It’s Almost Over

Election seasons sucks!

Comments

  1. Time for a new thread.

  2. Nope, the fun is just starting.

  3. Isn’t it interesting how the MSM is reporting Covid spikes just before the election, yet, after the Sturgis bike rally, there was no spike reported that was claimed would occur. I’m thinking that much of this is political bullshit.

    Pics of Hunter and Malia Obama doing cocaine and having sex is going around the net. Who cares.

    Remember this day in 2016 when Trump had NO CHANCE of winning the election.

    Some serious rain coming down today, 1-3 inches of snow Sunday night. Pa. weather is great!

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Took long enough to get there. We chased that off last week. Good luck because it is WET and COLD and HEAVY.

  4. Nice defense of the Trump administration by several senators and Nigel Farage. Mathius, I know you’ve already voted, but Rand Paul is speaking directly to you in his part. Here’s hoping I’ve done this right. If not go to 43:39. Its only a few minutes and you can stop listening after Nigel.

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      Rand Paul is such a turd. “Joe Biden is responsible for the decimation of the black community”. Hyperbole lately? Its Joe’s fault eh? Say nothing of personal responsibility unless its an election cycle and campaign stumping. Blech!

    • I have noticed that the Liberal media has been pushing the narrative that the election won’t be decided shortly after the election. I think they’re blowing smoke to cause problems after the election. Using the Primary votes is silly, as Trump had no one against him. After the Iowa debacle and the PA primaries, where only the parties count the votes, this article is trying to compare apples and bananas. Frankly, just blowing smoke up the asses of people who fall for the crap they put out.

      • Is it possible that rational minds disagree on this?

        Does it have to be “evil Democrats setting the stage to cause problems”?

        Is it possible that they believe this to be true and fear that Trump will “claim victory” before all the votes are counted and then there will be a push to ignore or reject late-counted (predominantly Democratic) ballots as fraudulent?

        ——–

        I mean, ignore everything else and ask yourself this: are Blue Voters or Red Voters more likely to consider Corona a serious danger? And, if so, might those voters be more inclined to vote by mail rather than going into a polling place?

        • I mean, ignore everything else and ask yourself this: are Blue Voters or Red Voters more likely to consider Corona a serious danger? No sir, I do not believe this.

          • Boy, did I leave that incomplete……sorry…..I do not think that the virus, or the seriousness of it , is relegated to political viewpoints. I do, however, think that the blue team (most of them, not all ) is more apt to followa party line than think for them selves…..

          • I do not think that the virus, or the seriousness of it , is relegated to political viewpoints

            It’s not about the seriousness of the virus – “it is what it is” – but rather how seriously the people in each party take it.

            I believe that Republicans / Conservatives are more prone to minimize concerns about the virus, to try to “open up” and to try to “resume normal life” than the Democrats who are more prone to “hide in their homes.”

            I find it impossible to believe that you don’t think the PEOPLE on the left are taking the virus more seriously (read: as though it is more of a threat) than people on the right.

            • It seems you are ignoring the hundreds of huge protests and the many riots that are attributed to the Left. That doesn’t seem like taking it serious. You forgot that Pelosi was in Chinatown in late Feb, not taking it serious.
              Then you discount or ignore the elderly who may normally vote in person, will now vote by mail because it attacks them harder. You not considering that Consetvatives dont want to be in lines with mouthy, violent Lefties and will just vote by mail.
              Basically you, like the liberal media are making foolish assumptions based on past elections, not the one with the pandemic. Assume at your own peril.

            • I believe that Republicans / Conservatives are more prone to minimize concerns about the virus, to try to “open up” and to try to “resume normal life” than the Democrats who are more prone to “hide in their homes.” Ok, I can get my arms around this statement.

              Now, taking your statement verbatim…..using your example, would you stipulate that conservatives are more risk takers and individual thinkers that are independent vs Democrats are prone to be followers who want someone else to take care of them in their caves….I mean….homes?

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Mathius

          Last report I saw claimed that about 40% of the mail in ballots received so far come from heavily Red areas. The disparity between red and blue in the mail in ballots is not holding per historical averages.

          This makes sense given that never before has mail in ballots been the major means of voting. Conservatives who are at risk are voting by mail.

          As for your question, I think who is “concerned” about the virus is probably not as split down party line as you think. Most “conservatives”/”Republicans” I know who argue AGAINST MANDATORY masks and such wear a mask when in crowded places. I will grant you this, however. There are far more from the Red team voicing opposition to all the BS than from the Blue team. But maybe that is more a reflection of the political climate than how they feel personally.

          The number claiming it is all a hoax is not that large and I might add seems to exist among the wingnuts at both ends of the spectrum. Antifa had no interest in Covid masks until the political fallout became to great.

          As for the concern that we will not know the outcome, that became a GIVEN when the D’s and Governors went all in on the mail in ballot issue. Then some of them decided to extend the deadlines for receiving and/or counting those same ballots. Guaranteed the post election fiasco we are about to see.

          If you see Buck tell him to lock himself in the house. Because we will soon be wanting to PURGE the lawyers.

  5. Thanksgiving rules from comrade Newsom:

    1. Attendance

    Gatherings that include more than 3 households are prohibited. This includes everyone present, including hosts and guests. Remember, the smaller the number of people, the safer.
    Keep the households that you interact with stable over time. By spending time with the same people, risk of transmission is reduced. Participating in multiple gatherings with different households or groups is strongly discouraged.
    The host should collect names of all attendees and contact information in case contact tracing is needed later.

    2. Gather Outdoors

    Gatherings that occur outdoors are significantly safer than indoor gatherings. All gatherings must be held outside. Attendees may go inside to use restrooms as long as the restrooms are frequently sanitized.
    Gatherings may occur in outdoor spaces that are covered by umbrellas, canopies, awnings, roofs, and other shade structures provided that at least three sides of the space (or 75%) are open to the outdoors.
    A gathering of no more than three households is permitted in a public park or other outdoor space, even if unrelated gatherings of other groups up to three households are also occurring in the same park or other outdoor space. If multiple such gatherings are occurring, mixing between group gatherings is not allowed. Additionally, multiple gatherings of three households cannot be jointly organized or coordinated to occur in the same public park or other outdoor space at the same time – this would constitute a gathering exceeding the permitted size.

    3. Don’t Attend Gatherings If You Feel Sick or You Are in a High-Risk Group

    Anyone with any COVID-19-like symptoms (fever, cough, shortness of breath, chills, night sweats, sore throat, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, tiredness, muscle or body aches, headaches, confusion, or loss of sense of taste/smell), must stay home and not come into contact with anyone outside their household.
    Anyone who develops COVID-19 within 48 hours after attending a gathering should notify the other attendees as soon as possible regarding the potential exposure.
    People at higher risk of severe illness or death from COVID-19 (such as older adults and people with chronic medical conditions) are strongly urged not to attend any gatherings.

    4. Practice Physical Distancing and Hand Hygiene at Gatherings

    For any gatherings permitted under this guidance, the space must be large enough so that everyone at a gathering can maintain at least a 6-foot physical distance from others (not including their own household) at all times.
    Seating must provide at least 6 feet of distance (in all directions—front-to-back and side-to-side) between different households.
    Everyone at a gathering should frequently wash their hands with soap and water, or use hand sanitizer if soap and water are not available. A place to wash hands or hand sanitizer must be available for participants to use.
    Shared items should not be used during a gathering. As much as possible, any food or beverages at outdoor gatherings must be in single-serve disposable containers. If providing single-serve containers is not possible, food and beverages must be served by a person who washes or sanitizes their hands frequently, and wears a face covering. Self-serve items from communal containers should not be used.

    5. Wear a Face Covering to Keep COVID-19 from Spreading

    When gathering, face coverings must be worn in accordance with the CDPH Guidance on the Use of Face Coverings (PDF), unless an exemption is applicable.
    People at gatherings may remove their face coverings briefly to eat or drink as long as they stay at least 6 feet away from everyone outside their own household, and put their face covering back on as soon as they are done with the activity.
    Face coverings can also be removed to meet urgent medical needs (for example, to use an asthma inhaler, take medication, or if feeling light-headed).

    6. Keep it short

    Gatherings should be two hours or less. The longer the duration, the risk of transmission increases.

    7. Rules for Singing, Chanting, and Shouting at Outdoor Gatherings

    Singing, chanting, shouting, and physical exertion significantly increases the risk of COVID-19 transmission because these activities increase the release of respiratory droplets and fine aerosols into the air. Because of this, singing, chanting, and shouting are strongly discouraged, but if they occur, the following rules and recommendations apply:
    All people who are singing or chanting should wear a face covering at all times while singing or chanting, including anyone who is leading a song or chant. Because these activities pose a very high risk of COVID-19 transmission, face coverings are essential to reduce the spread of respiratory droplets and fine aerosols;
    People who are singing, shouting, chanting, or exercising are strongly encouraged to maintain physical distancing beyond 6 feet to further reduce risk.
    People who are singing or chanting are strongly encouraged to do so quietly (at or below the volume of a normal speaking voice).
    Instrumental music is allowed as long as the musicians maintain at least 6-foot physical distancing. Musicians must be from one of the three households. Playing of wind instruments (any instrument played by the mouth, such as a trumpet or clarinet) is strongly discouraged.

    • From the looks of all the pop up Trump rallies in Cali, I bet a whole lotta people will ignore these rules like the plague.

      • Just follow the old tried and true rules. If sick stay home. Otherwise have a good time with the family.

        Here in the NorCal foothills Nov. is often too cold and wet to have a meal outside.

        • Just follow the old tried and true rules. If sick stay home. Otherwise have a good time with the family.

          Mr. T-Ray,

          A simple question: Can viruses be spread by infected ASYMPTOMATIC or PRESYMPTOMATIC people?

          • Can viruses be spread by infected ASYMPTOMATIC or PRESYMPTOMATIC people? Mathius…….remember from your school days. In business law class, our professor said contracts are great…..but if you wrote a contract to cover every possible contingency, it would stretch around the world three times.

            You cannot possibly cover all the contigencies you want to come up with on the virus. It is not possible…..AND, you cannot economically afford it. RISK must be taken. Where do you draw the line….and it ain’t masks.

            • What did you Business Law professor tell you about failing the question that was asked?

              • He would have said to quit hypothesizing before answering the question to which I would agree because I want to pass……HOWEVER…..to answer your question…..I do not know if it could be spread or not….but my answer would remain the same.

              • to answer your question…..I do not know if it could be spread or not

                Mathius: Objection, will the court please direct the witness to answer the question?

                JUDGE Mathius: Sustained.

                Colonel: Uhh… could you please repeat the question? I’m a mite senile and seem to have forgotten it.

                Mathius: The question was “Can viruses be spread by infected ASYMPTOMATIC or PRESYMPTOMATIC people?”

                Colonel: I answered that! I said I don’t know if it can spread or not.

                Mathius: The question was not about this specific virus, but whether there are virii that can spread in this manner.

                JUDGE Mathius: Maybe you could rephrase the question for the witless.. err.. witness?

                Mathius: Yes, your honor. Colonel, is it possible to catch a virus – any virus – from a person who is not showing yet showing symptoms of that infection?

