ESSE SINE METU IN FACIE INIMICI TUI. TUENDAM INOPS ET FACERE NON MALI.
Category: Crap For Brains
“Watch me,” President Joe Biden told MSNBC’s Jonathan Capehart this week during one of the most awkward interviews in the history of American politics.
So we did. It was similar to watching John Fetterman, the stroke victim and Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate in Pennsylvania, bumble his way through a debate after his campaign allies in the media insisted he was fine.
“Am I don’t have the same pace?” the president asked Capehart during a discussion about his fitness for office. “Everything physically about me is still functioning well, so you know, and mentally too.” The evidence suggests otherwise.
Biden wandered around like a sluggish toddler chasing a butterfly, told a group of transgender activists about the Democratic Party’s plan to “overrule Dob,” meaning the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson, which struck down Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 ruling that Biden couldn’t remember. He expressed concern that the American “pleople” are “vuedejegguli,” and pledged to encourage economic “innervation.”
The commander in chief, who turns 80 next month, insisted (without evidence) that Vice President Kamala Harris was doing a “great” job. (Just 38 percent of Americans have a favorable opinion of Harris.) A Washington Free Beacon analysis determined that Biden, Harris, and Fetterman would combine to form a single human being of average competence and speaking ability.
Have a great weekend!
I seem to remember this thing called the 1st amendment…..
Lawmakers in California, led by Congressman Mike Thompson, penned a letter asking the Joe Biden administration to hold manufacturers responsible for homemade ghost guns.
Currently, it is relatively easy to buy gun parts, or make them at home with a 3D printer, and create an untraceable firearm. Ghost guns allow people to circumvent the background check requirement to own a gun.
“It is far too easy for anyone to download from the internet the computer code to 3D-print unserialized, untraceable, plastic ‘ghost guns,’” the letter said. “These 3D-printed weapons circumvent our system of gun safety rules and regulations, and pose a serious threat to public safety and national security.”
The question of banning the distribution of blueprints for 3D printed guns has been debated over the years, with much speculation that banning the sharing of blueprints is a First Amendment violation.
“President Biden can undo the Trump-era rule that has made the instructions for the 3D-printing of untraceable and deadly ‘ghost’ guns widely available online,” said Senator Markey. “The online distribution of these ghost gun blueprints only increases the risk of these weapons proliferating and poses a serious threat to public safety and national security. President Biden should fulfil his campaign promise and reverse the Trump administration’s weakening of these gun safety regulations.”
“They’re making firearms and they’re shooting and they’re killing people,” Thompson said.
“If you are a danger to yourself or to others, if you’re dangerously mentally ill, if you’re a criminal, you should not be able to get your mitts on a gun,” he added.
CBS13 asked Thompson about gun advocacy groups pushing back against manufacturers being held liable yet they did not commit the actual crimes.
“I have one word for these groups and that’s, ‘tough.’ We need these rules,” he responded.
Thompson is urging the Biden administration to tighten federal enforcement on these guns because he does not believe that such legislation would pass through Congress.
“Well, I’d like to see congress have the intestinal fortitude to pass legislation that would prohibit this nonsense from taking place. But as you know, as long as they have this 60-vote rule in the Senate, we’re never going to get a bill like that passed,” said Thompson.
Thompson wants the President to direct the ATF and DOJ to pass stricter rules that would hold manufacturers liable for ghost guns.
Not just Glocks, actually. The Violence Policy Center’s Kristen Rand (and a lot of other gun control activists) want the ATF to broadly reclassify semi-automatic firearms as machine guns, and it’s an idea that will likely gain more traction in the gun control lobby if Republicans take back one or both chambers of Congress in the midterms. With no chance of new gun control laws passing on Capitol Hill and the Supreme Court likely to undo some of the existing infringements already on the books, the White House and the executive branch agencies are going to be one of the only places where groups like the VPC can expect to find any traction, and they’re aiming big.
Rand’s argument (one that the gun control group Brady has also made in a recent lawsuit) is that many models of semi-automatic firearms are “readily converted” into machine guns, which would subject them and their owners to the provisions of the National Firearms Act.
As evidence, Rand and others point to the increase in the number of firearms recovered by police that have been illegally adapted with auto sears or switches that enable the guns to fire continuously. The Chicago Sun-Times reports that last year police in the city recovered more than 300 firearms that had been illegally modified to full-auto, and lays out in detail the struggles that law enforcement have in trying to combat their growing popularity among the city’s criminal class. The switches are small and easily available, both from online shippers who sent the switches from China and those who make their own on 3D printers, which is why Rand says the focus should be on the guns themselves.
In July, Democrats in the U.S. Senate introduced a bill to establish “a coordinated national strategy to prevent or intercept the importation and trafficking of automatic gun conversion devices.”
“Gun violence is an epidemic, and lawmakers must do all we can to combat this horrific threat — including by stopping the flow of illegal gun-modification devices into our society,” says U.S. Sen. Gary Peters, D-Michigan, a lead sponsor.
With switches, though, the effort might be too late, says Kristen Rand, government affairs director for the nonprofit Violence Policy Center, which advocates for gun control. She says concentrating on the devices is “probably a lost cause.”
“The focus should be on why so many firearms are so easily converted to full auto,” Rand says, noting that Glocks and other guns can easily be modified. “Manufacturers must bear some of the responsibility to design their guns to be more resistant to conversion.”
From 2018 through late September, 643 of the 706 modified automatic weapons recovered by the Chicago police were Glock handguns, records show.
A spokeswoman for Glock didn’t respond to questions or interview requests.
Rand says ATF should consider using its authority to reclassify certain types of firearms that are easily converted into fully automatic weapons. Other firearms besides Glocks also are “readily convertible” into machine guns by machining or adding a few parts, she says.
“ATF should be looking at using their existing authority to classify some of these firearms as ‘machine guns’ as they did in the 1980s with the KG-9, MAC-10 and STEN,” Rand says. “This is a classic example of how the gun industry escapes responsibility for problems of their own making.”
If concentrating on the switches is a “lost cause” then so is focusing on the gun. After all, we’re talking about hundreds of millions of firearms that would fall under the type of re-classification Rand and other anti-gun activists would like to see from the ATF. But for Rand and other anti-gun activists, that’s not a bug, but a feature. In fact, the more guns that are re-classified the better.
At best the vast majority of U.S. gun owners would have to register their guns with the federal government and pay a $200 per gun fee or else become a criminal subject to ten years in an federal prison for possession of an unregistered machine gun. At worst, the Biden administration and Attorney General Merrick Garland could argue that since the Hughes Amendment prohibits the registration of any machine gun made after 1986, tens of millions of Americans need to hand over their legally purchased and lawfully owned pistols and rifles. Either one would be the most significant victory the gun control lobby has ever achieved, though one that would face an immediate court challenge.
The Supreme Court has already declared that arms that are in common use are, prima facie, protected by the Second Amendment. Only those arms that are dangerous and “unusual” fall outside of the Second Amendment’s protections, and it’s hard to argue with a straight face that semi-automatic firearms aren’t in common use for a variety of lawful purposes. I have no idea what would happen if “readily converted” meets “dangerous and unusual” inside the Court’s chambers, but if the gun control lobby gets its way we’re all going to find out soon enough.
When you don’t have facts or reason on your side and don’t care to learn the facts, what’s left?
Dumping milk onto floors. Hurling food onto walls. Refusing to eat. Gluing body parts. Throwing paint. Refusing to leave. Threatening to pee and poop in your pants. Screaming accusations. Are those the behaviors of a toddler’s temper tantrum? Yes. But they’re also the dominant tactics of today’s climate activists.
Consider the case of Gianluca Grimalda. On October 19, Grimalda, along with 15 other members of a climate activist group called Scientist Rebellion, glued himself to the floor of the visitors center next to a Volkswagon factory in Germany. The VW security guards brought pizza to Grimalda and the other activist scientists, but Grimalda felt disrespected and so he declared a hunger strike in retaliation.
Grimalda immediately expressed outrage at his treatment. “VW told us that they supported our right to protest,” he complained on Twitter, “but they refused our request to provide us with a bowl to urinate and defecate in a decent manner while we are glued, and have turned off the heating.”
Many were quick to point out the childish nature of the protest. “I’m a serious scientist protesting against fossil fuels,” wrote one user. “Now turn the gas heating on and bring me my potty.”
The activists say that such childish tactics were necessary. Grimalda tweeted that he and his colleagues are protesting “until our demands to decarbonise the German transport sector are met.” On Sunday, after climate activists in Germany threw mashed potatoes on a Monet painting, they screamed at the nearby museum-goers. “We won’t be able to feed our families in 2050” because of climate change, they alleged.
But Volkswagen already agreed last year to end the sale of vehicles with internal combustion engines by 2035, and the UN Food & Agriculture Organization (FAO) predicts rising yields under even very high temperatures so long as farmers keep using fertilizer, irrigation, and tractors. That is, yields will continue under climate change so long as farmers don’t take the advice of climate activists.
The activists who keep degrading precious works of art, and themselves, claim to be concerned about food and energy supplies, but in opposing oil, gas and fertilizer production they are actively reducing both. Over the last several months, I have described the demands of climate activists as fanatical and pointed to a large body of evidence suggesting that nihilism, narcissism, and feelings of personal inadequacy are the primary motives.
But nihilism, narcissism, and personal inadequacy alone do not explain why climate activists have chosen temper tantrum tactics. After all, the greatest protest movements of all time engaged in far more grown-up and dignified tactics. Think of the Salt March led by Gandhi, the Montgomery Bus Boycott led by Martin Luther King, and the anti-whaling protests of Greenpeace.
Where protesters in the past asked to be treated like adults, climate protesters today demand to be treated like children. Civil rights activists in the 1950s sat at lunch counters and demanded to be treated like full adults. Notably, it was racist counterprotesters who poured milkshakes over them. Today, it’s the protesters who are spilling milk and throwing food.
Why is that, exactly? Why have Left-wing activists regressed in their tactics?
The people in the protests are themselves apparently dignified people. Grimalda is an economist who works at the Kiel Institute for the World Economy. He has published for the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science, Nature Communications, and other prestigious publications. Why, then, are he and his colleagues acting like babies?
