Bob Hansler, Survivalist YouTube Star

 

Today I had a phone conversation with Bob Hansler—the popular YouTube Survival Expert.

I don’t know Bob’s politics, I never mentioned mine, and the subject never came up.

Here’s Bob’s public Bio:

Expert in Bushcraft, Wilderness Survival, Wilderness First Aid, Wilderness First Responder, Primitive Skills as well as a certified shooting instructor. Bobs former life as a Biologist, and Teacher aids him in his understanding of the natural world around him, as well as the animal kingdom and its inner workings. Bob is an experienced Horseman, Farrier, Blacksmith, as well as a Leather worker. Bob has been a lifetime advocate of Boy Scouts, and an Eagle Scout himself….

For more information and to follow Bob on his adventures in the wilds of Texas, visit his youtube Channel at https://www.youtube.com/user/horsebackbob

GrimWorkshop

I didn’t interview Bob or take notes. We just talked a bit. He’s quite philosophical. He’s engaging, experienced in Living, and rather brilliant.

Bob Hansler is my favorite YouTube person. He hosts a wilderness survival channel where I learned to forage food in the wild; and to catch, clean, and cook fish, snakes, mammals, insects, and other wild bushcraft skills.

I’m from da concrete and asphalt of South Philly! But this wilderness stuff—I love it.

I think almost everybody wants to know how to survive in the wilderness, and how to do what Bob does. For me Bob is the best and most sincere on this topic.

I’ve seen Bob Hansler copied and emulated by other popular YouTube personalities—as in his presentation on poison ivy, and on even Bear Grylls.

Bob is funny. I saw him wrestle and pin a giant, armored gar fish. He had this monster pinned to the ground but it kept fighting. Clinging in a hug to the giant fish and pinning it, Bob coolly remarked, “I love my gar.”

9E66B686-AEB3-4DFA-8EEC-05573599C865
Bob Hansler Pinning Giant Armored Gar – YouTube

It was funny 🙂

Bob’s videos consist basically of him getting right into the thick of whatever he’s explaining or demonstrating. This can take place deep inside his own, “Lost World,” Texas property—in summer or winter.

The point is, Bob Hansler demonstrates and teaches by actually doing it—by doing the thing itself.

So, if the topic is—say—making fish-traps, Bob Hansler will be right there, wet to the bone, down in the mud of his own creek, intensely showing how to make a fish-trap. He is dedicated and tireless. That’s just how he is. It comes across.

Or he could be skinning a rattle snake, building a Paiute deadfall trap, cooking up a mess of craw-dads, trapping packrats to be relocated, or foraging for edible vegetables and plants. He’s very straightforward and sincere.

Part of Bob Hansler’s online charm is his sincere intensity. His interest in the topic, and his confidence in his training. He makes it all look effortless, as if he has been doing it for a lifetime. And—kids—he really has been doing it for a lifetime

Bob Hansler is deep, compassionate, and educated. He can talk tree-grubs or mitochondria. Snake skins or DNA. He holds Nature sacred. He seeks to share his knowledge to help build a better world.

And he holds quietly within himself a feeling of Wonder at what drives it all. What might turn the great wheel of Nature from beginning to ending.

When you’re watching Bob Hansler on YouTube, you’re not just seeing some simple farm-boy. You’re in the presence of a working intellect focused on teaching you, but in awe of what he is teaching.

A popular inhabitant of Bob Hansler’s wild world is “Huck The Inscrutable”—the most laid-back, tail-less dog you have ever seen. Huck is in charge of security, taste-testing Bob’s cooking, and critiquing the action.

A9E7F909-9F2B-47DE-BB7A-E2CDD943BD02
“HUCK,” BOB HANSLER, YOUTUBE

Bob is also occasionally joined by his college-age daughter, Bre, who assists, who sometimes hosts her own survival channel, and who has watched over him in the past.

2533DAFF-B014-437C-9489-756DA3B7AFD6
BOB HANSLER AND DAUGHTER BRE, YOUTUBE

A few years ago Bob Hansler had suffered two debilitating retina detachments. He had completely lost all use of his right eye, and was considered blind in his left eye.

Bob’s blindness at the time was tragically revealed in a video when it suddenly became apparent he could not actually see Huck, who was right in front of him.

I am happy to report, however, that, now years later, Bob Hansler can see again and is back on the job, making important videos here in New Mexico and preparing to re-take on the world.

Bob Hansler has a genuine interest in his Viewers; he has a love of Planet Earth, and he produces wondrous videos. Bob Hansler declares that despite severe rigors of production, he can never quit any of this; he can never give up; and that he will always keep doing what he loves, no matter what.

I am looking forward to Bob’s important, next videos, to his homespun wit, and his wilderness wisdoms.

Best Wishes—to Bob Hansler and Family. Keep moving 🙂

 

The post Bob Hansler, Survivalist YouTube Star appeared first on Watcher of Weasels.

Respect my Conglomerate: Costco does not support the Second Amendment.

(Female voice)
“Most people would consider this illegal.Since we are the best and you agree with me right? No need to debate, the way we run shit. You see we’re kind of like the government, just respect my Conglomerate.”
Lil Wayne”Me no talk much but, the heat so verbal….Gun outside of the gear external…….Dirty South bitch admire and acknowledge it and respect my Conglomerate.”


Respect my Conglomerate Album: Back on my B.S.April 4, 2009 Busta Rhymes feat Jadakiss and Lil’ Wayne.


I was enjoying family time on Saturday, May 25, 2019 in preparation for our trip to First Landing State Park, Virginia Beach. I drove the family to Costco on 1401 Mall Drive in North Chesterfield County, Virginia. I dropped my wife Mandy, her Aunt Keri and our grandmother Eliane to the front door. I carefully tucked the family SUV into a parking space and made my way to the entrance to join my family.


As I reached the door the greeter asked me a very specific question, “Excuse me sir, are you law enforcement?”


My response, “No, Armed Government Security Officer.” 
I kindly presented my credentials along with my Henrico County Concealed weapons permit.
The greeter continued, “Costco requests that you leave your firearm in your car.”


