Also stolen from AOSHQ:
Wisconsin native. "The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him."--GKC "Liberalism is the modern and morbid habit of always sacrificing the normal to the abnormal" --G K Chesterton "The only objective of Liberty is Life" --G K Chesterton "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling
Once upon a time in a great land, there were two Governors. One of them was not like the other. In fact, one of them was the "anti" of the other.
Here's one of them:
DeSantis told reporters during a news briefing at the Polk County Sheriff's Office the bill would charge protesters with felonies for damaging property and inflicting injuries, as well as sentence them to mandatory jail time for hitting a law enforcement officer. The bill, which state lawmakers will consider during next year's legislative session, would also bar protesters who commit crimes from receiving state benefits or working for the state....--AOS quoting PoliticoI've been to Polk County, FL. That's a "FAAFO" County if there ever was one, and that's why DeSantis was there.
J. E Dyer is The Optimistic Conservative and a retired Naval Intel Officer. Pay attention!
She notes the (D) reaction to the passing of Ginsburg.
...The bottom line up front: for the Democrats, the operational problem is not how to “win the election” and “keep a new Supreme Court justice from being confirmed.”
The problem is how to weave those now-scheduled decision points into what Lee Smith has dubbed the Permanent Coup.* For the Democratic Party of 2020, running the Permanent Coup is their guiding purpose.
To define their purpose as “winning the election” is to lag the OODA loop and never catch up with it, much less “get inside” it. The view from inside the Democrats’ OODA loop is this one: come what may, they don’t intend to lose their bid to regain the levers of power. That’s a more accurate reading of the end-state they have in mind....
In evidence, Dyer submits the following:
1. Their formal candidate, Joe Biden, is neither their leader nor in charge of his own campaign. ... It tells us for one thing that the key condition exists for a Bolshevik revolution: a major party that is not, in the most meaningful sense, what it represents itself to be.
2. Nor is the vice presidential candidate – an unpopular, low-polling also-ran with no power base – the leader. The leader is former President Obama, a person not eligible to be elected president again.
3. The terrain they are fighting on isn’t about “winning the election” in a conventional sense, by appealing to a broad section of voters on policy concerns.
4. They will use any means necessary to regain power, in the White House at a minimum.
Ooooh. That's nice.
Here's the counter-intuitive thinking that made Dyer famous:
...They recognize the convenience of the constitutional timeline for creating exploitable opportunities (in 2020, an election), and conditioning the thinking of the voting public and the Republicans. But at the decision points that matter to their goal, we can be pretty sure they won’t regard themselves as constrained by the constitutional timeline. They’ll be ready to breach it if they have to.
That means they don’t have to wait to launch the final assault. It’s a good bet they will refrain from tipping their hand too obviously for the time being, as that keeps people mentally unalerted. But the important point to keep in mind is that the constitutional timeline isn’t a constraint on their expectations. It’s a constraint on yours....
Actually, Dyer is very optimistic about the end result because she believes in the power of prayer (!!)
...No Bolshevik revolution has ever been attempted where virtually the entire population knew itself free to relate to God as it saw fit. America makes it possible for religion itself to not repress religion. Regardless of what faith they adhere to, or don’t, people can’t be forced into rote orthodoxies, under brittle, politicized religious power structures. Denominations and sects in any faith can disagree without blowing each other up or burning each other at the stake....
Yup. Read the whole thing. Then use (or clean and load) ALL your weapons, including a Rosary.
Another feeble punch swung by Evers, who is begging citizens for complete and total disrespect. Synopsis from the "nooz:"
People need to wear a mask while indoors, unless you're inside a personal residence.
Children under age 5 are not required to wear masks, but are encouraged to do so.
Other exemptions include members of the state Legislature and the state judiciary, as well as people eating and drinking, speakers at religious services, reporters delivering news reports and people who have breathing issues, among others.
Spaces included in the order, aside from businesses and workplaces, are outdoor bars, outdoor restaurants, taxis, public transit, ride-share vehicles and outdoor park structures. ...
