FORMER San Francisco County Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi wasn’t a cop anyway. He was a Leftist poseur who donned a law enforcement uniform in order to further his own perverse Leftist agendas because he could. And shamed the uniform itself during his ridiculous rule. He also has the blood of Kate Steinle on his hands.
Now he’s gone. The citizens of San Francisco voted him out, and a former SFSO Chief Deputy Sheriff named Vicki Hennessy is in. Even SF voters can act like a broken clock now and then.
Let’s recall: Ross Mirkarimi was the co-founder of the Green Party of Fornicalia. His claim to fame as a SF Supervisor was to ban plastic bags. He introduced legislation to legalize marijuana. He wanted to ban smoking on golf courses. He introduced the re-naming of Eddy Street to Marcus Garvey Way, because he knew the name change would convince black residents to stay in the city despite cost of living increases. He wanted reparations for SF blacks displaced in the 1960s when the Fillmore District was mostly torn down.
Mirkarimi was a heavy advocate of gun control despite the fact that he owned firearms. One happy note: he had those firearms confiscated, and was convicted of false imprisonment stemming from a domestic violence call where he was initially charged with battery, child endangerment and dissuading a witness. Good times, eh Ross? Smack the ol’ wife around, get convicted of false imprisonment and then “somehow” manage to get that conviction expunged? Good times, eh Ross? Read about that here. His firearm was given back due to a plea bargain. He was Sheriff, after all.
Except for this: if me or any other LEO in Fornicalia were convicted for any domestic-violence-related charge, we would be mandated to forfeit our firearms under Fornicalia law, which in turn means we would forfeit our jobs.
Mirkarimi also had his license suspended when he was involved in an accident with his official County of San Francisco vehicle and did not report the accident to DMV as required by law. Oddly enough, his county G-ride got repaired. Imagine that.
Sort of a clue: Mirkarimi did not receive an endorsement from the SF Deputy Sheriff’s Association when he ran for Sheriff.
Finally, if you recall, it was the agenda and directives of Ross Mirkarimi that resulted in the needless death of Kate Steinle on SFs’ Pier 14. The illegal Mexican suspect had been deported five times. Despite that, it was the policy of the SFSO — under Mirkarimi — that illegals should not be held. SFSO asked for the Mexican suspect to be transferred to their agency so that they could free him.
Nope, can’t use that name, wouldn’t be prudent. Might offend actual humans with what persons call red skins. Though Caucasoids appear to have white skins, asians something of yellow skins and blacks black skin. What a shock.
California bans use of ‘Redskins’ as school mascot or team name
by David Siders
Amid national debate about the use of a term many critics call outdated and offensive, Gov. Jerry Brown on Sunday signed legislation banning the use of “Redskins” as a school mascot or team name.
The “Redskins” bill’s enactment comes 11 years after then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed similar legislation. Brown signed the bill without comment.
In the meantime, however, businesses continue to flee Fornicalia, Fornicalia continues to embrace illegal invaders and Sanctuary Cities though those illegal citizens keep racking up the body points, fires ravage the state because state regulations have disallowed the harvesting of downed or dead trees and the deadfall is truly frightening, and there are no plans in place to buttress and support Fornicalia’s water system as our drought worsens. And just like the federal government, Fornicalia politicians seem to think cash to pay for their pink ponies and unicorns appears out of thin air. Translated: the people left in Fornicalia who actually pay taxes.
That Redskin naming thingie, that’s so terribly important. Deck chairs, anyone? The blue one goes right over there. Look; it’s got Jerry’s name right on the back.
Oh, how this state does so very much deserve to crash.
The initial focus of job elimination will be on unskilled workers primarily because of the recent insistence on a minimum “living wage” of $15 for jobs that were never meant to be anything more than entry-level introductory jobs.
One of the first targeted forms of job elimination will be at what are termed “fast food” type restaurants, where a kiosk can somewhat readily streamline the ordering process. Whereas a human employee once touched the CHEESEBURGER icon, you will be able to do that yourself. These various kiosks are already in operation in Europe and here in the US. McDonalds readily admits they are a response to $15 minimum wage demands.
Of course, there will be “unforeseen consequences” to this wage increase demand — that I readily and easily foresee. More on that in a moment.
Robots are going to steal the jobs of chefs, salespeople and models, researchers say as they unveil full list of likely robot professions
by Andrew Griffin
Scientists have created a huge, in-depth analysis of what jobs are under threat from robots — with salesmen, chefs and even models all in the firing line.
Researchers have assembled a full list of all the things that robots are good and bad at, and so what jobs they are likely to take. In all, about 35 per cent of jobs are likely to have been taken on by robots in the next 20 years, the researchers said.
Some professions — such as therapists, personal trainers and teachers — are safe from the coming robot apocalypse. But those that require repetitive skills, the manipulation of data or manual entering of information could see their jobs taken away.
The first question you must ask: is this me? If you have one of those delineated jobs, that means you likely inhabit an unskilled or semi-skilled job that isn’t long for this earth.
That also means you need to refocus your attention on upgrading your job skills or perhaps moving into a different job altogether.
For the time being, jobs that demand a high degree of human interaction are safe.
But that brings us back to unskilled and/or repetitive jobs.
Like those that illegal aliens used to fill — and jobs the likes of which are being eliminated due to, in Fornicalia, the drought — and in other places by the more rapid introduction of various forms of technology because of increased business costs.
In other words, the argument supporters of illegal Mexican (and other) invaders make on behalf of those invaders — that they do jobs others won’t or can’t — isn’t holding water any more. A greater number of jobs in the agricultural or various service fields are being mechanized. This isn’t speculation; it’s occurring right now.
Therefore, the “need” for more illegal immigrants in order to fill the increasing number of unskilled jobs is a specious one at best, more and more unnecessary with each and every passing week and month.
For real Americans, the writing is on the wall: adapt and educate yourself or become superfluous.
For illegals, we don’t need your unskilled labor. We don’t have enough room to accommodate the unskilled true American citizens in the labor force already.
Which translates to: illegal invaders these days mean only to acquire their portions of American Free Cheese, their own piece of the Entitlement Pie.
Their future is to take and not to produce.
Adding unskilled Syrians who bring only more Islam to the equation?
Because, after all, if it’s good enough for Harry Reid, it’s good enough for me.
It’s also apparently good enough for Louisiana Senator David Vitter:
Vitter happened to quote from another figure who advocated for the end of birthright citizenship: Harry Reid.
In 1993, Reid introduced S.1351, called the Immigrant Stabilization Act. As you can see when you click the link, this bill was proposed solely by Reid himself, fully credited.
Reid said then, in a 1993 speech:
If you break our laws by entering this country without permission and give birth to a child, we reward that child with U.S. citizenship and guarantee full access to all public and social services this society provides. And that is a lot of services.
Reid is entirely correct. Vitter agrees. And so do I, wholeheartedly. Reid continued:
Is it any wonder that two-thirds of the babies born at taxpayer expense in county-run hospitals in Los Angeles are born to illegal alien mothers?”
No wonder at all. True then and true now. Want proof of Reid’s words? Here it is:
Reid later verbally regretted the move in 1999. That was because he realized he was moving closer and closer to more true power in DC and his seniority in the Demorat Party helped immensely. Demorats counseled him to walk back his earlier remarks. Also, Nevada became flooded with illegal Mexicans, a firm expanding base of Demorat voters who filled the mandatory two-pronged ideal: 1) ignorant and 2) needy, not independent.
And nothing smells better to a Demorat than another ignorant, needy, Mexican voter.
Demography is prophecy. As such, we are well on our way to turning the Left Coast into what Victor Davis Hanson calls “Mexifornia.” That is to say: purposely “importing” the same ignorant mindset that has turned Mexico into the southern country from which people have, for decades, wanted to escape. DC is purposely importing unskilled, uneducated and disease-ridden illegals into the United States. For one reason only: votes.
When illegal children began flooding our southern border in huge waves roughly two years ago, is it any surprise whatsoever that diseases the US hadn’t seen in any kind of significant numbers shot skywards? TB? Pertussis? Swine flu? Dengue? Measles? All over the US? DC purposely took those children and hid them in communities all around the states, refusing to tell anyone what they had done and where they had stashed those children, in order to hide them. Then it lied about the statistics.
Like Vitter, like the younger Harry Reid, I too support the end of “anchor babies” and birthright citizenship.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
But: does the 14th absolutely guarantee birthright citizenship?
RUMOR: The 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to children born to parents illegally in the U.S.
FACT: The current law that grants automatic citizenship to children born to illegal aliens is Section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1401, which uses language similar to the 14th Amendment, regarding persons born in the United States and “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Critics argue that automatic birthright citizenship could be changed by revoking the statute. Others say it would require a constitutional amendment because they believe the 14th Amendment requires birthright citizenship. However, nobody can say what the 14th Amendment means until the Supreme Court interprets it. The court has not done that (The 19th century case – United States v. Wong Kim Ark – that some outlets are reporting concerned a legal Chinese immigrant).
The Birthright Citizenship Act would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act – not the constitution – to consider a person born in the United States “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States for citizenship at birth purposes if the person is born in the United States of parents, one of whom is: (1) a U.S. citizen or national; (2) a lawful permanent resident alien whose residence is in the United States; or (3) an alien performing active service in the U.S. Armed Forces.
And there you go. Just a modicum of logic used.
I say: end automatic “anchor babies” and birthright citizenship.”
Leftists will squeal like stuck pigs.
Because: there goes their ignorant and needy voting base.