Happiness Is A Warming Gun

Global Confusion241

This entry was posted in Politics, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

39 Responses to Happiness Is A Warming Gun

  1. rl crabb says:

    The BBC says that a hot world will lead to violence. Ya think? On the other hand, the govmint doesn’t think we ought to have too many guns. Somewhat of a contradiction.


  2. PeteK says:

    Well Government has always been full of a bunch of Oxy-Morons.

  3. I’ve never owned a gun and see no point in buying one now.

    Besides, the fleeing hoards figure to go south of San Jose and into the central valley in search of food. All they’ll find up here is over-priced farm to fork organic food (but only where NID lets the water flow).

  4. I didn’t see “The Postman” because I’m not a sci fi guy and I’m not interested in speculation about a post-apocalyptic America.

    I have noticed a higher level of fear and paranoia in the foothills than I ever experienced in the Bay Area. Shortly before the Zimmerman verdict, a guy told me he feared an invasion of blacks if Zimmerman wasn’t convicted. When I pointed out that this is the second whitest county in the state, he said, “They’re all over the place.” I had to admit I’d seen a black man in Grass Valley the day before. (He looked lost.)

    It is said that people who prefer to live in rural communities like the slower pace of life and the lack of stress found in metro areas. This combination apparently gives them too much time to let their imaginations run wild.

    P.S.: Don’t bother with the observation that just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean you don’t have enemies. I’ve heard if before.

    • Chris Peterson says:

      Quite a leap; going from global warming to race. I had no idea the two were remotely related. I’ve seen Marlin Perkin’s Animal Kingdom, (“meanwhile downstream, Jim is impregnating an alligator”), enough to know the survival of the fittest theory, (in this case; survival of the largest gun), but I never caught the part where the gazelle cared whether it was a lion or a tiger that was chewing on it’s ass.

      It appears that city folk have an equal amount of time to envision our end.

    • Ryan Mount says:

      I’m of the opinion that it’s no slower here; we just have better parking. Unless you’re at Raley’s and looking for a door ding. Side Note: I just recently returned from the Big Island of Hawaii and they move at an excruciating slow pace. For example, they do not have speed limits, but rather minimum speed signs. Going into Long’s drugs in Pahoa for one 750ml bottle of gin was a 30 minute proposition.

      And we doesn’t seem to me to be any less more prone to fear or paranoia, unless I use the local blogs as my news source (apologies to you Mr. Crabb for dragging your delightful blog into the fray).

      • rl crabb says:

        Yeah, the Big Island is notoriously slow. If I was rich I’d seriously consider moving there, even with the constant threat of molten rock spewing into your backyard. There’s still the crime problem though. When the wife and I spent our honeymoon there, we were warned about leaving our rental car locked while wandering through the jungle. Almost every place we went there was a car full of Hawaiians sitting in the parking area, just watching the tourists.
        And locally, have you been following the news? I haven’t seen this much crime in the police blotter in many moons.
        We don’t have to wait for an invasion. They’re already here.

      • Todd Juvinall says:

        My sis lived there until last year and I have to say I never experienced any “line waiting”. I did experience some retail babes with attitudes though. Overall, I had a great time on the Big Island. It is four times bigger than our county in square miles. Worthless trivia.

        • Ryan Mount says:

          The slowness is a multi-player activity, which of course included me. The humidity and heat coupled with a general “we’re not in a hurry” culture contributed to the slowness. I may have been drunk too. Everyone else in Puna (the south part of the Island) is stoned.

          A big deal with the locals is this somewhat vague notion of “respect.” My Haole* white ass saw signs all over Puna that said things like “show respect u fuka idiot” and simply “respect.” One time a local yelled it directly at me for no apparent reason as I was just standing sunburning to death at Pohoiki. I waved and smiled.

          I couldn’t get anyone to tell me what they were after. But I suspected that it had to do with going slow and not letting your hippie children run around local stores. I failed in both regards.


          • rl crabb says:

            More useless trivia: Pahoa means “knife” in Hawaiian. And the warm pools down on the south side were very nice, as long as the eels weren’t biting.

