Thursday, January 17, 2019

The Dems will all be RGB...Really Going Bananas!

Ruth Bader Ginsburg is hale and hearty at 85 years old, and plans to outlast Donald Trump's Presidency by sitting on the Ccourt until she is 90.

Unless, of course, fate has other plans for her.

At the moment, she is convalescing at home after lung surgery and has cancelled all public events for the rest of the month.  Her declining health has fueled speculation that Donald Trump is, in fact, going to get to make a third Supreme Court selection in the near future.

A third conservative Trump SCOTUS appointment would alter the balance of the Court for years to come.  It would nominally create a 6-3 conservative majority, all but guaranteeing significant changes in public policy on several hotly debated topics.

This terrifies Democrats and the Left.   They have made huge advances in their agenda over the past 20 years primarily through the courts.   Gay marriage and abortion rights failed on every ballot they were ever on, and only became law through the SCOTUS.  All of that progress is at risk with a more conservative Court. 

The Democrats cannot afford for this to happen.

If Ginsburg's seat opens up, they will execute a three part plan beyond the usual confirmation hearings circus:

1.  Impeach the President.  The House will vote to Impeach the President on some pretext.  The Mueller report, his refusal to disclose his tax returns, buying hamberders for Clemson, or some other spurious charge will be the excuse.  They know full well that the Impeachment will end with the Senate refusing to remove the President, but that doesn't really matter.  All they want to do is de-legitimize his SCOTUS picks.


2.  Call the SCOTUS picks illegitimate.   The Democrats and the press will scream from the rafters that Trump should not be allowed to pick a third Justice because he has been impeached.   The Peoples house voted to impeach him, and that means he has lost his mandate as President, they will claim.  Therefore, they will argue, the Ginsburg seat should remain vacant until after the 2020 election.  If Trump manages to seat a new Justice, they will then use the 'illegitimate court' argument to impugn and demean every decision of that court.  Note that the Democrats have already laid the groundwork for these claims, stating that the Kavanaugh selection is invalid because Trump is under investigation.

3.  Pack the Court.  There is no Constitutionally defined number of Justices on the SCOTUS.  The number of justices has been as low as 6 and as high as 10.  Since the 9-Justice SCOTUS will be 'illegitimate', and there will be no prospect for righting that wrong for many decades, the Democrats will pack the court.. Similar to the FDR's scheme in the late 30's, they will simply add members to the Court until they have a solid majority.  A 15 Justice court would be about right to achieve a liberal majority for the foreseeable future.  In fact, there are already calls for a Court packing plan being floated in the press. 

The Democrats want power, and they will stop and nothing to get it. 

Thursday, January 10, 2019

Fake News is Fake....

Once again the Media demonstrates just how much Fake news they push. 


Government Shut Down is a Dangerous Game.. for the Government

The Government Shutdown enters its 19th day as Trump battles it out with Democrats over a border wall.  This is a reckless and dangerous gamble to take, and it creates enormous risk that... the people might discover that we don't really need the Government.

The new is full of endless stories about the economic hardships imposed on furloughed government workers by a hardhearted Trump and the dangers of Government services not being provided.  Such critical services as updating Magnitski Act sanctions, publishing reports of economic data,  and other random things are reported as a dire crisis.

It has been noted in dire tones that the FDA is not conducting food inspections during the shutdown and that this places our food supply at risk.

Nonsense. 

The FDA has zero impact on food safety. 

"But what if there is an outbreak of contaminated Romaine lettuce!??" they ask breathlessly. 

Well, since we recently had that exact event happen last fall while the FDA was fully functional, I'm guessing the FDA has no impact. 

The FDA oversight is an excellent example of why most Government services are a complete waste. Do you believe that, absent Government FDA inspectors, your local grocery store would be selling you rotting, infested meat and salmonella laden groceries?  That farmers would knowingly sell contaminated milk and beef, or diseased eggs?

