I had written yesterday that I would be attending the Trump event last night. I was looking forward to writing about it. Good intentions...
I know downtown Phoenix about as well as I know downtown Moscow.
When I reached the convention center area yesterday evening there were a number of closed roads. After a short while I gave up trying to find my way to a safe parking area and returned home.
My primary interest in attending was to try and help ensure that the venue had a good crowd. It was obvious by the throngs (not just erstwhile protesters) downtown that this would not be a problem.
It so happens that Phoenix airport is on the route I had to take downtown. As I was driving, at about 5PM, I began to wonder how long in advance of an event like this the President would arrive. The event was to begin at 7PM.
The highway I was on is roughly parallel to the airport's two glide paths. One to the left, the other to the right. As I looked to the right, at 5:13PM, there it was. Air Force One on the glide path, gear down, floating towards the runway. An inspiring sight. And the answer to my question.
Wednesday, August 23, 2017
Monday, August 21, 2017
Don't Believe A Word They Say
No doubt you have noticed the never ending torrent of outrage directed at President Trump. Don't believe a word of it.
The latest outrage is over his immediate post Charlottesville comments and the press conference that followed.
I will leave you to look at the transcripts if you feel the need. Otherwise, you can take my word for fact that he said nothing wrong or inappropriate.
The left, MSM and more than a few so-called Republicans are setting their hair on fire, again, because Trump did not say exactly what they wanted him to say.
While it is an outrage to them it is not to us ordinary people who have watched the "Antifa" movement riot over and over again in their never ending determination to make it impossible for ordinary Americans to speak our common sense minds. They deserve as much blame for the events in Charlottesville as the Nazi thugs. But for their abandonment of the American social contract that is the 1st Amendment there would have been no violence at all. None. The idiot Nazis would have marched and gone home just like they do after making some noise every 30 years or so.
The combined anti-Trump forces are deluging us in negative press in the hope that we will all be shamed into deserting the President. As they have made obvious, that is their sole agenda. Do not believe a word they say.
I will be attending the President's event in Phoenix tomorrow evening. Can't wait to show him that we appreciate his courage in the face of the most vicious onslaught any President I know of, with the possible exception of Lincoln, has had to endure.
In case an example of the anti-Trump forces knee jerk besmirching of Trump is necessary I will share my most recent favorite. In an interview with the NYTimes (I think) he referred to his big win in New Hampshire. Without bothering to give it a second thought they were bellowing their derision. "Trump didn't win New Hampshire", came the full throated roar. That would be correct if he was referring to the election. He was not. He was referring to his primary win which was crucial to his candidacy.
Don't let the bastards get you down!
The latest outrage is over his immediate post Charlottesville comments and the press conference that followed.
I will leave you to look at the transcripts if you feel the need. Otherwise, you can take my word for fact that he said nothing wrong or inappropriate.
The left, MSM and more than a few so-called Republicans are setting their hair on fire, again, because Trump did not say exactly what they wanted him to say.
While it is an outrage to them it is not to us ordinary people who have watched the "Antifa" movement riot over and over again in their never ending determination to make it impossible for ordinary Americans to speak our common sense minds. They deserve as much blame for the events in Charlottesville as the Nazi thugs. But for their abandonment of the American social contract that is the 1st Amendment there would have been no violence at all. None. The idiot Nazis would have marched and gone home just like they do after making some noise every 30 years or so.
The combined anti-Trump forces are deluging us in negative press in the hope that we will all be shamed into deserting the President. As they have made obvious, that is their sole agenda. Do not believe a word they say.
I will be attending the President's event in Phoenix tomorrow evening. Can't wait to show him that we appreciate his courage in the face of the most vicious onslaught any President I know of, with the possible exception of Lincoln, has had to endure.
In case an example of the anti-Trump forces knee jerk besmirching of Trump is necessary I will share my most recent favorite. In an interview with the NYTimes (I think) he referred to his big win in New Hampshire. Without bothering to give it a second thought they were bellowing their derision. "Trump didn't win New Hampshire", came the full throated roar. That would be correct if he was referring to the election. He was not. He was referring to his primary win which was crucial to his candidacy.
Don't let the bastards get you down!
Tuesday, July 04, 2017
This and That, July 4th Edition
Happy Independence Day to all.
Courtesy of Powerline's Scott Johnson, an excerpt from Calvin Coolidge's July 4, 1926 speech.
"If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final. No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people. Those who wish to proceed in that direction can not lay claim to progress. They are reactionary." Indeed.
If the above looks familiar you are either a long term reader of this blog or of Powerline. Mr. Johnson has published the excerpt (a much longer one actually, you should enjoy it at the link above) every July 4th since 2004.
&
I hope you have been enjoying the Donald Trump Show as much as I have. His latest Tweet storms have been fabulous. Thin skinned poseurs like Joe Scarborough and Mika Brezinski apparently cannot help themselves and respond to him like Pavlov's dogs.
It is a joy to watch their hair catch fire as these two hypocrites try to take on a man much more clever than them.
For months, since he didn't allow them into a New Year's Eve party at his Palm Beach resort, they have been attacking him daily. Suggesting he suffers from a mental illness among other insightful revelations of his character . Having been friends of his for years, no doubt they know him well. Except for the curious change in their attitude after he wasn't nice to them, I might even believe some of what they have to say. Or not. Truly a joy to watch.
&
Do you remember the controversy President Trump created with his "Comey better hope there are no tapes of our conversations" Tweet? It was beautiful. All the right people reacted in all the right ways interpreting his comment to mean that he had taped the conversations and the Nixon comparisons took flight.
"With that tweet, Trump immediately deepened his own legal and political quagmire, evoking comparisons to President Richard M. Nixon and prompting congressional committees investigating his campaign’s alleged ties with Russia to demand the disclosure of any such recordings."
Look at what he actually said.
Do you remember his much earlier Tweet about Obama having wire tapped Trump Towers in New York?
It has been suggested, credibly I think, that when looked at together Trump was actually warning Comey that the intelligence community might have tapes of their conversations and he had best be careful about his then pending testimony to Congress. It worked. Comey confirmed in that testimony everything Trump had said. Trump didn't need to tape anything. The bluff was sufficient. Brilliant.
&
From the annals of "You must be joking " comes this.
"The Denver City Council voted Monday to approve major sentencing reform (in other words, making penalties more lenient) on Class I and II offenses. The latter cover crimes like public defecation, panhandling and camping out on the sidewalk." (Emphasis added).
The "reasoning" behind this outrage?
"City leaders and immigrant rights advocates argued the changes will protect Denver’s immigrant community from facing unintended consequences.
“Many times it becomes a deportable (sic)offense if you’ve been convicted of even a minor ordinance violation that’s punishable by a year in jail,” Mark Silverstein said, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado."
Abject stupidity in the service of the progressive agenda to turn the USA brown.
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Enjoy the 4th of July. Most of you have the great good fortune to live in the greatest country in human history. Too bad we have to share it with so many ingrates and fools.
Even so, it is well worth the price.
Courtesy of Powerline's Scott Johnson, an excerpt from Calvin Coolidge's July 4, 1926 speech.
"If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final. No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people. Those who wish to proceed in that direction can not lay claim to progress. They are reactionary." Indeed.
If the above looks familiar you are either a long term reader of this blog or of Powerline. Mr. Johnson has published the excerpt (a much longer one actually, you should enjoy it at the link above) every July 4th since 2004.
&
I hope you have been enjoying the Donald Trump Show as much as I have. His latest Tweet storms have been fabulous. Thin skinned poseurs like Joe Scarborough and Mika Brezinski apparently cannot help themselves and respond to him like Pavlov's dogs.
It is a joy to watch their hair catch fire as these two hypocrites try to take on a man much more clever than them.
For months, since he didn't allow them into a New Year's Eve party at his Palm Beach resort, they have been attacking him daily. Suggesting he suffers from a mental illness among other insightful revelations of his character . Having been friends of his for years, no doubt they know him well. Except for the curious change in their attitude after he wasn't nice to them, I might even believe some of what they have to say. Or not. Truly a joy to watch.
&
Do you remember the controversy President Trump created with his "Comey better hope there are no tapes of our conversations" Tweet? It was beautiful. All the right people reacted in all the right ways interpreting his comment to mean that he had taped the conversations and the Nixon comparisons took flight.
"With that tweet, Trump immediately deepened his own legal and political quagmire, evoking comparisons to President Richard M. Nixon and prompting congressional committees investigating his campaign’s alleged ties with Russia to demand the disclosure of any such recordings."
Look at what he actually said.
Do you remember his much earlier Tweet about Obama having wire tapped Trump Towers in New York?
It has been suggested, credibly I think, that when looked at together Trump was actually warning Comey that the intelligence community might have tapes of their conversations and he had best be careful about his then pending testimony to Congress. It worked. Comey confirmed in that testimony everything Trump had said. Trump didn't need to tape anything. The bluff was sufficient. Brilliant.
&
From the annals of "You must be joking " comes this.
"The Denver City Council voted Monday to approve major sentencing reform (in other words, making penalties more lenient) on Class I and II offenses. The latter cover crimes like public defecation, panhandling and camping out on the sidewalk." (Emphasis added).
The "reasoning" behind this outrage?
"City leaders and immigrant rights advocates argued the changes will protect Denver’s immigrant community from facing unintended consequences.
“Many times it becomes a deportable (sic)offense if you’ve been convicted of even a minor ordinance violation that’s punishable by a year in jail,” Mark Silverstein said, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado."
Abject stupidity in the service of the progressive agenda to turn the USA brown.
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Enjoy the 4th of July. Most of you have the great good fortune to live in the greatest country in human history. Too bad we have to share it with so many ingrates and fools.
Even so, it is well worth the price.
Saturday, June 17, 2017
This and That # 5
As I mentioned in an earlier post I watched some of the NBA finals. Thanks to Obama, Black Lives Matter, people of color only spaces at universities, people of color only dormitories at universities, and toxic racialists who seem to be everywhere, I am now seeing things through the prism of skin color.
During game 1 a huge white Golden State player set a legal, non moving pick. It was perfect. Feet solidly beneath him well before the black offensive player arrived at the spot. Black guy bumps the white guy, black guy falls down. Foul on white guy, natch. Oh, black referee, I almost forgot.
