Good for her!

I've been following Jessica Watson's solo circumnavigation since before day 1, seven months ago, with daily checks of her blog and updates of her position in the ocean.

I don't know why I was interested since I'm not a sailor and don't have anything in common with Jessica, but I was. Maybe it started out as a reaction to some bullshit people were saying about irresponsible parents of reckless, spoiled teenagers or some such. I just felt admiration for her, hoped the best for her, and now I'm glad she's home safely.

Congratulations Jessica! More power to you.

in reference to: BBC News - Australia hails solo yacht girl Jessica Watson (view on Google Sidewiki)

Arizona's Proposition 100

This is so annoying.

There's a problem with State revenues and budget projections that will require further major cuts in the budgets of various sectors of State government. The proposed Proposition 100 would create a temporary one cent increase in the State sales tax to lessen the cuts that will otherwise me made in education, public safety and health care. They say two thirds of the anticipated $1 billion dollars in revenue will go to education, and apparently the lion's share of the rest will go to public safety.

One of the complaints among the commenters on the Yes on 100 blog is that there's not enough information about how the money would be spent. Maybe a complete breakdown is too much to ask, or maybe it's available and I just have not found it.

Someone suggested looking at the two budgets that the Arizona Legislature had proposed or passed, one with and one without revenues stemming from this temporary sales tax hike. I looked for them, but could not find anything on the Legislature's web page. Maybe it's there and I just didn't see it.

The particular tidbit I was looking for has to do with the public safety allocation, justification for which includes a scare line about having to release thousands of non-violent prisoners, by which they mean, for the most part, thousands of non-violent drug offenders.

Non-violent drug offenders should not be incarcerated in the first place. Their incarceration is the result of bad public policy, the power of the prison-cop complex, deep corruption in the halls of power, stupid authoritarianism and a refusal to recognize that prohibition is as bad today as it was when it was applied to the that really dangerous drug: alcohol.

It would be so easy for me to vote Yes on Proposition 100 if whatever portion of its revenues that will support keeping non-violent drug offenders incarcerated were, instead, going to education. As it is, I will have to hold my nose tightly when I probably vote Yes.

in reference to: Homepage | Yes On 100 (view on Google Sidewiki)

Short Shrift Friedman

Thomas Friedman's column of May 1, "Narcos, No's and Nafta," contains two paragraphs about the Narcos and the troubles they present, then he drops them from further consideration of Mexico's future.

He goes on about how the No's (the conservative middle class of unionized teachers, oil workers, electric utility workers, other government workers) are the segment of the Mexican middle class that derives its position from Mexico's dwindling oil, which finances 40 percent of the government's budget.

The Nafta's are the segment of the middle class that is meritocratic.

"So here’s my prediction," Friedman writes. "When Mexico’s steadily falling oil production meets its rising meritocratic middle class, you will see real political/economic reform here. That is when the No’s will no longer have the resources to maintain the status quo, and that is when the Naftas from the Instituto Wisdom will demand the reforms that will enable them to realize their full potential."

And the Narcos?

Unless we in the United States get real about the drugs problem and remove prohibition inflation from the profits of the drug trade, the Narcos will gain even more power over society as the No's enter decline. The poor Naftas won't be able to do a thing about it.

The corrupting influence of prohibition has to end. If it doesn't, the Narcos will stifle Mexican progress as the decline of the No's draws nearer.

Thomas Friedman, you gave short shrift to a crucial aspect the issue you addressed.

in reference to: Op-Ed Columnist - Narcos, No’s and Nafta - NYTimes.com (view on Google Sidewiki)

Deep corruption evident in drugs policy

Every day, it seems, there is a piece in the news that deepens my contempt for national and international drug policy, and for those who insist on resisting reform and staying the course.

The refusal to recognize that, no matter what, people will go out of their way to get intoxicated, coupled with the refusal to recognize that the prohibition approach to the drugs problem only makes things worse, reflects deep corruption in the halls of power.

Contemporary drugs policy does not serve the public interest. It is harmful to the public interest.

Contemporary drugs policy serves only special interests, including drug cartels, insurgent groups, and the prison/cop complex.

It's all about the money. It's all about the power. It has nothing to do with the public interest.

God damn you people!

in reference to: Fake Weed, Real Drug: K2 Causing Hallucinations in Teens - Yahoo! News (view on Google Sidewiki)

New Jersey snow sculpture

The appropriate response, upon having been informed by a policeman that a neighbor had found a snow sculpture of Venus de Milo too risque, might have been to decline to cover or knock down the scupture, but to immediately sculpt a six foot phallus right next to it.

As it is, I think the "more objectified and sexualized" response was pretty good, too.

What's wrong with people?

in reference to: BBC News - New Jersey snow sculpture gets frosty reception (view on Google Sidewiki)

YouTube - "Adding comments has been disabled for this video."

YouTube - Congressman Becerra Laughs At Pledge of Allegiance

"Adding comments has been disabled for this video."

Yes, but why?

Here's a GREAT comment.

I would like to congratulate the man who had the bravery and patriotism to make a call for the pledge, which every meeting relating to American politics should begin with. It should be clear to everyone, that those who laughed, or hesitated, when the call to pledge loyalty to America was made, are weak or lacking in such loyalty; they sympathize with, or, indeed, are agents of, non-American elements. They represent a very great danger; it is impossible to underestimate the influence of non-American elements, in these extremely serious times, when we have a President of unknown origins, who has spent an unknown amount of time in Russia, and an unknown amount of time enabling Bill Ayers to conspire with the Taliban, and an unknown amount of time communicating with the secret orbital base, Draconis.

Posted by: llewelly | February 25, 2010 10:02 PM

Update about an asshole

The asshole I was referring to in the passage below is Dennis Miller.

What he spewed comes 4 minutes 44 seconds into this Fox News clip on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zD1GNjH-Ygs.

in reference to:

"The bit about TV pundits came on the heels of having deliberately tried to watch the run up to the address on Fox News. Bill O'Reiley was hosting. His guest was some cretin whose name escapes me who responded to a prompt about climate change by saying words to the effect that he wanted to drive his huge SUV down is long driveway from his huge house, and that if you couldn't do that without worrying about carbon dioxide then what's the use of having a planet anyway."
- Skeptacles: State of The Union (view on Google Sidewiki)

Dear Vice President Biden and Speaker Pelosi:

Dear Vice President Biden and Speaker Pelosi:

I watched President Obama's State of the Union speech the other night, and I found the constant stream of standing ovations to be a major irritant.

Excessive standing ovations that characterize events like this do not encourage me to tune in. I'm pretty sure the same is true of many people.

One of the most important parts of Mr. Obama's speech was about three quarters of the way through, when he spoke of the loss of faith in institutions, CEO's rewarding themselves for failure, TV pundits reducing serious arguments to silly sound bites and politicians cutting each other down rather than lifting the country up. The place was quiet. People seemed to be assimilating the message rather than making sure to clap and cheer louder.

I'm glad the cheer-leading had subsided by that point because, otherwise, by then I would have changed the channel.

Please stop the overdone cheer-leading. It wastes time, detracts from the message and squanders the impact of a real standing ovation.

Stop it. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Steve Sturgill

State of The Union

He's talking about me:

> Unfortunately, too many of our citizens have
> lost faith that our biggest institutions – our
> corporations, our media, and yes, our government
> – still reflect these same values. Each of these
> institutions are full of honorable men and women
> doing important work that helps our country
> prosper. But each time a CEO rewards himself for
> failure, or a banker puts the rest of us at risk for
> his own selfish gain, people’s doubts grow. Each
> time lobbyists game the system or politicians
> tear each other down instead of lifting this country
> up, we lose faith. The more that TV pundits reduce
> serious debates into silly arguments, and big
> issues into sound bites, our citizens turn away.
>
> No wonder there’s so much cynicism out there.
>
> No wonder there’s so much disappointment.

I lost any such illusions ages ago.

The bit about TV pundits came on the heels of having deliberately tried to watch the run up to the address on Fox News. Bill O'Reiley was hosting. His guest was some cretin whose name escapes me who responded to a prompt about climate change by saying words to the effect that he wanted to drive his huge SUV down is long driveway from his huge house, and that if you couldn't do that without worrying about carbon dioxide then what's the use of having a planet anyway.

What an asshole.

Right about then my son looked over at me and asked if they weren't showing the address on PBS. Having had my fill of TV pundits and silly arguments, we switched to PBS.

in reference to:

"Unfortunately, too many of our citizens have lost faith that our biggest institutions – our corporations, our media, and yes, our government – still reflect these same values. Each of these institutions are full of honorable men and women doing important work that helps our country prosper. But each time a CEO rewards himself for failure, or a banker puts the rest of us at risk for his own selfish gain, people’s doubts grow. Each time lobbyists game the system or politicians tear each other down instead of lifting this country up, we lose faith. The more that TV pundits reduce serious debates into silly arguments, and big issues into sound bites, our citizens turn away. No wonder there’s so much cynicism out there. No wonder there’s so much disappointment."
- 2010 Barack Obama State Of The Union Address (view on Google Sidewiki)

Predictable, revolting

> "Governor Palin has captivated everyone on
> both sides of the political spectrum and we
> are excited to add her dynamic voice to the
> Fox News line-up," Bill Shine, executive vice
> president of programming, said in a statement.
>
> Mrs Palin said in a statement posted on the
> network's website: "It's wonderful to be part of
> a place that so values fair and balanced news."

WHAT!!??

"Captivated everyone" on "both sides" of the political spectrum?

This is, as they say, not even wrong. It's just noise. "Both sides" of the political spectrum? Two sides? That's it? Good and evil? Black and white?

"...a place that so values fair and balanced news."

Revolting.

in reference to: Sarah Palin campaign was a 'train wreck', insiders say - Times Online (view on Google Sidewiki)

Mercenary Prick!

Travis Kuykendall, head of the Special High Intensity Trafficking office in El Paso, seems to be a mercenary prick.

He's also blind if he can't see the benefits of drug policy reform.

Then again, someone pointed out a long time ago that it's tough to get someone to acknowledge reality when his job depends on continued denial.

in reference to:

"Travis Kuykendall, head of the West Texas High Intensity Drug-Trafficking Area office in El Paso, Texas was quoted by Associated Press as saying, "There's no upside to it in any manner other than for those people who want to smoke pot. There's nothing for society in it, there's nothing good for the country in it, there's nothing for the good of the economy in it.""
- Washington considering legalizing marijuana | The Money Times (view on Google Sidewiki)

The problem is people

Malthus was right.

It is not necessarily a mistake to fail to foresee future developments, but it most certainly is a mistake to take them for granted.

It's not just the fossil-fuel fueled industrial revolution that created vast agricultural surpluses. Those surpluses only delayed the inevitable for a while, and would not have sustained population growth that occurred in the latter part of the 20th century. For that, the green revolution was required.

What will be the next revolution, the one that's going to sustain two-Chinas worth of people that the globe is supposed to add to today's human numbers if they increase as projected?

It is a mistake to take future developments for granted. It seems unlikely that the "two-Chinas" population projection will come to pass.

To say that "the problem is pollution not people" is to, as they say, put the cart before the horse.

in reference to:

"Indeed, the big mistake made by the original prophet of population doom, Thomas Malthus, was his failure to appreciate how fossil fuels would transform the world economy. To be fair, it would have been hard to foresee, back in 1798, how industrialisation - powered by fossil fuels - would create the vast agricultural surpluses that would sustain a huge increase in population. But his mistake points to the real culprit here: the problem is pollution not people."
- BBC - Ethical Man blog: Are our children to blame? (view on Google Sidewiki)

A key point

This is a key point about why out-and-out legalization is necessary. Decriminalization of use and possession worsens the situation next door, worsening spill-over effects as well.

By refusing to acknowledge reality we will continue to shoot ourselves in the foot, in the process shooting our neighbors in more vital areas.

Excellent article.

in reference to:

"Several U.S. states like California and Oregon have decriminalized marijuana, making possession of small quantities a misdemeanor, like a parking ticket. Decriminalization falls short of legalization because the sale and distribution remain a serious felony. One of the big reasons for the move is to reduce the problem of overcrowded and costly prisons. While this strategy may make sense domestically for the U.S., Mexican officials say it is the worst possible outcome for Mexico, because it guarantees demand for the drug by eliminating the risk that if you buy you go to jail. But it keeps the supply chain illegal, ensuring that organized crime will be the drug's supplier."
- Solutions to Mexico's Drug Crisis - WSJ.com (view on Google Sidewiki)

Good for Catalonia

Salvador Boix equates eating meat and torturing animals? He's not stupid, so what is he?

I suppose Boix might say of this picture (might have to click on it) that the matador cut himself while preparing the bull for slaughter.

Disgusting.

Good for Catalonia if they manage to ban bullfighting.

in reference to:

"“This attempt to ban bullfighting shows the hypocrisy of the politicians who all enjoy eating meat but vote to end bullfighting.”"
- Catalan Parliament passes landmark vote to ban bullfighting - Times Online (view on Google Sidewiki)

Beretta Tomcat 32: Stuck Safety Lever

UPDATE2 - December 18, 2009

To hell with it!

I have no more time or patience to deal with Beretta's maze of obfuscation, which you run in to whether on the computer or on the phone.

This Tomcat I'm disgusted with will be the last Beretta product I buy. My advice to anyone happening upon these words is to look elsewhere. Beretta has always been a good brand in my eyes, but no more.

