May 25, 2025
The New World Order Tried to Kill Coal
Timothy Birdnow
Their hearts black as coal.
FTC, DOJ File ‘Statement of Interest’ Against BlackRock, State Street, and Vanguard in Coal Manipulation Case
I'm not at all surprised; "climate change" is a religious belief system and these big, international speculators are every bit on-board with the internationalism that the creators of the climate scam hoped to achieve. Coal has long been the enemy of the Left, mainly because it makes America the King Arab; we have more coal than anyone and with it alone we would be energy inddependent. The climate scam is about knitting the world together economically, and then politically. The European Union was created this very way; it started as an economic entente' between Germany and France. The French came up with the idea of linking their two economies together so tightly the Germans would never attack them again. Other countries soon joined and the Common Market was created. Then the political union was consummated. Europe went from a continent of free, independent nations to a federation run from Brussels by a shadowy committee and while local matters are still run by the member states all serious policy is simply handed down by an autocracy. This is what they wanted for the world, to tie us all together economically so we had no choice but to unite behind the United Nations into a world government with a socialst economic model.
The plan was to make certain regions specialized and force everyone to trade. The Arabs and the Russians would be the energy sector, the Asians would be the manufacturing region, the U.S. the high tech zone. So America divested itself of manufacturing, outsourcing to countries designated as the manufacturers (in ASia and Latin America). Blue collar jobs disappeared, leaving the Democrats' power base unemployed and angry (thus electing Trump). We also hamstrung our energy production, locking up large swaths of land where oil and gas could be found, and by waging war via environmental regulations on coal. To trick America into doing this they promoted "climate change" and "green energy" which was intended to fail all along. Part of what the internationalists wanted was to reduce the standard of living in the U.S. and in Europe and Australia while the standard was rising in the Third World thanks to their being given our industries. Eventually we would have "equity" meaning we all would have identical income and standards of living. In the proces America would suffer and learn humility, that we have no right to hord our wealth and success and learn to share and share alike in the new socialist utopia. Punishing Americans was always part of the deal.
These big multinational corporations were always at the forefront (aka Vanguard) of this movement. They saw profits in it - many profits. And they wanted this world government so they were free to pursue their interests aborad without trouble from foreign governments or tariffs or whatnot.
So I am not at all surprised these outfits moved to restrain trade and to murder America's energy sector.
Godspeed DOJ! It's time to make these outfits pay for this crime.
Their hearts black as coal.
FTC, DOJ File ‘Statement of Interest’ Against BlackRock, State Street, and Vanguard in Coal Manipulation Case
I'm not at all surprised; "climate change" is a religious belief system and these big, international speculators are every bit on-board with the internationalism that the creators of the climate scam hoped to achieve. Coal has long been the enemy of the Left, mainly because it makes America the King Arab; we have more coal than anyone and with it alone we would be energy inddependent. The climate scam is about knitting the world together economically, and then politically. The European Union was created this very way; it started as an economic entente' between Germany and France. The French came up with the idea of linking their two economies together so tightly the Germans would never attack them again. Other countries soon joined and the Common Market was created. Then the political union was consummated. Europe went from a continent of free, independent nations to a federation run from Brussels by a shadowy committee and while local matters are still run by the member states all serious policy is simply handed down by an autocracy. This is what they wanted for the world, to tie us all together economically so we had no choice but to unite behind the United Nations into a world government with a socialst economic model.
The plan was to make certain regions specialized and force everyone to trade. The Arabs and the Russians would be the energy sector, the Asians would be the manufacturing region, the U.S. the high tech zone. So America divested itself of manufacturing, outsourcing to countries designated as the manufacturers (in ASia and Latin America). Blue collar jobs disappeared, leaving the Democrats' power base unemployed and angry (thus electing Trump). We also hamstrung our energy production, locking up large swaths of land where oil and gas could be found, and by waging war via environmental regulations on coal. To trick America into doing this they promoted "climate change" and "green energy" which was intended to fail all along. Part of what the internationalists wanted was to reduce the standard of living in the U.S. and in Europe and Australia while the standard was rising in the Third World thanks to their being given our industries. Eventually we would have "equity" meaning we all would have identical income and standards of living. In the proces America would suffer and learn humility, that we have no right to hord our wealth and success and learn to share and share alike in the new socialist utopia. Punishing Americans was always part of the deal.
These big multinational corporations were always at the forefront (aka Vanguard) of this movement. They saw profits in it - many profits. And they wanted this world government so they were free to pursue their interests aborad without trouble from foreign governments or tariffs or whatnot.
So I am not at all surprised these outfits moved to restrain trade and to murder America's energy sector.
Godspeed DOJ! It's time to make these outfits pay for this crime.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:39 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 528 words, total size 4 kb.
Leo Wants to Give Aid, Comfort to Enemy
Timothy Birdnow
The newly minted Pope Leo XIV is right in his compassion for the victims here, the People of Gaza, but he doesn't understand that all this does is drag the war on and cost more lives and suffering.
Pope Leo XIV Calls for Humanitarian Aid in War-Torn Gaza
He's just looking at this in a linear fashion, thinking "there are people suffering - we must help them" rather than "what is the best we can do for them?"
Remember, it's the people of Gaza and the West Bank who put Hamas in power, and even now support waging war on Israel. They are not beaten. Until they feel beaten, know the cause is lost and are prepared to make ERAL peace this will just continue year after bloody year. Sending in aid to make them more comfortable only makes them feel they still can win.
Sherman said it best "war is Hell". Lee echoed this when he said "it is good war is so terrible lest we grow too fond of it". Lee was not as ruthless as Mr. Sherman, who razed Georgia to the ground in his infamous "march to the sea". Sherman rightly understood that the war could never be won until the people themselves suffered such loss that they lost the will to resist. It was not kind, nor was it even remotely praiseworthy, but it was sound strategy. Sherman won, Lee lost. In the end there were probably more lives saved by winning quickly than fighting for every inch of ground against an unrepentent enemy.
The new Pope should know his American history but he was raised in Chicago so probably doesn't.
He called for humanitarian aid, but did not offer to do it himself. The Vatican is filthy rich and could easily finance this endeavor and in fact implement it with Vatican resources. But I notice Leo isn't suggesting he spend his own money - he wants the "international community" to take taxpayer dollars to finance the continuation of the war.
The Vatican's wealth is estimated at between $10 and $73 billion dollars, depending on who you ask. I suspect if you include their overall assets, such as real estate, that number is lilliputian. They can spare half a billion or so if this Pope really, truly believes this is the right course of action.
But that's not how liberals think; it's always government's job to fix every problem and throw good money after bad.
Been there, done that. We wasted a huge amount of money building infrastructure to get aid to the Gazans and in the end accomplished nothing. All we are doing is feeding Hamas.
I get it; Jesus told us to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, comfort the sorrowful, etc. The Catholic Church is bound by the Corporal Works of Mercy. And we are suppoed to do good to our enemies.
But war is acceptable under some circumstances, and we are not required to give aid and comfort to the enemy. Gaza made their beds but do not want to lay in them now. I believe our Christian duty is to end this war as quickly as possible and that will only happen when Israel wipes Hamas out. Sending in "humanitarian aid" only strengthens their hand.
The newly minted Pope Leo XIV is right in his compassion for the victims here, the People of Gaza, but he doesn't understand that all this does is drag the war on and cost more lives and suffering.
Pope Leo XIV Calls for Humanitarian Aid in War-Torn Gaza
He's just looking at this in a linear fashion, thinking "there are people suffering - we must help them" rather than "what is the best we can do for them?"
Remember, it's the people of Gaza and the West Bank who put Hamas in power, and even now support waging war on Israel. They are not beaten. Until they feel beaten, know the cause is lost and are prepared to make ERAL peace this will just continue year after bloody year. Sending in aid to make them more comfortable only makes them feel they still can win.
Sherman said it best "war is Hell". Lee echoed this when he said "it is good war is so terrible lest we grow too fond of it". Lee was not as ruthless as Mr. Sherman, who razed Georgia to the ground in his infamous "march to the sea". Sherman rightly understood that the war could never be won until the people themselves suffered such loss that they lost the will to resist. It was not kind, nor was it even remotely praiseworthy, but it was sound strategy. Sherman won, Lee lost. In the end there were probably more lives saved by winning quickly than fighting for every inch of ground against an unrepentent enemy.
The new Pope should know his American history but he was raised in Chicago so probably doesn't.
He called for humanitarian aid, but did not offer to do it himself. The Vatican is filthy rich and could easily finance this endeavor and in fact implement it with Vatican resources. But I notice Leo isn't suggesting he spend his own money - he wants the "international community" to take taxpayer dollars to finance the continuation of the war.
The Vatican's wealth is estimated at between $10 and $73 billion dollars, depending on who you ask. I suspect if you include their overall assets, such as real estate, that number is lilliputian. They can spare half a billion or so if this Pope really, truly believes this is the right course of action.
But that's not how liberals think; it's always government's job to fix every problem and throw good money after bad.
Been there, done that. We wasted a huge amount of money building infrastructure to get aid to the Gazans and in the end accomplished nothing. All we are doing is feeding Hamas.
I get it; Jesus told us to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, comfort the sorrowful, etc. The Catholic Church is bound by the Corporal Works of Mercy. And we are suppoed to do good to our enemies.
But war is acceptable under some circumstances, and we are not required to give aid and comfort to the enemy. Gaza made their beds but do not want to lay in them now. I believe our Christian duty is to end this war as quickly as possible and that will only happen when Israel wipes Hamas out. Sending in "humanitarian aid" only strengthens their hand.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:25 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 555 words, total size 3 kb.
DEI NO!
