monday search term safari LXXXIII.

how to write a military novel

Here’s the easiest way to write one: you write whatever story you have on your mind, and then go through the manuscript and preface every character name with a rank.  Works with the classics, too:  “Call me Sergeant Ishmael.”

unlock neibhour router

Has it ever occurred to you that your neighbor locked his router because he doesn’t want other people leeching his bandwidth?  I mean, how would you feel if your neighbor queried the Intertubes on “unlock neighbour front door”?

winchester silvertips werewolves

Silvertips don’t actually have any silver content.  They’re called that because their aluminum-washed bullets look silvery.  But hey…all that matters is that the werewolf believes they’re silver, so it all depends on your bluffing and persuasion skills. 

inside waistband holster lcp

I’ve seen a ton of IWB holsters for little Elsie Pea, and I’m a bit puzzled at the desire to stuff a 12-ounce pistol the size of a box of Marlboros into your waistband.  That little gun was made for pocket carry.  I mean, if you’re going to carry on the belt anyway, why not carry something a little bigger?  Five ounces and fractions of an inch make a huge difference when you carry in a pocket, but unless you are a wisp of a person and suffer from major back problems, you probably won’t notice much of a difference between the LCP and , say, a Kahr PM9 on your belt.

large moleskine able to bend backwards?

The Moles have a hard oilcloth-over-cardboard cover that’s pretty inflexible.  You can fold it back onto itself so that the covers touch, but you’ll put a lot of strain on the sewn pages and the spine, and it’ll probably unravel after a while.  For a notebook that can be used in that fashion, spiral-bound is your best bet.

caledonian kitchen’s sauce for haggis

Their blackcurrant haggis sauce is awesome.  It’s the perfect complement to the dish.  I used to insist on eating haggis plain, but that sauce is delicious.  Another traditional sauce for haggis is heavy cream with a shot of good single malt Scotch.

marko kloos "terms of enlistment"

That’s the military science fiction novel I finished last year, the first chapter of which you can sample for free here.  It’s still sitting in a pile in an office in New York City, so I don’t have any further details on its possible future life in print.   (The publishing world works slowly.)  I’m about 50% finished with the  sequel, called “Lines of Departure”. 

conservatives who hate libertarians

Conservatives vacillate between sympathy and outright hatred for Libertarians.  They’re usually sympathetic to the “Nobody gets to tell you what to do…” part of Libertarian ethics, but they get all foamy at the mouth at the “…but you don’t get to tell anybody else what to do, either” part.  Then there are those who dismiss Libertarians as childish, amoral, and irresponsible, but those are usually the people who don’t have the first clue of what Libertarianism is all about, and who just have a Pavlovian reaction to our dislike of drug prohibition and failure to embrace Scripture as the sole source of morality.

it’s not rape if it’s in self defence

That makes total sense.  I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had to hold someone down and forcibly have sex with them to keep them from hurting or killing me.  (Do tell that one to the judge, and let me know how it goes.)

are mustelids vicious

You know the crazy-ass kid in your neighborhood that nobody ever fucked with because he carried a straight razor, never bathed, and cut up small animals for shits and giggles?  Mustelids are that guy in the animal world.  Other animals give them a wide berth, because they smell, they’re fucking nuts, and they’ll mutilate you.

why is the ruger called elsie

It’s the Ruger LCP.  Slowly spell out the three letters of the model name.  Elsie Pea!

why blouse military boots

You blouse the pant legs, not the boots, and you do it because it looks neater.  Also, military pants aren’t sized precisely by inseam length, and blousing them prevents having one troop with legs that end above his ankles, and another who steps on the bottoms of his legs when he walks.

longhand manuscript permanence

My wife owns a set of hand-written cookbooks that were written by her paternal grandmother in the 1910s back in Germany.  They were written with pencil and whatever off-the-shelf pen ink they had at the time.  The pages are yellowed, but the writing is still perfectly legible.  If you use good, acid-free paper and one of the new water-and fraudproof inks (I like and use Noodler’s black), and you store your manuscript in a dry place, your great-great-grandkids will be able to read it on their commute to the fleet yards in orbit around Mars.

fn fal good for deer hunting?

