It's frightening how the Executive Order has replaced the Rule of the People.
Laws enacted by the 535 people's representatives in Congress are virtually irrelevant. The President - charged with enforcing the laws - now either ignores them or makes his own. Pandora's box has been opened.
And there's nothing we can do about it.
The checks and balances on the Executive branch have been compromised. Permanently, I'm afraid. Those checks have historically included impeachment, funding, and and nominations. Impeachment is out of the question - it's too political, especially with a biased media. House leaders have gone on record they will not use funding as leverage. And disrupting nominations are countered with a Presidential fiat, as in, if you block so-and-so for this post, then I'll an EO ban on bullets (as in AR-15).
This is scary. There is no control on the Presidency.
I think our current President actually does love our country. It's just that he is imp…
A friend of mine from back in my high school days, Marty Stroud gives a frank, honest interview about his role as a prosecutor in a 1983 death penalty case. The case was overturned in 2014, and the defendant, Glenn Ford, was released. Ironically, he suffers from untreated stage 4 cancer, so his freedom will be relatively short-lived. Marty's interview is moving and thought provoking, regardless of your views on the death penalty. The video is about 6 minutes - worth a look if you have a few minutes to spare... In wake of apology, ex prosecutor calls for abolishment of death penalty
In an unprecedented apology, Stroud calls out state's fight against compensation
There is a bunch of silliness from the believers of anthropogenic global warming (AGW), led by the fatuous Al Gore.
Here's yet another refutation of AGW from a founder of Greenpeace, of all people, Dr. Patrick Moore.
The money quote:
By its constitution, the IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] has a hopeless conflict of interest. Its mandate is to consider only the human causes of global warming, not the many natural causes changing the climate for billions of years. We don’t understand the natural causes of climate change any more than we know if humans are part of the cause at present. If the IPCC did not find humans were the cause of warming, or if it found warming would be more positive than negative, there would be no need for the IPCC under its present mandate. To survive, it must find on the side of the apocalypse.
The IPCC should either have its mandate expanded to include all causes of climate change, or it should be dismantled.