======================

UPDATE - December 18, 2009:

I took this little Beretta Tomcat shooting this morning, after having thought the problem of the stuck safety was fixed, but no.

After shooting just 40 rounds, the safety is stuck again. It is possible to free it from the OFF (down) position by the use of a small glasses screwdriver as shown in the last picture below, but I did not disassemble the pistol this time and the safety gets stuck in the OFF (down) position every time.

I will post Beretta's response. [See above. There's nothing to post.]

======================

This little story gets around to the trouble I had with the safety on a Beretta Tomcat 3032 pistol. It started when my son and I purchased one of these little guns for my wife a couple of years ago. It was my fault that we purchased the Beretta over my son's preferred Kel Tek P32. I was swayed by my lack of familiarity with Kel Tek, my favorable impression of Beretta, the tip-up barrel and the heavier frame (which I thought would help with recoil).

I should have listened to my son, who has known far more than me about guns ever since he was ten years old. My bad. Sorry Eddie.

It turned out that the Beretta was not to my wife's liking because it was just too hard for her to operate. Racking the slide, closing the tip-up barrel, operating the safety and even opening the tip-up barrel all required too much force for her to enjoy shooting this little pistol, so my son and I reclaimed it and got something else for my wife.

All in all, the Beretta Tomcat 3032 that we bought has been a disappointment, largely because of the problems I had with the safety mechanism, which seems to reflect a design or materials flaw of some sort.

Shortly after we bought the little pistol for my wife, the safety lever got stuck in the OFF position. Nothing we tried would free the lever, so we took it to a local gun shop where there is a gunsmith we like and trust. The pistol never even reached our gunsmith, though, because the shop wouldn't work on it. I don't recall exactly why not, but the reason had something to do with Beretta policies. We had the gun shop mail the Tomcat to Beretta for warranty repair.

When the Tomcat came back the safety lever worked again, but in very short order the same problem occurred again. Nothing we did would free up the safety, which remained stuck in the OFF position. I cursed Beretta and put the thing away, and only took it shooting once since then.

Last night I came across the pistol as we were getting ready to go shooting today, and I decided to try to deal with the stuck safety one last time.

Here's a picture of the pistol. You can make out the safety lever in the upper right, shown in the OFF positon because the lever was stuck.



The following picture shows the safety lever in more detail, and you can see the red "safety off" indicator.



Following is an extract from the owner's manual showing three of the four parts involved in the mis-operation of the safety lever.


It's a little hard to visualize how part number 25, the safety lever, relates to the pictures I'm posting of the pistol, but consider that the schematic drawing is rotated 180 degrees about its up/down axis relative to the position of the pistol in the pictures I'm posting. In the schematic, the images are on the far side of the pistol, which would be pointed to the right. The long, downward-pointing shaft on part 25, the safety lever, traverses the frame of the pistol. Spring 27 fits into a small hole in the main body of the safety lever 25, and safety plunger 26 fits into the spring, which pushes the plunger up against a Safety Plunger Contact Pin shown in the picture below.



Sorry, it looks like you might have to click on the pictures to show them in a bigger size in order to be able to read the red text that attempts to explain what is shown.

In the picture above, the safety is OFF (rotated down).

In the picture below, the safety is ON (rotated up). Note in the picture below that the tip of the Safety Plunger (part 26) is visible, whereas it is not seen in the picture above because it is rotated to a position underneath the Safety Plunger Contact Pin. In the picture below, you can see the tip of the Safety Plunger because the safety is in the ON position (rotated up), and the Safety Plunger has rotated to a position above the Safety Plunger Contact Pin.



So, you can see how, when you rotate the safety back and forth between the OFF (down) position and the ON (up) position, the Safety Plunger (part 26) has to slide past the Safety Plunger Contact Pin, in the process compressing the Safety Plunger Spring (part 27), which releases after rotation is complete in order to secure the safety lever in its new position.

Here's another picture that might further clarify things, in which the safety lever has again been placed in the OFF (down) position, and the Safety Plunger is no longer visible, having been rotated back underneath the Safety Plunger Contact Pin:



As I was Googling this problem I came across forum posts in which people said they had lost the Safety Plunger while trying to deal with their pistol's issues, so I was aware the thing might take off. I was very careful about that when I removed the grip to try to get at whatever ailed the safety. Sure enough, the damned Safety Plunger came out anyway, but at least it landed right on the table where I could see it.

Fortunately, now that I think I know what the problem is, it should not be necessary to disassemble the thing to this extent to get the safety lever to work if it is stuck.

If the safety lever is stuck in the OFF position, it should be possible to free it by pushing on it with a small instrument of some sort as illustrated in the picture below.



