Category: Crap For Brains

Biden Brags ‘We’re the Only Country in the World’ Giving COVID Vaccines to Children.

Last week, the Biden administration approved the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines for children ages 6 months to 5 years old. The FDA advisory committee claimed they found that the vaccines provided safe and effective protection against COVID for kids, even though fully vaccinated and boosted adults have still caught COVID.

The quest to vaccinate kids from COVID has been going on from the moment the vaccines were approved for emergency use, and the Biden administration and the media have colluded in a fear campaign to convince parents to vaccinate their kids. On Tuesday, Joe Biden spoke at a COVID vaccine center, during which he pointed out, “We’re the only country in the world doing this right now.”

He actually thought this was a good thing, that it was something to brag about. Did it ever occur to him that there might be a reason for that? Earlier this year, health officials in Sweden decided against recommending COVID vaccines for kids aged 5-12, arguing that the benefits don’t outweigh the risks.

We’ve known for some time now that school-aged children have a COVID recovery rate of 99.997% — which is better than their mortality risk from the seasonal flu and that unvaccinated children are safer from COVID than even vaccinated adults of any age. Meanwhile, studies have shown that the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines are more likely to cause myocarditis in young men than natural infection from COVID.

Even UNICEF admits that “The available evidence indicates the direct impact of COVID-19 on child, adolescent and youth mortality to be limited,” but the Biden administration is enthusiastically all-in on vaccinating kids from COVID despite the risks.

The data does not support the universal vaccination of kids from COVID. Period. So why does Biden think the USA pushing unnecessary COVID vaccines on kids when other countries are not is a good thing? It’s all about the money.

STOP! OR I’LL SAY STOP AGAIN!

Chicago cops barred from chasing people on foot who run away.

The Chicago Police Department has unveiled a new policy prohibiting its officers from chasing people on foot simply because they run away, or because they have committed minor offenses.

The policy, which was introduced Tuesday, also encourages cops to “consider alternatives” to pursuing someone who “is visibly armed with a firearm.”

Under the policy, officers may give chase if they believe a person is committing or is about to commit a felony, a Class A misdemeanor such as domestic battery, or a serious traffic offense that could risk injuring others, such as drunken driving or street racing.

Perhaps most significantly, the new policy makes clear that the days of officers giving chase just because someone tries to get away from them are over.

“People may avoid contact with a member for many reasons other than involvement in criminal activity,” the policy states.

The long-awaited foot chase ban is expected to go into effect by the end of the summer, after the city’s 11,900 uniformed cops receive training.

The policy prohibits officers from chasing people on foot simply because they run away.

The new policy comes more than a year after two foot pursuits ended with cops fatally shooting 13-year-old Adam Toledo and 22-year-old Anthony Alvarez in separate March 2021 incidents.

Toledo and Alvarez, who were armed when they ran from police in separate March 2021 pursuits, were not mentioned in the news release announcing the policy or the policy itself.

Toledo was shot in the chest after dropping a gun and raising his hands, and Alvarez was shot in the back while brandishing a gun.

Mayor Lori Lightfoot demanded that the department create an interim policy after the March 2021 shootings and the county’s top prosecutor harshly criticized police over the Alvarez pursuit.

Continue reading “”

Observation O’ The Day
SloJoe starts babbling about some  “International Flat Tax™” that he got 140 nations to sign onto (?) and his daughter and granddaughter shuffle him off stage ASAP.

They know all too well that Daddy has senile dementia

 

Stupid is as stupid does

New York Democrats already looking to revise just-passed ban on body armor

New York Democrats have a history of acting before they think, especially when it comes to guns and gun control measures. In 2013 lawmakers rammed the SAFE Act through the legislature, only to find that many of the elements of the gun control legislation were completely unworkable in practice. The ban on magazines that can hold more than seven rounds, for instance, ultimately had to be changed to allow for gun owners to use ten-round magazines, though they’re only allowed to load seven rounds of ammunition (a law that’s impossible to proactively enforce). The SAFE Act was also supposed to require background checks on all ammunition sales, though nearly a decade after its passage that element of the law has yet to go into effect.

