Currently Browsing: Politics
Aug 15, 2016
Pennsylvania’s proud first female Attorney General hasn’t been able to practice law for months. Tonight, she was found guilty of perjury, obstruction, and other counts of abusing her official position in order to exact illegal revenge on an opponent.
Did I mention that the Clintons are huge supporters?
It shouldn’t be surprising that Kathleen Kane’s attorney indicates that she’s still not going to make any move to resign. The woman won’t give up, despite widespread calls from her party to resign. She has not yet been jailed, but she must come back to court tomorrow to surrender her passport, and she was issued a warning that any hint of retaliation against witnesses will put her behind bars immediately.
Aug 15, 2016
What killed the tea party:
What began as an organic, policy-driven grass-roots movement was drained of its vitality and resources by national political action committees that dunned the movement’s true believers endlessly for money to support its candidates and causes. The PACs used that money first to enrich themselves and their vendors and then deployed most of the rest to search for more “prospects.” In Tea Party world, that meant mostly older, technologically unsavvy people willing to divulge personal information through “petitions”—which only made them prey to further attempts to lighten their wallets for what they believed was a good cause. While the solicitations continue, the audience has greatly diminished because of a lack of policy results and changing political winds.
This is a lesson gun people could use as well. We’re all going to have to become a lot more politically sophisticated to survive what is coming, and that means being able to recognize charlatans after your money, who have no real organization backing them up, when you see it.
One reason the left wins and the right loses is the left is a lot more politically sophisticated.
Aug 10, 2016
A lot of hay is being made out of Trump’s statement on Hillary’s nominees to the Supreme Court:
“Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the 2nd Amendment,” Trump told the crowd in Wilmington, N.C. “By the way, and if she gets to pick if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do folks. Although the 2nd Amendment people, maybe there is. I don’t know.”
I didn’t take this as an invitation for people to off Hillary or her nominees, but as an indication that we had the political power to block her nominees. That the left, and many people in our issue, are taking his statement this way is a form of self-immolation. The implication is that we would do such a thing, and are inarticulate enough to announce it publicly. And maybe Trump really believes that. Who knows? But I don’t think we should help them out by jumping on it ourselves.
It should be apparent by now that Trump doesn’t stop for two seconds to consider whether and/or how he should say the shit that moves to the tip of his tongue. I’m not going to engage in hand wringing over this one. This is what we’ve come to expect.
Aug 8, 2016
Funny how once places that stop respecting your right to keep and bear arms usually stop respecting you altogether:
New Jersey already draws ire for not letting drivers pump their own gas. But the state might ban them from having a cup of coffee behind the wheel too.
Keep in mind that using a cell phone (other than hands-free) is already illegal for everyone in New Jersey, as is texting while driving. Though, given what I see from Jersey drivers on the Turnpike, maybe having a breakfast burrito and driving might be a bit much for them.
Wisniewski said he has seen people try to multitask while driving, even reading newspapers behind the wheel, according to News 12 New Jersey. The law, he said, is meant to educate, not punish motorists.
Oh, so there’s no fines associated with it then? A big problem with politicians in general is that they think we’re fucking stupid, and treat us as such.
H/T to Instapundit
Aug 4, 2016
This is what’s going to kill us, to be honest:
“I don’t see any evidence that important Senate races are going to be decided on guns this year, even after Orlando,” said Wes Anderson, the National Rifle Association’s longtime pollster.
Gun control advocates are also preparing for a low profile in November. Everytown for Gun Safety, the gun control group started by former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, has so far targeted only one candidate, New Hampshire Republican Sen. Kelly Ayotte, a leader of the group told American Media Institute.
The Democrats are running the most anti-gun campaign in the party’s history. If we can’t make guns an issue in this election, we might as well start buying PVC tubes, shovels, and cosmoline now, because that’s where they are going to end up if the Dems are rewarded for this bullshit.
Aug 1, 2016
Question 1 on the Nevada Ballot is basically what Bloomberg successfully spent tons of money to get in Washington State. They are back for more of the gun rights pie in Washington, and you can be sure they will be in Nevada as well. Ballot fights almost always go to the side the spends on the most money. Sure, eventually Bloomberg will likely overreach and lose, but where will that be? We were successful at defeating handgun bans via ballot in the 1970s, but what about the new strategy of nibbling around the margins?
