Brain missing, regressed, or something?

Cheryl K. Chumley: Trump coded kiss-off letter the work of childish left – “Ooh, a secret code. Like a 9-year-old might write.” and this from a professor at UCB.

Kammen, an energy professor at the University of California, Berkeley, just resigned his post as science envoy at the U.S. Department of State. In a letter to the president, posted on his Twitter account, he wrote of Trump’s “failure to condemn white supremacists and neo-Nazis” and the subsequent “domestic and international ramifications” that brought as fueling his resignation decision.

Specifically, he wrote: “Particularly troubling to me is how your response to Charlottesville is consistent with a broader pattern of behavior that enables sexism and racism and disregards the welfare of all Americans, the global community and the planet.”

And here’s the really clever part.

At the beginning of each paragraph, Kammen used a word that began with a letter that, when read downward, spelled the word “impeach.”

That’s not just passive-aggressive. That’s just stupid. It’s like the mysteries of the universe unfolding — only, Not.

Is this what the left has become — the political equivalent of the religious world’s Wiccans? As if sneakily inserting messages of “impeach” will actually bring about the hoped-for impeachment. As if the childish coding will serve as the magic elixir, the witchlike spell, that secures the impeachment success.

The reaction to the President’s calling out behavior rather than identity, such as this example illustrates, registers. The childishness is telling.

The Washington Times: Assault on the thin blue line – “The campaign against the cops is leading to a very bad place.” The pardon of Sherriff Arpaio controversy fits into this. Professor Kammen has chosen a side that supports the campaign.

The expansion of civil unrest across the American landscape is ominous enough, but the ferocity of the abuse of the nation’s men and women in blue is more alarming still, a precursor to anarchy. The truly deplorable who hold the upholders of the law in contempt must get a grip, or be restrained, before the violence crosses the line into a primitive land of no return.

The trend, whether cause and effect, nevertheless accompanies the leftists, usually dressed in black masks, who challenge the law as the police follow a strategy of avoiding confrontation.

the police, obviously under instructions from the top, did almost nothing to keep combatants apart, enabling and encouraging the violence.

The line between civilization and anarchy is blue and thin, and left-wing radicals imagine they can achieve their goals by spilling blood, breaking bones and striking fear in the hearts of the innocent and the law-abiding. This will lead society into a new place in America, where nobody should want to go.

Patricia McCarthy: Arpaio Pardoned, RINOs melt down – “What on earth has happened to the moral and political sensibilities of Paul Ryan, John McCain, Jeff Flake, Jeb Bush, etc.?

Arpaio was found in contempt of court after a Clinton-appointed judge, Susan Bolton, ordered him to stop enforcing the law, detaining people he suspected (or knew) to be illegal immigrants. It was the judge who broke the law as so many of our activist judges have over the last decade. They do not want laws that protect our borders enforced. Such judges are traitors to the nation as well.

How have we come to the point at which the Republican leadership in Congress is so consistently on the wrong side of their stated principles?

James Fotis: Trump’s pardon of ex-Sheriff Joe Arpaio was the right (and courageous) thing to do – “Despite knowing he would face criticism, the president did what was right.”

Arpaio was convicted by a federal judge in July of criminal contempt after being charged with violating a court order that attempted to prevent suspected illegal immigrants from being targeted by the sheriff’s traffic patrols. The sheriff acknowledged continuing the patrols, but said that targeting was not the focus.

Arpaio’s conviction arose out of a lawsuit wrongfully accusing the sheriff’s office of violating the rights of Hispanics, allegedly using racial profiling tactics to identify people for traffic stops, and detaining convicts based only on the suspicion that they were illegal immigrants.

Hearing testimony during Arpaio’s trial, I realized that any reasonable person who was there to pass judgment on this honest law-abiding man – who gave his life to the rule of law – could never have found him guilty on the evidence presented.

However, the only one who could pass judgment on the former sheriff was U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton, because Arpaio was denied his right to a jury trial under the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The judge’s verdict convicting Arpaio was a travesty of justice.

The Washington Post, as one might expect, has a sob story of an immigrant who spent a year in Arpaio’s tent city jail to try to refute Trump’s pardon. Slate also shows its colors headlining The Arpaio Pardon Is a Bad Sign for the Mueller Investigation and Trump’s Revenge with articles asserting “that Trump has no respect for the rule of law” and “Arpaio was not convicted for his relentless and well-documented brutality, but for criminal contempt” and calling Arpaio “sadistic.”

It is interesting that Luboš Motl is providing the more reasonable school in U.S. civics. He says Trump had moral duty to pardon political prisoner Arpaio – “My understanding is that he has never tangibly hurt or restricted someone who wasn’t an illegal immigrant.”

But just like Europe, America is filled with organized activists who find the illegal immigration desirable. So they’re telling you: You aren’t allowed to look whether someone looks like an illegal immigrant, listen whether he quacks like an illegal immigrant, and you’re not even allowed to take his lack of documentation into account.

