Country Living Series

Sunday, September 30, 2018

My affair with Brett Kavanaugh

Here's my weekend WND column entitled "I had an affair with Brett Kavanaugh."

To my surprise, it ended up on the WND skyline:


And holy cow, did I get emails. (Except from Robert.) Most were supportive, but a few were blisteringly ugly and full of profanity. No surprise.

Before posting this column here, I took the precaution of backing up my blog. You never know what Google might find offensive. Blogs have been known to disappear.

For those unable to access the WND website, the text is below.



I Had an Affair with Brett Kavanaugh

I had an affair with Brett Kavanaugh.

No, really I did. I can’t remember the time, the place or the circumstances – but I certainly had an affair with Kavanaugh. I’m a woman, so you have to believe everything I say.

It doesn’t matter that my memory is poor, my sources unverified, or that I never told a soul about my passionate involvement with Kavanaugh. I couldn’t possibly have an agenda when it comes to making public my affair. The fact is, I’m an über-leftist woman; therefore everything I say is true. Period, end of sentence, no debate allowed or you’re just a bully.

And now … hang on a second, it’s all coming back to me … did I say I had an affair with Kavanaugh? My bad. The truth is, I was nearly raped by Kavanaugh. I just remembered that part. It was at a party, one of dozens I attended in my youth. Of course, I was drinking and I don’t remember the time, date, year, location or circumstances of the most traumatic event in my life, but I’m positive Kavanaugh tried to rape me back around 1982 or so. Or maybe it was 1983. It’s true. I’m a woman, so you have to believe me.

That’s a new movement, by the way: “Believe women,” a wonderful campaign to force everyone to “believe women” who make sexual assault allegations with no proof. What a great idea! We should believe women, not evidence!

Of course, there are exceptions in the “Believe women” movement. We can’t believe anything against liberal men. Liberal men are incapable of rape or sexual assault. Bill Clinton is a saint who would never mistreat a woman. Juanita Broaddrick was a liar. Oh wait, didn’t I just say women can’t lie? Um, forget I said that. We’ll just forget Broaddrick exists. Don’t believe her.

Of course, this “Believe women” movement couldn’t possibly have any negative repercussions on women who truly have been raped. It means ALL women must be believed, not just the ones who have actually been assaulted.

Now back to me. (It’s all about me.) Of course, I never told anyone – my parents or any friends, let alone law enforcement – that Kavanaugh tried to rape me at this party I can’t remember. The reason was it never happ … I mean, I was too intimidated to talk about it. To my parents. To my best friends. To the school principal.

And the people I name as witnesses to my assault? They just have poor memories when they claim they weren’t at the party. Or maybe they were involved too. Or maybe they're Republicans. What do they know?

Let’s see, back in 1982 I was 20 years old, but I just remembered I was actually 15. Yeah, 15. Underage! I witnessed “rape trains” at these parties I attended. At 15. Somehow during all these dozens of inebriated events with underage minors held at private homes, parental oversight was conspicuously lacking, conveniently providing an absence of adult witnesses to these shenanigans just in case some random kid should get nominated for the Supreme Court 36 years down the line.

I know I saw some traumatic things in my youth – I have a “firm recollection” of lines out the door in the rape rooms at all those parties I kept going to … and going to … but somehow it all slipped my mind that the ultimate culprit behind everything was Kavanaugh until my memory was jogged by six days of careful assessment and the help of an unbiased attorney to get my story straight. Thank goodness for sound legal counseling; where would we be without it?

There are other women coming out of the woodwork to support my claim that Kavanaugh is a sexual predator, and my claims have just as much merit as theirs. My memory is just as accurate as theirs. Above all, my motives are just as pure as theirs. Pure as the driven snow, folks. Really. Honestly. I’m a woman, so you have to believe me.

And because you have to believe me, you can’t pry into my political or personal beliefs. You can’t factor in my support for abortion as a taxpayer-funded right which might be jeopardized if Kavanaugh gets on the Supreme Court. You can’t examine my social media posts where I say Donald Trump is a bleepity-bleeping bleeper bleep bleep. You can’t take into account that I’m a rabid feminist who think all men should shut up and sit down, as Mazie Hirono recommends.

In fact, Hirono says it’s about “whether or not a woman who has been a victim at some point in her life is to be believed.” Does this mean we should “believe” Kavanaugh when he denies he was even at the party where he assaulted me? Of course not. If you believe him over me, then you’re a racist, a bigot, a misogynist and a bully. All men are liars. All women are truthful. Our entire judiciary system is based upon this understanding.

Now I demand an FBI investigation into my accusations. It doesn’t matter if my allegations against Kavanaugh are unprovable. That’s not the point. The point is I need to justify my pay from Mr. Sor … um, what I meant was, I need to speak for all women – “Believe women” – no matter what. And if you don’t believe me, then you’re a racist, a bigot, a misogynist and a bully.