              • The Colonel, while sitting at the table drinking a Dr Pepper with a deer in the headlights look….ponders the question……………..takes more time because he does not trust how lawyers rephrase things…looking for the trap……….gazes into the Mathius crystal ball and the little triangle says to ask again……..The colonel, having NO patience, puts the crystal ball, once again, into the Pirates heavy cannon and shoots it far out to sea……

                Can any virus, singular or plural, be transmitted by ASYMPTOMATIC (means there are no symptoms) to someone else…..the answer to this one is Yes because I am an asymptomatic person infected with the Malaria bug and cannot give blood because of it…so yes,

                Presymptomatic, to mean that there is an infection beginning but not yet showing symptoms…I would say that this is also a problem because we already know that the flu can be transmitted in this fashion….so yes, it is conceivable.

                Colonel’s lawyer: Objection to relevancy. Whether Asymptomatic or presymptomatic has no bearing on this case.

                Jusge says: Sustained and instructs Mathius lawyer to stay within the bounds of the discussion.

              • Alright.. .getting somewhere…

                OK, first thing to note about your malaria bug.. that’s a parasite – a plasmodium – which is a eukaryot (sp?) not a virus. It has a nucleus and everything.

                Anyway… if the court reporter would please read back the salient portion of the colonel’s testimony…

                CR: “we already know that the flu can be transmitted in this fashion….so yes, it is conceivable.” – D13

                Thank you.

                We already know that virii – including the flu – can be transmitted by asymptomatic and presymptomatic people.

                It is strongly suspected, but not proven (to my knowledge) that covid can be spread this way, too. Certainly, some people, will contract the disease without ever experiencing any symptoms at all and yet may be contagious.

                Will the court reporter please read back the salient part of T-Ray’s testimony?

                CR: “If sick stay home. Otherwise have a good time with the family.” – T-Ray

                Very good, thank you.

                Ok, Mr. The Colonel. The question is thus: How do these two statements jive in your mind?

          • For all your so called vaunted intelligence, you still seem not to be able to grasp the fact that we are not going to stop this virus.

            • I don’t believe that was the question I was asking…

              • Why should I answer your gotcha question. You duck many of my questions.

                The CDC just came out and said cloth masks don’t work. There is a Danish study on masks that 3 journals refuse to publish. Why? Does it negate the political narrative that masks are effective?

                From a physics point of view, the mesh size of cloth and paper masks is too large to stop the virus. It is like using chicken wire to stop a mosquito. They only work at stopping large droplets. They do not stop entrained aerosols. Even when they do trap a viral particle, does it get killed on the mask or permanently get glued to it or does in get released on the next inhale? These masks are only meant for short term use. Once loaded with moisture, they become restrictive, more dangerous (loaded with other germs), and less effective at filtering. N95 masks are more effective but also more restrictive. Anyone that has had to use a respirator at work knows there are OSHA rules for their use, including a doctor’s permit, fit tests, and time limits. No beards allowed.

                But, Mathius, go ahead and continue thinking that you can stop this virus with silly rules such as this. We have never stopped a virus in this fashion. This virus will move through the entire population no matter what we do. So get on with life, protect the most vulnerable and get to herd immunity as fast as possible while ensuring that we do not overload our health system. .

                One thing I will fault the politicians at all levels on is the lack of PSAs outlining the symptoms and what to do if you have 2 or more of these symptoms. Early diagnosis and mitigation is the key to keeping people out of the hospital which is key to keeping deaths down. They should be advising us to take vitamin C & D and possibly zinc with specific dosage levels.

                The testing is good but is not the metric we should be using. Hospitalizations and deaths are the important metrics. The more people who get the disease w/o hospitalization and death, the better as we will be achieving herd immunity.

                Living in a bubble is not the answer. But go ahead and believe the fallacy that this thing can be stopped.

              • You duck many of my questions.

                I’m a busy man.

                And as the only liberal in these parts, I get asked a lot of questions.

                The CDC just came out and said cloth masks don’t work

                Citation?

                From a physics point of view, the mesh size of cloth and paper masks is too large to stop the virus.

                From a physics point of view, that’s overly simplistic.

                First of all, we’re trying to catch the WATER DROPLETS it’s suspended in.

                Secondly, at the scales we’re talking about, everything is “sticky,” so you just need to touch a thread. I actually posted a while back a really interesting video on the physics of masks. I strongly recommend spending six minutes to watch that.

                Yes, that’s a video on N95’s, but the same principles apply to cloth and surgical masks, just that they’re less effective. I keep circling back to a very simple question that no one here has yet been willing to answer: If I have covid and I’m about to cough directly into your face, would you prefer (A) neither of us wear a cloth mask (B) I wear a cloth mask (C) you wear a cloth mask (D) we both wear cloth masks or (E) I have no preference to the above.

                If you prefer that, when I’m coughing directly into your face, I wear a mask, then you already know it helps at least somewhat. That is, it’s better than nothing.

                We don’t need to stop ALL transmission – just enough that the r-naught drops below 1.

                Even when they do trap a viral particle, does it get killed on the mask or permanently get glued to it or does in get released on the next inhale?

                Trapped.

                These masks are only meant for short term use.

                Correct.

                Once loaded with moisture, they become restrictive, more dangerous (loaded with other germs), and less effective at filtering.

                I don’t know about “more dangerous,” but the rest of that is certainly true.

                But, I mean, change your mask.

                Switch masks from time to time, when you change situations, when it gets moist, after a higher-risk encounter, at the end of the day, etc. Who cares if you go through a dozen a day? They’re cheap and reusable (after washing).

                You don’t wear a condom more than once.

                You don’t wear the same underwear every day without washing it.

                Surgeons don’t use the same gloves from patient to patient.

                Why should you wear a single mask to the point where it’s moist and soiled and loaded with virii and then keep wearing it after that? That’s not an argument for “masks don’t work” but rather “improperly used masks aren’t as effective” and I mean, yea… duh.

                N95 masks are more effective but also more restrictive. Anyone that has had to use a respirator at work knows there are OSHA rules for their use, including a doctor’s permit, fit tests, and time limits. No beards allowed.

                … for best results.

                Again, we’re not striving for perfection here.

                Would that we lived in a perfect world, but we don’t need to be perfect.

                We’re not dealing with airborn super-ebola here.

                We just need to make it a bit harder for the damned thing to spread.

                But, Mathius, go ahead and continue thinking that you can stop this virus with silly rules such as this.

                I think your odds of surviving it are dramatically better than they were just a few months ago.

                I think, in a few more months, they’ll be better still.

                I think, a few months after that, there will be a vaccine.

                It’s not that we can stop the virus – although, we did manage to eradicate smallpox – but rather that this is a nasty little bug and the more time we can buy the better.

                And I’m not even saying we need to shut the planet down. Maybe that was an appropriate reaction in the early days, but I don’t think it’s there anymore.

                All I’m saying is that a mask (used properly) is a very small thing to ask with a big potential upside.

                We have never stopped a virus in this fashion. This virus will move through the entire population no matter what we do.

                Of course it will. At least until we have a vaccine.

                But we can somewhat control the speed at which it travels through the population.

                If there’s a wild fire near your house, do you just shrug and go about your day? Or do you dig fire-breaks? Maybe they won’t stop it, but maybe they’ll buy some time for the firemen to get a handle on things.

                So get on with life, protect the most vulnerable

                THAT’S WHAT I’M TRYING TO DO!

                Living in a bubble is not the answer.

                But I’m really enjoying Naked Thursday. I don’t wanna leave the house!

              • Cough in my face, get a knuckle sandwich.

                The CDC report on cloth masks is the news the news for the last couple of days.

                You are not busy enough to prevent you from writing long useless screeds on masks.

                You are still approaching this as a univariate problem typical of a linear thinker.

              • Cough in my face, get a knuckle sandwich.

                Refusing, yet again, to answer the question… obfuscation is a tacit admission.

                The CDC report on cloth masks is the news the news for the last couple of days.

                I guess I’ll have to go googling…

                You are not busy enough to prevent you from writing long useless screeds on masks.

                Actually… I’m waaaaaaaay too busy to write long useless screeds.

                I just can’t seem to stop myself. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

                You are still approaching this as a univariate problem typical of a linear thinker.

                I’ve been accused of a lot of things… and I’ve been called a lot of names… but I think “linear thinker” is a new one.

          • I’d like to see proof that an asymtomatic or presymptomatic person has passed this virus on. Proof, not claims. How can you prove that?

            • Just A Citizen says:

              Anita

              This report includes summaries of the proof you ask to see. This is the only way to prove the hypothesis unless you deliberately expose people to asymptomatic people and then make sure none of them have any other contacts. Then test them.

              This of course means violating people or asking for volunteers to get infected.

              https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/7/20-1595_article

              Now for what I see as the NEXT STEP. Notice the implications of having a large number of asymptomatic folks in the population. We need to test, test, test. I could easily see Govt MANDATING TESTING in order to hunt down the infected people and then locking them in their house for 30 days.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Mathius

            The virus CAN be spread by asymptomatic people. Presymptomatic is redundant.

            However, the latest I have read indicates that the ability to get the virus from someone like this depends on their “Viral Load”. This being the amount of virus in the nasal passages, where the swabs are used to test for the virus. Lower loads result in far less risk, but test positive to the same degree as heavy loads.

            So testing shows who has it, within the sampling error of the test, but not who is a threat of spread and who is not. Again, threat of spread being a “statistical value”.

  6. For my county:
    Mailed ballots: 135,201
    Blank ballots returned: 3,348 (undeliverable, moved…)
    Completed ballots returned: 61,915
    Signatures verified: 60,276
    Signatures pending: ~1,400
    Signatures Challenged: 240

  7. Just A Citizen says:

    Dr. Fauci would need a double blind study to prove toilet paper works before he would publicly state that it works.

    “he WHO’s statement that asymptomatic transmission is rare “is not backed up by any data,” says Anthony Fauci, director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in Bethesda, Md. “We know that there is asymptomatic transmission…. What we do not know is the extent to which that occurs. So when we hear statements that this is very rare, we do not know that as a fact.”

    • Once again, the science and the experts are all over the place. Down is up, male is female, …

  8. Just A Citizen says:

    Like I said above. The emphasis on mail in ballots without doing the PREPARATION needed to make sure it works has guaranteed a post election fiasco. The lawyers are going to get rich …………….. AGAIN.

    https://redstate.com/scotthounsell/2020/10/29/pa-county-elections-official-announces-infuriating-news-on-mail-ballots-n271690

    On a side note but related. I see that now Federal Judges can require Postal Employees to work overtime or as many hours as needed to get all the mail posted on Nov 3 delivered on Nov 3. Should we be sending them the bill for all the overtime?????

    • What if those ballots were stolen and get filled out by a harvester? Obviously, signatures will not match but matching signatures has been overturned in many places. I am not sure if this is true in PA. Now if the voter goes and fills out a provisional ballot, which one is accepted. Once the ballot gets separated from the envelope, it is impossible to track.

      Life was easy when we only had to worry about hanging chads.

      • Texas has a rejection rate of mail in ballots in the 10-15% range,,,mainly because signatures do not match. This was in earlier elections…..2016 and 2018.

        • Do you think that 10-15% are fraudulent? Or that the filter rejecting otherwise-valid ballots?

          • Well, here is what has been said. In Texas, the Driver’s License is on file as is your car insurance, tied to your license plate. The voter registration that is normally filled out also has a signature. They compare the driver’s license signature to the voter registration signature to the ballot signature, then to the back of the envelope. The envelope is cross checked to three signatures if the envelope does not match the ballot. They claim that while not foolproof, that 98% of the rejected ballots are rejected properly.

            The other thing that is interesting…..the majority of the non matching signatures belong to a minority class.