Last time this happened, Robin Vos declared VICTORY!! and stayed home, leaving the State's citizens in the lurch. Smooth move, Robin!
But since members of the Legislature are excluded from this cartoon-order, Robin doesn't care. Smooth move, Robin.
Also interesting that "reporters" are not subject to this violation of civil rights.
Observation from traveling around the southern half of the State during the last several weeks: only about 1/2 of the people we saw were wearing them, but that's trended up from July when it was only about 1/4th. However, we're near the Big City which is filled with fearful feminines of both sexes.
A Madistan resident (enough right there) Fed judge smacked down common-sense Wisconsin election law, again.
A federal judge on Monday gave Wisconsin voters an extra six days to get their absentee ballots back to election clerks this fall in a broad decision that also will make it easier to hire poll workers.
Anticipating an appeal was likely, U.S. District Judge William Conley immediately stayed his ruling, writing that it wouldn't go into effect for at least a week. If higher courts uphold his decision, the nation will have to wait for a week after Election Day to get full presidential results in a crucial swing state....
Conley managed to insult "Wisconsin voters" by implication that they aren't smart enough to mail their ballots on time. Nice!
But there's more!!
... for this fall, he said clerks could immediately begin reporting their results, even though they will continue to receive valid ballots for six more days....
So the professional Vote-Cheat Party will know exactly how many ballots to "find" in various PO boxes around the State.
Smooth move, judge!
And here we go again!!
After publishing guidance warning about the serious risks of "airborne" infection associated with SARS-CoV-2, the CDC just seriously harmed its own credibility by acknowledging Monday that it had posted the new guidance "in error", following a pressure campaign from the WHO.
Scientists have been gathering evidence that the novel coronavirus plaguing the world spreads via aerosol particles practically since it first emerged, and back in July, a group of 200 scientists sent a letter to the WHO urging the international public health agency to change its guidance on the spread of the disease. The problem scientists argued is that the WHO hasn't updated its views to incorporate new research showing that aerosol spread is a much greater threat than touching contaminated surfaces, or via large droplets spread by close contact between individuals.
Yet, the WHO has refused these overtures, and this week it successfully convinced the CDC to do the same...
However, you should continue to sneeze into the crook of your arm. Or into a handkerchief. Or something-or-other, but unless the mask is tight-fitting, 200,000,000 people will be dead.
You know the thing.
Apparently Reinhold Niebuhr was.......ahhh........not enthused about Latin Americans. He's that guy with the "First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out/ Because I was not a socialist" quote.
He didn't mention South Americans because it appears he was coming for them.
Scroll down a bit, past the material about Ms. Cordelia Scaife May (Mellon Bank) and go to the photocopy of the NYT advertisement. Yup. Right there in the "signature" section..........along with Jimmy Cagney and Harold Bostrom (Bostrom Seating, Milwaukee).
In addition to publicly flogging Fr. Altman, the Bishop of LaCrosse has decided not to lift the dispensation from the Sunday obligation.
He cites 'numbers of co-vid cases' as the excuse along with difficulty 'maintaining social distance' in the churches of the Diocese.
"Cases" (really, positive tests) are up in EVERY college-town in Wisconsin, and LaCrosse is a college town. Madison, Eau Claire, and Green Bay ALL have seen large pops in positives in the last 10 days.
Does the Bish think that all those college kiddies go to Mass every Sunday?
Something's going on here and it doesn't smell good.
Norm always provides the facts on matters of H-1B policy.
A group of 35 “tech pioneers” have issued a public statement endorsing Biden, citing objections to Trump’s immigration policies. Of course, their focus is the H-1B work visa and related programs...
They claim that the 'best and brightest' are going to 'other countries' because Orange Man Bad.
Norm shreds them at the link.
By the way, will Kohl's lay off the 400 or so H-1Bs sucking up US jobs at its headquarters?
It would seem that naming names--especially the name "George Soros" will lead to your early death at Fox News.
Notice that Joe DeGenova and his wife Victoria Toensing haven't been appearing on Fox lately?