New York lawmakers similarly rushed through a package of nearly a dozen new measures after the recent targeted attack on a Buffalo grocery store, including a new ban on the purchase of some types of body armor. Supposedly the new law is meant to prevent mass killers from protecting themselves against returning fire from police, but as some critics have pointed out, the type of body armor worn by the suspect in the Buffalo shooting isn’t actually covered by the new law.

A law hastily enacted by state lawmakers after the attack restricts sales of vests defined as “bullet-resistant soft body armor.”

Soft vests, which are light and can be concealed beneath clothing, can be effective against pistol fire. Vests carrying steel, ceramic or polyethylene plates, which can potentially stop rifle rounds, aren’t explicitly covered by the legislation.

That has left some retailers confused about what they can and can’t sell — and lawmakers talking about a possible fix.

“I know you said soft vests, but what about hard armor plates, plate carriers, or armors that aren’t vests, but clothing that provide protection. Is that also prohibited? It is so vague,” said Brad Pedell, who runs 221B Tactical, a tactical gear and body armor store in New York City. He said his store tends to sell more hard-plated armor than the soft type being banned.

… Pedell says many customers at his New York City store buy the armor for their own protection.

“It’s disappointing because residents are just scared, and they come to us because they are scared, and we offer help that makes them feel more confident, that they won’t get stabbed or injured or potentially killed,” Pedell said. “The fact (lawmakers) are taking that away, for whatever purpose they have in their minds, I find that really sad and unnecessary and morally wrong.”

Yeah, well, this is what happens when lawmakers are so intent on “doing something” in response to a shooting that they don’t think about the unintended consequences of their own actions. The suspected killer in Buffalo was wearing body armor? Well then, better ban it. Never mind the fact that ban will impact law-abiding citizens who want to protect themselves far more than it will thwart criminals from wearing body armor; there is virtue to be signaled here. And rather than recognizing the errors of their ways, supporters of the new ban say they’re ready to “fix” it if necessary.

Assemblymember Jonathon Jacobson, a lead sponsor of the legislation, told The Associated Press he would “be glad to amend the law to make it even stronger.”

… New Yorkers are still allowed to own body vests and purchase them in other states, though Jacobson, a Democrat, said he would work to eliminate that option during the next Legislative session in January.

“We wanted to get things done as quickly as possible, and not let the perfect get in the way of the good,” said Jacobson. “Like all laws in New York State, we always try to make them better in the future. Of course we’ll try to make this law better.”

The only way to do that would be to scrap this law entirely, which isn’t going to happen as long as Democrats have a majority in the statehouse in Albany.

Biden Is Blaming You, America, for His Rotten Economy.

“The World According to Joe Biden” is an interesting place. It’s full of unicorns and rainbows, cotton candy clouds, and magical gnomes who cause all kinds of mischief.

According to Biden, the gnomes have been busy. How else do you explain the worst inflation in 40 years or the baby formula crisis, or supply chain woes, or the other economic disasters that the president has visited upon us?

You explain it by blaming the American people. “People are really, really down,” Biden told the Associated Press in an interview on Thursday.

“Their need for mental health in America has skyrocketed because people have seen everything upset,” Biden said. “Everything they’ve counted on upset. But most of it’s the consequence of what happened, what happened as a consequence of the, the COVID crisis.”

Biden says America needs a mental health intervention. And he is dutifully following the first rule of politics: deny reality. Biden spoke of the warnings by some economists that a recession was on the way.

“First of all, it’s not inevitable,” he said. “Secondly, we’re in a stronger position than any nation in the world to overcome this inflation.”

As for the causes of inflation, Biden flashed some defensiveness on that count. “If it’s my fault, why is it the case in every other major industrial country in the world that inflation is higher? You ask yourself that? I’m not being a wise guy,” he said.

The president’s statement appeared to be about inflation rising worldwide, not necessarily whether countries had higher rates than the U.S. Annual inflation in Japan, for example, has risen in recent months though it’s still at a yearly rate of 2.4%, according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.

Biden said he was still optimistic about the economy, given the 3.6 percent unemployment rate. But with interest rates rising — the largest increase since 1994 — unemployment will once again become an issue, along with inflation, and tightening credit.

