The Fun Clovers Killed

Hi Freak,

You NH people are lucky… in that respect. The problem is that every state is tyrannical in some other respect. One can move here – or there – to improve things in this way a little bit… but things in that way get a little worse. Plus, it’s cold where you are – and that’s a deal breaker for me. I hate the cold. It screws up my motorcycle time and makes running outside unpleasant, if it’s even possible.

And I gotta be able to run… or else all I’ll do is drink!

Doug, and that’s the state with the hit song that had the lyrics “fun fun fun” till her daddy takes her T bird away.”

The one CA law I recall with amazement (when I was stationed there in the 80’s) was the limit on how high you could lift your pickup.

Turns out some politician’s daughter was killed when a lifted truck ran a redlight and hit the vehicle she was in. Which I’m sorry for his loss. But then he went and got a law passed banning all those inanimate objects because one person wasn’t being responsible.

Whatever. A T-top did have that “redneck” appeal…however, what’s missing from the discussion is: does the driver get to pick how his ride is configured, whether ragtop, T-top, sunroof, or whatever?

Me, given enough deustchmarks, I’d rather my “other ride” be a Pzkpfw VI “Kongistiger”, but with a modern 1500 bhp MTU multi-fuel engine powering the drive sprockets through a ZF gearbox. Seventy tons of fun!

Hi Rik,

Opinions vary, of course! But the point is we’re denied the choice by mandates and regs that eliminate them.

Hi Ayn,

Love this! And your get-up is even better than mine… 🙂

Any,

You mentioned problems with weight in the video.

You also mentioned very expensive printers.

Have you considered renting the printers to those who purchase a “kit car?”

Hi JWK,

You write: “But you will likely cast a vote for your preferred sociopath…” This is gaslighting. Akin to faulting a man facing a beating for “preferring” one leg broken rather than two. Or – faulting a man for taking pain meds when he has cancer. He’d prefer not to have cancer, obviously.

We are all under duress. There is no option C – to be left alone. There is only option A and option B. The argument that we are supporting tyranny by doing what is possible to lessen it is absurd.

We can defend our principles and pursue them – while also making do with least-worst alternative available to us.

So, I voted for Trump. Because there was no other choice – in terms of who would wield power against me. It was him – or her.

No option C.

My vote wasn’t for Trump – more gaslighting – it was a vote for less worse.

I fully understand the lesser-of-two-evils argument. And I agree – I wish we didn’t have to choose any evil. Unfortunately, that’s not the choice we’re presented with.

Hi JWK,

The primary purpose of Democracy is to grant perceived legitimacy to political authority, thus voting matters in the abstract. However, your individual vote, or non vote, does nothing, the act is not immoral, it is amoral. The insistence among some libertarians that voting is immoral, overvalues the importance of voting, as does the Statist, “you must vote” crowd. I hope for a day when people no longer vote, but that will only occur if enough people realize that political authority is illegitimate. An individual’s vote, or non vote, is the least significant political action they will ever take, it seems odd to place so much importance on it.

Cheers,
Jeremy

I didn’t vote, because there was no one to vote for. There never is.

If one votes for which thug will rape you and your neighbor, you are giving the rapist at least a few points of validity when he says that you chose him to rape you- or, even if the other guy rapes you whom you didn’t vote for, that you at the very least gave your assent to what they are doing by participating,- which is the opposite of protesting or defending one’s self.

There is no “lesser evil”. They all do the same thing. Many of the agendas we are seeing unfold have been going on for decades or even generations; they, along with the tyranny and ever-expanding government just keep multiplying with each successive administration. It is NEVER dialed back; It is never even kept at the same level at which it was last year; it only increases.

The “less evil” only seem less evil because of the words they may occasionally mouth- words carefully calculated to woo one half of the participants(voters), and because of the the way the media portrays them, to emphasize the role that they are playing (e.g. if Trump had run as a Dumbocrap- which he was for most of his life- the media would now be emphasizing and praising him for furthering immigration and gun control. When Slick Willy was in, they downplayed his welfare reform; if it had been a Repugnantcan, they would have been screaming about how he was “harming the poor and how racist he is”).

