Impact 2

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

When the killer took his shot, Charlie was talking to students at Utah Valley University (photo), holding one of his customary "Prove me wrong!" events. Anyone who disagreed with him was invited to come to the microphone, explain why, and dialog with him in the spirit of America's core value of free speech.

No wonder he had such a following. Gen Z values authenticity. These dialogs were unscripted and authentic--in today's cynical climate of spin, rage, and fake news.

As Utah's governor put it, "Charlie was murdered because of his political views, in the very act of exercising constitutionally protected political speech." 

It seems that, in today's climate, we need the clarity to state what should be obvious: justice is not served by murdering someone you don't approve of.

from The Free Press

(cont'd tomorrow)

"We're exempt" 3

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

"Compassion" justifies the sanctuary movement in their opinion. Our laws limiting who and how many may enter the US are an outrageous violation of the virtue of compassion, they seem to think. Instead of working to change those laws they consider un-compassionate (as our system allows), they choose to defy the lawfully created rules.

That's very bad policy. It won't work for them and it won't work for America.

Of course we need laws, and of course the laws should be enforced. Citizens who want completely open borders make a claim that is irrational, and they have left common sense behind. No other country's borders are open in that way, and for good reason.

If "no one is illegal [image]," then no one is safe either.

"We're exempt" 2

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

A 32-year-old woman, Kate Steinle, died in July of 2015 while walking in San Francisco. She was with her father and a friend when a man, Jose Garcia-Zarate, shot her in the back. He was in the US illegally and had a long criminal record.

He had earlier been arrested on a drug warrant. US immigration officials asked San Francisco police to hold him for a couple days, but they dropped charges and released him. Kate was shot less than three months later. He said at his murder trial that it was an accident. The jury found him innocent of that but guilty of a minor charge. Then an appeals court threw out that charge. He was only deported--for the seventh time.

How could a man here illegally break our laws, kill one of us, and get home free?

Under our previous president's administration, immigrants illegally crossing our border were set free and told to show up later in court for processing. One example in 2022 from Venezuela went to New York (sanctuary city), was housed at the Crown Plaza hotel, and then requested to be flown to Georgia. Taxpayers paid for his flight, then in Georgia he brutally killed a nursing student, Laken Riley (photo).

from Imprimis

(cont'd tomorrow)

"We're exempt"

Our first president, trusted for his integrity, was elected unanimously. George Washington "was, in every sense of the words, a wise, a good, and a great man" according to Thomas Jefferson. Some thought he was so good that he should be made into a king.

But he rejected the idea then, and we don't want a king today. Why? A king can be a tyrant with power to overwhelm the people. America is a republic. Our representatives are elected by citizens to make laws that govern us according to the people's will--not a king's will. We call ourselves a nation of laws (not men) and we enforce those laws.

That is, we all did respect and enforce our laws . . until recently. Now, segments of this country declare themselves exempt from laws they don't like. That's the "sanctuary" movement (image). It started with the city of Berkeley, California, back in 1971 and now it's that whole state and more.

A long list of cities, counties, and states declare that they refuse to enforce America's immigration laws.

from Imprimis

(cont'd tomorrow)

Unjust

Luigi Mangione murdered a man in cold blood on a street in New York City. He said he did it, and there's video evidence of it, so there's no doubt about it. He's on trial for the crime now.

It's an "open and shut" case of breaking the law, of doing what's obviously and morally wrong. But a substantial group of people disagree. Alarmingly, 41% of registered voters between 18 and 29 say that this murder is ok with them.

How do they justify the killing? The victim was an insurance executive, and they say that insurance companies are unjustly withholding payments from clients who deserve to have their claims paid (image).

"Clear Thinker" Kaizen Asiedu tries to clear up the confusion by saying: "It's not that hard. Murder is bad. Luigi Mangione murdering Brian Thompson is bad. People dying because they were denied healthcare is bad. Murdering someone to fix healthcare does not fix healthcare and is bad." Yes, that's rational thinking.

But we're in trouble when a sizeable number of us think murder is ok as a way to solve a problem.

from Clear Thinker

Google admits it

Google has been accused multiple times of suppressing political views they don't like, of favoring the left in their search algorithms. They always denied it. 

Back in 2018, CEO Sundar Pichai (photo) stressed that they operate without political bias.

As late as last October, he claimed Google's innocence for almost four hours before a congressional committee. He said they are as objective as possible.

Now . . everybody knows the accusations were correct and the denials were lies, because they've admitted it in a letter to the House Judiciary Committee. The previous administration pressured them repeatedly, they say, to remove content from Youtube and they did it.

They admit it was "unacceptable and wrong," and they "will allow creators banned for political speech on COVID-19, elections, and related issues an opportunity to return to the platform."

Maybe they're sorry. Or . . maybe they're just complying to the "vibe shift" and they'll do it again as soon as it's convenient to do so.

