Friday, November 29, 2024

The Libet Experiments and How to Maximize Free Will

From LP Koch on Luctalks.substack,com (Nov. 27, 2022):

The experiments carried out by Benjamin Libet in the early 1980s have caused quite the stir. I vividly remember how even in the late 90s and early 2000s, the media was hammering home the message that these experiments somehow proved that Free Will was an illusion—just as those zeitgeist-enslaved philosophers and scientists had been saying all along.

At the very least, this interpretation has been given much room and put those who challenged it on the defensive.

However, the “no free will” interpretation of the Libet experiments amounts to little more than an opinion, and an unsophisticated one at that. There is a lot more to it than meets the eye, with direct and practical consequences for our lives.

But first, let’s give a brief overview of the Libet experiment.

Short Summary of the Libet Experiments

Libet gave participants of his experiments a simple task, while measuring their brain activity: they had to decide to flex a finger whenever they wished, and note the position on a fast-moving clock at the precise moment they took the decision.

 

The result was that the brain showed activity at least 400ms before the participants became aware of their “decision making.”

Here’s a diagram showing what’s going on:1

 

 

“RP” stands for “Readiness Potential,” that is, the supposed build-up in brain activity before the decision to act and the subsequent action. What we see is that this brain activity starts before the participants became aware of their intention to flex the finger.

The results have led the no-Free-Will crowd to exclaim, “see, everything is driven by your brain, and you taking decisions is just an illusion!”

However, this seems to be a typical case of taking something very specific and isolated out of context and then drawing conclusions based on existing biases.

First, Libet himself thought that there is still enough time between our awareness of intention and the action itself for us to “veto” the decision and stop the movement. This would leave free will intact: remember that even the tiniest bit of actual free will leads to the philosophical position of what is called libertarian free will, that is, genuine free will with the power to really cause something.

Second, critics of the “no Free Will” interpretation have pointed out that the process of our decision-making is actually much more complex and involves the generation of different alternatives before we pick out one of those. This would explain the brain activity before our awareness of intention: we begin thinking about flexing that finger, possibly weighing different times when we should do so, before we actually decide to go for it. This “potential” builds up and becomes detectable about half a second before we “shoot.” Heck, it seems that just by introspection, we can literally feel that this is the case—how, tasked with lifting a finger at random times, things start moving in our mind until we decide to execute, with the built-up right before we close the deal rising exponentially.

I might also add that even if we accept that we literally make the decision after the build-up, I can’t see a reason why such things should not take the form of a blurry occurrence in time instead of an imaginary, abstract, dimensionless point on a scale: for all we know, we attract a potential, which shows up on the brain scan, but only actualize that potential a little later.

Alternatively, to leave the safe space of respectable academic orthodoxy entirely, there might even be retro-causation involved: we take a decision, and by doing so, something which is slightly in the past becomes a logical necessity, and therefore actualized.2

All that being said, there’s a more straight-forward interpretation of the experiment that I find very useful.

A Better Interpretation of Libet

A slightly different take comes from Christopher Langan—one that I find very interesting and which may have important implications for our lives.

He argues that decision-making might involve different layers, where an overarching decision might be made, which is then split up and executed in different sub-decisions. Such sub-decisions may be taken on an unconscious level, but reported to our conscious awareness so that we still have the option to stop it: to execute our veto power. In other words, when we take overarching decisions (or follow an overarching instruction), we relegate the execution of the sub-decisions to our subconsciousness, which then makes us aware of those along the way, if we are lucky.3

In the Libet experiments, the overarching plan is dictated to the participant by the experimenter: look at the watch, take decisions, note times. The participant then decides to follow these instructions and build a plan in his or her mind. After that, the plan is simply executed. And so, what appear to be individual decisions to flex the finger are really part of this bigger plan, and these are simply brought to the participant’s awareness to enable veto power. [read more]

Interesting. Yea, the Langan interpretation makes more sense. 

Thursday, November 28, 2024

The First Steps of the New Trump Administration

From Gingrich360.com (Nov. 13):

In the first week since his stunning election victory, President Donald J. Trump has begun assembling the team with which he will lead America. These first appointments give some sense of how President Trump will govern for the next four years.

First, with the exceptions of soon-to-be Border Czar Tom Homan and Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller virtually everyone President Trump has named so far has come without prior experience in the first Trump administration.

It is clear President Trump is looking for new energy and enthusiasm – and deep loyalty to him and to the Make America Great Again movement.

The first announcement was Chief of Staff Susie Wiles. She was central to President Trump’s comeback after the 2020 election. Wiles ran the most effective presidential campaign in modern times. It included a decisive defeat of the other Republican candidates and a near complete takeover of the Republican Party in every state.

Wiles is important because she really understands President Trump and can anticipate what he needs to be effective. She also has the best ability of anyone other than Melania Trump to talk with him candidly and keep him focused on winning.

It was interesting that the next two announcements were both New Yorkers. President Trump’s love for his home state has grown in recent years, and he is determined to make New York a much more competitive state for Republicans. Announcing House Republican Conference Chair Elise Stefanik from upstate New York as the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations was a brilliant move. Rep. Stefanik proved in the public hearings on antisemitism on college campuses that she is bright and tough. At least three university presidents lost their jobs after tangling with her. I expect she will be the most dynamic U.N. Ambassador since Jeane Kirkpatrick.

Next, President Trump picked former Congressman Lee Zeldin to head up the Environmental Protection Agency. Zeldin ran a great campaign for governor in 2020. For a Republican in New York, he did remarkably well. Zeldin is smart and tough – and he will reorient the EPA toward practicality, common sense, and results.

Callista and I were delighted when we learned Sen. Marco Rubio may be named Secretary of State. We chatted with Sen. Rubio at the Convention Center early Wednesday morning while we waited for President Trump to make his victory speech. Sen. Rubio is keenly aware of the collapse of the Cuban economy as its Soviet era power grid increasingly fails. There may be an opportunity for the United States to work with the Cuban people and replace the eight-decade old communist dictatorship. That would have a revolutionary impact on Latin America.

Sen. Rubio has been solid in his opposition to Chinese Communist activities. Having served on the Senate’s foreign relations and intelligence committees, he would approach his new job with an enormous amount of knowledge – and a mature determination to protect America and our allies and undermine our opponents.

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem was a surprise choice for Secretary of Homeland Security, but if you consider the importance President Trump places on communicating with the American people her selection makes a lot of sense.

The media will almost certainly criticize (and exaggerate) the Trump administration’s work on the border. The administration will regain control of the border (as President Trump did in his first term) and engage the largest illegal immigrant deportation program in American history – starting with convicted criminals who threaten Americans. Only President Dwight Eisenhower’s deportation project in the 1950s will be comparable.

Gov. Noem will balance Holman’s toughness and directness with a people-oriented effort to explain what is happening. There will undoubtedly be deeply human stories that emerge while controlling the border and deporting people who have come here illegally. Having an articulate and sympathetic governor, who has the skillset that comes from working directly with voters, will make it much easier for President Trump to sustain popular support for what is inherently a difficult policy to implement. Gov. Noem will be an effective advocate for a firm but humane program of returning America to a legal system of legitimate immigration.

The first days of the transition have been encouraging. President Trump is making solid, sound personnel decisions – and he is building a team capable of helping America move to greatness. [source]

All good picks. Hopefully, they'll be loyal to the MAGA agenda. I think they will.

President Trump’s other nominations:

Wednesday, November 27, 2024

Trump plans ambitious tax agenda — with insiders revealing how it could put more money in Americans’ pockets

From NY Post.com (Nov. 9):

On the campaign trail Trump repeatedly promised to slash taxes on tips and social security benefits, and suggested the total elimination of income taxes with the hope or replacing the revenue with tariffs.

With the signature tax cuts of Trump’s first term set to expire in 2025, and the high likelihood Republicans will have full control of Congress, extending and even expanding tax changes are high on his agenda.

Chief among the wish-list items of an expanded tax cut program would be lowering corporate tax rates.

In 2027, Trump slashed the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21% — and now wants to bring it down even more to 15%.

