Month: January 2023

I’m sure that many of you have been hoping that the pendulum will soon start to swing in the opposite direction as far as the mandating of EVs in the future. Those of us who think logically realize that the mandating that new cars be EVs by certain states (e.g California, New York, & Oregon) in 20XX is pure folly for a variety of reasons.

Finally, Wyoming has stepped up and taken the bull by the horns, so to speak, as what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

From the Daily Mail:

Wyoming has introduced state legislation to ban the sale of new electric vehicles by 2035 to ‘ensure the stability’ of its oil and gas industry. Wyoming officials argue that the oil and gas production has created ‘countless jobs’ and contributed ‘revenues to the state of Wyoming throughout its history.‘I

The bill also notes that Wyoming lacks charging stations and that ‘the critical minerals used in electric batteries are not easily recyclable or disposable.’

In 2021, Wyoming placed as the eighth top oil producer in the US, producing 85.43 million barrels.

Today, approximately 100 companies are operating 30,000 miles of pipelines in Wyoming, not including all gathering systems or all inactive or abandoned pipelines.

And there are more than 68,000 jobs in the state’s oil and gas industry.

The bill praises gas-powered vehicles as enabling the state’s industries and businesses to ship goods and resources across the US. 

The lawmakers also note that the US ‘has consistently invested in the oil and gas industry to sustain gas-powered vehicles and that investment has resulted in the continued employment of thousands of people in the oil and gas industry in Wyoming and throughout the country.’

On the other hand, the shift to electric vehicles would ‘have deleterious impacts on Wyoming’s communities and will be detrimental to Wyoming’s economy and the ability for the country to efficiently engage in commerce.’

The bill encourages Wyoming residents to limit the sale and purchase of new EVs and aim to phase them out entirely by 2035.

Kudos to Wyoming for sticking up for its citizens and their jobs. Will any other states have the guts to agree with Wyoming’s position and adapt something similar? … if so, how many?

1/31/23

When is it okay to express your religious views on social media? Whether you agree or disagree with the religious views of X, the issue here today is whether or not he/she has the right to express these views on Social Media without fear of retaliation from his employer. I guess an argument could be made that a private employer could restrict some employees’ views on Social Media, if those expressed views were affecting his private business. (For example, if the employee was effusively praising Hitler on Social Media and the business he was employed at was in a Jewish community, a reasonable argument could be made that because of the horrific treatment the Jewish people received from Hitler’s Third Reich that the employee could be made to restrict his hateful praise of Hitler.)

But what about if the “business” was a bureau of government, and the employee was expressing his non-violent views on something that his more liberal superior did not agree with. Could the employee be threatened with the loss of his job? Is it okay or not okay to be non-PC. To make this even more contentious, the views expressed on Social Media were “religious” views.

Now before I relate the details of what happened to Jacob Kersey in Georgia, remember that this is not about whether you agree or disagree with the views of Jacob Kersey, but whether or not you agree with his right to express these views.

From BlazeNews:

“Rookie Georgia police officer Jacob Kersey resigned after his superiors threatened to terminate him for expressing his views on traditional marriage on 1/2/23. Kersey posted the following on Facebook … ‘God designed marriage. Marriage refers to Christ and the church,’ Kersey said in the post. ‘That’s why there is no such thing as homosexual marriage,’ the post concluded.

The next day, Kersey’s supervisor requested he remove the post; Kersey refused, and was warned he could be terminated if he did not comply, according to the Daily Signal’s reporting. Shortly after that, Maj. Bradwick L. Sherrod ordered him to ‘return everything he had that belonged to the city,’ and Kersey was placed on paid administrative leave while the city investigated.

Department leadership formalized its position in a letter to Kersey dated January 13, which was obtained by the Daily Signal. In the letter, Port Wentworth Police Department’s Major Sherrod says, in part, ‘After reviewing your Podcast and social media platforms. . .we did not find sufficient evidence to establish a violation of any policies. . . However, the posts, podcasts, and so forth found and considered in our investigation likely offensive to protected classes . . . please be reminded that if any post on any of your social media platforms, or any other statement or action, renders you unable to perform, and to be seen as able to perform, your job in a fair an equitable manner, you could be terminated.’”