            • Just A Citizen says:

              Hard to believe that many Californians can’t do better at matching their signatures.

              Bwahahahahaha

  9. Just A Citizen says:
  10. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    The presumption is that I, not being a virologist, nor a scientest, nor a Doctor (although that really does not count in this epidemic) have no say or valid opinion on how to deal with it.

    Have we become so incredibly dimwitted as to believe one needs a degree in the sciences, a post graduate degree at that to be able to READ and interpret the literature?

    Have we become so iuncredibly full of ourselves as to believce that NOTHING that happened before say, last Thursday is relevant any longer?

    This sucker ain’t going nowhere till we get off our scardy pants off our high horse and let it take its course. Unlike 100 years ago, we can treat the symptoms. Just protect the vulnerable.

    Having NOT seen their Grandchuldren since last December, the In Laws will NOT travel south from the Hinterlands of NY State to Maryland this week to help out their daughter because they believe Cuomo about crossing an alien, plague infested border. Our son is on temporary assignment out of state. Both are younger than us, in fine fettle but democrats to the core. Cowards too!

    Just got back from a three day jaunt in the aluminium tube from Denver for a required family affair attended by my offspring and their kids. Ate out WITHOUTAMASK! OK today I say taht this generation of Americans, born in this and the last century will pay no price, bear no burden and sell their freedom for a farthing and a fake promise of “safety”.

  11. Just A Citizen says:

    I do not necessarily disagree with the authors conclusion. I do find it a bit hypocritical that the author and many of those commenting seem to forget that this has happened many times throughout our history. The first example being POTUS Washington taking troops to attack citizens expressing their right to dissent. Or how about JFK sending in National Guard Troops to enforce a court order, with no precedent to support him. Or how about the drinking age and speed limit mandates imposed on Stated by withholding highway funds.

    There are situations written into law which allow the POTUS to withhold and/or redirect funding. Remember the recent use of Defense funds for the Wall, as an example. So the author should have let the readers know it is not a blanket truth that POTUS cannot withhold funds. In most cases yes, but not in all cases.

    https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/523126-trumps-threat-to-anarchist-cities-violates-the-constitution

    The interesting thing in this is that POTUS is charged with executing the laws of the Federal Congress. This means all laws, not just spending. So how is the executive to enforce the law if he/she has no means to coerce States into complying?

  12. Mr. The Colonel,

    Following up on our conversation on the other thread……..

    ———–

    Suppose that you give an order to a subordinate, let’s say a major, and one of the following happens. What is your response:

    A) he obeys, fully and immediately, doing the job to the best of his ability.

    B) he half-asses it – but within the bare minimum of technical compliance.

    C) he half-asses it – not meeting the bare minimum of technical compliance.

    D) he asks permission to speak freely, then begs you to please not make him. You laugh hysterically until curled in the fetal position, then grant his request. He then goes on his merry way.

    E) he starts to obey, but your order is countermanded by a general. He then stops doing what you told him to. (does it make a difference if he appealed to the general or the general did it on his own?)

    F) he sincerely believes your order to be illegal. He takes his case to the appropriate authorities within the military structure, litigates within his rights. He loses his case. Then, having lost, he immediately does what you told him to to the fullest of his ability while apologizing profusely for his mistake.

    G) he sincerely believes your order to be illegal. He takes his case to the appropriate authorities within the military structure, litigates within his rights. He wins his case. Then, having won, he does not obey your order.

    H) having won his case and refusing to obey, you tell him to do it anyway while pointing at the bird on your lapel. He digs his heels in and continues to refuse.

    I) he just says “no.”

    J) he says “ok, but if you make me, I’ll slash your tires.”

    • Suppose that you give an order to a subordinate, let’s say a major, and one of the following happens. What is your response:

      A) he obeys, fully and immediately, doing the job to the best of his ability. That is a good soldier and he gets an oreo double stuff cookie.

      B) he half-asses it – but within the bare minimum of technical compliance. He does not get his cookie and has to answer for a substandard performance. If it is a first offense and I do not know the soldier, he will get a warning and an evil raise of the eyebrow.

      C) he half-asses it – not meeting the bare minimum of technical compliance. Two raised eyebrows and, if I am his immediate supervisor, he will get a write up and a pretty stern warning of which the consequences would be a reduction in rank should this type of attitude and performance continue. If I am not his supervisor, I would bring in his supervisor, and inquire as to why his subordinate did not perform as expected and that should his performance continue, then the supervisor would be held equally liable.

      D) he asks permission to speak freely, then begs you to please not make him. You laugh hysterically until curled in the fetal position, then grant his request. He then goes on his merry way. This would not happen. I have no problem with subordinates speaking their mind within boundaries. But, unless he has a very good and logical reason to beg off, replace him immediately.

      E) he starts to obey, but your order is countermanded by a general. He then stops doing what you told him to. Now, this is the sticky part because officers, even though they have the rank, do not interfere unless it is life threatening. An example….a Captain in charge of a company of men places his men in a defensive position…no general is going to countermand those orders. He would go to the company commander and talk with him.

      (does it make a difference if he appealed to the general or the general did it on his own?) If he jumps the chain of command, as you indicate he does, he would get an article 32 investigation, a reprimand in writing to be placed in his file, possibly demoted and moved out and dig ditches for the rest of his enlisted life, or, if it was an officer, it would be noted on his OER (Officer Evaluation Report) and no other commander will want him. He will be riffed and sent on his merry way.

      F) he sincerely believes your order to be illegal. He takes his case to the appropriate authorities within the military structure, litigates within his rights. He loses his case. Then, having lost, he immediately does what you told him to to the fullest of his ability while apologizing profusely for his mistake. He has a right to ask to go to higher command to endorse his decision. If I issued an order that I firmly believed was legal and higher authority did not endorse my decision, then I would admit that I am wrong and countermand my own order. If he loses, and he still believes that he was correct, he gets the benefit of doubt without prejudice.

      G) he sincerely believes your order to be illegal. He takes his case to the appropriate authorities within the military structure, litigates within his rights. He wins his case. Then, having won, he does not obey your order. First of all, there is no litigation in either case. I would give permission to take the case up to the next higher authority. If the next higher authority orders him to carry out the order (depending on what the order is) then he can take it even higher. However, like I already stated, if he is correct, then the order would be withdrawn and nothing would happen to him,

      H) having won his case and refusing to obey, you tell him to do it anyway while pointing at the bird on your lapel. He digs his heels in and continues to refuse. I would be in BIG trouble.

      I) he just says “no.” I would not advise it. It better be no SIR.

      J) he says “ok, but if you make me, I’ll slash your tires.” To which he would be assigned to rather dubious duties and have an unfortunate accident in training or be condemned to the hold of The Hammer.
      ——————————-
      A true case in point that I think I said on here but will say it again….there is a line in my OER as a Captain….that says…”This Captain exhibits candor and frankness to both subordinates and superiors alike”. Seemingly harmless in stature but it is/was a death sentence for me to never make general officer. There are lots of code words used in evaluations that are detrimental…..not unlike the civilian retort to, “is the person eligible for rehire” and you answer “no”. Death sentence.

      • Appreciate that… the military is another world, so your insights are always valued.

        Ok, so, what I take from this is that there is a rigid system of rules… a “rule of law” as it were… where you, a superior authority have dominion over subordinates within the framework where you have such authority. In other cases, you have no such power. In other cases, still, the line may be unclear and an arbiter may be required – that arbiter’s decision, however, might as well be the Voice of God.

        One thing I take from this, in particular, is that a good faith exercise of disobedience while challenging the legality or validity or authority of your order is fine. But to balk and defy your order would be… ill-advised.

        So it is with Texas.

        The Federal government has the power it has, and in its appropriate columns, it has superior authority. If, within its power, it says “jump,” the answer is “how high?” (we cannot expect Texas to include the “sir”)

        In other cases, it has no such authority and cannot order you one iota. If the federal government here says “jump,” the answer is “sure, why not?” if you feel like doing it and “go &^#@ yourself you *#@$@ @#$@# $ing piece of $#!* and the horse you rode in on” if you don’t)

        In other cases, it thinks it has certain authority or tries to issue dubious instructions – and such disputes must be resolved through the courts. And the decision of the courts – once appeals have run – is the Voice of God. The only answer if you lose can be to obey the order. If you win, well, you win.

        … and then there’s a decision to simply balk at due authority (options I & J above). And, as you understand – that kind of thing can only end certain ways.

        • You are close but I need to clear some things up a little in your comparisons of military law to state law.

          a superior authority have dominion over subordinates within the framework where you have such authority. In other cases, you have no such power. In other cases, still, the line may be unclear and an arbiter may be required – that arbiter’s decision, however, might as well be the Voice of God. Let me break this down a little further for you. We have a saying in the military….”green tab” to “green tab”. Military officers that wear a green tab are command officers. What this actually means is that a “green tab” 2nd Lt, fresh out of the academy or Officers Training, has dominion over his platoon over that of a non green tab four star general from the Pentagon. Command structure is omnipotent. This is not questioned. Command authority is not absolute. Let us take the Pentagon as an example. The Joint Chiefs of Staff…all general officers cannot tell a command structure what to do in combat. They can issue directives, plans, and change policy but they cannot tell a 2nd Lt how to take a hill of to achieve an objective. Nor can they jump in their plane, fly to some army post and take over. The command structure is very rigid. If a brand new recruit joins a platoon commanded by a brand new 2nd Lt and a 4 star general countermands an order of the 2nd Lt and that private hesitates or does not follow the LT’s order……woe be the young private. The 2nd Lt’s order is to be followed. A Navy staff admiral cannot fly out and take over a nuclear submarine just because he is an admiral. The Commander in Chief, whom has dominion over the military, cannot command. So, there is no jurisdictional dispute.

          I do not like Federal District Courts ruling on things outside their district.

          One thing I take from this, in particular, is that a good faith exercise of disobedience while challenging the legality or validity or authority of your order is fine. Not quite that simple…..a soldier cannot balk and ask…”are you sure about that?” If they are ordered to take an objective and it is a well known fact that the casualty rate will be astronomically high…..you do not have a right to challenge that decision. You cannot balk……however, if you are ordered to shoot a prisoner of war while in captivity, that is not a lawful order. You are not required to take prisoners but once you do, they are in your protection. So to say a good faith exercise of disobedience…..it is not that simple. Also, you have inserted the words “validity and authority”….you have to take those words out. They do not exist in the same context as legally……for example: 2nd Lt Joe Tentpeg orders his platoon to do something….you do NOT have the ability to say…does the Captain know about this?
          —————————
          I do not believe that any Federal Government has the right to tell a state…we do not like your law, therefore, change it. No Federal Government should have the right to say, we do not like the way you draw your district lines…..change them. While I understand that where there is a Federal Law that prohibits something…..think prohibition….it is questionable and I would go by the Feds….But telling a state how to run its own business should be outside the Federal Jurisdiction. Another example, the Civil Rights Act of 1964…I think it is an immoral piece of legislation but it is Federal Law. We abide by it. That is not the same as challenging a State Law that is NOT in violation of Federal Law, especially by a friendly court outside the jurisdiction 0f the state.

