The Mask Slips on Seattle Homeless Mitigation Plans

The Mask Slips on Seattle Homeless Mitigation Plans

In Seattle, the City Council passed, over the Mayor’s veto, a bill to reduce the budget of the police department.  Included in this bill was a provision to eliminate the Navigation Team (wherever did they get that name?  It says zero about what the team actually does.) that has been doing (ineffective) outreach to the so-called “unsheltered” population of the streets of the city.

First is a story about the proposed new outreach team from the city.  Here is a very interesting quote from the KOMO article. From the mayor’s response:

This proposal is a first step in addressing Mayor Durkan’s significant concerns about the elimination of all City resources to coordinate outreach and mitigation of health and safety impacts at unmanaged encampments. In the coming weeks, the City will prepare to operationalize this plan to scale outreach, shelter, and address the most hazardous encampments that pose a risk to encampment residents or surrounding communities. As Council knows, outreach and mitigation at those encampments that present significant public safety or health risks may continue to need the support and services of the Seattle Police Department. This bill would attempt to reduce the number of such cases by expanding outreach.

Please notice that the city is giving a higher priority to addressing risks to the homeless over the risks to the residents of surrounding communities.  I think that the taxpaying citizens of Seattle might not be too happy about that, if they actually read this article.

And then, another story about those poor, unsheltered, residents of Seattle.

Security cameras show ongoing crimes at Ballard homeless camps.

I wonder how those taxpaying citizens of Ballard are liking the ubiquitous homeless camps in a formerly pleasant city neighborhood.  I used to live in Ballard.  With the defunding of the police, my crystal ball tells me that those taxpayers are in for more, not fewer, homeless camps in their neighborhoods, accompanied by high levels of crime and drug use and trafficking.

The citizens of Seattle deserve the government they elect.

View This Video. Share it Far and Wide. Today.

This Video by my Hero, Rush Limbaugh, celebrates our First Responders, Police and Firefighters, who have been denigrated, shot at, murdered in cold blood, by the New Thugs of American Society. This has to stop.

Please share this video with all your friends and neighbors, on all your Social Media, today. Do it Now. Support those who have always to keep Society safe from criminals. Do your part to Save America!

Thanks very much.

Washington State (Seattle) Supreme Court confirms that “all your money belongs to us”.

In a unanimous ruling, the state/Seattle Supreme Court declared Tim Eyman’s $30 car-tab initiative that passed last year to be unconstitutional.  The reason? “More than one subject”.

The judges’ ruling Thursday is a victory for a coalition of cities, King County and Garfield County’s transit agency, which had sued saying it would eviscerate funds they need to pay for transit and road maintenance.

Confirming, once again, that the various governmental units in Washington State reject the right of their citizens to the fruits of their labor.  Predictably, the usual suspects cheered.

“Justice for Seattle voters prevailed in today’s Supreme Court ruling on I-976,” Tweeted Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan. “Even before the pandemic and economic crisis, Seattle’s transportation budget was unnecessarily decimated by I-976 last year and our residents and businesses have felt the real impacts of cuts.”

Another Usual Suspect:

Sound Transit officials also say the initiative would dry up a primary funding source needed for expansion of the light rail system to Tacoma, Bellevue and Everett. It would have cost the state and local governments more than $4 billion in revenue over the next six years.

Heaven forbid that the Almighty Governments and Almightiest Sound Transit be denied THEIR money.

THIS is Voter Suppression:

New Black Panthers at Philadelphia Polling Place to intimidate voters

THIS is Not Voter Suppression.

Long Lines of Voters in Georgia

This is a long line of peaceful, long-suffering voters. They are not being intimidated or suppressed by anyone, and everyone will get to cast his or her vote. The Left likes to claim that whites are trying to suppress black votes, and this is absurd. Blacks in Georgia had higher turnout than whites did! If any voters were suppressed, it was white voters!

We will not let the Left redefine “voter suppression”. Actually, there is little to no actual voter suppression these days, so don’t let your leftist friends try to convince you that there is. What was the Voting Rights Act of 1964 supposed to do? Outlaw voter suppression. And it did.

It must be uncomfortable to live in Seattle these days

With the city council overriding the mayor’s veto of their bill making drastic cuts to the Seattle Police Department, and the number of homeless camps increasing all over the city, residents of Seattle may be worrying about the safety of themselves, their homes, and their children.  Especially since for a few years now, Seattle police have been de-emphasizing prosecution of most property crimes in the city, telling citizens to just file a report online.  And they are hearing daily of prolific offenders again being released on little or no bail for additional lawbreaking.