Note that by review, “there was not sufficient evidence to establish a violation of any policies,” but yet Officer Kersey was still threatened with termination.

Now to me the question is whether or not Major Sherrod mainly disagreed with Officer Kersey’s views on marriage, or whether Major Sherrod did not agree with Kersey’s ability to speak his views. I guess freedom of speech apparently does not exist in Port Wentworth, Georgia or in the mind of Major Sherrod !

1/30/23

As is my Sunday custom, today I pay tribute to someone who is a hero. Today’s honoree is Brandon Tsay.

From BlazeNews:

72-year-old Huu Can Tran allegedly killed 11 people and injured several others on Saturday evening, 1/21/23, at the Star Ballroom Dance Studio in Monterey Park, California, where Asian-Americans and others were celebrating the Lunar New Year Festival.

Twenty minutes after committing the first massacre, the shooter visited a second location just two miles north: the Lai Lai Ballroom & Studio, where 

26-year-old California man, Brandon Tsay, looked down the barrel of a mass shooter’s gun. Despite a presumption that he would die, he ensured that the innocents in his family’s dance hall would not suffer the same fate as the 11 people the gunman had just slain at a nearby ballroom.

Brandon Tsay was standing by the ticket office and watching the remaining people on the Lai Lai dance floor run out the last 30 minutes before closing time when the shooter ambled in.

“He was looking at me and looking around, not hiding that he was trying to do harm. His eyes were menacing,” Tsay recounted to the New York Times. “From his body language, his facial expression, his eyes, he was looking for people.”

For a fleeting moment, Tsay reportedly froze. He reckoned, “I’m going to die. This is it. This is the end for me.”

“But then something happened,” Tsay said. “Something came over me.”

The young man decided to rewrite his ending on the fly.

Tsay reportedly lunged toward the gunman in hopes of disarming him.

The battle over the modified pistol reportedly lasted for nearly a minute, but Tsay suggested it felt like “way longer.”

In newly released footage of the melee, Tsay can be seen grabbing the barrel of the weapon and then finally besting the gunman, despite catching repeated punches to the head and upper body.

Tom Tsay, the hero’s father, told the Times, “He’s lucky, someone was watching over him.”

Sheriff Luna said during a press conference, “I’d like to take a second to also thank Mr. Brandon Tsay for his heroic action, which saved countless lives. … He’s the hero who disarmed the suspect at the Alhambra location and in my opinion saved many lives.”

Luna emphasized, “What a brave man he is.”

I agree, Brandon Tsay is a true hero.

1/29/23

Just today I thought about a game we used to play as kids when someone had to make a choice. “I am thinking of a number between one and five; each of you make a guess, and whoever is the closest wins.” Because it is impossible to know what a person is thinking, he/she would have to be honest … “the number I am thinking of is ‘two.’” 

Hypothetically, if there was a substantial penalty for thinking of the number ‘two,’ would the questioner lie? I guess that whether he lies or not would depend on his character. 

I was reminded of this “what am I thinking when I read another amazing story from England of mind reading.

From BlazeNews:

A British Army veteran was confronted by police for standing silently near an abortion clinic in Bournemouth, England. The man’s apparent crime: He was silently praying for his murdered son.

According to Adam Smith-Connor! “22 years ago, I drove an ex-girlfriend to a facility where I paid for her to have an abortion. Many years later, I came to realize what I had done and it has been a source of great grief to me in my life. 

“I now pray for my son and to God for forgiveness,” said Smith-Connor, adding, “I would never have imagined being in a position to risk a criminal record for praying silently.”

The Scotsman reported that in October, the abattoir in Bournemouth became the fifth in the country to get a PSPO (Public Space Protection Order). Among the things that are forbidden in such a buffer zone are protests via “graphic, verbal or written means” and “holding vigils where members audible pray, recite Scripture, genuflect, sprinkle holy water on the ground or cross themselves if they perceive a service-user is passing by.”

