It’s just a drop in the bucket but it shows that these are the two tech giants that most offend the President. Hopefully it’s only the beginning of a process to rein them in. The author of the article says breaking up Amazon and Google is a bad idea. I totally disagree. Breaking them into a thousand pieces is a wonderful idea.
Category: Current Events
This Year’s Supreme Court Docket
I went through the Supreme Court Docket and picked out the ones I thought could have a major impact on social, political and constitutional issues. This will be a very important year for a whole host of issues that conservatives are very interested in. We will find out if Roberts is an enemy.
The issues include:
- Trying to force employers to put up with transgender insanity.
- Trying to force employers to put up with homosexual insanity.
- Trying to stop the federal government from doing its job removing illegal aliens
- Trying to force the government to uphold the expired DACA program.
- Ruling on New York City’s unconstitutional gun laws.
- Ruling on attacks against the religious freedoms of groups and individuals
Below is the list of the relevant cases.
October Term 2019
October Sitting
R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, No. 18-107 [Arg: 10.8.2019 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): Whether Title VII prohibits discrimination against transgender people based on (1) their status as transgender or (2) sex stereotyping under Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins.
Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, No. 17-1618 [Arg: 10.8.2019 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): Whether discrimination against an employee because of sexual orientation constitutes prohibited employment discrimination “because of . . . sex” within the meaning of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2.
Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda, No. 17-1623 [Arg: 10.8.2019 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): Whether the prohibition in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1), against employment discrimination “because of . . . sex” encompasses discrimination based on an individual’s sexual orientation.
Kansas v. Garcia, No. 17-834 [Arg: 10.16.2019 Trans./Aud.; Decided 3.3.2020]
Holding: The Kansas statutes under which respondents were convicted are not preempted expressly or by implication under the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986.
November Sitting
Barton v. Barr, No. 18-725 [Arg: 11.4.2019 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): Whether a lawfully admitted permanent resident who is not seeking admission to the United States can be “render[ed] … inadmissible” for the purposes of the stop-time rule, 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(d)(1).
County of Maui, Hawaii v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund, No. 18-260 [Arg: 11.6.2019 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): Whether the Clean Water Act requires a permit when pollutants originate from a point source but are conveyed to navigable waters by a nonpoint source, such as groundwater.
Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California, No. 18-587 [Arg: 11.12.2019 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): (1) Whether the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to wind down the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy is judicially reviewable; and (2) whether DHS’s decision to wind down the DACA policy is lawful.
Trump v. NAACP, No. 18-588 [Arg: 11.12.2019 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): (1) Whether the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to wind down the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy is judicially reviewable; and (2) whether DHS’s decision to wind down the DACA policy is lawful.
McAleenan v. Vidal, No. 18-589 [Arg: 11.12.2019 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): (1) Whether the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to wind down the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy is judicially reviewable; and (2) whether DHS’s decision to wind down the DACA policy is lawful.
Comcast Corp. v. National Association of African American-Owned Media, No. 18-1171 [Arg: 11.13.2019 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): Whether a claim of race discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 fails in the absence of but-for causation.
December Sitting
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. City of New York, New York, No. 18-280 [Arg: 12.2.2019 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): Whether New York City’s ban on transporting a licensed, locked and unloaded handgun to a home or shooting range outside city limits is consistent with the Second Amendment, the commerce clause and the constitutional right to travel.
Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Christian, No. 17-1498 [Arg: 12.3.2019 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): (1) Whether a common-law claim for restoration seeking cleanup remedies that conflict with remedies the Environmental Protection Agency ordered is a jurisdictionally barred “challenge” to the EPA’s cleanup under 42 U.S.C. § 9613 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act; (2) whether a landowner at a Superfund site is a “potentially responsible party” that must seek EPA approval under 42 U.S.C. § 9622(e)(6) of CERCLA before engaging in remedial action, even if the EPA has never ordered the landowner to pay for a cleanup; and (3) whether CERCLA pre-empts state common-law claims for restoration that seek cleanup remedies that conflict with EPA-ordered remedies.
Ovalles v. Barr, No. 18-1015 [Arg: 12.9.2019 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): Whether the criminal alien bar, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C), tempered by 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D), prohibits a court from reviewing an agency decision finding that a movant lacked diligence for equitable tolling purposes, notwithstanding the lack of a factual dispute.
