We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Wednesday, November 2. 2022
What’s Wrong With Long-Term Care?
Free Bird: On Elon Musk and Twitter. In more than a decade on Twitter, Walter Kirn watched as the platform manipulated reality in real-time. Now? ‘Let the wild rumpus begin.’
AFTER THE HARVARD CASE, WHAT NEXT?
Bring Back Standardized Testing
Kari Lake Torches the Media: You Idiots Will Fall for Anything
David DePape Is Sick, And So Is San Francisco. This isn’t the first time in recent history that the Right has been the Left’s scapegoat.
Illegals Bearing Giant Venezuelan Flag Attack Border Patrol
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Give it a year or so and Beau will have died in his father's arms as Joe knelt on the battlefield pinning a silver star on his son's chest.
Re: David DePape Is Sick, And So Is San Francisco
Now, we find out that no one is quite sure if a third person opened the door for the police. That’s a pretty basic fact to walk back.
Has anybody else noticed that now that the FBI is involved, there is even less that is known about the situation than when the police held the first mini press conference the morning of the incident?
mudbug: Now, we find out that no one is quite sure if a third person opened the door for the police.
“We want to make it clear that there were only two people in the home at the time that the police arrived, Mister Pelosi and the suspect. There was no third person present.” — San Francisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins
mudbug: Has anybody else noticed that now that the FBI is involved, there is even less that is known about the situation than when the police held the first mini press conference the morning of the incident?
United States v. Depape, Criminal Complaint
This isn’t the first time in recent history that the Right has been the Left’s scapegoat.
DePape's social media is full of QAnon conspiracy theories. He was radicalized by the Gamergate misogynistic harassment campaign, saying "How did I get into all this? Gamer gate it was gamer gate.”
Qanon is so scary! But 99% of Americans never followed Qanon and have no idea what was said. But you are trying to make Qanon into some kind of right wing devil. And yet David in his underwear was a liberal and he supposedly like Qanon. Hmmm! So was Qanon liberal?
The DA's office could have cleared up all the discrepancies but instead choose to give almost the exact same press conference we were all subjected to after Paul's DUI. Clearly they are hiding something. Why not just come out with the truth and let the chips fall where they may? Oh, that's right there is an election coming up and the DA's job is to do no harm to Democrats.
If there was no third person than who opened the door so that the police could witness the hammering? If there was no third person why was this stated as fact?
JustMe: But 99% of Americans never followed Qanon and have no idea what was said.
That's not relevant to the point, that DePape was radicalized on the political right. However, the conspiracy theories associated with QAnon are prevalent on the political right. And some notable Republicans, such as Marjorie Taylor Greene, have expressed support of QAnon conspiracy theories.
JustMe: And yet David in his underwear . . .
DePape was not dressed in just underwear. A witness saw "an individual in all black, carrying a large black bag on his back, walking near the Pelosi residence".
JustMe: Why not just come out with the truth and let the chips fall where they may?
Unfounded speculation isn't much of an argument. As DePape has been charged, the evidence will be given in court. DePape has confessed to targeting the Speaker of the House.
JustMe: If there was no third person than who opened the door so that the police could witness the hammering?
Pelosi ran to the door and opened it followed by DePape. They then struggled over the hammer.
JustMe: If there was no third person why was this stated as fact?
Who stated it as a fact? Please be specific.
"DePape was not dressed in just underwear."
So why are we told he was just in his underwear? Was that a lie or did you just lie?
"DePape was radicalized on the political right."
This seems to be YOUR wet dream. He is a lefty, as stupid and crazy as we all imagine lefty's to be. And somehow the "political right" radicalized him? Yeah, that's believable.
"the evidence will be given in court"
Typically the DA's will brag about what they have to implicate the perp but on this case they are strangely quiet and even duplicitous. AND they aren't even following the law and providing information requested by the media/ They are hiding it. Why?
