R.I.P. Michael Clarke Duncan

I just learned this morning that the actor Michael Clarke Duncan died yesterday from complications of a heart attack.  He was only 54!  I am not a fatuous follower of celebrities, but this man impressed me in the few films I saw in which he appeared.  I thought he was an actor of truly great ability and presence.  I also thought he deserved the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor in The Green Mile.  I find that he did win a Saturn award for the role as Best Supporting Actor, and that is good.

You departed rather earlier than we should have preferred, and that is how it sometimes goes.  So farewell, Michael.

Posted in Miscellaneous, Movies, News | Leave a comment

Zo Hits the Nail on the Head

As you may have noticed I got really ticked off about that massacre in Aurora, Colorado last week.  I was particularly angered that there were no concealed carry holders in the house, and this in a state where concealed carry is relatively easy to qualify for.  But the second part of this whole mess had to be the Liberal talking heads (with mush instead of brains it appears) using this tragedy to bring up the tired subject of gun control.  It was fairly predictable.

Well, one of my favorite conservative YouTubers, Alonzo Rachel, weighed in on this subject in his YouTube channel, Macho Sauce Productions.  Go see!  You will like, I am sure.

Subscribe to his YouTube channel for even more fun!

Posted in Miscellaneous, Politics | Leave a comment

Where were the Concealed Carry Holders?

But For a Bit of Space and Time…

As I indicated, I am both sickened and angered by this event, but dismayed as well.  Colorado is a Concealed Carry state!  Why was this guy allowed to continue his rampage until he himself terminated it?  Or ran out of ammunition?  Nope.  He had plenty.  Did he run out of targets?  Not at all.  Were any of those who were killed outright holders of concealed carry permits?  Not that I have heard.  Were there any concealed carry permit holders even present, and if so, were they carrying at the time?  The answer to those questions at least would appear to be a big NO.

It seems that the shooter had the foresight to imagine that there might have been someone in the audience who was armed.  He was able to perform his actions entirely at his leisure, but he prepared himself with ballistic clothing, as if anticipating the possibility of return fire.  Better to be prepared and not need it, of course, but if there had been any in the theater that night who possessed concealed carry permits, they clearly under-prepared, because nobody took any steps to oppose this madman.

Colorado: a Concealed Carry State

A friend of mine suggested that the lack of anyone capable of returning fire was likely due to the young age of most of the movie-goers (concealed carry permits are usually age-restricted to over-21).  I must concede this possibility.  But why couldn’t there have been at least one?  Someone to distract the shooter with the need to defend himself, rather than allowing him free reign?  Alas, no.

Futile and Pathetic Measures Predicted

Here is what will likely happen now.  Irrespective of the fact that forbidding the carrying of arms into the theater would not have stopped this senseless event, the movie theater chain, Century 16, will now post signs prominently at entrances, stating uselessly and pathetically, “No firearms allowed!”  All this would accomplish, of course, would be to prevent rule-abiding people from bringing firearms into the theater.  Mr. Holmes wouldn’t have even seen the signs, had they already been posted, because he came in through the exit.  And if he had come in through the entrance, does anyone really expect that he would have stopped short and turned around because of a silly rule?  When he planned to break the most sacred of laws?  That’s why posting such signs would be pathetic.  Just watch, though.  I bet they have already posted them!

Effectual Means of Protection

Regardless of ballistic protection, if someone had been returning fire and hitting this guy in his ballistic vest, he would have been forced to remove his attention from his fleeing victims and first find, and then engage, someone returning fire.  And while some have pointed out that a movie theater is normally darkened, in order to allow viewers to see the movie, the screen itself would provide enough light to engage a single target.  And with only a single target, and collateral targets (the victims) fleeing as quickly as possible, a defender would have pretty much a clear shot.  How quick to draw and shoot?  Check this out:

Posted in Events, Politics | Leave a comment

Sickened and Angered About the Aurora Shooting

Ever have one of those days when you kind of know what you want to say, but aren’t sure where to begin with it?  Nobody’s ever accused me of being a man of few words, but sometimes there is so much to say that the magnitude of what needs to be said confers a degree of silence upon me.  Temporarily, at least.