I look down to notice the print of my fourth generation Glock 19 semi automatic hand gun through my Libertarian tee shirt.
My response, “No problem”.


I turned to return to my SUV. My wife stopped me and said “where are you going?!”


I looked at Mandy and said, ” I am going back to my truck with my handgun where it is safe. Gun free does not mean safe.”


The greeter jumped back in the conversation, “No you can just leave it in your car.”


I quickly responded, “Costco has made the request that my firearm is not welcomed here. That means me and my money are not welcomed either. I will wait in my car.”


I then departed the store and waited in my truck until my wife called. I shared my experience on Facebook to mix responses. Some said tough break but, it is private property. Some said they would no longer shop there.
I shared my experience with friends and co workers. At work, one of my Corporals advised the pizza the Captain and Sergeant bought us for lunch last week came from Costco on the West End. I guess the difference was they went in uniform however they are not law enforcement either.
Well, I am about supporting those who support you. I was on my way to purchase a Costco membership. Instead, I am making a contribution to Virginia Right, sharing my second amendment thoughts and feelings with Costco as well as refusing to support the establishment.


I was unable to locate anything about the chains anti second amendment views on their mobile website. My co worker Alonzo Taylor did share this link with me.


What is Costco’s Gun Policy?What is Costco’s Gun Policy?In recent weeks here on ConcealedCarry.com we have been taking a look at major companies in the United States and their gun policies in order to give curious gun owners some knowledge about where they and their firearms will or won’t be invited with


While reviewing the Costco website I did see they offered gun safes for sale. I guess the gun is alright locked in a safe or the car. 


I am disappointed but, happy I found out about the policy BEFORE I purchased a membership

Christmas in May AGAIN! Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party Wins National EU Parliament Election! Tories reduced to THREE seats!

It was exciting at the Sanders home last evening and the only disappointment was that Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party did not have a higher percentage of the vote.

The Brexit Party garnered over 31% of the EU vote and this was not a tiny turnout – the turnout was over 50%.

In the last EU elections in 2014, this was the blog headline:

UPDATE! UPDATE! UPDATE! CHRISTMAS in MAY! UKIP PROJECTED OVERALL UK WINNER! First time since 1906 that neither TORIES nor LABOUR won a national election! EU ELECTION RESULTS: LIBERTY maybe ON THE MARCH but SO ARE some BAD PARTIES, too!

Well, in 2019, the Brexit Party actually did better than UKIP did in 2014. This is the really neat graphic for Thursday’s elections from the Guardian.

Let’s sum up the destruction: Farage’s party won every region except Scotland and London (Northern Ireland has not reported yet) and won seats in every region including Scotland (came in 2nd) and London (came in 3rd). Over five million votes overall.

The false conservatives called the Tory party got three seats. Labour did somewhat better – 10 seats – but it was the anti-Brexit Liberal Democrats that came in second with 16 seats and 20 percent. (The UK Greens did better than the Conservatives but not as well as Labour, winning seven seats and 12% of the vote.)

And this Guardian article raises the spectre of what I called (I believe I was the first to do so in 2013) the Farage Labourite – a takeoff from the Reagan Democrat. Here is one such article, again from the Guardian, with short highlight on the turnout.

The party’s success was unsurprising in a region where only one local authority, Newcastle, voted to remain in the 2016 EU referendum, and that by a margin of just 0.7%. Nigel Farage’s new party won 240,056 votes, twice that of Labour, which won 119,931. The Liberal Democrats were a close third, on 104,330. The Greens were fourth on 49,905, ahead of the Conservatives (42,395), Ukip (38,269) and Change UK (24,968).

Looks like there are hundreds of thousands if not millions of Farage Labourites in Great Britain. We may find out on Thursday June 6 when a by-election in Peterborough for the Westminster Parliament and the Brexit Party has a candidate standing. The former incumbent, recalled by her constituents, was a Labourite who won it from the Conservatives by a narrow margin.

Congrats to one of the greatest politicians in UK history and maybe ever: Nigel Farage! Here’s what I’d say if I could meet him. And my kids want to go to England in the worst way!

Progressives collude to prevent investigation of attempted coup

By resisting an investigation of the apparent attempted coup against Trump, Progressives reject a core Anglo-American doctrine that no one is above the law.

By Wolf Howling

The “collusion investigation” — 2+ years, $30+ million, and using all the investigative resources of government — is over.  Given the specificity and nature of the allegations in the Steele Dossier, given that Steele and his employer wanted the allegations publicized before the 2016 election, given the repeated leaks of classified material to the press over the past two years (central to the Pulitzer Prize won by the NYT and Wapo last year for reporting on Trump’s allegedly treasonous activities) and, finally, given the complete lack of evidence found to support the allegations, it would be reasonable to suspect, first, that this was all a con game from its inception to elect Hillary Clinton and second, after that failed, that it was an effort to destroy the Trump presidency and protect those who broke our laws by engaging in the con.

The former was an unlawful dirty trick involving a false allegation of criminality to the FBI.  The latter would be unprecedented in our nation’s history — nothing less than an attempted coup (one which is still ongoing in Crazy Nancy’s House), seemingly both to overturn the 2016 election and to protect those who had broken the law to protect Hillary Clinton.

Can anyone tell me a legitimate justification for why those reasonable suspicions should not be investigated?  The stakes could not be higher for this nation.

And yet, the MSM and progressive politicians are colluding in a full court “press” to ensure that no investigation takes place or, if it does, that the country is primed to ignore it as illegitimate.  Toward that effort, NBC’s Johnathan Allen has penned a ridiculous polemic today, based on a recent interview Trump gave and his declassification order of earlier in the week.  This from the execrable Mr. Allen:

President Donald Trump found four former federal officials guilty of “treason” Thursday — and then commissioned his intelligence agencies to help the Department of Justice prove it.

In this instance, have been ongoing investigations into the origins of the Russia collusion hoax/coup. In fact, when it comes to the Justice Dept. IG, the investigations have been in play for more than a year.  Trump did not order any of these investigations. Moreover, the declassification order itself orders cooperation with an investigation, no more and no less.  Unless Allen believes that the FBI and DOJ are utterly corrupt (quite possible), investigations are done to establish all relevant facts, and only then is an assessment made of the law in light of those facts.  What do the proggies and media possibly have to fear from that?