Exposed 3

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

The drive for justice is a reason for our new Department of Government Efficiency. When you and I fund the federal government with our tax dollars, we suppose that it's well-managed. But apparently the federal government is spending our money wildly, making payments that we would not approve--if only we knew about them. We want it stopped. Doge is investigating.

Some expenses are inefficient. The IRS manages about the same number of daily transactions as a bank. Banks budget about $20 million/year for operation and maintenance. The IRS budget for operation is $3.7 billion/year. That's seventeen times more than what a bank spends for about the same amount of work. 

Some payments are fraud. Social Security checks were going out to 3.7 million people who were listed as . . 120+ years old. Somebody was cashing all those checks.

Some payments are waste. $3 million for transparency and accountability in the cotton industry of Uzbekistan.

 from Doge

Exposed 2

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

Wait, do people really want injustice exposed? For some, that depends on who did it. They'd be okay with injustice if it's done by someone on their own side.

Genuine justice calls for perpetrators to be called out, regardless of which political side they're on. Check out this attack on personal property, part of a wave of vandalism directed at Elon Musk's Tesla car company. The man may think he's justified in this crime because (in his opinion) Elon is bad. 

But that's not justice. And, fortunately, he didn't get away with it.

Exposed

All of us have a sense of "justice," a feeling that we should be treated fairly, according to what is right. We are frustrated when wrongdoing is covered up, when it's kept secret, whether it happens to us or to someone we care about. We want it exposed and set right.

(Of course, that drive for justice is much reduced when it comes to our own wrongdoing. We're not anxious for that to be exposed.)

What does God think about it? One appeal of Christianity is that God is going to set things right eventually. Part of Giuseppe Verdi's dramatic and beautiful requiem (1874) deals with God's final judgment:

The great book shall be unfurled,
Whereby God shall judge the world;
What was distant shall be near,
What was hidden shall be clear.

Merit 3

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

If shoplifters are arrested and laws are enforced for one race but not for other races, we've lost justice.  

It seems obvious that justice and medical standards and law schools should be color-blind. It was obvious to all of us until 5 minutes ago. The point of the civil rights movement in the latter half of the last century was that rights and justice should be administered without regard to the race of the individual. That would be fair and just. Now we've gone backward, less fair and less just.

Most Americans are bewildered. A scholar and writer puts it in black and white terms with no confusion in this address to a conference last month. She says, "Disparate impact thinking is destroying our civilization."

"Any racial disparity in any institution is by definition the result of racial discrimination." So bar exams, police arrests, medical degrees, law schools--anywhere that the percentage of black people differs from the 13% of the general population that is black--are all the result of racist discrimination.

Wouldn't it be interesting to know how many people actually believe this nonsense? If you haven't bowed to the wokeness, please speak up. But maybe not at work . . I don't want you to be fired for thinking things through.

from Hillsdale

Rights

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

The concept that all human beings have "rights" is a moral imperative, a "should" sort of claim: all human beings should freely exercise their rights. But is it obvious? It was definitely not obvious for thousands and thousands of years of civilization. 

Kings and emperors throughout history might rule kindly from time to time, but their governing paradigm was not to preserve peoples' rights. They held their power position because of birth or force, but either way they did what they pleased. It's called "totalitarian" when there's no greater authority than the ruler or the government and they have total control.

photo

American founders wanted to break that mold. They took the "Imago Dei" concept from the Bible (that humans are all created in the image of God) and crafted a government around it:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

Radical.

Zero for Zero

A Florida school compels teachers to give a grade of 50% to students who make zero effort to turn in an assignment.

Diane Mirado was fired in 2018 for refusing to comply. She gave a grade of 0% to the students who made zero effort. 

She left this message for her students when she cleaned out her room:

"Bye kids, Mrs Tirado loves you and wishes you the best in life! I have been fired for refusing to give you a 50 percent for not handing anything in."

photo

Woman in Gold

Somehow, stories of escape from Nazi occupation of Austria (1938) came together for me this weekend. Last Friday's post was about a Jewish boy who escaped to Britain. Then that night my husband and I went to see "Woman in Gold" which turned out to be a Jewish woman's (Maria) story of escaping Austria about that same time.

Nazis began to isolate and bully Jewish Austrians. Police barged into Maria's family home and stole their art - paintings, jewelry, and a cello. (If you saw the movie "Monuments Men," you know that they stole thousands upon thousands of art pieces.)

"Woman in Gold" was a painting of Maria's aunt, a family treasure, which ended up after WWII in an Austrian gallery as public property. Maria wanted to get it back. She loved Austria, so why the hard feelings against the land of her birth? Some Austrians collaborated with the Nazis, betraying the Jewish community.

Another Maria, another movie example of escape - "Sound of Music." The Von Trapps abandoned everything to escape to the West when the new Nazi command in Austria "offered" Capt. Von Trapp a position in their military.