Role Reversal
Racist counterprotesters dump milkshakes over a white social science professor and his black students sitting at the “Whites Only” counter in Woolworth’s store lunch counter in May 1963 in Jackson, Mississippi (left). Climate activists dump soup over Van Gogh’s “Sunflowers” in October 2022 (right).
Crap For Brains Quote O’ the Day
Sen. Nia Gill (D- Essex) pushed back on some of Durr’s claims about the bill violating the Constitution and the Supreme Court’s June ruling……
“This is an exercise in legislation that we must do in order for the court to determine the legislative constitutionality of it,” Gill said.
A fast-tracked bill to limit concealed carry in New Jersey hit a snag Thursday when Assembly leaders yanked it from a scheduled vote, conceding its broad restrictions could fold under constitutional scrutiny.
The canceled vote came the same day a Senate panel approved the bill along party lines — and with about 15 amendments that appear to be aimed at appeasing critics who have vowed to fight any new law in court. The bill, introduced two weeks ago, has already been approved along party lines by three Assembly committees.
Assemblyman Louis Greenwald (D-Camden), one of the bill’s sponsors and the majority leader in the Assembly, said legislators plan to revise language in the bill to ensure “it’s directly in line with our legislative intent.”
“That may help constitutional arguments at the end of the day,” Greenwald said. “There’s a focus on making sure that it’s not too broad, not too vague, and that it withstands a challenge.”
Greenwald said lawmakers still aim to pass the bill by the end of November.
“Obviously, the day that the governor signs it, there’s going to be legal challenges — those against it have already made that clear,” said Assemblyman John McKeon (D-Essex), another bill sponsor. “So we’re just doing everything we need to do to cross our t’s and dot our i’s. There’s no lack of resolve. If anything, we’re even more determined to get something to the governor’s desk.”
Legislators say they drafted the bill to counter the uptick in gun usage they anticipate after about 300,000 gun owners applied for concealed carry permits in the wake of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in June that affirmed a constitutional right to carry. In that ruling, the nation’s highest court struck down a New York law requiring gun owners to prove a reason why they need to carry a concealed gun, prompting New Jersey to remove its similar “justifiable need” requirement.
New Jersey’s bill would create new hurdles for gun owners seeking carry permits and carve out 25 categories of sensitive places where guns are prohibited, which range from beaches to bars to parks.
But gun rights advocates have singled out various provisions of the bill they find problematic — and grounds for a court challenge. A federal judge in New York last week temporarily halted a similar ban there on guns in sensitive places, citing constitutional concerns.
Some of the amendments made to New Jersey’s bill since its introduction have addressed critics’ concerns. After gun supporters complained about one provision that would allow the state’s 565 municipalities to define their own sensitive places where guns would be banned, lawmakers amended the bill to remove it.
Scott Bach, president of the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, on Wednesday sounded the alarm about other language in the bill referring to “weapons.” Such vague wording could refer to any everyday tool, including mops, kitchen cutlery, and knitting needles, the association warned in an alert to members.
Greenwald on Thursday conceded the weapons verbiage was one tweak legislators would make before rescheduling the bill for a full Assembly vote.
We’re just doing everything we need to do to cross our t’s and dot our i’s. There’s no lack of resolve. If anything, we’re even more determined to get something to the governor’s desk.
– Assemblyman John McKeon
Earlier in the day, during the Senate’s Law and Public Safety Committee, Sen. Linda Greenstein (D-Middlesex), the committee’s chair, agreed some unclear language in the bill needs further consideration.
The committee made 15 amendments to the bill. Two amendments would remove requirements that someone with a carry permit stopped by police produce the gun for inspection and show proof of liability insurance. Two more would allow active and retired law enforcement officers to carry a handgun in sensitive places where the public can’t take them.
Still, supporters and critics spent nearly three hours debating the bill Thursday, with some especially testy exchanges between the panel’s Democratic members and Sen. Ed Durr (R-Gloucester), whose political campaign centered on Second Amendment rights.
Sen. Ed Durr (R-Gloucester) testifies against a bill that would limit concealed carry at the Senate Law and Public Safety Committee on Oct. 27, 2022. (Photo by Dana DiFilippo | New Jersey Monitor)
“If I were to sit here and list all the problems with this bill, we’d be here until sometime next week,” Durr told the panel.
Durr especially objected to the increased fees proposed in the legislation, complaining they would “make it impossible for a person of modest means to protect him- or herself.”
He questioned the state’s ongoing effort to reduce its prison population while tightening gun control at the same time.
“You were making room (in prison) for all the responsible but unlucky gun owners who are going to unintentionally violate this bill,” he said.
Sen. Nia Gill (D- Essex) pushed back on some of Durr’s claims about the bill violating the Constitution and the Supreme Court’s June ruling.
“I’m a lawyer,” Gill told Durr.
He responded, “I’ve seen many lawyers get things wrong.”
Gill retorted: “I’ve seen legislators get them wrong too.”
After almost three hours of testimony, the panel advanced the bill.
“This is an exercise in legislation that we must do in order for the court to determine the legislative constitutionality of it,” Gill said.
In the race for governor of New York, Republican Lee Zeldin has been hammering Democrat Kathy Hochul on crime and it has been working.
Last night, during their only debate, Zeldin kept up the pressure on this issue and it led to one of those definitive debate moments that people remember.
‘Don’t know why that’s so important’: Hochul baffled when Zeldin talks jailing criminals during NY gov debate
Gov. Kathy Hochul stunningly said she didn’t know why it’s “so important” to lock up criminals when confronted by Republican challenger Lee Zeldin over the state’s controversial bail reform law during their first and only debate Tuesday night.
Zeldin, who’s pledged to declare a crime emergency and suspend cashless bail if elected, brought up the issue midway through the televised face-off.
“My opponent thinks that right now there’s a polio emergency going on but there’s not a crime emergency — different priorities than I’m hearing from people right now,” the outgoing congressman from Long Island said.
“They’re not being represented from this governor — who still, to this moment…hasn’t talked about locking up anyone committing any crimes.”
Hochul responded by saying, “Anyone who commits a crime, under our laws, especially with the changes we made to bail, has consequences.
“I don’t know why that’s so important to you,” the incumbent Democrat added. “All I know is that we could do more.”
Here’s the video
.@leezeldin: "She still hasn’t talked about locking up anyone committing any crimes.”
What’s driving them? And how can they be defeated?
Protesters with “Just Stop Oil” after throwing tomato soup at Van Gogh’s “Sunflowers” in London, October 14, 2022. (Photo Credit: Just Stop Oil.)
“The fiercest fanatics are often selfish people who were forced, by innate shortcomings or external circumstances, to lose faith in their own selves. They separate the excellent instrument of their selfishness from their ineffectual selves and attach it to the service of some holy cause.”
— ERIC HOFFER, THE TRUE BELIEVER
Over the last few weeks, climate activists in Britain have blocked highways (because cars emit carbon dioxide), poured milk onto the floors of supermarkets (because livestock emits methane), and thrown tomato soup at Van Gogh’s “Sunflowers” (because climate change is more important than art. Or something). The activists are a kind of reboot of the Extinction Rebellion (XR) climate protests in the UK in the fall of 2019.
People in the UK are at risk of dying from natural gas shortages. Still, the climate activists with “Just Stop Oil” think it’s outrageous that their government is desperately trying to produce more natural gas for its people. But without more natural gas, there could be three-hour-long blackouts, which threaten the operation of medical equipment, and thus the lives of vulnerable people.
The various media stunts appeared authentically grassroots but were, in fact, financed by a $1 million grant from a philanthropic group called Climate Emergency Fund, which is funded by their heirs to the Getty and Rockefeller oil fortunes, and founded in 2019. The Board of Directors consists of a who’s-who of climate alarmism including “Don’t Look Up!” film director, Adam McKay, who donated $4 million, New Yorker writer Bill McKibben, and New York Times columnist David Wallace-Wells.
The Fund and their grantees have been cheered on by the Secretary General of the United Nations and much of the mainstream media.
A portion of the web page of Climate Emergency Fund.
In a series of recent articles I have argued that what lies behind climate fanaticism and narcissism is an apocalyptic religion born from nihilism. The power of science to explain humankind’s place in the universe (e.g., the big bang, evolution by natural selection) resulted in a dominant narrative coming out of society’s elite institutions for over 100 years that human life has no inherent meaning or purpose (nihilism). We’re just animals like any other.
This depressing story has led the ostensibly secular elite, which are educated and indoctrinated in universities that teach nihilism as unquestioning scientific gospel, to create a new apocalyptic religion (climate catastrophe), complete with a new victim-god (nature), a new reason for guilt (sins against nature), and a path for redemption (renewables and low-energy living). It, and the broader Woke religion, have found intellectual ballast since World War II from Rousseau, Malthus, and Foucault.
But that account only partly addresses the motivations of the fanatics. It doesn’t answer why some people become fanatics and others don’t. It doesn’t explain the specific role of fanatics, particularly in relation to other actors, such as the intellectual architects of the movement, and the institution-builders. Nor does it address how fanaticism ends and what, if anything, can be done to hasten its expiration date.
As such, we need to ask, who exactly are the climate fanatics? And how can their power over Western cultural and political life be reduced?
His brain is acting like a computer with defective RAM.
Observation O’ The Day Given how much editing NBC and its sister networks must do to get usable footage of Biden, that they allowed this to air could be a preview of how the networks will start treating him post-midterms. –Ed Driscoll
WATCH: North Carolina Democrat Senate candidate Cheri Beasley says it’s “deeply troubling” and “very dangerous” that irreversible sex reassignment surgery and puberty blockers for KIDS are not paid for by taxpayers. pic.twitter.com/H9Yg28OxKf
BELLEVUE, WA – A federal judge in Tacoma, Washington has allowed a Seattle-based gun prohibition lobbying group to intervene as a defendant in the Second Amendment Foundation’s challenge of an Evergreen State magazine ban which became effective July 1.
The billionaire-backed Alliance for Gun Responsibility requested intervention only days after the law took effect. Their motion was supported by Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson and State Patrol Chief John Batiste, who are defendants in the case. The Alliance supported the magazine ban as part of its gun prohibition political agenda, and Ferguson requested the legislation earlier this year.
“Apparently the Alliance is worried Ferguson isn’t capable of defending his own magazine ban in this lawsuit,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “Obviously, after the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision last June, the gun ban lobby fears the state may not be able to defend any of its gun laws, including a couple passed by initiative campaigns the Alliance financed.”
SAF is joined in the lawsuit by the Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc., Rainier Arms, LLC and two private citizens, Daniel Martin and Gabriela Sullivan. The case is known as Sullivan v. Ferguson.
“A few days after the high court handed down its ruling in Bruen,” Gottlieb recalled, “the Supreme Court granted certiorari to two other magazine ban challenges, in California and New Jersey. The court vacated lower court rulings in both cases and remanded the cases back to the respective appeals courts for further action in compliance with the language in Bruen.
“Based on the Supreme Court’s action in both magazine ban cases,” he added, “it is clear such restrictive laws might be in serious trouble, which explains why the Alliance is interested. Courts in California have already ruled that state’s magazine ban is unconstitutional, and that position may now stand when the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has to reconsider the case under the new guidelines set down in the Bruen ruling.
“If the Alliance wants to hold hands with Ferguson,” Gottlieb said, “that’s their business. Maybe he needs the moral support.”
“Just because you can do something, doesn’t mean you should”
Jeff Goldblum as Dr. Ian Malcolm in Jurassic Park
Researchers at Boston University have developed a new strain of COVID-19 that has an 80% kill rate on mice infected with it.https://t.co/BHt0NwRQm7
Okay, update on the Raleigh massacre.
Why the type of gun wasn’t mentioned?
Nailed it: Shotgun. And that doesn’t fit the gun banner’s narrative, so this will be shoved down the memory hole by Monday. And all SloJoe could do is replay he want’s to ban ‘assault weapons’.
A 15-year-old active shooter, wearing camouflage and wielding a shotgun, randomly shot and killed five people near a trail in Raleigh, North Carolina. Video emerged from the scene, showing a massive law enforcement response.
After yet another mental gaffe by President Joe Biden, a new poll has found a majority of Democrats are at least “concerned” about his mental health.
The Issues & Insights/TIPP survey of 1,376 adults released Monday showed 64% of Americans are either “very concerned” or “somewhat concerned,” a 5-point jump from its last poll in August.
But the percentage of Democrats now concerned about Biden’s mental lapses leaped 13 points in two months. “Virtually all of October’s gain came from Democrats, who went from just 39% expressing ‘concern’ over Biden’s mental health in August, a high number in itself, to 52% in the latest poll,” the pollsters wrote.
“Is Biden’s mental infirmity a danger to this country? Is it time for the president, who turns 80 next month, to be tested by competent medical experts and have the results openly released to allay public fears?” said the pollsters.
They also pointed out numerous recent gaffes by Biden.
“Recent video snippets show Biden wandering off stage, apparently lost, after speaking briefly; forgetting the name of the Declaration of Independence, the nation’s founding document; not remembering that a congresswoman he was honoring at a ceremony was in fact dead, asking Where’s Jackie (Walorski)?’; invoking the possibility of nuclear ‘Armageddon’ after Vladimir Putin’s military suffered setbacks in Ukraine; and so on.”
On September 28, Biden delivered a speech at the White House Conference on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health in Washington, D.C. He recognized those involved in the effort, including Rep. Jackie Walorski (R-IN).
In his shout-outs, Biden said: “Jackie, are you here? Where’s Jackie? She must not be here.”
She wasn’t there because Walorski is dead. She died, along with three others, in a head-on car crash on August 3.
Biden, 79, had clearly forgotten that Walorski had died, even though on the day of her death, the White House released a statement from the president mourning her.
“Jill and I are shocked and saddened by the death of Congresswoman Jackie Walorski of Indiana along with two members of her staff in a car accident today in Indiana,” Biden said at the time. He also ordered the U.S. flag at the White House to be lowered for two days.
What made the whole mess worse is that the White House decided to lie about Biden’s confusion, implying that he knew Walorski was dead but that she was simply “top of mind.”
“So, of course, she was on his mind. She was of top of mind for the President,” Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters the next day. “He looks — very much looks forward to discussing her remarkable legacy of public service with them when he sees her family this coming Friday.”
Reporters lashed out at Jean-Pierre, who simply repeated her scripted lies. But Fox News’ Peter Doocy delivered a zinger, telling the flack: “Karine, I have John Lennon top of mind just about every day, but I’m not looking around for him anywhere.”
Biden would eventually apologize to Walorski’s family when he met with them for a bill signing in the Oval Office two days later.
Maybe he should apologize to all Americans for being president.
‘plays’? He is old and ugly. He’s also stupid.
Joe Biden Plays the Old Ugly American
Having shut down America’s oil-producing abilities, Biden believes that he can strongarm his enemies to send us more of such taboo energy that we won’t produce ourselves.
The Left used to accuse imperialist, resource-hungry Yanquis in Washington of cutting selfish deals with illiberal dictatorships in Latin America to grab their natural resources.
How odd then that Joe Biden is now begging the despicable Maduro regime in Venezuela—corrupt, murderous, and anti-American—to produce more of its oil solely to send northward to America.
