CBMT Tek said to Hagar:
Thoughts on this fiasco?
https://hotair.com/tree-hugging-sister/2023/10/04/sunak-steps-in-it-a-man-is-a-man-and-a-woman-is-a-woman-n582395
.
If the left really wants to live in a Star Trek tolerance level of society, why the automatic leap to “hate” and “…phobe?” It is almost as if the left cannot imagine anyone can disagree with them unless they “hate” them. Someone misgenders you, and it is apparently the end of the world. Why? Because the allure of power is too overwhelming, and shutting down the UK PM over a statement he made is power.
Granted, I see that from the right as well, but not as frequently. (Then again, my personal biases may be at play)

So… I have a ton to say and I’m not entirely sure how to say it. Let me give it a go here.

Part the first: I don’t believe it’s as simple as, “A man is a man, and a woman is a woman.” According to Yale, there are two biological genders: male and female. According to some other scientists there are six genders, or 27, or some other odd number. Per the National Institute of Health, there are two main genders, male and female, and other outliers that sometimes happen, but that basically if there’s a Y in the mix of chromosomes, it’s a male, and if there’s no Y, it’s female. These biological genders may OR MAY NOT match the sexual organs exterior to the body. It’s possible, for instance, for a person with both Xs and Ys in their genes to have genitals that we perceive as female, but they are still male no matter whether they have breasts, ovaries, or even female hormones. Essentially, chromosomes are the only way to actually determine someone’s biological gender.

I personally believe that people under the age of 18 should be restricted from making irreversible life-altering changes to their bodies. That includes, but is not limited to, tattoos, piercings, circumcision, sexual organs, etc. Those changes should be made under only two circumstances. Either you’re 18 (old enough to vote, live on your own, and to give consent that is at least somewhat informed), or there’s a medical emergency that requires something happen (such as an emergency hysterectomy due to cancer, or something along those lines). I am somewhat okay with those 16 and older getting piercings with parental consent, but I’d be absolutely fine with it being 18, as well.

Read More

B.L.U.F.What do all of those citations mean, and why is it important?

(1900 words)

There are two types of items that can possibly be cited in a legal “brief”. Those are the opinion or ruling of the court, and things submitted to the docket of a case.

With “real” legal briefs and opinions, they never(?) cite to docketed material in other cases. They might cite to items on this case’s docket. These are sometimes difficult to figure out, but it is possible.

Most of the problems stem from abbreviations. As an example, when a case is appealed, the parties might be asked to submit a “joint appendix”. This is often a multi-volume submission of hundreds of pages with all referenced works listed. In the latest filing by the state in Duncan v. Bonta the state cites some 28 different documents.

This is similar to the bibliography that some of my posts include.

Once the Joint Appendix is filed, the parties refer to those citations by “JA #”, where “#” is the number of that entry in the joint appendix. This makes it somewhat easier for the people reading to recognize the citations they have already processed. All it takes is a checkmark next to that citation to tell the reader they have already read and analyzed that citation.

For us, common people, it means we have to find the joint appendix and access it to look up a citation. I’m almost to the point where I want to write software that takes a PDF of these references and turns it into a spreadsheet.

Names

Read More

I posed earlier about the stabbing death of Leftist activist Ryan Carson.

His girlfriend is now the beneficiary of a GoFundMe for over $60,000 at the time of this posting.

In the description it says:

Hi everyone.

We are a collective of Ryan’s close friends, reeling from a brutal loss. We are asking for your help on behalf of his partner in easing the burden and stress of this horrifying situation so that we can have space and time to grieve, and remember Ryan. Immediate needs are to offset the costs of working class people taking time off of work to properly mourn.

This is a lot of Leftist gobbledygook that translates to covering her bills while she mourns, while increasing her victim status.

The original goal was $20,000 but they blew right past that.

How long a mourning period does she need, because $20,000 is a lot of money.  It’s way more than the average weekly salary, assuming she took of a week.

At $60,000, that’s a year’s salary to take off from work to mourn.

And she’s his girlfriend, not his wife.

Her boyfriend gets stabbed and she rushes to GoFundMe to make money off his death.

That seems odd.

And another thing.

Watch the video again.

https://twitter.com/CassowaryVacati/status/1709442282880188503?s=19

Her behavior is odd.

Shr doesn’t scream, she doesn’t apply first aid, she doesn’t touch him and try to help, she doesn’t call the police, she just stands over his crumpled body and asks “are you okay.”

But she does create a GoFundMe.

This whole situation seems sketchy.

This came across my feed today, from three different people. As some of you may have guessed, many of my friends and acquaintances are Left leaning to some degree. I see this thing come up every election season, basically. Today, I spent 20 minutes staring at it, trying to decide whether to reply. I eventually decided it wasn’t worth it, and moved on. Then I went back, snagged the image, and came here.

Let’s see. I personally have my human right to exist challenged fairly regularly. As someone who is pansexual (which is the new bisexual), for years I was put down by straight people as “just needing to find the right man,” and by gay people as, “just confused and unwilling to come out of the closet.” When you’re bi, everyone hates you. That challenge happens daily, for the most part, not just at election time. I wonder if some of the people who posted this have considered that.

