While some folks don’t care for the snow, I am not one of them. I love the snow, even if at times it can be inconvenient. If nothing else it helps me to appreciate summer all the more. It can also give us some bragging rights now and then. (See Blizzard of 78.)
It is particularly nice to watch the storm while sitting in the living room with a good fire going in the woodstove. I spent more than a few storms at The Manse doing just that, something I hope I’ll be able at the new Weekend Pundit digs...once I get it built.
We are seeing more lower level government and law enforcement officials refusing to enforce “stay at home” or lockdown orders, with the latest to do so being the L.A. County Sheriff.
Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villaneuva has taken a stand against California Governor Gavin Newsom in defiance of Newsom's coronavirus lockdown orders.Many other jurisdictions have seen resistance to lockdowns as well, with local government and local law enforcement unwilling to enforce such lockdowns, particularly in light of more than a few studies showing lockdowns don’t work, with the only effect being damage to, or destruction of businesses and/or jobs. Those effects are worse than the threat of Covid-19. So in this case #Resist has taken on a different meaning, with more people refusing to capitulate to heavy-handed government mandated shutdowns. The number of municipalities refusing to enforce shutdown mandates grows with each subsequent shutdown, and rightfully so.
Villaneuva has stated that he will not enforce the governor’s new statewide stay-at-home order that prohibits people from going outside for “unnecessary” activities.
In a conversation with KTTV’s Bill Melugin, Sheriff Villaneuva reportedly “tells me he found out about the new stay at home orders from Governor Newsom’s press conference, and there was no coordination with law enforcement beforehand, which he says is concerning when the Governor is expecting enforcement of his orders.”
“I want to stay away from business[es] that are trying to comply, they bent over backwards to modify their operations to conform to these orders and then they have the rug yanked out from under them, that’s a disservice. I don’t want to make them more miserable,” said Villaneuva.
Speaking of resistance to lockdowns, CNBC’s Rick Santelli, whose 2009 rant about mortgage bailouts while reporting from the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange sparked creation of the TEA Party, has a new rant, this time about the asymmetrical and unfair application of lockdowns and how they destroy small businesses yet give the big-box stores a pass.
On a panel on CNBC’s “Squawk Box,” a flash of anger erupted between Santelli and co-host Andrew Ross Sorkin. Santelli questioned how people can’t get COVID at a Lowes or Home Depot, but are miraculously put in more danger by going to smaller stores or restaurants while taking the same precautions.It’s easy for those who are not directly affected by lockdowns to sneer and be condescending to those who deal with the effects of the lockdowns up close and personal, seeing everything they’ve worked for being wiped out due to ill-conceived and ineffective government decrees.
Two world views. One, Santelli, pragmatic and deferential to the intelligence of the American people, and Sorkin, who apparently believes people aren’t smart enough to control their own lives without government diktats – even irrational ones like opening Best Buy but keeping the local electronics store or restaurant closed. Sorkin couldn’t win the argument and appealed to emotion about how much more he cared about viewers than … who? Santelli. It was insulting and beside the point.
By way of Zero Hedge comes this message: Positive Covid Test? Ask this question!
There are a bunch of links pointing to a number of articles and posts questioning the validity of the PCR test used to test for Covid-19. A number of them point to the problems with using the PCR test, implying the large percentage of ‘positive’ tests are wrong due to the improper application of the test.
Read The Whole Thing.
From the “Just When I Thought They Couldn’t Get Any Stupider” Department comes this:
More Defunding Police – Crimes Soar in Major Cities: Libs Call It “Safety For All”.
Minneapolis is proposing a “Safety for All” plan that severely reduces the number of sworn officers. Los Angeles, California, is also proposing budget cuts, which will reduce the police force by 951 officers. Seattle cut their police budget by 18% for 2021, and that was a pittance of what the radical left wanted. Portland’s 18% cut failed, and protesters vandalized the Mayor’s home over it. All of these plans come in the midst of spiking crime rates in the big cities. And not one of them will bring “safety for all.”They have come to believe the “All our problems are caused by the police” meme being sold by those who do not really give a fig about the real problems and are working hard to make things worse. It all started with the Michael Brown “Hands Up! Don’t Shoot!” lie used to justify rioting, looting, and arson in Ferguson, Missouri. It and other incidents that were not what they first appeared to be were used as an excuse for all kinds of “mostly peaceful” protests that included the aforementioned rioting, looting, and arson. Now it appears those cities buying into it are working to make things even less safe.
I expect if things get worse we’ll see vigilantes and ‘regulators’ replacing law enforcement officers, and that won’t make things better or safer, specifically for criminals and “mostly peaceful” rioters, looters, and arsonists. It won’t be safe for anyone.
And that’s the news from Lake Winnipesaukee, where the snow has ended, the cleanup is in progress, and Monday has moved us one day closer to Christmas.