All errors should be reported to

Friday, August 09, 2019

Gun control? You first

Three summers ago, the St. Helena Star ran a letter to the editor from Paul Smith, "Say it ain't so, Nancy," about Pelosi's visit to a shoe shop in that Napa Valley town.

He wrote, "Last Saturday afternoon (June 4) I'm standing on the west side of Main Street directly across from the Hunt Avenue intersection chatting with friends. Of course, traffic was heavy in both directions.

"A large perfectly polished and gleaming black SUV is attempting a left turn from Hunt onto southbound Main (not easy). Suddenly blue/red lights are flashing from the windshield area of the SUV (like you would see in an official fire/police vehicle). I said to my friends, I've never seen that before on a regular vehicle and I'd think that's illegal and dangerous. They agreed.

"The big black SUV then darts out across both lanes of traffic with lights flashing in both front and rear windows. It goes directly into the red zone/fire hydrant area in front of Padis and Footcandy.

"A St. Helena police car happens to be going northbound and pulls into the center lane and the officer starts shaking his arm and hollering at the driver of the SUV. While this goes on a man exits the SUV assisting a woman from the vehicle. She dashes off to Footcandy while he waits by the SUV in the red zone."

Who's that lady?

Smith wrote, "As I approach Footcandy, Nancy Pelosi comes out with her shopping bags and the man assists her into the awaiting SUV. The SUV, with lights flashing, bursts back into southbound traffic."

The San Francisco Chronicle followed that up with its own story, "Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill confirmed that his boss was in Napa County on the weekend in question, but insisted that Smith had gotten it wrong. 'This is not at all an accurate account,' he said without elaborating. 'The security detail always complies with appropriate laws and regulations.'

"Asked by the town’s paper to weigh in, St. Helena Police Chief Bill Imboden wrote that his hands were tied because the U.S. Capitol Police and the Secret Service provide dignitary protection for certain high-ranking members of the government, 'and the protection comes with the discretion to violate some state and local laws under the guise of providing the best possible protection.'

"Imboden told us that Pelosi visits St. Helena a lot — she and her husband have a winery just outside town — and that her security detail at times plays fast and loose with the traffic laws. But Pelosi’s isn’t the only one, he said — it happens with other VIPs as well."

Other VIPs?

I guess George Lucas and the rest of the Hollywood crowd go there and have security. I guess the trade off of being a policeman in a well-off small town is having to deal with rich snoots.

But the story shows one of the many politicians who are jerks. They believe the laws that they pass do not apply to them.

Such politicians are not our public servants. They think they are our betters. They think we serve them. And they think voters are fools, especially those who do not support them. That is why Hillary and the rest are so comfortable with calling us deplorable. Bigotry did not die with Bull Connor. The target merely shifted.

They want to disarm us.

Let them go first.

Let Pelosi lose her Capitol Police and Secret Service protection. Yes, I get that she is now second in line in presidential succession. But Chuck Grassley is the next man up followed by 14 cabinet members. (Not Elaine Chao as she is not a native American.)

If private gun ownership is such a bad thing that we must restrict what guns citizens may use, then let the proponents of no guns go first. Let Pelosi sacrifice her armed bodyguards.

It is for the greater good of society, comrade.


  1. -An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.-
    -Robert Heinlein
    It's not that there's too many guns on the streets, it's that there are not enough lawfully carrying gun owners.
    I think many more lives would've been saved if gun ownership was actively promoted.
    Might help improve on illegally parking in the red zone, too.


    2. Exactly my point, Susan. You think if the Wal-Mart was full of carrying gun owners going about their business, that your mental-midget-retard-snowflake would've even tried his publicity stunt?

      I didn't think so, either.

    3. Well, Lonely Girl, you really jammed your fist up your own ass on that reply.

      Did you read the article?

      If you did not, that is the only thing that can reduce that fist jamming to maybe a fee fingers.

      I would refrain a bit and give you the opportnity to reconsider your own retarded reaction on this one, but you are impressively committed to your perspective, so, no reconsiderations from you are worth waiting for.


      1. How is this event not consistent with your position on Heinlein's statement?

      2. Why are the stated reasons, the why question answers, of those quoted in this New York Post article of no affirmative value to your perspective?

      3. What qualities of those who were there to experience this event are qualities you agree with? The New York Post quotes many involved. Describes the actions of many involved. Provides adequate facts concerning the preceeding. Again, did you read the New York Post article?