More from Allen:

At the same time, he is blocking Congress from executing its constitutional duty to execute oversight of his administration, not only with regard to his campaign’s ties to Russia and the interference detailed in special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation but also on a host of other fronts.

The thing about proggies is they are all about building a narrative.  And with the media carrying their water and cheer-leading, it doesn’t matter that the narrative is complete horse crap that cannot possibly survive examination.  Trump has blocked nothing in regards to legitimate oversight — and believe it or not, opposition research is not one of the categories of legitimate oversight.

Prying into Trump’s private affairs is subject to the Fourth Amendment.  Executive and attorney client privilege are well established at law.  You’ll note that Allen does not get into a single specific example.   Democrats in the House are quite literally putting out subpoenas that they know so overreach their bounds that the administration will not comply.  They are doing it to build a narrative that worthless media people like Allen will then parrot to the public.

[Trump’s] wielding power in ways not seen in the United States in generations, if ever, and which many experts say do not resemble global norms for heads of state.

Really?  Which powers and how so?  If Allen means investigating for a coup, well, we’ve never had one before in this country.  This is unique.  And it is not a global norm because this is unprecedented in supposedly free societies.  If he means resisting Crazy Nancy’s and the House’s efforts to get this deeply treasonous coup across the finish line, well, oh my.  As dryly put at Maggie’s Farm recently:  “”While we recognize that the subject did not actually steal any horses, he is obviously guilty of trying to resist being hanged for it.”

At this point, I will stop my fisking but for two final points.  One regards something utterly central to understanding Progressives — they live on projection.  If you want to know what they are doing, look at what they accuse you of doing.  Thus, you will find no better example of pure projection than this from Allen:

“Countries with the rule of law do not conduct criminal investigations for political reasons,” he said. “In countries that lack the rule of law — like Russia — the ruling political officials instrumentally utilize the legal system to target opponents for criminal prosecution as a means of intimidation or punishment.”

I couldn’t agree more with the sentiment, but in this case, Allen is attempting to claim that any investigation of a lawless coup attempt is disrespect for the rule of law.  It is pure projection turning reality on its head.

Finally, in what has to be the ultimate irony, Allen concludes his polemic by raising Hillary Clinton as a sort of Cassandra regarding the rule of law:

In the hours after Trump was elected in November 2016, Clinton asked her aides to insert lines into her concession speech that would be a subtle caution to the public about the possibility that Trump might try to rewrite the rule of law. She wanted to avoid direct criticism of the president-elect, but she juxtaposed her call to accept his victory with her admonition.

“Donald Trump is going to be our president. We owe him an open mind and the chance to lead,” she said the day after the election. “Our constitutional democracy enshrines the peaceful transfer of power and we don’t just respect that, we cherish it. It also enshrines other things; the rule of law, the principle that we are all equal in rights and dignity, freedom of worship and expression. We respect and cherish these values too, and we must defend them.”

Good lord.  We’re in this mess because our weaponized bureaucracy tried to whitewash Hillary Clinton’s felonies in the first place.  We’re in this mess because the progressives have not accepted the 2016 election and still want to overturn it.  Moreover,  Comey and the DOJ actually did rewrite the legal standard of 18 U.S.C. § 793  so that Hillary could escape prosecution, then did a cover up instead of an investigation, all in the expectation that she would beat Trump in the 2016 election.

Trump’s failure in all of this was that he did not immediately move to reestablish rule of law in this country when he was inaugurated.  Hillary skated.  Those who helped her skate tried to stage a coup against Trump while Trump was trying to ignore them and govern.  That didn’t work out too well.

If Trump let’s these people likewise skate from legal consequence, then we have an existential problem.  “Rule of law” is — and can only be — founded on the premise that “no one is above the law.”  Allen would do away with that foundation.  If the progressives succeed, this nation is in dire straits indeed.

The post Progressives collude to prevent investigation of attempted coup appeared first on Watcher of Weasels.

California turned this Democrat into a conservative

My California upbringing shows that people will cling to ideas long after the facts reveal those ideas are flawed — a scary thought for the 2020 election.

I grew up in the San Francisco Bay Area, one of America’s bluest of blue regions; attended UC Berkeley, which once was the standard-bearer for campus Leftism, although others have caught up; and lived in and, for many years, practiced law in San Francisco. If politics were a marinade, I would have been marinated in the stuff for decades and would be blue through and through.

Instead, my life experiences gave me a deep and abiding distrust for and disgust with Leftism. To the extent that our American states are laboratories of democracy, California proves everything that is wrong with Leftism.

Growing up, Leftism meant tolerating the Haight Ashbury invasion. After the pretty summer of love, filled with rainbows, rock, and half-dressed young women in gauzy shirts ended, what remained were the ancestors of today’s homeless: drugged out people lying in their own filth, destroying public property, and committing crimes. Back then, the poop map ran the distance of Haight Street, with Golden Gate Park thrown in for good measure. Even though San Francisco was less lenient than it is today about homeless behaviors, the City government still allowed the hippies ridiculous leeway when it came to engaging in uncivilized public behavior. But I was still a Democrat.

My public schools were on the cutting edge of each crazy idea that was emanating from teaching colleges, in which Leftism was becoming ascendant. I didn’t learn math because we were being taught some crazy variant of Base 6 math. (Go figure.) I was lucky to be a natural-born reader, because phonics — the thing that makes reading incredibly easy to master in English — were already being phased out in favor of “whole word” teaching. Teachers were also warned not to children who misspelled words lest it harm the children’s self-esteem. These ideas blossomed nationwide in the 1980s, but were already creeping into San Francisco classrooms almost 20 years earlier. Having failed there, they were ready to take on the nation. But I was still a Democrat.