Y’know, it’s kinda fun to go forward with these charges against Kavanaugh! It gets me all kinds of attention and lots of uplifting support from my fellow women. No matter what the outcome of Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court, I’m set for life. I can write books, get paid obscene amounts of money for speaking engagements, get a professorship at any university in the country, and be the darling of the progressive set for ruining the lives of Kavanaugh and his family. What’s not to love?

And if Kavanaugh gets dumped from consideration to the Supreme Court, I look forward to Trump’s next nominee so I can recall my sexual assault from him as well. All I’ll need is a poor memory, six days with a porn attorney, a leftist agenda and I’ll be ready … right after I scrub my social media accounts and bleach my laptop.

So my deepest thanks to everyone who has helped kill the antiquated and patriarchal concepts of the rule of law and the presumption of innocence. We finally get to reap what we sowed.

Wednesday, September 26, 2018

One year ago today

“Today is my one-year in the Navy mark,” Younger Daughter emailed this morning. “A year ago today I arrived at RTC, stayed up all night stenciling and peeing in cups and getting screamed at by people in red ropes.”


Younger Daughter has been stuck in the same spot (Great Lakes, Illinois) for a year now, undergoing lots of academic training, but this will shortly change as she heads off to another location for her specialized “C” school training, and then hitting the fleet – at last!

I’m being purposely vague about her whereabouts because I don’t want her movements public – but she’s moving ahead in her naval career and will soon be facing life aboard a ship.

Tuesday, September 25, 2018

Happy logs?

I was coming back from a nearby town a few days ago and found myself behind a logging truck.


I noticed one of the logs had a happy face.


Is this a happy log or a happy logger?

The lazy man's guide to world domination

Here's my WND column for this weekend, entitled "The lazy man's guide to world domination."


For those unable to access the WND website, here's the text.



The Lazy Man’s Guide to World Domination

Most people are familiar with Paul Harvey’s classic radio piece, “If I were the devil.” (If not, listen to it here.)

Though this piece dates from the mid-1960s, it’s still as fresh and frightening today because, of course, every statement is coming true. In a nutshell, it’s a lazy man’s guide to world domination.

In this column I’d like to discuss, not world domination, but national domination. World domination starts at home.

Domination, as it turns out, isn’t that hard to do. It merely has to be inspired by the world’s enemy, the devil, and voilà.

So what is the easiest way to take over the nation? To examine this question, we merely have to look at the tactics of those who were successful in taking over their own nations (Stalin, Hitler, etc.). This is an ambitious subject to tackle in a 1000-word column, so let’s see how far I can go.

Do as you please. Encourage decadence and immorality by calling it “liberty.” Push immorality as the new norm. Mock self-control. Harass those who object to the normalizing of depravity; if necessary, intimidate and threaten them into silence.

Trash religion. Take God out of the equation and encourage people to become their own gods. That way, everything they do is justified in their own eyes and they are not restrained by any higher power. (To paraphrase Dostoevsky: If there is no God, everything is permitted.) Make morality subjective rather than based on Judeo-Christian traditions and values. Anyone who tries to “bitterly cling” to those silly fables should be mocked, ridiculed and excluded.

Popularize violence and immorality. Flood television screens and movie theaters with visual stimuli dripping with sexual or bloody excess to dull peoples’ senses and make peace and morality seem boring by contrast. Portray immortality as normal, and depict religious people as either hypocrites or evil. Show immorality as being utterly without consequences. Make sure the immoral characters are sympathetic and come out as winners.

Destroy the family. It’s critical to disrupt, destroy and redefine families, since these societal units will just get in the way of the new agenda. Portray it as normal for husbands and wives to hate each other and fight all the time. Portray it as normal for teens to explode into horrible rebellion and spend their adolescence fornicating and doing drugs. Portray it as normal for divorce to tear families apart. Exalt the single parent. Punish parents who discipline their children. Be suspicious of happy families; label them as abnormal and closely examine them; be ready to tear them apart if necessary (Child Protective Services?) because hey, no one can really be that happy, right?

Abolish self-control. In a feel-good society, no one should be expected to exercise any restraint whatever. Teach people – especially young people – that self-control is not only unnecessary but wrong. If it feeeeels good, do it.

Cultivate envy. The rich are only rich because they are lucky. They don’t deserve their wealth, even if they worked 18 hours a day for 25 years to get it. All their money should be redistributed. Vote for anyone who promises to sock it to the rich.

Encourage hatred. Accuse anyone who disagrees with you of being a racist and a white supremacist, no matter what the subject. Make everyone sputter a denial and apology every time; it weakens their position. Separate people into either “oppressors” or “victims,” then punish the “oppressors” for crimes they never committed and reward the “victims” for crimes they never experienced.

Encourage a welfare state. Nothing kills ambition or incentive better than free everything. No one should have to work for life’s necessities. Declare such things as housing, transportation, education, health care, etc. as “rights” which should be distributed by the government, especially if the government steals more money from “the rich” to do it. Vote for anyone who promises to keep the freebies coming.

