Mike's Home Page

A Song!
Mar 15, 201611:13PM

Category: General

Chris Dow came up with this catchy tune in response to the term "Trumpeteers."

Who's the leader of the club that hates our whole country? D-O-N---A-L-D---T-R-U-M-P!

Come along and join the club that's filled with bigotry.




Forever let us hold our hands up high! HEIL HEIL HEIL!

This needs some more work.

I told my friends this needed to be a thing.

Dick Evans came up with this script:


This is Old Spice, this is New Spice, These are the Spice girls (BANG BANG BANG) - That's Splatter Art! Old Spice!

This is me offending you with out deodorant. This is me doing the exact same thing with deodorant on! Guess where.

This is me on a horse that's now a Unicorn, this is me having my way with the unicorn... actually that's it. Old Spice


Now someone needs to film it.


You can get a free sampler at the above URL, and the complete book will have my story, "The Digital Kid."

We're trying for 2113 pre-orders, for the symmetry.

Several of us were having a nice, friendly sargasm when this person stopped by to tell all of us she knows more about us than we do, what horrible people we are, and why can't we be just like her ideal?

We declined the invitation.


Wyman Cooke shared Sean Faircloth's photo — with Michael Z. Williamson and Tad Williams.

Unless Vermin Supreme wins, in which case it'll be The First Outright Lunitic President.




 George Avery I would complain about the insult if I were a flesh-eating lizard person

 Patrick Culley I for one welcome our new reptilian overlords.

 Garry Hamilton First communist president. I don't think he's our first Jewish guy.

 Michael Z. Williamson He is, but is he practicing Jew or just sort of Jewish?

 James Stepanek he's not practicing at all from what I understand

 George Avery Lieberman was the first Jewish candidate for President OR Vice President. We have never had a Jewish President or Vice President. Barry Goldwater was of Jewish ancestry, but an Episcopalian.

 Ivan Batinic Fuck you and your Trump -ass holiness

 Garry Hamilton Jewish or not, active or not, his deep commitment to the principles of communism is more important and significant.

 Garry Hamilton Ivan Batinic ... ???

 Ivan Batinic I don't think he's communist. But I should not assume that meant you wee pro Trump. I hate texting.

 Catherine Baker If only you understood what communism was, but then you wouldn't be an murikan.

 Garry Hamilton A little research will help with that. I'm married to a researcher. I get that stuff for free. He's a commie. I'm not gonna bother with nuance and hedging. And I don't give a rat's rectum who the GOP puts up, I will vote for him and campaign for him. There is no scenario where I vote for a communist or a pathological liar/traitor, and that's all the Dems have put forward this time out.

 Catherine Baker Uh huh. I'm sure someone with a sold gold conservative mindset was *strongly* considering voting D. No really, totes believe you, dude.

 Keith Beavis


  Liam McCumber But can he get the trains to run on time?

 Garry Hamilton Conservative. Heh. I chuckled.

 Michael Z. Williamson There are Dems I will vote for. Hillary, Bernie and Trump are not three of them. Yes, Trump is much closer to a Dem than a Rep. Bernie is a socialist, not a liberal, and Hillary is a right-statist. I also wasn't born an American, know exactly what a communist is, and can even invoke former Soviets to discuss it with you. In fact, let me do that. Nicki Kenyon, Oleg Volk, please enlighten the lady. Tossing around ego will not get you anywhere on my wall.

 Nicki Kenyon


  Nicki Kenyon I just love how American born ignorants who have never lived the horror try to privilegesplain to those of us who have what communism is. I'm so done with these people!

 Henry Willard Garry, the kind of Scandinavian-style Nordic capitalism/social democracy that Bernie Sanders promotes and communism aren't even in the same wing of economic spectrum. The Nordic model works within the capitalist system -- private ownership of enterprise still runs the show from the industrial level down to the small business level. What social democracy, or 'democratic socialism' does, is to have a universal redistributionist policy where the goal is to create as much financial equality -and- individual financial autonomy as possible. In Nordic countries, their corporations and capital are seen to serve their own citizens, as opposed to the United States where a handful of private individuals (regardless of their nationality and regardless of what they intend to do with that money) can own and extract huge streams of money from the American economy and do whatever they want with it, even if its antagonistic to American interests. You might not agree with Nordic capitalism, but it is not communism, because there is no command economy there. If you still believe it to be, can you please share with us your broad definition of communism? Because if in your view communism means 'redistribution' (which is not correct), then I have news for you: the US is by that definition communist, because the government redistributes billions of dollars from taxpayers to wealthy corporations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model

 Michael Z. Williamson Henry Willard Actually, the government redistributes money FROM corporations, which is to say, from the customers. And your definition of US capitalism is biased to the point of caricature.

 Garry Hamilton I've lived in Scandinavia. Several years. Had a couple of marriages, a couple of kids there. The idealized perception that some Americans have of Denmark is quite distorted. I'm sure that, with actual research, this could be corrected, but research doesn't seem to be in vogue lately. When I tell you that we really don't want Denmark in America, it's not derived from rumors, biased reportage, or Wikipedia. My love for the Danes does not transfer to their system of government. Socialism really, really doesn't work. You can flavor it all you like, but it's fundamentally broken. What is this obsession with trying to find the clean end of that turd? It's busted. Quit confirming Einstein's definition of insanity, and let's embrace the only thing that has lifted mankind out of its native state of poverty. Command economies don't work. Parasite economies don't work. Free enterprise works. Let's do that.