“Freedom of thought has to be one of the most fundamental freedoms that any human being can have,” Smith-Connor said. “I spent 20 years in the military including spending time in Afghanistan defending the very principle of freedom.”

“I’m not a criminal,” Smith-Connor emphasized. “I am a husband. I am a father. I’m a military veteran and I’m a Christian. But I have been censored.”

The amazing thing in Adam’s case, he “could now face prosecution for holding thoughts, and lifting those thoughts to God in prayer, within a censorship zone.”

If Adam Smith-Connor when he was asked had said that he was thinking of his daily wordle game, then he would not have been cited. But because he was silently praying and admitted it, he was cited and fined.

He is now challenging the resultant council fine, stating, “This cannot be right in a country that values freedom.”

Let this be a warning, fellow Americans, as the thought police are out there. If they have their way, apparently thinking the wrong thoughts will soon be verboten!

1/28/23

I wrote this piece about two years ago, and am still wondering if the same question should be asked.

What’s Best For the Country ?

Everyone who is over sixty-five probably remembers JFK saying, “Ask not what your country can do for you, but rather what you can do for your country.”

Any child who possibly isn’t familiar with this memorable piece of advice should have it put on a plaque and hung in their bedroom by their parents or grandparents. Why? . . . because it is becoming more and more ironic that the wisdom of this iconic Democratic president is not just being ignored, but is being actively tossed into the trash by the liberal “me first” generation now being catered to by Democrats. What I am hearing now is less of “what’s best for the country,” but rather more of “what can my country do for me.” [We are already now seeing this with the vaccine, and who should be given priority to get the limited supply. “Me (us) first.”]

The same attitude is now occurring in the more liberal areas of the country where there are those who are advocating the removal of the names of Washington, Jefferson, and even Lincoln from schools and public buildings. “What I want is the only thing of importance . . . the hell with the country.”

What’s next? Predictably, those on the left want to have all student loans forgiven. It doesn’t matter that these unfortunate individuals voluntarily signed contracts of repayment, as they are unfortunate “victims” of this pandemic. The Democrats are now saying  that what’s best for them is to forgive their debt . . . the hell with what is best for the country. 

Not so fast, Joe! 

If those who voluntarily took on student loan debt are now going to be considered as unfortunate “victims” of the pandemic, should the country not first look at those who are the real innocent economic victims of the pandemic? What about those small business owners who went belly-up or who are teetering on bankruptcy, mostly because of government imposed lockdowns. Would it not be best for the country to try to help them? What about those who cannot pay their rent and will probably never get back on their economic feet through no fault of their own? Should the country not consider their debt before the debt of the airheads with degrees in gender studies?  

Perhaps in this cancel culture milieu, I should be more careful, but wouldn’t it be best to ask, “What would be best for the country, Joe?”

2/9/21

1/28/23

Say goodbye to more wealthy California residents as the lalapaloozas in  Sacramento often seem to be working overtime coming up with cockamamie new laws that will surely drive some wealthy individuals out of California.

From Fox News:

“California lawmakers are pushing legislation that would impose a new tax on the state’s wealthiest residents — even if they’ve already moved to another part of the country.

Assemblyman Alex Lee, a progressive Democrat, last week introduced a bill in the California State Legislature that would impose an extra annual 1.5% tax on those with a “worldwide net worth” above $1 billion, starting as early as January 2024.

As early as 2026, the threshold for being taxed would drop: those with a worldwide net worth exceeding $50 million would be hit with a 1% annual tax on wealth, while billionaires would still be taxed 1.5%.

Worldwide wealth extends beyond annual income to include diverse holdings such as farm assets, arts and other collectibles, and stocks and hedge fund interest.

The legislation is a modified version of a wealth tax approved in the California Assembly in 2020, which the Democrat-led state Senate declined to pass.

The current version just introduced includes measures to allow California to impose wealth taxes on residents even years after they left the state and moved elsewhere.”