          • Todd Juvinall says:

            Not being a hippie or a hippie parent I guess I will hold my comments to a single white tall haole who they generally left alone. The pace is truly slower and I suspect you may have been the recipient of their “take Hawaii back” movement types. I read last week they are finally paying for a plane ticket for the bums to return to the mainland. My sis was a physical therapist there and said the government run systems are terrible and wasteful. She is a lib.

          • Ryan Mount says:

            Locals seem to have little patience for feral children running though stores. Kinda like my Calvinist Mother in Mervyns times 10.
            In the Target in Hilo, no less than 3 people, including one employee, came up to us to check to see if my 18 month old was strapped into the cart. Yet, they let you ride in the back of pickup trucks down the highway. Weird.
            We stayed with my in-laws in Opihikao who are off the grid/we grow our own food types. They fight for indigenous hunting and foraging rights that the government is trying to take away, but even they find the Hawaiian independence movement silly, noisy and a waste of time. Which it is.

          • rl crabb says:

            My ex-in-laws live down in that part of the island. We showed a photo of them in their native habitat to a friend once. He said it reminded him of “Quest For Fire”. Ha ha. Current wife and I stayed at Uncle Billy’s in Hilo the last time I was there. I like Hilo a lot better than Kona. Too damn civilized. Pahoa is the Ridge with palm trees. Hang Loose.

          • Michael Anderson says:

            I think Honomu is more Ridge-like than Pahoa. And Waimea is Penn Valley. Heh.

          • Ryan Mount says:

            There is an unusually large number of Ridge transplants in Puna.

            It’s kinda odd sitting under a coconut palm taking to a naked guy on Kahena beach discussing the virtues of Mother Truckers.

    • rlcrabb says:

      I would never suggest that you should buy a gun, George, but I think that those responsible folks that have them shouldn’t be forced to give them up due to excessive fees and regs.

    • Todd Juvinall says:

      Speculation? I think Kevin Costner’s movie had it right on. All one needs to do is read a bit of history. Maybe read what Attila the Hun did or before that maybe the early Romans. Genghis Khan also comes to mind. The paranoia level seems to be in the liberal folks. We highlanders are not concerned because we know how to defend ourselves when they come to take our stuff. So, perhaps a bit of city exists inside you and you need some more “quiet time” on the back deck.

      • Chris Peterson says:

        Back to the ol’ type-casting, Todd? I’m about as far out in the country here in the NW as you can get, have plenty of guns and ammo, and a progressive attitude. When someone’s messing about in my shop late at night, I don’t yell out, “What political persuasion are you?” I’m not even close to a survivalist lifestyle, but I know survival has nothing to do with politics.

        Not all conservatives are John Wayne, and not all progressives are hippies.

        • Todd Juvinall says:

          I was responding to another person but since you bring it up I would say a mass of hungry and starving people might not be deterred by a person and one weapon. If there is food they will sniff it out. I don’t think I mentioned any politics in my response except I know the person I was talking to is a liberal. I really would like some examples of liberal heroism in say, defending his person or home from thugs. If you have some links I would appreciate you listing them.

          • Chris Peterson says:

            Yeah, I can see where, “The paranoia level seems to be in the liberal folks”, would be aimed at just one person, and in no way taken as political stereotyping.

            And of course there are no documented instances of any liberals protecting their family or home. Only conservatives are capable of such things. (lol) I’m no Audie Murphy or Neville Brand, but I am a veteran. Are you?

            Your supposition flies in the face of generations of my family’s protection of home and country. It may be your most ridiculous argument to date; that only conservatives stand between us and total anarchy. And I have always found it absurd that many conservatives trot out the flag, which to them symbolizes a nation founded on “Christian values”, yet scoff at anyone who dares quote anything resembling the words of the “Prince of Peace”. Peace is a word used by hippies and cowards, right? And caring for the sick and needy is for church ladies and communists. It’s as hypocritical as those who fight for anti-gay legislation in Congress, and then get busted for soliciting such behavior in an airport bathroom, or preach the gospel to their million-fold congregations while secretly having all manner of bent sexual affairs.

            People are people. Period. Stop quoting some preordained script of political tradition which is designed to stop us from uniting against those who truly pull the strings in our society for their own profit at our expense.