 Henry Willard Where did you live in Denmark? What did you do? I'm sorry if I sound skeptical, but half the conservatives I've spoken to about it have apparently lived in Scandinavia, which I find an astounding fact. I've traveled there and have friends who live in Copenhagen and Stavanger, so I don't really account your argument for authority to hold much weight because I know the economies are doing well by virtually any metric. Do you believe Denmark to be a command economy, and why do you think their system of government is flawed? Having lived there, I'm sure you're aware, the government has no control of industrial production and companies like Novo Nordisk and Mærsk do, and all of the Scandinavian countries (including Denmark) have a higher % of small business employment and a higher % of self-employment than the USA does. So by what measure is Denmark a 'command economy' and by what metrics are you judging these economies? Denmark has a higher standard of living than the US and an after-tax higher median income bolstered by extremely high wages compared to the US. https://cepr.net/.../publications/small-business-2009-08.pdf

 Garry Hamilton I lived in Copenhagen. I was an international telex operator, among other things. My first in-laws lived in Goteborg/Gothenburg. My second in-laws lived in Farum, outside Copenhagen. He worked as an engineer for the the country's foremost elevator manufacturer. Had his own car. Free-standing house. Very well to do, by Danish standards. Capital flight laws. Horrific taxation. "Free" medical (both kids). "Free" education. Paid for with those horrific taxes. I was making low wages, and my tax rate was 40%. If it hadn't been for subsidies (via my wife) we could not have afforded our cold water flat. Higher standard of living? My "standard of living" was a freaking cold water flat. And that was subsidized, cuz Danish wife. Have you BEEN there? You have any idea what it costs to drive a stinking car over there? Like I said, the US perception is distorted and romanticized. My advice to those who want to live "like they do in Denmark" is GO LIVE THERE. If you're still happy after ten years, change your citizenship. I won't be the least bit offended. Me, I've been. I'm staying here. And I'm not adopting a parasitic taxation and "free everything" model.

 Henry Willard I know people who live in Copenhagen who have the opposite experience, and I can show you some horror stories of folks who live with me here in Texas. Shall we compare and contrast? Forbes Magazine's #1 Best Country for Business? Denmark. Highest investment rating in Europe, highest monetary freedom. So tell me another one about capital flight and how it's communist, please. http://www.forbes.com/places/denmark/

 Denmark - Forbes

Denmark #1 Best Countries for Business - Forbes


 Garry Hamilton Capital flight laws may have changed. Dunno. It's been nearly forty years. I don't believe I said capital flight laws were communist. I do, however, find them oppressive. Your mileage may vary. Enjoy your stay there. I'll be here, suffering, in the States. 


 Adam Newton Historic/Catastrophic same difference...

*edit to add, I'm OK with Cruz being elected...

 Michael Z. Williamson Only racists would oppose Cruz or question his citizenship.

 Edward Lindeman I think he is a douche. does that make me a bigot?

 Curtis Pritchard wow I am not a racist and I oppose Cruz and I also do not think he should be allowed to be Pres. he had a Non-American Father and born in Canada so to me I will not vote for him on that if you feel that makes me a racist then you are just wrong. it only means I have a right to choose whomever I want for whatever reason.

 Michael Z. Williamson Curtis Pritchard No, but that makes you anti-immigrant, even though legally he's not an immigrant.

 Adam Newton Michael Williamson, or he's just willfully ignorant to the laws regarding qualification for presidency.

 Curtis Pritchard I do not think it does my wife was not born here so your wrong on that as well I will not vote for any foreign born for Pres. its a preference it makes me American since I have the right to chose with my vote and Adam I am not ignorant of the Law I went to law school I just do not believe anyone should be Pres if not born on American soil.

 Adam Newton What you believe or feel doesn't change what's been the law for far longer than you've been alive...

 Curtis Pritchard I did not say it did what I said was my opinion which is my right and that it does not make me a racist.

 Curtis Pritchard and for the record the clause being used to say he is eligible is ambiguous and can be or may need clarity by the Supreme Court


 Michael Z. Williamson I need to see evidence that Hillary is female. No, not photos, thank you.

 Richard K. Hopkins Those could be faked either through Photoshop or surgery.

 Robert Vance Like everything else in her life.

 Judy Rudek Be careful what you wish for... Rule 34, you know...

 Alan French Video...

 Thomas Stewart Alan French I think the video has her with Janet Reno. You have been warned.

 Alan French No, the one I'm thinking of is Ron Jeremy with Hillary and Maggy Thacher...


Catherine Baker So many misogynists, so little effort.

 Nick Gardner And who exactly are the misogynists?

 Catherine Baker As this is the first post you've made in this thread, it seems likely that you are not under discussion. Isn't that nice?

 Michael Z. Williamson Not at all. There are numerous women qualified to be president. Hillary is not one of them. Just as there are many black men qualified to be president. 0bama is not one of them. I don't think Trump or Bernie are qualified either. That doesn't make me anti-business or anti-semitic. Hillary is a detestable human being. Were she theoretically male, I'd ask for proof she was actually a man. But we can easily see who the sexist is in the thread.

 Catherine Baker And who better than a white man to explain, using small words, to wimmenz and blacks just what moveable bar they need to jump to be 'qualified'. Yes, yes, you can name THOUSANDS of black men who would be qualified. Or ten. Maybe. Because... black. Or wimmenz.