Well, they may be cheered up today, with the announcement by the city that they have hired a new “Street Czar” to offer alternatives to the policing being cut by their city government (who, by the way, they elected).  This new city employee is a gentleman named Andre Taylor, and he has a colorful background.  It seems that his previous occupation was “pimp”, and he had a brother who was “killed by Seattle police in 2016”.  His salary will be $150,000.  Pleasant-looking fellow, isn’t he?

Andre-Taylor

Now, that may not please some Seattle residents, especially those unemployed as a result of government actions against the spread of the Wuhan Coronavirus.  Their city is reducing the presence of police in a city wracked by demonstrations, overrun with homeless camps in city parks, and subject to sometimes-violent riots and looting in the downtown core.

I think if I lived in Seattle today, I might consider moving elsewhere.

He said it better than I could: Guest Writer Henry Racette on the open U.S. Supreme Court seat

He said it better than I could: Guest Writer Henry Racette on the open U.S. Supreme Court seat

Today, we feature another of our Ricochet writers, Henry Racette. Please enjoy and respond to his post on filling the new Supreme Court vacancy brought about by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Saturday.

About That Vacancy

Now that the coronavirus crisis is essentially over but for the continuing economic disaster being wrought by various governors and power-drunk state officials, we could do with yet another catastrophe to keep the press enthused through the end of this election year.

The passing this week of Justice Ginsburg will do just fine.

Let me explain why it is right, proper, and essential that the Court be restored to a full complement of nine members prior to the election.

GARLAND v (UNKNOWN)

You’ll hear endless babble about the way Senator McConnell handled the Garland nomination, President Obama’s lame duck nomination that McConnell refused to allow to be voted on by the Senate. People will say it’s hypocritical of the Senate to vote now, when it failed to vote on Obama’s nomination. They’ll argue that it’s a breach of trust with the American people, etc., etc.

That’s all wrong, and here’s why.

It isn’t hypocrisy to treat the two situations differently because the two situations are in fact different. Obama was a lame duck in his last year in office, filling a vacancy (Justice Scalia’s) created in that last year in office, and opposed by a Senate the electorate had handed to the Republicans. Never in U.S. history has the Senate confirmed a Supreme Court nomination in such circumstances; Senator McConnell wisely chose not to preside over the first Senate to do so.

In contrast, the President and the Senate are of the same party. If the Democrats had taken the Senate in 2018, it would be perfectly reasonable for them to block the President’s next nomination; I would expect nothing less (though I’d hope they didn’t stoop to the character assassination they displayed during the Kavanaugh confirmation). But the American people left the Senate in Republican hands, and I hope that Senate will support the President as he makes yet another excellent appointment.

BUT THE CONSTITUTION!

So ignore the hypocrisy claim. And absolutely scoff at anyone who pretends that there are actually constitutional barriers to a speedy appointment: that’s simply wrong. As an iconic Supreme Court Justice once observed, “there’s nothing in the Constitution that says the President stops being President in his last year.” (In fact, that was Justice Ginsburg herself.) Similarly, there is nothing in the Constitution that says the Senate stops being the Senate in an election year. There are no legal nor Constitutional barriers to a speedy nomination and confirmation.

LAST WISHES

There’s a particularly troubling claim you’ll hear, which is that Justice Ginsburg, in her final days, said the following:
“My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.”

Let me be very clear. I will say nothing ill of the late Justice, and I applaud her tenacity and strength during what must have been extraordinarily difficult times. It is my hope that she didn’t in fact say what has been attributed to her, because the idea that she would have is repugnant to me and would diminish her in my eyes.

Filling a seat on the Supreme Court is a high honor, a position of service to the American people granted with great ceremony and enormous trust. But the seat is not the property of its occupant to be assigned by him or her to the next candidate, and the late Justice has no more right to determine who occupies it next than I have. I would like to believe that Justice Ginsburg appreciated the dignity of the court and its unique role to uphold the Constitution, and wouldn’t try to subvert the Constitutional provisions for peopling the Court by attempting to impose her own political vision upon her successor. That would be a kind of betrayal — though, in fairness, perhaps one forgivable in an old and critically ill woman.

WHY IT’S NECESSARY

There is no legal, Constitutional, procedural, or moral reason not to quickly confirm a new Supreme Court Justice. There are two practical reasons why it is extraordinarily important that we do appoint a new Supreme Court Justice as quickly as possible.

First, and most importantly, there is already ample reason to expect the 2020 election to be legally challenged regardless of outcome. The Democratic candidate himself has spoken openly, and strangely, of having the support of the military in the event that the election doesn’t appear to go in his favor. Secretary Clinton is on record as advising Vice President Biden that he should not concede, regardless of the electoral outcome. Given this, it is hard to see how a Trump victory will not be challenged in court.

Left-leaning and Democratic think tanks have been “war-gaming” (simulating) various scenarios for challenging the 2020 election results. The most widely published account finds only one electoral outcome that does *not* lead to widespread violence and/or a Constitutional crisis, and that is a landslide Democratic victory. Every other outcome leads to chaos.
Add to this the left’s enthusiasm for mail-in voting, which is inherently less secure than in-person voting and so more susceptible to challenge, and we have been put on notice: if the Democratic candidate doesn’t win, we should expect a Constitutional crisis.

We will need a Supreme Court with an odd number of Justices present. A hung Court unable to resolve a contested outcome of the 2020 election will leave the country in a precarious and dangerous condition: for the first time in history, the transition of power will be uncertain.

That possibility alone demands that we restore the Court to nine members before the election. A failure to do so will be inexcusably reckless, endangering the world’s greatest democracy and its uninterrupted tradition of peaceful transition of power.

The second reason that it is essential that we fill the court is that there are those who fear widespread civil unrest and violence if the Senate does act quickly.

There’s a word for that, for the threat of violence if a particular political demand is not delivered. It’s called terrorism. The United States should not submit to the demands of terrorists, whether they’re foreign or domestic. Anyone who argues that the Senate must not act for fear of triggering a violent backlash is calling for the appeasement and rewarding of domestic terrorists.

To hell with that. We don’t surrender our Constitution because one side isn’t willing to lose with grace. Congressmen are about as spineless a species as one will find, but when given the choice of answering to the mob or answering to the Constitution they’d best not find it a hard decision to make.

ONE LAST THING

Those reasons are more than enough, but there’s one more practical consideration. President Trump has made hundreds of very good judicial appointments. There’s every reason to believe that his next Supreme Court nomination will also be very good. There’s every reason to believe that a Democratic nomination will not be good at all.

People are confused about what “conservative” means when we’re speaking of the Supreme Court. “Conservative” and “liberal” when it comes to the Supreme Court is a bit like “firefighter” and “arsonist” when it comes to house fires. The purpose of the Supreme Court is to interpret and uphold the Constitution. Its purpose isn’t to rewrite the Constitution, to reinvent the Constitution, or to “fix” the Constitution. It isn’t to burn the Constitution down.

“Conservative,” in the context of the Supreme Court, means pro-Constitution. Everyone who values Constitutional governance should support conservative Justices.

Facebook Supports Antifa, the Destroyers

Facebook Supports Antifa, the Destroyers

In violation of its own standards against so-called “hate groups”, Facebook allows Rose City (Portland, OR) Antifa to recruit online, on its platform.  You have, no doubt, seen all the news stories of the violent riots in Portland for the past 100+ days.  Please read the linked article above, and then sever all ties you have with Facebook.

We already know that Facebook supports and listens to the sleazy Southern Poverty Law Center when it deems groups such as the totally non-violent Tea Party and educational site Prager U “hate groups”, because they happen to strenuously disagree with the current Social Justice Warrior philosophy.  It is time to give up Facebook.  Forever.  Your family can find you on your WordPress Blog, can’t they?

He said it better than I could…Today’s Quote

I admit that I copied this quote from George Will’s book The Conservative Sensibility, from a friend’s post over on Ricochet.  He (George Will) said this better than I could.

Conservatives’ task is to build a society that nurtures individuals to self-sufficiency, including independence from politics. Now more than ever conservatives need to be focused on this nurturing because the related forces of urbanization and statism are exerting a powerful pull toward an enervating dependency. It is a dependency on large economic entities, and on government, for security. Ultimately, it is dependency on – and addiction to – security as the highest aim of life. This addiction produces, over time, a timid, fearful debased people erecting barriers against a competitive world and aggressively asserting an entitlement mentality, including an entitlement to government protection against uncertainty. This entitlement exacts a steep moral cost. Government that acknowledges such an entitlement becomes a bland Leviathan, administering a soft, kindly, but ultimately corrupting statism of benighted benevolence.

Those units of Government who now control our lives, due to “emergency” declarations over the Wuhan Coronavirus pandemic, are demonstrating how far this country has declined into the “Enervating Dependency” Mr. Will describes.  Can we stop it?  I wonder.

Headline: Top CEOs paid 320 Times Typical Worker’s Pay

Yes, it’s a real article.  It set me to thinking.  When you see that kind of a headline, what’s the first thought that comes to your mind?

Is it: Wow, cool!  I wonder how they got to make that much money?  I wonder what they had to do for their company to get that kind of salary?  What company has that much compensation variation?  I wonder what I would have to do to become a CEO?  Maybe I should try to get my foot in the door at that company so I can rise to be the CEO someday.

Or, is it:  That is totally insane!  That CEO is being paid WAY too much money, if he earns 320 times the average worker at his company!  He must be stealing that money from workers  lower down the totem pole than he is.  He must have cheated to make it so high in that company!  That company must be really keeping those other workers down, and favoring the executives.  That firm must have rules that make it harder for the average guy to get a higher salary there.

So, are you like the conservative, who sees that headline as a motivator, who tries to find out how those CEOs rose so high, and earned so much at their company, so he can emulate them?  Who thinks that, if CEO X can do it, so can I!

Or are you like the typical Leftist, whose first thought is how to bring that over-paid CEO’s salary closer to the average worker.  And devises ways to take away the CEO’s huge salary, by increasing taxation on the higher-earners, and lobbying for higher minimum wages so the lower-earners make more without earning more.

Leftists don’t want to give the workers at the bottom a hand up, so they can climb the corporate ladder, and earn a better job at a higher salary.  Their first thought is to bring down those at the top, which benefits exactly no one.  That guy at the bottom benefits not one bit from the CEO earning less, and may actually be harmed, if that excellent CEO takes another job where he can earn what he is really worth.

Think about it.  What would you say to that headline?

Ruining Society Every Day

The so-called “Public Health” “Authorities”, and the so-called “Press” (scare quotes fully intended) seem to be in collusion with the state government to ruin society.  If Society means people interacting with each other for mutual benefit, Society is being ruined, decimated by the reactions of Government to the spread of the Wuhan Coronavirus.  The lockdowns that started in March, and are continuing in various forms six months later, are having deleterious effects on every aspect of Society.  Here are some stories from today’s KOMO Seattle Web site.  [Please note that the actions of the Seattle City Council and mayor might have taken place anyway, but are amplified due to the abrupt halt in revenue from sales taxes curtailed by business shutdowns.]

Nearly 600 Layoffs as Boeing Supplier to Close Plant in Kent

Covid-19: Report Looks at Risks of In-person Learning

Washington adds 800 New Covid-19 Cases While New Report says Cases Are Plateauing

Some counties worry that people fleeing the heat could bring Covid-19

Mayor Durkan extends moratorium on evictions through end of year

All of the above articles directly relate to the effects of government shutdowns to try and halt the spread of the virus.  Please note that none of the efforts to halt the virus have been effective.

Now, to the double-whammy affecting residents and businesses in Seattle, the City Government and local “activists” add their Demands.  Some of these issues stem from the death of a black man in Minneapolis that was immediately assumed to be the fault of the policeman who was arresting him, but now, with new information coming out, may have been the result of medical conditions he already had.  No matter, Seattle activists and Antifa will be equal-opportunity destroyers.

Seattle businesses ask the City Council to stop the Payroll Tax      That would be the tax on high-earners that would affect companies like Amazon and Bartell Drugs (a local chain which was started in Seattle in 1895)

Activists demand Mayor Durkan to use $100 million for minority community

Seattle Police arrest 4 at Cal Anderson Park for alleged criminal trespass   That park was part of the CHOP/CHAZ zone that saw so many incidents of shooting, vandalism, and property destruction.

All the above stories testify to the ruination of Society in our area.  Please see my post on the War of All Against All, where the governments are pitting every citizen against every other citizen.  The Seattle city government is a past master at this, with their ruination of landlords by requiring them to accept tenants who do not pay rent; their ruination of area bars and restaurants by forcing them to close; and their ruination of thriving businesses with a payroll tax on their most creative and productive employees.

I feel sorry for the ordinary citizens of Seattle, who seem to be despised by the people they elect to public office.  Maybe you get the government you elect.  Good and Hard.