In the heat of the event itself, which as I write occurred just a few days ago, I hardly need to write about what happened.  But for the sake of future readers who may have forgotten, it was shortly after midnight on 20 July 2012 that James E. Holmes entered a theater which was screening the newest Batman movie, The Dark Knight Rises, and firing three weapons at the audience, killed 12, and injured many others.  More about this on Wikipedia, HERE.

Innocent Victims

I am sickened by this event because of the lives that were senselessly taken, especially so that it happened in a place that should have been completely devoid of peril, and happening so unexpectedly.  I hope devoutly for the loved ones of those who died that they will be blessed by a merciful God, and that their anguish and sadness might be tempered by the certain hope in the Resurrection wrought by our Savior Jesus Christ.  Death separates too many of us too young from those whom we love, but whether it happens expectedly after a long life, or unexpectedly as in tragedies such as this, there still remains hope in the Lord.  That, at least, remains to us.

The Perp

There is little to be said for the actor in this tragedy.  His insanity was little remarked upon during the time leading up to this event, and little he did or said beforehand would have led most reasonable persons to fear for his future actions.  Thus this culmination is about as unpredictable, and as unpreventable, as any event of nature could be.  That he did not kill himself, and that he allowed himself to be captured, will at least allow us to be trammeled unmercifully with the subsequent trial and sentencing for his crime.

It would have been better, I tend to think, that he should have turned his weapons upon himself — and saved us from the coming denouement and media circus that it will surely become.  Thus he further victimizes us all.

Posted in Events, Politics | Leave a comment

My Review of Regular Expressions Cookbook

Originally submitted at O’Reilly

This cookbook provides more than 100 recipes to help you crunch data and manipulate text with regular expressions. With recipes for popular programming languages such as C#, Java, JavaScript, Perl, PHP, Python, Ruby, and VB.NET, Regular Expressions Cookbook will help you learn powerful …

A Very Handy Addition to my Bookshelf!

By Cyberherbalist from Olympia, WA on 7/17/2012

 

4out of 5

Pros: Helpful examples, Easy to understand, Well Organized, Well-written

Cons: Index could be expanded

Best Uses: Student, Expert, Novice, Intermediate

Describe Yourself: Developer

I got this book hoping to find “recipes” for the various Regex problems I run into in my work, and it has more than fulfilled my expectations. Finding a thankfully clear tutorial on Regexes was an unexpected plus.

A previous reviewer, Steve of Houston, TX, complained about the recipe numbering scheme, like where the text might say “see Recipes 3.15 and 3.16”. He said he couldn’t figure out what these numbers meant or where there was a list of them. What?! Did he actually have a copy of the book in hand? The Table of Contents lists each recipe and gives its title. The format is X.Y, where X is the chapter and Y is the individual recipe. If one is referred to Recipe 2.6, it is child’s play to turn to chapter 2 and find the sixth recipe. They are clearly marked. This is entirely intuitive, and I cannot understand how he could have missed it.

(legalese)

Posted in Miscellaneous | Leave a comment

Romney at the NAACP: Boos, Yes, But Also Applause

I just got done watching the video of Mitt Romney’s address today at the NAACP convention in Dallas, Texas.  It was very well received, in my opinion.  Of course, not a rousing chorus of approval, and yes there were a few boos, but I noticed that there were far more instances of applause than of boos.  And if you watch it all the way to the end, Romney gets a warm response to his closing words — and surprise, surprise, surprise as Gomer Pyle might have said, he actually got a standing ovation.  Again, not wildly enthusiastic, but certainly more than just polite.

But what do we hear from the media?  The first thing they mention, right up front, is the boos.  As if that was the NAACP’s entire reaction to Romney’s address.  Of course, the “mainstream” media is completely neutral, and always strives for even-handedness, as if the fact that 90% of them voted for Barack Obama doesn’t matter one bit.

The funny thing is, even Fox News led with the boos.  Like nobody expected it, if Romney brought up repealing Obamacare?

The main thing to keep in mind is that the folks at the NAACP were more than gracious in their treatment of Mitt Romney, and so what if they booed a particular item?  It would have been astounding if they hadn’t booed at that.

Just for the sake of having a link to a good version of the video of the speech, here’s the NAACP’s version:

Mittens?

Yesterday, I saw that one of my old high school friends used on Facebook a nickname for Mitt Romney I hadn’t heard before: “Mittens”.  How odd!  And how very sophomoric!