Guerrero-Lasprilla v. Barr, No. 18-776 [Arg: 12.9.2019 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): Whether a request for equitable tolling, as it applies to statutory motions to reopen, is judicially reviewable as a “question of law.”
January Sitting
Babb v. Wilkie, No. 18-882 [Arg: 1.15.2020 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): Whether the federal-sector provision of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, which provides that personnel actions affecting agency employees aged 40 years or older shall be made free from any “discrimination based on age,” 29 U.S.C. §633a(a), requires a plaintiff to prove that age was a but-for cause of the challenged personnel action.
Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, No. 18-1195 [Arg: 1.22.2020 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): Whether it violates the religion clauses or the equal protection clause of the United States Constitution to invalidate a generally available and religiously neutral student-aid program simply because the program affords students the choice of attending religious schools.
February Sitting
U.S. v. Sineneng-Smith, No. 19-67 [Arg: 2.25.2020 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): Whether the federal criminal prohibition against encouraging or inducing illegal immigration for commercial advantage or private financial gain, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv) and (B)(i), is facially unconstitutional.
Nasrallah v. Barr, No. 18-1432 [Arg: 3.2.2020 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): Whether, notwithstanding 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C), the courts of appeals possess jurisdiction to review factual findings underlying denials of withholding (and deferral) of removal relief.
Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam, No. 19-161 [Arg: 3.2.2020 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): Whether, as applied to the respondent, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(e)(2) is unconstitutional under the suspension clause.
June Medical Services LLC v. Russo, No. 18-1323 [Arg: 3.4.2020 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit’s decision upholding Louisiana’s law requiring physicians who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at a local hospital conflicts with the Supreme Court’s binding precedent in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt.
Russo v. June Medical Services LLC, No. 18-1460 [Arg: 3.4.2020 Trans./Aud.]
Issue(s): (1) Whether abortion providers can be presumed to have third-party standing to challenge health and safety regulations on behalf of their patients absent a “close” relationship with their patients and a “hindrance” to their patients’ ability to sue on their own behalf; and (2) whether objections to prudential standing are waivable – per the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 4th, 5th, 7th, 9th, 10th and Federal Circuits – or non-waivable per the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the D.C., 2nd, and 6th Circuits.
March Sitting
Google LLC v. Oracle America Inc., No. 18-956 [Arg: 3.24.2020]
Issue(s): (1) Whether copyright protection extends to a software interface; and (2) whether, as the jury found, the petitioner’s use of a software interface in the context of creating a new computer program constitutes fair use.
Tanzin v. Tanvir, No. 19-71 [Arg: 3.24.2020]
Issue(s): Whether the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb, permits suits seeking money damages against individual federal employees.
Carney v. Adams, No. 19-309 [Arg: 3.25.2020]
Issue(s): (1) Whether the First Amendment invalidates a longstanding state constitutional provision that limits judges affiliated with any one political party to no more than a “bare majority” on the state’s three highest courts, with the other seats reserved for judges affiliated with the “other major political party”; (2) whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit erred in holding that a provision of the Delaware Constitution requiring that no more than a “bare majority” of three of the state courts may be made up of judges affiliated with any one political party is not severable from a provision that judges who are not members of the majority party on those courts must be members of the other “major political party,” when the former requirement existed for more than 50 years without the latter, and the former requirement, without the latter, continues to govern appointments to two other courts; and (3) whether the respondent, James Adams, has demonstrated Article III standing.
U.S. Agency for Int’l Development v. Alliance for Open Society Int’l, No. 19-177 [Arg: 3.25.2020]
Issue(s): Whether – when in Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society International Inc., the Supreme Court held that the First Amendment bars enforcement of Congress’ directive, which required respondents, United States-based organizations that receive federal funds to fight HIV/AIDS abroad, to “have a policy explicitly opposing prostitution and sex trafficking” as a condition of accepting those funds – the First Amendment further bars enforcement of that directive with respect to legally distinct foreign entities operating overseas that are affiliated with respondents.
Pereida v. Barr, No. 19-438 [Arg: 3.30.2020]
Issue(s): Whether a criminal conviction bars a noncitizen from applying for relief from removal when the record of conviction is merely ambiguous as to whether it corresponds to an offense listed in the Immigration and Nationality Act.
Trump v. Vance, No. 19-635 [Arg: 3.31.2020]
Issue(s): Whether a grand-jury subpoena served on a custodian of the president’s personal records, demanding production of nearly 10 years’ worth of the president’s financial papers and his tax returns, violates Article II and the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution.
Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP, No. 19-715 [Arg: 3.31.2020]
Issue(s): Whether the Committee on Oversight and Reform of the U.S. House of Representatives has the constitutional and statutory authority to issue a subpoena to the accountant for President Trump and several of his business entities demanding private financial records belonging to the president.
Trump v. Deutsche Bank AG, No. 19-760 [Arg: 3.31.2020]
Issue(s): Whether the Committee on Financial Services and the Intelligence Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives have the constitutional and statutory authority to issue a subpoena to creditors for President Donald Trump and several of his business entities demanding private financial records belonging to the president.
Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru, No. 19-267 [Arg: 4.1.2020]
Issue(s): Whether the First Amendment’s religion clauses prevent civil courts from adjudicating employment-discrimination claims brought by an employee against her religious employer, when the employee carried out important religious functions.
St. James School v. Biel, No. 19-348 [Arg: 4.1.2020]
Issue(s): Whether the First Amendment’s religion clauses prevent civil courts from adjudicating employment-discrimination claims brought by an employee against her religious employer, when the employee carried out important religious functions.
April Sitting
Chiafalo v. Washington, No. 19-465 [Arg: 4.28.2020]
Issue(s): Whether enforcement of a Washington state law that threatens a fine for presidential electors who vote contrary to how the law directs is unconstitutional because a state has no power to legally enforce how a presidential elector casts his or her ballot and a state penalizing an elector for exercising his or her constitutional discretion to vote violates the First Amendment.
Colorado Department of State v. Baca, No. 19-518 [Arg: 4.28.2020]
Issue(s): (1) Whether a presidential elector who is prevented by their appointing state from casting an electoral-college ballot that violates state law lacks standing to sue their appointing state because they hold no constitutionally protected right to exercise discretion; and (2) whether Article II or the 12th Amendment forbids a state from requiring its presidential electors to follow the state’s popular vote when casting their electoral-college ballots.
Trump v. Pennsylvania, No. 19-454 [Arg: 4.29.2020]
Issue(s): (1) Whether the Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor and the Treasury had statutory authority under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 to expand the conscience exemption to the contraceptive-coverage mandate; (2) whether the agencies’ decision to forgo notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing the interim final rules rendered the final rules – which were issued after notice and comment – invalid under the Administrative Procedure Act; and (3) whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit erred in affirming a nationwide preliminary injunction barring implementation of the final rules.
Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home v. Pennsylvania, No. 19-431 [Arg: 4.29.2020]
Issue(s): (1) Whether a litigant who is directly protected by an administrative rule and has been allowed to intervene to defend it lacks standing to appeal a decision invalidating the rule if the litigant is also protected by an injunction from a different court; and (2) whether the federal government lawfully exempted religious objectors from the regulatory requirement to provide health plans that include contraceptive coverage.
My Latest Take on the Coronavirus
Like everyone else I’ve been reading about the coronavirus for the last couple of months and trying to decide how dangerous this bug is. The situation in China was alarming but also puzzling. The information was obviously being parsed by the Chinese government there to minimize the negative impact on their economy and reputation. Now that the virus is global, better information is emerging. I found a very useful website that not only has all the data that is available from the health organizations but also some helpful tables and graphs that make clear some of the characteristics of this outbreak.
Something that I had heard but didn’t have good information on was the correlation between age and mortality rate. This table will put that into perspective.
Notice that in general, the mortality rates for this virus are much higher than the seasonal flu. 0.2% of people in their twenties who catch this die. Compare that with the seasonal flu where the mortality for that age group in the United States is considerably less than 0.002%. So this measures a thousand times deadlier than the flu. But the joker in the deck is that’s comparing flu statistics for the United States versus what are mostly deaths in China. Now that the bug is spreading outside of China we are seeing the proportion of critical cases sink.