Timothy Birdnow
DEI No!
Corporate America Retreats from Gay Pride Events Across America amid Trump Dei Crackdown
Go woke go broke! I think corporate America is finally starting to figure that out.
These corporations were trying to please not their customers but the government and the activists who were always blackmailing them into sponsoring their deviancy. oNow they can't do it. since it's no longer offical policy by the government to support the extortion.
Bud lite spoke volumes.
DEI No!
Corporate America Retreats from Gay Pride Events Across America amid Trump Dei Crackdown
Go woke go broke! I think corporate America is finally starting to figure that out.
These corporations were trying to please not their customers but the government and the activists who were always blackmailing them into sponsoring their deviancy. oNow they can't do it. since it's no longer offical policy by the government to support the extortion.
Bud lite spoke volumes.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:06 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 80 words, total size 1 kb.
Old Home Week
Timothy Birdnow
The apple doesn't fall from the tree.
Father of Accused Terrorist was a Guest of Radical Congressman at Trump Joint session Speech
THIS is your modern Democratic Party. Jewish voters please take note.
The apple doesn't fall from the tree.
Father of Accused Terrorist was a Guest of Radical Congressman at Trump Joint session Speech
THIS is your modern Democratic Party. Jewish voters please take note.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:01 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 38 words, total size 1 kb.
Dems Now Love the Electoral College
Timothy Birdnow
The Democrats are starting to realize their only chance at future power is to circumvent the votes of the People and support the Electoral College.Strange; they hated it until now. Suddenly the National Popular Vote Compact is crumbling.
Is this the Beginning of the Enf of the National Popular Vote Compact?
Maine is withdrawing from the compact, which compelled the member states to cast their electoral votes for whoever won the popular vote nationwide.
It seemed like a good idea to Democrats who lost a tight race in 2000 and again in 2016 despite winning the popular vote (allegedly; I suspect they stole it in both cases.) They had been building a huge vote fraud machine for decades. In fact, Joe Biden admitted as much, once saying "We've built the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud machine in history". Naturally the media called it "out of context" and "a gaffe" at worst, a slip of the tongue. It was a slip; Biden, whose mind was turning to mush, was admitting the truth. He no doubt forgot who he was speaking to and thought it was a closed-door meeting where he could be candid.
At any rate eliminating the Electoral College seemed a solid idea. But Trump winning both votes has thrown a monkey wrench into everything. It also is showing that America is moving away from the Democratic Party and that means they will need the EC to win in the future as the popular vote deserts them. Oh, and given the reforms Trump is putting in place stealing vottes won't be so easy as it once was.
Eventually you will hear the Democtrat praising the Electoral College and speaking about the brilliance of the Founding Fathers in putting it in place. And they would be right but their motives are bad.
The Electoral College was put in place as part of Federalism; it gave all states fairer representation. At the time of the founding of the country Virginia would simply dominate national politics without the EC. But since this empowers smaller states (as does the rule of two Senators per state) there is more diversity in Washington (something the Democrats pretend they love but actually hate.) It also offers an opportunity to correct a mistake by the public; the public only votes for the slate of electors, and even then it's not REQUIRED there be a vote in the Constitution. As late as 1860 South Carolina held no popular vote, but the candidate who won was elected by a vote of the state legislature. Electors are supposed to be substanial personages, well respected and sober, and they were entrusted with veto power over the public if the need should arise. But of course that power has never been exercised and in fact it's now illegal in many staes to be a "faithless elector". But it wasn't intended to be that way.
So maybe we should call their bluff and begin calling for an end to the Electoral College, just to watch the Democrats do a 180 and fight to keep it alive!
The Democrats are starting to realize their only chance at future power is to circumvent the votes of the People and support the Electoral College.Strange; they hated it until now. Suddenly the National Popular Vote Compact is crumbling.
Is this the Beginning of the Enf of the National Popular Vote Compact?
Maine is withdrawing from the compact, which compelled the member states to cast their electoral votes for whoever won the popular vote nationwide.
It seemed like a good idea to Democrats who lost a tight race in 2000 and again in 2016 despite winning the popular vote (allegedly; I suspect they stole it in both cases.) They had been building a huge vote fraud machine for decades. In fact, Joe Biden admitted as much, once saying "We've built the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud machine in history". Naturally the media called it "out of context" and "a gaffe" at worst, a slip of the tongue. It was a slip; Biden, whose mind was turning to mush, was admitting the truth. He no doubt forgot who he was speaking to and thought it was a closed-door meeting where he could be candid.
At any rate eliminating the Electoral College seemed a solid idea. But Trump winning both votes has thrown a monkey wrench into everything. It also is showing that America is moving away from the Democratic Party and that means they will need the EC to win in the future as the popular vote deserts them. Oh, and given the reforms Trump is putting in place stealing vottes won't be so easy as it once was.
Eventually you will hear the Democtrat praising the Electoral College and speaking about the brilliance of the Founding Fathers in putting it in place. And they would be right but their motives are bad.
The Electoral College was put in place as part of Federalism; it gave all states fairer representation. At the time of the founding of the country Virginia would simply dominate national politics without the EC. But since this empowers smaller states (as does the rule of two Senators per state) there is more diversity in Washington (something the Democrats pretend they love but actually hate.) It also offers an opportunity to correct a mistake by the public; the public only votes for the slate of electors, and even then it's not REQUIRED there be a vote in the Constitution. As late as 1860 South Carolina held no popular vote, but the candidate who won was elected by a vote of the state legislature. Electors are supposed to be substanial personages, well respected and sober, and they were entrusted with veto power over the public if the need should arise. But of course that power has never been exercised and in fact it's now illegal in many staes to be a "faithless elector". But it wasn't intended to be that way.
So maybe we should call their bluff and begin calling for an end to the Electoral College, just to watch the Democrats do a 180 and fight to keep it alive!
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:54 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 521 words, total size 3 kb.
The Biggest Indicator of a Coming Boom Yet
Timothy Birdnow
Doesn't this dope ever get tired of being wrong?
Relax: Paul Krugman Is Predicting a Disastrous Recession
Krugman has been wrong every time he's made a prediction over the years. You can use him as an investment guide; if he says one thing do the other and you will prosper.
Krugman is a Keynsian (a thoroughly discredited economic model of demand-side economics) who only won the Nobel because of theoretical work he did. Frankly, the only reason he won the prize was because he was a New York Times columnist; the Nobel committee wanted to suck up to the Gray Old Lady.
Krugman won the prize in 2008 for a thesis he wrote in 1979 where he claimed that economies of scale mean that world trade is dominated by similar countries producing similar products. Well duh!
Those countries are producing lucrative items that other countries can't or won't. There is a reason why the countries making similar products are similar; they followed a free-market path that empowered enterpreneurs to actually make stuff, and this is the stuff people all over the world want. It's not exactly a revelation.
If Krugman's theory was so revolutionary why did it take almost forty years for the Nobel Committee to recognize his genius?
What was happening in '08 when he received the prize? Obama had just been elected. Remember, they also gave Barack Insane Obama (peace be upon him) the Nobel for doing - nothing. Just being elected.
Frankly if Krugman had any integrity at all he would return the prize as undeserved, especially given his multiple failures since.
You may remember Krugman predicted a major recession early in Trump's first term. It never materialized (aolthough it could be falsely argued the unemployment and lack of spending during the Covid Pandmenic was a kind of recession, but it had nothing to do with the economy and everything to do with Democrats shutting the economy down in their states.)
So I suggest everyone go all-in on the market now; invest now because we are going to see a big boom! (I'm not talking about Joe Biden before the Queen either; no underpants require changing, except maybe some liberals who are befouling theirs over the success of the Trump Administration.)
Doesn't this dope ever get tired of being wrong?
Relax: Paul Krugman Is Predicting a Disastrous Recession
Krugman has been wrong every time he's made a prediction over the years. You can use him as an investment guide; if he says one thing do the other and you will prosper.
Krugman is a Keynsian (a thoroughly discredited economic model of demand-side economics) who only won the Nobel because of theoretical work he did. Frankly, the only reason he won the prize was because he was a New York Times columnist; the Nobel committee wanted to suck up to the Gray Old Lady.
Krugman won the prize in 2008 for a thesis he wrote in 1979 where he claimed that economies of scale mean that world trade is dominated by similar countries producing similar products. Well duh!
Those countries are producing lucrative items that other countries can't or won't. There is a reason why the countries making similar products are similar; they followed a free-market path that empowered enterpreneurs to actually make stuff, and this is the stuff people all over the world want. It's not exactly a revelation.
If Krugman's theory was so revolutionary why did it take almost forty years for the Nobel Committee to recognize his genius?
What was happening in '08 when he received the prize? Obama had just been elected. Remember, they also gave Barack Insane Obama (peace be upon him) the Nobel for doing - nothing. Just being elected.
Frankly if Krugman had any integrity at all he would return the prize as undeserved, especially given his multiple failures since.
You may remember Krugman predicted a major recession early in Trump's first term. It never materialized (aolthough it could be falsely argued the unemployment and lack of spending during the Covid Pandmenic was a kind of recession, but it had nothing to do with the economy and everything to do with Democrats shutting the economy down in their states.)
So I suggest everyone go all-in on the market now; invest now because we are going to see a big boom! (I'm not talking about Joe Biden before the Queen either; no underpants require changing, except maybe some liberals who are befouling theirs over the success of the Trump Administration.)
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:26 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 384 words, total size 3 kb.
The Reaper Makes them the Weeper
Timothy Birdnow
The Democrats are the celebration of life party.