Michael Z. Williamson Catherine Baker Obviously, you came here to insult people, not have a debate. I bet you wonder why no one likes you.

Michael Z. Williamson Catherine Baker I'm noting your anti-immigrant sentiment, though. I bet you think you can justify it somehow.

 Catherine Baker My mum emigrated. My grandparents emigrated. My great-grandparents emigrated. My nieces & nephews have emigrated. Yep. I'm all anti-immigrant. How well you know me. I came to bring what everyone else does - a pov. It doesn't include accepting racism and misogyny silently -- oops. Bad wommanz.

 Michael Z. Williamson Catherine Baker Oh, yes, some of your family were immigrants. Well, that makes it all okay, then. The only racist and sexist in the thread is you. In fact, you seem to know everything about every segment of society, and can tell people you've never met exactly what they're thinking and why they're wrong about it. Perhaps there's a point in there.

 Robert Boyer Fuck you Catherine. How about that? If someone disagrees with you then they're a misogynist. Eat a slimy dick. There you should feel great. That's what I would tell a man who was an asshole.

 Nathan Gayle Maybe, She has the,"Gift," us Menz lack...

 Michael Z. Williamson I don't think anyone here is anti-woman. Just anti-Catherine, because she's obnoxious. If everyone you meet is an "ist," it could be you're the noun they're ist against, not any group.

 Rick Drayson Why is it that in an age where so many Feminists are pushing to end the stereotype that females are illogical, none too intelligent and overly emotional that there are so many Feminists like Catherine Baker being fucking stupid sexist illogical retards

 Brad Johnson I've been watching this thread for a while now, from what I've seen all you have done is reply to fairly civil discourse with nothing but insults and condescension. BTW: you do know that there is a difference between "immigrate" and "emigrate" right?

 Rick Drayson Brad Johnson Can't take the Cunt out of Feminist

 Brad Johnson Well, there are feminists and Feminists. One you can actually have a civil discussion with and the other is pretty much this.

 Rick Drayson Brad Johnson What mythological creature do you speak of? I have only met the vile man hating rabid cultist(feminist) and the people who ASSume that they are feminist without knowing one thing about feminist ideology

 Michael Z. Williamson I think there should be more women in this thread. Amanda Fuesting, Heather Morgan, are you free?

 Rick Drayson Michael Z. Williamson The number of female anti-feminists is very heartening and certainly growing. (me assuming that those two you mentioned are that)

 Catherine Baker If only women would state their views in a manner pleasing to men. That's the problem, right there. Not saying shit men don't want to hear in a way they'll be happy to hear it.

 Brad Johnson No, the problem is you being rude and obnoxious. Simple as that. If you can't manage simple civility then you are worthy only of scorn and insults. Male or female makes no difference in that regard. BTW you never answered my question: Do you know the difference between "immigrate" and "emigrate?"

 Rick Drayson Catherine Baker Did Daddy walk out on you and Mumma? There is no better time than the present to start talking about your hatred of men which is normally caused by Daddy issues

 Catherine Baker Offering an opinion while female. I guess its almost as offensive as accepting Hillary as female without getting to personally finger her to be really sure. But why would anyone find that comment rude? Its just being politically thorough, and a woman who would find that offensive obviously has daddy issues. Cuz... well, they're female, so duh.

 Michael Z. Williamson Catherine Baker But you demand men express opinions in a manner pleasing to women. Sexist.

 Michael Z. Williamson Please, gentlemen, don' t call her a cunt. Cunts have warmth and depth.

 Michael Z. Williamson Catherine Baker Gender is distinct from sex. One can be physically one sex and identify chromosomally or psychologically as either or both. So you're also transphobic. Looks like anyone who disagrees with you is somehow wrong, and you're right about everything. You know more about communism than escaped Soviets, more about Judaism than practicing Jews, more about immigration than immigrants, more about Hispanic issues than Hispanics. All of us were having a discussion and some humor at the whole thing, and you stomped in to tell us we're all wrong and some sort of ---ist because you don't like it. You're a complete piece of shit. And you'd still be a complete piece of shit if you were a trangender black atheist male.

 John Kincaid Read this whole side thread. Shook my head wondering why someone would start shit like this. Dropping a bullshit comment meant to inflame people that had nothing to do with the original post. If you get butthurt over your treatment here Catherine, just refer to this jewel posted on your wall:


  Brett Bowen Let me get this straight. Not endorsing Obama or Hillary means you are a racist or a sexist. Did I get that right? And thinking they are terrible for the position means that you are arbitrarily moving the bar because you're a racist, sexist, patriarchal menace? Boils down to: you can't disagree with any of her designated candidates without being an "ist". And no defensible arguments have been put forth.

 Robert Boyer She's a misandrist ass. Simple as that.

 Heather Morgan I say shit men don't like all the time. I say shit women don't like too. The difference, dear special snowflake, is knowing why and when it's appropriate. And feminists don't see men as scary or hateful. We're supposed to be equal you twat, not special. Sexism is treating others different because of gender. So far Catherine, all i see is you. Way to play the victim. Do you carry your own outline chalk too?


