California puts legal racial and sexual discrimination on the ballot

California Proposition 209:

The ballot measure would repeal Proposition 209 (1996), which added the following provision to the California Constitution: “The State shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.”

Just to make this completely clear, from the same web page:

A “yes” vote supports this constitutional amendment to repeal Proposition 209 (1996), which prohibited the state from discriminating against or granting preferential treatment to persons on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in public employment, public education, and public contracting.

A “no” vote opposes this constitutional amendment, thereby keeping Proposition 209 (1996), which prohibited the state from discriminating against or granting preferential treatment to persons on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in public employment, public education, and public contracting.

And from Steve Miller @SteveMillerOC:

The California legislature has now voted to strike these words from our state constitution:

“The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin.”

I’m speechless.

We live in interesting times.

Quote of the day—Mike Sievert, CEO, T-Mobile, @MikeSievert

We are making changes in the following areas to increase opportunities for People of Color across our business.

  • We are diversifying our pipeline of talent. 
  • We are funding new scholarship programs and launching an apprenticeship program for People of Color.
  • We are changing and expanding our talent development programs to ensure more opportunities and retention for Employees of Color to strengthen our pipeline of talent up to the executive leadership level.

Mike Sievert, CEO, T-Mobile, @MikeSievert
June 2020
Destroying Western Civilization’s History, one guilt trip on sin at a time.
[Some text has been removed for clarity. Please read the complete text at the link above. There is a lot more stuff of interest.

The post, written by howlingpuffin, outlines a set of concerns. I have a completely different set of concerns.

Did Sievert run this past the legal department? How in the world can it pass muster with either Federal or Washington State law?

For example, here are a few highlights from Federal law (emphasis added):

Prohibited Employment Policies/Practices

Under the laws enforced by EEOC, it is illegal to discriminate against someone (applicant or employee) because of that person’s race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity, sexual orientation, and pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information. It is also illegal to retaliate against a person because he or she complained about discrimination, filed a charge of discrimination, or participated in an employment discrimination investigation or lawsuit.

The law forbids discrimination in every aspect of employment.

How does “making changes … to increase opportunities for People of Color“ or “funding new scholarship programs and launching an apprenticeship program for People of Color” not violate the law? If the company announced they were:

“making changes … to increase opportunities for white people“

… funding new scholarship programs and launching an apprenticeship program for white people.

Would this be legal? Isn’t this exactly what the law prohibits?

Okay. Let’s, just for the moment, ignore the illegal on the face of it aspect of these corporate changes.

Suppose neither the Federal government nor Washington State prosecute T-Mobile for this. Then, next year some dirt bag executive at some company creates a policy favoring white people in a nearly identical manner. Doesn’t the dirt bag have an air-tight defense in that they are not getting equal treatment under the law because T-Mobile wasn’t prosecuted?

Okay. Let’s pretend, for the moment, the legal aspects of this simply do not matter.

It appears this corporate initiative was in response to the protests, riots, and looting in the wake of the death of George Floyd:

These past few weeks have been both historic and heart-wrenching, as the protests for greater racial justice in the wake of George Floyd’s murder erupt all around the world.  As I shared in my statement last week to customers, employees, and shareholders, T-Mobile stands in solidarity with the Black Community and behind our belief that Black Lives Matter.

I get it that T-Mobile stores have been targets of rioters and looters. I get it that at first thought appeasing the beast seems like a good idea. But it doesn’t work in the long (or even medium) term.

Mr. Sievert, please look at the incentives you have created. Which is greater the incentive? To stop the looting and vandalism because T-Mobile sent some money and potential employment opportunities in the general direction of the looters? Or continue the criminal activity because it gives them attention, power, and a sense of satisfaction plus money and potential employment opportunities every time they do it? Haven’t you ever heard you should never appease terrorists or pay a blackmailer or extortionist?

Suppose we even discount the probability this was about appeasement. Hasn’t he or anyone on his staff heard of The Tyranny of Low Expectations?

Low expectations are one of the most subtle yet devastatingly effective forms of sabotage we can do to others and ourselves. Low expectations often masquerade as kindness yet they are the cruelest cuts because they deny an individual or an organization its opportunity for greatness.

By passing low expectations off as being nice or kind under the guise of going easy on someone, low expectations perpetuate another insidious myth: That discipline is mean. Discipline is simply a mental tool, a form of training that lets you develop the skills and abilities to make your life better. Like any tool, discipline can and has been misused at times but in general, discipline is an incredibly valuable, frequently overlooked tool to create extraordinary value in your life.

