She Obviously Didn't Think This Through

By way of GraniteGrok comes this photo.

She'd best be careful if she gets her wish. Just how pissed off would she be if it were to become reality?


Thoughts On A Sunday

Here it is, late September, but we're seeing mid-summer weather, with sunny skies, temps in the upper 80's and lower 90's, and higher humidity. This is the type of weather I expected for August. (August was more like September this summer.) So maybe Mother Nature is making up for the cool August temperatures by gracing us with August weather now. I'm certainly not complaining.


I've been a fan of the NFL for most of my life. My two favorite teams are the New England Patriots and the Philadelphia Eagles. But I have to admit that I have seen my enthusiasm for the NFL has been waning the league has made changes the fans don't like all, but particularly because the SJW disease has been infecting the league, all with the tacit approval of NFL Commissioner Roger Goodel. It appears I am not the only one with such growing dislike of the NFL.

But even if I hook up the old satellite dish again here in my rural New England community, I still wouldn't watch pro football now that the NFL and some of its players have injected racial politics into a sport that, more than any other, pioneered on-field integration and got white America cheering for black athletes.

Now they're making the NFL politically unpalatable. I don't know about you, but if I want to be preached to, I go to church. If I want to hear political opinion/points of view I watch TV or go to rallies or protests. I don't expect anyone at my place of work to do either, nor would I do that where I work. That's what these athletes are doing – protesting at their place of work and doing so on my dime (and that of all the other fans). I don't care what they do once they're off the field or the court.

For more backlash against the now politicized NFL, read these reactions left on Twitter.


Legal Insurrection posts about the trend of blue-staters moving to red states and slowly converting them to blue states.

I've certainly seen that here in New Hampshire, where folks from Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New York move here to get away from all of the high taxes and government overreach, then start pushing for the same things here as back where they came from. They don't understand (or worse, don't care) that all of these things are what created the very conditions they came here to flee.

One of my neighbors, a dyed-in-the-wool Massachusetts Democrat who moved up here a few years ago, decried the lack of sidewalks and paved bike trails in our little rural town. So I asked him who would pay for all of those sidewalks and bike trails? His answer: Either state should pony up the cash or we should raise property taxes to pay for them.

Who would be the first to complain about the rising property taxes if he got his way? Exactly! There was a big disconnect between the 'nice-to-haves' and the means to pay for them. This is something too many of the folks “from away” have in common.

We do have sidewalks in one section of our town, that being the historical district. Those were paid for with private funds raised by the kids of our elementary school as a project. The sidewalks made it safer for the school kids to walk to and from schools and to the library, historical society, community fields, and the village general store. Not a penny of state money was involved. The town's Department of Public Works did some of the engineering and oversaw the project, but that was the limit of the town government's involvement.

While the post and one or two of the comments show New Hampshire being a Blue State, I have to disagree. It is more purple at the moment, with a GOP majority in the NH House, Senate, Executive Council, and Governor. While our congressional delegation are all Democrats, one of them – Senator Maggie Hassan – won by only 432 votes and there were questions about possible voter fraud in the town of Durham, which houses the University of New Hampshire. A lot of out-of-state students registered to vote on election day but never legally established residency, meaning their votes could have been considered fraudulent. Regardless, I have a feeling that our next set of elections in 2018 may see the balance of the congressional delegation shift from 4 Democrats, to 3 Republicans and 1 Democrat. Would we still be considered a Blue State at that point?


It's not often one hears from the First Lady, but her address the UN General Assembly hit the nail right on the head.

“Show me the loving bonds between your families today and I will show you the patriotism and moral clarity of your nation tomorrow. Our choices on how we raise and educate our children in fact provide the blueprint for the next generation. If we do not advocate a love of country to our children and generations to come, then why would our children grow up to fight for their countries?”



One more link from GraniteGrok, this being a perfect example of life after an EMP attack, the example being Puerto Rico after first Irma and then Maria devastated the island.

