They’re burning candles for light and shutting down trains in Europe because they lack sufficient power supplies…last I read was some places were experiencing a 500% increase in power bills: this is unofficial rationing as most power companies in Europe are either government owned or functionally government controlled. And it is just amazing. Europe sits on vast coal supplies – British coal, especially, is high quality. They’ve got overflowing buckets of the stuff…now just sitting in the ground (read an article about how a French coal town, its mines long shut down, was building a coal mining museum…which was just pathetic). They also have nuclear capability – with French nuclear plant designs arguably the best and cleanest in the world, but they’re all shutting down their nuke plants. They’re now sitting in the dark because to be “green” they had to outsource their energy supplies to Russia…and then they decided to fight a proxy war with Russia, who has now said, “hey, turns out the gas pipeline doesn’t work. Don’t call us, we’ll call you when we’ve got it up and running again”.
Europe, by the way, is cold in winter. About half of Europe is north of the 49th parallel…which is our northern border (absent Alaska). We think of Juneau of being way the heck up there by the North Pole…for Europeans, that is just Stockholm and St Petersburg. The glorious weather of September is going to lead into the cold, dark and wet times of October to March. Unless Europe rapidly gets a grip on this, people are going to freeze to death this winter all over Europe.
This is the future the Ruling Class wants for us – remember, we’re the carbon they want to reduce.
A couple former Department of Homeland Security employees developed a way to use our cell phones to track our movements…and they then sell the resultant data to law enforcement. You can rely on it that if you’re trying to track a murder suspect, this is great…but it is also surveillance without a warrant, with law enforcement (so far) getting away with it by saying, “hey, we just bought the data”. This is totalitarian – this is a step towards applying China’s social credit system here in the USA. This practice, and anything like it, needs to be legislatively banned. The United States government must not be able to collect data on us without a warrant.
Gonna need some common sense knife control in Canada, I guess.
The Irish Times doesn’t like The Rings of Power, the Lord of the Rings spinoff on Amazon. Their complaint; the proto-hobbits are made out like low-rent Irish peasants. To me, as the descendant of low-rent Irish peasants, that is the least complaint. My gripe is that it is boring. I get that they had to make a lot of strong female characters because Girrlllll Power of modern times. I have no complaints about Middle Earth now becoming multi-ethnic (totes cool with black Hobbits and dwarves). But what I don’t get is how they couldn’t write an exciting story based on Tolkien’s works.
For those of you not fully versed in Tolkien, I’ll nutshell:
First Age: mostly revolved around the war between the Elves and Morgoth, who is a Satan-like fallen angel who wishes to rule the created world. He is finally defeated by other, non-fallen angels after centuries of war and defeat and the instrument of his defeat is a man who makes the perilous journey to seek aid against Morgoth.
Second Age: The men who aided the Elves are given a home removed from Middle Earth; they are granted long life and great power and over time build themselves up a magnificent civilization only slightly lower than that of the Elves. Meanwhile, in Middle Earth, Elves, men and dwarves live a much more perilous existence and over time come under attack from Sauron, the lieutenant of Morgoth who eventually forges the Ring of Power to exert control over all of Middle Earth. Over long years, Sauron is finally defeated but not destroyed.
Third Age: that is the bit with the Hobbits and finally getting rid of the Ring.
So, if you want to make some new stuff, you’re going to go with First or Second Age – Rings of Power goes with Second Age but it appears to take almost nothing from Tolkien save some character and place names. It is, as I said, dull – the action sequences are too dependent upon CGI, the acting is two dimensional and the writing just terrible. I’m going to give it a couple more episodes to see if there is an improvement – the Elrond character seems ok so far and the mysterious man Galadriel meets has some promise. So, we’ll see.
ESG and the green energy effort is a dangerous and authoritarian political agenda that needs to be vanquished. We literally have people now who are imposing their delusional college faculty ideas on the world and people are suffering. Big Education and teachers unions have destroyed the minds of one or two generations, and rational people just can’t sit by anymore and allow these narcissistic ignorant people to have any power or any kind of say in politics. Reagan warned us of people who “know so much that isn’t true” and we have legions of them now. Climate change is the biggest snake oil salesman scam out there. There have been over 50 years of climate “scares” that our government has used to assert more control and extract more money (think global cooling in the 70’s), and yet the worlds elite continue to live in seaside mansions and fly private jets. The fact is, they are using 150 year old weather data to make definitive conclusions about 4.5 billion year old planet. Feel stupid yet? If you believe in climate change, you should feel stupid.
Why is systemic racism only found in Blue cities and states? And many of these cities and states are governed largely by black officials yet the slightest perceived injustice is always blamed on racism. It’s entirely predictable. Racism is just another faculty lounge cudgel used to silence people and force compliance. Don’t play along.
Voter suppression is a joke. Recent elections have seen more turn out than ever before and that should be celebrated. If you are an American citizen with proper photo ID, you can vote. Period. It’s that easy and those rules should NEVER change. Any attempt to change these rules, is an effort to cheat.
Now is the time to be very loud and vocal for your support of MAGA. The leftist authoritarian bullies are doing everything they can to demean and marginalize this movement because they know the success of MAGA means their demise. No longer will their brain damaged world view be allowed to dominate the political agenda and national narrative. Common sense will reign again !!!