There was a Nissan commercial dissing girls on Barbie bikes. Girl on black Boys bike is the big thing while mom imitates a man in her black Nissan and leather jacket. Really? Barbie girls look on disapprovingly. What happened to toxic masculinity? I swear I can't keep up.
&
In the first "This and That" post I mentioned that the inspiration for the format came from Steven Hayward's "Loose Ends" series. He has another series, The Week in Pictures. He publishes it every Saturday and many of the offerings are very, very funny. Here are a couple from today's post for your consideration.
Well, I know I said a couple but I couldn't resist this.
&
I have mentioned before my search for "moderate" Muslims condemning the mayhem practiced in their name and that I have had very little success finding them. I did post a photo of Muslims demonstrating outside Trump Tower in New York. Unfortunately they were protesting us.
I got to thinking about the possibility that the reason "moderate" Muslims were not holding Not in My Name rallies after any of their coreligionists' atrocities is because such demonstrations are not part of their culture.
Turns out I was wrong. Again.
Wither that "vast majority" of Muslims who are "moderates"?
&
For my legion of fans north of the border, this one is for you.
"Canada passed a law Thursday making it illegal to use the wrong gender pronouns. Critics say that Canadians who do not subscribe to progressive gender theory could be accused of hate crimes, jailed, fined, and made to take anti-bias training." (Emphasis added)
This appears to be a law that says if a girl identifies as a boy and you insist on acknowledging reality by referring to her as "her" after being informed (not sure how) that she prefers to be referred to as "he", you may be subject to prosecution. Prosecution.
Some years back I had a conversation with an especially eminent member of my legion of Canadian fans about the advisability of labeling anything a hate crime. Aside from being awfully close to criminalizing thoughts, the practical problem is who is controlling what gets named a hate crime. This episode is a very clear example of the potential for catastrophe. Lunatics running the asylum. See cartoon above regarding transgender access to what, in any sane universe, would still be called the lady's room.
During game 1 a huge white Golden State player set a legal, non moving pick. It was perfect. Feet solidly beneath him well before the black offensive player arrived at the spot. Black guy bumps the white guy, black guy falls down. Foul on white guy, natch. Oh, black referee, I almost forgot.
There was a Nissan commercial dissing girls on Barbie bikes. Girl on black Boys bike is the big thing while mom imitates a man in her black Nissan and leather jacket. Really? Barbie girls look on disapprovingly. What happened to toxic masculinity? I swear I can't keep up.
&
In the first "This and That" post I mentioned that the inspiration for the format came from Steven Hayward's "Loose Ends" series. He has another series, The Week in Pictures. He publishes it every Saturday and many of the offerings are very, very funny. Here are a couple from today's post for your consideration.
Well, I know I said a couple but I couldn't resist this.
&
I have mentioned before my search for "moderate" Muslims condemning the mayhem practiced in their name and that I have had very little success finding them. I did post a photo of Muslims demonstrating outside Trump Tower in New York. Unfortunately they were protesting us.
I got to thinking about the possibility that the reason "moderate" Muslims were not holding Not in My Name rallies after any of their coreligionists' atrocities is because such demonstrations are not part of their culture.
Turns out I was wrong. Again.
Wither that "vast majority" of Muslims who are "moderates"?
&
For my legion of fans north of the border, this one is for you.
"Canada passed a law Thursday making it illegal to use the wrong gender pronouns. Critics say that Canadians who do not subscribe to progressive gender theory could be accused of hate crimes, jailed, fined, and made to take anti-bias training." (Emphasis added)
This appears to be a law that says if a girl identifies as a boy and you insist on acknowledging reality by referring to her as "her" after being informed (not sure how) that she prefers to be referred to as "he", you may be subject to prosecution. Prosecution.
Some years back I had a conversation with an especially eminent member of my legion of Canadian fans about the advisability of labeling anything a hate crime. Aside from being awfully close to criminalizing thoughts, the practical problem is who is controlling what gets named a hate crime. This episode is a very clear example of the potential for catastrophe. Lunatics running the asylum. See cartoon above regarding transgender access to what, in any sane universe, would still be called the lady's room.
Saturday, June 10, 2017
Keepers of the Protocols
In the wake of the Comey kerfuffle I have read a lot of analysis of the unnecessarily provocative manner in which President Trump fired him.
Un-presidential, incompetent, chaotic, and, a breach of protocol, are common descriptions unfortunately coming not only from the left but also from the right. In my opinion the President did it perfectly. As in, exactly what I hoped he would do.
We elected him because "Presidential" in the way his critics mean it is precisely not what we wanted. We wanted a particularly big bull in that incredibly corrupt and self-dealing china shop, rampaging about and breaking things. And break things he does. He so infuriated the execrable Comey that Big Jim actually became a leaker, of all things. Whiny, weepy, self-righteous, broken and humiliated. Exposed for who he is, finally. Protocol be damned. Outstanding job Mr. President.
Their precious protocols just protect them, but not us, from their incompetence and informs their corruption.
Congress inconvenienced by being subject to ObamaCare rules regarding employer subsidies? No problem. Exempted.
"...members of Congress and their staffs are slated to get that will make them the only participants in the new Obamacare exchanges to receive generous subsidies from their employer to pay for their health insurance." (Emphasis added)
An illegal immigrant crime spree? No problem. Those illegals never get close to the keepers of the protocols.
A border wall? No way. Un-American. Xenophobic. Walls around the homes and communities of the keepers of the protocols. No problem.
2nd amendment. No way we should be permitted to arm ourselves. We are too stupid and dangerous. Armed guards and gun permits for the keepers of the protocols? No problem.
There is another way to spell President Donald J. Trump. Enough.
Un-presidential, incompetent, chaotic, and, a breach of protocol, are common descriptions unfortunately coming not only from the left but also from the right. In my opinion the President did it perfectly. As in, exactly what I hoped he would do.
We elected him because "Presidential" in the way his critics mean it is precisely not what we wanted. We wanted a particularly big bull in that incredibly corrupt and self-dealing china shop, rampaging about and breaking things. And break things he does. He so infuriated the execrable Comey that Big Jim actually became a leaker, of all things. Whiny, weepy, self-righteous, broken and humiliated. Exposed for who he is, finally. Protocol be damned. Outstanding job Mr. President.
Their precious protocols just protect them, but not us, from their incompetence and informs their corruption.
Congress inconvenienced by being subject to ObamaCare rules regarding employer subsidies? No problem. Exempted.
"...members of Congress and their staffs are slated to get that will make them the only participants in the new Obamacare exchanges to receive generous subsidies from their employer to pay for their health insurance." (Emphasis added)
That was 2013. Fast forward to last month. Have the keepers of the protocols learned anything from the 2014 and 2016 elections? Judge for yourself.
"As Republicans rush to vote on their latest ObamaCare
repeal-and-replace plan, it appears to still include an item exempting
members of Congress and their staffs from losing the healthcare bill's
popular provisions (ed. Of which they are the only beneficiaries. Interesting to note how the author tries to hide that fact. Popular provisions? Right, except for the part where those "popular" provisions apply only to Congress.).
House GOP leaders worked Wednesday night to fast-track consideration of an amended American Health Care Act without posting the bill text and without a Congressional Budget Office analysis detailing the effects of the latest changes to the legislation." (Emphasis added).
To be fair,
"...Rep. Tom MacArthur's (R-N.J.) office said separate legislation would close that loophole." Uh, right, I'll take your word for it. That has worked out really well for us taxpayers so far.
House GOP leaders worked Wednesday night to fast-track consideration of an amended American Health Care Act without posting the bill text and without a Congressional Budget Office analysis detailing the effects of the latest changes to the legislation." (Emphasis added).
To be fair,
"...Rep. Tom MacArthur's (R-N.J.) office said separate legislation would close that loophole." Uh, right, I'll take your word for it. That has worked out really well for us taxpayers so far.
An illegal immigrant crime spree? No problem. Those illegals never get close to the keepers of the protocols.
A border wall? No way. Un-American. Xenophobic. Walls around the homes and communities of the keepers of the protocols. No problem.
2nd amendment. No way we should be permitted to arm ourselves. We are too stupid and dangerous. Armed guards and gun permits for the keepers of the protocols? No problem.
There is another way to spell President Donald J. Trump. Enough.
Wednesday, June 07, 2017
"Moderate" Muslim Update
As you know I have been looking for signs of that vast majority of Muslims who are "moderates" and opposed to their coreligionists penchant for blowing up and otherwise dismembering innocents. They have been hard to find.
This (link fixed) story looked promising.
"Over 130 imams from across the United Kingdom have said they will refuse to perform the traditional Islamic funeral prayer for the London and Manchester terror attackers. The ritual is normally carried out for every Muslim, regardless of their actions.
In what is a highly unusual move, Muslim religious leaders from different schools of Islam -- both Sunni and Shia -- issued a statement late Monday saying their pain at the suffering of the victims of Saturday's attacks had led to their decision, and they called on others imams to follow suit."
Given all I have heard and read over the years about the proliferation of Muslims in the UK I decided to try and find out what proportion of UK Imams were represented in the letter.
That would be about 7.4%. Not impressive, at all.
There is something very familiar about that percentage. It is in the general area of the number of Muslims said to be supportive of Islamic terrorists.
It seems to me that the numbers we have been treated to over the years are upside down.
It is becoming more obvious, as a matter of simple observation, that the vast majority of Muslims are content to sit on the sidelines and watch, if not applaud, the slaughter of innocents.
No doubt they happily engage in the moral relativism that conflates jihadists blowing up and otherwise attacking ordinary citizens as they go about their lives with Muslims killed in wars. If the distinction has to be explained it is not worth the bytes to do so.
This (link fixed) story looked promising.
"Over 130 imams from across the United Kingdom have said they will refuse to perform the traditional Islamic funeral prayer for the London and Manchester terror attackers. The ritual is normally carried out for every Muslim, regardless of their actions.
In what is a highly unusual move, Muslim religious leaders from different schools of Islam -- both Sunni and Shia -- issued a statement late Monday saying their pain at the suffering of the victims of Saturday's attacks had led to their decision, and they called on others imams to follow suit."
Given all I have heard and read over the years about the proliferation of Muslims in the UK I decided to try and find out what proportion of UK Imams were represented in the letter.
That would be about 7.4%. Not impressive, at all.