It’s a gas-operated semi-automatic rifle with a twenty-round magazine.  The deer in your area must be savage, feral predators who hunt in packs. 

Seriously?  Sure, it’ll make a decent deer gun in a pinch.  The ballistics of the round are pretty much the same whether you fire it out of a FAL or a Winchester bolt cranker.  Hunting with 20-round magazines, however, is illegal in a lot of places, so you’d have to find a three- or five-round FAL magazine.  Also, FALs don’t scope all that well, so you’d be using irons.  All in all, the FAL wouldn’t make a bad deer gun, but I can think of a lot of rifles I’d rather take along to zap Bambi.

how many watts does pellet stove draw

Ours draws about five hundred watts under load.  Our electric bill has actually decreased compared to last year, because the pellet stove uses less power than the space heater we used to have to run in the playroom on really cold days.

did fbi use m13 revolver in 1990

Yeah, sort of.  At that point, the Feebs had started issuing flatguns (first the S&W 1076 in 10mm, then the SIG P226 when the Smiths didn’t work out too well), but agents could grandfather in their carry revolvers until recently.  The Model 13 was standard issue through most of the 1980s, so most of the agents who joined the Bureau in that decade probably got one issued, and there were probably lots of agents who decided to stick with their M13s.

air travel with unvaccinated infant

I’d be really wary about sticking your infant into a metal tube in close proximity to a few hundred people who may be carrying around new and exciting pestilences from all over the world.  Your little tyke may be breathing in something that was picked up by the businessman sitting next to you, the one who just went to Buckfutting Province in rural China to check out the local poultry.


And there’s this Monday’s edition of the MSTS!  See what I can do when you folks feed me some decent search terms?  Hardly a mention of that Jersey Shore douchebagguette, or homeless people jerking off in lieberries!


31 thoughts on “monday search term safari LXXXIII.

  1. BobG says:

    “I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had to hold someone down and forcibly have sex with them to keep them from hurting or killing me. ”

    Just make sure you have a sign in the front yard that says “No trespassing. Trespassers will be violated.”

  2. Al Terego says:

    “…people who don’t have the first clue of what Libertarianism is all about…”

    Edited to add:”…and sadly, most Libertarians don’t have the first clue of what libertarianism is all about.”

  3. BRB says:

    “You blouse the pant legs, not the boots, and you do it because it looks neater. ”

    Damn, and all these years I thought we did it so we could have these really cool red rings around our ankles.


  4. Phillip C says:

    “it’s not rape if it’s in self defence”

    My mind hurts from that one. It’s like someone took two separate sentences and spliced them. It does not compute.

  5. pdb says:

    fn fal good for deer hunting?

    Indian say, one shot game. Two shot, maybe. Three shot, no way. Twenty shot, redneck who needs to go back to gun school.

  6. Isaiah Kellogg says:

    Although, if the pestilences are new and exciting, vaccines wouldn’t help, would they? I’d be worried about some of the old and exciting bugs from nations where they don’t vaccinate.

    Also, I have heard the comment “it’s not rape if it’s in self defense” from liberals who believe it’s wrong to injure or kill someone in self defense. They don’t understand the difference between taking action necessary to stop an act of violence initiated against you, and initiating an act of violence against another.

  7. Kristopher says:

    Don’t be hating on the FAL …

    I use this mount on mine … I can shoot consistent 9, 10, and X ring hits at 400 yards with it.

    I encourage anyone who has a home defense rifle to get a five round mag and take game with it as well.

    If you want to hunt for sport instead of making meat, I would suggest using a bow.

  8. Joanna says:

    “it’s not rape if it’s in self defence”

    I always heard that it’s not rape if you yell “Surprise!” Because then it’s surprise sex! And if they cry, you can just say, “What, you didn’t like the surprise?”