And some judges have issued verdicts with these ludicrous statements, too.

The reaction I found most stunning was one by Noah Feldman, … But I am primarily disgusted by Feldman’s words that “Trump has attacked the rule of law in the U.S. itself”. What? The pardon for Arpaio is surely a middle finger for a certain clique of judges and other activists who loved to imagine that they’re omnipotent but they’re not and they’re not the same thing as the rule of law. In fact, they’re much closer to the rule of lawlessness.

Trump’s pardon for Joe Arpaio is a textbook example of a pardon that the founding fathers had in mind. The pardon was incorporated as an extra tool to reverse decisions that are partially driven by angry mobs, that haven’t really defined what the crime is supposed to be, and that are too cruel given the age or other characteristics of the defendant.

Allahpundit points out the absurdities from a Former GOP senator: We need to make clear that Trump doesn’t represent what the Republican Party stands for – but “He beat 16 candidates to win the party’s presidential nomination. And not JV-level candidates like Romney did in 2012, either.

Trump defeated them all easily in nearly every major primary. And once he was nominee, they all fell in line behind him. It bears stressing this: He’s the same guy now as he was last year. There have been various shocks during his first seven months but no true surprises. The party chose him expecting him to be this guy, elected him expecting him to be this guy, and is now being rewarded by having him be this guy. Even with no significant legislation passed, daily distractions on Twitter, sniping at congressional Republicans, needless self-made clusterfarks over some of the “very fine people” in the alt-right, conflicts of interest, and sporadic Russiagate developments, he still enjoys the backing of 75-80 percent of GOPers or better in most polls. When Kevin Williamson, disgusted, warned Republicans after Trump finished off Cruz in the Indiana primary, “Remember, you asked for this,” he wasn’t just warning them about the chaos to come. He was acknowledging a plain fact. We did in fact ask for this.

John Danforth can comfort himself over that if he likes by asserting that Trump doesn’t represent Republicans, but Republicans themselves have been pretty clear over the past 26 months what their view of that is. You don’t need to like what the party’s become, but we’re late in the game now to insist that it hasn’t already become that.

It is rather amazing how this “self-made clusterfarks over some of the “very fine people” in the alt-right” myth sticks despite it being an unsupportable misperception. Neither UCB professors nor pundits with a distaste for Trump are honest enough to go look at the transcript of what Trump actually said and read it carefully without bias.

Rowan Scarborough: Democrats intentionally used disinformation from Russia to attack Trump, campaign aides – “the public record shows that Democrats have willfully used Moscow disinformation to influence the presidential election

Some Democrats have widely circulated the discredited information. Mr. Steele was paid by the Democrat-funded opposition research firm Fusion GPS with money from a Hillary Clinton backer. Fusion GPS distributed the dossier among Democrats and journalists. The information fell into the hands of the FBI, which used it in part to investigate Mr. Trump’s campaign aides.

Clarice Feldman: Crying Wolf in a Crowded Theater – “In the Federalist, Stella Morabito does a stellar job explaining exactly how media manipulated people into a “nervous breakdown“ over the events in Charlottesville, a breakdown that has created a feeling of alienation and hatred toward our fellow citizens.”

She explains the three potent weapons they utilized to this end: “the manipulation of our language; the deliberate use of such loaded language to cultivate extreme emotions in people, particularly anger and resentment; and the role of mass media as a nuclear device to impose those perceptions on a mass scale.” … “The whole point of manipulating language is to obfuscate in order to control.”

I agree with her and that’s why I find so disturbing the efforts of the large Internet giants to regulate free speech on their sites. Also distressing is internet giants, movie stars, and commercial enterprises supporting the Southern Poverty Law Center, the money sucking partisan outfit intent on shutting down one side of all debate. It is so inimical to the right of free speech (even if it offends) with which 83% of us agree.

Everyone who isn’t buying this baloney is being targeted.

With businesses like Google, PayPal, and Facebook allowing SPLC to declare who and what constitutes “hate” — often because the management shares SPLC’s blinkered view — perhaps Congress ought to consider a Bill of Rights for the internet if free speech is not to be unreasonably occluded and one side again being given the only voice in the marketplace of ideas, to our great detriment.

Feldman’s recommendation is a good one. Read Stella Morabito on America’s Post-Charlottesville Nervous Breakdown Was Deliberately Induced.

Ned Ryun: The real threat to our republic is the Orwellian Antifa – “Over the past few months, we have finally entered the fully realized historical revisionism promised in George Orwell’s “1984,” in which the motto, “Who controls the present controls the past.

For all the talk of Trumpian bluster or exaggeration, there is only one group that seeks to systematically and violently achieve its goals here in the United States on a broad scale: the so-called “anti-facist” movement, now commonly called “Antifa.” And the goal? It’s not “anti-facist” or “anti-racist” as they attempt to portray themselves. It’s the systematic elimination of free speech, free assembly, and free thought via any means necessary, including violent protest, the media and Orwellian revisionism.