There is something very familiar about that percentage. It is in the general area of the number of Muslims said to be supportive of Islamic terrorists.
It seems to me that the numbers we have been treated to over the years are upside down.
It is becoming more obvious, as a matter of simple observation, that the vast majority of Muslims are content to sit on the sidelines and watch, if not applaud, the slaughter of innocents.
No doubt they happily engage in the moral relativism that conflates jihadists blowing up and otherwise attacking ordinary citizens as they go about their lives with Muslims killed in wars. If the distinction has to be explained it is not worth the bytes to do so.
Monday, June 05, 2017
This and That, Religion of Peace Edition
You will have noticed, upon careful reading, that I have been pointing out the deafening lack of remorse by "moderate" Muslims with respect to the murderous antics of their coreligionists. If Islam ever was the Religion of Peace it can now more accurately be described as the Religion of Pieces given the penchant of so many of its adherents to turn those of whom they do not approve into pieces in various creative ways.
Bombs laden with ball bearings and nails, machetes, knives and even vehicles. Clever those people, eh?
So, wasn't I pleased to come across this this morning.
Well, on second thought, no. CNN is doing its best to prop up the notion that there are "moderate" adherents to the Religion of Pieces. The ruse didn't last long.
"Note the white police officers leaving before the CNN shot & the Asian officers coming in. They then left after they went off air!"
I wrote yesterday of Roger L. Simon's suggestion on stamping out Islamic terrorists by enlisting the help of Muslim countries. He suggests that those who do not help will be punished with sanctions. I called the idea useless.
You may recall that during his recent trip to Saudi Arabia President Donald J. Trump addressed a meeting of 50 Muslim leaders from the region and exhorted them to become more active in the terror fight.
This morning I read this and I am more hopeful than I was yesterday when I was busy criticizing Mr. Simon.
"Several countries took major moves against Qatar today over its support for terror. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain severed diplomatic ties, setting off a major crisis in the Middle East."
I would be very happy to have been entirely incorrect in my take on Mr. Simon's proposal.
In another, earlier post on the subject of terrorism, I pointed out that part of the frustration we ordinary people suffer with respect to the policing of these terrorists is the result of the fact that our police and legal systems are obviously not up to the task.
Once again the ring leader was known to the authorities.
"The ex-KFC and London Tube worker, known as Abz, 27, was quizzed by cops over his twisted views before he was gunned down along with his two accomplices down following the depraved assault on Saturday night."
There is, perhaps, a silver lining to this story. The people complaining to the cops about this nut job were Muslims. Could these be the "moderate" Muslims I have been looking for? I hope so and I hope there are many more of them willing to come forward because that will be the best way out of this mess.
Bombs laden with ball bearings and nails, machetes, knives and even vehicles. Clever those people, eh?
So, wasn't I pleased to come across this this morning.
Well, on second thought, no. CNN is doing its best to prop up the notion that there are "moderate" adherents to the Religion of Pieces. The ruse didn't last long.
"Note the white police officers leaving before the CNN shot & the Asian officers coming in. They then left after they went off air!"
I wrote yesterday of Roger L. Simon's suggestion on stamping out Islamic terrorists by enlisting the help of Muslim countries. He suggests that those who do not help will be punished with sanctions. I called the idea useless.
You may recall that during his recent trip to Saudi Arabia President Donald J. Trump addressed a meeting of 50 Muslim leaders from the region and exhorted them to become more active in the terror fight.
This morning I read this and I am more hopeful than I was yesterday when I was busy criticizing Mr. Simon.
"Several countries took major moves against Qatar today over its support for terror. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain severed diplomatic ties, setting off a major crisis in the Middle East."
I would be very happy to have been entirely incorrect in my take on Mr. Simon's proposal.
In another, earlier post on the subject of terrorism, I pointed out that part of the frustration we ordinary people suffer with respect to the policing of these terrorists is the result of the fact that our police and legal systems are obviously not up to the task.
Once again the ring leader was known to the authorities.
"The ex-KFC and London Tube worker, known as Abz, 27, was quizzed by cops over his twisted views before he was gunned down along with his two accomplices down following the depraved assault on Saturday night."
There is, perhaps, a silver lining to this story. The people complaining to the cops about this nut job were Muslims. Could these be the "moderate" Muslims I have been looking for? I hope so and I hope there are many more of them willing to come forward because that will be the best way out of this mess.
Sunday, June 04, 2017
This and That # 4
Poor LeBron James.
I watched some of Game 1 of the NBA Finals the other day. At one point the commentators began discussing the tragedy that had recently befallen Mr. James.
Apparently his house was vandalized .
"A racist slur was spray-painted on the front gate of James' Los Angeles home, LA police told CNN."
His "home"? Why the sudden humility?
"The 9,350-square-foot house was custom built by "mansion specialist" Ken Ungar in 2011 for a real estate developer, his wife, and their family. The house wasn't listed on the open market, but Curbed has gotten its hands on photos of the house taken a few years back; you can just mentally superimpose the 6'8" James into them."
Yes, this poor, benighted man, who said, in response to the vandalism of his $21,000,000 "home",
"No matter how much money you have, no matter how famous you are, no matter how many people admire you, being black in America is tough, and we got a long way to go," James said."
Poor thing.
I am assuming that the racial slur painted on his front gate was "nigger" or some variation of it. Our press is so pathetically hamstrung by political correctness I can't find an actual description of the offending term.
I wrote in This and That # 3 about all the fake hate crimes being reported in order to keep us white folk, particularly Trump supporters, on the defensive.
What if this turns out to have been done by a black guy? My limited exposure to popular black culture has confirmed that black people call each other nigger and whore all the time. So if a black guy did it, a virtual certainty in my opinion, is it still a racist slur?
You be the judge.
&
This has a certain evergreen quality to it, particularly as the markets set new records.
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
&
When the lunatics run the asylum. In this case, California .
"The state Senate on Wednesday voted to no longer make it a felony for someone infected with HIV to knowingly expose others to the disease by having unprotected sex without telling his or her partner about the infection."
It is the rationale that is the kicker.
" “These laws are irrational and discriminatory,” Wiener told the Senate, adding that the current felony status is “creating an incentive not to be tested, because if you don’t know your status you can’t be guilty of a felony.”" Seriously? There are too many levels on which this is stupid to bother with analysis.
Do you recognize the formulation? Why do we not arrest illegal aliens simply for being illegal aliens? Because if we arrest ordinary illegals, the rationale goes, they might be reluctant to help us solve crimes in their communities.
Brilliant. What if there were no illegals? Well, no crime in their communities. Problem solved.
I watched some of Game 1 of the NBA Finals the other day. At one point the commentators began discussing the tragedy that had recently befallen Mr. James.
Apparently his house was vandalized .
"A racist slur was spray-painted on the front gate of James' Los Angeles home, LA police told CNN."
His "home"? Why the sudden humility?
"The 9,350-square-foot house was custom built by "mansion specialist" Ken Ungar in 2011 for a real estate developer, his wife, and their family. The house wasn't listed on the open market, but Curbed has gotten its hands on photos of the house taken a few years back; you can just mentally superimpose the 6'8" James into them."
Yes, this poor, benighted man, who said, in response to the vandalism of his $21,000,000 "home",
"No matter how much money you have, no matter how famous you are, no matter how many people admire you, being black in America is tough, and we got a long way to go," James said."
Poor thing.
I am assuming that the racial slur painted on his front gate was "nigger" or some variation of it. Our press is so pathetically hamstrung by political correctness I can't find an actual description of the offending term.
I wrote in This and That # 3 about all the fake hate crimes being reported in order to keep us white folk, particularly Trump supporters, on the defensive.
What if this turns out to have been done by a black guy? My limited exposure to popular black culture has confirmed that black people call each other nigger and whore all the time. So if a black guy did it, a virtual certainty in my opinion, is it still a racist slur?
You be the judge.
&
This has a certain evergreen quality to it, particularly as the markets set new records.
Paul Krugman: The Economic Fallout
Comment
It really does now look like President Donald J. Trump, and markets are plunging. When might we expect them to recover?
Frankly, I find it hard to care much,
even though this is my specialty. The disaster for America and the world
has so many aspects that the economic ramifications are way down my
list of things to fear.
Still, I guess people want an answer: If the question is when markets will recover, a first-pass answer is never.
Under any circumstances, putting an
irresponsible, ignorant man who takes his advice from all the wrong
people in charge of the nation with the world’s most important economy
would be very bad news." (Emphasis added)Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
&
When the lunatics run the asylum. In this case, California .
"The state Senate on Wednesday voted to no longer make it a felony for someone infected with HIV to knowingly expose others to the disease by having unprotected sex without telling his or her partner about the infection."
It is the rationale that is the kicker.
" “These laws are irrational and discriminatory,” Wiener told the Senate, adding that the current felony status is “creating an incentive not to be tested, because if you don’t know your status you can’t be guilty of a felony.”" Seriously? There are too many levels on which this is stupid to bother with analysis.
Do you recognize the formulation? Why do we not arrest illegal aliens simply for being illegal aliens? Because if we arrest ordinary illegals, the rationale goes, they might be reluctant to help us solve crimes in their communities.
Brilliant. What if there were no illegals? Well, no crime in their communities. Problem solved.
The Religion of Peace, Again. Again
Well, another week, another massacre in England thanks to our Islamic friends.
I wrote on May 23, after the Manchester attack,
"So where are all these moderate Muslims and why are they not speaking up?
I think, faced with this obvious paradox, we must conclude that we non-Muslims have invented a species of Muslim whose collective silence argues against their existence."
The silence of the "moderate" Muslims was broken, finally.
Well, kind of. This piece is written by a person I assume is a "moderate" Muslim. It is well worth the read. Here is a taste.
"While living safely under Britain’s rule of law, they nonetheless view British society as beneath contempt. They don’t want to be part of it, and they teach people like Salman Abedi that it’s a mortal sin for them to want to be part of it. Anything that happens to a Muslim anywhere in the world, once passed through the Islamist victimhood filter, becomes an anti-Muslim act for which the guilty must be punished. And so it seems that Abedi’s actions were the result of this solipsistic staple of Islamist indoctrination. In a country, and a city, where young men run the risk of falling prey to knife crime, Abedi interpreted the stabbing of a friend as an anti-Muslim ‘hate crime’, and swore revenge on the society around him.'"
