The governor is wrong (as usual)

I don’t read Abdul’s blog very often, because he tends to post a teaser and then a video I don’t have the time or patience to watch, instead of actually doing journalism and posting a real article.

However, I clicked on his blog today and lo and behold, I find our very own Dog-Daddy Gov is suing the state Attorney General over whether or not he can prevent state legislators from convening a special session during a declared emergency, and whether or not he can sue lawmakers when they are in session. Holcomb, the RINO prick, naturally says yes to both; Rokita, the sometime RINO prick, says, nope to both.

My own feeling (and I was just thinking this yesterday) is the legislature needs to get on its horse and find a way to meet virtually. If that requires an amendment to the state constitution, all well and good. But the legislature (IMHO) cannot be prevented from convening at any time by the governor, because of separation of powers. And I think legislative immunity probably is good enough to cover whether or not the Gov can sue legislators while in session.

In this particular case, Abdul actually wrote more than his usual single-sentence blurb before urging one to watch the whole thing (which of course is paid for by his sponsor). It might or might not be edifying; I don’t care, because I think Holcomb is full of shit on his best days, and I think the judge should listen to Rokita on this one.

Exactly, citizens.

Fauci the Fraud

Unmasked at last.  Dumbass didn’t have the sense Hillary did to dump his emails when the FOIA request came through…

This is despicable.

Out-of-state dark money group kicks off effort to unseat Lauren Boebert; repeats several debunked claims

Full disclosure, as if I really need to say it:  I don’t live in Colorado.  I’m a Hoosier.  But…

South Carolinans trying to persuade Coloradans to do anything in an election should be 100% illegal.  Spending money to unseat a Congressman in a state where you don’t live should be 100% illegal.

How this is permitted is beyond me.  The American political system is cash-heavy with untraceable “dark money” like this.  I would be extremely angry if someone were pouring such money into my state in an attempt to unseat my congressman or one of my senators — even if I didn’t like the worthless fuckers and was planning to vote against them anyway.  (And I’m sure there’s a lot of dark money that funnels into Indiana elections through Chicago.)

The rule should be, if that congressman or senator doesn’t directly represent you, it should be a felony to make ANY contribution to their election or to their opponent(s).  Out-of-state money should be absolutely verboten.  We should be getting our backs up and shouting, “This is MY state, motherfuckers, keep your dirty money to yourselves.”

I believe, quite frankly, this should be the same rule for the congressional and senatorial PACs that are designed to spread the national party’s wealth to help candidates in underfunded races.

I consistently refuse to give $3 to the Presidential Election Fund on my tax return (and refused back when it was still $1, too) because fuck the entire notion of the government (which has its own motivations) dispensing money to the candidates for presidential electoral purposes.  I simply don’t buy that this reduces the amount of private money in presidential contests.  And of course it doesn’t, because a Jeff Bezos (boo!) or an Elon Musk (yay!) could easily refuse the federal money and spend all of their billions they wanted to on running for president.  (If I recall correctly, Trump almost did, but I think the businessman in him shied away from spending his own money when the fund was already there.)

There needs to be a reckoning.  All this “dark” money needs to be removed from political operations.  Donors should have the courage of their convictions to be identified as supporting a given candidate, or they should not donate (and they should abstain from voting, too).

We cannot maintain our freedoms when inimical movements are spending tons of dark money to remove freedom-loving individuals like Lauren Boebert from office.

Inflation is not solved by green bullshit.

Yet that’s what the WSJ reports central banks seem to be saying.  But we all know how to prevent inflation, right, guys?  Right?  Guys?

Biden on Empty

The Jackson Browne song was, frankly, better.

H/T, Instapundit.

Nobody ever gets it till it’s gone.

Before you go off half-cocked at the conspiracy theory that the Biden Maladministration “ordered” the Colonial Pipeline shut down (and yes, I’ve read this elsewhere), I’d recommend the application of Occam’s Razor to the problem.

