Birthright Citizenship Will Ultimately Be Decided By the Supreme Court

 Ever since Trump signed his executive order ending birthright citizenship for illegal aliens, the Left has been going crazy.  Several states have sued trying to stop him.  Now, COL Allen West has weighed in on the issue at Townhall.com giving us a black man's interpretation of the 14th Amendment. Naturally, West thinks the Amendment was designed to grant citizenship to recently freed slaves, not to people who illegally cross our borders and drop a baby. The heart of West's argument is this:

I find it very perplexing, and hypocritical, that the progressive socialist left, aka the Democrat party, is so interested in the 14th Amendment. Back when it was being created and debated, Democrats were staunchly against the 14th Amendment. Matter of fact, they were against the preceding 13th Amendment which ended slavery in America. These two Amendments, along with the 15th, were legislative endeavors, policies, sought out by Republicans. Yes, the same Republican Party that was established for one single issue, the abolition of slavery. I believe that we should have a strict originalist interpretation of the Constitution, not this living constitution nonsense leftists seek to impart. And they do so for a very specific reason, and that is to manipulate the Constitution to fit into their designed ideological agenda.

And such is the case with the 14th Amendment, especially Section 1.

The 14th Amendment's original intent was to grant citizenship to the Blacks in America who had just been made free by the 13th Amendment. Remember again that the Democrats did not support either of these amendments then, and according to Joe Biden, “No amendment to the Constitution is absolute.” This is the same Joe Biden who delivered the eulogy for a known Klansman, his Senate Democrat colleague Robert Byrd.

...snip...

Now we have these delusional leftists who want us to believe, and accept their “living interpretation” that anyone can just waltz across the border into our Republic and be a citizen. They want us to believe that we have no sovereign borders and citizenship in these United States is a privilege to all, and even a birthright. For me, as an American Black man who has had generations in his family serve this Nation in uniform, and in combat, this is offensive, condescending. The leftists are taking something intended to right a wrong, which they created and did not support, and now manipulating it to the advantage of those entering our Country illegally. And this is being done all to the detriment of the American Black community, hence the protest in places like Chicago.

Now, many experts agree with West, but the question will wind up in the Supreme Court. So what any of the so-called "experts" think is irrelevant. Once again the meaning of the law is being decided by 9 men in black robes. *Sigh*.

The Ultimate Goal of the "Shall Issue" Concealed Carry Movement

 Jeff Charles at Townhall.com has an article entitled Thomas Massie Introduces Measure That Would Be A Game Changer for Gun Rights. The bill introduced by Massie would allow Constitutional Carry nationwide. Given that all the Democrat/socialists/communists would vote against this on general principle, and there are a number of Republicans from anti-gun states, I suspect this is going nowhere. But one hopes that something in the way of nationwide carry can be achieved.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) announced on Thursday that he is introducing the National Constitutional Carry Act, which would protect the right to keep and bear arms in all areas of the country.

If passed, this legislation would be a tremendous win for the Second Amendment.

"Massie's legislation is composed of two major provisions. The first provision prohibits any state or political subdivision from imposing criminal or civil penalties on eligible individuals carrying firearms in public. The second provision invalidates any existing state or local laws, statutes, regulations, or local restrictions that criminalize, penalize, or otherwise dissuade the carrying of firearms in public. In addition to covering all fifty states, H.R. 645 includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and other territories of the United States within its scope to ensure that residents of all U.S. jurisdictions enjoy consistent protection of their Second Amendment rights."

I am sure the first thing that states will object to is the potential loss of the revenue stream that concealed carry licenses provide. Sheriffs in North Carolina get $75 bucks every five years for the privilege of carrying a firearm concealed in public. Hell, the sheriffs fought tooth and nail to maintain the $5 dollar permission slip to purchase a firearm. I doubt this $5 fee represents a significant revenue stream, but they defended it as if it was all they got. So, I am sure they will fight this too.

Still, we should watch this and applaud each step the bill makes toward passage. This represents the ultimate goal of the "shall issue" concealed carry movement.  Please go read the whole article.

California Wildfires Negate All Their Supposed "Savings" of Greenhouse Gases

 I noted several days ago in a post here entitled Do Californians Deserve What They Get From Their Leaders? that the wildfires are putting out more greenhouse gases than decades of so called "savings" from the EVs. Now D. Parker at the American Thinker has just reiterated the point with additional data in a post entitled It must be climate change.

First, it was global cooling, then global warming, until they came up with the climate crisis wording that never had to change.

Sometimes, the phrasing is all they need. Back in the 1970s, the ominous threat was from global cooling until things started warming up. Then, they turned on a dine to make it global warming. And that’s still the operative propaganda phrase when the weather is going in the right direction. But then the environmental activists came up with the phrase for the crisis that made it unfalsifiable -- climate change.

So, when there’s a cold snap -- it’s climate change. A heat wave -- climate change. Snow -- well, you get the picture. The funny thing is that for most normal folks, this is becoming a joke, to the point that people started referring to the arsonists accused of starting some of the LA wildfires as ‘climate change.’

...snip...

The state’s record-breaking 2020 fire season, which saw more than 4 million acres burn, spewed almost twice the tonnage of greenhouse gases as the total amount of carbon dioxide reductions made since 2003, according to a study published recently in the journal Environmental Pollution.

Not to mention the fact that others around the globe are failing to curb their emissions, negating the point of all the steps demanded by the environmental activists that only served to destroy our economic future.

Please go and read Parker's post. He packs a lot of information into his post with excellent use of the hyperlink function. Indeed, the use of hyperlink was what attracted me to the internet in the first place. Rather than footnoting articles, one could connect directly to the article in question whether it be a new article or a scientific paper.

On a personal note, I was appalled to learn that the fires are now in Ventura County as well.  We lived in Camarillo for several years, while working at the Pacific Missile Test Center at Point Mugu, California.  Mrs PolyKahr was born and raised in Oceanside, California.

Journalist Insults the Gun Culture

 Tom Knighton has it right at Bearing Arms when he notes with respect to a recnt story out of Chicago that This Is Not Gun Culture. It is actually the opposite of gun culture. It is in fact gun barbarism.

The actual "gun culture" includes things like the Appleseed Project, the International Practical Shooting Confederation, the International Defensive Pistol Association, along with the National Rifle Association and many state organizations like Grass Roots North Carolina. It includes the many responsible hunters, concealed carriers, and sport shooters who constantly train to maintain the skills required to be responsible gun owners. And of course, it includes the many trainers and writers for various publications. The gun culture is NOT the problem with violence in Chicago, or anywhere else.

Speaking of violence committed with guns, the WBBM News Radio article embedded in the above article calls this "gun violence." The use of "gun violence" is a deceptive way to turn the reader's attention to the tool used rather than the true cause of the violence, the miscreant himself. Journalists don't use "fist violence" when writing about someone beating another with fists. They don't write about "knife violence" when discussing a stabbing. For all of these other crimes the writers place the blame where it belongs, on the criminal. It is only when the criminal uses a gun that they then write or talk about "gun violence." But the use of the term "gun violence" is a illegitimate as the use of any other tool to commit violence.

We here at Bearing Arms, as well as the other gun-related sites, are part of the gun culture of the United States, along with our readers. We value the Second Amendment and the freedoms that come from having the right to keep and bear arms and a nation that more or less respects that right.

We are the gun culture.

Unfortunately, a lot of people don't seem to understand what is and what isn't "gun culture."

This was made painfully obvious in a recent story out of Chicago.

Cherie Animashaun, 20, says her first memory of the danger of guns was when her mother wouldn't let her go to her favorite park anymore.

"I remember in kindergarten, I used to go to the park behind my house in Evanston, and, one day, my mom told me we couldn't go to the park anymore. She said it wasn't safe,” says Animashaun.

The Cornell University student and Evanston Township High School graduate didn't even know what a gun was, but she remembers being afraid.

"In first grade, you don't know the depth of the issue, but you can feel it,” Animashaun tells WBBM. “ I remember being terrified. For the most people I know, seeing guns growing up is almost a prerequisite to this generation."

For her and her peers, guns and gun violence have become the norm, something Nina Vinik soon realized.

"I've been working to reduce gun violence for the last 20 years,” Vinik says. “I was a young housing lawyer in the 90s, and a lot of my clients lived on the West and South Sides of the city. Gun violence was at its peak in the city, and West and South Side neighborhoods are the hardest hit by gun violence. I was tired of reading about violence happening on the blocks where my clients lived. It led me to see the ability to feel safe in our homes and communities as just a threshold issue for the ability for kids and families to thrive."

Project Unloaded, a 501(c)(3) organization, was born in 2022 after the rise of school shootings. One in particular sparked Vinik's activism.

...

“That can make a difference in connecting with their peers in sending the message that gun violence is preventable, guns do not make us safer, and that little by little, by sharing those messages far and wide, we can chip away at the gun culture that is driving so much violence."

Please read all of Knighton's article. I don't know if these people intend to be insulting, or if it is just ignorance, but they insult everyone who is legitimately a part of the gun culture.

Not "Trust But Verify" But Instead "Verify Before Trusting"

 Many of my friends were excited yesterday at the inauguration of President Trump.  Now, I have to admit to voting for Trump not only because he did advance conservative causes during his first term, but because no sane person wanted Kamala as president.  But I have to also remain cautious about trusting the Trump administration to do the right things.  One of the things I think needs careful scrutiny is the reaction of the various "BIGs," business, tech, banks, pharmaceuticals, food etc.

At Townhall.com today, Seton Motley expresses my concerns in an article entitled please Don't Inaugurate Big Biz's Sudden Political Switch.

The Big Banks, Big Investment, Big Tech…ALL the Bigs? Are all of a sudden Donald Trump’s bestest buddies. And we’re supposed to pretend they didn’t spend the last decade doing EVERYTHING they could to ruin him.

Big Biz has for DECADES had a REALLY good thing going in DC. For the last half-century-plus, they’ve made tens of billions of dollars in political contributions. And received tens of trillions of dollars in government cronyism. It’s undoubtedly the greatest Return On Investment (ROI) in human history.

Trump again threatens to threaten all that. Well, Big Biz tried being his enemy last time. And it got them nowhere. But they now know even better Trump is keenly susceptible to flattery. So they’re now, SUDDENLY, trying to kill him with kindness.

These are the guys who sold us gay and lesbian products, who sold us transgender products, who are busy buying up Americans houses and then renting them back to us, who tried to sell us on eating bugs, and on and on. These are the guys who outsourced American jobs to our enemy China.  These are the men and women who tried to sell the idea that Bud Light buyers were interested in having a man dressed as a woman to advertise their product while insulting actual men.  These are the guys who gave us mRNA "vaccines" that didn't actually vaccinate anybody.

These people should not be trusted for one minute.

I hope that Trump sees these "BIGs" for what they are. I certainly think Trump's agenda items are what will make America stronger, and I certainly applaud Trump's newly expressed belief in God. What I think mostly is that we must remain eternally vigilant. We cannot, as conservatives and Christians just turn it over to someone who says the right things. As we have seen, even the Pope can be corrupt. Please read the whole article and remember to verify before you trust.

Do Californians Deserve What They Get from Their Leaders

 Mike McDaniel has a post today entitled California: electric vehicles are on fire! that discusses the impracticality of EVs when one most needs a vehicle.

Gavin Newsom, possibly the soon-to-be recalled Governor of California, banned internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles in California by 20235, ostensibly to reduce pollution. That pipe dream went up in smoke with the wildfires that are still consuming much of the LA area. Whatever pollution reduction that lunatic law might have achieved was lost with Newsom’s equally deranged refusal to do anything to prevent wildfires, including ensuring enough water to fight them.

Something no one has mentioned yet is that the Los Angeles fires have put far more greenhouse gas into the atmosphere than decades of supposed savings by using EVs. Once one factors in disasters like wildfires and volcanos one realizes that man's tiny addition to the greenhouse gases is insignificant. Moreover, if man disappeared from the face of the earth, it would make no difference to the earth's climate, and it is the height of hubris to believe otherwise.

