Monthly Archives: June 2023

A NATO Drill

Posted on by
Reply

NATO has a Monday drill set up to exercise and demonstrate its largest-ever air force deployment in its history to stimulate an attack on an allied nation, and the NATO response.

The drill…will take place Monday over Germany and involve 10,000 participants and 250 aircraft from 25 countries, including 100 aircraft and 2,000 personnel from the US, as first reported [by] German news outlet DW.
The exercises are meant to ensure a coordinated response from NATO allies under Article 5 of the alliance’s charter, which states that an attack on a NATO member nation is considered an attack on all the members.

This is a drill that ought to be emulated in another part of the world, too. The Republic of Korea, Japan, Australia, the Socialist Republic Vietnam (yes, them, too), the Republic of the Philippines, and the United States should conduct similar air drills, in conjunction with naval drills—a broad joint operations exercise tailored to the facts of eastern Asia and western Pacific Ocean—across the South China Sea, through the Taiwan Strait, and over the Republic of China.

The People’s Republic of China’s President Xi Jinping needs to get the same message that the NATO drill is aiming at Russian President Vladimir Putin, only much more loudly and with far greater clarity. The nations of the South and East China Seas, Australia, and the US need to draw a bright red line along the midline of the Taiwan Strait and tie off the Nine-Dash Line grab and make the point that the RoC’s sovereignty is not to be questioned and neither is the territorial integrity of the nations proximately rimming those two Seas.

Republican Ego-Ridden Obstructionists

Posted on by
Reply

The “conservative” House Freedom Caucus now is holding its collective breath until the dozen, or so, members are blue in the face if they can’t have their way every time. As a practical matter, they’re blocking the Republican Party from passing bills strongly favored by Republicans, including those self-styled Freedom Caucus Republicans, bills like a procedural rule for a vote on a bill to stop the Biden administration’s efforts to curtail the use and sale of gas-powered stoves.

We hold the floor, crows Matt Gaetz (R, FL). As of last Wednesday, all votes for the rest of the week had to be canceled because of the temper tantrum of these Precious Few.

Just to illustrate the utter foolishness of the children of the tantrum, Congressman Chip Roy (R, TX) complained that the gas stove bill wasn’t thrown into a Christmas tree version of the debt ceiling and spending cuts bill that was just passed. Then he said—and he actually was serious,

We should be serious about forcing votes to get it done[.]

And then he participated in blocking that vote.

This is the same mistake the then-newly elected Tea Party Caucus made, and those members were personally responsible for the failure to repeal Obamacare during the early months when repeal had the best chance. The repeals weren’t pure enough to suit them, they said their version or the highway, and they got the highway on any repeal. Most of those Congressmen learned the lesson of the failures caused by “their way or the highway” virtue-signaling obstructionism.

It’s time now for the crop of Republican virtue-signalers in that “Freedom” Caucus to (re)learn the same lesson, a crop led by Congressmen Roy, Gaetz, and Andy Biggs (R, AZ). Or at least to acknowledge that their “Freedom” Caucus stands for freedom for them and eh for everyone else, and therewith give fatal credence to what used to be a mere trope that Republicans cannot govern.

Politely

Posted on by
Reply

DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas lost his appeal from a Federal district court’s injunction blocking DHS from implementing a policy that allows for the release of migrants into the US without court dates. The Appellate Court summarized (within my own summary) Mayorkas’ plaint [italics added]:

As to irreparable injury, [DHS argued among other things]…”The most immediate consequence of the [District Court’s] orders,” according to DHS, “will likely be [the] overcrowding [of] CBP facilities during increases in border encounters,” which would threaten the “health, safety, and security” of USBP officers and aliens.

The Appellate Court wrote in part:

To start, DHS’s claims of irreparable injury ring somewhat hollow on this record, considering the department’s track record of overstating similar threats in the underlying proceedings. For instance, on January 12, 2023, DHS represented to the district court that any vacatur of the Parole+ATD policy would result in “disastrous consequences” for the management of the border starting the very next day. DHS made the same representation again on February 16, 2023. But, in truth, CBP had stopped using the Parole+ATD practices as of January 2, 2023, and DHS now admits that it was able to “manage[] its detention capacity [since January] using many other tools at its disposal.” The department’s ability to ascertain future harm is uncertain at best. Given this record, we take DHS’s latest claims of impending disaster if it is not allowed to use either of the challenged policies with some skepticism.

And

Recent data from the border casts further doubt on DHS’s irreparable-injury argument. Contrary to DHS’s catastrophic predictions, the number of daily encounters with aliens did not surge in the days following the expiration of the Title 42 order on May 11, 2023, but instead fell significantly. Compare Doc. 13-1 ¶ 11 in No. 23-cv-09962 (predicting a daily average of 12,000–14,000 encounters), with Doc. 28 at 4 in No. 23-cv-09962 (showing that the number of encounters dropped from 9,649 on May 11, 2023, to 4,193 on May 14). DHS has neither explained how that data is consistent with its representations nor provided any more recent data demonstrating a surge in illegal crossings at the border. This Court will not find irreparable harm based on mere conjecture.

This is the court calling Mayorkas—politely, mind you, and with the circumlocutions for which courts are well-known—a liar. Which he is. Now the case, State of Florida v United States of America, et al., will finish its wending through our courts with the block on blanket release without any requirement to show up in court remaining in place.

The 11th Circuit’s ruling (nearly unanimous; one judge concurred in part and dissented in part) can be read here. It’s a breathtakingly terse dismissal of Mayorkas’ dishonesty.

Banning the Bible in Schools

Posted on by
Reply

The Davis School District, Utah’s second largest for public schools, has decided to ban the Bible from its elementary and junior high schools, retaining it only in district high school libraries.

The district’s officials aren’t even claiming the transparent fig leaf of separation of church and state for the ban. The Bible is out because of its vulgarity or violence. It’s true enough that the Bible has what some might consider vulgarity—all those begets and begots, even incidents like one man in a leadership role sending a rival off to war to be killed so the one could have the other’s wife for himself.

And that violence—all those wars, David so violently killing Goliath, the mass killing of Pharoah’s army in the Red Sea; sacrificing animals; the violence just goes on and on.

What’s the next set of books to be banned from the Utah district’s children’s tender minds?

History books, of course. History is rife with the violence of war and all those killings, destructions of whole nations, slavery, rape. There’s the vulgarity, too, of those rapes: the Sabine women, the rapes of slave women, the literal rape of Nanking, comfort women; the incestuous behavior of royals who married each other’s women for the sake of politics; one king’s serial use and abuse of his wives—these make up just a few examples.

This is the Left, infesting even Utah’s schools.

Aiding and Abetting?

Posted on by
Reply

Acting as an accessory?

Lululemon CEO Calvin McDonald is defending with a straight face his decision to fire two employees who, while thieves were robbing a Lululemon store, verbally objected to the thefts, filmed the thieves in the act, and called the police.

McDonald insists that employees should “let the theft occur.” He went on:

We put the safety of our team, of our guests, front and center. It’s only merchandise. They’re trained to step back, let the theft occur, know that there’s technology and there’s cameras and we’re working with law enforcement.

This is, to use the technical term, a crock. The employees he fired used cameras—the ones in their cell phones—and they worked with law enforcement—they called the cops on the thieves.

Stepping back and letting the theft occur: that puts the safety of Lululemon employees front and center how, exactly? Allowing the crimes to occur unhindered only makes Lululemon stores—and other stores in the immediate area—even more susceptible to crime. And that endangers even more store employees and those customers who are present when criminals accept the McDonalds of the nation’s invitations.

I report. You decide. Or something like that.