Book Review: How To Diagnose And Fix Everything Electronic

How to Diagnose and Fix Everything Electronic, Second Edition

[rating=4]

For the beginning to intermediate electronics hobbyist or journeyman fix-it guy this is an excellent resource. It could be used as a textbook. Highly organized, well presented and comprehensive. It addresses everything from the bottom up; tools you’ll need, how to use them, safety issues, troubleshooting techniques, component identification, signal tracing, mechanical considerations and more. Lots of red meat in this book. Worth reading and keeping.

The Romney Stericycle Abortion Myth

Pathological liar and disgraced pseudo-journalist David Corn is perpetuating yet another lie about Mitt Romney, to wit, that he invested, via BAIN Capital, in a medical waste disposal company that disposed of aborted human beings.

Naturally, other left-wing useful idiots are picking up on this without any fact checking, and relabeling the ‘medical waste disposal business’ as the ‘abortion business’.

The gist of the claims is that Romney was still at BAIN when the Stericycle deal happened, Stericycle deals in aborted human beings, and that makes Mitt Romney an abortion facilitating hypocrite.

The simple truth is this: Not only did Stericycle not begin dealing with aborted human beings until after Romney had left BAIN, Stericycle did not begin disposing of aborted human bengs untill after BAIN had completely divested from it.

Having been an executive in a business, I can say that the venture capitalists that invested in that business not only didn’t get involved in the day to days, they didn’t dictate clients, either. The claim that while Romney was organizing and running the Olympics he somehow managed to find the time to secretly run dozens of other companies is ludicrous. But even if you believe that he was somehow able to do so, BAIN’s, and therefore Romney’s, involvement with Stericycle ended at least one year before Stericycle became involved with abortion clinics as clients.

As for Stericycle, the idea that they should be punished for disposing of aborted babies is kind of putting the cart before the horse. They didn’t invent abortion and somebody has to dispose of the so-called waste. Would I invest in a company that did it, though? No. And Mitt Romney didn’t invest in that kind of company, either.

Oh, and if Mitt Romney can organize and run a successful Olympics while secretly running a bunch of other companies profitably, maybe he is *exactly* the guy we need in the White House.

MoveOn.org – fast and loose with the facts, again!

You might have seen this new video MoveOn.org published recently. As is the norm for them, it is difficult to find anything in their publications that even remotely resembles the truth. The best they can do is project their own strategies onto the Republicans or quote people out of context. There is so much wrong with this video, it is difficult to know where to start. I must say that I am in one fashion impressed with the video, though. The amount of falsehoods, misrepresentations and out of context quotes packed into a mere 4 minutes is downright Orwellian.

But, since a friend of the liberal persuasion asked me, no, challenged me, to do just that, I’ll start with a point by point rundown of the claims made in the MoveOn.org video. I’m sure that I’ll miss some, but no doubt someone will point out my oversights.

The first thing I will address is the comment regarding Romney’s background: “Did anybody even vet this guy?

WHAT?!?! LOL! From Obama backers? I couldn’t stop laughing at that one for a while. Are these people even aware that Obama has released virtually none of his records and of the few he has released, most of them have been declared forgeries by qualified document forensic analysts? Of those that have not been demonstrated to be fakes, most of them are contradicted by each other or by documents the Obama machine could not completely eradicate, like his book blurb. Even the pictures put forth by the Obama machine have been discredited, like the one where his mother has a black hand, or the one where Obama is wearing a wedding ring in 1983 (he married Michelle in 1992, nine years later). All those documents and pictures do is lend support to the claims that his birth certificate is a forgery.

Romney, on the other hand, has published many of his personal documents. That is why the Obama machine is targeting the tax returns. They don’t have anything else to go after that might be useful. Obama has never had a particularly complicated financial situation. It’s certain to be easy for the Obama machine to pick some specific point and present it out of context with the complexity Romney’s tax records are likely to present. And, of course, since nobody has legal access to Romney’s tax records, it’s easy for Reid and Pelosi, as surrogates of the Obama campaign, to insinuate or outright declare anything they want to regarding them. Of course, Reid has not released his own income tax returns.

Next up is the “corporations are people” out-of-context quote. When Romney said that he intended to convey the fact that people own corporations, and making corporations pay taxes is just making those people who own the corporation pay more taxes – which get passed on to the consumers of what ever that corporation makes. Corporations are not faceless inanimate objects, they are jobs, incomes, products, services and a host of other things to their employees, owners, customers and vendors. Make an oil company pay more taxes? You are just making gas more expensive. Make a pharmaceuticals corporation pay more taxes? You just made medicine cost more. Pass laws or create regulations to prevent those price increases? You just put those companies out of business. Since a lot of those companies are components in IRAs and pensions, you just screwed a lot of people. Really, where does it stop?

