Tuesday, September 20, 2005

Well shit!

It seems that Kim and Connie are calling it quits.

I think that I am fairly aware of the "whys" of the situation, but that doesn't make it any easier.

I have viewed Kim as one of the few beacons of hope in this world over the last several years and will miss reading his essays, his critiques and razor sharp humor, not to mention all the gun porn, of which there is, I mean was, considerable.

I hope that the NoR forum can be resurrected by Chris Byrne over at Anarchangel. It has been serving as a valuable resource for the devoted following that Kim has grown. It is NECESSARY to keep it alive. It is truly a progeny and gift to all of us riflemen.

Hopefully Kim can return to blogging sometime in the future, possibly when his finances aren't quite as dire and the youngins' are maybe out of the house. I hope that by then he wouldn't have mellowed too much, or corporate america having sucked too much life out of him, because I know of THAT all too well.

Kim, to you all I can give is the highest regard. Good luck Sir.

And, Thank you, Jim, for posting on the situation and keeping all of us lackeys in the loop. And Godspeed to you as well. Get out of the path of that Bitch while you still can.


Thursday, September 08, 2005

Why the shock???

This is hardly a surprise, as the higher price of oil would be reflected in higher heating costs come this winter, just as we've seen a meteoric rise is pump prices. The most disturbing thing is this tidbit,

"Separately, Bodman said he expected the drop in crude oil prices from last week's record of over $70 a barrel to be passed on to consumers in the form of lower gasoline costs.

"We would expect that over time that would be reflected at the pump," he said."

Over time!!! Over time. How about RIGHT FUCKING NOW?!!!

It didn't take even 24 hours for prices to go up in the KC area about 40 CENTS/gallon! I expect a sharp downturn in crude prices should be associated with an equally sharp drop in gas, and in a time frame of, say days, and not "over time," which could imply weeks or months!

I am not opposed to the oil companies, or refineries, or distributors making profits. I also understand that this has been an especially stressful time, for everyone, including 'Big Oil'. I also know a fair bit about how refinery output is controlled, and that the products they produce are cyclical, and that gas isn't necessarily in production when crude prices drop suddenly. This I understand. But my problem lies with how the curve looks on both sides of the 'bubble', going up sharply when even a hint of 'high demand' or 'low supply' is mentioned, and that 'over time' the price will go down with lower crude prices.

Fuck this shit.

I keep my house at a less than balmy 65 in the winter, where the season lasts for 6 months at between 0 and 30 degrees fahrenheit and the wind howls at 30 miles per hour. I don't complain, I just wear extra clothes. I keep my house at a just-less-than-sweating 75 in the summer, where it is 100 degrees from about the middle of May until the middle of September, all the while at 90 percent humidity. Again, I complain little. (As an aside, this leaves about 4 weeks during the entire year when the weather could be nice in KC, but it could just as easily be raining cats and dogs, hosting another tornado, or any of the other associated transitional season bullshit from living in the god-forsaken midwest.) I do this in the name of conserving, just to get ass-raped by the fucking dicks who say they can't pass on the savings just yet.

I am moving to the woods with my chainsaw and rifle. Move over Salinger, there will be another Emerson moving in soon. Need to start on my manifesto now.


Friday, September 02, 2005

As always, playing the race card exactly to his political advantage

I was not surprised to see the Reverend clammoring at the top of the pile, exclaiming at the top of his voice, no doubt, this little tidbit,

"How can blacks be locked out of the leadership, and trapped in the suffering?"

Because Bush designed it that way, stupid! (Snark alert)

Does this man actually think before he says these things, or is it on purpose that he sounds so utterly dumb?

No. It was all Bush's doing, it is all his fault, and he should be personally held accountable for all that has happened as a result of a natural disaster. It is also his fault that everyone was put out by the storm, that there are thousands who are helpless, homeless and also responsible for all the looting.

Yea, that makes sense.

It may very well be that the response IS slow. We probably DO need to expend more money and allocate more time with more aid workers to this problem, but all I seem to be hearing is that ALL of this was preventable. BULLSHIT!!!

People have been living in the path of natural destruction for millenia. We will always do so in the future. The scale of the disasters, or the possible scope of them has never posed much of a deterrent. California's climate is too good for a good percentage of America to pass up, yet MOST of its population is located over, or very near, a variety of faults along the coast. Little wonder why. That there will be more quakes is of little concern, it seems, people continue to move there. Jesse, do you remember Loma Prieta? Northridge? Why do people continue to live there?

What a race-baiting Dipshit.