Category Archives: Government

UPDATE III (1/18): In US Government, Error That Could’ve Triggered Attack On North Korea Goes Unpunished. Oh, Well.

Foreign Policy, Government, Homeland Security, Technology, The State, War

“Temporarily reassigned” to other duties. That’s the fate—the punishment—of a government employee who, by mistake, “activated a missile launch warning” that “stirred panic across Hawaii over the weekend.”

Preparedness never killed anyone, but what if the US had annihilated North Korea based on a false emergency alert of a ballistic missile headed for Hawaii?

Yet an error that could have triggered a deadly attack on North Korea goes unpunished. In the private sector; you’d be fired.

There is little accountability in government, because it is a body that writes the rules it applies to itself.

And so many Americans want more government control!

Name, shame and fire the responsible government employee at the Hawaii Emergency Management Agency.

… The error occurred when, in the midst of a drill during a shift change at the agency, an employee made the wrong selection from a “drop-down” computer menu, choosing to activate a missile launch warning instead of the option for generating an internal test alert … The employee, believing the correct selection had been made, then went ahead and clicked “yes” when the system’s computer prompt asked whether to proceed …

MORE.

UPDATE I: In reply to Facebook thread: What would we do without the statist voice of reason?! It’s not like the US didn’t destroy Iraq after Colon (sic) Powell’s slide show at the UN. Then Libya. But it’s all “ridiculous story telling” to the statist incapable of learning to distrust the US State.

UPDATE II (1/15):  You know those countries on which America drops bombs—only ever for their own good? Ever thought of what their citizens experience just before such a “righteous” payload is dropped? In Hawaii, Americans got a taste of that. But maybe not, since no lessons or learning curve is ever cultivated.

UPDATE III (1/18): Readers thought the comment above was “the only decent take I’ve heard.” Agree, not because it’s me.

Comments Off on UPDATE III (1/18): In US Government, Error That Could’ve Triggered Attack On North Korea Goes Unpunished. Oh, Well.

Written by on

NEW COLUMN: Military Disasters: Gender Fluidity And Chicks In Camo

Cultural Marxism, Government, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, libertarianism, Military, Paleolibertarianism, Sex

THE NEW COLUMN,  colorfully titled by the editor, is “Military Disasters: Gender Fluidity and Chicks in Camo” (“army men don’t want “mate who suddenly grows breasts and bats eyelashes”).

Now on WND, it revisits the reversed ban on LGBTQ in the military. Among all else, it challenges the idea that everyone is eligible to serve in government institutions, an idea that runs counter to the libertarian imperative to contain government growth and reach.

(Of course, tele-Judge Andrew Napolitano, a lite, left-libertarian, has celebrated the freighting of men with females in combat as a great step toward the ideal of “judging individuals based on their merits and not their group.”)

An excerpt:

President Trump’s July 26th LGBTQ directive, signaling his intention to ban the politicized transgender production from the theater of war, has been overturned.

Pursuant to a complaint filed by US service members (ISIS was tickled pink), a federal judge, Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, blocked the enforcement of the president’s ban. “The reasons given for the ban do not appear to be supported by any facts,” she ruled.

Judge KK was not alone. Predictably, the Joint Chiefs of Staff had pooh-poohed the president, too.

Why “predictably”? Whether Republicans like it or not, the military is government; it works like government; is financed like government, and is marred by the same inherent malignancies of government. Like all government-run divisions and departments, the US military is manacled by multiculturalism, feminism and all manner of outré sexual politics, affirmative action, and political correctness that kills.

LGBTQ is a political program why? Central to the concept of “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and Questioning” in the military is the idea of a group whose members have chosen to identify not as Private X or Private Z, but as a party to a political fraternity that promises and delivers an aggressive, noisy, sexual identity politics.

Evangelizing for the cause is implicit in the introduction of this political production into the military. Ditto payment for drastic elective medical procedures and the attendant hormonal maintenance.

In other words, LGBTQ in the military isn’t about enhancing a fighting force, it’s about introducing another state-driven reformation program. Egalitarian access here aims, inadvertently (as always), to grow an arm of government and, at the same time, “re-educate” the country.

Contra Judge Kollar-Kotelly, LGBTQ in the military is but another “Draconian social policy [enforced] without showing any interest in—and in many cases actively suppressing—good-faith information about how those policies [are] playing out at ground level,” in the prescient words of Stephanie Gutmann, author of “The Kinder, Gentler Military: Can America’s Gender-Neutral Fighting Force Still Win Wars?” …

… READ THE REST. “Military Disasters: Gender Fluidity and Chicks in Camo” is now on WND.com.