          Now where your argument might have some ……S O M E ….validity, would be if the SCOTUS said, do not do it and the SCOTUS is the final arbiter, then perhaps you should follow the rule set down, I do know that Texas has not done that, in particular, voter ID. We require and have, in fact, continue to use our version of voter ID. can be argued that we are not complying by the SCOTUS decision……you would be correct. even if we think the SCOTUS decision to be wrong, technically, we should be following it. We do not. I actually have a problem with part of that because I have always said that the rule of law should prevail…..this puts me at odds with what we are doing…..BUT…there is a preponderance of evidence that the rules of law are not followed……another example is my grief about “selective enforcement”. This sets a precedent that you get to pick and choose which laws or how far you follow a law.

          So, until EVERYONE follows the law completely as it is written, then there is precedent being set. So….up yours and the horse you rode in on,,,,,,,is, sometimes..appropriate.

  13. Just A Citizen says:

    Mask effectiveness. As with many things it depends on what you mean by the term.

    The actual studies we looked at here on SUFA months ago indicated an effectiveness of about 15 to 40% depending on the situations and studies. These involved other flu virus, not Covid. But lets just assume 20%

    What does this mean? If it means that the mask stops 20% of the individual virus organisms then they are useless. Obviously if you are close to someone with a mask who is infected and you have a mask you will be exposed to 64% of the viral load exhaled by the infected person (,8 x ,8 = .64).

    Note: This is where Mathius pulls a Fuaci in effect. You see the two masks did have an effect. They REDUCED the viral load you might have received otherwise. BUT, the remaining load is adequate to infect you so it is meaningless.

    Now lets take another meaning. That 20% of those healthy people exposed FAIL to become infected with both wearing a mask. So you put an infected person in a room of 100 people. 80 of those folks get infected. Now they move on to another room. Is the next infection 80% of 80% again? No. It is a flat 80% of those exposed to the infected person. So your individual risk linked to a single person does not change.

    Where the number starts to matter is when you look at the population dynamics, such as with levels of immunity. A 20% mask effectiveness could be viewed as 20% immunity. That is that 20% of the population will not get infected if everyone wore masks. Now note that 20% immunity is far below the level required for herd immunity to “control” an outbreak.

    So in this example, the “rate of spread” may be slowed somewhat, but it is essentially useless in terms of overall population protection.

    Insert any number you like for Mask Effectiveness and then rerun the numbers I gave. You get the idea. Bottom LIne: Unless Masks will prevent somewhere around 50% or more from getting infected they are worthless with respect to “controlling the virus”.

    They could, when coupled with other things like washing and distancing, reduce rates enough to keep from overcoming local healthcare facilities.

    • Note: This is where Mathius pulls a Fuaci in effect.

      I know that sounds like a bad thing in your head.. but it sounds like a compliment to me…

      You see the two masks did have an effect. They REDUCED the viral load you might have received otherwise. BUT, the remaining load is adequate to infect you so it is meaningless.

      Contraction of, and severity of, viruses is often strongly linked to initial load.

      It’s not exactly binary: infected / not infected.

      It’s a complicated dynamic, but you might imagine the oversimplified question as: is it better for you if the Germans start attacking in drips and drabs, giving you ample time to prepare before their main force shows up, or would they have been more effective if they, you know… blitzed?

      For this reason, some classes of virii and bacteria actually have signaling proteins they release into your body. They’ll sit largely dormant until enough signal builds up to say “hey, we’ve got enough forces here to attack with” and THEN they’ll launch their assault. It’s kind of scary. And disrupting this coordination (either preventing the attack or triggering it too soon) is actually a promising “next generation” kind of weapon against disease.

      Now note that 20% immunity is far below the level required for herd immunity to “control” an outbreak.

      Agreed.

      But it still slows things down, no?

      So in this example, the “rate of spread” may be slowed somewhat,

      Thanks for agreeing!

      but it is essentially useless in terms of overall population protection.

      Yes and no.

      For one thing, I would ask you this: If you were to catch covid, would you rather (A) catch it 8 months ago (B) catch it today or (C) catch it 6 months from now?

      Note that, even while cases climb, the death toll continues to shrink. Part of this has to do with better early detection, sure, but a big part also has to do with us getting better at treating it.

      For another thing, if we can slow it down for another few months, a vaccine might be ready

      If your version of herd immunity is “everyone gets it, X percentage die, the rest are sufficiently immune to protect them,” mine is “everyone gets it OR gets a vaccine.” Which is better?

      Bottom LIne: Unless Masks will prevent somewhere around 50% or more from getting infected they are worthless with respect to “controlling the virus”.

      Let’s say your mother is immunocompromised.

      You know, like my mother in law is.

      And let’s say you could offer a 20% increased chance of not killing her.

      Is it not worth it because it’s only 20%?

      They could, when coupled with other things like washing and distancing, reduce rates enough to keep from overcoming local healthcare facilities.

      That’s the goal.

      This is just ONE thread to pull on.

      Social distancing, better hygiene, better treatments, upcoming vaccines, better detection, and… yes… masks.

      You might argue that seat belts don’t work 100% of the time. But that’s why we don’t have only seat belts. We also have antilock breaks, and collision detection, and airbags, and crumple zones, and backup cameras, and rearview mirrors, and speed limits, and road design principles, and vehicle standards, and vehicle inspections, and road warning signage, and traffic laws, and police enforcement, and and and and.

      None of them need to be perfect or even more than a few percentages effective.. but when you put them all together.. fewer people die overall.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Mathius

        Your mother in law example shows that you misrepresent the numbers. She doesn’t have a 20% increased chance of not killing her. And how you interpret the outcome depends on how you define effectiveness. Which was my bigger point.

        Nobody has clearly defined what they mean by many of these terms. Like “mask effectiveness” or “control the spread”.

        Masks more than likely have their greatest impact in situations where contact is brief. People are urged to use them in congested situations. Fine. But if that congestion lasts for an hour or more the chance of infection WITH MASKS goes up. Remember, the effectiveness is on a breath by breath basis. Infections depend on TOTAL LOAD. So one thing ignored is the DURATION of exposure.

        We are told wearing masks is needed to keep the economy open. Ignore the obvious totalitarian bent to this and just consider that the work place requires LONG DURATION of exposure to others.

        One other thought. The impact to the workplace or gatherings will be resolved when we have fast and accurate testing for the virus. Then you could get swabbed on your way in the door.

        • I was out doing some chainsawing so you beat me to the time element. I have seen over a dozen papers that say masks are ineffective or marginal. This why I say the science is uncertain.

          Trump has asked if the cure is worse than the disease. How many businesses and individuals must go bankrupt before we declare an end to this? How many cancers must go diagnosed, how many suicides must we endure, how much schooling will we forgo…? This has been going on since February. Eight months is enough. This is not that deadly of a disease except for the elderly and the compromised. Let the healthy out of prison. Let’s enjoy our Thanksgiving without tyrannical government interference.

  14. I watched some of Trumps Florida rally and some of Biden’s rally (somewhere). Trump seems relaxed and having fun, whereas Biden is barking like an angry old man. Biden’s tone not long ago was cool and calm, now he’s far from that person. Reminds me of HRC’s rant about why she wasn’t up by 50 points, angry. Body language can tell a huge story. Thoughts?

    • He is cornered and he knows it. The labtop from hell tells it all. Add to it the Cooney and Bobulinski documents and Bobulinski’s eyewitness account and the you have a serious case with 10K times the evidence than was presented against Trump in the last four years.

      Now a serious question for Mathius: Given all these revelations, should Biden withdraw from the race immediately. Yes/No no obfuscation allowed.

      • Biden hasn’t said the evidence is fake at this point. A Senate Committee has confirmed they are legit.
        I wonder what Carlson’s viewership will be when he puts out the supposed lost papers?

  15. Just A Citizen says:

    One more thing on masks. Our local data.

    Before we had a mask “mandate” we were able to reduce the rate of Covid infections and the number hospitalized. Then we had a mid summer jump, thanks to all the tourists and refugees from Washington that showed up. All of a sudden we needed a “Mask Mandate”. However, this was only enforced by private businesses so it was not uniform by any means.

    But as the number of cases rose the number of folks wearing masks went up. So did the editorials attacking those not wearing them. The spike subsided but only a little. Then mid September we got a really, really big increase. Which is still increasing. This increase occurred while the “Mask Mandate” was in place and while more and more people were wearing masks in public. And when fewer people were gathering in public places, like the bars downtown. So how could the number of cases be increasing so much when more and more people are practicing the protocols? Since nobody in Govt. will give us the information I will speculate here. Guessing that these huge numbers are among groups of people exposed at particular events or locations. And of course, we reopened the schools in mid September.

    Ironies of all ironies, the Health District lifted the “Mask Mandate” last week in the midst of this massive increase. The City Council for CdA then instated a “Mandate” on Monday. Meaning that a small portion of our population is subject to the mandate and there are no restrictions in people moving from the town next door, which is literally next door.

    Meanwhile the local hospital is screaming about being at capacity with 40 cases. During the March/April spike they hit about 30 to 36. So some of us are now asking why we had to shut down in March and April if the Hospital and Health District did NOT TAKE THE TIME and FEDERAL MONEY to increase their capacity. Wasn’t that the goal?

    More irony. People from Washington and Oregon are writing editorials in our paper saying that because we are stupid rednecks who prefer freedom to safety that our excess sick people should not be sent to their States. Exchange of patients is a standard practice here. This might be a defensible position if not for the fact that we were overrun by people from these two states this spring, summer and now fall as they ran away from the heavy handed shutdowns in their states. Let alone the number from Washington who work here in N. Idaho, and visa versa. Also…………. we had ZERO infections here until March 13th. Weeks after Washington became a hotspot and problem area. Our initial infection came from WASHINGTON STATE. In N. Idaho that is.

    The first major infections in Idaho (Blain County) came from skiers traveling from NY and other eastern States.

    • In a recent CDC survey, they reported that about 5/6th of the infected people always wore masks. You pass through a cloud of Covid droplets which are adsorbed (the liquid that is) by the mask. This leaves the virus free. So the next few dozen inhalations desorb the virus from the mask. Since the particles are small they are entrained in the air thus enter the lungs like a P2.5 particle. So while the cloud was only momentary, the body sees a continuous influx of virus.

  16. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    Interesting conversation this afternoon with an old friend who did statistics for over 40 years (and never wants to see a number again, ever)

    Calculating Covid deaths:

    1. How many people died of any illness/disease in the six month period March-September per 100,000 US population, 2019

    2. Ditto 2018

    3. Ditto 2017

    4. Average the three.

    5. How many people died of any illness/ disease in the six month period March-September per 100,000 US Population 2020.

    6. Subtract # 4 from # 5 and you have a pretty accurate number for Covid caused deaths.

    Anybody up for the research?

    • Ok, it was a much needed slow night for me, you piqued my interest, so I did some quick research. All I could find for 2020 was the period from March 1 – Aug. 1, 2020 so I researched the same time frame for 2019. I found nada for 2019. I was able to use the CDC website to research the same time frame for 2016 – 2018 however. I could not get the death rate per 100,000 (Maybe I was doing something wrong, I don’t know.) so I used the total death numbers for each month and added them together, averaged, threw in some black magic and necromancy and came up with the following.

      The averaged number of deaths from 2016 – 2018, for the time frame of March 1 – Aug 1 of each year was 1,146,243. The number of total deaths from March 1 – Aug 1 2020 was 1,336,561. So a difference of 190,318.

      So there you have it. It’s towards the end of my shift, and I ran the numbers rather quickly, and I couldn’t use the exact formula that you presented, but there are my results.

      At first glance I would say that the Covid numbers are probably pretty accurate. Probably more accurate than any of the Presidential Polls!

