Preaching To The Choir

Of course the Left wants to muzzle people who disagree with their agenda:

The College of Psychologists of Ontario, which has embraced radical gender theory in recent years, has threatened to remove Peterson’s clinical psychology license over his social media activity if he did not go through a so-called “specified continuing education or remedial program.” 

…and unsurprisingly, the Canucki courts (another bunch of Stalinists) has sided with these assholes:

On Wednesday, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice ordered Peterson to pay $25,000 to the College of Psychologists and upheld the order that he go through a social media education program. 

Also unsurprisingly, Jordan Peterson has told them to fuck off, in his polite manner.

Here’s my thought on the matter.  If there’s some wealthy conservative tycoon out there who wants to put his money where it will do a lot of good, he should announce the endowment of a Department of Modern Psychology at, say, Hillsdale College, to be headed by Dr. Jordan Peterson.

Why Hillsdale?

Regular Readers of this website know my philosophy about education.  It is based on the principles of Albert Jay Nock, which can be summarized as follows:  “Educate only those who are receptive to being educated, instead of trying to educate everybody.”

Kids who attend Hillsdale College are likely to be conservative (or at least their parents are), and Peterson’s teachings are more likely to be appreciated and reinforced by their receptive audience.

From a practical perspective, this would take Peterson away from the toxic College of Psychologists of Ontario and still-more toxic Canadian environment, put him in a position which encourages his thinking and analysis, and would create a platform for his message.  Also, Peterson would be forever immune to censure and “re-education” (a.k.a. psychological bullying).

In the long run, this would be far more effective than contributing to Chris Christie’s doomed presidential election bid.

Just a thought.

Stupid Idiots

Some people just haven’t got the memo.  Like senior hillbilly Asa Hutchinson [who? nemmind, just stay with me here]:

GOP presidential candidate former Gov. Asa Hutchinson (R-AR) said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union” that former President Donald Trump is in “serious jeopardy” of being found not to be qualified to be president.

…and the rest of his statement is all politico-legal jargon about “courts” and whatever.

You clueless idiot.  Can’t you see that the more people line up against Trump — especially the DoJ, the White House and morons like yourself — the more likely that conservative voters who are just pissed off at the whole circus will just say, “Fuck all y’all!” and vote for Trump in still-greater numbers, just out of spite?

Regardless, Asa old bean, if Trump is found “not qualified” to be president (by whom? on what grounds?), then what does that make you?

Where It Counts

I saw this yesterday (link in pic):

…and it struck me that politicians shouldn’t ever take this at face value.  Why?

Because we gun owners seldom show up to demonstrate.  We do, however, show up at the polls, and in greater numbers than the ninnies carrying silly placards.

Wussy TennGov Bill Lee should take note.

By the way, the anti-gunners aren’t having much success, as this weepy article reveals.

Forensic Summary

If ever you utter the words “election fraud” and are met with eyerolls, looks of pity and so on, feel free to repeat the content of this excellent historical infographic on the topic from Doug Ross.  A sample:

And all those points are amplified, one by one.

Better still, the actions described are not only irrefutable — if anyone even attempts to refute them, their motives are to be questioned — they are all documented fact.

When Panic Costs Money

The Greatest Living Englishman has turned his ire towards the BBC, and at climate fearmongers in general:

Amazon Prime star has slammed weather forecasters for spreading what he has described as “green propaganda” in his latest column.

The presenter, 63, went on to explain that due to inaccurate weather reports, he and many other farmers and been forced to “take a massive financial hit” for “absolutely no reason”.

Jeremy recalled how earlier this week, weather presenters had claimed “an apocalyptic storm would arrive in Britain on Tuesday night”.

The Former Top Gear host went on to explain how, due to predictions of weeks of “torrential rain and gales”, he had felt forced to harvest his crops even though they weren’t ready because the moisture content was too high.

“Yes, I’d have to pay £10 a ton to dry the grain after it was harvested but better to take that hit than have the whole lot ruined by the storm,” he wrote in his column for the Sun. 

“We worked tirelessly until 11pm and when I finally crawled into bed, utterly exhausted, I noticed that all of my neighbouring farmers were still out here, doing the same thing.”

Here’s what he was talking about:

But:

The ex-BBC star went on to express his outrage when he had expected to see “Armageddon” the next morning only to be greeted by “blue skies and a gentle breeze”.

“So the farmers had brought in their harvest early and taken a massive financial hit that they can’t afford… for absolutely no reason,” Jeremy fumed.

So he lashed out.

“They feel compelled, when it’s warm, to paint their maps dark red and talk about ‘extreme heat’. And similarly, to keep Greta and the snowflake army happy, they need to say when it’s a bit chilly, that we will all soon be buried under a 20-foot snow drift,” he complained.