The author certainly sounds like what we conjure up as a "moderate" Muslim.
Trouble is, he is so certain of the grateful support he will receive from the other 1.2 billion or so "moderate" Muslims worldwide for speaking out that he has to use a pseudonym. No doubt they will kill him when they find him.
Back here in the USA I see that "moderate" Muslims are indeed capable of public demonstrations.
New York – Muslims continued on with their civilization Jihad as they took over the street in front of Trump Tower during ‘Iftar’ or ‘breaking their Ramadan fast’.
Just not public demonstrations condemning their murderous coreligionists. The real problem for them, as usual, is us and our bigoted President.
The reason for the lack of public repudiation of the Jihadis is easily explained. While they probably wouldn't pull the trigger or slash a throat themselves, "moderate" Muslims are quite content with it being done. Islam is a triumphalist religion/ideology which robustly declares that the one true god is Allah, his prophet is Mohamed and, if you are not a Muslim you are a second class person. They obviously believe this and are content to pursue both violent and demographic means to bury western civilization.
I think I have linked to and written about Roger L. Simon before. He is a big talent. A successful Hollywood screenwriter, blogger and former liberal. He published the linked article today. We all make mistakes. His prescription for the reform of Islam is, in my view, misguided and useless. The reason it is useless is this;
"To be clear, this is not about bad people (many Muslims are fine human beings), but about a malignant ideology from the seventh century that must be expunged for the survival of all."
They are not fine human beings. If they were they would have risen up against this appalling creed long ago.
I am sure they love their children. Oh, wait, they happily send them out in suicide attacks, so maybe they have a different definition of parental love than we do. After all, they will enter paradise immediately. That is not love. It is depravity. A depravity being condoned by silence.
As the saying goes, freedom is not free. We cannot talk these people into "moderation". The practice of their religion, whether jihadist or "moderate", must be stopped in the west.
There is no "until" in my formulation.
Let them stay in all those countries of the world where they already dominate. Given the superiority of their religion and culture, why should they want to leave? Let them kill each other, Sunni and Shiite alike, to their hearts' content.
Keep in mind how we got here. We turned the Saudis into mega billionaires. They used many of those billions to export their particularly vicious version of Islam, Wahhabism, all over the world.
We had to have their oil so we turned a blind eye. Deal with the devil and all that. The devil is now taking his repayment in the form of dismembered, by various means, men, women and children. We no longer need their oil. We no longer need them. We no longer have to put up with their murderous barbarism.
Mr. Simon suggests that we gather all their leaders together in a huge conclave and insist that they "reform" their religion. Mr. Simon, with respect, that is a fools errand. Your suggestion that there be economic penalties for not applying themselves to this task is a pipe dream.
There are no metrics by which to appropriately place blame. The complexity of the problem combined with, except for Donald Trump, spineless western leadership would drown any such program before it could produce a single desirable result.
This is not a fight in which we prevail by trying, for the millionth time, to get these people to behave by applying western tactics of persuasion. Coercion is required, as un-American, illiberal and uncomfortable as it is for us.
My suggestion is for all of us to stop pretending Muslims are just another group of immigrants anxious to become Americans. We must confront them at every opportunity and demand that they denounce their coreligionists, if not their religion, as the purveyors of murder and triumphalism that they are.
I wrote on May 23, after the Manchester attack,
"So where are all these moderate Muslims and why are they not speaking up?
I think, faced with this obvious paradox, we must conclude that we non-Muslims have invented a species of Muslim whose collective silence argues against their existence."
The silence of the "moderate" Muslims was broken, finally.
Well, kind of. This piece is written by a person I assume is a "moderate" Muslim. It is well worth the read. Here is a taste.
"While living safely under Britain’s rule of law, they nonetheless view British society as beneath contempt. They don’t want to be part of it, and they teach people like Salman Abedi that it’s a mortal sin for them to want to be part of it. Anything that happens to a Muslim anywhere in the world, once passed through the Islamist victimhood filter, becomes an anti-Muslim act for which the guilty must be punished. And so it seems that Abedi’s actions were the result of this solipsistic staple of Islamist indoctrination. In a country, and a city, where young men run the risk of falling prey to knife crime, Abedi interpreted the stabbing of a friend as an anti-Muslim ‘hate crime’, and swore revenge on the society around him.'"
The author certainly sounds like what we conjure up as a "moderate" Muslim.
Trouble is, he is so certain of the grateful support he will receive from the other 1.2 billion or so "moderate" Muslims worldwide for speaking out that he has to use a pseudonym. No doubt they will kill him when they find him.
Back here in the USA I see that "moderate" Muslims are indeed capable of public demonstrations.
New York – Muslims continued on with their civilization Jihad as they took over the street in front of Trump Tower during ‘Iftar’ or ‘breaking their Ramadan fast’.
Just not public demonstrations condemning their murderous coreligionists. The real problem for them, as usual, is us and our bigoted President.
The reason for the lack of public repudiation of the Jihadis is easily explained. While they probably wouldn't pull the trigger or slash a throat themselves, "moderate" Muslims are quite content with it being done. Islam is a triumphalist religion/ideology which robustly declares that the one true god is Allah, his prophet is Mohamed and, if you are not a Muslim you are a second class person. They obviously believe this and are content to pursue both violent and demographic means to bury western civilization.
I think I have linked to and written about Roger L. Simon before. He is a big talent. A successful Hollywood screenwriter, blogger and former liberal. He published the linked article today. We all make mistakes. His prescription for the reform of Islam is, in my view, misguided and useless. The reason it is useless is this;
"To be clear, this is not about bad people (many Muslims are fine human beings), but about a malignant ideology from the seventh century that must be expunged for the survival of all."
They are not fine human beings. If they were they would have risen up against this appalling creed long ago.
I am sure they love their children. Oh, wait, they happily send them out in suicide attacks, so maybe they have a different definition of parental love than we do. After all, they will enter paradise immediately. That is not love. It is depravity. A depravity being condoned by silence.
As the saying goes, freedom is not free. We cannot talk these people into "moderation". The practice of their religion, whether jihadist or "moderate", must be stopped in the west.
There is no "until" in my formulation.
Let them stay in all those countries of the world where they already dominate. Given the superiority of their religion and culture, why should they want to leave? Let them kill each other, Sunni and Shiite alike, to their hearts' content.
Keep in mind how we got here. We turned the Saudis into mega billionaires. They used many of those billions to export their particularly vicious version of Islam, Wahhabism, all over the world.
We had to have their oil so we turned a blind eye. Deal with the devil and all that. The devil is now taking his repayment in the form of dismembered, by various means, men, women and children. We no longer need their oil. We no longer need them. We no longer have to put up with their murderous barbarism.
Mr. Simon suggests that we gather all their leaders together in a huge conclave and insist that they "reform" their religion. Mr. Simon, with respect, that is a fools errand. Your suggestion that there be economic penalties for not applying themselves to this task is a pipe dream.
There are no metrics by which to appropriately place blame. The complexity of the problem combined with, except for Donald Trump, spineless western leadership would drown any such program before it could produce a single desirable result.
This is not a fight in which we prevail by trying, for the millionth time, to get these people to behave by applying western tactics of persuasion. Coercion is required, as un-American, illiberal and uncomfortable as it is for us.
My suggestion is for all of us to stop pretending Muslims are just another group of immigrants anxious to become Americans. We must confront them at every opportunity and demand that they denounce their coreligionists, if not their religion, as the purveyors of murder and triumphalism that they are.
Sunday, May 28, 2017
Thanks Chelsea
I never thought I would have any reason for quoting Chelsea Clinton.
“We have to realize, especially at this moment, that sexism is not an opinion. Islamophobia is not an opinion. Racism is not an opinion. Homophobia is not an opinion. Jingoism is not an opinion. So I think that in our posture of listening, we also have to get comfortable with standing up and speaking out.”
But, here I am. She has articulated the answer to a puzzle I have been thinking about for some time.
I have mentioned before that the left is not interested in debate. They just want us to shut up and sit down.
Their method is shaming. But that is only the surface. The tactic underpinning that method is much more insidious.
Racism, sexism and homophobia are well defined terms. We all understand what they mean and none of those ism's are anything any of us would want to be identified with. The last 60 years of Western Civilization have proven that decisively.
Might any of us, in his heart of hearts be any or all of those things? Emphatically yes. We cannot however, indulge those opinions in any way meaningfully detrimental to the objects of our prejudices. Not only are all of those real ism's against the law with respect to all commercial transactions and government interactions, they are abhorrent to most of those we want and need to interact with daily. Expression of these ism's in their real form finds one immediately ostracized except at the very fringes of society where few of us want to reside and fewer still actually reside.
In order to continue to impose their beliefs on us the left has expanded the definition of those ism's beyond recognition, but they still get to use the words.
Racism now means criticizing the opinions of black people (see any opposition to Obama), not lynching or otherwise illegally discriminating against them. Homophobia means opposing same sex marriage, not arresting, beating, ostracizing and otherwise illegally discriminating against homosexuals. Sexism now means being opposed to the distribution of tampons to women at no charge to them, paid for by men, not keeping women from voting, out of higher education and the professions, not paying them less than men for the same work.
Islamophobia? Well what is it? It is whatever they say it is at the moment. I oppose Islam for what it has always been, a superstition (like all the religions, only worse) and what it has become, a murderous and triumphal anti-democratic ideology. I am powerless to adversely affect proponents of that religion for the reasons described above, in any meaningful way. According to Clinton and her ilk I am not even allowed to hold this opinion.
Jingoism? Good grief. That she would confuse renewed American confidence with jingoism is hardly surprising given her adherence to the modern leftist notion of America's awfulness.
None of the things in the previous paragraphs have anything to do with the real definitions of those ism's. Nothing. Do not sit down and shut up!
“We have to realize, especially at this moment, that sexism is not an opinion. Islamophobia is not an opinion. Racism is not an opinion. Homophobia is not an opinion. Jingoism is not an opinion. So I think that in our posture of listening, we also have to get comfortable with standing up and speaking out.”
But, here I am. She has articulated the answer to a puzzle I have been thinking about for some time.
I have mentioned before that the left is not interested in debate. They just want us to shut up and sit down.