McDaniel points out a number of problems with EVs that make them impractical for the average American. They are expensive to purchase and expensive to repair. Their tires wear out quickly because of the extra weight of the vehicles. Replacing the batteries is also expensive, effectively rendering a vehicle which needs a replacement battery a total loss. Because our electrical grid is already marginal at best, when you most need to charge an EV, you won't be able to do so. And then there are the fires. We have long known that lithium batteries are prone to fire, but the size of vehicle batteries make for spectacular fires.

Even better, EV batteries tend to burst into flame because they contain substances that must be kept separate. Pinholes cause instant flames and even explosions. Once ignited, they produce their own oxygen to fuel the flames, are prone to reignite and all firefighters can do is pour thousands of gallons of water on them to keep the flames from spreading elsewhere as unquenchable flames melt the vehicles into the pavement.

McDaniel points out that if all, or even if most of the cars in Los Angeles were EVs, when the fires broke out, that it would have made the disaster even worse. The power companies would shut down the power at a time when people needed to flee the fires quickly. How many people might have been caught in the conflagration and died? McDaniel asks an important question:

A pertinent question is will the wildfires provoke the spread of sanity among Californians who keep voting worse and worse D/S/C politicians into office? If they keep EV mandates, the answer to that question is obvious.

We do live in interesting times

 J. B Shurk, at the American Thinker today has a very interesting piece entitled, appropriately enough, What an Interesting Time to Be Alive. In it, he writes about Western so called "democracies" that are supposed to be promoting the freedom, liberty, and opportunity of their people, but instead are censoring free speech and in some cases scuttling democratic elections. What he paints is a picture of governments offering "democracy" while behind the scenes controlling the outcomes to favor themselves.

At the same time, he notes that there seems to be a new revival of Christianity taking place among both old and new alike. Personally, I have been concerned about the neopaganism that seems to be flourishing in the United States. But of course there is little I can do about it. The Lord sends his Spirit out into the World, and finds those He wishes. We can only help by providing pastors to minister to those the Spirit brings in.

A lot of people are anxious these days. They are worried about nuclear war, mass government surveillance, artificial intelligence, lab-created disease, central bank digital currencies — you name it! I’m worried about those issues, too. However, there is a part of me that relishes the opportunities we have to shape the future. This is an interesting time to be alive.

This is not the age of tranquility. There have been epochs for which that description might be apt — when people were born and died without experiencing much change during the course of their lives. The technologies that existed never advanced. The universe of human knowledge never expanded. Time stood more or less still, as if humanity were stuck in amber.

We’re not stuck in anything. The technological revolutions from the late nineteenth century forward have remade the world time and again. We’ve gone from telegraphs to telephones to cellular phones to smartphones. Mass communication has evolved from printed newspapers to radio broadcasts to television news to internet chatrooms, email, and social media. In the last twenty years, individuals have seized control over the instruments of mass communication — becoming self-created news reporters, entertainers, influencers, and celebrities. In the last ten years, governments and their corporate allies have tried desperately to claw back control over the mass media monopoly they once had.

Part of the reason so many are anxious is because news stories are designed as click bait to bring eyes in for advertisers. Whole narratives are built on speculation about things that might be or could happen. But most of the things speculated about never do happen, and in the meantime, people have spent money on things that were not needed. One such hoax is the "climate change" narrative. Of course, the climate is always in a state of flux. It has been much warmer in times past, and somewhat cooler as well. I prefer warmer, myself. But the climate scam is designed to stampede people into asking for the governments of the World to "do something," and that something takes away your freedom and your liberty and tax you into poverty. You will, as they so aptly put it, own nothing. But they assure us you will be happy - or else.

The “greenies” rejected Jesus Christ but told us that we’re all going to die for our “fossil fuel” sins. The central bankers and globalist oligarchs joined this self-hating bandwagon because the “climate change” religion offered them a chance to maximize wealth and power. For years, they have elevated a line of “global warming” popes — Al Gore, Klaus Schwab, John Kerry — all claiming to have influence with planetary gods that might be willing to save us from Armageddon if we do exactly what the rich people vacationing in Davos, Switzerland say.

The World Economic Forum updates its globalist bible every year so that laypeople know what to believe and what to worship. The “climate change” clergy even promote young know-nothings such as Greta Thunberg, who play-acts as a modern, “truth”-telling “green” Jesus. Global “elites” love the “net zero” religion because they can make up new commandments as needed, condemn naysayers as selfish apostates, and rebrand totalitarianism as philanthropic virtue. “Global warming” pseudoscience allows the U.N., the WEF, and other religious denominations to tell everyone else how much to pay in taxes, how much freedom to give up, and how to behave.

And yet, Shurk sees a new Christian revival coming. From Shurk's pen to God's ear:

And yet there is substantial evidence that a very real Christian revival is gaining energy. Older people who have perhaps lost their way are picking up dusty Bibles to see just what truths lie within. Well known commentators — including Tucker Carlson, Joe Rogan, and Russell Brand — are doing something that few could have predicted even five years ago: they are publicly discussing the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Young people, too, are finding their way to Christ. What would have seemed quite unusual last decade is becoming almost commonplace: athletes, musicians, actors, and academics are bearing witness to Christ’s purposeful influence upon their lives. Even politicians who forgot Jesus’s name as they became worshipful converts to the “green” religion are slowly recovering from decades of amnesia and remembering the King of kings.

I don't listen to Tucker Carlson, Joe Rogan or Russell Brand for theological wisdom, but I suppose lots of people do. They wouldn't be talking about such things publically unless it attracted audiences. So, I see Shurk's point. Even more, Shurk thinks we are winning, based on the old idea that when you are taking flak you know you are over the target.

Yet they are afraid. They are losing. We are winning. How do I know? Their absolute abandonment of even the pretense of supporting free speech is a dead giveaway. Western leaders are so fearful of losing power that they have become overtly pro-censorship.