About the only thing that’s missing from the 1970s is “malaise.” Oh, wait.

Yet Biden’s remedy is not that different from the diagnosis made by former President Jimmy Carter in 1979, when the U.S. economy was crippled by stagflation. Carter said then the U.S. was suffering from a “crisis of confidence” and “the erosion of our confidence in the future is threatening to destroy the social and the political fabric of America.”

The president said he wants to endow the U.S. with more verve, fortitude and courage.

“Be confident,” Biden said. “Because I am confident. We’re better positioned than any country in the world to own the second quarter of the 21st century.”

Brave words. Empty words, but brave. Sometime in the next decade, China will surpass America as the number one economy in the world. And the Chinese government has a lot more confidence in their Communist system than Biden and his woke advisors have about American capitalism. If you’re looking for a reason for America’s decline, that’s a good place to start.

The similarities between Joe Biden and Jimmy Carter are eerie. Both men had no faith in the genius of America — its capitalists, its workers, or its ability to compete. The people aren’t inspired by leaders who whine about how unfair the criticism is, or how circumstances beyond the president’s control are the real cause of our problems.

For Carter, it was the Arab oil embargo that was the proximate cause of our economic woes. He, too, blamed the American people for not being inspired by his very existence. In a way, Biden and Carter are pathetic historical figures, lashed by forces they don’t understand. And like Carter, Biden will exit history in disgrace, leaving behind a prostrate nation needing to be inspired.

THE WORLD ACCORDING TO BIDEN: TRANSCRIPT

I was looking for transcript in all the wrong places, i.e., for the official White House transcript of President Biden’s fabulations at the 29th quadrennial convention of the AFL-CIO in Philadelphia yesterday morning. The White House posted it under Statements and Releases here. I commented on it here based on the PBS video (below).

Today’s New York Post devotes a good editorial to Biden’s speech under the heading “The Post says: Biden pumps out more economic baloney.” The editorial concludes: “Until he gets his head out of … the clouds, inflation and all our other economic woes are only going to get worse.”

I found Biden’s speech a disgraceful and disgusting performance. The professional fact-checkers could have a field day with it, if only…but the stretchers, whoppers, and lies aren’t the worst of it. The worst of it would be the destructive mission on which he is gleefully bound.

They either don’t care and are rubbing our noses in it, or they’re still building a case to depose him after January, next year

CNN’s anti-gun cop:
The AR-15 is a terrible self defense weapon
Same anti-gun cop:
Cops have AR-15s for self defense
“meant for use only on the battlefield”
Calls for all semi-auto rifles to be NFA

Here’s the reason people tell me they want to buy an AR-15. And it’s simply ludicrous

“Michael Fanone is a CNN law enforcement analyst who served for 20 years with the Washington, DC, Metropolitan Police Department. ”

Officer Michael Fanone attends The 15th Annual CNN Heroes: All-Star Tribute at American Museum of Natural History on December 12, 2021, in New York.
Officer Michael Fanone
Read it if you want. It’s the typical I’m an expert!™  ‘appeal to authority’ BS meant for the ignorant, that’s so commonplace these days.

President McConaughey makes the case for gun control compromise at the White House

The average joe doesn’t pay attention to daily political claptrap, especially when it’s coming from a figure as underwhelming and predictable as the president. But have an A-list actor revisiting the most gruesome and heartbreaking details of a mass shooting and some will perk up.

I wonder if the true target of having McConaughey speak today isn’t Congress but Greg Abbott. In an alternate universe, McConaughey is running for governor against him right now. He’s sufficiently well-liked at home that having him champion a cause like this in an emotional way after a catastrophe might affect some Texans. If McConaughey ends up as an advocate for red-flag laws at the state level, that’ll put pressure on Abbott.

Another point is; Why does anyone give these people ‘authority’? I could not care less what a movie actor believes I should or shouldn’t do, own, believe, or think.

 

Take out “The” and  “of ‘assault weapons’” and it would still be right.

The Reality of ‘Assault Weapons’ is Far Too Boring and Inconvenient for the Media.

