Disparity

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Compare the green shaded areas on this map:

with the red circles on this map:

I know, I’m comparing apples to oranges but it’s the best available data to make my point.  The area of the state with the most shots fired has the fewest permits to carry.  Why is that?

Perhaps because criminals don’t obey laws?

Joe Doakes

Let’s ask Kim Norton.

This Is “Gun Safety”

Chicago has dragged their feet and obstructed the law-abiding gun citizen’s attempt to protect themselves ever since the day the Heller decisions was announced.

And the city’s murder rate is setting new records; January saw 51 homicides, the bloodiest January since the gory days of the ’90s.

Gang conflicts and retaliatory violence drove the “unacceptable” increase in homicides, the police department said in a statement. But the rise in violence also notably comes as the Chicago Police Department faces increased scrutiny following the court-ordered release of a police video showing a white police officer fatally shooting a black teenager 16 times, and as the department implements changes in how it monitors street stops by officers.

Chicago routinely records more homicides annually than any other American city, but the grim January violence toll marks a shocking spike in violence in a city that recorded 29 murders for the month of January last year and 20 murders for the month in 2014. In addition to the jump in killings, police department said that it recorded 241 shooting incidents for the month, more than double the 119 incidents recorded last January.

Some on the left – including, I suspect, Kim Norton – might think that the spike in violence is despite the city’s intransigence on guns in the hands of the law-abiding.

Some of us know better.

Promises, Promises

It’s become an election-year staple; celebrities – usually well past the tops of their career bell curves – promising to move to other countries if a Republican is elected or re-elected President.

Of course, I can’t recall a single one that ever did.

But here’s one such promise that, if true, could have a monumental impact on our society:

One in four federal workers would consider leaving their jobs if Trump were elected president, according to a new survey conducted by the Government Business Council, Government Executive Media Group’s research arm. About 14 percent of respondents said they would definitely consider leaving federal service under President Trump, while an additional 11 percent said they might.

 

The findings indicate those leaving government would come from agencies’ top ranks, as a majority of respondents were in General Schedule positions GS-13 and higher.

 

Nearly as many Democrats said they would consider leaving in a Trump administration as would definitely stay, the survey found. Among Democrats, 42 percent said they would consider leaving, while 48 percent would not. Just 8 percent of Republican feds would consider refusing to work in a Trump presidency.

Read on if you want to get even more disgusted with the Federal workforce.

Of course, just like our big-talking celeb class, it’ll never happen.  If Trump is elected, the morning after the inauguration every federal worker will look at that Trump picture on the wall, and then they’ll look at their pension prospectus, and then likely think about what it’d take for someone with no marketable skills in the private sector to get a job, and they’ll sit back down at those government-issued seats and go back to, um, “work“.

But we can dream.

When Out And About In Roseville Tonight

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Black Lives Matter Series Feb. 2, 9 and 16

A free, three-part series about the historical roots of the Black Lives Matter movement will be presented at the Ramsey County Library in Roseville on Tuesdays throughout February at 12:30 p.m. Macalester College professor Duchess Harris, author of the new book, Black Lives Matter, will conduct the series.

 

Series dates:

  • Feb. 2 – Part 1: Reconstruction to Brown v Board of Education
  • Feb. 9 – Part II: Civil Rights to the Clinton Administration
  • Feb. 16 – Part III: Black Lives Matter in the Age of Obama

Black History Month Programs Feb. 19 and 26

The Ramsey County and City of Saint Paul Employees Black History Month Planning Committee will host two programs in February. Additional details will be available in upcoming editions of Ramsey News.

 

Program schedule:

  • Friday, Feb. 19: The Dred Scott Decision and Minnesota’s Ties to the Underground Railroad, noon – 1 p.m., East Building
  • Friday, Feb. 26: Proclamations and program, noon – 1 p.m., City Hall-Courthouse (catered lunch available for purchase at 11:30 a.m.)

Joe Doakes

Interesting.

Unprecedented!

I’ve had some of my Democrat friends chuckling about the idea that the GOP might endorse Donald Trump for President.

And I can see why they’re so giggly. The idea that a major political party might endorse someone with almost no relevant experience, whose entire campaign is built on saying things people want to hear (sometimes contradictory things to different audiences)?  The product of cynical marketing aimed at a sincere but gullible and undiscriminating audience?  A product bolstered with breathless media hype from a bloated, entitled and leadenly incurious media – the same media that was intimately complicit with creating him as a public figure in the first place?

Why, that‘s just preposterous!  That’s almost like a bad movie!

(“Hey, Mitch – are you talking about Jesse Ventura?”  Why, no.  Very close, of course – but that was almost two decades ago).

Urban Liberal Privilege

For all the talk about “White Privilege”, there is a much bigger, much more powerful form of privilege in our society; the privilege of belonging to the urban liberal establishment.

Kevin Williamson has a dossier on the slice (and it’s a large, non-diet-friendly slice) of that sector that works for government, and government academia.  There’s far too much to quote.  The conclusion:

For all the talk about “privilege,” this is a much more familiar phenomenon: This is what it means to have a ruling class.

And it cannot be repeated often enough: We are ruled by criminals.

But read the whole thing.  You’re not angry enough yet.

The Franken Privilege

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Newest newsletter – grandson born.  Not something public funds should be spent to announce.  The Franking Privilege was meant to talk about legislative matters, not personal ones.  But it’s a small drop in an ocean of enormous Congressional waste, so ignore it.  Congratulations, Senator, on the newest family member.  No grade.

Senator Franken is working on legislation to make student loans more affordable.  But senator, you voted for Obamacare, which included a federal take-over of all student loans so the origination fees and interest payments would off-set the cost of providing health care to poor people.  If you cut those student fees and interest, you reduce funding for Obamacare.  Why does Al Franken hate poor children and want them to DIE?  Grade: F

Protecting student’s privacy is a great idea.  Could we expand it to everyone’s data?  Stop the federal government from intercepting all email, text and phone conversations?  Stop spying on Congress?  Just a thought. Grade D

Bringing an immigrant to the State of the Union is a fine piece of showmanship, but you brought the wrong one, senator.  Instead of the one entrepreneur who spent 20 years making something of his new life to contribute to the community, you should have brought some of the thousands of illegal immigrants who only take from the community, or who cause disruption with endless demands to convert Minnesota into Mogadishu.  Your guest is not a representative example of the immigrant community, he’s the exception that reinforces the stereotype.  And that’s why The Donald is riding a wave of populist support for restricting immigration: people see through your showmanship and recognize the underlying truth. Grade F
Joe Doakes

I think Franken is auditing the class.

Got A Whole Lotta NARN

I’m out on assignment today.  John Hinderaker will be filling in.

Don’t forget – King Banaian is on from 9-11AM on AM1440, and Brad Carlson has “The Closer” edition of the NARN Sundays from 2-3PM.

So tune in the Northern Alliance! You have so many options:

Join us!

What If?

On the weekend before the official kickoff of the GOP nomination season, Donald Trump would seem to have the momentum.  Now, both of “my guys” for this race – Walker and Jindal – are long gone, so my short list is (in very rough order) Rubio, Cruz, Paul, Christie.

Trump’s ascendancy has, of course, brought out the usual jeremiads about the oncoming implosion of the GOP (to which cooler and more historically-grounded heads reply “What?  Again?  This happens every eight years or so“).

But I keep getting asked – what if Trump is, at the end of the day, the nominee?

Simple.  I’ll hold my nose and vote for Trump.

It’s not just because I regard third-party candidacies as irrelevant exercises in personal philosophical navel-gazing – that’s between you and your conscience, and is none of my business.

And it’s not that I’m a “my party, right or wrong” guy; I’m a Tea Party Conservative who votes GOP because it is, to evoke Buckley, the most conservative party that can win.  And if Trump, heaven forefend, is the most conservative person on the ballot who can win next November, then I’ll vote for him.

But Trump promises to be a rerun of the Jesse Ventura years, only coast-to-coast.   So why bother?

Three reasons:  Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Scalia – one of the better conservative minds in the history of the court – lamentably can’t last forever.  Having Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders nominate his “replacement” – or that of Kennedy, the most powerful “Moderate” in the history of the universe – would turn the SCOTUS bright blue for decades to come.  Kiss any chance of rolling back Obamacare, getting control of immigration or voting or the borders, or the Second Amendment, goodbye right now.

And by the opposite token, if Kennedy retires, or Ginsburg gets called by her overlords back to her mothership, during a GOP administration, there’s at least a chance of getting a much better, more conservative justice on the bench.  And don’t be caterwauling at me about what disappointments Roberts and Souter turned out to be as conservatives; without a GOP president and GOP Senate, “eventual disappointment” is the best you can hope for.

Remember – Trump may well nominate a complete idiot.  But the Senate has to confirm them.  And if both a hypothetical President Trump and a GOP Senate are idiots, then we’re screwed – but those are both “maybes”; you can bet a hypothetical President Sanders will nominate Saul Alinksky, and Clinton’s nominees will make Sonia Sotomayor look like John Marshall.

So yeah.  I’ll hold my nose and vote Trump.

And then set to work on fixing the rot that led us to this point.

Fiction And Fact

Fiction: Liberal “comedians”, trying to show how easy it is to “legally” buy a gun without a background check, show that the law and system works (not that they’re apparently smart enough to see it that way, judging by their responses in the comment section) – and flirt with committing a felony in the process:

Note for those who don’t know their gun laws: “Comic” Steve Hofstetter took his friend in with his ID to do the buy, which – “joking” notwithstanding – went through without a hitch.  Because “Brent”, the “buyer”, was perfectly legal.   He has a criminal record and is, as such, a relatively low risk, himself.

But if he’d given the gun to someone who was otherwise disqualified from owning a gun,  that, too, would be a felony.  And while Steve Hofstetter’s “comedy” would be a disqualifying felony in a just world, it’s not in this one.  But if Steve had a couple DWIs, a domestic abuse rap, or some other mischief on his record?  They’re both committing a felony.

So you might ask – what if a criminal with a long felony rap sheet had gotten a friend with a clean record to go to a gun show and buy a gun, and give it to him out in the parking lot?  Well, it’s already illegal, and both parties would be committing a felony.  And if we instituted mandatory background checks to close the so-called “gun show loophole” – more about that below – then what?  They’d be committing another felony – which, like the two they committed without the mandatory background check, will go utterly undetected until some other crime is committed.

Same as today!

Fact:  Crowder goes to actual gun shows, tries to actually find the “gun show loophole”.

And fails:

Not that I need to reinforce this to people who are smart enough to deserve the right to vote – I get this.

I mostly write these things so smart people can pass it on to their friends who need convincing and educating.  Because God knows there are still a lot of them out there.

Our Fetishistic Elites

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Liberals say Second Amendment advocates are compensating for small genitals [and let’s not forget the more recent, almost-as-dumb “ammosexual” – Ed.]; they call members of the Taxed Enough Already Party by the name for a deviant homosexual sex act; and now gasp that the intramural insult “cuckservative” refers to three-way-inter-racial porn (it doesn’t, it’s a combination of “cuckold” and “conservative” and means nominal conservatives that stick by the Republican Party even though the party elite constantly cheats on them).

Everything Liberals say about their political opponents is grounded in sexual fetishes.  And yet, if I were to suggest that gay marriage activists are queer, I’d be excoriated for unacceptable and demeaning incivility.

If Liberals didn’t have double standards, they’d have none at all.  I guess that’s what makes them better than me – they have twice as many standards!

Joe Doakes

Liberal Privilege is never really having to make sense.

Shot In The Dark: Today’s Insights, Ten Years Ago

Ten years ago on this blog, we were talking about the trend in advertising since probably the mid-nineties; if you look at an ad featuring a family, the man is probably depicted as a bumbling doughy cretin married to an improbably gorgeous woman who is (along with the kids, apparently including any boys that haven’t gotten married and had kids yet) inevitably smarter and more capable than him.

And now, the people who study and talk about these things are…well, studying and talking about it.  At least in the UK:

What is more concerning is advertisers’ and programme makers’ depiction of men as stupid, subservient slaves to career-juggling supermums – a trend that runs from the buffoonery of Daddy Pig to an endless tidal wave of cretinous TV ad dads.

The Mintel research confirmed that 20 per cent of men think we are portrayed as incompetent about the house in ads, and small wonder. In ad land – unlike the real world where men dominate computing and engineering – bumbling blokes can’t even get a broadband connection and struggle with basic domestic appliances, while smarter women roll their eyes, then save the day.

Overall, this means that, increasingly, men in adverts are prized for their looks, but ridiculed for their brains – which is precisely where women were in the 1950s and ’60s.

Here’s the scary part – and the part that I’ve never seen anyone write about;  advertising doesn’t happen by accident.  Even in the Mad Men era, advertising was the product of rigorous audience research; it’s vastly moreso today.

The “Dumb Husband” stereotype reigns supreme in ads for products where women might be reasonably assumed to be the primary consumers.   Look at ads aimed at men; for the most part, women may well be eye candy, but the ad passes on little or no subtext about the womens’ intelligence.     And yet ads aimed at women are highly likely to portray men as idiots.

Given that ads – much less trends in advertising – don’t happen by accident, this suggests that these ads are dominant because that’s what women think about their men.  

And yet society wonders why young men are choosing video games over dating.

For Those Living In Saint Paul

The city is looking for feedback (or, possibly, “looking for feedback”) in re a new police chief.   Here’s where to give that feedback, if you live in the city.

Outgoing chief Tim Smith seemed to regard the law-abiding gun owner as a bigger nuisance than criminals – notwithstanding that the law-abiding gun owner has a crime rate of roughly zero in this state.

It’d be nice to get a pro-shooter chief – but given that the city is generally run by and for the Volvo-driving, Macalester-attending, Whole-Foods-shopping set, I’d be happy to get a chief who was knowledgeably neutral.

So if you live in St. Paul, by all means provide your feedback, for whatever good it’ll do.

A Good Guy With A Gun?

A couple of wannabe thugs apparently tried to turn a craigslist transaction into a heist in Shakopee yesterday.

And while the article doesn’t say so explicitly, reading between the lines, it would appear the Fugs picked the wrong guy:

Police radio reports indicated that the apparent victim of the attempted robbery had a handgun and fired at the would-be robber. Shakopee police and other law officers were looking for a silver-gray Chevrolet Venture van with at least two people inside, with at least one armed with a revolver.

Radio reports indicated that the robber ran from the scene toward the White Castle restaurant near Walmart and then got into a vehicle, which reportedly got on Highway 169. The State Patrol was looking for the vehicle.

The apparent victim was waiting near the Walmart garden center entrance for police. He apparently was not injured.

Police were planning to look at store video.

The article doesn’t say so explicitly – but waiting for the cops at the store after an incident is the behavior you’d expect from someone who took carry permit training.

Kim Norton and Heather Martens, obviously, would have preferred that the victim submit meekly, and maybe die.

UPDATE:  The Strib is being veeeeeeery slow to release the facts of this case, including who shot first and who shot who.

One Evening At The Saint Paul City Council

SCENE:  The Saint Paul City Council chambers.  Present are:

  • Mayor Chris COLEMAN
  • Ward 1 councilor Bernadette SANDERS
  • Ward 2 councilor Benny TOMUSOLLINI
  • Ward 3 councilor Francine BURNS
  • Ward 4 councilor Evita P. EVITA
  • Ward 5 councilor Hugh GOCHAVEZ
  • Ward 6 councilor L. A. PDOG
  • Ward 7 councilor Katherine ANTSY

COLEMAN gavels the meeting to order.

COLEMAN:  May the meeting come to order.

BURNS: (loudly clears her throat)

COLEMAN:  Sorry.  May the meeting please come to order, by your indulgent leave?

Continue reading

The Last Million Men

The debate in the House of Commons had raged for several weeks.  The failures of the coalition government of Prime Minister H.H. Asquith – Gallipoli, Mesopotamia, the failure of the British offensives of the fall of 1915, and a shortage of munitions in the spring of the same year – had been thrown at the PM’s feet.  The conservatives in Asquith’s coalition had begun calling for his head, as men he had dismissed from the War Cabinet, like Churchill and Lord Kitchener, attempted to speak directly to the public about what they deemed the PM’s lapses in judgement.

The measure before the House of Commons had been intended to blunt such criticisms.  It was a measure Asquith had fought against, both publicly and privately within the War Cabinet.  Asquith had tried for months to stall such a vote, commissioning studies in the vain hope of proving it unnecessary.  Instead, Asquith’s commissions had proven the opposite.  Placed between his principles and his ability to prosecute the war, Asquith chose the war.

The vote wasn’t even close.  By a margin of 383 to 36, the Military Service Act of 1916 passed on January 27th.  The proud tradition of the small, professional British Army had vanished.  Britain had joined the rest of Europe in embracing conscription.

The Promise of a “New Army.”  Millions of Britons flocked to the call in 1914 and 1915

Since the Battle of the Marne in the fall of 1914, most British authorities – both civilian and military – had understood that the British system of volunteerism had reached its logical limitations in a modern war.  The only question was the best way forward.    Continue reading

Hard To Believe

…that this was already thirty years ago:

I remember I had been working at KSTP for about a month; I’d finagled my way into a couple extra hours a day working in the control room during a couple of syndicated talk shows before the Vogel show.  I was on the board during the “Michael Jackson” show – the talk host, not the singer or the beer expert – when network news alarms started going off in the studio, and ABC Radio’s anchor broke in to announce the explosion.

And over the next minute or two, everyone in the building piled into the control room, and I – the lowliest person in the building – had to tell everyone to shut up and get out so I could concentrate on all hell breaking loose.  And, since the board operator is the bottom line in the control room, everyone – the general manager, the news director, everyone – promptly did.

I spent a chunk of the rest of the day trying to track down an astronaut to comment on the air with Don Vogel – and i found one (a guy from my hometown, an old student of my dad’s who eventually did one or two Shuttle missions).

And it was one of those days I figured that broadcast news was what I really liked doing.

Without all the national tragedies, of course.

I think we carried Reagan’s speech live.

Thirty years? Yow.

Triumph Of The Bern

Bernie Sanders is proud to call himself a socialist.  He’s happy to continue the ideological legacy of Mussolini, Peron and Hugo Chavez.

I know I’m not the only one who sees the photos of his campaign rallies, and imagines them debouching out onto the street to look for pockets to pick and (fill in the unfavored minority) to beat up.

And yet, I can’t help watch this spot and think “hell yeah!”

It takes my (far and away) favorite Simon and Garfunkel song, and wraps it around a whole lot of stirring images, and says absolutely nothing, and says it with glorious style.

Of course, it’s dishonest.  Bernie Sanders loves “America”, provided it acts like Sweden (or like Sweden did, until recently).  But it’s not Swedes he’s trying to convince to vote for him.

But who cares, really?    I want fill up a bathtub with this ad, and soak in it for hours.  The imagery, the videography, the intersection of picture and sound – all of them are absolutely glorious.

Glorious pictures and sound have a long history, of course. We’ve seen that before; all the way back to Triumph des Willens (Triumph of the Will), the signature movie by Leni Riefenstahl, the greatest female filmmaker of all time (that’s gotta sit just wonderfully with the Feminists) – a film (as opposed to a TV spot) that punches a lot of the same buttons.

And no, I’m not comparing Sanders to Hitler, at least as far as the whole “genocidal madman” thing goes.

But there’s little content.

There’s very little substance.

But oh, lord, the imagery and sound and cinematography.  Is it any wonder that a nation of low-information voters turned out in droves back then, just as Sanders hopes they will now?

Them Rootin’, Tootin’, Shootin’ Minnesotans

It’s one of Minnesota liberals’ standard conceits; that Minnesota is just plain more civilized than rough ‘n tumble southern zip codes like Texas.

But if you look at the numbers, Andrew Rothman at GOCRA reminds us, you can find some interesting surprises.

For example:  If you divide Minnesota’s population of 5,457,173 by its total number of carry permits – 210.647, you get a figure of 3.86%.

If you do the same thing with Texas’ population and carry permits, you get 3.38%.

How about in convenient graphic form?

12552772_10154475874172542_3192169079444791877_n

In other words, while liberals want to have you believe the sky will fall if Minnesota becomes as “gun crazy” as Minnesota liberals’ stereotype of Texas, we are already carrying more than Texans are.

By the way – that 3.86 becomes closer to 5% if you count only adults.

And yet we have one of the lowest murder rates in the country, down around western European levels.

Surely there must be some mistake.

Those Gun-Toting White Christian Terrorists Strike Again

Gun toting white Christianist terrorists armed with carry permits and a perfectly legal semiautomatic handgun and lots of hatred shoot a gay man seven times outside a gay bar in Lubbock Texas.

Clearly, that wave of white Christianist terror that Barack Obama, Janet Napolitano and wave after wave of earnest lefties have been warning us about is upon us.

Well, no.

They were Muslims.

And the attack happened in Sydney, Australia – where, President Obama assures us, hate crime can’t turn into a handgun homicide because law-abiding people can’t get those kinds of guns.

One thing’s for sure; when Mark Dayton says “if you don’t like immigrants, leave the state”, there are people out there who are ready to put some teeth into the demand!

Armageddon Lost

1985:  “IBM is going to dominate the entire world!”.   1995:  IBM is fading fast.

1995:  “Microsoft is going to own the entire world!”  2005:  Microsoft has settled into a niche.

2005:  “WalMart is going to destroy small business!”.  2016:  WalMart seems to be hitting limits.

As little as the left seems to trust the market, it seems to be keeping “monopolies” pretty well under control.

Who could have foreseen it?

(Answer:  every single free market conservative).

Diasporic?

If nothing else, Europe’s Jews have learned that when your ship strikes an iceberg, you don’t wait for a future round of lifeboats:

The European Jewish Congress has publicized a shocking poll: “A third of the European Jews think of emigrating”. That is 700,000 people.

“The Jews of Europe are at a crossroads”, tells me Moshe Kantor, president of the European Jewish Congress based in Brussels. “If the authorities continue to add only defensive measures, building taller walls and thicker doors, then the Jews will not want to live this imprisoned life and will leave Europe in large numbers”.

Before the attack in Copenhagen, a year ago, there were 23 children in the Jewish kindergarten in Malmö [Sweden]: today there are only 5 left. The armed guards in front of the school triggered panic and parents prefer to enroll their children in public school. It is the end of Jewish identity. Some people whispered that the synagogue of the city will soon be turned into a museum. From 2010 to today, the synagogue lost a third of the faithful. The rabbi, Shneur Kesselman, is constantly attacked in the streets: almost 200 episodes of anti-Semitism in ten years.

Wonder where this round of refugees is going to settle?