I’m sure he didn’t invent the nickname, however, because  I’ve seen it elsewhere since then.  I guess it’s one of those things that are going to be bandied about, probably even after Mitt Romney gets elected President, something I most devoutly hope for.

There’s some “Hope and Change” that even I can believe in.

Posted in Miscellaneous | Leave a comment

A Really FINE rendition of the Star-Spangled Banner

I was clued into this version of the Star-Spangled Banner by Alphonso Rachel of Zonation.  A bit different but really beautiful — at least to my ears.

Posted in Miscellaneous | Leave a comment

Morgan Freeman: Obama not our first black President

I love Morgan Freeman as an actor.  There’s nobody quite like him, and I’ve liked pretty much every movie he’s acted in, largely because of him.  Of course he’s not perfect.  Nobody is.  But how could he say things like this — and still remain credible?

OK, I was disappointed when I heard him refer to the Tea Party as racists.  And the reason for this?  Because the Tea Party supposedly wanted to see President Obama lose this November.  It sure is fun, isn’t it?  Calling people nasty names because they take principled political stands on issues — just because those principles happen to be opposed by a President who happens to be black?  I wonder if Republicans could get away with this?  Say, if Mitt Romney gets elected, could the Republicans get away with calling those people who voted for Obama racists?  Because Romney is white?  Nah.

But his latest pronouncement is simply amazing, as well as disappointing.  In an interview with NPR, Mr. Freeman said that Obama isn’t actually our first black President.  He’s our first “mixed-race President”.  And why?  Because Obama’s mother was white!  You could have knocked me over with a feather.  Don’t believe me?  Here, have a listen:

The reason I felt that this outrageous is that I know something about discrimination.  As white as I am, one of my great great grandmothers was American Indian.  Her children were all “Half-Breeds” and treated even more disrespectfully by the whites than their full-blood cousins.  Mixed race, indeed!  So Obama is a “half-breed”?  That is what Mr. Freeman just said.  Not in so many words, but can you say “code words”?

Another situation came to my mind after hearing Mr. Freeman’s words.  Apartheid.  If you don’t know what that means, count yourself fortunate, but read about it HERE.

Back in the mid-60’s my family lived for a time in Toronto, Canada due to my father’s employment.  In my high school I had a friend and fraternity brother named Dion.  He was from South Africa.  But he was not white, neither was black.  In South African terms, by legal definition, Dion and his family were all “colored”.  Under Apartheid Dion had certain privileges not enjoyed by his black cousins, and had certain privileges enjoyed by whites withheld.  They emigrated from South Africa because of Apartheid, because they were “mixed-race” or “half-breeds”.  They were second-class citizens in the land of their birth.

This is what I was astonished to hear, that Morgan Freeman could call Barack Obama a “half-breed” or a “mulatto“, simply by using another euphemism, “mixed-race”, and get away with it.

But to cut to the chase, to Morgan Freeman at least, Barack Obama isn’t black enough.

Simply astounding.

Posted in Politics | Leave a comment

Misrepresentations: Mitt Romney and Abortion

Washington state isn’t considered a swing state in the upcoming election (it’s probably considered a “sure thing” for the Obama campaign), so we didn’t get to see the recent scare-tactic ads directed against Mitt Romney in a number of swing states, claiming that Romney plans to do away with a woman’s right to kill her unborn baby.  Ahem, I mean her “right to choose.”

As an aside, I must point out that normally, a person’s right to choose a particular thing is not associated with the death of another person, at least when it comes to a legal act, but when it comes to this particular euphemism, exercising the “right to choose” does involve the death of another person, and the most helpless of all persons, an unborn baby.  Aren’t euphemisms great?

Anyway, the text of the ad contains the following:

“Every woman who believes decisions about our bodies and our health-care should  be our own is troubled Mitt Romney supports overturning Roe v. Wade… Romney backed a law that outlaws all  abortions, even in cases of rape and incest.”

As Nazi Propaganda Minister Josef Goebbels once said,

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.

Given that the “mainstream media” are largely liberal Democrats and firmly in Obama’s camp (their public posturing as “neutral actors” – another lie – notwithstanding), NBC, ABC, CNN, and CBS together form what amounts to the virtually state-controlled media in the United States, and if any of their news programs happens to report on the Obama campaign’s ad as a misrepresentation I will be quite surprised.