If corporations are ‘not people’ then what are they, exactly? They are property of people. So when you make the corporation pay taxes and then the owners pay additional taxes, you are taxing those people twice. That seems fair, especially since we already have the highest corporate taxes in the developed world… Right.

Then we have the Romney family dog strapped to the roof of the car. He was in a carrier. Dogs ride in carriers inside vehicles. Dogs love to have the breeze flapping their ears and nose and their tongues, too, with as much of their bodies as possible stuffed into however much you dared to roll down the window. Dogs ride in the beds of pickup trucks all the time, too. Based on my experience and observations of my family’s dogs (gasp! profiling!), including one Irish Setter, I am inclined to accept Anne Romney’s claim that the dog liked it. So far, I haven’t seen any evidence that the Romneys actually ate the family dog, like Obama did.

Next we hear that Romney has refused to release more than two years of his records. I believe I covered that more generally in the ‘vetting’ section, but why should Romney release any records when Obama has released virtually none of his own?

Next up is the charge that Romney parks his money in offshore accounts. Lots of rich people do, especially when they can’t make as much investing here, like they want to. Kennedy (yes, I know he’s dead), multiple time Presidential Candidate did. DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz has offshore investments. Should we even talk about tax cheat John Kerry? Nancy Pelosi has offshore money, too, along with many of her co-hypocrites and invested in one of the companies they are trying to bash Romney over with regard to outsourcing jobs. Obama would have them, no doubt, if he’d ever had a high paying private sector job or an inheritance. There are numerous tax cheats in the Obama administration, so he ought to know what he’s talking about – or having his surrogates talk about. It’s all just a distraction to keep you from talking about the jobs crisis.

Now we get to the conspiracy theories. The ‘three prong GOP plan’ to elect Mitt Romney. First of all, is there some reason that the GOP should not be planning to get Romney into the White House? No? So it must be a matter of methods.

Prong one: Sabotage the economy and blame Obama.

The Republicans don’t need to sabotage the economy, Obama is doing fine on his own. Job creation is stagnant – or worse – because of the uncertainty of the cost of doing business that exists. This doesn’t just affect existing businesses, it affects people trying to start businesses, and the most significant factor in job creation is not the size of the business so much as the age of it. The younger the business the more jobs it creates. There is also a high correlation between size and age, which has led to the belief that it is the small companies, and as far as tax policy goes, it works out pretty much the same way. If nobody is starting businesses, they are not creating those jobs. If they aren’t sure they can afford the overhead of even the employees they already have, they aren’t hiring more, and especially with the larger companies, may need to cut staff in order to afford the rest. And no raises. Companies are also spending money – some – on equipment that will replace current or potential new employees just like they did during the last major downturn.

The idea that ‘the federal government is starving the states of funding’ might be arguable if there was a budget, but now, as for the last three years, there isn’t one. The House has passed budgets with some Democrat support but the Senate rejected them, the Obama administration has submitted three budgets which all failed to get any votes at all, and the Democrat controlled Senate has done… nothing. Right now the federal government is just spending willy-nilly and it’s already a catastrophe. And the ‘debt ceiling debacle‘? We got our credit rating downgraded because of our fiscal recklessness. We didn’t have to raise the debt ceiling, but Obama insisted. Blaming that on some GOP conspiracy is just insane.

Mitch McConnell vowing to make Obama a one term President as his most important goal was also presented out of context. Here is the complete quote:

“Well that is true, [making Obama a one-term President is] my single most important political goal along with every active Republican in the country. But that’s in 2012. Our biggest goal for this year is to get this country straightened out, and you can’t get this country straightened out if we don’t do something about spending, about deficit, about debt and get this economy moving again. So, our goal is to have a robust vibrant economy that will benefit all Americans, and that’s why I think this debate that we’re having right now is so important to our country’s future.”

Exactly the opposite of what the video claims.

The claim that people blame Obama more for the struggling economy over ‘Wall Street, Congress or even George W. Bush‘ might be true, but the underlying claim that the crash was caused by Wall Street, Congress or Bush has some serious holes in it. The struggling economy is the direct consequence of the mortgage crisis, and that was engineered by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd. Simply, Frank and Dodd created a situation that forced banks to make high risk loans. A large number of these loans went bad – after being bundled and sold overseas in many cases – causing the mortgage bubble created by easy loans to burst. Housing market crashed. Then Dodd and Frank (again) authored some legislation in the Democrat controlled congress that was supposed to help the situation but really just made it a lot worse. Meanwhile, the market crash also wreaked economic havoc in Europe, where many of those bundled toxic assets had gone, and their economic troubles bounced back to us for the double-whammy.