      And this is the link where I extracted most of my data.

      https://wonder.cdc.gov/ucd-icd10.html

      • HUZZAH! For Rick!

        Any chance you saved your math? I’d love to see it.

        I love this kind of back-of-the-napkin stat crunching – it’s what moved me from anti-gun to the “meh” category.

        ———-

        Without speculating just how much to an adjustment, we should also be considerate of the following facts:

        1. Medicine / technology are constantly improving, even year over year. Ceteral paribus, the number of deaths due to disease should be going down each year. That is, if 100 people died last year and 100 died this year, something was worse this year since the number didn’t go down as expected. Within such a short span, however, this effect is probably nominal at best and easily within random variation. If we were comparing decade over decade, I would expect this to be an important factor.

        2. With the lockdowns, increased social distancing, improved hygiene, improved sanitation, mask-wearing, work-from-home, and other miscellaneous efforts to combat covid, we can and should expect OTHER diseases to be spread less and kill less. That is, the same efforts to avoid and mitigate covid also avoid and mitigate the seasonal flu and a host of other diseases. So, again, without speculating as to the magnitude of this effect, I would expect the baseline to be shifted down for 2020. Therefore the increased number of deaths should actually be compared to a slightly lower baseline.

        Does this make sense?

        So maybe your conclusion of 190,318 is actually 190,319 or even 190,320.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Mathius

          1. Yes, medical treatments advance. But not as fast as the Exit Strategy of the Baby Boomers. This is why “Total Deaths” is meaningless to a large extent when looking year over year.

          2. Correct. The lockdowns and social distancing greatly reduced the number of flu cases this past year. But then we have the problem of mixed vectors all being classified as Covid. And I am not talking about motorcycle accidents, but mixing of regular flu or colds with Covid.

        • Any chance you saved your math? I’d love to see it.

          I absolutely knew you would ask that question. But no, it made it’s way to the shred pile. There wasn’t much to see anyway. I used the CDC ‘Wonder’ tool to display the monthly deaths and then just wrote down the totals.

          As to your first point, I was thinking along the same lines, however, the total deaths have actually INCREASED from year to year. Maybe because the population increases every year therefore there are more deaths? I don’t know but I thought it was odd.

          As to the second point, yes. From what I am hearing, seeing and reading at least the seasonal flu is being mitigated from the social distancing, lack of large gatherings, etc.

          • Re population increases… good point… also the boomers are getting older.

            Also probably something-something-something economics something-something-something access to health care.

        • Thanks for this.

          I’m just curious…. in your mind, where does 200k extra dead Americans fit in the scheme of things worthy of concern?

          Put another way, what kind of response / what scale of response / what expense of response is justified by [thing] which kills 200k Americans?

          (For context, Mathius has long argued that the response to 9/11 was blown beyond any recognizable scale for the actual damage and loss of life related to the attack itself. Yet many felt that any price was the right price to pay to prevent another such attack. So if they were willing to spend (and did spend) trillions to prevent the deaths of another 3k people (not that you necessarily hold this view), how does this kind of thinking stack up in your mind against something like covid?)

          ——————–

          I’m sure you’ll object, but the narrative over on the left goes something like this…

          • Just A Citizen says:

            The narrative is big eyed goofy looking cats and goats?

          • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

            Yes, an interesting comparison to 9-11. What Do you do when a foreign entity takes out 3,000 or 230,000 of your citizens?

            Nuke Beijing?

            In Heinlein’s “Starship Troopers” the teacher character, Mr. Dubois, a veteran and therefore “citizen” asks the High School ethics class the what if question. If they hold 100,000 of your citzens hostage, 10,000, 1,000 or just ONE what do you do?

            The correct answer should never be based on a number if you claim to be acting ethically.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          For those who love digging into numbers. Please note the weekly deaths chart in T-Ray’s link. The first one.

          By using “weekly” deaths the total number of deaths is missed in favor of the more “dramatic” weekly spikes. Note that from Jan to April 2019 the rise in “weekly” deaths remains flat. This in reality results in “more deaths” than the more dramatic high “weekly” spikes which don’t last as long. The Spring of 2019 saw the arrival of a second flu wave across the country.

          A flu for which the vaccine we took in the fall of 2018 was only about 12% effective. Hospitals were almost overrun with flu victims in March/April and the number of deaths was greater than the first wave.

          Key point is that you should always look closely at numbers and analyze critically. They don’t always tell the whole story and this is how they can be abused to drive public opinion.

          • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

            Variables! I love variables. That’s what science is supposed to be all about, eliminate the varables!

  17. Just A Citizen says:
    • Stop paging me! I’m trying to do work!

      Graham, who has been cited as a cybersecurity expert in The Washington Post, the Associated Press, Wired, Engadget and other news and technology outlets, told the DCNF that he used a cryptographic signature found in the email’s metadata to validate that Vadym Pozharsky, an advisor to Burisma’s board of directors, emailed Hunter Biden on April 17, 2015.

      Ok, so first thing’s first. I don’t know Graham, but I do know the Daily Caller, and they have zero – ZERO – credibility. They are a tabloid.

      That said, that’s great that Graham was willing and able to authenticate the email.

      But why are they keeping the signature secret? I retain my position that they should just release it – let anyone interested plug it in and verify it for themselves.

      I retain the skepticism I had when they wouldn’t let anyone look at it that I do when they just let one specific person see it? Maybe it’s true, maybe it isn’t, but why the hell would they be so cagey about it?

      Graham previously told the DCNF that emails sent from Gmail, such as Pozharski’s message to Hunter Biden, can be “absolutely verified beyond a shadow of a doubt” by testing its contents against the unique DKIM signature found in its metadata.

      Absolutely 100% true.

      So why are they letting one guy look at it and no one else?

      Send it to me – I’ll verify it myself.

      There’s nothing confidential or secretive in it. If it’s real, it can self authenticate.

      All this does is just add another corroborating point to the story – I’m being told “it’s authentic because that guy says it is.”

      If that’s all the proof we could have, that’s one thing. Such is life sometimes.

      But it’s not. We could easily have rock-solid PROOF, that they continue to withhold that and that renders me highly skeptical.

      Graham said the only way the email could have been faked is if someone hacked into Google’s servers, found the private key and used it to reverse engineer the email’s DKIM signature.

      Not quite true, but close enough. It would be monsterously difficult to forge this email post hoc. To the point where I categorically reject any assertions of its falsity if – IF – the signature is verified. This is the kind of thing that maybe – MAYBE – the NSA could pull off. Maybe.

      (note post hoc – nothing stops them faking it from several years ago via a simple hack, but if they were that prescient, frankly, they deserve to win)

      But again, “that guy says so” is not proof. Not when real proof is just sitting there and being deliberately and inexplicably withheld.

      ——————

      JAC, I have proof that aliens are real.

      In fact, I have several locked up in my basement.

      I’ll send you grainy and easily fakable photos so you have to believe me?

      What? You still don’t believe me?

      Well, I could just invite you to take a look, but I’m not going to do that.

      Instead, I’m going to invite someone you don’t know to come and you can take his word for it.

      He said they’re genuine.

      So now you have to believe me, right?

      Well, yes, I could put them on public display and let everyone take an independent look to verify it. But, for absolutely no apparent reason, I’ve decided not to do that.

      What do you mean you find that suspicious? I gave you the word of that other guy! Why do you need the actual easily providable and easily verifiable proof itself when you can just take his word for it?

      ——————

      Essentially, what this boils down to, is that the only “evidence” of the veracity of these emails is “that guy says so.”

      That’s it.

      Meanwhile, hard proof of its authenticity or lack thereof is being deliberately withheld.

      And I find that highly suspect.

      ——————

      That said!

      I also retain my position from the other day if this is proven true (which it hasn’t yet).

      If it’s true, my next question is “was it legal?” And “did he actually do anything wrong?”

      Thereafter, if the answer is that it was illegal, then I want him tried in a fair and open court of law and, if found guilty, duly convicted.

      If it was lawful but awful, I want him tarred and feathered. And, if it was bad enough, I want him to resign (if he gets elected).

      • Just A Citizen says:

        As expected. Thanks for confirming my expectations Dr. Fauci.

      • If one wants to know if the emails are true, just look at the reaction by the Liberal media (crickets), big tech (censorship) etc. Yea, it’s all true and factual or they wouldn’t be trying so hard to ignore it.

        You do bring up one good point (maybe). Biden was a private citizen in 2017 when this took place. Was it illegal? Depends. Dealing with foreign entities is complicated. If he was getting ANY money from a foreign government (which is everything in China) did he file the proper paperwork (foreign agent, taxes etc). We know it’s NOT in his tax records. Did he know he was running for President?

        Bottom line, a corrupt politician to the core, who is losing his mental faculties.

  18. Just A Citizen says:

    Still no MSM coverage of the Bulinski interview. But NBC tried to pull a fast one last night. I am saying it was deliberately manipulative.

    They did a story on a “report” that suddenly appeared months ago claiming all kinds of things about Biden and his connections to Ukraine, China, etc. The media, including Fox, and others could not verify this and so it was not widely reported. I picked up on it at Politico a few weeks back when they used it to frame the Biden story much as NBC did last night.

    What was the framing? The entire story was about the “refuted” report. Then instead of mentioning the newest info, computer and Bulinski, they made reference to unproven “allegations” of wrong doing.

    If you have not been following all this you would have concluded that the current reports are all part of the “unproven allegations” and would more than likely dismiss the current stories from the laptop and Bulinski interview.

    In my opinion, based on years of dealing with these media “people” (note I did not say professionals) this was a deliberate effort to obfuscate and create political cover for Mr. Biden.

  19. Just A Citizen says:

    Don’t necessarily focus on the use of HCQ in this story. Instead just focus on the data/graphs. Yes, hard to read. But the narrative explains it well enough. Note that the USA deaths per million has not risen like Europe although we are in a Second/Third wave. Of course we are just now reaching capacity in many hospitals so this could change.

    https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/10/europes_second_wave_suggests_covid_pandemic_could_have_been_avoided.html

    Oh, the HCQ comparison with India is very interesting as well. As is Sweden’s outcome.

    • Since the HCQ thing is not a double blind study, ignore it. The experience of a few 100 million people is irrelevant.

  20. Just A Citizen says:

    Hmmmmmm Kind of strange given we did exactly this when we left Britain behind.

    “But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty once lost is lost forever. When the People once surrender their share in the Legislature, and their Right of defending the Limitations upon the Government, and of resisting every Encroachment upon them, they can never regain it. —John Adams”

    Maybe that last line should end with “without bloodshed”.

    • Yup.

      It’s a ratcheting effect.

      From time to time, you have to just throw out the rulebook and rewrite the thing from scratch.

      I wonder, Mr. JAC, were we to hold a brand new Constitutional Convention, were you and I appointed delegates of our respective states, and were the Red Coats breathing down our throats such that we had to reach an accord or die… what might WE cook up together in the year 2020 that could stand the test of time? What Great Compromises might we brew up?

      I offer my opening bid, sir: I propose 1A exactly as written with the words “seriously, we mean it” appended at the end.

  21. Mathius, with respect to 9/11, we had had 20+ years of jihad attacks with an escalating body count. When the body count was a few dozen to a few hundred, the attacks were just bee stings. Brush it off and go on with life. However, over 3500 dead is not a bee sting especially when it is on home soil. The trend needed to be stopped because the next attack would have been 10,000 or more via dirty bomb or bio weapon. This was a deliberate attack perpetrated by identifiable bad guys. It was right for us to counter attack. The mistake was the nation building concept which extended the war indefinitely.

    • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

      Gonna reprint my answer from above in case you missed it.

      Yes, an interesting comparison to 9-11. What Do you do when a foreign entity takes out 3,000 or 230,000 of your citizens?

      Nuke Beijing?

      In Heinlein’s “Starship Troopers” the teacher character, Mr. Dubois, a veteran and therefore “citizen” asks the High School ethics class the what if question. If they hold 100,000 of your citzens hostage, 10,000, 1,000 or just ONE what do you do?

      The correct answer should never be based on a number if you claim to be acting ethically.

      I remember the last incredibly bad taste from the Viet-nam war, the Mayaguez incident where the Khmer Rouge siezed a ship and imprisoned 20 some odd civilian merchant seamen mostly US citizens. We mounted a large scale Cluster-F##k operation in no time at all and lost about twice the number of Marines while the Khmers were in the process of releasing the seamen. Lesson learned, “First you negotiate” then you kick their asses with the proper amount of excessive force.

      • At this point in time we do not know if the Chinese virus was a deliberate attack on the west or an accident. It is highly probable that the virus was man made in a lab that was known to have sloppy security. We do not know if it was deliberately released but we do know the Chinese shut down domestic travel but left international travel open. They then lied to WHO. So there seems to be a deliberate act to let the virus loose in the world. This tantamount to biological warfare. Since the attack was on the entire world, the world should respond in unison. We should kick China out of the UN and the WTO and declare them a pariah nation.

      • the Mayaguez incident where the Khmer Rouge siezed a ship and imprisoned 20 some odd civilian merchant seamen mostly US citizens.

        For what it’s worth, given a hostage situation, President Mathius responds with restrainged appropriate excessive catestrophic force.

        But, Mathius is a big believer in not rewarding bad behavior. If the reward for taking my citizens hostage is anything less than utter annihilation, then people might start getting silly ideas about trying again.

        In fact, during a Mathius administration, your most likely cause of death once taken hostage is “being rescued to death.”

        In Heinlein’s “Starship Troopers” the teacher character, Mr. Dubois, a veteran and therefore “citizen” asks the High School ethics class the what if question.

        I was surprisingly underwhelmed by this book. And I love Heinlein.

        One of only a handful of books I’ve ever read where the movie was better (along with Jurassic Park and Shawshank Redemption). I can’t think of any others off the top of my head, but I welcome your ideas.

        • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

          Totally disagree with you. The movie was panned by critics as :fascist” and I agreed it was a travesty, I’ve re-read SST a dozen times getting more from it each time. “Moon is a harsh Mistress” is an excellent primer on organizing a revolution.

          SST is for people who believe that responsibility should be a part of obtaining citizenship. What I liked was that basic rights were gurataneed to all but only a “veteran”: could vote. If you remember, a “veteran” did not have to be in the military. What is interesting is that the book pretty much flys in the face of Heinlein’s Libertarianism.

          Then go off and read “Methusalas Children” followed by the sequal “Time Enough for Love”. Both are what we used to call “thought provoking”. Both are heavily into the downside of human nature.

          Revolt in 2100, Sixth Column, and Beyond thios horizon are all fast, fun, thinkinmg reads having to do with 1. An American Religious dictatorship by teh Scudderites, 2. A revolution against our Asian “over;lords” after we were conquered and 3. A “perfect” society where teh term, “An armed society is a polite society came from>,.

          • “Moon is a harsh Mistress” is an excellent primer on organizing a revolution.

            Is sooooooooooooooo good.

            I wonder if my 8 year old is old enough to listen to that as a bedtime story… we just finished Hobbit..

            I was thinking about Dune, but maybe some Heinlein is the way to go….?

            hen go off and read “Methusalas Children” followed by the sequal “Time Enough for Love”.

            Right. We’ve talked about these.

            Time Enough for Love was absolutely wonderful, though… errr…. I could have done without the incest. I get it – and I see how it was part of the story he wanted to tell – but eh.

            I don’t think I ever told you.. I read it on the recommendation of my buddy (who used to comment here for a while). He read the chapter “The Tale of the Man Who Was Too Lazy to Fail” and said he thought it was written about me.

  22. Just watched a Biden speech in Iowa. The outright lies he spewed makes Trump look like the Mother Theresa of truth.

  23. Just A Citizen says:

    Mathius

    Re: Your post about how the narrative looks from the left………. masks and cowards, etc.

    I agree ………… that seems to be how many on the left see us. They cannot seem to see the principles involved nor the actual arguments made and thus wind up doing nothing but puking up the usual emotional BS.

    Now, while there are a group of people who say hell no to masks in all cases, most of us who have criticized the mandates are complaining about MANDATE, not wearing masks.

    These people on the left, and I submit they are not only on the left because fear brings out stupid in everyone, refuse to acknowledge that in a Free country you do not have the Govt dictating by use of force what you must wear, where you can go and with whom you can gather. As I said months ago: ASK ……. DON’T TELL and especially DO NOT THREATEN ME.

    Our City Council’s mandate is for 90 days. That is the end of January for crying out loud. Now the neighboring cities are considering the same mandate. Because having one town and not the others makes little sense. Even if the mandate itself makes little sense.

    Here is another concept to consider. These people screaming for FORCED MANDATES are in effect using Government Force against me and others for no other reason than FEAR. And as one smart local asked in todays paper: If you can mandate masks because of this fear, can we expect you will also mandate vaccinations?

    Special note of consideration here. Sweden did not use the MANDATE approach. Instead they informed and educated and suggested protocols. The compliance with wearing masks was close to our mandated cities. All done VOLUNTARILY. Why? Because the Swedish Govt. doesn’t often use coercion to get what it wants (excluding their God awful taxes) and thus the population doesn’t have near the mistrust many Americans have come to hold.

  24. Nothing has changed, the numbers are just bigger.

  25. Canine Weapon says:

    (2nd attempt)

    Happy Halloween!

  26. Hee hee, that cutie has a look of resignation, in those eyes. Take the picture, already.

  27. Go Green!

  28. I’m pretty sure the Colonel is mixed in here somewhere 🙂 🙂

  29. U.S.—Business owners in Democrat-controlled cities are boarding up in preparation for an onslaught of mostly peaceful demonstrations should Trump win the election Tuesday.

    The real concern is that the party of love and tolerance loses the election.

    “We just want to make sure our businesses will be safe from the sudden outpouring of peace, love, and tolerance,” said one frightened business owner in Los Angeles as he frantically boarded up his hookah lounge. “You know, too much peace can sometimes intensify and end up destroying millions of dollars of property. You know, from all the peace.”

    “Can’t be too careful when there’s roaming bands of people spreading peace.”

    Many business owners are even arming themselves with firearms to protect themselves from all the peace.

  30. While the assholes in the “Trump train” are, well, assholes (and criminals), I do think the Biden campaign missed an opportunity to get a big bump in Texas.

    They had to know this was coming. Jared was promoting it publicly and there was enough information out there that they should have known it was coming.

    So, if they knew it was coming, the obvious solution was to add a tail gunner and roof turret to the tour bus with a big banner that just says “when in Texas…”

    And, you know, if the need arises, twin 50 cals are a pretty decent deterrent to tailgaters.

    I have to imagine that there are at least some Texans who might be swayed over to the Biden camp by high-quality drone footage of a Mad Max style highway “ambush” fended off with anti-aircraft fire from the Biden tour bus.

    • All I see is people having fun (except the one in the SUV, who was the ONLY asshole in the video). Welcome to Texas Sleepy Joe 🙂 Where is “Heels in the Air” Harris?

      • I love how you see “fun” and I see dangerous behavior, driving that would have gotten any of us arrested, and harassment.

        Of course, the cops weren’t there to pull anyone over.. probably because all the cops were as likely as not driving the pickup trucks.

        • I’ve driven in far, far worse traffic just travelling. This looks like a normal day during rush hour
          in Youngstown Ohio.

        • Not a single one of you has mentioned that the Governor, Uncle Greg, has publicly stated that any driving like this on Texas highways will be stopped and the DPS put a stop to it, as they should have. You also did not mention the interview with one of the drivers that said it was not planned…..he said it was a sort of flash mob thing.

          • Not a single one of you has mentioned that the Governor, Uncle Greg, has publicly stated that any driving like this on Texas highways will be stopped and the DPS put a stop to it, as they should have.

            That’s because I didn’t know this. Thanks for sharing. Good for him. Will he be pushing for charges against those involved?

            What are YOUR thoughts on this?

            I’ll share MY thoughts: I don’t have an intrinsic problem with a protest of this sort. Hell, I’ll even admit that I find it funny and creative – though it is obvious to me that the driving was too aggressive with very close tailgating and brake checking and deliberate collisions. My thought is that this is fine IF you comport yourself in a safe manner. (Mathius wonders aloud about “stand your ground” laws as applicable to road aggression – can you shoot out the guy’s tires in self-defense? It’s Texas, so I assume so.) Perhaps this was intended in a more peaceful / controlled way – I do not know – but if it was, it got out of hand. It really should go without saying that, regardless of any other considerations, boxing a bus in like this is not safe behavior. We can easily imagine a situation wherein there was a serious accident and someone died – either a member of the Trump Train or, hell, maybe Biden himself. The applicable term here might be, at the very least, reckless endangerment.

            You also did not mention the interview with one of the drivers that said it was not planned…..he said it was a sort of flash mob thing.

            That’s (A) because I didn’t know this and (B) because it’s an obvious lie and (C) because flash mobs are planned and organized.

            • I don’t remember such level of protesting from you when anti-Trump mobs harassed and attacked Trump supporters four years ago. We have had 5 months of looting, firebombing, laser attacks, shooting, beatings, … and you are all bent out of shape over one road prank.

              • I don’t remember such level of protesting from you when anti-Trump mobs harassed and attacked Trump supporters four years ago

                I can’t speak to your memory, nor to what others say or did.

                What I can say is that -I- don’t think people should do things like this.

                This was an attack – an attack – on the tour bus of the major party candidate for President.

                Did they actually shoot at it? No. Was he even aboard? No. But all the say, they aggressively surrounded the bus and endangered the lives of everyone aboard.

                It crossed the line from “valid protest” to “reckless endangerment.”

                If that bus had crashed and people died, would that not have been a reasonbaly foreseeable consequence given how they were driving and the fact that it’s a fucking BUS? Yes? Of course it was. That’s reckless endangerment and about 500 other major vehicular violations.

                If liberals had done this to Trump, you’d be shitting a brick over it and you damned well know it.

                I’d like you to take a moment and close your eyes. Imagine that it was the Trump motorcade deep in Biden country, and a swarm of Biden supporters surrounded the motorcade, driving recklessly / dangerously, tailgating and brake-checking the limo while hurling insults. Now I’d like you to tell me how close they get before the Secret Service nukes them from orbit? And what, pray tell, is the response to this from the right? Would you call it a harmless “road prank”? Or would you say the Biden supporters were way outside of appropriate bounds and got what they deserved – play stupid games, win stupid prizes – and all that? Do you think Trump would be on Twitter saying he thinks they didn’t do anything wrong? Or would he be lambasting those evil violent terroristic leftists?

                You tell me. But I want you to take a moment and do some honest introspection before you answer that.

                We have had 5 months of looting, firebombing, laser attacks, shooting, beatings, … and you are all bent out of shape over one road prank.