Their method is shaming. But that is only the surface. The tactic underpinning that method is much more insidious.
Racism, sexism and homophobia are well defined terms. We all understand what they mean and none of those ism's are anything any of us would want to be identified with. The last 60 years of Western Civilization have proven that decisively.
Might any of us, in his heart of hearts be any or all of those things? Emphatically yes. We cannot however, indulge those opinions in any way meaningfully detrimental to the objects of our prejudices. Not only are all of those real ism's against the law with respect to all commercial transactions and government interactions, they are abhorrent to most of those we want and need to interact with daily. Expression of these ism's in their real form finds one immediately ostracized except at the very fringes of society where few of us want to reside and fewer still actually reside.
In order to continue to impose their beliefs on us the left has expanded the definition of those ism's beyond recognition, but they still get to use the words.
Racism now means criticizing the opinions of black people (see any opposition to Obama), not lynching or otherwise illegally discriminating against them. Homophobia means opposing same sex marriage, not arresting, beating, ostracizing and otherwise illegally discriminating against homosexuals. Sexism now means being opposed to the distribution of tampons to women at no charge to them, paid for by men, not keeping women from voting, out of higher education and the professions, not paying them less than men for the same work.
Islamophobia? Well what is it? It is whatever they say it is at the moment. I oppose Islam for what it has always been, a superstition (like all the religions, only worse) and what it has become, a murderous and triumphal anti-democratic ideology. I am powerless to adversely affect proponents of that religion for the reasons described above, in any meaningful way. According to Clinton and her ilk I am not even allowed to hold this opinion.
Jingoism? Good grief. That she would confuse renewed American confidence with jingoism is hardly surprising given her adherence to the modern leftist notion of America's awfulness.
None of the things in the previous paragraphs have anything to do with the real definitions of those ism's. Nothing. Do not sit down and shut up!
Tuesday, May 23, 2017
The Religion of Peace Lashes Out Again
In the wake of the latest Muslim outrage, the Manchester bombing, it is very reassuring to see millions of peaceful Muslims in the streets chanting "Not In MY Name" and taking to their pulpits, the airwaves, internet and press to denounce yet another in an apparently never ending series of vicious, brutal, attacks...
Oh, right. Silence. Again.
WTC 1993, silence.
9/11, silence.
Madrid 2004, silence.
London 2007, silence.
Fort Hood 2009, silence.
Boston 2013, silence.
San Bernadino 2015, silence.
Orlando 2016, silence.
Paris, Brussels, London again. On and on it goes. Silence.
Hundreds of other attacks worldwide, silence.
Silence.
Can you imagine any huge group of people, (more than 1.6 billion in this case) adherents to a supposedly sacred text, watching in silence as their sacred text is allegedly warped into a murderous creed? It is behavior completely at odds with ordinary human conduct.
So where are all these moderate Muslims and why are they not speaking up?
I think, faced with this obvious paradox, we must conclude that we non-Muslims have invented a species of Muslim whose collective silence argues against their existence.
Perhaps Indonesians are the moderate Muslims we hope exist. Well, maybe.
"Jakarta’s Christian governor Basuki Tjahaja Purnama, also known as Ahok, was found guilty of blasphemy and has been sentenced to two years in prison in Indonesia on Tuesday."
His crime?
" Ahok was the first ethnic Chinese Christian to run the nation’s capital, and was accused of insulting Islam by referring to a verse in the Koran during a campaign speech, which was met with strong disapproval by religious hardliners."
A non-Muslim dared to interpret a verse of the Koran in a manner that "hardliners" disapproved and is going to jail. For 2 years! At least they didn't kill him. Their restraint is most admirable. Moderate Muslims at work.
I believe moderate Muslims exist in about the same numbers as unicorns.
Western governments are operating under a deadly delusion and putting ordinary citizens at risk every day. Muslim immigration to the West should be stopped, in total, now.
What makes all this so much more infuriating is that the people we employ to protect us from them can't or won't. Early reports suggest that the Manchester bomber was "known" to authorities.
The Boston bombers, Fort Hood shooter, San Bernadino shooters and Orlando shooter were all "known" to authorities.
It is obviously beyond the abilities of western law enforcement agencies, playing by western rules of police engagement, to deal with this army of in place terrorists. No more kids should be murdered in the name of political correctness or moderate Muslims.
Oh, right. Silence. Again.
WTC 1993, silence.
9/11, silence.
Madrid 2004, silence.
London 2007, silence.
Fort Hood 2009, silence.
Boston 2013, silence.
San Bernadino 2015, silence.
Orlando 2016, silence.
Paris, Brussels, London again. On and on it goes. Silence.
Hundreds of other attacks worldwide, silence.
Silence.
Can you imagine any huge group of people, (more than 1.6 billion in this case) adherents to a supposedly sacred text, watching in silence as their sacred text is allegedly warped into a murderous creed? It is behavior completely at odds with ordinary human conduct.
So where are all these moderate Muslims and why are they not speaking up?
I think, faced with this obvious paradox, we must conclude that we non-Muslims have invented a species of Muslim whose collective silence argues against their existence.
Perhaps Indonesians are the moderate Muslims we hope exist. Well, maybe.
"Jakarta’s Christian governor Basuki Tjahaja Purnama, also known as Ahok, was found guilty of blasphemy and has been sentenced to two years in prison in Indonesia on Tuesday."
His crime?
" Ahok was the first ethnic Chinese Christian to run the nation’s capital, and was accused of insulting Islam by referring to a verse in the Koran during a campaign speech, which was met with strong disapproval by religious hardliners."
A non-Muslim dared to interpret a verse of the Koran in a manner that "hardliners" disapproved and is going to jail. For 2 years! At least they didn't kill him. Their restraint is most admirable. Moderate Muslims at work.
I believe moderate Muslims exist in about the same numbers as unicorns.
Western governments are operating under a deadly delusion and putting ordinary citizens at risk every day. Muslim immigration to the West should be stopped, in total, now.
What makes all this so much more infuriating is that the people we employ to protect us from them can't or won't. Early reports suggest that the Manchester bomber was "known" to authorities.
The Boston bombers, Fort Hood shooter, San Bernadino shooters and Orlando shooter were all "known" to authorities.
It is obviously beyond the abilities of western law enforcement agencies, playing by western rules of police engagement, to deal with this army of in place terrorists. No more kids should be murdered in the name of political correctness or moderate Muslims.
Monday, May 22, 2017
This and That #3
I have written several times about the difficulty engaging the left in meaningful discussion because of, among other things, the apparent complete lack of good faith on their part.
There is at least one and hopefully many other lefty's I have yet to encounter, who has not abandoned the notion of good faith.
Alan Dershowitz is as doctrinaire a Democrat as there is, except where Israel is concerned. He is a stalwart supporter. He is also a brilliant lawyer. Unfortunately he is also one of the lawyers who got O.J. off. Well, we all make mistakes.
He recently tweeted a response to assertions that President Trump had committed some sort of infraction when he fired James Comey.
Because a president has the unreviewable authority to fire the Director for any reason.
_____________________
Classic line from the story;
![Trump Victory Christian(3)]()
![Trump Victory Christian(3)]()
![Trump Victory Christian(3)]()
There is at least one and hopefully many other lefty's I have yet to encounter, who has not abandoned the notion of good faith.
Alan Dershowitz is as doctrinaire a Democrat as there is, except where Israel is concerned. He is a stalwart supporter. He is also a brilliant lawyer. Unfortunately he is also one of the lawyers who got O.J. off. Well, we all make mistakes.
He recently tweeted a response to assertions that President Trump had committed some sort of infraction when he fired James Comey.
Because a president has the unreviewable authority to fire the Director for any reason.
Joe Scarborough @JoeNBCI eagerly await the flood of experts explaining why Donald Trump firing Comey to obstruct justice is not obstruction of justice.
Unreviewable Joe. Case closed.
___________________
___________________
You have no doubt heard about all the hate crimes carried out by Trump supporters. A handy compilation at the link. They are all hoaxes of course.
One of the headline stories at Yahoo over the weekend began,
"HOUSTON (AP) — A black Texas congressman said Saturday that he's been
threatened with lynching by callers infuriated over him seeking
impeachment of President Donald Trump."
Also, over the weekend, this story was published by The Hill describing harassment and threats against Republican office holders.
If you read both stories you will see that the Republican office holders who experienced harassment and threats reported them to the authorities and arrests were made.
Unsurprisingly, the "black Texas Congressman", Al Green (D), does not appear to have
reported anything to the authorities. Why not? Most likely, in my opinion, the recordings he shared are a hoax.
Update. Here is an even more comprehensive examination of the hoaxes.
Update. Here is an even more comprehensive examination of the hoaxes.
_____________________
As you know, for most of the left the narrative is everything. Anything that does not advance the narrative is suppressed.
This fabulous story did not make it beyond the Charlotte Observer as far as I know.
Unfortunately I can't seem to copy and paste the photo from the story. Have a look. It is worth it. It is also the real, non-narrative America being led by President Trump.
Classic line from the story;
" “They’re never going to put that on television,” Trump said."
Indeed.
Sunday, May 21, 2017
The New "Civility"
You may recall the shooting of Gabriella Giffords back in 2011. Democrats hoped, as they always do, that the shooter would be some Republican lunatic. As usual they were wrong. Not deterred, they immediately seized on Sarah Palin's graphic use of what appeared to be the images of congressional districts seen through a rifle sight on her web site as, if not the proximate cause of the shooting, at least a vile indicator of the incivility of the then political landscape.
Democrats embraced the "civility" strategy.
"TUCSON — President Obama offered the nation’s condolences on Wednesday to the victims of the shootings here, calling on Americans to draw a lesson from the lives of the fallen and the actions of the heroes, and to usher in a new era of civility in their honor."
At the time it was clear that they meant that Republican rhetoric was over the top and the root of the lack of civility in the public forum. This all took place in the shadow of the then recent 2010 "Tea Party" election. The new strategy was just another in a long line of efforts to get us to shut up and sit down.
It was a sham from the start of course. We have always been the polite party. The 2008 Presidential election, if proof is needed, demonstrated that we still were. Kid glove treatment for Barry. Using his middle name, Hussein, was verboten, for example.
Now it is 2017, Barry is out and Donald is in. And, this is the new "civility".
