Category: Gummint

Beaten To The Punch

Gummint, Politics

I was actually going to write this post, except that someone far more qualified than I wrote it first.  And with far less profanity than I would have, too.  A sample:

Fascism didn’t really come into play as a functioning ideology until Giovanni Gentile and Benito Mussolini, defined it as the state as an organic being, controlling everything. “Everything in the state, nothing against the state, nothing outside the state” became the definition of a totalitarian state (total control over the economy, society, and culture). Where Marx envisioned the “withering away” of the state (totally skipping over human nature and the drive for power and control, whether over other people or just your own life), Mussolini and Gentile envisioned the state as the sole arbiter of life, the universe, and everything.

Small-government conservatives, by definition, are therefore not fascists.

It’s a lot easier to define “fascism” or “fascist” as an epithet by using George Orwell’s remark, written in 1944:

The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies ‘something not desirable.’

…to the accuser.

SURE They Wouldn’t

Government Thugs

Over at Bearing Arms, another silly question:

If the FBI will “mislead” to seize assets, why wouldn’t they do the same to take guns?

As the man says, to ask the question is to answer it.

I think that the time is rapidly approaching when the feds will just come in whenever they feel like it, take whatever of yours that they feel like taking, and fuck you up if you dare question them.  Hell, they probably have a drawer full of pre-signed (possibly forged) warrants that they can fill in with the necessary details, wave in your face, and then conveniently “lose” after the raid.  If they bother to do even that.

My question:  Why the fuck should we believe anything that law enforcement says, anymore?

Once again, to ask the question is to answer it.

And to quote another wise man (H.L. Mencken):

“Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.”

Are we there yet, Ma?

Scratching Around

Government Thugs

As Glenn Reynolds puts it, when it comes to violent White supremacist movements in the U.S., demand is far greater than supply — in other words, while the Democratic Socialists would just love to have a plethora of such groups around so that they can go all “Exterminate the Fascist Counter-Revolution!”, the fact is that there are no such groups extant, other than a few mopes muttering about “The Day Of Reckoning” and similar.

So they have to try to create such groups — with the support of their little Stasi underlings (a.k.a. the FBI) — with nomenclatures such as “concerned parents”, “Gretchen Whitmer kidnappers”,  “Ultra Magas” or “Jan 6 Insurrectionists”, and so on.

That effort, too, is failing.  So what next?  Step forward the post-9/11 knee-jerk agency known by the ominously-named Department of Homeland Security — the big guns, in other words.

And here is their master plan:

DHS Funds Leftist Orgs to Study ‘Radicalization,’ ‘White Supremacy’ in Video Games

Video games?

Are you kidding me?  So Call of Duty, Medal of Honor and… wait, I don’t know much about this stuff… oh yeah, World of Warcraft are the tools whereby impressionable kids are being “radicalized” and taught about the practice of White Supremacy?

I don’t know whether to chuckle, laugh hysterically or just wave my private parts at this foolishness.

What a bunch of pathetic morons.

Next they’ll be trying to link, oh I dunno, bulldog ownership to the above bogeymen (you heard it here first).  Hey, DHS / FBI fuckwits:  here’s your first candidate for a radical White supremacist bulldog owner:

Go get ‘im.

Next: The Supremes

Legal Stuff, Rights

Oh, I like this kind of thing:

A federal appeals court upheld a Texas law that bans Big Tech from censoring speech based on political viewpoint on Friday.

House Bill 20 prevents social media companies with more than 50 million monthly users banning users simply based on their political viewpoints. The law also requires several consumer protection disclosures and processes related to content management on the social media sites to which the bill applies. These sites must disclose their content management and moderation policies and implement a complaint and appeals process for content they remove, providing a reason for the removal and a review of their decision. They also must review and remove illegal content within 48 hours. House Bill 20 also prohibits email service providers from impeding the transmission of email messages based on content.

Needless to say, the Left went into full hair-on-fire mode:

The law was promptly challenged by NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association. They argued that tech companies have a First Amendment right to select and curate the content people post on their platforms. They were able to get the new law blocked, but Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton appealed that decision — and won.

Fortunately, common sense and Constitutionalism prevailed.  In the judgment of the 5th Circuit:

The implications of the platforms’ argument are staggering. In the platforms’ view, email providers, mobile phone companies, and banks* could cancel the accounts of anyone who sends an email, makes a phone call, or spends money in support of a disfavored political party, candidate, or business. What’s worse, the platforms argue that a business can acquire a dominant market position by holding itself out as open to everyone — as Twitter did in championing itself as “the free speech wing of the free speech party.”…Then, having cemented itself as the monopolist of “the modern public square,”…Twitter unapologetically argues that it could turn around and ban all pro-LGBT speech for no other reason than its employees want to pick on members of that community…

The 11th Court found differently, hence it’s off to the Supremes we go.  And they can’t punt it back, because two federal appeals courts have conflicting rulings.

Let’s see what happens.

*Note how banks were specifically mentioned, which should make this little episode interesting.

Fair Warning

Legal Stuff, Rights

Following on from the decision of credit card companies to “flag” sales made at gun stores, we have this development:

Twenty-four Republican attorneys general sent a letter to Visa, Mastercard, and American Express Tuesday warning them to drop plans to code and compile gun sales in America.

The new code will not protect public safety. Categorizing the constitutionally protected right to purchase firearms unfairly singles out law-abiding merchants and consumers alike. First, efforts to track and monitor sales at gun stores would only result in vague and misleading information. This categorization would not recognize the difference, for example, between the purchase of a gun safe and a firearm. Nor would it capture firearm purchases made at department stores, resulting in arbitrarily disparate treatment of “gun store” merchants and consumers.

More importantly, purposefully tracking this information can only result in its misuse, either unintentional or deliberate. Creating and tracking this data only matters if your institutions are considering using that information to take further, harmful action—like infringing upon consumer privacy, inhibiting constitutionally protected purchases by selectively restricting the use of your payment systems, or otherwise withholding your financial services from targeted “disfavored” merchants.

And my favorite part:

Social policy should be debated and determined within our political institutions. Americans are tired of seeing corporate leverage used to advance political goals that cannot muster basic democratic support. The Second Amendment is a fundamental right, but it’s also a fundamental American value. Our financial institutions should stop lending their market power to those who wish to attack that value.

Be advised that we will marshal the full scope of our lawful authority to protect our citizens and consumers from unlawful attempts to undermine their constitutional rights. Please keep that in mind as you consider whether to proceed with adopting and implementing this Merchant Category Code.

Give it to the bastards good and hard, boys and girls.  Make ’em sweat, and make ’em bleed if they ignore you.

Basic Stupidity

Gummint, Marxists, Taxes and Theft, Wokism

Several of you sent me this lovely little bit of governmental stupidity:

More than 140 people experiencing homelessness in Denver will each be provided up to $1,000 in cash a month for up to one year as part of a basic income program designed to help “lift individuals out of homelessness,” the city announced last week.

The $2 million contract with the Denver Basic Income Project was approved by the City Council and will provide direct cash assistance to more than 140 women, transgender and gender non-conforming individuals, and families in shelters.

Civic altruism and wokism, all subsidized by taxpayer dollars.  And I hate to break it to these Colorado morons, but “up to” a grand is going to lift precisely nobody out of poverty.  It will, however, encourage more people in similar circumstances to come to Denver…

Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of socialists.