I know you have seen as I have that the tech moguls in Silicon Valley are all moving to Texas and billionaires in New York are moving to Florida. My question is why are they moving. I assume as I’m sure you do that they are moving to escape the ridiculous policies and taxes in those states which are losing residents in unprecedented numbers.

Just for the hell of it, let’s consider another option. Sure they want lower taxes and more freedom, but maybe they are really planning on using their wealth to turn Texas and Florida blue. I think it’s worth considering and is inline with my previous rants about Yankees leaving the north and invading the south but wanting to instigate the same shit they left. Think about it.

I saw an excellent article pointing out how poor Jill Biden’s‘dissertation’ ( it’s actually called a position paper in the Ed world) was and it was incredibly poor. Anyone want to bet that the University of Delaware wasn’t about to deny a ‘doctorate’ to the wife of their senator? There is a link in the article to her actual paper and I started to read it but after 20 pages or so I couldn’t take it anymore. Not only was it extremely poorly written, which should make you question the validity of a doctorate in education — if you’re an educator you should at least be literate — contained many typos, but it is filled with ‘data’ for which there are no footnotes meaning just like her husband she just makes shit up and that’s all it takes to get an ED D. At least that’s all it takes if your husband is a senator. Enjoy!

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2020/12/15/jill-biden-wants-us-to-call-her-dr-s-heres-a-look-at-her-ed-d-position-paper-to-receive-that-doctorate-n294848

Ok just so you know I have a Juris Doctor degree and so can claim to be as much as a doctor as Jill Biden, but really that’s not true. My claim is much more valid than hers. I will explain later how that came to be.

The reason for this rant is that the WSJ published an article questioning Jill Biden’s insistence that she be called Dr. Biden. I apologize for not being able to find and link to an article I saw today exposing the fallacy of her claim. The left went crazy of course. But consider this, she doesn’t have even a a Ph. D, she has a doctorate in education. I think it’s an ED.D. It may actually be denominated something else but it’s not a Ph.D much less a medical degree.

The article creditably said that her degree was at best the equivalent of an MBA . I disagree. Her doctorate is not even the equivalent of a bachelors degree in any of the sciences or engineering. BYW I have a MBA and an BS in Chemical Engineering and so am uniquely qualified to opine and so I will. Based on my experience and knowledge a doctorate in education is basically the equivalent of a high school diploma with a little bit of college casework. I know of at least one, quite frankly idiot, who teaches second grade and needs to study to keep ahead of her students and she has a masters degree in education.

Now so you know the basis for my opinion let me tell you about my first wife’s aunt. She has a doctorate in education in this state. When we visited, and at that point I already had my law degree, her husband was waxing about her brilliance and she shut him down. She wanted no part in a discussion of who had the real academic credentials. She knew that her degrees were not at the level of mine.

Now for what I talked about earlier, the reason I have a doctorate is because after WWII the law schools got together and decided to change a law degree from a Bachelors of law to a Juris Doctor because the federal government was considering a medical doctor degree as a doctorate but a law degree as the equivalent of a bachelors degree in the humanities.

Jill give it up. You are only minimally brighter than your brain dead husband.

ACB, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh were spineless. Trump put them on and now they pay him back by being cowards. They apparently were more more worried about being trashed by the media than by doing their job. They are apparently new Roberts. They are more concerned about their publicity than the law.

They effectively recused themselves without actually having to do so. I feel sorry for Trump having nominated such spineless wimps.

Trump should send both the Paris Clinate Accord and the Iran nuclear deal to the senate for ratification as treaties before brain dead Biden assumes the presidency illegitimately. They would both fall epically. Then Biden would have to try to do something unilaterally that had already been rejected by the senate. He could not even in his diminished mental capacity believe that he had the authority to do something that had been rejected by the senate.

Now that we will have an illegitimate president, it is imperative that AG Barr appoints a Special Counsel to pursue the Hunter Biden case which also involves his dad. There is no way that the incoming administration can be allowed to investigate itself.

Now that the Supreme Court has declined to do their job and put a dementia addled, Chinese puppet in the White House, Hillary must be crying. Apparently she screwed the wrong guy and now Kamala will be the first female president of the US.

Just out the Supremes ducked their duty and like all the other courts have failed to address the issues and ruled on procedural grounds to put an illegitimate president in office. Hopefully the people of Georgia will vote to prevent the left from destroying the court and then they will know how stupid their decision was.

The four states being sued by Texas filed their briefs opposing Texas yesterday afternoon and this morning Texas filed its reply brief.

It appears to me that the defendant states know that they lose on the merits. They clearly did not follow the constitution and they know it so they are arguing the same bullshit they did in their state courts. Basically, they are arguing procedural issues not substance. For example in one state at the state level they argued what amounts to doctrine of laches which basically means you filed too late and should have filed earlier. This is not the same as a statute of limitations argument where by law you have to file suit by a specific time. It’s similar in effect though and in the case I speak of the state court would have thrown out the suit if it had been filed before the election because they would have said they had no standing because they hadn’t been harmed until the vote occurred. The classic Catch-22.

I am unaware of any case where the Republicans were actually allowed to have discovery or present evidence. I could be wrong but I don’t think evidence has been presented only in legislative hearings.

Now these states are trying to claim before the Supremes that this has already been adjudicated and so the doctrine of res judicata should be applied although I don’t believe they actually used those words. Res judicata means it’s already been decided. And importantly it only applies to the parties to the lawsuit. For example if I sue you for some fraudulent activity and lose I can’t sue you again for the same thing. However anyone else who may have been affected by the same fraud can still sue you.

Importantly, Texas was not a part of any of these state court suits and therefore their rights have never been adjudicated and res judicata doesn’t apply.

The defendants also argued that Texas wants the Supremes to decide the election for Trump. As I indicated yesterday, that’s not what Texas is seeking. They want these four states to follow the constitution in this election so as to protect the constitutional votes of its citizens.

Now my prediction is that they will take the case because they are the only court who can and if they decline then they will have decided that the constitution is just an old document in the National Archives. In case you don’t know Justices Thomas and Alito stated, I believe four years ago, that when one state sues another on non frivolous grounds they are required to take the case. So the question becomes, do the three justices appointed by Trump because they are originalists follow the constitution or duck their responsibility?

If they take the case, Trump will win and here’s why. As I said earlier, even Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Georgia know they violated the constitution with the changes they made without legislative approval.

So what remedy could the Supremes order. First they could order a new election in those four states but that is highly unlikely given the time frame. The second thing they could and should do is issue a TRO — temporary restraining order — to prevent these states from certifying electors in their state until after they decide the case, and there is one more option which I have already discussed and so will put aside for a moment.

What I find interesting is what would happen if they entered the TRO. The electoral college is set by statute to meet Monday to elect the president. If the Supremes prevent these four states from certifying their electors then neither Trump nor Biden will have the requisite 270 votes and that constitutionally would send it to the House where Trump wins. However, Congress could change the law and put off the electoral college vote until later. In our history the electoral college has met as late as the first week in January. I suspect that they would put it off.

That gets us to the other option previously discussed, namely that the Supremes send it back to the legislatures of these four states to exercise constitutional authority to determine which set of electors get certified. At that point the question becomes do the Republican legislators have the balls to vote for their party and if they don’t they should lose their next election.

At least I am pretty sure I have ranted about this before. The ridiculous whu flu orders being put in place are not about the virus, they are about seeing just how far they can impose nonsense and we will go along like lemmings.

I have ranted before about the left planning to call global warming a pandemic and then do the same kind of actions to destroy our rights. And there are many articles making the same point.

Now let’s be clear, despite the lefts protestations to the contrary, there is zero science backing up any of their nonsense. Masks don’t work! Social distancing is total bs that grew out of a high school science fair project. Lockdowns have been proven to be totally ineffective and frankly counterproductive often resulting in more deaths than they supposedly prevent. Let’s look at the latest from our crazy governor. You have to stay in your house from 10pm to 5am. And drinks can’t be served in restaurants and bars after 9pm. Please tell me what even bogus science backs up this nonsense.

The supposed reason for this bullshit is that cases are spiking in the state. First positive tests are not cases. As I have said many times, 90% plus of these people don’t know and would never know they were supposedly infected. And I say supposedly because as I’m sure you’re aware because I have ranted about it before. The PCR test being used was not developed for this purpose and in fact a positive test has no proven correlation with this specific virus. The more you test the more ‘cases’ you will find and then you can use the bogus results to further your fascist desire to control us.

Don’t be a lemming!