Your Money or Your Life

A story came through mmy newsfeed this morning of a man in Seattle who was killed for refusing to give up his phone to an attacker. It occurs to me to discuss the idea of your possessions not being worth your life.

First off, the obvious- I put a much higher value on my life (and my family's lives) than on any personal possessions. The point I'd like to emphasize is that the person who offers good old fashioned violence in exchange for not giving them any money DOES NOT. Their opening statement is that they are valuing your life at lower than the sum of what you MIGHT be able to give them. Furthermore, they are explaing that they are just as prepared to take both as they are to take only one. This person does not have your best interests in mind, therefore it would be less than wise to entrust them with either your life or your possessions.

Frame it as a transaction- person A has some money. Person B has some valuable possessions. Person A wants Person B's possessions and offers to trade- except that person B is not particularly interested in person A's money, and would prefer to retain his possessions. Transaction over? Not quite. Person A has another thing- person B's life (or at least the ability to end it, which is, for our purposes, equivalent). By offering to exchange these two things, they are making a statement of equal value (or acceptably similar value) just the same as they were with the money. Person B thinks their life is precious, while person A is making the statement that the same life is worth, oh lets say $100. Does it make sense to trust someone at their word when they've just made the statement that your life is worth $100?

Take it another step- Person A has made it clear that he has valued B's life at $100 but he also makes it clear that he is willing to take BOTH. So what he's really asking is for you to agree with him- your life is worthless. Less than $100. He'll take both if he wants to, but he MAY, if he feels like it, let you keep a little of it. He's not offering anything you want, and if you don't give up the goods he may just kill you and take them, or he may kill you anyway after you give them up. Either way, they aren't much value to him. He has now defined the value of life, and its unacceptably low.

I don't agree with that. My life is pretty damn valuable, and I intend to keep the value of it. Joe Stickupguy is offering violence in exchange for a life he values at nothing and $100 phone- I'm offering an equivalent amount of violence in return. If he decides HIS life is worth more than my money, he'll decline to continue the transaction, and we'll all walk away from it. If not, well, we'll throw both lives in the fire and see which one burns first. I'll take that chance before I let someone kill me over the cost of a telephone.

A bitter political break-up

So we're a year out from the last election, and just starting the run-up to the mid-terms. Parts of this post have been kicking around since last November, parts of it from the Primaries, but I was looking through my old draft posts, and it still applies. I was pretty pissed about the primaries and the general election, I won't lie. In fact, I threw out at least one screed that may or may not have tuned my faithful readers in to that fact. So after a little while to cool down, think about things for a while, I've decided I'm going to register as a Democrat before the next election cycle. Why? Well, because I think I'll get just as much of a voice there, and in the meantime I can actually vote against the nanny-state pricks when it might do some good. It obviously isn't helping to vote Republican, and third party votes are not very effective. So, I'm going over to the 'big-tent' party and see if I can find some converts. If we're ever going to get a viable party out of this partisan mess, we're going to need to steal at least of few of those voters from the left.

I'm not talking about fracturing one party- I'm talking about fracturing BOTH. Look, I know a lot of Democrats- I married one, raised by two more, the vast majority of my family are democrats, many of my friends are Democrats- if there's one thing that needs said, its that they are as fractured a party as it is possible to be. The problem isn't with them, any more than Mitt Romney is the absolute favorite choice of all Republicans, everywhere. Much like the Brady campaign did by putting Helmke in charge, we need to find the right standard bearer from the opposition party- and soon. Its obvious that this psuedo-alliance with the Republican party is not working for Libertarians. So I say we go try to make some friends in the Democratic party. They ARE there, they are just not single issue voters. And I damn near guarantee that they all think they are the only Democrats that feel that way. We should OWN the ACLU. But we've been locked in this special relationship with the Republicans so long that we can't get out of it. That would be the Republican Party that brought us the DHS and TSA. The Republican party that wouldnt or couldnt stop the Hughes Amendment. The one that threw us into an oil war we didn't get any goddamn oil from. The one that put Mitt Romney on the ticket instead of going with Gary Johnson in the first place, who I may remind you was also a successful governor of a traditionally Democrat state, with reams of business experience. Mitt was an annointed candidate, chosen by the Republican leadership and the liberal media. With a choice like that they didn't WANT our vote, they didn't think they NEEDED our vote, and they have not acted like they give a damn about our values at all. So aside from this one issue, I don't think we are any worse off on our own than we are with them. So let's break up, and see other people for a while. I hear the Blue Dog Democrats are looking for a date.

Oh, and to the GOP? It's not me, it's YOU.

