Category Archives: Politics

Posted on by

The Supreme Court destroys all chances of race-based ‘reparations’

It was 2003 when the Supreme Court released its decision in Grutter v Bollinger, 539 U. S. ____ (2003), in which a bare majority allowed the University of Michigan Law School to continue to consider race in its admissions decisions. Associate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor concluded, in something we have cited previously:

We take the Law School at its word that it would like nothing better than to find a race-neutral admissions formula and will terminate its race-conscious admissions program as soon as practicable. See Brief for Respondents Bollinger et al. 34; Bakke, supra, at 317ñ318 (opinion of Powell, J.) (presuming good faith of university officials in the absence of a showing to the contrary). It has been 25 years since Justice Powell first approved the use of race to further an interest in student body diversity in the context of public higher education. Since that time, the number of minority applicants with high grades and test scores has indeed increased. We expect that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.[1]Grutter v Bollinger, Decision of the Court, page 31 of the .pdf file.

I have long said that it was internally both significant and stupid that the Supreme Court allowed something it said would be unconstitutional come June 23, 2028 to be allowable up until that time. Well, it has taken 20 of those 25 years, but the Supreme Court has finally righted that wrong. The Supreme Court finally released its decision in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College.

To hear the principal dissent tell it, Grutter blessed such programs indefinitely, until “racial inequality will end.” Post, at 54 (opinion of SOTOMAYOR, J.). But Grutter did no such thing. It emphasized—not once or twice, but at least six separate times—that race-based admissions programs “must have reasonable durational limits” and that their “deviation from the norm of equal treatment” must be “a temporary matter.” 539 U. S., at 342. The Court also disclaimed “[e]nshrining a permanent justification for racial preferences.” Ibid. Yet the justification for race-based admissions that the dissent latches on to is just that—unceasing.[2]Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, Decision of the Court, page 36-37 of the decision, and pages 44-45 of the .pdf file.

Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, emphasized what we have known all along: the racially biased admissions structure being used by colleges and universities was not moving steadily, or in any way at all, to a terminal date in 2028, and that the schools which were party to this case, Harvard University and the University of North Carolina made no claims that they were proceeding toward that end.

In what may be an underappreciated footnote number 9, the Chief Justice noted:

The principal dissent rebukes the Court for not considering adequately the reliance interests respondents and other universities had in Grutter. But as we have explained, Grutter itself limited the reliance that could be placed upon it by insisting, over and over again, that race-based admissions programs be limited in time. See supra, at 20. Grutter indeed went so far as to suggest a specific period of reliance — 25 years — precluding the indefinite reliance interests that the dissent articulates. Cf. post, at 2–4 (KAVANAUGH, J., concurring). Those interests are, moreover, vastly overstated on their own terms. Three out of every five American universities do not consider race in their admissions decisions. See Brief for Respondent in No. 20–1199, p. 40. And several States — including some of the most populous (California, Florida, and Michigan) — have prohibited race-based admissions outright. See Brief for Oklahoma et al. as Amici Curiae 9, n. 6.[3]Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, Decision of the Court, page 38 of the decision, and page 46 of the .pdf file.

If roughly 60% of American colleges and universities do not consider race at all in their admissions decisions, then it becomes clear that the consideration of race is unnecessary.

Court decisions are difficult to read, in large part due to all of the internal citations, but also because lawyers are, let’s face it, not usually all that great with prose. Nevertheless, I’d invite all of my readers — both of them! — to follow the link and read the decision.

There will be thousands of articles about this decision, and at least in our nation’s professional media, most will be negative. Solomon Jones in The Philadelphia Inquirer has a column entitled “Affirmative action is racial justice. The Supreme Court ruling is a step backwards. To be blunt, right-wing activists aren’t fighting to abolish racial preferences. They’re fighting to maintain them.” Mr Jones went through many of the reasons he believes we need Affirmative Action, but his column is noteworthy in one major way: he made no argument at all that the Court’s decision was based on a faulty reading of the Constitution.[4]Actually, Mr Jones’ column reads very much as though it was written before the Court’s decision was released, and that he had not been able to read the decision before he wrote his piece.

In a mostly straight news article, Susan Snyder reported on how some Pennsylvania universities will deal with the decision, noting the sole exception the Chief Justice allowed, that in individual admission essays, the way racial discrimination impacted an individual applicant, and how he overcame them, could be considered. Count on admissions departments to start advising applicants to write about that!

The Editorial Board also weighed in on the subject.

But there was one brief point in the decision that seemed very important to me, and which I haven’t seen mentioned by anyone else:

The Court soon adopted Justice Powell’s analysis as its own. In the years after Bakke, the Court repeatedly held that ameliorating societal discrimination does not constitute a compelling interest that justifies race-based state action. “[A]n effort to alleviate the effects of societal discrimination is not a compelling interest,” we said plainly in Hunt, a 1996 case about the Voting Rights Act. 517 U. S., at 909–910. We reached the same conclusion in Croson, a case that concerned a preferential government contracting program. Permitting “past societal discrimination” to “serve as the basis for rigid racial preferences would be to open the door to competing claims for ‘remedial relief ’ for every disadvantaged group.” 488 U. S., at 505. Opening that door would shutter another—“[t]he dream of a Nation of equal citizens . . . would be lost,” we observed, “in a mosaic of shifting preferences based on inherently unmeasurable claims of past wrongs.” Id., at 505–506. “[S]uch a result would be contrary to both the letter and spirit of a constitutional provision whose central command is equality.”[5]Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, Decision of the Court, page 35-36 of the decision, and pages 43-44 of the .pdf file.

The Chief Justice spent a significant amount of time, earlier in the decision, noting how the Fourteenth Amendment specified equal protection of the law, and that many subsequent decisions, as well as statements by elected officials and others, meant that equal protection of the law meant that all were equal under the law, regardless of race. With the paragraph above, the Court said that neither “ameliorating societal discrimination” nor allowing “past societal discrimination” to “serve as the basis for rigid racial preferences would be to open the door to competing claims for ‘remedial relief ’ for every disadvantaged group” was constitutionally allowable, and that must certainly mean that payments or advantages given to black Americans, from the taxes of white Americans, for the enslavement of their distant ancestors, can be legal.

Robert Stacy McCain noted, amusingly enough, that only Donald Trump, among all living Presidents, is not the descendant of slave owners, as Mr Trump’s family did not arrive on these shores until after slavery had been ended. Since only direct injury, caused by a specifiable person or institution, is the basis for restorative payments, and there are no living Americans who were enslaved, it is impossible, under the Court’s standard to allow all black Americans, none of whom were directly injured by slavery, to be paid by white Americans, none of whom owned slaves and most of whom cannot be traced back to a slaveowner.

