Random Thought, 22 March 2025

Given the proliferation of monies courtesy of NCAA NIL (Name-Image-Likeness) rules, can we just go ahead and get rid of the supposed fiction that collegiate sports are still amateur in nature?

District Courts in the Age of Trump

(Patriot Post, 21 March 2025)

Unless we want to see Trump just begin ignoring the courts, someone (looking at you, Roberts!) needs to wallop these district judges at the first opportunity.

 

Founders' Quotes, 20-21 March 2025

(1) As there is a degree of depravity in mankind which requires a certain degree of circumspection and distrust: So there are other qualities in human nature, which justify a certain portion of esteem and confidence. Republican government presupposes the existence of these qualities in a higher degree than any other form. Were the pictures which have been drawn by the political jealousy of some among us, faithful likenesses of the human character, the inference would be that there is not sufficient virtue among men for self-government; and that nothing less than the chains of despotism can restrain them from destroying and devouring one another. - James Madison, Federalist #55, 1788

(2) Strangers are welcome because there is room enough for them all, and therefore the old Inhabitants are not jealous of them; the Laws protect them sufficiently so that they have no need of the Patronage of great Men; and every one will enjoy securely the Profits of his Industry. But if he does not bring a Fortune with him, he must work and be industrious to live. - Benjamin Franklin, Those Who Would Remove to America, 1784

On the first point: the trick about republican (little-r) forms of government is that they require a civil society that is cogent and educated to function; otherwise, to borrow/paraphrase the quote from Men in Black, "you have dumb scared animals instead of individuals."

On the second point: Immigrating to another country is a privilege, not a right. Work hard, play by the rules and come legally and America will welcome you with open arms. Do anything else and you better always look over your shoulder.

Greenpeace Loses Jury Trial in North Dakota, Faces Existential Crisis

Remember back towards the end of 2016 and the beginning of 2017 when the Left was taking out its' fury on voters for daring to elect Donald Trump the first time around and one of their targets was the Dakota Access pipeline in North Dakota?

Well... In 2016 and 2017, the left vented its shock and fury at Donald Trump's unexpected victory by, among other things, protesting the construction of an oil pipeline in North Dakota. The "mainstream" media claimed that Energy Transfer was ramming its Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) through all sorts of sacred Native American lands and that no one wanted it.

In fact, Energy Transfer went out of its way to work with natives and locals, and most were glad of the opportunity and prosperity DAPL would provide. Nonetheless, environmentalist activists co-opted a protest by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, making it into the face of the spurious claims. Professional protestors from near and far got into the act, throwing sand into the project's gears at the construction site, at funding sources, and in the PR sphere. In the end, these actions delayed the project by five months and added approximately $350 million to the cost, Energy Transfer claimed in a lawsuit it launched in 2019. 

Energy Transfer named three Greenpeace entities — Greenpeace USA, Greenpeace International (based in the Netherlands), and Greenpeace Fund — as the organizers and funders of this sabotage. And on Wednesday, a North Dakota jury found that the infamous non-profit must pay the price for its actions.

The nine-person and two-alternate jury deliberated for two and a half days before arriving at its unanimous verdict. (PJ Media)

The result was a $300m verdict against Greenpeace according to most news reports and all I can say here is About. Damn. Time.

This was a concerted effort to block an energy project that would've helped make America more and more energy-independent, which would then allow us to better decide when and where to get involved overseas (thus benefiting the America First agenda of the current Trump Administration, never mind that DAPL began under Obama of all people). But its' one thing to peacefully protest, even when said peaceful actions cross into illegality (a good example would be the Freedom Riders of the early 1960's who rode on integrated bus across the South at the height of early 60's Jim Crow. They suffered heavily for it but won in the end after the Feds' ordered the transportation lines fully desegregated).

These protests weren't peaceful; they were violent, reckless and conspiratorial and I don't feel sorry for Greenpeace one bit. I find it darkly amusing that they're worried about their existence (as they should be) and with a $300m or so verdict agst. them, they best hope of avoiding it would seem to be bankruptcy.

Only thing there is...while it would stop assessment and service on said judgment, it would be up to the bankruptcy judge to decide whether, for instance, the bankruptcy is being used to avoid it. Most, as far as I can tell, look dimly on defendants in civil cases using the bankruptcy courts to avoid paying on civil judgments. That said, if Greenpeace went this route and succeeded, they could avoid paying out on it.

Then again, one thing not mentioned in the PJM article is whether this case was tried in federal court or ND state court; that's important because the laws for each are different and if this was in state court....anyone remember what happened to the former Gawker back in the late 2010's?

Yeah, that's what I was thinking.

Founders Quote, 18-19 March 2025

(1) History by apprising [citizens] of the past will enable them to judge of the future; it will avail them of the experience of other times and other nations; it will qualify them as judges of the actions and designs of men; it will enable them to know ambition under every disguise it may assume; and knowing it, to defeat its views. - Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, Query 18, 1781

(2) The house of representatives...can make no law which will not have its full operation on themselves and their friends, as well as the great mass of society. This has always been deemed one of the strongest bonds by which human policy can connect the rulers and the people together. It creates between them that communion of interest, and sympathy of sentiments, of which few governments have furnished examples; but without which every government degenerates into tyranny. - James Madison, Federalist #57, 1788

On the first point, another sign of a civil society is that society's knowing of history and its' effects, both for the good and for the bad. A country ignorant of its' history is a country doomed to repeat the past, warts and all. 

