...and they're more than willing to admit it. Apparently this downtown church is willing to loosen the old shackles just a wee bit if they're hurting you -- but they are in no way interested in having you remove them. You might escape.
Quitters Blog
"It's not about bashing Democrats, it's not about taxes, they have no idea what the Boston tea party was about, they don't know their history at all. This is about hating a black man in the White House. This is racism straight up. That is nothing but a bunch of teabagging rednecks. And there is no way around that. And you know, you can tell these type of right wingers anything and they'll believe it, except the truth."Oh Janeane. I had such a crush on you. Why do you have to end it with us this way? So, the logic goes "if you disagree with a black man, you hate black men." According to this logic, I disagree with Hilary Clinton. I hate all women. Oh, and let's throw "carpetbagging Yankees" in there as well to stir up trouble. I disagree with George Bush. I hate all white men. I did not much care for Alberto Gonzales, thus I obviously hate all Hispanics. I really detest and fully disagree with Kim Jong Il and I guess that means I hate all Asians. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad really sets me off sometimes, showing, I am sure, my pure unfettered display of unilateral hate of all Muslims and Middle Easterners. I have never found a love of the taste whale blubber, which obviously shows contempt for the Inuits. I've never spent any time reading Perez Hilton's celebrity gossip drivel and obviously this is my latent homosexuality showing which creates my internal strife and makes me violent towards all gays and lesbians.
First off, I must admit: I am a coffee drinker. Tea doesn't do it for me. That said, I like the whole tea party concept -- but I think it missed the boat. I think it was ignored. And I think I know why.
First off, it got no media coverage. Oh, sure, Fox News was there -- and almost seemed to be a sponsor. This probably drove the other media outlets away. Who wants to be seen covering someone else's event? Some will see this as the "awful liberal media" but I don't see it -- at least not at the moment. And I don't care if Fox was the only one covering you -- this is not a benefit. Fox News is divisive. Sure there may be a handful of pundits on Fox that occasionally spout a rational point of view, but they are so buried in over dramatization, fear promotion and pandering to the religious right that it gets lost in the shuffle. And the right so doesn't understand they are getting hoaxed -- that Fox News is a lefty's joke to make money off the right and funnel it to the left.
And, oh my god, shut Rick Perry up. I understand his message. And the right person can say it in a way that is a little more balanced. But this is Texas. And in Texas there is something extra special about the whole "Secede from the Union" thing. In Texas, there is a whole subculture of crazies that preach secession all the time. They don't need anyone pushing them. In Texas, secession brings out the confederate flag waving, monster truck driving, hood wearing lynch mob. These folks don't need a push. They are scary enough without the Gov standing up and giving them a shout out. Take your Rod Blagojevich hair and go back to the governor's mansion.
But most importantly, if this movement were to be effective, there needs to be a very loud criticism of the right. Yes, I said the right. We all know that the tea party folks hate the insane spending of the left. But they need to embrace the insanity of the spending of the right as well. Don't you sit there and defend Bush and criticize Obama when their spending and bailout plans are pretty much explicitly the same. Bush and Clinton got us into this mess with their idiotic financial policies. Obama's plan to get us out is right in line with the plans that got us here. To criticize one without bashing the other is a farce.
This needs to not be a left vs right or liberal vs conservative issue. This needs to be a reason vs irrationality issue. And it needs to be loud. And it can't just be something we do on "tax day." The protest needs to happen until the idiots in Washington step down. Right now, they're not even scared. Right now, the tea parties have been dismissed and ignored.
As always, there's a little back story. You see: we make our own dog food. We're not overly crazy nutso, we just started reading the dog food bag one day and -- well it didn't sound like stuff I wanted to feed my best friends. And the corn, good god, the corn. I used to live right next to a corn field. And I had 2 dogs back then -- darn good ones, too, if you ask me. They begged and whined for all sorts of food at various times, but they NEVER EVER went running into the cornfield looking for corn. Corn just isn't a natural food for a dog. (A cow either, but that's another rant altogether.)