Naturally, the Usual Suspects are aghast that the Court said that racial preferences violate the Fourteenth Amendment, but the Court has, for at least 45 years since Regents of the University of California v Bakke tried to massage the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to mean something other than what it actually says. Now, at last, the Court has decided that yes, equal protection of the laws actually means equal protection of the laws.
__________________________________
Also posted on American Free News Network. Check out American Free News Network for more well written and well reasoned conservative commentary.
__________________________________

References

References
↑1 Grutter v Bollinger, Decision of the Court, page 31 of the .pdf file.
↑2 Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, Decision of the Court, page 36-37 of the decision, and pages 44-45 of the .pdf file.
↑3 Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, Decision of the Court, page 38 of the decision, and page 46 of the .pdf file.
↑4 Actually, Mr Jones’ column reads very much as though it was written before the Court’s decision was released, and that he had not been able to read the decision before he wrote his piece.
↑5 Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, Decision of the Court, page 35-36 of the decision, and pages 43-44 of the .pdf file.
Posted on by

Get #woke, go broke: this is what can happen when companies start getting involved in political controversies All too often, it's not just the #woke who go broke

Everybody has heard the expression, ‘Get #woke[1]From Wikipedia: Woke (/ˈwoʊk/) as a political term of African-American origin refers to a perceived awareness of issues concerning social justice and racial justice. It is derived from … Continue reading, go broke.’

Some on the left thought that the backlash against Bud Light over the Dylan Mulvaney stunt would fade relatively quickly. In news which might call into question other corporations and their ‘celebration’ of homosexual ‘Pride Month,’ it looks like that hasn’t happened yet. From The Wall Street Journal:

Bud Light Loses Title as Top-Selling U.S. Beer

Modelo Especial in May took over the top sales spot, reflecting the enduring damage from a Bud Light boycott

By Jennifer Maloney | Tuesday, June 13, 2023 | 8:58 PM EDT

Bud Light no longer rules the American beer market.

Modelo Especial overtook the brand as the top-selling U.S. beer in May, punctuating a monthslong boycott of Bud Light that has reshuffled the beer industry.

Modelo represented 8.4% of U.S. retail-store beer sales in the four weeks ended June 3, compared with 7.3% for Bud Light, according to an analysis of Nielsen data by consulting firm Bump Williams.

Bud Light’s sales have tanked since April, when transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney posted an image on Instagram of a personalized Bud Light can that the brand had sent her as a gift. The Instagram post sparked an uproar, and brewer Anheuser-Busch InBev’s BUD: (%) response to the boycott angered even more people.

Bud Light’s sales were down about 24% in the week ended June 3 compared with the same week last year, according to Bump Williams. Other Anheuser-Busch brands also have taken a hit, including Budweiser and Michelob Ultra.

At least as of June 1th, it was “unclear” whether Bud Light’s vice president for marketing Alissa Heinerscheid remains on her ‘leave of absence’ or has returned to work. That was the latest information I could find in a Google search for Alissa Heinerscheid.

One would have thought that other corporate leaders, seeing what happened to Mrs Heinerscheid and her boss, Group Vice President for Marketing at Anheuser-Busch Daniel Blake, who also took a ‘leave of absence,’, reportedly involuntarily, would have tempered the response of other corporate executives to going all-in on ‘Pride Month,’ but some took the leap anyway.

The continued decline through May is an ominous sign for Bud Light distributors during what they say is a make-or-break stretch between Memorial Day and the Fourth of July. Most Anheuser-Busch distributors are independently owned, many of them by families who have sold Budweiser for generations. Some Anheuser-Busch distributors said they are now contemplating layoffs. Others who also carry Constellation brands said their losses have been partially offset by Modelo’s surge.

“Our year is screwed,” said an Anheuser-Busch distributor who doesn’t carry Modelo.

In other words, it isn’t just Mr Blake and Mrs Heinerscheid who have suffered[2]I have not seen any public information as to whether Mr Blake or Mrs Heinerscheid are being paid during their involuntary leaves of absence.; many small business owners have lost a lot of business, and some of their employees may lose their jobs.

Since the boycott, Anheuser-Busch has accelerated production of new Bud Light ads, leaning into the themes of football and country music. The brewer also told its distributors that it would buy back unsold cases of beer that have gone past their expiration date.

In other words, ‘leaning into the themes’ that are not controversial or political, which is pretty much what sensible advertisers have been doing since advertising began. Try to get a few new customers, and don’t piss off the ones you already have. One would have thought that the Harvard-educated Mrs Heinerscheid would have already known that, but apparently if one did think that, one would have been wrong.

References

References
↑1 From Wikipedia:

Woke (/ˈwoʊk/) as a political term of African-American origin refers to a perceived awareness of issues concerning social justice and racial justice. It is derived from the African-American Vernacular English expression “stay woke“, whose grammatical aspect refers to a continuing awareness of these issues.
By the late 2010s, woke had been adopted as a more generic slang term broadly associated with left-wing politics and cultural issues (with the terms woke culture and woke politics also being used). It has been the subject of memes and ironic usage. Its widespread use since 2014 is a result of the Black Lives Matter movement.

I shall confess to sometimes “ironic usage” of the term. To put it bluntly, I think that the ‘woke’ are just boneheadedly stupid.

↑2 I have not seen any public information as to whether Mr Blake or Mrs Heinerscheid are being paid during their involuntary leaves of absence.
Posted on by

Lies, damned lies, and statistics The left use bogus numbers to try to make their case

Garbage in, garbage out: when you base your arguments on lies bad data, your arguments fall apart.

Mary Lou Marzian, former Kentucky House Representative for the previous District 34, and Honi Marleen Goldman, described as “a Kentucky activist,” and is, in fact, a pro-abortion agitator, were granted OpEd space in what my best friend used to call the Lexington Herald-Liberal, claiming that the General Assembly, Kentucky’s state legislature, is unfairly gerrymandered to harm the interests of the Commonwealth’s urban residents.

Fueled by dark money, Kentucky’s rural/urban divide hurts all of us | Opinion

by Mary Lou Marzian and Honi Goldman | Thursday, May 25, 2023 | 10:11 AM EDT | Updated: 12:23 PM EDT

Kentucky is comprised of 120 counties. In only two of those counties is there a major city, Louisville and Lexington (1.4 million and 517,000 respectively). Together these two key cities make up 44% of Kentucky’s population.

The citizens of Louisville and Lexington are diverse in race, religion, and ethnic origin. The population in Kentucky’s smaller towns and counties is primarily white and Christian.

The biggest concerns in the urban centers are crime, homelessness, and human rights. The rural areas focus on gun rights, “Family Values” and government overreach.

The issues for both sides are unique and fundamental to their respective populations.

Read more here.

