I am recommending the following series of five 5 minute lectures
about tribes in Afghanistan. I expect that you will find that Steven Pressfield's enthusiasm for his subject makes it a very enjoyable to listen to in addition to it's worth in dispelling any effete notions you may have.
Being buried among a series of tiny url links in a rather long post by Papa Ray at Belmont Club, I fear many club members never saw it. I will emphasize this there.
The title of this thread relates it in part to my post yesterday about Western decay. But don't get me wrong: I am not suggesting a return to tribalism as an antidote to our decline.
What I am suggesting is that the tribes may outlast us if we don't begin to renew our appreciation for the fundamentals that permitted the West to advance as it has.
Sunday, January 10, 2010
Saturday, January 09, 2010
Our State of Decay...
Our state of decay is indicated to a great extent by what we are willing to put up with.
I get into arguments, sometimes heated, sometimes seemingly so (friends like to bare teeth at each other simply to stay in practice) over how bad our decay has progressed.
For instance, abandoning known leaders who have proven their principled stands (because the buzz is "he's good but he can't win") in favor of the less than qualified and the less trustworthy. You wind up voting for people for whom you have been relentlessly told: "because they can win." It all sort of runs afoul of the maxim "God helps those who help themselves."
When you vote against the guy you trust for the guy they want, and usually that is because of their money and influence is behind their guy, the chances are very good that you've fallen for the longest running confidence racket in existence; God has nothing to do with it.
So, I am directing this question of our state of decay at those who claim to be more faithful than I.
If you lack faith that your principles are worth defending in the relatively few times you are faced such a choice, what can you say in your defense when you appear before Him for judgment?
Well, I have one excuse in your favor. There is our news media. It is so bought that it allows into its ranks only true believers (e.g., Matthews and Olbermann) while spitting out any who it let in back when it was pretending to be fair (e.g., Stossel). The media, which really earned my label Sinister, is a constantly dissembling, disingenuous, outright lying partisan.
Worse. It is worse than any political party in a system where it (being labeled the "Fourth Estate") is supposed to ride rein on politics!
It has been granted access and privileges not available to ordinary citizens. And what do we find it doing most? Exploiting its access with license. It uses its luxury of time and repetition to convince large bodies of our fellow Americans that the ends they endorse justify all sorts of means. And they win recruits to steal votes and engage in many other anti-democratic activities of which they are guilty of promoting with a wink. Media is our primary area of indoctrination outside of teaching colleges, and it remains primary in convincing teachers to stay indoctrinated after they become part of the edu-bureaucracy.
But, if you consider yourself a conservative, there are even worse people -- if you will allow me to call them that -- than those who are known sinister media-types. These are the likes of Michael Medved who never lets up on the idea of winning elections at all costs. Medved cut his teeth as a Leftist. If that isn't bad enough, he was a Leftist who engaged in agit-prop during the Viet Nam war.
Well, IMO, he's still doing it. No matter his protestations and books to the contrary, and his smarmy attacks on all those who justifiably worry about those in our institutions who have betrayed our nation and continue to do so, he is the quintessential wolf in sheep's clothing. He is the type who King Saul refused to believe existed at the cost of his crown and the continued existence of his country.
The aim of Med-type-heads is to shake the resolve of conservatives to stand by their principle. He and a few other influence peddlers very strongly helped bring about the dismal conditions governing in California. Somewhere in our future, the truth of what I am asserting will come out. But will it be too late for our nation? It needn't be.
This man and those like him are paid to broadcast for the conservative cause. He is relentless in his campaign to convince conservative voters and donors that their primary political interests lay not in promoting their principles, but in winning elections. Ronald Reagan proved, in the face of immense opposition, that speaking as a conservative actually sways minds and wins elections. He was clearly a firm believer that God helped him because he helped himself.
When your society and its institutions have been thoroughly decimated, will you feel comfortable with your defense that it all happened incrementally?
"What could I have done? That happened despite my party (with it's nominal conservative facade) winning periodically."
At that future meeting, will you say "I never dreamed my great country would meet its demise due to my giving up to sinister forces only a little bit at a time rather than checking to see what it was I was really giving in to"?
Are you going to tell your Judge that you never looked at where you made errors in the past?