                I know this is hard for you.

                I’m going to try this again.

                I’ll use small words.

                I.. can.. be.. unhappy.. with.. more.. than.. one.. thing.. at.. a.. time.

                And also:

                Two.. wrongs.. don’t.. make.. a.. right..

                and you are all bent out of shape over one road prank.

                I’m not “bent out of shape” about it.

                I actually think it was funny and clever.

                But I do think the way it was executed was aggressive and dangerous and ought to be criticized as such.

                The idea was good. The implementation was bad.

                I’m giving the organizers the benefit of the doubt here and assuming – without evidence – that their intention was a show of anti-support rather than aggression and creating a dangerous situation. I’m assuming they just intended to protest rather than endangering anyone or crossing the line into illegality and harassment.

                That said, if you’re going to do something like this, “overenthusiasm” is an obvious and predictable outcome. This kind of thing doesn’t “just happen.” Someone organized. And that person failed to ensure proper guidelines and discipline.

                It’s just that fucking simple.

                This is gross negligence.

              • You hide behind the two wrongs don’t make a right line when you get caught in obvious hypocrisy. Again, I do not recall this level of anger when Trump supporters were attacked in Chicago, San Jose and other places four years ago. I do not recall this level of anger over the continuous rioting, looting, assaults and deaths we have had from left wing mobs this summer. Your anger is selective bias.

              • I can’t help what YOU recall.

                I object then, now, and forever, to unnecessary violence, theft, and destruction of any kind.

                I think, further, that you overestimate my ire at the current topic. I believe the Trump Train idiots committed various crimes and ought to be duly prosecuted. I believe they recklessly endangered their own lives (I don’t care), the lives of people on the bus (I do care), and innocent drivers on the highway (most important).

                I do not think they need to be rounded up and executed. I’m not losing my mind over it. But I do think they committed crimes – I believe that if you or I drove that way toward a normal bus, we would be arrested and lose our licenses and face heavy fines and probable jail time. I do believe that, if someone did this to Trump, you and others would be losing your minds over it. I do believe that, because this was directed toward someone you dislike, you find it a “harmless prank” rather than dangerous and illegal harassment. And I do believe that if it were against Trump, the Secret Service would have (rightfully) obliterated any vehicle approaching too closely.

                I think, if it’s an unacceptable behavior toward the President, it’s an unacceptable behavior toward anyone running for office.

                And I further think that I can decry looters without stipulating that the entirety of BLM and “antifa” are malign evildoers. And I further think that one need not affect the other. That I can say A is bad AND B is bad without necessarily getting worked up over either.

              • No Mathius it is the level of your ire over this incident. A level that you never approached over the left’s wrongs when they occurred. You are clearly biased but wont admit it. You have in fact supported the BLM movement despite the fact that it is built on lies perpetrated by the Ds and MSM. There is no systematic killing of blacks by police as shown by the statistics. BLM is a Marxist group using polices action as an excuse. They care not one wit for black lives or they would be cleaning up black on black murder in Chicago and other violent cities.

              • No Mathius it is the level of your ire over this incident. A level that you never approached over the left’s wrongs when they occurred.

                I can’t help ya here, buddy.

                I’m NOT worked up over this.

                I think they’re assholes and ought to be prosecuted.

                That’s pretty much to a T how I feel about looters and rioters. I feel I’ve been very clear about this and you’re inferring some kind of rage that just isn’t here.

                You are clearly biased but wont admit it.

                My friend… I really can’t help you here if you’re going to just ignore what I say and then accuse me of failing to say those things.

                You have in fact supported the BLM movement despite the fact that it is built on lies perpetrated by the Ds and MSM.

                I very much do agree that there are systemic problems involving race in this country.

                I very much do believe that Black Lives Matter.

                I very much do believe that there are problems of, shall we say, overly agressive policing involving black people that would never stant against us crackers.

                I very much do support the NOMINAL aims of the BLM movement.

                I am ambivilent and silent as to the actual implications of how they comport themselves, what the power brokers within the movement actually seek and actually do.

                I am overtly hostile toward those who would hijack the cause of equality for the aims of “black supremacy” or opportunistic rioting / looting.

                It’s kind of the same way you might be “pro Christianity” but be apathetic toward how some people implement it and overtly hostile toward its worst actors like the Westboro folks. You can be “pro Christianity” without having to marry yourself to the worst things done in its name or, in fact, even being implicitly tied to them. If you say you’re “pro Christianity” and I call you a bigot for the foced conversion of Muslims during the Spanish Inquisition, you’d rightfully look at me like I’d lost my mind.

                There is no systematic killing of blacks by police as shown by the statistics.

                I see statistics which say otherwise.

                Regardless, I can assert that there SHOULDN’T be any excessive killing of black people by the police and that police who do, say, “misbehave,” that they should be held accountable.

                BLM is a Marxist group using polices action as an excuse.

                Don’t care.

                I’m exhausted with the right’s insistence that everything they don’t like is socialism and marxism. Fuck it.

                This country NEEDS a little socialism.

                And if BLM is advocating for things I don’t like – such as rounding up white people and forcing them to apologize for their whiteness – then I object to that.

                See how – and I know this hard – I can pick and choose what I want to support?

                If the argument is “police shouldn’t murder people,” I’m on board. If the argument is “white people are evil,” I’m not on board. If you ask ten BLM members what their “goals” are, you’ll get ten different answers. I support the answer I support, I oppose the answers I oppose.

                They care not one wit for black lives

                Says you.

                Says me, they do.

                or they would be cleaning up black on black murder in Chicago and other violent cities.

                Or maybe they think that’s the job of the police? Just, you know, without occasionally murdering people in cold blood and getting away with it. (yea, yea, that’s a white guy.. shockingly I oppose murdering white people, too.)

              • A lot of BS for someone who is not angry. Thou doth protest too much.

            • How can you plan and organize when they haven’t been giving out their locations ahead of time. It’s organized only loosely. Still trying to track down video of a call to action like this when Biden/Obama visited Detroit the other day. I saw tweets going out in real time to head to Belle Isle, where the campaign location was leaked. So…organized? Very loosely via Twitter.

              • You know what, Anita? Fine.

                I accept your assertion.

                This was a… let’s call it… free-market solution.

                The People just spontaneously self-organized and turned up to do this.

                No leadership, no leadership, no governance of any kind. Just people being people.

                An idea was generated, it spread 100% organically, some other people thought it was a good idea and decided to do it, someone got on Twitter and let people know where to be, and everyone just acted completely of their own volition and without any centralized authority.

                Sound good?

                ::whistles innocently::

              • Sounds perfectly good to me. Besides…who was organizing for Biden? Bad call to hold the event at Belle Isle. From a security standpoint, it was a good call. But someone didn’t realize there was a boat parade scheduled for the Detroit River that day. Belle Isle is smack in the middle of the river. They were surrounded anyway!

              • Sounds perfectly good to me.

                Great!

                Thank you for conclusively proving that small government libertarianism is impossible and that big government is an objective necessity.

              • Wait a minute! Isn’t that a strawman? JAC! Help!!

              • Wait a minute!

                BWA HA HA HA!

                Isn’t that a strawman?

                Nope.

                JAC! Help!!

                JAC could do the trick, but the one you really want is Black Flag. (DPM could work in a pinch)

            • (Mathius wonders aloud about “stand your ground” laws as applicable to road aggression – can you shoot out the guy’s tires in self-defense? As you said, it IS Texas..but, no, I doubt that stand your ground laws would have any effect.

              It really should go without saying that, regardless of any other considerations, boxing a bus in like this is not safe behavior. Not good behavior any way you look at it. And, no criminal intent or laws broken.

              You probably do not remember the nation wide truckers strike where 18 wheelers would get side by side on all the major highways at a given time and drive the minimum posted speed. Blocked interstate highways and traffic for hundreds of miles on hundreds of highways.

              • And, no criminal intent or laws broken.

                Look, I know that I only set foot in Texas one time for about an hour to make a connecting flight… but I’m am absolutely POSITIVE that laws were broken.

                There was ABSOLUTLEY tailgating, reckless driving, and… you know what… hold on one second….

                ::Google…. dot…. com::

                Ah, first hit… here we go…

                Texas law considers aggressive driving actions, directed at an individual, to be assault and battery with a vehicle, which is illegal in Texas.

                Care to opine?

                You probably do not remember the nation wide truckers strike where 18 wheelers would get side by side on all the major highways at a given time and drive the minimum posted speed

                I do not.

                And, while something like that probably would have driven [puns are fun!] me to murder, I don’t really see the relevance.

                Doing a slowdown of this manner might be horrifically annoying, and probably constitutes a traffic violation of some sort, but isn’t really “endangering” or “harassing” or “threatening” anyone.

                They were being assholes – sure – but not being dangerous to anyone.

              • We were coming back from a fishing trip in northern WI during the gas crisis of the late ’70s and came upon a traffic jam. Before we hit the jam, cars were moving in the upper 60s to low 70s mph range, spread out and well spaced. Things were orderly. I was driving at the time so I started to pick my way through the traffic to see if I could get to the head of the problem. Traffic was doing about 50 bunched up, tailgating, changing lanes and generally more dangerous than before. On topping one hill I could see over half a mile ahead. There were 2 police cruisers driving double nickel and blocking both lanes. I exited at the next exit, pulled into a restaurant and took a break. When we got back on the rode, everything was back to normal.

              • Care to opine? Intent…..there must be intent……

              • And, while something like that probably would have driven [puns are fun!] me to murder, I don’t really see the relevance. Absolutely no relevance at all…just came to mind.

                Your idea and my idea of reckless driving is obviously different….there was no intent to do harm. No one rammed him……the actual law that was broken, if you must have one, is Texas does have minimum speed laws AND you cannot block a left lane. Even if you are driving the speed limit, you cannot block the left lane. Signs posted everywhere.

              • At any rate…..the problem was solved. From what I understand, the tour bus did not stop at the next planned event and they left immediately afterwards.

              • Question: WHY do you think that they “did not stop at the next planned event”?

              • Because they knew there would be more Trump supporters there than Biden supporters? Not good optics?

    • Biden said that they tried to run the bus off the road. He has no clue whats going on in the world.

    • We all know that the Biden campaign would not be armed, now, didn’t we?

    • Before I read everyone’s comments, I’m going to just leave this here. What say you, Mathius? I know everyone else on the left has nothing to say about it when it happens.

      https://milnenews.com/2019/06/26/complete-list-of-attacks-on-supporters-of-president-trump/

      • Well, without spending the time to go through the list item-by-item, I’ll answer:

        People who committed crimes should be arrested, duly tried, and, if convicted in a fair and honest trial by a jury of their peers, should suffer the appropriate penalties.

        I’ll wager that, like all such lists, there is a healthy mix of disingenuous inclusions or whose full context would be pertinent – these help to pad the list. I’ve seen similar lists of Trump supporter malfeasance and, while some items are certainly legitimate, others fall apart on cursory examination. So, while I make no claim as to what percentage this might be, I do accept that some (if not many or even most) are perfectly legitimate examples of what you suggest.

        And all of those people should be arrested and tried accordingly.

        ——-

        What say you, Mathius

        I say that there are pieces of shit on both sides. I draw no conclusions, either way, to suggest that one side is intrinsically worse / more violent / etc. I neither suggest that there is a worse side nor which side it might be.

        What I say is that pieces of shit are going to behave like pieces of shit.