No power for between 4 and 6 months. Infrastructure all but useless without it. Few means to deal with the crisis.

Not a pretty picture.


At the opening of the New England Patriots-Houston Texans game a dozen Patriots players knelt during the national anthem. What's worse is that Bob Kraft, owner of the Patriots, excused this behavior in a statement while not seeing the hypocrisy in his statement about “sports bringing people together while politics divides them.” Yet politics were there right on the field.

On the other side of the field all of the Houston Texans stood for the anthem, linked arm in arm.

Either Kraft or Belichik should suspend or fire the players that knelt. Goodness knows if something like that happened while Vince Lombardi coached the Green Bay Packers, he would have marched into the locker room, emptied the offending players' belongings from their lockers, and fired them on the spot.


And speaking of politics, here's a story from Adrienne's Corner that highlights a woman who loses it because a veteran's service dog is in a restaurant.

A U.S. military veteran brought his service dog into a Delaware City, Del., restaurant last week, and Ciara Miller was one patron who wasn’t having it. She was caught on camera screaming and swearing at the veteran and the restaurant establishment for allowing the service dog to be inside the eatery. 

The dog was wearing an official service jacket which read, “PTSD Service Dog,” and bore service animal emblems of the U.S. military.“I’m leaving because the food is nasty and there’s a dog!” Miller screamed while being filmed.

An restaurant employee can be heard in the video telling the woman that the man she was disrespecting is a veteran who “fought for our country.” 

“Congratulations!” Miller screams. “My husband’s dad did, too. What’s your point? My husband’s dad fought for the f***ing country! So what? It’s still nasty to me! I don’t care!”

As if her father-in-law's service somehow brought gravitas in her rant. Some people just don't get it. Certainly this selfish harridan doesn't. Hopefully she'll never darken that restaurant's doorway again as the don't need customers like that.


Stuart Schneiderman delves into the issue of marriage, and specifically in regards to one specific woman. As he asks as part of his post, “Do you want to be a wife?” As Schneiderman writes in regards to the young woman in question:

Of course, GA does not understand marriage. Self-love, the kind of narcissistic self-absorption that the therapy culture is doling out in dollops is precisely what you should not bring into a marriage.

And yet, in our deviant culture, more and more people, infused with the gospel of self-esteem, think that marriage should be a therapeutic journey toward self-actualization.

As any of us older people know, marriage is not “ a therapeutic journey toward self-actualization.” It is much more. Continues Schneiderman:

Getting married means becoming a wife and functioning as same. If GA and her friends do not understand that the role comes with rules and obligations, duties and responsibilities to other people, they will inevitably fail at marriage. Their failures will breed resentment and that, in and of itself, will throw a damp blanket over their desire.

Back in the day, when women consulted with me because they wanted to get married, I used to ask them a simple question: Do you want to be a wife? Often enough, they were horrified by the question. They took grievous offense. Their looks seemed to say, What kind of woman do you think I am?

Today’s younger generation, having imbibed the dual elixirs of psycho self-esteem and of feminist ideology, has gotten marriage wrong. Young women are acting like mistresses within a context that requires them to be wives.

I have overheard many a conversation amongst young women talking about relationships and marriage and just about every one of them I've overheard had either no concept what marriage was or had unrealistic expectations about the role they would be filling. In a lot of cases they weren't really looking for a husband, but for a sugar-daddy with deep pockets. (Most of these conversations I overheard took places in metropolitan areas – in airports, convention centers, train stations, and restaurants as well as on planes, trains, and buses.) Few of them truly seemed to understand what marriage was all about.

They were setting themselves up for disappointment and unhappiness.


And that's the news from toasty and humid Lake Winnipesaukee, where the boating weather is just perfect, the summerfolk are mostly gone, and only we fortunate enough to live here continue to enjoy the lake now that we have it for ourselves.


The 'Big Lie' Tactic Lives On

The efficacy of The Big Lie has been proven again and again over the years. It certainly has been proven most recently in regards to the so-called “rape crisis” on college campuses. I was reminded of this while watching our local TV station's morning news.