      4. You consider yourself to be an adequately smart person, do you not? So, if you do, you will read the New York Post article and understand the many factors which this event presents for any to consider.

      5. My name is not susan. My name is not your business. Nor is your name. Nor is any name relevant. Your chosen fake blog name, LG, means not a thing relevant to you being who you are. Lonely Girl, Lazy Gal, Lucky Guy, Lackie Goon, Lovely Gay, Lefty Gump, Licky Gonads, etc., your fake name has no intrinsic meaning or value. It is your perspectives, as you express them in written and posted words, which define you being you.

      Read the article.

      Think about it.

      You may see your perspective changing right before your eyes.

      Or may not.

    4. Ohhh, susan, did you forget your midal again?

    5. Well, Little Girly, your ego will not allow you to remove your fist from your ass.

      Thus, you are Little Girly.

    6. Ahhh, you hurt my feelings.

      There, you take a screen shot of that, give you something to wank off to.

    7. So, Little Girly:

      Progressive snowflake pretending to be MAGA = Check.

      2. Progressive duplicitous snowflake pretending to be MAGA = Check.

      3. Progressive, duplicitous snowflake pretending to be MAGA and pretending it's progressive dupliciotous snowflake reaction to a current event is not a progressive duplicitous snowflake perspective = Check.

      And you did not read the New York Post article, did you, Little Girly?

      Oh no.

      You read all the other progressive fake news articles, jumped your progressive duplicitous Little Girly bunched panties onto this blog, made duplicitous comment, conradicted by your Little Girly replies to the mere suggestion that you are progressively misunderstanding the events so reported upon in the New York Post article, non-active link provided, that all your Little Girly bunched panties stuffing your bunched panties bag could not save you from displaying your progressive duplicity most obviously.

      Perhaps actual MAGA minded will read the New York Post article, be amazed at how less progressively fake it is concerning the actual events and determine for themselves just what is true.

      Not you, tho, Little Girly.

      You got them bunched panties glued solid to your nature.


      Last chance for Little Girly to unbunch those panties.

      See if you, Little Girly, can manage to read this web page, AND resist the bunched panties compulsion to search out anything at all that your Little Girly ego can claim supports your Little Girly contradictions so abundant and obvious within your series of comments on this thread.

    9. From the NYPost article:

      “Missouri protects the right of people to open carry a firearm, but that does not allow an individual to act in a reckless and criminal manner endangering other citizens,” said Greene County prosecutor Dan Patterson in a statement Friday. “As Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes famously explained, ‘the most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre causing a panic.’”

      Obviously Mo has a problem with their own laws. Yeah it might have scared snowflakes in the store, but if he was simply minding his own business otherwise, they had no reason to melt down over it. The prosecutor is simply another fool with a law degree. Last I looked, no one can read anyone's mind and prosecutors are the worst when it comes to that side of the business.

    10. Precisely!!!!

      Are we, as Americans, Constitutionally protected by ANY article or amemdment whatsoever in our Right to be Afraid, Feel Fear and Panic?

      Is there anything in our Constitution declaring that we, as Americans, shall not have our Right to Fear and Panic Infringed?

      The "right" to be afraid, to feel fearful, to panic and to then act the fool is, I think, NOT to be found in our nation's Constitution.

      This event is of more significance than most perceive.

      Much more significance than even Don here appreciates. Perhaps even more than Don understands.

      Thus, Don omits this event from his blog's daily news.

      This event has it all.

      Every element of the conflicts concerning our Constitutional Right to KEEP And BEAR ARMS.

      Why have the abundant knuckleheads clamoring for total infringement of our Right to Keep AND Bear Arms been so quiet about this event?

      They puked out their initial vomitus of fake articles, with every one of them emphasising the previous actual murderous attacks, and yet only the New York Post article reported the actual facts?

      The fake news knows THIS event is significant.

      THIS event demonstrates multiple facets of our Constitutional Right to Keep AND Bear Arms, THE Right that our Constitution specifies SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

      The facts of this event are significant beyond exageration.

      This event should be understood as what the individual who was arressted said it was: A Test most elegant, and challenging to what so many Americans claim they support, but so few actually do.

      Will Don remain quiet as a mouse on this event?

  2. Nancy is probably safe from pedophiles.

  3. here's another perk in corruptifornia.

    some years back, police officers had their home address erased from DMV files, saying, with some justification, that their homes and families could be the target of wackos.

    the year after, all the other SEIU types, librarians, building inspectors, DMV clerks, lifeguards, fireman, and other government employees demanding the same perk. and they got it because govt employee unions own Sacramento.

    then came the rash of tickets on carpool/ toll roads and red light cameras. the ticket would be crossdecked to the DMV, where it would stop. no mailing address. phhht.

    one traffic safety officer (like a meter maid, not a sworn officer, no gun) at LAX had 174 car pool lane tickets that died. these are thousand dollar tickets with the tripled court costs. even if a CHP on a bike pulled him over on a visual, and ran his license to discover 175 previous, he can't arrest him.

    all he can do is write him a ticket.

    democracy is served...with whip cream and a cherry if you belong to the ruling class. and in ca. that's employee unions.


    ps. this wasn't in the la Times. it was in a Denver paper that was against that same idea taking root in Colorado.

    like zappa said, dripping with sarcasm, "it can't happen here!"

  4. I'd go one better, let's disarm the police. That's gun control I can get behind.

    1. Disarming law abiding citizens doesn't make criminals less dangerous. The first responsibility of any government is to maintain law and order. Why would you want to disarm law enforcement and put them and yourself at the mercy of the criminals? Look at what happened in Baltimore when the City government shackled their police force. Now Baltimore can't get enough applicants to fill all their slots. Crime has gone way up and they're on their way to their fifth straight year of over 300 murders. Without armed police, the most vulnerable become easy targets for the criminals.


      Bobbywhatzit is the infantile irritant bobbywhatzit intends to be.

      The bobbywhatzit angst algorhythm is always obvious in every bobywhatzit comment.

      The mild scent of the bobbywhatzit longing for group acceptance to sooth the bobbywhatzit's nagging pains of loneliness are also inbued in the bobbywhatzit comments.

      If bobbywhatzit had a clue, bobbywhatzit would not constantly post comments devoid of substance of content.

      This particular bobbywhatzit comment is typical.

      Bobbywhatzit proclaims to be willing to "get behind" something, that something being yet another absurdity.

      Well, bobbywhatzit is authentically a "get behind" kinda fella.

      That is as much substance as bobbywhatzit has.

      A foundation of mush upon which bobbywhatzit builds the bobbywhatzit house of cards.

  5. I despise professional politicians (99% of them). This story is example 2,938,638.

  6. Nasty Nancy's property in Napa has lots of open space. The weather is mild these all year round. Put up some tents and drop off a few porta-pottys and you could keep at least 100 asylum seekers there.

    Nancy's official residence is in SF but she doesn't stay there. Why not let the homeless use it?

  7. "They believe the laws that they pass do not apply to them."

    It's more than that. They exempt themselves from the laws they impose on us.

    1. Thus, we have opportunity via MAGA.

      MAGA nulls out elist hubris.

      As elitist hubris has been breeding unimpeded for some time in our nation, MAGA needs a bit more than a few moments to reverse the abundant quantities of elitist minions currently infesting our nation.

      We, Americans all, are living the times akin to the rise of socialist democratic nazism of adolf's germany.

      Aka the democrat party of socialist fascist dictatorship.

      Each of all 50 Sovereign States of our Union are being imperiled by this.

      Each of all our Sovereign States' citizens are faced with being the Americans they think they are.

      2020 is just the beginning of all Americans, of all Sovereign States of our Union, proving whether they are the Americans they think they are and precisely what that actually means to each citizen.


    Well, Don, here is your opportunity.

    The New York Post has set the table.

    Your blog here is about perspectives.

    Perspectives, in portions, influenced by publicly available communications.

    Publicly available communications portionally via "journalism".

    So, the New York Post, in this single piece of web posted journalism, has provided you with the opportunity to express your perspectives upon the reported there facts.

    The Who did What, Where, When, How and Why.

    The Why being reported from the quoted sources required of any accurate Why: The person(s) whose Why is the only Why not speculation.

    So, Don, what will you do?

    1. Do you copy and paste your posts from a word salad generator? It sure seems that way. Why not try and be coherent and make your point?
      So, what will you do? Continue to look ridiculous? I imagine so.

    2. Are you drunk, randy?

      The only copy/paste in the above comment is the non-active link to the New York Post web article.

      Did you read the article?

      Is your level of reading comprehension the standard by which all must meet, or you get all panty bunched because you failed to comprehend?

      What level of coherent word composition do you require, randy?