"Pelosi ran to the door and opened it"
And then stood there while the police watched David hit him. Yeah I believe that. That makes so much sense. Seriously, the police are there because Paul called them about a home invasion and the door opens and David is chasing Paul and the police stand by and watch. Did I get that right?
"Who stated it as a fact? Please be specific."
THAT is the whole point. We can't be specific because the police and the DA are intentionally hiding everything. DUH!
JustMe: So why are we told he was just in his underwear?
Who told you that? Please be specific.
JustMe: Was that a lie or did you just lie?
United States v. Depape, Criminal Complaint
JustMe: And somehow the "political right" radicalized him?
Ignoring the evidence (noted above) does not make it go away.
JustMe: And then stood there while the police watched David hit him.
"Pelosi and DEPAPE were both holding a hammer . . . DEPAPE pulled the hammer from Pelosi’s hand and swung the hammer, striking Pelosi in the head."
JustMe: THAT is the whole point.
You claimed that it was "stated as fact," but you can't say who stated it as fact. In other words, you made a claim you can't substantiate.
"you made a claim you can't substantiate."
EXACTLY!! Now you got it. No one can substantiate anything because everything is either being hidden or lied about.
Here is what we do know:
Normally there are government guards/police at the Pelosi house even when she is not there. This is from neighbors who would know this to be true. But this night they were not there and that seems to imply that Paul dismissed them.
The police lied about this being a "welfare check" OR they did not lie and now the DA is lying. Why lie???
David is a liberal, not a conservative and not a MAGA and he didn't have a MAGA hat on or tell Paul this is MAGA country.
The DA was inexplicably and purposefully not forthcoming about what happened and she is clearly lying and covering something up.
And most inexplicable is David was in his underwear (even though you insist he was not) and that makes sense ONLY if he was there for sex.
Your claim was of the form "why was this stated as a fact?" Who stated it? Please substantiate your claim.
JustMe: Normally there are government guards/police at the Pelosi house even when she is not there.
Please substantiate your claim.
JustMe: The police lied about this being a "welfare check"
Please substantiate your claim.
JustMe: David is a liberal
DePape was radicalized by QAnon. The evidence, which you have ignored, was provided above (#2.1).
JustMe: And most inexplicable is David was in his underwear
Please substantiate your claim.
Z: “We want to make it clear that there were only two people in the home at the time that the police arrived, Mister Pelosi and the suspect. There was no third person present.” — San Francisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins
But Politico reported:
The police chief said Friday that officers arrived at the house and entered through the front door, which someone — they didn’t specify who — opened from the inside. ...https://www.politico.com/news/2022/10/28/police-pelosi-attack-intentional-00064098
So the police chief said something and the District attorney is trying to walk it back. Isn't how the police entered the house a basic fact? Isn't the District Attorney trying to walk it back? How is that not what I said?
From the criminal complaint you linked to:
PelosiThis implies that the "male" is Depape but according to the officer responding to the call, Pelosi said his name was David. Are we supposed to think that Depape interjected in the 911 call that his name was David?
stated words to the effect of there is a male in the home and that the male is going to wait for
Pelosi’s wife. Pelosi further conveyed that he does not know who the male is. The male said his
name is David.
Later in the complaint:
At 2:31 a.m., San Francisco Police Department (“SFPD”) Officer Colby Wilmes
responded to the Pelosi residence, California and knocked on the front door. When the door was
opened, Pelosi and DEPAPE were both holding a hammer with one hand and DEPAPE had his
other hand holding onto Pelosi’s forearm. Pelosi greeted the officers. The officers asked them
what was going on. DEPAPE responded that everything was good. Officers then asked Pelosi
and DEPAPE to drop the hammer.
So who opened the door? Are we supposed to believe that either Pelosi or Depape opened the door? It strains credulity to believe that either Pelosi or Depape opened the door?
Then you brought up something about scapegoats which did not come from my post or the complaint you linked to. I don't know what you're talking about.