My public schools also featured a handful of gifted teachers, a decent population of good to average teachers, and a small, but completely stable population of horrible teachers, many of whom were also horrible human beings. There was the science teacher who said of a Jewish student, “There’s another one Hitler should have gotten.” There was the math teacher who would periodically insult students as “Future pimps and whores.” There was the English teacher famous for having sex with male students, which bothered us in those days only because she gave them a pass for bad work. There were the teachers counting the days to retirement and a pension who couldn’t be bothered with teaching at all. (I had a lot of those.) The common denominator was that, thanks to government unions, none of these people could be fired and, with the exception of the science teacher — who finally got himself kicked out of the classroom for throwing a movie projector out of the window (although he apparently still collected his salary for years) — all of them continued to teach generations of students. But I was still a Democrat.

Berkeley. Ah, Berkeley! The last dregs of the hippies hanging out in their own urine or vomit while begging on campus or on Telegraph Avenue. People celebrating the day that Ronald Reagan got shot. Pre-modern history being taught through a Marxist lens which is, when you think about it, quite an amazing intellectual contortion. And a constant thread of hostility to America and reverence for the Soviet Union permeating the air…. But I was still a Democrat.

After law school, which I attended in a blue city that was in a red state, I returned to California. For several decades, I routinely made legal arguments before Leftist judges. These were judges who said, “I don’t care what the law is; I think there’s something here;” judges who reluctantly ruled in favor of a bank, only to warn the bank’s counsel, “There’s more than one way to skin a cat;” judges who literally read with their lips moving as they reluctantly came to terms with the fact that discovery statutes sometimes protected defendants. I learned to loath judges because, at least when it came to the ones before whom I practiced, the law was too often irrelevant to them. If the parties were similarly situated in terms of social stature or economic power, the law applied; but if you represented a corporation or a rich individual, most judges before whom I practiced would engage in amazing contortions to rule against your client. Back in those days, I hadn’t heard the terms “living Constitution” or “strict constructionist,” but I knew that, subject to a few notable exceptions, Bay Area judges were not interested in administering the law; they were all about administering their personal version of “justice.” (We’d call it social justice today.) But I was still a Democrat.

Meanwhile, in the 1970s, I’d watched Carter make a hash of America’s economy and foreign policy. I’d seen the economic “malaise,” the “killer rabbits,” the “lust for the Polish people.” I’d watched the Iran Revolution and the hostage crisis, and I’d seen Carter’s simmering hostility to Israel. But I was still a Democrat.

In the 1980s, I watched the Reagan economic miracle. I watched the resurgence of American pride. I saw Reagan, Thatcher, and John Paul III reaffirm classic principles of liberalism and, by doing so, begin chipping away at the Soviet monolith, exposing its rotten foundations. I saw the Soviet Union fall and the Berlin Wall get quite literally dismantled. But I was still a Democrat.

In both the 1970s and the 1980s, I watched as our welfare system grew and grew and, as it grew, I watched it provide truly perverse incentives to people. The worst was the way in which women were economically rewarded for having children out-of-wedlock. I understood that this behavior led to more illegitimate children, more children without any loving male presence in their lives, more children in poverty, and more children who turned to prostitution and crime as they matured. I knew that the pathologies in the black community weren’t because blacks were defective, but were because the government was paying blacks to live have defective lives. But I was still a Democrat.

My politics only started to shift in the late 1990s, not because I’d grasped that all the things I hated about California arose from Leftist principles, but because NPR was lying about Israel. That was my initial cognitive dissonance. The cognitive dissonance worsened after 9/11, when were told Islam had nothing to do with it or people such as Michael Moore likened the terrorists (who slaughtered innocents and whose goal was the subjugation of the world to sharia law, complete with sexual enslavement, second class citizenship, slavery, or death for “non-believers,” especially Jews, and the whole panoply of medieval punishments) to America’s own revolutionaries, who fought for individual liberty. (And yes, 18th C women didn’t have rights and the South had slaves, but the principles the revolutionaries advanced were inherently good and they paved the way for emancipation, women’s rights, gay rights, etc.)

After almost 40 years, I finally realized that I was no longer a Democrat. It was a shocking and uncomfortable realization. After all, I knew, or thought I knew, that Democrats are good and Republicans are evil. Was I now no longer good? Was I now evil?

I eventually decided that I was still good. My goals were still the goals that Democrats always loudly espoused during my early years: True equality before the law for all people, the diminution of tribal hatreds between different cultures and races in America, a thriving economy, strong national security, friendship with Israel (our ally in the Middle East during the waning days of the Cold War and the only true democratic republic in the region), etc. (Obviously, the Democrats no longer espouse many of these goals.) What I finally figured out was that the way to achieve these ends was through conservative means. Intentionally or not, Democrat means invariably achieved the opposite of those goals.

Although I am no longer a Democrat, California continues to provide example after example of failures in Leftist policies. It is a hardcore Democrat state that preserves its mandate through the corrupt practice of “ballot harvesting.” It needs this corruption because reality (which I’ll discuss more below), eventually catches up with totalitarian ideologies and people can then be kept in line only through brute force and corruption.

California sees itself a political leader in the fight against “income inequality,” yet it has one of the most unequal economic systems in America. In the coastal cities, where people make money from products sold outside of America (e.g., Hollywood and Silicon Valley), you have hard Left bazillionaires. In their hard Left cities, you have tens of thousands of homeless people living in squalor. San Francisco once known for the Golden Gate Bridge, Chinatown, and Fisherman’s wharf, is now the poop capital of America, as well as the car crime capital. Los Angeles is seeing typhus and other very scary infectious diseases making a comeback. In the San Francisco Bay Area, real estate, whether owned or rented, is no longer affordable, so twenty- and thirty-somethings now make a virtue of returning to dorm-style living because it’s all that they can afford.

Were a medieval person to be transported through time to land in one of California’s coastal communities, that person would undoubtedly be confounded by modern technology. However, he would recognize instantly the vast economic chasm between the aristocracy and the masses. Every medieval city had its walled enclaves for the wealthy and the rest of the city, where people lived in filth, disease, and despair.

Travel inland in California and the wealth vanishes. All that’s left is economic despair. The outbreaks of poverty that one sees in the cities — homelessness, diseases, filth — are taking hold in the large inland communities (Bakersfield, Fresno, Sacramento), while the smaller communities are plagued by crime and disrepair. One only has to read Victor Davis Hanson’s elegies to the community that’s been home to his family for generations to understand how the Blue enclaves’ wealth doesn’t reach the rest of California even as, unfortunately, the Blue enclaves’ political ideas do reach those areas . . . and destroy them too.

Meanwhile, as its native-born or legally immigrated citizens despair, California encourages the endless flow of illegal immigrants from Latin America (with unknown numbers of Islamic terrorists sheltering among the crowd). By doing so, California Democrats, who are all about “women’s rights,” encourage unchecked sex trafficking. And California Democrats, who always claim that their policies are “for the children,” encourage coyotes to traffic in children as a way of exploiting America’s laws on behalf of illegal immigrant “families.” And California Democrats, who are all about lifting up America’s minorities, flood American minority communities with people who compete for jobs and bring in crime.

Apropos that crime, it’s completely irrelevant if some left-wing think tanks’ produce statistics “proving” that these illegal immigrants as a whole are less likely to run afoul of the law. Even if only one American is murdered at the hands of an illegal immigrant, that murder is one murder too many. It should never have happened. In every case in which an illegal alien commits a crime, the “but for” cause of that crime was Democrats’ cultivation of illegal immigration. In other words, but for Democrats’ desperation to bring in illegal Latin American immigrants, a teenager might not have been hacked to death by MS-13 gangsters or a mother of four might not have been killed by a hit-and-run, drunk, illegal immigrant driver.

If there ever was an indictment of Democrat policies, California is it. The problem, though, is that we live in the version of an old joke. You know the joke, don’t you? It’s the one that has a whose wife caught him red-handed in a compromising situation.  Rather than apologizing, he demanded of her, “Who are you going to believe? Me or your lying eyes?” Even as California’s laboratory of democracy shows that every Leftist policy, when given play, creates social collapse and economic destruction, America’s Leftists, both inside and outside of California, repeatedly ask, “Who are you, the voters, going to believe? The Democrat Party or your lying eyes?”

Tragically, it’s a question that works. It took me 40 years to break free of that question, especially because the subtext was, “If you believe me, you’re good. If you believe your lying eyes, you’ve sworn fealty to the Devil.’

As conservatives like to say, reality always wins . . . but it can take a long, long time. Look at Naomi Wolf, who is rightly being ridiculed for her failure to research one of the core premises of her most recent book.

Naomi assumed that the phrase “death recorded” in suits involving homosexual activity meant that, in Victorian England, scores of gay men were being executed. She didn’t question that assumption, and certainly didn’t bother to do research to confirm her believe, because the assumption jived with her reality — Christians kill gays. Had Naomi questioned her assumptions, she would have discovered, as the man interviewing her did, that (a) “death recorded” was a way of saying that the death sentence was not carried out and (b) that many of those she believed were arrested for homosexual activity were, in fact, arrested for pedophilia, rape, or assault, all with a homosexual angle.

So yes, reality did finally catch up with Naomi . . . but not before she successfully occupied the public stage for decades. It took this type of embarrassing debacle for people to realize that her scholarship has always been shoddy and ought never to have been used as a basis for anything at all.

I hope that the average American is smarter than I am and that reality catches up with that average American in time for the 2020 election. Scott Adams is not sanguine. He believes that the new masters of the universe — the social media titans, working in conjunction with the major media — will warp reality so completely that Trump will not have a snowball’s chance in Hell of winning in 2020. I sincerely hope Adams is completely, off-the-wall wrong with this one.

The post California turned this Democrat into a conservative appeared first on Watcher of Weasels.

California turned this Democrat into a conservative

My California upbringing shows that people will cling to ideas long after the facts reveal those ideas are flawed — a scary thought for the 2020 election.

I grew up in the San Francisco Bay Area, one of America’s bluest of blue regions; attended UC Berkeley, which once was the standard-bearer for campus Leftism, although others have caught up; and lived in and, for many years, practiced law in San Francisco. If politics were a marinade, I would have been marinated in the stuff for decades and would be blue through and through.

Instead, my life experiences gave me a deep and abiding distrust for and disgust with Leftism. To the extent that our American states are laboratories of democracy, California proves everything that is wrong with Leftism.

Growing up, Leftism meant tolerating the Haight Ashbury invasion. After the pretty summer of love, filled with rainbows, rock, and half-dressed young women in gauzy shirts ended, what remained were the ancestors of today’s homeless: drugged out people lying in their own filth, destroying public property, and committing crimes. Back then, the poop map ran the distance of Haight Street, with Golden Gate Park thrown in for good measure. Even though San Francisco was less lenient than it is today about homeless behaviors, the City government still allowed the hippies ridiculous leeway when it came to engaging in uncivilized public behavior. But I was still a Democrat.

My public schools were on the cutting edge of each crazy idea that was emanating from teaching colleges, in which Leftism was becoming ascendant. I didn’t learn math because we were being taught some crazy variant of Base 6 math. (Go figure.) I was lucky to be a natural-born reader, because phonics — the thing that makes reading incredibly easy to master in English — were already being phased out in favor of “whole word” teaching. Teachers were also warned not to children who misspelled words lest it harm the children’s self-esteem. These ideas blossomed nationwide in the 1980s, but were already creeping into San Francisco classrooms almost 20 years earlier. Having failed there, they were ready to take on the nation. But I was still a Democrat.

My public schools also featured a handful of gifted teachers, a decent population of good to average teachers, and a small, but completely stable population of horrible teachers, many of whom were also horrible human beings. There was the science teacher who said of a Jewish student, “There’s another one Hitler should have gotten.” There was the math teacher who would periodically insult students as “Future pimps and whores.” There was the English teacher famous for having sex with male students, which bothered us in those days only because she gave them a pass for bad work. There were the teachers counting the days to retirement and a pension who couldn’t be bothered with teaching at all. (I had a lot of those.) The common denominator was that, thanks to government unions, none of these people could be fired and, with the exception of the science teacher — who finally got himself kicked out of the classroom for throwing a movie projector out of the window (although he apparently still collected his salary for years) — all of them continued to teach generations of students. But I was still a Democrat.