Or are you going to say "Yes, I did realize that I'd made mistakes. But, alas, it was too late to correct them."
If it's this last one, you are sure to hear "So, you did realize you made mistakes."
What then what can you say when asked the logical follow-up:
We are witnessing decay of the soul because of decay of the souls.
I get into arguments, sometimes heated, sometimes seemingly so (friends like to bare teeth at each other simply to stay in practice) over how bad our decay has progressed.
For instance, abandoning known leaders who have proven their principled stands (because the buzz is "he's good but he can't win") in favor of the less than qualified and the less trustworthy. You wind up voting for people for whom you have been relentlessly told: "because they can win." It all sort of runs afoul of the maxim "God helps those who help themselves."
When you vote against the guy you trust for the guy they want, and usually that is because of their money and influence is behind their guy, the chances are very good that you've fallen for the longest running confidence racket in existence; God has nothing to do with it.
So, I am directing this question of our state of decay at those who claim to be more faithful than I.
If you lack faith that your principles are worth defending in the relatively few times you are faced such a choice, what can you say in your defense when you appear before Him for judgment?
Well, I have one excuse in your favor. There is our news media. It is so bought that it allows into its ranks only true believers (e.g., Matthews and Olbermann) while spitting out any who it let in back when it was pretending to be fair (e.g., Stossel). The media, which really earned my label Sinister, is a constantly dissembling, disingenuous, outright lying partisan.
Worse. It is worse than any political party in a system where it (being labeled the "Fourth Estate") is supposed to ride rein on politics!
It has been granted access and privileges not available to ordinary citizens. And what do we find it doing most? Exploiting its access with license. It uses its luxury of time and repetition to convince large bodies of our fellow Americans that the ends they endorse justify all sorts of means. And they win recruits to steal votes and engage in many other anti-democratic activities of which they are guilty of promoting with a wink. Media is our primary area of indoctrination outside of teaching colleges, and it remains primary in convincing teachers to stay indoctrinated after they become part of the edu-bureaucracy.
But, if you consider yourself a conservative, there are even worse people -- if you will allow me to call them that -- than those who are known sinister media-types. These are the likes of Michael Medved who never lets up on the idea of winning elections at all costs. Medved cut his teeth as a Leftist. If that isn't bad enough, he was a Leftist who engaged in agit-prop during the Viet Nam war.
Well, IMO, he's still doing it. No matter his protestations and books to the contrary, and his smarmy attacks on all those who justifiably worry about those in our institutions who have betrayed our nation and continue to do so, he is the quintessential wolf in sheep's clothing. He is the type who King Saul refused to believe existed at the cost of his crown and the continued existence of his country.
The aim of Med-type-heads is to shake the resolve of conservatives to stand by their principle. He and a few other influence peddlers very strongly helped bring about the dismal conditions governing in California. Somewhere in our future, the truth of what I am asserting will come out. But will it be too late for our nation? It needn't be.
This man and those like him are paid to broadcast for the conservative cause. He is relentless in his campaign to convince conservative voters and donors that their primary political interests lay not in promoting their principles, but in winning elections. Ronald Reagan proved, in the face of immense opposition, that speaking as a conservative actually sways minds and wins elections. He was clearly a firm believer that God helped him because he helped himself.
When your society and its institutions have been thoroughly decimated, will you feel comfortable with your defense that it all happened incrementally?
"What could I have done? That happened despite my party (with it's nominal conservative facade) winning periodically."
At that future meeting, will you say "I never dreamed my great country would meet its demise due to my giving up to sinister forces only a little bit at a time rather than checking to see what it was I was really giving in to"?
Are you going to tell your Judge that you never looked at where you made errors in the past?
Or are you going to say "Yes, I did realize that I'd made mistakes. But, alas, it was too late to correct them."
If it's this last one, you are sure to hear "So, you did realize you made mistakes."
What then what can you say when asked the logical follow-up:
"Didn't it occur to you to ask for forgiveness? Didn't it occur to you to promise never to travel down that path again?"I shudder for the faithful who have to answer those last two questions. I know a few who will not be able to contain a sneer. That will be -- literally -- all He wrote darlings.
We are witnessing decay of the soul because of decay of the souls.
