Interesting…

So on the one hand Democrats want to pass sweeping gun control legislation that will make it extremely difficult for law-abiding citizens to own guns, while on the other hand they will stop penalizing criminals who use guns during the commission of their crimes:

LA County DA George Gascón reverses course, says he will allow certain sentencing enhancements

Yes, he is walking back some enhancements. But notably he is not walking back his refusal to prosecute enhancements for gun crimes. From the same article:

Firearm allegations pursuant to Penal Code section 12022.53 shall not be filed, will not be used for sentencing, and will be dismissed or withdrawn from the charging document.

So – penalize law-abiding citizens with draconian rules meant to effectively end private firearm ownership, but refuse to prosecute criminals who use firearms to commit violent crimes? Why not; criminals vote Democrat (or at least they will now!).

My guess is that it’s intentional. You can’t easily pass gun control laws without gun crimes, and the lack of prosecution has caused gun crimes to soar in Los Angeles county. Should be much easier to win local support for gun control now….

Uh… what??

From a recent NPR article relaying Energy Secretary Graham’s thoughts on “needed” changes to the energy grid:

She said it may make sense for the state’s famously independent energy infrastructure to be connected to the national grid “in some way, shape or form that allows its neighbors to help” in an emergency. “We all plan for redundancies and backups in our lives and this might be just a backup that Texas might want to consider at this time.”

They’re talking about Texas. Only the Texas grid is independent precisely to avoid empire … uh, federal… entanglements. If they connect to other grids then the Texas system will fall under federal regulatory control – not something Texans are too keen to allow (and I don’t blame them). If I were to guess, I’d say the lack of Sith … uh, federal… control over the Texas grid (the only state-run independent grid in the nation) is irritating the new Energy Secretary. Biden’s administration might run into issues with their death star … uh, green energy … plan if they can’t regulate all energy production and distribution. Besides, Jar Jar Binks needs a job, and micro-managing the Texas grid might just be his calling.

Here’s another interesting tidbit from the same article:

Critics have also attacked the transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy as prohibitively expensive. But a recent analysis by the World Resources Institute found that investing in clean energy generates more jobs than investing in fossil fuels due to the more labor-intensive nature of today’s clean energy systems.

Uh… doesn’t more jobs – and thus more employees –  for the “…more labor-intensive nature of … clean energy systems…” mean that clean energy must be more expensive? I find it fascinating that NPR can counter a claim by confirming it!

Note: I am for transitioning from fossil fuels to clean energy sources, even if it increases our energy costs. However, increasing the costs of U.S. energy sources will force energy-intensive U.S. production to be moved to countries with lower-cost (and likely more polluting) energy. Eliminating production here (where we at least have some control over pollution) in favor of cheaper production in China (where we have no control) hardly seems prudent. Yet this is the result a Paris Accord that permits different levels of polluting for different countries.

In our transition to clean energy we must hold our trading partners to the same environmental standards that we apply to ourselves. The idea that newer, less-developed countries should be allowed to pollute in an effort to “catch up” is simply ludicrous, particularly given the global impact of air and sea pollution. We do everything we can to discourage new nuclear development due to the dangers associated; given the dangers of global warming, shouldn’t we do the same for the use of fossil fuels?

Read more about this impact of the Paris Climate Accord here, here and here.

Woke Coke?

Coke allegedly wants it white employees to “…be less white…”:

Coca-Cola, Facing Backlash, Says ‘Be Less White’ Learning Plan Was About Workplace Inclusion

I saw a response on one of the social media sites that I thought was funny (I’m paraphrasing because I can’t find the original response):

“I’m not sure I know how to be ‘less white’, but I do know how to buy less Coke.”

I think I’ve had enough of the “woke” cancel-culture mentality for the year. Next topic, please…

The rules don’t apply to us… again

Attempting to pass legislation via the budget reconciliation process – particularly legislation not allowed using this maneuver – is a slap in the face of the 48.7% of voters who didn’t vote for the Biden ticket:

Pelosi vows to keep minimum wage provision in House bill; Harris could act

Insisting on using such a procedure is no less an example of  “…tyranny of the majority…” than is the elimination of the filibuster supported by many Democrats. And it’s dangerous; we need to be very cautious when the majority party uses such tactics to force through legislation, for this is how despots rise. They can use this power to tilt the tables in their favor forever, essentially abolishing the minority voice.

The constitution, specifically the Bill of Rights, was designed to protect the minority voice from the tyranny of a small majority – like the 50.8% the Democrats hold in the House, and 50.5%  (including Harris) in the Senate. And yet with no regard for the 48.7% of people who did not vote for President Biden or his agenda, the Democrats are going to shove their ideals down your throat whether you like it or not. No discussion, no consensus, no compromise.