You can't see the tip of the Safety Plunger when the safety is OFF (lever down), but by carefully feeling around for the Safety Plunger as shown above, applying a little pressure to push down the Saftey Plunger, and simultaneously applying reasonable upward force on the safety lever, you should be able to free the safety lever.

I think what's happened is that either the Safety Plunger tip, or the Safety Plunger Contact Pin, or both, are insufficiently polished and/or insufficiently hardened, and until they are polished enough by repeated rotation of the safety lever there is too much friction, which effectively locks the safety lever in the OFF position because one is reluctant to apply more force to the lever for fear of breaking something. As it was, I don't think I could have exerted much more force on the safety lever without a pair of pliers (which would probably have been a stupid thing to try).

I suppose the problem could be something else entirely, but clearly, there is an issue for Beretta to deal with. Maybe it's a manufacturing defect in my particular gun, where the Safety Plunger hole is drilled at the wrong angle. Maybe the Safety Plunger wasn't machined correctly, but then why didn't they catch that when they worked on this gun? Maybe the Safety Plunger Contact Pin is not positioned correctly in the frame due to some manufacturing issue. Maybe the Safety Plunger Spring is too strong. Whatever.

I don't know, but it seems that the safety lever on this particular Beretta Tomcat is now working correctly as a function of repeated rotations having polished the contact points of the Safety Plunger and the Safety Plunger Contact Pin, thereby reducing friction between them to an acceptable level.

I hope this was a unique circumstance with this one pistol, but that seems unlikely at the moment. I know I could have benefited from a post like this as I searched the Internet, so here it is in case anybody else has this problem.

Beretta, you owe me.

Just minarets?

I wasn't able to find, in the short time it was worth, the wording of the Swiss proposal to ban the minaret, but I gather it specified minarets and not steeples or other intrusive religious power structures.

To the extent the measure was specific to the islamic symbol, I would not have supported it because of the discriminatory nature of the ban.

Want to ban minarets? I'd be all in favor, but only if you ban steeples, too.

in reference to: Swiss voters 'back ban on building of minarets' - Times Online (view on Google Sidewiki)

"The American people," Senator McConnell?

> "The American people are asking us to stop
> this bill and we're going to do anything and
> everything we can to prevent this measure from
> becoming law," [Senator McConnell] said.

No, Senator McConnell, "the American people" are most certainly NOT asking any such thing of you.

What's being asked of you, and not by "the American people," is to preserve present arrangements. The ones asking it of you are 1) special interests making big money from the status quo and 2) ideologues, along with followers manipulated into believing in death panels.

"The American people." Whenever I hear or read that phrase it sets off my bullshit alarm.

in reference to:

""The American people are asking us to stop this bill and we're going to do anything and everything we can to prevent this measure from becoming law," he said."
- BBC News - US healthcare bill passes first Senate hurdle in vote (view on Google Sidewiki)

Incomplete

The topic of human overpopulation being taboo, this article in incomplete. If prominent projections come true, the world will add two Chinas worth of people in the next few decades. All the while, people everywhere wish to raise their standards of living. In the meantime, we've already depleted vast ocean areas of important species of fish, created vast ocean dead zones, raised the temperature and acidity of the oceans, melted the snows of Kilimanjaro and freshwater glaciers the world over. And so on and on and on...

Articles like this one report selected facts but don't really educate or inform.

in reference to: Earth needs users' guide to protect it from people | Green Business | Reuters (view on Google Sidewiki)

Loose Lips in High Places...

What happened, Senator Feinstein? Was it a simple mistake? How about an explanation?

The attack followed the statement in Congress on Friday by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California and the head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, that the pilotless aircraft take off from a base inside Pakistan.

“As I understand, these are flown out of a Pakistani base,” Ms. Feinstein said during a hearing attended by the director of U.S. national intelligence, Admiral Dennis C. Blair. In his testimony, Admiral Blair said that the drone attacks had achieved their goal. “Al Qaeda today is less capable and effective than it was a year ago,” he said.

The drone attacks, especially in the last six months, have increased anti-American sentiment in Pakistan to very high levels. Ms. Feinstein’s acknowledgment that the flights have the tacit support of the Pakistani government is likely to further inflame the protests over the flights. Her statement was prominently covered the Pakistani press Saturday morning.

Link

Damn!

Fat Fucking Chance!

NATO commander: Afghanistan drug raids imminent - Yahoo! News:

'Activities and actions will occur soon that will be helpful,' Craddock told reporters.

Fat fucking chance, unless you are candid about to whom the actions will be helpful.