Sometimes, Unintended Consequences Have MASSIVELY Unintended Benefits

All the manufactured sturm und drang of folks upset that “their” criminal candidate–surprisingly!–managed to lose a fixed election to a clown has driven more and more #NeverTrump -ers into reluctant defense of the Orange Clown, and reluctant Trumpery voters into firm support for a pres-elect no thinking person wanted.

Chill or lose even bigger down the road, dumbasses.

“The trouble began” the morning after the election, when the principal of West High emailed the teachers: “Please be positive and strong and teach the heck out of our kids today.”

By the Skin of Their Teeth

I see a lot of silly folks crowing about having a “Republican” in the WH along with “Republican control” (by the skin of their teeth) of Congress.

So? It means little to nothing, really, since any “conservatism” in the Republican Party is no different to the “conservatism” decried by R.L. Dabney in his day:

“Conservatism’s history has been that it demurs to each aggression of the progressive party, and aims to save its credit by a respectable amount of growling, but always acquiesces at last in the innovation. What was the resisted novelty of yesterday is today one of the accepted principles of conservatism; it is now conservative only in affecting to resist the next innovation, which will tomorrow be forced upon its timidity and will be succeeded by some third revolution, to be denounced and then adopted in its turn. American conservatism is merely the shadow that follows Radicalism as it moves forward to perdition. It remains behind it, but never retards it, and always advances near its leader. This pretended salt hath utterly lost its savor: wherewith shall it be salted? Its impotency is not hard to explain. It is worthless because it is the conservatism of expediency only, and not of sturdy principle. It tends to risk nothing serious for the sake of truth.”

But at least one good thing has come of The Trumpery’s win in the prexy race:

A Musing: Driving

I’ve observed changes* in my driving over the past couple of decades–maybe “few” would be more like–mostly for the better.

For one thing, I’m more conservative in my driving now than in previous decades. Part of that–a large part–is due to conscious changes to my habitual driving behaviors. For example, while I never had my first car (1953 Chevy Bel Air, 6 cylinder, 3 on the column manual transmission) above 110 mph (to my knowledge; the speedometer pegged at 110 😉 ), I did, of olden days *heh*, regularly and habitually travel at whatever speeds I thought I could handle in whatever vehicle I was driving. . . without getting caught. Yeh, I did get a speeding ticket one time, but that’s a long story.

Now, I habitually travel at posted speeds, only exceeding the speed limits for passing, or when keeping to the posted speed would seriously impede traffic, or a few times when I zone out, as it were, and do not maintain conscious control of my lead foot.

And “more conservative”? Yeh, I just noticed this morning that a turn-off on a 55 mph-posted highway that has a 25 mph posted “recommended speed” cautionary sign that I used to take at the posted 55, I now, apparently, have a “new normal” 45 mph turn-off speed. *shrugs* That one seems to have happened all on its own.

Or perhaps it was just an effect of a coffee deficiency. *shrugs* It felt “right” though.

Some old patterns remain, of course, and some older things I was taught when I first started driving are reasserting themselves, or I have decided they are worthwhile patterns to re-engage. For example, I do still have problems with some slowly-moving roadblocks. Oh, I don’t so much mind slowing down for horse-drawn carriages or farm or road maintenance equipment that are occasional “slowly-moving roadblocks,” and especially the school buses on two lane roads and highways here in America’s Third World County™, but folks who cannot even manage a double nickel on roads that were originally designed and built for faster travel, simply because “Hills! Curves! Scary!” or other mental handicaps really irk me.

And it does take some serious self-control, still, to not answer some asshat’s high beams with the same.

But overall, less agressive driving is my new norm. The old “one car length for every 10 mph when following another car” does make passing “slow-moving roadblocks” a bit more challenging when on two-lane highways, but it’s my renewed norm, and, in fact, on some roads here in America’s Third World County™ where I know I can expect some “slowly-moving roadblocks,” I tend to drive even more conservatively than my ancient “Driver’s Ed” instructions dictated.

But more gripes still abound. The aforementioned “slowly-moving roadblocks,” folks who think the ONLY setting for their headlights is high beam, wanderers (“Hey, doofus! Find your lane and stay in it! That double yellow line before that blind hill/corner is there for a reason. I don’t want to have to avoid your head-on collision with someone in oncoming traffic!” *sigh*), people performing a “GHETTO STOP” on two lane highways (in 55 or 60 mph posted speeds) having conversations between their cars blocking the highway, etc., have convinced me that Lovely Daughter’s dream of taking the cars away from 80% of the drivers on the road is a worthy dream. *heh*

Other things: I used to find cruise control to be useful. No longer, not even on Interstate highway driving. I find it a barrier between me and the road. I want to have to think about what I’m doing a bit more than just pointing the car in this direction or that.

All our current vehicles have automatic transmissions. I really miss manual transmission driving. The engagement factor, again. I may address that lack sometime in the coming year. . . or not. Something to think about.

