I don’t care what side of the political fence you are on – using state resources to silence the press will have a chilling impact on free speech rights:
A Missouri newspaper told the state about a security risk. Now it faces prosecution
Category: Politics
You’ve got to love the hypocrisy
Liberals want prisoners to be counted as residents where they last lived, rather than residents of where the prison that incarcerates them resides. The reason: doing so increases the population – and thus the representation – of Democrat-leaning areas. Apparently, prisons are in more Republican-leaning areas, while criminals reside in more Democrat-leaning areas (?!?).
Most Prisoners Can’t Vote, But They’re Still Counted In Voting Districts
But here’s the real hypocrisy: Illegal aliens, who typically migrate to left-leaning areas where they have both financial and political support, are counted as residents where they illegally reside. But using the same left-leaning logic as for prisoners, shouldn’t they be counted as residents of their home country and not as residents of the Unites States?
Talk about gerrymandering…
The danger of government “crisis control”
When the government uses a health crisis to exert control – to dictate to us our dating habits – perhaps they’ve gone a bit too far:
Oregon health officials say you can kiss on dates — if both vaccinated
What’s next? Will they start dictating who we can date? What about sporting activities in which we are “allowed” to indulge, based on their inherent danger? Why not ban rock climbing, hang gliding, target shooting, hunting or other dangerous activities under the guise of the “public good”? They’ve already effectively banned smoking; what if they decide to return to the era of prohibition in the name of “public health”? Where is the individual right to live one’s life as they see fit, without interference from the government or others? This level of control is very Orwellian, very dangerous, and should be resisted fervently.
There is, however, some humor in the situation. It is expressed in the secondary title of the article:
During the beginning of the pandemic, state health officials declared ‘you’ as your safest sex partner
Probably have to use hand sanitizer and wear a mask, though….
Creepy & Orwellian
And I’ll bet we’ll never know when we are being evaluated by such a system:
iPhones may soon detect depression, autism, and cognitive decline: report
What if Apple is already using iPhones to evaluate us for other traits? Are we being evaluated for our willingness to be lemmings and follow government mandates or societal pressure? Are we being used as guinea pigs to test political propaganda? Could it be that we are being evaluated and manipulated in support of a particular political party or dogma in an effort to sway an election? Are we being tested by Apple, or perhaps by Apple on behalf of the government or some other 3rd party?
Anyone want to buy an iPhone?
Proof that educated doesn’t mean smart
Liberals have been quick to claim an “education gap” between conservative and liberal voters, which they use to assert the moral high ground as the informed, intellectual class. Unfortunately, being educated today doesn’t necessarily make one smart. The classical “liberal” college degree, once meant to impart a well-rounded general education onto its graduates, now only serves to provide proof of indoctrination into the liberal agenda and a blind adherence to its dogma. Here’s a perfect example where the “educated” left are ignorant to reality, instead choosing to churn out tired old leftist cliches learned during their indoctrination:
Residents in AOC’s district say how much they think the rich pay in taxes
Here are the more interesting quotes from the news article linked above:
“We’re paying too much taxes,” a woman named [redacted] told Fox News. “The lower and middle classes, we’re working our butts off and we’re paying so much taxes, and then you’ve got the upper class and they’re not paying anything.”
But this is far from the truth. In 2018, the top 1.6% of earners paid 38.4% of all income taxes. In fact, the top 8.3% of earners paid fully 61.6% of all income taxes – more than the remaining 91.7% combined!
The wealthiest people are “definitely paying the bare minimum if any,” he continued. “I would assume it’s about 5%, if that.”
Interesting, but false. The top 0.5% of earners in America paid a marginal tax rate of 37%.
“They should be paying the same amount of taxes as the middle and lower class are,” [redacted] said. “That way it gives us equal share and no one is feeling singled out.”
Finally, something we can all agree on – a flat tax. The real benefit to this plan, however, is detrimental to Congress: it means that we all have to pay for the indulgences of our political leaders, making it more difficult for Congress to buy the votes of their favored constituents with other people’s money. This, of course, would be a boon for freedom and democracy – but a bust for politics as usual.
In any event, thank Dog for the “educated” class. How else would we learn just how stupid people can be?
More “rules for thee, but not for me”?
Are you kidding me?
So, using illegal drugs while on parole is only a “technical” violation? Aren’t drugs the reason many of these people were in prison to begin with?
The scariest observation from this article?
“New York incarcerates more people for parole violations than anywhere in the country,” she said. “That is a point of shame for us and it needs to be fixed.”
It’s not a point of shame for me; I’m not the one who violated the conditions of my parole. And just because New York incarcerates more people than anywhere else in the country (a claim that I have not verified), it doesn’t mean that these people should not be locked away. I might just mean that we are simply better at catching criminals.
In any event, shame on you Gov. Hochul for asking us to accept the shame for criminals.
Objectivity is the new racism?
It’s hard to believe, but apparently objectivity is now racist:
Math Suffers From White Supremacy, According to a Bill Gates-Funded Course
I am particularly interested in the following snippet from the article, citing the web site equitablemath.org (page 67):
“Upholding the idea that there are always right and wrong answers perpetuate objectivity…”
Math, getting the right answer and objectivity are now on the educational chopping block? Well, if you need a compliant populace – one that won’t be able to question their leaders using logic and reason – then I guess eliminating math and objectivity are a pretty good start. But what good would it do to have a voter base too dumb to see the facts, one that can only be motivated by partisan rhetoric? Oh, wait….