            George Carlin was right; these days it’s, “The American dream; you have to be asleep to believe it.” And as long as you hold onto, “I’m a man, you’re a liberal”, we’re all screwed.

          • Todd Juvinall says:

            ChrisP, thanks for exposing your deepest inner thoughts on who you hate and despise. I could not ask for a better explanation to the minions who may fall for a liberals hypocrisy. Thanks.

          • Chris Peterson says:

            Hate and despise? You got a funny way of reading things.

            I have no respect for hypocrites, no matter who they are or what they say. If they’re OK with you then that’s your choice. But I don’t hate and despise them; I feel sorry for the twisted lives they lead, and truth be told, if their actions didn’t effect the rest of us, I couldn’t care less.

            Our government has become a game played by and for billionaires, and rooting for the R team over the D team goes beyond naivete. Our system was based on the premise that our government would answer only to the will of the people, and I refuse to be told by those in power, or those who support them, what that will is. Others can join a team and drink the Kool-aid; I’ll have none of it, and I certainly won’t accept the opinion of a cheerleader for either team telling me which side I’m on.


          • Todd Juvinall says:

            Tell us all how you would affect change then. I am sure if you have answers to the concerns you espouse I especially am all ears.

          • Ryan Mount says:

            The fix is in. First this, which explains what’s wrong in 6 minutes and 31 seconds:


            Then this, which is the fix in 4 minutes and 27 seconds:


          • Chris Peterson says:

            It’s not really complicated, Todd.

            Get the money out of politics.

            We elect fellow citizens to represent us at all levels of government. In turn for their service, we pay them a salary which is compensatory to the work performed. Anything outside of that agreed upon salary is graft; a bribe paid by an individual or group to influence the decisions made by that representative.

            Contributions to any representative should be held to a level that is within the average citizen’s ability to equally participate. No more PACs, no more union contributions, no more revolving doors. Period. No one should be able to influence the decisions of our government any more than you and me.

            Try http://www.represent.us for starters. Demand an end to Citizens United by way of an amendment to our Constitution. It’s NOT a liberal thing; at the moment, liberal PACs are far ahead of conservative PACs in money raised, and everybody loses when PACs have their way.

            2nd- return to Glass-Steagall. Banks should not be able to use the federally protected savings of private citizens for their own market gambling. Banks should be banks, and investment firms should be separate from that. With very few exceptions, it kept our economy stable for over fifty years, and once repealed, we slid into the disaster of 2007 after countless firms went into bankruptcy.

            We, the people, have lost control of our own government, and the reason is simple; money now rules the day, and the few who control the lionshare of that wealth are calling the shots. It’s a 21st century feudal state, and something we fought against 230 some years ago to form this nation.

            Poll after poll shows that the overwhelming majority of American people recognize this problem, yet daily we are bombarded by the dog-and-pony show of red vs. blue, conservative vs. liberal, us vs. them, that keeps us from uniting to demand action. That’s all trivial bullshit that I refuse to buy into, and that’s why your constant droning on liberals upsets me so much; you’re smarter than that. Most of us are.

          • Todd Juvinall says:

            I agree about Glass-Steagal. But I must say you are quite naive about the me v them here in our politics. One only needs to see that that is a natural way of life. Politics is called “war without bloodshed” for a reason. Egypt, Syria, East Timor etc. are all good examples of people duking it out with fists or guns. In America it is different. We duke it out woth money. Citizens United has my full support. Money is speech and a corporation is simply a group of people with shareholders. As are PACs. I do think “bundling” should be stopped since we do not have a clue who the people bundled are. Obama did 250 million in bundles. I say I don’t care how much money someone gives as long as we have instant public notification who they are. I get a kick out people who say get the monmey\ out of politics and then have no answer on how do you pay for the TV, Radio and direct mail. Even at the local level it costs a shitpile of green to get your name out there so people hopefully remember you. I bet most people cannot name our Congressman, Senators and the Vice President. They remember Obama becasue he spent a billion buckos to implant his name in their pea brains.