“When you reduce the corporate rate by 2% wages go up 1%, corporations have more money to invest for workers,” Grover Norquist, and activist and president of Americans for Tax Reform, told The Post.

Norquist, a longtime insider in GOP tax circles, said he expected House and Senate leadership would be completely on board with the reduction.

Trump has also promised to walk back a product of his 2017 tax law: the $10,000 cap on state and local tax deductions, known as SALT.

The cap overwhelmingly targets residents of high-tax blue states where soaring state and local taxes support bloated state bureaucracies, and Trump’s promise to repeal it has the potential to be an early bipartisan win.

“I take President Trump at his word and will hold him accountable for his promise to eliminate the SALT cap. I will work with him and anyone to get things done on behalf of the people,” said Long Island Democratic Rep. Tom Suozzi, an avowed enemy of the cap.

Insiders, however, say the repeal will be a significantly heavier lift.

“The major problem is it pits high tax states against low tax states. Certain states like New York and California and New Jersey have really high and state and local tax rates, and it gives people who live there an advantage in their deductions over people who live in [low-tax] places like Florida or Texas,” said Phil Magness, an economic historian at the Independent Institute.

Far-left progressives may also find themselves loathe to support what amounts to a tax cut for the rich. Socialist Squad Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has blasted past efforts to remove the SALT cap as a “gift to billionaires.”

Norquist said he wasn’t so sure Trump could get the cap totally lifted, but that raising the deduction could be a compromise solution. [read more]

More money in American's pockets is always a good plan.  The Congress should also make the tax cuts permanent from Trump's first term.

Tuesday, November 26, 2024

Trump Officially Wins Nevada, All Seven Swing States


From Newsmax.com (Nov. 9):

President-elect Donald Trump officially won Nevada on Saturday, closing out the last of the coveted seven swing states, Politico has confirmed.

Trump won a solid 3 percentage point victory over Vice President Kamala Harris in the Silver State, 50.7% to 47.4%.  The win raises Trump's electoral vote total to 312 over Harris' 226. The president-elect's popular vote total has now passed 74 million. Trump is the first Republican to win Nevada and its 6 electoral votes since former President George W. Bush in 2004.

The state’s abundant Latino population caused some insiders to predict an easier win for Harris, yet Trump’s populist message proved effective. In May, Trump announced his plan to make tips tax-exempt, a move that appealed to the state’s high percentage of hospitality workers.

Also on Saturday, Democrat Senator Jacky Rosen officially held on after a valiant effort by Republican Sam Brown to flip the Nevada seat held by Rosen since 2018.  Although a favorite of Trump, Brown suffered from a sizable cash disadvantage and lack of national support from Senate Republicans. [source]

Good for him and the country. It's a shame Sam Brown didn't win. Hopefully, the next Republican Senate leader will financially support America First Senate candidates.

Monday, November 25, 2024

Hamas Calls for 'Immediate' End to War After Trump Election Win

From Newsweek.com (Nov. 6):

A senior Hamas official has called for an immediate end to Israel's war against the group in the Gaza Strip and a plan to achieve Palestinian statehood in remarks shared with Newsweek in the wake of former President Donald Trump's election victory.

"The election of Trump as the 47th president of the USA is a private matter for the Americans," Hamas Political Bureau member and spokesperson Basem Naim told Newsweek, "but Palestinians look forward to an immediate cessation of the aggression against our people, especially in Gaza, and look for assistance in achieving their legitimate rights of freedom, independence, and the establishment of their independent self-sovereign state with Jerusalem as its capital."

"The blind support for the Zionist entity 'Israel' and its fascist government, at the expense of the future of our people and the security and stability of the region, must stop immediately," he added.

When previously in office, Trump forged a close relationship with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is today engaged in a multifront war against the Iran-aligned Axis of Resistance that began with a large-scale Hamas-led attack against Israel in October 2023. However, Trump has also expressed criticism of Netanyahu's wartime leadership and has called for a timely end to the conflict.

Reached for comment, an Israeli official told Newsweek that "maintaining and building upon the special relationship between the U.S. and Israel has been a bipartisan feature of American politics since the founding of the Jewish state."

"We have no doubt that this will continue to be the case," the Israeli official said. "Going forward, we look forward to a strong working relationship with his administration to bring about a more peaceful, secure and prosperous Middle East." [read more]

Here's an idea: Hamas can unconditionally surrender and release all their hostages.  Just saying.

Friday, November 22, 2024

Civil Rights in American History lecture notes part 4

The Combahee River Collective Statement declares: “This focusing on our own oppression embodied in the concept of identity politics.”

The Combahee River Collective Statement was written by a group of radical feminists in 1977.

At its foundation, identity politics holds that oppressed groups are morally superior groups in America.

Derrick Bell one of the founders of critical race theory, argued in 1991 that black people had made no progress in the United States since 1865.

Ta-Nehisi Coates wrote: “Perhaps one person can make a change, but not the kind of change that would raise your body to equality with your countrymen.”

Dr. Azerrad argues that the focus on group results by identity politics creates the paradoxical approach of requiring discrimination in order to eliminate it.

Identity politics asserts that in a world without discrimination, the various identity groups would succeed and fail at the same rate.

Source: "Civil Rights in American History" course from Hillsdale.edu.

Thursday, November 21, 2024

Prisoners and Amish Guys Both Busted With 'Secret Cell Phones' Thanks to Emergency Alert Test

From Washington Engager.com (Oct. 8, 2023):

If there are two types of people in our society who shouldn't own cell phones, it's prisoners and the Amish.

So, when the  National Emergency Alert System triggered phones this past Wednesday, it certainly exposed plenty of prisoners who had illegal cell phones in their possession, as well as Amish folks who unknowingly had this forbidden piece of technology on their person.

From TMZ:

A New York State Prison official tells us they confiscated two phones at Sing Sing Correctional Facility during the test. Additionally, a source at FCI Coleman Low in Florida says they too confiscated two phones during the emergency test.

It's unclear how many other prisons faced similar circumstances -- we called around in Arizona, California, Illinois and others -- but you gotta imagine it was a problem nationwide.

A source in Nevada tells us most of their prisoners were already aware the alert was gonna happen, likely turning their phones off, so they didn't confiscate any devices.

From The Daily Caller:

Amish men who secretly owned cellphones were reportedly outed by Wednesday’s national Emergency Alert System test, causing them to be shunned by their peers.

  A formerly Amish man took to TikTok to reveal that the loud noise sounding the alert test reportedly exposed concealed cellphones of three supposed members of the religious community unwilling to abandon modern devices, according to DailyMail.

“Guess what, I just got a couple of my Amish buddies shunned today by the Amish Church,” Eli Yoder, an ex-Amish man, said. “Over the years there’s been quite a few Amish men who reached out and wanted phones, so whenever they request to have a phone, I’ll do everything I can to try to get them a phone.”

What's amusing about this  situation is that obviously, both people locked up in prisons and in Amish society would have little to no idea that this national test was even going to take place.
It would have been hilarious to see the looks on their faces when these alarms went off! [source]

I bet they will think twice before trying that again.

Wednesday, November 20, 2024

New AI Tool 'FraudGPT' Emerges, Tailored for Sophisticated Attacks

From The Hacker News.com (July 26, 2023):

Following the footsteps of WormGPT, threat actors are advertising yet another cybercrime generative artificial intelligence (AI) tool dubbed FraudGPT on various dark web marketplaces and Telegram channels.

"This is an AI bot, exclusively targeted for offensive purposes, such as crafting spear phishing emails, creating cracking tools, carding, etc.," Netenrich security researcher Rakesh Krishnan said in a report published Tuesday.

The cybersecurity firm said the offering has been circulating since at least July 22, 2023, for a subscription cost of $200 a month (or $1,000 for six months and $1,700 for a year).

"If your [sic] looking for a Chat GPT alternative designed to provide a wide range of exclusive tools, features, and capabilities tailored to anyone's individuals with no boundaries then look no further!," claims the actor, who goes by the online alias CanadianKingpin.

The author also states that the tool could be used to write malicious code, create undetectable malware, find leaks and vulnerabilities, and that there have been more than 3,000 confirmed sales and reviews. The exact large language model (LLM) used to develop the system is currently not known.