One of the news stories dealt with a new smart phone app created to help prevent sexual assaults on the University of New Hampshire campus. That in itself was not what bothered me. There's nothing wrong with creating and using such an app. Call it just another measure women can take to help protect themselves. My gripe is the reasoning behind the creation and use of the app, that reason being nothing more than the result of the most recent Big Lie being touted as truth.

"If you send your daughter to college, there's a one-in-five chance she'll be a victim of a completed or attempted sexual assault," said Sharyn Potter of the UNH Prevention Innovations Research Center. (emphasis added - dce)

And there it is. One of the most blatant lies being used to justify things like college kangaroo courts that ignore basic rights like due process. The “one-in-five chance” 'statistic' is being used to justify all kinds of blatantly unconstitutional actions by college administrators. That 'statistic' is around ten times the rate outside college campuses. It's also completely untrue.

Ask someone quoting the 'one-in-five' line where it came from. They may point out reports here and there that have touted that line, but hit them again with it, asking them where the reports got their information. It is highly unlikely that they'll know, but it won't matter to them because it sounds true.

But the truth is that the wholly misleading statistic came from a non-scientific study that polled self-selecting respondents on two college campuses. The researchers posed questions to female students about a number of different situations in regards to interactions between them and male students on the two campuses. They ran the gamut between being asked out by someone they didn't want to date, 'stolen' kisses, unwanted advances, stalking behavior, one-night stands, drunken sexual encounters, consensual sex, and outright rape or attempted rape. (There was a wider range of examples given, but these few give you a pretty good idea of the range of behaviors covered in the questionnaires filled out by the students.)

Other than the last two, no information was given in the questionnaire whether any of the other activities constituted sexual assault. That was determined by the researchers, and the definitions were so broad as to be worthless. (I'm sorry, but being asked out by someone you really don't want to date isn't sexual assault, even if the “rape crisis” weenies on campuses say it is. It's merely an uncomfortable and maybe embarrassing inconvenience.) When the study was cited by a number of organizations and college groups as proof of the campus rape crisis, the researchers themselves said their study should not be used because it wasn't authoritative and wasn't designed for that purpose. The researchers themselves stated the numbers were misleading and were being misconstrued. But by then, it was too late.

Ironically, the Department of Justice stats show the incidents of sexual assaults on college campuses is lower than compared to the rest of the population. The DOJ didn't use the bogus, misleading, and overly broad definitions of sexual assault being used by colleges as justification to railroad male students. They used the definition of sexual assault as laid out in law:

Sexual assault refers to an assault of a sexual nature on another person. It can include a wide range of unwanted sexual contact such as rape, forced vaginal, anal or oral penetration, forced sexual intercourse, inappropriate touching, forced kissing, child molestation ,exhibitionism, voyeurism, obscene phone calls, torture of a victim in a sexual manner etc. The actor causes submission of the victim by means that is reasonably calculated to cause submission against the victim's will. Definitions of offenses are primarily governed by state criminal laws, which vary by state. It is generally a felony.

That is the only definition that should apply.

A drunken hookup where both parties are equally intoxicated should not be a sexual assault, yet many colleges say it is because supposedly the woman involved could not give consent because she was drunk. But so was the man and he would be just as incapable of giving consent, yet he is deemed the guilty party. (There was one case I recall reading about on Instapundit where a male student was passed out and the drunk female student he was with fellated him, taking some selfies as she did so. Later he was charged with sexual assault after she stated she had some regrets about doing so because “she couldn't give consent”.)

So the Big Lie generates an false meme. A witch hunt ensues which traps many an unsuspecting male college student in a hellish limbo.

Am I saying sexual assaults don't happen on college campuses? No. Not even close. But redefining so many actions, many of them innocuous, as sexual assault does a disservice to everyone and creates a very hostile environment on campuses.

