One year ago today: April 16, 2013, Fort Pulaski.
Five years ago today: April 16, 2009, Mel gets divorced.
I spent the morning towing motorcycles and bicycles, this time from the mechanic shop to home base (Alpha 20). It reminded me of that old puzzle about the man who had to take the fox, goose, and grain across the river. How did I get my vehicles back here without riding the bus? You see, when I drove home in the rain last evening, I had to leave the batbike and the pod over with Miguelito. Easy, this morning I drove the Jamus [bicycle] over there, threw it into the pod wagon, hooked it to the batbike, and was back in time for morning coffee.
Two new developments. One is the old club, Jimbos, wants to do an open mic on Wednesdays. That would be every other week, as Wednesday competes with the dart club. I can see myself hosting it but I cannot see myself doing it for free. The promoter knows all the local music stores and musicians, so I must at least be receptive to this idea. What would you do? The next item is, get this, “Bar Rescue”. Since it is a TV offering, the joke is really on those who laugh that I’ve never heard of it. The premise is take a dead bar and resurrect it. Yeah, that would be Jimbos, alright.
They find a joint, spruce it up, do the promo, and voila, instant TV show. I watched a few series on youTube. True, if you take a rundown pub and inject the half-million into it that the current owner can’t afford, yes, business is definitely going to pick up. True, Jimbos has no place to go but up. I don’t know what the catch is but if there is even one single string attached, it will not happen here.
Force fields are neat in the movies. It seems a new invention called electric armor, or electromagnetic armor, is being tested in England. I can’t find any published details but there are a few videos showing sideplates detonating shaped charges before striking the armor. But would that work on kinetic rounds? Anyway, it is something to watch. The plates look like reactive armor, which explodes outward and deflects the energy of incoming shells. It was invented by a guy who noticed after the 1967 war knocked-out Egyptian tanks with internally exploded ammunition were less damaged than those whose ammunition did not explode. A simple application of Newton’s Third. What a gruesome discovery.
The tiny window of home sales is drying up already for this season. But I’m in no hurry. This is the kitchen of a place I was considering. If it was possible, I would dispel the notion that manufactured home living is tiny galleys and cubbyholes. As shown here, this is the kitchen dining area with an island, and yes, I would live the hell out of a nice place like that. I see nothing wrong with it and it certainly beats anything I was raised in. (I decided against purchasing the place. The second bath was only a half-bath and the second bedroom was only 8 x 10. I want the real thing.)
I’ve already met so many people who are stuck in their gated communities entertaining each other because, well, they don’t have the bucks to get out into the real world. They can’t even get away for a month because of the upkeep, where a month for me is almost mandatory. And I have something against dying in a big, expensive house when one has not even seen the Pacific.
Ah, bureaucracy. The SEC is looking to extend its authority over crowdfunding. Just like other government agencies now control the Internet, these people tend to forget the very reason a lot of these innovations came along was to get around the stifling control of the non-elects. True, there will be major scams, but those could easily be handled by the police. I can’t help but suspect the goal of these agencies is absolute control and to ensure nobody makes an unrecorded dollar. So just you watch. As soon as crowdfunding takes off, which it will, watch for pre-emptive regulation. Pre-emptive means your “tax identity” is on file whether or not you make any money—the exact opposite of the way tax reporting is supposed to work if you read the original rulebook.
Want a laugh? Read the advice columns these days. It is trendy to catch cheating boyfriends by use of smartphones, cell records, this kind of "proof". The laugh is how lop-sided the advice has become. The columnists don't seem to realize they are totally siding with the female point of view. True, they are women themselves, but when you ladle out advice for a living, please make some attempts at fairness. And if a man can afford more than one car, more than one house, and more than one girlfriend, who the hell is Abby to come along and say he is wrong? Is there some decree that says relationships make the man the woman's property? There, that's controversy.
Let me express an opinion on that. I say nobody has a right another's exclusivity unless it is voluntarily openly decided. Anything else makes it an assumption. I've found exclusivity is something you have to work at, not expect as a consequence of seeing someone. I've never "cheated" since I was a teen, and was it cheating if we never mutually agreed to go steady? In my opinion, no. I've dated just too many women who turned out to be boring after the novelty wore off. They come across like party girls to get your attention, then revert to homebodies and soap operas. If their boyfriends seek variety, they ain't gonna find it with such women at home. And ladies, what is false advertising if not a form of cheating?
If you are offended by that, time to look in a mirror. As Churchill put it, "We already know what kind of woman you are. Let's just settle the price."