Berkeley. Ah, Berkeley! The last dregs of the hippies hanging out in their own urine or vomit while begging on campus or on Telegraph Avenue. People celebrating the day that Ronald Reagan got shot. Pre-modern history being taught through a Marxist lens which is, when you think about it, quite an amazing intellectual contortion. And a constant thread of hostility to America and reverence for the Soviet Union permeating the air…. But I was still a Democrat.

After law school, which I attended in a blue city that was in a red state, I returned to California. For several decades, I routinely made legal arguments before Leftist judges. These were judges who said, “I don’t care what the law is; I think there’s something here;” judges who reluctantly ruled in favor of a bank, only to warn the bank’s counsel, “There’s more than one way to skin a cat;” judges who literally read with their lips moving as they reluctantly came to terms with the fact that discovery statutes sometimes protected defendants. I learned to loath judges because, at least when it came to the ones before whom I practiced, the law was too often irrelevant to them. If the parties were similarly situated in terms of social stature or economic power, the law applied; but if you represented a corporation or a rich individual, most judges before whom I practiced would engage in amazing contortions to rule against your client. Back in those days, I hadn’t heard the terms “living Constitution” or “strict constructionist,” but I knew that, subject to a few notable exceptions, Bay Area judges were not interested in administering the law; they were all about administering their personal version of “justice.” (We’d call it social justice today.) But I was still a Democrat.

Meanwhile, in the 1970s, I’d watched Carter make a hash of America’s economy and foreign policy. I’d seen the economic “malaise,” the “killer rabbits,” the “lust for the Polish people.” I’d watched the Iran Revolution and the hostage crisis, and I’d seen Carter’s simmering hostility to Israel. But I was still a Democrat.

In the 1980s, I watched the Reagan economic miracle. I watched the resurgence of American pride. I saw Reagan, Thatcher, and John Paul III reaffirm classic principles of liberalism and, by doing so, begin chipping away at the Soviet monolith, exposing its rotten foundations. I saw the Soviet Union fall and the Berlin Wall get quite literally dismantled. But I was still a Democrat.

In both the 1970s and the 1980s, I watched as our welfare system grew and grew and, as it grew, I watched it provide truly perverse incentives to people. The worst was the way in which women were economically rewarded for having children out-of-wedlock. I understood that this behavior led to more illegitimate children, more children without any loving male presence in their lives, more children in poverty, and more children who turned to prostitution and crime as they matured. I knew that the pathologies in the black community weren’t because blacks were defective, but were because the government was paying blacks to live have defective lives. But I was still a Democrat.

My politics only started to shift in the late 1990s, not because I’d grasped that all the things I hated about California arose from Leftist principles, but because NPR was lying about Israel. That was my initial cognitive dissonance. The cognitive dissonance worsened after 9/11, when were told Islam had nothing to do with it or people such as Michael Moore likened the terrorists (who slaughtered innocents and whose goal was the subjugation of the world to sharia law, complete with sexual enslavement, second class citizenship, slavery, or death for “non-believers,” especially Jews, and the whole panoply of medieval punishments) to America’s own revolutionaries, who fought for individual liberty. (And yes, 18th C women didn’t have rights and the South had slaves, but the principles the revolutionaries advanced were inherently good and they paved the way for emancipation, women’s rights, gay rights, etc.)

After almost 40 years, I finally realized that I was no longer a Democrat. It was a shocking and uncomfortable realization. After all, I knew, or thought I knew, that Democrats are good and Republicans are evil. Was I now no longer good? Was I now evil?

I eventually decided that I was still good. My goals were still the goals that Democrats always loudly espoused during my early years: True equality before the law for all people, the diminution of tribal hatreds between different cultures and races in America, a thriving economy, strong national security, friendship with Israel (our ally in the Middle East during the waning days of the Cold War and the only true democratic republic in the region), etc. (Obviously, the Democrats no longer espouse many of these goals.) What I finally figured out was that the way to achieve these ends was through conservative means. Intentionally or not, Democrat means invariably achieved the opposite of those goals.

Although I am no longer a Democrat, California continues to provide example after example of failures in Leftist policies. It is a hardcore Democrat state that preserves its mandate through the corrupt practice of “ballot harvesting.” It needs this corruption because reality (which I’ll discuss more below), eventually catches up with totalitarian ideologies and people can then be kept in line only through brute force and corruption.

California sees itself a political leader in the fight against “income inequality,” yet it has one of the most unequal economic systems in America. In the coastal cities, where people make money from products sold outside of America (e.g., Hollywood and Silicon Valley), you have hard Left bazillionaires. In their hard Left cities, you have tens of thousands of homeless people living in squalor. San Francisco once known for the Golden Gate Bridge, Chinatown, and Fisherman’s wharf, is now the poop capital of America, as well as the car crime capital. Los Angeles is seeing typhus and other very scary infectious diseases making a comeback. In the San Francisco Bay Area, real estate, whether owned or rented, is no longer affordable, so twenty- and thirty-somethings now make a virtue of returning to dorm-style living because it’s all that they can afford.

Were a medieval person to be transported through time to land in one of California’s coastal communities, that person would undoubtedly be confounded by modern technology. However, he would recognize instantly the vast economic chasm between the aristocracy and the masses. Every medieval city had its walled enclaves for the wealthy and the rest of the city, where people lived in filth, disease, and despair.

Travel inland in California and the wealth vanishes. All that’s left is economic despair. The outbreaks of poverty that one sees in the cities — homelessness, diseases, filth — are taking hold in the large inland communities (Bakersfield, Fresno, Sacramento), while the smaller communities are plagued by crime and disrepair. One only has to read Victor Davis Hanson’s elegies to the community that’s been home to his family for generations to understand how the Blue enclaves’ wealth doesn’t reach the rest of California even as, unfortunately, the Blue enclaves’ political ideas do reach those areas . . . and destroy them too.

