Orrin Johnson @orrinjohnson

If by "whack-a-mole" you mean that threats to western civilization and humanity will regularly pop up, and protectors of civilization and humanity need to regularly either destroy them utterly or deny them the means to cause harm to us, then yes. Welcome to history, the good and bad of the human condition, and why we say "freedom isn't free." Acknowledging the need for regular maintenance/protection of our way of life isn't "defeatist," it's just reality.

I'm not a particularly religious guy, but I love SF because I love stories that explore the human conition, and religion has always been part of the human experience one way or another. I appreciated your posts as a fellow vet and old school ST fan, but it led me to read Chaplain's War and I really enjoyed it. So thanks! Agree we need more literature writen by traditionalists, without them being overtly "message" projects.

@BradRTorgersen My old college roommate once described somebody he worked with as "Picard if he hadn't been stabbed by the Naussican," and it perfectly encapsulated a certain type of sad, angry male that has sadly proliferated in our culture. I think about that description often.

@cabsav456 @inane_gimmick @HansMahncke But even if the defense is, "we weren't malicious, just incompetent," the result is the same - an election result no one can trust, leaving public trust "in shambles." And "merely" incompetent but otherwise non-nefarious guards are still the best friends of thieves.

In my industry, I'm happy (well, satisfied, anyway) when I see incompetent or dishonest practitioners get fired, go out of business, or even disbarred. It is to the greater health of my profession that failure has these consequences. Reagan-era Peggy Noonan would have understood this - it is a constant sadness to see her previous insight turn so shallow. I agree that credible mass media is critical to a functioning Republic. But if you define "vital, fully functioning" newspaper as one which fearlessly reports facts rather than acting as the propaganda arm of one political tribe, then our nation's capital hasn't had one in many years. The paper has been on the whole tribally partisan, dishonest, smug, entitled, arrogant-without-cause, and frankly just not that insightful or smart. No honest observer can conclude otherwise. Better for the people of DC - and the media industry as a whole, if credibility is ever to return to it - to tear it down to the studs and rebuild something worth having.

@dpolehn Almost exactly where I'm at - 290 this week with deadlifts almost identical (300x5 this week). Glad to know I'm not weird for those numbers being close!

Anyone who claims a product or service is a “right” is saying something far darker than they admit. If you have a right to a doctor’s time, a farmer’s crops, a builder’s labor, or a programmer’s work, then by consequence the people who produce those things exist to serve you. Their effort becomes an obligation. Their time becomes a duty. Their life becomes a means to your ends. You cannot have a “right” to something that must be created by someone else unless you believe the creator belongs to you. Rights protect freedom. They don’t impose labor. The moment you declare another person’s work to be your entitlement, you have already crossed the line. You have said, whether you realize it or not, that the producer is your property.

Pramila Jayapal @PramilaJayapal

8 months ago

Health care is a human right.