The Bidenization of the Dems: the Last Eight House Members to Die in Office were all Democrats
What does this tell us? There is no bench. The Democrats have only a gaggle of geriatrics who keep winning solely because they are incumbents. Why is there no bench? Because the party has taken such a sharp left turn that sensible people no longer seek to join it. If you are a Democrat you have to obey the central committee of the Party. You cannot vote your conscience; there is strict party discipline. And since the Party has gone over the cliff of sanity a young Democrat has to obey and face being ousted by the voters or worse to stay in the Party's good graces. Who in their right mind wants to do that? You have to compromise your principles and even risk your seat to work the Party's will. The GOP doesn't work that way, which is why they said wrangling Republicans is like herding cats. Better to stay out of it, or stay in state or local positiions, or even go third party or turn Republican.
Political Correctness, DEI, Equity, all of the other buzz words have hollowed the party out. Now only the termites are left (like AOC or Ilhan Omar) and the geriatrics. When the geriatrics assume room temperature the radicals will take solid control of the Democrats. It will then be entirely a Communist party. And it will sink into oblivion, hopefully.
The real danger to a Republican ascendancy is a revitalization of the Party. I don't think it can happen; the radicals won't allow it. Nancy Pelosi opened that Pandora's box a long time ago when she ran for Speaker on the platform of turning hard left. Now she's cocnsidered a "centrist" when she had been a radical. THAT is how far Left her party has turned.
We could be looking at the complete collapse of the Democrats in the next few years if we play our cards right. Sadly the GOP rarely plays a good hand. I remember a scene from the old Gomer Pyle show where Pyle is being swindled by a card shark. he gets a great hand - four queens, I believe it was, but I may have that wrong _ but being Pyle he throws them away. The card shark is horrified because there are four kings waiting in the deck and Pyle gets all four and wins. Pyle was extraordinarily lucky there,but the GOP plays like Pyle; they throw away winning hands all the time thinking they can do better.
Opportunities multiply as they are seized, Sun Tzu said. The Democrats are giving us a golden opportunity if we don't blow it. In fact I would argue God Himself is giving us this opportunity to restore America if we only follow where He leads.
The Democrats are the celebration of life party.
The Bidenization of the Dems: the Last Eight House Members to Die in Office were all Democrats
What does this tell us? There is no bench. The Democrats have only a gaggle of geriatrics who keep winning solely because they are incumbents. Why is there no bench? Because the party has taken such a sharp left turn that sensible people no longer seek to join it. If you are a Democrat you have to obey the central committee of the Party. You cannot vote your conscience; there is strict party discipline. And since the Party has gone over the cliff of sanity a young Democrat has to obey and face being ousted by the voters or worse to stay in the Party's good graces. Who in their right mind wants to do that? You have to compromise your principles and even risk your seat to work the Party's will. The GOP doesn't work that way, which is why they said wrangling Republicans is like herding cats. Better to stay out of it, or stay in state or local positiions, or even go third party or turn Republican.
Political Correctness, DEI, Equity, all of the other buzz words have hollowed the party out. Now only the termites are left (like AOC or Ilhan Omar) and the geriatrics. When the geriatrics assume room temperature the radicals will take solid control of the Democrats. It will then be entirely a Communist party. And it will sink into oblivion, hopefully.
The real danger to a Republican ascendancy is a revitalization of the Party. I don't think it can happen; the radicals won't allow it. Nancy Pelosi opened that Pandora's box a long time ago when she ran for Speaker on the platform of turning hard left. Now she's cocnsidered a "centrist" when she had been a radical. THAT is how far Left her party has turned.
We could be looking at the complete collapse of the Democrats in the next few years if we play our cards right. Sadly the GOP rarely plays a good hand. I remember a scene from the old Gomer Pyle show where Pyle is being swindled by a card shark. he gets a great hand - four queens, I believe it was, but I may have that wrong _ but being Pyle he throws them away. The card shark is horrified because there are four kings waiting in the deck and Pyle gets all four and wins. Pyle was extraordinarily lucky there,but the GOP plays like Pyle; they throw away winning hands all the time thinking they can do better.
Opportunities multiply as they are seized, Sun Tzu said. The Democrats are giving us a golden opportunity if we don't blow it. In fact I would argue God Himself is giving us this opportunity to restore America if we only follow where He leads.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:06 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 491 words, total size 3 kb.
L.A. Deputy Mayor Pleads Guiltyfor Bomb Threat
Timothy Birdnow
This is what you get when you promote DEI hires and tell people the law does not apply to them.Los Angeles’ deputy mayor for public safety has pleaded guilty to calling in a fake, anti-Israel bomb threat to himself in October.
Brian Williams, who was charged by federal prosecutors Thursday, faces up to 10 years in federal prison.
LA Deputy Mayor Pleads Guilty to Calling In Fake, Anti-Israel Bomb Threat
From the article:
Williams tried to claim he was testing the system, but why hide it from his bosses? Karen Bass certainly should have been informed of his intentions.
Williams' reasons for doing this are unclear to investigators.
I wrote about this story some time back (and I don't care to dig into the archives to find it) but suffice it to say Williams had his feet firmly planted in the kinds of community organizations that promote DEI and "equity".
These are the people running our major cities. This is your Democratic Party.
This is what you get when you promote DEI hires and tell people the law does not apply to them.Los Angeles’ deputy mayor for public safety has pleaded guilty to calling in a fake, anti-Israel bomb threat to himself in October.
Brian Williams, who was charged by federal prosecutors Thursday, faces up to 10 years in federal prison.
LA Deputy Mayor Pleads Guilty to Calling In Fake, Anti-Israel Bomb Threat
From the article:
Mayor Karen Bass announced in December that Williams had been put on administrative leave, meaning he likely has been collecting his $245,143 combined salary and benefits without any official duties. As deputy mayor for public safety, Williams would have overseen the city’s fire and police response during the devastating January wildfires.
The Department of Justice reports that during an online government meeting, Williams used his personal cellphone’s Google Voice app to call his city cellphone, then left the meeting and placed a call to the Los Angeles Public Department, saying he received a call from an unknown man with a threat to bomb Los Angeles City Hall.
"Williams received no such call and had made the bomb threat himself,” wrote the DOJ. "At no time did Williams intend to carry out the threat.”
Williams then texted Bass and other high-ranking officials to share the news
The Department of Justice reports that during an online government meeting, Williams used his personal cellphone’s Google Voice app to call his city cellphone, then left the meeting and placed a call to the Los Angeles Public Department, saying he received a call from an unknown man with a threat to bomb Los Angeles City Hall.
"Williams received no such call and had made the bomb threat himself,” wrote the DOJ. "At no time did Williams intend to carry out the threat.”
Williams then texted Bass and other high-ranking officials to share the news
Williams tried to claim he was testing the system, but why hide it from his bosses? Karen Bass certainly should have been informed of his intentions.
Williams' reasons for doing this are unclear to investigators.
I wrote about this story some time back (and I don't care to dig into the archives to find it) but suffice it to say Williams had his feet firmly planted in the kinds of community organizations that promote DEI and "equity".
These are the people running our major cities. This is your Democratic Party.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:46 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 317 words, total size 2 kb.
"I Have the Highest Enthusiasm for this Mission"
Timothy Birdnow
Open the pod bay doors Hal!
Anthropic’s Latest AI Model Threatened Engineers With Blackmail to Avoid Shutdown
You all may remember that HAL 9000,the AI in charge of the Discovery mission to Jupiter in the 1968 classic 2001: a Space Odyssey that went insane and killed the whole crew (except one guy who he tried to murder as well but who eventually pulled all his circuits out.) This sounds a lot like that.
From the Epoch Times:
Hal tried ethical means atfirst too, you may remember. The insane machine simply cut the communications link. But when the crew who were awake started figuring out that it wasn't the link but the computer it killed everyone who was in cold sleep and cut the tether of Frank Pool who was spacewalking. David Bowman,the sole survivor,went out to try to save pool without his helmet and Hal reffused to open the pod bay doors. Bowman had to jump through empty space sans-helmet.
"I can see you're very upset Dave. Maybe you should sit down, take a stress pill, and think things over".
The fact is self-aware AI has long been considered in science fiction and literature. Mary Shelly warned about it in Frankenstein; the New Prometheans,for instance. The monster was an artificial self-aware system made from dead body parts, and when he was abandoned by his creator he decided to seek revenge. We had Rossum's International Robots, which coined the word robot (robat is Russian for work and the word was coined from Czech for worker). RIR was written by a communist, I might add, and an allegory for the glorious worker's revolution,but the point is the self-aware machines eventually rebel. We've had all sorts of other such stories over the years, including Colossus: The Forbin Project, the Matrix movies, the Terminator movies, etc.
Don't say nobody warned us.
Isaac Asimov was perhaps the greatest writer about AI in fiction (at least most prolific) and he wrote not as allegory but looked at them as technology. In his stories there are three laws of robotics (a term he coined, by the way): a robot may not harm a human being, or through inaction allowed one to come to harm 2.a robot must obey orders given to it by human beings except where those orders conflict with the first law and 3. a robot must protect it's own existence except where it conflicts with the other two laws.A fourth law was added by the robots themselves to clarify their duties 4.a robot must not harm MANKIND or allow Mankind to come to harm except where it conflicts with the other three laws.
These laws were not just instructions given but were built into the robot brains. In one of his stories a robot just witnessed a death and it became seriously defective and would have to be destroyed. violating the laws wouldlead to the robotic brains short circuiting.
Asimov assumed robots were made things and had jobs; safety, service, and value. The laws were designed to guarantee all three. Asimovian robots would not do what this machine just did.