A comment on the “systemic racism—America is a racist country” theme:
Starting from the Leftist whine that big old mean old corporations only care about profits, one would assume that a company would avoid doing anything that might negatively affect its sales. Therefore, it must follow that the market research of these many types of companies shows that Americans will not be turned off by black actors representing the companies in TV commercials. It stands to reason that a racist black-hating nation dominated by systemic racism would not prefer companies represented by black people, and the goal of a commercial is to get us to prefer one company over another.
In a country in which the black population is about 12% of the total, something like 40% of TV commercial actors are black. Not only that, but a large number of ads showing families show interracial families, or a white parent with an interracial child.
I’m fine with that. I don’t care. And that’s my point. I don’t think anyone cares. This has been going on at this rate for a few years now, and it’s obvious that nobody cares what color those actors are, or what is the racial makeup of those families. And that has been the goal of this country for decades now—not caring. That is, to find the skin color of people to be pretty much irrelevant.
And the confirmation that hard-hearted calculating profit-seeking Corporate America realizes this is on our TV screens every day and every night. We just don’t care.
To the predictable response that this is just PC pandering, blah blah blah, it might have started off that way, it might still contain an element of that, but the bottom line is—-the bottom line. If the corporate bottom line is not negatively affected by a preponderance of black representation, that means that the country doesn’t pay that much attention to race. We just don’t care.
One of, if not THE main reason the Left emphasizes race is that it is the only way left to divide the nation, and they desperately need to divide us if their agenda is to succeed. Unlike Communist revolutions of the past that relied on class differences, the United States has such a large middle class that that won’t work here. Voila – racial differences. But, like you said — most people don’t care. It must be very frustrating to be a Leftist, knowing that you can throw shit at the wall 24/7 and almost none of it sticks. Sooner or later you just end up with hands covered in shit.
Yeah, but there are always those fieldings and forties eager to go sniff at the stains.
The media bleats on about “systemic racism” yet in real life, it’s non existent. I live in a very “diverse” community, predominantly Hispanic and Black and aside from the usual dust ups which are usually money related and not race related, this community is awesome and there’s a lot of civic pride. At many of our festivals, you’ll see entertainment for all groups, from hip hop to country to oompa loompa Mexicano musica hahaha, but it’s all there and everyone loves it. Diversity of culture is our strength. Diversity of skin color is our weakness.
I am unvaccinated as are millions of other Americans, and don’t think for a minute that we have forgotten how we were treated. It was beyond shameful. Many of us lost jobs, were not allowed to travel, not allowed to see our relatives, not allowed to work, etc., etc. That day of reckoning has yet to come. It was all a complete scam.
I think the real day of reckoning will come when the damage done to our children and youth starts to make itself known more than it is right now.
Having a weakened frivolous military pandering to gender dysphoria and delusion is pretty bad, but it can be corrected in a couple of years of recruitment of men who know they are men and women who know they are women. The problem will be the pool of potential military personnel if, as it looks entirely possible, a large number of young men are permanently damaged by the “vaccines”. As the long-term effects of myocarditis and abnormal blood clotting start to appear the number of strong healthy individuals of two whole generations will be dramatically reduced.
That’s not even addressing the economic impact of impaired millions, much less the emotional and psychological damage done to these people by their own government. And the possible long-term effects of these toxic drugs on reproduction are still not known. Research has shown that the drug, assuming that includes its more toxic elements, is drawn to hormones. That is, to the reproductive organs. Will we have reduced fertility, or will we have deformed babies? It will take a while to find out if this is another time bomb waiting to go off. I was a child during the Thalidomide years, and still remember the photos of babies with no arms, or no legs, or dramatically shortened or deformed limbs, and that was from a drug taken by some pregnant women. We have no idea what to expect in a population in which millions and millions of people ranging from6 months to 40 years in age have been forced or at least strongly encouraged through constant advertising to take these new drugs.
And don’t forget, the drug companies have no accountability, because they are being given legal cover by our government, which is sending them billions of our dollars while protecting them from liability for damages, while pushing those drugs on the public. We may all be gone by the time this all comes out, but when it does it will rival the Stalin purges and the Final Solution and the killing fields of Cambodia for the numbers of dead and maimed.
Have you noticed that Ivermectin is now listed on the NIH website as a Covid treatment … that would be funny if weren’t so messed up. Just imagine how many lives could have been saved if Ivermectin and Hydroxyclhoriquine were made available to everyone from the beginning. Because these are the best remedies. I took Ivermectin when I got Covd, and I was back at it in three days, feeling great.
In late summer of 2020 I compared the death figures from the U.S. to the 53 countries in Sub-Saharan Africa where Hydroxychloroquine is over-the-counter for Malaria. Adjusting for the difference in populations, their death rate was 3% of ours. Not 3% less, but 97% less. I don’t know if those numbers hold today, but that’s what it was 6 or 7 months into the pandemic. The demonization of Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin by the public health community was criminal.
This study just came out this week.
I’ve been saying all along that someday, when someone starts to connect all the dots, one of those areas of investigation is going to be into how many people died needlessly because the medical Establishment discounted any early treatment protocols and went straight to hospitals and vents. and how many died because of the purely political opposition to anything Trump talked about.