2K 160 1K 1.3M 31

When I was writing my columns for the RGJ and later the Nevada Independent, I’d get all kinds of commentary. Some was positive, some was negative (the Indy’s readership, or at least their commentariat, decidedly does not share my political philosophies), and that was all fine, even enjoyable. I’m a lawyer after all, and debate is central to my profession. But the comments that bothered me to my core – the ones that kept me off Twitter or the news sites themselves – were the ones hysterically accusing me of literally killing people with my ideas. This occurred most during COVID when I was (correctly) questioning the wisdom, legality, ethics, and efficacy of the lockdowns, but it predated it as well. I thought at first that it bothered me merely because it was so ugly, because I like people and do not, in fact, want to kill them, or because they were always calls for censorship (which I abhor). But that wasn’t it. Instead, it was because I realized that they were threats. If I was seen on the street corner literally trying to kill someone, it would be legal justification for a good Samaritan to kill me in defense of that person. To equate speech with violence – as all autocrats and censors do to justify their acts – is to validate a “self-defense” claim justifying stopping the speaker immediately, and by any means necessary. The same is true in invoking Nazis or fascism – it was necessary to kill Nazis and other fascists during World War II to defend the free nature of Western Civilization, and when the analogy is run to its logical end point, such rhetoric is a threat and a call to violence. Charlie Kirk’s murder shook me in ways I wouldn’t have expected. I’d seen a number of his videos on line. Expecting empty bombast, to my surprise I rather enjoyed them, usually agreed with him (but not always), and appreciated that he not only invited disagreement, but insisted that the disagree-ers come to the front of the line and present THEIR ideas to as big a platform as he could produce. Exposure to things we disagree with – even find repugnant – is not a mere necessary evil to cope with in a free society. Such exposure is NECESSARY to ensure our mind can think independently, and to inoculate ourselves to those bad ideas, and to even change our minds if ideas we once assumed were bad turned out to be more reasonable. The Charlie Kirk hate is unfathomable to any but those sad souls trapped in unspeakably dark places. The allegations that he is a white supremacist or whatever other smears are running around are absurd lies, and only believed by idiots or cowards who refuse to listen to the man’s words for themselves. When he was shot, it re-exposed and clarified that old discomfort I had when I was also trying to be a public ambassador for my ideas. There are people willing to kill to silence debate and dissent. The people who justify or excuse or refuse to even feel bad about Kirk’s death because of his (usually deliberately misunderstood) past statements would also justify or excuse or refuse to mourn MY death, and the deaths of tens of millions of others who share some or all of my point of view. It is an evil and corrosive way to think and feel, and if you love and care about people who express such views (as we are all commanded to do), hold them accountable for the sakes of their own souls. It is important to understand that the temptation towards evil is a part of the human condition. There are no “good people” or “bad people.” My dog is good – he has no choice but to be. But humans are different and special because we get to choose. The line between good and evil runs through the middle of every human heart, and we make a hundred choices a day large and small to indulge one side or another. No individual or faction has a monopoly on good or evil. Most of us (thank God) generally indulge the pro-humanity, pro-freedom good side. Those who seek power for its own sake over other humans against their will, even if it’s nominally “for their own good,” are indulging the evil side. Those who attempt to censor and silence others by threats of force or violence – including the violence of state action – are giving in to evil. You know who you are. In the vast sweep of history, political violence has been the default condition of human societies, with the post-War Pax Americana the absurdly lucky outlier. To protect and preserve what we’ve had and can have again, we must all recommit ourselves to understand that “good” and “evil” are tangible, definable, objective things. We must recognize that culture matters, that some cultures are frankly better than others, and that while imperfect, Western civilization has been the most potent protector and cultivator of net good over evil than any other cultural tradition in history, for all races and ethnicities. There is no “left” or “right.” Thos terms have no real meaning beyond tribal identifiers, and to use those terms is lazy and destructive. We are either pro- some idea or anti. We are either pro- a candidate or party, or anti. There is only pro-human, and anti-human. There is only freedom, or totalitarianism in some guise or another. If you are pro-human and pro-freedom, you are my brother and my countryman, no matter where you come from or what your skin tone is or what party you’ve registered with. We must recognize the slide towards evil in others, and because we commanded to love them whoever they are, we must endeavor to call that evil out to stop the slide into darkness. And more importantly, we must recognize the constant temptation in ourselves, to seek retribution on the wrong targets, or call for censorship or other restrictions on the freedoms of others we may disagree with. (I don’t want the ghouls who are celebrating Kirk’s death to be silenced – I want them exposed to the light for all to see.) We must rediscover, internalize, and commit to the mantra that while we may disagree with what someone says, we will defend WITH OUR LIVES their right to say it. The freedom to explore and debate ideas that Charlie Kirk espoused was not free. Whether he understood it or not, he risked – and ultimately gave – his life to protect that freedom for future generations, just as countless members of Western Civilization have done before him. We can do no less. Speak out against the darkness when you see it. Speak the truth lovingly but firmly, even at risk to yourself. Resist the evil always lurking in our own hearts. Understand that often the most loving thing you can do for someone is to hold them accountable when they err. Fight for freedom for all, and resist the addiction of tribalism and power over others. The future is ours to create – let’s create the freest, most prosperous, most loving one we can.