Biden is quite willing to ease sanctions and condone the human rights abuses of Maduro—if his dictatorship will just open its oil spigots before the November midterm elections.
Biden in 2020 campaigned on the supposed evil nature of the Saudi Arabian monarchy. Yet after vainly entreating Venezuela, Iran, and Russia, it was inevitable that Biden would once again supplicate the Saudis to pump more oil.
Biden even pleaded with OPEC to increase its output and thus lower the world price of energy—again before the midterm elections.
Biden, remember, has a bad habit of bragging that he lowered gas prices at the pump when the natural volatility of the petroleum markets leads to a fractional decrease. But once prices spike, he is utterly silent about his own role in limiting U.S. oil and gas output.
So, was it any surprise that the Saudis became the fourth non-democratic regime to refuse Biden’s entreaties? During the 2020 campaign, when gas prices were dirt cheap, and when then candidate Biden was demagoguing about ending fossil fuel, he opportunistically libeled the Saudis a “pariah” state.
Biden also claimed that his opponent Donald Trump had cozied up to these supposedly awful Saudi royals. That accusation was especially ironic given that Trump was the first American president who had no need for Saudi oil.
His administration had managed to make the United States the largest producer of gas and oil in history— precluding any energy dependence on illiberal regimes abroad.
Trump was the first U.S. president whose interest in Gulf State monarchies was not energy-driven.
The first lawsuit, against manufacturers, was thrown out. This one is against dealers and distributors. I think it’ll fare no better, but you never know. In any case, most of the weapons the cartels have are stolen from the Mexican military, or sold to them by corrupt people in the Mexican military. You don’t buy M2, M240, M4 & automatic AK machineguns at the local gun store
MEXICO CITY (AP) — The Mexican government filed another U.S. gun lawsuit Monday, this time against five U.S. gun shops and distributors it claims are responsible for the flow of illegal weapons into Mexico.
Mexico’s first lawsuit, which was recently dismissed, targeted U.S. gun manufacturers. The second, which Foreign Affairs Secretary Marcelo Ebrard said was filed in Arizona’s federal district court Monday, targets gun dealers.
“We are suing them because clearly there is a pattern, we contend that it is obvious that there is weapons trafficking and that it is known that these guns are going to our country,” Ebrard said.
Ebrard promised last week the new lawsuit would target gun shops or dealers in U.S. border states who sell guns to “straw” purchasers who pass them on to smugglers, who then take the weapons into Mexico.
Mexico is suing for unspecified monetary damages and to demand the gun stores hire independent monitors to ensure that U.S. federal laws are followed in gun purchases.
Alejandro Celorio Alcántara, the legal adviser to Mexico’s Foreign Relations Department, said Mexico had chosen “the five worst stores” to name in the lawsuit, including three gun outlets in Tucson, one in Phoenix and one in Yuma, Arizona.
“They are not careful when they sell products, so they allow straw purchasers to buy guns,” said Celorio Alcántara, adding they sold multiple guns, multiple times to some purchasers. “We are saying they are negligent and facilitate straw purchasers, to the point of being accomplices.”
He claimed that U.S. criminal investigations had traced weapons purchases back to the stores, and said there was evidence that the shops had not filed required information on some purchases.
“The main argument of our lawsuit is that these businesses are an organized part of a criminal enterprise, a mechanism, to facilitate criminals and cartels in Mexico being able to use their weapons,” said Celorio Alcántara.
He said the first hearing on the suit might not come until the summer.
Ebrard said about 60% of the weapons seized in Mexico in recent years were believed to have been sold in 10 U.S. counties, mostly along the border. Mexico has very strict restrictions on weapon possession, but drug cartel violence has cost hundreds of thousands of lives in the country in recent years.
“We are going to show that many of these outlets where they sell these products in these counties I mentioned, are dealing with straw purchasers, and criminal charges have to be brought,” Ebrard said last week in an appearance before the Mexican Senate.
A recently enacted U.S. law defines straw purchasing as a crime, and sets out sentences of as much as 15 to 25 years if the offense is related to drug trafficking.
Celorio Alcántara said that was a key difference between this and Mexico’s earlier lawsuit: in the Arizona suit, Mexico is arguing a violation of U.S. laws.
The announcement comes several days after a U.S. federal judge dismissed Mexico’s first lawsuit against U.S. gun manufacturers; Mexico has said it will appeal that decision.
The judge ruled Mexico’s claims against the gun makers did not overcome the broad protection provided to firearms manufacturers by the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act passed in 2005.
The law shields gun manufacturers from damages “resulting from the criminal or unlawful misuse” of a firearm.
Mexico was seeking at least $10 billion in compensation, but legal experts had viewed the lawsuit as a long shot.
The Mexican government estimates 70% of the weapons trafficked into Mexico come from the U.S., according to the Foreign Affairs Ministry. It said that in 2019 alone, at least 17,000 homicides in Mexico were linked to trafficked weapons.
In a shocking development Saturday afternoon, it was first reported by CNN that top officials within the Biden administration met with top Taliban leaders in Doha, Qatar, marking the first meeting with the terrorist group since al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri was vaporized by a U.S. drone strike in July, under Taliban care and comfort.