        And pro-Trump pieces of shit will behave in unacceptable ways toward their perceived enemies.

        Likewise, pro-Biden pieces of shit will behave in unacceptable ways toward their perceived enemies.

        I will say that 99.999% of Trump supporters and Biden supporters are good and decent people with an honest disagreement.

        That in no way excuses unacceptable behavior by anyone who has engaged in it, regardless of their ideology.

        And, if in the final calculation, you were able to show that – in fact – liberals are actually the more criminally prone of the two groups, I would accept that and assert that the criminals should be arrested. But I would deny any implication that this discredits the larger “liberal movement” just as you would deny the implication that criminals on the conservative side discredit the “conservative movement.”

        Does this answer your question?

  31. Credit where it is due… Bill Barr may be a shitty AG and human being and a sycophantic today enabler, but he can rock the bagpipes.

    Gotta say… at least on par with Clinton.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      What’s the matter? Run out of TP and forced to use old dry corn cobs?

      That would at least explain your bizzare behavior, or should I say outlandish conclusions, today.

  32. A taste of winter this morning. 4 inches of fresh snow, 30 degrees with 15 mph winds gusting to 25. Tomorrow it will hit 50 degrees and stay warm for awhile.

    I will be soooooo glad when these soul sucking political ads are over with.

    Happy Election Day tomorrow.

  33. https://delawarevalleyjournal.com/stigall-pa-dems-making-their-voters-see-and-vote-red/

    I wonder how many other people feel they’ve become the new deplorables.

    • About 30% of the black voters? I’ve been following this woman for some time now. This one really had me cheering out loud.

  34. Very neat Halloween night with the moon and all…we had over 150 children hit our door……………….and guess what……not a single mask anywhere except the costumes. Neighborhood block parties everywhere……and no masks….so I guess we are like China and releasing the Kracken….

    • Meanwhile, we had a very civilized Halloween: neighbors set out tables with individual baggies at the end of their driveways. They hung back in their driveways, and the kids shouted Trick or Treat to them.

      Older kids attempting to swipe more than their share were hunted for sport.

      • Well, our neighborhood is gated……so we closed the gates and did not let outsiders in. (Last year we had problems with teenagers driving fast and stealing candy and things.) We had food trucks come into the neighborhood and set up. Adult libations were in abundant supply at various homes and we put candy in little bags as well. In fairness, we had very little contact with outsiders. Our neighborhood only has 84 houses in it any way and there is only one way in an one way out.

  35. Some music reflecting my current mood…

    The ’90s went hard sometimes.

  36. Ok. Just to get it on the official SUFA record. At the midnight rally in Florida last night, the crowd erupted….I mean loud and clear(ly)… FIRE FAUCI! FIRE FAUCI! Trump said he’d wait until a little after the election.

    • That is correct. Fauci has been a clusterf#@k from the beginning. He should join Biden in announcing his retirement.

  37. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    Bout 300 kids yesterday, a third of normal for our NON GATED COMMUNITY. Mixed bag of masked and non masked. My job was to keep them from bunching up while the wife used tongs to hand out treats. Since before the collapse of the USSR, we have had an influx of Russians into our neighborhood, now have enough who were either born here or came as children so that several are running for office. Want to see conservative? Watch them. Ditto with masks and distancing. Not cowards, not by a stretch,.

  38. You know Mathius, it isn’t that people can’t acknowledge two wrongs don’t make a right. It’s your seeming insistence that all wrongs are equivalent, so they can just be ignored as unimportant.

    • It’s your seeming insistence that all wrongs are equivalent

      The problem I’m having here is with “seeming.”

      Where I have ever given the impression that I consider all wrongs equivalent?

      It seems to me that it’s actually more or less the opposite: that is, every time I object to [bad action by the right] I get called out for my perceived lack of condemnation of [bad action by the left]. It’s people here who are drawing the equivalence, not me. I’m trying to say “this is bad” (because it is!) and what I get back is “but that other bad thing is bad and I don’t remember you condemning it even though you have repeatedly” as though the two were inextricably linked. And then I get some form of “ok, yea, you did condemn it, but I perceive and insist that you’re more worked up over this even though you have expressed otherwise and I accuse you of therefore of bias!” I simply assert “the behavior of the Trump Train is reckless endangerment and should be prosecuted” (because it is) and I get back “well you support BLM who are a bunch of Marxist rioters and looters!!1!!1” I didn’t draw that equivalence.

      As a general rule, off the cuff*, it goes like this…

      From worst to least bad:**
      1. State-sponsored violence
      2. Lethal violence (exclude self-defense)
      3. Violence
      4. Stochastic terrorism
      5. Deliberate actions which might cause death / harm
      6. Property destruction (eg riots – see also #5)
      7. Property theft (eg looting – see also #5)
      8. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

      *Please note that I make no consideration for whether the Bad Thing is perpetuated by the left or right. Bad Things are Bad because they’re Bad, not because “your side” or “my side” did them.

      **I reserve the right to update this upon further reflection.

      • A wise man would know when to shut up, but you being you must have the last 100 words.

        • A wise man would know when to shut up

          I am many things. I’m not sure “wise” is among them.

          but you being you must have the last 100 words.

          Yes.

          Though this is only forty-one words (including the quoted portions).

  39. T-Ray,

    A lot of BS for someone who is not angry. Thou doth protest too much.

    My friend… I’m just wordy.. and I try to be thorough. You really shouldn’t read into things this much. I’ve written blocks 10x this long on total nonsense I couldn’t care less about.

    A lot of BS for someone who is not angry. Thou doth protest too much.

    The other thing you should know about me is this: I have the emotional variance of a salt flat. It really takes a lot to “get a rise” out of me.

    I honestly and sincerely don’t give a shit about the Trump Train. I’m not upset. I’m not angry.

    I believe what I believe, but I don’t CARE.

    If they go free, it will be a miscarriage of justice.

    If they get arrested and tried, great.

    Either way, I’m not going to lose any sleep.

    I just don’t CARE enough to be angry.

    That doesn’t mean I can’t have opinions. But if you think I’m raging over this, brother, you’re just projecting.

    • Your actions say differently.

      • What actions?

        Frankly, I think THIS says differently.

        • Your continuous protestations. Your hiding behind all pols are bad, two wrongs don’t make a right but the fact is you do not react the same way to left wing violence which has been rampant all summer long. You use all the weasel words but your condemnations of both sides are not equivalent until someone calls you on it. Then you pull out the everyone bad line. If that does not work, you talk everyone to death until they give up.

  40. And there are the Trump supporters that are receiving letters threatening to burn their house down. But let’s complain about a Trump parade on the highway.

    ((rolls eyes))

    https://nypost.com/2020/10/20/trump-supporters-sent-letters-threatening-to-burn-down-homes/

    • Now post the rest of the story. Hint: Has to do with ACB, her background, and her rise to the Supreme Court. No need in reading anything else into it.

      • Fine. If you’re going to suck all the fun out of things, here’s a different one:

        • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

          102 cars, a new record!

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Hey Mathius. How does it feel to have voted for a guy who used his office to enrich himself and his family??? I mean direct pay for playing.

          I guess you did say you would vote for an ax murderer, so why would I think you might draw the line with absolute corruption.

          • How does it feel to have voted for a guy who used his office to enrich himself and his family???

            Well, I mean, the choice was between one guy who is using his office to enrich himself and his family and another guy who is accused of doing that.

            Sooooo……?

            I guess you did say you would vote for an ax murderer, so why would I think you might draw the line with absolute corruption.

            I hate it. Biden was choice #300,000,000. Trump was choice #320,000,000. But we live is a shitty two-party system and there are only two choices, so I chose the lesser of two evils – what else is there to do?

            Did you vote for Trump? Surely there are people you would have preferred to vote for, no?

  41. Canine Weapon says:
  42. Canine Weapon says:
  43. JAC's Daughter says:

    Also to lighten things up, just returned back to Seattle after a great father daughter fishing trip!

    blob:https://imgur.com/c55a6411-8348-4871-af29-b269bca987b6

    blob:https://imgur.com/8cb07bab-b18e-4966-baf6-a6554f81d6db

  44. ROFL 🍷

  45. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    “President” Joe Biden’s ultimate fate ……..

  46. A new thread is posted.

  47. Sudan, just now, has become the 5th Arab country in 6 weeks to normalize relationships with Israel…..

  48. So, as I understand it, drive-through voting is illegal in Texas.

    Not sure why – seems like a great idea to me – but ok. It’s illegal.

    Now Harris County went ahead and did it anyway.

    That’s bad.

    The questions are (A) should it be allowed to continue and (B) what about the votes already cast?

    (A) No. It should be stopped immediately.

    (B) They should be kept.

    Ok, fine. (B) is my opinion, and rational minds could differ on it.

    But what’s interesting is that the Republicans sued (of course they did.. and rightfully!)… but they sued after 127,000 votes had been cast, seeking to throw those votes out. This had been going on including in the primaries since July, but they waited until after more than a hundred thousand (mostly Democrats) voted and then filed to get those votes thrown out.

    Now, if they’d sued when plans were initially announced and given months of advance notice, whatever. That’s one thing.

    But why wait until after 127,000 people in a Democratic stronghold had voted and then try to throw those votes out? Hmmm…..

    Well, the Texas Supreme Court had a word to say about this. Well, actually, shockingly, they didn’t. They rejected the Republican motion without comment. The 100%-Republican court denied the request without an order or opinion. They just flat said “no.”

    You should take a moment to appreciate that that’s… unusual. Judges love to opine and to rule unanimously on something like this with zero explanation, just a flat rejection is highly interesting. For the life of me, I don’t know what it means, but it means something.

    Anyway… what’s a Republican to do? File simultaneously in Federal Court, of course! Because Republicans believe in States Rights(tm) except when they don’t. They hoped that Feds would step in and overrule their own state supreme court.

    To which the Federal judge in question – a notoriously conservative GWB appointee – rejected it because the Republicans don’t have standing (standing is always a nitpicky and technical issue). And so, lacking standing, he denied the request for injunctive relief. Because, you know, he didn’t have standing to grant it, so it’s not like he had a choice.

    But unlike his compatriots at the State Supreme Court, he had a few things to say: “Why am I just getting this case? This has been going on all summer.”

    Seems that that very conservative Republican-appointed federal judge hearing a case that would directly benefit his political ideology took issue with the fact that the Republicans waited until the last minute to try to throw out otherwise valid votes rather than filing in a timely manner. Seems he found it fishy – rather like throwing out Democratic votes was the goal and not adherence to the law. Maybe I’m reading too much into it, though.

    He further weighed in that, if he had found the plaintiffs did have standing, he would have still ruled against them “as to the voting that has already taken place,” but that he would “probably enjoin tomorrow’s votes.”

    In other words: “listen here, jerkfaces, I’m happy to uphold the law and stop people from voting in a method which is illegal according to state law, but I’m not going to let you use me as a tool to wipe out 127k otherwise valid votes because you’re playing cute games with my court.

    Now, of course, we can look forward to an appeal to SCOTUS and the Republican majority thereon.

    —————–

    Thoughts?

    • No thoughts….it was stupid and there is nothing there. There is a drive through in Houston relegated to one drive through….fine, no worries. They get checked and if they do not have the proper ID’s, no one gets to vote. Pretty simple. I do not like games and neither do most Republicans. The Texas Supreme Court is outstanding and they do not let either side play games…..no comment means….no comment. This ploy was not even worthy of comment.

%d bloggers like this: