From all over the place…
UPDATE: Pelosi backpedals (via War On Guns)
Maybe to insert the AWB into a “must-pass” legislation?
From all over the place…
UPDATE: Pelosi backpedals (via War On Guns)
Maybe to insert the AWB into a “must-pass” legislation?
With my tax refund in, I finally have enough to get a scope mount…
http://www.bassettmachine.com/aboutus.htm (the picatinny version, please),
so now I have to get the scope rings, prolly some flip-up lens covers (the scope came with a sexy bikini lens cover, but I’m not sure how well that’s going to stay transparent), a bore sighter…
and a nice gun rest to hold it all when zeroing the rifle. By chance, I got a coupon from Cabela’s that’ll save me 20%, but that’s still a lot of stuff to buy to make a proper shot. ”Lives, Fortune, and Sacred Honor” I suppose.
Mostly Fortune right now, though.
Nice of them to inform the good residents of Carroll – perhaps they can also sell Girl Scout cookies as well while training up.
I took the day off to hear the verdict in the Krause case in West Allis…
Judge Paul Murphy spoke at length about the decision (and I wish I could have had the full recording I tried to get of the verdict – my MP3 recoder took this as a sign that it won’t record). I’ll try to give my impressions of the case, but it looks like I’m going back to the back of the journalism school line as far as reporting goes.
Murphy spoke at length about precedent (including Heller) but seemed to put aside constitutional concerns (probably because it’s a municipal court, something he addressed at length about, saying that this was strictly to be an oral decision, not a written one). He mentioned that Krause and the man who called the police, Dykstra, seemed to be upstanding citizens, and the crux of the case came down to “was Krause being disorderly?”*
He then brought up the Nazi flag analogy that he apparently used in the first hearing on the subject, saying that Nazis holding a rally in Illinois were protected by Fist Amendment concerns, and were allowed to march, even though they were certain to promote disorderly conduct in someone. That, the fact that Krause was not confrontational in any way with the arresting officers, and the absence of any statute on West Allis’ books that said explicitly that open carry was against the law, led him to give the Not Guilty verdict.
There was a nice turnout for the hearing (mostly men, though). The local affiliate of Fox showed up for media coverage (maybe I can get some of that on the web later today?).
Now- where’s our Milwaukee Gun Examiner, and what’s her take on this?
* And this got the most reaction out of me – Murphy sounded at one point to me like he wanted a cut-&-paste statute for this hearing, so he could go back to doing simple things like traffic violations, rather than giving 2A supporters fuel to perform open carry in Wisconsin. He even spoke at length about how the legislature failed to address this for several years, sounding, in my opinion, like he’d be in favor of legislation against both open carry and concealed carry.
I imagine that some people might care whether or not I let comments on this site – here’s a reason why I don’t…
A couple of months back, I sent a letter to the editor at The Journal-Sentinel. Yesterday I get a postal letter from a Jerome E. Frederick, “Academic auditor at U.W”. I guess Jerome feels a little paranoid, since on the pages of the photocopied letter, he redacted the PO box and the last digit of the zip code (wasn’t much help, as he needed to put that stuff on the envelope if he wanted to mail it).
I’m going to put the entire letter up here, since he mailed it to me, and since I don’t think he knows what this newfangled Internet thingy is…I’ll start with the most legible of the pages first…
ELEMENTS OF DISASTER
I do not know how to calculate wind chill factor. What’s the formula?
But becauseof big snowfalls in the last few years I have developed a theory about it that uses atmosphereic carbon dioxide as a K factor. The other K factor I think about is Westerly winds which we get at this latitude of our Northern Tier.
My theory of global warming has a significan small decimal to Recon(sic) with. It’s the CO2 content of Earth’s atmosphere. The percentage of carbon dioxide has been increasing to something more than .04 percent. I recall that the N2 content of air is 80%. I rember(sic) the atomic weights of carbon, nitrogen,and sulphur. Most oxygen occurs as O2 in the air. Carbon dioxide has a molecular wt. of co(?) 14 + 32. So the Co2 is a heavier compound than the N2, O2, or methane. But if you arrange these air molecules from heavy to light and know the percentage of CO2 in your atmosphere, you can theorize that out excessively heavy snow falls musbe due to slower continental movement of air which is now a heavier atmosphere than it used to be.
