Monthly Archives: April 2023

“Help Ukraine Defeat Russia, Then Make Friends”

Posted on by
Reply

That’s the headline on (ex-acting CIA Deputy Director of Operations) Jack Devin’s op-ed in The Wall Street Journal.

Help Ukraine Defeat Russia, Then Make Friends

That might be useful on the international stage from a purely political perspective, but consider the cost.

What we’re seeing in the atrocities the Russian “soldiers” and “officers” are committing in Ukraine—bombing civilian bomb shelters carefully marked as civilian—and child—shelters, bombing or missile-attacking hospitals, raping women and children(!), torturing civilian men—these soldiers may be in the lower tiers of Russian society, but their officers are from the middle and upper tiers, and they’re all representative of Russian culture.

How is it possible to make friends with such a country is this?

20th Century Bigotry Updated

Posted on by
Reply

The Wall Street Journal‘s editors opined on the fraud that’s rampant—and hard to root out—in Federal programs intended to give a special leg up on project awards to “Disadvantaged Business Enterprises.” They closed their piece with this bit of truism on the…foolishness…of singling out government-favored groups of Americans for special treatment.

Trying to do social engineering via civil engineering makes federal projects opaque, inefficient and—far too often—dishonest.

To which I add, it’s also just another way for the Left and their Progressive-Democratic Party to repeat—updated for the 21st century—the segregationist bigotry of the middle of the last century.

Defenseless

Posted on by
Reply

Wisconsin State Congressman Scott Allen is proposing a state law that would give local school boards the ability to decide for themselves whether to allow firearms in their districts rather than being hamstrung (in several senses) by a Statewide ban on firearms in all schools. Allen, on the origin of his bill:

This bill came about at the request of the Germantown School Board who wrote that the “gun free school zone” signs do nothing but notify a criminal that there will be few, if any, people in the building that can defend themselves. Schools provide soft targets for those looking to do harm, and this bill gives school boards the option to change that.

That’s a pretty sensible step toward Wisconsin’s citizens being able to defend themselves and their children until the second responders, the police, arrive on the scene just a very few minutes later. Those very few minutes are when the shooter’s butchery occurs unless the first responders, the citizens already present, can defend.

Wisconsin’s Progressive-Democratic Party Governor, Tony Evers, says otherwise.

This bill shouldn’t make it to my desk—but if it does, I’ll veto it. Plain and simple. I already vetoed Republicans’ bill to allow loaded guns on school grounds because increasing firearms on school grounds won’t make our schools or our kids safer. So, let me be clear: I’ll veto any bill that weakens Wisconsin’s gun-free school zone law. Period.

Evers doesn’t take Germantown’s school board seriously; he wants that Gun-Free Zone sign posted and that exposure proclaimed. Evers is showing that he doesn’t want common sense firearm laws, his claims to the contrary notwithstanding. Evers is insisting, instead, that he wants Wisconsin’s schools to be target zones for shooters.

Evers plainly wants Wisconsin’s school children, teachers, and school staff to be as defenseless in those critical minutes as is his gun control ideology.

I Have Questions

Posted on by
Reply

Recall that Maricopa County, AZ, has developed a hoary history of election ballot and counting irregularities, most recently in the 2022 election in which the county was unable to deliver sufficient ballots in sufficient numbers to accommodate the voters, many of whom were denied their right to vote by those ballot failures. Maricopa County investigators, led by Former Arizona Supreme Court Chief Justice Ruth McGregor, have released their report on causes of those…snafus.

Between the August primaries and the November general contest, the county expanded the length of the ballots from 19 inches to 20 inches in order to include all of the required information. The increased ballot size in combination with the use of 100-pound ballot paper, the report concludes, was too great a strain on the printers.
“Based on our tests, and for the reasons described in this report, we concluded that the combined effect of using 100-pound ballot paper and a 20-inch ballot during the 2022 general election was to require that the Oki B432 printers perform at the extreme edge of their capability, a level that could not be reliably sustained by a substantial number of printers,” the report states.

That raises questions in my poor, dumb, flyover country northern Texan mind.

Who reviewed the performance specifications for the Oki B432 printers?

Who tested those printers on the larger paper?

Who tested those printers on the heavier-weight paper?

Who tested those printers on the combination of larger size and heavier weight?

Finally, an encompassing question: of the County’s election officials and staff, for how long have the staff members—the bureaucrats and volunteers, not the elected officials—been in place?

Rogue Judge

Posted on by
Reply

A couple of teachers had the impudence to demur from compulsory “antiracism training” imposed by their Springfield Public Schools district managers.

In response, US District Judge Douglas Harpool, of the Western District of Missouri, not only ruled against the teachers, he ordered them to pay $313,000 in legal costs for bothering the district, and he did this cavalierly disregarding their arguments and issuing his ruling via summary judgment—which means the court—Harpool—never really took the case up, or took it seriously. He wrote in pertinent part, as summarized by Just the News:

They have not provided evidence they were compelled to “speak favorably” about the district’s message or “somehow affiliate or associate” with that message, as evidenced by Lumley’s allegation that “her own coworkers berated her during training” for disagreeing, Harpool wrote.” about the district’s message or “somehow affiliate or associate” with that message, as evidenced by Lumley’s allegation that “her own coworkers berated her during training” for disagreeing, Harpool wrote.

Never mind that the very parts that Harpool cited demonstrates the compulsory nature of the requirement not to speak unfavorably about the district’s “message” and not to remain unaffiliated or unassociated with the district’s “message.” That pressure to not be unaligned or to not speak unfavorably is exactly the compulsion to speak favorably and to align. The fact that the beratement went unchallenged by the program’s instructors or the district’s managers further emphasizes the compulsory nature of the district’s “message.”

This is a Federal judge who needs to be removed from the bench forthwith. He has shown himself not just incapable of, but openly refusing to, adjudicating a case objectively and on the basis of the facts and statute(s) presented. Instead, Harpool reigns over his court on the basis of his personal agenda.

Harpool’s ruling can be read here.