Encourage illegal immigration. Legal immigrants have the unfortunate habit of coming to this nation, learning English, working very hard, buying homes, educating their children, and becoming business owners. In short, they assimilate. These people are bad examples and every obstacle should be put in their path. Instead, throw open the borders and welcome a flood of illegal immigrants. Ignore factual statistics of drug smuggling, human trafficking, violent crimes, and other petty issues. Give these illegal immigrants free food, housing, education, medicine, and transportation. Oh, and make sure they vote only in approved ways.

Capture the press and dominate the internet. The only permitted point of view is the satanic one; label anything else as “intolerant. Social media and internet search engines must only be geared to find positive information on approved positions. Moral or ethical opinions and viewpoints must be shadow-banned or censored.

Capture the children. This is critical, possibly the single-most important facet of world (certainly national) domination. Because adults tend to be stubbornly resistant to devilish tactics, it’s essential to get children away from their parents and education them only in satanically approved ways. Homeschooling should be abolished, or at best made so difficult that parents give up. Take away pride in the nation and teach children our country is evil and oppressive. Refuse to study the Founding documents lest children get a notion that our nation is unique and special. Teach kids the Founding Fathers were white supremacist monsters. Keep children ignorant of economics and teach them everything should be free. Drown them in sexual permissiveness so they never learn self-control and spit on the sanctity of marriage. Let them know clusters of cells are not babies and Planned Parenthood is their savior. Mess up their young minds (and bodies) with faddish notions like transgenderism. Fill their unformed brains with earth-worship and punish them when they express religious devotion (except to Gaia). Teach them emotion should override logic at all times. Remove parental authority, which also removes God’s authority.

Hey, you know what? A brilliant man (inspired by the devil) summed it all up in a tidy instruction book entitled “Rules for Radicals.” Gosh, it’s almost like he listened to Paul Harvey and followed the devil’s advice word for word.

Imagine that.



Now, for added amusement, here are two emails from my faithful liberal reader Robert. First email:

Hello again Patrice ! Sorry, but Trump is a very lazy man, and no doubt the laziest president in US history . He was born rich , but if he had not been such an incompetent, corrupt and wasteful businessman, he would be much richer than he is . Remember what the Bible says "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven . " Being or becoming wealthy is not a sin .
But greed, avarice, unscrupulousness, mendacity , cruelty , lechery , pride , arrogance , conceit and dishonesty , all of which which Trump is guilty of in spades , are definitely sinful . Why do so many Christians still
support this monstrously evil man ?

Here are some examples of the differences between liberals and conservatives in America

Liberals favor the common people . Conservatives favor the rich and corporations .

Libs seek to liberate people . Cons seek to subjugate them .

Libs seek to unite and protect people . Cons seek to divide and exploit them .

Libs encourage individuality . Cons encourage and enforce conformity .

Libs celebrate diversity . Cons fear diversity .

Libs embrace science and the arts . Cons oppose science and the arts .

Libs promote peace . Cons promote war and oppression .

Libs promote hope . Cons promote fear .

Libs promote education . Cons promote ignorance .

Libs promote truth . Cons promote deception .

Libs promote cooperation . Cons promote unilateralism .

Libs promote innovation and progress . Cons defend "tradition " against progress .

Libs believe that people are fundamentally good . Cons believe that humans are
fundamentally sinful .

I'm not saying all these thongs are characteristic of you personally, Patrice , just
conservatives in general in America .

All the best, Robert




And second email:

Hello again Patrice ! No offense meant, but this is just a rehash of the same old tired conservative talking points and straw men . It implies that only conservatives and Christians can be good and moral people . In fact, I know many atheists who are the nicest , kindest and mot
generous people you could ever imagine , and there is a small but very vocal number of Christians in America who are horrible people - disgusting bigots and hateful hypocrites who think they have monopoly on morals and ethics . But they are nothing but appallingly narrow-minded,
intolerant , self-righteous and arrogant jerks .

No, Satan doesn’t actually exist , unless you count Donald Trump . Why do so many Christians in America worship a man who may have raped at least one 13 year old girl and who thinks he can do anything he wants with any woman and get away with it ?

1. Do as you please . No, liberals do NOT think it’s OK for people to do anything . However, they rightly feel that people should be free to do as they please as long as they do not harm anyone else , do not interfere with other people’s lives and violate their rights , are not a
public nuisance and don’t do anything which endangers others . Sex between consenting adults in private is no business of any one else - certainly not the police, the law, the courts , or the law . This includes gay sex, which is NOT a “sin “ or a “crime “.

2. Trash religion ?” Conservatives are unable to see the difference between criticizing christianity and individual Christians who say and do reprehensible things and “trashing religion “. Religion SHOULD be criticized . It has caused an unimaginable amount of human misery over the centuries .
Death and destruction, mass murder , brutal torture , etc and has caused so much ignorance and blind fear .

The Spanish Inquisition . The witch hunts . The slaughter of the Albigensian heretics by the Catholic church . Islamic terrorism and brutality . Christian brutality . Oppression prosecution and mass murder of Jews (yes, long before Hitler who was actually a Christian ! ) .
Catholics slaughtering protestants and vice versa . People who criticize and condemn the bigotry and hypocrisy which SOME Christians are guilty of do not “hate” Christians as a whole . American Christians can be among the worst hypocrites on earth .

3. Popularize violence and immorality . The Bible is chock full of violence and immorality ! And it has been used often as an excuse to justify hypocritical immorality and still is . The Bible has done infinitely more harm to America and the world than all the racy movies and TV shows and all the pornography in the world .

If people don’t like movies, books, magazines, websites, movies and TV shows which are ore adult , no one is forcing them to buy the DVDs , go to th movies , watch them on TV etc . Censoring TV and film etc will never make people more virtuous . This only encourages more censorship and ultimately,.government tyranny . There is also plenty of entertainment which Christian themes for anyone who wants it available, and no liberals are trying to censor it .

4. “Destroy the family “? The notions that liberals have been setting out to “destroy the family “ in America is pure poppycock . You know what destroys families ? Poverty . Unemployment . Lack of good education and college education being too expensive except for the rich .
Children raised in poor , cold housing who do not get good nutrition and medical care . And who has caused all of this poverty and helplessness in America ? The Republicans - by denying the poor the help they need, preventing them from escaping poverty etc .
Divorce is unfortunate but often absolutely necessary . But many kids have survived it and gone on to become successful in spite of everything .

Making it hard to divorce has actually resulted in the MURDER of many married women by their husbands . No fault divorce is actually a GOOD thing . Child abuse destroys families . And most victims of child abuse have heterosexual parents , not gay ones .
Who is “suspicious of happy families “? Another star man .

5. “Abolish self control ?” Give me a break ! No liberals want to do this ! Where is the self control of people who spread mindless fear and hatred of gay people , non-christians , Hispanics, atheists and others ? Does Donald Trump have “self control ?” Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha !!!
I’ve seen toddlers with more self control ! Where is the ”self control “ of all the pedophile Catholic priests and the many evangelical Christian preachers who are also pedophiles , or serial adulterers , and who live lives of concealed debauchery while pretending to be “men of God ?”

6. “Cultivate envy ?” Who is doing this ? No liberals I know of . Liberals are not opposed to rich people, or people who are able to become rich .. They don’t want the government to take all or even most of their money away in order to give imaginary “free stuff “ to the poor or others .

But if more rich people paid their fair share in taxes , our economy would be in much better shape . They could still live lives of unimaginable luxury . “Redistribution of wealth ?” ROFLOL !!! It’s our government which redistributes wealth as reverse Robin Hood,s by taking men from the poor and
middle class to make the rich even richer . And some people, like Trump were BORN rich . To be rich is no sin . But to be a rich person who is greedy and callous is a grievous sin . Remember - the vast majority of poor people in America are NOT “lazy “. In fact they work incredibly hard often at
more than one job, and they can barely make ends meet . So do so many members of the middle class , and life is getting tougher than ever for them .too .

7. “ Encourage hatred ?” Come on now . Another straw man . You know who encourages hate din America ? Donald Trump. He encourages hatred of anyone who is not a white Christian in America . Hatred of innocent Hispanics who are NOT “ murderers and rapists “.
Mindless fear and hatred of innocent people merely because they happen to be Muslims . And Trump has refused to condemn the KKK, the Neo-Nazis and other white supremacist hate groups . Some “Christian “.

All over America, preachers and others encourage mindless hatred of gay people, and transgender people . Accusing them of being evil perverts who are “out to recruit children into the gay lifestyle, even though nobody chooses to be gay . And accusing ays of being pedophiles despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of pedophiles are actually HETEROSEXUAL !

And preachers encouraging hatred of atheists , even though they are just abut the most harmless people in the world . Liberals encourage TOLERANCE of others . Compassion for hated minorities and the underdog . And racism SHOULD be condemned . AS well as sexism,
antisemitism, xenophobia, homophobia and any kind of bigotry .

8. “Encourage the welfare state ?” Give me a break ! No one is doing this . The government MUST provide a secure social safety net for the unfortunate and those who are down on their luck . Conservatives want to destroy or greatly weaken this safety net in America . They don’t care
about the poor, the unemployed , people struggling to earn enough to survive , the disabled, children and infants , the elderly and infirm etc . They blather about “self reliance “. How can people rely on themselves if they are helpless ?

Our government does not provide “free stuff “ and no one is asking the government to support them generously while they do no work and nobody is demanding that the government take hard-earned money form those who do work . People want to be ABLE to earn a decent living .

But too many can’t through no fault of their own . Who gets all the free stuff ? The RICH ! And the big corporations and their CEOs .

Millions of Americans are struggling to get by . Many have fallen through the cracks . 30,000 Americans die every year because health care is too expensive . And far more who are not even poor go BANKRUPT in order to afford it .

In America , our government , especially the GOP , have kept wages stagnant for decades while allowing the cost of living to rise steadily . This has had a disastrous effect on the nation. Yet conservatives still accuse the poor and middle class of being “lazy bums “!

Please consider what I am saying here and please respond. Please put as much of it as possible in your nest post at WND . Thanks !

All the best, Robert

Saturday, September 22, 2018

Silly Darcy

Here's just a few photos of Mr. Darcy being silly in the front yard, playing with assorted stuff like a bundle of baling twine and an old cheap Frisbee.














And here's Mr. Darcy barking at some cows, who are supremely indifferent to him and calmly chewing their cud.



Only after a couple minutes did the cows leisurely get up, stretch, and wander away. Mr. Darcy was very proud he'd routed the animals All By Himself.

Wednesday, September 19, 2018

Prepper gardening -- listen to the talk!

I've giving a workshop on the subject of Prepper Gardening this upcoming Saturday at Inland Northwest Preparedness Expo in Sandpoint, Idaho.


If you're in the area, please consider attending!

Saturday, September 15, 2018

The latest victim of Social Justice Warriors

Here's my WND column for this weekend, entitled "Science: The latest victim of Social Justice Warriors."


For those unable to access the WND website, the text is below.



Science, the Latest Victim of
Social Justice Warriors

With the rise in awareness of “fake media” and the internet speech cartel banning conservative viewpoints, more and more people are starting to question the clamp on “truth” dominated by the left.

Science – supposedly neutral and free from partisan bias – is no exception. If something is controversial, it’s squelched. If a scientific conclusion contradicts political correctness, it is stifled and the scientist harassed and persecuted.

Consider this article by Theodore P. Hill, professor emeritus of mathematics at Georgia Institute of Technology, who had the audacity to research gender differences in intelligence, specifically the “Greater Male Variability Hypothesis” (GMVH) which asserts there are more idiots and more geniuses among men than among women. While there are many exceptions, the rule of thumb is there is generally more variability in males than in females of the same species throughout the animal kingdom.

“Multiple studies have found that boys and men are over-represented at both the high and low ends of the distributions in categories ranging from birth weight and brain structures and 60-meter dash times to reading and mathematics test scores,” writes Dr. Hill. “There are significantly more men than women, for example, among Nobel laureates, music composers, and chess champions – and also among homeless people, suicide victims, and federal prison inmates.”

Dr. Hill was curious to learn why males in many species are more variable than females. “My aim was not to prove or disprove that the hypothesis applies to human intelligence or to any other specific traits or species,” he stated, “but simply to discover a logical reason that could help explain how gender differences in variability might naturally arise in the same species.” [Italics in original.]

Like any good academic, Dr. Hill’s research was based on solid data. But he made the horrible miscalculation of addressing a subject – gender – inviolate among progressives. This proved to be an unforgivable mistake.

As Dr. Hill and his co-author Sergei Tabachnikov attempted to get the paper published in respected peer-reviewed mathematical journals, they found themselves facing increased hostility from an ever-widening pool of academic social justice warriors. How dare these men suggest there are more male geniuses? Faced with harassment, intimidation, loss of funding and other career threats, Dr. Tabachnikov asked his name to be removed from the paper.

No one could – or would – debate the soundness of the research or the mathematical accuracy of the conclusions. Instead, the opposition was based on feeeeelings. That’s it. Science took a back seat to feeeeelings.

Dr. Hill wasn’t the first to fall prey to progressive bias. Everyone remembers Harvard President Larry Summers, who was given the sack in 2005 for saying that the GMVH might possibly be a contributing factor to the scarcity of women in physics and mathematics departments at top universities. Feminists got a fit of the vapors and Summers was out.

Another high-profile victim, this one in 2017, was at Google when “engineer James Damore suggested that several innate biological factors, including gender differences in variability, might help explain gender disparities in Silicon Valley hi-tech jobs. For sending out an internal memo to that effect, he too was summarily fired.”

Recently, Brown University published a study concluding the “exceptionally rapid growth in cases of transgenderism among children and teens is very likely a result of ‘social contagion.’”

This article noted, “An in-depth report by the Federalist summarizes the study’s conclusion, saying ‘Rapid-onset gender dysphoria’ among teens and young adults may be a social contagion linked with having friends who identify as LGBT, an identity politics peer culture, and an increase in internet use.”

Translation: Transgenderism is a dangerous fad, not a biological condition. But the transgender activists went nuts and the study – regardless of the accuracy of its conclusions – was yanked. Telling the truth is a horrible thing when it contradicts the feeeelings of the left.

This leads to the esoteric question posted by Kevin Sorbo on Twitter: “If liberals don't believe in biological gender then why did they march for women's rights?”

In 2016, a SJW student at the University of Cape Town in South Africa put out a video that went viral, claiming all science must be torn down and abolished because it’s racist.

All science abolished. Let’s see, how did that video get made? How did it get distributed? Wasn’t it science that was involved in making and distributing the video? Doesn’t everyone benefit from this science?

But logic doesn’t apply to social justice warriors – it’s all about feeeelings. Science today does not dare challenge feminist or progressive ideology which, ironically, slows the progress of science (but who cares, right?).

