San Francisco voters elected a far-left district attorney who promised “progressive justice reform,” and they’re getting it good and hard. Releasing the same career criminals to victimize citizens again and again…not prosecuting nonviolent crimes of less than $950, which has incentivized gangs of shoplifters to openly loot store shelves and drive stores to close…kowtowing to drug addicts and homeless people until the streets are filled with garbage, needles and feces...

But the San Francisco Chronicle reports that city leaders and residents who are now living in constant fear are baffled over what could possibly be done about all this? Maybe the answer is tolerance…of criminals:

“Should they tolerate a high level of burglaries as a downside of city living and focus on barricading their homes? Should people who are repeatedly accused of stealing be targeted with rehabilitation services or incarcerated so they can’t commit more crimes?”

Supervisor and “justice reform” advocate Rafael Mandelman is frustrated. The city’s leftist leaders claim that jailing criminals “fails to address the underlying factors” such as poverty and addiction (which they address by giving junkies free heroin needles.) Speaking of two constant repeat offenders, Mandelman said, “It raises tricky questions about incarceration. Because so far we’ve been unable to release (them) without them committing more crimes. And the question for reformers is, ‘What do we do with someone like that?’”

Yes, ‘tis a puzzlement. It’s a riddle wrapped in a mystery wrapped in an enigma. What can you possibly do with criminals who just keep committing more crimes every time you let them out of jail? Hmmm...

This is your brain on leftism. And you thought heroin was a terrible drug!



p>Did anyone there who’s aghast at the poor criminals having to live behind bars ever consider that if people have to barricade themselves in their homes to be safe, then all the law-abiding citizens will be living behind bars? And they did nothing to deserve it. Well, other than vote for leftist morons to destroy their once-great city.

Last month, Derek Hunter at wrote a great article about how he used to feel sorry for people suffering in Democrat-run cities, but he just can’t empathize anymore because “They vote for this, they elect these idiots who implement these asinine plans and policies.”

And they just keep doing it again and again, even as everything slides deeper into the sewer. One of his many examples was San Francisco, where as bad as it’s gotten, “not a single elected Democrat in the city (fears) anyone taking their job, outside of the rare primary challenge.” And those primary challengers are usually even further left.

But I’m a little more optimistic. Hunter assumed that Virginia would elect yet another Democrat and keep careening over the leftward cliff, but the voters finally rose up and said, “Enough!” Maybe someday, even San Franciscans will get fed up with dodging criminals, homeless mental cases, addicts, drug needles and feces and actually force themselves to vote for some Republicans to save their city. Maybe they’ll finally stop playing out Einstein’s definition of insanity over and over.

I will maintain hope, but I won’t hold my breath. Unless I’m forced to visit one of these poop-covered, garbage-strewn, urine-soaked, Democrat-run cities. Then I’ll definitely be holding my breath.

Biden does a 180 on Veterans

November 11, 2021

I don’t want to politicize Veterans Day, but there is too much in the news at the moment to ignore, relating to the sudden 180 that’s occurred in the relationship between our service members and those in command.

Last Veterans Day, our service members still had a Commander in Chief who had made their welfare a top concern of his Administration. He constantly praised our troops, went out of his way to show respect for them, and made fixing the shameful conditions at VA hospitals one of his first priorities. He was also rightly proud of being the first President in decades who started no new wars. He was willing to use the military when necessary, but he made sure their hands weren’t tied. He respected that these heroic men and women were willing to put their lives on the line for the USA, and he felt it his duty not to make them take that risk for less than vital reasons, and to give them every advantage to make sure they came home safely.

All that changed with the 2020 election. Since Biden came into office, it seems as if he and his staff and top military leaders are more concerned with waging war on our own troops than in ensuring we can defeat our enemies abroad. They treat members of the military with suspicion and hostility, sifting through their social media pages and treating those who express conservative views as worse threats to America than ISIS. Service members are threatened with dishonorable discharges and loss of the benefits they put their lives and limbs on the line to earn, just because they object to taking a vaccine they don’t want (even religious objections are not respected.)

This Administration thinks that illegal immigrants who don’t like the way they were treated when they were detained for breaking our immigration laws deserve $450,000 in compensation, 4-1/2 times more than Gold Star families receive when a loved one is killed in the line of duty. They also continue to spend outrageous amounts of tax money to shelter, support and transport illegal immigrants, even as homeless veterans live on the streets and go without needed medical care.

Perhaps worst of all, Biden’s botched pullout from Afghanistan needlessly cost the lives of 13 brave service members. Yet to this day, the only military person who’s faced any consequences for that was a Marine Lt. Colonel who was jailed and discharged for calling on his superior officers to show some accountability.

So yes, there are many, many reasons why I am counting the minutes until I can vote to throw all of these people out of office. But as I’m checking the boxes on the ballot, I can assure you that the #1 thought in my mind will be, “This is for the veterans.”

