…then you’re the kind of person that buys a lap dance at a strip club and comes back to your buddies saying, “Man, that stripper REALLY liked me!”
The next 20 or so seconds of this clip summarizes the entire acceptance speech. Exactly how long do you suppose Romney’s handlers had him work on that in front of a mirror? He gave us this look for a good 20 minutes. Did anyone actually buy that?
Now I’m not going to go over the entire speech because I can’t put myself through it a second time. But I couldn’t help but laugh at his blatant pandering to women, which was clearly ordered by his handlers. Or maybe the multiple times he said, “When we voted for Obama 4 years ago…” Really? How many people in that room voted for Obama 4 years ago? How many people who took the time out of their day to listen to this creepy bastard speak voted for Obama 4 years ago?
By the way, were you to put a gun to my head I’d vote Romney over Obama. If I were in a battleground state there’d be a good chance I’d vote for Obama. That isn’t to say I like Romney (I think I’ve made that pretty clear at this point), but rather that I don’t want either of these two getting a second term. Second term Obama is scary. I’d hate to see either or these men when they no longer feel they need to behave in a way to get them reelected.
Regardless, if you want to see a right proper acceptance speech, look no further:
While pouring through some random criminal cases for my own pleasure I found some pretty neat stuff:
The Exclusionary Rule: Under the 4th Amendment when a gov’t agent gathers evidence illegally, that evidence cannot be used against you in court. However, there is an exception to this rule. If the government agent made an honest mistake, then a good-faith exception exists and the evidence can be admitted. I’ve always thought this concept was silly; you either have a right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure or you don’t. Mistakes should have no part in it. Well, Idaho agrees. Under Idaho’s equivalent to the 4th Amendment, Article I, Section 17, there is no good faith exception to the exclusionary rule. I give you State v. Guzman, 842 P.2d 660:
the people of a state are in more real danger from a court of last resort which participates in the violation of its fundamental laws, even in order to bring a criminal to justice, than they are from the most persistent efforts of all the bootleggers at large.
Resisting Excessive Force During Arrest: Mind you, I wouldn’t want the uphill task of defending that poor sap, but in Idaho you can go ahead and resist a cop using excessive force.
Miranda: Here in the great state of Idaho, a Terry stop CAN ripen into one necessitating a Miranda warning.
Checkpoints: Unconstitutional. The money quote in State v. Henderson, 756 P.2d 1057: Perhaps the most important attribute of our way of life in Idaho is individual liberty. A citizen is free to stroll the streets, hike the mountains, and float the rivers of this state without interference from the government.
There are many more that I may get around to in the future. But suffice it to say that many of those things I got upset about during my Criminal Procedure classes and Bar Study have been remedied with greater protections than the Bill of Rights outlines here in Free Idaho(TM)
Not only has my Corps decided to take the lead and bring back the 1911, but check this out…
From the Marines facebook page:
All Terrain Vehicle.
Sgt. Justin D. Head, animal packing course chief instructor, excercises his mustang, Hondo, shortly after grazing. The animal packing course is the only one of its kindin the department of defense and teaches Marines and other military personnel how to effectively and efficiently work with beast of burden to transport munitions, supplies and wounded personnel to and from are
as inaccessible to mechanized and air transportation. The course, offered at the Marine Corps Mountain Warfare Training Center, teaches an introduction to animal packing, an anatomy of pack animals, animal packing techniques, casualty evacuation techniques, animal first aid and bivouac considerations.
(U.S. Marine Corps photo by Sgt. Aaron Hostutler)
Now my guess is that it’s the only one of its kind because, well, we generally lack the support of the other services. And frankly, it’s part of what makes for a superior warfighter. It isn’t too far removed from my time in the Philippines. We used to have this 1′ diameter satellite dish we had to line up with another geosynchronous satellite to bounce communications out of the jungle. The soldiers in the area had them in the back of their trucks automatically keeping lined up. Us? We had it lashed to a stick and a Marine with his head out the window keeping it lined up with a compass.