We’re hearing a lot of claims and counter-claims about modern sporting rifles right now. While these “modern” guns are more than half a century old, honest gun owners still buy and use them every day. Occasionally, criminals use them as well, but that’s rare. About one-out-of-eight gun owners have a modern sporting rifle today. And as we’d expect, rifles are used in armed defense situations about an eighth of the time.

Semi-automatic, magazine-fed rifles were introduced to the civilian market here in the US in 1905. The US military adopted them about three decades later for use in World War II.

The civilian version of the modern sporting rifle, the AR-15, was introduced in 1956 so it has been with us for over six decades. In addition to its low recoil and plastic stock, the AR platform’s real innovation is its modularity. The AR can be adjusted to fit people of almost any stature in seconds, which is why it’s so popular. It’s the gateway rifle, the volksgun. I think that is why the democrats want it banned.

Here are two recent news stories that involve the use of a modern sporting rifle . . .

Homeowner with an AR stops two home invaders
It was mid-morning when a homeowner in Brownsboro, Texas heard the sounds of breaking glass coming from inside his home. The homeowner grabbed his AR rifle and went to see what was happening. The homeowner saw two strangers in his house. The defender told the intruders not to move. The second intruder, a female accomplice, ran away. The defender let her go and called 911.

Police arrested the male intruder. The homeowner pointed out the broken glass near his front door. Police arrested and searched the neighborhood for the second robber.

The defender was not charged with a crime.

The homeowner never pulled the trigger as he defended himself. That’s the usual outcome and happens in over 80 percent of defensive gun uses. There are exceptions, of course.

Woman with concealed carry license stops felon with an AR
A woman with a concealed carry permit was attending a graduation/birthday party at an apartment complex in Charleston, West Virginia. The party had spilled out into the parking lot with about 40 people at the celebration. At about 10 at night, a man drove through the parking lot and people shouted for him to slow down.

The driver took offense and came back a half hour later. He climbed into the back seat of his car and started shooting at the crowd with an AR rifle. The woman shot back several times, stopping the attacker in what would have been a mass shooting. No one else was injured.

She called 911 and remained at the scene. Emergency medical services declared the shooter dead from multiple gunshot wounds. The attacker was a convicted felon with a long criminal record. Police are investigating how he got his firearm.

Gun control laws don’t stop criminals from acquiring and using guns. They never have. But there is more we can learn from these two news accounts. AR rifles don’t turn honest homeowners into enraged murderers and they don’t make criminals into unstoppable killers. Modern sporting rifles are actually mundane. And as we’d expect, our neighbors only use lethal force as a last resort.

The reality is, however, that honest reporting about ordinary citizens defending themselves doesn’t make much money for the mainstream news media. They find it more clickworthy to say that a particular piece of steel, plastic and aluminum is horribly frightening and unusually deadly. Apparently that’s the only thing that keeps us watching through the commercials.

Here’s another take on the moronic crap-for-brains CBS article about Japanese gun control laws. And an interesting statistic

Why comparing gun violence here to Japan is stupid

Japan and the United States don’t have a lot in common. Culturally, we’re quite different, though not necessarily incompatible. After all, while legions of Americans consume bits of Japanese culture as if it were the greatest thing ever, other legions in Japan do the same thing with American culture.

But there are profound differences between the United States and Japan.

You wouldn’t really know that if you saw this story going on about their low rates of gun homicides.

As the U.S. gun control debate intensifies, some Americans are looking overseas for ideas on how to prevent mass shootings. Japan has one of the lowest rates of gun violence in the world. There were more than four firearm homicides in the U.S. per 100,000 people during 2019, compared to almost zero in Japan.

As CBS News senior foreign correspondent Elizabeth Palmer reports, Japan’s strict laws on private gun ownership have surprising origins in the United States. She met Raphael, a well-known Japanese YouTuber who decided to take skeet shooting lessons. Despite being ex-military, he had to jump through all the same hoops that any Japanese civilian must clear to get a gun license.

There’s mandatory training. You have to pass a written exam, plus a physical and mental health evaluation. Even then, the police will go and ask your family and friends whether you have any violent tendencies.