Romney’s campaign has of course addressed this lying ad already, so far be it for me to try repeat their efforts, but it might be instructive to note that the church that Romney adheres to (the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, to which I also adhere) happens to hold as doctrine that abortion is permissible under certain circumstances, namely the exact circumstances that the Obama ad claims Romney was opposed to allowing abortion in case of:  rape, incest or to save the life of the mother.  Romney has in fact indicated that those are the circumstances under which he considers that abortion may be permitted.  So the ad is an out and out lie.

The precise language of the LDS church policy is as follows:

The Lord commanded, “Thou shalt not . . . kill, nor do anything like unto it” (D&C 59:6). The Church opposes elective abortion for personal or social convenience. Members must not submit to, perform, arrange for, pay for, consent to, or encourage an abortion. The only possible exceptions are when:

  1. Pregnancy resulted from forcible rape or incest.
  2. A competent physician determines that the life or health of the mother is in serious jeopardy.
  3. A competent physician determines that the fetus has severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth.

Even these exceptions do not justify abortion automatically. Abortion is a most serious matter and should be considered only after the persons responsible have consulted with their bishops and received divine confirmation through prayer.

I don’t think that Mitt Romney would seek to have the law restrict abortion any further than this, short of a majority in both houses of Congress enacting a law so restricting it.

In other words, the Left is again attempting to put words in the Right’s mouth, words which the Right would not speak and by and large doesn’t believe.  Although of course there are some on the right who do hold that abortion is wrong in all cases.  Mitt Romney is not one of them, however.

Posted in Politics, Religion | Leave a comment

More Princes

My earlier post about what seems to be a relartively close connection to the Queen of England had to do with an acquaintanceship chain therein — where Dave, my brother’s friend, was actually acquainted with Princess Di.  I can actually claim a closer connection than that, although it more tenuous, since it involved my late father having once met and briefly associated with Prince Charles.

This is the story:

My father worked for the McDonnell-Douglas aircraft company as a quality assurance representative, and one of his assignments as a QA rep was in England to a company called Dowty-Rotol in Gloucestershire. We lived in the town of Cheltenham.

While we lived in England the supersonic airliner, the Concorde, was introduced. Since my father was the highest ranking employee of McDonnell-Douglas in England, the company requested that he go to Heathrow Airport, near London, and try to get a look at it at its public introduction.

Because Dad was obviously (by his speech) an American, he was at some point mistaken by the security people at the event as a member of the press corps, and he was handed a Press Pass, which he took without letting on that he really wasn’t part of the news media.

As it turned out, Prince Charles was also at this event for a tour of the airplane. And by means of his Press Pass, Dad managed to make his way to the vicinity of the VIP delegation in which the Prince was in, and listened as Prince Charles asked questions about the aircraft. At one point Prince Charles asked an aviation question that the resident “expert” couldn’t answer. The expert indicated that he would have to refer the question to someone else who was not there at the time. But Dad, being very knowledgeable about aircraft in general, spoke up and indicated that he knew the answer to the question. Accordingly, Charles asked him to come forward to elaborate, which he did. When he finished, he went back to his place on the fringes of the VIP group.

Later, as the Prince’s party was about to board the Concorde for a demonstration flight to Paris and back, Charles requested that Dad be invited to accompany them and sit nearby in case his knowledge about aircraft might be needed again. And so my father was invited to fly on the Concorde with Prince Charles, heir to the throne of England!

I imagine that when Dad later reported to his bosses at McDonnell-Douglas in Long Beach about the results of his trip to see the Concorde, they would have been much gratified at his ingenuity in getting a ride.

All in all, Dad was very impressed with Prince Charles’ depth of interest in and ability to understand technical matters. For his part, Prince Charles thanked Dad for coming to England to write about the new airplane for the American audience!

Dad ended up taking a number of photographs of the Concorde and the Prince at this event, and tried to get the photos of the Prince autographed by sending them and his request to Buckingham palace. Unfortunately, the policy of Buckingham palace prevented this plan from coming to fruition, and they just sent the photographs back with an apology.

So, back to the original “Small World Principle”, I am connected to the Queen of England by only two jumps:

Me -> Father -> Charles -> Queen Elizabeth II

Although I am certain that after all these years Prince Charles probably couldn’t come up with a memory of my father to save his life.

Posted in Family | Leave a comment