Category Archives: Uncategorized

Posted on by

This is why I have no sympathy for the Palestinians!

Given the chance to build something, and some of the best beachfront property in the world — the Palestinians could have created a real tourist Mecca to bring in literally billions of euros into an otherwise poor land — the irredentists decided that what they really wanted to do was continue to attack Israel. They didn’t care about their families, they didn’t care about Palestinian poverty, they didn’t care about anything but their own seething hatred of the Jews.

The Hamas terrorists are actually few in number, but like guerrilla fighters everywhere, they depend upon the support, tacit or otherwise, of the larger populations around them. The Hamas terrorists live among the Palestinian people, are housed and clothed and fed and supported by them; they are no different from the inner-city thugs in Chicago and Philadelphia and St Louis, hiding from the police and destroying their own neighborhoods with destruction and death.

Posted on by

Big Brother is watching you, and the left think you need to be watched more closely

In George Orwell’s 1984, every home was fitted with a Telescreen.

The voice came from an oblong metal plaque like a dulled mirror which formed part of the surface of the right-hand wall. Winston turned a switch and the voice sank somewhat, though the words were still distinguishable. The instrument (the telescreen, it was called) could be dimmed, but there was no way of shutting it off completely. . . . .

The telescreen received and transmitted simultaneously. Any sound that Winston made, above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by it; moreover, so long as he remained within the field of vision which the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard. There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment.

After nine months now of increasingly draconian controls of our society and our economy in the huge governmental response to COVID-19, we are now being told that the one place into which government cannot reach, our homes, is the place in which our leaders need to exert the most control.

Where COVID-19 spreads most easily, according to experts

The most likely place to contract the virus is not at work or at school.

By Dr. Adjoa Smalls-Mantey | December 24, 2020 | 6:08 AM

COVID-19 is a highly transmissible disease, but evidence shows that small indoor gatherings and households are where the novel coronavirus is spreading the fastest.

For nearly a year, public health officials across the globe have grappled with how to reduce the spread of COVID-19. At times, travel has been restricted, schools and gyms have closed, and some cities, such as San Francisco, are under lockdown. But despite these restrictions, the number of COVID-19 infections and deaths continue to reach record highs.

“I think we want to be careful about blaming one particular environment and scapegoating one particular setting for generating transmission,” said Dr. John Brownstein, an ABC News contributor, epidemiologist and chief innovation officer at Boston Children’s Hospital.

However, there are some settings where COVID-19 is more easily spread. In New York, for example, contact tracing has shown that 70% of new cases come from small gatherings and households.

“Informal gatherings may have played even the biggest role,” Brownstein said, “because they are harder to police, they’re harder to enforce, and people are probably more lax when it comes to recommendations of mask wearing and social distancing.”

I will admit to some amusement at Dr. Adjoa Smalls-Mantey’s, the author’s, choice of language, that informal gatherings, meetings between friends and family, “are harder to police, (are) harder to enforce” restrictions. In the end, of course, policing things, enforcing rules, is precisely what Our Betters want to do.

Pennsylvania’s Secretary of Health, Dr Richard Levine[1]Dr Levine is a mentally ill male who thinks he’s somehow a woman, calling himself ‘Rachel.’ The First Street Journal does not go along with such foolishness, and always refers to … Continue reading issued orders that individuals must wear masks and practice social distancing inside their own homes if guests are present. The credentialed media were also full of similar recommendations.

When people gather in small groups with friends and family, they are more likely to let their guard down, not wear their masks and stay together indoors for longer periods of time, which makes it easier to transmit the virus.

In a recent study at the University of Mississippi Medical Center, researchers found that for children and adolescents who tested positive for COVID-19, it was small social gatherings — not school — that was the most likely place they were exposed to the virus.

The children who tested positive in the study were more likely to have attended social gatherings outside of their homes, had playdates or had visitors at their home where mask wearing and social distancing precautions were not taken.

Gladys Kravitz

As we have noted previously, various officials know that they can’t just send the gendarmerie into your house, so they want your neighbors to peer into your windows and snitch on you. Of course, Mayor Bill de Blasio (D-New York City) does seem to think that he can send the sheriff’s deputies to your home, so perhaps other of our government officials will try to make my statement that they can’t send the police to your homes a false one. A conspiracy theorist might suggest that Dr Smalls-Mantey’s article is just something to condition the public into thinking that such is regrettably necessary, so that the sheeple will simply accept it, at least if it only happens to their neighbors and not themselves.

Governor Andy Beshear (D-KY) issued executive orders limiting gatherings in your home of more than eight people, from more than two separate households. I am happy to say that we didn’t obey the Governor’s restrictions any heed on either Thanksgiving or Christmas. Three households, no masks.