Prong two: Round up a bunch of rich one-percenters to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on misleading ads.

Obama got more wall street donations last election cycle than John McCain and now he’s whining because he pissed off or scared a bunch of them into giving to Romney’s campaign? Whiny crybaby. Obama’s continual reliance on criminals supporting his campaigns should bother you more. It was okay for Obama to expect to spend 1 billion, but now it’s wrong for Romney. And the claim that Romney would be beholden to his big corporate donors is ridiculous, or perhaps it means that Obama is beholden to his big donors, such as SEIU President (former) Andy Stern who visited the White House some 53 times. Then there are some other big donors to Obama, who only got about the same amount of small donations (under $200) as Bush did in 2004. So who is misleading who?

Prong Three:  An unprecedented voter suppression campaign.

This one is particularly offensive, considering that the Obama campaign is actively trying to suppress military votes in swing states as part of his reelection strategy, along with a campaign to enable massive voter fraud. Meanwhile, attempts to remove ineligible voters (cartoon characters, pets, felons, non-citizens and dead people, constituencies that vote overwhelmingly Democrat) from the rolls are denounced as vote suppression. Why is this? Because Democrats can’t win some states without massive fraud. Requiring someone to provide an ID in order to vote is also not voter suppression. Some places will provide you with transportation in order for you to get an ID if you don’t already have one and don’t have the means to get to where you can get one. Oh, and it’s free in many places.

On top of that, the hypocrisy of Michelle Obama requiring photo IDs in order to attend her book signings – presumably people who are going to vote for her husband – and Eric Holder, who describes voter IDs as racist, yet required them for his own speech to the NAACP is boundless.

In Pennsylvania, the House Majority Leader, Mike Turzai said “voter ID, which is going to allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania” – not “give” the state to Romney. This statement was also taken out of context, that being that Pennsylvania has had a vote fraud problem which has given the state to the Democrats and would not ‘allow’ a fair election. But this video distorts that context to imply Republican fraud.

And, of course, the race card is played repeatedly. The classic liberal acknowledgement that they don’t actually have the issues on their side.

“Let’s just call it what it is. A racist strategy to stop voters that they think are statistically inclined to vote for Obama. And Mitt Romney is right in lock-step with that plan.”

Shameless.

Finally(!), in their closing comments they said:

“The next President could fill three Supreme Court Justice seats. This election is about a whole lot more than Obama versus Romney. It’s about the soul and direction of our country for the next 50 years.”

They got that much right, but that’s about it.

The Wisdom of Ron Paul Supporters

Posted by ‘Jay’ in response to criticism of Ron Paul supporters that did not like the outcome of the 2012 Republican primaries who were undermining support for Mitt Romney:

“Let’s play this out shall we? If positions were reversed, and Ron Paul was the nominee…do you think we would still be telling you Romney is stupid? Do you think we would insult and alienate folks of the same political party with slightly different views? You both (Al and William) have a demeaning way of talking to folks. Your sarcasm and insulting nature shine through brilliantly, now only if you were to use your brilliance to try to win people over instead of informing us silly children. RP is stupid? You do know he has been a leader in the party you give your allegiance to for almost 30 years right? And in actuality the only position that Romney has that prevents me from jumping on the team is that he thinks the Federal Reserve is “doing a fine job” words from his mouth not made up. The only thing the Fed has been doing a fine job of for almost 100 years is raping the American taxpayer. No William as you stated above we are not all that different but that one position is enough for a lot of people to turn their back on the party all together.”

And my response:

Jay, if Ron Paul was the Republican nominee (presumptive) and Romney was the one foot-dragging and undermining the party, I would be supporting Paul and condemning Romney. And I would still think Paul’s foreign policy was suicidal. I agree with many of Paul’s positions, but those happen to be in the areas where Paul and Romney also agree to a large extent. I do believe, however, that instead of saying Mitt Romney is stupid and a bad choice for the Republicans as the presumptive nominee, Paulists would be saying “Paul was the right choice *because* Romney is stupid.” I don’t think you can help yourselves. And if Paul lost you would find something other than Paul’s political positions to blame.

If Ron Paul were elected he could only do so much. The President relies on Congress for, essentially, *permission* to do most things. In the areas where the Executive branch can act unilaterally, Obama has done a great deal of damage. Ron Paul would go to the opposite extreme and do just as much damage. Or more. Meanwhile, Obama has seized power via illegally bypassing Congress with EOs, and that will catch up with him, hopefully before it is too late. Paul can’t fix that, all he can do is drag down the Republican Party and give Obama 4 more years to consolidate power.