Meanwhile, as its native-born or legally immigrated citizens despair, California encourages the endless flow of illegal immigrants from Latin America (with unknown numbers of Islamic terrorists sheltering among the crowd). By doing so, California Democrats, who are all about “women’s rights,” encourage unchecked sex trafficking. And California Democrats, who always claim that their policies are “for the children,” encourage coyotes to traffic in children as a way of exploiting America’s laws on behalf of illegal immigrant “families.” And California Democrats, who are all about lifting up America’s minorities, flood American minority communities with people who compete for jobs and bring in crime.

Apropos that crime, it’s completely irrelevant if some left-wing think tanks’ produce statistics “proving” that these illegal immigrants as a whole are less likely to run afoul of the law. Even if only one American is murdered at the hands of an illegal immigrant, that murder is one murder too many. It should never have happened. In every case in which an illegal alien commits a crime, the “but for” cause of that crime was Democrats’ cultivation of illegal immigration. In other words, but for Democrats’ desperation to bring in illegal Latin American immigrants, a teenager might not have been hacked to death by MS-13 gangsters or a mother of four might not have been killed by a hit-and-run, drunk, illegal immigrant driver.

If there ever was an indictment of Democrat policies, California is it. The problem, though, is that we live in the version of an old joke. You know the joke, don’t you? It’s the one that has a whose wife caught him red-handed in a compromising situation.  Rather than apologizing, he demanded of her, “Who are you going to believe? Me or your lying eyes?” Even as California’s laboratory of democracy shows that every Leftist policy, when given play, creates social collapse and economic destruction, America’s Leftists, both inside and outside of California, repeatedly ask, “Who are you, the voters, going to believe? The Democrat Party or your lying eyes?”

Tragically, it’s a question that works. It took me 40 years to break free of that question, especially because the subtext was, “If you believe me, you’re good. If you believe your lying eyes, you’ve sworn fealty to the Devil.’

As conservatives like to say, reality always wins . . . but it can take a long, long time. Look at Naomi Wolf, who is rightly being ridiculed for her failure to research one of the core premises of her most recent book.

Naomi assumed that the phrase “death recorded” in suits involving homosexual activity meant that, in Victorian England, scores of gay men were being executed. She didn’t question that assumption, and certainly didn’t bother to do research to confirm her believe, because the assumption jived with her reality — Christians kill gays. Had Naomi questioned her assumptions, she would have discovered, as the man interviewing her did, that (a) “death recorded” was a way of saying that the death sentence was not carried out and (b) that many of those she believed were arrested for homosexual activity were, in fact, arrested for pedophilia, rape, or assault, all with a homosexual angle.

So yes, reality did finally catch up with Naomi . . . but not before she successfully occupied the public stage for decades. It took this type of embarrassing debacle for people to realize that her scholarship has always been shoddy and ought never to have been used as a basis for anything at all.

I hope that the average American is smarter than I am and that reality catches up with that average American in time for the 2020 election. Scott Adams is not sanguine. He believes that the new masters of the universe — the social media titans, working in conjunction with the major media — will warp reality so completely that Trump will not have a snowball’s chance in Hell of winning in 2020. I sincerely hope Adams is completely, off-the-wall wrong with this one.

The post California turned this Democrat into a conservative appeared first on Watcher of Weasels.

THE DIMINISHING POWER OF THE MEDIA, PART I

Vassar Bushmills

Keep this simple set of facts in mind when the subject of the strength of the Democratic Party base comes up.
And keep a constant visual of this map in your head when the subject of the power of the media comes up.

2016 presidential election results red and blue map

There are 3,141 counties in the United States.
Trump won 3,084 of them.  
Clinton won 57.
Now look at New York State
There are 62 counties in New York State.
Trump won 46 of them.
Clinton won 16  
Clinton won the NY state popular vote by approximately 1.5 million votes.
In the 5 counties that encompass New York City (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Richmond & Queens) Clinton received over 2 million more votes than Trump, which means Trump won all the rest of New York State by half a million votes. (Clinton only won 4 of those counties; Trump won Richmond).
                                            Therefore these 4 counties alone more than accounted for Clinton winning the popular vote of the entire country.
Those 5 counties comprise 319 square miles.  
The United States is comprised of 3,797,000 square miles
When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election.
Large, densely populated Democrat cities (NYC, Chicago, LA, etc.) DO NOT and SHOULD NOT be allowed speak for the rest of our country!
Consider that people still pay to see “Lion King”, on stage after 22 years, while “Russian Collusion” was written and directed so poorly it closed after only one performance. Two years of commercial hype couldn’t buy it even a single Sold-Out, SRO performance, not one standing ovation, despite the lavish praise heaped on its leaked script by the majority of the sycophantic Ellsworth Toohey media who tried to drown out the alternative media calling for it to be shut down on opening night[…]

Continue Reading

The post THE DIMINISHING POWER OF THE MEDIA, PART I appeared first on Watcher of Weasels.

Yes it’s True! Blogger Sanders IS Seeking the Henry School Board Seat!

I think, in the interest of transparency, I should disclose this and also disclose that I will not use the blog to promote my candidacy.

That frees up the posts to write about the impending Brexit Party win or events in Zimbabwe or maybe Tulsi Gabbard (Only Dem I would at this point even CONSIDER voting for in the 2020 Primary.) or even maybe the first LP Congressman Rep. Justin Amash.

BUT any post that I think might have an impact on the SB selection (Del. Peace v. Supervisor Wyatt for example) will be off limits for the time being.

What if you get it, Sanders? No more blog? Well, maybe it’ll be like the President’s Twitter account. My own media outlet! Truthfully, I am undecided at this point. I will not do anything to dishonor the office if selected. But I will say this: the Board of Supervisors select the SB representative and that announcement will come about in late June.

The Dems’ impeachment demands are Heaven-sent manna for Trump

Trump’s impeachment battle with Pelosi — he wants it; she doesn’t — and his negotiations with Iran and China, highlight his strategic and tactical genius.

Of late, Trump has put me in mind of two very funny videos. But before I get to the videos, let me explain what I see going on right now between Trump and his opponents, both domestic and foreign. He is proving to be masterful at toying with his political enemies and with herding people into pens from which there is no easy escape or, perhaps, no escape at all.