Their argument? Because they can. And you’d better get used to it; they have only just begun. Their next major agenda will be to make sure that they remain in power forever (remember when I spoke of despots above…?). Think not? Read H.R.1 – “For the People Act of 2021”, then think again. Here’s an interesting take on this law from the Institute for Free Speech.

Be afraid… be very afraid…

Finally, we agree

Although not as she might expect:

AOC says GOP minimum wage compromise is ‘legislated poverty’

Any attempt to set wages for labor based on edict rather than actual value simply won’t work. Jobs that are worth the legislated minimum will likely already be paid that wage due to market forces; jobs that are not worth the minimum wage will be exported to other labor markets, and those that can’t be exported will result in higher prices and thus lower demand. The net result will be reduced employment, literally legislating some into poverty.

Even the CBO agrees: 1.4 million jobs will be lost by increasing the minimum wage to $15/hr. However, the CBO also concludes that the number of people overall living in poverty will decrease by 900,000. But take a moment to ponder this a bit and you’ll see a dilemma not accounted for in the projections: while 900,000 will be moving from below the poverty line to above, 1.4 million people will go from below the poverty line all the way to zero. This disparate impact should not be ignored; just ask one of the 1.4 million people who will lose their jobs.

The solution to lifting people out of poverty in America is not an edict setting wages at a level greater than their value; this will only drive some further into poverty. Instead the solution is to actually increase the value of labor, for instance by education and training, such that wages increase naturally as a result.

It’s the games, stupid…

Brilliant. So it’s not the defund police movement, allowing criminals to roam free; it’s not the elimination of cash bail, forcing the release of dangerous criminals; it’s not the kids being out of the classroom due to COVID-19 school restrictions (and getting dumber by the minute). No; instead it’s the video games. Yeah, right…

Chicago sees spike in carjackings, prompting call to ban ‘Grand Theft Auto’

Does anyone else hear how stupid this sounds? Failed political and social policies are at the heart of the significant crime increases we are witnessing in largely urban areas – NOT video games.

Media bias… again

Here’s the headline from NPR:

3 Dead, 2 Wounded In Shooting At Gun Store In New Orleans Suburb

Here’s the Fox News headline for the same event:

Armed citizens halt shooting spree that left 3 dead, including suspect, at Louisiana gun outlet: sheriff

Notice how the NPR headline doesn’t mention that the shooter was stopped by armed citizens exercising their 2nd Amendment right to defend their lives and the lives of others using suitable defensive arms.

Interesting, no? Biased, yes?

Dueling banjos

NPR recently reported on preliminary findings announced by the WHO team investigating the origins of COVID-19 virus in China. The NPR article states that, “The team said it’s highly unlikely the virus leaked from a lab…”, conveniently echoing the long-held position of the Chinese government.

Interestingly, the NPR article conveniently fails to mention the obstructionist actions of the Chinese government with respect to the investigation – including that the WHO team was initially delayed by the Chinese government from entering Wuhan to perform their investigation, and once admitted to the area were prevented from conducting an independent investigation. In some cases the WHO team were not provided access to raw data, and instead were forced to rely on analyses provided by their Chinese handlers. Nor does NPR mention the concerns of some regarding the impartiality of WHO president Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, due to the large investments China has made in his home country.  Instead, NPR ignores all of these issues with the WHO report and proclaims “…it’s clear the virus did not come from a lab.”

Contrast NPR’s report with this Fact Sheet from the U.S. State Department, which gives a decidedly different take on the matter. This report, which I will guess is the result of national intelligence work for which we will never know the full scope (but may be in part supported by this separate news report), takes the position that work was being done at the Wuhan lab to develop such a virus and that several researchers became ill at the facility just prior to the emergence of COVID-19. In addition, the Biden administration expressing reservations regarding the initial report from WHO, with National security adviser Jake Sullivan stating: “We have deep concerns about the way in which the early findings of the Covid-19 investigation were communicated and questions about the process used to reach them.”

So, the question is: Who do you believe? NPR and WHO, or NBC and the U.S. intelligence community? I’m betting on the latter.

Conspiracy theory?

I love this line from a recent press conference (as reported via MSN from ABC News) with New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo regarding his administration’s failure to fully report the deaths associated with nursing home residents:

“The void we created by not providing information was filled with skepticism and cynicism and conspiracy theories…”

You mean it generated conspiracy theories on how you actually withheld critical information from the public? How is the truth a “conspiracy theory”, Governor?

Lets see if I’ve got this right: Deny, deny, deny; if you get caught, deny some more and blame the bad press on “conspiracy theories.”

Got it. I’m adding it to my political playbook now…