One of the things about reading articles online is that the browser tabs can sometimes tell you more than the authors and editors want you to know. As originally saved, the article was entited “With misinformation, Ky’s urban/rural divide hurts us.” Someone, who would normally be the newspaper’s editor, changed the title, to blame “dark money”, and changed urban/rural to rural/urban. 🙂

The authors’ first paragraph gives us the “misinformation” with which the article was originally entitled. Louisville’s population is not 1.4 million and Lexington’s is not 517,000. According to the United States Census Bureau, the Louisville/Jefferson County’s population in the 2020 Census was 633,045, and the July 1, 2022 guesstimate is 624,444. The Census Bureau stated that Lexington/Fayette County’s population was 322,570 in the 2020 Census, and a guesstimated 320,347 as of July 1, 2022. The population of the entire state was given as 4,505,836 in the Census, and an estimated 4,512,310 last July.

Let’s do the math! 624,444 + 320,347 = 944,791. 944,791 ÷ 4,512,310 = 0.2094, or 20.94%.

So, no, those “two key cities” do not “make up 44% of Kentucky’s population.”

It has been suggested that Misses Marzian and Goldman were actually using the metropolitan statistical area concept for population numbers, and the Louisville metropolitan statistical area had a population of 1,395,855, close enough to the 1.4 million the authors claimed.

Also see: William Teach; Credentialed Media Is Losing Minds After Target Removes LGBT Material

But the metropolitan statistical area for Louisville includes Clark, Floyd, Harrison, and Washington counties in Indiana! Unintentionally or otherwise, Misses Marzian and Goldman were trying to include parts of Indiana in the Bluegrass State’s population, to reach their elevated count of 44%.

The Kentucky counties listed as part of the Louisville metropolitan statistical area are, along with Jefferson, Bullitt, Henry, Oldham, Shelby, Spencer, and Trimble. The authors contended that these were all urbanized counties, with urbanized interests: “crime, homelessness, and human rights.” But, in the 2020 presidential election, while Joe Biden carried Jefferson County 228,358 (59.06%) to 150,646 (38.96%) for President Trump, Mr Trump carried the other listed Kentucky counties, in the same order, by 73.12%, 72.05%, 59.65%, 63.93%, 76.42%, and 74.70%.

The counties listed as part of the Lexington/Fayette County metropolitan statistical area are Bourbon, Clark, Jessamine, Scott, and Woodford, and while Mr Biden carried Fayette County 90,600 (59.25%) to Mr Trump’s 58,860 (38.49%), President Trump carried the other listed counties, respectively, 64.16%, 65.11%, 65.05%, 61.33%, and 54.97%.

In the two United States Senate races, Mitch McConnell vs Amy McGrath Henderson in 2020, and Rand Paul vs Charles Booker in 2022, while the Democrat challenger carried Jefferson and Fayette counties, the Republican incumbent carried all of the others in their metropolitan statistical areas.

These are all statewide races; there are no gerrymandered districts.

Back to the original:

However, 75% of Kentucky State House Representatives, 77% State Senators, 83% of U.S. House Representatives and 100% of Kentucky’s U.S. Senators are making laws that affect nearly half of Kentucky’s population who are against what these legislators are voting for and what their campaigns are based on.

The authors couldn’t even get that right! The GOP controls 80%, not 75%, of the seats in the state House of Representatives; the 75% figure was from the previous House, from 2021-22, rather than the current one. With 30 seats in the state Senate, the GOP controls 79% — 78.94% to be more accurate — in that chamber. Can’t the authors do math?

But, while those numbers are pretty strong for Republicans, with the only two reliably Democratic counties in the state having just 20.94% of the Commonwealth’s population, they seem to fit the way Kentuckians vote!

Naturally, there are some Republicans in Jefferson and Fayette counties, just as there are Democrats in the rural areas, but the numbers have pretty much worked out.

While the authors gave at least a tip of the hat to more rural Kentuckians — “The rural areas focus on gun rights, ‘Family Values’ and government overreach. The issues for both sides are unique and fundamental to their respective populations” — it didn’t take them too long to list a litany of complaints blatantly tilted to the ‘progressive’ agenda. They continued:

The citizens of Kentucky are fighting for their very existence. Laws are being passed that claim to “protect” the rural population from concocted horrors, are in fact hurting and killing people in the urban population.

Killing people? What laws are being passed which kill people? We know, of course, that Miss Goldman fully supports prenatal infanticide, so it would seem that the laws she supports would actually kill people!

In very conservative Kentucky, the Lexington Herald-Leader has apparently taken a full-tilt transgender advocacy stand. Long-time Herald-Leader columnist Linda Blackford even told us it was coming:

Alex Acquisto has written a harrowing, intimate account of some of the families in our state who are simply trying to meet their children’s needs in the wake of Senate Bill 150, which bans gender-affirming healthcare. She opens with a scene of 13-year-old Henry Svec who sat in a Frankfort hearing room as “experts” defined him as unnatural, confused and disordered. Henry and his parents are actually pretty clear about who Henry is and what he needs. They’d like to provide it to him, but the GOP majority has decided that “parents rights” means politicians get to decide what’s best for Henry.

In Opinion, we will have some first person accounts from trans people on the front lines. Rebecca Blankenship, the first trans person elected to public office in Kentucky, and some of her colleagues talk about how the trans movement is used by both the left and right for their own purposes. Ysa Leon, the incoming SGA president at Transy, always believed they would live in Kentucky and work to make it a better place, but now believes they will have to leave[1]The author claims to be transgender and uses the plural pronouns. because politicians are ginning up so much hatred. Bill Adkins, a lawyer in Williamsburg, is not trans, but he does study history and explains how political scapegoating of minorities can lead to far more deadly consequences. Former Rep. Mary Lou Marzian explains how gerrymandering has given rural legislators too much power over urban areas, which further heightens these kinds of divides.

As we have previously noted, the newspaper has fallen completely out-of-touch with its readership. Newspapers are failing all over the country, but the newspaper, which was once the dominant paper in central and eastern Kentucky, is a shadow of its former self. Where, in junior high and early high school I used to deliver the old Lexington Herald and afternoon Lexington Leader in Mt Sterling, they closed up their printing plant in seven years ago, outsourcing the print edition to a plant outside of Louisville 1½ hours west of Lexington, and dropped a separate Saturday edition at the beginning of 2020.

You want home delivery outside of Lexington? Too bad, so sad, but it ain’t going to happen!

The truthful statistic? Kentuckians as a whole are pretty conservative, and while there are some liberals and even progressives in the Bluegrass State, they are a decided minority. I can remember, back in the dark age of quill pens on parchment, University of Kentucky political science professor Malcolm Jewell telling his students that the two major party candidates are practically guaranteed 40% of the vote, and the real battle is for the 20% that’s actually up for grabs. But in the three most recent statewide general election campaigns, Democrats Joe Biden, Amy McGrath Henderson, and Charles Booker couldn’t even get the 40% Dr Jewell told us they were guaranteed.

References

References
↑1 The author claims to be transgender and uses the plural pronouns.
Posted on by

A major loss for ‘progressives’? Philly Democrats nominate a (supposedly) tough-on-crime mayoral candidate

Chart from The Philadelphia Inquirer. Click to enlarge.

