I haven't been paying a lot of attention to the national news because it has become quite boring, repetitive, and even more disturbing to me, predictable. The propaganda division of the DNC, aka the MSM, are devoting far too much time trying to tear down the president while ignoring everything else going on around the country. The only exception to that being stories about tornadoes, heavy rains with flooding, or brush fires, all of which have been caused by Donald Trump withdrawing the US from the Paris Accords. (Yes, it is sarcasm. I wouldn't think I would actually need to tell any of you this, but better safe than sorry.)
Sometimes people need to be reminded that if existing laws have problems, more often than not they can be corrected by legislative action. The newest jurist on the US Supreme Court offers his dissenting opinion on a case that the Supreme Court just ruled on in a 7-2 decision, and addresses this issue in a forthright and clear manner. Writes Justice Neil Gorsuch in his dissent in the Perry v. Merit Systems Protection Board mentions the plaintiff took the convenient action rather than the correct action:
Anthony Perry asks us to tweak a congressional statute—just a little—so that it might (he says) work a bit more efficiently. No doubt his invitation is well meaning. But it’s one we should decline all the same. Not only is the business of enacting statutory fixes one that belongs to Congress and not this Court, but taking up Mr. Perry’s invitation also seems sure to spell trouble. …Indeed.
Mr. Perry’s is an invitation I would run from fast. If a statute needs repair, there’s a constitutionally prescribed way to do it. It’s called legislation. To be sure, the demands of bicameralism and presentment are real, and the process can be protracted. But the difficulty of making new laws isn’t some bug in the constitutional design: it’s the point of the design, the better to preserve liberty.
The Left is constantly screaming at us to “check our White Privilege”, but maybe it's time for the Left to check their Anger Privilege, or so writes Sultan Knish.
If you want to know who has privilege in a society and who doesn’t, follow the anger.Then again, if the Left didn't have double standards then they'd have no standards at all.
There are people in this country who can safely express their anger. And those who can’t. If you’re angry that Trump won, your anger is socially acceptable. If you were angry that Obama won, it wasn’t.
James Hodgkinson’s rage was socially acceptable. It continued to be socially acceptable until he crossed the line into murder. And he’s not alone. There’s Micah Xavier Johnson, the Black Lives Matter cop-killer in Dallas, and Gavin Long, the Black Lives Matter cop-killer in Baton Rouge. If you’re black and angry about the police, your anger is celebrated. If you’re white and angry about the Terror travel ban, the Paris Climate treaty, ObamaCare repeal or any leftist cause, you’re on the side of the angry angels.
But if you’re white and angry that your job is going to China or that you just missed being killed in a Muslim suicide bombing, your anger is unacceptable.
I remember when Portland, Oregon used to be a pretty nice place. Now it has poo-flinging leftist Antifa scumbags and a homegrown terrorist who likes killing people on a public bus. I wonder how far it will have to go before the Progressive mayor of Portland will crack down on these fascist s**theels? How many will have to die at their hands or how many city blocks will have to burn before the idiot in charge stops worrying about offending the antifa thugs and their ACLU buddies? This is Portland Freakin', Oregon, not Detroit, Michigan.
And that's the (greatly abbreviated) news from Lake Winnipesaukee, where a long Fourth of July weekend is on the way, the grills will be ready, and where time on the lake will take precedence over all other things.