Notice that Newt Gingrich was "SHUSHED!!!" when he brought up Soros' financing of Leftist District Attorneys (like Kim Foxx/Chicago and Kim Gardner/St Louis)?
Paul Ryan should get right on this!!
There's been a near-halt to the BLM/Antifa/RevCom insurrection-arson-looting-vandalism riots in the last 10 days. Yes, Portland continues, and there are scattered reports of "peaceful" demonstrations here and there.
But the Big One, scheduled for fifty days in D.C. beginning yesterday, didn't happen--at least, not yet.
Because the people financing all this read polls and understand that the riots only strengthen Trump. The riots are demolishing support for Biden and other Democrats and as a result, it's possible that Republicans will control Congress AND the White House after 11/3.
There is no such thing as co-incidence, friends. Jack Ryan never lied to you, did he?
Pew research issued a horrifying study.
...a full 77 percent of “Democratic and Democratic-leaning Catholic adults say they think abortion should be legal in all or most cases,”...
That's the worst of TWO "bad news" findings.
The other is that only 63% percent of Republican and Republican-leaning Catholics say they think that abortion should be illegal in all or most cases."
So more than one-third of "Republican- and -leaner" Catholics think abortion is OK in all or most cases, as do 77% of "Democrat- and -leaner" Catholics.
We cannot place our finger on the part of this survey which is "good" news.
Only one US Bishop openly supports Fr. Altman. Surprised?
Do you remember the days when we all knew "10%" were off the reservation? Good times, good times.
Barky Hussein Obama asks that you SD and SU for his sermonette.
I'll cut to the chase for you.
...Four and a half years ago, when Republicans refused to hold a hearing or an up-or-down vote on Merrick Garland, they invented the principle that the Senate shouldn’t fill an open seat on the Supreme Court before a new president was sworn in.
A basic principle of the law — and of everyday fairness — is that we apply rules with consistency, and not based on what’s convenient or advantageous in the moment. The rule of law, the legitimacy of our courts, the fundamental workings of our democracy all depend on that basic principle. As votes are already being cast in this election, Republican Senators are now called to apply that standard. The questions before the Court now and in the coming years — with decisions that will determine whether or not our economy is fair, our society is just, women are treated equally, our planet survives, and our democracy endures — are too consequential to future generations for courts to be filled through anything less than an unimpeachable process....
Hey, Barky: FOAD
Bp. Paprocki wrote a paper regarding the morality surrounding Government-imposed restrictions during Kung-Flu--or for another similar event. Here's the payoff quote:
...the distinction between ordinary and extraordinary means of preserving life is important,” he writes, “for if a means is extraordinary — that is, if the burdens outweigh the benefits — then it is not morally obligatory and should not be coerced by state power.” Bishop Paprocki also makes the point in his essay that although human life is a great gift, it is not a moral absolute...
The Karens of the world have begun pointing the Finger of Shame at various businesses in this area for NOT FORCING CUSTOMERS TO WEAR MASKS!!!!! and other grave crimes against humanity such as 'distancing.' These crimes are at least as grave as the Holocaust, you know.
None of the Karens give a rip about moral theology, of course. They're not adults in the ordinary sense of that word; they're narcissist gammas or worse. They should be ignored or given finger-signals IYKWIMAITYD.
This should not come as a surprise--other than that Kroger was surprisingly stupid to fire these employees.
Kroger is facing a lawsuit after it fired two employees for refusing to wear a pro-LGBT apron as part of their work uniform because it violated their religious beliefs.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit against the grocery store chain after a location in Conway, Arkansas, fired two employees for refusing to follow a new dress code that required them to wear an apron with a rainbow-colored heart emblem.
The two women said that wearing the apron was an endorsement of the LGBT movement, which went against their religious beliefs....
Kroger (Pick-N-Save here in Wisconsin) will lose this suit and pay a lot of money to those ladies.