Let me be clear here: I don’t live in Philadelphia, I don’t work in Philly, and, since July of 2017, I haven’t even lived in Pennsylvania. A victory by Helen Gym Flaherty in the Democratic primary for mayor in the city was never going to affect me personally. But a victory for ‘progressives,’ which William Teach has called ‘nice fascists,’ would have had repercussions nationwide, emboldening the dumbest people in our electorate, and that she lost makes me very, very happy.

What makes me unhappy is that the race was determined mostly by race! Former City Councilwoman Cherelle Parker Mullins won because she won the heavily black districts, and the heavily Hispanic ones, and she was the only black ‘major’ candidate; there was no serious Hispanic candidate in the race. Former City Controller Rebecca Rhynhart McDuff[1]It is interesting, and sad, that none of the major female candidates respected their husbands enough to have taken their names. won the majority white areas, but she wound up splitting that vote more evenly with Allan Domb and Mrs Flaherty. Mrs Flaherty, who is ethnically Korean, won one demographic group, which The Philadelphia Inquirer listed as “AAPI,” meaning Asian-American/Pacific Islander.

Even there, however, she took only a plurality, 41.1%, not a majority. But the notion that skin color is a determining factor doesn’t speak well for a ‘diverse’ city.

Chart from The Philadelphia Inquirer. Click to enlarge.

The Inquirer also worked out, though taking some assumptions based on precinct populations, larger political groups, and Mrs Flaherty won a plurality, 42.7%, among ‘younger white progressive voters,’ but even there, Mrs Mullins and Mrs McDuff together outpolled her, with 45.5% of the votes. Mrs McDuff, who had been endorsed by the Inquirer, carried both ‘working class white moderate voters’ and ‘wealthy white liberal voters.’

But what really sunk the progressives?

Areas that have seen the most gun violence supported Parker the most

Chart via The Philadelphia Inquirer. Click to enlarge.

A strong majority of residents rated crime as the top issue in pre-election polls, and the city remains in a years-long crisis of gun violence. But gun violence doesn’t affect residents equally: Some neighborhoods have far more shootings than others.The choice of those areas closest to gun violence is clear: They picked Parker.

Precincts that had seen more than 175 shooting victims within 2,000 feet of their boundaries since 2015 gave Parker half of their vote. By contrast, neighborhoods with the fewest shooting victims gave a disproportionately high share of their vote to other candidates.

Notably, Parker has espoused some tough-on-crime policies, including a willingness to revisit the policy of stop-and-frisk, citing a “crisis” of public safety.

It has been said before that a conservative is a liberal who has been mugged, and while calling Philly voters ‘conservatives’ would certainly be wrong, it seems that the ‘progressive’ candidate saw her share of the vote steadily decline as neighborhoods were exposed to more shootings.

There is, however, a major disconnect in the City of Brotherly Love when it comes to crime. While Mrs Mullins won at least in part based on her tough-on-crime campaign, wanting to put more police officers on the streets — Mrs Flaherty had previously supported ‘defund the police’ efforts, though she kept it out of her campaign this year — rather than deploy social workers and mental health professionals as Mrs Flaherty wanted, the city also re-elected the very much soft-on-crime, police-hating defense lawyer Larry Krasner as District Attorney in 2021, the year in which Philly set its all-time record for homicides. Mr Krasner actually is fairly tough on actual murderers; it’s just that he’s not just a marshmallow, but makes marshmallows look tough when it comes to ‘lesser’ crimes. The thugs and gang-bangers — and the Inky once told us that there were no actual gangs in the city, just “cliques of young men affiliated with certain neighborhoods and families,” and the newspaper’s apparent, if unpublished, stylebook has substituted “street group” for gangs — mostly get a pass, or just a slap on the wrist for illegal gun possession from the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office, right up until they up their crimes to rape and murder. The apparently odd notion of locking up the bad guys before they become worse guys is wholly outside the paradigm for Mr Krasner, and his voters as well. Mr Krasner being a separately elected official means that Mrs Mullins’ policy preferences don’t have any controlling authority over him.

Mr Krasner has been elected through the end of 2025, which means two full years in office after Mrs Mullins becomes mayor. Technically, she still has to win the general election against Republican David Oh, but in Philly, that’s almost a formality; the city hasn’t had a Republican mayor since Harry Truman was President! How much pushback he will give to Mrs Mullins remains to be seen, but I suspect it will be a lot.

Police Commissioner Danielle Outlaw? Mrs Mullins said that she wasn’t going to take personnel decisions during the campaign, but, as Commissioner, Miss Outlaw has been unable to prevent a steady stream of retirements and resignations, coupled with smaller new recruit numbers, and case closure numbers have dropped. For Mrs Mullins to be tough on crime, she’ll need a Police Department that can actually do the job.

References

References
↑1 It is interesting, and sad, that none of the major female candidates respected their husbands enough to have taken their names.
Posted on by

Danielle Outlaw will probably fire another good cop

To be a Philly cop, you must be politically correct and like totally #woke!

A Philly detective who handles sex crimes is under investigation for allegedly posting crude tweets about women, police say

Ron Kahlan’s account often tweeted vulgar sexual innuendo and used boorish language. Internal Affairs is investigating, police said.

by Chris Palmer and Ellie Rushing | Sunday, May 7, 2023 | 4:21 _PM EDT

A detective in the Philadelphia Police Department’s special victims unit who is assigned to investigate sex crimes is under internal investigation for a series of offensive tweets posted on his account over the years, including a number of crude sexual remarks about women.

“The only reason [I’m] watching the Phils now is because [of] the hot chick behind the on-deck circle!!!” read a tweet posted on Ron Kahlan’s Twitter page in 2012. That post was among the tamest of the tweets Kahlan allegedly wrote that were shared Saturday by an Instagram account called WatchOutPhilly.

In 2012? Holy calculator, Batman, that was 11 years ago! More, it was the latest of the tweets shown in the links; all of the rest pictured are dated in 2011.

In others, Kahlan’s account replied to pages such as “@ILikeGirlsDaily” with vulgar sexual innuendo and boorish language.

Many of the tweets in question were from 2011 or 2012, according to an Inquirer review. In more recent years, Kahlan’s account — which used the handle “@rkppd” — tended to comment instead on politics, often by making disparaging remarks about Democrats, including Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs.

If you read the entire article, you will note that nowhere in it is any contention that he wrote in any way differently about male Democrats. And the Inky’s story does not indicate any of the social media activities “with vulgar sexual innuendo and boorish language” occurred later than 2012.

In February, his account re-tweeted a post from another account asking if Christine Blasey Ford — the woman who accused then-U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault — should be arrested.

So, he didn’t write it himself, but retweeted someone else. And a lot people have thought that Dr Ford’s completely unsubstantiated allegations, in an attempt to deny Justice Kavanaugh confirmation, should entail some consequences for her, especially given that Mr Kavanaugh had actually kept detailed engagement calendars from the time, and none indicated that he ever attended the event Dr Ford alleged that he did. Why shouldn’t Dr Ford’s false allegations subject her to some negative consequences?

