Terry McAuliffe is an Idiot. But I Repeat Myself.

The “but I repeat myself” is because “Terry McAuliffe” is a synonym for “idiot.”

[Apologies for the watermark. I cut this lil snippet using a device I don’t usually use for video editing and used a freebie app to do it.]

McAuliffe demonstrates better than usual grasp of (alternative) facts (from the Bizarro Univese), for a Dhimmicrap pol.

Terry McAuliffe_ ‘We Lose 93 Million Americans A Day to Gun Violence’_cut

Seems Like Karma to Me

I already knew, generally, what an M44 was in the context of wildlife management–a baited cyanide device ostensibly used to control [that is, kill] coyotes and other canidae (apparently against foxes in Australia, though using a different poison), but for some reason it popped into my head and I decided to check a few resources for a more detailed description of it and its uses.

The Wikipedia article included an incident in “criticisms” of its use that made me snicker:

“In 2003, Mr. Dennis Slaugh of Vernal, Utah, was on public lands and mistook an M-44 for a survey marker. When he pulled on it, the device shot sodium cyanide powder on his face and chest causing him to become violently ill.” [Wikipedia article on M44 cyanide device]

He THOUGHT it was a SURVEY MARKER on public land, so he tried to pull it up? Asshat. He got what he deserved. The Deuteronomical injunction against moving “boundary stones” came to mind (along with all the laws currently on the books) when I read about this asshat. Since the incident was cited as a criticism of the use of M44 cyanide devices, I doubt the asshat learned the proper lesson from his disgusting behavior. The proper lessons to have learned from that would include:

DON’T MESS WITH SURVEY MARKERS
DON’T MESS WITH STUFF THAT IS NOT YOURS, PERIOD
DON’T BITCH AND MOAN AND DEMAND SOMEONE “DO SOMETHING” WHEN YOUR OWN MISBEHAVIOR REBOUNDS ON YOU

But, as I said, since the incident is cited as a criticism of the device and its use, I doubt the asshat learned the proper lesson from it. I could be wrong. . . but that’s not the way to bet.

Cressida Dick Says Latest Muslim Terrorist Attack Shows the Strength of London’s Diversity

I’ll look for other sources for this, since ABC “News” has so often purveyed fake news, but if this is indeed genuine, then the police commissioner of London’s Metropolitan Police should go practice her “diversity” with ISIS. (She does have an appropriate last name, though):

London police chief: Attack victims show city’s diversity

Yeh, she’s a real dick, all right.

Sometimes, Even Subliterate Writers Can Be Entertaining. . . Though By Accident

Sometimes, text written by a subliterate writer can lead to fun stuff. A silly, 20-something self-pub subliterate writer (whose “editorial” helpers are no more literate than he is) provided such a brief moment, before I ashcanned his stupid book.

“. . .tells me that a newly discovered landmark was uncovered by the storm and that the ruin is not in any kind of withered [sic] state.”

Oh, my. The subliterate writer was probably groping for “weathered,” but since

a. his ears are apparently dull and
b. he just flat-out doesn’t know the differences between “wither” and “weather,”

. . .he went with a near homophone that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

But. . . then I paused and thought of the different meanings of wither, and their etymologies. (Yes, because I spent much of my youth reading dictionaries–and still do to this day, for that matter–and have a wide range of interests in disparate fields, I knew that the noun “wither” and the verb “wither” came from two very different roots. *shrugs* So? 🙂 ) So I had a bit of personal entertainment contemplating a horse’s withers and the withering of a plant.

And then, back to the Badly Written Text to a further description of the “ruin”:

“In fact, it doesn’t look “ruined” at all! It appears to be in perfect condition!”

*head-desk* Then why, oh why, did the “eminent archaeologist” initially refer to it as a “ruin”?

Because the writer had no appropriate vocabulary to describe it else, of course.

Well, this lil incident combined with four others in the two pages since I picked the book back up to convince me I needed to delete it from my library entirely, so as not to even accidentally pick it back up.

Oh, well. At least I managed to get all the way to 4% of the thing this time. . .

Which Is It?

Stuck on stupid, or “Dunning-Krugerite can’t get off a dime.”

“At the age of 12, Adam’s 40 year old mother left the family for her 20 year old ski instructor”

OK, was Adam’s mother 40 or 12 when she left the family?

File this under “Other reasons I am completely uninterested any the book from this writer,” along with “Stupid/Boring/Uninteresting Premise,” cretinous statements in the text (page 1–I got no further) like, “I held my gaze on the sun in amazement,” (and no, dram sequences don’t excuse such idiocies), and other such jejune, moronic, or even illiterate text.

Gee. One might think a _writer_ would at least try to put his best foot forward on the first page. Oh, wait. he probably did.

#gagamaggot

Stupid Information for Dunning-Kruger-ites

Saw a silly article, “Science reveals why your shoelaces come untied.” Silly. Tie them correctly and they won’t come untied until you want them to.

But I’m sure the wide-spectrum incompetents who have inflicted Dunning-Kruger Syndrome on themselves (and who then inflict everyone else with their undeservedly confident incompetent behavior) would find the article comforting.

#gagamaggot

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.