The fact is, far too many public infrastructure installations are vulnerable to exactly the sort of hack reported, because they are designed to be accessed from the public Internet by their operators. Why? Because it’s easy to do it that way, that’s why. And it means they can hire fewer operators because they don’t have to be on site.

You can firewall to a fare-thee-well, you can use all sorts of fancy gadgets and hardware dongles and suchlike to secure logins, but in the end, all of these systems are exactly as impenetrable as their weakest link. Which is usually a bug in security code that someone manages to find and exploit.

Don’t be surprised when this happens again, and again, and again — and it may not happen to a pipeline next time. It might happen to the regional power grid. Or your local water company.

And it’s all because they’re all too goddamn cheap to hire people to run things in person, the way things used to be done before the Internet.

NONE of these installations should be hooked up to the public Internet. Period. End of subject.

 

Go and read.

Now is the time at the Castle… when we dance

I was 15 and not-quite-a-half on April 30, 1975.  I remember it like it was yesterday.  I was pretty politically aware even at that age (I’d be a “Reagan ’76” partisan the next year, even though I wasn’t old enough to vote), and I knew quite a lot about the Vietnam War.  Learned even more reading about it when I was in college.

Generals and politicians (though I may be repeating myself) should have been whipped through the streets over this.  I thought so then and I think so now.  There was no reason we couldn’t have won that conflict; we had them on the ropes after Tet, in 1968, but the media then as now lied to the American public.  After the initial surprise, we’d regrouped along with the ARVN and beat the living shit out of the commies, nearly causing them to surrender.  They did sue for peace and a cease-fire.  But did the media report it that way?  Of course not.  And the commies sat at the Paris Peace Talks for years after that, shoveling bullshit, until Nixon fucked up so badly he had to resign, and Ford had little or not stomach to keep fighting.

And that’s how we got Carter and the four wasted years until Reagan soundly thumped his ass back to his peanut farm in Georgia.

Now we have Resident Bidet, good ol’ #rapistpedojoefauxpres, and friends, things are going to get worse before they get better.  Inflation is already here and will do nothing but get worse until we get a handle on all that free faux fiat cash that’s been infused into our banking system.  The Chinese are ugly (well, some of their women aren’t hard to look at, but their minds are ugly) and they’re not going to get any better until their population of young’uns crashes, which some folks say is already happening and that’s why Winnie the Xi is being such a bitch and trying to ruin the world — or the part of it that works, anyway — so completely and so fast.

Meanwhile, the Vietnamese still aren’t free, still nominally Commie (or, more accurately, an autocratic dictatorship, same difference) but at least they are halfway capitalist, these days, and inclined to be friendly with the US the Viet Cong used to hate.  And they hate the Chinese more than we do.

I think there’s a lesson in that.

A little cheese with your whinge, sir?

Ross K. Baker, whoever the fuck he is, is a moron.

Gun control is a lost cause. Come despair with me.

What kills such efforts in Congress, [massive hyperbole excised because it was enough to make me puke – ed.], is the recognition in the minds of politicians that there are voters in their states and districts who are Second Amendment absolutists, whether they be the kind of people who shoot at targets for practice or those who might shoot at people because of malice or derangement.

He’d be even more upset if he understood that his 1st Amendment absolutism (at least as far as his own speech is concerned, and I’m sure he believes implicitly that he has a right to say and write what he pleases) is protected in the end by all those 2nd Amendment absolutists he despises.

So strong is the constituency for firearms ownership in Congress that a law is on the books immunizing gun manufacturers and sellers from lawsuits arising out of the use of their products for mass shootings and mayhem on smaller scale. It is the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act that became effective in 2005.

Are knife manufacturers liable when someone, out of malice, kills someone else with one of their products?  Is someone going to sue the manufacturer of the knife the woman in Columbus was going to kill the other woman with, based on some idiotic theory of “gross misuse”?  Attempted murder and murder using knives goes back an awfully long way.

