This is one of those “Are you really that stupid or do you just think I am?” arguments. President Biden tried to blame the need to raise the federal debt limit on (you guessed it) President Trump and his “reckless tax and spending policies” that Biden claims added $8 trillion to the debt in four years.

Reality check: under the eight years of Obama/Biden, the debt doubled from $10 trillion to $20 trillion, and that was without a pandemic to deal with. They also had the first trillion-dollar deficits in history. Under Trump, the economy boomed, unemployment plummeted to record lows and there were no trillion-dollar deficits for three years. Then, China (yes, I said it) unleashed a pandemic, and the government had to spend trillions of dollars to keep the shut-down economy afloat. Democrats not only supported that spending, many complained it wasn’t nearly enough.

And now Biden actually wants us to believe that it’s Trump’s fault that we have to raise the debt limit, even as he’s pressuring Congress to pass nearly $5 trillion in additional spending.

So for the record, no, I’m not stupid enough to believe that it’s Trump’s fault we have to raise the debt limit. Are you, Mr. President? Really?

Although maybe he does believe that most Americans are stupid enough to believe that...

As Facebook’s cursed week rolled on, its stock took a deep dive on Monday, as did other tech stocks.

There were several reasons, but Facebook was hardest hit because it suffered its worst service outage ever. Its social media subsidiaries Instagram and What’s App were also out of service. For a while, not only could users not log on, but Facebook employees couldn’t access their email, and some reportedly couldn’t even get past the "smart" security systems to enter their offices. The sites were eventually restored after it was discovered to have been caused by a glitch in configuration changes that had a “cascading effect” on the way its data centers communicate. Whatever that means.

The positive news was how many people openly celebrated the welcome absence of Facebook, Instagram and What’s App from our lives, even if it was only for one blessed day. Some of them celebrated it on Twitter, not seeing the irony.

The Babylon Bee had a field day with headlines such as, “Hackers warn that if demands aren’t met, they will reactivate Facebook.” And “In major disaster for humanity, Facebook comes back online.” It’s funny because it’s true.

Years ago, “The Simpsons,” which has accurately predicted many things, like Trump becoming President, predicted what happened on Monday. You can see it here:

(Okay, technically, that was what happened when kids turned off the TV, but the results were the same.)

But in all seriousness, this outage did offer some valuable lessons, among them: we rely far too much on social media, which has some positives but a lot of negatives. Also, if it’s going to be part of our lives, then it’s a bad idea to rely on any one platform for our news or communications. We know how Facebook, Twitter and other giant platforms skew what we’re allowed to see and censor what we’re allowed to say. Then, because of their near monopolies, it’s a serious problem when they go down.

The best solution (short of government intervention that will not happen as long as Democrats are in charge and benefiting from the unfair slant) is diversification. I’m on Facebook and Twitter, but I’m also on as many other alternative platforms as possible, like Parler, and their numbers are growing. I also keep my own website, just in case.

The only advice I can give you is to have real friends, seek out reliable independent sources of information (like this newsletter), and live your life so that you wouldn’t miss Facebook or the others if they did go away. If enough people did that, their influence would dwindle and life might once again be as pleasant and peaceful as it was for a brief period on Monday.

DC Statehood

October 6, 2021

Tuesday morning, the Supreme Court shattered one more liberal dream by rejecting an appeal of a lower court ruling that D.C. residents are not entitled to voting representation in Congress. That court cited a 2000 SCOTUS ruling that the Constitution does not require that DC must have a right to vote in Congress.

DC Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton expressed deep disappointment but insisted that this ruling "has no bearing on D.C. statehood, which would give D.C. residents not only voting representation in Congress but full control over their local affairs."

I’m not a lawyer, but it seems to me that it does. The same Constitution that the SCOTUS found does not require that DC have a vote in Congress also specifically states in Article 1, Section 8, that the nation’s capital will not be part of a state nor treated as a state, but in a neutral district under the sole authority of Congress, where the representatives of all states can meet on equal footing.

Since this case shows that the SCOTUS will look to the Constitution in deciding such issues, then how can it not suggest that they will bar DC statehood, just as the Constitution does?

"Changed circumstances"

October 6, 2021

Citing “changed circumstances,” the Supreme Court vacated a district court ruling that the Trump White House couldn’t use Pentagon funds to build a border wall. The SCOTUS also ordered the notoriously leftwing 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider its ruling upholding the original district court decision.

Trump had declared the porous border a national emergency, but on his first day in office, President Biden halted border wall construction, calling it a waste of money (it’s a microscopic fraction of the money he’s pushing to spend, BTW) “that diverts attention from genuine threats to our homeland security.”

