You Can’t Cure Stupid – Page 60

Funding the GOP Stupid Train

The Republican Party has decided to dump their money into their stupid train. Remember Mourdock? He’s the Republican candidate who said pregnancies resulting from rape were gifts from God. After making an incredibly idiotic statement like that you would think the Republican Party would have separated themselves from the man faster than they separated themselves from Todd “women seldom become pregnant from legitimate rate” Akins (of course Rand Paul swooped in to help Akin’s campaign). Instead they’re dumping millions into the man’s campaign:

Republicans are spending big to salvage Richard Mourdock’s candidacy in the aftermath of his comments on rape and pregnancy that have imperiled GOP hopes of taking back the Senate majority.

About $4 million is being spent across the airwaves in the final week of the campaign to bolster Mourdock, from the likes of well-known Republican groups like American Crossroads, the National Republican Senatorial Committee and the Club for Growth. And that comes as both sides acknowledge that Mourdock has taken a hit in the polls since his comments. Democrats are now more confident than ever that their candidate, Rep. Joe Donnelly, is poised to pull off one of the biggest upsets of the cycle.

Why is the Republican Party wasting its money on this guy? Oh, that’s right, it’s because they’re piss poor money managers. If the Republican Party had a brain it would withhold any further money from Mourdock as a lesson to the rest of its candidates to keep their offensives statements to themselves during campaign season.

Apparently We’re Helpless without Big Government

According to the New York Times big storms, like the ones that just hammered the east coast, require big government:

Most Americans have never heard of the National Response Coordination Center, but they’re lucky it exists on days of lethal winds and flood tides. The center is the war room of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, where officials gather to decide where rescuers should go, where drinking water should be shipped, and how to assist hospitals that have to evacuate.
Related in Opinion

Disaster coordination is one of the most vital functions of “big government,” which is why Mitt Romney wants to eliminate it.

Unsurprisingly this article is a thinly veiled exploitation piece meant to attack Romney while jacking off Obama. What I want to address is the claim that natural disasters require a big government. Consider the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for a moment. Supposedly this single organization has enough knowledge, foresight, and resources to coordinate and supply disaster relief efforts throughout the country. Without them, if the New York Times is to believed, it would be impossible for areas to recover from major disasters.

Let’s consider resources for a moment. As a federal agency FEMA must supply whatever resources are necessary to help with disaster relief throughout the entire country. Being a large country the number of resources necessary is absolutely mind boggling. Furthermore different regions face different potential disasters and therefore need different resources. Damage caused by tidal waves is different than damage caused by tornadoes and therefore the resources required to recover from a tidal wave are different than the resources necessary to recover from a tornado. Yet disasters such as tidal waves will not affect interior states and tornadoes are far less likely to occur in coastal states.

Resources include everything from drinking water to temporary shelter to specialized knowledge. The last resources, specialized knowledge, is the most important because without it there is no way to effectively determine the other resources needed for disaster relief. Who is more likely to know what is needed when a tornado touches down and destroys a vast section of a Midwestern town: a bureaucrat sitting in Washington DC that has likely never experienced a tornado or residents living in the affected Midwestern town that have dealt with tornadoes before? In all likelihood it will be the latter group.

Stocking FEMA with resources necessary takes resources form somewhere else. Scarcity is a fact of life and the government, no matter how badly it wants to, cannot overcome it. The resources sent to FEMA come from other parts of the country meaning each individual state has less resources available to prepare for local disasters than they would if FEMA didn’t exist. Wyoming would have more free resources to invest in preparing for coal mine collapses while Texas would have more free resources to invest in preparing for oil fires if they weren’t sending resources to FEMA.

There is also no guarantee that resources taken by FEMA will be distributed to areas affected by a disaster. FEMA only enters the equation when the federal government declares a disaster. When floods struck Duluth, Minnesota governor Dayton requested FEMA provide assistance, a request that FEMA denied:

On July 19, Governor Dayton requested individual assistance for home and business owners affected by June’s one-in-a-lifetime Duluth-area flood.

Today, FEMA denied Dayton’s request, and the governor is none too happy about it. “The Governor is very disappointed in FEMA’s decision, and is currently working with state agencies to explore next steps,” says a release from spokesman Bob Hume.

Minnesota, like every other state, has sent resources to FEMA. When storms hit and devastated Duluth FEMA refused to release its resources. Individuals working on disaster relief in Duluth found themselves with fewer resources than would have been available if FEMA wasn’t syphoning them. Not only are resources taken from localities and given to FEMA but there is no guarantee those resources will ever be made available.

Individuals are also able to prepare for natural disasters. By stocking nonperishable foods, generators and fuel, blankets, drinking water, and medical supplies an individual can prepare themselves for surviving the disruptions caused by natural disasters. By taking advantage of division of labor one individual in a community can focus on stocking food while another can focus on ensuring available shelter. Working together directly individuals can prepare necessary supplies because they have access to the sole source of specialized knowledge regarding each person’s personal needs. FEMA, sitting off in Washington DC, has no way of knowing what your or I need when a disaster strikes. It’s impossible to know the needs of another individual, especially when you’ve never met them.

Natural disasters don’t require big government. In fact big government can actually be extremely detrimental to disaster relief.

The New GOP High-Speed Stupid Train

The Republican Party improving their stupid train. Things started out well when the Todd Akins unveiled the prototype coal-powered stupid train when he said women seldom become pregnant from “legitimate” rape. Improving the stupid train immensely Jon Hubbad and Loy Mauch announced the diesel powered version when they went on record saying slavery was a blessing in disguise. Last week Richard Mourdock released the diesel-electric version of the stupid train saying children resulting from rape were gifts from God.

Today, thanks to the diligent work of reader and commenter Matt Tanous, I’m proud to announce that Charles Fuqua introduced a new high-speed version of the stupid train by stating support for enacted the death penalty on unruly children:

The maintenance of civil order in society rests on the foundation of family discipline. Therefore, a child who disrespects his parents must be permanently removed from society in a way that gives an example to all other children of the importance of respect for parents. The death penalty for rebellioius children is not something to be taken lightly. The guidelines for administering the death penalty to rebellious children are given in Deut 21:18-21:

The cited passages were omitted in the linked article to save space, fortunately I looked them up:

¹⁸ If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:

¹⁹ Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;

²⁰ And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.

²¹ And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

Fear not citizens, Fuqua’s support for enacting the death penalty on unruly children isn’t as bad as it sounds. He understands how dire such a situation is and believe there should be stringent oversight:

This passage does not give parents blanket authority to kill their children. They must follow the proper procedure in order to have the death penalty executed against their children.

See, it’s OK, very strict procedures must be followed before a child is put to death for being unruly. Fuqua may be harsh but he’s certainly benevolent!

As the election gets closer I expect the Republican Party to release a new flying version of their stupid train. Perhaps it will even be powered by burning the bodies of freshly executed children. It’ll be innovative and powered with renewable resources!

Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Minnesota Voter ID Amendment

Political organizations are spending their money for the final push before the election. Television screens are alive with political advertisements, newspapers are filled with pages of propaganda, and billboards across the country are urging you to vote one way or another. In Minnesota we’re being assaulted with advertisements asking us to vote yes or no on two constitutional amendments. These amendments have consumed a great deal of time for the politically active members living in this state, even though they’re really just scams meant to get the Democratic and Republican voter bases out to the polls.

Of the two amendments I find the one that would require voters to present state issued photo identification when voting to be the most interesting. Unlike the amendment that would make the state’s prohibition against same-sex marriages constitutional, which is nothing more than further legislating religious dogma, the voter identification amendment is a potential solution to a potential problem. Both the problem and the solution are only potentials because no reliable study has been performed to determine if the cost of implementing voter identification outweighs the cost. To this point all arguments for and against this amendment are hypothetical. Those who support the amendment claim that it will fight voter fraud but haven’t demonstrated that voter fraud is a significant problem and those who oppose the amendment claim it will disenfranchise specific voting blocks (which can’t actually be demonstrated until the amendment is passed so I give them a bit of a break). Security, like anything else that requires the use of resources, needs to undergo cost-benefit analysis.

In order to perform a cost-benefit analysis we need to identify the threat. Voter identification legislation is meant to combat the threat of individuals claiming they’re somebody else in order to cast additional votes. How many cases of such fraud have occurred in Minnesota? I’ve seen no conclusive studies indicating such a number, just vague statements claiming it’s a rampant problem. Nationwide the rate of voter impersonation is statistically nonexistent:

Out of the 197 million votes cast for federal candidates between 2002 and 2005, only 40 voters were indicted for voter fraud, according to a Department of Justice study outlined during a 2006 Congressional hearing. Only 26 of those cases, or about .00000013 percent of the votes cast, resulted in convictions or guilty pleas.

.00000013 percent of votes cast nationwide were demonstrated to be cases of voter impersonation. That number is so statistically insignificant as to be entirely irrelevant. Unless Minnesota greatly bucks the national trend voter impersonation isn’t a notable problem here. Considering the likely insignificant nature of the problem how much would it cost to implement a voter identification system? According to the only study I’ve found on the subject the cost it is estimated that a voter identification program would be $68.5 million in the first year [PDF].

Is it really worth spending $68.5 million in the first year on something that hasn’t even been proven to be a problem? Personally I don’t think it’s a good idea to spend a single dime on something that hasn’t been proven to be a problem.

The GOP Stupid Train Keeps Chugging Along

The Republican Party seems to have a problem keeping a muzzle on their candidates this year. First Todd Akins claimed that women rarely get pregnant from legitimate rape then Jon Hubbad and Loy Mauch claimed slavery was a blessing in disguise. Now a Republican Senate candidates named Richard Mourdock has publicly stated that pregnancies resulting from rape are a gift from God:

Indiana Republican Senate candidate Richard Mourdock said Tuesday when a woman is impregnated during a rape, “it’s something God intended.”

Mourdock, who’s been locked in a tight race with Democratic challenger Rep. Joe Donnelly, was asked during the final minutes of a debate whether abortion should be allowed in cases of rape or incest.

“I struggled with it myself for a long time, but I came to realize that life is that gift from God. And, I think, even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happened,” Mourdock said.

Are these clowns trying to see who can say the dumbest statement publicly? Perhaps he’s hoping to get some of that sweet RandPAC money.

I Don’t Think You Thought Your Clever Plan All the Way Through

Every Day, No Days Off demonstrates that lunacy isn’t confined to gun control advocates in the United States. Some rather creative, although short sighted, anti-gunners in Germany are trying to crowdsource funding to bury the Heckler and Koch factory in cement:

We plan to put a sarcophagus, similar to the one that encases the Chernobyl reactor, over Germany’s deadliest factory, so that none of its lethal “products” can illegally escape.

We will drop a sand and concrete mixture from helicopters onto the weapons factory in Oberndorf – a work of art changing reality. We need to shut down this gigantic wreck of humanity now, the German factory of Heckler & Koch in Oberndorf, once and for all!
Tons of sand and concrete will bring all deadly activities to a halt (see video). We need at least €4.000 ($5.200) to rent helicopters! For a donation of €10 ($13), you will receive a poster of the sarcophagus (Format: A1 – see below)!

The site has some really shitty renders of the Heckler and Koch factory (along with several neighboring houses by the looks of it) encased in cement. They’re goal is to raise €3,400 (even though they state they need €4,000 to rent a helicopter, obviously they’re not good at math), which isn’t going to be enough to rent and fuel a helicopter for enough trips that it will take to bury the entire factory in cement. Needless to say anti-gunner craziness is an international phenomenon.

Equality, the Lowest Common Denominator

Modern society has become obsessed with the idea of equality. Public schools have especially become proponents of making everybody equal, even if it means making others miserable:

A talented head cook at a school in central Sweden has been told to stop baking fresh bread and to cut back on her wide-ranging veggie buffets because it was unfair that students at other schools didn’t have access to the unusually tasty offerings.

What’s next? Will a high school football team with a great quarterback be forced to remove him from the team to ensure teams with poor players can compete equally? Reality doesn’t concern itself with what’s fair. Some people are simply luckier than others and nothing can be done to correct that. While many children are born into poor families in third world countries some are fortunate and born into wealthy families. Most children are both with good health but some are unfortunate and have horrible health issues starting at birth. When we obsess over perfect equality or fairness we are effectively saying we must bring everybody down to the lowest common denominator, which will require lowering the standard of living for a huge number of people.

Instead of punishing those with advantages we should be striving to boost everybody’s quality of living to match those of the more fortunate.

Calling for Unrelated Gun Control Schemes

While gun control advocates confuse me in general this story has given me a major headache:

The ease of stockpiling ammunition once again became apparent after police discovered that the perpetrator of one of the deadliest mass shootings in Minnesota history had packaging for 10,000 rounds of ammunition in his south Minneapolis home.

Last Thursday, Andrew J. Engeldinger had a Glock 9-millimeter handgun, two 15-round magazines and several loose rounds when he killed four co-workers, a UPS man and himself after being fired from Accent Signage Systems. In addition to the ammunition shipping boxes, police found a second Glock 9mm handgun in his house.

Let me get this straight, Engeldinger had no more than 30-some rounds of ammunition when he shot up Accent Signage so gun control advocates are now calling to control large lots of ammunition purchases? The man had less than a box of 9mm ammunition on his person. Whatever stockpile he had at home is entirely irrelevant because he didn’t use it in commission of his crime. To use the often-beloved car analogy this would be like demanding stricter controls on the number of automobiles an individual can purchase after a getaway driver for a bank robbery was found to own 12 vehicles.

I’m glad we have people like Andrew Rothman in this state raising these exact questions:

Andrew Rothman, vice president of the Minnesota Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance, said it’s not uncommon for people to make bulk purchases to guard against changes in gun laws and increases in ammunition prices in recent years.

“The shooter probably used 10 or 20 rounds of ammunition [in the attack] — is it really relevant how many rounds he had at home?” Rothman said.

Notice the stark difference between gun rights advocates and gun control advocates in this story? Gun control advocates are striving to find something to further restrict while gun rights advocates are asking what relevance the amount of ammunition owned by the shooter had to do with the shooting. I think this is why our society has slowly turned away from supporting stricter gun control, the people advocating such things fail to make logical arguments.

Those calling for ammunition controls have also failed to explain what good such controls would do. A person is limited in the amount of ammunition they can use in a crime. First of all ammunition isn’t weightless so the amount of can carry on their person is limited to the physical strength of the individual in question. Second of all a person can only operate a fixed number of firearms at the same time (two, if they’re operating a handgun in each hand) so the amount they can fire is limited by human anatomy. The story mentioned that controlling ammunition could give police an indicator that an individual is planning to do something wrong but they would be forced to interview every competitive shooter in the state (we go through a lot of ammunition). They would also be forced to interview ever person purchasing for a group buy or simply stockpiling ammunition because they found a really good sale. In other words the police would be forced to sink their time into countless wasted interviews. It would accomplish nothing besides wasting everybody’s time.

We should also consider the absurdity of controlling ammunition. Ammunition isn’t complicated to make, in fact there are reloading presses that allow you to make great quantities of ammunition quickly. If somebody is unable to purchase 10,000 rounds of ammunition they will simply make it or buy it from somebody who does make it (what a great agorist opportunity).

There is no logic in gun control and even less in ammunition control.

The Dangers of Leasing Equipment

Leading equipment can be a dangerous proposition, especially when you’re doing something controversial with it:

Cody Wilson planned in the coming weeks to make and test a 3-D printed pistol. Now those plans have been put on hold as desktop-manufacturing company Stratasys pulled the lease on a printer rented out for Wiki Weapon, the internet project lead by Wilson and dedicated to sharing open-source blueprints for 3-D printed guns. Stratasys even sent a team to seize the printer from Wilson’s home.

“They came for it straight up,” Cody Wilson, director of Defense Distributed, the online collective that oversees the Wiki project, tells Danger Room. “I didn’t even have it out of the box.” Wilson, who is a second-year law student at the University of Texas at Austin, had leased the printer earlier in September after his group raised $20,000 online. As well as using the funds to build a pistol, the Wiki Weapon project aimed to eventually provide a platform for anyone to share 3-D weapons schematics online. Eventually, the group hoped, anyone could download the open source blueprints and build weapons at home.

Stratasys is simply trying to delay the inevitable. Gun control is impossible because guns are mechanically simple devices that can be manufactured with little in the way of tooling. 3D printers could revolutionize the speed in which an individual can manufacture their own firearm but some companies are scrambling to put the genie back in the bottle.

If we’re going to make firearms with 3D printers we must relay on printers that are owned outright. If we rely on leased equipment we’ll face the equipment owners pulling the lease after a minimal amount of pressure from gun control advocates.

Like Children Fighting

It appears as though the United States will be resorting to third grader tactics against Iran:

The United States on Wednesday slammed “repulsive slurs” against Israel by Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and said it would boycott his speech at the UN General Assembly.

Seriously states act like petulant children. They get angry whenever another state says something “mean” and stomp off. It would be funny if these temper tantrums didn’t lead to innocent people dying.