The point, of course, is very clear. Japan good, America bad. (The article later goes on to point out the irony in the fact that their gun laws are the result of American occupation following World War II.)

However, for all of Palmer’s questions, she never bothered to dig beyond the surface level.

Japan’s total homicide rate is 0.3 per 100,000 people. That’s for all weapons, and yes, that is incredibly low by anyone’s standard. It’s easy to see why some would look to Japan and try to see what they’re doing in hopes of replicating it here.

If our gun homicide rate were only 0.3 per 100,000, that would probably be a rate we could live with, right?

Except, our non-gun homicide rate is 1.6 per 100,000. That’s more than [5] times greater than Japan’s total rate.

In other words, whatever is making Japan so relatively safe has little or nothing to do with their gun laws. After all, the Japanese government can’t ban knives, hammers, sticks, or body parts–all of which are used to kill plenty of people here in the United States.

Instead, whatever has created such a low homicide rate is likely something that has nothing to do with weapon restrictions and more to do with culture or, at least, some other regulation.

Unfortunately, that’s beyond the modern media to delve into. That’s a question they never bother to think to ask because they’re apparently conditioned to not think of homicide as anything other than a gun issue.

The thing is, though, if you managed to make all guns go away overnight from every hand in the country, we’d still have a higher homicide rather than Japan–at least five times higher, though I suspect it would increase since you have to assume a large percentage of those who kill with guns would simply shift to another weapon.

So yeah, Palmer skimmed the surface and never dug any deeper, which is par for the course in this day and age.

Observation O’ The Day
“Our ‘elites’ are now promoting the kind of history one would impose on a conquered nation, to break its people’s spirit.”

Common Sense? CBS Urges U.S. Adopt Japan’s Occupation-Era Gun Control

On Monday’s CBS Mornings, the network continued their series globetrotting for gun control laws. This time they left Europe and jetted over to Japan where senior foreign correspondent (and friend to the Iranian regime) Elizabeth Palmer touted their oppressive system where a citizen could wait a year or longer to get a gun license as authorities prod their lives and a gun shop owners need to get permission to buy ammo. All imposed on them during the post-WWII occupation.

So much for “common sense” gun laws.

“As the U.S. gun-control debate intensifies, some Americans are looking overseas for ideas on how to prevent mass shootings. Japan has one of the lowest rates of gun violence in the world,” co-host Nate Burleson announced at the top of the segment. “Seems like it’s about time we adopt some of those laws,” he pushed at the end.

Hanging out with Japanese YouTuber Raphael at a skeet shooting range, Palmer praised the “mandatory training” citizen had to go through, in addition to a “written exam, a physical and a mental health evaluation, and even then the police can go and ask your family and friends whether you’ve got any violent tendencies.”

“It took me a year,” Raphael told her. She also noted, “the police had even interviewed his wife.”

She also touted how Japanese citizens were only allowed to buy firearms from three categories and the ridiculous fact that gun store owners needed permission to restock ammunition:

He’s proud of the buck he shot in northern Japan with a rifle, one of only three types of guns a civilian can own. Air guns are also allowed, he said, as shotguns, but that’s it.

I’ve heard that there’s very strict control on ammunition, as well. I see you have some rounds here in the cabinet.

“Yes,” he tells me. “When a gun owner runs out he needs police authorization to buy more.”

“Does he think the law goes too far? Not a bit. Like most Japanese, he supports it as the price for almost zero gun violence,” she boasted.

Palmer was absolutely giddy to note that the reason Japan had such strict gun control laws was because of the United States. “And how’s this for ironic? Japan owes its strict gun laws to America,” she mocked. “When the U.S. occupied Japan after World War II it disarmed the country.”

She even threw in a soundbite from an old documentary where the narrator proclaimed: “To the scrap heap went the guns.” Palmer conveniently omitted the part where the U.S. also banned Japan from having a military.

“Americans shaped the legislation that took firearms out of the hands of civilians, and to this day, that means getting hurt or killed by a gun in Japan is an extremely long shot,” she jabbed as she wrapped up the report.