CNN noted:
The administration sent the CIA’s deputy director and the top State Department official responsible for Afghanistan to the Qatari capital of Doha for the talks with the Taliban delegation which included their head of intelligence, Abdul Haq Wasiq.
The presence of CIA Deputy Director David Cohen and the Taliban’s Wasiq at the meeting on Saturday indicates an emphasis on counterterrorism. The White House last month called cooperation with the Taliban on counterterrorism “a work in progress.”
Cohen was accompanied by the State Department’s Special Representative for Afghanistan, Tom West, who has often led engagement with the Taliban since the US withdrawal last year.
The goal of the meeting is still unclear, but it comes in the wake of recent news regarding a giant pile of cash — $3.5 billion — that Taliban leaders in Afghanistan would love to get their hands on. The money was frozen after the Taliban took over Afghanistan following President Joe Biden’s disastrous, failed withdrawal of U.S. troops, allowing terrorist masterminds back to their sandy playground.
The meeting also comes just weeks after Taliban terrorists celebrated the first anniversary of Biden’s botched pullout by parading some of the billions in top-tier U.S. military equipment left behind by Biden and Pentagon brass.
Some screens from military parade of Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (Taliban) celebrate first anniversary of the withdrawal of US-coalition from Afghanistan on August 31 2022. MD-530F and UH-60A helicopters pic.twitter.com/EchGSsU0Yp
Watching the Biden Administration announce, retract, modify, announce, let Joe speak, retract… and on and on is like watching a toddler on a sugar high. Think about it. Anybody who’s ever raised or dealt with small children knows that within the limits of their understanding, toddlers don’t necessarily lie. Tell outrageous stories about why or how something happened, yes. Understand that those stories are what adults often consider to be lies, no.
Ask a toddler how a vase got broken and s/he might tell you that the dinosaur did it. Yeah, right, you say. No, really mama! The dinosaur flew around the room and crashed into the vase! It wasn’t me! The dinosaur did it! The kid totally believes this and does not recognize it as a lie. Why? Well, it’s true that the dinosaur flew around the room and hit the vase. What the child has neglected to mention is that it flew out of their hand. Yep, they tossed it. But after that, the dinosaur was on its own, therefore its inability to fly properly led to it crashing into the vase. So, it’s not the kid’s fault. See how that works?
The Biden Administration seems to think that those sorts of fantastical, detail omitting stories can be utilized by adults trying to clumsily talk their way out of a bad situation that they created. They don’t seem to understand or recognize that they were supposed to leave that behavior behind when they were five or six years old. We have a bunch of toddlers in charge.
The magical thinking that this administration engages in is astounding. I mean, yes, magical thinking is emblematic of Democratic administrations, but this one is taking it a step further. Okay, on second thought, Gavin Newsome may be tied or pulling ahead in the race for most magical thinking by a Democratic pol. After all, Newsome seems to believe that he can order California drivers to go all in on electric cars with zero consequences for the electrical grid. Given his penchant for magical toddler thinking, I’m sure the fault for the electrical system will reside with the states from whom California purchases electricity and the failure of the grid will be the fault of the electrical companies who can’t upgrade their grid due to California’s highly restrictive environmental laws and regulations.
Back to our national toddler drama.
The Biden administration has been putting ideas out in the media-sphere and stating that these are done deals. Then when the public and often other Democrats push back and either refuse to deal or publicly state that this is not only a bad idea, it’s a stupidly bad idea, the administration pulls back and claims that this was never a done deal, but rather a suggestion. Just like the toddler who told mom, that no, he really wasn’t planning on jumping off the back of the sofa onto the dog, even though the kid is standing on the back of the sofa, looming over the dog. Not a lie for the toddler, simply a change of plans.
The entire kerfuffle with DeSantis over Hurricane Ian is a good example. Biden called the governors of the states affected by Ian, except for DeSantis. When DeSantis pointed that out, Biden called a few hours later. The administration of the President of the United States got called out for toddler behavior. They tried to justify it as scheduling. A toddler would argue that he meant to do it all along, and just hadn’t gotten to it yet.
A week or so ago, the feds were discovered purchasing $290 million worth of Nplate, a medicine used to treat radiation poisoning. Right after Putin threatened to use nukes against Ukraine. What are the feds (led by the Biden administration) expecting to happen? And who’s getting that medicine? When asked, Biden’s press secretary tried to pass it off as a scheduled and normal purchase. Uh-huh. Yep. Of course. Toddler magical thinking again, this time of the “What? I do this all the time!” variety.
Another example… refusing to reopen the Keystone pipeline for gas but trying to get OPEC to increase production and then relaxing sanctions on Venezuela in the hopes that we can up their production and buy gas there. It’s clear that the administration will do anything to avoid giving jobs to the middle, fly-over states and it’s clear that environmental concerns regarding pumping oil are not a consideration with regard to other, poorer countries. Toddlers engaging in payback behavior combined with the selective amnesia about prior behavior that led to current situation.
I know I’m not pointing out anything new or exciting here. Anybody who’s been paying attention has seen the projection of behaviors, the lies, obfuscations, hypocrisy, and contorted explanations coming out of the White House. But it just hit me that this is truly toddler behavior. What really scares me is that, like toddlers, I’m afraid that this administration – Ron Klain, Jill Biden on down – actually believes its own stories and doesn’t understand why the rest of us aren’t buying those stories. That’s the truly scary thing.