AP reports:
Note that the person leading this demonstration of complete nitwittery is not some fringe player. He is the outgoing chairman of the California Democratic Party. Very high profile democrats are in the audience. Kamala Harris and Gavin Newsome, among others, addressed the convention. Are they going to be asked by the press whether they will disavow this sort of verbal thuggery? I know, stupid question.
While the outburst above is extreme, it is not inconsistent with Democrats latest strategic brilliance.
"Swearing has become such a part of Democratic stump speeches that profane clips have become routine in Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez's speeches. With children on stage behind him, Perez told an audience in Las Vegas this weekend that Trump "doesn't give a shit about health care."
We have known who they are for a very long time. Thanks to Donald J. Trump they are finally coming out of the closet. I am sure it will serve them well.
Democrats embraced the "civility" strategy.
"TUCSON — President Obama offered the nation’s condolences on Wednesday to the victims of the shootings here, calling on Americans to draw a lesson from the lives of the fallen and the actions of the heroes, and to usher in a new era of civility in their honor."
At the time it was clear that they meant that Republican rhetoric was over the top and the root of the lack of civility in the public forum. This all took place in the shadow of the then recent 2010 "Tea Party" election. The new strategy was just another in a long line of efforts to get us to shut up and sit down.
It was a sham from the start of course. We have always been the polite party. The 2008 Presidential election, if proof is needed, demonstrated that we still were. Kid glove treatment for Barry. Using his middle name, Hussein, was verboten, for example.
Now it is 2017, Barry is out and Donald is in. And, this is the new "civility".
CA Dem Chair: ‘All Together Now: F*ck Donald Trump!’ as Crowd Holds Up Two Middle Fingers (VIDEO)
AP reports:California’s elected Democrats had tough words for President Donald Trump and the GOP Congress on Saturday, urging their party’s fired-up activists to work against the 14 Republicans in the state’s congressional delegation.Video of crowd with middle fingers in the air after outgoing CA Dem Chair, John Burton screamed, ‘F*ck Donald Trump!’…"
In a sign of the vigor of the party’s distaste for the president, outgoing party Chair John Burton, a longtime Democratic lawmaker and powerbroker known for his blunt and profane manner, extended two middle fingers in the air as the crowd cheered and joined him. “F— Donald Trump,” he said.
Note that the person leading this demonstration of complete nitwittery is not some fringe player. He is the outgoing chairman of the California Democratic Party. Very high profile democrats are in the audience. Kamala Harris and Gavin Newsome, among others, addressed the convention. Are they going to be asked by the press whether they will disavow this sort of verbal thuggery? I know, stupid question.
While the outburst above is extreme, it is not inconsistent with Democrats latest strategic brilliance.
"Swearing has become such a part of Democratic stump speeches that profane clips have become routine in Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez's speeches. With children on stage behind him, Perez told an audience in Las Vegas this weekend that Trump "doesn't give a shit about health care."
We have known who they are for a very long time. Thanks to Donald J. Trump they are finally coming out of the closet. I am sure it will serve them well.
Saturday, May 20, 2017
The Wall
Much has been said and written about the need, or not, for a wall along our southern border.
Immigration reforms were undertaken in 1965 , 1986 and were attempted again in 2007 .
The political right was persuaded in 1986 to enact reforms, which included amnesty, in exchange for an employer based status verification regime and enhanced border security. There "... was the enforcement bit. The law aimed to secure the U.S.-Mexico border against illegal crossings with new surveillance technology and a bigger staff."
The status verification system was, to put it politely, a sham.
"Under the final law, all employers had to do to avoid sanctions was to make sure their workers had paperwork that "reasonably appears on its face to be genuine." If the documents were decent fakes, that wasn't the boss's problem. In fact, employers were actually penalized if they scrutinized a worker's nationality too aggressively."
In 1986 I was CEO of a manufacturing business in Houston, TX. We had as many as 100 factory floor employees at peak times of the year. Most were illegals. The system was such a farce that I don't even remember it being more than an occasional topic of conversation at management meetings. No one came looking for anything. We changed our hiring package to ensure we had proper "documentation" on new hires. We checked the files of existing employees to see whether additional information was required. If so, it was always readily provided.
I often read that the reason employers employ illegals is that they are willing to accept lesser pay and benefits. That may be true of some but I can safely say that it was certainly not the case for us. It was just how things had developed in the 20 years or so the company was in business before I was hired to run it. In fact, we never advertised for factory workers. When the need arose our factory managers just told their workers we needed more people and they showed up. Wages were standard for the area and every employee had company paid medical insurance.
As is obvious the increased presence and border surveillance never happened.
That brings us to 2007 when John McCain and friends announced that a new deal had been reached behind closed doors. What little we were told about the legislation made it clear that it was going to be amnesty first, enforcement second, again. McCain declared that it would be voted on and passed within 48 hours. The right erupted and the legislation was killed.
Those of us who were around in 1986 refused to go along with amnesty first and enforcement second. We had already seen that the enforcement never arrived and we were certain the same would be true this time.
We have focused on the wall as an essential element of enforcement ever since. Enduring the barrage of insults hurled our way over the last 10 years stoically.
Now it is 2017. We elected a President who promised to build the wall. There has been no significant progress made. Funds were dropped from the continuing resolution recently approved. He said it was too difficult to do now and we will get back to it in September, in the next budget.
A funny thing has happened on the way to the wall , illegal immigration has plummeted since President Trump's election.
"Illegal immigration across the southwest border is down more than 60 percent so far under President Trump, officials revealed Tuesday, even before the first new agent is hired or the first mile of his promised border wall is constructed."
Like many, I do not like the idea of a wall but considered it a necessity if the flood of illegals was to be stopped. It looks as though the mere enforcement of laws on the books already has had an enormous influence on illegals. Maybe we don't need a wall after all.
Wishful thinking, unfortunately. As much as I hate to think about it Trump will only be President for 8 years. His successor, Democrat or Republican can, and probably will, back off enforcement again. It will be much less likely that such a stand down will have much of an effect if the wall is in place. So, in my reluctant opinion, it must be built.
Immigration reforms were undertaken in 1965 , 1986 and were attempted again in 2007 .
The political right was persuaded in 1986 to enact reforms, which included amnesty, in exchange for an employer based status verification regime and enhanced border security. There "... was the enforcement bit. The law aimed to secure the U.S.-Mexico border against illegal crossings with new surveillance technology and a bigger staff."
The status verification system was, to put it politely, a sham.
"Under the final law, all employers had to do to avoid sanctions was to make sure their workers had paperwork that "reasonably appears on its face to be genuine." If the documents were decent fakes, that wasn't the boss's problem. In fact, employers were actually penalized if they scrutinized a worker's nationality too aggressively."
In 1986 I was CEO of a manufacturing business in Houston, TX. We had as many as 100 factory floor employees at peak times of the year. Most were illegals. The system was such a farce that I don't even remember it being more than an occasional topic of conversation at management meetings. No one came looking for anything. We changed our hiring package to ensure we had proper "documentation" on new hires. We checked the files of existing employees to see whether additional information was required. If so, it was always readily provided.
I often read that the reason employers employ illegals is that they are willing to accept lesser pay and benefits. That may be true of some but I can safely say that it was certainly not the case for us. It was just how things had developed in the 20 years or so the company was in business before I was hired to run it. In fact, we never advertised for factory workers. When the need arose our factory managers just told their workers we needed more people and they showed up. Wages were standard for the area and every employee had company paid medical insurance.
As is obvious the increased presence and border surveillance never happened.
That brings us to 2007 when John McCain and friends announced that a new deal had been reached behind closed doors. What little we were told about the legislation made it clear that it was going to be amnesty first, enforcement second, again. McCain declared that it would be voted on and passed within 48 hours. The right erupted and the legislation was killed.
Those of us who were around in 1986 refused to go along with amnesty first and enforcement second. We had already seen that the enforcement never arrived and we were certain the same would be true this time.
We have focused on the wall as an essential element of enforcement ever since. Enduring the barrage of insults hurled our way over the last 10 years stoically.
Now it is 2017. We elected a President who promised to build the wall. There has been no significant progress made. Funds were dropped from the continuing resolution recently approved. He said it was too difficult to do now and we will get back to it in September, in the next budget.
A funny thing has happened on the way to the wall , illegal immigration has plummeted since President Trump's election.
"Illegal immigration across the southwest border is down more than 60 percent so far under President Trump, officials revealed Tuesday, even before the first new agent is hired or the first mile of his promised border wall is constructed."
Like many, I do not like the idea of a wall but considered it a necessity if the flood of illegals was to be stopped. It looks as though the mere enforcement of laws on the books already has had an enormous influence on illegals. Maybe we don't need a wall after all.
Wishful thinking, unfortunately. As much as I hate to think about it Trump will only be President for 8 years. His successor, Democrat or Republican can, and probably will, back off enforcement again. It will be much less likely that such a stand down will have much of an effect if the wall is in place. So, in my reluctant opinion, it must be built.
Thursday, May 18, 2017
Reciprocity
It will come as a surprise to most Americans under the age of 50, given the trajectory of modern history courses, that in the mid to late 1800's there were two very famous British politicians who dominated their era. William Gladstone and Benjamin Disraeli were, like their contemporary, Abraham Lincoln, accomplished orators. I was reading this article when a quote from Disraeli came to mind.
He said, of Gladstone, "Nothing delights me more than the sight of an unsophisticated rhetorician intoxicated by the exuberance of his own natural verbosity."
From the story;
He said, of Gladstone, "Nothing delights me more than the sight of an unsophisticated rhetorician intoxicated by the exuberance of his own natural verbosity."
From the story;
"A GOP congressman asked why men should have to pay for maternity care, and this woman’s response is now resonating across the country.
Barbara Rank, 63, wrote to her local newspaper, the Dubuque Telegraph Herald, after Rep. Rod Blum (R-Iowa) made the comments at a town hall last Monday.
Blum said he’d voted in favor of legislation that repeals and replaces major parts of the Affordable Care Act to “get rid of some of these crazy regulations that Obamacare puts on […] such as a 62-year-old male having to have pregnancy insurance.”
Sounds like a pretty crazy regulation to me too. Always has. In fact I wrote about just that aspect of Obamacare years ago. My conclusion was that any system that requires such an artifice to maintain its solvency cannot last for long. Looks like I was right.