I’m not a doctor, but when I heard two stories—one that deaths were caused by massive pulmonary inflammation and other directing doctors to not use steroids, I thought WTH? Steroids are the first and best line of treatment for inflammation. And sure enough, two years later, after doctors who had been forced underground started to get their stories out about never losing a Covid patient who got help in the first couple of days, and who regularly used steroids, then steroid use stopped being so loudly condemned. Ditto for hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.
To let people die because you don’t want the public to think Trump gave them good advice is a level of evil I can only associate with Stalin, Hitler and Pol Pot and people like that.
A large study on the impact of using ivermectin as a prophylaxis for COVID-19 found that regular users of the drug experienced up to a 92% reduction in mortality compared to those who did not.
Brazilian research scientist Dr. Flavio A. Cadegiani said via Twitter that his study in his home country showed a “dose-response effect,” meaning that “the more you used, the more protection you had.”
What do you think are the chances of a big promotion to get people to start taking ivermectin every day, instead of the toxic “vaccines”, in preparation for the expected winter Covid outbreak?
Ivermectin has been around for decades, it works, it’s cheap and it has never killed or maimed anyone. BUT—the patent has expired, so the drug companies and their pushers, the US Government, need to move on to more expensive drugs
Well, it USED to be cheap. It’s now priced in US and Canadian pharmacies at $4-6 per dose. I think we can be sure that the people taking it daily around the world are not paying that much for it.
Put it this way—it’s pretty cheap to make and a government contract to make it in huge quantities would bring the price down so the American citizen could finally believe his government is trying to do something to help him instead of treating him like a mushroom.
In looking it up I found a website for a company in Canada selling it, which has a long and extremely odd article about ivermectin. Odd in that it will say one thing in one paragraph and the opposite in the next, and it makes claims I have never heard before. One of my favorite claims is “It is also a vasodilator, which allows for faster delivery of sperm in an emergency.”
I started to wonder what kind of emergency would call for faster delivery of sperm and then realized I really don’t want to go there. I’m guessing “emergency” is a highly subjective analysis of a situation.
It’s still cheap in Mexico!!! Viva la Mexicanos !!
What does it cost in Mexico and is there still a limit on how much you can bring back to the US?
When I tried to look up the cost in Mexico I ran into this as part of an article on bringing pharmaceutical drugs back from Mexico:
“According to the FDA, the reason it’s mostly illegal to import drugs is because the agency “cannot ensure the safety and effectiveness” of those drugs.”
I laughed and I laughed and I laughed.—assuming this is the same FDA that approved the “vaccines” and continues to do so even after deaths and injuries.
I started to wonder what kind of emergency would call for faster delivery of sperm and then realized I really don’t want to go there.
They’re burning candles for light and shutting down trains in Europe because they lack sufficient power supplies…last I read was some places were experiencing a 500% increase in power bills: this is unofficial rationing as most power companies in Europe are either government owned or functionally government controlled
Nothing like a little adversity to get the masses to realize that maybe their leaders are going down the wrong path. 2023 is going to be an interesting year.
I firmly believe that if Trump were still president our domestic energy sector would be ramped up to even higher levels of production and we would be shipping vast amounts of oil and gas to Europe. One side effect of that, other than the domestic benefits of cheap energy, tens of thousands of good high-paying jobs and rising tax revenues to help offset the debt created by prior administrations:
It really wasn’t that long ago, only about 30 years, that the brutal Communist regime in Russia toppled, to a very great extent due to its economic collapse, Their economy was faltering anyway, and under Reagan and his ability to convince Russia that we had developed an amazing defense system they would never be able to overcome Russia frantically started to shift more and more of its already limited resources into trying to develop systems that would be able to get past those defense systems.
In 2020, not that far down the road from 1990, the economy of Russia was in big trouble again, with oil exports propping it up. So did the 50-pound heads in our new regime use this to further weaken the newly radicalized Left in Russia? Did they learn from history? Did they see and take advantage if an opportunity to add to our national security by weakening a geopolitical enemy?
Not only no but HELL NO. We shut down our own energy sector and started buying oil, at premium prices, from Russia, not only saving her from economic collapse but helping fund her vicious attacks on a neighboring country, resulting in mayhem and the deaths of thousands.
When we look at the damage done in the name of “GREEN” we see it mounting as we see it undermining our own economy, internationally leading to untold misery and death and in reality having absolutely no beneficial effect on the planet.
Hmmm–it almost looks like the “GREEN” movement has a lot in common with Leftist governance: Economic misery, war, death, oppressive government edicts and loss of personal liberty. A coincidence????
Regarding the cell phone tracking, you say: You can rely on it that if you’re trying to track a murder suspect,,,,but not if you’re tracking paid mules dropping off bundles of ballots at unsupervised drop boxes in the middle of the night.
This is the most under reported story in this country. And it’s not just Portland. Democrats have destroyed Minneapolis, Seattle, SF, LA, NY, etc., etc.