Low expectations often involve mental laziness on both sides of the equation. Holding someone (or yourself) accountable is a LOT of hard work. It is much easier to just slide by. Easier that is until the time of testing comes and those who are not prepared diligently fail miserably.

Maybe there is some “3-D Chess” game being played here. Maybe the legal department explicitly told them to clearly make the policy illegal beyond any shadow of doubt. Then later they can say they have to cancel the program because of “unexpected” legal issues.

It will take the Feds and Washington State a few weeks or months to tell them what they are doing is illegal and in response they can “regretfully announce the cancellation of their well intentioned initiative” and it’s all the fault of the evil Trump administration (or some such thing). By that time emotions will have subsided and the vandalism and looting will have stopped. T-Mobile will have gotten all the benefits of the illegal activity with almost none of the costs.

I don’t know what’s going on here. I just know I don’t like any possible scenario I can imagine here. I don’t like the illegal employment policies. I don’t like the appeasement. I don’t like the incentives of low expectations. I don’t like the possibility of it being a clever game of false appeasement.

I think this is on the same moral level as the terrorists, looters, and vandals. It’s despicable.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Tirno

To paraphrase Milton Friedman, your life, liberty and property are not protected when the right people are elected to office to do the right thing. Your life, liberty and property are safe when the wrong people are elected, but cannot avoid doing the right thing.

The law is badly formed at this time because there are more and more restrictive law that bear on the citizen, and less and less constrains on those that exercise the publicly authorized powers. This needs to be inverted: the laws bearing on the individual need to be reduced, also reducing and constraining the scope of government. Laws concerning malum in se should be as clear and uncontrovertible as possible. Laws of the malum prohibitum type should be reduced to the minimum scope possible, and none should be felonies.

At the same time, the constraints on how, when and what manner an individual can wield a public power should be quite constrained, and severe penalties for misuse, abuse or use in private interest, and those restrictions vigorously enforced.

Tirno
June 24, 2020
Comment to Quote of the day—Steve Mylett
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Rhode Island to change state name

Via email from Paul K.:

Democrat Gov of Rhode Island Moves To Change State Name with Executive Order

The smallest state in the union has found itself in the crosshairs of the ongoing culture wars, as Rhode Island’s Democratic governor, Gina Raimondo, removed part of the state’s official name from several documents via executive order Monday.

While the Ocean State is known to the rest of the country simply as Rhode Island, it has had the official name “the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations” since it became the 13th state in 1790.

Detractors of the name argue that the word “Plantations” invokes the legacy of slavery. As demonstrated by her decision to sign an executive order to eliminate part of the state’s name from government documents, the governor agrees with that analysis.

Apparently these people don’t realize the enormity of what they are doing by attempting to appease the terrorists. The simple version is:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Martin Niemöller
First they came …

But it’s far more complicated than that. There is a deadly psychology that goes along with this. Sociopaths have muted emotion responses.

The thugs and terrorists who beat people because of their skin color or political persuasion and vandalize buildings and monuments and loot stores get a thrill they don’t get and perhaps have never experienced before in their lives. The high they get from this requires greater and greater levels of violence and domination of others to recreate.

Read The Gulag Archipelago, 1918-1956: An Experiment in Literary Investigation, and/or Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin, and/or Hitler’s Willing Executioners.And read my blog post from nearly 13 years ago: Drawing a line in the sand.

What these history lessons demonstrate is that there exist people who, once they “taste blood”, are never satisfied. They will not stop when they accomplish what you might think, and even they think, is their end goal. As they acquire more and more power without significant resistance there comes a point where they become genocidal and murder millions. It feeds that hunger for power and emotional high which can no longer be achieved with mere rioting, looting, and beatings of innocent people.

As they run out of victims the “purity test scores” to avoid death become higher and higher. Those who were once favored supporters become victims to the almost unstoppable murderous thugs. They “eat their own” after leaving rivers of blood in their wake.

These people must be stopped now. They must not be appeased.

We now return to our regularly scheduled program

TheLittleThingInYourHead

After the previous lightness I decided we needed a gentle transition back to the serious business at hand.

It’s time we stopped “biting our tongue” out of politeness. Hatred, aggression, and criminal violence must no longer be tolerated. It’s time for “that little thing inside your head” to be told, “It’s time to be honest, courageous, and do the right thing rather than just trying to avoid trouble.” We are already in trouble. Extremely serious trouble. We are facing the end of civilization. We are facing budding tyrants who would enslave everyone in a Marxist systems of governments. We know Marxist governments murdered 100’s of millions in the 20th Century.

