Monthly Archives: June 2017

Still Out Here….

Just busier than a one-legged man in a butt-kicking contest!

Going fishing for the holiday weekend, but when I return I’ll be posting more often.  Things to consider while celebrating our Independence Day in the meantime:

  • Your ability to still purchase firearms, ammunition and other preps.
  • Family and friends you know have your back.
  • The only thing stopping you from getting into better shape is the man/woman you see in the mirror.
  • There are people in our State and country right now who are planning to kill you and yours.
  • All the skills in the world won’t help you if you don’t have Hope, Faith, and Love.  Make peace with God if you haven’t.  Having Faith in God and a Hope for the future based on that Faith will get you through some really difficult times.

See you after the fishing trip.

Happy Father’s Day…

If your Dad is still with you, make sure you spend a call or a visit with him.  If you’re a Dad, enjoy the time with your children.  Life is fleeting.

Proverbs 4: 1 -4

1 Listen, my sons, to a father’s instruction;
    pay attention and gain understanding.
I give you sound learning,
    so do not forsake my teaching.
For I too was a son to my father,
    still tender, and cherished by my mother.
Then he taught me, and he said to me,
    “Take hold of my words with all your heart;
    keep my commands, and you will live.

Remember who you are….

RIP ‘Flounder’

I found out over at Phil’s place that ‘Flounder’ is gone….damn.  Rest in Peace.

From the Detroit News, here.

Stephen Furst, Flounder in ‘Animal House,’ dies at 63





A Primer on Vehicle Ramming Attacks (VRA)

Reblogged from the, “Raconteur Report,” here.

by Chris Hernandez


And one caveat to Chris’ piece:

Be aware that the VRA may only be the first stage of the attack, but that shooting or stabbing bystanders afterwards may not always be the second.

If everyone starts running after and swarming vehicles, it will be a nasty surprise when the truck bomber, having a large mob surrounding and attacking his vehicle, lets go of the VBIED deadman switch; or steps out with a suicide vest on, for the same deal.

If you’re already in the blast radius when the vehicle stops or slows, you have nothing to lose by responding closer.

But if it goes by you and on down the road a ways, taking cover for a bit may be a better way to deal with it than running towards Stage Two and becoming part of the crater.

You Shall Come No Further!


Excellent article from, ‘Men of the West.’

“…If there was ever something worth taking action against, it has to be this. We can’t afford to hope that reason or basic human decency will win in the end. We can’t trust in our leaders to make the right choices. Leaders change. And progressives are masters of wearing issues down inch by inch. But not for this. Never for this. They Shall Come No Further.”

Read the rest, here.

Re-Post: Two Sides of the Same Coin…

Yes, it’s true.  Both ‘Team Freedom’ and ‘OPFOR’ are basically two sides of the same coin when observing them in their natural habitat on the internet venue of choice.  Here’s a few examples that provide a synopsis of commentary on various subjects at blogs both in the ‘liberty movement’ and the other side ‘liberal/progressive/cultural Marxists/communists’:


Fallacious reasoning, ad hominem attacks, circular arguments, demonization, arrogance, group think, BFYTW (a chicken shit excuse to avoid presenting reasonable explanation to a challenger in a discussion), etc., etc., etc..   And our ‘side’ wonders why readership and mindset growth based on value added discussion doesn’t occur in the so-called, “liberty” blogosphere.  Our side wonders why such ‘piece of work’ groups such as Antifa is growing.   Besides having financial backing, they are appealing to something in their intended recruits that strikes a resonant chord.

Why should anyone ask a question or join a discussion when there’s a good chance some brave, consequence free keyboard hee-row is going to use the same exact Alinsky tactics to silence his or her opinion?  Even if the reason is because the attacker just doesn’t like the opinion in question.  Especially when our consequence free keyboard hee-row uses the ultimate, “I get the last word, so there!” junior high school ‘slam’ that demonstrates the hee-row’s maturity and depth of knowledge.

My own thoughts on the subject are simple:  If ‘Team Freedom’ wants to move ahead, get ‘the message’ out to a larger audience that will join with us and then help us move forward, we need a really significant lesson in ‘Come, let us reason together….’  Debate is fine; disagreement is fine; inability to back away and not get the last word (typically a cheap shot) is a losing proposition because it does not move our ideology forward or gain a single follower.  It might make the person taking the cheap shot think, “so there!,” but the victory is short lived, because someone who may have helped us most likely walked away.  And with good reason.

The paragraph above is the primary reason comments on here are closely moderated.

Commentary that adds to the discussion, whether in the form of reasonable debate or disagreement on any topic, acknowledging that even brand-spanking new people bring something to the table (willingness to learn and personal motivation comes to mind), is entirely welcome and encouraged.  Commentary designed to attack, discredit, demonize, or otherwise fallacious in nature that will stifle discussion for the sake of discord is not.

Some have said in the past, “Oh, so no free speech here?  Well, Fuck YOU!” and then they either leave or are banned.  What those few who’ve been banned or left on their own to never return fail to understand is simple:   ‘Free’ speech is not license to crap all over input by another commenter or spread garbage where ever one wishes without consequence.  Free speech guarantees under the First Amendment refer to the limitation on government entities attempting to limit speech, not discussions between private individuals in one forum or another.

Here, on DTG’s blog, there are only two consequences for speech that do not follow the guidelines set forth.    Banning and self-elimination from commenting.  Pretty reasonable, in my opinion.

Bottom line at DTG:  Positive discussions, debates, and disagreements that move the subject forward, even if corrective in nature, so long as those discussions, debates, and disagreements are not debilitating to those who may have a different opinion are welcome.

Let’s stop mirroring the tactics of the communists; let’s reason together and move toward the objective.  Anything or anyone that doesn’t help that really isn’t on the same side intellectually or ideologically.

We need consensus, which is not unanimity.

What, exactly, is consensus?  It is simply reaching substantial agreement by discussion but not necessarily unanimity. There are four positions participants take while trying to reach consensus. The first three can be included in a consensus agreement:

  • This is what I want.
  • This is not ideal but it’s OK by me.
  • This is not what I want but I can agree to support the group and not interfere.
  • This is not what I want and I cannot agree to support it.

Getting to the first three bullet points above, where most ‘can live with’ what has been developed can be measured individually with a simple method of problem solving:

  • What is the problem?
  • What are the root causes?
  • Who owns the problem (who does it significantly affect?)
  • Why is the problem important to you?
  • What evidence supports the assertion that the problem exists?
  • What are the objectives of our ideology (political, economic, personal)?
  • What strategy or options are available to nullify the root causes?
  • What methodology will be most effective to implement the strategy or options for root cause mitigation/nullification?
  • Who will follow up to determine if any ‘course correction’ or other action is necessary to reach consensus?

Here’s a few questions one can ask himself to determine whether or not he or she ‘consents’ or is joining in group consensus on a particular subject:

  • Does the agreement being reached come somewhat close to fulfilling my interests?
  • Will other people involved in the agreement fulfill their end?
  • Does an effective process for measuring/monitoring the actions agreed upon by those involved being implemented?
  • Does the substance of the agreement having consensus and the process by which it was reached satisfy a majority of those involved?
  • Will all the other people involved in the process provide the same answers, give or take?

Note there’s nothing unanimous when reaching consensus.  I’d be suspect of a group that didn’t have differences and rarely, if ever, reached unanimous conclusions or decisions.  Differences are essential to move good ideas, plans, and processes forward into the arena of ‘great ideas, plans, and processes.’

Be Silent Friend…

A Palatable Solution

Thought provoking post over at, “Men of the West,” original, here.

Over at Vox Day’s Blog, Vox Populi, a good discussion has been had on the fact that the past few decades (or more) have been a charade, as far as politics go.  The globalist worldview is in shambles, and continues to deteriorate. In the midst of this conversation, the estimable Tom Kratman offered his thoughts, which you can see in the screen shot above. Therein, he raises and important question, and one that I have struggled with. Some of our regular readers and commenters will agree to the veracity of that fact. Some of them have gone farther down that line than I have, to this point.

Now, this does not mean that I do not realize the possibility of no palatable solution being available. I just hold out some ray of hope that one can be found. Of course, that totally depends on how you define “palatable.” I am quite comfortable with repatriation of all non-Americans, which we have discussed before. Muslims need to be sent packing. I wholeheartedly welcome a “Big Beautiful Wall” on our Southern border.  So I do find all of that palatable.

What I hope to avoid is excessive violence to make it happen. I am no Pollyanna, expecting all sunshine and rainbows, and that these non-Americans will gladly pack up and leave. I am sure that there will be many isolated cases of violence and forced repatriation. However, I would sure like to avoid wholesale bloodshed. At this point, I find that unpalatable.

However, the situation is not static. It is a very dynamic scenario, and if those non-Americans refuse and react with violence, then we will have no choice. There comes a time when what used to be unpalatable becomes palatable.

I agree with Kratman. There is a very real likelihood that no palatable solution will present itself. If that is how the chips fall, then so be it. I just hold out some small sliver of hope that a more palatable solution can be found.

Either way, Men of the West have to be prepared for the absolute lack of palatability. If we have steeled ourselves to that unpleasant possibility, recognizing that we might have to do things we do not want to do, but must, then we will be much more efficient and effective when the time comes. And prayerfully, we will be pleasantly surprised with a better option.

Wisdom From the Past…Adapting it to Today

For a lot of scenarios we’re facing every single hour, every single day.  Make sure you know that when you utter this quote from Patrick Henry, there are those who will do what they can to ‘give you death.’  Be prepared for that eventuality.

Look at the actions of those who wish to subjugate quiet, peaceful people who wish to be left alone either by force or by fiat rather than by their words or platitudes.

Embrace the facts, deal with what is, and take appropriate action to safeguard your ‘precious cargo.’