UPDATED (6/28/018): Another Of Judge Napolitano’s Un-Libertarian Brainstorms

Constitution, English, Government, IMMIGRATION, libertarianism, Media, The State

Leave a reply

I have a dossier on the guy. I’m talking about “Judge Andrew Napolitano, [who] Is [absolutely] NOT A Rightist Libertarian.” Ann Coulter has also lost her legendary patience with this TV personality posing as a legal scholar. Ms. Coulter had the good sense to demolish Napolitano’s ridiculous 14th Amendment jurisprudence.

Today Napolitano declared Vladimir Putin to be “the most dangerous man on the planet,” to all inhabitants, on all continents, practically.

A couple of months back, I made a note of another of Judge Napolitano’s un-libertarian infractions. As is his wont, Napolitano was empaneled on the Bret Baier show. “The Panel” was vaporizing about Tom Price, the Health and Human Services Secretary, who used chartered flights for government business, and subsequently resigned.

The usual banalities were exchanged, when Napolitano decided to show his “originality.” The Judge ventured that he didn’t much care that Price splashed out at the expense of the taxpayer, if this got Mr. Price to his destination quickly. After all, “argued” Napolitano, we want our government to be efficient. We want them to do things in a timely manner. No delays on the way. (If readers can locate the link, I’d be most grateful.)

No we don’t!

A libertarian wants the exact opposite.

Knowing how government “works”; knowing that practically everything a government official does is harmful, we libertarians want the state to be thwarted at every turn. If Tom Price needs to get from destination A to destination B to sign some giveaway bill, I want him traveling via … camel or walking. Unless it is repealing rights-infringing legislation, I want to see inertia and inaction in government.

What makes this libertarian happy is to be told that President Trump has not filled many a position in his administration. And when, likewise, The Economist saddles Dr. Carlson (in its latest issue) with the same “sin.”

As for the Judge’s “WTF If” columns, you know, the ones in which every sentence (x 50) begins with, “What if government was …  What if government was … “: More than of his atrocious writing style, this writing is an indictment of the syndicator’s piss-poor editor.

AP Dossier:

“Julie Borowski’s Wrong: Judge Andrew Napolitano Is NO Rightist Libertarian”

Andrew Napolitano: Some Libertarian

Ann Coulter Offers A Corrective To Judge Andrew Napolitano

Judge Napolitano’s Left-Libertarian Confusion

Fighting Words From Left-Libertarian Egalitarians

Napolitano-Koch Connection? (Sixth Sense)

The Neoconservative & Left-Libertarian Positions: Liberty Is Universal

14th Amendment Jurisprudence For Dummies

UPDATE (6/28/2018):

Judge Napolitano, to repeat, is a left-libertarian. Always said so. Above are my many blogs about his leftist exploits. In his latest column, Napolitano is essentially arguing that if X trespasses into your home, you can’t, in natural law, remove him. Crap. Not to conflate natural law with positive law, but I hazard that were you to research this bit of Napolitano legalism, you’d find he’s hiding/finessing certain aspects of due-process jurisprudence.

Discussion on Facebook.

Roy Moore: How Ethical Is It To Overturn The People’s Democratic Decision Via An Ethics Committee?

Democracy, Elections, Ethics, Government, Morality, Republicans, States' Rights

It isn’t.

By now you have to have noticed the ethical and moral corruption baked into the vaunted American system.

In the event Judge Roy Moore is elected in the Alabama special election by the people, The Establishment is waiting to unseat him and overturn the election via a Senate ethics investigation when he gets to Washington.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters last week that he expects Moore will face a Senate ethics probe if he wins.

“If he were to be elected I think he would immediately have an issue with the Ethics Committee, which they would take up,” McConnell said.
Young, the Moore strategist, cast the Senate election Tuesday in Alabama as a referendum on President Donald Trump.
“This is Donald Trump on trial in Alabama,” Young said on “This Week.” “If the people of Alabama vote for this liberal Democrat, Doug Jones, then they’re voting against the president who they put in office.”
“It’s ground zero for President Donald Trump,” Young added. “If they can beat him, they can beat his agenda, because Judge Moore stands with Donald Trump, and his agenda.”

It’s unethical for a politburo to overturn The People’s democratic decision via a far-removed ethics committee. They do it anyway.

Comments Off on Roy Moore: How Ethical Is It To Overturn The People’s Democratic Decision Via An Ethics Committee?

Written by on