Friday, January 08, 2010
State-Shopping
Independent radio talkshow host Michael Savage is playing with the idea of running for the U.S. Senate in 2010.
He considers his home state of California to be ill-advised because the libs would leave no stone unturned to re-elect Barbara Boxer despite her otherwise unlikely chances.
Although he hasn't stated it yet, he's looking for a red state that isn't afraid of having every other part of the country hating it for electing him. LMAO.
Since he's planning on running as a Republican in a primary against another Republican, he's gotta figure out a way to win despite widespread GOP opposition. That would especially be true after he wins the pubbie nomination.
Oh. and is there another talkshow host who wouldn't be out to frag him?
He considers his home state of California to be ill-advised because the libs would leave no stone unturned to re-elect Barbara Boxer despite her otherwise unlikely chances.
Although he hasn't stated it yet, he's looking for a red state that isn't afraid of having every other part of the country hating it for electing him. LMAO.
Since he's planning on running as a Republican in a primary against another Republican, he's gotta figure out a way to win despite widespread GOP opposition. That would especially be true after he wins the pubbie nomination.
Oh. and is there another talkshow host who wouldn't be out to frag him?
Fifth Columnists in Action: 1
Judge tosses out most evidence on Gitmo detainee
Who expected something else?
The aim of AG Holder and President Obama is clearly something other than protecting Americans. Seriously.
(hat tip to Just A Grunt at JammieWearingFool)
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
For What Your Vote's Worth
Do you recall reading here Congress is Rigging the Vote yesterday?
You may want to hear it from the Wall Street Journal's John Fund instead of little old me. The first 2 plus minutes of this clip will tell you about Congress' next stab at brazenness of which I've been warning for some time, but with more authority.
As I asked yesterday: What will you do?
You may want to hear it from the Wall Street Journal's John Fund instead of little old me. The first 2 plus minutes of this clip will tell you about Congress' next stab at brazenness of which I've been warning for some time, but with more authority.
As I asked yesterday: What will you do?
Tuesday, January 05, 2010
Congress is Rigging the Vote
What will you do when Congress rams through federal control of voting? They'll do it like they have done with healthcare so far. They will claim they're doing it for some Leftist "altruistic" purpose, but it will be to protect themselves from our displeasure over everything they have done over the last 15-18 months.
What will you do? Better to have started planning last year, but now is better than later. They are not going to come after you unless you try to prevent their implementation of the theft of your vote, which is your only real voice in how government operates. IOW, they'll have rigged it so you have to come to them to prevent them. They make the rules, and they're daring you to violate the rules they make.
What will you do?
See update!
What will you do? Better to have started planning last year, but now is better than later. They are not going to come after you unless you try to prevent their implementation of the theft of your vote, which is your only real voice in how government operates. IOW, they'll have rigged it so you have to come to them to prevent them. They make the rules, and they're daring you to violate the rules they make.
What will you do?
See update!
Monday, January 04, 2010
"I Just Can't Understand..."
Thus ends a post at Belmont Club by commenter 42. vb:
Those who follow my line of thinking already can understand. I know the problems remain,
Well, as I had just finished writing the above words, Wretchard posted again.
Wretchard, who is not as convinced as I am about the Western death cults having gained hegemony, provided us an answer -- right on time! 43. wretchard:
Our enemies [Islamists] use our perceived weakness and degradation as a recruiting tool, and our elites sharpen their blades for them. I just can't understand how so many supposedly smart people can be so ignorant of basic psychology. [emphasis added]
Those who follow my line of thinking already can understand. I know the problems remain,
- how much dare you agree with me openly, and
- how do we get others to take a "no more nonsense" approach with those who've risen to power?
Well, as I had just finished writing the above words, Wretchard posted again.
Wretchard, who is not as convinced as I am about the Western death cults having gained hegemony, provided us an answer -- right on time! 43. wretchard:
Just as I predicted in the comments above, the UK Government has resolutely decided to be open to banning an Islamist march through the funerary route of British dead from Afghanistan. The Daily Mail reports:What I've highlighted in yellow, my friends, tells you what you can do and why you must do it. Those at the top can have backbone infused in them from the courageousness of those below. Live it.