The Inquirer continues to note that the case has been turned over to Internal Affairs.

Many of the tweets on Kahlan’s page were crude, including comments about woman’s appearances and vulgar descriptions of sex acts.

Shockingly, it appears that Detective Kahlan is a normal male, attracted to women. No wonder the left are appalled!

You know what else isn’t in there? There are no allegations that the Detective unjustifiably threw any cases.

Kahlan, a 24-year veteran of the force, is not the first Philadelphia officer to come under scrutiny for his social media presence. In 2019, advocates with the Plain View Project published a database of racist or offensive Facebook posts or comments made by hundreds of city cops.

The Police Department went on to fire 15 officers and discipline dozens of others for what they wrote, an unprecedented undertaking. Still, some officers have since won their jobs back in arbitration proceedings mandated under the city’s contract with the police union.

So, the city engaged in a rush to judgement, and had to reinstate some of the officers.

Clearly, the standard is that a Philadelphia police officer must have zero social media presence, unless all of his postings are either innocuous things about birthdays and puppies and kittens, or politically support Democrats. I’m pretty sure that if Detective Kahlan had tweeted “Helen Gym is very attractive,” it would have been acceptable.

Posted on by

The left combitch about #gerrymandering, but Democrats have gerrymandered themselves into small areas

The New York Times usually does decent reporting, but on occasion, not so much. In what is touted as a straight news article, the Times veered off into editorializing:

If Tennessee’s Legislature Looks Broken, It’s Not Alone

State legislatures around the country — plagued by partisan division, uncompetitive races and gerrymandering — reflect the current pressures on democracy.

by Michael Wines | Thursday, April 13, 2023 | 3:54 AM EDT

WASHINGTON — There are 99 legislators in the Tennessee House of Representatives, the body that voted on Thursday to expel two of its Democratic members for leading an anti-gun protest in the chamber.

Sixty of them had no opponent in last November’s election.

Of the remaining House races, almost none were competitive. Not a single seat flipped from one party to the other.

“We’re just not in a normal political system,” said Kent Syler, a political science professor and expert on state politics at Middle Tennessee State University in Murfreesboro. “In a normal two-party system, if one party goes too far, usually the other party stops them. They put the brakes on.”

In Tennessee, he said, “there’s nobody to put on the brakes.”

And not just in Tennessee.

Nationwide, candidates for roughly four of every 10 state legislative seats run unopposed in general elections.

And across the country, one-party control of state legislatures, compounded by hyperpartisan politics, widespread gerrymandering, an urban-rural divide and uncompetitive races, has made the dysfunction in Tennessee more the rule than the exception.

It took reporter Michael Wines eight paragraphs to get down to the word he wanted to use, ‘gerrymandering.’ Mr Wines wants readers to think that evil reich-wing Republicans are being just unfair!

But look at the county-by-county map of the Volunteer State in the 2020 presidential election. There are 95 counties in Tennessee, and Joe Biden carried exactly three of them. Mr Biden didn’t carry a single county in the eastern half of the state, regions 1 and 2 as defined by the state Department of Transportation. Even Knox County, where the University of Tennessee is located, was carried by President Trump, 124,540 (56.47%) to 91,422 (41.45%). Of the three counties carried by Mr Biden, one, Haywood, is relatively small, and is one of the two counties which have a majority of the population being black. The other two, Davidson (Nashville) and Shelby (Memphis) are large, urban areas. The last time a Republican won Davidson County was 1988, and even in 1980, when Ronald Reagan defeated Jimmy Carter, Davidson County was carried by the Democrat, with a whopping 59.08% of the vote.

In 2020, President Trump won 1,852,475 votes, 60.66% of the total, from Tennesseans, compared to 1,143,711, or 37.45%, for Mr Biden. If Republicans have a super-majority in the Tennessee state legislature, it’s because Democrats have gerrymandered themselves, being heavily concentrated in three counties. There’s no way to apportion districts, other than some minor adjustments at the margin, to help Democrats very much.

The 2018 Senate election, 2018 gubernatorial election, 2020 Senate election, and 2022 gubernatorial election, all statewide races and thus not subject to gerrymandering by anybody, all showed the same thing: heavy Republican victories, with the same three counties being the only ones carried by the Democratic candidate. In the 2022 gubernatorial campaign, incumbent Republican even carried Haywood County, albeit by a small margin.

We have previously documented the same type of thing in Kentucky, where a liberal Lexington Herald-Leader columnist whined that “gerrymandered political districts do not represent the will of the people”, but the state legislative and congressional results fairly accurately represented the actual votes of Kentuckians.

Pennsylvania is a great example of the problem: in 2020, Joe Biden carried the Keystone State by 80,555 votes, 3,458,229 (50.01%) to 3,377674 (48.84%), but only because he carried Philadelphia 603,790 (81.44%) to 132,740 (17.90%), a margin of 471,050 votes. Without Philly, Mr Trump would have carried the Keystone State 3,244,935 (52.56%) to 2,854,439 (46.23%). The Democratic vote has effectively gerrymandered itself, concentrating in major cities, smaller geographical areas, while sensible people are more likely to live in more suburban and rural areas.

In the 2004 elections, President George W Bush got zero votes in five Philadelphia precincts; John Kerry won twenty congressional districts by greater percentages than Mr Bush’s best district, yet President Bush won nationwide 62,040,610 (50.73%) to 59,028,444 (48.27%). In 2008, John McCain got zero votes in a whopping 57 city precincts, and four years later, Mitt Romney was blanked in 59 precincts. The Philadelphia Inquirer, of course, could find no evidence of fraud in any of this, but it points out a fact that everyone knows, but the Democrats just don’t want to talk about: Democrats, and Democrat votes, are very heavily concentrated in our major cities. At 142.7 square miles, out of Pennsylvania’s 46,055 mi², 0.31% of the state’s total area, how would you redistrict Philadelphia to not gerrymander the state of Pennsylvania?

Oddly enough, we don’t seem to see the left whining about gerrymandering in states like New York and California, where Republicans don’t have much of a chance.

But it is Republican-run states, many experts say, that are taking extreme positions on limiting voting and bending or breaking other democratic norms, as Tennessee did in expelling two lawmakers last week.

Perhaps Mr Wines has forgotten that congressional Democrats wanted to expel Republican members who they claim supported the Capitol kerfuffle, and probably would have, if they had a strong enough majority. While I disapprove of the Tennessee House expelling the two Democrat members — both of whom have been reappointed by their local governments pending special elections — this is an example of what goes around, comes around.

It’s simple: with accepted rules for drawing legislative districts calling for as close as is reasonably practical in the number of residents and that districts should be contiguous and at least reasonably compact, and cities in which Democrats have huge percentage advantages, there aren’t that many ways to draw district boundaries reasonably which don’t pack Democrats into a smaller number of districts, unless a state is heavily Democratic as a whole.

