Previous month:
April 2020
Next month:
June 2020


Diffuse, distract, disassemble is the new deep state battle plan now that undeniable truths are being revealed from documents and sworn testimony…


FBI Director Wray orders internal review of Flynn case

FBI Director Christopher Wray on Friday ordered an internal probe into the bureau’s handling of the case against Michael Flynn, who briefly served as President Trump’s first national security adviser.

[OCS: Why now?

Especially after knowing the John Durham, the Connecticut U.S. Attorney, was tasked by the Attorney General to conduct a thorough review of the matters surrounding the Russia Collusion hoax which encompasses the domestic spying and FBI malfeasance issues.

Especially after stonewalling the production of individuals and documents to those outside of the FBI.

Especially after knowing that any investigation is limited to current employees.

Especially when there is no subpoena power to compel testimony from other individuals or agencies

And especially since the end result is a report with only the possibility of duplicative criminal referrals to the Department of Justice --whose substantive probe is nearly complete.

What's the point of the fruitless exercize?

There can only be a few answers: one, Christopher Wray is trying to deflect claims of incompetence or loyalty to the so-called “deep state” to protect himself and his job; two, to diffuse the findings of the Durham report; and three, to stymie any additional congressional oversight using the old canard of an “ongoing investigation.”]

The review will look into whether any current FBI employees engaged in misconduct and if any policies were violated, the bureau said in a statement.

[OCS: Is this a joke? Most of the worst actors have been fired or resigned. Sworn testimony and documents make misconduct painfully obvious and another investigation – especially an impotent one run by the very agency responsible for the misconduct – is worthless.  Given the degree of malfeasance and criminal conduct at the FBI, no findings will be credible.]

The FBI’s Inspection Division will handle the review, but its discipline authority is limited to current employees. Many of the key players in the Flynn case, including former FBI Director James Comey, Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and agent Peter Strzok have long since left the bureau.

As for former employees, the FBI does not have the ability to take any disciplinary action,” the statement said.

[OCS: A worthless charade – Kabuki Theater.]

Also Friday, the FBI revealed that two agents outside the beltway had been provided to U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen, who was tapped by Attorney General William P. Barr earlier this year to investigate the Flynn case.

[OCS: Since the U.S. Attorney has subpoena power and can haul individuals before a grand jury, you can bet this was not a voluntary move. It is possible, if not probable, that these agents will be given transactional immunity or a plea deal for “cooperating” since they may be key players in the misconduct.

The two agents are likely to be Bill Preistap, former FBI head of counterintelligence, and agent Joe Pientka.]

Mr. Wray said the Inspection Division will coordinate its review with Mr. Jensen’s efforts.

[OCS: a face-saving statement as the entire FBI is compelled by law to cooperate with the investigation or face criminal charges.]

The review comes as the president’s Republican allies have demanded Mr. Wray take stronger actions to clean up the FBI.

Some of the harshest attacks have come from lawmakers close to the president who’ve demanded to know why the FBI withheld secret evidence that would have exonerated Flynn.

“I think the FBI needs to show more energy in terms of solving some of these internal problems and I don’t know why it took so long to get the information out about the Flynn case,” Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican, told reporters this month.

[OCS: Wray is a member of the deep state and his actions are self-serving. He is the third worst FBI Director after Comey and Hoover. As for the tough-talking Graham, he is impotent and likely to side with the opposition. All sound and fury – signifying nothing by a distraction on behalf of the opposition.]

Even Mr. Trump has questioned his FBI director, telling Fox News “the jury is out” on Mr. Wray. <Source>

[OCS: I say fire the miscreant and start with a new Director chosen by a search committee headed by Attorney General Barr who will then make recommendations to Donald Trump. ]

Bottom line...

Wray is as worthless as that other experienced schmuck, Robert Mueller.

We are so screwed.


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell


In a conversation with nationally syndicated radio host “Charlamagne Tha God” (Lenard Larry McKelvey) on The Breakfast Club, Joe Biden questioned the host’s motives and blackness…

Charlamagne: “It’s a long way until November, we’ve got more questions.”

Joe Biden: “You’ve got more questions. I’ll tell you, if you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or for Trump, then you ain’t black.” <Source>


Heaven forbid that hyphenated-Americans disappear and only Americans remain … what will the progressive socialist democrats do?

Lest we forget, the Democrat Party was the party of racism, slavery. segregation, Jim Crow, the KKK – and promises the same things over and over without ever delivering anything except “walking around money” to certain members of the Black clergy. The inner cities remain cesspools of poverty, illiteracy, disease, and crime in spite of the billions flowing into the pockets of the progressive socialist democrats who govern these areas and their special interest friends.

Question: What do you call twenty people, including three children, killed in the inner cities? Answer: Saturday. It’s no joke. The Democrats do nothing until election time. Time to reassess your priorities.

We are so screwed.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell



There is no place to hide…

With the steady drip of previously classified documents and the soon to be released report from John H. Durham, the U.S. attorney in Connecticut, there is no place for members of the Obama Administration to hide from Spygate and its subsequent coverup.

It is all about to be revealed. Yes, the Obama Administration, under White House direction, did attempt to interfere in the 2016 election. Yes, the Obama Administration, under White House direction did engage in domestic spying on various Americans, the full extent which remains unknown but is thought to include individuals in the Trump orbit, Members of Congress, and members of the media. Yes, members of the Hillary Clinton cadre did attempt to introduce anti-Trump dirt into the 2016 campaign with the sole purpose of damaging the Trump candidacy. And, yes, the spying and cover-up continued during the Trump presidency.

The game has changed…

There will no longer be an attempt to deny what the documents and testimony reveal. The game has changed to protect the Supreme Leader, Barack Hussein Obama at all costs and to preserve as much as his legacy as possible. A questionable legacy of scandal, failed programs, and a disastrously negligent foreign policy.

Obama’s SODDI defense…

In a classic “Some Other Dude Did It” defense, it appears that Obama and his cadre of corrupt operatives plan to lay the blame for everything at the clay feet of former FBI Director James Comey and diffuse the blame among "everybody else". Especially since Comey admitted in a television interview with MSNBC's Nicole Wallace that he did not do everything “by the book.”

NICOLE WALLACE: You look at this White House now and it's hard to imagine two FBI agents hanging out in the Situation room. How does that happen?

JAMES COMEY: I sent them. Something we, I probably wouldn't have done or gotten away with in a more organized investigation -- a more organized administration... The Bush administration, the Obama administration... The FBI wanted to send agents into the White House itself to interview a senior official, you would work through the White House Counsel. There would be discussions, approvals, who would be there.  And, I thought it is early enough, let's just send a couple of guys over.

Everybody, even up to Hillary Clinton, is now expendable if it protects former President Obama and what remains of his legacy.

Why is this a plausible resolution to the worst scandal in the history of American politics?

There is no chance that former President Obama, former Vice President Biden, and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will be further investigated, prosecuted, and sent to prison for various crimes – including obstruction of justice. The American people will have to be content with the prosecution of lesser individuals from the Obama Administration. Knowing the top people will not be held accountable, except in the court of public opinion and by the historians, the value of certain facts that could have been used as bargaining chips is greatly diminished. Even if revelations led directly to Obama, so what?

The fix – or should I say “fixer” is in …

For even the most casual observer of the Obama era machinations and scandals, they all appear to have one thing in common: the presence of Obama’s “Fixer,” attorney Kathryn Ruemmler.  Ruemmler who served as President Obama’s long-term White House Counsel has made a come-back. This time to defuse the issues created by former Ambassador and general-purpose liar Susan Rice’s last-minute ass-covering “by the book” email written to herself on January 20, 2017, when Donald Trump was being inaugurated, 

The email purports to memorialize then-President Obama’s instructions to the individuals in a January 5, 2017 meeting where Obama specifically ordered the individuals present to do everything “by the book.” What makes this meeting so interesting is that many of those alleged to be involved in perpetrating the domestic spying on American citizens included such notables as then-President Obama, then-Vice President Joe Biden, then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, then-CIA Director John Brennan, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and fired former FBI Director James Comey.

No, the timing of the self-serving email was not suspicious…

Email Written Upon Advice of Obama’s White House Counsel

“Rice’s attorney and former Obama White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler wrote the letter to Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I. on Feb. 23, 2018.  According to Ruemmler, Rice wrote the letter  “upon the advice of the White House Counsel’s Office” and didn’t get to it until Inauguration Day, 2017 because “that was the first opportunity she had to do so.”


So other than to absolve Barack “by the book” Obama and name the potential targets for prosecution, the letter is now worthless.

Editorial cartoonist Michael Ramirez nails it…


Bottom line…

It is more than likely that Brennan, Clapper, and Comey will be portrayed as the primary drivers of the conspiracy. Other significant players, especially in the FBI, DOJ, and Department of State and those involved with the Steele Dossier are likely to be given the opportunity to plea out and be given minimal sentences.

And, so much depends on who wins the House of Representatives in 2020 – provided that the GOP can retain the Presidency and a Senate majority large enough to overcome the drag of RINOs like Mitt Romney.

If the progressive socialist democrats prevail in the House and Trump is reelected, look for continuing resistance. If the GOP takes the House, look for little more than censuring Representative Adam Schiff because the GOP historically is afraid to wield power. Massive spending will continue with marginal cuts around the edge. Look for more corrupt and dissolute candidates in 2024.

There is no doubt that Obama will blame everyone else and will wind up being the most corrupt President in history.

We are so screwed.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell


Many progressives believe that President Donald Trump is the devil incarnate or at least an uncouth buffoon that should be dismissed as a fool and buried under the sands of time. They dismiss the fact that it was Donald Trump., written off by the mainstream media and the political elites of both parties, that went on to become the President of the United States.

Was it a fluke, an unlikely chance occurrence, or an especially incredible piece of luck? Or was it that the ordinary non-elite individual voter was deeply dissatisfied with the current crop of elites proffered as candidates – corrupt, incompetent, and ill-tempered, but socially adept?

And, now the un-American progressive socialist democrats stand bare before the public. The corruption at the highest levels of the Obama Administration has been exposed. Former President Obama, as naked as the poohbah in the Emperor’s New Clothes as scandals swirls around him, repeating to the world that his administration was scandal-free.

But what scares the elites and their experts the most?


As President Trump pushes past the elites and so-called experts to rack-up wins for the American public, or to mitigate the damage caused by their foolishness, he becomes more and more attractive. Like General George S. Patton, an accomplished soldier who pushed through the swamp and emerged victorious even if he was rather unacceptable in polite society despite being a wealthy polo-playing elite himself. Donald Trump never left his Queens’ language, behavior, and mannerisms behind at he moved upward through Manhattan society. Doing business with Trump was acceptable, socializing with him when you wanted something was acceptable, but welcoming him into the elite stratosphere was unthinkable. So Trump remained an outsider, a counter-puncher, and a wealthy man with somewhat ordinary sensibilities.

Bottom line…

They need to defeat Trump before he can further embarrass his “betters.” He is likely to win re-election but will be mostly forgotten by the ruling elite after his second term. But what a second term that will be. A one-time opportunity to re-group, regain their courage, and hopefully become the party they pretend to be.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell


Tesla’s Elon Musk, a progressive icon, publishes a cryptic tweet that suggests he is recommending people take a “truth” pill …


The communists at the New York Times freak out and attempt to warn Musk off by suggesting the “truth pill” is associated with racism and prejudiced against women…


Can’t have individuals pursuing the truth, they may realize that the New York Times has been lying for years on behalf of radical progressives and attacking unbelievers…

Tesla Owners Try to Make Sense of Elon Musk’s ‘Red Pill’ Moment
A liberal status symbol now has a founder who is moving to the right.

Owning a Tesla, the luxurious electric car, is a major liberal status symbol. It signals nothing more than good taste — the perfect balance of wealth with care for fossil fuels. But the man behind the brand is crafting a very different persona online that may now prove to be a challenge for his fans.

Elon Musk, the bombastic head of Tesla and SpaceX, exhorted his 34 million Twitter followers on Sunday to “take the red pill.” The comment was quickly embraced by his followers, including Ivanka Trump, President Trump’s elder daughter, who announced that she had taken the pill already.

The exchange referred to a scene from “The Matrix,” the 1999 science fiction action film. But the meaning of “red pill,” and the idea of taking it, have since percolated in online forums and become a deeply political metaphor. And with Mr. Musk and Ms. Trump, the phrase is now lodged more fully into the mainstream

So Tesla owners are having to grapple with a car that carries a few new connotations.

[OCS: Only in the pages of the New York Times would a reporter attempt to rebrand an expensive electric luxury vehicle for virtue-signaling progressives as a symbol of hate because of a single Tweet by the vehicle’s manufacturer CEO.]

“Honestly, Musk is becoming a liability and the Tesla board needs to seriously consider ousting him,” wrote Markos Moulitsas, author of “The Resistance Handbook: 45 Ways to Fight Trump.” “And I say that as a proud owner of a Tesla and a SpaceX fanatic who truly appreciates what he’s built.”

[OCS: Notice the use of a third-party to suggest than an individual’s professional life should be destroyed because he dared to Tweet a cryptic message. The fact that this virtue-signaling nobody is commenting on a man whose accomplishments are literally out-of-this-world only points to the moral bankruptcy of the New York Times.]

So what is the red pill?

In “The Matrix,” the movie’s hero, Neo, played by Keanu Reeves, is given the option to take a pill that lets him see the truth.

[OCS: The “truth” is the last thing you will find in the pages of the New York Times. The paper who minimized the Holocaust and gave cover to Stalin’s mass murder of Ukrainian people. The paper’s editorial board is so invested in the Democrat Party that they could be the media arm of the Democratic National Committee. Speaking of truth – they have been publishing Clinton fables for years – even preceding those fables of the Obama Administration.]

The world he thinks is real turns out to be an entertaining lie; his body is actually trapped in a farm where people are being used as human batteries. Taking the blue pill would let him return to living in the ignorant but blissful lie, while taking the red pill would launch him into an arduous journey through a brutal but fulfilling reality.

[OCS: I wonder if the authors and producers of the Matrix actually considered the color of the pill to be representative of today’s political parties? The pleasant lies embraced by the Democrat “blues” and the brutal truth of the Republican ‘reds.”]

The idea of taking the red pill later grew to mean waking up to society’s grand lies. It was embraced by the right, especially by members of its youngest cohort who organized and spent their time in online forums like Reddit and 4chan.

The truth to be woken up to varied, but it ended up usually being about gender. To be red-pilled meant you discovered that feminism was a scam that ruined the lives of boys and girls. In this view, for a male to refuse the red pill was to be weak.


Red Pill forums were often filled with deeply misogynistic and often racist diatribes. The more extreme elements splintered into groups like involuntary celibates (“incels”) or male separatists (Men Going Their Own Way, or MGTOWs). Conferences like the 21 Convention and its sister convention, Make Women Great Again, sprang up to gather red-pilled men. Being red-pilled became a sort of umbrella term for all of it.


As these conversations seeped into the mainstream, pulled along by a host of other internet language from message boards to establishment Republican conversations on sites like Breitbart, the meaning broadened and got watered down. To be red-pilled can now mean being broadly skeptical of experts, to be distrustful of the mainstream press or to see hypocrisy in social liberalism.

[OCS: In a backhanded way, they have accidently told the truth. We have a right to be skeptical of “experts” – especially the ones who have been wrong so many times.

This article is proof positive why you should distrust a mainstream press that seeks to destroy individual lives because something they said or did runs counter to their political ideology.

And today’s social liberalism, in essence disguised communism, is not only hypocritical but a clear and present danger to freedom and a civil society.]

What’s going on with Elon Musk?     

Covid-19, and someone very concerned simultaneously about the environment, the economy, my kids’ and my parents’ future, this ain’t great,” said Jeff Guilfoyle, a product manager at FireEye in San Diego. “This disease is no joke, and the long-term health impacts are unknown for survivors.”

[OCS: Change the subject: make it about the Communist Chinese Coronavirus instead of the botched response by largely Democrat governors.

FireEye, you mean the company that tracked the Russian interference in our elections? As far as I know, the only people colluding with the Russians and interfering with the election were Hillary Clinton, the Democratic National Committee, and Barack Obama and his cadre of top-level intelligence, law enforcement, and State Department stooges.]

Many have implored Mr. Musk online to stop.

Raja Sohail Abbas, the chief executive of an outpatient psychiatric clinic in Allentown, Pa., wrote: “I am a Tesla owner and love the company. You have to stop being an idiot about this.”

“Tesla owner and Fan here, but this was a disappointing tweet despite the frustrations of and holdups,” added Alex Goodchild, a D.J. in Brooklyn. “Words are weapons especially when used during situations like the one we’re currently experiencing. You sound just like Trump in this tweet.”

The debate has riven the Tesla community.

[OCS: Does anyone want to abandon their Tesla over a Tweet? I think not.]

“The last two months, there’s been this polarization in the Elon Musk fan club,” said Paula Timothy-Mellon, a technology consultant who moderates that LinkedIn-based fan club, which has 22,000 members. “There are those who are believers in these California guidelines and there are those in favor of his push to re-open Tesla.”

Driving a Tesla often carries great symbolism for the owner (and observers).

If you own a Tesla, you feel you are directly connected to Elon Musk and people think that Tesla owners are directly connected to the politics of the C.E.O.,” said Sam Kelly, a Tesla owner and investor based in Spain who posts under the name SamTalksTesla.

[OCS: A Ferrari carries more prestige and social clout – but I doubt any Ferrari owner considers the union-driven communists in Italy or even knows who the head of Ferrari might be.]

He added that he did not think the red pill comment meant any big new political awakening from Mr. Musk.

Asked to explain his thinking, Mr. Musk pasted an image of the Urban Dictionary definition of red pill in an email. It read:

“‘Red pill’ has become a popular phrase among cyberculture and signifies a free-thinking attitude, and a waking up from a ‘normal’ life of sloth and ignorance. Red pills prefer the truth, no matter how gritty and painful it may be.” <Source>  

Bottom line…

Who is against the truth?

Who is willing to stand up to question what “science” can be reliable enough to inform draconian public policies, which scientists are putting aside their activism (if any), where are the well-credentialed contrarian scientists, and which politicians are acting on behalf of their constituency and which ones on behalf of themselves, their party, and their ideology?

Indeed, the New York Times cannot be trusted – as they have proven time-after-time. The idea that they would attack Elon Musk over such a trivial issue as a Tweet is little more than revenue-generating clickbait and ideological idiocy.

We are so screwed.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell



In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on the United States on 9/11/2001, the government created the TSA, an agency under the control of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, to assure the security of the traveling public, primarily at airports.

Many travelers believe a TSA intrusive search, by active or passive means, is little more than political Kabuki Theater because there are no recorded instances of the TSA having ever detected nor stopped a terrorist attack. And, other than finding ordinary contraband such as guns and sharp objects, it misses a fair percentage of ordinary, but dangerous items. There is no doubt that the TSA has become a large, cumbersome, self-perpetuating organization and a law unto itself -- creating a cadre of petty tyrants who delight in harassing those who do not immediately comply with their demands or even ask questions.

Now we appear to be faced with a similar situation to prevent the spread of the Chinese Coronavirus and the use of “monitors” who are using various technologies to screen an individual’s temperature from a distance of inches to several feet. Turning away and denying entry to those who test above 100.4, which is commonly accepted as an indication of a fever. And the TSA will likely self-task to be the lead temperature takers at airports.

Is this more political Kabuki Theater?

1.   Many of the cheaper, mass-produced instruments (mostly from China) that remotely measure temperature may be inaccurate, totally ineffective, and lack adequate calibration.

2.   There is a distinct difference between a rise in temperature caused by COVID-19 and those attributable to other medical and emotional conditions including exercise, an excited, emotional state, and other commonly encountered illnesses such as the seasonal flu or common cold. Both are identical symptoms with very different causes.

3.   An individual can be asymptomatic (without symptoms) and infectious before exhibiting a fever. Since so much remains unknown about the virus and its transmissibility, there is no scientific proof that temperature screening is effective in slowing the spread of the Chinese Coronavirus.

4.   At present, employees may simply pass a recalcitrant or abusive individual rather than deal with the hassle that may ensue. Especially if the line is long and the wait becomes lengthy. Imagine a cranky individual who waits for an hour and then is denied admittance and told to leave the area? Or an individual who is singled out in a crowd at a major event?

5.   While privacy at present is a minor concern when the screening is done in a public venue, and the individual has no expectation of privacy – similar to being photographed on the street – imagine the concern if an individual is identified and the information entered into a database?

6.   Emergency procedures that are implemented during a crisis are likely to be “normalized” and remain in use long after the crisis passes.

Bottom line…

Does it work? Many public health officials, including physicians, epidemiologists, and virologists, are openly questioning the effectiveness of temperature screening and whether this intervention produces the expected result of slowing the spread of the Chinese Coronavirus.

Of great concern is whether the government will use this Chinese Coronavirus crisis to normalize the collection, storage, analysis, and use of biometric health information without an individual’s consent because they happen to be in a public venue?

And, of even greater concern, will the government allow the major technology companies to capture biometric information on voluntarily-purchased devices and then make the data available to the government or sell the information to others to monetize the data stream?

Few in the government, including politicians and their fashionable scientists, actually know what they are doing and the outcome of their so-called interventions.

Do not be so quick to give up your privacy rights under the Fourth Amendment…

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

… for once individual freedom is compromised or lost, no matter what the circumstances, it is not likely to be regained without a fight.

Perhaps we should heed the wise counsel of Benjamin Franklin, “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

We are so screwed.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell


Once again, we are seeing politicians use scientists and science to support their public policy prescriptions for a fruitful future. Unfortunately, in some cases, it has lead to disaster and death.

Are there only three or four reputable scientists whose word should be taken as gospel and used to inform draconian usurpations of power and our inalienable rights?

The progressive plea to respect science…


It was precisely 100 years ago that, coming off the one-two punch of World War I and the Spanish flu, Warren Harding popularized a phrase and ran for president on the slogan “Return to Normalcy.” He won the election, but there was no normalcy. There was a roaring and rambunctious decade that ended with a Depression.

The same principle applies today. We might speak, achingly, of our pre-COVID existences, but life has changed abruptly, profoundly, and irretrievably. We will, instead, go hurtling into a new era.

The real reckoning of our age, maybe of our lifetime, is not whether we will prevail over the virus. It’s whether our respect for science, and our collective will—so muscular during the crisis—will prevail when we reboot and rebuild.

[OCS: Perhaps the question should not be one of respect for science, but the degree to which we can trust corrupt, agenda-driven politicians to pursue public policies in the name of science. Especially those public policies that concentrate control within a single political party, result in larger government, higher taxes, and fewer personal freedoms?]

Let’s start with a thought exercise: It’s New Year’s Eve heading into 2020, a number, ironically, associated with perfect vision and clarity. What’s your response that night upon being told that soon there will be no live sports or concerts or Broadway shows? That Grand Central Station at rush hour will look like this? That toilet paper might be more valuable than crude oil? That by spring, there will be food lines on the streets of New York and more than 300,000 people worldwide will have died tragically.

Looking back, Mother Earth was starting to clear her throat and make herself heard: Australian bush fires were ravaging the continent. Earth had registered its highest temperatures since records began. Icebergs and glaciers melted, popsicles in the sun; there were floods and droughts; and swarms of locusts descending on Africa.

[OCS: Anthropomorphizing our world as “Mother Earth” is not science, nor is it descriptive of our planetary dynamics. So begins another screed on settled science, the wisdom of experts, and the proclamations of activists who have made a fairly decent living with their alarmist viewpoint based on nothing more than deeply-flawed computer models and heavily manipulated input data.]

Bill McKibben was one of the early climate change whistleblowers, so to speak. Ever since, he has been issuing warnings on the danger of ignoring science. <Source>

[OCS: The question is: which science and which scientists are we to believe. Because, far from being settled as a consensus opinion, I can easily find well-credentialed, well-experienced scientists on both sides of the questions: to what extent does man-made activity influence the climate, how can these findings be independently validated or falsified, and what can man do to affect the global climate.

Climate change appears to be of renewed interest given the minimization of the sun’s activity and the likelihood of a cooling trend to balance any warming trend. In essence, regression to some mean value which remains unknown to modern science.]

The havoc wreaked by the Chinese Coronavirus is but a small taste of the devastation yet to come if we listen to the activist scientists and continue to ignore the well-credentialed skeptics…

Consider that the Chinese Coronavirus computer model developed by Professor Neil Ferguson, who led the COVID-19 modeling team at Imperial College in London, which was used to inform worldwide public opinion and policies, was grossly in error. Not only were some of the basic assumptions in error, but the model also contained approximately 150,000 lines of Fortran code. To be noted, this outmoded compiled computer language has a number of inherent flaws. The results appear to have assisted in crippling economies and bankrupting businesses and individuals. It is self-evident that the model should have been studied and validated, as well as the phenomenon the model purported to simulate. And before, the results were used to inform public policies and political power grabs.

Likewise, the global climate models have dodgy assumptions and contain hundreds of thousands of lines of code written in Fortran and lack the same type of validation.

Consider Dr. Anthony Fauci, the physician-immunologist who has served as the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases since 1984 and who heads President Trump’s Chinese Coronavirus Advisory Panel. Widely regarded as an expert on the Chinese Coronavirus, the truth is far different. Dr. Fauci is more of a long-time bureaucrat than a physician or researcher. Much of the information he has passed along to the public is grossly in error, and he often reminds us that models are flawed, and the data may be incomplete -- excusing his earlier pronouncements.

Likewise, the United Nation’s IPCC (International Panel on Climate Control) is comprised of politicians and policymakers, not scientists. It merely passes along research produced by others and chosen by a select group of overwhelmingly activist scientists whose institutions and projects depend on governmental funding. Why have they not allocated sufficient funds to validate models, verify data, and above all, attempt to replicate the findings used to inform public policy? The short answer is: they like what they have, and it appears accepted by the mainstream media as sufficient to drive their progressive agenda.

Apparently, anyone can build a model…

Minnesota’s COVID-19 Models Were Created Over One Weekend Partly By Students

The University of Minnesota (UMN) says it developed the predictive models used to justify Governor Tim Walz’s economic shutdowns in one weekend, enlisting the help of students.

The mathematical models used to justify Minnesota’s sweeping economic shutdowns amidst the coronavirus were hastily developed by a team partially composed of students who did not have time to fully validate their work, according to a release by UMN that boasts about the speed with which their model was created.

“I don’t think a lot of researchers get to work on something over the weekend and have public figures talk about it and make decisions based on it three days later,” says associate professor Marina Kirkeide who just completed her undergraduate degree last year. “[In this situation] you don’t have the time to validate as much as you normally would,” she adds.

Associate Professor Eva Enns who also helped build the models admits in the University release that her work cannot be used to make predictions with a great degree of accuracy, and that uncertainty figured greatly into the models’ construction. “We need to build in uncertainty as a clear message,” she says.

The University also concedes that the accuracy of its models are limited because statisticians don’t know how many people have cases of COVID-19 that are so mild they go undetected. Yet another confounding factor is the use of data reported by the ruling Communist Party of China. <Source>

Science über alles …


How Blind Faith In Scientific Expertise Wrecked The Economy

The phrase “settled science” is a classic oxymoron. There can never be science that is settled, and science cannot or should not be the only determinant of policy, especially on things related to the economic direction of the planet.

This is important due to two observable phenomena. One, this pandemic has highlighted how much of our public and social media are full of mindless drones. Two, it has highlighted just how much of our scientific consensus is flawed, and still worshiped as if it consists of matters of faith instead of evidence.

Consider the the mushrooming of Twitter-take artists. They are not scientists, or qualified in matters of economics, history, strategy, or policy. They are random individuals whose sole purpose is to remind us that we should have faith in “science and data.”

Obviously, they don’t understand having “faith” in science is in itself a fallacy of scientism. Scientism is a faith in the idea that all social problems have only one answer, through the process of science. It is a fallacy  because scientists are humans and have their own biases, as well as flawed methodologies, which is why science is constantly scrutinized and measured alongside historical and economic questions.

Scientism elevates science to the point of a religion, thereby defeating the whole purpose of scientific inquiry. Nevertheless, these prophets of scientism run all over the internet, telling us that nothing else matters, because “SCIENCE!” <Source>

It gets worse…

Now we are seeing the billionaire technocrats starting to police their platforms to remove any “contradictory” information that does not conform to government dictates or the progressive agenda – in the guide of “fact-checking.” But whose “facts?” Whose expertise? This is censorship pure and simple and is likely to concentrate the voices of the activists and their corrupt agenda to the exclusion of rational, well-considered thought from qualified experts and even commentators seeking to explore various issues. We saw what happened to the initial brave physicians and scientists in China when they tried to warn the world, do not let that happen here. Do not let the mainstream media dominate the conversation merely because they have a louder voice.

Free speech and a free press? Yeah Right!

Bottom line…

We have all seen the problems with the Coronavirus and its economic impact. Now consider that the impact of Climate Change proposals greatly outweigh the virus’s effects and are likely to cause permanent damage.

Perhaps former President Ronald Reagan’s advice, "Trust but Verify," should be the watch-phrase of the day.

We are so screwed when the mainstream media provides additional exposure and validation to climate activists whose communist agenda outranks the controlled skepticism of science. Or gives credit to virus scientists who speak with certitude about facts not in evidence.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell



What more can you say?

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell


There is no doubt in my mind that California does not have a budgetary problem, we have a prioritization problem in a state governed by progressive socialist democrats…


Newsom’s lies and idiocy on display for all Californians to see…


TAPPER: Well, the House passed a bill on Friday night with money for states, but Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has suggested it's dead on arrival. Can you explain what you think will happen to California if the federal government doesn't give you money to help you out? 

NEWSOM: Well, these same folks that say it's dead on arrival, I hope they will consider this.

The next time they want to salute and celebrate our heroes, our first responders, our police officers and firefighters, consider the fact that they are the first ones that will be laid off by cities and counties.

[OCS: This is the typical progressive socialist democrat bullpucky and extortion to threaten the health and welfare of individuals during times of budgetary shortfalls.

Truth be told, it is the sworn duty of all elected officials to prioritize the expenditure of funds to first provide for the public’s safety (law enforcement and fire protection), the public’s health (emergency responders and acute health facilities), and critical infrastructure (water, electricity, sanitation, communications) and these take precedent over all non-essential government workers and discretionary programs.

The fact that the governor suggests that this would be tolerated by the state without consequences is unconscionable. But, then again, this is the Governor who advances the rights of illegal aliens over the lawful residents of California.]

The folks that are out there, the true heroes of this pandemic are health care workers and nurses. Those county health systems have been ravaged. Their budgets have been devastated and depleted, their budget counts depleted since this pandemic. They're the first ones to be laid off.

[OCS: The county health systems were ravaged prior to the Chinese Coronavirus Pandemic, mostly by an influx of indigents and illegal aliens who use critical care facilities for their primary care. Add to that California’s restrictive healthcare policies which disadvantage healthcare facilities and practitioners in favor of the special interests who lobby the Democrat-governed State of California and supply the majority of campaign funds to politicians willing to sell their votes.  That local and state government cannot correctly prioritize their expenditure of funds or fund non-essential programs and projects is the root cause of budgetary shortfalls.]

So, we have got to square our rhetoric with the reality. Twenty percent of Americans are unemployed. In a few weeks, over 100,000 Americans will have lost their lives. These are Depression era unemployment numbers, and we have to own up to that.

[Newsom’s lies and radical progressive socialist democrat rhetoric can never be squared with reality. The truth is that he is not in charge of the United States and would do well to concentrate on California’s problems. The fact that he is running for the 2024 Democrat presidential nomination colors his thinking and he is likely to say or do anything which advances his personal agenda over the needs of Californians.]

So, I'm not looking to score cheap political points, but I do want to make this point, Jake. We have an obligation, a moral, an ethical obligation to American citizens all across this country to help support cities, states and counties.

[OCS: This is a lie. And there is no moral obligation for the citizens of prudently-managed states to pay for states whose profligate spending on non-essential, politically-expedient programs has crippled their state’s finances.]

TAPPER: You talked about the budget surplus that California had.

There are some who say that California wasn't in great financial shape. Stanford Professor Joe Nation, a former Democratic state lawmaker, says that California has more than a trillion dollars in pension debt.

And just six months before the crisis began, he warned that -- quote -- "Even a mini-recession in which pension systems assets fall by one- half, Great Recession levels, would be a horrible development. Schools and municipal governments would be forced to cut even further. Taxpayers would be asked to chip in more. Public employees would face layoffs and salary cuts" -- unquote.

How much of the crisis you're in right now is due to preexisting financial obligations?


[OCS: Another lie. California’s pension problems are well-known and caused by the overwhelming corruption between the public employee unions and the corrupt politicians they support. The entire enterprise is actuarially unsound with union members being able to purchase additional years – and retiring employees given time-in-grade or salary bumps to increase their pensions. Government pensions exceed those in the private sector and given that a great number of government workers are non-essential, the system cannot be regarded as self-sustaining.

California’s budget is an accounting fiction, with billions of dollars held in reserves or dedicated funds year-after-year to generate interest income rather than be used for their designated purpose. Like Social Security, California borrows from restricted funds and replaces actual money with worthless interest-bearing state obligations that help balance the books but are, in actuality, worthless.]

That $54.3 billion is direct result of COVID-19. Just a few months ago, I introduced my January budget with, again, a projected surplus. We paid off 100 percent of our wall of debt we had paid -- we had inherited over seven or eight years ago.

[OCS: This is a lie! Pension debt has been increasing year-after-year as has the State’s profligate expenditures on non-essentials and illegal aliens. There is no surplus if the pensions were correctly funded.]

We were using $9.13 billion of the surplus last year to pay down long- term pension obligations. So, Joe is absolutely right as it relates to the unfunded liabilities that states all across this country are facing. But it relates to the operating accounts of the state.

[OCS: Yada. Yada. Yada. The State does not have a surplus and spending is through the roof.]

They were never healthier, the reserves never higher. And so this is a direct result of a global pandemic manifesting in different ways all across this world, around the globe, and across this country.

[OCS: Yeah Right!]

And so I, with respect, will just caution people to look at this as a frame of charity, when it's fundamental purpose of government. It's to protect people's safety and to protect their well-being.

[OCS: Charity? Why should we help those who refuse to mend their ways and help themselves? California, one of the most productive economies, is not deserving of charity – especially from states like West Virginia.]

This is a moment where we need to meet the moment head on and acknowledge this is not a red issue or a blue issue. This has impacted every state in America.

[OCS: Bullpucky – this is a “blue issue” with most of the budgetary shortfalls, profligate spending, and corrupt government located in areas governed by progressive socialist democrats.]


Bottom line…

As long as the State of California is governed by progressive socialist democrats and RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) like Arnold Schwarzenegger, we are well and truly screwed. Even if we elect Republicans to state office, they are likely to continue the endemic political corruption in California – claiming “it is now our turn to get ours.” Where are the patriots? Where are the constitutional conservatives? It appears they might be in Nevada, Colorado, Idaho, and Texas.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell


In my wildest dreams, I never thought anyone would attempt to subvert mathematics into an ideological tool…

A friend of mine just sent me a copy of “Data Feminism” authored by Catherine D’Ignazio and Lauren F. Klein and published by the MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) Press.

Data Feminism
Catherine D’Ignazio and Lauren F. Klein

For feminism begins with a belief in the ‘political, social, and economic equality of the sexes,’ as the Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines the term— as does, for the record, Beyoncé. And any definition of feminism also necessarily includes the activist work that is required to turn that belief into reality.

In Data Feminism, we bring these two aspects of feminism together, demonstrating a way of thinking about data, their analysis, and their display, that is informed by this tradition of feminist activism as well as the legacy of feminist critical thought.”

[OCS: I wonder how far the influence of feminism reaches into the world of data. Is it acceptable to alter the data to prove a social point? Does a “correct” answer matter if it does not support feminism or contradict its core teachings?]

Indeed, a central aim of this book is to describe a form of intersectional feminism that takes the inequities of the present moment as its starting point and begins its own work by asking: How can we use data to remake the world?

[OCS: You will notice that the authors did not ask, How can we make the world better?, they appear to want to fundamentally transform the world’s behavior into being compatible with their social construct.

However, this fundamental transformation seems oblivious to the basics of human nature where someone will always be stronger, more agile, better educated, wealthier, or simply be born into privilege. A world where there are leaders and followers including those individuals who will control power and amass assets. Even to the point of subjugating and disadvantaging others. This is a given and unlikely to change in the future.

Moreover, the author’s utopian visions of equality – as expressed in the mythical politics of communism – are unrealistic to say the least. Consider that there are approximately 2 billion Muslims in the world whose fundamental teachings are invariant, intolerant of dissent, and by all modern measures, disadvantage women. No concept of science,  mathematics, or data analysis is likely to reform their viewpoint.]

Key to the idea of intersectionality is that it does not only describe the intersecting aspects of any particular person’s identity (or positionalities, as they are sometimes termed). It also describes the intersecting forces of privilege and oppression at work in a given society. Oppression involves the systematic mistreatment of certain groups of people by other groups. It happens when power is not distributed equally— when one group controls the institutions of law, education, and culture, and uses its power to systematically exclude other groups while giving its own group unfair advantages (or simply maintaining the status quo).  In the case of gender oppression, we can point to the sexism, cissexism, and patriarchy that is evident in everything from political representation to the wage gap to who speaks more often (or more loudly) in a meeting.

[OCS: By definition and historical patterns and practices, politics is just that: one group controlling the government, institutions, and governing people to advantage themselves above others. Especially those political systems that pretend to promote equality for all such as socialism, communism, and whatever is the opposite of capitalism. Capitalism has transformed society into a better place – but is still a work in progress.

One need only consider that the endpoint of feminism, socialism, and communism is always authoritarian and backed by force. Whereas the endpoint of capitalism is more capitalism.]

The effects of privilege and oppression are not distributed evenly across all individuals and groups, however. For some, they become an obvious and unavoidable part of daily life, particularly for women and people of color and queer people and immigrants: the list goes on. If you are a member of any or all of these (or other) minoritized groups, you experience their effects everywhere, shaping the choices you make (or don’t get to make) each day.

[OCS: The key is the choices you choose to make. Under an egalitarian system, there is no motivation to excel because the fruits of your labor will be distributed to someone who is less able or chooses not to work. I am not saying that we should not care for the disabled among us, but to simply declare the disabled as abled – is not only misleading, it is counterproductive.]

The starting point for data feminism is something that goes mostly unacknowledged in data science: power is not distributed equally in the world.

[OCS: It is a given that power has not, nor is ever likely to be, distributed equally as long as one obeys their biological urges and physiological benefits. Data science is a descriptive subset of mathematics and does not recognize anything beyond true, false or the probabilities that the proposition is one or the other. Please spare me the quantum dilemma of Schrodinger’s Cat because that is not the macro world in which we operate.]

Those who wield power are disproportionately elite, straight, white, able-bodied, cisgender men from the Global North. The work of data feminism is first to tune into how standard practices in data science serve to reinforce these existing inequalities and second to use data science to challenge and change the distribution of power.

[OCS; Enter the world of Marxism – class warfare, the creation of ideologues who exploit the disadvantaged minorities who are promised a redress of their grievances in return for political power – ostensibly to make things more equal. Change the distribution of power? In reality, taking power from those who govern and accreting it for their own benefit. And, if history prevails, misusing it to enslave millions on the road to equality of death, destruction, and despair.]

Underlying data feminism is a belief in and commitment to co-liberation: the idea that oppressive systems of power harm all of us, that they undermine the quality and validity of our work, and that they hinder us from creating true and lasting social impact with data science. We wrote this book because we are data scientists and data feminists. Although we speak as a “we” in this book, and share certain identities, experiences, and share certain identities, experiences, and skills, we have distinct life trajectories and motivations for our work on this project.

[OCS: Fine! But I will wager to say that neither one of the authors is a conservative constitutionalist or proponent of capitalism. In fact, they will probably describe themselves as progressive feminists because alternate, more accurate political labels are offensive to those who are power hungry.]

Although datafication may occasionally verge into the realm of the absurd, it remains a very serious issue. Decisions of civic, economic, and individual importance are already and increasingly being made by automated systems sifting through large amounts of data.

For example, PredPol, a so-called predictive policing company founded in 2012 by an anthropology professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, has been employed by the City of Los Angeles for nearly a decade to determine which neighborhoods to patrol more heavily, and which neighborhoods to (mostly) ignore.

[OCS: The idea of computerized police statistics and predictive allocation of resources is often attributed to Jack Maple, the New York City deputy police commissioner for crime control strategies, where is was used by New York Police Department Commissioner William Bratton to reduce crime and improve the quality of life for all New Yorkers. It should come as no surprise that the system was introduced in Los Angeles, where not so coincidently, William Bratton became the Chief of Police. It should be noted that Bratton was a progressive socialist democrat and remains one to this day.]

But because PredPol is based on historical crime data and US policing practices have always disproportionately surveilled and patrolled neighborhoods of color, the predictions of where crime will happen in the future look a lot like the racist practices of the past.

[OCS: This is a grossly false inaccuracy. One, because the program uses more than historical data and reflects current reporting -- which is often weighted heavier than historical data. And two, because crime happens where crime happens. The data and its display is neutral and simply a way to map current events against a pattern of background occurrences.]

These systems create what mathematician and writer Cathy O’Neil, in Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy, calls a “pernicious feedback loop,” amplifying the effects of racial bias and of the criminalization of poverty that are already endemic to the United States.

[OCS: Here is a question that is easily answered by data analysis. Since many of the areas related to illiteracy, poverty, disease, and crime are governed by progressive Democrats, is it not likely that the public policies and the diversion of funds by the Democrats to themselves and their special interests is a causal factor in ongoing criminal activity? Or, considering the Democrat’s penchant for releasing criminals back into the community or trivializing their criminal activities, is this not a consideration for increasing crime? Or, why do the Democrats allow minority gangs to threaten the minority community or control the distribution of dangerous substances? If anything threatens democracy, it is the behavior of the Democrats.]

O’Neil’s solution is to open up the computational systems that produce these racist results. Only by knowing what goes in, she argues, can we understand what comes out.

[OCS: This is nonsensical … the system is open and the inputs are the data points generated by criminal activity, namely date, location, type of crime, response time, etc. If you want to know what comes out, look at the ongoing crime map here, and select your location and the police agency you want to observe.]

This is a key step in the project of mitigating the effects of biased data. Data feminism additionally requires that we trace those biased data back to their source. PredPol and the “three most objective data points” that it employs certainly amplify existing biases, but they are not the root cause. The cause, rather, is the long history of the criminalization of Blackness in the United States, which produces biased policing practices, which produce biased historical data, which are then used to develop risk models for the future.

[OCS: An unpleasant truth is that the Democrats are the party of racism, segregation, Jim Crow, and the KKK. And that the endemic corruption of the Democrat Party, to this day, continues to oppress the very people they profess to assist. It was the Democrats who criminalized Blackness in America. And, no matter how much the re-write history, the truth is the truth.]

Tracing these links to historical and ongoing forces of oppression can help us answer the ethical question, Should this system exist? In the case of PredPol, the answer is a resounding no.

[OCS: The reason the Democrats punish law-abiding individuals with their gun control restrictions is because they are at the root of the criminal enterprise: be it the poverty pimps, the illegal alien activists, or even the judicial system. They are the ones who allow criminals that steal less than $950 worth of merchandise to be ticketed and released back into the community. They are the ones who plea bargain away the most serious gun charges that allow felons to be eligible for “good behavior” releases. They are the ones who allow the gangs to control the prisons and minority communities. Crime is good for business, bigger government, higher taxes, and restrictions on individual freedoms – in essence, the Democrat Party platform.]


Bottom line…


As I replied to my friend, this seems to be a foot-noted virtue-signaling academic exercise written for social scientists, probably more accurately described as socialist scientists. To say I did not like it would be an understatement. 

I have always believed that data, like any other tool, is neutral and without ideology. It is those who exploit it for their own agenda who are responsible for the outcome.

Stripped of its pseudo-intellectual jargon and convoluted thought -- it all comes down to divide and conquer using coalitions to build a power base that can be manipulated by promising to redress individual slights and grievances in return for political power - preferably in the form of the mythical egalitarianism of communism.

We are so screwed.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell