Thursday, June 30, 2016


The AP reports that Bill Clinton had a private meeting with Loretta Lynch, Attorney General of the United States.

Yes, the woman who will ultimately decide the fate of HRC. She also happens to be the woman who will certainly be out of a job if HRC does not win the Presidency and, given the often reported hostility between the Obama and Clinton camps, would probably have been out of job even if HRC did win. I wonder how Bill made her the offer she couldn't refuse and what it consisted of. His mega billion dollar foundation might be a perfect soft landing, if  the investigation finds nothing to prosecute. On the other hand, it may have included keeping her AG spot if HRC wins. Of one thing I am absolutely certain; grandchildren did not enter into the conversation.

We have all heard of the importance of politicians, judges and other government employees avoiding the appearance of impropriety.

I can think of few more perfect examples of the appearance of impropriety than a 30 minute private meeting between the nation's top law enforcement official and the husband of the subject of at least one of  her agencies' investigations. It has been rumored (unconfirmed as far as I know) that the Clinton Foundation is also under investigation.

Looking around for definitions and examples of the appearance of impropriety I came across this

The definition is not unusual. It does have a bonus feature;

" Associated concepts: crime, violation"

Yes, associated indeed. A certainty in this case.

The mainstream media has been working overtime to spin this as no big deal but there are some dissenters this time. Some lefties for whom this is just too much water to carry.

It is a big deal. All the participants in the meeting, by virtue of allowing it to take place, have clearly demonstrated their complete contempt for all of us. They are above the law, and they know it.

It is truly sad to be able to write the previous sentence in the United States of America and know that it is a common sentiment, not some conspiracy freak nonsense.

Monday, June 27, 2016

Gun Control

As everyone but the dead knows, the Muslim Orlando Massacre has made a lot of news.

As the left fulminates and plays hide the bean, professing to be confused about the registered Democrat Muslim murderer's motives, the usual dishonest gun control debates are front and center again.

The 2nd amendment gives us the right to own guns for the primary purpose of defending ourselves from the government.

The amendment was enacted in 1791. At that time, except for cannons and explosives, guns used by the military and police were, as far as I can tell, the same as those owned by citizens. One could argue that at that time gun ownership was an effective method of defense against governmental tyranny.

In 2016 (and long before) we are no longer effectively armed to defend ourselves from the government. Despite hysterical and disingenuous arguments to the contrary, it is already illegal for citizens to own automatic weapons. We can only own single shot weapons. That is not the case for our federal agencies.

While armed to the teeth federal agencies are a problem they are not, in my opinion, the primary problem with respect to defending ourselves against a tyrannical government.

This is 

It is impossible for citizens to defend against even local governments now.

We have already been effectively disarmed and have been for quite some time.

As I said in my previous post, "Good luck to all of us". 

Friday, June 24, 2016

Election 2016

I have mentioned to a few family members and friends over the last few years that I believe a series of events may unfold that will culminate with the 2016 Presidential election postponed and Obama continuing in office for an indefinite period of time. This notion did not result from anything other than Obama's re-election in 2012 and my assessment of his character and actions.

As the election approaches I am, to my amazement, beginning to think I may be on to something.

I believe the disclosure by the AP that Clinton hid 75 meetings with donors and other private individuals during the time she was SS  will prove to be the last straw for her. On top of the ever uglier mess her email issue is becoming, this latest is just not tolerable and even she will not be able to overcome it.

Over the last few months I have been thinking about scenarios in which Trump disappears from the race. Among the triggering events I have been considering is his assassination. Apparently someone tried just that a few days ago.

It will take a while for HRC to give up, but I don't see how, even in 2016 America, she can hold on for long.

So, it's September, she is indicted or forced out of the race by a combination of humiliation and ill-health, Trump is killed.

Obama, as he has demonstrated constantly, has reached the reasonable conclusion that, except for the Supreme Court, no one has the nerve to stop him and the Court has no power of enforcement. He is not constrained by the Constitution. He has nothing but contempt for it.

That being the case he will declare a state of emergency and halt the election.

Sounds crazy, doesn't it. I know. On the other hand, look around you. It seems that every federal government agency is armed to the teeth.

Democrats in the House of Representatives are staging an illegal sit-in. Apparently they are so far gone that the irony of using a 60's style civil rights type sit-in to promote their intention to gut the 1st, 2nd and 4th amendments has not occurred to them. Nonetheless, whatever their tactics, these are elected members of the US House of Representatives and they want the 1st, 2nd and 4th amendments vitiated. They will certainly not complain should Obama put another tear in the Constitution. I think they might welcome it, makes accomplishing their goal that much easier.

The country's legions of social justice warriors, minted during Obama's reign, are on a rampage, intent on destroying every vestige of our history on the theory that the people, white men, almost exclusively, who are responsible for the most astonishingly successful culture in human history, are bad. The President is in their corner. Yes, I know.

Local police forces are now armed with military weapons. Why do they need these? I don't know why either. Read the whole thing.

Good luck to all of us.

Monday, June 20, 2016

Socialism, Again

The 2nd link below is to an AP story about Cuba which was brought to my attention by this Powerline post

The AP article's headline referring to Cuba's Curse is, of course, unintentionally hilarious. As John Hinderaker points out the article never does mention the real source of the curse. He is not so reluctant.

"Left unexplained is why a planned socialist economy couldn’t get along without foreign subsidies...Funny, too, how Cuba’s socialist benefactors bite the dust one after another."

Before anyone launches the US economic embargo argument as the source of the curse please keep in mind that the embargo prevented Cuba from trading with one country on earth. That left about 191 others it could trade with (the UN currently has 193 members).

Socialism fails every single time it is tried. This has been pointed out by far more authoritative sources than me.

I will mention again that the Scandinavian countries are not socialist. They are free market economies with very generous welfare regimes.

"The Nordic model (also called Nordic capitalism[1] or Nordic social democracy)[2][3] refers to the economic and social policies common to the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Norway, Iceland and Sweden). This includes a combination of free market capitalism with a comprehensive welfare state and collective bargaining at the national level.[4][5]
Although there are significant differences among the Nordic countries, they all share some common traits. These include support for a "universalist" welfare state aimed specifically at enhancing individual autonomy and promoting social mobility; a corporatist system involving a tripartite arrangement where representatives of labor and employers negotiate wages and labor market policy mediated by the government;[6] and a commitment to widespread private ownership, free markets and free trade.[7]Emphasis added)
Each of the Nordic countries has its own economic and social models, sometimes with large differences from its neighbours.[8] According to sociologist Lane Kenworthy, in the context of the Nordic model, "social democracy" refers to a set of policies for promoting economic security and opportunity within the framework of capitalism rather than a system to replace capitalism.[9] (Emphasis added)"

Someone should bring this to Bernie's attention.

I think it worth noting that Israel tried socialism too. The Kibbutz regime of co-operative farms failed completely. I had the opportunity to visit the remnants of one two years ago. They failed for the same reason socialism always fails. It is inconsistent with human nature. Human traits are, in my experience, quite evenly divided among any group of humans. 

Socialism quite naturally appeals to those with a surfeit of the laziness trait, a considerable number of the total of any human group. After all, what could be better than being licensed to do as little as possible to provide for one's self and be fully provided for by the effort of others.

The others, the productive people seduced by the nobility of the socialist ideology, play along for a while, suppressing another common human trait, self-interest. Until they get fed up watching the lazy live off their effort.

In uniformly socialist countries, once the productive get fed up with watching the lazy live off their effort, a police state develops to coerce the productive into cooperating with the authorities. USSR, Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela. It never ends well. 

Happily, at least in this respect, Israel was a hybrid. Now it is not.

Sunday, June 12, 2016


Among our many older friends of long standing is a very smart (as an objective matter), funny and socialist lady. It is my experience that socialists can be very smart. It is also my experience that they tend to be ill-informed and/or choose to ignore the catastrophic shortcomings of their creed by virtue of their complete inability or unwillingness to perform any sort of analysis. They also tend to be multi-millionaires, as is our friend. This last has always puzzled me.

This lady recently underwent hip replacement surgery. She lives in a socialized medicine jurisdiction, Canada.

My wife called her last week to see how she was getting along. In the lady's usual, humorous way she described a post surgical interaction with one of her socialist (naturally) grandchildren. Apparently the grand daughter was outraged that our friend jumped the queue and had her surgery before less well connected Canadians would have.

The grand daughter wanted her granny to share the misery of her socialist sisters and, had she the influence, would have forced her granny to wait, in misery. Her own grandmother. Shared misery is, after all, what socialism always results in. See Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, North Korea, the former Soviet Union etc. (Please note that the Scandinavian countries are not socialist. They are free market economies with generous welfare regimes, as is Canada.)

This story also highlights another ubiquitous aspect of socialism. The connected do not actually live under the socialism they prescribe for everyone else. They jump the queue.

Why? Because socialism cannot co-exist with human nature. It is counter-intuitive to a human not to take advantage of every opportunity to improve the quality of his own life. Thus, every socialist regime becomes brutal when persuasion is insufficient to suppress human nature and people refuse to countenance the shared misery absent coercion. Cuba and North Korea are giant prisons, as was the USSR. What else do you call a place, no matter how large, that one is forbidden to leave without the blessing of the authorities?

There have been a few individuals in human history who appear to have been able to overcome human nature in some respects. Jesus and Mother Theresa come to mind. I know, small list.

Take a close look at any socialist country and what you find, once the veneer has been removed, is a kleptocracy. The rich and connected become richer, the poor poorer and the middle class disappears.