On the second point? James Madison would be fuming (as would most political leaders of the period he lived in) over how Congress and America's elites in general have insulated themselves from the laws they enforce on the rest of us. Another sign of the two-tiered I hope Trump eliminates once and for all.

Doug Batchelor Welcomes Barbara O'Neil, Defies SDA "Cancel Culture"

There are times where I'm glad to be a Seventh-Day Adventist....this ain't one of them.

The TL/DR: Barbara O'Neill is an alternative health care practitioner and member of the SDA church in Australian who...how can I put it simply? Ahh, yes: she's a crank... (O'Neill's health claims, Australian criminal investigations) ..enough of one that the New South Wales Health Care Complaints Commission found multiple substantiated complaints agst. her, enough to where in Sept. 2019 she was given a prohibition order banning her from putting forth the info she was giving.

Didn't stop her though; she kept right on and also went full-on anti-vax (far more so than even RFK Jr. at his worst ever did)...everything built up enough to where Adventist Health Ministries, the in-house health group of the General Conference of Seventh-Day Adventists officially advised member SDA churches and organizations (i'll get to them in a second) not to have her speak at their churches or organizations.

Enter one of those aforementioned SDA organizations, Amazing Facts. HQ'ed in Granite Bay, CA and led by Granite Bay SDA Pastor Doug Batchelor, AF is one of the major unofficial SDA organizations in existence (along with 3ABN, Voice of Prophecy, Hope Channel, 2CBN in Africa and so forth)...they're a powerful outside voice w/in SDA circles and Batchelor is one pastor who I really, really respect and admire...

...and yet, according to the video above and a recent article in Adventist Today, they invited Ms. O'Neill to speak at Sacremento Central (Sac Central) SDA church (according to their FB page, the week's run of shows is booked solid). 

Yeah, You and me both, Jesus.

Now, I'm relatively new to Adventist (it'll be three and a half years since I first began attending my local SDA church here in Morganton, NC) but if there's one thing I keep seriously it is the Adventist health message, something I do principally because its' a commonsense health message, especially the diet part - no, I'm not a vegetarian or vegan; I'm more of a flexitarian in my eating habits. I also take a more focused approach to my health, especially given all of my past health issues mental and physical.

Part of that is paying attention to the best advice of medical professionals on both medicine and vaccinations....which makes me wonder what in the holy kernals is Pr. Batchelor doing bringing a crank and oddball like Barbara O'Neill to the 'States to peddle her crap?

She's no "health educator" (with all due respect to Mr. Batchelor) she's a Down Under crank. Period, end of story.

Founders Quotes, 16-17 March 2025

(1) The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. - Thomas Jefferson, letter to The Republican Citizens of Washington County, Maryland — 1809

(2) Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. - Declaration of Independence, 1776

Both quotes go to the heart of what good government is supposed to be (no apologies to Paul Weyrich's twisted view of it) - government functions best when it stays within the confines of the rules set forth for it in the Constitution, protects the nation's borders, ensures that no one falls through the cracks and preserves the common good.

Do those things effectively and efficiently and you got my vote.

Random Thought, 16 March 2025...

If AdSense is seeing this: please approve my AdSense request to start running ads on this blog.

I've done everything I can think of under the rules in place to have a blog capable of having ads on it; at least approve it.

Thank you,

Matthew.

Are Democrats Destroying Themselves?

Short answer: yes.

Long answer? Yes, but so long as there is no viable alternative for liberals/leftists to go to, not in the immediate future (with all due respect to Townhall's Mark Lewis). That said, even a cursory look at the political map shows how hard it'll be for them to get back the reins of power. For instance, while the House could still flip next November, if the Senate even reverts to the Presidential line, its' a one-seat loss for Dems (from 53 seats currently to 54 seats).

Go out four years and its' still just as bleak there for Democrats.

Karl Rove once spoke of the "permanent Republican majority" during George W. Bush's administration....I still think he was wrong then but I do believe that every so often each party has a generational majority that endures for a couple decades either way.

Until recently Dems' owned a lock on the House majority (1954-1994) and odds are there were people who were born, lived and died only knowing Democratic house majorities (led by, among others, Sam Rayburn, Carl Albert, Tip O'Neill and Tom Foley). Likewise, assuming no epic collapses by Republicans, Democrats may be staring at a generational minority in the Senate of similar length.

Why? Couple reasons but the two that come to mind quickest are: (1) lack of a viable Democratic bench in a bunch of GOP-led states and (b) their collapse in winning red states over the past couple decades.

Until Democrats square those two, they may never hold all three reigns of elective federal power in the immediate future. Of course, given who runs the Democratic Party these days....