I simply cannot understand folks who apparently drive no further ahead of themselves than their noses. IMO, folks who do not “drive” at least a quarter mile ahead of their own position (while maintaining observation to everything between their position and the distance they drive ahead) should have automatic “dope slap” mechanisms installed in their head rests. Really. Continue reading “A Musing: Driving”

Isn’t That Special

Another one for the “The Book Blurbs are Better Than the Book Could POSSIBLY Be” file (and a evidence of one of the reasons many new writers shouldn’t. Write, that is.):

“To beat a depraved serial killer, [Xxxx] may need to think like one. . . ”

Thanks for letting me know the book’s not worth reading (*meh* I’d rather read about a cereal killer, whether it be a bug, fungus, or rodent), but at least reading the blurb gave me the entertaining moment considering the differences between a depraved serial killer and all the normal, run-of-the-mill serial killers.

*Throws a Bullshit Flag on the Play*

Seen [at an undisclosed Internet location], stated by a person claiming to be a Bible-believing Christian:

“My job is NOT to ‘stop Hillary’ or to “StopTrump.’ My job is to lovingly trust and obey my Savior. He gave us very specific vetting lists for consideration when choosing candidates for leadership of a nation.”

I’d like to have the scripture citations where Christ noted the qualifications for “candidates for leading a nation,” please. TY. I do recall the scripture where he told some folks to “render unto Caesar [a pagan with questionable morals by biblical standards] that which is Caesar’s,” but cannot seem to put my finger on his “vetting lists” for candidates to be voted into civil office. . .

And no, I will not accept the parameters set down by which Saul was chosen as king of Israel (against God’s wishes, but he gave ’em what they wanted. Didn’t THAT turn out well. . . )

The comment specifically cites “vetting lists for candidates” set forth by “my Savior”–very specific vetting lists WHICH DO NOT EXIST.

I do very much hope the person who made this asinine statement gets lost on the way to the polling place this November.

“Based on a True Story”

Whenever I see “based on a true story” hitched to any sort of media presentation, I understand that the “based” part simply means, “Something happened. One or more elements of what happened may appear in the following presentation. . . or may not.”

Of course, this makes such media presentations “truer” than a typical “news” story, so there’s that. . .

Twigging to Dunning-Krugerites

Another trait that exposes those who want others to suffer for their self-inflicted Dunning-Kruger Effect is claiming status they obviously cannot qualify for.

Example:

Every now and then, I see a self-pub book cover with “Author So-and-so”. Invariably, at least so far, such books have proven to be unreadable well within the first page of text. Sometimes the first paragraph or the first sentence or even the dedication (if one exists) is so badly written that I almost feel a wee bit of pity for the po’ baby that refers to himself (or herself) as “Author So-and-so,” because the chance that such folk will ever even become moderately competent wordsmiths is somewhere zero and -1,000–and that’s often an optimistic estimation.

Sad. I just wanna know who encouraged them to write without becoming at least literate enough to be fluent in English.

Oh, another clue to incompetent self-pub writers is that they frequently include a forward or dedication that makes much of the extensive editing their “work” has undergone. Almost invariably, that indicates that the book is FULL of misused words, indicating that both the writer and any editors are the next thing to illiterate, inexcusably execrable grammar (in narrative, not even dialog), unbelievable continuity errors, etc.

And they (and their so-called “editors”) never see all the “Oopsies” because they are not really literate enough to know the differences. Not one of them.

And yet they think of themselves as and proudly proclaim themselves to be “authors”.

SPAM “Success!”

From a “Free English Tutorial” site, this SPAM comment caught my eye:

“English language has grow to be a prerequisite for pretty much something that we do, from applying your favorite social networking web sites like Twitter and Facebook and generally working with the internet to applying for strong jobs. We all know how a great deal a second language can enhance our careers”

Yeh, about that English language tutorial thingy. . . Tutoring folks to speak/write at the (illiterate) level of most Mass Media Podpeople or 20-something aspiring self-pup writers isn’t necessarily a success track, IYNWIMAITTYD.

Pro tip: don’t give up your day job digging ditches.

“Helicopter Nanny State” Wants All Parents to be “Helicopter Parents”

“Don’t Leave Your Kids Near Judgmental Strangers” highlights once again the evils of “No Child Alone–EVER!” societal/judicial constructs.

Frankly, I think parents who are unjustly harassed by nosy parker buttinskis should go on the offensive and sue ’em (defamation? Something like that), demanding p-sych evaluations, background checks, and more. Put the (steel-toed, spike-soled) shoe on the other foot. . . and give ’em a really swift, hard kick in the “fundamentals” with it.

Repeatedly. Until, they go away and stay away.

Stupid Book Blurbs (for Stupid Books?) Level: Grandmaster

Here’s one that starts badly with the first word and goes downhill from there.

“Shalthazar the dark wizard came to Llars seeking power beyond imagining, and got more than he ever imagined.”

*doh*

I’m almost sorry I missed this book. (But, I wasn’t really aiming, anyway.)


I’m also unimpressed by blurbs that mention an “affirmative action” award–you know, one reserved for some ethnicity or whatever “disadvantaged” multi-culti “lit-ur-airy” Balkan state group author who can’t write well enough to win a legitimate award.

Oh, heck. ANY award not decided strictly by everyday, ordinary readers of the book is bogus. In that vein, book awards should be based on (actual, real, legitimate) sales, and, in fact, the only awards that really count are those that go into the writer’s pocket.