If only the government had those telescreens, they wouldn’t have to depend on those Gladys Kravitzes to peer into your windows![2]I had to put a descriptive link to Gladys Kravitz in the article, because my good friend Donald Douglas pointed out that you have to be older than dirt to get the reference.

If we allow authoritarianism to continue for this emergency, in what other emer-gencies will it be used?

Am I just being paranoid here? In 1984, sexual activity is regulated by the government, and Winston Smith’s and Julia’s sexual life is a form of rebellion. And in 2020, Dr Levine issued ‘guidance’ about your sex life, ‘suggesting’ that you must ‘limit’ your number of sex partners, and always ‘discuss’ COVID-19 with any new potential inamorata. Mayor Muriel Bowser (D-Washington, DC) did the same.[3]The left had always claimed that it was evil reich-wing conservatives who wanted to regulate sex, even referencing 1984, but it doesn’t seem to have been conservatives doing this now, does it?

People with actual governing authority have been telling us how we must live our lives, interfering in our jobs, our businesses and trying to impose their authority even in our homes, justifying it as an emergency, of course. But if they are allowed to get away with this for the COVID emergency, just what other ’emergencies’ can they use to justify restricting our rights? The September 11th attacks wound up justifying the PATRIOT Act, and, sadly, that was done by Republican congressmen and senators, and signed into law by a Republican president.

Benjamin Franklin put it best, saying, “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” We have surrendered some of our essential liberty, and far too many of our people have agreed with this, because it’s just so necessary, or, as the law would put it, “a compelling government interest.”

This is where we must say, nay, scream, that government cannot do this, and the people will not allow it. More than just scream, we must protest, we must take political action, to unseat the would-be tyrants and petty dictators. If we do not do this, now, we insure that it will happen again, and again, as those who believe they should run our lives for us can always find something to justify it.
_________________________________
Cross-posted on RedState.

References

References
↑1 Dr Levine is a mentally ill male who thinks he’s somehow a woman, calling himself ‘Rachel.’ The First Street Journal does not go along with such foolishness, and always refers to ‘transgender’ individuals by their birth names and sex.
↑2 I had to put a descriptive link to Gladys Kravitz in the article, because my good friend Donald Douglas pointed out that you have to be older than dirt to get the reference.
↑3 The left had always claimed that it was evil reich-wing conservatives who wanted to regulate sex, even referencing 1984, but it doesn’t seem to have been conservatives doing this now, does it?
Posted on by

Dr Fauci: “You can’t handle the truth!”

To the surprise of absolutely no one, the over-hyped Dr Anthony Fauci, head of the government’s COVID-19 taskforce, has been lying to us. No, this isn’t from some conservative blog, but The New York Times:

How Much Herd Immunity Is Enough?

Scientists initially estimated that 60 to 70 percent of the population needed to acquire resistance to the coronavirus to banish it. Now Dr. Anthony Fauci and others are quietly shifting that number upward.

By Donald G. McNeil Jr. | December 24, 2020 | 5:00 AM EST

At what point does a country achieve herd immunity? What portion of the population must acquire resistance to the coronavirus, either through infection or vaccination, in order for the disease to fade away and life to return to normal?

Since the start of the pandemic, the figure that many epidemiologists have offered has been 60 to 70 percent. That range is still cited by the World Health Organization and is often repeated during discussions of the future course of the disease.

Although it is impossible to know with certainty what the limit will be until we reach it and transmission stops, having a good estimate is important: It gives Americans a sense of when we can hope to breathe freely again.

Recently, a figure to whom millions of Americans look for guidance — Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, an adviser to both the Trump administration and the incoming Biden administration — has begun incrementally raising his herd-immunity estimate.

In the pandemic’s early days, Dr. Fauci tended to cite the same 60 to 70 percent estimate that most experts did. About a month ago, he began saying “70, 75 percent” in television interviews. And last week, in an interview with CNBC News, he said “75, 80, 85 percent” and “75 to 80-plus percent.”

In a telephone interview the next day, Dr. Fauci acknowledged that he had slowly but deliberately been moving the goal posts. He is doing so, he said, partly based on new science, and partly on his gut feeling that the country is finally ready to hear what he really thinks.

Translation: the guy who has been all over CNN and MSNBC, giving us an air of quiet confidence, had been lying to us, and doing so deliberately. Perhaps he was channeling Jack Nicholson in A Few Good Men:

Dr Fauci admitted to trying to sell us a bill of goods:

“When polls said only about half of all Americans would take a vaccine, I was saying herd immunity would take 70 to 75 percent,” Dr. Fauci said. “Then, when newer surveys said 60 percent or more would take it, I thought, ‘I can nudge this up a bit,’ so I went to 80, 85.”