Another time, we had Marines in my unit go on patrol tugging a goat around to slaughter and eat out in the field. Moto.
I suppose we can look at the closing of an era in 2 ways. Either an end of something awesome, or the next phase of awesome. Americans fly to ISS on Soviet-era rockets. But private industry is picking up the slack (will they use their powers for good or for awesome?), and we just landed something the size of a mini-cooper on the red planet. So I guess the jury is still out.
The last few days I’ve had something troubling me: why is it that although I don’t identify myself as a conservative, I feel defensive of them when they’re attacked by liberals? I’ve only come up with 2 possibilities: 1) as a veteran, conservatives regularly kiss my ass; and 2) the words (though clearly not the actions) of conservatism are more relatable to me. You never hear a liberal talk about small government.
But these answers are not sufficiently satisfying to me. What’s more, I find my anger at conservatives far greater than that at liberals. It’s been said that we generally ignore the flaws in the members of our group while point out the flaws much more readily in others. That is absolutely true for most people. I operate under a different set of rules though. I’m MUCH harder on people in the groups I identify with. I absolutely cannot accept moral failures on members of the warrior class, especially so with Marines, while I expect, and often accept such failures in others. The end result is that I more readily identify with conservatives, and I absolutely fucking abhor them. This still leaves me with the problem as to why I identify at all as a conservative, but leaving that issue aside, allow me to go to my anger with conservatism.
America will find itself in another civil war before the close of the century. And I place the blame for that squarely on conservatives. When you look at liberalism, well, it’s just flat out evil. It is openly and doctrinally antithetical to human liberty and progress. The answer, the gatekeepers, were, and still could and should be the conservatives. Yet they operate under this slavish obedience to biblical superstition. The end result of this will be the end of the Republican party. Men like Rep. Akin, and much of the Republican Party do engage in a legitimate war on women, gays, and minorities. This just places you into idealogical obscurity.
Consider if you will the obvious spokesperson of the hour, Mitt Romney. Romney, who gave Massachusetts an assault weapon ban and RomneyCare speaks out boldly and proudly about how ObamaCare is unconstitutional. He’ll argue that the individual mandate is wrong and against the concept of American liberty. Yet in a recent ad he mentions that his and Paul Ryan’s plan will “save Medicare”. Well, what the shit do you think Medicare is? It’s an INDIVIDUAL MANDATE. Try not paying your medicare and get back to me on how well that works out for you.
A good number of my friends have been upset at my assertion that they are all voting Romney because of shared religion. These men, who were shouting right along with me that blacks voted for Obama because of race (they did) deny and become wildly offended at any suggestion they would do the same. Say what you will, at least blacks were honest about what they did. I know of but 1 Mormon friend of mine who held the line against Romney. The rest of them got in lockstep behind a SOCIALIST due to their shared religion. They just lacked the guts to admit it. At the minimum, accepting that Mormons are much more inclined to vote Republican in the first place, they are complicit in not coming out vocally against his more liberal positions. Again, these are the same people who kept asking where the “good Muslims” were when <insert attack or inflammatory act>. These Mormons spoke out against Islam because, by their logic, after each attack there should be a massive outcry in the Muslim community denouncing them. Yet, where are the Mormons denouncing Romney for being a liberal and Socialist? It isn’t even as if most of them are holding their nose and saying they’ll vote for him because he’s the Republican. No, these people are out posting pro-Romney ads all over Facebook, ect.
Besides the fact that they’re just plain wrong about the social conservative matters, I also just don’t understand how they can’t see the writing on the wall. Where exactly in the entire history of our nation has equality stagnated or regressed? The history of the nation has gone but one direction, and that is to be more inclusive. So to all of you fundamentalists, regardless of your religion, you hold onto your silly bigoted systems, and when our nation is at war with itself, it will be your fault, because you were too stubborn, ignorant, and pigheaded to stop a legitimate systematic evil in liberal expanse in government.
