Where ONT Low-Lieth, The Breezes Pause And Die

Hi everybody! Welcome to Thursday night. Why don't you grab yourself a piece of pizza and make yourself at home?

Anniversary Edition

This week (tomorrow, actually) marks the 7 year anniversary of Maetenloch's final ONT. (Don't comment on old threads. You can't actually comment at the comment link there because Pixy's changed the servers since then, and I'm not going to tell you how to get around that, but if you do, just in general – don't comment on old threads, you'll be auto-banned)

I didn't immediately pick up covering two nights a week, but it didn't take long, so, yeah. Wow, I've been doing this for a minute.

A Point Of View On Addicts

Abusers Give Vice a Bad Name

Why, though, shouldn’t we just double-down on orthodox prohibitionist remedies? Because you wind up punishing a vastly larger number of innocent people, that’s why. Prohibiting drugs really is like banning guns. When you ban guns, you conceivably reduce violence, but you definitely end up punishing an enormous number of innocent hobbyists - as well as the professionals who supply them. When you ban intoxicants, you conceivably reduce abuse, but you definitely end up punishing an enormous number of innocent hobbyists - as well as the professionals who supply them. It is easy to tar opponents of gun control as “soft on crime.”

It is easy to tar opponents of prohibition as “soft on abuse.” But in a strange sense, both gun control and prohibition grow out of softness. A system with the moral courage to harshly, swiftly, and surely punish violence would have little need of gun control. A system with the moral courage to harshly, swiftly, and surely punish abusers for stealing, trespassing, vandalizing, and defiling would have little need of prohibition. In both cases, we haphazardly punish millions of innocents because we refuse to decisively punish thousands of clear-cut criminals.

I like the point he makes there. We see society crumble around us daily, and a great deal of it is caused by the refusal of a “compassionate” law enforcement system to enforce the laws that are on the books. This isn't compassion. It's cowardice. It doesn't benefit society, it doesn't benefit cities in particular and it certainly doesn't benefit the homeless folks themselves. Look at El Salvador. Until recently, it was a crime infested, dangerous shithole. Their new dictator has been violently and ruthlessly attacking and suppressing the criminal gangs responsible. They're being rounded up in wholesale lots and thrown in prisons to rot as quickly as they can build the things. He's got a 90% approval rating from the population.

Let me make this clear, unequivocally. I am NOT, repeat NOT advocating for our government to do anything even remotely similar. I'm sure they've violated more human rights down there than there are stars in the sky. BUT think about what a difference it would make here if our government officials simply followed the laws on the books and prosecuted the criminals properly.

The most basic part of the social compact between citizen and government is that the government maintains law and order by justly enforcing the laws enacted by those elected by the citizenry. When it doesn't, society starts to disintegrate (you are here). When law and order breaks down far enough, the citizenry will start to take matters into their own hands. At that point it's Katy bar the door, and conditions are ripe for a strongman to sweep into power and do just that, and he'll have a 90% approval rating too. What will be lost in the chaos will be our rights and freedoms. The globalists causing the decay are counting on their guys being in charge when the dust settles, but I think we're more likely to produce our own Pinochet. In any event, it's not a place I want to be. It may seem odd for a Christian to quote the Quran, but I'm gonna do it:

And the disbelievers plotted; God also plotted; God is the Best of Plotters.

Gay The Whole World!

Tennyson classed as ‘queer’ despite lack of evidence he was gay

Alfred, Lord Tennyson has been named as an LGBT historical figure on a tour for schools, despite a lack of evidence that the poet had any homosexual relationships. The former poet laureate’s personal life has been swept up in a project aimed at “queering” the history of the Isle of Wight, and he has been included on a list of the island’s “notable LGBT people”. While there is no clear evidence Tennyson was homosexual, the Isle of Wight residence where he lived with his wife of 42 years has been included in a tour of sights linked to LGBT figures whose stories may have been obscured by “cis/heteronormative narratives”. Those following the LGBT heritage trail are advised that Tennyson’s story contains themes of “same-sex romantic relationships” and “the meaning of queering”.

Here's the saddest thing about all of these groups that try to claim everything and everyone in history as “queer”. It's not surprising from people whose entire identity springs from what they do to or with their genitals, but it is sad. They are absolutely unable to comprehend any kind of relationship between two people as anything other than sexual. Lifelong friends? Gotta be closeted gays! Close personal relationship? Gay! Gay! Gay! It must be exhausting, it's certainly pathetic, but it's also profoundly sad.

Boom!

‘Oppenheimer’ reignites the bomb debate — but there’s no question Truman was right

Anyway, the great tension between Truman and Oppenheimer was never a secret: “I don’t want to see that son of a bitch in this office ever again,” the president reportedly said of the physicist after a post-Hiroshima Oval Office meeting went sour.

“I have blood on my hands,” the scientist had told the president — whereupon Truman is said to have handed Oppenheimer a handkerchief and ordered: “Here. Wipe it off.”

No doubt Oppenheimer’s guilt was sincere and profound — as was Truman’s resentment.
The president’s principal concern was a timely end to World War II; he quite reasonably felt he had no choice but to order the attacks — and he never ducked responsibility for that decision.

The article then goes on to catalog the human cost of the Asian side of WWII, but I think it's simpler than that. Absent the bombs, the US was set to invade mainland Japan in November of '45. The defense department estimated that the invasion would result in five million casualties. Four million of them were estimated to be Japanese casualties. Frankly, I bet those numbers are ridiculously low. High end estimates for those killed at Nagasaki and Hiroshima is 225K. Using the bombs to end the war saved the lives of 4,775,000 Japanese soldiers and civilians. By that estimation, they may be the most moral weapons used in the history of warfare.

Thrifty Fellow

Gardner Minshew Is Very Frugal, Slept On A Mattress He Found In The Garbage

The man is driving a car that was given to him during Barack Obama’s first term in the White House. He slept on a mattress he found in the trash. He might buy the rare first class plane ticket, but that’s not going to bankrupt someone with his net worth if it rarely happens.

You know what bankrupts athletes? Too many houses and cars, bad business deals and child support payments they can’t keep up with. That’s how a lot of pro athletes go broke.

I think I might have at least bought myself a new car, but good for him.

Let's Hear It For The Boy

Click through to read the rest. What a life.

Tonight's ONT has been brought to you by plumbing:

Condensation lines from a bunch of rooftop A/C units is the only thing I can think of, but I have no idea.

posted by WeirdDave at 10:00 PM

| Access Comments