The good doctor wanted to sell us something, but the Times reported that roughly 20% of Americans are unwilling to accept the vaccine.

Think about that: if the incoming President is going to keep Dr Fauci as his COVID guru, and Dr Fauci tells him that 90% compliance is required, but the willingness to take the vaccine tops out somewhere around 80%, then we’ll have a government which will try to force people to take the vaccine, and, if the government can’t, then the government will want to keep the economic and social restrictions in place for who knows how long.

So, why would anybody accept the word of an admitted liar?

In the end, the government’s response has been at least as much about control of citizens as it has been about fighting the virus. Of course, the editors of The New York Times, though they ran the story, will never make that connection for you.

Posted on by

And now Bill de Blasio wants to trample on the Fourth Amendment as well as the First

We have noted, over and over and over again, that the various actions of state Governors and big city Mayors have been violations of our First Amendment rights of peaceable assembly and free exercise of religion.

Well, now Oberbürgermeister Bill de Blasio (NSDAP-New York City) has decided that that isn’t enough, and now he’s going to violate your Fourth Amendment rights as well:

The Fourth Amendment provides that:

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

Under Katz v United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967), the Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment protected anyplace in which a subject had a reasonable expectation of privacy. If the Oberbürgermeister sends the sheriff’s deputies to anyplace the subject of the visit has a reasonable expectation of privacy, which would seem to include “the home or the hotel of every single traveler coming in from the UK,” those deputies are all going to need warrants.

Note that some people traveling to the New York City from the United Kingdom will be American citizens.

Does travel from one country to another constitute probable cause? Can a city or state impose regulations against free travel from another country, or is that solely a federal power?

Remember how the left were complaining that President Trump was an authoritarian fascist? Well, it isn’t President Trump threatening to send in the gendarmerie to everyone’s home.

Posted on by

A cure worse than the disease

My good friend Donald Douglas has, Alas! cut back on his posting, but he did have this one important pass-it-on post!

Public Schools Are Losing Their Captive Audience of Children

Posted by AmPowerBlog 10:33 AM

At Reason.

But see this, from L.A.T, a couple of weeks ago, “L.A. Unified will not give Fs this semester and instead give students a second chance to pass.”

And this passage especially is killing me, about the push-back against the “no fail” policy:

In April, L.A. Unified prohibited failing grades for the spring semester and also determined that no student’s grade would be lower than it was on March 13, the final day of on-campus instruction. At the time, many teachers and some principals complained that the policy undermined student motivation and some reported a subsequent drop-off in student effort. 

Stocks surge. Retail rises. Unemployment continues to decline. Post-election markets set record highs while online shopping contributed to recovery. How did this month fare overall? 

Such concerns resurfaced Monday during a faculty meeting at a high school in the San Fernando Valley, according to an English teacher who did not wish to be identified because she was not authorized to speak.

“Yes, it’s COVID time,” the teacher said. “But this soft bigotry of low expectations — including us being banned from demanding students ever comment with their voices or actually show themselves on camera during Zoom — will indeed help our low-income students stay on the bottom of the pile of learning.”

A high school principal from a different campus was more supportive. Given the unprecedented crisis, the principal said, students who earn A’s and B’s should get to keep them but that the only other grade handed out should be a pass. This principal — who also was not authorized to comment — requested anonymity…

Astonishing, really.

Notice how everybody speaks off the record, obviously so they won’t face the guillotine.

There have been plenty of stories about students falling behind during the ‘remote instruction’ pushed by COVID-19:

Schools confront ‘off the rails’ numbers of failing grades

by Carolyn Thompson, Associated Press | December 6, 2020

The first report cards of the school year are arriving with many more Fs than usual in a dismal sign of the struggles students are experiencing with distance learning.

School districts from coast to coast have reported the number of students failing classes has risen by as many as two or three times — with English language learners and disabled and disadvantaged students suffering the most.

“It was completely off the rails from what is normal for us, and that was obviously very alarming,” said Erik Jespersen, principal of Oregon’s McNary High School, where 38% of grades in late October were failing, compared with 8% in normal times.

Educators see a number of factors at play: Students learning from home skip assignments — or school altogether. Internet access is limited or inconsistent, making it difficult to complete and upload assignments. And teachers who don’t see their students in person have fewer ways to pick up on who is falling behind, especially with many keeping their cameras off during Zoom sessions.

Well, color me shocked! Many students are keeping their cameras off during Zoom sessions? When a 9-year-old Louisiana student was suspended after a teacher reported seeing a gun in the boy’s bedroom during a virtual class, yeah, I can see why some families might choose not to have the cameras on. The school board refused to remove the idiotic suspension from his record.

There could be other reasons as well. Perhaps a student is still in his pajamas, or his hair is all funky looking because he hadn’t showered that morning. Given that the students seeing increased failing grades have been ‘disproportionately’ poor, maybe, just maybe, the students are living in homes where their rooms don’t look very good. Would a fourth or seventh grader be embarrassed if his bedroom had peeling paint or wallpaper? Yeah, I’d guess so.

So, what do we have? Students receiving twice and thrice as many failing grades, in schools that haven’t banned failure:

The increase in failing grades has been seen in districts of all sizes around the country.

At Jespersen’s school in the Salem-Keizer Public School district, hundreds of students initially had not just Fs, but grade scores of 0.0%, indicating they simply were not participating in school at all. In New Mexico, more than 40 percent of middle and high school students were failing at least one class as of late October. In Houston, 42% of students received at least one F in the first grading period of the year. Nearly 40% of grades for high school students in St. Paul, Minnesota, were Fs, double the amount in a typical year.

Yet teachers, and their unions, have been protesting plans to return to in-classroom instruction.

We have, of course, noted Governor Andy Beshear’s (D-KY) forcing both public and private schools to close to in-class instruction through at least January 4, 2021, and possibly beyond.

Let me be clear about this: students are losing an entire year of education due to the government’s response to COVID-19. In Kentucky, Governor Beshear has prioritized vaccine for teachers, which would “give the school district ‘a path’ to return to in-person learning for the first time since the pandemic began in March,” but even that depends upon when the teachers could get the immunizations. The Centers for Disease Control noted that:

All but one of the COVID-19 vaccines that are currently in Phase 3 clinical trials in the United States use two shots. The first shot starts building protection. A second shot a few weeks later is needed to get the most protection the vaccine has to offer.

And that:

It typically takes a few weeks for the body to produce T-lymphocytes and B-lymphocytes after vaccination. Therefore, it is possible that a person could be infected with the virus that causes COVID-19 just before or just after vaccination and then get sick because the vaccine did not have enough time to provide protection.

How long between the initial shot and the booster?

Both the Moderna and the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccines require two shots: a priming dose, followed by a booster shot. The interval between Moderna doses is 28 days; for the Pfizer vaccine, it’s 21 days.

So, if teachers get the initial shot on January 4th, they wouldn’t receive the booster shot until January 25th with the Pfizer vaccine, and February 1st for the Moderna. But there’s more:

The Pfizer vaccine showed efficacy of 95% at preventing symptomatic Covid infection, measured starting from seven days after the second dose was administered. The vaccine appeared to be more or less equally protective across age groups and racial and ethnic groups.

The Moderna vaccine was 94.1% effective at preventing symptomatic Covid-19, measured starting from 14 days after the second dose. The vaccine’s efficacy appeared to be slightly lower in people 65 and older, but during a presentation to the Food and Drug Administration’s advisory committee the company explained that the numbers could have been influenced by the fact there were few cases in that age group in the trial. The vaccine appeared to be equally effective across different ethnic and racial groups.

So, now we’re up to February 1st before those receiving the Phizer vaccine are protected, and February 15th with the Moderna. That’s another entire month of in-person classes missed. Will Governor Beshear, or other state Governors around the country keep schools closed until then?

You can count on one thing: that’s what the teachers’ unions will want!

Both vaccines seemed to reduce the risk of severe Covid disease. It’s not yet known if either prevents asymptomatic infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Nor is it known if vaccinated people can transmit the virus if they do become infected but don’t show symptoms.

There is a double-edged sword here. Teachers who are immunized might still carry the virus, and be able to transmit it; no one knows if this is the case yet. The Herald-Leader story noted that:

According to information from the state, (Fayette district spokeswoman Lisa) Deffendall said, “all district employees will be eligible for vaccination; contractors who don’t have direct contact with students are not eligible. Only those on the roster will be eligible for vaccination during the educator distribution period due to the limited availability of the vaccine.”

That means that district employees could pass on the virus to contractors, even if those contractors do not have contact with students.

An important point: none of the vaccines have finished testing on, and been approved for, children. The vaccines might protect the teachers and other school employees, but they aren’t going to protect the students, and that means they won’t stop the virus from being transmitted from home to home.

If you believe that the various Governors have been right, and that the virus is so serious that the schools must be closed to in person instruction, there’s no way we can expect Governors not to keep the schools closed.

Anthony Fauci, the grossly overhyped director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, claimed that even with the vaccines, if the coming vaccination campaign goes well, we could approach herd immunity by summer’s end and “normality that is close to where we were before” by the end of 2021.

(He) said on Wednesday (December 9, 2020) that that estimate is dependent on significant numbers of Americans being willing to be inoculated with one of several vaccines in various stages of development. If 75 percent to 80 percent of Americans are vaccinated in broad-based campaigns likely to start in the second quarter of next year, then the U.S. should reach the herd immunity threshold months later. If vaccination levels are significantly lower, 40 percent to 50 percent, Fauci said, it could take a very long time to reach that level of protection.