          • Greg Goodknight says:

            “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” – P. J. O’Rourke

            “If the First Amendment has any force, it prohibits Congress from fining or jailing citizens, or associations of citizens, for simply engaging in political speech.” -Justice Kennedy, majority opinion in Citizens United case

            Let’s see, CP… you want no one to be able to spend more to influence others than the average Joe, while communications companies have all the free speech they want between the spots they sell to others. And you want to do this by restricting people and groups of people from using their own money to buy ads.

            Sorry, Justice Kennedy and the majority on Citizens United pretty much got it right.

          • Chris Peterson says:


            My objection to the inequality of political funding isn’t one confined to the liberties of free speech, but more of a concern for the health of the democracy itself. As I’ve stated before, there are no political speeches in a boardroom; no debates on abortion, or gay rights, or gun control, unless of course, the company has holdings which are affected by such issues. That is what motivates a business enterprise to support one candidate, or legislation, over another.

            A statesman once said, “A merchant has no allegiance save that of the ground beneath his feet.” What is best for our country, and our citizens, is not the concern of those who’s function is purely profit. Witness: off-shoring of manufacturing, large sums of un-taxable cash. The concrete ramifications of business policy over national interest are everywhere. When capitalism rules a society, rather than being a regulated integral component, today’s economy is the result.

            Take a current favorite dilemma; immigration. When Clinton, Congress, and ex-Coca-Cole exec Vincente Fox, enacted NAFTA, it opened the Mexican market to a flood of cheap, government-subsidized corn. Millions of Mexican farmers could no longer feed their families in the manner in which they had for hundreds of years, causing a mass migration across the border. We created the conditions that caused the problem and now many seek to blame the victims themselves for the resulting effect.

            So, sorry my friends, but I’m with Thomas Jefferson on this one:
            ” I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country.”Capitalism must be tempered with the needs of the nation or the many will suffer for the profits of the few; something the founders sought to remedy with our Constitution.

          • Chris Peterson says:

            Oh, and Todd, politics may be called by some, “war without bloodshed”, but it has been recognized from the beginning that, while some may take radical positions to sway the medium one way or the other, it is compromise which is the foundation of our system.

            As Hamilton, speaking as Publius in his tag-team support of a new Constitution, said in Federalist Paper #1, “Ambition, avarice, personal animosity, party opposition, and many other motives not more laudable than these, are apt to operate as well upon those who support as those who oppose the right side of a question. Were there not even these inducements to moderation, nothing could be more ill-judged than that intolerant spirit which has, at all times, characterized political parties. For in politics, as in religion, it is equally absurd to aim at making proselytes by fire and sword. Heresies in either can rarely be cured by persecution.”

            The present-day position of, “Our way, or we all go down”, is in direct opposition to that principle.

          • Todd Juvinall says:

            ChrisP. I agree with a small amount of what you have addressed as the main concern you have with things. But I am in total favor of unlimited free speech in our country and I am surprised based on your comments that you are not. America has made its bed and it was mainly the liberal ideology in place for many years that caused it. Even your liberal President Wilson used his power to squash free speech and assembly when he did not like things in 1919. And he was from academia for goodness sakes.

            Your dislike of corporations is evident but I do not share that concern. They are a business and not part of government. If the government was coming after your stash without a warrant because they made laws to do so, would you not try and influence that legislation? Sure you would. You would organize those in agreement with you and try to change the legislators to those that favored you position.

            But like many people who quote the Founders, rather, cherry picjk their words, I am sorry you fell so oppressed by the system. I would suggest you run for office here and make those changes. You will see even at the local level, that getting the third vote is pretty tough sometimes.

          • Chris Peterson says:

            Firstly, I am also for free speech, but it has never been unlimited. You are not allowed slander, except in politics. You are not allowed to yell fire in a theater, except in politics. In addition to free speech, we have always had a basis in our system for free actions, as long your actions do me no harm. I’m all for that. (I would note which party yells the most about those freedoms, yet seeks to limit our society to those actions which it considers appropriate, via their personal religion, morals, etc.)

            As far as Pres. Wilson, I’d have to note the difference of going to see Obama talk to an unfettered and open forum of 80,000 here in Portland vs. W having a fenced-off, free speech zone on the other side of town.