“Feminist science” – a term that makes me want to puke – is becoming more and more popular (and funded by Your Tax Dollars). PJ Media notes, “They want scientists to only undertake studies and only publish conclusions that will support a radical feminist worldview.”

But that’s not science. Got that? It’s not science when “research” is cherry-picked to only support one point of view. That’s propaganda, creepily reminiscent of what went on in National Socialist (read: Nazi) Germany.

Feminist scientists and other academic twits want to argue there is no such thing as a universal truth; that everything is a matter of perception and social construction. “They're hoping to harness the field of scientific discovery to support this idea,” states PJ Media.

But they can’t. Truth is truth, and the scientific method has worked for a long, long time to discard biased feeeelings and uphold facts. Therefore the only way the social justice warriors can bypass this stringent process (as Dr. Hill learned) is to harass, intimidate, defund and ruin the careers of real scientists who refuse to support their agenda.

Great plan, folks. Let’s bring science to a standstill.

Even the left is getting fed up with SJWs and their feeeelings. “What used to be a characteristic of the left wing fringe is now creeping into the mainstream ether, a pitchforks and torches method of forcing regular people to abide by unwritten rules of interaction,” notes James Di Fiore (who describes himself as “a moderate progressive”) on HuffPo.

These kinds of reactions don’t make feminists or SJWs look tough, strong and academically competent. No, it makes them look like fragile little cupcakes unable to stand up to the rigors of the scientific method.

America is becoming an international laughing stock for the quality of its education. Clearly its science output will soon follow.

But there are many non-PC countries which depend on science to advance their national agenda. And some of those countries are our enemies.

Just saying.

Wednesday, September 12, 2018

The wisdom of age

It's birthday time in the Lewis household. I just turned 56. Don will turn 61 in a couple of weeks.

At this point in our lives, we don't celebrate our birthdays, but they certainly make us more thoughtful. We've reached the point where we're aware of our own mortality. I hope that doesn't sound gloomy because it's not. We're quite happy and content, pleased with how our children have launched themselves into the world, happy to still have my parents with us, still facing challenges in work and on the farm. Life is good.

Which is why this article struck a chord: "Who was happier at 60?"

The author, Liz Jones, just turned 60. And my goodness doesn't she look fabulous:


Ms. Jones contrasts her incredible fitness at 60 with her mother's health at the same age. Her mother had gray hair, false teeth, arthritis, and hip and knee replacements.

But her mom also giggled at life. She never wore a swimsuit, but she happily limped to the beach and sat on the sand with homemade rolls and watched her seven children romp in the water.

In fact, Ms. Jones was "terrified" to look like her mom at the same age, and spent her entire life fighting it. She writes:
I’m the same dress size as when I turned 16. You can tell I’ve dedicated my life not to raising a family, or giggling, but to being 'beach body ready.' Effort is etched on my face. I’m anxious, too: do my arms look fat? Is my hair, dyed fortnightly from the day I turned 25, looking crispy? I only have a half-smile because, if I’m not smiling a little, my face falls. My teeth are veneered, not false. I don’t hobble; instead I walk and run, every day, for miles: a good thing, certainly. But all I can think when I look at the photo of me is my God, how exhausting, and how desperately unhappy. How lonely, too.

I’d been dreading my 60th (Wednesday was the Big Day) from the day I turned 50. It has loomed, large and dark, like an empty grave, because I fear it will mean the death of all I’ve strived for: to be desirable, sexy, fashionable, in and certainly not out. I don’t want to be invisible. I really, really don’t want to be old.

I’ve tried to buy into 60 being the new 40, and how liberating it will be to not feel obliged to Hollywood wax, but the truth is I know I will continue to battle to keep the years at bay. Why? Because I’m not where I should be: I’m single, not secure, not loved. I can’t relax. I have to keep trying.
And therein lays the sad part of this article. Ms. Jones looks like a woman half her age. But how long can she keep this up? When she's 80, will she look like she's 40? What about when she's 90?

Contrast this with her mother, who looked -- arguably -- older than her 60 years. Yet her mother giggled at the beach. She made homemade rolls for her seven kids. She had a husband who adored her and helped her put on her socks since she could no longer reach her feet because of the arthritis. She had already had a hip replacement and a knee replacement. "She was in constant, excruciating pain," noted Ms. Jones. "And yet she is smiling. ... She didn’t dread her birthdays, as I do. She never mentioned the big Six-O or expected a fuss; she probably spent the evening ironing."

Ms. Jones was a career woman, a journalist and a former editor at the beauty magazine Marie Claire. Yet in this painfully honest article, she asks who is happier at 60 -- her or her mom? "My mum was content with her lot, she lived in the moment, she didn’t put off life," noted Ms. Jones. "My overriding feeling, as the Big Day [her 60th birthday] came and went last week, was that my generation of women was sold a lie. We were told our mothers’ lives were disgracefully submissive. We were told we must battle our bodies into submission, land a career in order to hold all the power. Problem is, a great job doesn’t bend down each morning, without a murmur, and pull stockings gently over toes, as Dad did for Mum."