Pater Familias What makes one a "Jew"? A theological belief or DNA? Consider what makes one a Muslim? Theology or DNA? Can one believe a theology and not practice it? If one does not practice a theology does one truely believe it? How would you know? If one claims to be something and does not live according to what that thing is what then is that person actually? A liar? A hypocrite? A fool? How much does one's DNA influence their behavior & beliefs? How would you know? What is more important, DNA, stated beliefs or pattern and practice of behavior?

 Steve Shook You can be a Jew by DNA or Theology, but you can only be a Muslim by theology.

Catherine Baker Obviously there is only one right or wrong answer, and I suspect you're in charge of setting the parameters.

 Garry Hamilton Traditionally, "Jewish-ness" is transmitted through the maternal side. I had this explained to me once, but I must confess I didn't quite grasp why that is. In the moslem world, I've been told that the son of a moslem is presumptively moslem. From what I understand, it's bad juju (like capital-bad) for a moslem's son to adopt a different faith. Again, my understanding is thin here.

 Steve Shook Science sets the rules, even though you can convert into Judaism itself the truth is Jews are a race of people, Muslims are not in anyway a singular race, regardless of anyone's philosophical prattle that remains an unalterable fact.

 Ivan Batinic OMG. I'm ducking out -- Ciao!

 Catherine Baker Ah, the confession. "Why iz wimmenz impoortant?" is a good question, and obviously "They not ever" is the answer. Your understanding isn't thin, it's Murikan! and therefore cannot be thicked, which is just eurononsense anyway.

 Steve Shook Catherine Baker What's that all about?

 Garry Hamilton She presumes to know the mind of someone across the interwebz. There is no clue, but at least there's certainty.

 Catherine Baker Well... let's just keep our minds on the "jewishness", shall we?

 Steve Shook It was the question.

 Michael Z. Williamson Jews actually do generally have genetic markers, being an insular people for the last several thousand years. Muslims are much broader spread, more proselytizing, and can be of any genetics whatsoever including South Asian, Pacific, East Asian, Altaic, Caucasian, North African and Berber, Central African, South African and any mix in between.

 Garry Hamilton It was asked. I proposed an answer. If the answer is wrong, I can always be enlightened. Not by a troll, of course, but a little light is always welcome.

 Michael Z. Williamson Garry Hamilton You were correct.

 Catherine Baker Troll: someone who doesn't agree with you

 Michael Z. Williamson Catherine Baker As you have proven, repeatedly.

 Steve Shook


  Robert Boyer No a fucking douche like you, Kitty. There, I ensmalled your name, go and cry foul.

 Michael Z. Williamson Catherine Baker wommenz weren't even mentioned in this thread, other than as a legitimate part of Jewish tradition. So, your own statements mark you so far as anti-semitic, racist, sexist, and anti-immigrant. Do you want to tell Nicki Kenyon all about communism now, since she escaped from the USSR in the 80s and obviously can't know anything about the subject?

 Robert Boyer A non Liberal female's opinion means nothing.

 Steve Weinberg I think trying to parse Judaism as a "race" vs. a "theology" is going to be.... complicated. How much DNA do my German and Lithuanian forbears share? With the Sephardim? With the Ethiopians? I will note that there does to be some genetic commonality in the Cohain caste.

 Nicki Kenyon Michael Z. Williamson escaped JEW no less. Why do you bother with idiots?

 Eric Tank Nicki, I suspect masochism is at play - they seem to seek him out.

 Michael Z. Williamson Nicki Kenyon I have no idea where she showed up from. Not my Flist.

 Michael Z. Williamson Catherine Baker has explained it, Steve Weinberg. What do you know? You're only a Jew. And male.

 Nicki Kenyon Eric Tank possibly. I've always thought Mike was a bit of a nut magnet. Must be why he and I get along so well.

 Eric Tank He certainly prompts interesting conversations. Which most of us really appreciate, especially the parts that drive the rest to frothing at the mouth.


 Jason Cordova Please. I doubt that Vermin Supreme would be our first lunatic president.

 Michael Z. Williamson He might be our best.

 Jason Cordova I'll give you that

 Robert Boyer First openly lunatic. 


Brad Johnson


 Rachel Dunlop Oh shit the lizard people have figured out how to access the internet!

 Doug Harrell My herpetology is weak. My first impression was that the picture is a komodo, rather than a monitor. However, after exhaustive research, I have concluded you are not dragon the wrong lizard into the comments...

 Ray Ficara Doug Harrell Komodos are monitorts. THe largest of the genus. BTW I used to have 5 at work reclining in a hot tub all day. They thought we were their maids.


 Dave M West Jr Cruz would also be the first president who isn't a natural born citizen...

 Seth Breidbart Not even close. George Washington was the first.

 Dave M West Jr A fair point, but it doesn't make Cruz any more eligible.

 Phillip Miehm Do you even citizenship? American mother, natural born American citizen. So, unless you have evidence that she renounced her citizenship at some point prior to his birth, Cruz is eligible. Even if he is an idiot.

 James R McCain Jr Only for idiots who dont know what a natural born citizen is as evidently you do not.

 Dave M West Jr Sure if you have no clue what the law actually says. Being called idiot by an idiot is actually a pretty strong compliment.

 Phillip Miehm Luckily for us, you are wrong. Ted Cruz is as much a natural born citizen as I am.