Our technology is better now than it was during the great 20th Century democides. Our surveillance system of cameras, location tracking, and communication monitoring combined with databases of almost unimaginable scale and detail and artificial intelligence enable an Orwellian dystopian future of tremendous power:

There will be no loyalty, except loyalty to the party, but always there will be the intoxication of power. Always at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever. The moral to be drawn from this dangerous nightmare situation is a simple one. Don’t let it happen. It depends on you.

Harsh but fair

More lightness after all the darkness.

Via email from Rolf who found it here:

HealthCareRight

Harsh. But fair.

Quote of the day—Juanita Broaddrick @atensnut

[A little bit of lightness after so much darkness the last few days.

There would be a long line for that opportunity. But, I’m pretty sure nearly everyone would let Ms. Broaddrick take whatever position she wanted in that effort.—Joe]

Quote of the day—U.S. Attorneys @USAttorneys

The #FirstAmendment does not permit people to use a protest as cover to commit arson, destroy property or incite violence. Any protestors who cross this line should know that we will use every tool at our disposal to find you and prosecute you.

U.S. Attorneys @USAttorneys
Tweeted on June 3, 2020
[I know it takes time. But I’ll believe it when a non-trivial number of the terrorists are successfully prosecuted and receive non-trivial sentences.

My trust in the government is at an all time low.—Joe]

Interesting observations

It could be because the people who utilize this behavior are evil and deliberately create these narratives. Or it could be they have mental issues and, as people with certain personality disorders do, create no-win situations because in their own minds “it is never their fault”:

IfAWhitePerson

In any case, people need to stand up to such people.

Via Paterson Love???? @BLACKLIFESMAGA.

False flag operation?

If true, this is very odd:

The withdrawal of $475,000 in cash by the man who killed 22 Nova Scotians in April matches the method the RCMP uses to send money to confidential informants and agents, sources say.

See also here and here.

Via email from Rolf.

Quote of the day—Lawrence Keane

These four associate justices could have voted to hear any of the 10 petitions, but not all four chose to bring the cases before the court. That’s telling in as much as it is disturbing. The fact that four justices who complained the court needed to hear Second Amendment cases passed on 10 chances to do so tells us much about the court’s “swing vote.”

One or more of the conservative justices are in essence telling us Roberts cannot be trusted to interpret the Second Amendment as written, or faithfully apply the precedents of the Heller and McDonald decisions. He ruled in the 5-4 majority in both those cases.

…

It’s going to take a new justice to stand up for American rights. The next president and Senate will determine whether the Second Amendment will mean anything in America or whether it will continue to be treated as a constitutional orphan.

Lawrence Keane
June 17, 2020
SCOTUS Gun Case Denials Signal Conservative Justices Don’t Trust Roberts With The Second Amendment
[Via email from Rolf.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)

[This is my only hope, and a slim one at that, for a semi-peaceful resolution to our current situation.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Frank J.

We don’t need democracy, we just need to trust angry mobs. Who can ever get the biggest mob and makes them the angriest should make the rules.

Frank J.
Random Thoughts: JK Rowling and Angry Screaming
June 17, 2020
[SCOTUS dropping (almost) all of the 2nd Amendment cases on Monday made the truth of the quote above all the more clear.

Monday was extremely depressing for me. I’ve been donating thousands of dollars per year to SAF and FPC to pursue these court cases, I write letters to representatives, I follow the rules, and urge others to do the same. And what are people going to learn from current events?

The lesson to many is going to be exceptionally clear. You are a fool if you follow the rules. The proper way to get your way, no matter how delusional you are, is to riot and loot. This will not end well. And all I will be able to do is say I tried and failed.

I still have a tiny sliver of hope. And that is Trump wins in landside this November, Republicans continue their hold in the Senate and another 2nd Amendment supporting SCOTUS justice or two are appointed by the end of 2024. By that time I will have been fighting this fight and following the rules for 30 years.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Firearms Policy Coalition

The ATF exists exclusively to threaten Americans with the violent enforcement of unconstitutional laws. We believe firmly that the ATF should be abolished, and that all of the laws it was created to enforce should be repealed or struck down. The NFA, GCA, and every other law that threatens the People with disarmament and prison for exercising human rights are leprotic reminders of prior generations’ sins against our Republic, founding principles, constitutional guarantees, and human liberty itself. The sooner they are eliminated, the better.

Firearms Policy Coalition
FPC Statement on Possible ATF Action to Ban More Legal Products
June 17, 2020
[The ATF should be defunded long before local law enforcement. But that’s not the way it works.

