Category Archives: morality

“He needs to be shot”

Posted on by
Reply

That’s the threat [skip ahead to ~3:30] the Progressive-Democratic Party’s US Virgin Islands Delegate to the House of Representatives, Stacey Plaskett, said on MSNBC Sunday about Party’s political opponent, former President Donald Trump (R).

She changed her phrasing right away and then followed her threat with her pro forma claim that Trump “should have his day in court,” but that’s just her claim that Trump should have his fast trial and prompt firing squad. What concrete, publicly accessible action has Plaskett taken since to indicate that she didn’t really mean her statement that Trump should be murdered?

This is the stuff of lower tier third world countries where political opponents routinely are murdered, when they’re not simply thrown in jail. And then murdered.

This is what the Progressive-Democratic Party wants to inflict on their political opponents here in our nation. Wait—she’s not typical of Party? It’s been three days since Plaskett made her threat. How many Party politicians have spoken publicly in repudiation or rejection of her threat? Their silence is their roaring approval.

Joe Biden and Women

Posted on by
Reply

And no, I’m not writing about the Progressive-Democrat President’s penchant for sniffing women’s and little girl’s hair. This is much more general than that.

Biden tweeted out his congratulations for a Las Vegas National Hockey League Stanley Cup victory, tweeting that the team’s win last week was

the first major professional franchise in such a proud American city.

Never mind that the Las Vegas Aces of the WNBA won the league championship last year.

It’s clear that Biden disdains women and women’s sports so thoroughly that he doesn’t even recognize women’s teams exist. Which may be why he’s so enthusiastic about allowing men to play in women’s sports.

Libraries, Book Banning, and Funding

Posted on by
Reply

Illinois’ Progressive-Democrat politicians, including the State’s Governor, JB Pritzker, have produced a law that will withhold State funds—Illinois citizens’ tax monies already remitted—from libraries that “ban books.”

The only books being banned, though, are books on the subjects of LGBTQ+, the gay culture, and transgenderism, including books nominally on these subjects that contain graphic sexual images, that are inappropriate for young children—and they’re not even being banned, just withheld from children too young to read them or to be exposed to pornographic imagery.

Illinois Secretary of State Alexi Giannoulias actually insists with a straight face that the threat to withhold State funds from libraries that move to withhold access by children to these sexualizing books is not really a matter of State centralization of librarians’ decisions.

Local librarians [he says] “have the educational and professional experience to determine what’s in circulation. Let them decide.”

Sure. They can decide as long as their decisions are approved by the State.

This is an example of the price organizations pay when they accept government funding. The strings attached are more akin to chains.

These libraries need to adjust their budgets and funding sources to eliminate the need for Illinois government-allocated dollars and go right ahead withholding from children, on age-based criteria, sexualizing, transgenderizing books.

NYT’s Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Performance

Posted on by
Reply

Now The New York Times is pushing the wokeness of gender “alteration” and associated child abuse directly to children. New York Times for Kids is a section aimed directly at children ages 8-13—prebuscent children up through children whose hormones are starting into an uproar as their bodies begin to change from a child’s to an adult’s body. The current rendition of this section includes things like

…suggest[ing] finding a “supportive space with friends or a counselor” to “let you safely explore what feels best, like changes to your name, pronouns, or style of dress.” This process of making outward gender changes is often referred to as social transitioning.

And

“Trans kids in trouble.” … “Healthcare for transgender kids has been in the news a lot,” lamenting that “at least 15 states have banned treatment for gender dysphoria.” It went on to tell readers, “The laws keep trans kids from getting the treatments they need. But experts are clear: Access to care saves trans kids’ lives.”

And

One article [in the section], headlined “When it doesn’t feel right,” talked about what to do about gender dysphoria. A doctor explained, “I’ve had a good number of young people describe it as having really intense feelings of anger, sadness, or insecurity about themselves or their bodies.”

Which, in particular, is nothing more than that hormonal uproar.

This section is disgusting even for tabloid journalism. The paper of record? Say, rather, the paper my cat wouldn’t tolerate under her litter box.

This will be the last time I reference this…outlet…by name. My blog may be meager, but I decline to give this birdcage reject any further air time or space.

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.