            And I have no strong dislike of corporations; they are doing what they are designed to do; making money for their share holders. All they are, basically, are instruments that protect personal holdings from business losses. They are subject to, in theory, regulations that keep them from harming the average citizens interests. (Back to the “do no harm” rule.) The first Republican President put labor above capital because, back then, there wasn’t capital without the labor. (Many of today’s operations are no longer are bound by that limitation.)

            From time to time, as you have noted in your “pendulum” scenario, they get out of control, and our society, as a whole, suffers from their actions. In 1913, another Republican President said that, to paraphrase, in the beginning, less government meant more liberty for the masses, but in today’s society, less government, and less government action, means that the masses are subjected to the rule of corporate interests. (T.R.)

            Our economy is like a fruit tree which must be trimmed and shaped from time to time for the betterment of all. And our taxes should not be a result of picking mainly the low-lying fruit while the fruit at the top grows heavier and stronger than the tree can support. Runaway capitalism is a recipe for disaster. (You don’t need a history book for examples of that.)

            Lastly; I always chuckle when someone says that a quote from our founders is “cherry picking”. I have the whole body of the Federalist Papers permanently posted to my desk top on my computer. If you’d rather, I could fill this blog with it’s entire content every time I wish to make a point about what they said on any given subject, but I doubt anyone would appreciate that. Time and again folks make the argument that individual freedoms are what the founders had in mind, and while that is the central core of our system, many forget that the Federalist Papers was an advertisement in a New York newspaper selling the need for a new document which would bind our nation together in a way which afforded the most freedom while protecting the health of the nation.

            Many, like the governor of NY then, and you now, have argued that it is an infringement upon their personal liberty to be subject to rules that prevent them from doing what ever the hell they want. Hamilton and Madison as Publius, and many of us now, argue that the good of all our citizens is the core of our republic, and that capitalism, like any other integral part of our union, must be tempered to ensure the reality that without “We the People” there will be no individual rights.

            And, by the way, when you use the example of the government coming to take “my stash”, you confuse the 60’s of time with the 60’s of my age.

  5. Juvinall seems to be armed and ready. I hope the plundering hoards show up during his lifetime so he can live his fantasy and go down with guns ‘ablazin.

    I have a hard time believing we have a crime problem here when our cops have the luxury of deploying a CHP helicopter, a K-9 unit from Placer County, park rangers, county deputies, and cops from Nevada City to chase a smash-and-grab thief who probably stole no more than a couple of hundred dollars.

    It’s a good thing there weren’t two scofflaws on the loose. The sheriff may have asked the governor to send in the National Guard.

    • Todd Juvinall says:

      I would rather talk someone out of thrashing me and my possessions but I am ready to defend if necessary. I am a nonviolent person so I just guffawed at your comments. Too funny. I am ready to stand my ground if necessary.

      I would suspect people moved here to get out of the crime ridden city and were looking for some peace and quiet. I bet you might b one of those people? Anyway, the reason we are safer here is becasue our law enforcement uses overwhelming force on the scofflaws. That also sends a message to other potential thieves of your stuff wouldn’t you say?

      • Todd, I am confident that you won’t have to “stand your ground” in your lifetime. This apocalyptic nonsense is just that.

        We didn’t move here to get away from crime; in fact, I was never a victim of crime until I moved here, and I was never propositioned to buy drugs until I moved here.

        Amazing, considering I spent all those years in the big, bad Bay Area.

        • Todd Juvinall says:

          Was your stash robbed? LOL! Yes every place has crime and my guess is you probably lived in the suburbs of the Bay Area where crime is a l,ot less than downtown. Regarding SYG. I am not a survivalist like some others and I am a peaceful fellow. But, if you think things can’t change quickly into anarchy anywhere on the planet then you are simply naive. Ask the people of the USSR where it is now and what the aftermath was. Or perhaps Burma or Zimbabwe.

          • rl crabb says:

            Why the debate over apocalypic global warming? It’s all poopadoodle anyway, right?

          • Chris Peterson says:

            I know it’s your website, Bob, but is such vile language really called for?
            And just as a warning, I believe p**pad**dle is on the NSA’s watch list for subversive catchphrases.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *