Category: Crap For Brains

This is why they think you’re a racist

First, I hope you all had a great Thanksgiving.

One of our Thanksgiving traditions, as it is for a lot of you, is watching the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade. I started watching it as a kid and while I don’t particularly care about watching it one way or another, the rest of the family enjoys it and I enjoy that. Such is the life of a dad.

Anyway, every year, we get to see the Radio City Music Hall Rockettes and to be quite honest, that part I enjoy. Ahem.

Anyway, after the parade, I found myself on Twitter, and “Rockettes” was trending. I groaned because I knew what I was likely to find.

Sure enough, it seems some people were pissed that more of the Rockettes weren’t black.

Niki @HaulinOats_
Ah and here are the Rockettes, wishing everyone a VERY WHITE Christmas 🙄 #rockettes #MacysThanksgivingDayParade
2:45 PM ∙ Nov 24, 2022
George Miller @justG_Miller
Tell me you don’t represent the diversity in America without telling me you don’t represent the diversity in America. #Rockettes #MacysParade

2:45 PM ∙ Nov 24, 2022

🤷🏼‍♀️ @Possamaquadi
How is it even statistically possible that there are only 2 Black Rockettes???? Come on, now. #MacysThanksgivingDayParade #Rockettes #RockettesSoWhite
Image

2:49 PM ∙ Nov 24, 2022

Optimistic Sophia @OptimisticSoph1
So the @Rockettes only have 2 black dancers out of 30+ girls? #macydayparade #rockettes
7:46 PM ∙ Nov 24, 2022

Now, in fairness, there are also a lot of people who aren’t like this. Many were celebrating having any representation at all while others were just delighted to see the Rockettes.

But these people represent something.

You see, becoming a Rockette is a strange thing. You have to not just be able to do the dances required, but there are height and weight requirements so everyone fits the same mold. As such, it rules a lot of women out right off the bat.

As such, the lack of black Rockettes could mean any number of things, and they’re not all because those who hire them are racist.

But everyone knows that the arts have a profound liberal bias. Even artists tend to acknowledge that. They’re proud of it, actually.

So what does this have to do with us?

Well, the answer is very simple. You see, when they look at something like this and see racism, they simply can’t fathom that those of us not fawning at the altar of diversity and equity could be anything but racist.

They see the supposed racism in their own ranks and hear about how much better they are than we are and cannot fathom any other potential but that we’re racist.

Yet that “logic” is anything but. It assumes facts not in evidence; namely that liberals are better about race than anyone else.

For me and many others, I judge people as individuals. Their race is part of who they are, but it’s not the totality of their identity. I could no more disapprove of someone for their ethnicity than I could their eye color.

But, for the left, they view people as groups. They see them based on those superficial factors and can’t comprehend that they’re not any such thing. They’re not just “black” or “white” or “Hispanic.”

They’re people, with all the complexity that entails.

We can see that. Apparently, they can’t, and that’s why they can’t imagine how everyone who disagrees with them isn’t a raging racist.

Skynet smiles

Dystopia Arrives in San Francisco: Authorities Introduce Policy Granting Robots a License to Kill.

In this episode of Dystopian Moments on the Left…

While I hesitate to make comparisons to George Orwell’s dystopian account of a future totalitarian state in the classic “1984” while writing about the crazy goings on in today’s America, what term is better suited when dystopia finally arrives? That is if you consider killer robots taking out human beings in the streets.

The San Francisco Police Department has submitted a proposal to city officials, which is likely to be approved on November 29, that would give robots the license to use deadly force against suspects who threaten the lives of citizens or police officers — with military-style weapons, no less.

Look, I’m all in on the notion that the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun, but — and maybe it’s just me — robots armed with military-style weapons killing human beings sounds a bit creepy and, well, Orwellian. Nonetheless, as reported by Mission Local, the draft policy reads:

Robots will only be used as a deadly force option when the risk of loss of life to members of the public or officers is imminent and outweighs any other force option available to SFPD.

San Francisco’s rules committee unanimously approved a version of the draft last week, which will face the Board of Supervisors on November 29th, where it’s likely to sail through. The Board will also be required to sign off on the purchase of any new military-style equipment, but the police will be able to replace existing equipment up to a value of $10 million without approval.

Tifanei Moyer, senior staff attorney with the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area, wrote in an email, as noted by Mission Local, that the policy isn’t standard and that legal professionals and citizens should reject the idea.

We are living in a dystopian future, where we debate whether the police may use robots to execute citizens without a trial, jury, or judge. This is not normal. No legal professional or ordinary resident should carry on as if it is normal.

That’s a bit nonsensical in my book, given that an officer in the same situation, as outlined earlier, would make the same deadly force decision — or would he or she? Jennifer Tu, a fellow with the American Friends Service Committee, appears to disagree:

There is a really big difference between hurting someone right in front of you, and hurting someone via a video screen.

The SFPD has 17 robots in its arsenal, 12 of which are fully functional. According to police spokesperson Officer Robert Rueca, they have never been used to attack anyone. That appears about to change. If the policy is approved as expected, it will just be a matter of time before a robot takes out a suspect.

Hell, let’s extrapolate. How long will it be before deadly robots patrol the crime-infested streets of cities across America? If it someday happens, would that be a good thing or bad? Questions abound.

On November 29, San Francisco and its citizenry will likely take a giant step forward — or would that be backward?  All the way to George Orwell’s 1984.

BLUF
Biden may have directly named Elon Musk at that press conference, but his threat was aimed at every household in America.

Biden’s not-so-subtle lurch toward dictatorship

In the wake of the midterm elections, President Joe Biden was asked during a rare press conference, in reference to Twitter’s new owner, whether he thought Elon Musk was a threat to national security. With a pause and a smirk, the president said that topic was “ worthy of being looked at. ”

With those words, Biden made it clear that if you even seem to oppose his politics, your private life will be under the direct scrutiny of the state. Despite his constant prattle about saving our democracy, Biden seems to think he’s running an authoritarian police state.

In truth, the federal government already maintains entities that review acquisitions such as Musk’s for anything from foreign influence to anti-competitive business practices. After many months in which Musk’s negotiations to purchase Twitter happened in full public view, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said last week that she sees no basis for the government to investigate that purchase.

Despite Musk’s having followed the law, Biden, on a whim, wants to change the game. Suddenly, and after years of Twitter and other social media having significant foreign investors, a normal and transparent voluntary transaction is a potential “threat to national security.”

Biden signaled his desire to strip off the veneer of the rule of law and use the power of the presidency as a dictator would—by his whim and without respect for the rules that everyone else must abide by.

Continue reading “”

He used that ‘no redeeming social value‘ line because he believes it has some magical power over the courts. Where his senile brain got it was when SCOTUS in Memoirs v. Massachusetts required that to prove obscenity it must be affirmatively established that the material is “utterly without redeeming social value”

Biden Protected by Very Guns He Says Have ‘No Redeeming Value’

President Joe Biden is protected by semiautomatic firearms yet told reporters Thanksgiving morning that he cannot understand how sales of semiautomatic guns continue, as they have “no social redeeming value.”

Biden said, “The idea we still allow semiautomatic weapons to be purchased is sick. It has no social redeeming value.”

(Can you even imagine a world in which Secret Service agents are standing around with six-shot revolvers in their holsters?)

After criticizing semiautomatics, Biden pledged anew on Thanksgiving to ban “assault weapons.”

Ironically, again, Biden is protected by “assault weapons.”

Breitbart News reported that Biden was given a Secret Service detail during the 2020 presidential campaign and from that time till now, agents are around him 24/7 to keep him safe.

A source told Breitbart News such a detail meant Biden would be protected with semiautomatic pistols and rifles — perhaps ARs and/or Sig Sauer MCX platform firearms. There was also the strong possibility of fully automatic firearms being part of the equation. The latter category of firearms consists of submachine guns, such as the H&K MP5. (An MP5 is a true “assault weapon.”)

Biden’s agents rely on semiautomatic platform firearms to protect him from bad guys, yet Biden criticizes such guns being for sale for average citizens who need to protect their own lives everyday. The key phrase: “No social redeeming value.”

I’ll paraphrase Mussolini:
“All within the narrative, nothing outside the narrative, nothing against the narrative.”