The development comes as the threat actors are increasingly riding on the advent of OpenAI ChatGPT-like AI tools to concoct new adversarial variants that are explicitly engineered to promote all kinds of cybercriminal activity sans any restrictions.

Such tools, besides taking the phishing-as-a-service (PhaaS) model to the next level, could act as a launchpad for novice actors looking to mount convincing phishing and business email compromise (BEC) attacks at scale, leading to the theft of sensitive information and unauthorized wire payments.

"While organizations can create ChatGPT (and other tools) with ethical safeguards, it isn't a difficult feat to reimplement the same technology without those safeguards," Krishnan noted.

"Implementing a defense-in-depth strategy with all the security telemetry available for fast analytics has become all the more essential to finding these fast-moving threats before a phishing email can turn into ransomware or data exfiltration." [source]

Tuesday, November 19, 2024

California man first in US to face charges for allegedly smuggling ‘highly potent greenhouse gases’ into country

From The Blaze.com (Mar. 5):

A California man became the first in the United States to face charges for allegedly smuggling “highly potent greenhouse gases” into the country from Mexico, the Department of Justice reported Monday.

Michael Hart, a 58-year-old San Diego resident, was arrested early Monday after he allegedly illegally smuggled hydrofluorocarbons, commonly used as refrigerants, into the country to sell for a profit, the DOJ stated.

The agency accused Hart of purchasing refrigerants in Mexico and concealing them under a tarp and tools in his vehicle before crossing into the U.S. Hart then allegedly attempted to sell the refrigerants by listing them on OfferUp, Facebook Marketplace, and other online merchants. According to the DOJ, Hart sold the refrigerants for a profit.

The charges, related to the Trump-era American Innovation and Manufacturing Act of 2020, state that the Environmental Protection Agency must approve the importation of HFCs.

According to the EPA, HFCs are “greenhouse gases” commonly used in refrigeration, air conditioning, building insulation, fire extinguishing systems, and aerosols. The EPA claims that HFCs have “high global warming potential.”

The Climate & Clear Air Coalition notes that HFCs “are very powerful, short-lived climate pollutants with an average atmospheric lifetime of 15 years.” The synthetic gases “represent around 2% of total greenhouse gases.”

“The most abundant HFC warms the planet 3,790 times as much as CO2 over a 20-year period,” the coalition claimed.

“The global warming potential (GWP) of an HFC can be hundreds to thousands of times more potent than carbon dioxide. The use of HFCs has been rapidly increasing worldwide due to the global phaseout of ozone-depleting substances (ODS) and increased demand for refrigeration and air conditioning,” the DOJ stated.

David M. Uhlmann, EPA assistant administrator for the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, stated, “The illegal smuggling of hydrofluorocarbons, a highly potent greenhouse gas, undermines international efforts to combat climate change under the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol.”

“Anyone who seeks to profit from illegal actions that worsen climate change must be held accountable. This arrest highlights the significance of EPA’s climate enforcement initiative and our efforts to prevent refrigerants that are climate super pollutants from illegally entering the United States,” Uhlmann added.

U.S. Attorney Tara McGrath called the charges “a significant milestone for our country.”

“This is the first time the Department of Justice is prosecuting someone for illegally importing greenhouse gases, and it will not be the last. We are using every means possible to protect our planet from the harm caused by toxic pollutants, including bringing criminal charges,” McGrath said.

The DOJ reported that Hart entered a not-guilty plea on Monday and is scheduled for his next hearing on March 25. [source]

Dumb. The global warming cult claims its first sinner. In this cult there is no forgiveness. One of these days it will be a sin to fart.

Monday, November 18, 2024

Biden Reportedly Struggling To Raise Enough Cash For Presidential Library

From Daily Caller.com (Oct. 30):

President Joe Biden is reportedly struggling to raise the capital required to establish a presidential library, The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday.

Since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, former presidents have privately built libraries where their personal and presidential letters are stored. Now, Biden is allegedly running into challenges raising between $200 million and $300 million, which his allies think will be necessary for him to establish his own, according to the WSJ.

The problem stems, in part, from Biden’s weakness as a fundraiser, with the president reportedly unwilling to partake in fundraising tactics such as inviting mega-donors to spend the night at the White House, the outlet reported. Some donors have stated they won’t make decisions until the result of the November election is clear, with some also noting continued animosity and confusion due to Biden’s early exit from the 2024 presidential race and his short-lived re-election campaign more broadly.

Biden’s top aide Steve Richetti, once described by Politico as the president’s “sherpa,” has taken a leading role on the library project, according to the WSJ.

Biden claimed his alma maters Syracuse University and the University of Delaware are “competing” to be the chosen location of the library, along with several other institutions, according to a transcript of an interview Biden gave to Special Counsel Robert Hur. Officials from the University of Pennsylvania — the Ivy League university that four of Biden’s grandchildren and his deceased son Beau attended — purportedly have also had discussions about hosting the center, the WSJ reported.

The fundraising challenges for his presidential library would not be the first time Biden has run into issues with winning over donors, with Democratic mega-donors like Abigail Disney pulling their financial support for the president after his disastrous June debate performance.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. [source]

I wonder what would be in the library? His real medical mental diagnoses, Robert Hur's tapes and unedited transcripts? Who knows. Not much of a legacy.

Friday, November 15, 2024

6 Things I Never Knew about Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein

From Jon Miltimore on FEE.org (Nov. 15, 2022):

Frankenstein is one of those stories that you learn about as a kid but can’t remember how you learned about it. At least it was for me.

We know he—the Monster—is big and green and has a squarish head and scars. We know he was dead and brought to life by a mad doctor. We sense that he’s not exactly evil, but misunderstood. At least that’s what I recall remembering.

You see, I never actually read Mary Shelley’s frightening novel until a few weeks ago. Nor had I ever seen James Whale’s classic 1931 movie Frankenstein featuring the legendary Boris Karloff, or any Frankenstein movie for that matter. (I have since watched Kenneth Branagh’s dark adaptation, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.)

That I had never read Shelley’s fine book—Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus—is a source of mild embarrassment for me, since I consider myself a student of literature, which I studied as both an undergraduate and graduate student.

Having finally read the book, here are six things I learned.

1. There Is No Igor

As I was reading Shelley’s work, I kept waiting for Igor to appear. One of the few things I knew was that Dr. Victor Frankenstein has an odd-looking, hunch-backed assistant named Igor he commands around as he constructs his creation in his laboratory. But early in the story the Monster comes to life and Frankenstein flees and there’s not a word of anyone named Igor.

I thought perhaps I missed it. After all, Shelley breezes past the creation of the Monster in just a page or so. I went back and read it. Nope, no Igor. I thought maybe he’d show up later in a flashback or Frankenstein’s attempt to construct a new Monster. Nope. No Igor.

In fact, there is no Igor in the Boris Karloff version of Frankenstein or Branagh’s 1994 version. Apparently it was not until the 1939 film Son of Frankenstein that an assistant named “Ygor” appears, whose name was later changed to Igor in later films. (There was an assistant in the first two Frankenstein movies, but his name was Fritz and he was inspired from 19th century plays.)

2. Mary Wollstonecraft Died Giving Birth to Mary Shelley

I almost didn’t share this because I’m so embarrassed I didn’t know it—but Mary Shelley was the daughter of the famous British philosopher and women’s rights activist Mary Wollstonecraft, who died giving birth to Shelley.

Apparently the placenta broke during the birth. An infection developed and the famous libertarian feminist died of septicemia on 10 September, 1797.

It makes me a little sad to know that Wollstonecraft never learned her daughter would become one of the most famous novelists of the ages. Something tells me she would have been proud.

3. It’s Anti-Death Penalty

Okay, I admit it. I have no idea how Shelley actually felt about the death penalty. But the novel’s example of capital punishment is hardly a ringing endorsement of the policy. After Frankenstein creates his Monster, we learn that his younger brother William—who is only a child—is killed while playing in the forest.