No.  They would not.   Businesses don't make a profit killing their customers.  The food supply is safe because there are millions of businesses working 24 hours a day to ensure cleanliness and safety, not because there are a few hundred inspectors wandering around.  Businesses try not to kill customers because killing customers is bad for business, not because of regulations. 

The biggest risk to the Government and it's employees is that people get wise to how little value it is really adding. 



Friday, January 4, 2019

Armed Teachers are NOT what the anti-gun crowd claims

Every time we have a school shooting, the Left calls for more gun control.   The Right advocates for removing the Gun Free zone restrictions that made the target attractive to the shooter in the first place.

The current situation is untenable: Shooters are able to roam the halls of the school shooting people who are utterly unable to to defend themselves.   This continues until they run out of victims, ammo, or someone else with a gun finally shows up.  In the case of Parkland, the response was so slow and inept, the shooter simply got bored and walked out of the school mixed in with other students.

Our students and teachers deserve better. One proposal that gets wildly mis-interpreted by both sides is the relatively simple idea of allowing school personnel to carry concealed firearms. 

The Left reacts with horror and derision to this idea.  They claim that armed teachers would be as much of threat to students as the actual shooter, and that you cannot expect teachers to do that which the police will not, namely charge into the hallways to hunt down the killer.

The Left also creates straw-man arguments that are not the actual proposal.  "What, teachers are going to wear body armor and carry assault rifles all day?' or "Oh, sure, the librarian and the school nurse will sweep the building like a SWAT team".

The Right over complicates the whole thing.  They advocate for rigorous training and mental health exams for teachers before they are allowed to carry concealed weapons into the school.  This will have the effect of radically reducing the pool of teachers who are willing to carry a gun.   The armed teacher population will thus be extremely small, making the whole idea ineffective.

The idea is much simpler and more effective:  Allow willing teachers to carry a concealed firearm.  This makes things much harder on a would be school shooter and will limit the time they have to roam the halls massacring students. 

The teachers would not have training in SWAT tactics.  They would not be responsible to form fire teams and hunt down the shooter.  They would simply be able to defend themselves and the students by shooting back if the opportunity arose/

At Parkland, the gym teacher responded to the shooting by charging at the shooter.  Had he been armed, he may not have died like he did.  Another teacher heard the initial shots and went to the door to investigate.  The shooter was a few yards away, back turned, reloading his gun.  The teacher closed and locked the door, and the shooter went on to murder a dozen more people.  Had that teacher been armed she may have been able to end the rampage right there. 

Armed teachers are an excellent deterrent to school shootings, and we do not need to over complicate the idea:  simply allow those teachers who are willing and basically qualified to carry a gun.  This will greatly increase safety in our schools..

Wednesday, January 2, 2019

NJ Magazine Ban is a Game Changer

New Jersey's ban on rifle magazines has turned out to be a dud. According to Ammoland.com and other sources, not ONE of the estimated 10 million now-illegal rifle magazines in the hands of NJ residents has been turned in to police in the first 30 days of the law taking effect. 

This means that virtually every rifle owner in the State of New Jersey is now a felon.   And the same goes for Massachusetts, where a ban on bump-stocks netted only 3 banned stocks being turned into the police. 

The implications of this mass civil disobedience are profound.  It demonstrates that even in the most Democratic, left-leaning state, there is very little support for gun control. 

It also alters the math for the results of an actual gun ban.  In earlier posts on this blog, we talked about the mass carnage that would ensue from  99.9% compliance with the demand to turn in all your guns.  The math is pretty simple when you assume extremely high compliance: 750,000+ SWAT raids that kill tens of thousands of people and likely spark a civil war.

The 99.9% compliance assumption appears not only to be wrong, but to be exactly the opposite of what will happen in reality.  If the Second Amendment was repealed and guns banned, 750,000 people could turn in their guns and we would still have 99% non-compliance. 

The gun control crows whips themselves into a frenzy over their fantasy of making every civilian gun in the country vanish.   The early results look pretty bad for the viability of that dream: exactly no one is complying with gun bans.

The NJ Magazine ban is a game changer, but not in the way the gun control commissars think.