The Convenient Victims

2019: Congresswoman Ilhan Omar I think it’s gay conversion therapy is torture.

2017: State representative Ilhan Omar thinks penalizing parents for allowing their daughters to be carved up and mutilated is a cultural imposition.

Representative Omar – taking the convenient moral stands.

You know the worst thing about the idea of replacing Rep. Omar?

The 5th CD DFL would come up with someone worse.  Am I the only one who can imagine Alondra Cano warming up her primary shoes?

Berg’s 12th Law Is No Less Universal Than The Others

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Volvo will install in-car cameras to monitor your behavior.
I suspect the signal will be beamed directly to Mac-Groveland for review by a cadre of St. Kate’s students who will scrutinize it for every micro-aggression and Tweet their dismay that offenders remain employed.
Joe Doakes


While not as well-known as Berg’s Seventh Law, Berg’s 12th Law – “The humorous, satirical or hyperbolic explanation of “progressive” behavior will, in direct proportion to the recklessness, extralegality, deviance or confrontiveness of the “progressive” actions being analyzed, to be the correct explanation.” – is both applicable here, and utterly on point.

We may be in line for a corollary, though. “Today’s jokes about “progressive” petulance, hypocrisy and bullying are tomorrow’s headlines, next week’s proposals, and next month’s policies”.

Cold Shock

One of the advantages of being almost 6’5 is that there’s a lot of room to pack away weight before people – and, well, you – really notice.

One of the disadvantages? When you finally do notice, it’s pretty shocking how bad things have gotten.

I was a downright scrawny teenager. When I was 14, I was 6’2 and probably 130 pounds. When I graduated from high school, 6’4-5 and about 190. College? I think I was like 220 pounds.

There’ve been ups and downs, of course. From 2007-2010, I biked to work most of the time – and got into some decent shape. And then went back to car commuting, and fell back out of it.

But over 30-odd years of life, somewhere along the line I got out of the habit of stepping on scales. For, like, 15 years. I didn’t really want to know. In the past few years, I knew I’d packed on a bunch of weight, and had a gut going on, and was getting kind of jowly. I knew my knees were killing me. When I took off my socks at night, there was some ankle swelling. One of my co-workers described me as “heavy-set”, which was a first (and a kick in the head, for someone whose self-image has always been and still is “Scrawny”. Also, she was a *really cute* co-worker, so there was that). But there were always bigger, nastier things to worry about.

A year ago today, I went in to the doctor for my first routine checkup in probably five years. I suspect the doctor knew that I’d been one form of denial or another – maybe I’m not the only middle-aged guy he’s busted on that. So I’m fairly sure he tricked me into looking at the printout with my actual weight on it – I think he said it was some billing stuff I needed to sign.

But I don’t honestly remember, because I almost blacked out. My actual current weight was right there, in big numbers. And I nearly soiled myself.

In my mind, I figured maybe, absolute worst case, I’d be 280 pounds or so. No more.

Nope. I was over 300.

SIgnificantly.

How significantly? I still don’t want to talk about it. Picture a hypothetical number, “n”, in your mind. We’ll come back to it.

The doctor – who must have been a psychologist earlier in life – eased us into a talk about the need to update some lifestyle choices. The weight wasn’t the last of it; my blood pressure was borderline-high, and, well, the list kept going.

And as I left the appointment, I thought – who do I know that’s actually pulled this off?

My thoughts turned to my friend, former producer and now lead singer, Tommy Huynh, who’d been writing about his experiences on the Keto diet.

Now, Keto had always been a joking matter to me – “How can you tell if someone at a party is Atheist, a Cross-Fitter, or on Keto? Don’t worry, they’ll tell you!”) – but at this point I figured I had nothing to lose – and with effort, drove past McDonalds on the way home, made an omelet and some bacon, and started researching.

Keto involves a diet that’s about 50-60% fat, 30-40% protein, and less than 10% carbohydrates – and to get started, you keep it to 20 grams of carbs a day. A regular tortilla is almost 30 – so potatoes, rice, legumes (including peanuts) and of course wheat, flour, corn and corn meal, and especially processed sugar are all right out. Even fruit is problematic. We’ll come back to that. You also operate at a calorie deficit – but the goal is, through restricting your carbs, your metabolism starts burning fat for energy instead of muscle.

And so I dove in.

It got worse, of course. That Monday, I went to the gym, worked out, and got back on the scale. The scale at the gym read “n”+15 pounds – worse than at the doctor’s office.

So I just kept going. I figured out how to eat a diet that was more than just eggs, meat and cheese; spinach, almonds, coconut flour and flaxseed meal all became staples, sooner than later.

And to avoid obsessing, I limited myself to weighing in every four weeks, to start with.

And after four weeks? Down 15 pounds.

Four weeks later? 12 more.

At my follow up checkup with the doctor, I was down some more. Blood pressure was down 20 points. Blood sugar well in the “safe” zone. Cholesterol a *little* high, but then I had no baseline. We’ll be seeing in coming weeks what’s happened there.

It was about that time that I noticed my knee pain had nearly disappeared, that climbing stairs wasn’t an effort, and that a day outside hacking away at hedges, which used to be a nightmare that I’d be trying to get out of after half an hour, was kind of fun again.

I was down 50 by mid-July at my niece’s wedding. Around 70 by fall.

And it almost feels bad to say this, because I’ve had friends who’ve struggled mightily with their weight – but it wasn’t that hard. It was a huge lifestyle change, of course – I haven’t had fast food in a year, I read menus and nutrition labels VERY carefully, I log what I eat pretty religiously, and even now I “cheat” very, very rarely (as in, I’ll eat a pita with my greek food once a month or so). The gym is now 3x a week, rather than 3x a year. But once I got it into my head that nothing tastes as good as getting healthier feels [1], and learned how to cook tasty stuff I *could* eat anyway, it *actually wasn’t all that bad*.

And I did figure out how to make some fun stuff; I make a pretty serviceable pizza crust out of mozzarella cheese and coconut flour; I make root beer floats out of diet root beer and whipped cream; and since I started replacing half and half with heavy whipping cream in my coffee, my morning Java has never tasted so good. I’ve changed my restaurant habits – pizza and nachos are out, dry rub wings are in, and I’ve become a regular at some of the local barbeque joints, and it’s been a wonderful thing.

I’ve been plateaued at about 75 pounds since the fall – I need to get my metabolism kicked up, which means I have to hit the biking hard when the ice is finally gone – but I’m OK with that for now.

Yes, I know – keeping it off is the hard part. Which is why I’ve pretty well resolved there’ll be no back-sliding into the regular American diet. I may transition from Keto to Paleo – introducing some unprocessed fruits and the like – but the days of wolfing down a frozen pizza are pretty much donesville.

Anyway – I’m writing this to encourage those of you who might be fighting that battle; if I can do it (so far, one picky, label-reading, carb-hunting day at a time), you can do it too.

[1] As I write this, I picture me falling over with a heart attack tomorrow, and some social media twerp writing a photomeme: “Pundit PWNed after ironic last Facebook post”.

Deep breath.

Driving The Herd

In response to the welter of mass shootings that’s cropped up lately, Malcolm Gladwell observed that it’s a fairly predictable example of mob behavior. I wrote about it almost a year ago.

David French (again) worries that we’re living Gladwell’s prediction out in the worst possible way:

In both my military and my civilian careers, I’ve been in meetings and discussions where someone points out a potentially unsolvable weakness in our systems and says, “Well, I hope the bad guys don’t figure this out.” I have a sick, sinking feeling that a vicious terrorist just “figured out” a path to even greater notoriety.
After mass shootings, we often focus on the instrument of death to the relative neglect of the culture of death. There are very human reasons for this — the cultural problem feels so big, so impossible to address, that we fix our eyes on the things we think we can control. We seemingly can’t control whether shooters become famous. We can’t control the fact that there are young men drawn to their example. We can’t control which aspects of their murders will capture the imagination of the next wave of killers… I’m old enough to remember Columbine vividly. We all recoiled in horror but, in hindsight, weren’t horrified enough. We did not realize that a new cultural script was written right in front of our eyes. I hope and pray that I’m wrong, but the New Zealand shooting feels more momentous even than the killings of the recent past. This was online darkness brought to life, then streamed back online. Another threshold has been crossed, and I fear there is no going back.

The worst among us are causing the herd to logroll the entire society into really, really bad decisions. The New Zealand shooter in particular – he calculated his atrocity’s approach to the media (!) precisely to logroll dim-bulb Americans.

And the herd doesn’t make great decisions even in the best of times.

Rationing

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Democrat candidates are in a bidding war to promise voters the most free stuff.  They don’t understand how society operates and risk destroying it.
In Star Trek, you could have as much as you want simply by punching the button on a replicator.  But until that day arrives, some things will be less plentiful than others. How we deal with scarcity is economics and Democrats don’t understand it at all.
Large, perfect diamonds are scarce but women want them.  Jewelers manage scarcity by price.  Million-dollar paydays are scarce.  Publisher’s Clearinghouse manages scarcity by chance.  College degrees from Harvard – managing scarcity by affirmative action – or USC – managing scarcity by bribery.
Even food can be scarce.  I went to an all-you-can-eat fish fry.  The server brought the first portion but no seconds.  She explained that too many customers had ordered fish, the restaurant was running run out, they were distributing one-to-a-customer.  When I mentioned false advertising, she said: “That IS all you can eat, that’s all we’re going to give you.”  Managing scarcity by rationing.
Free college, free health insurance, free medical care, paid free time, Democrats promise it all . . . but society can’t give everything to everybody for free so how will we manage scarcity?  The candidates are conspicuously quiet about their plans for that.

They’re being “quiet” in the same sense I”m “ghosting Scarlett Johanson”; telling the truth is not part of the vocabulary.

Hate Group

Reading the employement records of the “Southern Poverty Law Center”, one almost might think a black staffer might do better working for…

…well, not the Klan. Maybe the John Birch Society.

“Outside the Southern Poverty Law Center, a stunning civil rights memorial honors those who died to give blacks more opportunities. Inside, no blacks have held top management positions in the center’s 23-year history, and some former employees say blacks are treated like second-class citizens,” Morse wrote.
“I would definitely say there was not a single black employee with whom I spoke who was happy to be working there,” Christine Lee, a black graduate of Harvard Law School who interned at the SPLC in 1989, told the Advertiser.


According to the report, only one black man had ever been among the top five wage-earners, and he was only one of two black staff attorneys in the SPLC’s history. Both said they left unhappy.
Morse contacted 13 black former SPLC staffers, and 12 said they either experienced or observed racial problems in the organization. Three recalled hearing racial slurs, three compared the SPLC to a plantation, and two said they had been treated better at predominantly white corporate law firms. Only three said the SPLC did not treat them worse than any other workplace.
According to internal memorandums, staffers accused Morris Dees of being a racist and making black employees feel “threatened.”
“I think there’s a real question as to the sincerity and legitimacy of the organization because of the noticeable absence of blacks there,” Donald Jackson, a black graduate of the University of Virginia Law School who interned at the SPLC in 1987, told the Advertiser. “You know, it’s sort of like the pot calling the kettle black.”

As it were.

Why, it sounds like the SPLC is almost as honky as “Protect” Minnesota and “Moms Demand Action”.

Almost.

It Could Be Me

I didn’t vote for Trump in 2016 – I couldn’t quite do it.

But if things keep going the way George Bardemesser – a self-described “moderate Republican” – describes them, I probably will next time.

Was I worried? Hell, yeah! Was I depressed? You bet. But, really, what options were there? Hillary? Jill Stein? Seriously? Trump wasn’t my first choice or my second choice or my third choice, but by the time November 2016 rolled around, Trump was the only choice on the menu. So I swallowed hard, took a leap of faith, and pulled the lever for the Donald.
Stormy Daniels and Michael Cohen Are Non-Issues For Me
And let me tell ya, every time one of these newly minted Democratic “stars” opens their mouth, the same thought goes through my mind: Thank God for Trump. Trump is my last line of defense. Trump is the only thing that stands between me and these hallucinogenic socialist nut jobs. Trump is what’s keeping chaos and left-wing insanity at bay…today, every single Democrat I can name is working overtime to make damn certain that I will pull the lever for Trump again, and with both hands this time. Trump need not worry about locking down my vote––the Democrats are doing all the heavy lifting.

Both hands – as in, “not saving a hand to plug my nose”.

Affirmative Consent

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Minnesota’s New Puritans trying to make college sex “safe” might destroy it, instead.  

The proposed legislation says consent to a sexual act must be given by words or actions that create mutually understandable, unambiguous permission regarding willingness to engage in, and the conditions of, sexual activity.   It goes on to say that consent may be withdrawn at any time.  