What a crock! (updated)
OK, so maybe you’ve heard of the latest jobs report (aka “Employment Situation Summary“). This shows a slower than expected job growth, which some have blamed on the cornavirus “delta” variant. However, that’s just a load of dingo’s kidneys.
Many of us have seen the help wanted signs posted everywhere in our communities as employers clamor for employees; how could it possibly be that job growth is “slow”? As it turns out, what the government defines as “job growth” might be the real culprit – along with the administration’s insistence on paying people not to work.
You see, the so-called “job growth” noted in the Employment Situation Summary describes jobs actually filled, not new jobs made available. Even if the economy has millions of job openings available the jobs report will show little growth if no one comes to claim them. And millions there are: while the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey (JOLTS) hasn’t caught up to August, in June there were more than 10 million job openings in the U.S. That’s substantially more than the 8.4 million who are unemployed, and ~2.5 million more job openings than at any time in the 10 years prior to the pandemic. If just these 2.5 million “extra” jobs were filled we’d be back at pre-pandemic levels of unemployment. But hey – why go back to work when you can make money at home watching reality TV?
A clear case in point comes from a New York Times article on the job report:
[name redacted], [age redacted], took a job as a United States Postal Service carrier in late August after more than a year out of work. He will make more than $10,000 a year less than he did in his previous job as an assistant property manager in Chicago. But with unemployment benefits expiring this month, he wouldn’t have been able to pay his mortgage if he didn’t take the carrier job, he said.
“I took it in desperation,” he said. “I held out for the longest time. The unemployment benefits were very generous.”
This is a perfect example of how enhanced unemployment benefits have actually prevented a full employment recovery. If the enhanced unemployment benefits were not ending this man would have likely, by his own admission, “…held out…” as a result of the “…generous…” unemployment benefits. He’d probably still be unemployed!
Now when you read in the New York Times that “There are still 5.3 million fewer jobs nationwide than there were in February 2020”, you know to call “bullshit” on their claim. The fact is that there are approximately 10 million jobs available in the U.S. right now – but now one willing to take them and give up their “generous” unemployment payments. The reality is that the only thing currently slowing down job growth is Biden’s enhanced unemployment payments.
So when administration officials start pushing to extend enhanced unemployment benefits – citing the job report as justification rather than cause – make sure you tell them where to go. It’s time people are incentivized to work – not to stay home and watch soap operas on the people’s dime.
9/17/21 – UPDATE: The latest JOLTS report estimates that there are now 10,934,000 open jobs available in the U.S. as of July – almost 3.5 million more than the highest point in the ten years prior to the pandemic. In May of 2021 the unemployment rate fell to the same average rate as from 2011 through 2019 (before the pandemic, 5.8%), and yet we continued “enhanced” unemployment benefits until September 2021. Can anyone guess as to why there are so many unfilled jobs available in the U.S.? This is isn’t rocket science, folks, just basic math. Oh, wait; apparently math, getting the right answer and being objective are no longer acceptable behaviors. That explains why no one else can see the hypocrisy of paying people not to work and then complaining about the jobs report…
Don’t start the court packing yet…
Everyone is up in arms re: the Supreme Court’s refusal to block a recent Texas anti-abortion law. However, before we jump on the “pack the court” bandwagon, maybe we should read the decision. A couple of quick notes:
1) The court does not make laws, nor does it invalidate laws simply because it does not sit well with their political or moral beliefs. They can only gauge the legality of a law based on other laws, and on the supreme law – the Constitution of the United States.
2) Theirs is not an opinion on the legality of the Texas law; it is only a denial of an application for injunctive relief. The law’s constitutionality has not been determined by the court.
3) The denial make the following statements:
“The applicants now before us have raised serious questions regarding the constitutionality of the Texas law at issue.”
“The State has represented that neither it nor its executive employees possess the authority to enforce the Texas law either directly or indirectly. Nor is it clear whether, under existing precedent, this Court can issue an injunction against state judges asked to decide a lawsuit under Texas’s law.”
“In reaching this conclusion, we stress that we do not purport to resolve definitively any jurisdictional or substantive claim in the applicant’s lawsuit. In particular, this order is not based on any conclusion about the constitutionality of Texas’s law, and in no way limits other procedurally proper challenges to the Texas law, including in Texas state courts.”
4) Even the dissent by Chief Justice Roberts notes the following:
“Defendants argue that existing doctrines preclude judicial intervention, and they may be correct.”
“Although the Court denies the applicants’ request for emergency relief today, the Court’s order is emphatic in making clear that it cannot be understood as sustaining the constitutionality of the law at issue.”
I’m not excited about this Texas law, but I would be less excited by a Supreme Court that caved to public pressure instead of upholding the laws of the United States. And the fact remains that the Court was not tasked with determining the constitutionality of the law; this was only an application for injunctive relief (a stay on the law preventing it from being enforced). In summary, the plaintiffs failed to make their case but the court left open the opportunity to resubmit. Let’s see if the plaintiffs were listening before we go on a court-packing spree.
Editor note: What if the poor showing by the plaintiffs was intentional, and designed to get their case rejected? Could this be a strategy by left-wing entities designed to garner support for court packing?