Controversial Take: It’s Bad To Put Words In The Mouths Of Murder Victims
On Ben Collins and the scourge of opportunistic post-tragedy commentary

On Tuesday’s Morning Joe, Ben Collins, who “covers disinformation, extremism and the internet for NBC News,” gave what I found to be a very strange soliloquy about Club Q, an LGBT nightclub in Colorado Springs where five people were killed and about 18 injured by a man named Anderson Lee Aldrich on Saturday night.

Collins subsequently tweeted a link to it (archived here):

Collins starts by asking, “Am I doing something wrong here?” Then he runs down his and his colleagues’ tireless coverage of anti-LGBT rhetoric on the right, reading a bunch of headlines that are splashed on-screen:

He then says, “And I’m just wondering — what could I have done different? Seriously. As reporters, what can we do different?”

To be blunt, I found this obnoxious and solipsistic. Not everything is about journalists. The probability that any mass murder has anything to do with anything Ben Collins or his colleagues did (or didn’t do) is approximately nil. This is just a very strange, self-absorbed way to understand the world.

Continue reading “”

MEDIA LOSES ITS MIND OVER “RAMBO STYLE KNIFE” USED IN IDAHO QUAD-MURDER

That the media is prone to hyperventillation over anything weapon-related should hardly come as a shock. Our friends in the firearms community face it all the time when the media label what to many is just a light range trip worth of guns and ammunition an “arsenal”. Well they are at it again, and this time it is the knife community’s turn in the barrel, as the media frenzy over the quadruple homicide in Moscow, ID rages.

If you haven’t tuned into the news this week, 4 University of Idaho students were brutally stabbed to death over the weekend, and the Police seem to be at a loss. Their decision to focus on the potential murder weapon, looks to this reporter like an attempt to give the media anything in the face of very few public leads. The murder weapon remains undiscovered.

I am not a forensic expert by any means, though I took a few forensic anthropology classes in graduate school and I understand how the coroner reached their conclusion as to the nature of said weapon. The wound channels from the stabbings would have particular characteristics in terms of size and shape, and from this they have deduced that they match the characteristics of one of the most, if not the most mass-produced and iconic American fixed blade knives, the USMC Mark 2., commonly known as the KA-BAR.

KA-BAR USMC MK. 2 (from KABAR.com)

From Idaho Statesman:

Moscow police appear to be searching for a “Rambo”-style knife involved in the killing of four University of Idaho students, a store manager said Wednesday. Scott Jutte, general manager of Moscow Building Supply, told the Idaho Statesman that police have visited the store more than once to ask whether the retailer sold anyone Ka-Bar brand knives, which are also known as K bar knives. Idaho State Police spokesperson Aaron Snell told the Statesman on Thursday that detectives visited several local hardware stores that may carry “fixed-blade type knives,” but that they weren’t solely asking about Ka-Bar knives.

Ka-Bar, of Olean, New York, manufactures military-grade blades that were originally designed for use by American troops in World War II.

Jutte said a police officer stopped by the home improvement store and lumber yard off North Main Street in Moscow to speak with him on Monday. “They were specifically asking whether or not we carry Ka-Bar-style knives, which we do not,” Jutte said in an interview. “If we did, we could’ve reviewed surveillance footage. But it wasn’t something I could help them with.” Jutte said he is familiar with the military-style weapon, even though his store doesn’t sell it.

He says he is “familiar with the “military style weapon””…

I am trying to figure out what is specifically “military” about the KA-BAR, other than its history of course. The name of the Mk. 2 in Government-bureaucratese is “Knife, Fighting Utility”. Fighting is a verb, something you could do with it, not a description. I can fight you with a stapler. An entrenching tool is a devastatingly effective melee weapon. We don’t call a “Fighting Shovel”, no matter how efficiently it can be used as such.

Utility is a good descriptive word, as they are used for everything from prying open crates to opening ration cans. The “KA-BAR” (originally made by Camillus, PAL, and others under WWII contract) was much better at these tasks than the WWI era M1918 Trench Knife, with its more fragile, less utilitarian stiletto blade and single grip knuckle-duster hand guard.

The USMC Mk.2, now manufactured by KA-BAR Knives Inc. of Olean, New York, remains one of the most popular fixed blade outdoor knives in existence. A good portion of this is due to its military heritage. Many a serviceman or has carried the knife on deployment, even into combat just like their grandfathers before them. They are an heirloom quality tool, and it is entirely possible that someone actually carried their Grandfather’s own knife in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Of course plenty of civilians, this writer included, own one as well. It is an extremely robust and useful knife to have in the woods. It can shave, baton, drill, and all of the other tasks one might need in the field. I imagine that there is at least one in 20% or more of households in Idaho given the lifestyle and demographics. And that doesn’t count other fixed blade hunting knives as well of which Idaho most certainly has an abundance.

I feel for KA-BAR, which is being dragged by the media online. They slant their coverage to imply that anyone who owns this most common of fixed blades is some sort of survivalist nutball. It is expected, but disheartening.

Where they have made a heck of a jump is to apply the “Rambo” label to the knife. Rambo carried two different Jim Lile custom knives in the First Blood Movies:

Continue reading “”

An additional take on the morning’s mendacity by the 3rd circuit court

Appeals Court Cites Bigoted Historical Laws to Uphold Ban on Non-Violent Felons Owning Guns

The federal government can continue to block non-violent felons from possessing firearms.

That’s what a three-judge panel for the Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Wednesday. It found the federal law barring those convicted of non-violent felonies from possessing guns is consistent with the country’s history and tradition of gun regulation. The court specifically relies on historical laws that disarmed disfavored minority groups to reach that conclusion, despite referring to that history as “repugnant” and “unconstitutional.”

“The earliest firearm legislation in colonial America prohibited Native Americans, Black people, and indentured servants from owning firearms,” the court’s per curiam opinion reads. “Likewise, Catholics in the American colonies (as in Britain) were subject to disarmament without demonstrating a proclivity for violence.”

The ruling is the first from a federal appeals court to deal with the federal prohibition on felons having guns after the Supreme Court created a new standard for reviewing gun cases in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, which requires modern gun laws to be substantially similar to those in place near the ratification of the Second Amendment in order to be considered constitutional. An established circuit precedent upholding felon-in-possession crimes, even for non-violent offenders, could prove influential as courts flesh out how the new Bruen standard affects modern gun laws.

Continue reading “”

Portland’s Antifa ‘Justice’ Strikes Again

A Portland “anti-fascist” activist has been found not guilty of being a fascist by roughing up a journalist and stealing his phone because he didn’t like what the reporter said about his Antifa friends. After the Portland judge let off the notorious Portland Antifa attacker, he delivered a lecture to the victim, reporter Andy Ngo.

There’s your justice, Portland.

Ngo sought justice in court for three-and-a-half years against John Hacker, one of a mob of activists that has made a point to follow, chase, hassle, and attack Ngo multiple times.

 

The Post Millennial reported that Hacker confronted Ngo in a Portland area 24 Hour Fitness where he assaulted the reporter, poured water on him, and stole his phone. Ngo captured part of John Hacker’s attack on video.

“The shaky video is less than 30 seconds long, but prosecutors say it’s a key piece of evidence showing Hacker approaching Ngo, grabbing the device, and yelling, “I will break your f*cking phone,” the news website reported.

The Deputy District Attorney argued before the judge that Hacker had conducted a “harassment campaign targeting Ngo for years.”

Indeed, Hacker was part of a mob that chased Ngo in downtown Portland, forcing the journalist to seek a hiding place at a posh hotel.

Continue reading “”

DeWine allies push for passage of STRONG Ohio gun bill in lame duck session

Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine cruised to re-election last week, defeating Democrat Nan Whaley by an eye-popping 25 points. Now the governor, who signed Constitutional Carry into law back in March, is hoping to spend some of his newly-acquired political capital to put several new gun control measures on the books, and his allies in the state legislature are doing everything they can to help.

The bill in question is SB 357, and though it’s been bottled up in committee for most of the year, there’s now a push to move the bill forward during the legislature’s lame-duck session that started this week.

An attempt to revive some of the “Strong Ohio” proposals against gun violence, stalled in the General Assembly since 2019, faces a timeline that’s hard to meet.

State Sen. Matt Dolan, R-Chagrin Falls, is trying to resurrect some of the “Strong Ohio” proposals against gun violence that stalled in the legislature in 2019. His Senate Bill 357 will get a first hearing, but also faces a tight timeline. The bill includes a “red flag” provision, better background checks, some limitation on private sales, and using $175 million in federal funds to improve mental healthcare.