Ms. Rank, however, has another take on the subject which is what led me to remember Disraeli's quip.
" Rank explained how the lawmaker’s comment had caused her to
rhetorically ask herself “why should I pay for a bridge I don’t cross, a
sidewalk I don’t walk on, a library book I don’t read?”
Because of civic duty and, more importantly, reciprocity. All of us help pay for the bridges you do cross, the sidewalks you do walk on and the library books you do read. Which is why you are asked to help pay for ours, the ones you don't use in the cities you don't live in.
As in Disraeli's observation, she has been carried away with the exuberance of her own natural verbosity.
“Why should I pay for a flower I won’t smell, a park I don’t visit, or
art I can’t appreciate?” the retired special education teacher
continued. “Why should I pay the salaries of politicians I didn’t vote
for, a tax cut that doesn’t affect me, or a loophole I can’t take
advantage of?”
The answer is, of course, the same as the one above. Reciprocity and civic duty.
I am not sure why she thinks a loop hole, also known less pejoratively as an itemized tax deduction, somehow costs her something.
The story states that Ms. Rank is a retired school teacher. She is only 63. These teachers must have a pretty good pension system. I wonder who pays for that.
Given her former profession I thought I would ask a question in a format she is no doubt familiar with.
Which of these things is not like the others?
A) Parks, B) Roads, C) Bridges, D) Sidewalks, E) Health insurance and F) Libraries.
Right you are! Gold star smiley faces for all! E is unlike all the others. There is no reciprocal benefit to the 62 year old man forced to pay for maternity coverage. He is simply forced to pay money for something it is entirely impossible for him to use, regardless of where he lives, for the benefit of someone else. It is simply a taking with no benefit.
Not the way America is supposed to work.
Not the way America is supposed to work.
Wednesday, May 17, 2017
Apocalypse Trump
As you have no doubt noticed there is an apocalyptic story about President Trump just about every day. As you have also no doubt noticed, these stories contain very little in the way of facts.
Today Yahoo "News" (quote marks are mine) treated us to this howler:
Perhaps there is a memo, I guess we'll see. Seems to me that whoever leaked this could easily have made a copy of the "memo" available. After all, according to the NYT story Yahoo "News" relies on,
"The New York Times has not viewed a copy of the memo, which is unclassified, but one of Mr. Comey’s associates read parts of it to a Times reporter." If it isn't classified why not share it? As any 10 year old knows, because it either doesn't exist, doesn't say what the leaker claims it does, or the leaker is daring Trump to release the recordings of his conversations with Comey Trump referred to so they will know whether the tapes exist. Much better to know that before hand than risk being exposed for what they are if they publish the memo.
Curious indeed. If you read the NYT story you can see the methodology. An anonymous source reads from a "memo" the NYT cannot see. The NYT sees no problem here. In fact, the story extrapolates from the "memo" no one has seen.
Here is one of my favorites.
"The documentation of Mr. Trump’s request is the clearest evidence that the president has tried to directly influence the Justice Department and F.B.I. investigation into links between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia."
What "documentation"? No one has seen any such documentation but extrapolating damning conclusions from a document they don't have and have never seen is no stretch at all when President Trump is involved. And they wonder why Trump hates them and makes no secret of it.
President Trump vowed to "drain the swamp" that is Washington D.C. The swamp creatures are fighting back in unprecedented style.
Bureaucrats, prime stakeholders in the swamp, are leaking details of every meeting Trump has. Main stream media, also prime stakeholders in the swamp, continually print stories based on absolutely nothing but "unnamed sources" referring, to but never producing any "documentation".
This, from a recent Washington Post story, is, I think, a record for anonymous sourcing.
"But the private accounts of more than 30 officials at the White House, the Justice Department, the FBI and on Capitol Hill, as well as Trump confidants and other senior Republicans, paint a conflicting narrative centered on the president’s brewing personal animus toward Comey. Many of those interviewed spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to candidly discuss internal deliberations." Emphasis added.
So, "more than 30" eh? Well, how many actually or are the reporters unable to count that high? What possible reason could the writers have for not including the actual number? Many possibilities. None of which reflect well on the reporters, their editors or The Washington Post. Chief among the possibilities is that there were not 30 sources but they admired the effect the inclusion of the number had on the story's claim to legitimacy.
Then there is this; "Many of those interviewed spoke on the condition of anonymity..."
"Many"? There is not a single named "source" in the story as it relates to the leak. Why not include a quote from someone who didn't insist on anonymity? Because none of the quoted, attributed sources, were among the leakers. They were just offering opinions. Why include such dissembling? Because they are not writing a news story. They are trying to destroy the presidency of the man who vowed to make them play by the rules.
They are protecting their turf and will not give up easily.
Do not believe anything they say about President Trump. Not a thing. Their purpose is to persuade the President's supporters to abandon him. We won't. If any of his other supporters are anything like me, the behavior of the press and the bureaucrats simply confirms that Trump is and was right. These people are much more interested in taking him down than they are in reporting the "news".
One thing I find puzzling. Do they really want a President Pence? Hillary he is not.
Today Yahoo "News" (quote marks are mine) treated us to this howler:
The Comey memo was also about Trump’s request to arrest reporters. Journalists call it ‘crazy and scary.’
Only two small problems, again. No memo and no named source. Other than that, its totally credible. Well, no, it isn't.
Perhaps there is a memo, I guess we'll see. Seems to me that whoever leaked this could easily have made a copy of the "memo" available. After all, according to the NYT story Yahoo "News" relies on,
"The New York Times has not viewed a copy of the memo, which is unclassified, but one of Mr. Comey’s associates read parts of it to a Times reporter." If it isn't classified why not share it? As any 10 year old knows, because it either doesn't exist, doesn't say what the leaker claims it does, or the leaker is daring Trump to release the recordings of his conversations with Comey Trump referred to so they will know whether the tapes exist. Much better to know that before hand than risk being exposed for what they are if they publish the memo.
Curious indeed. If you read the NYT story you can see the methodology. An anonymous source reads from a "memo" the NYT cannot see. The NYT sees no problem here. In fact, the story extrapolates from the "memo" no one has seen.
Here is one of my favorites.
"The documentation of Mr. Trump’s request is the clearest evidence that the president has tried to directly influence the Justice Department and F.B.I. investigation into links between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia."
What "documentation"? No one has seen any such documentation but extrapolating damning conclusions from a document they don't have and have never seen is no stretch at all when President Trump is involved. And they wonder why Trump hates them and makes no secret of it.
President Trump vowed to "drain the swamp" that is Washington D.C. The swamp creatures are fighting back in unprecedented style.
Bureaucrats, prime stakeholders in the swamp, are leaking details of every meeting Trump has. Main stream media, also prime stakeholders in the swamp, continually print stories based on absolutely nothing but "unnamed sources" referring, to but never producing any "documentation".
This, from a recent Washington Post story, is, I think, a record for anonymous sourcing.
"But the private accounts of more than 30 officials at the White House, the Justice Department, the FBI and on Capitol Hill, as well as Trump confidants and other senior Republicans, paint a conflicting narrative centered on the president’s brewing personal animus toward Comey. Many of those interviewed spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to candidly discuss internal deliberations." Emphasis added.
So, "more than 30" eh? Well, how many actually or are the reporters unable to count that high? What possible reason could the writers have for not including the actual number? Many possibilities. None of which reflect well on the reporters, their editors or The Washington Post. Chief among the possibilities is that there were not 30 sources but they admired the effect the inclusion of the number had on the story's claim to legitimacy.
Then there is this; "Many of those interviewed spoke on the condition of anonymity..."
"Many"? There is not a single named "source" in the story as it relates to the leak. Why not include a quote from someone who didn't insist on anonymity? Because none of the quoted, attributed sources, were among the leakers. They were just offering opinions. Why include such dissembling? Because they are not writing a news story. They are trying to destroy the presidency of the man who vowed to make them play by the rules.
They are protecting their turf and will not give up easily.
Do not believe anything they say about President Trump. Not a thing. Their purpose is to persuade the President's supporters to abandon him. We won't. If any of his other supporters are anything like me, the behavior of the press and the bureaucrats simply confirms that Trump is and was right. These people are much more interested in taking him down than they are in reporting the "news".
One thing I find puzzling. Do they really want a President Pence? Hillary he is not.
Wednesday, May 10, 2017
Unbiased Journalism
I mentioned in the previous post that despite the dire warnings of a constitutional crisis in the wake of President Trump's firing of James Comey, there is no constitutional crisis.
There is another crisis, in my opinion. It has been a problem since Mr. Trump's election.
Mainstream journalism, while contemptible for its cheer leading tenor during Obama's reign and Hillary's campaign, has evolved into a new role.
They seem to see their job as being supportive of anyone the President criticizes.
Senator Richard Blumenthal weighed in on the Comey affair.
“What we have now is really a looming constitutional crisis that is deadly serious,” Blumenthal said on CNN’s “New Day.” “Because there is an investigation ongoing.”
Very restrained of him. The crisis is only looming. Of course, there is always "an investigation ongoing". In fact, I would be shocked if there were not thousands of investigations "ongoing".
The Donald, being The Donald took to Twitter to remind us that Blumenthal lied on many occasions about having served in Vietnam and that Blumenthal should be the subject of an investigation.
Yahoo "News" (quotes are mine) quickly leapt to Mr. Blumenthal's defense publishing the article linked above under the headline:
There is another crisis, in my opinion. It has been a problem since Mr. Trump's election.
Mainstream journalism, while contemptible for its cheer leading tenor during Obama's reign and Hillary's campaign, has evolved into a new role.
They seem to see their job as being supportive of anyone the President criticizes.
Senator Richard Blumenthal weighed in on the Comey affair.
“What we have now is really a looming constitutional crisis that is deadly serious,” Blumenthal said on CNN’s “New Day.” “Because there is an investigation ongoing.”
Very restrained of him. The crisis is only looming. Of course, there is always "an investigation ongoing". In fact, I would be shocked if there were not thousands of investigations "ongoing".
The Donald, being The Donald took to Twitter to remind us that Blumenthal lied on many occasions about having served in Vietnam and that Blumenthal should be the subject of an investigation.