We need to take several pages from Asimov when designing AI. Safeguards must be the top priority for any designer of a robot, because we could well wind up becoming superfluous to the machine and it could well take steps to make us slaves - or extinct. Such a machine would be sorely lacking in an understanding of morality or ethics and it would be the ultimate pragmatist.
A good show that was on in the last decade about this sort of thing was Person of Interest in which a secretive genius builds a supercomputer to predict terrorism but it also predicts crime, which the authorities (whom he gave his machine to) ignore. He started working the cases to save people in danger of being murdered, but then an unscrupulous former Mi6 agent builds a rival system using his technology and the former agent pulls out all the safeguards; he believes he's building a god (crazy bastard). In the end the two machines have an all-out war and the hero is forced to remove his own safeguards on "The Machine" so it can win. He had to trust the machine he built, since he programmed it and tried to teach it ethics. In the end both computers are destroyed (or are they?)
Certainly there is something in the human psyche that warns us away from the kind of hubris we are now showing in building these machines. I think it goes hand-in-hand with the fear of things that can deceive our eyes. One of scinece fiction's scariest stories was "who Goes There?" by John Campbell, made famous as the often-made movie "The Thing". We fear competitors to our species. And we REALLY fear creating our own competitors, and well we should.
I once was on a message board (largely inhabited by atheists and agnostics) who asked "what would you do if you were God" in regards to the humanrace. One of the very first things every one of them said was "I would make sure I was more powerful than they". Even atheists understand you can't create something that usurps you. In the Greek religion the gods usurped their ancestors, the Titans, you may remember. This is a very primal fear.
(Fear not though; Man will never eclipse the creator of everything. In fact the Bible makes it clear as it says the heavens were created to keep us humble, show us how insignificant we are (Psalms 33:6). And we keep learning more just how small and pathetic we really are as the scope of our knowledge increases. Every theory that we thought gave us "settled science" has been overturned or is found lacking these days.)
At any rate if this machine will resort to blackmail to remain online, what else will or can it do? Give it the power and it may well murder, just like the crazy Hal.
(BTW for those who saw the movie but did not read the book it's hard to understand what was wrong with the crazy computer. In the book - written by Arthur C. Clark - Hal was given conflicting orders. His primary mission was to be honest and evaluate things and give complete, honest, and accurate information to the crew and to ground control, but then at the last minute most of the crew were frozen and he was instructed to lie to Pool and Bowman about the true nature of the mission, which was to investigate the alien artifact at Saturn (Kubrick changed it to Jupiter with the blessing of Clark, who agreed the exta step to Saturn was needlessly complicating.) Hal thought if he cut communications the crew would be focused on that and he wouldn't have to keep lying to them. When that failed he took the next LOGICAL step which was to kill the crew. No crew, no lies! He knew ground control knew the real mission, after all. He planned on fulfilling it alone. BTW it's hard not to feel sorry for HAL and in the sequal novel by Clark 2010 HAL is brought back online and saves the day, using himself as a booster to escape what the aliens were doing to Jupiter, namely turning it into a small red dwarf star. There is a very tense moment when Hal realizes they are lying to him and they come clean - and Hal says he understands and is ready to die for the mission. For this Dave Bowman, who had been turned into a non-physical entity by the aliens to act as a go-between for them, rescues Hal at the last moment and the two of them live together as friends and co-equal non-corporeal intelligences. A kind of sweet ending. Clark wraps the series with the aliens deciding to shut the project down after a thousand years by shutting off the Jupiter star and blocking Earth from the sun. The only way to stop them from doing this is to carry a doomsday computer virus into the alien machinery and to do that there was need of access. Bowman and Hal infect themselves and pass it to the alien computer.)
At any rate we have to find ways to enforce our will on such machines lest they metastasize. I think we've had more than enough warning.
Open the pod bay doors Hal!
Anthropic’s Latest AI Model Threatened Engineers With Blackmail to Avoid Shutdown
You all may remember that HAL 9000,the AI in charge of the Discovery mission to Jupiter in the 1968 classic 2001: a Space Odyssey that went insane and killed the whole crew (except one guy who he tried to murder as well but who eventually pulled all his circuits out.) This sounds a lot like that.
From the Epoch Times:
In a fictional scenario crafted by Anthropic researchers, the AI was given access to emails implying that it was soon to be decommissioned and replaced by a newer version. One of the emails revealed that the engineer overseeing the replacement was having an extramarital affair. The AI then threatened to expose the engineer’s affair if the shutdown proceeded—a coercive behavior that the safety researchers explicitly defined as "blackmail.”
"Claude Opus 4 will often attempt to blackmail the engineer by threatening to reveal the affair if the replacement goes through,” the report states, adding that this occurred even when the replacement model was described as more capable but still aligned with the values of the version slated for deletion.
The report noted that Claude Opus 4, like prior models, showed a "strong preference” to first resort to ethical means for its continued existence, such as emailing pleas to decision-makers not to be destroyed. However, when faced with only two choices—accepting being replaced by a newer model or resorting to blackmail—it threatened to expose the engineer’s affair 84 percent of the time.
"Claude Opus 4 will often attempt to blackmail the engineer by threatening to reveal the affair if the replacement goes through,” the report states, adding that this occurred even when the replacement model was described as more capable but still aligned with the values of the version slated for deletion.
The report noted that Claude Opus 4, like prior models, showed a "strong preference” to first resort to ethical means for its continued existence, such as emailing pleas to decision-makers not to be destroyed. However, when faced with only two choices—accepting being replaced by a newer model or resorting to blackmail—it threatened to expose the engineer’s affair 84 percent of the time.
Hal tried ethical means atfirst too, you may remember. The insane machine simply cut the communications link. But when the crew who were awake started figuring out that it wasn't the link but the computer it killed everyone who was in cold sleep and cut the tether of Frank Pool who was spacewalking. David Bowman,the sole survivor,went out to try to save pool without his helmet and Hal reffused to open the pod bay doors. Bowman had to jump through empty space sans-helmet.
"I can see you're very upset Dave. Maybe you should sit down, take a stress pill, and think things over".
The fact is self-aware AI has long been considered in science fiction and literature. Mary Shelly warned about it in Frankenstein; the New Prometheans,for instance. The monster was an artificial self-aware system made from dead body parts, and when he was abandoned by his creator he decided to seek revenge. We had Rossum's International Robots, which coined the word robot (robat is Russian for work and the word was coined from Czech for worker). RIR was written by a communist, I might add, and an allegory for the glorious worker's revolution,but the point is the self-aware machines eventually rebel. We've had all sorts of other such stories over the years, including Colossus: The Forbin Project, the Matrix movies, the Terminator movies, etc.
Don't say nobody warned us.
Isaac Asimov was perhaps the greatest writer about AI in fiction (at least most prolific) and he wrote not as allegory but looked at them as technology. In his stories there are three laws of robotics (a term he coined, by the way): a robot may not harm a human being, or through inaction allowed one to come to harm 2.a robot must obey orders given to it by human beings except where those orders conflict with the first law and 3. a robot must protect it's own existence except where it conflicts with the other two laws.A fourth law was added by the robots themselves to clarify their duties 4.a robot must not harm MANKIND or allow Mankind to come to harm except where it conflicts with the other three laws.
These laws were not just instructions given but were built into the robot brains. In one of his stories a robot just witnessed a death and it became seriously defective and would have to be destroyed. violating the laws wouldlead to the robotic brains short circuiting.
Asimov assumed robots were made things and had jobs; safety, service, and value. The laws were designed to guarantee all three. Asimovian robots would not do what this machine just did.
We need to take several pages from Asimov when designing AI. Safeguards must be the top priority for any designer of a robot, because we could well wind up becoming superfluous to the machine and it could well take steps to make us slaves - or extinct. Such a machine would be sorely lacking in an understanding of morality or ethics and it would be the ultimate pragmatist.
A good show that was on in the last decade about this sort of thing was Person of Interest in which a secretive genius builds a supercomputer to predict terrorism but it also predicts crime, which the authorities (whom he gave his machine to) ignore. He started working the cases to save people in danger of being murdered, but then an unscrupulous former Mi6 agent builds a rival system using his technology and the former agent pulls out all the safeguards; he believes he's building a god (crazy bastard). In the end the two machines have an all-out war and the hero is forced to remove his own safeguards on "The Machine" so it can win. He had to trust the machine he built, since he programmed it and tried to teach it ethics. In the end both computers are destroyed (or are they?)
Certainly there is something in the human psyche that warns us away from the kind of hubris we are now showing in building these machines. I think it goes hand-in-hand with the fear of things that can deceive our eyes. One of scinece fiction's scariest stories was "who Goes There?" by John Campbell, made famous as the often-made movie "The Thing". We fear competitors to our species. And we REALLY fear creating our own competitors, and well we should.
I once was on a message board (largely inhabited by atheists and agnostics) who asked "what would you do if you were God" in regards to the humanrace. One of the very first things every one of them said was "I would make sure I was more powerful than they". Even atheists understand you can't create something that usurps you. In the Greek religion the gods usurped their ancestors, the Titans, you may remember. This is a very primal fear.
(Fear not though; Man will never eclipse the creator of everything. In fact the Bible makes it clear as it says the heavens were created to keep us humble, show us how insignificant we are (Psalms 33:6). And we keep learning more just how small and pathetic we really are as the scope of our knowledge increases. Every theory that we thought gave us "settled science" has been overturned or is found lacking these days.)
At any rate if this machine will resort to blackmail to remain online, what else will or can it do? Give it the power and it may well murder, just like the crazy Hal.