It’s not clear what the SCOTUS means by “changed circumstances.” Are they referring simply to the change in Administrations rendering the case moot, or that the change in the situation at the border has made it clear this is a genuine emergency? I’m not a legal scholar so the only thing I can say with certainty is that the #1 genuine threat to our homeland security at the border is President Biden.

A clear difference

October 6, 2021

The Washington Times looked at catch-and-release figures from our Southern border and found that in August 2020, under Trump, Border Patrol agents made 47,282 arrests. More than 90% were immediately expelled, 6.6% were put into a speedy deportation or removal process, and only 10, effectively a rate of 0%, were caught and released at the border.

In August 2021, under Biden, agents made 195,558 apprehensions. About 47% were expelled, 7% were put into the speedy deportation process, and the rest either caught and released, or caught, turned over to ICE and given notices to appear in court – which effectively means they were released.

That tallies up to a one-year increase in catch-and-release of illegal immigrants of over 430,000 percent!

Yet when criticized for this disaster, the Biden Administration has started hilariously complaining that Republicans aren’t offering any constructive ideas on how to deal with the border crisis. Okay, how about this?

Reinstate the Trump border security policies that were working fine before Biden reversed all of them and singlehandedly caused the border crisis. Is that constructive enough? And speaking of constructive, he could also finish constructing the border wall.

Glad that I could help.

IMO: A shocking violation

October 6, 2021

This is an outrage and in my opinion a shocking violation of the Hippocratic Oath. The Colorado health system UCHealth has reversed an earlier approval for a life-saving kidney transplant for a woman in stage five renal failure because she and the donor are both unvaccinated for COVID. She was told she’ll be removed from the transplant list if she didn’t take the vaccine.

Earlier, she was told that the vaccine would not be a prerequisite for her surgery, and she’s willing to sign a waiver absolving the hospital of any responsibility, but that’s not good enough. The hospital says contracting COVID raises the mortality risk for transplant patients, so apparently, they’re willing to let her go without a kidney and die for certain in order to slightly lower her risk of dying. She’s now scrambling to find a hospital outside Colorado that will do the surgery.

Recently, late night host Jimmy Kimmel proposed that hospitals should turn away unvaccinated people and let them die. Now, we’re seeing that shocking proposal being put into effect. Incidentally, this was the same Jimmy Kimmel who tearfully promoted Obamacare by declaring that medical care was a human right. If so, then are hospitals and the government now deciding who qualifies as human?

"Imminent Threat"

October 6, 2021

When the president of the National School Board Association sent a letter to President Biden, urging him to use federal law enforcement to deal with the “imminent threat” of parents showing up at school board meetings to protest their kids being forced into draconian COVID restrictions and indoctrinated with pornographic sexual content and racist “Critical Race Theory,” many Americans rightly reacted with fury and dismay. Public school bureaucrats have no divine right to decide how they will treat other people’s children or what they’ll teach them, especially if it’s controversial leftist propaganda that parents don’t want polluting their children’s minds.

In fact, in Virginia, Democrat gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe’s campaign took a big stumble when he sided with these educrats in a debate, declaring, “I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach.” Problem: that right is actually codified into state law, which he should know, having been Governor before (State code section 1-240.1: “A parent has a fundamental right to make decisions concerning the upbringing, education, and care of the parent’s child.”) Even Democrat ex-Gov. Doug Wilder slapped him down, saying, “If parents don’t have a say-so in terms of their kids’ education, then who does?”

We all know the left’s answer to that question: they believe the government owns your kids, the same way it owns every penny you earn but is generous enough to let you keep a few of them.

Anyway, do you know who didn’t give that outrageous letter the quick trip to the circular file that it deserved? Attorney General Merrick Garland, who announced that the FBI and the Biden “Justice” Department will begin holding meetings with federal, state and local law enforcement to discuss ways to combat this “disturbing trend” of parents refusing to let their children be brainwashed with leftist garbage. He didn’t exactly put it that way, of course, but I cut to the chase.

Garland said in a statement, "Threats against public servants are not only illegal, they run counter to our nation’s core values. Those who dedicate their time and energy to ensuring that our children receive a proper education in a safe environment deserve to be able to do their work without fear for their safety."

That’s funny, I thought the term “public servant” meant they serve the public, not the other way around. Also, America’s greatest core value is freedom of speech.

To be clear: it’s important to remain civil even when you’re justifiably angry. Nobody should express their anger at school boards with threats and intimidation. FYI to AG Garland: that also applies to BLM and Antifa protesters. But it’s reasonable to assume that with this massive effort to start “policing” and monitoring parental speech, the goal is not to prevent real threats and violence but to intimidate parents into being afraid to speak up at public meetings. It’s the same method that’s been used to intimidate Trump supporters into being afraid of expressing their honest opinions on social media. They know “Big Brother is watching you.”

So keep showing up at public meetings to express your opposition, but do it civilly. And most importantly, show up to all local elections and VOTE THESE BUMS OUT. The left has figured out that the way to destroy America is from the bottom up. So they show up for local elections, where voters have gotten complacent and assume it doesn't matter whether they vote or not. This is how you get city councils that defund the police and Soros-funded district attorneys who release criminals the prosecute people who defend themselves from criminals, and yes, school boards that push anti-Americanism, critical race theory and radical sexual politics. If you want to get rid of them, show up at the meetings, but better yet, show up at your local election polls.

Meanwhile, with every new action taken by Merrick Garland, we see what a debt of gratitude America owes to Sen. Mitch McConnell for blocking Obama from putting him onto the Supreme Court. Far from the moderate, centrist jurist he was touted as being, he’s proving daily that he has no qualms about treating the Bill of Rights like toilet paper and abusing his powers to impose the will of the authoritarian left. I am counting the minutes until 2024, when a new Republican President has him escorted from the DOJ, hopefully never to hold any position of public trust again.

I’m very glad to see that Attorney General Merrick Garland’s plan to engage federal, state and local law enforcement to intimidate parents who protest the actions of leftist schools boards is being met with the overwhelming furious backlash it deserves. One commentator said this might be the straw that broke the camel’s back (sorry for triggering any animal lovers) for the Democrats’ dwindling hopes in the midterm elections. This is such an outrageous assault on the most basic rights of all citizens to engage in free speech and protest, and of all parents to have a say in how their children are educated, that the outrage cuts across all political and racial lines.

To be clear: I'm not defending anyone who makes actual physical threats against school board members. But Garland cited no examples of actual threats to justify this. Instead, his statement included vague and overly broad terms such as “harassment” and “intimidation,” which signals that this is really an abuse of power designed to chill free speech. He also offered no justification for literally making a federal case out of these hypothetical threats, which are already covered by laws and police on the local level. The only reasons to federalize this are to assert more control in picking targets and to ramp up the intimidation factor (ironically, Garland is the one who seems to be guilty of attempting to harass and intimidate people.)

Here’s a round-up of just some of the reactions to this Orwellian abuse of power:

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis blasted Garland for “weaponizing the DOJ by using the FBI to pursue concerned parents and silence them through intimidation,” adding, “Florida will defend the free speech rights of its citizens and will not allow federal agents to squelch dissent.” His spokeswoman also called it “despicable and un-American,” saying, “Florida law enforcement is perfectly capable of responding to crimes in Florida, and we have never heard the FBI suggest otherwise. However, disagreement is not harassment. Protest is not terrorism, unless it involves rioting, looting, and assault, like some of the left-wing protests of summer 2020.”

Speaking of that, while the DOJ and FBI busy themselves with surveilling Trump voters and intimidating concerned parents, murders took the biggest spike in history in 2020, nearly 30 percent (thanks, all you police-defunding blue state Governors, mayors and city councils!)…

And while the FBI is ignoring that, they’re also doing virtually nothing about actual violent terrorists and anarchists like Antifa, as long as they’re on the left.

Facebook's very bad week

October 6, 2021

Facebook is having one of its worst weeks ever, and that has some people absolutely delighted.

It kicked off Sunday when “Sixty Minutes” interviewed Frances Haugen, the whistleblower who exposed thousands of pages of internal documents. They showed that people inside Facebook were complaining about how it allows misinformation, incitements of violence and hate speech to spread, and that they were aware that Instagram is harmful to users, particularly girls, but are pushing to introduce a version aimed at children anyway. Here’s that interview on YouTube:

It’s interesting, but notice how CBS illustrated every reference to “misinformation,” hate speech or violence by showing Trump supporters and repeating the ever-more-shaky claim that the January 6th Capitol violence was an “insurrection.” Note to “Sixty Minutes”: social media sites are also used by leftists to spread hate speech and to organize violence. Maybe you missed all the riots, looting, arson and attacks on citizens, police and government buildings and monuments last year by violent leftist radicals like Antifa, but some of us are old enough to remember way back to 2020.

It makes me wonder how much of this pious concern about Facebook’s internal post vetting and “fact-checking” is really just about the left not wanting people on the right to have free speech. After all, we’ve known since the First Amendment was written that some people would use it to express bad or incorrect ideas, but that would be fixed by challenging them with more free speech. I’m not ready to trade the free marketplace of ideas for a Facebook-created algorithm that decides who gets to speak.

Haugen will also be testifying to the Senate this morning, where she reportedly plans to accuse Facebook of tearing societies apart and compare it to big tobacco, and not just because Mark Zuckerberg has blown so much smoke in Congressional hearings.