Look at the lower curve which shows the death rate over time. What this reflects is the improved statistics we now have and the better care that patients receive in regions with modern healthcare infrastructure. Without a doubt, this virus is much more virulent than seasonal flu. Its mortality rate is thirty times higher (3% vs, 0.1%). That’s nowhere near the thousand times higher rate we saw above, but it’s still really high. In 2018 61,000 Americans died from the flu. 80% of those were the elderly. If coronavirus really is thirty times deadlier that means 1,800,000 Americans will die from this virus, of which 1,440,000 will be elderly. That’s a big number. And now being personally on the upper side of the age divide that of course makes it even more interesting! The seriousness of the virus is precisely why so many people are taking additional precautions to limit its spread. One of the most popular things to come out of the pandemic is the increased use of PPE, especially face masks. Because of the demand for them, they can be particularly difficult to acquire normally in the store which is why many are sourcing them online on sites like this – https://www.sciquip.co.uk/products/ppe/disposable-medical-face-masks.html.
Here’s my takeaway. It’s still too soon to know if the estimates on mortality are as high as they seem. It will take testing of the general population to tell if we’re underestimating the number of people who have been exposed to the virus but have been counted among the regular flu sufferers. If the actual mortality rate is closer to the 0.1% that a normal flu virus has then this won’t cause much more than the panic that is currently roiling the stock market.
But if it is as high as even 1% and it becomes a pandemic, then it’s going to kill a lot of old people. It won’t kill many younger people and almost no children. That probably means it won’t shut down the economy. It won’t even shut down the school system. But it will fill up the hospitals and funeral homes and empty out the nursing homes. Pretty grim thought. Will it become a pandemic? It’s starting to look like it already has. All over the world, people seem to be dying of this disease. Currently, there isn’t that much research on the disease, but it is known that it can impact the lungs quite significantly. For those concerned that they might have caught Coronavirus, it might be worth comparing your lungs to someone with the disease. To do this, people could use the COVID-19 lung ultrasound imager from Butterfly Network, for example. That device helps people to see their lungs, allowing them to see if they are inflamed. If they are, it could be a sign that the person has the disease. With this information, this person may want to contact their local healthcare department for treatment to ensure this disease doesn’t spread much more. Whilst we don’t know much about this disease, it’s important for people to take extra precautions to keep everyone safe. Soon we’ll find out if it’s the flu or the angel of death for the elderly.
Republican Senators Introduce a Motion to Censure Chuck Schumer for Threatening Supreme Court Justices
Sen. Josh Hawley, Missouri Republican, sponsored the motion and it already has fourteen senators joining in. This sounds like a good idea. Allowing the minority leader of the Senate to threaten judges without consequences is weak. He should be slapped down. Basically he is encouraging madmen like antifa to target the court. The Supreme Court has a number of important cases this year. Hopefully Roberts doesn’t make himself the spoiler an we get some progress on these issues.
A Eulogy for the Losers
And just like that, we’re down to two. Oh sure, Granny Warren is still in the race but after losing her “home” state there’s not much left to do but shovel some dirt on her carcass and call it a campaign. A newly reminted Biden is ready to spout inexplicable nonsense all the way up to the convention. Bernie is in a panic and will have to yell even louder and wave his arms even more wildly. It’s going to be amazing.
But what I want to talk about is what is to become of the losers. Just look at them. Sure, technically most of them still have high paying jobs and health insurance but how can they go forward with their lives when they’ve been forced to say ridiculous things now for half a year. All of them have raised their hands and said they believe in the Green New Deal and that AOC isn’t certifiably insane. Beto O’Rourke even claimed he was going to take our guns. And most importantly, they all made fun of the old white guys in the race.
And yet here we are and as far as the eye can see all there are is old white guys! So, it’s not like these folks are gonna get much love from Biden or Bernie. So, they’ll have to go back to work and make believe they’re Senators or ex-mayors or skateboarding Kennedy clones or whatever the hell Tom Steyer does nowadays. But one thing’s for sure. I’m gonna miss these crazy bastards.
Just think of all the fun and laughs we’ve had as each one explained how his plan was better than her plan, all without recourse to facts or even the magic of mathematics. Watching Kamala tell Creepy Uncle Joe that he had made her cry when he wouldn’t let her be bussed to a good school. Or ButtPete berating Amy Klobuchar for not knowing the name of the Mexican President. Or Fauxcahantas shaking with rage as she declared that Bernie had told her a woman couldn’t be elected President. And what about Spartacus trying to say anything at all? His pop-eyed expression and goofy voice always cheered me up. He never was coherent in any of the debates but he always looked so excited and hopeful, the poor little guy.