Speaking of Mormons, enjoy some kickass Lindsey Sterling:
Note: I openly admit that I have drank the Kool-aid and this post will likely be offensive to near anyone I know. That said, I do not mean this post as disrespect to any of my fellows in other branches, many of whom saw more action than myself. The rest of you though, can go fuck yourselves.
A few people I know lost a friend the other day. More unfortunate I would say would be the loss to the people of Afghanistan. Last week SSgt. Sky Mote / USMC was killed in action in Afghanistan. The usual group of people came out in support. But the usual people, well, they just don’t get it. Their feeling is one of sadness. They line the streets, shed their tears and feel pity for a man who will have lived a more complete and noble life than 99% of them. The police line the streets with their lights flashing and their uniforms pressed as if they understand, as if they are members of the same community. Those police wear their uniforms and feed off of warriors like this to bask in public adoration and score easy pussy. Those same officers are the ones that will respond to tell SSgt. Mote’s comrades who lived, sweat, and bled next to him that they need to call it a night or that they can’t walk home with that beer in their hands when they get stateside, drunk, and celebrate the man’s death.
But that isn’t my point. These people line the streets and feel sorrow. Weep they should. But those tears should be for themselves. The Marine Corps has two missions: (1)to win battles, and (2)to make Marines. The nation and the community lost a Marine. A nation needs her warriors; they are an especially necessary commodity in a society committing suicide through sloth and cowardice. The true warrior lives by a code of honor. He is a creature of moral courage in the vacuum of a decadent civilization.
Now SSgt. Mote, as I understand, was a warrior. The fact that he was baptized on the yellow footprints is no guarantee of valor, but it is a good early indicator. From the limited amount of information I’ve gathered from reading, my knowledge of the man’s unit and MOS, and some scattered stories from friends it sounds like he was the genuine article.
I can see you shaking your head now, still sad, thinking I’m some fool, or some insensitive asshole. That may well be. But I repeat: weep for yourself. Only a very special few will gain a seat in the halls of Valhalla. Such is why you sad, pathetic souls must rely on Christ. You need someone to do the heavy lifting for you, to die for you (there’s an interesting concept, considering the subject). You needed a better man to place himself on a cross (or in a desert shithole) to sacrifice to secure you a seat in Heaven. Valhalla does not work that way. You must EARN your place in the hall. There you do not rest on your laurels and toast with the finest mead; rather you wait, and you prepare for Ragnarǫk. Ragnarǫk, for the uninitiated, is but future combat, battle sufficiently brutal as to KILL GODS. The Marine Corps Hymn itself ends stating that when soldiers and sailors themselves make their way into your Judeo-Christian heaven, they find Marines on duty. So great an honor!Such an incredible duty is not to be sullied with tears but met with a grave reverence.
Weep! Weep for yourselves, for likely none of you truly will see him again, as the gates of Valhalla will never be opened to you. And I’ll never meet someone I feel very much at a loss for never having known. I will not earn so great an honor either.
Marines die. That’s what we’re here for. But the Marine Corps lives forever, and that means SSgt. Sky Mote lives forever. Cry for yourself. No one will speak so highly of you…
I close by saying perhaps the greatest loss was to the community of manly beards. I’m honestly quite jealous. Semper Fidelis.
Well, I wanted to say a few things about the Colorado theater shooting, but got tangled up in the bar.
Now the first side of this debate claims that an assault weapons ban would have prevented this. For the purposes of this post I’ll just accept the common inaccurate definition of an assault weapon as used by the anti gun crowd. Now, as I understand it, the shooter had with him a shotgun, a pistol, and an AR15 (the civilian variant of the M16). We had a saying when I was in the Corps, “Pray your enemy is on auto.” An automatic weapon is more likely to jam, and is far less controllable. Were automatic weapons easier to procure and the shooter had an M16 instead of a semiautomatic AR15, there would most likely have been fewer death.