Toddlers are narcissistic little creatures. Everything is all about them, how they feel, and what they want. There’s a reason ages two to about four are called “The Terrible Twos.” Parents are supposed to train that out of their children so that they grow up to be a wee bit more self-aware and somewhat less navel-gazing. Adults with a narcissistic toddler mindset are created either through a chemical imbalance in the brain, or a failure to have that mindset trained out of them at an early age. For this administration I’m going with the latter.
I’m not sanguine about the ability of the rest of us to teach them that this sort of behavior is unacceptable. They’ve gotten their way for too long. But I do believe that we can (and must) somehow sanction this behavior. Like toddlers, they will squirm and scream to avoid taking any responsibility for any consequences arising from their actions. They will call their opponents (which encompasses all those who disagree with them) all sorts of names in hopes of getting those opponents to feel guilty and ashamed and give up on doing anything. They will continue to spin fantastical tales of evil aliens forcing them into actions they really didn’t want to take. They will do and say anything to get away with everything.
Don’t let them.
These are supposedly functional adults (note the modifier. However, they want us to believe they’re functional adults, so I’m going to treat them as such. If they can’t handle that, that’s their problem). Just like you would with a toddler, calmly and patiently point out the inconsistencies in whatever story they’re spinning out. Don’t allow the temper tantrums to affect you. Continue to point out the problems. Do it in public if you can, because throwing a temper tantrum in front of an audience has the beneficial effect of showing their toddler behavior to everyone.
Call them out when you see and hear those stories. Ask why they think that’s going to work, or why the other thing is true.
If you’re not a parent, or haven’t dealt with toddlers, ask someone who has for tips and tricks. They’ll happily share.
This administration and its supporters are toddlers who are acting up. Treat them as such.
President Biden on Thursday said the risk of nuclear “Armageddon” was at its highest level since the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962—a warning The New York Times is calling “highly unusual for any American president.” Speaking at a fundraiser in New York City for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, the president admitted he didn’t know “Putin’s off ramp.”“Where does he find a way out? Where does he find himself where he does not only lose face but significant power?” Biden openly questioned.
“We have not faced the prospect of Armageddon since Kennedy and the Cuban Missile Crisis,” the president said.
Biden, claiming to know Russian President Vladimir Putin “fairly well,” argued the leader is serious when he speaks about using “tactical nuclear weapons or biological or chemical weapons.” Resorting to these weapons shows his military is “significantly underperforming,” he added.
In an angry and fiery speech last week, Mr. Putin raised the specter of using nuclear weapons to hold on to his territorial gains, which Ukraine’s powerful counteroffensives have begun to erode. Mr. Putin said he would use “all available means” to defend Russian territory — which he has declared now includes four provinces of eastern Ukraine that Russia illegally annexed in recent days.
The atomic bombs the United States dropped on Japan in 1945, Mr. Putin said in that speech, had “created a precedent.”
His remarks and others by top Russian leaders represent the first time since 1962 that Moscow officials have made explicit nuclear threats.
Officials in Washington have been gaming out scenarios in which Mr. Putin might decide to use a tactical nuclear weapon to make up for the failings of Russian troops in Ukraine. In late February, Mr. Putin called for his nuclear forces to go on alert, but there has been no evidence that they did so. (NYT)
White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Tuesday the U.S. hasn’t seen a reason yet to adjust its nuclear posture as there’s been no sign that Russia is imminently planning to use nuclear weapons.
Critics ripped the president, arguing his policies helped get to this point.
There’s no reason to believe the outcome will be any different than the first lawsuit that the administration of Andrés Manuel López Obrador brought against U.S. gun makers; a dismissal of the case long before it ever reached trial. Still, with AMLO’s cartel strategy of “hugs, not bullets” resulting in even more cartel violence, it’s no surprise that he and other officials are trying to distract from their own failures by pinning the blame on the US firearms industry.
Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard told the Mexican Senate on Wednesday that the government’s next lawsuit will be filed in the border state of Arizona, though he didn’t say whether any gun control groups will be a part of this new effort as they were the first time around.
During his speech on Wednesday, Ebrard referred to a bipartisan package of gun safety measures passed by the U.S. Congress and signed into law by President Joe Biden in June. The law blocks gun sales to those convicted of abusing unmarried intimate partners and cracks down on gun sales to purchasers convicted of domestic violence.
“Illicit arms trafficking is already a crime in the United States,” Ebrard said.
“You have to start establishing criminal responsibilities because the companies that are selling these weapons in these counties (in Arizona), which are very few, of course they know where those weapons are going,” he added, but did not specify which companies he was referring to.
Ebrard makes it sound as if there are no laws whatsoever governing gun sales from licensed firearms retailers, even though border state gun dealers not only have to follow the long list of federal regulations surrounding firearm transfers, but even have special requirements placed on them like reporting multiple sales of modern sporting rifles to the ATF.
Frankly, if he really wants to talk about establishing criminal responsibilities, I’d say he should start much closer to home and crack down on the graft, corruption, and theft within the Mexican armed forces.
