>Alan and I in Subic Bay

Roughly a year ago, taken by Afable.


>A great woman is dying.

>Her name is Cathy Seipp. I first read her with the byline “The Left Coast.” She wrote for National Review, among many other things. Her web log is here.

She wrote me back once. A real reply.

Lung cancer. Her college-age daughter is with her now. Maia. She talked her mom into the blog and has updated us on her mom’s condition now that she’s leaving.

Please explore this kind woman’s works.


>“The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley presents his compliments to Vice-President Albert Gore and by these presents challenges the said former Vice-President to a head-to-head, internationally-televised debate upon the question, ‘That our effect on climate is not dangerous,’ to be held in the Library of the Oxford University Museum of Natural History at a date of the Vice-President’s choosing.

“Forasmuch as it is His Lordship who now flings down the gauntlet to the Vice-President, it shall be the Vice-President’s prerogative and right to choose his weapons by specifying the form of the Great Debate. May the Truth win! Magna est veritas, et praevalet. God Bless America! God Save the Queen!”

I know it’s vastly unlikely that the former VP will take it– he’s shown adversion to actually, you know, facing unscripted challenges– but I can admire this fellow anyways!

>*Rolls her eyes*

Not a surprise, but I’d like to point out that “traditional values” include beliving there is a right and a wrong, and that murder, rape, lying and such are on the wrong side. *Grin*


The political description that
fits you best is….


CONSERVATIVES tend to favor economic freedom, but frequently support laws to restrict personal behavior that violates “traditional values.” They oppose excessive government control of business, while endorsing government action to defend morality and the traditional family structure. Conservatives usually support a strong military, oppose bureaucracy and high taxes, favor a free-market
economy, and endorse strong law enforcement.

The RED DOT on the Chart shows where you fit on the political map.

Your PERSONAL issues Score is 20%.
Your ECONOMIC issues Score is 70%.
(Please note: Scores falling on the Centrist border are counted as Centrist.)

>Know people by their enemies

>And this fellow has a couple of doozies.

He’s a doctor who doesn’t believe that the theory of evolution is needed to be a good doctor. (Personally, I’d say that a strong belief in evolution is a BAD thing in a doctor, since there are many folks who would make the human race “more fit” by being dead– and I do NOT want that view in my doctor!)

I think it’s interesting that the track-backs on the posts when I last saw it made personal attacks and ignored the good doctor’s logic.

>Two Women Endangered-

>By Anti-Gun Idiot.

Look, I don’t use the term “idiot” lightly. It’s over used as it is, and loses the pep it needs. But this SOB figured that because he *could* get a list of all folks with concealed carry permits, it was a good idea to publish them.

One woman has had to move to avoid the violent ex she got the CCP for, and another–who was living with a friend– missed her ex by a few days when she moved out of state. Her ex showed up *the next day* announcing that that b*tch had better be ready to use her gun. The friend was recently married and her husband was able to slow down the ex while she called the cops.

A quote to chew on: A state that eagerly puts sex offender data online complete with an interactive map could easily do the same with gun permits, but it does not.
This SOB thinks raping kids is morally the same as having a gun?

Generally, I’m a lot more mild than the Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler but I do appreciate the elegance of his solution when it comes to doing a background on this fellow and posting it online. Might be a slightly heavy clue-bat, but it might get the point across that just because you can do something doesn’t make it right.
(On a side note, anyone who thinks Fox news is “far right” needs to go visit AIR– the Emperor is far right, maybe not quite so far as Air America is to the left.)

I’m about mad enough to spit– I’m going in to get my CC soon. I’m a small, young-ish female. I REALLY don’t want to have to use a gun. I don’t have any violent exes, but that kind of list could put me in danger as well, by making a list of places likely to have guns to be stolen. I’m not home all the time, after all.

>Picture this…

>You’re in a small family graveyard; it’s very bare-bones (no pun intended) and there is little more than an inscription on each tombstone. There’s Jesus son of Jose, Maria, Marianna, Jude son of Jesus and Matheo. The DNA you’re able to recover is very sketchy– all you can tell is that Maria and Jesus don’t have the same mother.

Would you then conclude that Jesus is married to Marianna and is the son of Maria? If you knew all these names were common in the roughtly 100 year period that they died, would you assume that they are famous folks even though all tales from that era have zero backing for that assumption? How about if all the information you have about these famous people with common names says that this can’t possibly be their tomb?

Would you still assume they’re the famous folks that you’ve heard of? If so, welcome to my blog, Mr. Cameron.

The actual names are Jesus son of Yose–although one of the guys says that it looks more like the name Hanun to him– Maria, Mariamne, Judah son of Jesus/Hanun and Matai. That’s Jesus, Joseph, a latin Mary, a Jewish Mary and a Matthew.

Any guesses on what I think of this “scholarship”?

A former sailor's ramblings on anything from family, country and Church through general geek-ness.