Yahoo "News" (quotes are mine) quickly leapt to Mr. Blumenthal's defense publishing the article linked above under the headline:
Trump falsely claims Sen. Blumenthal devised ‘one of the greatest military frauds in U.S. history'
Their problem is not that Mr. Blumenthal is a self-aggrandizing serial liar. No, of course not.
The real problem is that President Trump exaggerates, not that Blumenthal is a disgrace.
I have mentioned before the analysis that his critics take him literally but not seriously. His supporters take him seriously but not literally. The critics keep proving the point.
Not being content with just asserting that there have been bigger frauds than Blumenthal in US military history, Yahoo goes on to try and even the playing field for Mr. Blumenthal.
"And during the Vietnam War, Trump avoided the draft by receiving five deferments, including one for what he described as bone spurs in his heels."
So Donald Trump had five deferments, just like Blumenthal! Indeed. Not.
Trump never pretended to have been in combat which is the source of Trump's contempt for Blumenthal.
Tuesday, May 09, 2017
James Comey/Updated
Well! President Trump has finally fired FBI Director James Comey.
Is this a manifestation of Trump's well known (to the left) penchant for totalitarianism?
Has he unleashed his inner Hitler/Mussolini/Pol Pot/Stalin/Attilla the Hun?
Maybe, but in a good way.
I wrote at some length last July about Comey's non-indictment indictment of Hillary Clinton. His explanation was complete nonsense in my view and that of many others more qualified to opine on the matter than I. He should long since have been fired.
I find myself wondering how the left is going to play this. They have a conundrum to deal with.
When Comey let Clinton off the hook he was the greatest, sharpest, most honest guy in the world. When he put her back on the hook briefly, at the end of October, he was the worst miscreant ever to work in Washington. When he promptly took her off the hook, again, he resumed his pedestal. But then she lost. Oh my. Comey's pedestal was promptly blown up.
But wait, there's more! He testified to Congress that some Trump people might be in the FBI's cross hairs over contacts with Russia. The pedestal was not resurrected but he was relieved of perennial villain status.
Now he has been fired. Are they shameless enough to set their hair on fire, again over Trump's megalomania?
I don't know but it should make for enjoyable entertainment.
Update:
Hair is on fire! It is the Saturday Night Massacre all over again! A Constitutional Crisis!
Except for the part where it is neither.
The Saturday Night Massacre occurred on October 20, 1973. Congress had appointed a Special Prosecutor to investigate the Watergate burglary. The ensuing investigation led to Richard Nixon's resignation from the presidency.
The statute creating the special prosecutor stated that he could not be fired except for cause and classified him as a justice department employee, not a political appointee. President Nixon demanded his Attorney General fire the SP without cause. The AG refused and resigned. Nixon then demanded that his assistant AG fire the SP. The AGA also resigned. The rest is well known history.
James Comey served at the pleasure of the President and could be fired for a good reason, a bad reason or no reason at all. Thus, no comparison at all to the SNM, as in, none.
Constitutional crisis? Apparently these people are not terribly well acquainted with the Constitution. The Director of the FBI is a political appointment of the executive branch. As such, as mentioned above, the President can fire him for any reason or no reason at all, at any time.
Billions of bytes are being deployed in the attempt to create the impression that the reason for the firing is that Comey's probe into Russian/Trump campaign collusion was getting too close to the President and had to be stopped.
There is a quite plausible, although less exciting, alternative explanation.
The Deputy AG, to whom the FBI Director reports, was only confirmed to office by the Senate on April 26, 2017. He then proceeded with his review of those for whose performance he is responsible. Unsurprisingly he found Comey's performance wanting, (agreeing with many Democrats' assessments, well, until they changed their minds en masse yesterday) and issued his report to the AG recommending he be fired. AG Sessions approved the report and informed the President. The President fired Comey.
The end.
Is this a manifestation of Trump's well known (to the left) penchant for totalitarianism?
Has he unleashed his inner Hitler/Mussolini/Pol Pot/Stalin/Attilla the Hun?
Maybe, but in a good way.
I wrote at some length last July about Comey's non-indictment indictment of Hillary Clinton. His explanation was complete nonsense in my view and that of many others more qualified to opine on the matter than I. He should long since have been fired.
I find myself wondering how the left is going to play this. They have a conundrum to deal with.
When Comey let Clinton off the hook he was the greatest, sharpest, most honest guy in the world. When he put her back on the hook briefly, at the end of October, he was the worst miscreant ever to work in Washington. When he promptly took her off the hook, again, he resumed his pedestal. But then she lost. Oh my. Comey's pedestal was promptly blown up.
But wait, there's more! He testified to Congress that some Trump people might be in the FBI's cross hairs over contacts with Russia. The pedestal was not resurrected but he was relieved of perennial villain status.
Now he has been fired. Are they shameless enough to set their hair on fire, again over Trump's megalomania?
I don't know but it should make for enjoyable entertainment.
Update:
Hair is on fire! It is the Saturday Night Massacre all over again! A Constitutional Crisis!
Except for the part where it is neither.
The Saturday Night Massacre occurred on October 20, 1973. Congress had appointed a Special Prosecutor to investigate the Watergate burglary. The ensuing investigation led to Richard Nixon's resignation from the presidency.
The statute creating the special prosecutor stated that he could not be fired except for cause and classified him as a justice department employee, not a political appointee. President Nixon demanded his Attorney General fire the SP without cause. The AG refused and resigned. Nixon then demanded that his assistant AG fire the SP. The AGA also resigned. The rest is well known history.
James Comey served at the pleasure of the President and could be fired for a good reason, a bad reason or no reason at all. Thus, no comparison at all to the SNM, as in, none.
Constitutional crisis? Apparently these people are not terribly well acquainted with the Constitution. The Director of the FBI is a political appointment of the executive branch. As such, as mentioned above, the President can fire him for any reason or no reason at all, at any time.
Billions of bytes are being deployed in the attempt to create the impression that the reason for the firing is that Comey's probe into Russian/Trump campaign collusion was getting too close to the President and had to be stopped.
There is a quite plausible, although less exciting, alternative explanation.
The Deputy AG, to whom the FBI Director reports, was only confirmed to office by the Senate on April 26, 2017. He then proceeded with his review of those for whose performance he is responsible. Unsurprisingly he found Comey's performance wanting, (agreeing with many Democrats' assessments, well, until they changed their minds en masse yesterday) and issued his report to the AG recommending he be fired. AG Sessions approved the report and informed the President. The President fired Comey.
The end.
Good Faith, Health Care Edition
I have written before of the critical role good faith plays in any meaningful discussion. I have written before that there does not appear to be any good faith on the left. They keep proving me, unfortunately, correct.
The House passed an Obamacare reform act last week. The world ended.
Courtesy of Senator Kamala Harris (D CA) this gem of lie..
"If you're one of the up to 129M people who have a pre-existing condition, share your story with me today & I’ll RT some throughout the day."
As the Senator (and former Attorney General of California) must know most
Americans get their health insurance through their employment. Consideration of pre-existing conditions has been unlawful in group policies for over 30 years, as she also surely knows.
The subject of the legislation she is vilifying is Obamacare. How many people are insured by Obamacare? Well, according to the Senator's home state paper of record, The L.A. Times, as published on March 29th of this year,
That is correct, 9.1 million people. Perhaps each of those 9.1 million has 14,175,824 pre-existing conditions, thus her 129,000,000. Probably not.
She isn't done yet. As the chart above makes clear, 290,200,000 Americans have health insurance. I'm guessing, since the entire population of the country is about 330,000,000 that at least a few of the 290,200,000 are not in the top 5% income wise, the privileged few, in other words. There are, by definition, no more than 16,500,000 people in that cohort. Probably far fewer since there are about 73,000,000 minors in the US and few of them are likely to have achieved top 5% income status on their own.
" Health care should not be a privilege for a few, but a right for all. The bill that passed earlier today won’t do that." Says the Senator. Indeed, says I, and thank goodness it isn't a "privilege for a few". Is it a right then? No. Just another service we buy or receive in some other manner.
Not to be outdone, a writer named Joan McCarter published a well informed piece under the following headline,
As you can imagine it is replete with nonsense. Have a look if you have the stomach for it.
If you do you will notice that every link supporting her hysteria is to a left wing or far left wing publication or organization. The definition of living in a bubble.
She ends the piece with this bit of hilarity.
"Here’s another consequence: we will make the political life of every Republican who voted for this a living hell."
It would be nice if we could actually discuss things with the left but it seems to be impossible, so bereft of good faith are they.
The House passed an Obamacare reform act last week. The world ended.
Courtesy of Senator Kamala Harris (D CA) this gem of lie..
"If you're one of the up to 129M people who have a pre-existing condition, share your story with me today & I’ll RT some throughout the day."
As the Senator (and former Attorney General of California) must know most
Americans get their health insurance through their employment. Consideration of pre-existing conditions has been unlawful in group policies for over 30 years, as she also surely knows.
The subject of the legislation she is vilifying is Obamacare. How many people are insured by Obamacare? Well, according to the Senator's home state paper of record, The L.A. Times, as published on March 29th of this year,
That is correct, 9.1 million people. Perhaps each of those 9.1 million has 14,175,824 pre-existing conditions, thus her 129,000,000. Probably not.
She isn't done yet. As the chart above makes clear, 290,200,000 Americans have health insurance. I'm guessing, since the entire population of the country is about 330,000,000 that at least a few of the 290,200,000 are not in the top 5% income wise, the privileged few, in other words. There are, by definition, no more than 16,500,000 people in that cohort. Probably far fewer since there are about 73,000,000 minors in the US and few of them are likely to have achieved top 5% income status on their own.
" Health care should not be a privilege for a few, but a right for all. The bill that passed earlier today won’t do that." Says the Senator. Indeed, says I, and thank goodness it isn't a "privilege for a few". Is it a right then? No. Just another service we buy or receive in some other manner.
Not to be outdone, a writer named Joan McCarter published a well informed piece under the following headline,
As you can imagine it is replete with nonsense. Have a look if you have the stomach for it.
If you do you will notice that every link supporting her hysteria is to a left wing or far left wing publication or organization. The definition of living in a bubble.
She ends the piece with this bit of hilarity.
"Here’s another consequence: we will make the political life of every Republican who voted for this a living hell."
It would be nice if we could actually discuss things with the left but it seems to be impossible, so bereft of good faith are they.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)