Healthcare

A few observations on the healthcare debate-

I really should read the ACA legislation, because it seems that an awful lot of people are still accusing others of not having done so. Its three thousand pages long, which seems like a lot until I look at the Robert Jordan books that line my library shelves- 16 books totalling (by my estimate) about 10,000 pages of voluntary reading. I'm pretty certain I could get through it, given enough determination. Anyone else done this yet?

Lacking that, I have to rely on what politicians are saying about it, which is not a good way to get at the truth. However, using my best judgement, logic, and powers of observation, I have filtered a few key points. The ACA does NOT provide free healthcare for the American people, despite the protestations that it does. So all those people who are insisting that it does would seem to be A) mistaken or B) lying. In the spirit of fairness, it is apparent to me that a few people are lying to the populace and a large number of people are, unfortunately, believing them. What the ACA does do, on the other hand, is channel an incredible amount of money into the capacious pockets of a very small group of people who, incidentally, are frequently cast as the villains in this theatre. The ACA isn't busting the stranglehold of greedy and capricious insurance executives- it is REINFORCING IT.

The next observation is that the people in opposition to the ACA seem to be objecting to all the wrong aspects of it, and those in support seem to be using all the wrong reasons to support it. Quite honestly, the Republican Party should be lauding its efforts to encourage people to work with the private insurance industry, while the Democratic Party should be furious that it forces (and I mean that, the act REQUIRES, under a huge tax penalty) one to give money to billionaires. Welcome to topsy turvy world.

Now an observation in the hyperbole. First, its not the President's personal playground. Yes, he supported it, but the man wasn't a legislator when it was passed, so BY DEFINITION its not his legislation. Calling it Obamacare gives him far too much credit while simultaneously cheapening efforts to alter or end it, by short-circuiting any logic and turning the entire argument into an ad hominem attack. Its called the Affordable Care Act- it really doesn't matter if it does what its name says, for the sake of accuracy, use its real name. Second, its not going to be the single most devastating thing thats ever happened, and to say so makes one sound shrill and alarmist. If a person makes a dozen good, solid arguments and then ends with, "This will cause the dead to rise from the grave hungering for brains at midnight tonight!" And that last part never happens, they just shot ALL their arguments in the foot. Now, on the other side, everyone out there that gets all dreamy eyed over the ACA- I really do think you are being lied to, and when you parrot back those lies with your breathy voice, it makes us pragmatists feel like we're living in Brave New World. Its creepy, and does not help your cause. This is not the vast humanitarian effort you seem to think it is.

Now, I may just a wild-eyed optimist, but I still thnk there is room for truth and logic in debate, and compromise, but that faith is fading day by day. So, if we could all step up and get a few facts in order, we could still hammer out a useful result from this furnace of disaster. It may be we are out of time for that, but I really hope not.

On Shutdown

Life is still veerrrryyy busy, so this will be a brief note, followed by another period of reflection.

By reports, the Fed.gov shut down this morning at the stroke of twelve (no word yet on who is finding the glass slipper) and some confusion exists as to the what and why. My observation? Group 1 decided not to compromise on their belief and dedication to Cause A, despite repeated threats from Group X. As both groups would only accept a full accounting of their demands, no agreement could be reached. Please, fill in the placeholders in your own time; we don't want spoilers in the comments. In fact, although I have never been interested in filtering conversation, I intend to MadLib any comments made referencing real people or parties, for my own entertainment.

As to the results- I fully expect that this shutdown will remarkably resemble the sequester cuts of earlier this year (partially because we are, in fact, in the throes of the very same debate) in that there will be basically no changes made in the operation of the federal government with the sole exception of making any contact with the gneral population as painful as possible. This will be seized upon by both guilty parties. The intent, of course, will be to encourage the population to contact their elected officials and respectfully request that they swallow their oath and make us comfy again. Since this is being done by both parties, I predict little gain in that regard. What I DO expect s a lot of confused, angry people arriving at the gates of National Parks and Monuments. Some of them will probably subsequently sneak in anyway.

In conclusion, Congress has once again placed a splinter squarely in our eye, fully expecting that we will thank them not only for removing it later, but thank them for putting it there in the first place.

Light Posting vs Burnout

I was digging through some feeds in my reader today, and thinking about blogs and bloggers. Now, some (such as Breda) maintain that blogs are dead- she maintains nearly the same following in facebook snippets as she did when blogging. Others have split off in different directions- SayUncle has gone all-linky/less-thinky, while Sebastian and Bitter are real life Active Activists. Caleb has staff writers now, and gets paid. Others have shuffled away, or abruptly ended, their sites cold or sold, or 404. I've never been good at 'post every day' blogging, but some are. Others drift in now and then (like me) drop nuggets of gold or Uberposts in their own way. Come this October, I've been riding this horse for 4 years. There's been gaps, some long ones, but I keep coming back, because I think there are some things I can't keep to myself. Thanks for reading. It'll keep coming as it always does, steady by jerks, until I either give up or run out of things to say.

