Some Militarized Cops Oppressing Students By Saving Them From a Maniac Shooter

Ain’t no one whining about “militarized policing” when relatively small town FSU cops show up with AR-15s to take out the piece of crap who shot up the library last night.  I’m glad none of the students were killed; sadly three were injured, one critically. This is a reminder that police need the gear and training to get the job done, and when they have it, it saves lives

I have to say, the whinging, some among people on the right, about “militarized policing” is the lamest, made-up issue of all time and a serious “changing of the subject” that has occurred, chiefly with regard to the Ferguson riots.  The latter is a story not about militarized policing, but that inner city blacks riot for infractions real and imaginary from time to time and have been doing so regularly since the mid-1960s.  Indeed, they are often egged on to do so by their “leadership,” but instead we’re all talking about police armored vehicles, as if the most natural thing on Earth is to riot when you see cops in a scary looking vehicle.  The latter is a symptom of the former, not its cause.

Probably the most important insight from the recent revelations of Obamacare architect, Jon Gruber’s, repeated statements of contempt for the American people and admissions that the entire program was based on misinformation, is not that it reveals the contempt so many liberals have for the American people (particularly when those people oppose their plans), but that these revelations undermine what little legitimacy the law ever had and make plain the mendacity of the entire Administration.

One of the keys of a democratic or republican government is fair and open debate.  But that did not occur with Obamacare, it was not really debated, but rather shadows and reflections of the law were debated, because it an enormously long law, which legislators for and against admitted they did not read and did not fully understand.  Whatever was sold, was different from what was bought.  We’re now told it’s a fully vetted, fully debated, “done deal” supported by the American people, but what at least some people supported–keeping their insurance policies and rates going down along with the promise of better care and universal coverage–did not occur and was not intended to occur.  People bought the marketing, not the product, because the authors of this bill knew that it would never fly if these details were spoken of openly.  So, they lied.  And whatever patina of legitimacy the law had is gone, because it was based on fraudulent inducement and confusion and false urgency in its passage that concealed its manifold flaws from both its supporters and its opponents.

As they said over at Ace’s blog, ” you can’t say we “debated” the plan when in fact the Plan was to hide the Plan from the “stupid” American voters, all along.

Indeed, the entire episode is a microcosm of the entire tenor of this Administration and this President, who was also oversold through marketing and concealment of various details of his life–his communist friends, his pro-terrorist pastor, and his overall mediocrity as a legislator and a professor.  Those who voted for him thought they were getting a moderate, debonair, intellectual uniter, and instead we got a petty, mediocre, college town, leftist hack.

Obama is losing all restraint.  And the reason is not small “p” politics, but rather the politics of people, as in who are the American people.  He knows his amnesty will create bitterness and division among Americans and hostility to him and his party from otherwise apolitical Americans.  He is callow and narcissistic, but even he can see the public mood as represented by the Republican juggernaut on election day.

But he has a long view, and that view is correct:  if enough Third Worlders settle here and have legal status and eventually become citizens, conservatives and everything this country has traditionally stood for (which he hates) is finished.  We see this on a smaller scale in cities like Detroit or Bakersfield, where the native stock has been displaced.  That’s what his plan is, namely, to destroy the power by of American whites by overwhelming numbers  He hates the latter group–at least its conservative members–has no sympathy for them, feels they’re the source of evil and retrograde viewpoints (recall his “bitter clingers” statement), and wants to permanently change the country by increasing the size of his coalition (minorities, single moms, government workers, transnational coastal elites).

And, unless this is stopped or used as a basis for impeachment or some other sanction against him, he will succeed.

He may not succeed in 2016, but he will succeed, because a country is a just a piece of earth and the people who inhabit it at the end of the day.  As Stalin once said, quantity has a quality all its own.  If a nation is partly “an idea” than it is also the collective ideas of its various inhabitants.  And those ideas are very different from those of the native stock, as evidenced by the huge predictive power of demographics in affecting electoral outcomes, crime, economic activity, education levels, and pretty much every relevant prosocial or antisocial behavior under the sun.

While I think the country is still split roughly 50/50 on the entire liberal agenda, yesterday’s election was a good and somewhat dramatic result.  I do believe it interesting that commentators all see what they want in this, and that the liberal media sees this as an endorsement of bipartisanship and the like.  Really?  With a Democratic President, voters know a Republican Congress and Senate are a formula for gridlock.  That’s the point.  Their whole purpose in life for the next two years, their mandate to the extent they have one at all, is to stop, slow, and frustrate Obama on all but the most necessary aspects of his presidential power.

The War on Ebola

Obama says we must stop the disease at its source.  Maybe.  Or maybe we can just close our borders to people that do not really do much to improve our country.