Does “at any time” mean “after the fact?”  Can a person regret having agreed to have sex and retroactively withdraw consent?  Do second-thoughts convert consensual activity into sexual assault? 

If a person is accused of engaging in sexual activity without obtaining express consent, at trial, how does the accused prove s/he did obtain explicit consent?  He-said-she-said testimony?  A witness who watched the sex act?  Sex video?  Who curates the library of sex videos? 

It would be much easier to enforce if they’d cut to the chase and say: “Students shall not engage in sexual activity while enrolled in college.”
Joe Doakes

My alma mater – at least while I was in school (I have no idea today) went through at least the formality of saying “nobody of the opposite sex in your room after 11PM – 1AM on weekends”. Everyone knew the rules were getting flouted – but the institution had the wisdom to imply “look, all you late-adolescents – we know you’re going to do it, because for all the academic jabbering you are all still governed by hormones. But we know you’re neither thinking clearly, nor ready for the consequences, and we’re at least going to nag you about it long enough that the consequences don’t happen on our watch”.

I’m pretty sure it was a better idea.

Harvard’s Everlasting Shame

Some think the admissions scandal currently in the news is a mortal blow to the importance of the Ivy League.
After listening to last night’s moronic “Westminster Town Hall” on MPR, featuring David Hogg – well, until I burned the radio out of my dashboard with a blowtorch – I’m pretty sure it’s the fact that Harvard invited him to attend.
Hogg’s address claimed the 2nd Amendment exists to protect “white supremacy”, and even linked it to “climate change” – further proof that Big Gun Control is entirely about logrolling the low-information, emotion-driven voter. He calls, naturally, for sweeping gun controls – and while polls show millennials are actually more libertarian on firearms than their elders, well, I’m pretty sure that’s why Big Left is funding Hogg and his fellow pocket fascists so heavily.
But let’s cut the crap, here.
————–
If you agree with Hogg, and want to exploit hysteria to ban a class of firearms that are mechanically indistinguishable from about 2/3 of the firearms in circulation, and are actually used *less* frequently in crimes, per capita, than any other – or, what the heck, ban all guns, as Hogg pretty much demands – there’s really only one route.
You’ve got to repeal the 2nd Amendment.
That means getting a 2/3 majority of the House and Senate on board. Even the current US House with its thin Democrat majority and growing neo-socialist caucus isn’t getting anywhere close. The Senate won’t, and never will – for reasons we’ll see in the next paragraph.
But you’re not done yet!
At the same time, you’ve got to get the legislatures of 37 states to call for the repeal. So far, I’m counting California, Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware and Rhode Island, and maaaaaaaybe Illinois, Vermont, and even less likely Washington and Oregon. In the unlikely event they get every single one, that’s 11. The other 26 *will never happen*. And the battle over the issue would likely set in motion city-vs-outstate battles in NY, IL, WA, PA and OR that will make today’s red/blue divide look like a Mr. Rogers marathon, and perhaps even provide the final impetus for California to finally break up into 2-6 smaller states, 1-3 of which would likely vote “Molon Labe” (Kids, ask your friends’ gun-owning parents).
Think we’ve got tribalism today? You ain’t seen nothing yet.
So no. You’re not going to ban guns, or even broad classes of guns. Not legally.
————————
Of course, your other option is to just forget about that pesky Constitution, and go do it anyway. Which *will* – no “maybe” about it – lead to a civil war, one that’ll make the last one look like the Women’s March.
“Hahah, Merg, that’s Treason!”, some will say (indeed, have said). Perhaps, but not in the way they think.
Some greet that notion with a cavalier brushoff. “We’ve got the nukes!” says Rep. Swalwell. Huh. Let that rattle around your head for a bit.
Others – as long as I can remember – respond “What, you think you’re going to fight a tank with a rifle?” Which betrays a serious misunderstanding, I think, of who the military actually are, and where they come from. Hint: largely, not the political class who are pushing this sort of resolution.
———————
Take a deep breath and get real. Gun crime is down over the past 20 years by rates that, had they happened to cancer deaths or high school dropouts or DUIs would be considered modern day miracles.
Schools are 1/4 as dangerous as they were 25 years ago.
The US is NOT the most violent place in the world.
Stop being logrolled by emotional ninnies and the not-very-closeted authoritarians behind them, and get serious.

Internet Of Dangerous And Not-Ready-For-Prime-Time Things

I’m not really looking forward to the “Internet of Things”.