Stock Market

You may think I have something to observe about the Dow Average or Securities exchange, but nope, not that kind of stock. For one, I understand only a very little about those things, but my understanding is mostly that its a complicated way of turning a small amount of real money into a great deal of playtime pretend money; or, to put it another way, like relieving one's bladder in a tornado and making bets on who gets wet. For two, I doubt any observations of mine will be particularly useful on that subject and it is, therefore, a bit of a waste of my increasingly precious time. So today, we are going to talk about chicken stock instead!

I've been making my own chicken stock for several years now, and I recently panicked to find that I had in stock only one lonely quart jar thereof. As can be imagined, this is unacceptable to me, and I set about remedying that situation.

I don't really consider stock a survival ration, so the lack is not truly an emergency, but I think it very neatly illustrates the difference between gettin' by and living well. I use homemade chicken stock in a great variety of ways, from the standard soups and sauces to rice dishes and crockpot meals, and the homemade stuff is cleaner, cheaper, and much tastier than most of the store bought stuff you can find.  This plays into my preps in a big way.

Some of the things we do as preps are matters of life and death- a reliable way to heat your home during a Minnesota or Montana winter blackout is the difference between living and freezing to death in your own home. A backup generator to give you lights during a summer storm blackout in the same place generally save your life, but it makes it easier and more comfortable, and level of comfort is a big part of feeling good about your situation. In that vein, having homemade stock on hand is the difference between basic survival and eating well. Imagine for a moment, a long term blackout in the early summer, in a temperate zone. With no refrigeration, food isn't coming to the grocery, nor is electronic commerce operating. After, say, a week, most people are completely out of food, until the Red Cross starts bringing in canned goods or MREs. During that week, one family digs into their emergency supplies of rice and beans- only requiring water to prepare, they light their emergency backpacking stove and boil up some rice. No spices, no meat, no flavor really, but you now what? They're eating, and that's more than other people are doing. They are surviving. Now on to my family- during that same week, I've been digging into my cans and jars. Instead of plain rice, I have savory rice, cooked with stock and canned veggies. The next day, we have a green salad (dandelion grows everywhere, a little bitter but quite nutritious) with homemade vinegarette (I can make vinegar, too, from cider, or beer, or old wine, even sugar water) and sourdough croutons. Even if it lasts long enough that I'm shooting pigeons for protein, we can stew them up with some rice and make gravy. Which of these families would you rather dine with? THATS the difference between survival and living well.

I'll finish off with a recipe (of sorts)-

One chicken carcass. I like to roast a chicken then make stock the next day. Save the giblets, the bones, the neck, etc. Broil this the next day to crisp everything up and get the fat out (Fat, the friend of roasting and sausage, is the enemy of stock). Save all the juices from the roast, and add this to the stock pot.

Veggies- i mix and match sometimes, depending on what I have, but a few things should always go in- onions (3 or so) celery (half a bunch, leaves and all) carrots, whole black pepper, and salt. Additionally, I like to add cilantro, garlic, basil, and sometimes some fresh rosemary. The best part is that you can just put in what you have. I suppose bell peppers would be good, some folks add a parmesan rind, there's lots of options. One note here- any leafy greens will occlude your stock. I like the flavors they add, but don't expect a crystal clear liquid if you add these. Just chop everything into quarters and dump it in. Things like onions don't even need peeled, since its all coming back out later.

About the fat- its very important to get all the fat out of your stock. I refrigerate the carcass overnight and peel off the layer or solidified fat before putting the juices in the stockpot. Similarly, once you have broiled and crisped the carcass, most of the fat will be rendered out. Don't put this in the pot.

Once you have everything in stock pot, add about two gallons plus a quart of water and bring it all to a low simmer. If you boil it, whatever fat is left will emulsify and cloud your stock. Cover, and simmer for about 4 hrs, till the chicken carcass falls apart easily. Strain it through a cheesecloth into large containers (I use half gallon mason jars), discarding the solids. Cool these overnight in a refrigerator. The next day, filter again through cheesecloth or paper towels- this should remove the rest of the now congealed fat, leaving a clear amber liquid.

If you do get stock you can't clarify with filtering, you can raft an egg white in it, which will pull in a lot of the emulsified fat. Crack an egg and remove the yolk. Crush up the shell and add it to the white, then whip it up with a little cold water. Bring your stock to a high simmer and gently float the egg white mixture into it. Simmer 5 minutes or so, then cool and strain the egg out. It should be noticeably clearer.

