User Profile: HonorTheOath

HonorTheOath

Member Since: April 18, 2013

CommentsDisplaying comments newest to oldest.

123
  • April 22, 2014 at 5:38pm

    Sapper, statistically, Yes, that’s exactly what she would have done. Capped the both of them. The results of the gender integrated LE experiment aren’t pretty.

    Responses (2) +
  • April 22, 2014 at 5:36pm

    I remember this being one of the main reasons to “push back” against hiring women as police officers. Due to biology, they would be quick to escalate and would have to draw/shoot under circumstances not warranted were it a man. I also remember distinctly this argument being hooted down by the ******** as being sexist, irrational, unfair, etc.

    Anybody want to guess what the rate of unjustified use of deadly force rates are between men and women? Reality is a bitch.

    And now we are lowering standards just so we can “fully integrate” unqualified women into combat roles in our military. And so it goes . . . (with apologies to Kurt Vonnegut)

  • April 18, 2014 at 4:42pm

    Rauljg: of course, the facts do not bear out that women are paid less for equal work. Quite the contrary. When you take into account the job held, the level of education, the level of experience, and hours worked, women earn (on the average) $1.06 for every $1 earned by a man. “Equal Pay for Equal Work” has been the law of the land since the 1960s. If a woman feels she is being paid less for the same work, she has the law on her side. How many women have successfully sued because they were being paid less than an equally qualified man for doing the same work? A few did back in the 1960s and by the late 1970s these lawsuits basically evaporated. That’s when the strategy changed from “equal pay for equal work” to the modern “statistical disparity” (equal pay, irrespective of job performed or qualifications). The “women earn less than men for doing the same job” lie has been debunked regularly and is really not the argument any more. It is now “women earn less than men.” Well, Duh. Women CHOOSE different jobs and work-life balances. And yet, progressives want to take the choices away from women . . .

    Responses (1) +
  • April 17, 2014 at 2:32pm

    http://www.alternet.org/story/151864/6_creepy_new_weapons_the_police_and_military_use_to_subdue_unarmed_people

  • April 17, 2014 at 2:29pm

    Looks like one of the new “Less Than Lethal” weapons used for crowd control. He appears to be carrying one the “strobe cannons” used to blind (most of them, temporarily) people so that you can take them down without killing them. The LEDs are the key. The light is so bright it makes most people start puking as well. Intense pain and blindness that lasts over 7 seconds. Many such devices in that class have been developed and deployed to a variety of domestic LE agencies. Microwave cannons (intense feeling of heat on skin even under clothing); Sound cannons (loud noise or just pressure wave to burst eardrums), etc. I really thought the feds were going to field test a bunch of those but since the militia had More Than Lethal weapons I guess they backed off. Rule #1 of a gunfight: bring a gun. Next time the feds won’t make that mistake.

  • April 15, 2014 at 4:36pm

    Awesome stuff. If you’ve never seen the greats like Al Topperwein and Jerry Miculek you ain’t seen squat! Of course, nowadays this is watered down by the realization that he filmed 1,000 attempts to get the one where he nailed it . . .

    Responses (1) +
  • April 15, 2014 at 1:58pm

    ” . . . paying out less in subsidies . . . ”

    Given that net-net fewer people now have health insurance, and way fewer have signed up than required, why on earth do you think subsidies would go anywhere but down?

    Sheesh.

  • April 15, 2014 at 12:01pm

    Well, throttle back just a tad. First of all, we have a HUGE (built-in) currency conversion error in all these numbers. You have to reduce the US expenditures by about 20% and increase all other (foreign currency) amounts by about 20% each. Then, you need to reduce the US amount by about another 20% for all the non-defense spending items in the “defense” budget.” So yeah, we do spend more than everyone else . . . just not by the amounts claimed.

    Oh, and after making those corrections . . . consider that a non-trivial amount of US defense spending goes to secure the sovereignty of OTHER nations. So while we like to get on our high horses about our “ridiculous” amount of defense spending . . . all 20% of our federal budget of it . . . the reality is not quite so bad.

    [for those not paying close attention, since the end of WWII the US has had a policy of overvaluing the US dollar while other central banks undervalue their currencies. We [our Fed] is ok with this and we do it on purpose to increase the purchasing power of our currency. This was all done as part of the Bretton Woods agreements (that created the GATT-WTO structure) to stimulate international trade.]

  • April 15, 2014 at 11:54am

    D&J is spot on. The “$900 toilet seat” furor (“$300 wrench”) etc. stories were all debunked at the time. A SF area columnist (Diana Razor? not sure of name) actually pretty much made the whole thing up. For example, the “$900 toilet seat” was actually one piece of plastic out of ten pieces of plastic that sold for $9,000. Yes, we paid $9,000 for an airline bathroom. Pretty cheap actually. Our Leftover From MacNamara Cost Accounting System “scored” the seat at $900 ($9,000/10) but we never paid $900 for that part.

