Welcoming Immigrants

For John, BLUF:  The photo cut:  Lowell City Councilor Paul Ratha Yem chose items for his family’s Sunday dinner in the New Pailin Market, home to a thriving Cambodian community. The state recently announced that it is moving about 70 migrant and homeless families into the Lowell Inn and Conference Center..  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Lowell is getting dozens of migrant families. Their struggles resonate with Cambodian community.

From Boston Globe, by Correspondent Daniel Kool, 26 April 2024, 5:50 a.m..

Here is the lede plus four:

Vanna Howard watched as Khmer Rouge militants captured her father in the late 1970s during the group’s reign of terror in Cambodia.  She watched as three of her younger siblings and her grandparents were lost to sickness and starvation in a genocide that killed more than 1.7 million people.

Now Howard, a state representative, and other Cambodians in Lowell are watching with empathetic eyes as dozens of new migrant families trickle into Lowell — the latest stop on a harrowing journey that took some through multiple countries in search of opportunity.  She said she sees reflections of her experience in the newest wave of migrants arriving in Massachusetts.

When Howard fled Cambodia, making her way to a refugee camp in Thailand, she walked for “weeks and weeks, similar to the folks who have been coming to our border” in the United States.

“We need to treat this matter with empathy, with compassion,” Howard said, her voice cracking with emotion. “Nobody wants to leave their home country.  The decision to leave their home country — it has to be so bad that you are willing to risk your life to flee."

The state announced last week that it would move nearly 70 migrant and homeless families from Bedford to the UMass Lowell Inn and Conference Center.  Many of those being relocated are Haitian migrants who fled a country consumed by gang violence.

The lead photo shows Lowell City Councillor Paul Ratha Yem, who was on City Life Show this last Friday.  Lowell is a City of immigrants.  I came here 30 years ago. I say to Councilor Yem that while he was born in Cambodia, like me he came here from the Southland (Southern California), where he lived in San Bernidino, and did work in Long Beach, where I did High School.

I am opposed to President Biden's Open borders policy.  For one thing, I don't understand his underlying objective.  He has not been able to articulate the value.  Further, he cannot explain what historians and social scientists know about the ability of this nation to absorb new immigrants and make them successful and proud Americans.

That said, those who are here are here and we, as Lowellians and as Citizens of our Commonwealth need to make these people feel welcome and we need to provide them shelter and food and work.  Even if they eventually return to the nation from which they came, while they are here, they are fellow human beings and we need to help them to do and live their best.  Lowell is a good place for that to happen, and for immigrants to learn, from us, the importancve of human rights and respect for those rights.

Regards  —  Cliff

Conversion

For John, BLUF:  To steal from the British, we are a land of hope and glory.  I am happy that Ms Ayaan Hirsi Ali decided to come to our shores and I appreciate her contributions to our nation.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Why I am now a Christian

Here is the sub-headline:

Atheism can't equip us for civilisational war

From UnHerd, by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, November 11, 2023.

Here is the lede plus three:

In 2002, I discovered a 1927 lecture by Bertrand Russell entitled “Why I am Not a Christian”.  It did not cross my mind, as I read it, that one day, nearly a century after he delivered it to the South London branch of the National Secular Society, I would be compelled to write an essay with precisely the opposite title.

The year before, I had publicly condemned the terrorist attacks of the 19 men who had hijacked passenger jets and crashed them into the twin towers in New York.  They had done it in the name of my religion, Islam.  I was a Muslim then, although not a practising one.  If I truly condemned their actions, then where did that leave me?  The underlying principle that justified the attacks was religious, after all: the idea of Jihad or Holy War against the infidels.  Was it possible for me, as for many members of the Muslim community, simply to distance myself from the action and its horrific results?

At the time, there were many eminent leaders in the West — politicians, scholars, journalists, and other experts — who insisted that the terrorists were motivated by reasons other than the ones they and their leader Osama Bin Laden had articulated so clearly.  So Islam had an alibi.

This excuse-making was not only condescending towards Muslims.  It also gave many Westerners a chance to retreat into denial.  Blaming the errors of US foreign policy was easier than contemplating the possibility that we were confronted with a religious war.  We have seen a similar tendency in the past five weeks, as millions of people sympathetic to the plight of Gazans seek to rationalise the October 7 terrorist attacks as a justified response to the policies of the Israeli government.

The author is a very intelligent and accomplished woman, arriving in the United States after being born in Somali and living in Saudi Arabia, Etheopia, Kenya, Germany and the Netherlands, where she served in Parliament.  Today she works at the Hoover Institute and is associsated with the American Enterprise Institute.