Partly it’s because of the nightmarish security risks – which we’re already seeing.

Partly I think it’s because it promotes a formo of “connectedness” that isn’t very connected.

But mostly it’s because, workign in the software industry as I do, I know that software doesn’t just work. The more complex it is, the longer it takes to debug, and the more byzantine the errors.

In fact, the recent Ethiopian Air and Lion Airways crashes have reinforced my desire to fly only in planes controlled by hydraulics and, if possible, mechanical cables.

Because the problems aren’t even especially new.

Stop Spending Money You Don’t Have, Dummy

That should be the title of this superb Kevin Williamson piece at National Review about the subject, of, well, not spending money you don’t have, and how Donald Trump, whatever his other found virtues, is really really bad at not doing that.

So many pull quotes – and all have a theme:

Stop spending money you don’t have, dummy.

The last time we had a surplus, tax revenue was 18.8 percent of GDP and spending was 17.6 percent of GDP. That was 2001. Taxes were even higher as a share of GDP in the two years before that: 19.2 percent of GDP in 1999 and 20 percent in 2000. I prefer low taxes, but I don’t remember the tail end of the 1990s as an Orwellian dystopia. If the estimates hold, this year, revenues will be about 16.3 percent of GDP and spending will be 21 percent — with deficits forecast as far as forecasters can see. And that’s while the economy is doing well. Either that tax number moves or that spending number moves — or we have deficits forever, until the creditors call us on our bullsh**.

At which point we will have no choice but to:

Stop spending money you don’t have, dummy.

And when they blow that?  Well, Williamson’s on that subject, too.

An Honest Browbeating

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Kamala Harris, candidate for President, says the United States still hasn’t had an honest discussion about race.
Well, Kamala, that’s because “discussion” means “two people talk,” not just “you lecture me.”  The word comes from a Latin root meaning “to take apart, to examine.”  We can’t have a discussion if every time I try to speak, you silence me with a label like “Racist.”
Oh, crap, what that mansplaining?  I guess I’d better shut up while you explain why I’m wrong about that, too.
Joe Doakes

We need a conversation about why you’re evil.

Distrust. Verify. Distrust More

The easiest way to cut down on all the “pouncing” (on Democrats) in politics?

Gundeck all critical insights.

Newswire service Reuters revealed over the weekend that one of its reporters sat on an explosive story about former Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-Texas) until after his contentious election battle against Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) last year, only publishing the story once O’Rourke officially announced his presidential candidacy.

That’s one way of cutting down on all the anger and ire in politics today…

If Justice Exists

Defamation suits are hard to win.  And to a great extent, that’s a good thing; it’d be a terrible thing if litigation could cow the media out of reporting on the rich, famous and powerful, as it does in the UK.

In the US, defamation is, loosely, saying something false about someone in public that can damage their reputation and livelihood.  If the target is a public figure, the defamer has to know it’s a lie.  The standards – actual damages, provable malice – are intentional, and largely a good thing.

And, says Hans Von Spakowski, a surmountable level of proof in Nick Sandman’s defemation case against CNN:

Since Sandmann would not be considered a “public figure” under applicable Supreme Court precedent, he doesn’t have to prove that CNN knew the statements were false, just that they were false. Sandmann’s lawyers make a strong case, though, that CNN acted with “actual malice” and that the network’s behavior was so “outrageous and willful” and such a violation of basic journalistic standards that punitive damages should be awarded.

Interestingly, one of the lawyers representing Sandmann is Lin Wood, the same lawyer who represented Richard Jewell. Jewell was the security guard at the 1996 Atlanta Olympics who was wrongly accused by CNN and other media companies of bombing the city’s Olympic Park. When CNN was sued for defamation, it agreed to pay Jewell an undisclosed amount. That settlement came shortly after NBC agreed to pay Jewell a reported half-million dollars.

Increasingly, our media seems to be acting like a law unto itself.  That needs to change.

An Opportunity

To:  The Council for American/Islamic Relations
From:  Mitch Berg, Crabby Peasant
Re:  Well, You Know

Dear CAIR:

For starters – condolences about last week’s shooting.   It’s a horrible thing and proves that even the most placid parts of the First World can be awful, anarchic places.  This should be a lesson for a lot of privileged, white, First World “progressives”…

But I digress.

Your Minnesota chair called for Minnesotans to reject Islamophobia:

The Minnesota chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) held a press conference Friday morning in Minneapolis, with a number of speakers highlighting the threat of anti-Muslim bigotry in the United States and across the world.

Jaylani Hussein, the executive director of CAIR-MN, called for all Minnesotans to stand against Islamophobia.

“The only way we can move forward is when the average Minnesotan says, ‘Not in my state, not on my watch,’” he said. “That is the only way we can move forward.”

On a couple levels, I couldn’t agree more.  I’ve fought with some of my political party’s moron bigot fringe against “Islamophobia”.  And like a lot of  people like me, I’ve offered to take any Muslim citizen who wants to learn a more active form of self-defense to the range (given that the closest thing to a positive lesson one can take from last week’s atrocity is that “a good guy with a gun” works for Muslims too).

But while we’re talking about bigotry – let’s see to all the antisemitism?

Don’t be coy.  You know it exists. You may not agree it’s a bad thing…

…and right there, there’s the problem.

Any chance you could speak out against that?

Have your people call my people.

That is all.

A Good Congregant With A Gun

First things first – with regard to the massacre in Christchurch New Zealand, Berg’s 18th Law is in full effect: “Nothing the media writes/says about any emotionally charged event – a mass shooting, a police shooting, anything – should be taken seriously for 48 hours after the original incident.  It will largely be rubbish, as media outlets vie to “scoop” each other even on incorrect facts.”.

But indications so far are that the attack was carried out by more than one person, whose motivations and “manifesto” seem at first blush strikingly similar to those of Anders Breivik, the Norwegian who murdered 70-odd Norwegians, mostly teens at a political summer camp; the killer/s seem to have been motivated to attack Muslims, specifically.

Note that while New Zealand’s gun laws aren’t as full-blown nanny as Australia’s, they are more in line with California’s or New York State’s – registration/licensing/permits to own, “universal” background checks, the works. Note to Governor Walz; get back to us about your “universal” registraiton bill.

So my thoughts and prayers to the Muslims of New Zealand. (And for those idiot progs on Twitter who mock and taunt the idea – yes, thought and prayer and taking a moment to think rationally is in fact more useful than the actions you propose in responding to this sort of thing).

But let’s make sure we’re clear on the real lesson, here: there was a Good Guy with a Gun at one of the mosques that was attacked, and God only knows how many lives the man saved:

Again – with Berg’s 18th Law in mind – it would appear that the shooters had a lot more in common with the French Bataclan terrorists than with your garden-variety American “Gone Postal”-style spree killers. The limited, regulated availability of firearms in News Zealand was only marginally less effective in preventing terror and saving lives than France’s near-complete ban (and ocmplete ban, for that matter, on the military-grade guns that the Paris terrorists used).

The only measure that worked? A good, Muslim guy with a gun.

That’s the real lesson – for those interested in rational thought.

The Real Problem With Ilhan Omar

Some of my conservative – and in some cases “conservative” – circle of acquaintances are exercised over Ilhan Omar’s Muslim faith. Some of the more hysterical believe she’s the vanguard of an invasion bringing “Sharia” law to the United States.

In its time, the US has withstood attacks by the greatest empire the world has ever known, by international socialism, Naziism and Communism. A seventh-century ideology that can barely feed its own people isn’t going to conquer us. And Muslims make up less than half a percent of the American population; if they manage to impose Sharia on the other 99.5% of the population, the majority will probably deserve what befalls them.

But the problem with Ilhan Omar isn’t that she’s Muslim. It’s that she’s a “progressive“:

Ilhan Omar attended a 2017 conference in Istanbul with left-wing advocates, including a pro-abortion group that calls for “abortions beyond laws and borders,” and activists who aim to “challenge patriarchal structures.”
Rolling Stone recently lauded the congresswoman, who has repeatedly made anti-Semitic comments, as “everything Trump is trying to ban.” Omar told the magazine she was afraid to leave the country in early 2017 after President Donald Trump signed an executive order restricting travel from seven Middle Eastern countries the administration identified as terrorist hotbeds.
“I had just gotten sworn in [to the Minnesota Legislature] two weeks before,” Omar said, remarking on the executive order 13769, signed on Jan. 27, 2017. “There was lots of chaos, people being stopped at the airports. I had a flight scheduled a week after to speak at a human-rights conference in Turkey. I didn’t know whether I could go.”…The conference was in Istanbul, Turkey, which was not affected by the travel ban. Nevertheless, Omar used her upcoming appearance at the International Human Rights Defenders Conference, which was organized by the local Turkish government and the British Embassy in Ankara, as a cudgel to attack the president.