Former European commissioner Thierry Breton openly brags that Europe and U.S.-NATO scuttled the recent Romanian election because voters chose the “wrong” leader. He promises that Eurocrats will do the same in Germany if German citizens vote “incorrectly” this year. How can a prominent European statesman defend such brazenly anti-democratic tyranny? He blames free speech. Voters, he alleges, are reading and listening to the wrong voices.

Breton’s authoritarianism echoes placeholder-president Joe Biden’s denunciation of Mark Zuckerberg’s “shameful” decision to purge left-wing “fact-checkers” from their years-long role as professional censors who monitor and delete public debate on Facebook and other Meta platforms. Biden called the move away from government-directed censorship “completely contrary to everything America is about.” The so-called “leader of the free world” and a man constitutionally duty-bound to defend the Bill of Rights thinks it’s “un-American” to protect the First Amendment.

We do indeed live in interesting times

Another Reason Gun Control Never Works (As Advertised)

 Yesterday, we discussed how several gunmen broke into a gun store and stole firearms.  These miscreants are prohibited from possessing firearms because they were convicted felons.  But they acquired them anyway.  No law would respected our right to keep and bear arms would have prevented them from acquiring guns.  Today, we will discuss another way felons get guns: by having someone with a clean record buy them.  This is known as "straw purchasing" and is also illegal.  The story is at Bearing Arms and is entitled Burnsville Shooter's Girlfriend Pleads Guilty To Buy Killer's Gun.

A little less than a year ago, an armed felon opened fire on law enforcement, killing two officers and an EMT. He was a convicted felon who couldn't have a gun at all.

It was later learned that his girlfriend purchased the firearm for him.

Of course, while the killer was dead from a self-inflicted gunshot wound and could be assumed guilty, she was still alive, which means her guilt needed to be established somehow.

Well, now it has as she's entered a guilty plea in court.

So, yet again we see another way that people that are prohibited from possessing guns by reason of being a convicted felon nevertheless acquire guns. Again, no law that would not infringe on our right to keep and bear arms could be written to prevent felons from getting guns in this way. As pointed out yesterday, even if all guns were magically to disappear from the United States jurisdiction tomorrow, smugglers could bring them in along with whatever other contraband items they smuggle. You cannot put the genie back in the bottle.

As a side note, I want to also point out that the Mainstream Media constantly harps on something called "gun violence" as if it is the guns that are killing and maiming people. But when it is a stabbing, they don't talk of "knife violence," or if a vehicle, they don't talk of "car violence." These terms of silly. Everyone knows that knives and cars are tools and can be used or misused at the will of the operator. Guns are no different. The MSM spokespeople should be called out for misuse of the English language.

Why Gun Control Never Works (As Advertised)

At Bearing Arms Tom Knighton tells us This Is One Major Reason Gun Control Never Works. Knighton has pointed out that criminals don't buy guns at gun stores, don't fill out 4473 forms or jump through any of the other hoops law abiding gun owners do. But he forgot about this trip to the gun store:

Gun control advocates, trying to sell the idea of gun restrictions, routinely claim that it's entirely possible to respect the right to keep and bear arms while creating laws that keep guns out of criminal hands. Of course, these restrictions never impact criminals because criminals don't go to gun stores.

...snip...

However, something happened in Pennsylvania that made me realize I'm not entirely correct. Plenty of them do, in fact, get guns from gun stores and do so without a straw purchase.

It's just that gun control that claims to respect our gun rights is never going to prevent something like this.

Police are investigating after a Bethel Park gun store was broken into early Monday morning.

Bethel Park Police and a forensics unit from Allegheny County were on scene at the Allegheny Arms & Gun Works store located in the Millennium Shops along Library Road in Bethel Park early Monday morning.

...

"We know that four suspects broke into this business and removed the firearms - the amount [of firearms] is undetermined at this time," said ATF Assistant Special Agent Joseph Price.

Police said the break-in happened before 4:30 a.m. and they didn't waste any time.

"They were probably in the store for under four minutes," Agent Price said. "In and out, four minutes."

...

The investigators said that in the latest burglary, the suspects shot their way in and used hatchets to bust up display cases.

The suspects are believed to be four white males, all wearing black.

Authorities believe the vehicle used was stolen and if you know anything, you're being asked to contact Bethel Park Police.

The truth is that even if there were no gun dealers, criminals would stage thefts from police and military armories. And if they can smuggle drugs into the United States, what makes gun-grabbers think they can't smuggle in firearms at the same time? The point is that criminals will find a way to get guns because they need them to protect not just themselves, but their property as well. They can hardly go to the police and swear out a complaint. They would be laughed out of the police station.

See, those who want guns will find a way to get guns. That often involves theft, which means that sooner or later, gun grabbers will start grabbing guns. "You can't have handguns because criminals use those. You don't need a handgun for hunting, anyway," they'll argue, all while continuing to pretend they're respecting your Second Amendment rights.

They'll do this all while knowing this isn't the only avenue for crime guns out there, but that won't matter.

No matter what you do, gun control will never work because criminals will just shift in how they get guns. Even now, the bad guys are listening to news reports about so-called ghost guns and figuring that's the way they should go. Somehow find a way to ban all of that and they'll just find something else--though banning 3D printing isn't likely to work either.

You'll never stop the bad guys from getting guns. The only people that will ever be stopped are law-abiding folks like you and me.

Which, if we're being frank, is really who they want disarmed anyway.

Whew! Our Coffee Habit Is Safe!

 Vijay Jayaraj tells us at the American Thinker today that Your cappaccino is safe despite climate fearmongering. Of course, I was not worried since I know that climate alarmism is just one big scam designed to take money out of your and my pockets and put it into the pockets of globalist oligarchs. But let Jayaraj tell it:

An estimated 21 billion pounds of green coffee are produced annually across more than 25 million acres worldwide. U.S., Brazil, and Japan are the top coffee-consuming countries.

Though late to the caffeinated party, China is now driving global demand. In the 2023-2024 crop year, China’s consumption reached nearly six million 60-kilogram bags, while domestic production stood at less than two million bags. The balance was imported

.