 Dave M West Jr Nope. Born in Canada to a US citizen and a Cuban national. Non-military births outside US territories require BOTH parents to be US citizens for the child to be considered a 'natural born citizen' which is a requirement of being the US president. Last time I checked Canada was a sovereign nation outside of US territory. All of this is easily researched if you're interested in actual knowledge instead of simple bias confirmation. Something tells me you aren't though.

 Michael Z. Williamson Dave M West Jr Please cite the SCOTUS ruling on what constitutes a "natural born" citizen.

While you look for that, you'll find that State Dept regs mandate ONE American parent who has lived 14 years in the US prior to the child's birth.

 We don't need and Cruz birthers.

 Dave M West Jr I've got some bad news for you: you're going to have Cruz Birthers if he gets the nomination. Count on it.


 Dave M West Jr LOL that's actually pretty funny.

Over the Hedge:

This is the story of RJ, a raccoon (Quisquiliae Ailurapoda) who is a textbook thieving socialist.  We start the movie with him stealing from a hibernating bear. Despite cautioning himself to only "take what he needs," he tries to steal everything on hand, including the food from the bear's paws. Once a socialist has an opening, they will always go too far, and RJ does. 

RJ gets caught, and resorts to fast talking and promises of extravagant returns if only the bear won't kill him, arguing that if the bear does, he'll have to repeat all that labor himself.  The bear grudgingly grants a grace period for compensation of RJ's crimes, and releases him on parole.

Denied a Have to leech off, RJ scavenges through trash for food and finds little.  He takes his bag of minimal possessions and goes stalking a new subdivision of Haves he hopes to exploit for the debt he's already acquired, and the resources he needs moving forward. This uncannily matches every Five Year Plan the USSR ever had. 

Without shills, Socialists starve, so he also seeks accomplices.  He finds them in the form of a motley band of foragers just waking from hibernation.

Being a dedicated socialist, he goes full Bernie Sanders, persuading the foragers that they can have all the good stuff for free, just by taking it from the leftovers of the Haves. They do so, oblivious of the wreckage they leave behind. RJ is aware, but doesn't care.  There's always more loot to be had.

Vern, the patriarchal conservative tortoise, loudly denounces RJ as taking advantage of the gullibility and stupidity of the group.  Offended by his presentation of documentable truth, they turn away from him entirely, and hug socialism to their bosoms. Hilarity and disaster ensue, as they always do, because socialists are gullible and stupid and never learn.

When an exterminator, representing capitalist power, is brought in, they realize they should retreat to safety and live within their means, but once again, RJ the Politician persuades them that enough just isn't enough, that they must enter the very homes of the people and steal goods directly.

Keep in mind this is to enrich himself personally by his position, and pay off the bear who has a legal claim against his very life if he doesn't furnish compensation. The bear represents a bank or investor who acted in good faith, but was screwed over by claims of "fairness."  RJ is a textbook democrat, stealing with one hand, lying about it, and feeding his sponsor with the other hand lest he become lunch himself.

The house is a shambles, the homeowner imprisoned for attempting to defend her premises, the exterminator deemed a villain for attempting to enforce the rules of society, and the bear is forcibly removed from the home where he was doing nothing wrong.  What was a functional system is totally destroyed.

And the socialists retreat to the life they had before, enhanced by the rotting remains of capitalist production, blissfully unaware that when it runs out they'll return to the edge of starvation. Then they'll repeat this pattern of behavior, and wonder why it never works out in the end, and why exterminators keep coming to kill them.

AFTERNOTE: It does deserve credit for showing the dangers of energy drinks on excitable youth.


This is the story of four naive urban socialists, unfamiliar with the processes that feed and support them, winding up in "the Wild."

The Wild is a libertarian paradise where no one has toilets or toilet paper, and occasionally feral creatures eat one of the residents due to the complete lack of national defense or police functions. They throw some bitchin parties, however.

The socialists, in classic fashion, demand to talk to "The people," code for the bureaucrats they expect to handle all their life issues for them.

Meanwhile, a group of right-wing extremist penguins hijacks the ship and head for their native paradise, only to find it sucks a lot more than an industrial society in the temperate zone.

They head back to Madagascar, where the socialists have finally learned to somewhat fend for themselves, but are still dependent upon others for the necessities of living.

Ultimately, everyone winds up On The Beach, with no drinking water, toilets or way to get home, but declare a win because the party is a lot of fun.

Palpatine Was a Wuss
Jan 25, 201609:49PM

Category: General

The Emperor talks too much.

Luke was clearly never trained in repartee.  As soon as it was clear Emps was going to monologue, he should have just fired back.

EMPEROR:  monologues about the Dark Side.

LUKE:  Forcedamnit old man, are you fucking trying to talk me to death? Shut up already.

EMPEROR: monologues louder.

LUKE: Seriously, dude, the first "Death Star" (finger quotes) got splattered, just like those drone control ships from the Trade Federation.  You weren't even original, and wasted a shit ton of money.  Is your dick as shriveled as the rest of you?

EMPEROR: monologues about "insignificant rebellion."

LUKE: Yeah?  So why did you bring an entire fleet AND a "Death Star" (more finger quotes)?  It's pretty clear you're scared. And why a second "Death Star"?  The first was Viagra Star and this is Cialis Star?  What's next?   Some sort of planetoid that drains suns or something? How original.

EMPEROR: Angrily monologues about the power of the Dark Side.

Luke:  Are you still blathering?  If it's so damned powerful, why the shriveled face, shriveled dick, reliance on mundane weapons and unoriginal thinking? You don't even have a harem?  It's pretty clear why it's "Dark." It's the opposite of "Bright." 'Look at me! I rule the galaxy!  I have to send entire fleets around to get the shit kicked out of them by wookies, retired Jedi, half-witted smugglers and gamblers and bumpkin farm boys.  I'm ugly, shriveled and don't have a woman. I have a creepy relationship with this orphan I helped mutilate. But trust me, this is as awesome as it gets!' You are one disturbingly pathetic geezer.

EMPEROR: throws ruling the galaxy out there one more time.

Luke: Yeah, you keep on with that. It's like you're Amway or something, multi-level marketing your repression.  'Oh, please! Take over in my downline!  I'm all powerful but need help ruling!' What have you done with the galaxy?  Is GDP up?  What about GINI index?  You're like the eight year old bully who steals all the balls in the neighborhood, but throws like a girl and can't bat even with the balls, in more ways than one. If this is the best the "Dark Side" has, I'm yawning.  Rent yourself one of those blue chicks with the head-handles and get blown. When you can accomplish just that, come back and we'll talk. From here, I see nothing worth my time.  You're old and need a replacement.  I don't need you. Go force choke your chicken.

"Smart" Guns, Dumb People
Jan 13, 201605:07PM

Category: Guns

I will try once again to explain to the ignorant why this will NEVER, EVER work, no matter how much you want it to.

It will do nothing about 350 million firearms already in existence.

Lawsuits will kill it. The first time an authorized shooter, cop or citizen, pulls the trigger, nothing happens, and the bad guy's gun works, they or their family will sue. I need it to FAIL TO THE UNLOCK STATE.

The first time an unauthorized shooter is able to access it, the victims will sue. The mfr needs it to FAIL TO THE LOCK STATE. It cannot do both.

Any disclaimer that the mfr is not responsible for failure of the lock means no one will buy.

There's no guarantee said gun will fit the ergonomics and tastes of existing shooters. People who don't shoot seem to think all guns are the same. Every brand, model, and even individual guns are different. I don't care how safe it is, if it feels like, say a Beretta 92, I will never buy one. Others don't like Glocks.

Guns are increasingly mechanically very simple. It needs repeated to you, no matter what the electronic component is, there will be a simple way to bypass it. If not bypassed, it can be jailbroken.
Your spouse/partner/buddy/trained kids/companion needs to be able to use it if you're down or not available.

Now, does this thing use batteries?  Do I need to comment on that?

 Also, this will increase the cost of firearms. That's fine for white people of privilege. Poor minorities need to defend themselves, too. Every "safety" measure passed by people who know nothing about guns (Which is all of them) only adds to the expense. Gun control is fundamentally racist, and about disarming those who most need to defend themselves.

Technology is irrelevant. The idea is crap.

So then I got commentary below an article about this.


"Well, that's just your OPINION! Those aren't facts."

Actually, yes, what I stated were facts. You could possibly come to a different conclusion, but I'd question your logical chain in doing so.

"The military manages to make missiles work on the battlefield will all kinds of electronics." They do. A missile works ONCE. And to do so, requires a large team of technicians performing regular maintenance, and spends a percentage of its time not ready for deployment. They cost thousands to millions of dollars.  Most of them are transported in secure, padded, isolated, electrically grounded containers against damage while in transit.

"My car has ABS and airbags! And they work!" How well does your ABS work after 1000 impacts? Or even 1000 panic stops? How many cars does your local dealer have in the shop for ABS failure? Airbags are DESIGNED to fail. That's what they do. Yet the last time I was hit, my airbag failed to deploy.

"Ever hear of a grandfather clause?"

12 of the revolvers in this image were made in the 19th century and still shoot. My daughter's favorite is a century old this year.  

Even if you sell a million smart guns (you won't), that's .35% of those in existence. Actual effect on guns used in contact crime cannot exceed .0175% (because a lot of gun crime is non-violent (license violations, carrying where not allowed, etc), and criminals will simply use other guns. You will spend billions, and have zero effect for generations.

If by "grandfather clause" you mean those valuable antiques will become contraband at some point, it's a shame about that 5th Amendment, isn't it?

Stop trying to be smarter than me about a subject you know nothing about.

Simple question: Once you've installed this mythical "smart" circuitry in the gun, let's say, a common Glock, where will it interface? What component will your smart circuit block to prevent the weapon from firing?

When you can answer that question, I'll then tell you why that won't last three minutes against someone with hand tools.

Until you can answer even that, stop pretending you have any knowledge of the subject whatsoever.

EDIT:  It's still going.  Some idiot invoked airbags again.  IIRC, there are 34 million of them awaiting recall.

One of my cars is on recall for an ignition switch that suddenly go from run to accessory. That's like a "smart" gun where pulling the trigger ejects the magazine.


ATF has guidelines for what constitutes "Engaging in the business" of selling firearms, though has no concrete definitions on how many guns one may sell.  The new "advisory" they just published as part of President 0's new "gun control" push simply reiterates exactly what they already say.

Official link is here: https://www.atf.gov/file/100871/download

Here is a layman's summary of the matter:

To buy new guns at wholesale, one must have an FFL--Federal Firearm's License, which come in several flavors for selling, smithing, manufacturing, ammunition, explosives, and with addenda for import or restricted National Firearms Act weapons--silencers, machine guns, short barrels, destructive devices and certain oddities.