Alan Johnson will support any request to ban a provocative march by Islamic extremists through Wootton Bassett, the town renowned for honouring Britain’s war dead.The politicians found their backbone when the population told them to look for it or else. The lesson here is real simple. If the leaders won’t lead from the front, they’ll from the rear. The real heroes here are the organizers who got together 250,000 Facebook signatures to give Gordon Brown his Come to Jesus Moment.
The Home Secretary reacted yesterday to mounting public anger at hate preacher Anjem Choudary’s plan to stage the stunt.
Gordon Brown had earlier declared that he was ‘completely disgusted’ at the ‘abhorrent’ protest proposed by the firebrand cleric.
Organize, organize, organize. With organization comes confidence. With organization comes daring and boldness. People lose their fear. Do you know who’s feeling his gizzard churning right now? Anjem Choudary of Islam4UK.
He thought he could terrify people with his bristly beard and trash talk. Well he could terrify the politicians for sure. But once the public got mobilized the tables were turned. This needs to happen all over. Then you’ll see the Muslim ladies who’ve been beaten by their husbands, the girls threatened with honor killings, the teachers who’ve been intimidated by the radicals come forward. Haltingly, blubberingly. But never mind. It’s like that scene with Walter Pigeon from “How Green Was My Valley”. Walk, child, walk.
The role of the security forces is to keep the armed opposition in check. To provide the security screen for the really killing blow: the struggle of the mind. If we can free our intelligensia of the dead tyranny of Leftist ostracism and Islamist fear, who knows what they might blurt out.
The Right Has Difficulties
Despite all the idiocy on the Left, the Right has difficulties making headway because radio spectrum occupying consortiums like Salem Radio give prominent time slots to notoriously slow talkshow hosts.
This morning I heard Dennis Prager say (my summary)
Because he is a popular advocate of conservative values, especially Judeo-Christian morality despite his personal failings (counter-intuitively non-hypocritical), I don't like slamming the guy.
Given his panicky support of TARP, this is not the first time Mr. Prager has permitted his total incompetency with regard to anything that requires some arithmetic skills (let alone simple math concepts like compound interest) get in the way of him speaking on a financial subject.
More and more the blogosphere is necessary to set the record straight or to challenge "conservative" talkshow hosts before their wider access to listeners, and thus easier ability to influence, can cause damage. The Right cannot counter the Left when those who control the airwaves may have an unknown agenda that may not match the individuals they pretend to serve. By no means is Dennis Prager the worst host Salem employs, but he frequently leaves me disappointed if not temporarily demoralized. What is known as conservative talk radio should never be demoralizing, but it frequently is.
This morning I heard Dennis Prager say (my summary)
"I hadn't made the connection before that the Left both wants welfare states and smaller populations. That's contradictory! You can't maintain a welfare state without a growing population."
Because he is a popular advocate of conservative values, especially Judeo-Christian morality despite his personal failings (counter-intuitively non-hypocritical), I don't like slamming the guy.
Given his panicky support of TARP, this is not the first time Mr. Prager has permitted his total incompetency with regard to anything that requires some arithmetic skills (let alone simple math concepts like compound interest) get in the way of him speaking on a financial subject.
More and more the blogosphere is necessary to set the record straight or to challenge "conservative" talkshow hosts before their wider access to listeners, and thus easier ability to influence, can cause damage. The Right cannot counter the Left when those who control the airwaves may have an unknown agenda that may not match the individuals they pretend to serve. By no means is Dennis Prager the worst host Salem employs, but he frequently leaves me disappointed if not temporarily demoralized. What is known as conservative talk radio should never be demoralizing, but it frequently is.
Saturday, January 02, 2010
The Most Dangerous Envy of All
Those who claim there is no God will nevertheless covet the worship mankind bestows upon Him.
I suspect their anger becomes greatest when it comes to gratitude. Although gratitude is widely acknowledged as the weakest of emotions, there is no tyrant on Earth, big or small, who does not covet any small symbol of gratitude granted the God they disparage publicly as Your Invisible Friend.
I've observed before the apparently brilliant balance of the Ten Commandments.
And in a larger sense, is happiness what the covetous seeks, or is it the power to deny happiness to another?
When I say there are men who deny God exists, but nevertheless make war on this God that does not exist, what I'm seeing are men who would do battle with a concept outside of their knowledge simply for the purpose of denying to Him (just in case He exists) the happiness He wishes for His Creation.