Frankenstein has his suspicions about who committed the dastardly deed, but what we see next is as chilling as anything in Shelley’s book. When William cannot be found, a search party is sent to find him. William’s nanny Justine, an adopted member of the Frankenstein family, discovers a locket of William’s but no sign of his body; when William’s dead body is later found and Justine is found with the locket, she is blamed for his death. Charges are brought against her. She is found guilty on the flimsiest of evidence and swiftly hanged.

4. Shelley Conceived the Story After a Nightmare—at Age 18

One of the coolest parts of Frankenstein is the story behind the book.

Imagine being 18 years old and hanging out at Lord Byron’s estate in Geneva, Switzerland. That’s exactly what Mary Shelley was doing in the summer of 1816, shortly after eloping to Italy with Percy Shelley (a married man) when she was just 16 years old.

One night while hanging out Lord Byron proposed that each of the four people present “write a ghost story.” Every morning she was asked, “Have you thought of a story.” Each morning Shelley was forced to reply with a “mortifying negative.”

Finally one night when she struggled to sleep her imagination took hold.

“I saw—with shut eyes, but acute mental vision—I saw the pale student of unhallowed arts kneeling beside the thing he had put together. I saw the hideous phantasm of a man stretched out, and then, on the working of some powerful engine, show signs of life and stir with an uneasy, half-vital motion. Frightful must it be, for supremely frightful would be the effect of any human endeavor to mock the stupendous mechanism of the Creator of the world. His success would terrify the artist; he would rush away from his odious handiwork horror-stricken.”

Frankenstein and his Monster were born.

5. The Monster Is Not ‘Sympathetic’ and Frankenstein Is Not the Villain

So, this idea exists that Frankenstein’s Monster is some gentle, stupid, and misunderstood creature. He wasn’t actually the villain, the modern interpretation goes, and I basically always assumed this was true, having not read the story. Movies I saw of Frankenstein’s Monster—such as Monster Squad (1987) and Van Helsing (2004)— always showed him in a sympathetic light, and that was kind of the vibe I got from Boris Karloff’s Monster.

This was not the vibe I got from Shelley’s Monster. At all. First of all, Shelley’s Monster is not stupid. He tells his story over several chapters, and one quickly realizes he’s highly literate (he reads Plutarch!). The Monster doesn’t mumble words like a dumb child or Simple Jack; he speaks eloquently. He possesses reason.

The Monster is angry, however, that he is different. He’s ugly. He has no one and nothing.

“I possessed no money, no friends, no kind of property,” he explains to Victor.

Indeed, even his creator despises him.

“I, the miserable and the abandoned, am an abortion, to be spurned at, and kicked, and trampled on,” the Monster explains near the end of the book.

This is no doubt why some have interpreted the Monster in a sympathetic light. And in some ways he is a sympathetic figure. We watch as the Monster watches a poor family of villagers and discovers he’s not like them.

“I admired virtue and good feelings and loved the gentle manners and amiable qualities of my cottagers, but I was shut out from intercourse with them, except through means which I obtained by stealth, when I was unseen and unknown, and which rather increased than satisfied the desire I had of becoming one among my fellows.”

We watch the Monster plead with Victor to have him create a female companion.

“I am alone and miserable, man will not associate with me, but one as deformed and horrible as myself would not deny herself to me,” he tells Victor. “My companion must be of the same species and have the same defects. This being you must create.”

Readers can identify with the Monster’s plight. After all, who among us would wish to spend life alone? The problem is, as I noted, the creature possesses reason. He knows right from wrong. Good from evil. And throughout the novel, he commits evil act after evil act, even admitting to Victor that he killed the child William.

“Boy, you will never see your father again,” the Monster tells the child, “you must come with me.”

Victor Frankenstein is not the villain of the story. His mistakes are far more human. They come from the unintended consequences of his creation and the fear that prevents him from addressing and confessing his mistake for most of the novel.

The Monster’s deeds are far more monstrous, and they are committed not by a bumbling, stupid, child-like creature, but by an intelligent and selfish fiend.

6. Frankenstein’s Monster Is a Metaphor for the State

I have no idea whatsoever if Shelley saw it, but her story is a wonderful metaphor for the state.

Using the power of modern science, Dr. Frankenstein creates a powerful Monster that he quickly realizes he cannot control. Frankenstein’s motives are pure when he brings the creature to life, but the Monster takes on a life of his own and a series of dark consequences follow. Most frightening of all, Frankenstein realizes he cannot turn off his own creation. If this is not a metaphor for the Leviathan state, I don’t know what is.

Now, as I said, it’s not clear that Shelley saw it this way, but there is some evidence that she did. In Chapter 4, Victor implies that it is the pursuit of “unlawful” sciences that has led men astray throughout history and infringed on peace.

“If this rule were always observed; if no man allowed to any pursuit whatsoever to interfere with the tranquility of his domestic affections, Greece had not been enslaved; Caesar would have spared his country; America would have been discovered more gradually; and the empires of Mexico and Peru had not been destroyed.”

Few things interfere with peace, tranquility, or our domestic affairs more than the state, which is just one more reason I see Shelley’s novel as a cautionary tale for would-be Babel builders.

The moral lesson is clear: be careful about what you create using unscrupulous or unnatural means. Your creation may grow beyond your control and cause you great misery. [source]

I like point #6! Nice.

Thursday, November 14, 2024

15 states sue Biden-Harris administration for enrolling noncitizens in Obamacare

From Just the News.com (Aug. 20):

A coalition of states led by Kansas has sued the Biden-Harris administration to block the federal government from providing free health care through the taxpayer-funded Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare, to foreign nationals in the U.S. illegally.

Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota Western Division and was joined by attorneys general from 14 states. The U.S. government and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services are named as defendants.

At issue is a CMS final rule change called, “Clarifying the Eligibility of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Recipients and Certain Other NonCitizens for a Qualified Health Plan Through an Exchange, Advance Payments of the Premium Tax Credit, Cost-Sharing Reductions, a Basic Health Program.” In it, CMS redefines the legal term of “lawfully present” to include DACA recipients.

When Congress enacted the ACA, it limited eligibility only to “citizen[s] or national[s] of the United States [and] aliens lawfully present in the United States.” By changing the definition of “lawfully present” to include DACA recipients, CMS is enabling them to have access to taxpayer-funded ACA coverage. Doing so violates the Administrative Procedures Act, federal law that prohibits taxpayer-funded benefits from being given to illegal foreign nationals, and the Affordable Care Act, the complaint states.

Congress has already limited eligibility coverage, which excludes DACA recipients. Additionally, “DACA recipients are, by definition, unlawfully present in the United States,” the complaint states. “Indeed, eligibility for DACA requires unlawful presence in the United States.”

Former President Barack Obama created DACA through executive order in 2012. It shielded children from deportation who were brought into the country illegally by their parents and has been in litigation for 12 years. A federal judge has twice ruled DACA is illegal. The most recent ruling was in a multi-state lawsuit led by Texas to end DACA once and for all, The Center Square reported. The U.S. Supreme Court is ultimately expected to decide the case.

Numerous reports suggest between 700,000 and 800,000 DACA recipients live in the U.S. The Los Angeles Times reports there are 578,680 on record with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services as of March 2023.

In June, President Joe Biden announced he was expanding deportation protections for DACA recipients and streamlining request waivers to make it easier for them to obtain temporary visas, The Center Square reported. DACA supporters argue recipients should be granted citizenship, claiming they contribute to the U.S. economy and are constructive members of society.

Others argue those with criminal records, at a minimum, should be deported. Within the first five years of the program, nearly 80,000 DACA recipients were released into the U.S. with arrest records, The Center Square reported.

"Illegal aliens shouldn't get a free pass into our country,” Kobach said. “They shouldn't receive taxpayer benefits when they arrive, and the Biden-Harris administration shouldn't get a free pass to violate federal law. That's why I am leading a multistate lawsuit to stop this illegal regulation from going into effect.”

If the CMS final rule takes effect Nov. 1, more than 200,000 DACA recipients would automatically become eligible for taxpayer-subsidized health plans nationwide.

The lawsuit cites data from the Migration Policy Institute, Pew Research Center and others to estimate how many illegal foreign nationals are estimated to receive public benefits and the associated costs to taxpayers in each of the plaintiff states.