Ms Ali's movement to Christianity is not of the type of a good old fashioned revival, complete with Alter Call.  Rather, it is an intellectual journay.  As a Roman Catholic, I am not bothered by that path.  The journey is not as impoortant as the goal, the end state.

further down in the esssay, Ms Ali quotes G K Chesterson:

The line often attributed to G.K. Chesterton has turned into a prophecy:  “When men choose not to believe in God, they do not thereafter believe in nothing, they then become capable of believing in anything.”

We are a land of immigrants, of colonizers if you are an extreme Progressive.  That is our strength, and liberty to grow is our promise.  We are foturnate to have Ms Ali as one of us and I wish her well.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Right to Food?

For John, BLUF:  Meanwhile, up in Maine, they are voting on adding a "right" to their constitution.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Residents of this state will vote on constitutional ‘right to food’

From The New York Post, by the Associated Press, 25 October 2021, 3:38pm .

Here is the lede plus two:

Depending on whom you ask, Maine’s proposed “right to food” constitutional amendment would simply put people in charge of how and what they eat — or would endanger animals and food supplies, and turn urban neighborhoods into cattle pastures.

For supporters, the language is short and to the point, ensuring the right to grow vegetables and raise livestock in an era when corporatization threatens local ownership of the food supply, a constitutional experiment that has never been tried in any state.

For opponents and skeptics, it’s deceptively vague, representing a threat to food safety and animal welfare, and could embolden residents to raise cows in their backyards in cities like Portland and Bangor.

This is food for thought.  .

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Where is the Joy in Joy Behar?

For John, BLUF:  What is wrong with people these days, that they can not go with live and let live, but must condemn those with a different view?  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Joy Behar implies unvaccinated COVID patients don't deserve medical help since they've 'chosen to listen to the lies' on Fox News

from The Blaze, by Dave Urbanski, 8 September 2021.

Here is the lede plus four:

Far-left co-host of "The View" Joy Behar on Wednesday's show implied that unvaccinated COVID-19 patients don't deserve medical help because they've "chosen to defy the science" and have "chosen to listen to the lies on Fox [News]" — all while patients with other needs can't get hospital beds.

What are the details? Former Utah Congresswoman Mia Love — a Republican — sat at "The View" table in former co-host Meghan McCain's seat and argued that it's a "slippery slope" for doctors to say they won't treat unvaccinated patients as that decision could lead to them saying they won't treat people for other illnesses.

Behar then stepped in, at first agreeing with Love that doctors denying health care to smokers and the morbidly obese could be problematic — but then she declared that such patients have developed "long-term" habits compared to the one-time decision by unvaccinated people to not get a COVID-19 shot "based on false information."

She added — as if she were speaking to unvaccinated COVID-19 patients — they should "go to [Fox News host] Tucker Carlson and make your case. Because he's telling you lies. He and other people on Fox and on some parts of Facebook are telling you lies about the vaccine."

Nothing is more fake than a person who allows herself to be bamboozeled in the name of science condemning those who question what is going on.

I would think Ms Behar's Producers would be too embarrassed by this rant to ever allow the show to appear again on air.

There are folks with legitimate reasons to question vaccines and masks.  I would defer especially to American Blacks, since a lot of living Americans were alive during the period when the Federal Government, in the name of Science, lied to Black people about what was going on during the Tuskegee "Bad Blood" experiments, which resulted in treatment being withheld from those suffering from syphilis.  The Federal Government lied to the victims of the disease in order to conduct an experiment on living human beings.

And, which group has the lowest rate4 of innoculations for COVID-19?  PhDs.

I got my vaccinations as soon as I could, and I carry a mask in case I am in a place where people wish to mask up.  It is only polite.  However, it is impolite and unAmerican to condemn others to wander outside the tribe for not getting a shot.

As a Post Script, I like Ms Mia Love.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Are We Ready?

For John, BLUF:  Are we ready for major actions to limit greenhouse gas emmissions, and will it make a difference?  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Study:  Fuel Shortages by 2025 Under TCI

TCI stands for Transportation and Climate Initiative

.

From Mass Fiscal Alliance, by Mr Paul Gangi, 4 August 2021.

Here is the lede plus three:

Did you happen to catch the latest analysis of the Transportation & Climate Initiative (TCI) put out by the Fiscal Alliance Foundation?

TCI is expected to cause fuel shortages almost immediately after implantation.