It’s useful that a majority of Nevada sheriffs have come out against Question 1.
“It really shows how gun violence is impacting various areas in our communities,” said Jennifer Crowe, spokeswoman for Nevadans for Background Checks. “They know it’ll make a difference and save lives.”
Ask Jennifer Crowe how much money she’s getting from Bloomberg. Rest assured, she’s paid, just like the people who went around to collect the signatures required.
Remember, they’ve been offered a compromise on this which involved full background checks for ever sale, and they rejected it out of hand. This isn’t and has never been about background checks. It’s about using the 4473 to create de-facto registration.
Jul 22, 2016
Hillary’s VP pick is VA Senator (and former governor) Tim Kaine – who has something of a record.
Jul 19, 2016
Glenn Reynolds: “I always say that if I ever quit blogging, it’ll be because I can’t take following the news anymore. It’s depressing.” I remember growing up my aging barber telling me “After a while, the idea of dying doesn’t scare you as much. In some way’s you’ll get happy about the idea of checking out. Look at the shit going on in this world today. And I probably haven’t seen half of what you’ll see. I’ll be happy to be taking a dirt nap.” Of course, the younger me that was told that was also promised flying cars, moon bases, and men on Mars. Today, I can play Pokemon Go!
I think about that a lot these days. I’m really glad my Grandparents didn’t live to have to make the choice between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. It also doesn’t say anything good about our politics that my grandparents, who have been dead for 20 years, would still know both candidates.
UPDATE: This somewhat related WaPo article is a good read. I also did not really appreciate my grandparent’s generation until they were gone, though mine were working class people from South Philly and not upper crust like the authors. Yes, that generation had their issues, but their progeny would have whole subscriptions.
Jul 13, 2016
Cam Edwards latest column:
Have you noticed the cognitive dissonance that many supporters of “common-sense” gun control have been exhibiting as of late? I’m not sure it’s possible to support more gun-control laws and oppose “mass incarceration” or “excessive policing” policies. How can someone argue that young men of color are overpoliced, while at the same time calling for more non-violent-offender gun laws to be placed on the books?
Cam goes on to ponder why the media was quick to jump on NRA’s lack of commentary, then cautious commentary on the Castile shooting, but isn’t asking Bloomberg about his “stop and frisk” policies that he promoted as mayor, which even he conceded disproportionally jailed minorities for non-violent offenses.
Jul 7, 2016
Some unfortunate news from Pennsylvania Superior Court. I believe Superior Courts mean this is now law in the entire state, so currently, it is now illegal to carry weapons on school property. The law states:
§ 912. Possession of weapon on school property.
(a) Definition.–Notwithstanding the definition of “weapon” in section 907 (relating to possessing instruments of crime),”weapon” for purposes of this section shall include but not be limited to any knife, cutting instrument, cutting tool, nun-chuck stick, firearm, shotgun, rifle and any other tool, instrument or implement capable of inflicting serious bodily injury.
(b) Offense defined.–A person commits a misdemeanor of the first degree if he possesses a weapon in the buildings of, on the grounds of, or in any conveyance providing transportation to or from any elementary or secondary publicly-funded educational institution, any elementary or secondary private school licensed by the Department of Education or any elementary or secondary parochial school.
(c) Defense.–It shall be a defense that the weapon is possessed and used in conjunction with a lawful supervised school activity or course or is possessed for other lawful purpose.
The Superior Court ruled that “other lawful purpose” needed to have a sanction from the school. In other words, the lunch ladies can have knives in the school, because their purpose is to cook lunch for the kiddies. The janitor can have a screwdriver, but not a student.
Statutes that are vague or unclear are supposed to be interpreted in a light most favorable to the defendant, but this very clear language, which exempts lawful purposes, was read to favor the state. The law already carved out an exception for the lunch ladies when it said “It shall be a defense that the weapon is possessed and used in conjunction with a lawful supervised school activity or course,” but then it went on to create a separate defense, the “other lawful purposes” defense, for the chef dropping his kid off at school on the way to the restaurant with the knives he just got sharpened.
As Josh Prince notes in his article, this appeal was pursued by a pro-se defendant, meaning a guy representing himself. That’s usually an invitation to disaster, as it was here. Nonetheless, the law is clear here, but there is no rule of law. They offer us the illusion, and not even a very good illusion, that there is rule of law, all the while ruling however they damned please.