Palmer is essentially praising the American confiscation of firearms for there to be a smoother occupation and pacification of a citizenry, the exact opposite of what the founders intended. And given the fact that the Democratic Roosevelt administration put Japanese-American citizens in internment camps, perhaps looking to that era for guidance is ill-advised.

Poor Baybee. Maybe if he stampy foots, it’ll get better

Awww: Joe Biden Is Angry That He’s Now More Unpopular Than Donald Trump.

Joe Biden has been underwater in the polls for nearly a year now. His polls were driven down sharply by his botched withdrawal from Afghanistan and only worsened due to his incompetence in dealing with the nation’s most significant issues, including the border crisis, COVID-19, the supply chain crisis, gas prices, and inflation.

But as bad as Joe Biden’s poll numbers became, they were still better than Trump’s, who came into office with low approval numbers. So whether or not you trusted Trump’s poll numbers, they were never good.

And now Joe Biden’s are worse… and he’s not happy about that.

“In crisis after crisis, the White House has found itself either limited or helpless in its efforts to combat the forces pummeling them. Morale inside 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. is plummeting amid growing fears that the parallels to Jimmy Carter, another first-term Democrat plagued by soaring prices and a foreign policy morass, will stick,” reports Politico. “The president has expressed exasperation that his poll numbers have sunk below those of Donald Trump, whom Biden routinely refers to in private as ‘the worst president’ in history and an existential threat to the nation’s democracy.”

Politico did its best to provide some cover for Biden, arguing that the White House is powerless to address the nation’s problems as if Biden is a mere observer with no influence over the country whatsoever. But, sure enough, Biden has spent his entire presidency blaming anyone and everyone else but himself for the nation’s problems.

However, the American people aren’t buying the finger-pointing, and Biden’s approval ratings have hit new lows despite various efforts by the White House to “reset” Biden’s presidency.

And he’s angry about it. Really, really, angry.

Far more prone to salty language behind the scenes than popularly known, Biden also recently erupted over being kept out of the loop about the direness of the baby formula shortage that has gripped parts of the country, according to a White House staffer and a Democrat with knowledge of the conversation. He voiced his frustration in a series of phone calls to allies, his complaints triggered by heart-wrenching cable news coverage of young mothers crying in fear that they could not feed their children.

From where I stand, it seems Joe Biden should care less about how these crises make him look and more about fixing them. Biden claimed to be the adult in the room who knew how to solve problems. Yet, he’s only shown himself to be the petulant child who doesn’t know what he’s doing and takes responsibility for nothing.

This crap-for-brains is what passes for ‘journalism’ today
And again, it is nice they provide means for positive ID

5 “Crazy” Gun Reform Ideas That Just Might Work

JEF ROUNER is a contributing writer who covers politics, pop culture, social justice, video games, and online behavior. He is often a professional annoyance to the ignorant and hurtful.

In the wake of the Robb Elementary shooting, the question of gun control has come up again. Unsurprisingly, Republicans uniformly resist any possible new regulations on guns. Governor Greg Abbott has even barred any talk of gun control from special committees in school shootings. All efforts at reform are portrayed as precursors to universal bans on firearms.

Continue reading “”

It really doesn’t take much for SloJoe to be ‘baffled’ does it?
And demoncraps have run with the same ‘product’ for too many decades for them to change now.

BLUF
If dogs won’t eat the dog food you’re selling, a new slogan won’t fix the problem. You need to change your product.

Hey, Team Biden, the problem isn’t your political messaging. It’s reality.

In five months, 13 Democratic senators and 191 Democratic representatives face their angry constituents at the ballot box. Some of them likely wonder why they didn’t join the 32 Dems opting for retirement instead.

The midterms are looking rough for Team Donkey. Very rough. And most of the troubles come straight from the top. While President Biden isn’t up for reelection this year, he’ll likely be responsible for ending a lot of careers this November.

Inflation is soaring, economists are warning of a recession, and moms still can’t find baby formula. Meanwhile, Biden is baffled about why voters are so upset with him.