Then you started talking about Qanon and Depape's posts to some website he's supposed to have set up. Here is some interesting information about them: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/11/breaking-exclusive-numerous-anomalies-identified-david-depape-connected-websites-indicate-not-create-articles-websites-not-work-alone/
mudbug: The police chief said Friday that officers arrived at the house and entered through the front door, which someone — they didn’t specify who — opened from the inside. ...
mudbug: So the police chief said something and the District attorney is trying to walk it back.
Walk what back? There's nothing in the original statement about a third person.
mudbug: This implies that the "male" is Depape but according to the officer responding to the call, Pelosi said his name was David.
Huh? Pelosi was relating that the intruder said his name is "David".
mudbug: It strains credulity to believe that either Pelosi or Depape opened the door?
What? "DEPAPE stated that they went downstairs to the front door. The police arrived and knocked on the door, and Pelosi ran over and opened it. Pelosi grabbed onto DEPAPE’s hammer, which was in DEPAPE’s hand." What is incredulous about that?
mudbug: Then you brought up something about scapegoats which did not come from my post or the complaint you linked to.
It came from the original post on the topic.
mudbug: Then you started talking about Qanon and Depape's posts to some website he's supposed to have set up.
DePape also had a Facebook page, confirmed by relatives, containing the same conspiracy nonsense.
Matt Margolis has questions about the way DePape describes the SFPD entry. Though it supports the revised reporting that only Pelosi and DePape were present it does make one wonder, as Matt does, why Paul Pelosi reengaged with DePape if the cops were making entry. I suppose you could surmise that DePape followed Pelosi to the door and might have been within arms reach again but none of the reports give an indication of the relative distances or movements of both men.
DEPAPE stated that they went downstairs to the front door. The police arrived and knocked on the door, and Pelosi ran over and opened it. Pelosi grabbed onto DEPAPE’s hammer, which was in DEPAPE’s hand. At this point in the interview, DEPAPE repeated that DEPAPE did not plan to surrender and that he would go “through” Pelosi.
From the affidavit this appears to be taken from an interview of DePape by the SFPD sometime on 28 October but is a summary by the FBI agent preparing the document, not a transcript.
Doctors have upgraded Mr Pelosi from "stable" to "Fetterman".
The best possible solution to affirmative action is to give all children a good education in our K-12 system. And to give them a good moral upbringing in the family, church and society. We need a stronger and more involved citizenry and a less intrusive and dominating government. We need to phase out the free stuff and get the welfare families off the couch and into jobs.
OneGuy: The best possible solution to affirmative action is to give all children a good education in our K-12 system.
Agreed in part. However, university admissions have long been geared to the white power structure, such as through legacy admissions, athletics not often available for minority youth, and the dean's list.
Affirmative action might be redirected to the economically disadvantaged. Before he died, Dr. King understood that a natural alliance could be formed between Blacks and poor whites. Well, a person has got to have a dream, anyway.
After the Harvard Case, What Next? . . . One might have thought that by now, that issue would have been settled.
It might be argued that the time for affirmative action is coming to an end. But, it's important to note that the original intent of the Fourteenth Amendment wasn't to preclude making amends to those who had been historically oppressed. However, the abandonment of Reconstruction led to generations more oppression, leaving reconciliation to modern times.
HOW do you "make amends" to those who were historically oppressed without harming those who never historically oppressed anyone???
HOW do you make sure that only those who were historically oppressed receive "amends" and not everyone who falls into a racial category.
WHAT is the right "amends"? Is it taking from Peter to pay Paul? The left has never come up with a way to "amend" their past wrongs without creating new "wrongs".
OneGuy: HOW do you "make amends" to those who were historically oppressed without harming those who never historically oppressed anyone???
Institutions retain liability, even if the individuals who make up the institution do not.
OneGuy: HOW do you make sure that only those who were historically oppressed receive "amends" and not everyone who falls into a racial category.
"I don't see race."
That means that the African tribes that originally took them as slaves and sold them into slavery should provide them with 40 acres and a mule back in Africa.
indyjonesouthere: That means that the African tribes that originally took them as slaves and sold them into slavery should provide them with 40 acres and a mule back in Africa.