In a city known for it’s unique neighborhoods, bike-friendly commutes, and locally-owned businesses, some Portland, Oregon residents have become so terrified of the homeless crisis plaguing the area, which is now spreading into the suburbs, they have resorted to selling their homes – but realtors are struggling to offload them. Photos by DailyMail.com show how some of the most charming, trendy and expensive neighborhoods of the Pacific Northwest city are now overrun with tent cities crowding residential sidewalks and littered with trash. The Democratic city has one of the most deserted downtowns in the United States as soaring crime rates and homelessness are scaring away both locals and tourists. But now the crisis has spread beyond the downtown area and into the quiet suburbs, forcing many to leave. ‘I’ve been here 65 years but I’m done,’ Bruce Philip said. ‘I’m done with Portland.’ ‘What’s there to say, they move in, take over the neighborhood, do their drugs, play their loud music, and make a mess,’ he said, adding that the homeless crisis has ruined not just a few neighborhoods, but the entire city. Local realtor George Patterson told DailyMail.com that the homeless encampments encroaching on residents’ front lawns is a topic that comes up with his clients ‘every day’, and that deals are falling through homes for sale in the area.
Who did these people vote for?
It doesn’t sound that that connection has been made—you know, little mental click that says “Oh, yeah, I did this to myself when I voted for _____” It just looks like there is this wide-eyed bafflement about how this could have happened.
But those who manage to escape will do the same thing to the next city they live in. Denver used to be a wonderful city, and while it’s not (yet) as bad as Portland, Seattle, and other blue cities it’s on the slide. Once Californians in particular started flooding into the state to escape from the hellholes they had created back home, they started to ruin Colorado as well.
A once-vibrant and thriving downtown is now not safe to go to at night, downtown is full of homeless encampments with their attendant filth, drug use and violence, and I’ve written about the time I tried to call 911 to report a man lying on the interstate where it runs right through town and hung up after 20 minutes of nothing but a recording telling me (in two languages) not to hang up. Democrat Mayor Hancock and Democrat Governor Polis seem to be looking at the dystopian cities of Portland, Seattle, Baltimore and Chicago, just to name some, as role models not as warnings.
Dr. Malone has another great article today. One excerpt:
Fear is inwardly directed, and generally causes people to want to seek shelter, but can also drive fight/flight. A case can be made that the migration from “blue” to “red” states is driven by fear, which is triggering a flight response. But those who promote Rage fan the fires of Mordor, of riot, of war, and of violent attacks on others. Whatever your political persuasion, I suspect that you will look back on the infamous political speech delivered by Joe Biden in front of Philadelphia’s Independence Hall as designed to promote Rage in his core constituency, and to channel that rage towards what he tried to label as a political “out group”, a demonized and stereotyped opponent. This was Rage directed for political advantage. And those who promote unfounded and poorly researched conspiracy theories to stoke internet Rage are often doing so for some financial benefit, because Rage also drives clicks, likes, followers, all of which can be converted into profit.
….in today’s social media ecosystem, there are trolls and bots who actively work to disrupt constructive dialog between those interested in sincere discussion.
In general, he is talking about the rabid unhinged responses he has gotten to some of the things he has said, and even to his basic approach to Covid. One of the tactics of the Left is to engage in this callous promotion of unfounded fury and then claim that it is being created and directed by the Right. While that is insane, it is also a mechanism to try to stir up rage on the Right for being so obviously maligned and because of the blatant dishonesty and hypocrisy of the claim.
The moderators try to keep this kind of seething rage off this blog, but we see it every time we look at a comments section of a newspaper or online newsletter. There is a lot of talk about the divisions in this country, but I think if we keep peeling away layers we will probably get to the core, which is the emotional and psychological makeup of some people to react to anyone or anything they don’t agree with with torrents of fury.
And the Left promotes this, validates it by feeding it more rhetoric to keep it stoked, and uses it to further the divisions among us. So we have gone from “I think this” answered by “I don’t agree and this is why” to “I think this” and response of “That means you are morally bankrupt, a horrible human being who wants to destroy the country and you don’t deserve to live and I hate you and everyone who agrees with you because you are all despicable”.
And the government continues to try to fan flames of hatred, even whey they first start the fire.
A senior Justice Department official referred to a highly regarded religious liberty organization as a “hate group” in a recent LinkedIn post.
Eric P. Bruskin, assistant director of the commercial litigation branch in the Justice Department’s Civil Division, used the term to describe Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian legal advocacy group founded in 1993.
Bruskin’s comment is in a post that also gives his government job title as “Associate Director, U.S. Department of Justice”.
Bruskin used the term “hate group” in responding to a LinkedIn post by Jason Weida, a former assistant U.S. attorney in Massachusetts who now is a state health official in Florida. Weida’s message also praised Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican who routinely is attacked by Democrats.
In his post, Weida wrote: “Honored to speak with [senior counsel] Matt Sharp at Alliance Defending Freedom about the work we’re doing in Florida to protect kids from experimental medical interventions and to defend parental rights, all thanks to the leadership of Governor DeSantis.”
Bruskin referred to Alliance Defending Freedom in his reply to Weida, writing: “Jason, this is a hate group. You’re speaking at a conference for a hate group. Are these the beliefs you hold? If so, then it’s time we end our professional association.”
Of course a man whose profile gives his preferred pronouns is going to be big mad at a group behind the revocation of the claim of a Constitutionally protected “right” to kill unborn children and fighting to preserve free speech but he is attacking and trying to incite hate of a group based on its exercising of religious beliefs and Constitutional rights under the title of Associate Director, U.S. Department of Justice, which certainly links this not just to a government agency but to the one now actively labeling Constitutionalists as terrorists.
Remember when the Germans laughed at Trump when he warned them of this?? I wonder how those Germans are doing today??
