Remember, perfect practice makes perfect! Have a great DTG weekend!
As you can see, your humble blogger needs more practice dry firing between range sessions…
In a case of ‘right now’ defense of your NPA, NPT strength dependent, here are 3 simple priorities to guide your DFP (Defensive Fighting Position) site selection:
Think about it: Get yourself an oversized old BDU shirt or an M65 you could remove the lining from. Follow his patterns. Experiment. What have you got to lose?
Here in our AO, we had some hellacious wind storms yesterday, uprooting trees, causing almost 750,000 to lose power, and countless wires came down that made traffic lights go dark. Here’s what the Michigan State Police have to say about intersection Right of Way:
DETROIT (WWJ) – When a traffic signal loses power, who has the right of way?
Many of us probably have the same thought: The intersection becomes a four-way stop. But that’s WRONG!
Michigan State Police say an intersection without power is never a four-way stop, unless temporary signage has been posted.
Instead, when a signal loses power, the intersection becomes uncontrolled and reverts back to the basic right of way requirements, as found in Michigan’s vehicle code MCL 257.649(1) and (2). Click here to see the law.
“Some people also mistakenly assume that the major road takes precedence, but this is not true,” Michigan State Police Attorney Steven Beatty said in an email. “To give you an example, if there are 5 to 10 cars on the side street who are continually going through the dark signal, the traffic on the main road would need to stop/yield the right of way. Likewise, if there is heavier traffic on the main road, the cars on the side street would have to wait until it is clear to proceed.”
To put it simply, the street or road with heavier traffic has the right of way. And remember, when two vehicles enter an intersection from different roadways at approximately the same time, the driver on the right has the right of way.
He’s got a point: “Don’t piss on my neck and tell me it’s rainin’….” Yes, I know President Trump is working against the GOP sponsored Ryan ‘Obamacare Lite,’ however, so long as Ryan is left in his position, Quisling that he is, the ACA “Obamination” will be left in place.
Dear President Trump: The Congress, including the Speaker of the House, needs to be drained. The full faith and credit of those who elected you is at stake.
So it’s out….. well, at least sort-of-out.
And let me point out a few things about this bill, at least as far as I can determine from reading and cross-referencing it:
Repeal and replace? More like bend over, grab your ankles and bite down on a big stick so you don’t chomp your tongue off.
When it comes to the media and their “lead-in” to the bill you have pieces like this, which sound awfully good when you read them until you realize there’s exactly zero being said about the how.
Remember, it’s who, what, when, where, why and how (sometimes stated as “with what?”)
These are the 5 Ws (and one H, or sometimes 6 Ws) that form the basis of journalism.
Where’s the examination of that last one: How?
Not in that oped and not in the “new bill” either IN WHICH THERE IS NOT ONE WORD ABOUT ANTI-TRUST, COLLUSION, OR ANY OF THE OTHER PRACTICES THAT MAKE MEDICAL CARE SO DAMNED EXPENSIVE, NEVER MIND THAT MANY OF THESE PRACTICES AND COLLUSIVE ACTS WERE RULED ILLEGAL IN 1979 BY THE SUPREME COURT YET THOSE LAWS ARE NOT ENFORCED AND THE COLLUDING PARTIES ARE NOT INDICTED, PROSECUTED OR BROKEN UP.
As an example you have laments like this from a physician:
Republicans ran on a platform of repealing and replacing a failing ObamaCare system.
Democrats touted ObamaCare as an overwhelming success. Neither party has really addressed the issues surrounding the law—patients are experiencing higher costs, diminished access and poorer quality care.
I have seen my patients go without medicines, miss important preventative care milestones and struggle to find access to high quality care. Copayments continue to increase—deductibles are rising (more than $12,000 in some cases) to the point where an average family simply cannot utilize insurance except in catastrophic circumstances.
There’s a hell of a screed in that article but as I read it what kept going through my head is that this is a physician who’s complaining that Washington has failed to fix this and that, lawmakers are putting “their own interests” ahead of the public and so on. Complaint after complaint after complaint leveled against both political parties.
But nowhere in that article is found any discussion about the how — that is, how is this individual physician prevented from putting a stop to that crap for his customers right damn now!
In other words how is it that he can’t charge $100/hour (a quite-reasonable wage, all things considered — that would be $200,000 for 50, 5-day-a-week 40 hour weeks of work in a year with 2 weeks off) in cash for his patients and given that most patients actually see said doctor for about 15 to 30 minutes per visit you then get to explain why someone who has a $12,000 deductible shouldn’t just pay $50 for 30 minutes of said doctor’s time with said physician seeing said person under his terms (and none of the nonsense being complained about.)
Is the problem that you can’t just pay the $50 because said doctor has been prohibited from holding out his hand for you to stuff a Grant into it? What law prevents him from doing that? Why is that all of these “escalating costs” and “administrators” have resulted in actual physicians kneeling before Zod instead of them telling everyone trying to mandate that crap to stick it up their ass?
