for your benefit, but theirs? Why should responsible adults believe that the people with fast word processors who cranked out the massive text of this beast have our interests in mind more than the guys with fast hands shuffling cards?

Barack Obama is for many a mythical figure and the folks who strike them down never get elected in response. Nobody goes on and on about how Achilles was just asking for it by running around without proper protective gear and a flawed operators manual from his mom. Daedealus always gets a bum rap for letting Icarus exceed the clearly stated flight envelop of his aircraft. Finally, nobody thanks Barabbus for putting that nice Jewish boy out of his misery.

I am not saying we should back down, the stakes are far too important and the issues are too pressing. I am saying we need to operate with enthusiasm and calculation to achieve a clear goal. We cannot be a bull chasing after waving red flags. Irresistible force going too far is what is wrong with all too many of the opposition's excesses. Unless you think that 1,000 page bills passed in less than a week represents contemplative restraint?

Someday soon a lot of people are going to be looking for bad guys to assign failure of the fantasy that was the Obama administration. Rather than fight people forever because they feel betrayed and would rather blame it on us than deny their delusions, we need to step up and go beyond anger ourselves. This is not just an opportunity to achieve a lasting victory, this is a chance to win with class.

Certainly we cannot expect paid operatives from SEIU and other thugs to respond to our outreach with decency and consideration. They are looking at losing giant payoffs that were almost in their hands and are not going to show restraint. Our way of keeping our cool is going to also be our way of showing their failure. We need to video everything we do and keep always in mind that YouTube never forgets.

While it would be nice to vent our darkest anger and trample all before us, a lot of people coming over to our side have already been trampled enough. That's why they came and they aren't going to stay if we start acting the mad bull. This is our chance to show we are worthy to lead

Be nice. Talk to the people with consideration and truth, and we will win some over. Record everything and always act with the knowledge that your least kind moment will be playing forever in political hell on the Internet. Crack the egg with all the force and precision of a Calibrated Pile Driver.

For gearheads interested in a truly great pioneer of early machine tooling: The Autobiography of James Nasmyth. Precision, power and class. Retired at age 48 because he wasn't taxed to death.

Comments will be closed after two weeks due to spambots stealing my time.

A whole lot depends on how the question is phrased and how the answers are marked. There is a fair amount of willful idiocy on all sides towards the "where there's smoke there must be fire" nonsense. People are inclined to give credence to a sober questioner who is asking a series of serious questions that include a handful of wowzer items. I suspect that some of these polls are reverse opposition polling where irrational questions are phrased in reasonable terms and the results are tailored to indicate that certain groups are nutty. Virginia is a swing state and investing in making the Republicans look crazy is money well spent for a lot of political groups.

There is also a fair amount of belief that if the guy who beat you must be wrong in a variety of ways, it isn't just that you lost. Look at how many people fell for the BS about Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard. A fair number of lazy thinkers would rather discount their enemy than accept responsibility for their loss. In conversations with Republicans here in Oregon, I've heard a fair few people willing to fall for the “we wuz robbed!” indulgence.

Some of this is also distant reverberations of the Glorious Revolution of 1688. Back in the day, accusing a Stuart of infidelity and other tomfoolery regarding dynastic succession made all kinds of sense. For a lot of people (English, Irish, Dutch, and French) who were involved in that fiasco and whose descendants many of us are, the charge that the person in charge is not lawful by birth feels better than acknowledging that the guy in charge is legitimate, although a schmuck.

Records of any kind from forty years ago are crap compared to today. Computers and additional wealth provide us with dozens of authoritative indicators now that weren't around back then. Future historians will have problems sorting through document overload, but until automated data processing came into play, official papers were rare and valuable. Truth to be told, I have no idea where my original birth certificate is, I've used a replacement for quite some time. I moved from my birthplace three weeks after I was born and I've spent less than three days there since. But for people who are under thirty, stacks of documents are the norm and paucity is suspicious.

Finally, Obama's dad was more than a bit of jerk and his behavior in abandoning his wife and child and going back to Kenya in no way reflects well on his son. The way his mom dealt with that at the time and Obama the way glossed over that in his books poses some fundamental questions of character that were hardly scrutinized by the major media last year. That lack of scrutiny invites rumors and innuendo. If the press had been doing their job and running down every lead with serious analysis, there wouldn't be so many people looking for fire behind the smoke screen of Obama's personal history.

Of course, none of the above explanations matter, nothing excuses idiocy and insanity that loses elections to such corrupt individuals. Once the Supreme Court justice swears the individual in, he or she is the President of the United States. That is the deal and it does no good forging papers, wearing tinfoil hats, or otherwise indulging derangement. Failing sanity checks will always lose elections, except possibly in New Orleans. If we want responsible government instead of Chicago cronyism, we need to act like people who trusting with a vote would be a good plan.

Sober up Republicans; in Virginia and around the country. Obama is President. He may stink at the job because of his beliefs and his beholdings, but he is legitimately in office.

Due to Comment Spam, that function is withheld for present. If you want, send an email to: pslblog gmail com and I will resume the function.

In little over a year we've seen Barack Obama's supporters and friends go from the delightfully salacious “Obama Girl” to Osmethne rants like this:

“Every white woman I know is positively horrified.”

“Wait, that's not exactly true. It's more accurate to say that every thoughtful or liberal or intuitive or open-minded white woman I know worth her vagina monologue and her self-determination and two centuries of nonstop striving for equal rights and sexual freedom and exhaustive patriarchal unshackling is right now openly horrified, appalled at what the addition of shrill PTA hockey-mom Sarah Palin seems to have done for the soggy, comatose McCain campaign — that is, make it not merely remotely interesting and melodramatic, but aggressively hostile to, well, to all intelligent women everywhere.”

While I'm certain that the Ndebele tribe** in Zimbabwe has intelligent women, I rather doubt they are feeling a vice-like squeeze on their liberties and aspirations from the McCain-Palin campaign in Africa; at least in comparison to the grinding poverty and political oppression that Robert Mugabe's policies bring. Real people have real problems, and it appears that a lot of Barack Obama's supporters have real difficulty managing stress, confrontation, fact, perspective, and coherence. While I'm sure any number of McCain-PALIN! supporters have similar issues, they aren't the ones screaming like their hair is on fire all the time these days.

This election is not the end of the world. There are going to be difficult and perilous times ahead, regardless of who gets elected. Regrettably, one side in this election is making their candidate appear like he couldn't manage the stress of leadership in an online role-playing game, and they couldn't handle the stress of followership.

If Barack Obama wants to be serious about leading this country, he should take some time to start leading his supporters. Right now his campaign's efforts to “energize the base” look a lot more like they are trying to stampede cattle. While that is certainly exciting in a number of ways, it doesn't get you elected with a sustainable mandate.

Note: I created this blog to be more of a consultant's diary and less of a political opinion swamp. I consider this to be good management advice for the Obama campaign and its followers. While I'm certain it will be rancorously accepted, it is not offered with any hostility. Put down the cattle prods and look around. You have nothing to lose but the bullshit on your shoes.

*Second Note: I really wish this was a satire, but Mark Morford got paid money by a large media organization to lose his mind on print. Nobody at the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board looked up and stopped this from getting published.

**Third Note: I picked the Ndebele tribe in Zimbabwe with Robert Mugabe at random, please insert any of the following if it clears your head and helps you function: B'hai women in Iran with Ahmadinejad; Korean women in North Korea with Kim Jong Il, Miss Scalett in the Conservatory with Professor Plum.

1. No, Sarah Palin did not have a torrid love affair with GEN Petraeus while she was in Kuwait visiting AKNG troops.
2. No, Sarah Palin did not pull Saddam out of his spider hole while she was in Kuwait visiting AKNG troops.
3. No, Sarah Palin did not offer mooseburger (or USS Moosebrugger DD-980) to Kuwaiti sheiks while she was visiting AKNG troops.
4. No, Sarah Palin did not offer her services as a “dance hall girl” during the Klondike gold rush or the building of the Alaska pipeline.
5. No, Sarah Palin did not set any out-of-favor members of the Wasilla or Alaska government adrift on an ice floe to preserve the remainder of the tribe. (She might have thought about it from time to time.)
6. No, Sarah Palin is not Cher’s new stage name.
7. No, Sarah Palin did not kill a camel spider with her teeth while in Kuwait visiting AKNG troops.
8. No, Todd Palin did not father any of the Spears girls' children.
9. No, Sarah Palin did not agree to jello wrestle Oprah on the David Letterman Show, although the fruit baskets Dave sent were magnificent.
10. No, Sarah Palin does not volunteer to serve as the Alaska state executioner to break up the long winter nights. (That's what she has Todd for.)
11. No, Sarah Palin did not “kilt her a b'ar when she was only three.” (Rumors of her mother holding her up as an infant on Pride Rock to accept the fealty of all the animals have no video evidence to dismiss it.)
12. No, Sarah Palin did not hunt down and kill everybody with a picture of her in a bikini from her pageant days. (Most people destroyed the negatives of their own free will after the disappearances started.)
UPDATED:
13. No, Sarah Palin did not hold her first gubernatorial fund raiser at William Ayers house. (She also did not give him or Bernadette Dorn advice or aid in the Pentagon bombing. After all she was only 4 at the time.) Contributed by Kleindo.
14. No, Sarah and Todd did not become estranged between 2002-2006, causing her to follow Todd to L.A. for a reconciliation where a series of hair raising explosions led her to throw Hans Gruber off the thirty-second floor of the Nakatomi Towers. Nevertheless, actor Alan RIckman loathes her.
15. No, Sarah Palin is not tougher than Chuck Norris or a better fighter. Sarah Palin is just a better politician.
16. No, when Sarah Palin stares at the sun, the sun does not blink. The zero count of sunspots in the last month is proof of that.
17. No, Sarah Palin does not wear the skins of Hollywood liberals. (The plastic content caused unsightly chafing.)
18. No, Sarah Palin did not receive Botox injections. (She head butted Nancy Pelosi so hard that there was unavoidable transference.)
19. No, Sarah Palin is not having Bigfoot's baby. (though Charlie Gibson is sure to ask) Contributed by AVMAKO.
20. No, gazing directly into Sarah Palin's face will not cause you to turn to stone. Contributed by jpl
21. No, Govenor Palin did not field dress the creep at the Daily Kos who concocted the ridiculous rumor about Trig ... she thought about it, though. Contributed by jpl
22. No, Sarah Palin did not ask what the hunting season for camenbert was when she was first served camenbert appetizers at a lobbyist event, nor did she compare one to her father's brown bear burgers. Contributed by FrancisT
23. No, Sarah Palin does not shoot squirrels or rabbits with a Barrett 0.50 sniper rifle, she uses a 12-guage shotgun. Contributed by FrancisT Editor's note: Many squirrels and rabbits turn themselves in upon discovering that Sarah is hunting for them.
24. No, Sarah Palin has never claimed that Global Warming is God's punishment for tolerating gay sex and other immoral lifestyles. Contributed by FrancisT Editor's note: Sarah Palin is from Alaska, why would she think Global Warming is a punishment for ANYTHING?
25. No, Sarah Palin has never shot a lawyer in the face while hunting. As an experienced Alaskan big game hunter, she knows the value of the heart-lung shot to get the animal to bleed out to improve the quality of the meat.
26. No, Sarah Palin does not have a tattoo of a moose to commemorate her first hunt.
27. No, Sarah Palin has not been cruising Anchorage tattoo shops looking for somebody who can do a good Ahmadinejad likeness.
28. No, the FDA is not planning on approving "Vitamin Palin" for seniors. Test results show that 50% of all senior men develop "unforced gaffe disorder" when provided with Vitamin Palin.
29. No, Sarah Palin did not sign legislation to increase oil production and consumption to hasten climate change in a bid to enhance Alaska tourism by making it the new "carribean" hot spot. Contributed by Dave
30. No, Sarah Palin is not a Sith Lord. Contributed by Ziotic
31. No, Sarah Palin did not cancel Firefly. Contributed by Ziotic
32. No, Sarah Palin is not River Tam. It is worth noting no Reavers survived attacking Wassila while she lived there, though.
33. No, Wasilla is not pronounced with a trailing "eee" sound in native Alaskan, and No, that was not the cause of Obama's gaffe when he called Palin "the Mayor of Way Silly."Contributed by Dave
34. No, Sarah Palin did not attempt to ban "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" four years before it was published. Even if my own brother sends me an email claiming she did!
35. No, Sarah Palin did not sneak into North Korea to give Kim Jong Il a "hot shot" of insulin in 2003 so he would be replaced by a double. Rumors of a ninja-suited figure with heels have not been substantiated. Contributed by the one true SMOF by email
36. No, Sarah Palin didn't say she BELIEVED life begins at conception, but it's okay to abort it anyway. That was JOE BIDEN. Contributed by Original Pechanga
37. No, Sarah Palin does not nail the hides of old friends who disappoint her on her office wall. She just fires them.
38. No, Sara Palin did not tell corrupt officials in her state to "Go ahead, make my day" while pointing her .375 H&H rifle at them.
39. No, she's not a member of the Illuminati. Contributed by ginmar
40. No, here real son is not actually Prince William. Contributed by ginmar
41. No, she's a secret lesbian who wields some sadistic power over her husband. Contributed by ginmar
42. No, her husband does not have a thing for moose. Contributed by ginmar
43. No, she's not governor in name only. No, she does not have an advisor who's a grizzly. Contributed by ginmar
44. No, she's not Russian. Contributed by ginmar
45. No, she's not John McCain's daughter. Contributed by ginmar
46. No, she was never a prostitute. No, she does not have a 'black book.' Contributed by ginmar
47. No, she didn't kill Vince Foster. Contributed by ginmar
48. No, she does not own stock in the National Enquirer. Contributed by ginmar
49. No, Sarah Palin did not spend her college days playing heads-up NL Poker with the Unabomber. Contributed by horn
50. No, Sarah Palin is not a supreme being sent here by the Mondoshawan to operate an ancient weapon to protect the earth from the ultimate evil. Nevertheless, actor Bruce Willis likes her a lot.
51. No, there are no pictures of Sarah Palin wearing "thermal bandages".
52. No, Sarah Palin has never been a Scientologist. They found her too secure.

Thanks to Hugh Hewitt and Charlie Martin for their links.

Please share your preemptive dismissals in comments. (Of course I'm going to screen them.)

Sorry, spambot attacks closed comments on this thread.

I went to Autumn and Nathaniel's place to pick them up. She's an art student and he's in a band, typical 20-something Portlanders who otherwise wanted nothing to do with firearms. Nathaniel even refused the weapons he inherited from his grandfather, a decision he came to regret. In their little apartment were tools of music and art; higher achievements they wanted to concentrate on this summer, but were distracted by terror from a professional felon, instead.

The problem is her monster graduated from prison with advanced knowledge of beating the system, presumably as a way of staying in business. He doesn't appear to have a day job, cars come and go from his apartment all the time, he appears to own seven vehicles, most of which appear ready for a quick exit at any given time. It would be rash of me to accuse Jesse Gordan and Tina West of actually dealing in methamphetamines because they've already threatened me with legal action. Jesse's brother threatened me with something more last November, though.

I was in immediate fear for my life last year when Jesse and his brother had a fight that resulted in shots fired. It is hard to forget hiding in your front yard from a shotgun armed maniac driving through the streets of your neighborhood. It wasn't until last month that I even knew any of the particulars of that conflict that caught me unarmed trying to help 911 direct police to the homicidal criminal. I stayed unarmed because I did not know enough about the situation to feel certain I would stay out of jail if I left my house with a rifle.

Eight months later, Autumn and Nathaniel decided they couldn't afford not to have a rifle to be uncertain about. Bicycle bound, they needed a ride and expert advice on what to get to protect themselves with. Portland is a wonderful city in many ways, but you can only use public transportation to purchase firearms when there is a gun show. Because there wasn't a gun show, and because the need was so urgent, my recommendations were limited. In the end, I selected a No.4 Mk.1 .303 British Enfield rifle. Right now 90% of the people who think they know weapons are objecting to my choice.

Allow me to explain. The No.4 Mk. 1 Enfield is cheap, rugged, easy to teach, accurate, and available. In less than an hour Autumn and Nathaniel were in my basement scrubbing the filth of neglect out of their weapon and she was getting to know how a bolt action rifle worked. There are other weapons that might be more perfect in some fantasy scenario. I am certain that I taught a skinny art student enough that she can stop a threat with this weapon in the environment she faces. This is the same rifle I taught Michael Totten to move and shoot with before he went to Iraq with me last year. Something else might be more perfect, the Enfield was available and it will work.

For the last month Autumn and Nathaniel survived as best they could, waiting for a judge to rule on a permanent restraining order that would put Jesse Gordon and Tina Wood out of their life forever. Friday the judge decided that their case had insufficient merit. It remains to be seen if the eviction will go through. Last night Autumn called me again in tears, in fear for her life. She can't find a place to move to, all the rentals available are twice the price of her current apartment, and most of them will throw her out if they can sell it. Jesse and his friends are open in their intimidation, unconcerned with the police now they know they can get away with more.

I really don't want this to end in violence. The paroled felon is so much better prepared to deal on those terms. When the police hauled Jesse Gordon off last month on parole violations, they couldn't confiscate the box of firearms they found in his apartment; and they could only warn him about the sword collection. The fear is present and the law proved itself an illusion of security. For a life in fear, a rifle is the only reality that counts.

Sometimes playing in traffic is worth the risk. At dawn on a perfectly clear summer morning, I went out around Portland and took pictures. This something I meant to do for over a decade, and now I have a camera and the opportunity. There were a number of times I wished I had a fish-eye lens and other times I wished I had a longer lens, but the Canon 24-70 f2.8L did just fine on my EOS 40D.

Thanks to LGF for the link

UPDATED:

More available on request...

Oregon’s (pronounced Or-A-GONE by twits) unique vote-by-mail system is made possible by a strong culture of independence. In the last decade voters have voted overwhelmingly for strong death with dignity and against same sex marriages, issues on opposite ends of the liberal-conservative divide. Most tellingly, Oregon voters get irritated over issues that are rammed down their throats in undemocratic ways. In the last year Portland Mayor Tom Potter’s attempt to change by fiat the name of Interstate Avenue to honor Cesar Chavez without a vote was derailed by community activism. The kinds of voter fraud rampant in Wisconsin and Illinois in 2004 are much less tolerated here because political machines would be ground up by irritated voters. The initiative and recall were invented in Oregon, and citizens here hate getting their power subverted by authorities.

How this will play out for “anointed” Democratic nominee Barack Obama remains to be seen. The black community in Oregon is less than 5%, smaller than the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender community that has been largely ignored by the Obama campaign. Barack Obama has yet to be interviewed by a gay newspaper (of which Portland has two), an omission that could be costly in Oregon’s thriving GLBT community.

Read the rest on Pajamas Media.

Having read all eight paragraphs of this op-ed and its addenda, a few printable comments seem called for. The story of the Munich Conference of 1938 is not the story appeasement. The story of appeasement, in Europe begins with the failure to enforce the disarmament clauses of The Versailles Treaty against Weimar Germany. Once Hitler had come to power we have the failure to prevent German rearmament, the Anglo-German Naval Agreement, the lack of affective opposition to the Italian conquest of Abyssinia, the Peace Ballot of 1935, the remilitarization of the Rhineland, the lack of action following the attempted coup in Austria, the failure to act after the assassination of the primer of Austria, the failure to act before or after the annexation of Austria, the ineffective response to the Italian and German intervention in the Spanish Civil War and then there was Munich. Hitler had made his goals clear in word and deed since his emergence in 1920 but his speeches, his actions and the complete failure of any concessions to change his goals were all ignored and Czechoslovakia was betrayed. Was it ‘unreasonable’ to hope that eighteen years of speeches and actions might have been taken into account? It is a cruel irony that opposition at almost any of these points might have caused Hitler’s fall from power and prevented World War II. Indeed, the German General Staff attempted to get the British and French to block Hitler at Munich so they could remove him from power. It would be nice to think that the German occupation of what remained of Czechoslovakia ended appeasement but this was not the case. Britain and France did not meet their commitments to defend what was left of the Czech state. During the Polish crisis of September of 1939 the cry went up, ‘do you want our boys dying for Danzig?’ Chamberlain, three days after German tanks rolled into Poland remarked, “Up to the very last it would have been quite possible to have arranged a peaceful and honourable settlement between Germany and Poland.”

In Asia the record of the attempts to appease Imperial Japan is just as lengthy and just as bleak.

Now can we learn anything from this beyond, Hitler was a bad man? There are four fairly obvious lessons.

* You can not negotiate reasonably with someone who is not prepared to be reasonable.
* What people say they want is at least an indicator of what they will attempt to do.
* What people have done in the past is a predictor of what they may do in the future.
* Concessions mistaken for weakness make it harder, not easier, to negotiate.

Maybe these points have no use in understanding how you must think about negotiations with Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran, but I have the feeling that few people other than Mr. Ramsey will find this to be the case.

Since the Seattle Times does not have the courage of their own convictions enough to post fact that is contrary to their fantasy, I sought permission to post his remarks here.

">

UPDATE: Thanks to Michelle Malkin and Rand Sindberg for their kind links.