Following the death of Ginsburg, McConnell promised a vote on Trump's SCOTUS nominee. Early money is on Amy Barrett, which will allow Feinstein to display her vicious anti-Catholicism once again. That won't be a good look for the old hag, since Barrett is the model of the 'girl next door.' Barrett is on record disagreeing with Roe, so for the Democrats, this is Armageddon.
Of course, McConnell's promise to "vote" means very little when Prissy Willard and Murkowski are inclined to vote against ANY Trump nominee, whether this year or next. But Prissy-Puss and Murkowski are irrelevant since Pence will break a tie. That means Collins is The One.
Normally, Collins would vote against someone like Barrett because Collins approves of slaughtering black babies. But Collins is up for re-election in a swing state and Trump is coming on strong down the stretch. Further, during the Kavanaugh fight, Feinstein made an enemy of Collins with her threats; it's possible that Collins will throw in with Trump just to stick it in Feinstein's ass.
That would be fun to watch.
Yesterday, Tin-Pot Tony Evers fired the head of Wisconsin's Department of Workforce Development.
...The governor had grown increasingly frustrated by the lack of progress in clearing the claims and getting benefits to those who deserve them despite increased resources and staffing for the agency, a source close to the governor's office told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. ...
Yada yada yada.
Took a long, long, time to kick Frostman down the stairs, eh?
How long will it take for DWD to pay HIS unemployment claim?
You all recall that Jennifer Schilling appointed Scot Ross to the Wisconsin Ethics Commission. Schilling was regarded as a 'moderate' Democrat until this move, which revealed that she is actually a member of the AOC Party of subversion, riot, and anarchy.
So is Scot Ross. Here's what he had to say about replacing Ginsburg:
Media pundit Scot Ross tweeted to Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA), who warned McConnell against filling Ginsburg’s seat: “Fucking A, Ed. If you can’t shut it down, burn it down.”
So there's your Democrat "ethics" in Wisconsin.
Are you fool enough to think he's the only Democrat in this State who thinks that way?
One local RadioMouth has made it his personal crusade to radio-convict Kyle Rittenhouse of murder or something because Rittenhouse was defending property in Kenosha. It's also his aim to trash-talk Rittenhouse's actions by referring to him as a "vigilante" and then decrying "vigilante justice" as the Most Horrible Thing since the Holocaust.
In brief, his fanatic-emotionalism on the topic is overcoming any intellectual discussion of "property rights", which Rittenhouse was actually defending. The concept of citizen-defense of property rights deserves a lot better than unhinged rants, so here we go.
This link was provided by Madison bloggeur (sic) David Blaska, (who is a very proper Moderate Republican, not some white-terrorist-supremacy ideologue.) The essay was written by Dustin Siebel, a Libertarian, and while his premises are seriously flawed, his conclusions and much of his argumentation happen to line up very well with Natural Law and standard moral-theology principles. (To clarify the issues, I have deleted some text which is extraneous to the matter at hand.)
Among other things, the RadioMouth claims that Rittenhouse was not protecting HIS OWN property. To that.......
...An [ ] argument might be that his claim to defending property is illegitimate because it was not his property, or because he crossed state lines. This, in my view, is a ridiculous proposition. ...The claim that people don’t have a right to defend the property of others also undermines the entire premise of protesting on the behalf of another....
Yes, there is a 'reverse the poles' example which RadioMouth didn't think about.
...The argument that Kyle’s claim to property defense ends across state lines also draws arbitrary boundaries on where your rights to aid others begin and end. Would you honestly refuse a request for aid from a friend, or relative, because they live in another state?...
Of course not. But RadioMouth's tirades begin with the fact that the car-lot owner did NOT call Rittenhouse; they were not acquainted at all. So we have a total stranger protecting somebody's property rights here, right?
So now we get to the center ring of this exercise. I will line-out his Libertarian ideology and substitute the Judaeo-Christian text; you will note that it makes no difference to his conclusion.
...To dispute the dismissal of property rights as a whole, let’s first identify where property rights come from.