As the good Professor Reynolds has stated on more than one occasion, if that one-in-five claim were true could parents of a female college student be charged with child neglect for knowingly sending them into such a dangerous environment? What parent in their right mind would do so?


Thoughts On A Sunday

Summer weather has returned to the Lakes Region, with temps in the 80's and high humidity. It feels more like July rather than mid-September. But I'm not complaining. It certainly has made for some nice boating, particularly now that the summerfolk are gone.

A few of the summer businesses are still open, at least on the weekends, but are shuttered during the week. Most of those will be closed by Columbus Day weekend as by then the leaf peepers will have moved farther south and the last die-hard boaters will be pulling there boats out of the water and getting them stored away for the winter.

One does have to ask where the summer went as it passed by so quickly.

Then again, it always does.


Just when I thought they couldn't get any stupider, they prove me wrong.

The latest bit of stupidity? Former NYT labor reporter Steven Greenhouse lamenting the signal sent by the Trump administration by allowing an 11-year old boy mow the Rose Garden lawn.

His claim? That it's “not sending a great signal on child labor, minimum wage & occupational safety.” Yeah, it's for the children, right?

What a maroon!


This is funny...but oh so true.

(H/T Maggie's Farm)


One of the morning 'news' shows – it might have been GMA - went on about climate change, stating the oft debunked and quite misleading 'statistic' about how 97% of scientists agree that climate change is a fact. That in itself doesn't disturb me. What disturbs me is that it is implying that those 97% believe that it's humans causing climate change, but they aren't.

I certainly agree with the opinion that the climate is changing. What wouldn't I? Earth's climate is changing all the time and has seen drastic climate changes in its history. Ever hear of the cyclical Ice Ages? How about the Roman or Medieval Warm Periods, or the Little Ice Age? They all illustrate that Earth's climate changes, sometimes for short periods (a few hundred years) and sometimes for long periods (thousands or even millions of years).

But I don't agree with the premise that the most recent climate change, that being over the past 200+ years, has anything to do with us. Have we contributed to climate change? Yeah, probably. The most likely areas to see that effect is in metropolitan areas where the Urban Heat Island effect has great influence over the local climate. But global effects? Nope, I'm not buying it.

That it will lead to catastrophic climate change is one hell of a stretch as the 'trends' the CAGW alarmists like to use as proof positive are based on such a short period of time as to be useless. Their Global Circulation Models are so faulty that they don't even come close to matching what has actually happened. They also have been incapable of what's called “hindcasting”, using the models and starting their predictions during the latter half of the 19th century to see if they match the actual climatic conditions. (They didn't even come close, meaning they are seriously faulty.) Yet the CAGW faithful insist we must act on the basis of those models to reverse the 'damage' in order to save the Earth. Of course the suggested actions we must take will cause far more harm and damage than if we did nothing. It would also require trillions of dollars. (Notice that it always comes down to money?)

Personnaly, I think a somewhat warmer planet would be a more pleasant place to live.


In light of what I wrote just above, we must wonder whether natural disasters are on the rise. According to this piece the answer is “not really”.

One point that the post brings up is that the number of disasters reported went up, but the actual number of disasters likely has not, something that must be taken into account. One musn't confuse 'reported' with 'actual' as they aren't the same thing.

With better reporting and almost instantaneous global communications, disasters that would not have been reported in the past are now instant news, and that skews the perceived numbers of disasters even though the actual number may not have changed.


I have to admit that I do not like wind turbines. While the idea of them sounds great, they aren't a panacea for the ills 'created' by non-renewable energy sources. Moonbattery doesn't like them either, and for reasons with which I wholeheartedly agree.

They are hideous and mar otherwise scenic landscapes. They are economically inefficient. They generate a constant noise that drives people who live near them insane. They kill raptors, including the most beautiful of birds, eagles and hawks. They kill bats, which aren’t so beautiful, but keep the mosquito population under control. They are coercively subsidized with money Big Government confiscates from us. They are involved in boondoggles that allow crony capitalists to get rich by allocating wealth unreasonably after cozying up to slimy politicians. They are an immediately recognizable symbol of pure moonbattery. They remind those driving through the countryside that there is no escape from the P.C. ruling class and its demented mandates anywhere.