To me this sounds like a version of “don’t let rich people screw California like Elon Musk did.” If you recall a few years back, during Covid, Elon Musk left California and took his Tesla company with him. Infamously, when Musk threatened to leave in May, 2020, State Assemblywoman, Lorena Gonzalez tweeted, “F**k Elon Musk”

Later in October, Tesla CEO Elon Musk confirmed that his company’s move to Texas was, in part, inspired by a California lawmaker’s incendiary tweet to him.

Strong work Ms. Gonzalez! In the last three years your poorly thought out and poorly phrased insult has undoubtedly cost California millions in tax revenue, and year after year, it just keeps on robbing the state of tax revenue that should still be in California. The Democrats in the legislature in California, instead of making California a better place for the super-wealthy to live, are about to repeat Gonzalez’s dumbass mistake but without using the ‘f-word!’ This potential new law will merely increase the stampede out of California to greener pastures! 

Even though taxing wealthy individuals after they have left California will eventually be judged to be unconstitutional, the threat that this absurd bill will pass will undoubtedly drive many wealthy individuals out of the state. When this happens it will have a Gonzalez-like effect that will penalize the state for many, many years to come as these super-rich individuals will now be paying their taxes elsewhere!

1/27/23

In a marked contrast to the way things are usually done, the FAA has made a change … under the radar, so to speak on a previously acceptable EKG parameter for airline pilots. In December, 2022, the FAA changed the acceptable upper limit on an EKG parameter, the PR Interval. It did this without a published explanation, and without any referenced medical literature or medical study to back up the change. The normal PR Interval for as long as I can remember has always been 0.20 seconds. Now all of the sudden, the FAA has said that for airline pilots a PR Interval of 0.30 seconds is acceptable.

For me this FAA change smells of skullduggery in two separate, but possibly related aspects.

First of all, why do this on the QT? (A weak attempt at irony as the QT Interval is another time interval measurement on an EKG.) To me any time a government agency does something under the cover of darkness, I am suspicious. In this situation why not have a physician, either a flight surgeon or a cardiologist publicly announce this change and explain why. If the FAA had consulted cardiologists before making this decision, why not have one those cardiologists make the announcement?

Secondly, as most are aware there is a shortage of pilots. Some people have suggested that the pilot shortage, which pre-dates COVID, could have influenced FAA to make the PR interval criteria change. The broadened range of acceptability could give more leeway for older pilots to continue flying, as  often the PR Interval will increase some with age. Onto the pre-Covid pilot shortage add the number of pilots who have refused to get the vaccine, and those claiming disability from the same mandated vaccine. Last year disturbing statistics began to emerge. At one major commercial airline, between January and July 2022, “there was a 300 percent increase in long-term disability claims among pilots.” That’s according to data from a pilots union. What caused the numbers to climb is not known, although the timing closely follows the vaccine mandates that affected pilots in late 2021. This significant increase in disability among pilots only aggravates the pilot shortage.

One of the things I have not commented on is the potential for myocarditis as a vaccine side effect, and the likelihood that asymptomatic silent myocarditis could affect the PR Interval. This becomes important since around 90+% of airline pilots are vaccinated.

So all in all, to me there is more than enough suspicion to spread around concerning the FAA’s raising of the acceptable PR on the QT! Hmmm!

1/26/23

There are a few interesting statistics coming out of Britain concerning death rates in people from ages 10-59. The date to remember is 4/19/21 as the weekly death rates of Covid-vaccinated versus Covid-unvaccinated initially flipped on that date, and have stayed flipped on the monthly reviews in a November, 2021 published ONS study. In other words in Britain the death rates per 100,000 individuals from 10-59 from 4/2021 through 9/2021 were twice as high in the vaccinated as compared to the unvaccinated. Now granted the death rates per 100,000 are not overwhelmingly off the charts, but are consistently different compared to before 4/19/21. This is especially concerning because the overall death rates in Britain have increased.