The African nations involved in the slave trade no longer exist as institutions.
Indeed, they still exist. It wasn't 20 years ago that WND was reporting on slave auctions occurring in north Africa and that some western organizations were going into the auctions and buying some of the slaves out of slavery.
It is a very inconvenient fact for western progressives to accept but there it is. These particular auctions were held in Morrocco but I'm sure they weren't the only ones. I don't recollect that the UN or any NGO wanting to discuss it as then they would have had to address the problem. And any US university would ignore those facts as they are just too inconvenient to the running narrative.
indyjonesouthere: It wasn't 20 years ago that WND was reporting on slave auctions occurring in north Africa and that some western organizations were going into the auctions and buying some of the slaves out of slavery.
There's slavery in the United States, too. Is the United States legally liable for contemporary slavery? Why or why not?
They define that "slavery" as human trafficking. With the southern border wide open there is not only human trafficking but also drug running. Who benefits? Perhaps the Pelosi's getting cheap labor at the vineyard or other cheap domestic labor. When politicians refuse to adopt programs like E-verify and refuse border fences and provide sanctuary cities and free services to illegals then we get characters like DePape in the neighborhood. Perhaps the Pelosi's got what they promoted and tolerated. And Epstein didn't kill himself. Where is the victimizer list?
indyjonesouthere: They define that "slavery" as human trafficking.
Notably, you didn't answer. Are you trying to say the United States is legally liable for contemporary slavery in the United States?
You want to define human trafficking as contemporary slavery. It is a crime and it is not slavery. Enforce the law and it's gone. Are you afraid to enforce the law? yes or no.
indyjonesouthere: You want to define human trafficking as contemporary slavery.
Trafficking people for forced labor is slavery. Are you trying to say the United States is legally liable for contemporary slavery in the United States? Why or why not?
No, we are not. Only the politicians, cities and law enforcement that won't enforce the countries immigration and trafficking laws are liable. Do you oppose immigration and trafficking laws? yes or no. You avoid the link between the two.
The law addresses trafficking. You want to equate that to slavery.
indyjonesouthere: The law addresses trafficking. You want to equate that to slavery.
United States law addresses "involuntary servitude". See 18 U.S. Code § 1584.
See also, the definition of slavery.
indyjonesouthere: No, we are not.
That's right. The United States has laws against slavery and enforces those laws, even if some corrupt persons break those laws. Similarly, slavery is outlawed by all African nations, most of which have only been in existence since the end of colonization.
indyjonesouthere: Do you oppose immigration and trafficking laws?
The original point was the institutions retain liability even if the individuals that make up the institution do not. You could argue the United States has made amends for slavery and later racial oppression to some degree. But you seem to be arguing the United States was not complicit, which is not the case; or that the complicity of the United States doesn't matter because others were also complicit in the conspiracy, which is nonsense.
If institutions retain liability then I suspect that the Democratic Party is screwed.
indyjonesouthere: If institutions retain liability then I suspect that the Democratic Party is screwed.
They certainly have moral responsibility, but political advocacy doesn't create the same liability as actions do.
End the Democratic party now...it's an evil institution that simply attempts to drag everyone else, not affiliated with them, into the racist shithole they created. They even used the SCOTUS to apply affirmative action (quotas) to make all the rest of us liable for their evil. Now the conservative SCOTUS is finally ready to dump the democrats evil racism. The democrats practice their racist policies against every race. It is the way of the progressive/marxists in the party. Gramsci and Marcuse are the heroes of the party for simply substituting race and gender for class.
Regarding "Private" Tech Companies colluding with the most worthless corrupt government in human history:
MiniTRU and the people's collective unity in the Benetton rainbow utopia?
Oh, my. Unity or else, comrade. Think right thoughts you shirker.
We'll fly to Mars in enviro friendly lithium powered Teslas if it gets up to 7500 degrees in a mushroom cloud for Ukraine.
Only techno triumphalist Tony Stark fairytales can save us now.
These things happen. Get in zee podz und eet ze bugz, JA!
The entire Covid debacle is being exposed. Tens of thousands, perhaps even hundreds of thousands of people were killed directly by the vaccine and many more were seriously harmed. To this day we are still getting "sudden deaths" of healthy people killed by the vaccine and that may continue for years if not decades. The perpetrators of this unnatural disaster are scared of what is coming out. How do you know this for sure? The requests for covid "amnesty" or in other words legal forgiveness of the terrible and in many cases intentional mistakes made over the last two years that harmed millions of us. What we need is public criminal trials and law suits, not amnesty.
It was either in 1973 or 1974 that the entire class of applicants sitting for the California bar exam failed the ethics portion of the bar exam! I believe the Bar exam in those days was given in Sacramento. This would be the first class of baby boomers coming through the system--they did not understand ethics then and they have never indicated any interest since then!!
Whoops! I forgot to mention that the above comment was posted in response to the article about standardized testing!
The FBI is involved in the Pelosi affair to create and maintain a narrative for the benefit of the political class. Nothing more and nothing less. They did as much in the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax. The FBI is there to protect the uniparty political class and prevent or disrupt anyone else meddling in those affairs.
So I went to a big city airport today to pick up a friend. While waiting I timed the take offs and there was one takeoff every 60 seconds. We are facing diesel shortages which may mean trucks can't run and that might mean serious food shortages and we are running out of heating oil and that might mean people freeze this winter and here a plane takes off every 60 seconds burning thousands of gallons of fuel just to get to cruising altitude. SO, if we are really in serious trouble with fuel why do we allow air travel? Correct me if I'm wrong but is getting to Hawaii or home for Thanksgiving more important than thousands of lives? Why not shut down all commercial travel right now and the amount of fuel saved in that step alone will prevent all the shortages. If we were serious we would do that.
Is the price of fuel not factored into the ticket price? Free market forces. Is the choice "diesel IS jet fuel"? When it is fractions of the barrel, it may just be a byproduct any way. The story is "We're down to 25 days of supply" though Full supply is 40 days. Prices will rise to cause rationing, or more supply will come to market. Planes do carry more than just passengers.
(snark) Why didn't you tell your friend to stay where they were? Why didn't you make them walk home from the airport?
(end snark). I'd be more than willing to let someone build an oil refinery on the property. Or a nuclear plant. Heck, I'd even volunteer to stay in the house to keep the baddies away
Yes, yes, all true. But it doesn't change the fact that if the trucks stop people will die and if the heating oil is unavailable people will die. So something must be done and most air traffic is not "essential" so if they were serious they would ground all the planes. Not forever, just a few years or so. While we are at it we could stop all the cruise ships too. I mean either we do have the fuel to piss away on these luxuries or we don't. If all the trucks are going to stop why should airlines still fly???
The world runs on diesel fuel, or its derivatives. Jet A-1 (jet plane fuel) is basically highly refined diesel. Most of the service and work vessels that support shipping and offshore work run on Marine diesel, while larger ships run on bunker fuel, a heavier, less refined fuel - but again, similar to diesel.
Agriculture, mining, logging, construction, harvest of natural resources: diesel. And while you're thinking of trucks, you shouldn't forget the trains that feed the markets that the trucks serve: diesel-electrics.
Here's an interesting thread that explains a bit about American oil and how it's refined. It's mostly refined for the diesel fractions, with the lighter fractions - gasoline and so on - a byproduct that is useful and can also be sold - but is secondary.
[url]Fractions of Crude Oil https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1585230462473351168.html[/url]
The people that decry nuclear-generated electricity, that want us to mine minerals for windmills and solar panels, and that glue themselves to artworks to complain about big oil, are doing it while completely unaware of their personal oil consumption signature. They are oblivious, and someday, it will be concluded that they are irredeemably stupid.
Except It's not true most air travel is not essential.
I need a part to fix the tractor (so I can get back to making Food) Next day air? or on a truck?
My friend is a mechanic with one work bay. Of course he wants it next day because if he has to wait 4 days (optimistically) for truck he can't get on to the next job. Parts guys will stupidly miss his need. "I saved them X$." You just cost the economy DAYS of output for 20 bucks.
The other side is the Consumer market. If they are not flying to subsidize the cost of the flight, That next day air charge goes up substantially.
The official position of the U.S. government is this “We’re taking forceful steps to moderate [energy] demand, so that it comes into better alignment with [policy driven energy] supply.” That means that the shortages are intentional. SO again tell me that your tractor part getting to you in one day vs two days is more important than lives. IF we are going to intentionally limit fossil fuel than it makes no logical sense to limit heating oil while providing a gazillion fuel gulping planes flying to Hawaii. End all air travel so people can live!!
So people can Live.
I said 1 or 4(+), not 1 or 2. They're not your hobby tractors, they're part of the 2% feeding everybody else. Every Day.
Last year ordered heavier parts that had to come by truck. 6-8 weeks later they never showed up, so ordered from another source. Both orders did show up 2 weeks later on the same day.
Great plan to stop Hawaii flights. Except for ones that might be carrying stuff that is coming or going on a shuttle schedule, not just the people going back and forth point A to B.
It's an interconnected world beyond our simple vacation plans. They just help to pay the freight.
A side story nobody is talking about. Mississippi river being closed for barges will pull trains off some of their normal routes. The trains can't be in two places at once, so somebody isn't getting something. Throw in a rail strike and we have no train in either place.
It's going to be an interesting winter.
Sorry, the URL mis-posted:
The oil business is made up of Upstream, Mid-stream, and Down-stream segments, representing three distinctly different kinds of investment and operation.
Upstream is exploration and development: Finding hydrocarbons, assessing extent and profitability, creating production.
Midstream is the transport, usually via pipelines, of the stablized produced products from the production site to the refinery or export route.
Downstream is the refinery / process that creates the marketed products and sells them.
Now, the Biden Administration and others have been broadcasting the end of fossil fuels. They've been making campaign promises that fossil fuels will be gone by, pick a date. 2025, 2030, 2035, 2050. United Nations, too. Near term end of the hydrocarbon age. Automakers are whittling down your engine sizes and adding blowers and winding up rpms to boost horsepower, but - no more V-8s. The CAFE gas mileage requirements are responsible for this directly, but really it's philosophical. Say goodbye to Detroit muscle. And they're making lots and lots of hybrids and electrics that nobody wants.
Biden has cancelled Federal lease programs for exploration, shut down active drilling, and signaled more of this. That's Upstream, pinned down.
Pipelines have been cancelled, new pipelines subjected to heightened obstacles, existing pipelines under legal attack. That's Mid-stream, stressed. Product is now being moved by train instead, more hazardous - much more emissions too.
No new refineries have been built in over 30 years. Existing ones are running over 95% (very high) with maintenance deferrals. Some have closed recently and won't be re-opened: Environmental attacks, regulatory changes, etc. This puts heightened stress on the surviving refineries, which are also under constant regulatory attack. Downstream, stressed.
Now Crazy Uncle Joe is talking about windfall profits taxes, because the price of oil is high - because of an intentional climate of shortage. Oil companies are finally getting their balance sheets in order after about 6-7 years of losses and breaking even - and now it's attack mode for Joe, who has done his best to bring shortages and high prices about.
A hydrocarbon prospect takes about 10-years to discover, assess, sanction, drill, construct, install, commission. It's a high-risk business with occasional high reward. Who do you think is going to invest a few tens of billions in discovering new hydrocarbons when they're being told that it's going to be legislated out of existence in the same time frame? By morons that don't understand that green energy depends on fossil fuels?
That's why we're going to be living under expensive shortages until some sanity returns to the scene, and then the 5-10 year recovery will start - maybe.
Thank your Leadership.