Thomas Wictor

This isn’t the same country it was when I was young. I lived in Tyler, Texas, from 1972 to 1975; Portland, Oregon, from 1981 to 1985; San Francisco, California, from 1991 to 1993; and Los Angeles from 1993 to the present. I’ve never seen such publicly expressed insanity as I’m seeing now. We are screwed.

Only if that’s what the majority of us want. Is it?

Today I read about the recently ended standoff between cattle ranchers and the feds in Clark County, Nevada. Now, you can support the ranchers or the federal government. There are valid reasons to be on either side. Like many conflicts, it was nowhere near as cut and dried as people would have you think.

This, however, is cut and dried.

A former sheriff is saying in plain English that the strategy was to ensure that if any shooting happened, women would be killed for the cameras. This is precisely the approach taken by al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, the al-Nusrah Front, and countless other violent religious fanatics trying to impose their view of the world on others by force.

Richard Mack has a lot of support for this idea.

Not chilled, huh? A former law-enforcement official openly says they facilitated the potential deaths of their female members for the specific purpose of political theater, and that’s okay with you.

Women can be at the front in order to be killed. He says it in his own unambiguous words.

That’s not what Mack said. He said women would face different consequences than men. They would be used as targets. The men would be behind the women.

So, you too are fine with killing your own in order to win a propaganda fight. Well, wouldn’t it be more effective to provoke the feds by shooting at them from behind the women? That’s what the Somalis did to our troops in Mogadishu. Or why not just shoot a couple of the women yourself and blame the feds? I mean, it’s for the greater good, right?

If this is what it takes to win, I’m content to lose. Count me out, “patriot.”

On the other side of the political aisle, we now have demands that those who refuse to convert to the religion of anthropogenic global warming be arrested.

“Deniers.” It would never in a billion years occur to me to label someone with a different opinion a “denier.” It’s a word from the Dark Ages. You have the right to believe that anthropogenic global warming is a grave danger. I don’t think any less of you for it. However, I’ve read enough to convince me that the threat is overstated for political reasons. That doesn’t make me a “denier.” You’re not God thundering commandments down at me. I get to disagree with you.

Tell us about the pressure put on scientists to “achieve consensus.” Tell us about how climate scientists use predictive models with “corrected” data as their main tools.

Well, you’re doing what you accuse the “deniers” of doing: making assertions not based on scientific evidence. That World Health Organization study is so full of qualifiers that your figure of 150,000 deaths is just a guess.

Climatic changes already are estimated to cause over 150,000 deaths annually. That estimate includes deaths as a result of extreme weather conditions, which may be occurring with increased frequency. Changes in temperature and rainfall conditions also may influence transmission patterns for many diseases, including water-related diseases, such as diarrhoea, and vector-borne infections, including malaria. Finally, climate change may affect patterns of food production, which in turn can have health impacts in terms of rates of malnutrition. There is further evidence that unmitigated greenhouse gas emissions would increase disease burdens in the coming decades.

Hold on a second. Global life expectancy is increasing dramatically, according to…the World Health Organization. How can climate change be killing us, when our lifespans are getting longer? Is climate change making us zombies? We’ve become perennial animated corpses?

You’re misusing the term “malcontent.” You mean “malefactor.” They both begin with M-A-L, so you got confused. And what about the malicious, profiteering climate scientists in the disinformation business? Michael Mann is a fraud. He had to retract his claim of being a Nobel laureate. Also, his famous “hockey stick graph” is fake.

Disagreeing with you isn’t malice. What is this, the Salem Witch Trials?

Though she was not willing to mention God, her answers were in a very wicked, spiteful manner reflecting and retorting against the authority with base and abusive words and many lies.

Threaten me all you want. I’m not converting to your religion. I’ll never submit to Wahabbism, and I’ll never submit to climautocracy.

You make pretty daisies, pretty daisies, love
I gotta find find find what you’re doing about things here

A few witches burning gets a little toasty
Hey now, what do you know? What do you know?
I gotta find find find find why you always go
When the wind blows

Back when I could play the bass, I worked out a two-handed-tapping solo version of that brilliant song. It was on one the tapes I stupidly threw away because I was so angry that arthritis had robbed me of a great love. What did rage and melodrama gain me? Nothing. I hated, and as a result, one of my finest achievements is gone forever.

Now I just want rationality. That’s all. I want everyone to settle down.

I’ll end with this: Which is the adulterous Republican, and which is the wife-beating Democrat?