(This bit is in blue ink, in different handwriting – maybe Jerome himself?)
When the snow gets so deep that I can’t get to my car out onto the road, that is a disaster.
(Back to the original writer)
References: When I was a student of chem 101 we used the table of atomic wts. of the elements to balance chem equations. Discussions at kyoto on current and former percentages of CO2 pollution in the air must have caused most of the big eight delegates to quit the conference early.
(This second sheet is also photocopied with my name on it, and has a clipped-out version of my letter to the editor pasted to the back, with my phone number and what looks to be another phone number written on it.)
IRAQ occupation will be permanent because it will mimic the SAUDI occupation.
On the eve of the invasion of Iraq, Pres. Bush met with AP reporters at the Whitehouse (sic). There was no T.V. coverage of the meeting but the Jour.-Sent. (sic) carried the story i.e. the AP report the next morning. In the AP report it said that all Amer. Army troops would be removed from Rhyhad and Yemen, and would be sent to a new Army token post to be established in Iraq. So if you or I go to visit Rhyhad or Yemen we will not see any soldiers wearing the uniform of the US Army there. The trade-off was approved by the War Dept. and applauded by some members of the U.N. It was a trade off of U.S. influence in two Arab countries.
The trade-off didn’t get T.V. coverage. And so all our T.V. couch potatoes have missed, and the frequen cover-up appearances of Colin powell, Condi, and Gen’l (sic) Petreus, etc. have made most AP readers forget about that singular AP report. A small residue of U.S. soldiers will guard against piracy in Iraq like they used to guard against piracy in Saudi Arabia. The shiek(sic) of Saudi had agreed previously that an Army post in Saudi A would help.
The War Dept. approved of the Bush-Sr. invasion of Kuait(sic). It also approved of the Bush-Cheney invasion of Iraq.
Ask your librarian about the War Dept.
The third page starts with the heading (clipped from a newspaper)…
BUSH SAYS MOTIVES ARE PURE
Geo. Bush was a cheerleader at Yale. And now he needs a new cheerleader because most of his adjenda(sic) items have failed. His biggest success has been in keeping gas prices from sky rocketing, but he will not brag about how Bush-Cheney did that because it would cause too many banalities to be uttered by himself and critics.
Bushes (sic) biggest failure was that he could not get a majority of G.O.P. senators to vote for his plan to give political asylum or amnesty to 12 mil. illegal aliens. Pres. bush has not apologised yet for his plagarizing(sic) of the word amnesty from a private organization of which he is not a member. Amnesty International tries to set refugees free from refugee camps in places like Austria and Thialand(sic). But 12 mil. Mex. aliensare not in refugee camps. They are migratory and mobile. The G.O.P. should censor Geo. Bushe’s(sic) speeches to omitt(sic) the word Amnesty and insert asylum in its place. Bush would like to have been able to utter a Proclamation of Emancipation on behalf of 12 mil. illegal aliens.
A new adjenda(sic)? Hold an auction in Bagdad to get rid of half of the inventory of Army Humvees. The Humvees are the most obvious objects of alien envy.
Humvee chariots of war should all be left behind for car dealers to get rid of. When all the Yankees come home from Iraq, all the Humvees shoudl be left in Iraq.
Now, what can we guess about jerome from the preceeding?
1 – Jerome is a veteran – my guess is a vet of the Korean war from the references to the War Dept.
2 – Jerome frequents the public library system.
3- Jerome needs to communicate with someone, but not face to face.
4 – Jerome reads the Journal-Sentinel.
5 – Jerome doesn’t like Humvees.
I wonder what Jerome thinks of Obama…
Been about 2 months since I was at the range – the weather’s gotten warmer for a bit, so I thought I’d better get down there…
Last of 3 targets, offhand, standing kinda cockeyed due to a big puddle where I wanted to be (I’m not getting into a puddle of cold water to shoot until there’s somebody shooting back, thanks.).