    On the other hand, around 20% of the DoD budget is totally unrelated to defense (SteamTown Museum-Bridge to Nowhere-etc.). Boondoggle “Christmas Tree Ornaments” get attached tot eh defense budget on a regular basis. We could slash “defense spending” if we just stopped putting no-defense line items in the DoD budget . . .

  • April 15, 2014 at 11:31am

    Hmm. Got my copy of the Constitution right here. Looking for wealth transfer payments . . . nope . . . don’t see them mentioned anywhere . . . Oh wait- here’s something about national defense . . . ok, looking for wealth transfer payments again . . .

    Oddly enough, we could balance the budget and give taxpayers an 80% cut overnight. All we have to do is actually follow the (so-called) “Law of the Land!”

    Responses (1) +
  • April 10, 2014 at 4:48pm

    So we trade one left-wing misogynistic hypocrite blowhard for another, younger version. Not sad to see the serial rapist and sexual harasser slink away. Perhaps the women around the show can breath a little easier now that the Lesserman is on the way out.

    Some of his past victims might even feel free to lawyer up and sue his ass . . .

  • April 8, 2014 at 4:51pm

    Obama should be arresting the leadership of the NBA and WNBA.

    *I used to do this every semester with my doctoral students. Take the BLS and Census data. Oh No! Women overall earn $0.77/$1. OK, now for the same occupation (NBA vs. WNBA athletes) . . . wait a minute; women earn $0.92/$1. Hmm, OK, now for the same occupation and the same degrees/training . . . hmmm, women now earn $0.97/$1. Using the same exact data set, now we account for occupation, education/training, and experience. Women earn $1/$1. Take into account hours worked and job performance. Women earn $1.06/$1. Lilly Ledbetter my ass. Men need to start suing their employers for VIOLATING THE EQUAL PAY LAW THAT WAS ENACTED IN 1963!

  • April 4, 2014 at 5:54pm

    Straw man argument. Argument of choice for proglodytes. Lott was baited and fell for it; Jacobs is evil and sophisticated. Watch the clip . . . Jacobs had nothing but little girl’s tears and a bogus argument.

    Responses (1) +
  • April 4, 2014 at 3:51pm

    On the average, women earn $0.75 for every dollar a man makes. For the same career category, they make $0.92 per dollar. For thee same career category and job position, they make $0.98. For the same career category, job position, and education/training, they make $1.01. Add in years of experience . . . women earn $1.09 per dollar FOR DOING THE SAME JOB as men. Lilly Ledbetter act my a$$. They should have named it the Leo Ledbetter act and required that MEN be paid as much as WOMEN. Go to the Bureau of Labor Statistics and do the math yourself . . .

  • March 27, 2014 at 11:01am

    If you hate being tailgated, GET OUT OF THE PASSING LANE!

  • March 27, 2014 at 10:41am

    Both drivers should be cited. Not sure what he should be cited for . . . but she was Failure to Yield and Distracted Driving. While Florida does not have a cell phone ban, here’s what their highway ptraol web site says about cell phone use while driving: “You can easily get a ticket in Florida if you become a distracted driver and break road rules, or worse, cause an accident.”

  • March 27, 2014 at 10:32am

    There is an awful lot of crap floating around in the oceans of the world. Always has been. Every ocean. Worse around shipping lanes and continents. Slightly less worse in remoter areas (given tides and currents). Have any of these news people ever been on a boat on the open seas? What I found completely amazing was the LACK of floating debris being found in initial stages of the search. Until someone pulls up a piece of THIS SPECIFIC VEHICLE or receives an ELT or OBDR ping that can be attributed to THIS SPECIFIC VEHICLE they don’t have **** . . .

  • March 27, 2014 at 10:27am

    And don[t forget the latest scam . . . relaxed SSI/disability rules and lax enforcement of the rules allows many long-term unemployed to simply move from the "unemployment insurance" [sic] teat to the “disability insurance” [sic-er] teat. The real number to look at is work force utilization- what percentage of people 18-65 (or better yet, 18-72) are employed full time? The official numbers (of course) only count the “non-disabled” adults in those age ranges so that is a bogus number as well (see above).

    The true state of employment in this country is shameful. And crashing even further.

  • March 26, 2014 at 3:58pm

    What an elitist snob. To think that any child could be given an advantage in life by learning a skilled trade is just evil. All our children must be made equally helpless and miseducated. How else can we march forward into our glorious futures komrades? All children must spend at least 16 years in our state run education camps. We must continue the struggle to make sure they get their minds right and worship the state.

    Responses (1) +
  • March 26, 2014 at 3:54pm

    Amazing. I wouldn’t trust him to walk my dog. The “people” of Nevada didn’t elect him. When was the last time they had “free and fair elections” in Nevada? Must be decades.

    Responses (1) +
123