Another problem? They cause wildfires.

And others? They are expensive to maintain. They are usually located far away from where any electricity they generate is needed, yet there's little or no infrastructure to get the power where it needs to be. Their service life is a WAG at best and I think they won't have nearly the longevity many proponents think they will. They require heavy government subsidies which means we pay for the more expensive electricity they generate one way or the other. (Well, actually both ways – the direct cost and the tax subsidies.) They require a lot of land per MWh of potential capacity as the so-called 'plate capacity' is the maximum a turbine could generate if there were sufficient wind 24/7. The actual capacity is generally less than a third of that.

If these things cannot survive without heavy subsidies then perhaps we shouldn't be subsidizing them at all. If they're so great they should be able to make money without the help of the taxpayer.


It seems California is bent upon hastening its own demise, this time by the California legislature passing a bill that would make it a “sanctuary state”.

If Governor Moonbeam signs it, the I suggest Congress vote to suspend any federal money going to California in regards to law enforcement because the federal agencies will need it to enforce our nation's immigration laws.

Cap'n Teach asks a truly important question on this matter, that being “What about the citizens of California feeling safe from the influx of criminal aliens?”

We already know the answer to that – California's state government doesn't care about its legal citizens. It already taxes and regulates the bejeezus out of them and wants to add even more financial burdens upon them. It could be why California has been losing both residents and businesses – they leave the state before the state can take it away from them to give to a 'more deserving' illegal immigrant.


And that's the news from Lake Winnipesaukee, where we await the rains from the latest hurricane/tropical storm remnant to arrive, try to get out roof finished before then, and make plans to get some more boating in before Columbus Day.


Thoughts On A Sunday

One might call this the Hurricane Irma weekend as it's “All Irma All The Time”, at least on the news.

Not that I'm tired of hearing about it, but the coverage could have easily been handled by recording many of the segments and replaying them on an endless loop with the occasional cut-ins for up to date information. The MSM could have saved a fortune and still had relevant coverage.

Far too often we saw scenes of their intrepid (but woefully stupid) reporters out in the midst of the roaring winds, driving rain and flying debris, doing exactly what they were warning their viewers not to do. I kept waiting for one of those wind-driven pieces of debris to take out a reporter on live TV, being flatted by a section of a roof or speared by a 2x4 or a shard of glass. While it would have been tragic, it would have served as a life lesson for the rest of the MSM.


A man comes home to find a naked woman he doesn't know in his bed and calls the police.

Smart man.


Ward Dorrity commenting on a post at American Thinker hits the nail on the head when it comes to things like 'social justice'.

Many of the dupes and useful idiots on the left claim that they are all for 'social justice' but most of them have no real idea of what that term really entails. 'Social justice' as the term is used today is a con game used by the clever to advance their personal wealth and egos, and by the ruling class as an instrument to destroy trust.

...the chief problem with the 'social justice' meme is that it is based upon a defective notion of human rights. 'Human rights,' after all, are the chief argument made by advocates for the imposition of social justice and the redistribution of wealth.


This is a low-rent way for the smug and the self-righteous to assert their assumption of moral superiority, as it neatly dodges - and in fact destroys - the larger questions of human dignity and aspirations.



I find this to be a bit of idiocy on the part of the media.

Florida residents call on Trump to open Mar-a-Lago as a shelter for hurricane victims.

Sounds like a good idea, right? There's just one teensie-tiny problem with doing that, that being that the area where Trump's resort is located has been ordered evacuated because the storm surge was expected to flood the area. What good is a shelter that's is going to flood when the storm surge hits?

I bet they didn't think about that, did they? Or maybe they didn't care. It was just one more thing that could be used against Trump, much like his personal contribution of $1 million to the Harvey relief efforts.