Continue reading “”

NY Times gets it right: polls showing support for gun control doesn’t mean the votes are there

How many times have you seen a news article talking about how most people support gun control? I know I’ve seen it a ton over the years. The media and politicians latch onto poll numbers as if they’re sacrosanct, telling us this proves the public supports them.

Then the election rolls around and gun control doesn’t seem to make a blip on the radar.

Over at the New York Times, they decided to delve into just why that is.

It’s one of the most puzzling questions for Democrats in American politics: Why is the political system so unresponsive to gun violence? Expanded background checks routinely receive more than 80 percent or 90 percent support in polling. Yet gun control legislation usually gets stymied in Washington and Republicans never seem to pay a political price for their opposition.

There have been countless explanations offered about why political reality seems so at odds with the polling, including the power of the gun lobby; the importance of single-issue voters; and the outsize influence of rural states in the Senate.

But there’s another possibility, one that might be the most sobering of all for gun control supporters: Their problem could also be the voters, not just politicians or special interests.

Oh, blaming the voters, right?

Not really.

You see, the argument being made isn’t that the voters are somehow wrong, but that issue polling is, well, useless.

Continue reading “”

Tools and puppets don’t have plans, and Biden is both.

There is no plan.
The closer attention you pay to Biden, the less he has to say.

President Joe Biden is “rattled,” according to NBC News, and “looking to regain voters’ confidence that he can provide the sure-handed leadership he promised during the campaign.”

How? By trying to change the media narrative. On May 30, Biden published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal that explained “My Plan for Fighting Inflation.” The next day, Biden wrote a “guest essay” for the New York Times on “What America Will and Will Not Do in Ukraine.”

Bad poll numbers and a collapsing domestic and international situation have excited the typically drowsy president into action. There’s a problem, though. The closer you read Biden’s op-eds, the less he has to say. This new, annoyed, engaged Biden may be a prolific writer and speaker. But he’s not an incisive one. He won’t admit that there is a connection between his ideology and America’s problems. He can’t decide between giving Ukraine the weapons necessary to defeat Russia or settling for a war of attrition.

Biden’s Journal op-ed is a masterclass in passing the buck. He doesn’t bring up his “plan for fighting inflation” until midway through his thousand-word piece. My inner college professor wanted to send the article back to him with suggestions for revision. Number one: Always move your best material to the top!

The plan itself is gauzy and thin. “The Federal Reserve has a primary responsibility to control inflation.” You wouldn’t know that from listening to Progressives, including some of Biden’s nominees to the Federal Reserve, who argue that the Fed’s interest in price stability distracts it from promoting full employment, green energy, and diversity, equity, and inclusion. Now Biden wants the Fed to correct not only its mistakes, but his own. Let’s see if his faith in an independent central bank can stand the test of higher interest rates, higher unemployment, and lower incomes.

Parts two and three of Biden’s inflation plan are the remnants of his Build Back Better agenda: some clean energy and housing subsidies here, a few tax hikes there. He mentions his use of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to lower gas prices, but not his appeals to Venezuela and OPEC to boost the oil supply. As for the obvious answers to America’s energy problems—a complete reversal of Biden’s hostility to oil and gas exploration and production, huge investments in nuclear power, and emergency efforts to increase refinery capacity—Biden has no words. His devotion to the environmental lobby and to green energy blinds him. If the Progressive Left rejects nuclear power, the “clean energy future” it desires won’t arrive.

This mismatch between ends and means is visible in Biden’s Ukraine policy. The president tells New York Times readers that the United States sends Ukraine weapons “so it can fight on the battlefield and be in the strongest possible position at the negotiating table.” The desired end state is “a democratic, independent, sovereign, and prosperous Ukraine with the means to deter and defend itself against further aggression.” And Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky is in the driver’s seat. “I will not pressure the Ukrainian government—in private or public—to make any territorial concessions.”

All good. Why, then, limit the weapons deliveries to systems with ranges of 40 miles? Why slow-walk and agonize over each tranche of support? Why engage with Russia in farcical and dangerous negotiations over Iran’s nuclear weapons? Why not take a more active role in peace talks between Ukraine and Russia? The Biden policy is static even as the shape of the war changes in ways that favor the aggressor. The president’s goals are laudable. But his tactics are calibrated for a war that Ukraine is winning.