    Someone’s going to hell for coming up with that, but it ain’t me …

  9. Caleb says:

    I think that should be “call me Petty Officer Ishmael”.

  10. Rusty P. Bucket says:

    Hi all~I am a conservative that fits the Munchkin’s description of libertarian haters up to a point. While I don’t hate libtarians, I have some huge problems with their ideology.

    Yes, hard core libertarians that defend drug, alcohol and child abusive cults as part of their ideology disgust me, and their rabid attacks on the church don’t help me much in sympathizing with their cause. There is no moral or intellectual defense for conduct like that, IMO, and expecting people to treat themselves, their communities and their kids well is not asking too much of any one. Their beliefs work when applied to you folks here, but unfortunately they can’t be applied to idiots that are mentally unstable, irresponsible or just plain evil.

    The best analysi s of the thing can be found here

    • MarkHB says:


      Drugs and alcohol we’re fine with. That’s hurting yourself, and it’s your own right. Child abusers get two rounds each to the occiput and I resent your paper-thin attempt to throw your unfavoured, godless bunch in with them.

      I realise I’ve recently rabidly attacked your church (along with every other church on the planet) in a moment of ire, and yeah I’m sure we’re unlikely to share a happy beer together debating the point. But your attempt to lump kiddy fiddlers in with libertarians as a category is one reason I get so very irked with the Moral Right – you say shit that ain’t real, ain’t right, and is basically a libel all over just because you think you can slip it in without anyone noticing.

      This is the problem, really. You’re bringing an emotionally charged falsehood into a fact-based transaction – and for every single solitary “libertarian” kiddy fiddler you bring me, I can bring you a couple dozen Catholic priests with a screening element of paedophiles from every other denomination.

      Am I clear?

      • Rusty P Bucket says:

        There are areas where the church deserves a kick in the ass for what it’s done Mark. I personally break with the church on stuff like famly planning and abortion and it has cost me. I walked out of a sermon in the early 70’s on just that subject and our church ostracized me for years cbecause of it. I remember your attack n my faith Mark, and as the munchkin says, all I heard was mwah mwah mwah mwah! Ha ha! It came through loud and clear.

        I don’t associate libertarians with kiddy diddling – I resent their stance that holds that I have to let them take the first shot at our kids before actually doing something about them. Or drug addicts. Libertarians, if I understand them correctly seem to say that until they actually hurt you – leave them alone. In the real world, there is a huge difference between trusting the Munchkin with a gun or trusting him with a crippling addiction to dangerous drugs or perverted sex cravings.

        You folks seem to think it is a sin for me to tell you what to do but it is OK for you to tell me that I have to tolerate cults that practice child abuse as long as it doesn’t hurt me personally, that I have to tolerate drug abuse as long as it doesn’t hurt me personally, and a raft of other crap that almost certainly WILL hurt me eventually. No offence but it doesn’t wash.

        The only rights you have, in my opinion, are those that you can defend morally and physically. If you want to hang those kiddy diddling priests, I have no problem with it. I will get you a rope and help you build the gallows. There is alot of fuzzy thinking going on in the libertarian camp r ight now and those that refuse to address it can’t be taken seriously.

        • ibex says:

          “[…]there is a huge difference between trusting the Munchkin with a gun or trusting him with a crippling addiction to dangerous drugs[…]”

          Could you explain this difference, please? As far as I can tell, the only difference is your enthusiasm for firearms and aversion to drugs. The hippie from down the road may be a narcotics enthusiast with a dislike of guns and will certainly see it the other way ’round.

          “You folks seem to think […] it is OK for you to tell me that I have to tolerate cults that practice child abuse as long as it doesn’t hurt me personally.”

          Is this a very badly executed strawman argument or do you really not understand the difference between “endorsing child abuse” and “rejecting the notions of prior restraint and preemptive punishment”?

        • ibex says:

          Shoot. Messed up the tags. I’m sure y’all can read it anyway.

  11. Sigivald says:

    Sadly, Al’s right (at least to a point).