According to the Foundation, Massachusetts will begin to experience fuel shortages by 2025 if it enters into the agreement as planned in 2023.  Approximately 80,000 vehicles will not have enough fuel by 2025.

To avoid TCI’s fuel shortages in 2025, Massachusetts drivers would need to buy (swap out a gasoline/diesel vehicle for an EV) approximately 2,000 EV each month beginning this month.  The problem? Approximately 2,000 Electric Vehicles (EV) were sold in Massachusetts in ALL of 2020.

Problem 1, there likely won't be enough electric vehicles to meet th need.

Problem 2, will the targetted drivers have the money to purchase an electric vehicle?

Problem 3, will private industry, utilities and governments coordinate and cooperate to provide the electric power to recharge all these new electric vehicles?

With regard to question 3, I keep asking, but all I get is the bureaucratic salute.

\_(*_*)_/

And there is this:

John Kerry echoes China’s argument that human rights sanctions threaten climate talks

Senior Chinese officials warned John Kerry that U.S. support for human rights threatens climate change cooperation, eliciting a pledge from President Joe Biden’s climate point-man to explain their perspective to officials in Washington.

“I will certainly pass on … the full nature of the message that I received from Chinese leaders,” former Secretary of State John Kerry, who is now Biden’s special envoy for climate change, told reporters following two days of meetings with top Chinese diplomats. “On the one hand, we’re saying to them, ‘You have to do more to help deal with the climate.’ And on the other hand, their solar panels are being sanctioned, which makes it harder for them to sell them.”

Are things so bad regarding the climate that we are willing to turn a blind eye to the battering of human rights in other nations?  Sadly, it seems so.  And, if we won't speak up for human rights abroad, how long will they last at home?

Regards  —  Cliff

Democrats Divided

For John, BLUF:  Are the Democrats divided, between their environmentalis wing and their humanitarianist wing?  It could be a problem trying to get things done in DC.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

'Climate Change' vs. the Uyghurs

From The Pipeline, by Mr Tom Finnerty, 8 July 2021.

Here is the lede plus two:

Pretty shocking -- Politico reports on growing tensions within the Democratic coalition, with the environmental activist faction of the party objecting to even the mildest attempts by the Biden administration to confront China over its human rights violations and international aggression.

As a new Cold War takes shape between the U.S. and China, progressives fear the result will be a dramatically warming planet.  Over 40 progressive groups sent a letter to President Joe Biden and lawmakers on Wednesday urging them to prioritize cooperation with China on climate change and curb its confrontational approach over issues like Beijing’s crackdown on Hong Kong and forced detention of Uyghur Muslims.

The problem for the Biden administration is that American public opinion has shifted significantly against China in recent years, such that according to a recent Pew survey, 89 percent of Americans "consider China a competitor or enemy, rather than a partner."  This move began with Donald Trump calling out China's predatory trade policy and intellectual property violations before he was even president and continued through then-President Trump and Chairman Xi's trade war.  It was cemented, however, by the CCP's handling of the Covid-19 outbreak last year, which, if the no-longer-a-conspiracy-theory lab leak hypothesis turns out to be true, would mean that China is responsible for the most significant man-made disaster in human history.

No comment.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Fordham Tramples Student Rights

For John, BLUF:  This could be filed under universities unhinged, except that that would be lost in the noise for those paying attention.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Fordham Demands Apology For Student’s Tiananmen Protest

Here is the sub-headline:

Austin Tong is refusing to back down after posting a photograph in which he criticized China's Tiananmen Square massacre

From The Washington Free Beacon, by Reporters Chrissy Clark and Stephen Gutowski, 23 JULY 2020.

Here is the lede plus one:

A New York City college has barred a Chinese immigrant from campus and demanded he apologize for posing with a legally owned rifle in a social media post that criticized China for the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre.

Fordham University administrators are demanding that rising senior Austin Tong submit an apology letter to the school by July 23 after he posted to Instagram a photo that shows him holding a firearm in honor of the Tiananmen Square protests, according to a disciplinary letter from the school. Tong risks suspension or expulsion if he refuses to apologize.

The school is arguing that the photograph ran afoul of its commitment to combat bias and hate crimes.  D. Keith Eldredge, Fordham's dean of students, said Tong will not be welcome on campus regardless of whether he attends the university-sanctioned "implicit bias" training demanded of him under the disciplinary letter.

So what the Chinese Government did in Tiananmen Square is all OK?  The Chinese Government attacks on peaceful protestors is just fine with Fordham University.  Is Fordham united with the NBA in silently approving of Chinese abuse of power, such as with their Uighur minority?.