So now I am pretty sure I need to try it for real. And again, I know it looks gross. But not liking a particular food is a weakness. The more you like, the better diversity you get and the better you are able to shop for what's in season and what's on sale. I guarantee those of you that are picky are getting less nutrition by eating the 3 or 4 bland things you like. It's time to branch out. Come with me... taste the food that will taste you back.
I googled around a bit. The more traditional approach is boiled with spices. There is also a cured approach (which I will definitely be trying). I am going to go with the traditional... and maybe twist it a bit in the middle. I started with a pretty simple recipe I found on JAMSGems4u. I pretty much followed her boiling recipe, though I figured a whole handful of garlic couldn't hurt, so that went in as well.
I took a left turn right off the recipe and decided to add a little smoke flavor. So I wrapped that bad boy in bacon to keep it from drying out. (Bacon is the universal flavoring, protector and moistener -- 3 products in 1!) Remember: the skin came off after boiling. There's nothing to hold in the moisture. And then I popped it in the smoker for a few hours of smoke

I was driving by "never smiles or waves scary Viet Nam vet guy" as he painstakingly hand watered the drainage ditch.[3] And I started to wonder: how many tightly wound nut jobs live within a 5 mile radius -- ready to go sproing at any moment. Sure there's a Google API plugin to find the nearest sex offender... But where's my Ruby Ridge Google? I want a map with a little confederate flag markers and a satellite view where I can zoom in and see the catacombs of broken school buses buried in the back yard.
The funny thing with these people is that, while they are all waiting on the impending doom of the next disaster, they're not all waiting on the same disaster. You've got your basic "housing market/stock market crash" guys, "racial riot expectations/Klan" folks and your basic "impending nuclear holocaust/terrorist briefcase dirty bomb" guys. They all have 6 months of food and a 55 gallon drum of gasoline stashed away. They're just waiting on different disasters. But the sad truth here is: There has always been some fire on the horizon. There has always been impending doom. Yet, mysteriously we still keep chugging along.[4]
And I do mean always. Just in the last fifty years, I can name a multitude of them off the top of my head: the cold war, the bay of pigs,[5] the Carter energy crisis, Reagan's star wars, Y2K,[6] the expected tribulations following the imminent second coming of Jebus,[7] asteroid strike, Mel Gibson, global warming, nuclear war, Islamic terror... I could go on, but I had to take a breath. It makes me wonder a few things, though.
First of all, what's the payout for all the hoarders and woodland creatures? Sure, they see it as insurance of sorts. And to some degree I understand that. I live within the last mile (literally) of a power line branch. I understand I am last in line for power restoration when a disaster occurs. I understand the need for a generator, a garden and a little bit of food. But the idea of hoarding a 6 month supply of food and a big sack of real gold just doesn't reach me. That food is just not likely to last and will have to be constantly replaced. Let's say you spent $10,000 on food for the coming apocalypse in the late 70's. Then assume, instead you put it in the stock market. It would be an underestimate to say it would be worth almost $100,000 some thirty years later -- even in today's down market.[8] And if the apocalypse comes and you really have a large sack of real gold, you may find it extremely difficult to defend or find the government may want to take it. Your best bet here is to just have a skill and a willingness to trade it.[9] But isn't that pretty much true all the time?
But most importantly I want to know: how do I make a big sack of cash off of these folks? Selling freeze dried banana chips in bulk isn't my thing. I am unlikely to open up a gun store. The school districts have the lock on broken down buses. I fear that the reasonable, rational model may win out again here. I suspect the way to win in castastrophear is to buy into widely diversified mutual funds. "What?" you say. "You're a crazier than a commune dweller. The market is sunk." Precisely. And here I sit without a real income. One lowly Unix administrator in a county that has 15 Unix systems -- 2 of which are mine. It's time for me to find an income stream or two and sink a big fat wad of it in the market. Remember: the goal is actually to buy low. So what if it tanks a little more. Low means its on sale. Turning it down would be like saying "I'll buy the Costco tennis shoes if they ever get up to $30 a pair. I don't want them at $14."
Besides, Ellie May wants a real kitchen. And I don't get home made pie crust until then.