The most obvious example today of Trump’s toying and his herding is the way in which he is baiting the Democrats to impeach him. Yes, I know it’s tacky when he talks about “Crazy Nancy Pelosi” or “Dumb as a Rock” Rex Tillerson, but we are living in tacky times, with a political party now devoting its entire energy and political capital to destroying a president. Dems have no other goals than to thwart Trump. Abnormal times seem to call for abnormal measures.

Here’s the way I see it: Being tacky is not an impeachable offense. Threatening to fire someone . . . and then listening to reason and not firing him is not an impeachable offense. Pushing back against an investigation by the same crew that’s trying to railroad you on false charges should not be an impeachable offense. Calling people mean nicknames is not an impeachable offense. In a constitutional republic, the executive officer refusing to produce his closest people for examination by the co-equal legislative branch is not an impeachable offense. Investigating law enforcement that either deliberately or with incredible stupidity launched a bogus investigation into a candidate’s/president’s affairs is not an impeachable offense.

While the base may have delusions of impeachability, ordinary people understand that saying “we hate you” does not establish the type of high crime or misdemeanor that justifies overthrowing the people’s choice. What the crazed base wants is profoundly un-democratic (that’s small “d” democratic). If we go down this route, we’ve given up on a true constitutional republic and become nothing more than a Western hemisphere banana republic.

Moreover, there is something very, very wrong in America when a Democrat-controlled House attempts to go all Lavrentiy Beria on a Republican president by digging into his bank records and taxes from the past decade. It is profoundly un-American when a government agency, instead of investigating an actual crime, instead tries to find a crime to pin upon a disfavored person.

Again, from Trump’s point of view, desperate times call for desperate measures. Or maybe in Trump’s case, we’re not talking about desperate measures at all but are talking about, instead, funny, showman-like measures. Ever since the Mueller report dropped, we’ve seen Trump batting his enemies around a bit, perhaps even letting them think they might succeed, before toppling them over. Or, alternatively, putting more and more pressure on them until they realize he’s trapped them.

So it is with the Democrats: In what might seem to be an irrational act, Trump is pushing as hard as he possibly can to be impeached. However, there’s nothing irrational about it. Trump knows that he hasn’t committed any high crimes and misdemeanors. After a two year rectal examine with a 6 foot long probe (that would be the Mueller investigation), the guy is squeaky clean when it comes to Russia. Moreover, as someone whom the IRS audits so regularly it’s become practically an annual IRS sporting even, we can assume that Trump has nothing too bad hiding in the dark recesses of either his business or personal finances.

Ordinarily, someone with that clean a record would simply proclaim his innocence . . . which, frankly, is seldom that convincing. Trump’s going the other direction: He’s behaving more and more aggressively, with the meeting walk-out, the name calling and, just today, the declassification of Russiagate documents.

In addition, his war of words with Nancy Pelosi may seem childish, and un-presidential, but the reality is that, as Trump escalates the insults, he’s putting her in an impossible position. Trump’s behavior is going to make her base, both inside and outside of the House, more and more strident when it comes to demanding impeachment. For Pelosi to ignore that base will be very dangerous because its the base that provides a party’s election energy.

What both Trump and Nancy know, though, although Nancy’s base refuses to recognize it, is that impeachment will be a disaster for the Democrats. The most obvious reason, of course, is that there’s no way in Hell that the Senate can muster a two-thirds majority to convict on the House’s impeachment charges. Moreover, the American people will be disgusted when they see Trump working like the devil to keep his promises while the House masturbates itself into an orgasmic impeachment frenzy. The optics will not favor the House — and it’s only going to get worse as Barr works his way through the facts behind the Russiagate scandal.

More and more ordinary Americans will start to say that the House is wasting its time, that the Democrats have run themselves right off the rails, that people knew what they were getting with Trump, that Trump is keeping his promises, and that he’s hard at work for the American people, even as the Democrats enact a cross between Soviet show trials and One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest. 

It’s been clear for some time that Pelosi’s goal has been to make impeachment quietly go away. You know how it is. You leave something kind of nasty in your inbox for a long time, hoping that if you ignore it, it will take care of itself by just fading into irrelevancy. Trump, however, will not let impeachment fade. He’s forcing a Hobson’s choice on Nancy: For her, there is no good option.

In much the same way, Trump is forcing Iran into a corner. You can hear Scott Adams talk about that here.

Briefly, Adams points out that Trump has effectively dealt a death blow to Iran’s economy because Iran is now unable to ship out any oil, which is it’s only real commodity. Moreover, Trump has made it clear that, if Iran gets feisty, Trump will decapitate the government. That is, unlike past regimes, he won’t do some sort of targeted blow somewhere. Instead, he will drop bombs on the presidential palace, the parliament, and the Guards’ headquarters. Iran’s only alternative to economic or actual death is to engage in serious peace talks that require it to stop sponsoring terrorism all over the world and trying to achieve complete dominance in the Middle East.

Trump has also put China in a corner. While Democrats and NeverTrumpers panic, the reality is that, while Americans are briefly being deprived of low price economic gadgets thanks to targeted tariffs (although it appears that the Chinese government, not American consumers, is currently taking on the costs of the tariffs), the Chinese are running out of food. Who do you think can hold out longer? I’m betting on Trump, not the Chinese.

Meanwhile, wisely, Trump makes sure to remind everyone that he thinks President Xi Jingping is a great guy with whom he can strike a deal that makes everyone happy. This is the complete opposite of his baiting behavior with Pelosi. It’s a reminder how calculating Trump is. He wants a deal with China. When it comes to Democrats, though, he wants to goad them into self-destructing.

So, President Trump plays with his enemies, even letting them think he’s running scared, before he goes in for the kill, and he corrals people in ways that either leave them without good options or that force hard decisions on them. And that leads me to my two videos.

The first is a video of Trump, the big dog, having some fun with the Democrats, as represented by Pelosi, the yapping little dog (starting at 4:15):

(Doesn’t that chihuahua kind of look like Nancy?)

And here’s a video of Trump, the sheepdog, relentlessly forcing those sheep-like Dems to go where he wants them to be:

The post The Dems’ impeachment demands are Heaven-sent manna for Trump appeared first on Watcher of Weasels.