This false dichotomy is what keeps the millions participating and contented.

Sad thing is, if all of the people who vote for ‘the lesser evil’ would actually STOP participating and stop validating the system and giving their assent, they might actually be a threat to that very system- or at least realize that their salvation is not going to come through that system, and so start actually living their lives apart from that system/stop cooperating.

You would think with the spectacular faiulure of Trump, that more people would see this- but instead, they continue to fall for the false dichotomy “The left is out to get our scumbag, so let’s support him even more!”- and he can thus trot out the very same slogans and promises (promises which he has already broken and has no intention of ever fulfilling) and his supporters will still wave their flags like salivating dogs….just as long as it’s Trump who’s bombing Syria and assassinating foreign diplomats and pissing on the Constitution and our liberties….instead of Hitlery or Burn-me.

No one prefers ANY “sociopath”, of course.

The reality of how politics evolves is that it DRAWS them. After all, the idea, though everyone in the “game” does so with a pretense of righteousness and altruistic motives, is to get as much as you can for those that, in effect, “hired” you, and, of course, why shouldn’t you “help yourself”?

Hence why so often you must truly pick the “lesser” of two EVILS, but understand that both are “evil”…it becomes then a matter of which “devil” you get to know. Then said “devil” has to be watched, CAREFULLY…

That’s part of the reason why our “Federal” Government was established by the several states via a Constitutional Convention, which some claim ended up being a “betrayal”. Originally this country was a loose federation of states, and we’ve heard all along at how ineffectual it was. Again, victors write the history books (and, where applicable, conduct the “war crimes” trials). Sure, there were issues like Shays’ rebellion, in which poor farmers, many of whom were on the verge of losing their farms, like Daniel Shays. Of course, they rebuffed efforts of their local sheriffs to foreclose their properties, and even occupied court houses in Western MA and refused to pay their taxes. This had the country in an uproar, as not only in MA were there disgruntled and UNPAID Revolutionary War veterans. Most of the states were in danger of defaulting on their outstanding debts, which, from the war, were considerable. There is considerable support that the Convention was at the behest of the banks, whom stood to see their respective portfolios wiped out if nothing was done about the “debt crisis”. Still, even then what we had was very limited, in terms of overall size and how much of the GDP it consumed, and likewise the several states, compared to what we have today. For that, we can blame “Dishonest Abe”, whose war, promulgated on the seceding Confederate states, with no less justification than there was for all the states having broken free of British rule some 80 years prior. His actions in ironic effect destroyed the Federal character of the Government, which was the SERVANT of the several states, and, like Lord Vader boasted on the Death Star to Obi-Wan Kenobi, now the Master, becoming NATIONAL in character.

Our current infestation of the White House is hardly a perfect man, his flaws are legend. However, consider what things would be like if the Witch were in charge. So let’s console rather than congratulate ourselves that Trump is our current POTUS, and keep working to (1) move members of his party to more Libertarian ideals and (2) get outright Libertarian party members and independents with libertarian ideals elected, as well as resist any further encroachments of our liberties, like what’s going on with gun rights in VA.

And yes, though I’d prefer to work peacefully and lawfully, “within the system”, history is seldom made by the law-abiding and peaceful.

Thanks, Keith!

And: The 403 Olds has an undeserved bad rep. It wasn’t any worse – in stock form – than the standard Pontiac 400. Both made a dismal 180 horsepower (advertised). Both could make a lot more with a cam, higher CR heads and the usual mods (back then – re-jetting the carb, headers, etc.).

I helped a friend who had a ’79 – like the one you worked on – we did the above and got probably 300 honest hp out of the 403. It ran strong – and with the 2:73 highway gears these cars came with, the thing was fast, too. We twisted the 100 MPH speedo around to 20 again several times!

They already got Radio Flyers, remember? They gave them that ridiculous steering limiter that constrains the front axle to the point where they’re pretty much useless for actually carting stuff around your yard. You have to pick up the front and swing it around in mid-air to make any reasonably tight turn.