Which raises a small question in the back of my mind.  Why are protestors in the United States not protesting the various civil rights violations of the Chinese?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Heath Care Right

For John, BLUF:  The term "right to health care" gets bandied about, but without analysis.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Is health care a human right?  No.

From Pastor Don's Blog, by Pastor Don, 3 March 2020, first written in 2009.

Here is the lede plus three:

I first wrote this in 2009, but it seems relevant to today as well; I have updated it.

Is health care a human right, as the United Methodist Church says?  I don't see how.  Human rights, as Americans have always understood them (beginning with Thomas Jefferson and the other Founders) are a fact of nature that cannot be rescinded by human beings.  Rights are immutable, indeed, unalienable ("Not to be separated, given away, or taken away" Dictionary.com, as Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence.)  As a precursor to his Declaration theology that unalienable human rights are a endowment by God, Jefferson wrote in his pre-revolution essay, Summary View of the Rights of British America, "The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time.  The hand of force may disjoin, but cannot destroy them."

Since his day, and certainly preceding it, the historic American understanding of human rights is the exercise of individual freedom, especially in the political realm, for both public and personal good.  We have historically never understood our rights as encompassing access to services or commodities.

Rights are inherent in each individual equally, they are not divisible.  Take the Declaration's famous insistence that among human rights is "the pursuit of happiness."  Note that it is the pursuit of happiness that is a right, not the achievement of it.  Nor is one person more entitled to pursue happiness than another, no matter one’s station in life.  Besides, happiness (what Jefferson meant was not happiness as we use the word today, but a state of contentment in life and possessions) is not something that can be given us, it is something we have to create.

This is a long blog post.  But worth the read.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Supporting Human Rights

For John, BLUF:  Rights come from God, or if you don't accept God, then from nature.  They are not granted by Government.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

The authoritarian left does not believe in human rights.  They think government GRANTS and contains your rights.

Here is the sub-headline:

“To do evil a human being must first of all believe that what he's doing is good” - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

From NOQ Report, by Blogger D Parker, 22 January 2020.

From the middle of the Blog Post:

Despite the fact that tens of thousands peacefully rallied for the conservation of human rights in Richmond this week, to the great disappointment of the national socialist media, ‘democrats’ in the Old Dominion are going to ignore the wishes of the people and impose their liberty-free vision on the state anyway.

This is more than an issue of ‘safety’ or guns, but of liberty itself such as the hideous example of gun confiscation swatting with so-called ‘red flag laws’.  Their tyrannical desires are now expanding to free speech with newly proposed law that will criminalize criticism of the ruling class of Virginia.

The authoritarian left is also ignoring the presumption of innocence with the impeachment trial.  They’ve blithely decided to turn centuries of precedent on it’s head, demanding that president Trump prove his innocence as pointed out in the video.

Rights need, from time to time, to be defended, usually against the Government.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Healing Past Wrongs

For John, BLUF:  We need to have a better knowledge of our past, of the wrongs inflicted, if we are going to move forward.  No flinching from the truth.  And, no placing blame on the people of today for what wrong was done in the past, if it has been renounced.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Possible Mass Graves Discovered From 1921 Tulsa Race Riot Massacre

From PJ Media, by Mr Rick Moran, 17 December 2019.

Here is the lede plus four:

It was the worst spasm of racial violence in the history of the United States. And it has been largely ignored in history.

The Greenwood district in Tulsa was the richest black neighborhood in the country, known at the time as "The Black Wall Street."  In 1921, a riot began over the Memorial Day weekend when a young black man was accused of assaulting a 17-year-old white girl.  Angry whites gathered at the jail while some black men, hearing rumors of a lynching, also headed to the jail.  At that point, history and myth merge and what happened to set off the crowd is unknown.

At one point, planes were employed to strafe the crowds of black women and children fleeing for their lives.  Property damage was immense.  More than 10,000 blacks were left homeless and an unknown number had been killed.  Official statistics put the number of dead at 36 with about 800 seriously injured.  Some believe the actual number of dead is in the hundreds.

The state established a commission in 1996 to investigate exactly what happened.  At that time, the commission found evidence of three possible mass grave sites, but the evidence had been inconclusive.

A more recent survey using far more sophisticated technology may have given state authorities enough evidence to begin an archaeological dig at some of the sites.

A blot on our history, and worthy of further investigation.

We need, as Americans, to make right what was wrong.  We need to acknowledge that the Tulsa Riot of 1921 was people, Caucasian American people, behaving badly.  Apologies are in order.  And good historic research to reveal all that really happened.  And, if we want to ever heal and unite, it includes acceptance of apologies.

If we are going to move forward as a nation, rather than breaking down into squabbling states, like we are the new Balkans, we have to unite going forward.  Please.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Gun Grabbing

For John, BLUF:  I wonder if Beto saw this, or Senator E Warren.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

New Zealand’s Gun Confiscation Shaping Up To Be Massive Failure

From Bearing Arms, by Blogger Cam Edwards, 4 November 2019.

Here is the lede plus three:

New Zealand’s gun grab, instituted in the wake of the Christchurch massacre, isn’t going so great.  In fact, with less than two months to go before the government-imposed deadline, fewer than 20% of the estimated number of banned firearms have been handed over.

New Zealand Police Minister Stuart Nash announced this week that more than 32,000 prohibited weapons have been returned to the government since collections began in mid-July.  Some estimates put the number of newly-banned military-style semi-automatic rifles in the country at up to 175,000.

This would suggest a compliance rate, so far, as low as 18 percent, 16 weeks into the buyback program.  With seven weeks left to go until the amnesty period ends, if the current rate of return holds, the New Zealand government is on track to collect around 50,000 prohibited weapons pursuant to the buyback.  That would impute a final compliance rate of around 29 percent, at the lower end, which would represent a modest but tangible success for policymakers.

A “modest but tangible success”?  I think it’s more like a complete failure.  Let’s say when the deadline passes less than one third of the banned firearms have been turned in.  What exactly has been accomplished, other than the compensated confiscation of a few thousand firearms and the criminalization of tens of thousands of otherwise law-abiding citizens?

There is no "Second Amendment" in New Zealand, explicitly enumerating the right to bear arms as a Right of the People, and yet tens of thousands of Kiwis are keeping their guns, rather than turning them in.

I wonder, if they are listening, what message Democrats take away from this?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Conflicting Ideas

For John, BLUF:  The Democrats are supporting Palestinian groups, which, in turn, oppose civil rights for homosexuals and the broader LGBTQ Community.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

INTERSECTIONALITY ON THE WEST BANK

From Powerline Blog, by Blogger John Hinderaker, 18 August 2019.

Here is the lede plus one:

If Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar had made their visit to “Palestine,” their time would have been devoted exclusively to bashing Israel.  Their attacks would have combined American-style leftism with Palestinian religious solidarity.  And yet, as Scott [Johnson] has pointed out more than once, there are obvious tensions between Islam and the contemporary Left, as embodied by the Squad.  What branch of Islam is it, exactly, that celebrates abortion, homosexuality and transgenderism?

It would be interesting to see a reporter ask Tlaib or Omar about this news story:  “PA Bans LGBTQ Activities In West Bank.”

On the one hand, the Republicans are trying to find unifying themes, while, on the other, the Democrats are trying to find what distinguishes groups from one another, appealing to each.

We should have some admiration for the Democrats, for as Author F Scott Fitzgerald said:

The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

The SPLC Exposed, Againt

For John, BLUF:  Some view the Southern Poverty Law Center as a fighter for human rights.  Others see it as a criminal racket.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

The Southern Poverty Law Center is a hate-based scam that nearly caused me to be murdered

Here is the sub-headline:

After internal challenges with discrimination, the Southern Poverty Law Center can't call itself an arbiter of justice.

From USA Today, by Ms Jessica Prol Smit, 17 August 2019.

Here is the lede plus:

I’ll never forget the moment I learned we were on lockdown. It was Aug.15, 2012. My frustration mingled with fear. Trapped on the sixth floor, we knew someone had been shot. We knew we couldn’t leave yet. We knew little else?

. . .

It was the type of violent incident that one could expect a group that purportedly monitors “hate,” like the Southern Poverty Law Center, to notice, research, and decry. In fact, we were on the center’s radar but for all the wrong reasons. The assailant acknowledged later in FBI testimony that he had selected our office precisely because the SPLC had labeled my employer a “hate group.”

It’s always been easier to smear people rather than wrestle with their ideas. It’s a bully who calls names and spreads lies rather than thoroughly reading a brief’s legal arguments or challenging the rationale underlying a policy proposal. The SPLC has chosen to take the easy path — to intimidate and mislead for raw political power and financial benefit.