Europe has been thrown into its biggest energy crisis in decades with natural gas supplies from Russia becoming volatile and unpredictable even before the invasion of Ukraine began. Now, those supplies have come to a complete halt.
It seems obvious to not put your welfare in the hands of an entity that not only does not have your best interests at heart but which might even be hostile to you. Trump understood this but Europe (and half of the United States) doesn’t.
Who did we grovel to, to buy the oil we refused to drill for here? Russia and OPEC. But gee. what could go wrong with that?
Who do we still have to rely on for most of our pharmaceuticals and medical supplies? Why, the country that developed and then sent us Covid. Again, what could go wrong with this?
Two hours ago I posted: It seems obvious to not put your welfare in the hands of an entity that not only does not have your best interests at heart but which might even be hostile to you.
Just now I read that OPEC has announced it will cut production by 100,000 barrels a day.
That alone won’t have much of an impact on the United States, but it is the equivalent of opening a jacket to show a gun, a message of what can be done.
Pete Buttigieg warned America that high gas prices were going to inflict a lot of pain, and the solution was to buy an electric car.
I know—and did you read the article pointing out that the much-ballyhooed subsidy for electric cars, supposedly to make them more affordable by shifting some of the cost onto people who are buying the (gee, am I seeing a pattern here??) is so restrictive that no electric car made today would qualify?
Who was it—Joe?—who explained that the high gas prices were to encourage people to buy electric cars? I get—though don’t like—the feds putting a thumb on the scale every now and then to make their preference a little more appealing, but this is putting the heavy jackboot of the government on the scale and then stomping down hard. You WILL buy an electric car if you want to drive! You WILL take a dangerous experimental drug if you want to work! You WILL let the government decide what your children will be taught and to sexualize them at an early age or be classified as a terrorist! (Sorry—but once an example of tyranny pops up it’s hard to not follow that string.)
And then we get to the really important stuff about electric cars. Well, WE do—the fanatics never seem to get that far. Like the electricity to power them comes from the fossil fuels they are supposed to replace, that few places have the electric infrastructure to carry the additional load needed, that right now we barely generate enough electricity to meet current needs, that the “nudging” toward “smart” thermostats would mean the feds could shut down your power just as you are charging that car, that the batteries have to replaced within the length of time most of us keep our cars and cost a LOT, that recycling those batteries is expensive if it is even possible, that mining and refining the materials needed to make the batteries is harmful to the environment, and that if there is a power shortage YOU CAN’T DRIVE YOUR CAR. (So much for evacuation orders) Then there’s charging times—on a home charger (that has to be purchased and installed for about $2500) it takes something like 8 hours to fully charge a car. 24 if using a plain old outlet. Faster, but still half an hour or more, if you can find a commercial charging station, and those at filling stations charge for it.
I just read an article by a woman who took a road trip with a friend and they rented or borrowed an electric car. It was a nightmare. Even with careful planning regarding where to recharge, it took them so much longer to keep the car on the road it ruined their trip.
They should have driven through Fort Wayne. I took this this morning in the parking lot of a supermarket across from the Toyota dealer where I was having my car serviced.
It may be one of the most surefire findings in all of social psychology, repeatedly replicated over almost five decades of study: American conservatives say they are much happier than American liberals.
They also report greater meaning and purpose in their lives, and higher overall life satisfaction.
“One of the biggest correlates with happiness in our surveys was the belief of a meritocracy, which is the belief that anybody who works hard can make it,” she told PBS. “That was the biggest predictor of happiness. That was also one of the biggest predictors of political ideology. So, the conservatives were much higher on these meritocratic beliefs than liberals were.
To paraphrase, conservatives are less concerned with equality of outcomes and more with equality of opportunity. While American liberals are depressed by inequalities in society, conservatives are OK with them provided that everyone has roughly the same opportunities to succeed. The latter is a more rosy and empowering view than the deterministic former.
Two other studies explored a more surprising contributor: neuroticism, typically defined as “a tendency toward anxiety, depression, self-doubt, and other negative feelings.” Surveyed conservatives consistently score lower in neuroticism than surveyed liberals.
I could have told you all that without reading the study.
We’ve all noticed and commented on this.
The Purpose Driven Life is always the happiest life
Another source of laughter this week, and it’s only Tuesday. Under the headline Mexicans Are ‘Fed up’ With Americans Moving to Their Cities we learn that (There) is an actual news network running a completely serious story about how Mexicans are upset that white Americans (race is singled out in the video) are moving to their cities legally. For context, there are an estimated 5.4 million illegal immigrants of Mexican origin in the United States. In Mexico City, we are talking about a few thousand (at most) Americans moving there due to the lower cost of living.
And What makes this even better is that it’s all wrapped up in modern woke ideology. The report claims that white people moving to Mexico City is “modern colonialism.”
Should be a bumper sticker: Demented mood swings are not genders
Erik Erikson (not a favorite, BTW) said today: I said multiple times on radio that the Dobbs decision on abortion would not be a major factor in driving Democrats to the polls on election day. I was wrong. We are seeing a pronounced shift in progressive areas of Democrats re-engaging in politics who previously were mad at Biden and happy to let the Republicans take control.
Do you think this might be mitigated to some extent by getting message out, loud and clear, that voting for a Democrat won’t change this? CAN’T change this? That even if the Dems held both houses by big majorities the Constitution simply does not authorize the federal government to assume control over abortion?