I’d like to say they won’t bother to mess up bicycles due to their being slow, inconvenient, and overall limited enough by default, but the problem is, whether the elites plan to ever attack bicycles or not, they’ve already created a safety monster. We already have so-called “car enthusiasts” who think side-curtain airbags should be mandatory even though they were already widely available years before they were made so. If I’m not mistaken someone is already floating the idea of a bicycle airbag. Yes, a bicycle airbag. The fact that anyone could say those words without immediately realizing how blatantly worthless and silly the entire concept is, already proves that we as a society are completely hosed.

But I’m sure it’s going to be enforced at some point, because just that’s how things work now. The idea will remain mostly unheard of until some undefined point in the future when suddenly it bursts onto the scene and becomes common almost overnight, then just as suddenly it will become mandatory, and then it will become “child abuse” or neglect or something to let your kid ride an old bike without one. It happened with plastic bag bans and raising the smoking age, why should anything else be exempt?

That’s what I mean by creating a safety monster. Even if the elites are content to mostly leave us be on our stupid little Chairman Mao bicycles once they’ve got rid of cars, the vast herds of programmed fraidy-cats will still demand bicycles be subject to airbags and speed limits and whatever else too, lest someone manage to sneak in a little bit of fun somewhere.

Don’t get me wrong, I still hate bicycles as much as I ever did. But a BICYCLE AIRBAG? Um, seriously? You know, sometimes when a thought comes into your head, you should just sort of leave it there and not let it out into the world? There is literally no situation imaginable where any person on earth could derive ANY sort of benefit AT ALL from such a device – except perhaps for a new category of repairman which will have to exist just to service these pointless liabilities, and the anthill of political/regulatory non-doers which will be retained to police these repairmen and their “customers”. Is nothing safe from safety?

“If we don’t put an end to this anti-fun charade, eventually, we’ll all be so ‘safe’ that existing will be banned. After all, can’t get hurt or die if you never live.”

This matches exactly my own thoughts on the issue. The thing of it is, most people out there really can’t see anything but what’s right in front of their face, and have bought into “zero visions” without fully realizing it. How can you be against less pollution? How can you be against fewer deaths? How can you be against following the law? On and on and on, and they can’t see – refuse to see – the bigger picture. What they want is a monotonous beige hell where nothing ever really happens and everything is just sort of “OK” (for a VERY generous definition of such) all the time, but at the same time they can’t really admit that, even to themselves, and so will deny it vehemently. It’s why gradualism works so well.

Well, I was like that as a child and for most of my teenage years. I’ve been down that road, and I know there’s nothing down that road but boredom and loneliness. Now I’m 24 and all I have to show for my former safety obsession is no friends, a cruddy car, and nothing to do for fun but sit behind a keyboard and shake my fist at the world.

Hi Bluegrey,

I have been singing this song – against sssssssssssssaaaaaaaafety – for decades. I have always known it was not about “safety.” That “safety” is just the excuse for exercising control. The antidote is so easy, too. It is to stand firm and deny that my safety (speaking first person; I mean you and everyone else) is no one else’s proper business. My mother – maybe any woman in my life – can express “concern” about my “safety” and ask me not to this – or to do that. But other people have no right to force me to do or not do anything, based on it being “safe” – or not. Because I own me. Every last got-damned cell and atom. If I want to drink bacon grease or drive unbuckled – then that is my business because it is myself being risked. It is beyond obnoxious to assert – as this society does – that an adult can be punished or constrained in any way on account of some other adults deciding it is necessary for the “safety” of that adult.

Man up, people! We are not children – or property. Kick anyone in the ass who dares to even mouth words that your “safety” entitles him to order you around, punish you or steal your money under color of law.

“After all, can’t get hurt or die if you never live.”

Methinks that’s the twisted logic behind the Pro-Choice movement, or the most radical of them, the Feminazis, whom seem to want EVERY pregnancy terminated with an abortion.

@Ken- Funny, you don’t LOOK ((( ))) !