And Ukraine is not winning. At least not now. The Ukrainians defeated Russia’s attempt at regime change. But they have been less successful in removing Russia from eastern Ukraine and from their port cities in the south and southeast. Absent a change in Biden administration policy—in the ranges of weapons systems America provides Ukraine, in the establishment of a humanitarian corridor to relieve the Russian blockade of Ukrainian Black Sea ports, or in a major diplomatic effort—the war will turn into a frozen conflict with no clear resolution and with mounting humanitarian costs. How that situation would help anyone, including Biden, is unclear.

Then again, little Biden says or does makes sense from the vantage point of either policy or politics. He’s right to be rattled. He’s also clueless.

They’ve only cared about the Constitution when its powers were a benefit to what they wanted.

To confiscate guns, Democrats demoncraps are ready to destroy the courts and the Constitution

Most Democrats demoncraps in Congress do not care about institutions or the “commonsense” gun control proposals they profess to support. They want full-scale gun confiscation, and they don’t care how many norms and institutions they need to destroy to accomplish it.

Rep. Mondaire Jones (D-NY) laid out where the Democrap Party stands and why Republicans should not humor any Democratic “deal” on gun control. “If the filibuster obstructs us, we will abolish it,” Jones said. “If the Supreme Court objects, we will expand it, and we will not rest until we’ve taken weapons of war out of circulation in our communities.”

Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) put it more bluntly: “Spare me the bulls*** about constitutional rights.”

Does Jones or Cicilline know anything about these “weapons of war” they want to ban and confiscate? Of course not. Cicilline said that he couldn’t think of a “single incident” where “an assailant using an assault weapon” was stopped by someone with a gun, even though such an example happened just last week in West Virginia. More prominently, there was Stephen Willeford, the man who confronted a shooter at a church in Sutherland Springs. Grabien’s Tom Elliott has a list of self-defense stories, with 315 examples going back to Jan. 1, 2019.

Jones is embarrassingly uneducated as well. When asked, he said that “semiautomatic weapons would qualify as assault weapons.” He then said that handguns “would not qualify” as assault weapons, even though the vast majority of handguns are semiautomatic. “Semiautomatic” simply means the gun fires one bullet every time the trigger is pulled and that you don’t need to cock or load the gun after every shot. Jones is either lying about not wanting to ban handguns or, more likely, he has absolutely no idea what he’s talking about.

The same is true for President Joe Biden, who wants to ban 9 mm guns because “a 9 mm bullet blows the lung out of the body,” and “there is no rational basis for it in terms of self-protection.” Biden wants you to think that the most popular handgun caliber in the country is like a sci-fi weapon. The White House then walked back the idea that Biden supported a handgun ban. Either the White House is lying now, or Biden, who has been advocating gun control for years, still has not learned a single fact about what guns are or how they work.

Democrats constantly trip over themselves on gun control, repeating blatant falsehoods and calling for gun control policies that contradict their rhetoric. While they claim their policies are commonsense and moderate, their rhetoric indicates that the only way they can get what they want is through gun confiscation, whether they are openly pursuing it or not. As Cicilline and Jones helpfully illustrated, they will destroy the Senate, the Supreme Court, and the Constitution to do so.

‘Killing Weapon’? So he wants what; Nerf Guns with marshmallow bullets? Using any gun is using a ‘killing weapon’. That’s why they’re referred to as a class of ‘deadly weapon’
And, again, it’s not about ‘need’. That comes from communism.
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his need”
— Karl Marx

“It’s a killing weapon, and we don’t need them.” Sisolak blasts assault weapon ownership at rally

****

Sisolak claimed assault style weapons weren’t designed for self defense calling them “weapons of war” not protected under the second amendment.

“The nonsense that it’s a right, well then why isn’t it a right to have a rocket launcher, or to drive a tank instead of a car,” he said……..

In point of fact, you can have a rocket launcher and a fully armed tank, as well as artillery. All it takes is money, and in the case of explosives, proper storage. And yet these mental midgets get elected to high office.