“Let’s say we get 75 percent, 80 percent of the population vaccinated,” Fauci said. “If we do that, if we do it efficiently enough over the second quarter of 2021, by the time we get to the end of the summer, i.e., the third quarter, we may actually have enough herd immunity protecting our society that as we get to the end of 2021, we can approach very much some degree of normality that is close to where we were before.”

We’re talking well over a year since this started, well after the end of the 2020-21 school year. The end of the 2019-20 school year was ruined, and the guy to whom so many decision-takers listen is warning that this entire school year might be shot as well.

At some point it needs to be asked: is the cure worse than the disease? At least a year of real education will have been lost, and possibly more, to go along with the millions and millions of people thrown out of work and hundreds of businesses which have been bankrupted by our reaction to this virus.

Our constitutional rights to freedom of peaceable assembly have been trashed, our right to freely exercise our religious beliefs have been trampled upon, our people have been prohibited from attending weddings and funerals and some Governors have even tried to ban Thanksgiving and Christmas family dinners.

Human beings are social animals; we need social contact, we need to interact with other people; that’s why solitary confinement in prisons is such an effective, and awful, punishment. But Our Betters have decided that isolation, that solitary confinement — remember: many people do live alone — is part of the solution to COVID-19. In essence, state Governors have decided that the way to save human lives is to not let us be human beings.

Posted on by

Mitch McConnell to allow Joe Biden’s cabinet nominees a vote He said he will treat the nominees better than Chuck Schumer treated President Trump's

Perhaps Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-KY) greatest claim to fame was his preventing President Barack Obama from filling the Supreme Court seat previously held by Antonin Scalia by refusing to allow committee hearings or a floor vote on Merrick Garland, the ‘stealth’ moderate whom the President had nominated. Senator McConnell kept that seat vacant until Donald Trump was in office, and the seat went to much more conservative Neil Gorsuch.

The Democrats waxed wroth, and tried to filibuster Judge Gorsuch’s nomination, but that was hardly the first time they tried it: they also filibustered the nomination of Samuel Alito, and though there was no filibuster attempt against Clarence Thomas, his nomination squeaked through by a bare 52-48 margin. Other than Chief Justice John Roberts, who received 22 negative votes, the Democrats have made a significant effort to block every Supreme Court Justice appointed by a Republican President who is currently sitting on the Court: filibustering Brett Kavanaugh, who was confirmed by a bare 50-48 vote and Amy Coney Barrett was filibustered as well, and confirmed 52-28 with all Democrats voting against her.

In contrast, Sonia Sotomayor was easily confirmed, including nine Republican votes, 68-31, and Elena Kagan had five GOP votes on her way to a 63-37 confirmation vote.

President Trump’s cabinet nominations also received heavy Democratic opposition, and had the Democrats had the Senate majority, they’d probably all have been rejected.

So, it was with some surprise that I read that Senator McConnell was going to allow floor votes on the incoming President’s cabinet nominations:

McConnell says he will allow Biden’s Cabinet nominees a hearing

Max Berley, Bloomberg News | December 21, 2020

WASHINGTON — Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell says he will allow President-elect Joe Biden’s Cabinet nominees to get consideration by the upper chamber.

Biden’s nominees “aren’t all going to pass on a voice vote, and they aren’t all going to make it, but I will put them on the floor,” McConnell said in an interview with Scott Jennings, a conservative commentator, published Monday in the Louisville Courier-Journal in McConnell’s home state of Kentucky.

In the interview conducted last week, McConnell said he didn’t intend to “bring the administration to its knees” the way he said that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., did by requiring cloture votes for many of President Donald Trump’s nominees to overcome filibusters.

There’s more at the original, but let’s face facts: it doesn’t matter whom Joe Biden nominates, they’re all going to be purveyors of bad policies. Reject one, and someone else just as bad will replace him.

There is a simple tactic the GOP could use to signal disapproval of the incoming President and his policies: Republican Senators could vote “Present” on confirmation of all but the worst of the worst, which would not block the nominees from confirmation but which would not signal approval either.

Posted on by

Perhaps there would be more Catholics in the pews if we had more Catholics in the priesthood

There’s a significant debate among the Catholic faithful concerning whether former Vice President Joe Biden, who claims to be a life-long Catholic, but supports an unlimited abortion license, should be given the eucharist if he approaches for communion.

Well the Reverend Mark R. Hession, now 62, delivered the homily at the late Senator Edward M Kennedy’s (D-MA) funeral Mass, and said that he was the Kennedy family’s pastor on Cape Cod. I’m surprised that they didn’t make him a monsignor for that!

Priest who gave homily at pro-abort Ted Kennedy’s funeral charged with rape, indecent assault of a child

In 2009, the Boston Globe dubbed Hession the Kennedys’ ‘family priest on Cape Cod.’ During his homily at Senator Kennedy’s funeral, Hession emphasized that he had been the deceased’s pastor.

By Dorothy Cummings McLean | Friday, December 18, 2020 | 9:47 AM EST

BARNSTABLE, Massachusetts, December 18, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — The Catholic priest who gave the homily at pro-abortion Senator Ted Kennedy’s funeral has been indicted for rape and indecent assault on a child.

Father Mark R. Hession, 62, a priest of the Fall River Diocese and the former pastor of Our Lady of Victory in Centerville, MA, where Kennedy’s Cape Cod funeral was held, was the subject of a “secret” grand jury indictment in Barnstable last Friday, Hyannis News reported. The full charges were two counts of rape, one count of indecent assault and battery on a person under 14, and one count of witness intimidation.

A statement from the Fall River Diocese underscored that Hession has been “suspended from actively priestly ministry since 2019” and thus has not been able “to present himself as a priest in public settings.”

According to NBC Boston Channel 10, Hession was put on leave after complaints by some adult parishioners of Our Lady of Mount Carmel parish in Seekonk that he had sent them “inappropriate communications.” Hession left the parish in 2018 after it was revealed that he had used funds from its budget to fund personal expenses.

There’s more at the original. But this good priest, who said of Senator Kennedy, “My vision, like yours, can’t encompass the totality of his life. My memories seen through the lens of a Catholic parish priest are about how one person, one man, a husband, a father, a public figure, a Catholic, and a citizen, tried to meet the tests of the kingdom of Matthew’s gospel,” was (allegedly) raping children under 14, and (allegedly) a thief as well.

None of the articles I found on this story noted whether Fr Hession was molesting boys or girls, but the John Jay Report studying sexual abuse by Catholic clergy between 1950 and 2002 found that 81% of the victims were boys.

So, what does it say that Senator Kennedy’s pastor, who stated that he was “confident” that the late Senator had entered heaven, who was at least willing to look the other way concerning the Senators open and flagrant support of abortion, appears to himself have been less than a paragon of virtue himself?

One wouldn’t have expected Fr Hession to speak ill of the dead at a funeral Mass, so that is, in one way, a bit less than strong evidence. But if Fr Hession ever attempted to counsel his parishioner on his views of, and Senatorial votes for, abortion, we do not know of it. If the Distinguished Gentleman from Massachusetts had ever been denied communion by his parish priest, we’d certainly have heard that; it would have been huge news.[1]Thomas Tobin, the Bishop of Providence, requested then-Representative Patrick Kennedy (D-RI), Edward Kenney’s son, to stop presenting himself for communion due to his support for abortion.

I recently learned that my previous parish, St Joseph’s in Jim Thorpe, Pennsylvania, has been consolidated with Immaculate Conception parish, in the tourist trap section of town. St Joseph’s, with a church which would seat over 500 parishioners, usually had around 100 on Sundays, but the Diocese of Allentown apparently saw the two parishes as not serving enough parishioners each, and consolidated the parishes. St Joseph’s Regional Academy, the parochial school, was closed down in 2018.

How much, I have to ask, is due to declining numbers of active Catholics, and how much is that decline due to a Church which has tolerated homosexual activist priests, and priests who happily present the Host to vigorously pro-abortion politicians?

Is it possible, just possible, that the Catholic Church in the United States would see more actual Catholics in the pews if they had more actual Catholics serving as priests?

References

References
↑1 Thomas Tobin, the Bishop of Providence, requested then-Representative Patrick Kennedy (D-RI), Edward Kenney’s son, to stop presenting himself for communion due to his support for abortion.
Posted on by

Conservative school administrators forced to resign over social media posts The only shocking thing is that The Philadelphia Inquirer printed the story

William F Buckley, Jr, famously said, “Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.” The Pico Corollary to that would be that where liberals get concentrated into greater numbers, they channel their offense into actions against those with other views. And there are no more concentrated pockets of liberalism than in our public education systems. From The Philadelphia Inquirer:

School administrators say they were forced to resign over conservative Facebook posts

by Maddie Hanna | December 18, 2020 | 6:36 PM EST

Two former administrators at Montgomery County public schools are suing their school districts, alleging that they were illegally forced out of their jobs over Facebook posts criticizing the Black Lives Matter movement and Democratic politicians.

Ashley Bennett — a former special education supervisor at the North Penn School District who appeared Thursday on Tucker Carlson Tonight — and Amy Sacks, a former elementary school principal in the Perkiomen Valley School District, said the districts violated their First Amendment rights, retaliating against them for comments made on their personal Facebook pages.

In Bennett’s case, she said she was forced to resign after a June 24 post that criticized Black Lives Matter, in the wake of national protests over the police killing of George Floyd. “I’m just trying to figure out WHICH black lives matter,” said the post, which someone else wrote but Bennett shared. “It can’t be the unborn black babies — they are destroyed without a second thought.” The post accused the movement of harming Black police officers, and media outlets of ignoring “black on black violence.”

I’m not a teacher or education professional, but I’ve certainly said the same things. The outrage over the killings of George Floyd, a convicted felon with a history of armed robbery and drug use, who was high on fentanyl and methamphetamines when caught passing counterfeit money generated a summer of Mostly Peaceful Protests™, and the left fêted Mr Floyd as though he was some kind of saint, when he was nothing but a criminal and a deadbeat dad. The Professionally Offended™ were outraged when two Philadelphia Police officers shot and killed Walter Wallace, even though body cam footage clearly showed the mentally unstable Mr Wallace approaching them with a raised knife. More Mostly Peaceful Protests™ occurred, and the story was in the Inquirer for days.[1]A site search for Walter Wallace returned 94 articles in the Inquirer.

Yet, just last week, the Inquirer ran an article telling us the names of the then 466 people murdered in the City of Brotherly Love,[2]In the seven days since that article was published, that number has increased by ten, to 476. because nobody other than their families and friends knew about them. Helen Ubiñas wrote:

The last time we published the names of those lost to gun violence, in early July, nearly 200 people had been fatally shot in the city.

Just weeks before the end of 2020, that number doubled. More than 400 people gunned down.

By the time you read this, there will only be more.

Even in a “normal” year, most of their stories would never be told.

At best they’d be reduced to a handful of lines in a media alert:

“A 21-year-old Black male was shot one time in the head. He was transported to Temple University Hospital and was pronounced at 8:12 p.m. The scene is being held, no weapon recovered and no arrest.”

That’s it. An entire life ending in a paragraph that may never make the daily newspaper.

Realistically speaking, a lot of the victims didn’t even get that much of a blurb.

Back to the original story:

While the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that public employees can express opinions on matters of public concern — in 1968 upholding Illinois public schoolteacher Marvin Pickering’s right to criticize his school board’s spending on athletics in a letter to the editor — North Penn argued that case might not apply to Bennett’s post.[3]Marvin Pickering v Board of Education of Township High School District 205, 391 U.S. 563 (1968).

“There is no clearly established body of case law as to whether the Pickering test shields from censure a teacher’s social media post dismissing Black Lives Matter as nothing more than an expression of hate for the United States President, denying the existence of systemic racism, and invoking ‘destroyed black babies’ and ‘black on black crime,’ ” the district said in the filing.

Note that the school district, in its legal filing, cites “the existence of systemic racism” as a given, as though it is not a subject up for debate. “(I)nvoking ‘destroyed black babies’ and ‘black on black crime’” is apparently an actionable offense, as though “black on black crime” isn’t a serious issue, and as though black women having abortions at nearly five times the rate white women do is not the truth.

I have said it before: We need to stop pretending that #BlackLivesMatter, because in the City of Brotherly Love, it’s very apparent that they don’t.

In Pickering, the appellant was fired for statements the school board claimed were detrimental to the functioning of the school system itself, namely a letter to the editor arguing against a tax increase for the schools. In the cases at hand, the statements made on social media had nothing to do with the operation of the schools, but were comments on the general political questions of the day, during a very political year. Were these private schools, then yes, those schools would have every right to fire the school administrators, because the First Amendment protects Americans against government action. The schools which went after Ashley Bennett and Amy Sacks were public schools, which are unquestionably part of the government.[4]In Pennsylvania, school districts have independent taxing authority, as fifteen years of my property tax bills unfortunately reflected.

While both cases were originally filed separately in state courts, in Montgomery County and Philadelphia, they have been consolidated and are now filed in federal court. This should probably be a good thing, but only time will tell that.
_____________________________________
Cross-posted on RedState.

References

References
↑1 A site search for Walter Wallace returned 94 articles in the Inquirer.
↑2 In the seven days since that article was published, that number has increased by ten, to 476.
↑3 Marvin Pickering v Board of Education of Township High School District 205, 391 U.S. 563 (1968).
↑4 In Pennsylvania, school districts have independent taxing authority, as fifteen years of my property tax bills unfortunately reflected.
Posted on by

Rights delayed are rights denied — again!