Just because you don’t like what I say, Jay, does not make it demeaning. I have tried logic and reason with Paul supporters, and, whenever I point out a flaw in their reasoning, they just redirect to another topic. Then the next time they make a groundless accusation or distort a fact or engage in outright conspiracy mongering, it’s the same set of non facts, delusions and baseless accusations.

You don’t have to like my sense of humor, either. I’d say that since it bothers you when I make a sarcastic comment, there must be some nugget in there that you recognize as truth, but it has not been my experience so far that there is any comprehension going on, just cognitive dissonance.

And please explain to me why this is so: I have not encountered a single – not one – Paul supporter that will vote for Romney. Not a single one. They say they will vote third-party, or stay home, or even that they will ‘vote Obama to bring on the Revolution.’ That last one, to me, reeks. How many of those people are just stooges of Obama doing their best to undermine the Republican Party? I have to say, most of them IMO. The ones claiming they will vote third-party on principle, I get that, even if I think it is wrongheaded and hypocritical (in your hypothetical scenario you would expect me to vote for Paul, right?) Where are the principles in voting for Obama? Was Obama running in the Republican primaries like Paul was? Why not just write in Paul instead of trying to wreck the country? It is those people who rob the rest of the Paul supporters of *any* credibility and make you all look like a bunch of spoiled children.

And that is your answer as to why you are mocked. Not by only me, but by many people who have already *completely* given up on you and won’t even bother to talk to you. That silence is not the adoring fans waiting on Paulist wisdom, it’s perdition. Wake up.

The Libertarian Factor

The anti-Romney protest vote; the Paul zealots and other ‘conservatives’ that are voting third party and even considering voting for Obama ‘to bring on the revolution’:

Even if the Republicans nominated and we elected Ron Paul with a Reagan-like electoral college landslide, he could not make a fraction of the sweeping changes his supporters want him to make. For a party based on the belief that all the evils in our society are based on government excess and intrusion into our everyday lives, Libertarians as a rule show a remarkable inability to see the realities of the modern world. Ron Paul’s foreign policy, the area where he differs from Romney the most, is suicidal. We can’t hide under a rock or wait until we have mushroom clouds over our major cities to defend ourselves, and we cannot simply allow the rest of the world to walk across our borders. To think that we can step back and watch the rest of the world go down in flames while hundreds of millions of refugees flee what ever hell hole they are from – the ones that don’t blame us for abandoning them, rightfully or otherwise – and overwhelm our infrastructure and society is delusional at best. What would actually happen is that China would impose its policies and politics on what ever parts of the world it wanted and leave the rest to the jihadis. World War III would come about, anyway, and we’d be on the crappy end of the stick as a result of having allowed the two powers that most want to destroy us to divide the world between them relatively unopposed. Stupid.

And Libertarians, or whoever the Paul supporters really are, are alienating the rest of us that want to save our country from the Progressives. It’s most likely going to be ‘no zoup for you’ after this election for Libertarians no matter who wins. You can’t have everything you want right away. Our system does not work that way, and it was specifically designed not to work that way so that radicals could not hijack our government easily. If you can’t deal with that then you don’t understand what our founding fathers intended.

No matter how many moral victories you win, no matter how many battles you win, if you lose the war, you still lose. And you get written out of the history books anyway.

Dirty Tricks by Gun Grabbing Criminals

Let me see if I have this right…

A family business – gun business – sells firearms to people they *psychically* should have known had lied on their forms, and who were going to walk them to Mexico to be used in the drug war. Their entire livelihood is destroyed with a vengeance, they spend a year in jail and massive amounts of personal property is seized or destroyed. Several of the family members are still in jail even though most of the charges resulted in a ‘not guilty’ verdict, and the charges they were convicted of, pending appeal, are secondary (‘try to keep your wits while the ATF terrorizes you’, making false statements) charges. Okay, throw the book at them for that, even though it appears they did nothing wrong (according to the jury) up until the government fell on them.

Meanwhile, the Justice Department deliberately walked 2000 guns which have resulted in hundreds (300-500, depending on who is doing the math) of murders, some of which were American border agents on American soil. The same Justice Department has withheld documents from Congress, been caught in deliberate false statements to Congress and been held in contempt of Congress for refusing to release the vast majority of documents subpoenaed by Congress.

The Holder Justice Department stages gun walking to attack the Second Amendment (and gets caught at it) and comes down on a legitimate family business like a ton of bricks (with claims that were eventually dismissed by a jury) in order to, again, attack the Second Amendment. On top of that, I smell entrapment.

Somebody should be going to jail, and it isn’t the gun dealers.

Funding Hate

Whose money funds hate? Yours does. That is, if you buy gasoline at gas stations that sell gas derived from Middle East oil. The money you spend at those stations takes a very direct route to the Middle East hate factory. And I’m not talking about the standard hate for the West, Israel and the United States. I’m talking about hate of gays. Throughout the Middles East, anywhere Islamic law prevails (officially or unofficially) gays are executed for the crime of being gay. Or they are murdered in the equivalent of honor killings. Or they are simply run down by a mob and tortured to death.

Across the Middle East, hundreds, perhaps thousands, are killed for being gay every year. States like Iran, whose President Ahmadinejad denies that there even are any gay people in Iran, has executed at least 4,000 since the Islamic Revolution in 1979. We don’t buy oil from Iran, but we pay for it with the money we send to China for all the plastic junk they make with their 1 billion slaves. (You’ll be happy to know, though, that China is very tolerant of its gay population as they help with China’s ongoing depopulation program.) The plastic junk is made with petroleum from the Middle East, too. China is the biggest importer of Iranian oil, followed by India, Japan, South Korea and then Turkey (Turkey? Yup.) The somewhat turbulent state of the Iranian oil embargo by the US and the waivers granted to various countries that totally defeat the purpose of it may mean that that list will be different before this article is even posted, but it is unlikely that China’s position at the top of it will change.

Other nations that execute gays that we DO buy oil from include Saudi  Arabia. The Saudi regime routinely flogs and imprisons homosexuals and has executed a number as well (death penalty applied to men who are married). In 2005 more than 100 men were sentenced in just one incident for “behaving like women” at an apparent “gay wedding”. In 2011 in Bahrain 127 were arrested for the same thing, and another 149 in Kuwait just this year, although in the last case it is not clear how many of them were gay. And in the UAE. Oman. Lebanon. Qatar. Seven countries altogether have the death penalty for being gay, all in the extended Middle East, all exporters of oil to some degree. The countries of Sudan, Nigeria, Mauritania, The United Arab Emirates and Yemen, in addition to the aforementioned Iran and Saudi Arabia, also execute gays, and in some countries like Egypt, where being gay is not illegal (for now), they are prosecuted under other laws. In Iraq, renegade militias kidnap and kill gays. Even if not always lethal, persecution is rampant throughout the Middle East, from the smallest to the largest country. The list of Middle Eastern countries that do not persecute gays, with penalties including arrest, flogging, prison, torture and death is short. Here it is: Israel. That’s it. Some Middle Eastern countries don’t have laws against being gay, but they punish gays with so-called decency laws. There are plenty of gay people in the Middle East, but come out of the closet on purpose or accidentally at your peril. Only Israel recognizes same-sex marriage, but you can’t get one there, at least not yet.

Strangely by American standards, in much of the Middle East pedophilia, including male on male pedophilia, is widely tolerated as long as the boy involved has not reached sexual maturity. A respected Saudi cleric, Dr. Salih bin Fawzan, issued a fatwa declaring there to be no minimum age for a girl to marry “even if they are in the cradle” as long as they are “capable of bearing the weight of the men.” In Pakistan it is permitted to have sex with a boy, and in Afghanistan you can buy a ‘dancing boy’ or ‘Nancy boy’ as a catamite. NAMBLA must be excited about that. Buying gas from Middle Eastern providers also funds perversion, apparently.

Under some circumstances, though, even the most extreme Muslims can find a reason to tolerate homosexual behavior. Abu al-Dema al-Qasab, a little-known cleric, produced a video in which he announced an “innovative and unprecedented way to execute martyrdom operations: place explosive capsules in your anus. However, to undertake this jihadi approach you must agree to be sodomized for a while to widen your anus so it can hold the explosives.” It seems to me that all those men being arrested and punished for being gay ought really to claim that they are preparing for jihad against the infidels…

Anyway, DEFUND HATE and buy gas that didn’t come from the Middle East. It isn’t that hard to find a station selling North American made gas or at least British made.There is no way to completely extricate Middle Eastern oil from our economy right now, but we can do as much as possible toward that end, and stop giving money to regimes that tolerate, promote and perpetuate hate.

A blatant display of HATE

In a blatant display of HATE, Chick-Fil-A restaurants provided free water to anti-Chick-Fil-A protesters. Further research has discovered more Chick-Fil-A deception, specifically, that the water was, in fact, not ‘free’ as Chick-Fil-A paid for it and failed to pass the costs of water, cups, lids and straws on to the several protesters.

‘Hateful,’ ‘day of intolerance’ Chick-fil-A restaurants across nation provide water … for protesters