If I pick up a brick and kill someone with it, is the state going to sue the brick manufacturer?  People have been hitting other people over the head with heavy objects for a long time, too.  Think Cain and Abel.

What about auto manufacturers?  Vehicular homicide is a thing.  Gonna sue the alcoholic beverage distiller or brewer, too, because the driver was DUI?  People have also been getting drunk and killing people probably since the first time someone drank off the liquid from spoiled grain [eww -ed.] and discovered the magic of fermentation.

That gun manufacturers had to be specifically exempted in law from this sort of thing suggests there are major legal issues that had to be enunciated in law before idiot lawyers (but I repeat myself) would stop trying to wrongly apply liability law in the hopes of a big payday and a black eye for the firearms industry.

The response of the gun industry has been, from a business standpoint, quite rational: Sellers give the consumers what they demand. The only limit is that they cannot manufacture or sell fully automatic machine guns.

This is a gross simplification of the issue, and it’s wrong anyway.  Certain classes of fully-automatic firearms and firearm accessories (suppressors, for instance) prohibited MAY be manufactured and sold to the public, but require an onerous permitting process via BATFE *spit* and typically require a fee of $200 for a federal tax stamp to validate the permit.  In other words, you don’t walk into your friendly neighborhood Class 3 firearms dealer, slap your credit card on the counter, and walk out the same day with your machine gun and suppressor.  That’s because the permitting process for such weapons and accessories can take months.  Moreover, attorneys familiar with this sort of thing advise their clients to put all such special weapons into a not-for-profit family corporation rather than own the weapons personally, since it would be next to impossible to transfer them either by gift or by last will and testament to one’s own children.  (Otherwise, new fees and permits would be required for such transfers, one supposes; I’m not able to afford such things, so I have no idea.  Ask Mad Mike.)

In addition, sellers who hold Federal Firearms Licenses (FFL) must require a Form 4473 and run an instant background check on anyone who wants to purchase a firearm from them.  Such instant background checks can fail for any number of reasons, including that you moved recently and the database hasn’t caught up yet.  The last time I bought a handgun, a woman who was there to pick up a firearm via FFL transfer had that very problem; she’d moved two weeks before and a hold was put on her background check.  “Give us a call in about a week,” was all the counterman could tell her.

The problem with the “red flag” laws he moans about is that they don’t work because the alleged behaviors under which they can be invoked rarely show up on a background check.

Besides which, the dude who shot up FedEx in Indy a week or so ago WAS QUESTIONED BY THE POLICE A YEAR AGO.  In other words, he was a “known wolf,” as many of these recent shooters have been.

The bottom line is that any gun control law is going to succeed only in controlling the law-abiding.  Anyone who would go on a mass-shooting tear by definition doesn’t give a flying fuck about your gun control laws.

The once plausible argument that gun ownership was somehow connected to membership in state militias was cast aside by a Supreme Court dominated by “originalists” who developed historical amnesia about the Founding Fathers’ dread of standing armies and preference for “a well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,” and declared that the only operative phrase in the Second Amendment was “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”.

No, you dumb fuck, it was put in there because the Framers KNEW citizens needed to be able to defend themselves from their government.  We talk about “taxation without representation” as being a root cause of the American Revolution, but when it came down to cases, the war started because the British tried to take our guns.  That’s what the Battle of Concord was all about.  See again the above where I ask if Mr. Baker understands that his freedoms were and remain secured by force of arms, and the only thing protecting his freedom to disparage gun ownership and bemoan the inability of the government to control arms is an armed citizenry.

Yeah, “The Second Protects The First” is a tired and hackneyed phrase.  But it’s no less true for it being tired and hackneyed.