As to watching people vote against my right to exist, well yes… it happens every election season. It happens on BOTH sides of the great aisle we’ve created. I see the Left voting down my right to free speech (their hatred of hate speech). I see the Left voting down my right to carry (second amendment). Both the Left and Right are guilty of raping the fourth amendment (that’d be the right to be secure in my person and against unwarranted and unreasonable searches and seizures, something both sides have eroded in their own ways). The fifth amendment is a mess, because (again for different reasons) Left and Right have decided some things are okay to “hold someone to answer for” without Grand Juries, and due process is a joke these days. The right to a speedy trial is not possible most of the time because of the ultimate mess of our legal system, so that’s the sixth down, though I don’t know that the gutting of the sixth is due to Left or Right… it’s just people in general. Excessive fines and cruel punishment seems to be the darling of the Right.

And the ninth… I don’t think anyone at all even remembers that one anymore. There are hundreds, thousands of rights. Not all of them are written down in the Constitution. Our Framers chose to highlight and protect certain rights because they were That Important, and yes, I recognize and appreciate that. But it doesn’t mean they granted me a right. No one grants me a right. If it’s something you were granted, then it’s a privileged, and it can be taken away. Women didn’t “win” the right to vote, they fought to have an already-present right recognized by a recalcitrant populace. Rights simply are. They exist because WE exist. No one can take them away, though if we don’t guard them, tyrants can restrict them and stop you from practicing them. But they don’t go away.

And on and on. Yes, I know the fear of my rights disappearing, not from the Right, not from the Left, but from both sides. From all sides! The pandering and downright bullshit mind twisting you have to do to think that only one side or group is guilty is mind boggling. I can’t even.

And as an aside, someone in commentary said they wondered why I said “sx” and “abse” instead of sex and abuse. That’s because on some social media, which I also write for, if you use those words you become censored, and can lose accounts. I sometimes forget that this is one of the places I can say things out loud. I won’t apologize for it, and you’ll probably see it again, if only because I will forget. But I do appreciate that here, at least, it is recognized that I have a right to free speech.

Hagar,
who’s angry today.

Ryan Carson, 32, is stabbed to death while waiting at bus stop with his girlfriend in unprovoked attack by unhinged thug

A left wing activist who was stabbed to death in New York City while waiting at a bus stop with his girlfriend, had just spent the evening prior with his partner at a wedding.

Ryan Carson, 32, was stabbed in the chest multiple times, and the blade pierced his heart, during the unprovoked attack at 4am near Lafayette Avenue and Malcolm X Boulevard in Brooklyn.

Ryan was with his girlfriend when the suspect – wearing a dark colored sweatshirt with his hood up – asked ‘What the f**k are you looking at?’ before violently stabbing him in the chest.

The attacker can be heard saying ‘I’ll kill you!’ on camera while Carson pleads with him and holds up his hand.

His girlfriend can be heard in the security footage shouting: ‘Please, please, please!’

Carson falls over the bench he had been sitting on before the attacker knocks him to the ground and knifes him multiple times.

He then spits on the girlfriend, kicks Carson’s body and storms away.

Here is the video:

https://twitter.com/libbyemmons/status/1709321510639341839?s=19

A lot of people on the internet have pointed out Carson is a radical Leftist, Antifa, communist who protested against the police and for more safe injection sites, and therefore he is the victim of his own ideology.

I won’t argue that.

But these thugs aren’t just stabbing Antifa activists.

That could have been anyone on that corner.

I hate NYC but I attended a buddy’s wedding there when he invited me and the reception got out after midnight.

This is why the Supreme Court decided the way it did on Bruen.

I counted this guy backing up and pushing they thug away three times before he ended up dead.

In any place in America, any expected duty to retreat has been met (for places that have it) and this would have been a good shoot.

I don’t personally care about guys like Carson.

I do care about myself if I have to end up in NYC or Chicago or Minneapolis.

This is the great granddaddy of the super thriller books. It was time to read it again after decades of rest.

It is an old trope for us now, but this was the first convincingly realistic book about an atomic bomb in NYC. It is amazingly well written and probably an inspiration to many great writes that came later.

Collins and Lapierre did write some other great books like Oh Jerusalem! Is Paris Burning and Freedom at Midnight which will put the independence of India and the whole non-violence movement in a whole new perspective. It sure as hell opened my eyes.

B.L.U.F.Short discussion of the level of honesty from the state.

I’m under the weather, so nothing too long, I hope. (I can hope, it just doesn’t happen.)

(2200 words)

Duncan v. Bonta is the case that started in 2017 challenging California’s magazine ban. Judge Benitez found magazine bans to be unconstitutional. He enjoined the state from enforcing the magazine ban. Thousands of magazines flowed into the state.

The state begged for a stay while the case was on appeal. Judge Benitez granted that stay in part. Those people who possessed forbidden magazines were protected as well as those that received magazines during the injunction, as well as the people who ordered during Freedom Week but had not yet received their magazines.

Since there was no emergency motion for a stay, the case was assigned to a three judge panel. The three judge panel agreed with Judge Benitez. The opinion of the three judge panel was written by Circuit Judge Lee.

The state asked for an en banc hearing. As expected, it was granted. The en banc panel then found in a 7 to 4 opinion that a magazine ban was constitutional and vacated the three judge panel’s opinion. Judge Vandyke wrote a fantastic dissent on the case, slamming the majority.

The plaintiffs (good guys) appealed to the Supreme Court. The request for certiorari was not granted, nor was it denied. The case was held pending the outcome of Bruen. After Bruen was decided, the Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated the en banc panel’s opinion, and remanded the case back to the Ninth Circuit.
Read More