“They see their weather forecasts now as political weapons. Baseball bats which can be used to beat the oil companies into submission. And they’ll mangle statistics if that’s what’s necessary.”

He then went on to beg weather forecasters to share “the truth” with farmers and to save their “propaganda forecasts” for people who need to “turn the heating down”.

“They think that the constant wrongness doesn’t matter, because a wonky weather forecast only affects people planning barbecues,” he stated. “But to farmers, it bloody well does matter.”

Frankly, if I were a British farmer, I’d subscribe to an actual meteorogical service and learn to interpret the data for myself.

And refuse to pay the BBC license fee, like millions of other Brits are doing.

Too Old To Rock ‘N Roll

…but too young to die, as a wise man once sang.

Now we have the political equivalent:

Former South Carolina Republican Governor Nikki Haley said over the weekend that politicians should have to take mental competency tests once they hit 75 years old to ensure they are fit to serve the public.

“We need to have mental competency tests for anyone over the age of 75,” she said. “And I don’t say that to be disrespectful. I don’t care if you do it for 50 and older. What I’m saying is, these are people in D.C. that are making decisions on our national security.”

Of course, this tin-eared politico uses this argument to score a point off the noticeably-senile Joe Biden, but she does have a point nevertheless.

We don’t let people go into public office when they’re too young, because even among a poulation of ignoramuses, youthful wannabe-politicians are no more than the primordial ooze of society.  Young people, as it’s been said, argue with passion, vigor and conviction;  except that they’re almost inevitably wrong.

So given the inescapable fact that old farts start losing their marbles as they approach senility — forget the numbers, stats and medical studies on this, it’s an inescapable fact of human life — why not set an arbitrary upper limit on public service?  Forget that “testing” bullshit as suggested by Haley et al., that’s just busybody government attitude on display.  Carve it in stone — hell, stick it in the Constitution, why not? — but make it impossible for any Olde Phartte to govern.

Yes, I know:  some old people are commendably active, mentally speaking, and denying them office would have denied us of, to name but one, Ronald Reagan (at least his second term, anyway).  But even in Reagan’s second term, it was apparent that the old boy was losing his marbles.  And taking our cue from that, it’s not really how old a President is when he takes office, it’s how old he’ll be at the end of his first term that’s important.  Think about it:  70 years old on Inauguration Day means 78 towards the end of his Presidency, when he’ll still have his finger on the nuclear trigger and be proposing legislation that may suit the present but be a hopeless long-term proposition. Older than 70?  Ladies and gentlemen, I give you:  Joe Biden.

Which brings me to the next issue about senior-citizen politicians:  the “I’ll be dead by then” attitude that is as inescapable a mindset as physical senility.  Oh sure, we’d like to think that our politicians are going to be statesmen like Washington or Jefferson and think of generations to come;  but the most likely scenario is that they’re going to be more like Barack fucking Obama.  (Tangentially, the only reason to allow older men to become president is because they’re more likely to die soon after leaving office, unless they’re named Jimmy Carter in which case they continue to meddle and foist their horrible ideas and opinions on us long after they’ve exceeded their useful date.)

If we think about this logically, politicians and lawmakers in general should have to live with the consequences of their actions, because then the urge to just say “oh fuck it, let the kids deal with it” is a lot less appealing.

Corporations, by the way, recognize this issue quite clearly, which is why we have mandatory-retirement policies in so many professions — airline pilots at 55 65 being the most noteworthy — and why so many people prefer middle-aged doctors to both young and inexperienced doctors and old doctors who may not be up to date with recent advances or do things “because I’ve always done it this way”.  There are limits to experience, of course, and particularly when that experience stands in the way of proper action.  Most corporate boards, by the way, have no age limit but that’s because the proper function of a board is advisory and not executive.

Here’s my suggestion:  all public servants, regardless of position, should be banned from running for public office after the age of 67 — the de facto  “retirement” age of current society.  I know that medical advances are wonderful and have done so much to ensure that the age of Man is no longer just threescore years and ten etc., but allowing much older people to run for office — yes, Trump as much as Biden — is an irresponsible indulgence that in general and in the long term will turn out to be harmful to society.  (Trump, for example, would be 78 were he to win the Presidency in 2024, which means he’d be 82 at the end of his term of office.  You sure you want an octogenarian Trump flailing around the Oval Office for two whole years?  And that’s assuming he’s still got all his marbles now:  by no means an established fact.)

As a bookie might put it:  yeah, there are some senior citizens who would function perfectly well while late into their seventies and even eighties — but that’s not the way to bet.

If we have a lower limit on political life, why not an upper one?