Gov. Mike DeWine has signaled approval of the bill, which includes some of the ideas he unsuccessfully floated following the August 2019 mass shooting in Dayton’s Oregon District.

On Tuesday, the Senate Finance Committee held its first hearing on SB 357, but didn’t hold a vote on the measure. Dolan, meanwhile, has made a few tweaks to the legislation, which would create a new category of prohibited persons, require adults under the age of 21 to have a co-signer for all gun purchases, and establish a “seller’s protection certificate” that is designed to encourage (but not require) background checks on private transfers of firearms.

“Everything in this sub bill is about before you buy a gun,” said Dolan, who chairs the finance committee.

During months of campaigning for the Nov. 8 election, legislators heard people statewide asking what they’d do to prevent gun violence, he said.

From speaking with healthcare personnel, law enforcement and others, it became clear the state’s current involuntary commitment program is not sufficient to identify all the at-risk people who shouldn’t be able to buy guns, Dolan said.

His substitute bill adds a sixth “disability” to state laws preventing people from buying guns. Existing ones prohibit fugitives from justice, felons, those who committed juvenile crimes that would be adult felonies, drug addicts and alcoholics, and those with established dangerous mental problems from buying guns, he said.

Dolan’s bill adds people who go before a behavioral risk assessment team and have been determined to be a “suicidal or homicidal risk.”

Ohio law already prohibits people under age 21 from buying handguns, he said. His bill would add that under-21 buyers of other guns would need a cosigner age 25 or older. There are exceptions for anyone under 21 in law enforcement or the military, Dolan said.

For some reason Dolan’s really focused on the fact that these provisions are all directed at individuals before they purchase a firearm, though that doesn’t mean that any or all of his proposals would be constitutional or effective.

Take his new category of prohibited persons, for example. The supposed reason to add those who’ve been determined by a behavioral risk assessment team to be a “suicidal or homicidal risk” is that the state’s current involuntary commitment law isn’t working as well as it should. Seems to me the proper legislative response would be to determine why that’s the case and work to fix the existing law, rather than avoiding improving the state’s mental health system by making it easier to deny some individuals the ability to purchase a firearm. If someone truly is a risk to themselves or others, simply denying them the ability to purchase a firearm at a gun store isn’t going to make them any less dangerous, but Dolan’s bill treats guns as the issue and not the supposedly dangerous individual.

There are also major issues with Dolan’s desire to force young adults to find someone who’ll sign off on their gun ownership. The co-signer assumes some legal liability if the under-21 gun buyer were to misuse the firearm; an extraordinary provision that is unlike any existing (or historical) gun regulation that I’m aware of. Not only would this have a chilling effect on the Second Amendment rights of young adults, it’s hard to see how this restriction even remotely fits with the text, history, and tradition of the right to keep and bear arms.

SB 357 has been floating around the Ohio legislature in one form or another since 2019, and so far it’s received a very cool reception from the Republican majority. Clearly DeWine is hoping to capitalize on his overwhelming victory last week, but whether or not his Republican colleagues in the statehouse have had a change of heart about his gun proposals is still very much up in the air. The first test will be a vote in the Senate Finance Committee, and Ohio gun owners should be reaching out to those committee members to share their concerns before the bill has a chance to reach the Senate floor.

Canned Response? White House, Seattle Students Blame Guns, Not Suspects

UPDATED: The reaction to tragic shootings—one at the University of Virginia and the other at Seattle’s Ingraham High School—has been predictable, according to Second Amendment advocates, with the White House and Seattle school students demanding gun bans with no mention of holding the suspects responsible.

Following the shooting death of a 17-year-old student at the high school, police arrested a 14- and 15-year old. The older teen had a Glock pistol in his backpack believed to have been used in the hallway shooting. According to court documents obtained by Liberty Park Press, the pistol had been reported missing 11 days earlier and was posted with the National Crime Information Center as a “lost gun” by the Snohomish County Sheriff’s Office on Oct. 28.

Seattle students put forth two demands:

  • Mental health counselors in every school that represent the diverse backgrounds of students, at least 1 per every 200 students
  • Demand Governor (Jay) Inslee call a special session in Olympia to ban all semi automatic (sic) weapons

In Washington, D.C., the White House issued a statement in reaction to the triple slaying of three student athletes at the University of Virginia. An arrest has already been made in that case, which reportedly involved a handgun.