A lot of people complained that he didn't give enough. I have to wonder how many of the wealthy Democrat politicians opened their checkbooks and cut a check for $1 million? (Remember, the $1 million was his personal money, not government money. Then again, Democrats love telling other people what they have to do with their own money. They are also quite generous with other people's money. But it isn't often you hear of them donating their own money for things like disaster relief.


From Stacy McCain comes Remembering 9/11: Friday Fiction Special.

I have no words.....


Adrienne shows us why the so-called “Snap Challenge” is just so much bull pucky.

Explains Adrienne:

The first word of the acronym "snap" is supplemental.  It means that the money is to supplement your earnings in order to be a short term help in time of need.  It was never intended to be your entire food budget.

She goes on to explain that stated purpose of the challenge ignores a number of important facts and proves through grocery purchases of her own that she could easily meet the challenge even if she didn't use her own money. It's all about being selective with your purchases, avoiding junk food, and whatever your do, and don't go to a place like Whole Foods to buy your food because food is a hell of a lot more expensive there. (Most folks that I know who shop there are virtue signaling. How do I know this? Because they make sure to let me and others know that's the only place they buy their groceries. It has little to do with the supposed superiority of 'organic' fruits and vegetables.)


This explains a lot.

As Dave Blount at Moonbattery puts it, “This is the fate that awaits statists when the day inevitably comes that Big Government is not there to wipe their noses for them.”



And that's the news from Lake Winnipesaukee, where most of the summerfolk are gone until next year, the die-hards are hanging on until Columbus Day, where we don't have any hurricanes coming this way...at least not at the moment.


Bourgeois Values Versus Burning Man

It seems that the op-ed that UPenn law professor Amy Wax and fellow USD law professor Larry Alexander penned for the Philadelphia Inquirer keeps bearing fruit.

The op-ed laid out what bourgeois culture is, here's a brief synopsis provided by Trevor Thomas:

Get married before you have children and strive to stay married for their sake. Get the education you need for gainful employment, work hard, and avoid idleness.  Go the extra mile for your employer or client.  Be a patriot, ready to serve the country.  Be neighborly, civic-minded, and charitable.  Avoid coarse language in public.  Be respectful of authority.  Eschew substance abuse and crime.

That's it. Nothing shocking. Nothing too over the top. Nothing extreme. But to hear from a letter by 54 UPenn doctoral students, you'd think that these things are somehow “racist.” They even went so far as to try to tie the Wax/Alexander op-ed to the events that took place in Charlottesville, Virginia. That's some darned convoluted thinking to be able to do that, or at least to attempt to do that. Then Professor Wax “doubled down in her defense of the bourgeois culture.”

Declaring Anglo-Protestant cultural norms superior, Wax told the student paper, "I don't shrink from the word 'superior.'"  She added, "Everyone wants to come to the countries that exemplify" these values.  "Everyone wants to go to countries ruled by white Europeans."  Furthermore, Wax made it clear – because when talking to liberals, one must always make this clear – that she was not implying the superiority of whites.  "Bourgeois values aren't just for white people."

In other words, as the professors' original piece concluded, "all cultures are not equal."  This is like saying "all pizzas are not equal," but such a conclusion flies in the face of the multiculturalism preached by the modern left.  And all cultures are not equal because all values are not equal.

Having been to a large number of countries around the world over a 20-year period during some of my younger days, I can attest to Wax's observations. There are some cultures, some values that are so reprehensible that they cannot be explained away or claimed to be as being equally valid as Western values.

Thomas goes on to show the dichotomy between the bourgeois values and those epitomized by the annual Burning Man Festival in Nevada, one that seems to extol debauchery and eschews many of the more common morals and ethics.

Read the whole thing.


Thoughts On A Sunday

Here it is, the last 'official' weekend of the summer season. It came upon us all too soon.