Regarding Bush’s democratizing strategy on terrorism and Iraq, I wrote (over 10 years ago):  The final problem with the neocon approach has been the whole concept that the Middle East must become liberal and democratic or that we are inevitably and perennially the victims of Islamist terrorism. This is the same “root causes” thinking behind the other liberal crusade, the War on Poverty. Conservatives and other realistic people know that some things can be dealt with more easily and efficiently by treating the symptoms. Crime for example seems best combated by locking up criminals for a long time when we find them, rather than by “draining the swamp” as we are advised to do in the case of Islamic fundamentalism.

I would add that because of the supposed inevitability of open borders, we must now spend billions and risk the health of our own people to stop what may prove unstoppable in both the case of terrorism and Ebola.  And we are told, without much evidence, that we must commit men and resources to disorderly hellholes for decades to fight against perennial conditions that would not affect us, but for open borders, like Islamic extremism or persistent jungle diseases.

Science has become like a magic talisman for the left, even though I suspect very few have spent much time in a lab, could tell you about Poppe’s “falsifiability” definition of science, or could say anything intelligent about Boyle’s Law.  Also, medicine is informed by science, but not every medical decision is the product of science, and various “values” issues come into play, particularly when we’re dealing with public health.  Here’s what is undeniable and no one cay say it’s anti-science or non-science:

1) Ebola is a very serious often deadly disease.
2) Ebola is contagious.
3) This particular strain of Ebola is more contagious than past strains.
4) There is almost no domestic Ebola; it all comes from visitors, whether native Africans or healthcare workers in the Ebola zone.
5) We can’t always or easily tell who has Ebola when they come here.
6) A Quarantine of health care worker would affect a few hundred people, and a travel ban a few tens of thousands of people that are, frankly, not contributing a great deal to our common life.
7) We do not have resources to track tens of thousands of people, and our ability to track and treat people declines as more people get Ebola.
8) Americans will die from the President’s policies that would not otherwise.

On the basis of supposed science, the President is saying troops who have minimal contact with Ebola patients are not there voluntarily should be quarantined, while a handful of admittedly heroic health care workers should be free to go about their business, even though at least four by my count–the two in Dallas, Brantley, and the Maine nurse–have gotten Ebola in Africa when they must deal with vomiting, diarrhea-ridden, dying Ebola patients.

The President looks so terrible on this that it is laughable.  He wants to show he’s sophisticated–as with releasing terrorists from GITMO–but he’s showing, once again, how stupid, anti-American, malicious, and paralyzed by political correctness that he really is.  And all of this, contrary to leftist self-congratulation, has very little to do with science and a lot to do with a basic disregard for the notion that America is a community with the basic right of self defense.

The CDC takes in $6.9B every year, but what is there to show for it?  Why so inept when its core function, preventing epidemics, is put to the test?

Consider the situation at the Dallas Hospital, as noted by Ace:  

Assuming what she says is true [regarding minimal training for dealing with Ebola] — and with two infected nurses, it’s hard to come to any conclusion except that the staff did not properly contain the disease — this is an indictment of the hospital’s administrators and the Texas Department of Health, first of all.

But it’s also an indictment of the CDC. These hospital workers clearly did not know what the hell to do with Thomas Eric Duncan, and yet the CDC seemed content to let untrained staff at a general hospital blunder along, both infecting themselves and possibly infecting other patients.

I always assumed that when a highly-infectious disease like ebola presented itself at a hospital, the CDC would send some experts to either advise the hospital on containment and protocols, or would send actual doctors and nurses, experienced in ebola, to treat the patient properly.

As of yesterday, Obama now says that such ebola threat response teams will be sent to hospitals (after a diagnosed case of ebola).

Again: As of yesterday. Before yesterday, Obama and the CDC were content to let the barely-trained locals figure it out on the fly.

You probably also know that Amber Vinson has now been flown by private medical charter to the CDC’s infectious diseases specialist hospital at Emory.

Again, this is what I assumed would happen from the outset. We are paying billions for the CDC. And yet when Duncan presented himself with full-blown ebola, the CDC did not jump up to take the lead on his treatment, or transfer him to their state-of-the-art containment wing.

Instead, they let untrained personnel out in a local Dallas hospital deal with it.

We see this in so many areas.  Our vast regulatory apparatus does little more than shake down those caught in its net, with little accountability for failing in its core functions, whether it is preventing hijackings, stopping illegal immigration, or protecting citizens from riots.  Instead, our regulators are more like mafia enforcers, people to be dealt with with warily and with a “zero sum” sense than paying them off is easier than resistance, even though the purported benefits of their presence accrue chiefly to the regulators themselves.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 44 other followers