If one plans to "Engage in the business" of selling firearms, new or used, an FFL is required.

A PRIVATE CITIZEN not "engaged in business" may buy and sell guns for purposes of collecting or using.  If you get tired of your old XDm and want a Glock, you can sell your XDm to anyone who is not a prohibited person (felon, domestic abuser, drug or alcohol abuser, and not under 18, etc).  If you decide you want to sell off your old revolvers and upgrade to newer pistols, you can do so.  If you decide you're 80, have done all the shooting you're going to, you can unload your collection without a license.

If you sell online, you can either meet a resident of your own state face to face and see ID, or, you can send it to an FFL who will log it in, transfer it to them, and conduct the background check, for a small fee. If they are not a resident of your state, you MUST follow this method. If it is a longarm, they may, as long as their state allows, receive it from an FFL in your state.  If it is a handgun, it MUST be shipped to an FFL in their state.  You can't even hand it to said FFL in your state at a gun show for him to take back to his state.  He must receive it via common carrier.  Don't ask why this is the law. It just is.  THERE IS NO "LOOPHOLE" FOR SELLING GUNS ON THE INTERNET. FEDERAL LAW APPLIES. Enforcing it is another issue, but the law is the law.

Every major online firearm site is even set up to tag "FFL Required?" with YES for firearms and NO for accessories.  They patrol their listings regularly, and very few people will risk selling a gun without it going to an FFL in case of a sting. Trust me on this, there are sellers who won't even sell to collectors, or demand an FFL for non-firearm items out of paranoid fear.  I'm sure there's a seller on Arms America somewhere who'll agree that for an unmarked MO or Western Union, he'll ship to your apartment.  Good luck finding him. And if you do: He's willing to violate the law to do this. You're willing to violate the law to do this. He probably has a PMB box somewhere under a false name, and may just keep your money and not ship the gun. It's not as if you can complain to the cops that he wouldn't ship your gun illegally.  FFLs actually offer protection to the buyer as well as the seller, to ensure both parties are legit.  If it wasn't necessary, few sellers would bother, though depending on the value of the gun, they might. But, since it's the law, there are benefits with the hindrances, and you make use of them.

Yes, some such deals go through, and always did, and always will, and no law is going to stop them. There are too many USPS, UPS, FedEx and DHL packages to ever search even 1% of them, and there's no guarantee the shipper's name and address is real.  Online funds and barter work as well as Western Union and gas station money orders always did. Just because we've had these laws for almost 50 years doesn't mean people comply with them, just as they don't comply with bans on selling pot or coke.


Exempt from the "only through a dealer" or "only via common carrier for handgun" are certain collectibles known as Curios and Relics, which ATF keeps a list of, or, are 50 years old an IN THEIR ORIGINAL CONFIGURATION (not with a different stock, shorter barrel, etc).  Any mods reset the 50 year clock for purpose of being a C&R only. There is an FFL, the Type 03, for C&R collectors. If you don't have a C&R FFL and receive one, you can do as you wish within the law. If you have a C&R FFL, you can receive such items directly by mail or carrier to your home of record, and must keep a log.  If you have logged the weapon as a C&R you MAY NOT modify it with aftermarket stocks, etc, that change its format.

A C&R weapon may go to any FFL anywhere at any time. So, the seller WOULD be able to transfer it to an out of state buyer who was in state, who had a C&R FFL, without having it shipped to a receiving FFL.

Clear? I hope so.

Now, a C&R holder is a collector, and may, for example, buy a crate of 20 Mosin Nagants, Russian surplus, look through the crate, keep 5 with arsenal marks they need for their collection, and sell the other 15. That the 15 sell individually for more than the buyer paid is not of itself "engaging in business."  Their purpose is to build a collection, and their documentation will show it. Most such collectors will then plow the sale money back into more guns for the collection.

An important but not widely known exception to all of this are weapons made before 1899, or using black powder, or not using fixed cartridges (such as pinfire).  When the Gun Control Act of 1968 was passed, those were exempted due to their age and function. A firearm is legally defined as firing a fixed cartridge, and manufactured on or after Jan 1, 1899.  There is a regular trade in antiques among both collectors, and shooters who prefer anonymity. Pre-99 and non-fixed guns may be modified within the limits of the National Firearms Act (you may not cut them short, silence them, or convert them to full auto), because they are not firearms under the GCA. They can be shipped without transfer papers.  It is important to note this is a federal law only, and most states still make felons ineligible to own them, and some states require dealer transfer on all items that shoot. THIS LAW APPLIES OUTSIDE AND INSIDE A GUN SHOW. There is no "loophole."

It is probable that the value of paperwork exempt antiques just increased with the greater scrutiny that will be placed on private sellers, since ATF officially may not, and does not want to, take notice of them.


So let us consider several sellers at a gun show.

First is a dealer with an FFL from that state. He can buy and sell, and transfer to anyone in state, and to long gun buyers from out of state (as long as their state permits). THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS IS REQUIRED OUTSIDE THE SHOW AT HIS PLACE OF BUSINESS.  There is no "gun show loophole."

Next is a dealer from out of state, who may exhibit (usually high end collectibles) and arrange to sell and transfer via common carrier, through a dealer in that state. Again, he can't just hand the guns over to that dealer. They must be shipped.  THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS IS REQUIRED OUTSIDE THE SHOW AT HIS PLACE OF BUSINESS.  There is no "gun show loophole."