Read The Gulag Archipelago, Volume 2: An Experiment in Literary Investigation, 1918-1956. It is trivial to draw the parallels to what we are going through today:

It’s a jungle, the consciousness of an orthodox Communist. It’s impossible-to make sense of it.

Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
Page 347.

Change some names and the location and you could believe Solzhenitsyn was talking about Baca in Albuquerque.

The evidence is extremely clear that we are traversing a track parallel to Solzhenitsyn’s dystopia. As he pointed out the criminal class is the natural ally of the communist. Hence they demand the abolishment of the police. Simultaneously the political left demands we give up our guns. Obviously, these acts are to protect their criminal allies.—Joe]

Legal question

Rolf has a legal question. Here is the essence of it:

Within the case West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, there is the following passage:

If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.

If I’m reading this correctly, that means that any school district or other government institution that requires you to sign or write a commitment to “diversity” is violating the law. Any legal-beagles out there who can confirm or reject my understanding?

Can anyone here enlighten him?

Quote of the day—Paul Vander Klay

Often these systems include human beings and they a lot of their agency from these agents that materialists recognize. Markets are such a thing. Markets create “an invisible hand” as Adam Smith called it.

Now it is easy to see how markets can create inequalities that CRT will see as racists (defined by consequences). Cultural elements of the majority population will achieve market share while comparative elements of the minority may not. Viola… “systemic racism”

Paul Vander Klay
Posted on June 16, 2020
[CRT refers to “Critical Race Theory”.

It appears that Klay is claiming that in any system an unequal outcome between people of different races is conclusive proof of a racist system.

If true, then Klay must also conclude our cultural is racist because black men murder other black men at a higher rate than white men murder other white men.

Via Scott Adams @ScottAdamsSays who says:

One of my rules-of-thumb is that anything that can’t be explained with normal words is bullshit.

I think Klay has crap for brains.—Joe]

Insanity?

Via email from Jeremy N. we have this:

In the hours leading up to the violence Monday, protesters faced off with members of an armed group that calls itself the New Mexico Civil Guard and counterprotesters toting “All lives matter” signs.

One group sought to tear down a monument to Oñate, a 16th-century despot who massacred indigenous people. The other set out as self-designated protectors of the statue, creating a heavily armed presence at the park in Albuquerque’s historic Old Town. Aside from a few scuffles over signs near the monument, the protest had largely been peaceful, although tense at times.

Then a white man in a blue T-shirt appeared to rile the crowd, according to video obtained by KOB4. People erupted in shouts, and the man took a few steps back.

The man in the blue shirt, identified as Baca, seemed to be protecting the statue in a bystander’s video, police said in the criminal complaint. An undercover police detective saw protesters pursuing Baca, who used pepper spray on them, the complaint adds. “The group appeared to maliciously pursue” Baca, hitting him with their hands and legs, police state.

In the video obtained by KOB4, a masked protester swung what police identified as a longboard and struck Baca in the shoulder. The man backpedaled out of the crowd but continued to exchange shouts with protesters.

Someone in the video encouraged people to follow the man and get his license plate number. Several people followed him, and one tackled him to the ground.

According to the complaint, Williams – the gunshot victim, dressed in black – can be seen on bystander video retrieving the board and swinging it toward Baca’s upper body and head. Then, the complaint says, Baca fired several shots. The crowd scattered.

Baca was arrested. Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller and the governor said:

The shooting tonight was a tragic, outrageous and unacceptable act of violence and it has no place in our city,” Keller said in a statement. “Our diverse community will not be deterred by acts meant to divide or silence us. Our hearts go out [to] the victim, his family and witnesses whose lives were needlessly threatened tonight.”

State leaders have denounced the armed civilian group that gathered in the area. Some of its members were taken into custody, police said. The group says it is not affiliated with the shooting suspect.

“The heavily armed individuals who flaunted themselves at the protest, calling themselves a ‘civil guard,’ were there for one reason: To menace protesters, to present an unsanctioned show of unregulated force,” New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, a Democrat, said in a statement. “To menace the people of New Mexico with weaponry – with an implicit threat of violence – is on its face unacceptable; that violence did indeed occur is unspeakable.”

The article describes the person shot as the victim. I can find nothing in the article that indicates he was anything other than the perpetrator. Everything indicates Baca had a valid reason to fear for his life, used non-lethal force without success then as a last resort used lethal force. So why is he considered the bad guy?

If “protestors” can attack, maim, and potentially kill those who stand in the way of their destruction something other than peaceful solutions will be implemented.