I was alerted to this startling data, not by the Main Stream Media, and certainly not in my local “newspaper,” but rather from an article on 

Issues and Insights on 1/20/23. Why do we not know if a similar mortality inversion is occurring in the U.S.? An interesting Anonymous quote sums it up nicely: “So, two years ago they couldn’t wait to tell you how many were dying. Every single news bulletin, TV, radio, and print. But in 2022, people are dropping dead everywhere and we hear nothing!”

The question in my mind is whether or not the effective news blackout on this British mortality inversion issue has been orchestrated by a select cabal of liberal elite journalists. Perhaps the fact that the major network TV stations, as well as the major national newspapers, have seemingly not reported on this issue is serendipity, but as the idiom states, “I’m from Missouri.” 

Remember how there was an “effective blackout” of the Hunter Biden computer story before the last presidential election. Was that serendipity, or was it orchestrated by this same cabal?

Hmmm!

1/25/23

The other day I read a story about the adventure that a brother and sister duo had when they rented a Tesla to find out what it was like to drive the electric vehicle.

From the Washington Examiner on 1/2/23:

“Xaviar and Alice Steavenson chose to test out a Tesla on a drive from Orlando, Florida, to Wichita, Kansas, in late December. They knew it would need charging but did not realize just how often that would be.

‘We ended up having to stop every 1 to 1 1/2 hours to charge for an hour, then an hour and a half, then two hours,’ Xaviar Steavenson said, noting that the ‘battery would drain faster than it would charge.’

Steavenson said they rented the car from Hertz with the idea that there would be significant cost savings, but that that was not the case.

‘Beyond the lost time, it also got to the point it was between $25 and $30 to recharge,’ Steavenson said. ‘Just in one day, we stopped six times to charge at that cost.’

Steavenson and his sister were not alone. Other Tesla owners have recently expressed frustration with the workings of the electric vehicle.

Virginia radio host Domenick Nati also shared a video on Christmas Eve showing how his Tesla would not charge in the cold weather. Nati was left stranded and had to cancel his holiday plans.”

So it seems that winter holiday visits to see out of town relatives is just not going to be dependable with an EV if the travel is north of the Mason-Dixon Line. Perhaps winter driving from Miami to see relatives in Orlando.would be safe, but in Wisconsin, New Hampshire, or Montana … no way!  OOPS! Back to the drawing board.

1/24/23

It has been three weeks today since a professional football player, Damar Hamlin, died, and then was resuscitated on the football field. Surprisingly, after the initial concern, all of the news stories about Damar Hamlin have disappeared. Now that his team, the Buffalo Bills, just got eliminated from being in contention for the Super Bowl. one must ask, “why are some basic questions not being answered?”

As I have stated before, to my way of thinking there are still a few  basic questions that need to be answered. The fact that, as best I can tell, these questions have not been answered arouses my suspicion. 

The first and foremost question is, “Was Damar Hamlin vaccinated for Covid? Since reportedly 95% of those who played this season in the NFL were vaccinated, why not just come out and say that either he was or he wasn’t vaccinated? Why is the answer to this simple question being avoided … Hmmm!

In addition, if he was fully vaccinated, was Damar Hamlin boosted. There is an unsubstantiated rumor that he received a Covid booster in mid/late December. Truth or not? Again it seems to me that the answer to this simple question is also being avoided … Hmmm!

Also there must be at least, a tentative diagnosis. Did he have underlying heart disease or not? If he did, then there should be a collective sigh of relief from not only the rest of the NFL players but also from the millions of high school and college football players and their parents, as underlying heart defects are quite unusual and can often be picked up on screening. Damar Hamlin obviously had a multitude of cardiac tests. What did the tests show? Were his coronary arteries normal? Did his echocardiogram demonstrate IHSS or any other form of congenital heart disease? The fact that neither his test results nor his diagnosis has  been revealed is still perplexing and unconscionable to me. This is because his diagnosis determines his prognosis. What is his prognosis?

As I said initially, it has now been three weeks since the episode, and the Damar Hamlin story has disappeared from the news, and what is worse, is that I do not hear anybody asking these same obvious questions … Hmmm!

1/23/23