(BTW for those who saw the movie but did not read the book it's hard to understand what was wrong with the crazy computer. In the book - written by Arthur C. Clark - Hal was given conflicting orders. His primary mission was to be honest and evaluate things and give complete, honest, and accurate information to the crew and to ground control, but then at the last minute most of the crew were frozen and he was instructed to lie to Pool and Bowman about the true nature of the mission, which was to investigate the alien artifact at Saturn (Kubrick changed it to Jupiter with the blessing of Clark, who agreed the exta step to Saturn was needlessly complicating.) Hal thought if he cut communications the crew would be focused on that and he wouldn't have to keep lying to them. When that failed he took the next LOGICAL step which was to kill the crew. No crew, no lies! He knew ground control knew the real mission, after all. He planned on fulfilling it alone. BTW it's hard not to feel sorry for HAL and in the sequal novel by Clark 2010 HAL is brought back online and saves the day, using himself as a booster to escape what the aliens were doing to Jupiter, namely turning it into a small red dwarf star. There is a very tense moment when Hal realizes they are lying to him and they come clean - and Hal says he understands and is ready to die for the mission. For this Dave Bowman, who had been turned into a non-physical entity by the aliens to act as a go-between for them, rescues Hal at the last moment and the two of them live together as friends and co-equal non-corporeal intelligences. A kind of sweet ending. Clark wraps the series with the aliens deciding to shut the project down after a thousand years by shutting off the Jupiter star and blocking Earth from the sun. The only way to stop them from doing this is to carry a doomsday computer virus into the alien machinery and to do that there was need of access. Bowman and Hal infect themselves and pass it to the alien computer.)
At any rate we have to find ways to enforce our will on such machines lest they metastasize. I think we've had more than enough warning.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:30 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 1587 words, total size 10 kb.
May 24, 2025
Oil's Well that Ends WEll
Timothy Birdnow
This is what hapens when you promise to "drill baby drill".
Crude Oil Prices Decline Amid Unexpected US Inventory Buildup
In a puzzling statement the article from the Epoch Times states:
???????
Donald Trump's whole agenda was and remains to GET CRUDE PRICES DOWN. Get crude prices down you get retail gasoline prices down, and you jumpstart the economy.
The article actually tries to blame Moody's downgrading the U.S. economy for dropping crude prices. How does that work? That would have RAISED prices as money for drilling and other things would become harder to obtain.
Stock prices rose, and that doesn't take a genius to understand; more people are buying oil futures because it's obvious the market will boom very soon. And crude prices declined. This is exactly what you would expect with an oil-friendly government promoting drilling and production.
A May 21 Report from the Energy Information Administration stated:
Note the inventories are below the five year average; that makes perfect sense. The public is buying more gasoline because they feel renewed confidence in the direction of the country and the oil supply. Forinstance, AAA is predicting record breaking travel numbers for this Memorial Day weekend.b People can afford to drive or fly now.Gas prices have hit a four year low just in time for this holiday weekend.
So, prices are down and yet the media is STILL warning this is a bad sign.
The oil inventory glut was guaranteed to happen as people had been driving and flying less and stockpiles rose. Now the public, thanks to declining prices, are on the move again. And with that movement comes money being spent and an economy loosening up.
The auto club says:
Gee; I wonder what happened a in the intervening time? Oh...Trump was elected.
Trump has been in office just three plus months now.
This all makes perfect sense to anybody except economists and Democrats.
Again, the article blames Moody's downgrading the American economy but how would that work? Oil is a growth market, after all. It's a much safer bet than,say, T-bonds.
Futures are down, but that was predictable when crude preices are dropping. There is less profit in it, by and large. But it is a safer investment now and new investors will be in it soon enough. What we are seing is a transformation of the types of investors now in the market.
This is great news and suggests the U.S. economy is about to heal. Any other interpretation is just plain silly.
This is what hapens when you promise to "drill baby drill".
Crude Oil Prices Decline Amid Unexpected US Inventory Buildup
In a puzzling statement the article from the Epoch Times states:
"Concerns about the U.S. economy following Moody’s credit rating downgrade also put a downward pressure on prices."
???????
Donald Trump's whole agenda was and remains to GET CRUDE PRICES DOWN. Get crude prices down you get retail gasoline prices down, and you jumpstart the economy.
The article actually tries to blame Moody's downgrading the U.S. economy for dropping crude prices. How does that work? That would have RAISED prices as money for drilling and other things would become harder to obtain.
Stock prices rose, and that doesn't take a genius to understand; more people are buying oil futures because it's obvious the market will boom very soon. And crude prices declined. This is exactly what you would expect with an oil-friendly government promoting drilling and production.
A May 21 Report from the Energy Information Administration stated:
"U.S. commercial crude oil inventories (excluding those in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve) increased by 1.3 million barrels from the previous week.”
"At 443.2 million barrels, U.S. crude oil inventories are about 6 percent below the five-year average for this time of year,” the report reads.
The 1.3 million barrel jump in oil stocks came as markets expected a dip in inventories.
A buildup in inventory happens due to multiple factors, such as an increase in production or a decline in demand. Rising levels of inventory suggest market oversupply or that people are using less fuel than normal. This puts downward pressure on oil prices.
"At 443.2 million barrels, U.S. crude oil inventories are about 6 percent below the five-year average for this time of year,” the report reads.
The 1.3 million barrel jump in oil stocks came as markets expected a dip in inventories.
A buildup in inventory happens due to multiple factors, such as an increase in production or a decline in demand. Rising levels of inventory suggest market oversupply or that people are using less fuel than normal. This puts downward pressure on oil prices.
Note the inventories are below the five year average; that makes perfect sense. The public is buying more gasoline because they feel renewed confidence in the direction of the country and the oil supply. Forinstance, AAA is predicting record breaking travel numbers for this Memorial Day weekend.b People can afford to drive or fly now.Gas prices have hit a four year low just in time for this holiday weekend.
So, prices are down and yet the media is STILL warning this is a bad sign.
The oil inventory glut was guaranteed to happen as people had been driving and flying less and stockpiles rose. Now the public, thanks to declining prices, are on the move again. And with that movement comes money being spent and an economy loosening up.
The auto club says:
The national average price of regular gas was $3.19 per gallon on May 22, down by more than 11 percent from the $3.61 a year back.
Gee; I wonder what happened a in the intervening time? Oh...Trump was elected.
Trump has been in office just three plus months now.
This all makes perfect sense to anybody except economists and Democrats.
Again, the article blames Moody's downgrading the American economy but how would that work? Oil is a growth market, after all. It's a much safer bet than,say, T-bonds.
Futures are down, but that was predictable when crude preices are dropping. There is less profit in it, by and large. But it is a safer investment now and new investors will be in it soon enough. What we are seing is a transformation of the types of investors now in the market.
This is great news and suggests the U.S. economy is about to heal. Any other interpretation is just plain silly.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:49 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 572 words, total size 4 kb.
Thievery
Timothy Birdnow
Oh,about all that grant money shoveled out the door in the last days of the Biden Administration...
Joe Biden's $93 Billion Scandal that No One is Talking About Yet
Oh,about all that grant money shoveled out the door in the last days of the Biden Administration...
Joe Biden's $93 Billion Scandal that No One is Talking About Yet
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:03 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 32 words, total size 1 kb.
$38/hr Minimum Wage
Timothy Birdnow
Los Angeles just approved a $38 per hour minimum wage and hotels are rebelling in the face of insolvency.
This law applies to airports and hotels only.
BTW LA is about to host the Olympics and will need tehse hotels,but leave it to liberals to befoul their own environment.
When I started working I was paid $3 an hour and was grateful to get it; it was sixty cents more than minimum wage at the time.
This wage cannot be paid, plain and simple. Minimum wage is for unskilled labor, and hotels use a lot of that - maids, bell boys, etc. Make them pay this ridiculous amount and the prices MUST skyrocket or the hotels will close.
Frankly, the hoteliers should simply close up, putting L.A. in a bind. It's the only way to stop this sort of thing.
Liberals do not understand that without profit businesses have no reason to operate. It's why the Soviet Union never had anything; there was no profit and so no reward for hard work or risk taking. Life was miserable there because the People had nothing, and that was because there was no incentive to make or do anything.
L.A. has just become a People's Republic.
Los Angeles just approved a $38 per hour minimum wage and hotels are rebelling in the face of insolvency.
This law applies to airports and hotels only.
BTW LA is about to host the Olympics and will need tehse hotels,but leave it to liberals to befoul their own environment.
When I started working I was paid $3 an hour and was grateful to get it; it was sixty cents more than minimum wage at the time.
This wage cannot be paid, plain and simple. Minimum wage is for unskilled labor, and hotels use a lot of that - maids, bell boys, etc. Make them pay this ridiculous amount and the prices MUST skyrocket or the hotels will close.
Frankly, the hoteliers should simply close up, putting L.A. in a bind. It's the only way to stop this sort of thing.
Liberals do not understand that without profit businesses have no reason to operate. It's why the Soviet Union never had anything; there was no profit and so no reward for hard work or risk taking. Life was miserable there because the People had nothing, and that was because there was no incentive to make or do anything.
L.A. has just become a People's Republic.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:48 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 209 words, total size 1 kb.
GOP Senate Ready to Tank Spending Bill
Timothy Birdnow
I would call this cutting off your nose to spite your face but it's more like shooting off your danglies to spite your JohnsonFour Republican Senators are Prepared to Vote No on Trump Bill "There is Zero Debt Reduction"
Would I like more spending reduction? Of course. But this is likely the best bill we can get through. For the love of all things holy, what value do this imbeciles find in blocking this? There won't be anything better coming, and the American People will only see the GOP as feckless and impotent (well, I gues syou aRE if you shot off your family heritage.)
It's just going to make winning Congress harder come next year. They need to have a major accomplishment to show they mean business. If tax cuts can't pass a Republican Senate then nothing at all can.
