Flock O' Worries

Flock, of ubiquitous camera fame, is an interesting phenomenon sitting at the intersection of technology, demographics and politics. Politics of the left, especially the "defund the police" movement, dramatically improved Flock's prospects allowing them to body-surf on the wave of political virtue signalling, a poorly understood, but virulent characteristic of the left. Flock gave the DtP pols cover. They could claim they support the police, but market Orwellian surveillance as a safety measure. All for the greater good, eh? Especially when you could watch PDs waste away due to attrition. A win-win for the left. 

The market is huge, and geographically concentrated, as the left who embraced and marketed the technology tend to dominate urban areas with dense populations and lots o' crime. And Flock played the collaboration card, as their technology allowed bad guys to be tracked across geo-political borders. No criminal, nor anyone else for that matter, can escape Sauron's never-blinking eye. The technology was sold as "license plate readers" simply tracking plates that the "good guys" told them to watch out for. Then it was gun shot tracking. And next? Who knows.

But all was going well until... 

...along came Trump.

The left fled their Maid Cafés, where they had been gorging on the empty calories of their word salads, to enlist-in-resist. They all did. And that is all they had...all they have. That is their dilemma and our entertainment as it is always fun to see the haughty hoisted on their own petard. Locally, the left pivoted very quickly, very anti-Flock, and suddenly anti-surveillance-state, as if the U.S. Constitution is a new-found friend. A friendship that will not long endure. Or, we would not have Flock in the first place. 

The left does have a real issue, at least in their mind, and it isn't just that they hate Trump, or that the score is Bad Orange Man two, Pant Suits zero. About the only thing they've had as a real, non-knee-jerk, policy position in the last 20 years has been "open borders." That's the real issue, and they dare not say it out loud. They gag at the current administration's enforcement of federal law, and their possible access to Flock's capabilities to do that job. The left's sanctimonious idealization of any and all who "ain't from 'round here," lawfully or not, resulted in serious atrophy in the reasoning parts of the human brain, so they cannot see the logical contradictions of their words and actions. They are also ignorant of how cartels are now into migrant trafficking and their business relationship is not transactional, it is recurring. These migrants will do the cartels' bidding lest the family they've left back home should suffer. Many are not the saints of the left's imagination---they are cartel operatives embedded in our society. But they prefer that over having this administration gain access to Flock services they somehow feel is theirs. 

It will be amusing to see if the left embraces their surveillance state or maintains their "resist" posture. 

Casting Call

The Professional Resisters (ProRes) leadership selected an interesting poster child in their fight against this administration's enforcement of U.S. laws: Seamus Colleton, an Irishman who entered under a visa waiver and overstayed...by somewhere close to two decades. This is a long time by any measure but when you consider the ProRes believe the statute of limitations on immigration offenses is somewhere between five, ten, maybe fifteen...minutes, well twenty years is virtual infinity. Hell, there are carpetbaggers here in daVille who think that after five years they're a native. 

The ProRes story on Colleton is simple: an immigrant seeking a better life, a chance at the American dream. He came here, settling in Boston, taking work as a plasterer. He got married and has two fur-babies. Then, down came ICE, and he is now detained thousands of miles from "home" (pick one) while his distraught pups sit at the door awaiting his return. 

Crocodile tears, right? Everything the ProRes say is correct. But then someone exhumed Paul Harvey. The rest of the story.

Did Colleton come to the U.S. for a better life? Absolutely, but the bar was set low. Why you ask? Glad you asked. That's because there was a bench warrant out for his arrest because he failed to show up in court to face drug charges. He had been apprehended with a sufficiently large quantity of drugs that he was all but certain to spend many years in an Irish prison. Does ICE have him detained far away from Boston? Yes. Yes they do, but only after they offered him the choice to be deported or detained. He chose to be detained. Here's where the dogs come into play. Tugs at the heart strings, doesn't it? You can almost hear Sarah McLachlan, can't you? You see, Colleton was fleeing more than just unpleasantries with the Irish authorities, he left behind a young woman, the mother of his 18 month old twin daughters. Nearly two decades of no contact whilst he pursued his dreams in America. No birthday cards. No Christmas Skype calls. And absolutely no child support. It wasn't until he was detained that he reached out and no one has a plausible explanation. His daughters, now nearly twenty years old, want him to return to Ireland. To face drug charges. They're pissed. 

If you step back, get a broader view of recent ProRes actions something interesting appears. They've made a pivot to white. It seems the casting call for street protesters was "middle-aged (or older) white women, angry preferred." What would Marshall McLuhan say? Since José Antonio Ibarra didn't work out as their poster child for the ICE is Bad campaign, maybe they shifted towards a whiter shade of pale. And where better than Ireland to find a pale-face? Bonus points for showing that ICE is actually going after an unlawful resident from Europe. Or is it?

And the moral to this story? When someone with a political agenda, or worse yet, a political business, tells you a story, be very cautious about what you believe. Think about that if you show up at Vintage Pizzeria tomorrow. 

What Changed?

A recent front page article in the Blue Bag Rag, which really shouldn't have been published, simply reveals the state of stupidity at city hall. It's ostensibly about Flock O' Cameras, but it is so full of nonsense one can only suggest that you "lift the pants, it's too late to save the shoes." 

Where to start?

Oh, let's start with the money. Where does this article say it comes from? Well, it is claimed to be PCID funded, the same PCID that back in the day was quite proud of getting 19 dollars of OPM for every dollar they ponied up. So...yep...outsider money to do what outsiders tell you to do. Sounds like city hall has a pretty loopy definition of "local control." But...wait for it...later the article mentions concerns about a private company using public money to surveil the public. Where the hell were these concerns in the first place? If city hall's greed overcame these concerns back then, why not now?

What changed with the Flock agreement, when, and why wasn't it noticed until now? With the army of money sponges we have at city hall, when they actually come to the office, why did we not have a single bureaucrat to monitor the T&C's, and changes thereunto, for outsourced responsibilities? Maybe we should fire a great number of useless bureaucrats and find someone who can bird-dog outsourcing contracts. Sounds like a win-win.

Then there is the big constitutional so what? You're in public, on public infrastructure, with a vehicle identification that, by law, must be visible. As a federal court has pointed out this violates no constitutional right, even if it were the government doing it themselves. Now, if a private company were to do this, constitutional rights don't apply because those rights protect us from the government, not from each other. 

And then we get to the real issue, or at least part of it, the issue that has the Blue Bellies running this shit show clutching their pearls: ICE. Mentioned ICE twice in this rather short article. First that ICE seems to have accessed some data from the Sandy Springs' (our big sister) Flock O' Cameras followed later by reported assurances from Flock that they don't do that. Heaven forbid that ICE should use every resource available to do their job. Maybe Dunwoody considers itself to be the gold standard of governance, one that ICE should emulate: just don't do your job. Don't even try.

It is a curiosity that city hall doesn't want to get criminals off our streets. And you only need pull the thread a bit before the whole sweater of "undocumented immigrants" unravels. Do they have a driver's license? Acquired by what means? Falsified statements and documents? And you want motor-voter, don't you?

Then you gotta bottom-line it. Are these spend-then-tax Blue Bellies really only pissed because they, well really PCID, are paying and ICE is free-loading? Well, as far as we know that may be the case, because no one seems to have asked if ICE is paying for Flock data services. Maybe if ICE went down to city hall and said "let's make a deal" and threw some money their way, they'd be cool...like ICE. That's how we got interstate lanes in folks' front yard. OPM and other people's agenda. City hall's definition of local control: we take their money and we control it.

Living Life Like A Song

Apparently some bloke witnessed shoplifting at a local Publix and reported the activity to the store's management. All good. Things went pear shaped when he decided to report this to [anti]social media. He may have expected a rough 'em and cuff 'em reaction from fellow Dunwoodians (this was a Dunwoody specific unsociable venue), sorta like this:

Instead he exposed an incredible number of our neighbors who tolerate at the least, and some who downright support shoplifting. Apparently in their mind every thief is a Jean Valjean. 

You have to wonder how many of these bleating hearts actually think it is OK to steal from a large faceless corporation, because well, it is just another big profit-making company. Wonder if that position would change if they knew that Publix is employee-owned and this thief is stealing from your average, common working stiff. 

Reckon this shoplifter will ever pay Publix back?

Silly Season Is Upon Us

It's that time again, time to pick the clowns in the circus. Yeppers. Elections are nigh upon us.

So let's have some fun.

Here is a good way to do just that: ask the question that will put them on the spot. First, a little context. Everybody knows that there is no, nada, zero traffic enforcement inside Dunwoody. Yes, 285 gets patrolled either because superspeeders are lucrative or there is a chance for an asset seizure, but in our neighborhoods? No way. Now this is the context you should use when posing a question to these posers. 

It goes a little like this: "As you know we have a problem with speeders in our neighborhood and what I want to know is can you tell the police chief to run a patrol to put a stop to this?" It is very, very important that you emphasize the word "can" because that means there is only one correct answer: No! Now if you want to have real fun, before you let them answer, say something along the lines of "this is a yes/no question, and anything other than "yes" means no, and anything other than just plain "no" is political obfuscation." 

Let the fun begin!

Another Rematch

This week's Blue Bag Rag sports yet another rematch of competing realities of a Founding Councilman and the Head Cheerleader.

Let's start with the Founder, who points to the office occupancy rate raising the alarm that a rate fifty percent higher than the national average might be alarming. Should be. Doesn't seem to bother bureaucrats at city hall, who simply pivoted from encouraging overdevelopment of office space to overdevelopment of apartment units. See? They can adapt. This Founder also points out that the worst is yet to come as some leases are held on spaces no longer occupied and not likely to be renewed. What he points out is alarming enough, or is it? Unoccupied also means loss of Occupational Tax revenue, which as anyone who has operated a business knows is a tax for the mere privilege of writing paychecks to your employees. Not as big as employer FICA/MC contributions but, still, a chunk of change. There are other knock-on effects. Fewer workers means fewer computers, networks, all things electrical, which means less power consumption and less franchise fees, which are a tax on the use of utilities, often necessary to run a business. There is also a loss of customers for those expensive restaurant build-outs in all those Developers Authority endorsed (and subsidized) buildings. The city gave up on controlled growth, selling out to the immediate greed of developers and now they are in a fiscal bind. Of their own making. 

This week's Head Cheerleader was, frankly, spectacular. It was a political version of a call-to-the-altar revival sermon: the quoting of the scriptures; the homily, descending to a whisper; the crescendo of the call for redemption. Adequate shaming of the sinners with no outright condemnation. Masterpiece of political sermonizing. Supported throughout with background vocals of How Great We Art, it starts with some overwrought testimony to transparency, reaching the pivotal phrase:

"And, we are committed to a robust public process should changes be necessary in our revenue process." 

And, given no similar mention of a "spending process" and how that might incur necessary changes, the pivot was to belabor "same as always" approach to millage rate, without the inconvenient observation that the city rakes in a back-door tax increase. Same as always. And maybe someone should tell the folks at city hall that shifting blame to DeKalb got pretty tiresome about five years into this dumpster fire of a city, and that the fact that appraisals come from Decatur in no way absolves city hall of responsibility for a millage rate above the roll-back rate. To the Head Cheerleader's point: the city sets the millage rate. 

It gets even more interesting as some of the tried and true politi-speak oozes, with the use of relativism compounded with incomplete comparisons. Comparing a Dunwoody homeowner's tax burden to anyone else is irrelevant. This city was founded on promises not applicable, not comparable to these other cities and their homeowners. And "we do more with less" begs the questions: more of what; and less than what? Certainly not less tax revenue. And "managed well, but even without adding additional services" flies in the face of reality. There has been mission creep (adding "services") as well as scope expansion (adding costs, just because). Are SUV's more economical than patrol cars? Really? How much money is spent on PR? Are four-color glossy mail-outs really a good value? A better question: what value are they, and are they covering for a less than glossy reality? Is the Head Cheerleader going to shake her pompoms at the legal expenses incurred to defend some indefensible (proven in court) police antics? But yes, that kind of "pride" is indeed incredible. 

The Truth, ...

...the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. 

There's been a bit of point-counterpoint going on between the city's head cheerleader and one of the founding councilmen playing out in the blue bag rag. It is over the issue of property tax. The meaning of property tax is crucial to any reasonable comprehension of what is circulating, so we'll look at that later. First some context. 

The head cheerleader, who is one of those politicos that loves to say "we didn't raise the property tax rate", is now saying "Dunwoody taxes to remain unchanged," with the assertion this is "No Spin." Now the context of this is property taxes, and as a revenue item, property taxes on homestead exemption eligible properties in the city is up this year over last, as it has been almost every year. This is the observation made earlier by the founding councilman, and it is absolutely true. However, if you close one eye, hold your mouth right and live in the alternate reality of politics, what the head cheerleader asserts can be viewed as true. 

It all depends on your understanding of "property tax." 

In the head cheerleader's world, "property tax" is yours, and if it is, then the taxable base value of your home is indeed frozen at the value in 2010 or at the time of your purchase. So how is it that the founding councilman can be correct? 

It's actually quite simple. It is not your tax, because the city is taxing property, not you. That's why it is called "property tax." You may be deceived by the fact that you write the check and that makes it your tax, and some folks would like you to think that way. It isn't and it's actually quite easy to understand. First, you will find, if you try, that they don't care from where or from whom they get the money. Your rich mother-in-law could write the check and bet your bottom dollar, they will cash it. Or, if that doesn't convince you that this is not a tax on you, but instead is a tax on property you own, try this: don't pay it. See what happens. Do they garnish your wages? Nope. Do they dip into your accounts? No. Do they bring in the big guns, the IRS, to take your money that way? Absolutely not. So, what do they do? They will auction that property on the courthouse steps to get their money. That's what they do, because they are taxing the property. Period. Hard stop.