So when you hear about the left combitching — yes, I created that word myself, and the etymology ought to be obvious 🙂 — about gerrymandering, remember: they did it to themselves.
_________________________________
Related article:

_________________________________
Also posted on American Free News Network. Check out American Free News Network for more well written and well reasoned conservative commentary.

Posted on by

The credentialed media don’t understand their home state! Once again, the Lexington Herald-Leader is out of touch with Kentuckians

We have previously reported how the Lexington Herald-Leader, a McClatchy newspaper, follows the McClatchy Mugshot Policy, and refrains from publishing the photos of black suspects and convicted criminals, and does not refer to race in its criminal reports, though somehow, photos of accused criminals who are white manage to make it into the newspaper.

So, imagine my surprise when reporters Taylor Six and Aaron Mudd wrote this line:

Connor Sturgeon, a white male who police said was live-streaming the shooting, was a former employee at Old National Bank, the site of Monday morning’s shooting.

Naturally, I took the screen shot of the sentence, before it vanishes into the ether.

Authorities identify former Old National Bank employee as Louisville shooter

by Taylor Six and Aaron Mudd | Monday, April 10, 2023 | 4:10 PM EDT | Updated: 9:52 PM EDT

Louisville Metro Police have identified a 25-year-old man as the shooter who killed five people and injured several others before he was fatally shot by police at a downtown bank Monday morning.

Connor Sturgeon, a white male who police said was live-streaming the shooting, was a former employee at Old National Bank, the site of Monday morning’s shooting.

The new details emerged during a Monday afternoon press conference attended by city officials and Gov. Andy Beshear, who said he’d lost a close friend in the shooting.

According to police, officers were dispatched to Old National Bank Monday morning for reports of an active shooter. When they arrived, the shooting was ongoing, but the shooter was reported dead soon after.

Louisville Metro Police Department Chief Jacquelyn Gwinn-Villaroel named him Monday afternoon during a press conference. She said Sturgeon was formerly an employee with Old National Bank and assumed he was a Louisville resident.

According to the police chief, Sturgeon was killed by police gunfire. He was reported to have used a “rifle,” although police did not specifically state what type.

There’s a little more at the original, but nothing that hasn’t been all over the news. The story mentions that the killer was a “former” employee of the bank, but does not state what several other sources have, that he was discharged by the bank.

Naturally, the Herald-Leader’s primary columnist wants gun control:

After Louisville shooting, it’s time to get out our bullhorns. We’re sick of gun deaths. | Opinion

by Linda Blackford | Monday, April 10, 2023 | 12:28 PM EDT

Have we had enough yet?

Exactly two weeks after a deranged shooter killed six people in Nashville, three of them precious, innocent children, a deranged shooter killed four people in Louisville (the shooter also died), and sent eight more to the hospital.

Also see: William Teach, “Gun Grabbers Push Gun Grabbing Immediately After Leftist Nutjob Kills People“

There have been 131 mass shootings — defined as more than four people dead or injured — THIS YEAR alone, according to the Gun Violence Archive. Almost 10,000 people have died from guns since Jan. 1.

Today made 132. The archive updated its numbers as police gave their final reports.

A tsunami of “thoughts and prayers” from politicians will now roll down, hoping to drown us in distraction from the fact that they could stop this if they wanted to.

If we made them.

After several more paragraphs blaming “the guns,” Mrs Blackford comes up with a statement she has made before, and one she knows is a lie:

But once again, gerrymandered political districts do not represent the will of the people, who are sick of seeing people, children, die for nothing but a perverted misunderstanding of our founding fathers.

“Gerrymandered”? In 2020, Republicans dramatically increased their number of seats in the Kentucky General Assembly, from 61-39 in the state House of Representatives to 75-25, and in the state Senate from 28-10 to 30-8. But those gains happened under the district lines passed following the 2010 Census, when Democrats controlled the state House, and a Democrat was Governor. Republicans did not take over control of teh state House until after the 2016 elections; they did previously control the state Senate, including prior to the reapportionment.

Republicans did increase their seats in the 2022 election, up to 80-20 in the House and 31-7 in the Senate. Interestingly enough, the Democrats never even fielded candidates in 44 of the House districts, so there was no way they could even think about regaining control. In my own district, no serious Democrat ran in the primary, and a perennial kook candidate won the nomination, a candidate so bad that the state Democratic Party disavowed him.

Is there gerrymandering? In 2020, President Trump received 1,326,646 votes from Kentuckians, 62.09% of the total, while Joe Biden got only 772,474, or 36.15%. President Teump carried 118 out of the Commonwealth’s 120 counties, losing only Jefferson (Louisville) and Fayette (Lexington). In the same election, Senator Mitch McConnell won 1,233,315 votes, 57.76%, while his well-funded Democrat opponent, Amy McGrath Henderson received only 816,257, 38.23%. Mrs Henderson carried only three counties, Jefferson, Fayette, and Franklin, which included the state capitol of Frankfort.

In 2022, Senator Rand Paul, a libertarian Republican, won 913,326 votes, 61.80%, to Democrat Charles Booker’s 564,311 votes, 38.19%.

Those were statewide elections, which means there was no gerrymandering possible. Mrs Blackford might argue gerrymandering at the margins of the 2022 General Assembly races, but a difference of two or three would hardly matter against the GOP’s overwhelming majorities.

Mrs Blackford called the Commonwealth’s gun laws “a perverted misunderstanding of our founding fathers,” but that completely ignores history. When what became the Second Amendment was written, it was by the generation which had just won a revolution against Great Britain. In 1775, the military Governor of Massachusetts, Thomas Gage, had ordered gun control himself, ordering the confiscation of firearms and ammunition from the wretched colonials. It was to seize reported storehouses of gunpowder and ammunition that General Gage sent the redcoats to Lexington and Concord, resulting in the shot heard ’round the world, and the first battles in our revolution. Does Mrs Blackford seriously believe that the revolutionaries who began that war fighting against gun control by the British would not have meant for individuals to have the right to keep and bear arms.

In 1791, when the Second Amendment was ratified, many Americans lived on or very near the frontier. Does Mrs Blackford believe that the “founding fathers” would have thought the government could ban individuals from owning firearms when they had to hunt for game to put meat on the table, and be able to defend themselves from the Indian tribes? Does Mrs Blackford believe that when her home state of Kentucky was settled by white families, that the “founding fathers” would have believed it acceptable for the government to have the authority to ban individual ownership of firearms when the settlers needed to hunt for food and defend themselves from the Cherokee and Shawnee Indians who already lived here?

There were no telephones in the late 18th century, and homesteads could be pretty far apart. There were no police departments on the frontier. The first organized, publicly-funded professional full-time police forces in the United States were established in Boston in 1838, New York in 1844, and Philadelphia in 1854. If a bad guy was raiding a homestead, would the “founding fathers” have thought that the government could ban the private ownership of firearms by individuals, leaving them unable to defend themselves?