In short did someone make the current model something he’s forced into rather than chooses and if so who did it with what law(s) (specifically) and why is doing so legal especially when every doctor in a given area has the same “problem”? If there’s no competition due to collusive behavior in a place where competition would obviously make someone richer at the other competitor’s expense then you have a very solid case that a felony violation of the law is taking place among all those who are doing the colluding! If extortion (that is, some sort of threat) is involved then it’s even worse. I remind you that in 1979 insurance companies and pharmacies tried to claim that their collusion was exempt from anti-trust law and lost at the Supreme Court.
There are only two possibilities: This physician is part of the scam voluntarily or he is being forced involuntarily. He’s either a protagonist and thus willingly engaged in the offense or he’s a victim of it.
Which is it and why isn’t that the center of the a whole lot of journalistic attention?
You know…. the old “How” question that is supposed to be central to journalism?
Start asking that question and you will find yourself in two places at once. The first is here, where we can remove $400 billion a year from the federal budget alone by cutting the crap on just one disease — by putting sufferers of same first and prescribing health instead of expensive drugs that do not resolve anything. The second is found in making The Surgery Center of Oklahoma the model for all medical practice exactly as it is for a car repair shop; that is, mandatory posting of prices and charging of the same price for the same product or service to all who come in the door for same.
Neither Democrat or Republican members of Congress will do either, and neither will Trump — and journalists will not poke at why physicians have not revolted en-masse and destroyed this demonic system from within by simply putting out their hand and demanding a Grant to see them for 30 minutes of their time, ending the rampjob on the front end, at the local medical office, with finality while demonstrating that obtaining medical advice need not bankrupt you or be complicated.
As a result of all these actors serving those who are colluding to jack up the price by a factor of five to ten over what it should be for medical care in this country and the complete unwillingness of both Congress and the press to call those parties out and put a stop to it the federal budget is on a path to implosion along with all of the pension systems in the United States within the current President’s term.
In 2009 I gave you a fairly simple “how” in these very pages, and have followed through with far more since, including more-complex ideas, all centered on the rule of law — specifically, law that has existed for more than 100 years and does apply to health care.
You might want to go back and read that piece again. Then read this one.
Make sure you note the dates on both….
As for Trump, Price and the GOP?
The above graphics literally underscore the point of this post, and those groups and their enablers (progressive social justice warriors) are smelling blood in the water, so to speak, however, some thoughts are offered for consideration, as an appeal to sanity:
All those bent on the destruction of the United States and it’s Constitution should also know one thing: The protections in the Constitution of government infringement on God given rights does not compromise a suicide pact.
The first step has been taken to right the wrongs of our government largess and flat out violation of the law: electing a president to return government activity to constitutional limits.
The millions of American citizens who are still American in spirit and purpose are showing great restraint to the Marxist, Islamist, La Raza/Aztlan, BLM movements. Those Americans are still going to work, paying taxes on their wealth (which provides the very food most of the non-assimilants eat), and not responding in kind to these enemies of our way of life.
To those of that ilk that read this, here’s another graphic for you:
And one more, for good measure:
And, lastly, while no sane man or woman wants war, and those inclined pray daily for Divine Intervention, a warning to those described and pictured at the beginning of this post, from a great combat leader, looked to by many patriots for example:
The Colonel lays it out rather clearly. See his column, here.
If it’s all right to “punch a Nazi,”1 can it ever be wrong to hospitalize or bury a Stalinist?
An interesting little tidbit came to my attention recently.2 Go ahead and read it here, then watch the video. I’ll still be here when you’re done.
Done? Good. Now what did you just see? No, no; it wasn’t just conservative, what some have taken to calling “cuckservative,” cowardice. Also, no, you didn’t just see someone destroying someone else’s property. Oh, sure, the left would try to paint it that way because, well, mere property crimes don’t call for violence3 and, given that property is theft in the first place4, it shouldn’t even be considered a crime. Naturally, all right-thinking5 people understand this.6
Unfortunately, however they’d like us to see it, that was not primarily a property crime, those broken College Republican signs. Neither was the incident where Professor Allison Stanger, of Middlebury College, was sent to the hospital and put in a neck brace a simple case of battery.7 And then there was Stranger Things actor, David Harbour, at the FAG awards8, approving of punching people in the face to shut them up and calling for more of the same.9 That’s not just inciting people to crimes of violence. Neither was it merely that when Berkeley middle school teacher and well known anti-free speech fascist, middle school teacher, and moral love child of Joseph Goebbels and Dolores Ibarruri, Yvette Falarca, insisted that Milo Yiannopoulos did not have the right to free speech, even as she approved of the violent riots that denied him that right.10
And that’s really the important crime on offer. It’s not damaging property that really counts, here; it’s the suppression of free political speech. The physical assault and battery of Professor Stanger wasn’t just about her and Charles Murray; it was much more an attempt to spread fear of speaking freely to far and near. David Harbour isn’t just inciting to violence from the safe perch of a stage; no, over and above his disgusting virtue signaling, nauseating moral preening, and filthy self-aggrandizement, he’s trying to terrorize into silence – rather, to get others to terrorize into silence – anyone who doesn’t agree with him and his. No need to belabor the point with Falarca and the anti-Milo riots, except to wonder why no one has yet put the tyrant bitch in the hospital or the morgue. O Tempora; o mores!11
In any case, that’s the real and really important crime, the attempted subversion through private action of the 1st Amendment’s right to free speech. One may, of course, argue that the 1st only protects one from governmental infringements on free speech. That’s true, as far as it goes. However, there are some nuances. Milo’s right to free speech is protected from government suppression. Falarca’s and Harbour’s incitements to violence are not necessarily protected speech, and, should we find that they’re inciting imminent violence, they can and should be put on trial for them. Then there is Section 1983,12 which may make liable to suit certain left-wing politicians who have refused to allow local law enforcement to protect constitutional rights.13
Title 18, USC 241, would appear to cover private action, at least if a conspiracy was involved, and carries up to ten years being made non-anal retentive by Bubba the Biker.14 Note that this is distinct from the rioting charge, carrying similar penalties, and under which some 214 of the Inauguration Day rioters have been indicted. There is, however a nuance to Section 241 that I am not sure will cover the problem, at least usually.