But will this global java joy be interrupted by production shortfalls caused by climate change? A simple Google search will yield thousands of news articles about how a warming world is killing Arabica and Robusta coffee beans.

You will notice that Mr. Jayaraj believes that the climate scam is real, or at least he believes it an be ignored because he says this:

Indian coffee traders say that the impact of climate change “is minimal for now.”

...snip...

This was confirmed by India’s Commerce Ministry, which has allayed fears about weather disruptions and projects higher coffee output for 2024-25. The Indian Coffee Board has set a 10-year road map for doubling the country’s coffee production and exports.

He then points to improvements in farming practices as well as improvements in the coffee trees themselves. Wherever there is significant money to be made by growing a crop of something, there you will find scientists working to improve the plants that produce that crop. It has been a long time coming, but as more and more people are finding coffee enjoyable, there is more and more incentive to seek better farming methods and plant more productive coffee trees. This is always the way it works. Unlike deer, that can not adapt except by natural selection, people are able to use their ability to reason as a tool to improve their condition. The coffee farmer makes more money, and we get more coffee at a better price: a win-win.

He also notes that if temperatures do rise, the coffee growing regions will simply move to higher elevations and further from the equator. I personally think the coffee growing regions will be expanding putting more acreage under coffee production.

Even if temperatures do rise significantly, coffee production can be moved to cooler locales at higher altitudes and at latitudes farther from the equator. For instance, conducive to growing both Arabica and Robusta are Southern California and alternative regions in existing coffee-producing countries like Brazil and India.

In Colombia, researchers modeled “climate suitability and crop-yield for current and future climate scenarios” and included factors such as soil constraints, pest infestation and socio-economic elements. They found that the “foothills along the eastern Andean Mountain ranges, the high plains of the Orinoquía region and the wet parts of the Caribbean region” are highly favorable to growing coffee if average temperature were to increase.

In Ethiopia -- one of the world’s largest coffee producers -- climate change was found to increase the suitable growing area by as much as 44% by 2080.

Likewise, the plateaus in China’s Yunnan Province are expected to have acreage suitable for growing coffee increase significantly in scenarios assuming future warming.

None of this takes into account improved coffee hybrids that can increase yields by 30-60%. Researchers have now found that these varieties have greater resistance to climatic changes and to pests.

So there you have it from someone in the know. Our coffee fancy is safe. But I knew that all along. It is why Malthus and neomalthusians like Paul Ehrich are wrong.

Facts just coming to light may exonerate Derek Chauvin in the George Floyd death case

 Mike McDaniel at the American Thinker today in a post entitled George Floyd: Did a police administrator commit perjury? discusses the Derek Chauvin case concerning the death of George Floyd . Many of us have known or at least suspected that the police officers involved in the arrest of Floyd were just doing their jobs and did so within standard operating procedures of the Minneapolis Police Department. But like the case of George Zimmerman killing Travon Martin in self defense, or the case of the police shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, the media, a certain segment of the Black community, and the Left seemed to want to tar and feather the "white guy." The Left I understand wants to create as much chaos as possible in order to sow distrust of the police in the minds of the average citizen. In the case of certain segment of the Black community, it is anybody's guess why they participate in this scam.

I’ve been covering the George Floyd case since its inception. Floyd was a drug-addicted violent felon. Among his arrests/convictions were three armed robberies, six burglaries, three car thefts, and holding a gun to the belly of a very pregnant robbery victim. When Minneapolis PD officer Derek Chauvin and three others met him, he was trying to pass a counterfeit bill and resisted arrest. Such behavior is not usually associated with saints, but the Democrats/socialists/communists (D/s/cs) in control of Minneapolis gave him special dispensation.

Floyd actually died from his drug-induced, severe health problems, but the narrative demanded he be killed by a supposed “choke restraint” applied by Chauvin, who was convicted and is currently in prison, having survived one shanking there. At Chauvin’s trial, despite clear evidence the technique applied by Chauvin was not only taught at the MPD Academy, but was standard operating procedure (SOP), the mob demanded his conviction and they were rewarded. Now it appears, the truth is coming out:

"Fourteen current and former police officers with the Minneapolis Police Department (MPD) have signed sworn declarations which say they believe MPD Assistant Chief Katie Blackwell perjured herself when testifying in former MPD officer Derek Chauvin’s murder trial.

Specifically, the group of former officers say they believe Blackwell perjured herself when she testified in court that the restraint method Chauvin used to subdue George Floyd in May 2020 was not a part of MPD officer training. In that trial, Chauvin was found guilty of second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter. He was sentenced to 22 years in prison.

However, many say the knee-on-neck restraint Chauvin employed was trained under the maximal-restraint technique (MRT), a restraint the MPD taught and allowed until 2023."

This wouldn’t have come to light were it not for a lawsuit filed by Blackwell against Alpha News, a reporter and producer and a publishing company.

“With this motion, 33 former MPD officers who served with Blackwell, and one who currently serves with her, have sworn that MPD trained this restraint as part of the ‘maximal-restraint technique’ (‘MRT’) and otherwise. Indeed, 14 of these officers have sworn—under oath—their belief that Blackwell perjured herself,” wrote attorney Chris Madel in this week’s motion.

These officers, according to the motion, “swore that this training was well known—indeed, common knowledge—and omnipresent.”

Please read the whole post by McDaniel. Let us hope that the lawsuit filed by police administrator Blackwell ends up exonerating Chauvin:

Those 14 statements were among dozens of declarations submitted by lawyers representing Alpha News in a defamation lawsuit brought by Blackwell last October against Alpha News, Alpha News reporter Liz Collin, producer J.C. Chaix, and a publishing company. In her lawsuit, Blackwell alleged that the Alpha News documentary film The Fall of Minneapolis and a book authored by Collin wrongly accused Blackwell of lying.

This week, lawyers for Alpha News filed a 113-page motion with 592 footnotes to have the case dismissed with prejudice.

German Fascism Rising?