But my overall favorite was Beto. He postured and swore and skate-boarded his way into our hearts. I’m old enough to guess that he was put forward based solely on his resemblance to one of the Kennedys. Some child of the sixties in a newsroom must have made it his project to give the hapless Beto just enough publicity to force him on the public eye. Too bad they couldn’t get him to read from a better script. Every time he opened his mouth the stupid came pouring out and destroyed any doubts about how empty his big head was. So Beto is the poster child for the group. What does he do now? He’s not qualified for any useful task and he’s too well known to attempt a normal life as, say, a lifeguard or a movie usher. His choices are either to be locked away in a mad house or given a show on MSNBC. Interestingly enough, Chris Matthews’ “retirement” provides a ready-made spot for Beto. His audience would be almost as stupid as he is and therefore reasonably willing to listen to him jabber on in Spanglish about how, “el hombre naranja est muy malo.” You know the more I think about it the better I like it. In fact, I think all failed Democrat politicians should be warehoused on MSNBC or CNN. Eventually that much stupidity concentrated in one place should tear a hole in the fabric of space and suck the whole studio straight into another dimension, hopefully one inhabited by some Lovecraftian horror that can feast on their stupidity for millennia.
I know I’ve gone a little overboard but darn it I’m gonna miss those losers and I didn’t want to let them go without saying goodbye.
Creepy Uncle Joe – The Comeback … Kid?
How could I have doubted Joe? Look at him go. He’s got the Joe-mentum. Poor Bernie. So sad. Poor Mike. Poor Fauxcahantas. Well let’s hope they can keep him going until November. He’s been sounding pretty raggedy recently. I wonder which historical figure he’ll confuse President Trump with when he’s trying to put him down? Ronald Reagan? Teddy Roosevelt?
Corn Pop, Leg Hair, Ukraine Money, Shoulder Grabbing. Bring it on!
The Age of Entitlement – A Book Review
Christopher Caldwell’s book, “The Age of Entitlement – America Since the Sixties” is a hard book to read. As I described in several places it took me much too long to finish because many times I had to stop after about fifteen minutes of reading and put it down. It was too painful to hear the seemingly endless litany of defeats, betrayals and acts of cowardice by our elected officials and their bureaucratic, academic, legal and corporate co-conspirators. And yet I think this book should be read by anyone who doesn’t know the full history of how we have been stripped of our constitutional rights based solely on our European ancestry and normal male identity. It is so infuriating to read, that it serves as the perfect eye-opener for anyone who still thinks that affirmative action and political correctness are harmless and just.
Caldwell walks us through the years, starting with the Civil Rights struggle against segregation in the South and shows the gradual but continual evolution of that movement from a crusade to end discrimination against blacks to a concerted program to discriminate against whites. He shows how the logic went from successfully ending the unconstitutional denial of equal rights for blacks into implementing the unconstitutional practices of affirmative action, with its abrogation of free speech, freedom of association and property rights based on not equality of opportunity, but rather equality of outcome. And since these decisions were made by unelected judges who were basically answerable to no one, no recourse was possible. For every white man the burden of guilt never had to be proved. It was always assumed.
After this Caldwell walks us through the expansion of the civil rights movement to embrace other “victims.” Next was women with the adoption by the left of abortion on demand and equal rights for women in the work place and the delegitimization of traditional marriage. After this we get homosexual rights, immigrant rights and on to the explosion of immigration. Finally, we come to the present day where demonization of European identity and culture is all pervasive. We reach a point where open contempt for the native-born Americans is open and threatening. We see these people marginalized and starved out of their homes by industry and government leaders who openly connive to replace them with immigrants legal and illegal. They end up on welfare and waiting for death under the soporific influence of cheap and plentiful opioids that have purposefully been allowed to flooded our streets and countryside.
Throughout Caldwell points out how the leaders of the conservative cause are always woefully unprepared or even unwilling to challenge incredibly unpopular programs and laws. Time after time a leader will run for office on a platform to defend or revive some part of life that the progressives are undermining and again and again, we witness either a defeated attempt or no attempt at all to prevent the destruction of our way of life.
And at the heart of most of these campaigns are the progressive lawyers and judges working hand in glove with the progressives in the bureaucracies and in the non-profit foundations. These foundations were set up by the elites that use them to push for the programs that they support but do not affect them personally. Their schools and homes and families are above the level of being disadvantaged or impinged upon by these forces, unlike the common people that they demonize whose lives are thrown into chaos by these anti-social measures.
Equally distressing is seeing how the leaders of industry sided with the progressives in order to gain access to cheap labor by both exporting jobs to the third world and importing these third world workers right here in the United States as either legal or illegal immigrants. And once the Tech Revolution was in full swing, we are walked through how the American men who dominated this industry adopted the progressive cause and used their new found tools to obliterate the brick and mortar retail landscape of the entire United States. And with the diminution of newspapers, radio and television as advertising channels, communication companies like Google and Facebook now get to decide who is allowed to do business and who is not. And they decide it based on whether they like your politics.
So, we reach the present day where any dissent from the official narrative that demonizes white men is not just shouted down but answered with de-platforming, unemployment, physical assault and sometimes criminal prosecution. And as the book signifies on its last page. That is what gave us the Trump presidency.
Personally, this book reinforced in my mind the necessity of challenging affirmative action in front of a conservative Supreme Court. The fig leaf that affirmative action employs to shield its unconstitutional nature is the importance of “diversity.” But since diversity doesn’t appear in the Constitution, a brave and honest court should strike down all the quota driven fairness devices and strip the Federal and State bureaucracies of their discriminatory mechanisms. All that needs to be asserted is that equality under the law doesn’t need to provide equal outcomes for every individual. Some people are smarter or stronger or more hard working or crueler or more beautiful or taller or shorter or luckier. I can live with those things and believe me there are enough things that I wish I could do that I can’t. But facing that is called sanity. And it’s far from a bad thing.
I highly recommend this book. It’s about time that someone published something as honest and informative on the subject of America’s descent into the maelstrom of social justice insanity. It’s time that we throw our support behind whichever men are brave enough to lead the fight back to sanity. And I know it won’t be easy. As Steve Bannon said “If you think they are going to give you your country back without a fight, you are sadly mistaken.” He’s right. They will fight at every step. If the Supreme Court strikes down affirmative action, the big cities will riot and burn. Well, that’s nothing new. But it’s the only way back to a world where fairness and freedom even have their original meanings.
Good work Christopher Caldwell. You wrote a horrible, urgently important, good book. Bravo.
29FEB2020 – American Greatness Post of the Day – Swing States, Landslides, and Libertarians by George S. Bardmesser
Here’s a fun post for Leap Day.
https://amgreatness.com/2020/02/28/swing-states-landslides-and-libertarians/
Mr. Bardmesser does a quick quantitative analysis of what the Never Trump vote cost President Trump in votes and states in 2016 and what additional states he’s likely and unlikely to add to his total this year. He’s predicting pick-ups in Maine, Nevada, Minnesota and New Hampshire. For myself, I’m pretty sure about Minnesota and sort of hopeful about New Hampshire. But if you like looking at numbers give it a look see.
27FEB2020 – OCF Update
As has been the case lately that stupid day job has been interfering with the important things in my life. Well, what can you do? They pay me a princely salary and I don’t really get much done. It’s hard to walk away. But I will persevere and keep the content coming as best I can.
I’ve got some Shakespeare movies that I’ll review. I’m still about 70 pages from the end of “The Age of Entitlement.” As I’ve said, it’s painful to read but it’s an amazing story of how we got where we are in a step by step narrative.
I think the Monday morning (or Sunday night to be completely technical) post won’t be on the 2020 race or big things in the news. I think I want to talk about practical things we can do day to day to improve our lives while living under the thumb of Big Brother (who by the way, doesn’t really love us).
And finally, I’ve got to figure out some way to get more comments from the folks out there. Especially when we get lots of new viewers. It’s way too quiet. Maybe some sort of contest. So if any of you folks know of effective way to increase comments, I’m definitely interested in ideas.
Pathetic Progressive Life Imitates Exaggerated OCF “Art”
So Sunday night I posted my incredibly over the top comic masterpiece “The Absolutely Final, Last Stand of the Losers, 2020 Democratic Kamikaze Debate.” Well, over the top may not be completely accurate. All descriptions of the Tuesday night debate put it within an order of magnitude of what I described in my parody. Ah, a prophet is never honored in his own time. It does my heart good to know that the Dems are fulfilling the direst fears of the progressive powers that be. If Bernie gets a convincing plurality of the delegates it will be checkmate against them in the November election. Give him the nomination he will go down in flames. Strip him of the nomination and his followers will stay home. Sweet poetic justice for the Left encouraging the Millenials to believe in magic socialism. Feel the Bern!