Moreover, the idea that gun manufacturers are in reality a bunch of evil mercantilists who wink and nod while piously protesting that their products are intended for sportsmen and personal defense is no different from every Jew in the world being blamed for the soi-disant depredations of a few rich Jewish families or the (false) claims of blood libel that have littered the world since the Middle Ages.

And this is where things stand: Daily, weekly, monthly massacres of sizable numbers of victims enabled by a patchwork of ineffective, indifferently enforced state laws, and the awesomely destructive firepower of many of the weapons used in these assaults.

Unbalanced, vengeful or politically motivated assailants armed, in many cases, with charismatic weapons patterned on those used by the military will continue to inflict death and grievous injury on innocent people. There is, effectively, no way to stop it.

Yes, there is.  AN ARMED CITIZENRY, unhindered by infringing possession and carry laws, or “gun-free zones” which are, in reality, killing zones for cowards who can’t control their urge to kill.  One armed citizen could have put a stop to most if not all of the “massacres” that have happened since Columbine.  If an unhinged person understands that they’re likely to get dead if they try something like that, they’re probably going to be less likely to try — even in their unhinged state.

But you can kill in mass with a knife, too.  Ask the Chinese.

33 Dead, 130 Injured in China Knife-Wielding Spree

Rampaging Chinese man kills 7 in ‘random’ knife attacks

Chinese man attacks 22 children, 1 adult with knife outside primary school (same year as Sandy Hook, FWIW)

Knife-wielding attackers kill 29, injure 130 at China train station

Those were all first-page Duck Duck Go search hits on “chinese man kills with knife”.

In sum:  Mr. Baker is an idiot.  I see now that he is employed by Rutgers University, so somehow that doesn’t surprise me.

Donks try to cancel the FCC

Disgusting.

But one FCC commissioner fights back.

Shine the light on the Donk cockroaches, maybe they’ll go scurrying back into the woodwork where they belong.

For Immediate Release

DEMOCRATS PRESSURE FCC TO DENY SALE OF SPANISH-LANGUAGE RADIO STATION IN FLORIDA BASED ON POLITICAL VIEWPOINTS
“To win in 2022 this must stop!” Florida Democrat Says of Campaign

WASHINGTON, April 19, 2021—Congressional Democrats recently called on the FCC to reject the sale of a Spanish-language radio station in South Florida based purely on politics. According to the Democrat Representatives, the FCC must block this change in ownership to prevent what they view as a progressive broadcast station from beginning to air conservative viewpoints to Miami’s Hispanic community.

As Newsweek reported, “Members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) mobilized … to pressure the Federal Communications Commission to … reject the sale of the well-known Miami radio station Caracol 1260 AM.” Separately, Newsweek wrote that Florida Democrats are sounding the alarm and reported that one former Obama Administration official called the sale of the station “‘a problem’ for the party.” Former Representative Debbie Mucarsel-Powell added that “To win in 2022 this must stop!” in reference to the Newsweek story.

FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr issued the following statement in response:

“This attempt by Democrats in Congress to pressure the FCC into blocking the sale of a Spanish-language radio station based on the political viewpoints that it would broadcast to South Florida’s Hispanic community crosses a line drawn by the First Amendment. The FCC has no business doing the Democrats’ bidding or using our regulatory process to censor political opinions that Democrats do not like. What’s worse, the Democrats appear to be treating the FCC as merely an arm of the DNC—expressly pressuring the agency to take action that they believe will increase their electoral odds in Florida in 2022.

“This is a deeply troubling transgression of free speech and the FCC’s status as an independent agency. I call on my FCC colleagues to join me in publicly rejecting this attempt to inject partisan politics into our licensing process. Doing so would go a long way in assuring the public that the FCC will review this proposed transaction free from political pressure and according to our long-standing rules and precedents.”

###

Office of Commissioner Brendan Carr: (202) 418-2200
www.fcc.gov/about/leadership/brendan-carr

Media Contact:
Benjamin Arden, (202) 418-0288 or benjamin.arden@fcc.gov

Older posts «