A Hard Question

It has a simple answer; unfortunately, it also has a gaslighting answer.

A San Francisco shoplifter was fatally shot in the end game of a fight with a store security guard who was trying to recover the merchandise being shoplifted. The headline and the first clause of the subheadline ask the question and gaslightingly answer it:

A Shoplifter Gets Shot Stealing Candy at Walgreens. Who’s to Blame?
More than a year after the killing, the official answer is no one….

The article went into many pixels worth of description of the event, but the question posed in the headline never was seriously answered. The perfectly straightforward, utterly simple answer to the headline question is: the shoplifter is to blame. The shoplifter even had two opportunities through which to avoid the outcome. His first, and most important, opportunity was to not have shoplifted in the first place.

His second opportunity was to surrender the stolen goods when confronted by the security guard instead of fighting with him.

But even in this city’s pretense of tightening shoplifting laws, the emphasis remains on holding the criminal blameless.

Aww, You Poor Babies

Baby Boomers are at grandparenting age, but their children aren’t having so many children of their own, so the Boomers aren’t getting to be grandparents. They’re not happy about it, either.

It’s true enough that our nation’s birthrate is well below the rate necessary to maintain, much less grow, our nation’s population, and that’s having detrimental effects on our economy and our ability to support Baby Boomers and subsequent generations of retirees in their dotage. It also makes us more dependent on immigration to fill our labor gaps.

But that doesn’t make women their parents’ baby making machines for the sake of those parents’ wishes to have grandchildren.

Professor Rachel Margolis of the University of Western Ontario:

Almost everyone grew up with at least one grandparent, and when you grow up with a grandparent around, you think about that as part of family life[.]

There’s a hint there. Children no longer want their parents living with them, for a variety of reasons both good and bad. Parents no longer want to live with their children, also for a variety of reasons both good and bad. One outcome of that is 74-year-old Ann Brenoff, whose children have no plans to have children:

I want to tell family stories to my grandkids. I want them to have memories of me. I don’t think it will happen. It’s selfish, I know.

That family life was an ideal environment for passing on family lore and for creating memories that include grandparents, especially so for the grandchildren. That family life also was instrumental in providing the mutual support of adult children for (grand)parents and vice versa along with the large advantages for grandchildren from growing up in three-generation households. Now, it’s supplanted by increasing dependency on charity, or government, or nursing homes and “retirement communities” in lieu of “family” support while actual family falls by the wayside.

For future reference (particularly today’s generation of child-bearing age, and the generation just entering that age): you want the part of family life that is grandchildren, then act like you still want to be part of a family and not like you want grandchildren as your personal entertainment. Do that from the moment you have your own children and revive a sense of family responsibility, instead of inculcating, however sub rosa, an attitude of gotta get off on my own as soon as my children are out of the house, and gotta get out on my own as soon as I’ve left my parents’ house.

You bet it’s selfish to want grandkids just for your personal entertainment.

Will No One Rid Us of this Troublesome Candidate?—Redux

The Progressive-Democratic Party’s politicians, even after two attempts to murder former President and Republican Party Presidential candidate Donald Trump, are continuing their deliberately inflammatory rhetoric against the opponent they hate so much.

This time, it’s Progressive-Democrat President Joe Biden’s Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo with her carefully threatening rhetoric during an interview on MSNBC:

Like, how did we get here? Let’s extinguish him [Trump], for good.

This is Party’s action toward anyone who dares disagree with them or demur from their…policies.

This is the Party that’s so desperate to rule over us this fall.

Destruction

Progressive-Democrat Vice President and Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate Kamala Harris has committed herself to eliminating the Senate’s filibuster.

I think we should eliminate the filibuster for Roe, and get us to the point where 51 votes would be what we need to actually put back in law the protections for reproductive freedom[.]

Never mind that the filibuster is the only tool the minority party—whichever it is—has with which to be heard in the Senate and to get at least part of its priorities included in legislation that winds up enacted into law.

Aside from her pushing a national mandate for abortions, instead of letting the citizens of each of our 50 States decide that question for themselves (with many of which States deciding in favor of abortion), the elimination won’t stop there. The Progressive-Democratic Party Senators will eliminate the filibuster altogether.

That elimination will lead to a number of nationally destructive outcomes. One will be the prompt passage of new laws accelerating Federal spending and increasing taxes on us average Americans and our businesses.

Another will be the loosening of our election laws, allowing anyone to vote, including illegal aliens. Recall all those Party politicians who oppose requiring voting eligibility to be limited to those who prove their American citizenship. Recall, too, those Progressive-Democratic Party-run local jurisdictions that already allow non-citizens to vote in those local elections.

Damaging as that would be, those moves at least could be reversed at the next election—assuming the other party can overcome the loosened election laws. Far worse will be the destruction of the Supreme Court as Party moves to expand it and to get confirmed activist, progressive Justices. That destruction will last for generations; it won’t be correctable by short-term election cycles.

This is Backwards

And it’s disappointingly so, although not that surprising in the increasingly Leftist bias of The Wall Street Journal‘s news page writers.

Israel launched its war against Hamas in Gaza after the Hamas-led October 7 attacks in southern Israel, in which approximately 1,200 people were killed and around 250 taken hostage.

No. Hamas launched the war with that attack and butchery; Israel has been responding and defending itself against that terrorist instigated and continuing war, a war that Hamas leadership has repeatedly said is intended to destroy Israel utterly.

The WSJ management team needs to clarify this with the writers in the news outlet’s news room. The error is blatant enough to be closely approaching being anti-Israel and, more broadly, antisemitic.