This violence against reprehensible, yet innocent citizens, and more importantly, law enforcement, which the Antifa routinely violently opposes, is not the result of a few bad apples. It’s the fundamental philosophy of the loose confederation of Antifa cells, much of it laid out for all to read on “how to” websites.

Increasingly, the violence we are seeing on the streets is not the result of the alt-right movement, but of the Antifa movement imposing their views on our society: tearing down statues, burning the American flag, shutting down town hall meetings, destroying private property and looting. All of it tactical toward achieving the goals of destroying the American culture, society and economy. Never mind that the tactics are themselves the tactics of the fascist.

Rebecca Onion: The Angle: Leave the Guns Edition – “Why should protesters ever need to carry weapons? Connor McLean argues that permitted rallies should disallow the kinds of strapped-up displays we saw in Charlottesville, Virginia.” What is getting sidestepped is that weapons is not just firearms.

John Sexton: LA Times: Restrict the Second Amendment at First Amendment rallies – “The argument is that free speech is too important to restrict but, for safety’s sake, police should be willing to tell people no guns allowed at outdoor rallies.”

I suspect the editorial writers for the LA Times are not gun owners and, maybe, don’t know any gun owners. But it’s worth noting that despite having two ostensibly opposing groups of armed people in Charlottesville, no shots were fired. It wasn’t the gun owners who got violent, it was the kids with flagpoles and one nut with a muscle car.

John Hinderaker: Far-Left Bullies Suppress Civil Rights In California – “The “heckler’s veto” is not recognized in American law, but it is increasingly becoming a fact of life in American cities.”

The hecklers are always from the far left, and they generally come armed. This is a scandal of major proportions, but is rarely recognized as such.

Rather than defending Patriot Prayer’s First Amendment rights, local authorities slandered the group in order to justify their own inaction:

“White supremacist” has become a catch-all epithet for anyone the Democrats don’t like.

So what happened? A vicious mob of antifa fascists swarmed the area while police stood by, threatening the “right wing” rally.

Does hunting down your political enemies with baseball bats an ax handles count as “hate”? Of course not!

The Associated Press describes an armed mob seeking to beat up people with whom they disagree politically as “anti-fascist”–with a straight face! What a time we live in.

So those who oppose the far left–surely a majority, even in California–are not allowed to assemble. This is an intolerable (not to mention illegal) situation. It can’t be allowed to continue.

Jonathan H. Adler: Why Gorsuch’s speech to a private group at the Trump Hotel does not raise serious ethical issues – “this is another example of the selective and somewhat-partisan invocation of judicial ethics concerns.” Somewhat partisan?

Neo-neocon: Presidents and lies – “it demonstrates how reluctant I am to use the word “lie” to refer to an error that comes from campaign hyperbole or ignorance. If it’s ignorance, I’ll criticize the ignorance, not a “lie” that isn’t really a lie. And I try to do the same for each side.”

That’s why I get so angry when I hear Obama supporters excusing him by saying “all presidents lie.” Not like Obama, they don’t.

About that most fundamental thing—his political points of view, and his plans for the country as president—Trump (at least so far) appears to have been telling the truth. Which is sort of funny, because during the campaign a lot of us suspected he might have been lying and had no intention of trying to do most of the things he said he would try to do. If during his campaign Obama seemed more trustworthy than he actually turned out to be (although I don’t think I was fooled; see this post), than Trump as president so far has been more trustworthy in that respect than he seemed to be during the campaign.

DCE: This Is How Science Is Supposed To Work – “the New York Times editorial claiming that we should trust climate scientists because of the recent eclipse certainly had me scratching my head.”

The “climate scientists” have discarded much of this, telling us instead to “Trust us. We’re scientists!” instead of showing us their work, the algorithms they’ve used to run their calculations, or even the data and other factors they’ve used to come up with the conclusion that “We’re all gonna DIE!” if we don’t impoverish ourselves to stop climate change. They are sounding more and more like Professor Irwin Corey – The World’s Foremost Authority, all the time. I wouldn’t mind that all that much if they were nearly as funny as he was. While he used his scientific sounding gobbledygook to comic effect, the so-called climate scientists are serious, at least when it comes to making sure they keep receiving funding.

It would be nice if they got back to doing real science.

Hurricane Harvey in Texas caused a lot of damage and there were a number of victims. There were also stories of another sort. William Bruso, a taxi driver, got a new friend he named after the hurricane. “As thousands evacuated the Houston area ahead of the Category 4 hurricane and others hunkered down, one hawk sought refuge in a car in Houston on Friday.” Fernando Alfonso III reports on the Dog carrying bag of food after Hurricane Harvey becomes viral hero – The grandson’s dog got loose but was found carrying his food.

Comments are closed.