Yes, the SPLC has been an abusive organization.  On the other hand, the First Amendment covers everyone, Saints and scoundrels.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Abortion's Possible Future

For John, BLUF:  At this point in time we had a compromise that seemed to work.  Unacceptable, but it provided access to abortion, if you are paying attention to your body, but discouraged abortion for all, at any point in the pregnancy.  Moves by both sides look to destroy that compromise.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

How Fetal Personhood Emerged as the Next Stage of the Abortion Wars

From The New Yorker, by Harvard Law School Professor Jeannie Suk Gersen, 5 June 2019.

Here is the concluding paragraph:

When Republican lawmakers consider the fact of rape or incest irrelevant to a decision to terminate a pregnancy, and when Thomas invokes the spectre of discrimination against a fetus, they are making the same point—that every “unborn child” is entitled to the same dignity as you or me.  And, if fetuses are thought to have basic rights as persons do, then a future ruling might reach beyond overturning Roe.  It might hold that it is unconstitutional for any state to allow abortions at all. This position—the constitutionalization of abortion abolition—would go far beyond what either liberals and conservatives have imagined possible, but it is where the ambitions of fetal personhood now entering the legal mainstream are headed.

There will be abortions, as long as men and women are having sex.  What is created, if there is creation, is a human (something some are blindly unwilling to admit).  At the same time, most of us have no stomach for putting in jail those who decide, early on, that their pregnancy is too much of a burden.

We are a diverse democracy.  Thus we must look for a compromise.

Regards  —  Cliff

The Right to Sue

For John, BLUF:  This reminds me of nothing more than the "Voting" lawsuit against Lowell, ongoing.  It is a money making scam for the lawyers.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Robbing Beyoncé Blind

Here is the sub-headline:

The ADA litigation monster continues to run amok.

From , by Mark Pulliam January 10, 2019.

Here is the lede plus four:

Is it Beyoncé’s fault that some of her fans are blind?  Is the performer a “public accommodation,” like a hotel, restaurant, or department store?  Is it society’s obligation to rectify all misfortunes in life’s lottery?  These questions may seem silly, but they lie at the heart of a cottage industry of abusive class-action litigation against websites pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, a well-intentioned but poorly conceived—and horribly drafted—law that continues to generate unintended consequences decades following its passage in 1990.  Computer users afflicted with various disabilities—blind consumers seem especially litigious—regularly sue companies hosting websites that allegedly aren’t sufficiently “accommodating” of their condition.  Beyoncé and her website (beyonce.com), through her management company, became their latest target.

The federal court complaint naming Beyoncé, as is typical of this predatory genre, is a cookie-cutter document.  Both the plaintiff and her lawyer are serial ADA litigants, sometimes referred to as “ADA trolls.”  Given the lack of any fixed legal standard for “web accessibility,” almost any grievance involving the technical features of a website is litigable, and there is no shortage of contingent-fee lawyers eager to file suit.  The principal requirement: a defendant with deep pockets.  With 22 Grammy awards to her credit, the phenomenally successful Beyoncé qualifies.  She and her husband, rapper Jay-Z, reportedly have a net worth over $1 billion.

Such lawsuits plague merchants engaged in e-commerce, even though the ADA was enacted before the advent of the Internet.  Wheelchair ramps and restroom grab rails are among the accommodations that businesses with physical premises must provide for disabled patrons, pursuant to regulations adopted by the U.S. Department of Justice to implement the ADA.  No such rules exist for websites.  Congress’s silence on the topic has not deterred disabled consumers from filing extortionate lawsuits under the ADA.  Most businesses choose to settle to avoid exorbitant (and unrecoverable) defense costs.

As I’ve pointed out in City Journal, applying the ADA to websites exposes businesses to “the worst of both worlds:  mandates without directions.”  The Beyoncé lawsuit is an example.  She is not a “brick and mortar” establishment.  She is an entertainer—singer, songwriter, actress, and dancer—with a huge social media presence.  Beyonce.com is primarily a marketing platform to update fans and promote her music and upcoming live shows.  The site, brimming with photos of the star and archived media coverage, also advertises her line of fragrances and peddles some themed swag and inexpensive apparel such as t-shirts and sweats.  It’s basically a cyber fan club.

For plaintiff Mary Connor, a visually impaired New York resident who requires screen-reading software to read website content on her computer, beyonce.com represents nefarious discrimination in violation of Title III of the ADA because it is an exclusively visual interface, making it impossible for Connor and other visually impaired customers to browse the site or make purchases without the assistance of a sighted companion. - In this respect, the website is no different than a newspaper, magazine, or mail-order catalog. Connor’s specific complaint is that she wanted to buy an embroidered hoodie but couldn’t, denying her the “full and equal access to, and enjoyment of, the goods, benefits and services of Beyonce.com.”  The class-action lawsuit seeks to compel Beyoncé to add features to make the website accessible to blind and visually impaired users, and—of course—to receive “compensatory damages” and attorneys’ fees.  Alternatively, Beyoncé could simply shut down beyonce.com or discontinue selling themed merchandise on the site, inconveniencing millions of her sighted fans—an outcome that apparently does not concern Connor.

It is bad, but not as bad as if there weren't laws and lawyers.  Or as bad as a system were we couldn't sue when we see injustice.  Sue on!

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Police Protection For All

For John, BLUF:  There is a danger that excess bureaucratization of policing results in less police protection for certain communities.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Why routine federal oversight of local police should be curtailed

From The San Diego Union Tribune, by Professor Gail Heriot, 19 December 2018.

Here is the lede plus one:

Adding extra layers of bureaucracy to a government agency rarely improves its performance.  Yet that was the approach most often taken by the Obama administration in dealing with local police.  When police departments were accused — fairly or unfairly — of misconduct, the Department of Justice quickly geared up to intervene and assert control.  An accusation that was racial in nature — even if it involved only one police officer and even if it could be disproven — was especially likely to trigger a federal response.

DOJ investigations would ordinarily result in a lawsuit.  But the court would never be called upon to decide definitively whether misconduct had in fact occurred.  Instead, DOJ would attempt to foist a “consent decree” on the police department.  The court would be called upon simply to rubber-stamp it.  Once approved, an agreement would be difficult to rescind or modify.

Here is the Bottom Line:

But spare a thought for the problem that has dogged African-American and low-income communities for more than a century:  Because these communities have higher than average crime rates and hence higher victimization rates, they stand to suffer the most when police departments are hamstrung by over-bureaucratization and discouraged from taking initiative.  To protect those communities, the federalization of law enforcement through extensive and expensive consent decrees should be a last resort, not a first resort.

People do well, prosper, when corruption, violence, and theft and other criminality is minimized.  We want all communities in this nation to prosper. That means we need to provide good police protection to all.  Police abuse must be rooted out.  However, that is done by leadership and training, not by multiple levels of approvals in a large bureaucracy.  A large bureaucracy gets in the way of good policing.  Layers of approval works against good policing.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Violence is Wrong

For John, BLUF:  Hiding from acknowledging the source of violence is wrong, and weak.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Violence Against Gays on the Rise in Europe

From PJ Media, by Mr Bruce Baker, 24 October 2018.

Here is the lede:

On October 22, about three thousand people rallied in central Paris “to denounce assaults on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people and demand urgent action from the government.”  Among the many recent incidents that had sparked the protest, noted Reuters, were “the beating of a gay couple by their cab driver” the previous week and the murder in August, in the Bois de Boulogne, of a “transgender sex worker.”  Another report on the rally mentioned two additional, and particularly high-profile, incidents:  in September, an actor named Arnaud Gagnoud was beaten up after giving his boyfriend a hug outside a theater in Paris's 20th arrondissement;  on October 16, Guillaume Mélanie, founder of the gay-rights group Urgence, was gay-bashed in a Paris street.

People are people.  Everyone, as a human right, should be safe in their person.  This situation in Europe is ugly.  This brings to mind Germany in the 1930s.

Gaining social conformance by violence is just plain wrong.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

The Cost of Single Payer Health Care

For John, BLUF:  We have to be careful and ask about the second and third order effects.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

ObamaCare Is Robbing Medicaid’s Sickest Patients

Here is the sub-headline:

The law’s incentives push states to spend more on new enrollees, and less on the disabled and ill.

This morning, on City Life, a Candidate for the Democratic Nomination for the Third Congressional District (3CD) suggested that single payer, modeled on Medicare, was the solution to our health care problems.  This article raises some concerns about that belief.  The problem is, once we go down that path, how do we walk back if we find it unsatisfactory?

From The Wall Street Journal, by Ms Allysia Finley, 25 July 2018.

Here is the lede plus four:

ObamaCare made it more difficult for health insurers to turn a profit on individual plans, since it prohibited them from charging consumers more based on their medical risks.  But the law also created a huge growth opportunity for insurers: Medicaid.

Over the past decade, federal and state spending on Medicaid has nearly doubled to $570 billion—roughly as much as the revenues of United Health, CVS, Anthem, Aetna and Humana put together.  California alone will spend nearly $100 billion on Medicaid this year.

The Medicaid rolls predictably swelled during the Great Recession as people lost jobs and left the workforce.  But many never returned to work.  ObamaCare gave states the option, starting in 2014, to expand Medicaid eligibility to able-bodied people earning up to 133% of the poverty line.  The feds promised to pick up nearly all the costs.

Two-thirds of states have cashed in on this “free” government lunch. Between 2008 and 2016, Medicaid enrollment nationwide rose 24 million to a total of 71 million, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.  By comparison, only five million more Americans signed up for plans on the private individual market.

Struggling to manage this Medicaid surge, states have increasingly come to rely on private health insurers.  About 270 “managed-care organizations” administer half of federal Medicaid dollars.  Under these arrangements, insurers are paid a capitated rate—that is, a flat monthly payment per enrollee, set to reflect what actuaries estimate will be the average cost to provide covered services.  Unlike on the ObamaCare exchanges, insurers are paid higher “premiums” for covering sicker patients.

The long term danger is that the Government will decide that certain people are consuming a disproportionate amount of resources and thus the Government will cut off their medical attention, thus allowing them to die, or perhaps even hasten that death.  This would be analogous to the German Aktion T4 Program, which operated from 1939 to 1945 and killed some 300,000 people, outside those killed in the Holocaust.  This program contributed to the German War Effort by freeing up medical resources for wounded Service members.

I am with the late Germany Bishop, Clemens August Graf von Galen, who publicly opposed this program.  It wasn't right then and wouldn't be right today.

As a side matter, health care is not a human right.  Human rights are against the Government and what it can do to deprive one of God given rights.  Health care is something that the Government provides, or one provides for oneself, perhaps by insurance.  The place where rights come in is if the Government prevents you having health care, and thus depriving you of life (liberty and the pursuit of happiness).

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Going to Singapore

For John, BLUF:  What is the skill set required here?  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Is Trump Unprepared to Negotiate with Kim?

From Pajama Media, by Mr Roger L Simon, 7 June 2018.

Remember, experts built the Titanic, while amateurs built the Ark.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Spouse Abuse—Males

For John, BLUF:  There is the meme and then there are the facts.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

When wives beat their husbands, no one wants to believe it

From The LA Times, by Reporter Cath Young, 22 February 2018.

Here is the lead-in:

During the recent Trump administration domestic-abuse scandals, most of the attention has been focused on former staff secretary Rob Porter.  Porter resigned after both his former wives publicly accused him of assault — with a photograph as corroboration, in one instance.  But a second case involving speechwriter David Sorensen, who also quit over allegations of past spousal violence, is far more complicated: Sorensen asserts that in his first marriage, he was the abused spouse.  His claim raises an important issue — one that, unfortunately, has been overshadowed by the moral train wreck of Donald Trump's White House.

Sorensen's ex-wife Jessica Corbett told the Washington Post she revealed her abuse to the FBI in 2017.  She reiterated her accusations in a television interview.  Yet Sorensen has at least some evidence on his side:  A statement he posted after his resignation is accompanied by several cellphone photos from 2015 and 2016 of minor cuts, scrapes and bruises on his face, neck and chest.  There is no proof these were inflicted by Corbett, but, assuming the dates on the photos were not doctored, the fact that Sorensen documented the injuries has some significance.

Sorensen's posted records also include a screenshot of text messages in which Corbett says she was justified in slapping him in response to his name-calling, and of messages with a friend of Corbett's who called her "high strung" and said she had admitted to slapping Sorenson.  Corbett has confirmed that she "slapped Sorensen a number of times after he called her a vulgar term."

But Sorensen asserts that there was more to it than slaps. He claims Corbett repeatedly hit and punched him, and that she once blocked his way and grabbed him by the crotch while trying to stop him from leaving the house.  She also threatened to accuse him of violence when she did not get her way, he says.

Not that it makes in right for men to physically, or psychologically, abuse women, but it is a two way street  Maybe this was not always this way, although I remember an Old Testament story about a woman murdering a man,♠ but as women have become less "the little wife" and more an equal partner, this kind of thing can develop.

It would be good if everyone stopped; maybe trying to be nice to their spouse or partner for Lent.

UPDATE:  "Heather Locklear arrested for domestic violence, attacking police officers", Fox News, Reporter Sasha Savitsky, 26 February 2018.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  Judith 13:1-10 and also Judges 4:19-21.