The primary right from which all other rights are derived is the right to ownership of one’s own body. From the right of self-ownership, God created you and gave you certain inalienable rights, among them the right to life and the pursuit of happiness. ...You have the right to sustain, or destroy, that which you own. In order to sustain the body, a person must be able to make claims to unclaimed resources in which they have invested their labor to transform. If a person cannot make claims to the resources they utilize to sustain themselves, then self-preservation is impossible. If theft, or destruction, of property cannot be a violation of rights, then the use of violence to impede a person’s survival is not a violation of their rights. Therefore, to imply that a person has no right to defend their property is to imply that they have no right to self-preservation.
This is Natural Law reasoning and it happens to be supported by Catholic moral theology. In fact, the Catholic position allows lethal force to protect property, which is NOT allowed in Wisconsin. (Yes, there are limits and conditions. Please apply common sense.)
...Let’s move on to the more common argument, that lethal force is not acceptable in defense of property. This argument is often based on a premise that the force utilized to protect property should be proportional to the threat against the property. However, a requirement of proportional response makes the claim to property rights contingent upon an individual’s ability to use marginally superior force in response to a threat. If you cannot repel a threat without using more force than necessary, then your right to that property is surrendered. Therefore, the claim to property would be relative to one’s own ability to exercise force. This strips property rights from those who cannot exercise force only marginally greater than the aggressor.
Under such conditions, only a person with unlimited access to power, across the spectrum of power, at all levels, has a claim to property. If a person’s right to keep their property is limited by their ability to defend it, then those with limited power must delegate the protection of their property to an outside force. This, in turn, makes the right of property ownership by the powerless subject to the discretion of those with power to enforce it. Because property is derived from self-preservation, this in turn means that self-preservation is limited by one’s ability to enact marginal violence....
"Delegating the power...." is what we do by funding law enforcement. But in Kenosha, "law enforcement" was not present or was insufficient. (The reason why is irrelevant.)
...The view that it is okay to destroy property, but not to defend property, that it is okay to batter and kill, but not to defend yourself, is a violation of natural rights....
Let's take the next step. We established that Natural Law allows defense of one's own property but that we delegate protection to law enforcement.
When law enforcement is not available, do natural rights disappear with them?
Are 'strangers' allowed to defend YOUR property?
Property rights do not disappear, and since we are all obligated to some degree to maintain Civil Order which protects ALL rights (life, liberty, pursuit of happiness), all of us are called by virtue of citizenship to assist in case of need. Can RadioMouth argue that nobody should assist in this task? If so, we'd be very interested in his thoughts.
It is impossible for one to maintain--as does RadioMouth--that only "authorities" or "owners" can protect property the possession of which is an inalienable right. It is also impossible to maintain that only specifically-called or -delegated friends are allowed to protect Civil Order, unless that Order exists only at your home/business, or your city block. Positing that the limits of Civil Order are congruent to your property-line (or that of the friend who engaged your help) is obviously silly.
In other words, if Civil Order should be maintained, all citizens are naturally responsible to assist in that maintenance, and that MAY include lethal force as a LAST RESORT.
Our RadioMouth seems to believe that Civil Order is either not a necessity OR that no citizen is allowed to maintain such Order. I wonder what his wife and children think about that.
Write your Legislature and change Wisconsin law to comport with moral and natural law--allow lethal force for protection of property.
Another entry on the same topic can be found here, with more links to RC moral theology.
Wray, the current Liar-in-Chief at the FBI, has information on domestic terrorism.
...“Within the domestic terrorism bucket, category as a whole, racially motivated violent extremism is I think the biggest bucket within that large group. And within the racially motivated extremism bucket people prescribing to some kind of white supremacist ideology is certainly the biggest chunk of that,” Wray told radical Democrat Rep. Elissa Slotkin (MI)....
Someone asked for statistics on that. You know--measures, numbers, "fact" stuff.
“I don’t have the numbers for you,” Wray said admitting he has no evidence whatsoever...
But he's the Big FEEB, just as dedicated to "fidelity, integrity, and bravery" as were his predecessors, like Comey. And some subordinates, like McCabe and Strzok.
Completely trustworthy. Top. Men.