Posts

Posted on

A Chillingly Reasonable Conspiracy Theory

A comment at The Belmont Club post, “Ebola in America,” is chilling in the manner it parses federal “incompetence.” Or maybe federal “incompetence” really is, à la John Ringo’s “The Last Centurion”–genuine institutional and political stupidity. You decide.

Ebola In America

From the comments to the post linked above:

“1) Responding to epidemics/pandemics is NOT something that has never come up before. The very fact that we are here, with our pre-Ebola life expectancies, is based on the ability of medical science to respond to disease outbreaks.

“2) The standard first response, backed by millennia of successful experience, is isolation of the infected community/individuals with quarantine for those who are suspected and at risk.

“3) The deliberate, considered, and premeditated response of Federal agencies across the board has been to bring as many disease vectors into this country as they possibly can, to forcibly prevent them from being medically screened, to scatter them throughout the country, and to actively impede state and local health authorities from responding to any disease outbreaks triggered.

“We now have Ebola being spread by government actions within our borders. We now have previously eradicated TB being spread by government action within our borders, except now drug resistant. We now have an epidemic enterovirus all over the country attacking children, now killing them, and mutating into a form of polio which we had eradicated within our borders. We now have Dengue Fever spreading within this country, which has not been here in any volume for a century.

“And all of it spread in the last couple of years with the help of all agencies of the Federal government.

“This is a level of ‘incompetence’ that cannot be blamed on one or two individuals. It crosses several Cabinet level departments with them working together for a common result. Which we are seeing now. That level of “incompetence” is in fact planning and premeditation. The odds of multiple departments committing reinforcing acts to bring this result by pure chance are beyond credibility. Especially, since not one of them are responding to the breaking reality with changed behavior.

“The proper domestic response to the initial outbreak would have been stopping all direct flights between the US and the affected countries, blocking entry of anyone who has been in those countries until they can prove that they have been outside those countries for 30 days, the cancellation of student and tourist visas for people from those countries, and [oh, yes] securing our borders so that anyone who comes in is screened for health and legal status. Noting that 15% of the illegal invaders who cross our deliberately-erased-by-the-Federal-government are NOT from Mexico, Central, or South America. And that from January-August this year 71 nationals from the Ebola infected countries were caught at the former border. And that we only catch a small percentage of those crossing.

“I would also note that we have done the travel restrictions relatively recently for H1N1 flu. This is not breaking new ground. It is deliberate avoidance of proper epidemiological procedure.

“Prediction: sometime soon, the Federal government will institute movement and quarantine controls inside the country for US citizens only. The national borders will remain wide open. Foreigners, legal or invaders, will be allowed to move as they please. And all anti-discrimination laws will be firmly enforced.

“I have expressed doubts about a real election in November. This reinforces those doubts.

“And it would not be a bad thing for those that can to prepare for a period of self-imposed isolation, and self-defense, during it.”–Subotai Bahadur

It sure seems to be a good fit for King Putz’s consistent implementation of Cloward-Pivens, doesn’t it?

In closing, competing aphorisms:

“Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action.”–Ian Flemming

and

“Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”–attributed to Napoleon

So, which is it? Or, is it essentially both: stupid malice?

Update: While considering the above, add this into your ponderings:

Immigration Expert: Obama Admin Responsible for Letting Ebola Patient into U.S.

Perhaps we should quarantine all US Ebola patients in the WH–along with the “foist” family

Posted on

Changing Tastes

It’s been a relatively long journey getting to the point where I enjoy my coffee with a little sweetener of some kind. I think it just brightens it a wee bit and aids some of the high notes, but I could just be fooling myself.

The thing is, I have also come to dislike sucrose. So, what to do.

Honey won’t do. It adds a flavor I find doesn’t agree with my coffee preferences.

“Stevia”? Oh, please-ia, no. It’s sort of OK in cold things, but coffee? Nuh-uh.

Aspartame? Emphatically no! That stuff’s just nasty!

Saccharin? In its calcium and potassium salts formulations, it’s not half bad. Sort of almost OK. Will do in a pinch, though it seems to add a slightly bitter aftertaste, in my mouth.

Sucralose? The recent Italian study that found a “high” incidence of leukemia in cancer-prone mice when they were fed “varying” (read, “varying excessively high”) doses of sucralose from birth doesn’t concern me. IMO, from what I could see from the abstract and what little other material from the study was freely available, the “researchers” should be flogged, tarred, feathered and run out of whatever town they seek to dwell in. JMO, of course. YMMV. But as to its use in coffee (an anti-carcinogenic beverage :-)), it is just about right, IMO. It’s sweet in hot stuff, doesn’t actually do anything to cancel out the lovely acidic nip of coffee, and has a “mouth” that approximates sucrose without the offensive stickiness. High/flowery notes in the coffee seem more pronounced with its use. Sucralose wins the race.

When I want to be really fancy-schmancy, I add some heavy cream (NO “CREAMER” EVER!!! *gagamaggot*), sprinkle a bit of ground cinnamon on top (or use a cinnamon “stick” as a stirer), froth it with a whisk, and drink up.

Lovely.

Sidebar:

A bonus? I like the fact that sucralose was discovered/invented by a guy who was trying to create a new insecticide. He noticed that while the bugs fed sucralose were dying, it was taking a really, really long time. More research. Nope. The insects were not being poisoned. They were dying of starvation, because they ate the super-sweet sucralose preferentially, avoiding other, nutritious, foods.

As a result, I also use sucralose in my own “insect powder” devised of sucralose, a very wee tad of cornstarch and boric acid, whirred together in a food processor. Kills crawling insects effectively and is much, much safer to use than most commercial preparations.