Yet, in a statement released by White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, the Biden administration said “We need to enact an assault weapons ban to get weapons of war off America’s streets.” It does not appear this crime involved any kind of so-called “assault weapon.”

The White House statement mentions nothing about prosecuting the man suspected of the killings.

Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, took the president to task for trying to “exploit” the tragedy in an attempt to push his gun ban agenda.

“This horrible crime had absolutely nothing to do with so-called ‘assault weapons,’ and the White House knows it,” Gottlieb said. “The statement, which the president had to have approved, amounts to a crass exploitation of a tragedy in a deplorable effort to advance Joe Biden’s gun ban agenda. He has fully embraced the despicable tactic of never letting a crisis go to waste, no matter how awful the situation.”

As in the case of the UVA shootings, the Seattle Student Union has not called for swift justice in the high school murder. The King County, Washington prosecutor’s office has filed a first-degree murder charge against the 14-year-old suspected killer, plus a first-degree assault charge and a charge of unlawful possession of a firearm. The 15-year-old is charged with unlawful firearm possession and felony rendering criminal assistance.

According to charging documents against the juveniles, the recovered pistol, chambered in .357 (SIG) was apparently empty. Eight spent shell casings were recovered at the crime scene.

Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell used the high school murder to resurrect his demand for repeal of Washington State’s firearm preemption statute, which prevents city and county governments from creating their own patchwork of local gun control ordinances. Preemption laws have been adopted by more than 40 states over the past three decades because they provide uniformity to each state’s gun laws.

Meanwhile, Virginia authorities have charged Christopher Darnell Jones, Jr. with three counts of second-degree murder and three counts of using a handgun in the commission of a felony, according to Fox News. Two other students were wounded in the incident, and hospitalized.

An friend terms posts like this übërpösts™ (in other words: It’s looong)
I’ll append commentary and observations from around the net.

Observation O’ The Day
It’s a look into the smartest minds of the enemy. Joe Huffman

The Ad Industry’s Plan to Fix America’s Gun Crisis

If you want a crude sketch of the biggest corporate players in a given year of TV, look no further than the Emmy Award for best commercial. Twenty-five years of winners form an ensemble cast of petty bourgeois preoccupations: Nike, Chrysler, Bud Light. This year’s nominees included a commercial for Meta (the artist formerly known as Facebook), one for Chevy (repping the still-muscular auto spend), two for Apple (a perennial contender), and two for the prevention of school shootings—one of which won the Emmy.

PSAs Killed Cigarettes. Can They Help End Gun Violence?

PSAs Killed Cigarettes. Can They Help End Gun Violence?© Getty; The Atlantic

Continue reading “”

Comment O’ The Day:
The ultimate bow to China

Biden and Trudeau Beclown Themselves by Parading Around Asia in Commie Mao Jackets

What better way to show the world you suckle at the teat of the globalists’ New World Order than to dress like the most “successful” mass-murdering communist in history?

Joe Biden and Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, North America’s one-two punch of Marxism, were filmed happily flouncing around the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit in matching Mao starter kit jackets.

FAMINE-O-RAMA! Some leftists believe dressing like a geisha on Halloween is “super not cool.” Yet Biden and Trudeau were happy to bend their weak knees and dress like Chairman Mao, the commie dictator responsible for more deaths than Hitler and Stalin. Democrats have said nothing.

Most of the people on Mao’s victim list died of starvation. Now is a good time to remind you that the Dutch want to close 30% of their livestock farms in the name of “climate change” and they want this done by 2030.

Holy cow farts, Batman: 2030 is the same year the commie swine (heh-heh) at the World Economic Forum (WEF) predict plan to cut most meat out of our lives.

The embarrassing, planned sartorial bum-licking comes just before North America’s Uriah Heeps are expected to meet with China’s leader Xi Jinping. Some Canadians expect Trudeau to confront Jinping on civil rights involving the Uyghurs and China’s possible involvement in Canada’s 2019 election.

FACT-O-RAMA!  A man suffering from cognitive disabilities was recently fired for dressing as Hitler in a mocking way. But when a president suffering from his own issues dresses as Mao, leftists say nothing.