Also today, Liberty Doll tells us that Germany wants to disarm an entire political party. Now, when a European country describes a person of movement as "right" or "far right," we have to remember that the Nazis were also described that way, and we know that the Nazis were socialists. Hardly right. Socialists are kissing cousins of Communists. In any case, the party being disarmed is the Alternative for Germany or AfD. The AfD has been cut out of the ruling coalition and is being accused to being a threat to Germany's democracy by the Social Democrats and the Greens. Hmmmmm. Sound familiar?

The Liberty Doll can be found here. Go and watch.

Why Have Gun Sales Declined?

 Tom Knighton, at Townhall.com asks Why Gun Sales Were Down For December(?) Citing numbers from the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) Knighton motes that Year over year for December gun sales have fallen from 1.776 million to 1.643 million firearms. The question is why? Have we finally begun to satisfy the desire to have a weapon around just in case of violent attack?

Knighton has his own ideas on the reasons why people are buying fewer guns.

With that said, why? Why were gun sales down, not just for December but for 2024 as a whole when compared to 2023?

Of course, this is going to just be speculation, but I think part of it was because the writing was on the wall that Democrats weren't really going to win in the 2024 election.

The one thing about guns that Democrats are great at is selling them. The threat of a gun ban looming tends to get a lot of people into gun stores and buying firearms, particularly those that are most likely to be banned.

From the moment of the first debate between Trump and Biden, it was clear where things were going. Kamala Harris taking over didn't help all that much, especially as the media bent over backward to such a degree that even your ordinary voters couldn't help but see it. Democrats alienated pretty much everyone who wasn't in their camp and the voters saw it.

What that meant, though, was that a lot of people just didn't see the threat of gun control as being all that real for the first time in a few years.

That means there just won't be as many gun sales.

We should all hope that Knighton is correct and that some sanity will return to America. As a Lutheran, I believe that man is fallen, and inclined to do the wrong things. But the more people who at least try to do the right thing, in otherwords the more sane we become, the less need for constant access to weapons we will have. But we will never eliminate the need entirely until Christ comes again.

I am not a doctor, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express

 Tristan Justice, at The Federalist has an article today entitled Americans Betting On Ozempic Over Willpower To Make America Healthy Again. It is a subject I am familiar with because I have been battling the bulge for close to 60 years. I have tried the "willpower" diet, which is the old exercise more and eat less idea. But that is fundamentally unsustainable. One is hungry all the time, and sooner or later your willpower will break down. Programs like Weight Watchers add a bit of shaming to the move more and eat less diet. But it is the same idea. Then there is the low-fat diet, which ultimately substitutes carbohydrates (including healthy doses of various sugars) to the food you eat. Unfortunately, this just makes you want to eat more. It is no wonder that so many give up and see Ozempic as the answer.

Not enough Americans are taking adequate measures to cultivate better health, and those who are seem to expect novel medical injections to do the heavy lifting for them.

A December YouGov survey found roughly 1 in 5 Americans have resolved to improve their physical health and either exercise more and/or eat healthier this year. A separate survey found a quarter plan to take Ozempic or some other kind of weight-loss drug akin to medically induced anorexia to reach their weight-loss goals.

For me, the risks and side effects of Ozempic and related GLP-1 drugs are too great, and frankly, the drugs are too new on the market to take for weight loss. Getting to a healthy weight is not to be taken as an end in itself, but as a byproduct of living healthily. The Atkins Diet as explained in Dr. Atkins book Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution presents some good advice. Here in North Carolina, at Duke Hospital, we have a student of Dr. Atkins, Dr. Eric Westman, whose videos can be found on Youtube and are very helpful. I am not a doctor, and you should not take such advice from me, but if you are like me and looking to improve your health, find a doctor who will help you get onto and stay onto a ketogenic diet, lose the weight and move more. Funnily enough, the ketogenic diet will give you more energy to do that moving more part, which is what healthy living is all about. Another doctor you might like is Dr. Ken Berry who argues that the proper human diet is a carnivor diet. But going carnivore is just taking the ketogenic diet to its ultimate restrictions. He can be found on Youtube as well.

Poland Leads Where We Should

 Tom Knighton has an article at Townhall.com that claims we should follow the lead of a European nation. What? Say it ain't so! We followed European Leftist ideas like socialized medicine and socialized welfare, to our dismay. But reading on, we find that indeed this nation is onto something and we SHOULD follow its lead. The article can be found at For Once, America SHOULD Follow a European Nation's Lead.

Poland has concerns following Russia's invasion of Ukraine. They have to believe they're on the hit list somewhere and so they're getting ready to fight. How? By making marksmanship a mandatory school subject.

...snip...

There's an apocryphal quote attributed to Japanese Admiral Yamamoto where he is alleged to have said that you could not invade the United States because "there would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." While he may not have actually said it, a similar attitude should be fostered in our nations' enemies and it should be based on fact.

Every man, woman, and child should know how to use a firearm. They should have the basics of firearm safety and marksmanship engrained in them from an early age and it should be encouraged well after the school years are over.

Many have noticed the Peter Pan effect in the last few decades, as children rather than growing up and moving out to start their lives seem to linger in their parents' basements well into their 30s. But training in the use of firearms and the other subjects Polish children will be receiving has a way of turning children into adults rather quickly. If our military isn't too far gone down the woke road, perhaps it might be a good idea to bring back Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps (JROTC) to high schools.

Please read the whole article, which isn't that long.

Standards

Kurt Schlichter, at Townhall.com has an article today entitled Kash Patel Has His Work Cut Out for Him Fixing the Disgraced, Incompetent and Poorly Dressed FBI. The last, being poorly dressed is a testament to the fact that the FBI, like a lot of today's institutions, lacks standards. When I worked for the Navy, civilians were expected to wear a suit and tie to work for men. Women had more leeway, but either a nice dress or one of those horrible pant suits. Still, both men and women were expected to dress in a professional manner.  When someone introduced the idea of "casual Fridays" we suddenly got to loosen the tie on Friday.  In today's federal government, that has all changed.

Just when you thought the once proud Federal Bureau of Investigation was utterly broken, it had to go out and completely humiliate itself in public by putting the woefully unprepared Assistant Special Agent-in-Charge Nosering Uptalky out there to explain that the Muslim dude who everybody else had called a terrorist wasn’t a terrorist. Yeah, he was a terrorist. Let’s not even get into how they left all sorts of relevant evidence at his unsecured house after searching it. Great work from a garbage organization whose sole focus, besides pursuing the latest DEI fads, has been terrorizing parents going to school board meetings to complain about perverts, praying Catholics, and grandmothers taking selfies in the Capitol Rotunda. What a disgrace. Boy, does Kash Patel ever have his work cut out for him, but he can do it with the right combination of institutional savvy and utter ruthlessness in pursuit of excellence.

Kash must start by enforcing standards, something the FBI hasn’t had in a very long time.

Let’s be clear about the problem. It’s a problem for many once-venerated institutions. At one time, these institutions had respect, even awe. If you grew up as a kid in the 70s, you watched Efrem Zimbalist, Jr., as Inspector Erskine, chasing bank robbers, mobsters, and commies on “The FBI” every Sunday night. No, the FBI wasn’t perfect, but they had a standard then. When they showed up, they looked like professionals. They spoke like professionals, not like valley girls spewing irritating jargon (“That is my ask.”) They weren’t a bunch of gender studies majors recruited straight out of the University of College. Most were lawyers, veterans or had previously been in law enforcement. Right now, we have an FBI that’s hiring baristas. Seriously.

The need for improved standards affects all levels of society today. There was a time when plain clothed officers wore suits and concealed their weapons. Today they wander around in casual clothing with the weapons hanging out for all to see. Somehow, to me that undermines the whole purpose of being plain clothed officers. But the FBI is a special case, as they not only can affect national security, but people's very lives and rights. Distrust of the FBI leads to distrust of the entire Federal government. FBI agents should be the best and brightest, and oh, by the way, should not be able to lie to people being interrogated. Lying to a Federal agent is a crime. It should equally be a crime for Federal agents to lie to the public.

In the name of diversity, inclusion, and equity (DIE) the FBI has been hiring people who are not qualified to be there. Some, of course, may not be qualified to be in any position, but what must be understood is that not being qualified to be in the FBI does not make one a second-class citizen. There are many jobs that must be done in society, and all are important and necessary. It is yet another fallacy of the Left, that because you aren't qualified to be, say, an FBI agent, you are nothing. Not so. There are no jobs for which people will pay someone, that do not have certain skills and knowledge. Even an entry level McDonald's job requires someone to show up on time, sober, properly attired with a good attitude. It takes skill to be a good barista, but these skills do not translate to being a good FBI agent.

You may be thinking that all this fuss over sartorial taste is beside the point. But strangely, dressing professionally is the first step in being professional. I have noticed that men going to seminary to become Lutheran pastors dress in the way of actual pastors, wearing a Roman collar. Why do you think that is? But please, read the whole article. And say a prayer for Kash Patel. He has his work cut out for him.

Debunking Islam

Mike Konrad has an article at the American Thinker today that speaks to the historical accuracy of Muhammed and Islam. Or not, as the truth more and more is that Muhammed is total fiction, and that Islam is a very poor copy of Christianity and Judaism. Moreover, they badly understand these two religions, for if they did, they would understand the peaceful nature of both of these religions. For man's true purpose is to be a faithful image of God himself on earth. The fact that we will never be that faithful image because we are fallen doesn't mean that we can give up and just do what we want. God has given us 10 commandments to live by, starting with to love, fear, and trust Him in all things. Jihad and suicide bombings are not part of God's plan, nor is lying and murder.

Konrad starts his article by discussing the historicity of King Arthur.

As an amateur historian -- and probably not a good one -- I go nuts when I see amateurish fictions tendered as core premises. This is no more frequently found than in Hollywood; but do not kid yourself, it is not confined to Hollywood.

The following famous movie scene (based on the play) is a case in point, one worse than most:

Camelot is unique. And we have, by far and away, the most equitable climate in all England -- Camelot (1967)

A) The King Arthur stories hail back to the collapse of Celtic Briton, after the Roman garrison left in 410 AD. England did not exist at the time.

B) King Arthur might have been based on the life of a Celtic tribal chief, who fought the Anglo-Saxons (the proto-English). The English were not the heroes.

C) The Medieval castle in the far background of the movie scene would not have existed at that time.

D) South Britain rarely has hard freezes as the movie shows. The Gulf Stream usually keeps London above freezing in winter. Miserably raw, but rarely snow and ice buildup on the trees.

E) The only thing the movie got right -- probably by accident -- was casting Richard Harris, an Irishman and Celt, in the role. Especially since Artuir mac Áedán, a sixth-century Gaelic Scot, the grandson of an Irish king, is the best possible candidate for the real Arthur (that link is great, but it also erroneously shows medieval castles). And even that speculation about Artuir mac Áedán is questionable.

So, Konrad concludes that King Arthur might possibly have existed, though not in the Middle Ages, not in a place called Camelot, and not in a country called England. Then he launches into the real reason he is writing today, the fact that Muhammed is less historical than King Arthur. Indeed, Muhammed did not even exist.

It is now coming out into the popular realm that the historicity of Mohammed may be a total fabrication. Not merely a distortion, but a total fabrication. Robert Spencer has written a polemic questioning the whole historicity of Islam’s founder. And not just Robert Spencer, but Dr. Jay Smith.

As Dr. Jay Smith points out, in the 19th and 20th centuries, Christianity was subjected to higher criticism, in which much of its basic history was questioned. Though the academic assaults were brutal, in the end, Christianity held up, as one by one, its critics were shown wrong. For ex: The historicity of Pontius Pilate was doubted until 1961, when the Pilate Stone was discovered in Caesarea, Israel.

Not so with Islam.

When Western academics finally started applying higher criticism to Islam, unlike Christianity, Islam quickly folded like a deck of cheap cards. The Muslims cannot handle this.

I have read Robert Spencer's book which makes a pretty airtight case that at the very least the existence of Muhammed is doubtful. But Spencer himself seems convinced that Muhammed was a fabrication, and that the Quran was put together from Christian writings in Syriac.