There are two ways forward from here- canning and freezing. Freezing is simple; ladle your cooled, filtered stock into bags or containers and freeze them. You'll have to thaw them before use, but if you have lots of freezer space and no pressure canner, its an option.

To can your chicken stock, first establish how many jars you will need to procede. Wash, rinse, prep, etc as required. (If you are just getting inti canning, I recommend downloading the USDA Home canning guide, available for download here). Next, decant the filtered stock back into your stock pot, and heat it to just under boiling (this will be easier on the jars and save time on the canning cycle). Fill the jars to a 1/2" headspace, them process them in a pressure canner (NOT A BOILING BATH CANNER! ONLY A TRUE PRESSURE CANNER WILL SAFELY PROCESS MEAT PRODUCTS!) for the recommended time. In my case, it was 11 lbs of pressure for 25 minutes (pint jars).

Voila! Shelf stable for up to a year! I do this about 4 times per year, meaning my family of two uses about 8 gallons of stock per year. If I were buying high quality stock at the store, my canner (no inexpensive) was paid for the first year, plus you have absolute control of the flavor, quality, and ingredients! Now go out and build up your stock portfolio!

Feeling good about OC

Ok, some of the very few that read this may have missed me (if not, don't bother telling me so), as I've been very busy with Danger. This week, though, was too good of an Open Carry Experience not to share.

Monday, and once Tuesday, I had no less than four major remarkable conversations about Open Carry.

 One, a stocker at the grocery store, was interested in whether or not I ever get hassled about it, as he was considering a little bit himself. I shared with him a few of my positive experiences, talked a little about the local laws, and he went on his way with a thoughtful look and, I think, an increased determination. A couple things stick out from this conversation- first off, this is our regular grocery store, and I am (I think) becoming something of a fixture there. On my own, I'm not an exceedingly memorable person, but the combination of small child in a carrier and Open Carry (as well as a ready smile and luxurious beard) probably starts to stand out in the minds of the employees. I've seen this kid there before, and I know this is not the first time he's noted the gun on my hip. It is, however, the first time he's asked about it. I got the impression he's been mulling this decision for a while, and has gradually been deciding to act on it. Diplomacy for the Win! Second, he and others have mentioned an aspect of the law that I have not encountered myself, and it makes me wonder where the belief comes from. Specifically, he was under the impression that having a Concealed Carry license removed OC from the table. I have done my diligence in familiarizing myself with Oregon's various laws (I can't quote chapter and verse, but I make sure to remain in compliance) and have not found this to be the law anywhere in Oregon. Possibly this rule exists in other places or states, but I have not come across it anywhere.

The second conversation came a scant few minutes later, near the deli, where two women were waiting for their cold cuts. While different in exact wording from other conversations I've had, the effect was the same. They noticed the combination of small child and large gun and found it to be most droll, as well as entirely appropriate. With a smile, I replied that one does what one must to keep his family safe, and they agreed. They both seemed very receptive to the idea that the gun was a tool for safety, which underscores the idea that the world is not necessarily a safe place, and we all must do what we can to mitigate that. This mirrors a number of other conversations I've had, notably a handful of very similar conversations with Mothers, children in tow, at that very same store. Quite a contrast to the Moms Demand Action crowd, who do not seem to coincide with very many real people I have met.

The next two encounters were in my own home, and both were strikingly similar (in fact both were with employees of our new pest control service). I don't care much for people knocking on my door to sell me things, but I understand that business always needs new customers- in fact, I spent some time in that same manner back when I was in roofing. When the clean cut young man started his pitch on pest control, My Lovely Wife answered, and we eventually decided to allow them to treat our home. OpSec priciples were followed of course, and proper documentation was obtained before allowing the pitch to proceed. Upon noticing my sidearm, he expressed quite an approval, and mentioned that he and his wife had been considering the purchase of their first firearm. In point of fact, it was my understanding that the matter was broached by his wife, who grew up in a shooting family. The very next day, the tech arrived at our home to do the initial treatment. He also noticed the gun on my hip, expressed his approval, and engaged in some conversation regarding shooting and carrying. At that point he admitted that his wife is a much better shot than he, and had been discussing with him the purchase of an arm for home defense! Strange, I have seen so many people purporting not only that gun ownership is in decline, but that women were against such a thing! Its almost like the Bloomberg and Brady people are... Wrong, or something.

In all, I consider this to have been a very good week to be an Open Carrier. Not only do I feel I am continuing in good form to be an ambassador for our culture, but I have managed to strike up conversation with several people interested in joining our inclusive little group, and one who seems quite on the verge of regular carry himself. A net win, I'd say, and a far cry from the dying culture that others wish us to be.