The weekend traffic has been insane. What's even more insane is that it started mid-morning on Friday. The traffic has made running some of my usual weekend errands difficult, so I've put many of them off until Monday.

One slight damper of the weekend has been the weather, with it being very windy yesterday and rain today. However Monday is supposed to be spectacular.


How many times over the past decade or so have we found out that all of the various types of food that were supposed to be bad for us weren't? How many times have the 'substitutes' we were supposed to use instead were found to be far worse for us that what they were replacing?

The latest “Oops, we got it wrong!” when it came to something that was supposedly bad for us: salt.

It turns out that, except for those who have high blood pressure or hypertension, a low salt intake can actually be bad for you.

Color me surprised...NOT.


It seems that no matter what President Trump does, it's never enough for the Left and the DNC-MSM.

The latest thing they're blasting him about?

That he only gave a million dollars of his own money to the flood relief efforts in Texas.

Really? And how much of their own money have they given in comparison? If I had to guess, the answer is “not much”. But then they are perfectly willing to give other people's money to the effort, so why should they spend their own?

Call it overt hypocrisy in action.


Also by way of the good professor comes this comment from one of his friends on Facebook about the rescue and recovery efforts in Texas: “It doesn’t take a disaster like Harvey to bring out the best in us; it takes a disaster like Harvey for the press to notice the everyday decency of most people.”

Indeed. Every day decency isn't newsworthy these days.


It's amazing how people's opinions can change once they can get past what the media has been telling them. In this case people in Houston who met President Trump have changed their opinions about him, including one person who posted on Facebook: “I think he's a wonderful man!”

Heads are exploding across the Leftosphere.


Who knew that a simple object like a banana peel could cause a widespread shortage of fainting couches at Ole Miss?

They sure don't make college students like they used to. These days too many of them need intense psychotherapy to cope with the real world. Maybe the need to skip college and check themselves into the nearest mental health facility because they sure as heck aren't ready for college.


One unexpected side effect of Hurricane Harvey?

It makes a clear case for nuclear power.

Refineries were shut down. Renewable energy sources (wind and solar) were offline. At least one chemical plant had explosions and fires because the cooling system used to keep them stored safely lost power. Twenty percent of the nation's oil production was shut down.

But the Texas nuclear power plants have been running smoothly.

The two nuclear reactors at the South Texas Project plant near Houston were operating at full capacity despite wind gusts that peaked at 130 mph as the Hurricane made landfall. The plant implemented its severe weather protocols as planned and completed hurricane preparations ahead of Category 4 Hurricane Harvey striking the Texas Gulf Coast on August 25th.

Anyone who knows anything about nuclear was not surprised. Nuclear is the only energy source immune to all extreme weather events – by design.

These plants were not like the Fukishima plants in Japan. The backups and the rock solid construction of both the reactors and the power generators made them shrug off the worst effects of the storm. They're still online. That can't be said of the wind and solar generation facilities.


And that's the news from a rather soggy Lake Winnipesaukee, where it's been a all day soaker, outdoor activities were curtailed, and where work on The Manse came to a screeching halt.


Leftists Decry Hard Word And Civility As "Hate Speech"

When I read the National Review post I linked in my previous post a bit closer, I realized I had forgotten to comment upon something that really made me shake my head in disbelief.

Were you planning to instruct your child about the value of hard work and civility? Not so fast! According to a current uproar at the University of Pennsylvania, advocacy of such bourgeois virtues is “hate speech.”

So inculcating your children with a work ethic and civility towards others is now considered racist/sexist/whateverist? (Yes, I made up that last word to cover a wide range of “isms”.) In what kind of twisted and drug-infested world can either of those two be considered “hate speech”? Are we all supposed to be rude slackers who haven't worked at anything more than difficult that ordering the fat-free decaf latte through a smart phone app? Or is all their work time taken up with being useless and unproductive SJW's “For the betterment of everyone who agrees with them?”

I dare you oh-so-concerned SJW's to tell these guys that hard work and civility is hate speech and tell me how it worked out for you.