A C&R holder may buy, and sell to anyone in state with ID, or anyone from out of state with any kind of FFL--dealer or collector.  However, this collector must be able to document his intent to collect.  Let's say he has 15 Mosins on the table, as mentioned above, and has a sign, "Looking for Finnish Mosins and parts," or "Want to Buy SMLEs, Mausers and related militaria."  Or let's say he doesn't have the sign, but an educated observer can look at him and say, "This guy's a C&R looking for deals and selling off the old stuff."  THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS IS REQUIRED OUTSIDE THE SHOW.  There is no "gun show loophole."

A collector, without a C&R, can do what the C&R holder above can, but may not buy anything from out of state without having an FFL DEALER transfer it to him.  A C&R holder may buy and sell, but MAY NOT transfer, because he can't access the National Instant criminal background Check System.  The collector may have a couple of old Colt Special Police revolvers, an old NYPD Glock, a couple of 1960s shotguns and a Mauser.  He also is buying and selling, but he's obviously looking for specific things.  Someone walks by with a 1970s Colt Gold Cup, he might buy it. If they have a .25 Jennings for $30, he ignores it, because it's junk and he's not interested. THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS OUTSIDE THE SHOW.  There is no "gun show loophole."

A private owner walking around, who's looking to unload some old guns for new guns. He has a half dozen older revolvers, and a sign, "Want to Buy Glock 23 or XD .40 cal."  Again, he can only sell to in-state residents, or ship to their FFL out of state.  THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS IS REQUIRED OUTSIDE THE SHOW.  There is no "gun show loophole."

A retired guy who's got a table with a metric crap ton of Mausers, Mosins, 2nd Model Smith & Wesson revolvers, Winchester shotguns...and is selling them because he's retired and needs money.  He's not buying replacements. He's just unloading. THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS WOULD HAPPEN OUTSIDE THE SHOW.  There is no "gun show loophole."

A dealer in antiques and black powder firearms, who has only historical firearms made  before 1899, or black powder originals or reproductions. He does not need an FFL and never did, because under the law, what he is selling are not firearms. THIS IS NOT A LOOPHOLE, THIS IS FEDERAL LAW.

Now we come to the joker.  He has a table with a dozen mixed guns on it.  He sells some. He buys others. He sees the $30 Jennings and buys it, sticks a $40 tag on it, and puts it back on the  table. THIS guy is "engaging in business" without a license. He's not selling many, and likely not actually making a profit after table fees and gas, but his intent is to sell guns for more than he paid for them. That's the "unlicensed dealer." 

Or is he?

He might also have a collection, and be using the funds from that sale to build his collection. So what's the call?

And the call is, "I would know if I looked at his table, and so would an ATF agent."  Much like porn is, "I know it when I see it." If he has a business card, it shows intent. A sign reading, "Always buying and selling guns" MIGHT show intent.  THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS IS THE LAW OUTSIDE THE SHOW.  There is no "gun show loophole."

There isn't a clear way to define a volume for "engaging in business," especially since firearm law is part of the Tax Code, and any change to it will be exploited into other items of trade for purposes of collecting or avoiding tax. 

As part of the Prez's latest push, ATF has reiterated their existing rules, and it's possible they'll follow up with more agents at gun shows (And there are pretty much ALWAYS ATF agents at gun shows.  Most people in ATF like guns and buy for themselves as well) (Our local show has agents on hand to answer dealer inquiries).  Those agents will have to make those calls based on available evidence.

And the unlicensed dealers?

The agents will know them when they see them. Just as we all do.

But as before, exceedingly few criminals walk into a building full of cops, feds, veterans, licensed dealers and hired security looking to buy a Hi Point Fotay to do a drive by with.  There are much easier ways to get a gun.

So, literally nothing has changed.

The emperor has no clothes.

EDIT:  oh, to note--you can sell as many guns as you want, transferred through a dealer, at any profit margin you can get, and it's not "business," because you've involved the dealer...even if he makes $10 on every transfer, and you make a half million selling off a huge estate.

Edited on 6 Jan with clarifications on antiques and minor style changes.


  • All sellers must be licensed and conduct background checks, overturning current exemptions to some online and gun show sellers

This is already federal law. That he's unaware of reality, and keeps bleating about the mythical "gun show loophole" speaks volumes.  The NICS process is set up for dealers.  Allowing private citizens to access it is a huge risk to personal data. I predict failure to implement, nevermind judicial review.

  • States must provide information on people disqualified due to mental illness or domestic violence

This requires Congressional funding, or is a dictate from Executive to the States, and they can, and should, tell him to go screw.

  • FBI will increase workforce processing background checks by 50%, hiring more than 230 new examiners

Thank god. Those 20 minute waits for review during busy hours get irritating.

  • Congress will be asked to invest $500m (£339m) to improve access to mental healthcare

That might ACTUALLY help...if they actually set up mental health clinics, and don't stigmatize anyone asking for help and threaten to revoke their rights for doing so.

  • The departments of defence, justice and homeland security will explore "smart gun technology" to improve gun safety

All three have already said, "Fuck, no," and there are so many reasons why a "smart" gun is complete fantasy bullshit there's no reason to write another book about it here.

Can our next president not be a complete shithead?  Please?