There is a fallacy among those that don’t understand guns, that somehow a round exiting an “assault weapon” somehow is more powerful than that in a common deer rifle. The fallacy continues into the idea that each round seems to find its target and has a lethal result. The 5.56mm round used by the M16 is generally used by civilians only as a varmint round. Those that use it to hunt whitetail are often shunned for the lack of lethality of the round. The military often complains of its lack of stopping power.
Consider next, Charles Whitman. Whitman engaged in the same level of death and destruction. What did he use? A common deer rifle. What then of the Virginia Tech shooter? A pair of pistols, and he killed 34. These assault weapons are not magical.
The second side claims that a “good guy” with a gun would have ended this.
There is no guarantee that a single armed person could have resolved this situation. A crowded theater in which a person is woefully outgunned is hardly the place where you will likely make a heroic stand, John McClain style.
Now before you gunnies get your panties twisted, do not confuse this as putting me in bed with the gun banners. The often advanced argument by the anti-gun crowd that a man in the theater with a gun would have made things worse is probably not likely either. I often hear, “Well, then there could be a shootout and innocent bystanders will be hit!” Yes, that’s possibly true, but what then? Last I looked, being unchallenged, this guy got to kill 12 people. So we shouldn’t challenge violent men?
Here’s the crux of what I’m trying to say: Everything we do in this life is a roll of the dice.
The only way you knew for sure that you would be safe from this nutter would be to have not gone to the theater that day. However, it’s also possible that by simply not going to the theater, some of those that did survive the shooting would have been killed in a car wreck. An armed man in the theater may well have been able to sneak up on this guy and put a bullet in his brain pan, saving several from death and dozens from harm. Maybe there’d be a crack shot from that could have taken him out from a distance. But maybe a shooter would have missed and hit an innocent. Maybe a shooter would have further enraged this guy and more people would have died. Maybe a shooter would have distracted the police. Maybe ad infinitum…
All we can do in this life is use our best logic and adjust the odds to put them as best in our favor as possible. Sometimes we’re going to roll snake-eyes regardless of what we do. Hell, I feel like that’s what happened with my marriage. But it is my position that more armed men in the theater would have been a good thing. Some of those times having armed men in the theater will make the situation worse. But more often, it will make the situation better.
As a final aside, when someone asks you why you need “assault rifles” or “armor piercing ammunition”, well, maybe because occasionally, bad guys wear body armor.
And this of course disregards the entire purpose of the Second Amendment which isn’t necessary for this post. Now time for some Tonic for what ails ye’
What does it say about my life, that on a day in which I’ve completed what a reasonable person (though not me) would consider the biggest accomplishment of my short life, the best part of my day was swapping stories with another infantry Marine?
Another video? No! Rewatch yesterday’s. It’s awesome!
Got the day off early and showed up more than an hour in advance. I just wanted to make certain I got my wireless up and running. Come to find out I didn’t need to get a wireless connection, I needed only to get the exam uploaded by midnight tonight.
I showed up, people were shifting through outlines and talking about the exam. So I decided to keep things positive and went downstairs to watch some Crocodile Hunter. That’ll put things in perspective. I mean, no matter how I do I can at least say that I didn’t get lanced in the heart by a gorram stingray.
The test? I couldn’t imagine a scenario where it could have gone better. I could have used more time for sure, but I left nothing out. I did absolutely incredible. I went in calm and confident. I had done 170 essays in preparation for these 6. I knew I was prepared. There were times when I wanted more time; there were times when I felt kind of iffy, but at no point did I feel like I was anywhere near in trouble. I got a secured transactions and wills question. I handled them both.
This was preparation. Had I put this amount of time in law school itself I’d have been something special. However, I am rather surprised at the toll this had on me. I am absolutely exhausted mentally. In fact, I think I will go to bed soon (now).
I put in an hour on my outlines today, and may well do another tomorrow. We’ll see. Either way, I feel fantastic going into tomorrow.
