Author: David

Over-educated Curmudgeon, Bit-Bucket Tuner and Budding Brewmeister.
Posted on

Home Is Where the Heart Is

In the sixty-*mumble* years of my short, short life, I’ve lived in quite a few places west of the Mississippi (one, just barelywest, but I have only vague recollections of my family’s sojourn in St. Louis) and traveled/visited to/in all the other lower 48 as well as other places outside our borders. Some have felt “home-ish” for a while, but when we moved to America’s Third World County™ a couple of decades ago, it felt like coming home.

First, the town and area we moved to had been buried in my unconscious since childhood by association with our “Uncle Hubert” (“adopted” uncle, lifelong friend of my maternal grandfather) who was from here, and whose grave is actually only about an eighth of a mile from our house. Automatic positive associations, since Uncle Hubert was a classy, classy guy who poured out strength, humility, honor and kindness.

Then, good Lord it’s beautiful here! Oh, it’s not the grandeur of the Rockies or the stunningly unique offerings of Yellowstone or suchlike. No, it’s a quieter, older beauty. A “rocks and rills and forested hills” kind of beauty. Get out and get “lost” on the back roads of the county: a fav activity of mine. (No, I don’t actually get lost. I know where the cardinal directions are and have a compass or three for seriously “dark and stormy nights” and whatever. I said “compass” not “GPS.” GPS is for subliterate wusses.) Still, the geographic and botanical variations are many and pretty darned amazing.

And the people. Sure, there are about as many dumbasses, jackasses and self-made morons as one might expect to find in any population, by normal distribution. But those are limited in effect and practice by an ethos of hard work, respect for common sense and a firm adherence by most of the folks to an attitude best characterized by, “your business ends where my nose begins. . . and vice versa.” “edumacation” levels are not what one might find in more urban areas, and, frankly, that is a good thing overall. (Most “highly educated” persons are self-made idiots, and I say that as a highly-educated idiot. :-)) Can-do? Yeh, third world county folks can.

And did someone say, “diversity”? We have the best and worst of that here, too, and it’s. . . working out for the most art (with some fear and trembling at times, but still working out). Somalis, Pacific Islanders (a couple of different groups, from different island groups, no less!), Moldavans, Germans, Vietnamese, Hmong, and quite a few more (including *sigh* more than a few alien invaders from South of the border). All of them seem, except for the Somalis, to be working hard at assimilating and becoming Americans (the illegals harder than some, though illegitimately). Culture clashes are almost. . . well, never.

And then there are the other demographics: townies and hill/country/”piney woods” folks. Those groups do overlap, but my fav folk are the folks I meet on back county roads, rednecks, hillbillies, even a few almost hermit squatters. Are some of ’em paranoid separatist “militia” folks? Yep. And almost all of them are good people, too, if a wee tad extreme in some views even for my taste.

Feels like home. Very classically conservative politically and socially, for the most part. That means, of course, that, applying the nose-business rule, that folks are allowed to be different and not generally forced into conformity, as in more and more subsets of society. Conformation to the norm of “if it ain’t your business, butt out” lifestyle is a type of conformity I can live with gladly.

Another Good Thing: Friction? Strong disagreements? Argument? Yeh, but when you can COUNT on most folks being armed, those things are usually dealt with better than in other places. Crime? Well, some, but home invasions, muggings, car jackings and suchlike? See above re: armed citizenry. Do more folks lock their doors in America’s Third World County than when we first moved here? Yeh, but the powers that be decided to put an Interstate highway through our county, and there went that tradition. No,seriously. Oh, there are other “benefits” of civilization that our rulers have foisted off on us that have contributed, but I’ll let the increased traffic stand in for them all.

Is America’s Third World County™ being brought slowly into the late 20th Century (it’ll be a while before the 21st Century begins its invasion here *heh*)? Yeh, but there is still a remnant of a better life here, and it’s home.

And, on top of all that, here is where my Wonder Woman lives, and that would trump anything else, anyway. 😉

Posted on

Reminder: Two Kinds of Muslims

1. Dishonest Muslims. These fall into two classes: a.) those who are practicing “holy deception” (taqiyya and kitman) to subvert the dar al harb and b.) those who simply lie about being Muslims for cultural or personal safety reasons.

2. Honest Muslims. These cover a short range from enablers of jihad (supplying money,personnel, matériel, [im]”moral” support, etc.) to those who actually open wage jihad against the dar al harb. (And another reminder: peaceful, “inner jihad” is BS.)

Thatisall.

And do remember:

“. . .the best thing about the inside of a terrorist’s mind was a 185-grain 10mm hollow-point bullet entering at high speed.”–Dink Chavez (Character in Tom Clancy’s “Rainbow Six”)

No, that is not all. How in the world did you think it would be, hmmm? 😉

Muslims and Muslim apologists who use “holy deception” (“taqiyya” or “holy lies” and “kitman” which is one-sided, deliberately deceptive propaganda) to gull stupid “unbelievers” into accepting their statements that Islam is a “religion of peace” (but, of course it is, if one thinks of “peace” as either a garden on the unprotected surface of the Moon or one of the circles of Hell) are, of course, type 1.a. Muslims. One of their fav techniques is to cite verses from the Koran that seem to implor even openly direct!–good intentions toward unbelievers. These verses are all from Mohamed’s early period in Mecca, but once he was kicked out of Mecca, his message, his words as well as his open behavior, underwent a dramatic transformation into a message advocating murder, pillage, rape, torture and slavery for unbelievers. And it is these later proclamations that are the real Islam, for,

2:106 “Whatever of Our revelations We repeal or cause to be forgotten, We will replace them with something superior or comparable. Do you not know that Allah has power over all things? Do you not know that Allah reigns sovereign over the heavens and earth and besides Him you have no protector or helper? Would you question your messenger [Mohamed] as Moses was questioned in his time? Those who exchange their faith for disbelief have gone astray from the right path.”

Remember that the next time someone quotes the early, Mecca-period,

Sura 2:256 “2:256: “There is no compulsion in religion.” (

A very small snippet that does not really reflect the context, but that’s the way “kitman” works.

)
. . .that later Mohamed said many, many things like this, abrogating his earlier “peaceful” verses:

Sura 9:29-33 “Make war upon such of those to whom the scriptures have been given as believe not in Allah. . . ”

Sura 8.12 “Remember thy lord has inspired the angels with the message. Give firmness to the believers and instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers. Smite them above their necks and smite the fingertips of them.”

Sura 9.5 “When the sacred months have passed, kill the idolaters wherever you find them.”

Sura 47.4 “When you encounter the unbelievers, Strike off their heads. Until you have made a wide slaughter among them tie up the remaining captives.”

Go ahead, examine all the above in context.

Posted on

Just Stop It

Sometimes, I just can’t stop myself. No, wait. Honestly, I could; I just don’t want to.

A recent SPAM comment began,

I know this if off topic but I’m looking into starting my own
blog and was curious what all is needed to get setup?

The first thing I’d do, were I you, is to enroll in a remedial English course. “Setup” is a noun that you used in place of the verb phrase, “set up.” Stop it. Then, learn to proofread your crap. “I know if this is off topic” is nonsense. Stop it.

Better yet, words? Stop using them, mmmK? Just stop it.

Posted on

Apples to Horseshoes

And other silly arguments.

FarceBook is so very educational that it’s hard to look away. It’s a train wreck composed of American education in collision with technological enabling. I almost despise myself for rubbernecking. Almost.

Straw man arguments? Check.

Appeal to emotion? Check.

Rampant illiteracy cloaked in an unwarranted, unassailable belief in one’s sterling education and wide-ranging grasp of facts? Check.

Non causa pro causa and ad hominem attacks wielded with assurance? Check.

Inigo Montoya wearing a perpetually puzzled look? (“You keep using that word. . . “) Check.

The Great Unwashed constantly mistaking correlation with causation? Check.

Invective mistaken for cogent argument? Check. (I particularly love shout-downs composed of “Racist!” and “Xenophobe!” as “winning arguments”. *head-desk* And such folks never even realize that anyone with more active brain cells than three-day-dead road kill sees ’em as idiot losers.)

Equating manatees and screwdrivers? Well, I’ve not seen this one in EXACTLY those terms, but I’ve seen analogs too many times to count.

Educational, I suppose. But still a train wreck. But then, that’s pretty much been the Internet since before the interwebs.

Posted on

Javascript Cookies™

Lo! these many years ago, I came up with this recipe (at an early version of twc). Good eats. I was feeling a wee tad “nibbly” one fine Saturday and hadn’t yet had my requisite dose of coffee, so I combined the two. BTW, make these a little more than double-sized, cool well and then slap a scoop of ice cream between two of them Re-chill, then serve. Sweet. Javascript Ice Cream Cookie Sandwiches™.

Javascript Cookies™
Recipe Type: Cookie
Cuisine: Javahead
Author: David
Perfect snack food for Javaheads.
Ingredients
  • Javascript Cookies™ (perfect for a late night computer activity snack ;-))
  • Ingredients:
  • •2 cups all-purpose flour
  • •1/3 cup finely ground coffee powder*
  • •1/2 teaspoon baking powder
  • •1/2 teaspoon salt
  • •2 sticks (1 cup) unsalted butter, softened**
  • •2/3 cup granulated sugar
  • •1 large egg
  • •1 teaspoon vanilla
  • •5 oz semi-sweet chocolate chips (or chop your own from your fav semi-sweet chocolate)
  • •1/2 cup hazelnuts or sliced almonds, finely chopped
  • •1 1/2 cups confectioners’ sugar for coating
Instructions
  1. Whisk together flour, coffee powder, baking powder, and salt in a bowl until combined.
  2. Beat together butter and granulated sugar in a large bowl with an electric mixer at medium-high speed (or get movin’ with your wire whisk!) until pale and fluffy, about 2 minutes in a stand mixer or 4 minutes with a handheld. Add egg and vanilla, beating until combined. Reduce speed to low, then add flour mixture and mix until combined well. Add chocolate and nuts and mix until just combined. Cover bowl with plastic wrap and chill dough until firm, about 30 minutes.
  3. Put oven racks in upper and lower thirds of oven and preheat oven to 325°F.
  4. Roll 1 tablespoon of dough into a 1-inch ball, then flatten slightly with palm of your hand to form a 1/3-inch-thick disk and coat with confectioners sugar. Make more cookies in same manner, arranging them 2 inches apart on ungreased baking sheets.
  5. OK, that was the original recipe directions. this is easier, and the cookies taste just as good. Put 1/2 cup of confectioners sugar in a bowl (I used a soup bowl/LARGE mug with a handle). Drop the appropriate amount of dough in the bowl and swirl the bowl to roll it around. Pick the doughballs up and flatten them onto the ungreased baking sheets. No (or less) messy hands, quicker and easier.
  6. Bake cookies, switching position of sheets halfway through baking, until they puff up and tops crack slightly, 8 to 10 minutes total, then transfer with a metal spatula to racks to cool completely. Recoat cookies with confectioners sugar, if you want (they’re sweet enough for me without the extra, but I have one tester who likes ’em that way). Oven times may vary. Add time if you make your cookies larger, of course.
  7. Too much dough? As chocolate/chocolate chip it refrigerates well for a short time. I’ll keep some of this dough around for a couple of days, then bake some cookies and see how it lasts.

 

*coffee powder: either from your fav ground coffee or fav whole beans (preferred); grind in a blade or burr coffee grinder until a fine, powdery consistency. If using a blade grinder, grind in bursts, as the coffee may overheat, especially if you’re grinding from whole beans, before becoming powdery.

BTW, I brought this forward from the deep, dark recesses of the shadow of twc’s past just because. Because my youngest nephew is getting married in June and his mom, my older sis, asked for a few of my fav recipes, and. . . he and his bride-to-be are both Javaheads. So, win-win-win-win. He and his lovely bride-to-be get a delish Javahead treat, I have this recipe brought forward (and updated a wee tad) and you, dear reader (oh, my, is it just one, now? *heh*) get to share in the delights of Javascript Cookies™.

Posted on

“Liberalism is a philosophy of consolation for Western civilization as it commits suicide.” — James Burnham

Re-“printing” this from January 20th, 2010.

It’s interesting to me that simple common sense is so completely forsaken that such things as this can even gain an audience in a Western society:

Muslim police say Islam not to blame for terror attacks

Muslim police officers have rebelled openly against the [British] Government’s anti-terrorism strategy, warning that it is an “affront to British values” which threatens to trigger ethnic unrest.

The plain fact of the matter is that so-called “radical” Muslims are at the dead solid center of Islam. It is those vanishingly few genuine “moderates” who are apostate Muslims, heretics, deniers of Islam and its prophet, the Butcher of Medina, and his diktat of hate, intolerance and jihad against any who refuse to embrace his cult. Those who are genuine followers of Mohamed are either open jihadists or enablers pretending to be “moderates” while practicing al taqiyah and acting as enablers for their openly jihadist brothers in arms.

Anyone who can allow such behavior as that linked above by police officers in a Western society is simply an active participant in societal sabotage, an enemy of the West and of human rights, decency and honesty.

h.t. Atlas Shrugs

Slight update:

Note another practice permitted–yea! encouraged–by the “prophet” that closely resembles the outright lying that characterizes taqiyyah is the Muslim practice of kitman. Kitman is quite similar to the most common lies told us by politicians, academicians and Mass MEdia Podpeople here in the West. It is lying by omission, telling a part of the truth in such a way as to remain “factual” while still committing a lie. Decent people in the West find such behavior reprehensible, but MOhamed taught such behavior as being not just permissible but in many cases desirable. Most such cases with Muslims are, of course, desirable when dealing with non-Muslims (although Mohamed also allowed lying to fellow Muslims in some cases. Try to get a Muslim to admit that).

One place kitman and taqiyyah are most effective in bamboozling stupid people in the West is on the very nature if Islam, “the religion of peace”. Of course, the “peace” of Islam is simply the religious, social, cultural, legal, and behavioral submission of a slave to a master, but Islamic apologists don’t want to (and so do not) go there, and roundly condemn anyone who does (because truth is anathema to these scum). Regularly cited by these liars are the so-called “peaceful verses” of the Koran (yeh, yeh, Islamic apologists have insisted that “Qu’ran” is more respectful. Eat my shorts.). What they do not want you to know is that not only are the so-called “peaceful verses” outnumbered at about 7-3 by the verses advocating violence, but that Mohamed’s own exegetical principle, which scholars call “abrogation,” dictates that any “apparent” conflict between his sayings is to be resolved by a saying uttered later taking precedence, abrogating an earlier, conflicting saying. Interestingly enough, the “peaceful verses” came early in Mohamed’s career as a con man, while the verses advocating violence against unbelievers came later.

That is why I hold the opinion that a more accurate descriptive of Islam is “Islam: Hate Cult.”

Surrender to Islam on any front by the West is stupid, immoral and suicidal.

Have you ever had a Muslim “friend”? If so, only one of two things obtained:

1. The Muslim who was your friend was an apostate or
2. The Muslim who was your “friend” deceived you, because Mohamed was adamant that his followers could not have friends who were unbelievers, and it is universal Islamic doctrine that his words are eternal, unchangeable, inerrant and infallible. (Koran 5:51, 5:80, 3:28, 3:118 and many others.)

Posted on

Now and then. . .

. . .our cat goes on a binge of sticking his butt in my face. What’s up with that, anyway? I TELL him, “Hey! I don’t like your a$$ in my face!” but all the glare he gives me seems to say in return is, “Why not? I like it just fine.”

*sigh* Cats. Can’t live with ’em, can’t find a good Chinese recipe.

Posted on

Why Should One Do One’s OWN “Homework”?

Almost daily, online, in “the real world,” in books and other media, I encounter folks making assertions based solely because someone else they accepted as authoritative said such and so.

Frequently “such and so” ain’t necessarily so. . . and the authority depended upon knows it full well.

Do your own homework.

I used to research topics by seeking out voices people I trusted about other things recognized as authoritative. Now, those “voices” could be texts by multiple authors, single authors, institutional proclamations or whatever, but even then, I always at least performed a rough “gut check” concerning what was said.

That was not enough.

Example:

Late on, though in early young adulthood, I began to see strange things in an acclaimed and widely accepted compilation of various ancient texts into one text likely to be “closest” to original source texts available only in fragments, performed by widely-recognized and respected historical-literary-linguistic critics and translators. The strange thing I noticed was that pieces of texts selected from various manuscripts sometimes did not follow, not even at all closely, the principles of historical-literary-linguistic criticism that the compilers clearly claimed to use in compilation. In fact, whole sentences, paragraphs, passages of what the compilers claimed to be the oldest, most reliable texts available were sliced and diced, with bits and pieces of manuscripts and passages the compilers themselves labeled as less reliable!

“Why?” I asked myself. Now, what I did in this particular case ran close to an ad hominem fallacy, but I believe I skirted that fallacy just to the side of legitimacy. What did I do in this case? I read the compilers’ own statements about their personal beliefs and, lo and behold! those beliefs were always reflected in the passages where they violated their own criteria!

Now, does this completely invalidate their work? No. I still use the text they compiled, but I do so fully aware of its flaws and fully aware of the legitimate readings of the text that simply disagree with the compilers’ own biases. I can, and do, make my own assessment of what texts are valid using both the compilers’ strict guidelines (which they asserted–falsely–that they followed) and older and newer scholarship to guide my decisions.

Now, is this an earth-shattering issue? For some, yes. For me, no. I do however much refer honesty in such things, and so my respect for the work of these scholars is seriously diminished, and as a result, I always squint a bit with a skeptic’s eye when I examine their work. Rightly so, I believe.

I know a great many others who simply and blindly and uncritically accept their work as “gospel”–the last word on the subject. They’ll do no serious harm, but I believe they’d do far, far more good were they to DO THEIR OWN HOMEWORK!

And so it is in life in general. Uncritically accept as “gospel” whatever a teacher, Mass MEdia Podperson, preacher, politician or even doctor tells me? No, never. I examine what they write/say and try to verify their facts and reasoning. Actually, more useful, I’ve recently discovered, is to use a principal scientific principle and attempt to falsify their message. If I cannot and instead find verification, I can at least provisionally work forward using the information as a basis for my own acts. If, however, their assertions/report is falsifiable by me, using the best sources I can discover, then I can place those assertions in the circular file. If falsification is rock solid (pertinent, verifiable text, audio or video that falsifies, along with sound reasoning), then that teacher, Mass MEdia Podperson, preacher, politician or even doctor really, really ought to recant, because if not, as far as I’m concerned, they’re toast.

There you have it: a non-rigorous proposal, with anecdotal commentary, for why one ought to do one’s own homework, especially before opening one’s mouth to provide proof of one’s status as a fool.

Just sayin’.