And that is why the head cheerleader can stand in front of folks owning homestead exemption eligible property and say "your property taxes remain unchanged," and it is true if you accept the [incorrect] notion that this is a personal tax. The fact (that must be disclosed by state law) that the city's property tax on homestead exemption eligible property increases without a milage rate increase casts an unfavorable light on "unchanged." 

So who is winning the war of words? Well, if this were is a sporting event, the founding councilman looks like a veteran sports analyst and the head cheerleader looks like she'll shake her pompoms at whatever her team does on the field, no matter how bad that is. 

Turns out you don't get your own facts, but you do get to spin your own truth.

Vote Mad

Double entendre intended.

Let's start with anger. Seems some left leaning loud chirpers want you to look at your power bill, get riled up and let emotions drive your vote for Public Service Commissioner. Perhaps that is the only way to get a Democrat into office, because facts ain't gonna cut it. 

It helps if you're crazy. You're supposed to ignore that Georgia suffers from some of the lowest rates in the country, and those that are lower are blessed with enormous amounts of hydro. You have to wonder how the eco-warriors feel about what those dams do to a natural ecosystem. Or, maybe you don't. You'll also need to turn a blind eye to the reliability of our power generation and distribution system. Can't compare us to Texas or California. At least not unfavorably enough to swing a vote to the left. 

What's really interesting is that some of the same, loud chirpers, laying hate on Ga Power and the PSC are the same ones decrying that Dunwoody has hit a millage rate cap. Ga Power charging what is necessary for abundant, reliable power is bad, but Dunwoody pilfering our purses to piss money away, well that is good. 

You gotta be crazy.

Hasty Retreat

Sandy Springs recently passed a "buffer zone" law seriously restricting in-your-face canvassing, proselytizing, and just general interaction in public. Yes, you would still be allowed to preach from the pulpit. In church. This passed with only two dissenting votes. 

More recently, Sandy Springs rescinded that ordinance by a unanimous vote, with the city attorney's legal opinion also doing a 180. It's enough to make your head spin. 

You gotta wonder why folks running the newish faux cities do the silly things they do.  

Where's Cancel-Culture When You Need It?

Remember those days? When you could say something seemingly harmless, certainly with no ill intent whatsoever, but someone, perhaps because they live in a world of their own, becomes offended? Try as you might, no apology is sufficient. None will ever be acceptable and the offended clearly prefers to wallow in victimhood. If the offended has an entourage you will be summarily excommunicated from your world. Your life is over. Gone. Disappeared. You might even say "86-ed."

Those days are over.

Apparently some former D.C. hotshot posted something offensive, intentionally so, but it was interpreted as a threat. A serious threat. On life and limb. Directed towards someone who, not that long ago, has suffered attacks on their life. Bullet whizzing past the head kind of serious. This hotshot wasn't just flashing an OK sign (which would have lots of folks up in arms), he made a threatening post targeting someone who might have reason to be a bit sensitive about these things. 

My how times have changed.

In the good old days, this hotshot would have been immediately canceled. Vilified in the media, social and legacy. Shunned by all right-thinking folk with an ounce of moral integrity. Today we can expect this hotshot to be immediately forgiven. It was just a misunderstanding of a term, a slang term, whose meaning is malleable and has been transformed at a rate this hotshot cannot fathom. He didn't know it would have that meaning, that his intent would be misunderstood, and after all it is his intent that is paramount, not the interpretation of the bloke he targeted. Right? Right. We can expect the hotshot to be defended, if not glorified, while his target will be vilified. 

We've come full circle.

Political Pontificates

A trifecta of DeKalb's political pontificates held a town hall to diss and discuss shenanigans under the gold dome. Not to worry, these were Democrats one and all so the party wasn't crashed by professional rabble rousers. Unhindered, they got to lay out Their Truths. One priceless nugget regarded bills to restrict or ban machine issued traffic tickets, all managed by a for-profit private corporation. Here's the kicker: they actually support the privatization of government responsibility. That's right, and they're Democrats, who've obviously never heard of a writ of mandamus. But we get this nugget:

“Here we are pontificating about protecting our children, then we turn around and ban local communities from protecting their children by not being able to give tickets to people who speed in school communities,” Draper said. [emphasis added]

Here's the deal, outside of political echo chambers it makes no sense for private citizens, and private companies, to be issuing fines for violating laws because that is the job of our government, a government ideally beholding to our elected officials. Like them. What they ignore, perhaps willingly, is that if these local communities want to protect children, they are free, almost required, to do so, after all that IS what the police force is for. In fact these new little cities that sprang up had to provide a minimum number of services, and most chose to put police at the top of the list. And yet...here we are, Democrats wanting to privatize government.

We don't need a corporate police force when we're paying for a real one. We may need a writ of mandamus. And a recall vote.