Perhaps I’m going about this the wrong way – maybe I should try to state what I think Libertarian Media Theory should be, as Rand did, rather than try to frame it through already made projects…
Well, then – I believe that it should start with a clear protagonist, and adhere to the Zero Aggression Principle. A lot of Westerns conform to this sort of structure: no pre-emption of others’ evil actions, and one helluva lot of provocation before the Hero opens the old trunk where the sixguns were placed because Mary was a churchgoer.
The antagonist, well, they are tresspassing on property rights in some sort of way. Using all the water from the river, drying out the rest of the farmers downstream, or refusing to take a “No” from the pretty schoolmarm.
I’m thinking that a lot of superhero films don’t match the test – most superheroes act as extralegal police on steroids.
Pictures are for entertainment, messages should be delivered by Western Union. Samuel Goldwyn*
Two things prompted this post – one, I get a hit every once in a while from somebody searching for “libertarian media theory” and two, I picked up Ayn Rand’s The Romantic Manifesto the other day, and some of the points she brings up point to that sort of analysis. No one will mistake me for a Philosophy professor, and for dipping my philosophical toe into the river like this, I’ll probably get it bitten off by an epistemological snapping turtle, but here goes. I will not extend this essay to all of her points, but rather to the moving-picture (including both film and video) and written-word end of her arguments (the ones I personally am most familiar with). I’m also addressing Rand specifically, since most Libertarians start with her as a major influence.
Rand’s definition of Art is 1) it “serves no practical, material end” (Chap. 1, pg. 4)**, that it “belongs to a non-socializable aspect of reality which is universal (i.e. applicable to all men) but non-collective: to the nature of man’s consciousness” (ibid) and, probably most important for her, Art is, “a selective re-creation of reality according to an artist’s metaphysical value-judgments.” (Chap.1, pg. 8).
Throughout her book, she examines particular art forms and decides which meet her standard of Art. To her credit, she does believe that one can recognize a particular work as Art, but disagree with that work’s premise on a personal level (as an example of this, Chap. 3, pgs. 33-34). Music in the Western mode (I assume that she’s speaking of Western Classical music here, since she mentions The Blue Danube) is better than Primitive or Oriental music, which has “a paralyzing, narcotic effect on man’s mind”. (Chap. 4, pg. 53). Hindu Dance, negative: Ballet, positive (Chap. 4, pgs. 58-59). Eventually, she arrives at film as a medium and generally finds favor with it (although Fritz Lang’s Siegfried seems to be her high point for the art form (Chap. 4, pg. 62)), but still photography, not so (“a technical, not a creative skill” and makes the distinction between film and still photography being Film having a story, without which the primary artist of Film, the director,”is merely a pretentious photographer”(Chap. 4, pg. 65).***
Later in the book, she also finds favor with certain writers (Victor Hugo, Margaret Mitchell, Ian Fleming) which, I believe, she shares certain traits with as a writer, especially so with Ian Fleming. Character driven, tightly plotted novels, with protagonists being “larger than life” and moving the plot along through “the character’s values (or treason to values)” (Chap. 6, pg. 100).
So, what would be my point in going through this? My belief is that libertarian media theory is based solidly in showing idealized individualism coupled however tenuously with character-based principles, whatever those may be. Consider: look at the James Bond franchise (according to Wikipedia, the longest running and most financially successful English-language film franchise to date). Or look at The Dark Knight (#24 on the Top 25 All-Time Box Office Winners according to IMDB) reaching $500 million in 45 days. I hate to make myself look like a fanboy here by talking about spy movies and super hero movies, but I choose to believe that their success had a lot to do with the way they were portrayed as being (dare I say it) heroic (and not just because James Bond gets women and Batman gets cool stuff AND gets women)?
Am I making any sense in this? Commenting is enabled for this post simply to see if anybody could define it any better.
* And by the way, every malapropism attributed to him they published on Wikipedia rocks!
** All references to Rand are from the Signet Centennial edition of The Romantic Manifesto (ISBN 0-451-14916-5)
*** I cannot believe that she discounts the screenplay as being one of the primary elements of what makes a film great – she swallowed Truffaut’s auteur theory HOOK, LINE, & SINKER!
Via David Codrea – a MILWAUKEE Gun Rights Examiner…
Hopefully she’ll be able to publish commentary often – especially since many of the most fervent gun control advocates are women.