Tuesday, February 23, 2021

Merrick Garland: Portland Riots May Not Be ‘Domestic Terrorism’ Because They Are At Night

Nominee for Attorney General, Merrick Garland, took questions in his Senate hearing yesterday in support of his nomination by President 46*.  When asked his thoughts on "assaults on federal property in places other than Washington, DC", he replied in essence that while the attack on the Capitol was domestic terrorism, the attacks on federal buildings over the summer in Portlandia and Seattle likely were not.
"Do you regard assaults on federal courthouses or other federal property as acts of domestic extremism, domestic terrorism?”  
"Well Senator, my own definition, which is about the same as the statutory definition, is the use of violence or threats of violence in an attempt to disrupt democratic processes. 
An attack on a courthouse while in operation, trying to prevent judges from actually deciding cases, that plainly is domestic extremism, domestic terrorism."
So, it seems if attacks on police and federal courthouses take place after hours when court was not in session, it's just a run of the mill vandalism?? 

Look, I spent many an evening and into early mornings watching live streams of large contingents of well organized jacked up black clad, meth enable fascist, when not destroying store fronts and setting fire to a Starbucks, attack news crews, intimidate bystanders, using industrial fireworks, bats, bricks and frozen water bottles against police, and setting fires at doors while blocking other exits to the the federal buildings with police inside in Portland and Seattle. They have killed before. 

In Portland, their main objective were/are the jails and releasing the inmates, mostly of color, held by the racist courts on the upper floors of the court house. If they were to breach the building there wouldn't have been anything like you saw at the capital building. There wouldn't be just ransacking of offices and feet on desk. They were intent on releasing the inmates and burned it to the ground. And you can bet that with their numbers, there would have be more than one dead federal agent as was the case in DC. These are real Domestic Terrorist, Judge.

And no, my good Judge Garland, you don't and never will belong on the Supreme Court with your anti second amendment views.  And if you spend your time and our money chasing small unorganized groups of zealot hillbillies in red hats who most are probably more of a danger to their wives than our democracy, and not removing these  destructive Antifa anarchist off the streets by any means necessary, then you have no business being the Attorney General of the United States either!   *Drops Mic*

~ Thank You WHATFINGER NEWS for the Linkage! ~

Sunday, February 21, 2021

Your Sunday Open Thread

Your Beloved Blog Editrix turns things over to you, the readers.
Post your links. Say your piece.


Saturday, February 20, 2021

The Party of Science Continues It's Mockery of Science

One of the biggest lies of the present decade is that the democrats are the "Party of Science." It fits quite nicely with their soviet style mantra of 'only they know what passes as truth'.  And now they propose to set some of their Legalistic Utopia and Alternative Reality in stone.

According to Breitbart, President 46* released a statement Friday urging Congress to “swiftly pass” H.R.5.- The Equality Act, a bill that would eliminate the legal recognition of male and female sex, cater to gender ideology, and designate protection for the unborn as “pregnancy” discrimination. This legislation, which would rewrite civil rights law to include “sexual orientation and gender identity” as protected classes, not to mention mock biological science, and would likely upend the national culture as Americans have known it.

Ryan Anderson Ph.D., president of Ethics & Public Policy Center (EPPC) an expert on bioethics, religious liberty, and political philosophy released a statement on this Equality sham. In part:
“The so-called Equality Act is legislative malpractice that turns equality on its head. It isn’t drafted as a shield to protect vulnerable minorities from unjust discrimination, but as a sword to persecute those who do not embrace new sexual and gender ideologies.”
Anderson underscored the impact the legislation will have on the privacy of women and girls, as well as the punitive consequences to which faith-based institutions and organizations will be exposed at its hands.  Anderson noted that any questioning of transgender medical treatments and surgeries would be labeled “discrimination” if the Equality Act becomes law.
“And any refusal to support or provide abortions would now be treated as ‘pregnancy’ discrimination,” he continued. “And no one—not even the act’s sponsors—can tell us what would be required under the act to avoid committing ‘discrimination’ in the case of ‘non-binary’ gender identities.”
The problem is that the Equality Act wouldn’t protect people in need of protection as much as it would fundamentally change civil rights law for the worse.