Posted on

Gripe #3,286,169 (But other than that, life’s juuuuust fine. . . )

Some of this might be a bit repetitious, but since those who need to read these gripes just AREN’T PAYING ATTENTION*, here ya go:

I’d like to put “cross hair” in my crosshairs, along with “on to” misused in place of “onto,” and, conversely, any number of other misused adjectives and adverbs people use in place of the adjective-noun phrase they are misused in place of: “backseat” and “backyard” instead of “back seat” and “back yard,” and “anyone” and “anything” for “any one” and “any thing,” for but a few examples of misuses common to people whose verbal vocabulary has far outstripped their subliterate written vocabulary.

Thatisall. For now. . .

*Just like such people paid no attention in English classes, and just like their so-called English (or, more likely nowadays, “language arts” *gagamaggot*) teachers likely paid no attention in THEIR classes, from all indications.

And yes, I know the statement immediately above is completely unacceptable syntax in formal, or even business, writing. I DGARA. At least it contains no misused words, the subject of this gripe.

Posted on

I Wouldn’t Exactly Shout “Crucify Him!”

. . .though his embrace of the “messiah” title a few years ago might make that seem appropriate, and I suppose *sigh* that drawing and quartering are right out the window (that pesky Eighth Amendment), but. . .

IF the outbreaks of enterovirus sweeping the country can be and are traced back to illegals encouraged to enter and allowed to stay by executive action in violation of immigration law, then wouldn’t it be a Good Thing for suit to be brought by the various states (and individuals; class action, perhaps) affected against the administration seeking relief from damages? And would it not be just and proper to press for the voiding of qualified immunity for individuals whose ILLEGAL actions led to the outbreak (if the above linkage could be demonstrated) in order that they might be held personally responsible and punitive damages sought against them as individuals, all the way to the White House?

These suits could then be followed by prison and terms on chain gangs making little rocks from big ones. For life. In lieu of execution for treason.

Flogging, tarring and feathering would just be icing on the cake.

Posted on

Evil Is as Evil Does

I’m once again questioning my FarceBook participation.

Stopping Zuckerberg’s ‘terrorism network’

From the link:

What are the reasons Facebook allowed the “Third Intifada Page” to remain online for so long while people were dying? The truth is simple: Zuckerberg is more concerned with increasing viewership and participation in the Middle East and elsewhere for his personal financial gain by increasing the value of any future public offering of shares than he is concerned with saving peoples’ lives. To Zuckerberg, if saving lives decreases viewership, he will have no part in it. Zuckerberg has become well aware that furthering and allowing terrorist death threats to remain on Facebook increases readership, which boosts the value of his shares. Facebook’s commercial objective has also obviously been to raise its user base to boost Facebook’s profits, and he will stop at nothing to make it happen.

Posted on

Just Another Gripe

It’s always pretty easy to tell when an author (and his proofreader(s) and editor) has a weak vocabulary, usually based on a verbal vocabulary, often misheard and spoken by others who have weak vocabularies. Example? Sure, here’s one:

“Tag him?” I felt a laugh rising from within and I let it slip. “Is that a crude aphorism [sic] for sex?”

The word the subliterate author was groping for that his subliterate proofreader(s) and editor were just as ignorant of was “euphemism.”

Posted on

Only a P-Sych-Ologist Would Be Capable of Out-Crazying Stacy McCain

But p-sychs try, day in and day out to be crazier than any sane person can imagine. . . and all too often succeed (witness the DSM in all its deteriorata). Stacy McCain’s latest diatribe against the stupidities of contemporary feminism includes this brilliant observation:

While I will stop short of saying that the entire field of psychology is an outright scam, it is not always easy to tell the difference between psychology and a three-card monte hustle. Perhaps a couple of weeks of therapeutic sessions could help me overcome my resentment of pretentious snobs and Ivy League assholes, except that my resentment of them is entirely rational. These snobs and assholes are determined to destroy everything good and decent in American life, and every honest and intelligent citizen ought to be fighting to stop them, while there is still anything in this country worth fighting to save.

Amen. Preach on, brother.

Posted on

Mediacom: Sucking Dead Bunnies Through a Straw Sideways (and Spewing Them Out on Customers)

Well, it’s now official. Mediacom sucks dead bunnies through a straw. Sideways. It doesn’t really affect me so much, because the Internet service is mostly OK, but the channel listings have been culled to the point that the already sparse selection of channels with something frequently _nearly_ worth watching is even smaller, while propaganda from CSPAN has tripled and a number of offensive holy roller crap channels that approach (or embrace) heresy have been added.

For nearly 20 years, the number of channels has varied very little–a few added here and there over the years, but not all that many. Suddenly, although our TV scan finds almost the same number of channels, only about 1/3 the raw number still display, the channels that do are very, very different in most cases (and complete and utter crap in those cases).

Unfortunately, the shows my Wonder Woman enjoys are not available (or not *cough* legitimately *cough* available) on the web, except through some sort of paywall, but it may come to excising the TV charges from our “service” and doing the paywall crap, just to get away from Mediacom’s disgusting schemes.

Posted on

I Knew Better. . .

But I decided to check out Saturday evening television.

First, commercials. LG apparently has a target demographic defined by idiocy. Latest LG phone commercial touts its ability to take great “pichers”. Not even “pitchers,” just “pichers.”

*gagamaggot*

Then, of course, since OTA reception here is. . . grainy and spotty to non-existent on both channels that are available OTA. . . cable. And what has Mediacom decided to do this month? “Improve” our service by moving channels all over the place and “improving” delivery of some channels to make the picture grainy to the point of almost unwatchable (but only channels we happen to find offer a few moderately interesting shows).

And then. . . the only even minimally bearable viewing offered tonight is reruns of Big Bang Theory.

Fortunately, I have plenty of books to read.