“Progressivism” will destroy this country long before Islam will.

“But she’s an anti-Semite!”

So are “Progressives”. Any antisemitism that comes from her Muslim background is an intersection with her real religion, “progressivism” – not an addition.

Green. Not New. Deal.

The actual science about the dangers of nuclear power – or lack thereof – is not “settled” so much as it is  very, very convincing:

“By now close to one million people have died of causes linked to the Chernobyl disaster,” wrote Helen Caldicott, an Australian medical doctor, in The New York Times. Fukushima could “far exceed Chernobyl in terms of the effects on public health.”

Many pro-nuclear people came to believe that the accident was proof that the dominant form of nuclear reactor, which is cooled by water, is fatally flawed. They called for radically different kinds of reactors to make the technology “inherently safe.”

But now, eight years after Fukushima, the best-available science clearly shows that Caldicott’s estimate of the number of people killed by nuclear accidents was off by one million. Radiation from Chernobyl will kill, at most, 200 people, while the radiation from Fukushima and Three Mile Island will kill zero people.

It’s a long read, but an excellent one…

…whose conclusions show that any “Green New Deal” that doesn’t include nuclear power, isn’t about saving the environment.

More Of This

Gun grabbers had a cute little rally the other day at the capitol.

It drew about a third what the Second Amendment rally two weeks ago managed – not that the media coverage of either would convey the difference. Not honestly.

But I digress.

They – the metrocrats who took power last fall – think guns are the wedge that’ll pick up the Senate for them:

One of the loudest voices leading the charge at Wednesday’s rally inside the State Capitol rotunda came from First Lady Gwen Walz, who vowed electoral consequences if measures to expand background checks and adopt a red flag law don’t receive hearings and a vote this session.
“If they do not put it up for a vote, there are seven senators sitting in seats where Tim Walz won — and we are coming,” Gwen Walz said.

By all means do, Mrs. Walz. You may have forgotten 2002, the last time the DFL made opposing the law-abiding citizen a beach worth dying on. I sure do, though.

The GOP majority in the Senate has apparently been listening to the overwhelming majority of phone calls and emails:

But Senate Majority Leader Paul Gazelka, R-Nisswa, has promised to stand in the way of any new gun restrictions in his chamber. Gazelka, in an interview this week, said the issue would instead be taken up next year.

Speaking to reporters Wednesday, Sen. Warren Limmer, R-Maple Grove, who chairs the Judiciary and Public Safety Finance and Policy Committee, echoed Gazelka’s wishes.
“With divided government that we have now, I think any gun bill will have to have a wide consensus in order to be seriously considered and passed in the Minnesota Legislature,” Limmer said.

If you haven’t been beating your legislators’ doors down, what are you waiting for?

Wings So Good, They’re Worth Going To Jail For

A Saint Paul woman, upset that a local Dominos Pizza had forgetten her wings in her delivery, decided to take the law into her own hands.

Well, not “the law”, per se.   More like “Customer Service”:

Police were called to the Domino’s at 1110 Grand Avenue just before 9 p.m. Thursday on a report of a customer pointing a handgun at staff.

When police arrived, they were told that the Robinsons — who had already left — were upset that their wings hadn’t been delivered with their pizza to their home in the 1000 block of Dayton Avenue. An argument had ensued.

It was fairly easy to find the Robinsons’ home, since the order had recently been delivered there. Police drove to the address, and — while waiting for a supervisor to arrive on scene — Holly Robinson came out of the home and began talking to officers.

“She didn’t want to wait for another order because they had already waited for an hour, so she decided to go to Domino’s because it would be faster,” a police report stated. The two had demanded a refund.

The Robinsons never got their wings, or a refund. The daughter told officers the “manager had an attitude,” and said her mother had brought a gun because she feared a physical confrontation. She took it out and held it at her hip but never pointed it, the daughter said.

The first thing I thought on hearing the story was “please don’t have a carry permit”.

Since it’s been about a week and we haven’t had Nancy Nord Bence yipping about it, I’m gonna guess Ms. Robinson doesn’t.