Be ready to battle anti-theists and their sponsors, for they are determined to destroy any who stand by Him or defend those who do.
I suspect their anger becomes greatest when it comes to gratitude. Although gratitude is widely acknowledged as the weakest of emotions, there is no tyrant on Earth, big or small, who does not covet any small symbol of gratitude granted the God they disparage publicly as Your Invisible Friend.
I've observed before the apparently brilliant balance of the Ten Commandments.
- The first Commandment is about wishing to be as close to God as possible: your nearest Neighbor, your surest Source of solace, of happiness.
- The last Commandment warns about coveting anything that is your neighbors.
And in a larger sense, is happiness what the covetous seeks, or is it the power to deny happiness to another?
When I say there are men who deny God exists, but nevertheless make war on this God that does not exist, what I'm seeing are men who would do battle with a concept outside of their knowledge simply for the purpose of denying to Him (just in case He exists) the happiness He wishes for His Creation.
Be ready to battle anti-theists and their sponsors, for they are determined to destroy any who stand by Him or defend those who do.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
See? You Matter Blogosphere!
Yesterday, when I published BHO: "Great Job Brownie, uh,... Janet", I was hoping that others immediately saw what I saw. And it looks like that is true. It wasn't only about Napolitano, it also involved the man who is responsible for her: Barack Obama.
So Congratulations bloggers on saying what needed to be said so that a day later Matt Drudge's headlines announce to the world that you were effective at getting the word out.
So Congratulations bloggers on saying what needed to be said so that a day later Matt Drudge's headlines announce to the world that you were effective at getting the word out.
Here are the Drudge headlines.
Obama under fire on national security...
Says 'systemic failure' allowed airline plot...
Breach Was 'Catastrophic'...
Many question 'system worked' comment...
Monday, December 28, 2009
Quote of the Day
"At Belmont Club, under Spin versus spool post by Wretchard:
Folks, as I suggested in my last post, it is time for us adults (that is, those who have finally shucked off the adult suppression programming wrought by our rotting institutions) to come up with words that will help our neighbors better understand what their government has morphed into.
80. NahnCee:
You do realize that you’re expecting the same people who have been tracking weather the last 20 years and reporting fur shur global warming is happening to get it together to successfully track bad guys? Surely bad guys are just as erratic as the weather. If they have a blindered mind-set that there *is* global warming, what sort of blindered mind-set do you suppose these geniuses will have on whether or not Abdul is a terrorist?
Dec 28, 2009 - 6:01 pm
Folks, as I suggested in my last post, it is time for us adults (that is, those who have finally shucked off the adult suppression programming wrought by our rotting institutions) to come up with words that will help our neighbors better understand what their government has morphed into.
BHO: "Great Job Brownie, uh,... Janet"
“BrownieJanet, you're doing a heck of a job.” -- BHO in his silence.
One day after repeatedly saying "The system worked" on her round of Sunday talk shows, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano admitted that the aviation security system failed.
Our system did not work in this instance,” she said on NBC’s “Today” show.There was no further comment from the Barack Hussein Obama White House on her job performance, so one may fairly say that Obama's approval of Janet "Brownnoser" Napolitano stands as noted in the headline of this post. Until further notice....
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Merry Christmas
Sorry for my extended absence. Wishing you all a merry Christmas and a new year filled with joy and good health.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
"Better Red Than Dead?..."
"Better Red Than Dead?...There You Go Again!"See the video below.There's your new slogan America*. How could I have been so blind?
In a comment of mine, inspired by Mark Alger's ruminations, I lamented of coming up with a new slogan that encapsulates the intentions of the Greens. To preserve humanity they will see to it that we sacrifice to their new god, Sustainability.
- They will demand you must sacrifice your way of life to Sus.
- You must sacrifice your old and lame to Sus.
- You must sacrifice your posterity to Sus not yet in a manner reminiscent of pagan Moloch worship (but who knows?).
- You may even be called to sacrifice yourself to Sus.
- But most of all, Sus is a nervous god. You must cashier your Judeo-Christian ethic. Given the secular war against Christianity, it's clear they hold a view identical to what their megalomaniacal predecessor called "that Jewish disease."
