Think of a War Where Only One Side Is Allowed to Fight

Media outlets keep promoting 'forest defenders' and ignoring that they shot a police officer

If the left campaigns to free an accused person, that person is likely guilty. When they are not trying to get the guilty off, they are trying to destroy the innocent (see: Sacco and Vanzetti = framed; Justice Kavanaugh = corrupt, and Joe Biden = honest). Even when I was on the left this tendency among those who claim to want a better world puzzled me. I came up with several reasons.

Recruitment: Most people would want an innocent person freed but only a potential true-believing, money-donating, self-deluding activist will campaign to free the guilty.

Delegitimizing the Justice System: The guilty person is on the "right side of history," combating an entrenched evil and therefore not just innocent but heroic. It's the other-way around for the so-called innocent person who is actually a cowardly defender of privilege.

A Display of Power: Freeing the guilty and destroying the innocent will attract supporters to the movement and discourage opponents. Also, it will strike fear in the souls of possible apostates (black conservatives, for instance).

The political left wants power above all else and believes that a highly disciplined and properly led band of activists can gain control during social chaos, hence "the worst the better" for the far left. Many would rather be a camp guard in a socialist state than a factory worker in a capitalist one.

Whither -- or Wither -- San Francisco

Government action and the reaction:

No major American city has failed at the same level as Detroit, whose population dropped from 1.85 million people in 1950 to about 630,000 today. Move over Detroit, here comes San Francisco, which lost 6.3 percent of its population between 2019 and 2021, a rate of decline larger than any two year-period in Detroit’s history and unprecedented among any major US city.

In 1964 the Democrats put the Model City Program in place. It was meant to show what innovative government programs could accomplish. Detroit was a model city. A lot of Federal money and "help" for Community Action went into Detroit. The 1967 riots -- a type of community action -- followed. Those who sponsored the Community Action then wrote a report blaming the results on systematic racism (other people's systematic racism, of course).

It's the model for Democrat Party governance they've followed ever since -- blame everyone else for your screw-ups. Comparing dynamic Detroit in 1960 with its current husk, to sleepy D.C. then with its bustling (and budget-busting) "farms into office-parks" present, explains why this approach -- an apparent failure for ordinary Americans of every color and belief -- persists.

https://www.hoover.org/research/san-francisco-falls-abyss

Under-Whelma, Velma

I said of Prime Video's The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power that it was a bad, expensive flop but not horrible. I suggested ROP was less-than-horrible because I watched every episode and was mindful of the old joke that "the food was awful and the portions were small." However, unlike some Youtube critics, I'm not hoping for a season two.

But as regards HBO's Velma, I suffer no such constraints. The tale is told from Velma's perspective and she revealed herself to be such a horrible person that 15 minutes into ep-one I determined she really was the murderer and, the case being solved, I stopped watching. But I will applaud the show's premise that not all persons of the non-binary persuasion are good.

Velma takes a cartoon character aimed at children and repackages her story for adults between the ages of thirteen-and-a-half and fourteen. With the exception of mainstream media movie critics, everyone else pretty much hated it. We can only hope that HBO cancels the plans for a Pornographic Bugs Bunny Show. Yes, I am aware that Bugs once dressed in drag and kissed Yosemite Sam but dammit, they didn't go steady.

The Last of Us, Episode One

First, I'm not familiar with the video-game, but I knew HBO's The Last of Us had Zombies, though I expected more -- more monsters and more action. However, talking in hallways with guns does work better than just talking in hallways.

The opening scene -- where the coming Fungal Apopocalypse is blamed on Global Warming -- succeeded in lowering my expectations (I'd have gone with an escaped pathogen from Dr. Anthony Fauci's basement lab -- after consulting legal counsel, of course). I'm glad I hung around for Depeche Mode's "Ride with my Best Friend" over the end credits.

Though I enjoyed the extended normal-life setup that followed the opening obligatory lecture, it should have been half as long with twice the ominous overtones. I assumed the delightful and precocious daughter was 14 or 15, so her picking up much of the household burden while Joel, her dad, operated a small business was OK. That doesn't work for a twelve-year-old -- apparently her age in the video game. I did not know she would die in the first episode, so, surprise! I enjoyed the panic, mayhem, and death caused by the sudden onset of the disease. Does that make me a bad person?

Fast forward twenty years and Joel is in a walled-off portion of Boston overrun by "girl bosses" within and zombies without. Given that it's Boston, the superfluidity of girl bosses makes sense. We don't see many zombies but I assume they are the bigger threat. How Joel got to Boston without the help of his daughter isn't explained. Joel isn't exactly "Pale Rider," but nonetheless Tess, his significant other and immediate supervisor, compares him to Clint Eastwood. Still, he has room to grow (or shrink) -- if he can escape the ever-present, domineering forces of the matriarchy. Given that Elle, the young girl he is supposed to accompany on her cross-country journey, is an alpha-diva aspiring girl boss, his chances don't look good. I thought there would be a threat from airborne spores since a fungal infection is the cause of this worldwide distress. However, when they came across a human victim "molded" to the wall in the abandoned Boston subway, I was surprised by how casually they treated the danger. They even seemed to step on some of the protruding growth.

Overall, I thought the first episode was good but could have been better with mo'violence. They showed the bloody aftermath of one violent fight. Why not show the fight? The series is, after all, based on a shooter game -- unless it was a feminist consciousness-raising effort that I thought was a shooter game.