Biden will meet Jinping for the first time on Monday to discuss, among other things, the tension between China and Taiwan. What better way for Trudeau and Biden to stand up to the pinkos than by dressing like their exalted, draconian leader? It reminds me of Jen Psaki wearing a Soviet hat in Russia.

BLUF
It all makes perfect sense if you just assume that Biden is prepared to say whatever he thinks the current audience wants to hear, no matter how contradictory to his previous statements and how factually inaccurate, with complete confidence that the mainstream media will cover for him.

Understanding Biden Administration Energy Policy.

Politicians have long been known for having a loose relationship with the truth. Generally, that takes the form of exaggeration or hyperbole. But the latest craze among Democrats is just making flatly contradictory statements.
In this category, it’s hard to top the performance of Pennsylvania Senate candidate John Fetterman on Saturday night, when he uttered this immortal quote: I run on Roe v Wade. I celebrate the demise of Roe v. Wade. That’s the choice that we have between us, in front of us.”
Video at the link if you don’t believe it. Clearly, Fetterman is not all there mentally.

But how different is that, really, from Joe Biden on energy policy? The main difference that I can find is that there does not appear to be an example where Biden has so clearly contradicted himself in consecutive sentences uttered to the same audience on the same night. But his various statements on energy policy are at least as contradictory as Fetterman’s on abortion. Consider a few from Category A and Category B.
Category A.

  • Biden at a February 2020 rally: “We are going to get rid of fossil fuels. . . . That’s okay. These guys are okay. They want to do the same thing I want to do. They want to phase out fossil fuels, and we’re going to phase out fossil fuels.”
  • Biden at a March 15, 2020 CNN debate with Bernie Sanders: “No more drilling on federal lands. No more drilling including offshore. No ability for the oil industry to continue to drill, period. [It] ends.”
  • Biden Executive Order, January 27, 2021: “The United States and the world face a profound climate crisis. We have a narrow moment to pursue action at home and abroad in order to avoid the most catastrophic impacts of that crisis and to seize the opportunity that tackling climate change presents.”
  • White House press release, April 22, 2021: “Today, President Biden will announce a new target for the United States to achieve a 50-52 percent reduction from 2005 levels in economy-wide net greenhouse gas pollution in 2030. . . . On Day One, President Biden fulfilled his promise to rejoin the Paris Agreement and set a course for the United States to tackle the climate crisis at home and abroad, reaching net zero emissions economy-wide by no later than 2050. As part of re-entering the Paris Agreement, he also launched a whole-of-government process, organized through his National Climate Task Force, to establish this new 2030 emissions target.”<
  • List of section headings from Report at RealClearEnergy by Joseph Toomey dated September 2022, listing major Biden Administration energy initiatives: “Canceling the Keystone XL Pipeline; Halting Lease Sales in Alaska’s ANWR; Placing a Moratorium on Drilling on Federal Lands; Rejoining the Paris Climate Accord; Proposing Energy-Inhibiting Budgets; Canceling Oil and Gas Drilling Leases; Initiating Punitive Government Investigations; Restricting Permian Basin Drilling Using Ozone Rules; Imposing Stricter Methane Emissions Rules.”

Category B.

  • Biden remarks at White House, October 19, 2022: “[W]e need to responsibly increase American oil production without delaying or deferring our transition to clean energy. [Ed – very Fettermanesque there] Let me — let’s debunk some myths here. My administration has not stopped or slowed U.S. oil production; quite the opposite.
  • Biden remarks in upstate New York, October 27, 2022: “Today . . . we’re in a much better place [than when I took office]. . . . [G]as prices are declining. We’re down $1.25 since the peak this summer, and they’ve been falling for the last three weeks at well — as well. That’s adding up to real savings for families. Today, the most common price of gas in America is $3.39 — down from over $5 when I took office.”

CNN, of all places, called out that last line in a big fact check of recent Biden whoppers (of which there are many):
Biden’s claim that the most common gas price when he took office was more than $5 is not even close to accurate. The most common price for a gallon of regular gas on the day he was inaugurated, January 20, 2021, was $2.39, according to data provided to CNN by Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy. In other words, Biden made it sound like gas prices had fallen significantly during his presidency when they had actually increased significantly.

Continue reading “”