@RalstonReports The far greater dysfunction/corruption of the full time federal legislature as well as the California example next door would seem to refute this hypothesis.

Yes, is the easy answer. This historical understanding is woven into the fabric of our Constitution. Power corrupts because exercising power over other humans is intoxicating and addictive. You can't hector people into civility or self-restraint without a culture where civility and self-restraint is the path to power (which requires much higher rates of religiosity and nationalistic pride that we currently enjoy). And even WITH such a culture, government officials must have their power constantly limited, divided, and at risk from the citizenry, so the dopamine rush from bossing other people around becomes less potent.

@MCFCDamo @al4n_woot @highbrow_nobrow The virus didn't shut down anything. Panicked, foolish, and/or corrupt politicians and public health officials took those disastrous, totalitarian, and unnecessary actions. You know. The same people who falsely claimed the mRNA vaccines were 100% safe and 100% effective.

My senior year of college my advisor said I was missing Sociology 1001, the intro class. I argued that any number of my political science classes should have covered that, but no, it was required. I went to class six times, including the three multiple choice exams I didn't study for, and aced the paper we were supposed to write. I "only" got a B+, mostly because the test questions were so badly writen, but they were still going to call me "Ensign" when I graduated so it wasn't worth arguing about. Something tells me Professor Gill's intro class is probably an even bigger waste of time than mine was.

When I was evacuated from my house last year for a week, I received up to date information from a myriad of media sources, none of which demand federal subsidies a la NPR and PBS. The government already has the power to cut in to private TV and radio stations, and of course our phones, for emergency alerts. Not one life will be at risk because NPR and PBS have to play on the same level playing field as any other news and entertainment enterprise, and for KUNR's manager to suggest otherwise is self-serving, dishonest, and emotionally manipulative. And this, of course, must make one question whether or not the rest of the information public radio/TV diseminates can be trusted.

@JLendabarker @johnkonrad Can confirm. We weren't even allowed to have a round in the chamber pre-9/11

Ketanji nuked from orbit

@FA_Bn_Mike_Golf @CynicalPublius Me too. Then his son was my first CO, and it retroactively had even more punch.

My guess is always that some opposing political tribal member wanted to use an ugly outlier to define the entire "enemy" tribe in a negative way. Sort of like how Republicans successfully made AOC the face of the Dems. The Dems are hurt by the association, but she gets a boost personally.

If this stance is controversial or objectionable to you, you are anti education, and should be ashamed of yourself. Thank you, Governor.

Joe Lombardo @JoeLombardoNV

a year ago

Nevada’s education budget must include equal pay for charter school teachers. I’ve been clear: No budget gets signed without it. No more politics, just fairness for every teacher.

49 75 350 22K 3

When I was County Judge Executive in Lewis County Kentucky, I was responsible for signing the check that paid for every phone landline and cellphone billed to the county. At first it seemed impossible to ferret out the waste, fraud, and abuse for these phone plans. How many phones were taxpayers paying for that were defunct? How many were former county employees who were no longer employed but had been able to keep their phone and mooch off the taxpayer? Was any of it fraudulent or inaccurate billing by the service provider? But then I came up with an idea… I told every county department (Sheriff, Clerk, Road Crew, Jail, etc.) to give me a list of their phones matched to their county employees or offices. In one month, I would DEACTIVATE EVERY PHONE that wasn’t on one of these lists. A month went by and only about 80% complied with the directive to list their phones. I gave them one more month and issued a serious warning that their phones would be turned off at the end of the next month. Finally, I directed the phone company to deactivate all phones that weren’t accounted for. Guess what? The jailer called me up and said the finger print machine wouldn’t send finger prints to the state police anymore. Ha! That was the only legitimate phone line that I deactivated. We quickly got it reactivated. I ended up saving our county thousands of dollars on the phone bill, much to the chagrin of the phone company and a few moochers who no longer had free phone plans. I think most of the savings came from phones that just weren’t in service but had been left on the bill. Why do I tell this story? Because what Elon is doing by asking federal employees to list five things they did in a week is brilliant. Requiring any kind of an affirmative response from a worker will prove whether that worker even exists and can be reached. Don’t forget, the Inspector General for Afghanistan found out we were paying millions for soldiers and police in Afghanistan who didn’t even exist (ghost employees). There’s no telling what Elon’s plan will uncover. We will find some employees can’t use email or aren’t even literate enough to write five things. So everyone take a chill pill and write down your five things to let us know you exist and you can read email and you aren’t completely insubordinate. Then we can clean the roster.