Don is the one who read this article and sent it to me. "You're given a limited lifespan," he observed, "and you're given seasons within that lifespan to accomplish things: marriage, children, retirement. One of the lovely things about having faith is knowing growing older is supposed to happen. No one will be 120 years old when you're standing before the throne. Everyone is immortal at 20. No one is immortal at 60."

My example for aging was set by my mother, who is almost exactly 31 years older than me (our birthdays are three days apart). My mom never fought her gray hair, she embraced it (she would instruct her hair dresser to cut her hair to show the gray to advantage). She and my dad rolled with the punches of life and got back on their feet. Now, having just celebrated their diamond anniversary, they move slower and take great care not to fall. But they're content and satisfied with their lives. What's not to admire? Sure, my mom has wrinkles. But you know what? She earned those wrinkles. They're beautiful.

Don led a rather "wild'n'crazy" life as a young man, before we met. He tells me I wouldn't have liked him at 20, and he doesn't think God would have either. "God blesses people who managed to make it into their 60s," he said, "because He's given us time to make up for our earlier shortfalls. To get square with God can’t happen if you can’t contemplate your own mortality. Since everyone at 20 thinks they’ll live forever, it takes age to acquire the wisdom to know they’re NOT immortal. Growing older is a gift -- if for no other reason it allows us to focus on the next life, not this one."

Ms. Jones apparently spent her whole life desperately trying to stay within one "season" -- her young adulthood. By obsessively focusing on staying a perpetual 25, she's missed the other, more mature seasons that come with life: stable marriage, having babies, raising kids, empty nesting, grandkids, and finally rocking on the back porch, watching the sun go down with a beloved spouse. She bypassed this so she could pretend she's forever 25.

At least she's smart enough to realize who was happier at 60 -- her mom. I sincerely hope she starts to contemplate her own mortality -- a cheery thought, not a grim one -- and gets square with God.

Tuesday, September 11, 2018

Friday, September 7, 2018

Livin' the dream

A couple weeks ago I walked out to the garden to pick some onions for dinner.


On the way I passed our cow Victoria. We had sold her six-month-old calf a few days before, so she was still in the agitated bellowing stage and was using it as an excuse to hop a low spot in the fence and hang around in the driveway. We kept the driveway gate closed, so there was no where else she could go. (She calmed down shortly thereafter and we repaired the fence.)


At the time, the driveway was littered with eight round bales of hay we had delivered to supplement our winter supply. We've since moved the bales into the barn.


I also passed the buff hen, busy mothering the 13 half-grown chicks.


I picked the onions and trimmed the roots and stems, which I dropped in the compost bin before I came back to the house. While I was in the garden, some neighbors dropped by for a visit. "Look at the size of these!" I exclaimed, holding up the onions, which they duly admired.

"And it occurred to me," I added, "how strange it would seem to some people to be passing cows and chickens and hay bales on the way to get onions from the garden for dinner."

"Yep, we're living the dream," replied the wife.

She was right. Sometimes I forget we're livin' the dream and it's good to be reminded.

Wednesday, September 5, 2018

Sad sight

A couple weeks ago, while walking Mr. Darcy, I noticed a pale blotch on the ground at the base of a telephone pole.


Closer inspection revealed it to be a juvenile great horned owl, dead.



It looked like it had just pitched off the telephone pole and fell to the ground. I suspect it starved to death.

Juvenile great horned owls are quite common around us.


At night we hear their characteristic screech, so different than the majestic hoot of their elders.


But it's a tough period in a young owl's life. His screeching calls are actually begging calls to be fed. But his parents can't feed him forever -- he has to learn to hunt on his own. And if he fails -- he starves. "During their initial dispersal in fall, juvenile owls have a high mortality rate, frequently more than 50 percent," notes Wikipedia.

That, I suspect, is what happened to the pathetic bundle of feathers on the ground at the base of the telephone pole.

After a few days, the carcass got scattered by other predators, presumably coyotes, though I suspect there wasn't much meat on those bones.


I hear other juvenile owls every night around our house. I hope they make it.

Monday, September 3, 2018

So when did "ma'am" become an insult?

Here's my WND column for this weekend entitled "When did 'ma'am' become an insult?"


For those unable to access the website, the text is below.



So When Did ‘Ma’am’ Become an Insult?

Our younger daughter, then 19, used to work as a manager in an antique store. As such, she was expected to be polite and respectful with customers. One evening she came home and vented about a customer who turned “volte-face” and nearly bit her head off when our daughter addressed her as “ma’am.” “Don’t call me that!” the woman snarled. “I’m not a ma’am!”

Since our daughter is bred to politeness – and since she represented the store – she couldn’t ask the obvious: “If you’re not a ‘ma’am,” then what ARE you? A jerk?”

I couldn’t believe anyone could be that rude until a similar experience happened to me a few weeks later, when a store clerk took exception to my addressing her as ma’am.

And of course, who can forget Barbara Boxer’s unbelievably rude exchange in 2009 during a committee hearing, when Brigadier General Michael Walsh of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers had the effrontery to address her as “ma’am.” Boxer interrupted and asked him to call her “senator.” Boxer was clearly ignorant of military protocol, in which “ma’am” is universally used to address female superiors. In other words, as a female in the military, you have to earn the right to be called “ma’am.”

More recently, a teacher in North Carolina punished a 10-year-old boy named Tamarion Wilson for calling her “ma’am” after she asked him not to – even though the child had recently been hospitalized with seizures and still suffered from memory issues.

This one blew me away. Wilson’s parents took the time to teach their son respect and manners toward authority figures, and then the boy’s politeness was punished. Additionally, “the teacher said that if she had something to throw, she would have thrown it at the boy,” according to Wilson. (The teacher later said that was a joke.)

What’s up with this? A hugely polite term such as “ma’am” is now considered insulting?

Apparently so.

The question of “why” takes a bit of examination. For some women, the term is an acknowledgement that they’re “past their prime.” For others, the term is considered a put-down, an admission of gender, a recognition that they are, in fact, women (horrors!) and not, I dunno, vacuum cleaners or something.

Cosmopolitan, in its usual clueless and vulgar way, states why the term is offensive: “‘Ma'am’ is yet another horrible-sounding word that women are stuck with to describe various aspects of their body/life/hair: Vagina. Moist. Fallopian tubes. Yeast infection. Clitoris. Frizz,” snarks writer Jessi Klein, concluding: “‘Ma'am’ makes people crazy. Almost universally, women hate it (with the exception of a few people in the South who have decided that being called ma'am is a sign of respect or something).”

Um, sweetie, I’ve got news for you: It IS a term of respect, and not just in the South; and by no stretch of the imagination do women hate it “universally.” The military would never condone adopting vulgar terms for body parts when addressing women; they use “ma’am” because it’s polite. Deal with it, cupcake.

Those who take offense at the term “ma’am” are merely revealing their own insecurities, whether it has to do with age or gender or competence or whatever. Klein demonstrates this. “‘Ma’am’ isn't just a form of address,” she writes. “It's a way for a perfect stranger to let us know how old he thinks we are. What is the purpose of this? Why does a West Elm clerk have to let me know he thinks he knows how old I am? The issue isn't my comfort with my age (I'm 40) so much as why, why, why the [very bad expletive] does this need to be a factor in every interaction I have?”

Let’s get one thing straight: Whatever your personal feelings about the matter, whatever your issues or insecurities, whatever your lament about no longer being 19 years old and sexually desirable to strangers on the street … the term is still one of respect. To bite the head off anyone who uses it – whether a brigadier general or a 10-year-old boy – is petty. In other words, don’t take your personal hang-ups and rampant insecurities out on military personnel, children, or strangers who are attempting to be polite. It’s rude.

Folks, if you’ve ever wondered why our country is not the great nation it once was, it’s because of this. It’s the little things. It’s teachers who punish their students for addressing them respectfully. It’s clerks or customers who snarl when addressed politely. It’s military officers who must deal with sensitive senators. It’s women who yell at men for opening a door for them.

Men used to open doors for women, stand when they entered a room, held their chairs, and performed other marks of courtesy. Feminism has largely trashed these courtesies and examples of politeness.

Since women set the benchmarks for behavior in Western culture, it’s no wonder things are going downhill. Telling men not to hold doors for you or to stop addressing you with a polite term of respect simply indicates you no longer want respect from them. Be careful what you wish for.

Politeness is a social lubricant, folks. It’s what holds our society together. It’s what allows millions of different people to get along, despite their differences. Personally I feel honored when someone addresses me as “ma’am.” – but then I’m starting to get grey hair, so maybe I feel I’ve earned it.

“I don't actually advocate for a loss of all courtesy,” said New York Times columnist Natalie Angier in an interview with NPR. “[T]he question is where you put your courtesy.”

That’s nice, Ms. Angier – but how does a stranger know the degree of courtesy you find objectionable? How are they supposed to gauge this?

So for those who take offense at the term “ma’am,” I’ve come up with an alternate term, something anyone can universally use for those rude women who object to “ma’am,” a term I would LOVE to have seen Brigadier General Michael Walsh use on Barbara Boxer:

Toots.

Try it. I’m sure they’ll love it.

Sunday, September 2, 2018

Mother hen

Well, of the two broody hens who hatched out eggs, resulting in an unusual co-parenting arrangement with the resulting 13 chicks, one hen has flown the coop and abandoned all pretense of being a mother. This would be the Jersey Giant hen, who now blends in so well with the rest of the flock that I can't find her to chastise her.


Not that it matters to the chicks. They have happily grouped around the Buff Orpington hen, who continues to act motherly but now has an enormous brood to care for.




But she's done a good job. She hasn't lost a single chick. It's always funny to watch the whole brood try to cram under her feathers.



Like a good mother, she calls them over whenever it's lunch time.



The babies are approaching what we call the "velociraptor" stage, gangling awkward creatures who run with their necks stretched straight out, flapping as they go.





Yep, makes for a happy barnyard.