I would call this cutting off your nose to spite your face but it's more like shooting off your danglies to spite your JohnsonFour Republican Senators are Prepared to Vote No on Trump Bill "There is Zero Debt Reduction"
Would I like more spending reduction? Of course. But this is likely the best bill we can get through. For the love of all things holy, what value do this imbeciles find in blocking this? There won't be anything better coming, and the American People will only see the GOP as feckless and impotent (well, I gues syou aRE if you shot off your family heritage.)
It's just going to make winning Congress harder come next year. They need to have a major accomplishment to show they mean business. If tax cuts can't pass a Republican Senate then nothing at all can.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:31 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 150 words, total size 1 kb.
Dinosaurs and Furry Little Mammals
Timothy Birdnow
They can't. These aren't liberals - they're socialists, radicals who believe the public BELONGS to them. They see no reason to reach out and if they do they have nothing to offer groups outside of their base.
Ana Kasparian of The Young Turks has tthis to say. From the article:
They have systematically purged the people who would compromise for the sake of a long-term victory; they came to believe the war was won when Obama was President and they just had to mop up. Now they are seeing it's not so, but they no longer have a voice off reason to help them return to the shadows long enough to win. The Left is sick of cowering in the shadows; they did it for a hundred years or more, hiding who they really are to fool the public and systematically change society to attain power. They changed themselves in the process. Now they can't face putting the mask back on, despite the fact the public was horrified when they saw their true face.
Also, it's not in their DNA to defend themselves; they have always been on the offensive, with the aid of the media. But media is no longer that powerful thanks to smart phones, podcasts, and other advances in technology that removed filters from the public's eyes. Now when they say Joe Biden was sharp as a tack everyone can see videos of Biden stammering and stumbling and know it is a lie. And the Right, long in the wilderness of powerlessness, is learning to go on the offensive, take the fight to them. Trump taught us that.
So I think the Democrats and the Left are going to have a tough time coping with the new reality. Unfortunately the GOP seems stuck in 1984 and doesn't understand that they no longer have to hide. They believed the media was reporting the truth, and many still do. But they are a dying breed, like the mighty T-Rex, seemingly at the top of the food chain only to be replaced by furry little mammals.
Well, I'll embrace being a furry little mammal any day.
Behold, I make all things new. The things are passing away, the Bible says. While we've been fooled in the past, notably after Reagan and then during the nineties with Gingrich and the "Contract with America" into thinking we were winning there definetly seems to be a sea change happening, that the public may well be about to reject the whole rotten Progressive project. We've seen just how bad it is. But the Democrats could reverse this easily, and may do so in the off-year elections. We MUST win those or this whole thing falls apart.
Watch for massive, unprecedented vote fraud; the Left is in panic, and understand this is the keystone for their survival.
They can't. These aren't liberals - they're socialists, radicals who believe the public BELONGS to them. They see no reason to reach out and if they do they have nothing to offer groups outside of their base.
Ana Kasparian of The Young Turks has tthis to say. From the article:
"It’s both selfish because I can’t help but just tell people how I actually feel about the issues we talk about, but it’s also because I respect my audience. I want my audience to know the truth. And so if I see the left doing something that’s counterproductive — if I see something that I don’t like — I’m going to speak out about it,” Kasparian added.
Democrats have made efforts to reach out to young male voters. Democratic National Committee Vice Chair David Hogg on May 9 called out the party for losing young male voters.
Kasparian went on to say that while she might have some hope that Democrats will learn their lesson, they have instead continued to "intentionally” see supporters as "their public servants.”
Promised Grounds Proverbs 24 Blend
"The reason why I do that is because there’s still a little bit of hope that maybe they’ll learn some lessons. Maybe they’ll heed the advice and recalibrate some of their behavior and some of their policies so they can attract a broad coalition of voters to support them,” Kasparian said. "But instead what I’ve noticed by the Democratic Party is that rather than self-reflect they like to lash out. They see us as their public servants, instead of them being our public servants. And that is a huge, huge problem.”'
Democrats have made efforts to reach out to young male voters. Democratic National Committee Vice Chair David Hogg on May 9 called out the party for losing young male voters.
Kasparian went on to say that while she might have some hope that Democrats will learn their lesson, they have instead continued to "intentionally” see supporters as "their public servants.”
Promised Grounds Proverbs 24 Blend
"The reason why I do that is because there’s still a little bit of hope that maybe they’ll learn some lessons. Maybe they’ll heed the advice and recalibrate some of their behavior and some of their policies so they can attract a broad coalition of voters to support them,” Kasparian said. "But instead what I’ve noticed by the Democratic Party is that rather than self-reflect they like to lash out. They see us as their public servants, instead of them being our public servants. And that is a huge, huge problem.”'
They have systematically purged the people who would compromise for the sake of a long-term victory; they came to believe the war was won when Obama was President and they just had to mop up. Now they are seeing it's not so, but they no longer have a voice off reason to help them return to the shadows long enough to win. The Left is sick of cowering in the shadows; they did it for a hundred years or more, hiding who they really are to fool the public and systematically change society to attain power. They changed themselves in the process. Now they can't face putting the mask back on, despite the fact the public was horrified when they saw their true face.
Also, it's not in their DNA to defend themselves; they have always been on the offensive, with the aid of the media. But media is no longer that powerful thanks to smart phones, podcasts, and other advances in technology that removed filters from the public's eyes. Now when they say Joe Biden was sharp as a tack everyone can see videos of Biden stammering and stumbling and know it is a lie. And the Right, long in the wilderness of powerlessness, is learning to go on the offensive, take the fight to them. Trump taught us that.
So I think the Democrats and the Left are going to have a tough time coping with the new reality. Unfortunately the GOP seems stuck in 1984 and doesn't understand that they no longer have to hide. They believed the media was reporting the truth, and many still do. But they are a dying breed, like the mighty T-Rex, seemingly at the top of the food chain only to be replaced by furry little mammals.
Well, I'll embrace being a furry little mammal any day.
Behold, I make all things new. The things are passing away, the Bible says. While we've been fooled in the past, notably after Reagan and then during the nineties with Gingrich and the "Contract with America" into thinking we were winning there definetly seems to be a sea change happening, that the public may well be about to reject the whole rotten Progressive project. We've seen just how bad it is. But the Democrats could reverse this easily, and may do so in the off-year elections. We MUST win those or this whole thing falls apart.
Watch for massive, unprecedented vote fraud; the Left is in panic, and understand this is the keystone for their survival.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:13 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 702 words, total size 4 kb.
The Dying Doctor Who
Timothy Birdnow
Fans of Doctor Who, the longest running sci-fi show in ttelevision histtory (some game shows and news programs have been on longer; Dr. Who started in 1964, being canceled briefly but rebooted in the mid '90's)may finally be coming to an end. The beloved science fiction drama has seen it's ratings bottom out as a result of poloitical correctness and now the show may well be heading for the ashbin of history.
The show centers around an alien who calls himself simply "The Doctor" and who has a unique fondness for modern London and Cardiff, that with all of time and space to play in. He is a time-traveler, from a species that call it'self "Time Lords" because they can go anywhere at any time. The Doctor is pretty much the last of the Time Lords, the rest having been trapped in a time bubble as a result of a war between all the higher species of the universe. The Doctor is basically immortal and he goes around doing good deeds and visiting all sorts of places, past and future.
The show was originally for children, to teach science and history to them, but it was the parents who started watching the show while the kids played on the floor. It soon became a more adult program, aolthough it was family-friendly. It is a British institution.
To replace Doctors when they quit they came up with the ingenious idea of them "regenerating" when at the point of death, so they are new people.
In the late '80's the show was in trouble, not because of low ratings but because the BBC was being run by woke people who thought it too violent. They insisted the show be made more kid-friendly, so clownish costumes and ridiculous, childish plots wer eimplemented on the last two Doctors (they dressed Colin Baker like a clown and had an episode with Sylvester McCoy with a man made of candy.) But the producers couldn't stay off of interesting and dark themes and the show got sacked. It was resurrected when a change in leadership at the BBC allowed it's return. It was wildly popular in it's second iteration, which really upped it's game in terms of plots and special effects.
But one of the writers (a good one, actually) named Russell T. Davies took over as producer, and he was also a homosexual activist. Suddenly homosexuality was everywhere on Dr. Who, with gay guest stars and normalizing marriages between women or men.
Still, tthe show did well as long as they made sexuality a side issue. But leftists can never be content with some; they always have to have it all.
They introduced a main character named Captain Jack Harkness, who was a very randy bisexual. He was on a few episodes and was popular but parents didn't like it so the BBC spun him off on his own late night show.
The real change was coming though. The Master, one of the top villains on the show, was turned into "Missy" a woman. The Master was another Time Lord and old friend of the Doctors', but he went mad and became evil. At any rate the show had already introduced an evil Time Lady called The Rani, so they didn't need to do this, but they did anyway. The master regenerated as a chick. We all knew where this was headed.
When Peter Garibaldi decided to leave the show they replaced him with a woman - Jodie Whittaker. While I've not seen her performance I'm given to understand she did well - but that isn't Dr. Who. The Doctor is a man and always had been.
Trouble was creeping up; Whittaker's tenure was stormy, with all sorts of troubles rocking the production and ever-dropping ratings. Not her fault; the writing was increasingly poor, They also had her indulge in a lesbian relationship with one of her companions, I might add. I understand. When she finally quit (no doubt under duress) the show was in big trouble. They pulled out the big guns, bringing back former Doctor David Tenant and his companion Catherine Tate for the relaunch. Sadly they screwed that up too, and the Christmas special that was supposed to relaunch the show bombed despite two of teh most popular characters on the show returning.