It's really quite simple. Since the greens are apopletic about the "carbon footprint" each of us human beings imprints upon the earth, and since they have invested in themselves the moral superiority to speak for all of us on the matter of our "sustainability" as a species on this planet, they have essentially begun singing to the old Marxist tune of "The Internationale" but with lyrics changed from defending the worker from exploitation to protecting us all from overburdening the earth with ourselves.
Understand this you red flag waving fools:
Rule by Reds Means Your Death
[The above video may not appear on my main blog page. You will need to click the "Read more" below to see it]Hat-tip to Breitbart for the above video. Marxism: The Ideology That Systematically Murdered 100 Million Human Beings. You know how they would save our planet, right?
*For those needing further explanation,
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Blue Became Red and Red Became Blue
Jeopardy Category: 2000 Elections
"What political party voting symbolism was changed, first employed by USA Today and immediately adopted by all Leftist Media, to distinguish between those who voted for the nominal conservative and those who voted for the Leftist?"
This was the equivalent of your bratty cousin -- suddenly realizing that the symbolism game wasn't going his way -- throwing the board in the air and demanding you all had to start over.
Getting a do-over has well served the aims of communist die-hards (Reds) who call themselves Greens, but we call them Watermelons.
That will be the subject of my next post: "Better Red Than Dead..."
"What political party voting symbolism was changed, first employed by USA Today and immediately adopted by all Leftist Media, to distinguish between those who voted for the nominal conservative and those who voted for the Leftist?"
This was the equivalent of your bratty cousin -- suddenly realizing that the symbolism game wasn't going his way -- throwing the board in the air and demanding you all had to start over.
Getting a do-over has well served the aims of communist die-hards (Reds) who call themselves Greens, but we call them Watermelons.
That will be the subject of my next post: "Better Red Than Dead..."
Monday, December 14, 2009
Blowing Smoke
I received the following reply from Greg Craven, the author of the video that was the subject of yesterday's post, Traffic-Light Propagandist.
This appears to be nothing more than a form response that Mr. Craven saves for all of his critics. Is it a blanket comment "to address that argument;" a smoke screen behind which to evade the specific issues I raised about his presentation?
1. Which of my arguments did Mr. Craven address exactly?
Yeah, that's why I posted a series of follow-up videos to address that argument. See the "Patching Holes" series of 3 vids, or the "How It All Ends" series of 70+ vids. Dig a little further.
Greg Craven
This appears to be nothing more than a form response that Mr. Craven saves for all of his critics. Is it a blanket comment "to address that argument;" a smoke screen behind which to evade the specific issues I raised about his presentation?
1. Which of my arguments did Mr. Craven address exactly?
Saturday, December 12, 2009
Traffic-Light Propagandist
The traffic light tendency: they call themselves Green because they're too yellow to admit that they are really Reds. -- Lord Monckton
The presenter (Greg Craven) of the following video tries so earnestly to sell the Precautionary Principle to the fearful and gullible by employing a variation of Pascal's Wager. It appears he was too yellow to permit valid responses at the same site, as comments are turned off.
So Fine, Yet So Treacherous
Winter 69-70, Eastbound I94, somewhere East of Belleville. In those days it was two lanes each way until you get closer to Detroit. (Is it still? ["Yes" says Ed])
It started snowing before I left home. The interstate's road surface was clear due to the traffic.
I came up behind an 18 wheeler in the passing lane and forced to follow a bit slower than I liked. And then came the transition from 2 to 3 lanes.
There was snow on the new passing lane, but it looked to be less than an inch thick. So I started passing the truck.
Halfway past the truck my car starts to skid a bit (drifting really), in the rear and towards the right. Towards the truck. Oh-oh!
So I naturally try to steer in the direction of the skid. Unfortunately this is taking me closer to the truck. And I can feel the wobbliness in the rear -- this car had a very big engine with a high torque rear wheel drive (with posi-traction, THANK GOD!), but virtually no weight in the rear. So it kept wanting to wiggle to the left as I jostled ever so gently my steering to the right and back again.
And I had no choice but to continue and try to pass. Pumping the brakes at that point almost certainly would not have been a good thing as locking up in the front wheels when trying to stabilize a skid seems a bit counter-productive.