    Lots of people seem to decide to call themselves “libertarians” when what thy really are is plain ol’ jerks. And probably Anarchists who won’t admit to it.

    Rusty: Problem with saying “nobody should treat their kids like *that*, it should be banned” is that next thing you know, the Commissar has decided that “*that*” isn’t “Scientology”, but “Christianity”.

    If the State can ban ideologies you don’t like by calling them “cults”, then it can ban ones you do like, the same way.

    (What it can, does, and should ban people from “treating their kids like” is beating or starving them. Concrete behaviours bad in and of themselves, unrelated to the presence or absence of any particular belief system.)

    Likewise, the irresponsible and stupid will do drugs to excess and harm themselves, even if they’re illegal – and as a bonus they’ll also create an organized crime syndicate.

    Making drugs and alcohol illegal has never yet stopped junkies and alcoholics, in the entire history of mankind.

    Recognizing that since it can’t stop them and does far more harm than good, it should be given up on, is not an abandonment of ethics; it’s the embodiment of it in a governmental context.

    (Which is, contrariwise, why banning murder remains a good idea even though it also can’t be stopped – because while it will occur in any case, the ban causes almost no negative side-effects at all, and innumerable positive ones.

    The majority of decent folk will not murder even if they could get away with it. Those same folk will drink black-market liquor and curse the State for a fool during prohibition.

    Recognizing those facts and that they’re different is important.)

    • Marko Kloos says:

      Very astute and well reasoned, Sigivald. Too bad the party you addressed will read it as the written equivalent of Charlie Brown’s teacher’s “mwah mwah, mwah mwah.”

      • Rusty P. Bucket says:

        Ha ha!

        No offence to you or yours Munchkin. I have never tried to shove my religion up anyone’s arse, and I try to be a good man and respectful of others. I like your ideology for the most part and try to stick by it as much as my religion allows, because in my world, at least, my religion does a much better job of defining decency than your ideology does.

        • Marko Kloos says:

          That’s your mistake, Rusty: you think that your religion provides a solid and consistent framework for ethics. It doesn’t.

          For every vile and evil act people can visit on each other, I can pull out Bible passages supporting it, condemning it, and God specifically commanding and forbidding it in different parts of the Bible. All you’re doing is selectively justifying your emotional preferences with Scripture.

          My ethical system is much less ambiguous, and far more consistent: Mind your own business, and keep your hands to yourself.

        • TimP says:

          I suspect that that is only a very tiny part of your ethical system. For instance I’m sure you have some sort of opinion as to wether it’s acceptable to cheat on your wife.

          The part you have listed only seems to be how you think the government should act. I generally agree with this, though I don’t fully match up with the typical Libertarian views, mostly in areas of sexual purity, where I lean a bit more towards conservative views.

          I also disagree that Christianity doesn’t provide a “solid and consistent framework” for ethics. Of course I agree that the Bible on it’s own does not because it is not written for modern, English-speaking westerners, so most people have no instinctive grasp of the social context in which something was said. I’m sure as someone who has lived in multiple countries with different languages can attest the to difficulties of transferring ideas from one culture to another, and even then Germany is a lot closer to America than ancient Israel is to any modern culture.

          One other thing is that I don’t think people should have to mind their own business. They should not force other people to “act in an acceptable way”, but they should be willing (and free) to disaprove (publically if desired) of others when they are acting in an “unacceptable” way.

          Also I don’t think that thinking Crack should be legal is on the same level as thinking peadophilia should be legal.

        • Rusty P Bucket says:

          Yes you can Muchkin, but my faith is like libertarianism. It has it’s limits. That is why our numbers are plummetting, we face so many new problems these days that it just can’t address. I don’t esactly believe the world was made 6000 years ago, I don’t believe in the flood or the other mythology and fables word for word – but I whole heartedly accept the morals and ethics that those fables try to teach. Many accuse me of not being a good christian because of that and maybe they’re right. i would rather be a good man than a good christian and sometimes those two things are at cross prposes in my world.