As I noted in Rights delayed are rights denied, Governor Andy Beshear’s executive order closing all public and private Kindergarten through 12th grade schools had been expeditiously appealed, but the Supreme Court sat on the case. Now, in Danville Christian Academy v Beshear, the Court did just as I guessed it would: it let the case go moot.

On November 18, the Governor of Kentucky issued a temporary school-closing Order that effectively closes K–12 schools for in-person instruction until and through the upcoming holiday break, which starts Friday, December 18, for many Kentucky schools. All schools in Kentucky may reopen after the holiday break, on January 4. . . . .

The Governor’s school-closing Order effectively expires this week or shortly thereafter, and there is no indication that it will be renewed.

Uhhh, yes, there is! Governor Beshear has already ‘recommended’ that schools delay opening another week, until January 11th, and while he did not make that an order, quite possibly because he knew it would impact the case and it contradicted his own Court filing, he is now free to make it an order.

Under all of the circumstances, especially the timing and the impending expiration of the Order, we deny the application without prejudice to the applicants or other parties seeking a new preliminary injunction if the Governor issues a school-closing order that applies in the new year.

In other words, the Court would entertain a new case, should the Governor issue another executive order, but all of that takes time, and money. With Christmas break about to start, the Governor could easily wait until Saturday, January 2nd, to issue another executive order. Since the Sixth Circuit’s order is the current precedent, a trial judge would have to deny another request for a stay, then it be appealed to the Sixth Circuit, which would almost certainly rule the same way, followed by an application to the Supreme Court, and how many weeks more would the free exercise of religion and freedom of assembly be denied to the people of the Bluegrass State?

In his dissent, Justice Samuel Alito noted that the delay was not the fault of the appellants:

(I)n my judgment, it is unfair to deny relief on this ground since this timing is in no way the applicants’ fault. They filed this action on November 20, 2020, just two days after the issuance of the Governor’s executive order. And when, on November 29, the Sixth Circuit granted a stay of the order that would have allowed classes to resume, the applicants sought relief in this Court just two days later, on December 1. It is hard to see how they could have proceeded more expeditiously.

Justice Neil Gorsuch also dissented:

Nor should a Governor be able to evade judicial review by issuing short-term edicts and then urging us to overlook their problems only because one edict is about to expire while the next has yet to arrive. Come January 4, a new school semester will be about to start, and the Governor has expressly told us that he reserves the right to issue more decrees like these if and when religious schools try to resume holding classes. Rather than telling the parties to renew their fight in a month, asking the Sixth Circuit to resolve the case now, under accurate legal rules, would be better for everyone—from the parents who might have to miss work and stay home should decrees like these be upheld, to the state public health officials who might have to plan for school if they are not.

Courts have a broader equity at stake here too. In their struggle to respond to the current pandemic, executive officials have sometimes treated constitutional rights with suspicion. In Kentucky, state troopers seeking to enforce gubernatorial orders even reprimanded and recorded the license plate numbers of worshippers who attended an Easter church service, some of whom were merely sitting in their cars listening to the service over a loudspeaker.

Recently, this Court made clear it would no longer tolerate such departures from the Constitution. We did so in a case where the challenged edict had arguably expired, explaining that our action remained appropriate given the Governor’s claim that he could revive his unconstitutional decree anytime. That was the proper course there, as I believe it is here. I would not leave in place yet another potentially unconstitutional decree, even for the next few weeks.

For these reasons, I respectfully dissent. I would grant the application, vacate the Sixth Circuit’s stay, and remand the matter for further consideration under the proper legal standards.

As Justice Gorsuch noted, the Court could have vacated the Sixth Circuit’s stay, and then the expiration of the Governor’s order would have been forced to stay expired. If the Governor wanted to close religious schools again, he’d have to go at it differently.

I will admit it: I had higher hopes for Justices Thomas, Kavanaugh and Barrett on this case.

Of course, the vast majority of students in the Commonwealth attend the public schools, over which the Governor indisputably has authority. If the Governor wanted to close down the public schools, he could do so. Since it was only the religious private schools seeking relief, the Governor’s order would also apply to secular private schools.

As I wrote previously, I do not trust Governor Beshear: with the Supreme Court having dismissed Danville Christian Academy’s case as moot, I have very little doubt that Mr Beshear will once again enact executive orders restricting religious private schools. He has already indicated, as noted above, that he believes the schools should stay closed yet another week, and he could issue an order to that effect without any fear that the Supreme Court would invalidate it, because of the time factor.

I am hoping that the General Assembly, which will begin the next session in January with Republicans holding veto-proof majorities in both chambers, will amend KRS 39A to greatly limit the Governor’s ’emergency powers’ in a way which will both protect all of our constitutional rights from such orders and limit what executive authority he has to issue such orders to a brief time, requiring consent from the legislature for any extensions.
_______________________________________
Cross-posted on RedState.