Mrs Blackford’s biography says that she “writes columns and commentary for the Herald-Leader. She has covered K-12, higher education and other topics for the past 20 years at the Herald-Leader.” Twenty years, huh? That means entirely in the 21st century, on computers and word processors, exercising her freedom of speech and of the press via giant printing presses and an internet which allows distribution of her words widely across the Herald-Leader’s service area, which is central and eastern Kentucky, and even around the world if someone chooses to search. These are certainly things of which the “founding fathers’ had no concept! If we were to accept the columnist’s ideas that the “founding fathers” certainly never meant for the Second Amendment to cover what it covers today, then wouldn’t we also have to say that the First Amendment does not cover more than a megaphone or a hand-set newspaper printed entirely by manual labor?

We have previously documented the newspaper’s endorsement history, and how the voters of the sixth congressional district and the commonwealth as a whole almost always vote the opposite from how what my best friend used to call the Herald-Liberal want.

When I moved away from the Bluegrass State at the end of 1984, the Herald-Leader was a broadsheet publication, and if not the size of Louisville’s Courier-Journal or The Philadelphia Inquirer, still a reasonable newspaper for central and eastern Kentucky. I used to deliver the old morning Lexington Herald and afternoon Lexington Leader in Mt Sterling, and when I returned to the Bluegrass State in 2017, I could see just how far downhill the newspaper had gone. Just a few pages, no longer a broadsheet, and visibly on its last legs. That, too, is freedom of speech and of the press, as, presented with the other news alternatives of television and radio and the internet, the people of the newspaper’s service area have chosen against it.

Perhaps that is why Mrs Blackford personally, and the newspaper’s editors in general, have lost touch with what used to be their service area. They now reflect only the opinions of the state’s second-largest city, and while it’s a significant voting block, it isn’t the majority of even the sixth congressional district. Mrs Blackford may blame it all on gerrymandering, but it’s the newspaper and her which are out of touch with Kentuckians, not the state legislature.
_____________________________
Also posted on American Free News Network. Check out American Free News Network for more well written and well reasoned conservative commentary.

Posted on by

The left keep making excuses for other leftists who kill.

Democrats in the United States have been very much in favor of enforcing the law when it came to the protests which occurred on January 6, 2021. The federal Department of Justice has charged nearly a thousand people with crimes over a rowdy demonstration, and The Washington Post reported that Attorney General Merrick Garland — who absolutely hates Republicans for denying him a Supreme Court seat — is looking at charges for perhaps another thousand people. What my best friend used to call the Lexington Herald-Liberal has been very much supportive of charging the Capitol kerfufflers as seriously as possible, even though the actual guilty pleas have been for a single, relatively minor misdemeanor count, 40 U.S.C. § 5104(e)(2)(G), Parading, Demonstrating, or Picketing in a Capitol Building; the penalty for which is a misdemeanor conviction punishable by a maximum fine of $5,000 or up to six months in prison, or both.

But it seems as though the Herald-Leader is actually quite supportive of breaking the law when it comes to something the editors support:

Civil disobedience is now required to fight gun violence and protect our most vulnerable | Opinion

by Fenton Johnson[1] | Thursday, April 6, 2023 | 11:00 AM EDT | updated: Friday, April 7, 2023 | 9:35 AM EDT

The moment I read that the Nashville school shooter was a woman whom the police indicated was being “treated for a mental disorder,” I wrote an email to a friend in Kentucky, like Tennessee a state where a Republican supermajority legislature is waging war on trans children and their parents. “I find myself wondering,” I wrote, “if the ‘mental disorder’ with which the killer was being treated was some kind of gender nonconformity issue, conscious or otherwise. So much mental illness resides there, and may have been triggered, to use the word of the day, by the Tennessee legislature’s actions against LGBT people.”

Really? It was reported almost immediately that Audrey Hale, the murderer — no need to used the qualifier “alleged,” since she was shot dead virtually in the act — was ‘transgendered,’ a woman claiming that she was really a man and calling herself “Aiden.” As we previously reported, with some confusion about Miss Hale’s status in the immediate aftermath, the professional media used some contorted language to avoid gendered pronouns or honorifics, to keep from getting them wrong.

Not that it mattered: “Gender identity advocates accused mainstream news outlets who scrambled to cover the story of ‘misgendering’ and ‘deadnaming’ Hale by not referring to her as a man or as a transman.”

How did I know this before reading or hearing the news that Audrey Hale was in fact trans? Because I grew up in rural Kentucky in the 1950s, where I attended the most conservative of Roman Catholic grade schools. Shaming and corporal punishment were commonplace and sex was never spoken of because the priestly hierarchy understood that silence was its most powerful tool in protecting its power to abuse children and women.

LOL! I attended a public school in a small town in Kentucky, in the 1960s and very early 1970s, and sex was never spoken of by the teachers and administrators — it was spoken about plenty of times by the students! — because those subjects were simply not supposed to be part of the educational curriculum, and if they had been part, parents would have been very upset. Sex education was a subject for parents, not the public schools.

I who loved learning dreaded not the classroom, where I could sneak a look into the science and literature textbooks that we were often forbidden to read. Instead I dreaded the playground and my walks to and from school, where class bullies beat me up for walking like a woman. They would teach me to be a man like them — they would teach me violence. But I got lucky — I got a scholarship; I got out; I ran away, to San Francisco, to a place where I could heal my wounds, learn peace, and find the courage to come out as a gay man.

The playground and those walks home taught me that the loudest bullies had the most to protect. The meanest bullies were such cowards that they resorted to violence to mask their insecurities. They rushed to buy assault weapons.

Really? The “bullies” of the 1950s “rushed to buy assault weapons”?

Fifty years later, ex-Marine Senator J.D. Vance tweets that “giving into these ideas is dangerous,” as if gender identity is an “idea,” as if his toxic heterosexuality has not slaughtered countless women, children, and men across centuries of war, in the battlefields and in the streets and lanes. Tennessee Congressman Tim Burchett implies that the solution is to lock our children up at home and go to the mats — an approach that has some merit, in that it allows loving and compassionate parents to protect their children from the likes of him and his ideologies.

When a homosexual male starts blabbering about “toxic heterosexuality,” you know that he’s pretty much losing it. 🙂

Audrey Hale’s powder keg of anger and self-loathing was prepared in the halls of the school where she acted out her despair on the terms established and promoted by the gun lovers. The leaders who in their public stances told her she was “dangerous” invited her to act out their accusation. That she did so on their terms and using their weapons of choice is a matter of cause and effect.

Oh, look! Fenton Johnson just ‘deadnamed‘ and ‘misgendered‘ Miss Johnson!

Americans live on sidewalks, migrants seeking asylum are murdered at our doors and in our streets, banks go under, our transportation infrastructure is in rotten shape, our students do not receive the literacy, skills, and moral compasses they need to become good and cheerful citizens. Our legislators’ response to these crises is to spend days debating drag performances while defending easy access to assault weapons. Beyond that, they say, they can do nothing.

The hour is here for peaceful civil disobedience, such as that practiced by Tennessee State Representative Gloria Johnson and over a thousand Nashville students, who are taking their case directly to the legislative halls in exercise of their constitutional rights, and whom the Republican supermajority is attempting to silence. As U.S. history teaches us, those who act from courage and compassion must be prepared to face the cowards with their guns. Better our aged bodies than those of our children.

Connor Sturgeon’s LinkedIn profile, screen captured before it could be deleted. Click to enlarge.

“Civil disobedience,” huh? Civil disobedience is defined as “active, professed refusal of a citizen to obey certain laws, demands, orders or commands of a government or other lawful authority.” Is Mr Johnson, and the Herald-Leader which chose to publish him, calling for breaking the law? The newspaper, at least, hasn’t been so charitable when it comes to the January 6 protesters, the vast majority of whom did nothing but march in the Capitol Building. Is Mr Johnson willing to go to jail, and be incarcerated amongst those “toxic(ly) heterosexual” other criminals?

Well, Connor Sturgeon, 25, just killed several people at Old National Bank, his employer, in Louisville, going to his eternal reward in the process. Will Mr Johnson “find myself wondering, if he had a ‘mental disorder’, or was perhaps homosexual or transgender, since the General Assembly recently overrode the Governor’s veto and passed Senate Bill 150, which prohibits hormone of surgical ‘transitioning’ of minors — they can do whatever fool thing they want once they turn 18 — and prohibits public school systems from requiring teachers and other employees from being required to go along with a ‘transgender’ student’s preferred name or pronouns? Mr Sturgeon did specify his ‘pronouns,’ “He/him” in his LinkedIn profile, though they only show up if you are logged in to LinkedIn, which I screen captured before it was deleted. Mr Johnson complained that “our students do not receive the literacy, skills, and moral compasses they need to become good and cheerful citizens,” but young Mr Sturgeon claimed that he had a Master of Science degree from the University of Alabama’s Manderson Graduate School of Business, and he had what would appear, from his job title, Syndications Associate and Portfolio Banker, to be a decently-paying job at Old National Bank.

Miss Hale and Mr Sturgeon were insane by any practical definition: both wanted to end it all, and both decided that suicide-by-cop and taking innocent people with them was a great, great way to make a splash as they departed our mortal vale. Anger over a legislative act does not somehow justify what Miss Hale, and perhaps Mr Johnson, did.

References

References
↑1
Posted on by

Oh, look! Helen Gym Flaherty is getting much of her financial support from people with no connection to Philadelphia! Socialists gotta socialist, and are trying to trash yet another big city

As critical as I have been of The Philadelphia Inquirer, I should note when they do good reporting.

Half the money collected by candidates for Philly mayor comes from outside the city

Some candidates in the crowded Democratic primary field have relied more than others on money from outside Philadelphia than others.

by Aseem Shukla and Anna Orso | Monday, April 10, 2023 | 5:00 AM EDT

Philadelphia’s mayoral race has already drawn millions in fundraising. And half of it has come from outside the city.

Campaigns have already raised more than $17 million. Of that, $8 million comes from the candidates themselves. But an Inquirer analysis shows that of the $9.3 million given by actual donors:

  • About half of the money, at least $4.4 million, comes from donors in Philadelphia.
  • Roughly another quarter, at least $2.5 million, comes from donors elsewhere in the region.
  • The remainder, at least another $2.1 million, comes from donors outside the area.
  • A small fraction, under $100,000, came from small donations that campaigns don’t have to disclose, so the addresses of those donors is unknown.

Maria Quiñones-Sánchez recently withdrew from the race.

That there would be donors from the city’s suburbs is hardly surprising: many people who work in Philadelphia don’t live in the city themselves, but have a vested interest in how the city functions.

It’s interesting that former city Controller Rebecca Rhynhart McDuff is tied for the largest percentage raised from city residents, and has, by far, the smallest percentage raised from outside of the area. The Inquirer surprised me when, rather than the furthest left candidate, Helen Gym Flaherty, the Editorial Board instead endorsed Mrs McDuff.

But here’s the money paragraph from the newspaper:

More than the rest of the field, Helen Gym and Derek Green, both former City Council members, have raised money from donors outside the region entirely. Gym in particular has a national profile as a leading voice in the progressive movement, and has significant financial support from the American Federation of Teachers, which is headquartered in Washington, D.C. Over one-third of her money comes from donors outside the region.

Also see: Robert Stacy McCain: Why Do Democrats Think They Can ‘Win’ the Crime Issue? Media bias misinforms the public about “gun violence.”

The Inquirer previously reported that the city’s teachers’ union has been one of Mrs Flaherty’s biggest supporters. As we previously reported, Mrs Flaherty has earned her reputation of being a major supporter of public schools, but one of her notable successes, keeping Edward T Steel Elementary School from becoming a charter school, hasn’t worked out all that well, as it is ranked 1,205th out of 1,607 Pennsylvania elementary schools, with 8% of students ranked as grade-level proficient in reading, and a whopping 1% as grade-level proficient in math.

So, why do I care? After all, I no longer work in Philadelphia and its suburbs, and don’t even live in Pennsylvania now. I care because I’ve seen the disastrous effects of big city liberalism, as the City of Brotherly Love has seen a tremendous spike in crime, with annual homicides more than doubling in fewer than ten years as the good people of Philly elected a mayor who is just plain tired of the job and a district attorney who doesn’t want to put criminals in jail. Chicago has suffered through the same things with outgoing Mayor Lori Lightfoot and State’s Attorney Kim Foxx, and just elected police-hating Brandon Johnson, who’s even further left than Miss Lightfoot to replace her as Mayor. Manhattan elected Alvin Bragg to be district attorney, and his chief assistant district Attorney, Meg Reiss has said, “We know incarceration doesn’t really solve any problems.” Me? I believe that our problem is not mass incarceration, but that not enough people are incarcerated, for not a long enough time.

One thing ought to be obvious: the criminal who is already locked up is not out on the streets, committing more crimes.

But Mrs Flaherty doesn’t seem to understand that. She strongly endorsed and campaigned with, George Soros-sponsored “restorative justice” District Attorney Larry Krasner, later saying, “I support reducing the prison population by 50% from 2019 levels. We must center transformative and restorative justice practices in Philadelphia.” She wants to do everything to increase public safety other than getting criminals off the streets! Yet Mrs Flaherty has been receiving a clear pile of money from public school teachers, who are the epitome of the socialist class, government employees who have no responsibility for actually being good at their jobs, and who seem to want to introduce every bit of #woke idiocy and sexual deviance to children.

The policies of the left, when put into government action, have proven to be actively harmful to our society and our civilization. That’s why I fret for Philadelphia, which is already suffering from such policies, and could well be poised to double-down on the stupidity.