          Fact is, aside from that, my system is much like yours. The only difference is I am comfortable making judgement calls on things like drugs and child abuse where as you are not – and acting against them if I see a threat. My morals and ethics have given me the means to make accurate judgements in such cases, where as yours do not in my opinion.

        • Adam says:

          “The only difference is I am comfortable making judgement calls on things like drugs and child abuse where as you are not – and acting against them if I see a threat.”

          See, there he goes again. It doesn’t matter how many time he brings up the child abuse strawman and how many times he’s had his head beaten in with it.

          The reason I write you off as an idiot, Rusty, is because you keep espousing the same crap over, and over, and over….

        • Rick R. says:

          Tim, I suspect Marko doesn’t cheat on his wife for the same reasons I don’t (cheat on mine — I’ve never met his, and thus cannot cheat on her {grin})

          1. I promised my wife I would be true to her. In effect, a contract (between her, me, and MY honor). Cheating on her would hurt her, AND violate that contract.

          2. My wife is perfectly capable of nailing the offending organs to the front door as a warning to others. Self preservation.

          Neither of these reasons is formed by my religious belief system. And I DO have strong religious beliefs and faith. But the concept of “sin” doesn’t even become statistically significant as a deterrent in this case; my other reasons for not screwing around can handle it all by themselves.

  12. Rusty P. Bucket says:

    Well, the moslems seem to have a lot less problems with junkies than we do. Over there if you sell that chit they kill you. Saying that drug and alcohol abuse can’t be deterred just isn’t true.

    I’m sorry, my rights are not infringed one iota by your not being able to shoot up on crack cocaine, or by you not being able to use kids as prostitutes or concubines as some mormon groups have done.

    Libertarians need to define ‘decency’ or be irrelevant in today’s society.

    • Marko Kloos says:

      Your rights are very much infringed by the War on Drugs, whether you realize it or not. For starters, ninety percent of all those onerous gun laws wouldn’t be on the books if it wasn’t for the fallout of the pointless War on Drugs.

      But you just go ahead and believe what you want to believe.

      “Decency” is a really elastic term that can be stretched any which way, because it has no definition other than what the speaker considers decency. You wouldn’t be able to give me a precise definition of the term, and what objectively makes up the line between decent and indecent, because you go by what you personally feel to be decent. It’s a completely subjective term.

      • MarkHB says:

        I ask again. What is this with you and kids as prostitutes/abuse victims and Libertarians? You keep throwing it in, and without citations all I can think is that you’ve dreamt it up between Jeebus loving you and the Rapture because if we’re fine with a pint, and if our chum woofs a line of Bolivian Marching Powder and isn’t a twat, we’re fine with that too…

        …so…. is it just that if we’re OK with self-harm, we’re OK with shagging babies in your head?

        If so, I wish your brain was different.

    • Tam says:

      Over there if you sell that chit they kill you.

      What was the Taliban’s cash crop, again?

  13. TimP says:

    “To Colonel Sherlock Holmes she is always the woman. I have seldom heard him mention her under any other name. In his eyes she eclipses and predominates the whole of her sex. It was not that he felt any emotion akin to love for Lieutenant Irene Alder.”


    “The only person for whom the house was in any way special was Corporal Arthur Dent, and that was only because it happened to be the one he lived in.”

    Now you’ve got me going through all my books that aren’t already military fiction, to see what comes out. 🙂

  14. Kristopher says:

    You’re too nice to this troll, Marko.

    I would have started deliberately editing his posts into lampoons a year or two ago.

    It only takes a few such edits to make a troll go away permanently.

    ( be sure to add an “edited by blog owner for clarity” tag at the end when done with it. )

  15. Vaarok says:

    A .308 150gr downrange is a .308 150gr downrange. I like my FAL, don’t be hatin’.

  16. thebastidge says:

    Trousers are bloused primarily to keep things out of them, not for neatness. Lots of people blouse them in a way that doesn’t meet the function test, but that’s because they are lazy.

Comments are closed.