I think I shall always retain a great deal of gratitude for that truck driver, because I'm certain he slowed his speed. Good thing too. He gave me the break I desperately needed.
For no sooner did I clear his front end than my steering to the right caused the car to straighten and then, under the slick conditions, to over-correct and really start skidding rear-left.
So I corrected again, and it started skidding right, but more violently.
One more correction, and she broke loose in the rear, and started ham-boning across 3 lanes of traffic. (All traffic behind me had apparently STOPPED -- Thanks to God AGAIN!)
I came to rest on the right shoulder guard rail with only a slight dent in the rear trunk lid as the consequence for my stupidity. (God must truly look out for small children and for at least one imbecile.)
I kept that dent in the trunk up to the day the car was retired.
I've not thought of that incident in years until this morning when I read of Ed's Thrill Ride, which seems to have occurred not far from the site of my incident.
Angel hair fine, newly fallen snow -- wet snow -- even though barely thick enough to cover the road surface, can build up in wheel-wells FAST. Be more cautious than I was in my youth.
It started snowing before I left home. The interstate's road surface was clear due to the traffic.
I came up behind an 18 wheeler in the passing lane and forced to follow a bit slower than I liked. And then came the transition from 2 to 3 lanes.
There was snow on the new passing lane, but it looked to be less than an inch thick. So I started passing the truck.
Halfway past the truck my car starts to skid a bit (drifting really), in the rear and towards the right. Towards the truck. Oh-oh!
So I naturally try to steer in the direction of the skid. Unfortunately this is taking me closer to the truck. And I can feel the wobbliness in the rear -- this car had a very big engine with a high torque rear wheel drive (with posi-traction, THANK GOD!), but virtually no weight in the rear. So it kept wanting to wiggle to the left as I jostled ever so gently my steering to the right and back again.
And I had no choice but to continue and try to pass. Pumping the brakes at that point almost certainly would not have been a good thing as locking up in the front wheels when trying to stabilize a skid seems a bit counter-productive.
I think I shall always retain a great deal of gratitude for that truck driver, because I'm certain he slowed his speed. Good thing too. He gave me the break I desperately needed.
For no sooner did I clear his front end than my steering to the right caused the car to straighten and then, under the slick conditions, to over-correct and really start skidding rear-left.
So I corrected again, and it started skidding right, but more violently.
One more correction, and she broke loose in the rear, and started ham-boning across 3 lanes of traffic. (All traffic behind me had apparently STOPPED -- Thanks to God AGAIN!)
I came to rest on the right shoulder guard rail with only a slight dent in the rear trunk lid as the consequence for my stupidity. (God must truly look out for small children and for at least one imbecile.)
I kept that dent in the trunk up to the day the car was retired.
I've not thought of that incident in years until this morning when I read of Ed's Thrill Ride, which seems to have occurred not far from the site of my incident.
Angel hair fine, newly fallen snow -- wet snow -- even though barely thick enough to cover the road surface, can build up in wheel-wells FAST. Be more cautious than I was in my youth.
Friday, December 11, 2009
Gross Sentimentality
Jeopardy Category: In A Green World
What is the charge against you when you seek an incubator for your premature baby, plead for medication for your grandma, or urge using corn to feed the poor instead of letting a smug pig burn it to heat his Tennessee mansions?
What is the charge against you when you seek an incubator for your premature baby, plead for medication for your grandma, or urge using corn to feed the poor instead of letting a smug pig burn it to heat his Tennessee mansions?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
View My Stats
I’m pretty sure most of you are getting the same impression. What Rickl might call “the thinking of the Left” — that’s what needs to be defeated NOW. That is needed whether or not the Left will (surely?) reappear later in another form as Teresita asserts.
What I’d like to find is the precise turn of phrase that can be shouted from afar at Western officials so that they cannot mistake that
This is not golf where we there is a need to make the game more even so that it is more enjoyable for all who play.
You Western governments have not been given power to handicap our anti-terrorist forces so that the terrorists chances IMPROVE.
You have been given power to protect us, not to “entertain” us.
Stop wasting our resources and endangering our lives and start profiling. Janet Napolitano was prepared to profile returning vets, but not Muslims. One might get the impression that among Muslims hide her agents while our vets are her enemy.