Friday, February 19, 2021

Middle Finger Symphony Theater


Brought To You By BLUESJUNKY: Chair of Music - Middle Finger Symphony Music Director

Thursday, February 18, 2021

Perseverance is His Middle Name 🤣

Brian Williams Reports from Perseverance Landing Zone

I Will Not Be Participating in Your New Culture Wars

There I was, stranded by a snowstorm and nothing better to do, reading up on what a journalist unjustly pushed out of his left-wing muckracking gig (one with whom I disagree about nearly everything) had to say about the forced resignation of a reporter from a newspaper I no longer read over the meta-ethics of using a racial slur in a non-derogatory context during a field trip for rich kids to South America that probably cost more than six months of most people's mortgage.

Then I checked my social media "feed",  only to discover that my attention was needed elsewhere. You see, an actress I have never heard of, who rose to prominence in a sport I loathe, had been fired from a television program I have no plans of ever watching on an online streaming platform that I would never subscribe to for employing a tired but once-popular Holocaust-derived analogy in an argument about well, I really don't know, but I was supposed to be thrilled that she is now engaged in an unnamed new film venture with another journalist whose work I don't care to read

Sandwiched between these two incidents was at least one other pseudo-controversy involving the inconsistent application of privacy rules at the aforementioned paper. It led to a once-pseudonymous blogger, who was supposed to be the subject of an abandoned profile, outing himself and then being written about in a somewhat nastier manner by the same publication. This in turn gave rise to dozens of impassioned defenses of the unlucky scribe by countless other 40-something male bloggers, including one prominent defender of polygamy.

What the hell am I doing reading this crap in my precious extra time I thought. In all of these and goodness knows how many other cases or whatever the word is supposed to be for these extended online sessions, what was being elicited was an intense fury that, upon a moment's reflection, I realized I did not actually feel. 

This is not because I do not care about truth or justice or any of the rather grand-sounding words trotted out by online sophist whenever we do these things, but because even when I squint and see how they enter at least proximately into the incident, it is not clear to me what my being outraged would accomplish.

I think the best way of illustrating my point is to mention what brought me to this point of thinking. It was yet another recent example of the tendency I am simultaneously decrying and refusing to engage with: the increasingly commonplace and utterly ludicrous contention that Western art music is the product of some kind of white supremacist conspiracy that is perpetuated every time someone praises or even listens to a work such as 'Fidelio'. 

Attempting to rebut a person who says that Beethoven was merely an "above-average" composer and that the centrality of tone in 19th-century music is a racist plot is a mug's game. One's intended interlocutors are simply not arguing in good faith.

There are only three conceivable responses to such idiotic assertions. The first, that of the indefatigable John McWhorter, is to attempt meaningful adult conversation, which is a bit like trying to convince someone making fart noises that your preferred translation of an 11th-century Japanese court romance is worth reading.

The second is performative indignation, as seen best in it's natural habitat, the Tweeter. This often feels good and occasionally allows us to enjoy feelings of camaraderie. But among other things I worry that when something becomes a wedge issue in these culture-war arguments, sooner or later the actual object (in this case the music of Beethoven) recedes into the horizon, merely instrumental if not irrelevant. This is a familiar pattern in the so-called "canon wars" of the last few decades: The entire modern history of the conservative movement might as well be the story of otherwise intelligent 20-somethings devoting their lives to defending "the products of Western civilization" without betraying even the slightest familiarity, much less sincere interest, in this vaguely defined corpus.

The third possible response is the one that seems to me the most reasonable. It is silence. Never mind the other considerations. The truth is that I cannot change the fact that all of America's institutions, political, economic, cultural,  are controlled by mendacious philistines.

But I can ignore these people, robbing them of the only thing that really matters to them: their ability to impose their will upon me and millions of others.   *burp*