This is insanity.

Update: I understand now. We are reliving The Gulag Archipelago. Criminals are the natural allies of the political left.

Quote of the day—Cesia Baires

It’s not something that I would want, but we’ve seen how, for at least the first couple days, we were left alone. There were no cops that would come around. So what are we to do? Just stand there and do nothing?

Cesia Baires
June 3, 2020
Armed Neighborhood Groups Form In The Absence Of Police Protection
[Via email from Rolf.

One of the biggest problems that I see with the situation is the reduced force continuum. They can’t make a citizens arrest when there are dozens or hundreds of rioters and looters. The options are:

  • Presence. Be visible, observe and record the actions of the terrorists.
  • Verbally warn the bad guys.
  • Under certain circumstances use pepper spray.
  • Warning shots.
  • Shoot to stop.

When the terrorist are breaking windows and doors and looting can you legally shoot to stop them? If not, then the terrorists win. They will just walk through the force continuum available to you and it’s game over.

Email from Paul K. a few days ago:

My understanding is that, with rare exceptions, deadly force is unfortunately no longer permitted in defense of property.

It turns out that it depends upon the state. Here are a few links:

Paul’s assertion does not appear to hold in Idaho and Washington.—Joe]

The story of how CHAZ was created

Read the whole thing. This is just how the terrorists won the last battle and created CHAZ.

A Shocking Eye-Witness Account Of What’s Really Happening During The Seattle Riots

SPD must have had some really good intelligence, or they were anticipating Antifa’s response from Durkan’s concessions. They installed permanent metal barriers at the intersection of 11th St and Pine St. A second line of barriers was also in place in between us and the initial barriers at the intersection. Everything kicked off per usual, with the “protesters” trying to provoke us with their words, umbrellas, and signs. This time, though, we didn’t give them an audience. We all stayed inside the East Precinct, as they did their normal agitation methods at the first barrier.

Suddenly, we were told the “protesters” began jumping the first barrier, heading towards us. We rushed out to the road and staged roughly 1/3 of the way up the block from the intersection of 11th St and Pine St, creating a large safety buffer between us and the “protesters” who had jumped the fencing. They were warned to return over the barrier, which they didn’t. They then began disassembling the barrier. They were warned not to disassemble the barrier, but they continued. They then walked towards us. They were warned to stop, but they didn’t. They continued walking towards us. They were warned again, but they continued. They reached the second barrier.

We later found out they brought a plasma cutter (blow torch) to cut through the barriers… (not that they are the provocateurs, or are planning to escalate, right?!)

They began cutting barriers so they could be used as weapons against us. They were warned about cutting the barriers, but they continued. They then picked up the second barriers and began walking towards us. They were warned again not to move the barriers, but they continued. They then jumped the last barrier. They were warned again to turn back, but they continued towards us. As they continued to approach, they were continuously warned. HOW MANY WARNINGS DOES IT TAKE?!

It started to get dark… The portable lights were turned on. The “protesters” then produced foil covered signs and were trying to blind the Officers and Guardsman. They were warned again, but they continued. They then threw a glass bottle at a Guardsman, the glass bottle shattering on a riot shield. They were warned again, but they just booed at us. They continued to walk slowly towards the Officers until they were within 2-3 feet. They then started using their umbrella’s and other objects, putting them in the face of the Officers. They were warned again to not do that.

As expected, objects were then thrown at us. They amplified things, this time. Instead of throwing glass bottles containing urine and other bodily fluids, they began throwing glass bottles full of gasoline. They then lit and threw fireworks at us, trying to light us on fire.

FINALLY the SPD Administration gave the green light and LESS LETHAL forms of riot control were deployed. As objects were continued to be thrown at us, SWAT finally deployed CS gas. The “protesters” proceeded to start vandalizing everything in the area. They smashed business windows, burned U.S. flags, lit dumpsters and other items on fire, and threw things on fire at us. We pushed them back in all directions about half a block but for some reason, we stopped pushing them back. They then regrouped and continued to vandalize the area with spray paint, breaking windows, and lighting things on fire. Around that time, the Guard was pulled back and we left East Precinct.

My big takeaway from this is also an observation made by, IIRC, the Bellevue Chief of Police after the Bellevue looting a couple weeks ago. The terrorists are well organized. This is not some impulsive, spontaneous, outburst of rage.

The organizers, in particular, must be tracked down and punished.

CHAZ characterization

Via daughter Kim:

123_1

From my visit there this seems somewhat overstated. But not by much.