The lawsuit asks the court to postpone the effective date of the rule, vacate it, enjoin the defendants from implementing it and award plaintiff attorneys the costs of their fees.

Joining Kobach are the attorneys general representing Alabama, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Virginia. [source]

Good! More states should do this.

Wednesday, November 13, 2024

7 GOP senators join Democrats in confirming Biden judicial nominee

From The Blaze.com (June 4):

Seven Republican senators joined with Democrats and independents on Tuesday in voting to confirm President Joe Biden's nomination of Judge Tanya Monique Jones Bosier to serve as an associate judge on the Superior Court of D.C.

Lawmakers voted 57-41 in favor of confirmation, with all 41 of the opposing votes coming from Republicans.

The seven GOP senators who voted to confirm included Susan Collins of Maine, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, James Lankford of Oklahoma, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Mitt Romney of Utah, Mike Rounds of South Dakota, and Thom Tillis of North Carolina.

"The GOP nominee was convicted in a kangaroo court Thursday. Just 5 days later AT THEIR FIRST CHANCE Sens. @LindseyGrahamSC @SenatorRounds @SenatorLankford @SenThomTillis voted yes on ANOTHER Biden judicial nominee. They won't stop Democrat Lawfare. In DC it's business as usual," Blaze Media's Christopher Bedford tweeted.

"Democrats didn't need these Republicans to confirm their judge. They didn't need @lisamurkowski @MittRomney @SenatorCollins either. These senators are simply adding their seals of approval. Even a controlled opposition at least pretends to oppose. There are no excuses," he added.

Last week, a jury found former President Donald Trump, the presumptive 2024 Republican presidential nominee, guilty on all counts in a New York criminal trial.

Some GOP senators signed onto a pledge that declares, in part, that they will not vote to confirm any Biden administration political and judicial nominees.

"The White House has made a mockery of the rule of law and fundamentally altered our politics in un-American ways. As a Senate Republican conference, we are unwilling to aid and abet this White House in its project to tear this country apart. To that end, we will not 1) allow any increase to non-security related funding for this administration, or any appropriations bill which funds partisan lawfare; 2) vote to confirm this administration's political and judicial appointees; and 3) allow expedited consideration and passage of Democrat legislation or authorities that are not directly relevant to the safety of the American people," the pledge declares. [source]

The usual suspects.

Tuesday, November 12, 2024

Magician: Dem Operative Paid for Fake Biden Robocall

From Newsmax.com (Feb. 23):

A New Orleans magician said a Democrat consultant paid him to use artificial intelligence to create a phony President Joe Biden robocall urging New Hampshire Democrats not to vote in the state's presidential primary, NBC News reported.

Paul Carpenter claims to have been hired by Steve Kramer, who has worked on ballot access for Democrat Dean Phillips, a presidential candidate. Carpenter says he used AI software to imitate Biden's voice.

"I created the audio used in the robocall," Carpenter told NBC News. "I did not distribute it. I was in a situation where someone offered me some money to do something, and I did it. There was no malicious intent. I didn't know how it was going to be distributed."

Carpenter, who holds a world record in fork-bending, has no fixed address, but is living in New Orleans, NBC News said.

The fake Biden call is at the center of a multistate law enforcement investigation. Law enforcement officials have interest in the call for possibly violating state voter suppression and federal telecom laws. Carpenter and Kramer have not been named as targets of any investigations.

It took less than 20 minutes to create the fake audio and cost just $1, Carpenter said. He said he was paid $150 and shared Venmo payments from Kramer and his father, Bruce Kramer.

"It's so scary that it's this easy to do," Carpenter said. "People aren't ready for it."

Kramer, a longtime political operative, worked for numerous campaigns over 20 years, including the 2020 presidential campaign of Ye, the rapper formerly known as Kanye West, NBC News said.

Contacted by NBC News, Kramer said he will wait to speak on the matter until he publishes something Saturday. "My op-Ed will explain all," he said in a text.

Phillips expressed outrage when asked about Kramer's alleged involvement. Phillips' spokesperson said the campaign would never work with Kramer again and may pursue legal action if the allegations are confirmed.

NBC News noted it has seen no evidence that the campaign directed Kramer to produce or disseminate the robocall.

According to records from the Federal Election Commission, Kramer was paid $259,946 by the Phillips' campaign for ballot access work in  December and January.

"If it is true that Mr. Kramer had any involvement in the creation of deepfake robocalls, he did so of his own volition which had nothing to do with our campaign," Phillips' press secretary Katie Dolan said. "The fundamental notion of our campaign is the importance of competition, choice, and democracy. We are disgusted to learn that Mr. Kramer is allegedly behind this call, and if the allegations are true, we absolutely denounce his actions."

In January, House Administration Committee ranking member Joseph Morelle, a New York Democrat, asked the Department of Justice to "immediately" launch an investigation into the robocalls generated by AI featuring Biden's voice urging New Hampshire Democrats not to vote in January's primary.

The robocalls said: "Voting … only enables the Republicans in their quest to elect Donald Trump again. Your vote makes a difference in November, not this Tuesday."

However, a spokesperson for Biden's New Hampshire write-in campaign told Axios that the calls were "deep fake disinformation designed to harm Joe Biden, suppress votes, and damage our democracy."

The New Hampshire state attorney general's office is probing the matter, NBC News said. [source]

The Dems are sneaky bastards. The magician said he didn't know how the fake audio was going to be used? Really?  Let's see. He was paid $150 to create the audio, which used a voice that sounded like Crooked Joe. He might have known exactly how the fake audio was going to be used, but he had to have had some idea at least.

Monday, November 11, 2024

First, they disappeared Biden; now they are disappearing his record

From The Blaze.com (July 27):

The magicians in the Democratic Party sure know a lot of tricks. First, they were able to create the illusion that Joe Biden hasn’t been in cognitive decline for years, even “fooling” the corporate press (if you believe their claims). Then — abracadabra! — they were able to magically replace Biden with Vice President Kamala Harris as the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate without her receiving a single presidential primary vote.

As a big part of Biden’s administration, Harris owns his record. But don’t worry! With the help of their friends in the corporate left-wing media, the Democratic magicians are trying to make that disappear, too.

In the short number of days since it was announced that Biden and many other Democrats were backing Harris, the race to memory-hole his awful record and give her the appearance of a good record, or at least a clean slate, has begun.

A slew of articles have appeared in the past week trying to sell Biden’s so-called accomplishments. Slate published a story lauding Biden’s “true legacy” of “full employment,” arguing that “Biden’s labor market has more than compensated for rising household costs.” Tell that to Main Street America. A new CNN poll found that 39% of Americans “worry most or all of the time that their family’s income won’t be enough to meet expenses,” a number that is two percentage points higher than when the same poll was taken during the Great Recession.

The Columbus Dispatch ran with an opinion piece alleging that “Biden accomplished more good in 4 years than any president since Abraham Lincoln.” Wow! While he certainly accomplished a ton, none of it was good.

Biden oversaw historic inflation and a collapse in the personal savings rate. In his term, home prices become completely unaffordable for a huge number of Americans. He oversaw deficits-to-GDP more than double the historic average and interest payments on the national debt explode past $1 trillion.

Credit downgrades? Don’t forget about that. The U.S. debt was downgraded for the second time ever under Biden, the first time being when he was Barack Obama’s vice president, and now stands near $35 trillion.

And that’s just part of his economic record. There is also illegal immigration and the border crisis. Merrill Matthews reported in January 2024 that by that time, the number of illegal immigrants in the United States had doubled under Biden. Let’s not forget foreign policy or America’s weakened position on the global stage, especially in the wake of the Afghanistan bugout debacle.

Kamala Harris and the Democrats need their media friends to magically make everyone forget the record, but the reality is that she owns it. She doesn’t get a free pass or a magic wand to make the abysmal record go away.

Biden in the first weeks of his administration put Harris in charge of the immigration crisis. Now the same media that regularly identified Harris as “border czar” is trying to claim that never happened. Axios published a story headlined, “Harris border confusion haunts her new campaign,” written by the same reporter who in 2021 wrote, “Biden puts Harris in charge of border crisis.”

Another Axios article stated, “Harris, appointed by Biden as border czar, said she would be looking at the ‘root causes’ that drive migration.” After online backlash, an editor’s note was hastily appended: “This article has been updated and clarified to note that Axios was among the news outlets that incorrectly labeled Harris a ‘border czar’ in 2021.”

The corporate press will continue to try to convince you otherwise, but Kamala Harris owns the Biden administration record.

No matter the smoke and mirrors, Joe Biden has made life worse for most Americans — and by extension, Kamala Harris has as well. Whatever rabbit they try to pull out of their hat to cover that up doesn’t change reality, and Harris and the entire administration must be held accountable for that record. [source]

More memory-holing from the Left. Just so they can pretend there is no connection to her and Crooked Joe's regime.

Friday, November 08, 2024

The Rise of Antihumanism

From First Things.com (Aug. 2023):

In 2009, one of Google’s self-driving cars came to an intersection with a four-way stop. It came to a halt and waited for other cars to do the same before proceeding through. Apparently, that is the rule it was taught—but of course, that is not what people do. So the robot car got completely paralyzed, blocked the intersection, and had to be rebooted. Tellingly, the Google engineer in charge said that what he had learned from this episode was that human beings need to be “less idiotic.”

Let’s think about that. If there is an ­ambiguous case of right-of-way, human drivers will often make eye contact. Maybe one waves the other through or indicates by the movements of the car itself a readiness to yield, or not. It’s not a stretch to say that there is a kind of body language of driving, and a range of driving dispositions. We are endowed with social intelligence, through the exercise of which people work things out among themselves, and usually manage to cooperate well enough. Tocqueville thought it was in small-bore practical activities demanding improvisation and cooperation that the habits of collective self-­government were formed. And this is significant. There is something that can aptly be called the democratic personality, and it is cultivated not in civics class, but in the granular features of everyday life. But the social intelligence on display at that intersection was completely invisible to the Google guy. This, too, is significant.

The premise behind the push for driverless cars is that human beings are terrible drivers. This is one instance of a wider pattern. There is a tacit picture of the human being that guides our institutions, and a shared intellectual DNA for the governing classes. It has various elements, but the common thread is a low regard for human beings, whether on the basis of their fragility, their cognitive limitations, their latent tendency to “hate,” or their imminent obsolescence with the arrival of imagined technological possibilities. Each of these premises carries an important but partial truth, and each provides the master supposition for some project of social control.

We are already sliding toward a post-political mode of governance in which expert administration replaces democratic contest, and political sovereignty is relocated from representative bodies to a permanent bureaucracy that is largely unaccountable. Common sense is disqualified as a guide to reality, and with this disqualification the political standing of the majority is demoted as well. The new antihumanisms can only accelerate these trends: They serve as apologetics for a further concentration of wealth and power, and the further erosion of the concept of the citizen—by which I mean the wide-awake, imperfect but responsible human being on whom the ideal of self-government rests.

That older ideal has its roots in the long arc of Western civilization. In the Christian centuries, man was conceived to be fallen, yet created in the image of God. You don’t have to be a Christian to see that this doubleness—this awareness of sin and of our orientation toward perfection—can help us to clarify the effects of our current antihumanisms, criticize their presuppositions, and look for an exit from the uncanny new forms of tyranny that are quickly developing.

The four antihumanisms, as I see it, are these: Human beings are stupid, we are obsolete, we are fragile, and we are hateful. I submit that these four premises are mutually supporting and that, together, they serve to legitimize, and usher in more fully, the post-political condition. One thing they have in common is that, if taken to heart, they attenuate the citizenly pride that is both cause and effect of self-government.

WE ARE STUPID

In the decades after World War II, the “­rational actor” model of human behavior was the foundation of economic thinking. It treated people as agents who act to maximize their own utility, which required the further assumption that they act with a perfectly lucid grasp of where their interests lie and how they can be secured. These assumptions may seem psychologically naive, but they provided the tacit anthropology for what we might call the party of the market—what is called “liberalism” in Europe but in the Anglophone world is associated with figures such as Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher.

In the 1990s, this intellectual edifice was deposed by the more psychologically informed school of behavioral economics, which teaches that our actions are largely guided by pre-reflective cognitive biases and heuristics. These offer “fast and frugal” substitutes for conscious deliberation, which is a slow and costly activity. This was a necessary correction of our view of the human person, in the direction of realism.

But something went awry in the institutionalization of these insights. In the psychological literature, one thing that stands out is that our “sub-rational” modes of coping with the world are actually pretty rational, in the Bayesian sense. That is, the biases and heuristics we rely on correspond to real regularities in the world and provide a good basis for action.

But the practical adequacy of “sub-rational” modes of coping with the world dropped out of consideration when the social engineers got ahold of what looked like a promising new tool kit for “evidence-based interventions,” as well as a fresh rationale for intervening. Biases? Those are bad. People are sub-rational? We knew it all along. Their takeaway was that people need all the help they can get in the form of external “nudges” and cognitive scaffolding if they are to do the rational thing.

In a sense they are correct. A level-headed, Burkean version of their thesis would stress that with the external scaffolding of settled usages and inherited forms, we don’t have to wake up every morning and deduce the necessity of each action from first principles, entirely on our own. It would acknowledge the rationality of tradition as a set of framing conditions for individual choice. Instead, for the nudgers, rationality is to be located neither in the individual nor in tradition, but in a separate class of social managers, acting according to a vision that is theirs alone. They aim to create a “choice architecture” that will guide us beneath the threshold of our awareness.

The nudge is a non-coercive way to alter people’s behavior without having to persuade them of anything. That is, without the inconvenience of having to engage in democratic politics. Following the publication of Nudge by Cass Sunstein and Richard Thaler in 2009, both the Obama White House and the government of David Cameron in the UK immediately established “behavioral insight” teams. Such units are currently operating in the European Commission, the United Nations, the WHO, and, by Thaler’s reckoning, about four hundred other entities in government and the NGO world, as well as in countless private corporations. It would be hard to overstate the degree to which this approach has been institutionalized.

The innovation achieved here, at scale, is in the way government conceives of its subjects: not as citizens whose considered consent must be secured, but as particles to be steered through a ­science of behavior management that relies on their pre-reflective biases.

The glee and sheer repetition with which this diminished picture of the human subject (as being cognitively incompetent) was trumpeted by journalists and popularizers in the 2010s indicate that it has some moral appeal, quite apart from its intellectual merits. Perhaps it is the old Enlightenment thrill at disabusing human beings of their pretensions to specialness, whether as made in the image of God or as “the rational animal,” seen in Aristotle (not to be confused with the purely calculative “rational market actor”). A likely effect of this demotion is to attenuate the pride of the citizen, and so make us more acquiescent to the work of those whom C. S. Lewis called “the conditioners.” [source]

It's mainly the Left who are putting out these ideas. They are the ones who are stupid and hateful. Rod Sterling wrote an interesting episode called "The Obsolete Man" that addresses that idea. As Rod Sterling says in the opening narration:

"You walk into this room at your own risk, because it leads to the future, not a future that will be but one that might be. This is not a new world, it is simply an extension of what began in the old one. It has patterned itself after every dictator who has ever planted the ripping imprint of a boot on the pages of history since the beginning of time. It has refinements, technological advances, and a more sophisticated approach to the destruction of human freedom. But like every one of the super-states that preceded it, it has one iron rule: logic is an enemy and truth is a menace. This is Mr. Romney Wordsworth, in his last forty-eight hours on Earth. He's a citizen of the State but will soon have to be eliminated, because he's built out of flesh and because he has a mind. Mr. Romney Wordsworth, who will draw his last breaths in The Twilight Zone."

Does this sound familiar especially the part about "logic is an enemy and truth is a menace?" I hope this future never completely comes to pass in America.

Thursday, November 07, 2024

Trial for Ashli Babbitt's Death Set for 2026

From Newsmax.com (Sept. 20):

A wrongful death lawsuit filed by the family of Ashli Babbitt, who was fatally shot during the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, will go to trial in July 2026, according to U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes.

The decision, announced during a Friday status hearing, came after both the lawyers for the Babbitt family and the government expressed concerns that the original 2025 trial date would not allow enough time to prepare, according to The Hill.

Reyes initially directed lawyers to prepare for a December 2025 trial. However, both sides warned that such a timeline could hinder efforts to obtain key evidence, such as from law enforcement, medical personnel, and other witnesses.

"In light of these circumstances and the significance of this case, the Parties believe that a modest extension ... may be warranted," they wrote in a joint statement.

Despite a revised proposal, the parties requested to push the trial to mid-2026. Reyes ultimately set the trial date for July 20, 2026, after the parties said they were unavailable in June.

Tensions emerged over the discovery process. Babbitt's lawyers sought broader discovery than the government, alleging that officials aimed to limit requests to "shield the facts and avoid or limit liability." The government countered that Babbitt's legal team intended to turn the lawsuit into a "sweeping inquiry" into the Jan. 6 events.

But Reyes warned that "this case is not going to turn into a discovery quagmire."

"You guys are going to work things out," she added. You're not going to bring any discovery dispute to me, and if one of you decides that you're going to ignore me for the second time, you had better have the best argument you've ever had in your entire life."

The suit, filed by Judicial Watch on behalf of Babbitt's estate, claims Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd acted negligently resulting in her death. An internal investigation previously cleared Byrd, stating he acted within department policy and "potentially saved members and staff from serious injury and possible death." [source]

Good! Hopefully Ashli Babbitt’s family can get her justice in a civil court. Too bad she couldn't get it in a criminal court.

Wednesday, November 06, 2024

Houston Church Shooter Identified as Transgender With a Long Criminal History

From The Epoch Times.com (Feb. 12):

A shooter who was killed by off-duty police officers after opening fire at a Houston megachurch while seemingly using a 7-year-old child as a human shield has been identified as a woman named Genesse Moreno, who police said also identified as a man named Jeffrey Escalante.

Police said a woman in her early 30s entered Lakewood Church on Feb. 11 wearing a trench coat and backpack, armed with a long rifle, and began firing.

Before managing to kill anyone, the shooter was taken down by two off-duty officers, one a Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission agent and the other a Houston police officer, according to Houston Police Chief Troy Finner.

“I want to commend those officers. She had a long gun, and it could’ve been a lot worse, but they stepped up and they did their job,” Chief Finner said during a media briefing on the afternoon of Feb. 11.

An affidavit seeking a search warrant for a home in Conroe, Texas, about 40 miles north of Houston, identifies the shooter as 36-year-old Genesse Ivonne Moreno, according to the Associated Press. The warrant was released by the Montgomery County district attorney’s office.

Records cited by the Houston Chronicle and other media outlets, and which are circulating online, show that the shooter also identified as Jeffrey Escalante, who had a long criminal history, including assault, drug, and weapons charges.

Twitter, that featured a series of the shooter’s mugshots over the years.

“My information is biological female per the medical examiner,” he wrote in an earlier post. “They were looking at the body when brought in.”

Chris Hassig, commander of the Houston Police Department homicide division, said during a media briefing on Feb. 12 that investigators have identified the shooter as a 36-year-old Hispanic female named Genesse Moreno.

“There are some discrepancies [regarding the individual’s gender],” he said. “We do have reports she used multiple aliases, including Jeffrey Escalante. So she utilized both male and female names.”

However, Mr. Hassig said the investigation indicates that “she has been identified this entire time as female.”

He noted that the gun used by the shooter had a sticker with the word “Palestine” on it.

Child as Human Shield?

At the Feb. 12 briefing, Mr. Hassig said two people were injured in the incident, including the child who accompanied the shooter.

The other person injured was a 57-year-old man, who was shot in the hip or leg.

Mr. Hassig said the 7-year-old child who accompanied Ms. Moreno was struck in the head in the exchange of gunfire and remains in critical condition.

He said Ms. Moreno pulled up to the church in a vehicle with the child inside and then entered the building with the little boy and, after entering, “she immediately starts firing inside of the hallway.”

The two officers returned fire.

“Multiple shots are exchanged by all three,” Mr. Hassig said. “She eventually falls to the ground; the 7-year-old child falls to the ground as well from gunfire. One gunshot wound to the head.”

A Montgomery County District Attorney’s Office spokesperson was cited by the Houston Chronicle as saying on Feb. 12 that the 7-year-old was not expected to survive.

While it’s unclear who shot the child, Chief Finner blamed the shooter.

“That female, that suspect put that baby in danger,” he said during the Feb. 11 briefing. “I’m going to put that blame on her.”

Lakewood Church, which seats roughly 16,000 people, is led by pastor Joel Osteen.

In a statement posted on X, Mr. Osteen praised law enforcement for acting swiftly to neutralize the threat and said that he was “devastated” by the shooting.

“In the face of such darkness, we must hold onto our faith and remember evil will not prevail,” he said.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott issued a statement calling the shooting a “heinous act” and praising law enforcement for acting “quickly to respond to this tragedy.”

“Our hearts are with those impacted by today’s tragic shooting and the entire Lakewood Church community in Houston,” Mr. Abbott wrote.

A motive for the attack remains unclear.

Ms. Moreno’s posts on social media show a history of leftist politics, according to independent journalist Andy Ngo.

Alan Guity, a member of Lakewood Church since 1998, said he heard gunshots while resting inside the church’s sanctuary as his mother was working as an usher.

He told the Associated Press that he ran to his mother and that they both lay flat on the floor as the gunfire continued.

Mr. Guity told the outlet that he and his mother prayed and stayed on the floor for about five minutes until they were told it was safe to leave the building. He said that as he exited the building, he could see people crying and looking for loved ones. [source]

It seems more and more that mass shooters are transgender. Something strange is going on.

Tuesday, November 05, 2024

43 Democrats Vote Against Resolution Condemning Pro-Genocidal Phrase

From Townhall.com (Apr. 18):

On Tuesday afternoon, the House overwhelmingly passed in a bipartisan fashion a resolution from Rep. Anthony D'Esposito (R-NY) condemning the pro-genocidal phrase of "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free." The vote was not unanimous, though, as 44 members voted against the resolution, and one voted "present." Nine members did not vote.

From the House floor, D'Esposito called out those who would chant or spray such a phrase for what they are. "When anti-Semitic activists masquerading as merely pro-Palestinian spray paint this slogan on the site of the 1972 Munich massacre of Israeli Olympians, we know, and they know, exactly what they are communicating."

He also made clear that "this slogan communicates one thing and one thing only. It is not human rights, it is certainly not peace, it is the violent destruction of the State of Israel and the Jewish people that live within it!"

The "no" votes came from the usual suspects, Republican Rep. Thomas Massie (KY), as well as all of the Squad members, plus other Democrats. Rep. Madeline Dean (D-PA) was the one member who voted "present."

When people say "from the river to the sea," they are calling for the genocide of the Jewish State of Israel. Late last October, Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), appeared in a digital ad accusing President Joe Biden of genocide for what support he had dared to show Israel at that point following the October 7 attack from Hamas against our ally in the Middle East. The ad contained chants of "from the river to the sea" from pro-Hamas agitators in Dearborn, where Tlaib's district is located. She also shared it from her personal X account a few days later. In part for her pathetic defense of the phrase, Tlaib was censured by the House in early November of last year.

Not surprisingly, Tlaib also voted against the resolution on Tuesday. She has had a record against supporting Israel, even when it comes to the condemnation of the rape that Israeli women endured at the hands of Hamas. She was the only member to vote "present" when it comes to voting for such a bipartisan resolution in February.