Dr. Jay Smith is more accessible, being on Youtube, and presents much evidence that the origins of Islam lay in the fight against the Arian heresy. Arius believed that Jesus was not divine. While this heresy was disposed of at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, many Arians remained and escaped to the East. So, a ruler that believed in Arianism could impose that belief on the people under him. In other words, the fight against the West has always been a fight between Trinitarians and Anti-trinitarians.

Of course, if you read the Old Testament carefully, you will notice that there is first God-YHWH. Then there is the Spirit of the LORD, acting independently of YHWH but of course it is His Spirit. Then there is the Angel of the LORD which we are told carries the Name of the LORD or YHWH. He appears a number of times in the Old Testament. So, the Trinity is already there in Jewish theology before Jesus is born. It takes Christian readers systemitizing theology to come up with the term "Trinity."

Jesus claimed to be that person, the Angel of the LORD, of YHWH in the Old Testament. You either believe him, in which case that makes you a Christian, or you believe that the Messiah is yet to come, which religiously makes you Jewish. Islam is not a real religion. It is a fabrication of a ruler who followed long debunked Arius. Those are the facts.

Mass Killings Are Not Uniquely American

 We are constantly told that mass killings only happen in America, that we are a uniquely violent nation, while other nations are peaceful.  This is a lie.  In terms of overall violence, the United States ranks in the middle.  While some of the more violent places may not have as many shootings, they make up for it with bladed weapons, vehicles and so on.  Today, at Bearing Arms Tom Knighton has a piece entitled 12 Killed in Mass Shooting in Montenegro. I want to highlight these mass shootings in places around the world to try to convince you that they are not unusual, nor uniquely American. They are just the result of a fallen humanity, sadly in desperate need of Jesus Christ.

The United States has a reputation for mass shootings. Part of that is because we have certain...entities in this country with a vested interest in misrepresenting the number of such shootings to try and create political change. We don't actually have nearly as many as those entities claim, but since the media likes the scare tactic, this is what we get.

Plus, we're told these are "uniquely American." Over and over again, those who demand gun control pretend these don't happen anywhere else, which is absolute nonsense.

Of course, the attack on Bourbon Street should illustrate that maniacs will still find a way to kill without needing a gun.

And, unfortunately, we have a stark reminder that even European-style gun control won't stop a mass shooting.

Knighton goes on to quote from the Voice of American piece on the shooting. You can go and read it for yourselves. It is pretty gross. But note, the gun whatever it was, didn't shoot anyone, it was the man, using the gun as a tool. The prime minister of Montenegro is pushing a total ban on firearms, as if that could actually be enforced. Montenegro is a surrounded by Albania, Serbia, Bosnia, and Croatia, with a shall shoreline on the Adriatic Sea. Do you think guns could not be smuggled into Montenegro?

Prime Minister Milojko Spajic is, unfortunately, already talking about enacting a total firearm ban, but we also need to keep in mind that Montenegro has already cracked down on guns not that long ago. Following two mass murders in Serbia, officials offered an amnesty where people could turn in guns, no questions asked, and implemented a two-year moratorium on gun licenses as well as an examination of all lawful gun owners.

Clearly, that didn't seem to accomplish anything.

However, like politicians pretty much everywhere, the failures of previous efforts should never be considered as evidence that maybe the problem lies somewhere else. Indeed, I don't know why the Left seems so enamored of killers.

Perhaps the gun-grabbers here should look for another solution to the problem of violence. It is not the guns, or indeed any of the tools used to kill and maim. It is the people themselves. Stop letting murderers go on to commit more crimes.

Teaching the Anti-Gunners to Tolerate Guns

On Monday, I had a post entitled I am not holding my breath speculating on the thought that a Trump administration might pass and sign nationwide concealed carry. Today, at Bearing Arms Ryan Petty has an article entitled National Constitutional Carry: The Second Amendment As Written that takes it a step further and to the ultimate goal of Constitutional Carry nationwide. Of course, the full Second Amendment would require not only that anyone who could legally own a weapon could carry it anywhere within the jurisdiction of the United States, but that we could also own and train with the same weapons used by the military. That is because one purpose of the Second Amendment was that all men* were to be part of the militia. I like it, but there are a number of hurdles, some of which Petty outlined.

1. Building a Majority in Congress

A bill to establish national Constitutional Carry would need a simple majority in both the House and Senate. With a slim Republican majority in the House and the Senate split nearly evenly, every vote counts. This means we’d need unwavering support from pro-Second Amendment legislators and likely a few Democrats from swing states to cross the aisle. While possible, the current hyper-partisan climate makes bipartisan support on gun rights a tall order.

2. Overcoming the Filibuster in the Senate

Even if a majority in the Senate supports Constitutional Carry, the filibuster rule remains a formidable obstacle. To overcome a filibuster, 60 votes are required to invoke cloture and move the bill to a vote. This means securing support from at least 9 Democratic or independent senators—a nearly Herculean task given the Democratic Party’s current stance on gun control.

3. Presidential Support

Assuming a hypothetical Trump administration or another pro-Second Amendment president in office, the likelihood of signing such legislation into law would be high. However, any hint of executive hesitation would embolden opposition, so strong presidential backing is non-negotiable. As I've written elsewhere, and discussed on Cam & Company, a key step would be to remake the Biden administration's White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention.

4. Litigation and Judicial Review

Even if passed, expect immediate legal challenges. States with restrictive gun laws—like California, New York, and Illinois—would likely sue to block the legislation. This would eventually land before the Supreme Court, which, fortunately, is currently aligned favorably toward a robust interpretation of the Second Amendment. The Bruen decision provides a solid legal foundation to defend such a law.

Petty out that Constitutional Carry is already the law of the land. He is correct, of course. The problem is that too many don't treat it that way. They treat it as a second or third rate right that can be infringed at will. That is an even longer process.

* At the founding, only men fought in wars.  That doesn't mean women weren't important.  They were expected to keep and manage the home and raise the children - no small task.