I'm concerned that many people do not understand the historical and institutional context in which the DOGE labor reforms are unfolding. They look at this as if these are some random, chaotic, arbitrary, strange, and even cruel measures to impose on a devoted civil service. The reality is very different, and I'm not even sure that Elon entirely understands this. For more than a century, even dating back to 1883, the civil service has grown and grown without check from the elected branch, either the presidency or the legislature . The bureaucracies have ballooned from a few to 450 or so. The bloat and absurdities have grown too. Get this: no one has ever known what to do about it. Not Coolidge, not Hoover, not Nixon, not Reagan, not Clinton, no one. No president has been able to crack this nut. The only reforms ever to have made it through are those that make the administrative state bigger, never smaller. Countless cabinet secretaries have come and gone, always with the intention of making a change but leaving saddened, demoralized, outwitted, outgunned, and ultimately devoured. No president has seriously taken on this problem because they simply did not know how. The unions are powerful, the intimidation from the deep institutional knowledge is overwhelming, the fear of the media as been powerful, and every single president comes to power vaguely feeling threatened by the intelligence agencies. The industries that have captured every single agency were also far too powerful to unseat or control. This combination of institutional inertia has blocked serious reform for a full century. No one has dared. No one has even had a theory or strategy about what to do about this problem. It had become so terrible that most people in politics have simply surrendered, like homeowners who know there are rats in the basement and bats in the attic but long ago gave up trying to fix the issue. All this time, the American people have felt themselves ever more oppressed, weighed upon, taxed and regulated, spied upon, brow beaten, and otherwise overwhelmed. Voting never made any difference because the politicians no longer controlled the system. The bureaucracies ruled all. The Biden years underscored the point. We didn't even need a conscious and present executive. We only needed a figurehead to pretend to be president, just like the Soviet premiers in the old days. The institutions ran everything and the people controlled nothing. How to deal with this? Trump alone figured it out in his last term: he simply took charge of the agencies in a limited way. There were screams of horror and plots galore. They performed a long stream of clever schemes to destroy him and show him who is boss, which is not the democratically elected president but the forces behind the scenes. The job of the president, goes the message from all the insiders, is to PRETEND to be in charge but not actually do anything meaningful. Shut up, mug up, obey, and disturb nothing, let the administrative state do its thing without oversight or disruption, and then you will get your honorary library and bestselling autobiography and go down in history as great. Trump refused the deal and look what happened. Four years have gone by and Trump is back again, this time with a determination to slay this beast, one that he knows all-to-well. The efforts of DOGE and MAHA and MAGA are epic in scope, breaking a century of pathetic acquiescence toward the deep, middle, and shallow states, at last using moral courage to confront the problem head on, come what may. They are profoundly aware that they MUST act fast and with some degree of ferocity, even recklessness, else we will default back to the status quo of leaders who pretend to be in charge while the embedded system runs things behind the scenes. It has been this way for TOO LONG. The voters this time have demanded change, and mustered the faith to believe that change is possible. This is precisely what DOGE is attempting, to make good on a promise, a promise that for once the voters actually believed was credible. They simply must succeed. There might never be another chance. The way of failure is the path everyone knows the US was on, toward economic stagnation, political scolerosis, and eventual irrelevance in the unfolding of the next stage of social evolution.