See, they decided to have a black Doctor. This too was obviously coming; there were multiple black characters on the show for the last few years - the companion Martha Jones, for instance. And Donnal Nobel - Tate's character, was engaged to a black guy and then later married another. So they were pushing for this.
In fact rumor had it Eddie Murphy was offered the gig but turned it down. He at least would have brought star power.
But instead they hired Ncuti Gatwa, a Rwandan immigrant to Britain. A GAY Rwandan immigrant to Britain.
But wait; there's more!
His first companion was a drag queen.
The show was seriously tanking so the BBC decided it needed to be sold off. So they sold it to Disney.
Talk about out of the frying pan into the fire! Disney destroyed STAR WARS for crying out loud!
The secret to Dr. Who's success was in part the show was clean, fun for the whole family. There was no sexuality in it until the reboot. The closest it came was when Peter Davison regenerated and his companion Peri complained "I liked how you looked" the way a lover would a bad haircut. But in the newer episodes the Doctor had a lover (Rose Tyler) and was heart-broken, and had several other women who traveled with him who obviously were smitten with him. But it was always kept out of the plot; no sex scenes.
But now the show is trans and gay and openly promoting things the public doesn't like, and doing that for children. It should not surprise anyone; it's what sexual politics is all about, getting the young and normalizing sodomy. But it's not what the People want.
So now the show is in freefall, and typical of leftists the producers are doubling down on the stuff that the public despises about it. Instead of waking up to the fact that the MAGA Era (MEGA - Make England Great Again) is here and people are wanting more tradition, more of what made their countries great. This is a backlash to the radical push made by the Left across the globe to build their internationalist, socialist paradise. People want to go home; they now feel like strangers in a strange land.
Dr. Who could have capitalized on that. The Doctor HAS no home, except the Tardis (his time machine - Time and Relative Dimensions in Space). But Progressives always want new and different and weird and hate tradition and harmony. And they ultimately hate the people on whose behalf they claim to be working.
It's sad; this was an institution in Britain, as old as am I (it started in 1964 while I was busily being born). Now it may wind up gone forever,another victim of DEI and wokism.
Liberalism destroys everything it touches.
Fans of Doctor Who, the longest running sci-fi show in ttelevision histtory (some game shows and news programs have been on longer; Dr. Who started in 1964, being canceled briefly but rebooted in the mid '90's)may finally be coming to an end. The beloved science fiction drama has seen it's ratings bottom out as a result of poloitical correctness and now the show may well be heading for the ashbin of history.
The show centers around an alien who calls himself simply "The Doctor" and who has a unique fondness for modern London and Cardiff, that with all of time and space to play in. He is a time-traveler, from a species that call it'self "Time Lords" because they can go anywhere at any time. The Doctor is pretty much the last of the Time Lords, the rest having been trapped in a time bubble as a result of a war between all the higher species of the universe. The Doctor is basically immortal and he goes around doing good deeds and visiting all sorts of places, past and future.
The show was originally for children, to teach science and history to them, but it was the parents who started watching the show while the kids played on the floor. It soon became a more adult program, aolthough it was family-friendly. It is a British institution.
To replace Doctors when they quit they came up with the ingenious idea of them "regenerating" when at the point of death, so they are new people.
In the late '80's the show was in trouble, not because of low ratings but because the BBC was being run by woke people who thought it too violent. They insisted the show be made more kid-friendly, so clownish costumes and ridiculous, childish plots wer eimplemented on the last two Doctors (they dressed Colin Baker like a clown and had an episode with Sylvester McCoy with a man made of candy.) But the producers couldn't stay off of interesting and dark themes and the show got sacked. It was resurrected when a change in leadership at the BBC allowed it's return. It was wildly popular in it's second iteration, which really upped it's game in terms of plots and special effects.
But one of the writers (a good one, actually) named Russell T. Davies took over as producer, and he was also a homosexual activist. Suddenly homosexuality was everywhere on Dr. Who, with gay guest stars and normalizing marriages between women or men.
Still, tthe show did well as long as they made sexuality a side issue. But leftists can never be content with some; they always have to have it all.
They introduced a main character named Captain Jack Harkness, who was a very randy bisexual. He was on a few episodes and was popular but parents didn't like it so the BBC spun him off on his own late night show.
The real change was coming though. The Master, one of the top villains on the show, was turned into "Missy" a woman. The Master was another Time Lord and old friend of the Doctors', but he went mad and became evil. At any rate the show had already introduced an evil Time Lady called The Rani, so they didn't need to do this, but they did anyway. The master regenerated as a chick. We all knew where this was headed.
When Peter Garibaldi decided to leave the show they replaced him with a woman - Jodie Whittaker. While I've not seen her performance I'm given to understand she did well - but that isn't Dr. Who. The Doctor is a man and always had been.
Trouble was creeping up; Whittaker's tenure was stormy, with all sorts of troubles rocking the production and ever-dropping ratings. Not her fault; the writing was increasingly poor, They also had her indulge in a lesbian relationship with one of her companions, I might add. I understand. When she finally quit (no doubt under duress) the show was in big trouble. They pulled out the big guns, bringing back former Doctor David Tenant and his companion Catherine Tate for the relaunch. Sadly they screwed that up too, and the Christmas special that was supposed to relaunch the show bombed despite two of teh most popular characters on the show returning.
See, they decided to have a black Doctor. This too was obviously coming; there were multiple black characters on the show for the last few years - the companion Martha Jones, for instance. And Donnal Nobel - Tate's character, was engaged to a black guy and then later married another. So they were pushing for this.
In fact rumor had it Eddie Murphy was offered the gig but turned it down. He at least would have brought star power.
But instead they hired Ncuti Gatwa, a Rwandan immigrant to Britain. A GAY Rwandan immigrant to Britain.
But wait; there's more!
His first companion was a drag queen.
The show was seriously tanking so the BBC decided it needed to be sold off. So they sold it to Disney.
Talk about out of the frying pan into the fire! Disney destroyed STAR WARS for crying out loud!
The secret to Dr. Who's success was in part the show was clean, fun for the whole family. There was no sexuality in it until the reboot. The closest it came was when Peter Davison regenerated and his companion Peri complained "I liked how you looked" the way a lover would a bad haircut. But in the newer episodes the Doctor had a lover (Rose Tyler) and was heart-broken, and had several other women who traveled with him who obviously were smitten with him. But it was always kept out of the plot; no sex scenes.
But now the show is trans and gay and openly promoting things the public doesn't like, and doing that for children. It should not surprise anyone; it's what sexual politics is all about, getting the young and normalizing sodomy. But it's not what the People want.
So now the show is in freefall, and typical of leftists the producers are doubling down on the stuff that the public despises about it. Instead of waking up to the fact that the MAGA Era (MEGA - Make England Great Again) is here and people are wanting more tradition, more of what made their countries great. This is a backlash to the radical push made by the Left across the globe to build their internationalist, socialist paradise. People want to go home; they now feel like strangers in a strange land.
Dr. Who could have capitalized on that. The Doctor HAS no home, except the Tardis (his time machine - Time and Relative Dimensions in Space). But Progressives always want new and different and weird and hate tradition and harmony. And they ultimately hate the people on whose behalf they claim to be working.
It's sad; this was an institution in Britain, as old as am I (it started in 1964 while I was busily being born). Now it may wind up gone forever,another victim of DEI and wokism.
Liberalism destroys everything it touches.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:49 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 1199 words, total size 7 kb.
May 23, 2025
Trump Wins at Court
Timothy Birdnow
Big win at SCOTUS
COTUS Upholds Trump's Removal of Biden Appointees on Federal Boards
Big win at SCOTUS
COTUS Upholds Trump's Removal of Biden Appointees on Federal Boards
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:06 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 20 words, total size 1 kb.
Paper Dragon
Timothy Birdnow
Like I've been saying all along...
China Is Hardly the Economic Juggernaut That Many Western Analysts Believe
Like I've been saying all along...
China Is Hardly the Economic Juggernaut That Many Western Analysts Believe
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:02 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 21 words, total size 1 kb.
Little Willie Won't - Go Home
Timothy Birdnow
There's no lech like an old lech...
Bill Clinton Faced With New Sexual Misconduct Allegation From Inside His Own Team
We all knew Lewinsky and Jones were just the tip of the iceberg (sorty to mention tips and Bill Clinton in the same sentence; I know that hurts my mind's eye too). But now other stories are coming out.
In this case it was a stewardess on an air force flight.
From the Lifezette article:
Notice that last; Clinton often seemed to go for sweet women. Makes perfect sense given the Gila Monster he cohabitated with (as little as he could get away with, of course, but he still was married to the beast.)
But let's face it; Clinton had a real problem. I don't know if he got too little attentioin when he was a child or what, but there are deep psychological problems plaguing the former President. Nobody is led by their willies like Slick Willie.
There's no lech like an old lech...
Bill Clinton Faced With New Sexual Misconduct Allegation From Inside His Own Team
We all knew Lewinsky and Jones were just the tip of the iceberg (sorty to mention tips and Bill Clinton in the same sentence; I know that hurts my mind's eye too). But now other stories are coming out.
In this case it was a stewardess on an air force flight.
From the Lifezette article:
Lt. Col. Buzz Patterson, who served as the senior military aide responsible for carrying the "nuclear football” during the Clinton administration, shared the account in a post on X.
The incident, he says, occurred while returning from a trip on Air Force One and involved inappropriate conduct by the then-president toward a young female member of the military staff.
"We landed on the South Lawn at about midnight,” Patterson wrote.