Hi Ken,

It’s said good ideas usually don’t require guns. Social Security is a great example. I suspect if one could opt out, most would. I know I would have – because by now, the money I would have saved would have accumulated to a sum sufficient to allow me a comfortable retirement in my 50s. But I am someone who lives below his means. I save. And I invest. I would have used the money not mulcted from me to buy land – which is almost always at the very least a hedge against the inflation value reduction you describe and often generates additional wealth. It doesn’t take a great deal of money to live a reasonably comfortable life if you own a modest home in an affordable area, have no debt and live below your means.

So many people, however, live for the moment. Debt has become normal. I mean acquiring titanic debt that makes saving and investing impossible.

Many of these people would just spend the “extra” 15 percent – and wind up broke at 65. But while I am sorry about that, I do not see how the irresponsible actions of people I don’t even know imposes an obligation enforceable at gunpoint on me to ameliorate it at my expense.

That is the core moral issue – and principle – here.

It’s not a question of “greed” or “selfishness.” That is gaslighting. It is a question of right. Assisting others who are in need when it is done by the individual and voluntarily is a wonderful thing. It is a loathsome thing when done using force. It established the evil principle that the misfortune – and irresponsibility – of Smith imposes an open-ended obligation on Jones, enforceable at gunpoint. This in turn serves as a kind of fuel for the politics of looting that defines our society today. It sets man against man – officially. It empowers the scum of the earth – politicians. It renders every person insecure at the most fundamental level – that of their property, which is to say – themselves. If my property can be lawfully taken to “help” others for any reason then it can be taken in any amount – and eventually, will be. How do you draw a line in the sand? The demand for “free” things paid for by others always goes up. Which is why property taxes always go up.

Speaking of that. Even worse than SS/FICA because at least those taxes end when you stop earning. But you never stop paying property taxes – on property you paid for.

I did some rough math once. I have paid something like $50 in property taxes on my current and previous house. Conservatively estimated, I have “contributed” at least $150k to SS over the past 30 years. So about $200k for me – leaving aside income taxes.

Christ! I could retire on that sum right now.

Instead, I have to keep on working… to keep on paying… like all the other tax mules out there!

Hey Cederq,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdQCPlAZjbY

Cheers,
Jeremy

Exactly! Or more precisely, anyone other than themselves (the elites).

Are there T tops on the C8?

I remember riding in the back of pickups back in the day! Back then, there was little choice because they only had the single bench seat; they could only hold 2-3 people in the cab; there were no double cabs back then. I seem to remember that, in the mid-late 1970s, club cabs started becoming available. Anyway, back in the day, if a family wanted to travel in a pickup, the kids rode in the back; there wasn’t space for ’em elsewhere…

When we were little (early 80s), dad put a camper shell on the Toyota truck, put a foam mattress in the bed and we took a family vacay from Indiana to Wyoming, Colorado, S. Dakota, etc. My brother and I lined it with sleeping bags and pillows and had our games and books and my boombox and had a great time back there. We could stretch out and sleep. We didn’t even fight. If the parents wanted to speak to us, they opened the little window in the back of the cab. We actually still liked each other when we got to our destination.

The way things are now, they’d probably be taken away for playing “unsupervised”……in their own backyard!

Hi Mike!

You’re right, of course… but it won’t happen. Because the whole point of those touchscreens and so on is to acclimate people to not driving at all. To make the automated car agreeable. Wait and see.

Back when screens started showing up in cars, a screen the driver could see was not legal. Next thing I know they’re putting the damn things in every vehicle. I’ve been with older drivers that couldn’t even adjust the climate control or the radio.

No shit! I like knobs, buttons, and switches for stuff I’m going to use all the time, such as HVAC or the radio! WTF thought it was a good idea to bury this stuff in some arcane menu accessible only via the screen?

I remember having an early Casio graphing calculator in college. Do you know that I had to go through 2-3 menus to access the Pi function? Here’s something that, if you’re doing any STEM stuff, you’ll need all the time; so many formulae have Pi in them. Ergo, it makes sense to have a dedicated Pi key. I never used the calculator because of that, either.

I don’t want a car with basic, oft used functions buried in the screen; I want a dedicated, accessible, and easy to use control, TYVM! I don’t want to f*ck with some touch screen and go through multiple menus to change something basic like the radio or HVAC…