However, there doesn’t appear to be a single source law that fully protects individuals’ exercise of their rights from private action. I suggest strongly that there ought to be, and soon…and with horrifying mandatory penalties. Moreover, I think the lefties ought to get on board with this. No, I don’t expect it as a matter of principle on their part. I learned long ago that few of them are capable of principle, any more than they are of friendship if contrary politics is involved. No, they ought get on board with it because if there is no or insufficient legal remedy or protection, the right will cast off limiting itself to legal remedies or hopes for legal protection. And we’re a lot better at it – at mass, organized, ruthless violence – than they are.
To illustrate why you ought to, lefties, follow along with this very brief lesson. This is what suppression of free speech looks like:
It ends in places like this:
And, to take a leaf from the title of Gauleiter Falarca’s organization, the right will do anything necessary, to include this:
to stop it.
You see, Martin Niemoeller got it all wrong.15 They didn’t go for the Communists first, and then the socialists and the trade unionists, then the Jews, and then him. No, first they went for the guns or, rather, liberal social democratic Weimar went for the guns. That made things easier for the Nazis, who then went after free speech, when it couldn’t be defended. Then they could go after the Jews and the rest with impunity.
In closing, let us consider Goethe’s words: “Be the anvil or the hammer.” Friends, if and when it comes to it, be the hammer.
Top photo by Getty Images
1 Of course, as all right thinking people know, the Nazis were actually moderates so it is all right to punch moderates since they’re just Nazis. Anyone to the right of Lenin is a Nazi. For that matter, Lenin, who wasn’t as far left as Stalin, was probably a Nazi, too. Anyone who believes in the US Constitution is a Nazi. The Russians are Nazis. Every German who isn’t antifa is a Nazi. All Israelis are also Nazis, except insofar as they may be working to help Hamas and the PLO drive Israel into the sea. Nazis, I’m tellin’ ya; they’re just everywhere! And, also of course, just about everyone is “literally Hitler,” of late.
2 Hat tip, Thales
3 I disagree, of course
4 Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, What is Property?
5 By which, of course, I mean crazed, sociopathic, leftist maniacs.
6 You do know I am joking there, right?
8 Okay, it was really Screen Actors Guild, not Film Actors Guild, but I am a minor fan of Southpark.
9 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07-VvcsrUIE. Incidentally, at a purely emotional level I kind of approve of punching my homey, Richard Spencer, in the face, if only for his idiocies and appalling sense of public relations, but as someone who took an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States,” I’ve got to say it’s a dangerous road that puts us on.
10 http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/02/14/berkeley-teacher-in-the-spotlight-after-condoning-violent-uc-berkeley-protest/. Note that this twat’s organization is entitled, By Any Means Necessary. Funny how they never realize that that can go both ways.
11 Still, give it some time; I figure her days walking around are numbered. When the last of those days arrives, I doubt she will understand the whys of it.
13 A way to look at Section 1983 is that action and inaction can be the same thing, that State action that would be unconstitutional cannot be permitted to flourish by the state’s inaction, hence encouragement, either.
Tom Kratman is a retired infantry lieutenant colonel, recovering attorney, and science fiction and military fiction writer. His latest novel, The Rods and the Axe, is available from Amazon.com for $9.99 for the Kindle version, or $25 for the hardback. A political refugee and defector from the People’s Republic of Massachusetts, he makes his home in Blacksburg, Virginia. He holds the non-exclusive military and foreign affairs portfolio for EveryJoe. Tom’s books can be ordered through baen.com.
Note: If you follow the retail links in this post and make purchases on the site(s), Defy Media may receive a share of the proceeds from your sale through the retailer’s affiliate program.