In addition to Massie and Tlaib, the other votes against the resolution on Tuesday included Democratic Reps. Becca Balint (VT), Don Beyer (VA), Suzanne Bonamici (OR), Jamaal Bowman (NY), Cori Bush (MO), André Carson (IN), Greg Casar (TX), Judy Chu (CA), Yvette Clarke (NY), Danny Davis (IL), Mark DeSaulnier (CA), Debbie Dingell (MI), Veronica Escobar (TX), Valerine Foushee (NC), Maxwell Frost (FL), Chuy García (IL), Sylvia Garcia (TX), Robert Garcia (CA), Al Green (TX), Jared Huffman (CA), Jonathan Jackson (IL), Sara Jacobs (CA), Pramila Jayapal (WA), Hank Johnson (GA), Sydney Kamlager-Dove (CA), Barbara Lee (CA), Summer Lee (PA), Jim McGovern (MA), Gwen Moore (WI), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY), Ilhan Omar (MN), Chellie Pingree (ME), Mark Pocan (WI), Katie Porter (CA), Ayanna Pressley (MA), Delia Ramirez (IL), Jan Schakowsky (IL), Jill Tokuda (HI), Lauren Underwood (IL), Nyida Velázquez (NY), Maxine Waters (CA), and Bonnie Watson Coleman (NJ).

In a post, D'Esposito noted that the 44 who voted against his resolution "should be ashamed for promoting hate."

It's also worth highlighting Dean's "present" vote, though. Her post, sent from her official account over X, claimed the resolution was a waste of time. She also specifically blamed Republicans.

"Since the fall, I've been firm that 'From the River to the Sea' has no place in discussing long-term peace for Israel and Palestine," she claimed, despite rejecting an opportunity that would give her the chance to prove that. "But Republicans prefer games over bills to support our allies & humanitarian aid," she went on to claim. "We must be purposeful with our words — and also with our time."

This resolution was also a bipartisan one, though, having been co-sponsored by Democratic Reps. Josh Gottheimer (NJ) and Jared Moskowitz (FL), as the New York Post noted

The statement she included, from when the resolution was introduced last November, recognizing how the phrase "evokes fear for many, especially in the Jewish community," makes her refusal to vote for it even more significant. Her phrasing was curious in other ways, though. "While the phrase dates back to the 1960s and originally described freedom for Palestine, the phrase has now been co-opted by terrorist groups like Hamas to mean complete and total destruction of the Jewish state," she mentioned, which is a funny way of acknowledging that it means to wipe Israel off of the map.

It also came just a day after Dean refused to join 22 of her fellow Democrats who voted to censure Tlaib for defending "from the river to the sea" as "an aspirational call for freedom, human rights, and peaceful coexistence, not death, destruction, or hate." [source]

All those Dems that voted against the resolution are showing their true anti-Semitic feelings.

Monday, November 04, 2024

Biden’s agency bosses say Americans have ‘too much freedom’

From MSN.com:

The ‘swamp’ thinks you have it too good.

In an unusual look at federal agency managers, most believe Americans have too much freedom, and they back President Joe Biden's efforts to impose new regulations.

The bosses of federal agencies were asked in a new Napolitan Institute survey about the “individual freedom” Americans have, and 51% said they have “somewhat” to “far too much freedom.”

But just 16% of voters agreed and 57% believe the government has too much control over their lives.

Democratic “swamp” managers felt the country has too much freedom at the highest levels in the survey, at 68%. Among Republican federal agency chiefs, just 33% agreed.

But the partisan bureaucrats were more in agreement when it came to choosing who is best at deciding if new regulations are needed, found the polling outfit headed by Scott Rasmussen.

Said the analysis shared with Secrets on Friday, “Fifty-four percent (54%) of government managers say that if, after carefully researching an important issue, they determine that a regulation is needed, yet voters overwhelmingly oppose it, they should follow their research and issue the regulation anyway. This includes 49% of Republican government managers and 60% of Democrats,” it said.

Unlike Democrats and Republicans in America, and even on Capitol Hill, partisans that work in the swamp generally think like the other, according to Napolitan’s latest poll of America’s 1% elitists.

“On many topics, there is a disturbing level of bi-partisan agreement among federal government managers. Fifty-three percent (53%) of Republican government managers and 48% of Democrats believe the federal government should be allowed to censor speech that is posted on social media platforms. Forty-three percent (43%) of ‘Elites’ and just 16% of voters share this view. Seventy-four percent of Republican government managers and 79% of Democrats favor banning private ownership of guns. This view is shared by 77% of ‘Elites,’ but just 36% of voters,” said the analysis.

In his polling of elites, Rasmussen has found a stunning gap with Middle Americans, which could be a danger sign considering the outsize effect of elites, especially in the media.

Rasmussen said, “The ‘Elite’ 1% wield a tremendous amount of institutional power but are wildly out of touch with the nation they want to rule. Over the years they have built institutions and mechanisms of regulatory power that are immune to the checks and balances of elections. Worse still, these same ‘Elites’ own, operate, and control a large majority of media outlets, blocking out the true voice of the American people and broadcasting their own out of touch viewpoints.” [source]

Well, of course they would say that. Makes sense. Now, if the elites were asked if they have too much freedom they would say no, definitely not. Some elites might say they don't have enough.

Friday, November 01, 2024

Leibniz: A Remarkable Thinker Guided by God’s Authority

From Breakpoint.org (Nov. 14, 2022):

Today, November 14, marks the 306th anniversary of the death of Gottfried von Leibniz, a German polymath, committed Lutheran, and one of the most wide-ranging intellects in all of history.

Leibniz was a child prodigy. At 13, he composed 300 hexameters of Latin verse in one morning for an event at school. In 1661, at 14, he enrolled in the University of Leipzig, completing a bachelor’s and master’s degree by 17. The following year, he earned a bachelor of law degree, and a doctorate in philosophy the year after that. When, that same year, the university turned him down for a doctorate in law, likely because of his youth, he left Leipzig for the University of Altdorf, presented his dissertation, and was granted a license to practice law. This was before he turned twenty.

Despite a busy legal and diplomatic career, Leibniz remained active in scholarly pursuits. Like many intellectuals of his time, Leibniz was engaged with Enlightenment thought and active in a variety of fields. As a thinker, he stands out for not only grasping the depths of contemporary philosophy but also contributing to them, all while remaining dependent on the authority of Scripture and the Church.

Leibniz is best remembered as one of the discoverers of calculus, along with Isaac Newton. The two developed this mathematical field independently. Though Newton more often receives the greater credit for his famous work, Principia Mathematica, it’s Leibniz’s notations that their successors have often found to be most precise.

Leibniz anticipated Einstein by arguing that space, time, and motion were relative. In fact, Einstein referred to himself as a Leibnizian and argued that Leibniz’s views would have won out over Newton’s had the technology of the day been more advanced.

Speaking of technology, Leibniz dreamed up a primitive computer that used marbles, punch cards, and binary numbers to make advanced calculations. He further described a machine that could, theoretically, do integral and differential calculus. In all these ways, he anticipated modern computers and even helped lay the foundation for their development.

Leibniz is also well known for his work in philosophy, particularly in relation to theology. He argued that since both reason and faith are gifts of God, the two fields, if properly understood, could not be contradictory.

Leibniz also argued for what came to be called “Optimism,” the idea that any flaw of our world must also exist in others. Quite unfairly, the French philosopher Voltaire misrepresented this idea in his famous book, Candide, as though it meant that everything is for the best in this, the best of all possible worlds. This is just close enough to Leibniz’s argument to sound plausible while at the same time being totally misleading about his philosophy.

Close to Leibniz’s heart was the reconciliation of Lutherans and Catholics. He had been born just two years before the end of the Thirty Years’ War, which was fought between Catholics and Protestants, primarily in Germany. Though a devout Lutheran, he held a deep appreciation of Catholic thought, and partly due to work toward reconciliation, he won the respect of high-level Catholics. He was even offered the prestigious position of curator of the Vatican library. To take it, Leibniz would have had to convert to Catholicism, and he didn’t want to “send a message” that Catholicism was better.

Leibniz’s work is so far reaching it is impossible to fully summarize in a brief commentary. In addition to his work in philosophy and theology, politics, law, history, and philology, he laid the foundation for modern analytic and linguistic philosophy and logic. He also anticipated developments in probability theory, computer science, geology, biology and medicine, linguistics, and psychology. The various elements within what was an incredible range of work were integrated together by his Christian faith, anchored in his belief in the Trinitarian Christian God. [source]

Interesting. Leibniz is definitely a polymath. His primitive computer is interesting.