"And, after ensuring the president was on his way to his residence upstairs, I headed to my bedroom in the East Wing. Shortly thereafter, my phone rang and it was the AF-1 presidential pilot. ‘Buzz, we have a problem,’ he said.”
Patterson stated that the pilot informed him of an incident in which President Clinton had allegedly "cornered a female AF-1 steward in the galley and molested her.”
The stewardess, a married Air Force staff sergeant with children, was described by Patterson as someone he knew personally and considered "super sweet.
The incident, he says, occurred while returning from a trip on Air Force One and involved inappropriate conduct by the then-president toward a young female member of the military staff.
"We landed on the South Lawn at about midnight,” Patterson wrote.
"And, after ensuring the president was on his way to his residence upstairs, I headed to my bedroom in the East Wing. Shortly thereafter, my phone rang and it was the AF-1 presidential pilot. ‘Buzz, we have a problem,’ he said.”
Patterson stated that the pilot informed him of an incident in which President Clinton had allegedly "cornered a female AF-1 steward in the galley and molested her.”
The stewardess, a married Air Force staff sergeant with children, was described by Patterson as someone he knew personally and considered "super sweet.
Notice that last; Clinton often seemed to go for sweet women. Makes perfect sense given the Gila Monster he cohabitated with (as little as he could get away with, of course, but he still was married to the beast.)
But let's face it; Clinton had a real problem. I don't know if he got too little attentioin when he was a child or what, but there are deep psychological problems plaguing the former President. Nobody is led by their willies like Slick Willie.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:57 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 327 words, total size 2 kb.
Leftist Judge to Preside Over Trial
Timothy Birdnow
Meet the judge who is going to preside over the trial of Judge Hannah Dugan, the woman who interfered with ICE by schlepping an illegal criminal alien out her back door (no, that's not a ribald comment.)
Turns out the guy who drew the lucky straw is a radical leftist Trump-hating activist named Lynn Adelman.
Adelman was a Bill Clinton appointtee known for his radicalism. Jonathan Turley observed:
So we have one radical judging another radical. What could go wrong?
Meet the judge who is going to preside over the trial of Judge Hannah Dugan, the woman who interfered with ICE by schlepping an illegal criminal alien out her back door (no, that's not a ribald comment.)
Turns out the guy who drew the lucky straw is a radical leftist Trump-hating activist named Lynn Adelman.
Adelman was a Bill Clinton appointtee known for his radicalism. Jonathan Turley observed:
…Judge Adelman attacked Chief Justice Roberts as lying in his confirmation hearing and described Trump as "an autocrat” who is "disinclined to buck the wealthy individuals and corporations who control his party.”…
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 20, 2025
"He was previously reversed and rebuked in a voter ID case after largely ignoring controlling precedent. For many conservatives, they may see little difference between the two judges in the case in terms of their demeanor and detachment,” Turley continued.
"Judge Alderman’s public commentary is another example of how extrajudicial statements undermine the judiciary. This history should not be added to a controversial case and raise questions over the objectivity and neutrality of the court.”
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 20, 2025
"He was previously reversed and rebuked in a voter ID case after largely ignoring controlling precedent. For many conservatives, they may see little difference between the two judges in the case in terms of their demeanor and detachment,” Turley continued.
"Judge Alderman’s public commentary is another example of how extrajudicial statements undermine the judiciary. This history should not be added to a controversial case and raise questions over the objectivity and neutrality of the court.”
So we have one radical judging another radical. What could go wrong?
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:37 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 202 words, total size 2 kb.
The Whole Abortion Enchilada?
Timothy Birdnow
Here is a piece at Western Journalism about how the GOOP is making a huge mistake in their handling of abortion in Missouri.
The author here is wrong; Missouri is not a "deep red state" but rather a pink state with the GOP holding a supermajority. That is not because Missourians are ultra conservative (though many of us are) but because the state Democrats are so over-the-top and leaderless they haven't been able to offer any reason for Missourians to vote for them.
But the state GOP is RINO, not conservative, and while we have some great guys from here like Josh Hawley or Eric Schmidt we are also the state that gave America John Danforth and Roy Blunt. And we elected Claire McCaskill TWICE. I would also point out Corey Bush was from Missouri and she was a squad member.
Missourians recently approved a constitutional amendment enshring abortion and the state GOP, in a moment of backbone, wants to annul that vote.
Voters approved the amendment 51.6% to 48.4%.
The state legislature has introduced House Joint Resolution 73, which seeks to put abortion back on the ballot.
The House Republicans left in the weasel clauses, omitting "fetal anomalies" and exempting rape and incsts.
I get the author's complaint; he sees abortion (as do I) as murder plain and simple, and argues this will enshrien abortion into the Constitution. I get his problem here. But it is fruitless to tilt at windmills and overturning abortion in the state without those exemptions is impossible, meaning many more children will die simply because some people are determined to stand on principle and cut off their own noses to spite their faces.
A huge part of why Missourians voted for the amendment enshrining abortion into the constitituion in the first place was because the state GOP had been discussing banning abortion with no exceptions. Polls show clearly Missourians want certain situations exempted.
He doesn't like that and I get it. But if we can repeal abortion first, we can update the constitution later and eliminate the loopholes. But there is nothing to be gained by obstinacy.
Missouri Right to Life favors the bill, which should tell us it's the best we can do. They are not compromisers. (My mother was big in Missouri Right to Life when I was a kid, by the way.)
The author of this piece doesn't understand that the amendment that made abortion the law of the land passed by narrow margins in a wave election for the GOP, and going into an off-year election will likely fail as voters traditionally favor the party out of power - and their policies. It would be a much harder fight to get this out than to stop it last time. If we couldn't stop it during a wave of conservatism, how do we roll it back without that wave?
I get his viewpoint and largely share it; I'm not known as a great compromiser. I believe that we should LEAD, that in leading people will follow. The GOP for decades has not wanted to lead, but merely wetted a finger and poked it in the air. I've long argued for boldness in politics, that you get people on board by bold colors and not pastels. But this is an instance where I think slow and steady wins the race. I've disagreed with many Conservatives over this idea we should eliminate abortion quickly and decisively because I am pretty certain this will only lead to a backlash. The abortionists had 52 years to win the hearts and minds of Americans; we should at least be willing to take a few years to win them back. I know children are dying, but losing out on restrictions because we go for the whole enchilada will only lead to more children dying needlessly. It's rather like Zelensky being unwilling to negotiate a settlement in Ukraine; he could wind up president of an empty country. Obstinacy can be quite foolish sometimes.
Here is a piece at Western Journalism about how the GOOP is making a huge mistake in their handling of abortion in Missouri.
The author here is wrong; Missouri is not a "deep red state" but rather a pink state with the GOP holding a supermajority. That is not because Missourians are ultra conservative (though many of us are) but because the state Democrats are so over-the-top and leaderless they haven't been able to offer any reason for Missourians to vote for them.
But the state GOP is RINO, not conservative, and while we have some great guys from here like Josh Hawley or Eric Schmidt we are also the state that gave America John Danforth and Roy Blunt. And we elected Claire McCaskill TWICE. I would also point out Corey Bush was from Missouri and she was a squad member.
Missourians recently approved a constitutional amendment enshring abortion and the state GOP, in a moment of backbone, wants to annul that vote.
Voters approved the amendment 51.6% to 48.4%.
The state legislature has introduced House Joint Resolution 73, which seeks to put abortion back on the ballot.
The House Republicans left in the weasel clauses, omitting "fetal anomalies" and exempting rape and incsts.
I get the author's complaint; he sees abortion (as do I) as murder plain and simple, and argues this will enshrien abortion into the Constitution. I get his problem here. But it is fruitless to tilt at windmills and overturning abortion in the state without those exemptions is impossible, meaning many more children will die simply because some people are determined to stand on principle and cut off their own noses to spite their faces.
A huge part of why Missourians voted for the amendment enshrining abortion into the constitituion in the first place was because the state GOP had been discussing banning abortion with no exceptions. Polls show clearly Missourians want certain situations exempted.
He doesn't like that and I get it. But if we can repeal abortion first, we can update the constitution later and eliminate the loopholes. But there is nothing to be gained by obstinacy.
Missouri Right to Life favors the bill, which should tell us it's the best we can do. They are not compromisers. (My mother was big in Missouri Right to Life when I was a kid, by the way.)
The author of this piece doesn't understand that the amendment that made abortion the law of the land passed by narrow margins in a wave election for the GOP, and going into an off-year election will likely fail as voters traditionally favor the party out of power - and their policies. It would be a much harder fight to get this out than to stop it last time. If we couldn't stop it during a wave of conservatism, how do we roll it back without that wave?
I get his viewpoint and largely share it; I'm not known as a great compromiser. I believe that we should LEAD, that in leading people will follow. The GOP for decades has not wanted to lead, but merely wetted a finger and poked it in the air. I've long argued for boldness in politics, that you get people on board by bold colors and not pastels. But this is an instance where I think slow and steady wins the race. I've disagreed with many Conservatives over this idea we should eliminate abortion quickly and decisively because I am pretty certain this will only lead to a backlash. The abortionists had 52 years to win the hearts and minds of Americans; we should at least be willing to take a few years to win them back. I know children are dying, but losing out on restrictions because we go for the whole enchilada will only lead to more children dying needlessly. It's rather like Zelensky being unwilling to negotiate a settlement in Ukraine; he could wind up president of an empty country. Obstinacy can be quite foolish sometimes.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:09 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 671 words, total size 4 kb.
<< Page 1 of 916 >>
93kb generated in CPU 0.2012, elapsed 1.0642 seconds.
36 queries taking 1.0532 seconds, 213 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
36 queries taking 1.0532 seconds, 213 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