A little bird told me that yet another organization has gone “woke,” and its original mission appears to have been subverted by the recognition of the more important need to control the climate and achieve social justice.

It’s the National Audubon Society.

Write a letter to the Audubon Society expressing concern about the millions of songbirds destined to be killed by the dramatic expansion of wind farms along our coastlines, and you’ll get a response that knocks you sideways like a whirling turbine blade. It will come as a form letter that speaks first not about birds, but about the need for wind energy and lots of it.

“Thank you for reaching out to the National Audubon Society,” the letter reads. “Audubon strongly supports wind energy that is sited and operated properly to avoid, minimize and mitigate effectively for the impacts on birds, other wildlife, and the places they need now and in the future. To that end, we support the development of wind energy to achieve 100% clean energy.

“Wind power is an important source of renewable, carbon-free energy that is critical to replacing and reducing emissions from fossil fuels such as coal, oil and natural gas that cause warming of our planet.”

They explain: “Top scientific experts...agree that the effects of climate change are happening now and will get worse if warming is not limited to 1.5 degrees C. ...Beyond the climate impacts, wind power also avoids air pollution caused by fossil fuel combustion that disproportionately affects low-income communities and communities of color.”

I am not kidding. That part of the sentence is highlighted in bold and includes a link to a page on the NAACP website. Clicking that link got us a screen that said “Page Not Found” but that included a link to the NAACP home page so we could “get back in the fight for civil rights and social justice.”

“Ensure that Black lives are a priority in all spaces,” it said. “Help make racial equity a reality.” It called for fighting “police brutality, COVID-19, and voter suppression” and working “to disrupt inequality, dismantle racism, and accelerate change in key areas including criminal justice, health care, education, climate, and the economy.”

We saw that it’s time to “Build Back Black” with legislation designed to “address historic issues of structural and systemic racism by making key investments in several areas that have a profound positive impact on Black communities around the country. It is time to prioritize the needs and interests of Black America, while also addressing long-standing issues around the racial wealth gap and systemic racism.”

I have to say, we were confused. We kept looking for something, anything about the needs and interests of birds, even blackbirds, but there was nothing. Why had the Audubon Society sent us to the NAACP website to fight for “racial equity”? Do bird lives matter? They seem to be way down the list of priorities for the Audubon Society, who appear to be endorsing the “Build Back Better” bill.

Perhaps they’ve been listening to Nancy Pelosi talking about climate being “the existential threat of our time,” though Nancy was talking about the disproportionate effect on women. (We linked to this yesterday but wouldn’t want you to miss it.)

But we turned up something else that might explain the Audubon Society's current focus on racial equity. They're atoning for the fact that their founder, ornithologist and illustrator John James Audubon, owned slaves. An affiliated group, the Washington DC-area Audubon Naturalist Society, is even changing its name. The national organization hasn't announced plans to change its name, but we won't' be surprised when they do.

Anyway, the Audubon letter goes on to explain that because only about 7 percent of our energy needs are currently supplied by wind power, “the U.S. will have to dramatically ramp up deployment of wind energy technology, but some of the most obvious and easily accessible places have already been taken. As a result, finding places to site wind energy that minimizes risk to birds will be increasingly difficult.” So at least they plan to be involved in the “siting process.”

Oh, but wind energy is going to “help birds on a global scale,” they say, by “curbing climate change.” They are correct to say that warming (note: cooling as well) will affect birds’ habitat and range and could certainly endanger them. But they don’t take into account the other scientific experts who say that, regardless of whether or not the planet is warming and whether that has much to do with human activity, America could go to 100 percent renewable energy tomorrow and not significantly affect global temperatures. We could end up with “bird Cuisinarts” up and down our coastlines –- ruining them for birds and people –- and from sea to shining sea and still not be able to control the climate, certainly not with nations such as China actually increasing their use of coal. (China has suddenly said it’s going to work with the U.S. on climate, but we’ll believe that when we see it. Activities will reportedly be “self-policed.”),than%20three%20times%20the%20capacity%20permitted%20in%202019.

China is also having a huge negative environmental impact in Africa.

The Audubon letter doesn’t discuss nuclear energy as an alternative, which would do much more to lessen our dependence on fossil fuels without knocking millions of birds out of the sky.

They acknowledge that wind power facilities can harm birds through “direct collisions,” habitat destruction, disturbance and displacement, and destruction of “important ecological links.” “Placing wind projects in the path of migratory routes makes this problem worse, especially for larger turbine blades that may reach up into the average flight zone of birds that migrate at night. As estimated 140,000 to 500,000 bird deaths occur per year due to turbine collisions, which is substantial, but significantly less than deaths caused by outdoor cats and building collisions.”

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service - Migratory Bird Program | Conserving America's Birds

But they have just said that wind power currently provides only about 7 percent of our power and that we will need dramatically more wind turbines. They also just said that as more wind turbines are placed, it gets harder and harder to find new locations that won’t impact migratory birds. Half a million birds today could be half a billion before we can generate enough wind and other renewable energy to take the place of fossil fuels, if that is even possible.

The letter goes on to talk about some ways Audubon can approach “advocacy in the siting and operation of wind turbines,” but it's obvious that they won't be trying to modify the scale of these projects.

They do mention one case in which they opposed a 2013 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service rule that offered 30-year permits to kill and injure Bald and Golden Eagles (protected species), and a judge did overturn that rule. Score one for the birds in a contest that, if wind turbines continue multiplying, they are destined to lose. In its quest to be counted among the “woke,” the National Audubon Society isn't nearly woke enough to that.

Trump request is denied

November 10, 2021

Not surprisingly, a federal judge denied an executive privilege request by former President Trump to block the House’s January 6th Committee from having access to White House records. They claim to want to see if Trump helped plan the January 6th “insurrection,” and they’ll be able to get the records Friday, but Trump’s lawyers plan to appeal. Details are here:

Trump accuses the Committee, which is so stacked against him that Nancy Pelosi took the unprecedented move of refusing to accept the Republicans chosen by the House Minority Leader to be on it, of wanting to see White House records and notes of private, classified conversations with advisers to go on a fishing expedition for anything they can leak to smear him.

He called on the Biden White House to defend executive privilege, but they refused. Some legal experts say that's a very short-sighted decision. We’ve already learned that “Contradict Trump” is their prime directive, and any resultant damages don’t matter, whether they’re from opening the border, shutting down oil production or undermining the Presidential right to executive privilege that I imagine Biden will be heavily relying upon himself in the near future.

Incidentally, to show you the politics-uber-alles attitude of this Administration, White House counsel Dana Remus argued that the documents requested by the committee could "shed light on events within the White House on and about January 6 and bear on the Select Committee's need to understand the facts underlying the most serious attack on the operations of the Federal government since the Civil War."

Really? FYI to the White House counsel: Here’s some info on the actual bombing of the Senate in 1983 by leftwing radicals known as the “Armed Resistance Unit,” who also plotted to kill Henry Kissinger:

And here’s the media-suppressed story of the Bernie Bro who nearly murdered Rep. Steve Scalise in a shooting spree at a Congressional softball practice, where he’d hoped to kill enough Republicans to alter the balance of power in the House. He had a record of violent anti-Republican and anti-Trump media posts, including on a Facebook page called “Trump Is Not My President.”

Both of those things sound like more serious attacks on “the operation of the federal government” than January 6th. And like the Civil War itself, they were launched by Democrats.

Ever since day one of President Biden taking office, a debate has been raging over whether his Administration is malicious or just almost supernaturally incompetent. Nobody wants to believe that a President (or more likely, his staffers who are really pulling the strings) would deliberately inflict so much damage on America. But could anyone possibly be dumb enough to think that throwing open the borders or shutting down the domestic fuel industry or pulling troops out of Afghanistan BEFORE evacuating our people, etc. etc. etc., could be anything other than disastrous?

Then, just as you’ve almost convinced yourself that they couldn't really hate America, they’re just really terrible at their jobs, they give you more evidence that it’s the former. Meet Cornell University law professor Saule Omarova, Biden’s nominee to head the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the most powerful and important regulator of banks, financial institutions and the US dollar.

She brings to the job such a long history of hostility to the banking industry and the established system that keeps our economy stable that it’s sort of like appointing Lex Luthor to oversee Superman. Her longtime dream is to kill the private banking industry and create a “National Investment Authority,” an independent government agency that would “centralize and nationalize strategic spending,” replacing the free market economy with a controlled economy, like that of China.

She’s praised the old Soviet Union for not having a “gender pay gap,” and she also recently told a conference that her NIA would direct capital toward “green” energy companies and away from the oil, gas and coal industries, because “we want them to go bankrupt if we want to tackle climate change.”

This is the type of idiotic blather that George Orwell called so absurd that only an intellectual could believe it. FYI: some European nations tried replacing reliable energy sources with insufficient and unstable alternative sources, and they ended up freezing in the winter and dying of heat stroke in the summer. And it could happen again, because leftists never learn from their mistakes, since their disasters are always someone else’s fault.

These are the type of grandiose, revolutionary pipe dreams that hothouse academics have been pushing for years, except the only places they actually work are in theory and in faculty lounges. Previous Administrations were smart enough to keep them there, but Biden actually wants to put one of these bubble-dwelling revolutionaries in charge of our money and our energy supply. That’s why it’s hard to believe anyone could have America’s best interests at heart and do that out of simple stupidity.

Omarova’s ideas are so out there, and would clearly be catastrophic to America’s economy and the free market, that even some Democrats on the Senate Banking Committee, including Sens. Jon Tester, Kyrsten Sinema and Mark Warner, are reportedly reluctant to confirm her. Surely, Biden can find someone better to deal with America’s money and energy interests. If not, try throwing a dart at the Dallas phone book.