Ol’ Dummy McConnell put his foot in it when he said such legislation would be on the table next term. It can’t be, and anyone who tries it will be slapped upside the head with the 10th Amendment. That’s what Dobbs is all about.
This is what drives me crazy about the Republican Party. It can be so clueless and clumsy. So I think every single candidate for every single office should, has to, hammer home the fact that there simply cannot be legislation nationalizing a right to abortion. Can’t done. It is now firmly in the “Never gonna happen” file, which is where it belonged fifty years ago. We have done such a miserable job of explaining that Roe was not really about abortion, and neither was Dobbs—one was about a power grab and one repealed it. Abortion was just the stalking horse that was used to shield the real purpose behind it.
Of course these days no one knows what a stalking horse is, and mentioning it is probably cultural appropriation.
There is no reason that a Democratic congress can’t pass a law making abortion legal. It was legal for half a century. There is no where in the Constitution giving states the right to force women to have children. Now that doesn’t mean that the Supreme Court couldn’t overturn such a law. Then again, there is nothing in the Constitution preventing congress from adding four positions to the Supreme Court either.
So you essentially admit that passing such a law, knowing it would be overturned and would just be a ploy to make some fanatics think the Dems are DOING SOMETHING !!! even if it is just another empty gesture, mere virtue signaling (if he word “virtue” can be linked in any way to baby-butchering) to pander to the radicals without actually doing or meaning anything.
(And BTW abortion is still legal. You sound like one of those shrill morons screeching that reversing Roe made abortions illegal. No, dummy, it merely took the power to decide on the topic away from five old Lefty activists and put it back in the hands of the citizens, where it belongs. And you lovers of a massively powerful Central Authority imposing its will on everyone are still having conniptions about that.)
In other words, just another example of Dem theater, wasting time they should be doing something meaningful just to play to the mob–like the impeachment hearings, like the J6 hearing, mere posturing to convince the rabble they are on their side.
And, of course, to set the Court up for another reversal, to set the stage for another effort to pack the Court and thereby totally go against its true purpose. Anyone who complains that the Court is not politically “balanced” is admitting either profound ignorance of the true role of the Court or stating the belief that the Court SHOULD be used to get laws in place that would never pass Congressional muster.
Why would packing the Court be unconstitutional? Not because the Constitution says how many justices should be on the Court—it doesn’t—but because it would a naked pursuit of power (to quote another troll) and a blatant effort to bypass Congressional legislative power and have a handful of unelected people make laws.
You sure do have a passion for killing babies, though.
There is no where in the Constitution giving states the right to force women to have children
Even the poster who has proved his utter stupidity time and time again seems determined to prove he can be even dumber.
The Constitution gives states the right to make their own laws—period. You have evidently never heard of the 10th Amendment, or at least understood it.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Walking you through this, very slowly to help you keep up:
Abortion and childbirth are not mentioned in the duties or powers delegated to the United States by the Constitution. You see, we start with those delegated powers, we look at them, we understand what they are, and then we go to the part where, if something is not specifically delegated to the federal government, OR PROHIBITED BY IT, the powers are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people
Now you have to go back through the Constitution again to see if there is anything in there prohibiting a state from making a law regarding childbirth. And whaddya know? There isn’t a single prohibition to any aspect of that in the Constitution. Therefore, ipso facto, the states DO have the authority to make laws.
There is, however, an actual amendment prohibiting the ownership of human beings. And what you advocate is a form of slavery. Because when one person claims to own another, to have the “right” to treat it as mere property to be disposed of at will, there is no other word for it than slavery.
I understand that the simple minded claim that not allowing a woman to butcher her child is the same thing as forcing her to give birth, but of course you all miss the most crucial part of this—she is pregnant due to a decision she made, with full knowledge and understanding of the possible outcome of her bump-and-tickle. The states do not have the power to force her to seek sexual pleasure, or to GET pregnant, but there is an implied social contract that when people engage in an activity that has a known possible outcome they are expected to accept that outcome.
I understand that the Left is more about hedonism and narcissism than it is about personal responsibility and morality, but that’s just what and who you are. The question is, can society in general allow this to go as far as ending a human life just because it’s inconvenient? Society in general makes a lot of decisions about what it does and does not accept, as a civilized society, from public nudity to drunk driving to murder. What gets your damp panties in a wad is the desire to put narcissistic selfishness ahead of personal responsibility and bumping up against segments of society that are, in some states, saying that is just too brutal and uncivilized for us to tolerate.
But that’s OK—the ability for different states to have different laws is one of the foundational aspects of our Constitution. Evidently they didn’t teach you this at Bob’s School of Refrigeration and Teaching, or wherever you picked up your remarkably deficient understanding of our government. There are havens for the pathologically selfish, and these gestational females can screw and scrape all they want. Just not everywhere.
“So you essentially admit that passing such a law, knowing it would be overturned and would just be a ploy to make some fanatics think the Dems are DOING SOMETHING !!!”
Actually, they would be doing something. Something that a majority of Americans agree with. As far a s packing the court, it’s already been packed and Republicans are using it to overturn established law. We already have a court where a handful of unelected people are making law.
“You sure do have a passion for killing babies, though.”
I don’t. I love babies, I just don’t consider a group of cells the size of a rice kernel a baby.
I know a number of rape victims. Some adults, some children. Some have chosen to terminate the pregnancy while a couple have chosen to bring the pregnancy to term. Their choice. Forcing a Chile to have a child is evil.
You seem to believe you still have to prove your stupidity. Hint: You don’t. We get it.
There is no way anyone could say the Court is already “packed”—that is unless he believes the purpose of the Court is to do an end run around Congress and the concept that laws must be made by elected legislators, elected specifically to do that. To claim that there should be a “balance” on the Court is to admit to a desire to have the Court legislate from the bench.
The purpose of the Court is to objectively analyze what is brought before it, to to rule on its relationship to the written Constitution. NOT to use the position to advance an agenda.
And you seem to be saying that a majority of Americans would like to see Congress waster even more time in even more useless charades just to pander to some special interests.
According to Gallup:
Do you think abortions should be legal under any circumstances, legal only under certain circumstances or illegal in all circumstances?
Combined data based on full sample
Legal under any Legal under most Legal only in a few Illegal in all No opinion
35% 18% 32% 13% 2%
So this “majority” you keep bleating about is only 53% and of that only 35% says it’s OK under any circumstances. And in other polls, when the realities of the ending of those human lives is explained, those approval numbers plummet.
And don’t try to change the subject. Abortion in cases of rape is still legal in every state. Your lack of personal dignity as you scuttle from one bad argument to another is really disgusting.
BTW, I don’t use the term “stupid” lightly. I know there are people with diminished mental capacity, and I don’t consider them “stupid”. Limited intellect due to brain injury, genetics, birth defects and so on is a tragic burden to bear and I would never demean these people.
But when I see a person with the ability to learn who courts stupidity, who nourishes it, who glories in it, I don’t hesitate to call it out for what it is. Casper is of an age when education was not as defective as it is now, and probably had to have at least one advanced degree to teach. He obviously had the ability to learn to read, to write, to spell. So he made the CHOICE to shut off his intellect in certain areas, and the result is a level of utter stupidity I have no qualms in identifying. He doesn’t even try to be accurate, which tells me accuracy is not a factor in his opining—he just wants to showcase his willful ignorance.
Casper, I will respond to you as soon as I take a shit on the street, rape a migrant woman, car jack someone, and then accuse someone of offending me by not using my pronouns. So it’s a busy day but good job and on staying focused on what’s really important in this country. By all means, every woman should have he right to kill their children at any time, right? I mean girl power right??
That’s enough You’re out of here //moderator
Another beautiful life added to AZ !! Shame that you and your friends won’t have a chance to kill it.
About half of Europe is north of the 49th parallel…
I once spent Christmas in London—most dreary Christmas of my life. Full daylight by about 10, starting to get dark a little after 3, and the kind of humid cold that goes through to your bones.
Everyone just needs to ruminate for a moment on these statements:
There is no where in the Constitution giving states the right to force women to have children
“Force women to have children” ?? This is a childish attempt to sensationalize the issue and in the process demean the care providers and marginalize the women. This comment has no basis in reality but Casper heard it in the media and liked it.
As far a s packing the court, it’s already been packed and Republicans are using it to overturn established law.
So filling vacant seats is now “packing the court”, and that was used to “overturn established law”. That’s a whole lot of false progressive narratives in one statement. In reality here’s what happened, Trump nominated three highly qualified justices who were approved by the Senate, and of whom then evaluated the court challenge in front of them and determined that Roe was not Constitutional and needed to be returned to the voters. In other words, the “Republicans” determined that 9 unelected Justices should not make decisions for millions of women. It’s that democracy thing.
Casper, you are a moron.
Casper reveals the mentality of his kind. Because he/they believe the purpose of the Court is to make law, not just interpret it according to the Constitution, he/they believe that the political affiliation of the justices matters. It doesn’t—or wouldn’t, anyway, if the Liberals on the Court had respect for their oaths of office and for the Constitution.
Even CNN admits that it is not uncommon for the Court to overturn a prior decisions:
As surprising as it might seem, it isn’t uncommon for Supreme Court justices to change their mind. The nation’s high court has overturned 236 rulings in its history, some of which marked sea changes in American society and rule of law.
Plessy v. Ferguson, which concluded that the idea of “separate but equal” was constitutionally viable, was overturned, on the grounds that racial segregation in schools, and by association all segregation, was unconstitutional. I guess Casper would have been outraged at this “overturning of established law”.
Another repeal he would squeal about would have been the overturning of Bowers v. Hardwick in Lawrence v. Texas, which repealed the prior Court’s ruling that homosexual sex was not a fundamental right.
There are some legal conditions that the courts have identified to overrule.
One of these is the idea that the conditions of the original ruling were wrongly decided.
That’s how the Court is supposed to work. Its job is to examine law, whether established or recent, to make sure it complies fully with the Constitution. Period. It is not to advance any particular agenda, which is why the demand that we need a “balanced” Court, and threats to pack it with new justices from a particular party and therefore ideology, are all efforts to subvert its true and original purpose.
And by subverting the role of the Court we would be subverting the Constitution.
Considering all the leaks from the DOJ re: the Trump documents, we can rest assure that they have nothing. This is Russia Collusion 2.0 complete with sensationalize media leaks (walls closing in) and the subsequent breathless hysterics from the media. They have nothing but they will keep the game going through the mid terms.
U.S. officials have acknowledged that agents took thousands of non-classified documents from Trump when serving the search warrant on Aug. 8, as well as dozens of books, clothing, gifts, magazines, and passports.
On top of government documents seized from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort, the FBI also seized personal financial documents including tax records and other business accounting information, personal medical documents, privileged lawyer-client documents, and other personal documents that have absolutely nothing to do with government property. That there is supposedly some U.S. government team in charge of shielding potentially privileged records from investigators still means people who have no right to view a private citizens personal information, will have done so anyways.
“Certain personal effects were commingled with classified material in the Seized Evidence, and they remain in the custody of the United States because of their evidentiary value,” prosecutors wrote in an Aug. 30 filing.
I’m sure glad various arms of different government agencies haven’t been politicized. /sarc
I don’t know if the Dems really think the public is as stupid as they seem to believe, or if they are so arrogant and smug in an assumption of greater power and influence than they really have, but this tactic of sending the people who are most threatened by the contents of documents in to confiscate those documents and then control them and review them is such a blatant effort to protect themselves that there really isn’t any way to hide that.
Rushing to go through the documents in a hurry before a master could be appointed to control them is another obvious maneuver. Having the president* of the United States try to act like a king and retroactively waive all executive privilege to help set up his future rival is so blatant and so corrupt it could only be done by a Biden.
They’ve tried to pull so many rabbits out of the hat to excuse this storm trooper raid and come up with nothing, they have had to fall back on “obstruction of justice”. I’m surprised they don’t burst into flames when they say “justice”.
they will keep the game going through the mid terms. and I think the American public will see the game for what it is. Or they should, if the GOP candidates are coherent enough to point out the corruption and efforts to subvert the law (the raid) and the Constitution (the J6 hearing) and the growing tyranny of this regime which can only be constrained by an opposition Congress.
Jeff Childers and Kurt Schlichter must have studied at the same college of humorous snark.
I’m tickled to see someone else with the same piercing wit that we admire so much in Schlichter .
with the rhetorical strength wheezing out and the whole thing going flat, like air gushing out of an overinflated colostomy bag. is classic.
This is interesting
The poll, conducted by the Trafalgar Group for the Convention of States Action, found that 56.8 percent of likely general election voters said that Biden’s speech in which he designated MAGA Republicans extremists “represents a dangerous escalation in rhetoric and is designed to incite conflict amongst Americans.”
Nice to see Democrats shoot themselves in the foot for a change.
Full disclosure: Harriet is a friend, but I’d admire her anyway. Good read, not just about her, or about Wyoming, but about the federal jackboot on the neck of Wyoming.
Harriet Hageman: How I Beat Liz Cheney
Harriet is a friend, but I’d admire her anyway.
One of my favorite lines is “I will never belong to a club that would have me as a member”
Not sure what you found hilarious in the Byron York piece, but then, different strokes…
Harriet said, in this piece, Congress has abdicated its lawmaking role to the federal regulatory agencies, she says. It is time to cut down and pull back those agencies’ power and reach, and have Congress return to its proper role of making laws that are then enforced by the executive branch. I had long ago come to the understanding of the problems of the Bureaucratic State, that de facto fourth branch of government, and I am not at all surprised that she has the same perspective. Many of us do.
I thought this line was funny: “Harriet is a friend, but I’d admire her anyway.”
Anyway, what the hell happened to Barr? What a fat POS insider he turned out to be. Barr allowed the Russia Collusion sham to go on and I’m convinced he knew all along that it was a fake investigation.
Barr got away with so much because his persona projected competence and trustworthiness. Unlike Garland, who is a shifty weasel who always looks like he’s trying to figure out how to steal your watch, Barr has a calm pleasant professional demeanor and he very carefully kissed the right behinds and avoided stepping on any toes till he got to the top.
I think he’s an example of the Peter principle:a concept in management developed by Laurence J. Peter, which observes that people in a hierarchy tend to rise to “a level of respective incompetence”: employees are promoted based on their success in previous jobs until they reach a level at which they are no longer competent, as skills in one job do not necessarily translate to another.
Either skills don’t translate or the final stage just requires more talent than the steps up to it do. So a person can be quite competent at what he does, enough to be promoted, and this goes on till he gets promoted to a level above his competence, where he remains.
“where he remains” is the problem, suggesting that if everyone who gets stalled because he has exceeded his abilities were just to be sent down to the last level where he showed competence business and government would run a lot better. It’s having the top positions filled by people who are a level or two above their abilities that creates the problems we have today.
It explains a lot. And Barr, I think, had never been challenged in areas like loyalty, to people or to ideals. He was able to skim along the surface, never ruffling many feathers, till he got the Big Show where he had to put up or shut up. And there, with the TV cameras and millions watching, he just lacked the ability to pick a lane and stay in it. When fame hit, he got too busy chasing it to worry about consistency or competence. Suddenly the people he might upset were powerful and famous people, and he caved, because he didn’t have a backbone and never had—he’d just never needed one before.
Let’s expound on the fat fuck Barr. Number one, in this day and age, how does an “intelligent” person get that big?? Secondly, not only could Barr have shut down the fake Russia collusion investigation, but he could have also launched investigations into the highly suspect Clinton Global Initiative, Hillary’s off site server and use of bleach bit to destroy evidence, Biden’s extortion of a Ukraine official, etc., etc. HE. DID. NOTHING