Out and About on a Monday

In and among all the heartache being generated re: Russia, one thing I’m not getting is how dealing with Russians is some sort of monstrous thing, but dealing with, say Chinese, isn’t. Suppose it is true that Trump and his people have deals with Russia – even nefarious deals – why is that so bad, but people having deals with China is ok? To me, tyranny is tyranny. Corrupt oligarchies are corrupt oligarchies. There’s no real differentiating between them.

A long while ago – I believe back in the Blogs for Bush days – I wrote an article in favor of “Freedom Trade”, as opposed to “Free Trade”. The short story on that was that I held we should have no economic relations with tyrannical regimes, but free trade with all free nations. The only exception for dealing with tyrannical regimes would be if they have some material which we simply cannot obtain elsewhere (this would be a rarity – for the most part, we can obtain just about everything we need here at home, one way or another; and, failing that, there’s got to be a free nation source out there, somewhere). There were several reasons I was opposed (and remain opposed) to dealing with tyrannical regimes:

1. Trade with tyrannical regimes does not lead to liberalization, but the mere strengthening of the tyranny. Britain had free trade with the Kaiser’s Germany and all that did was allow Germany to penetrate British markets and thus provide the sinews of war for the Germans. I can show, again and again, that this is what happens. I see no reason why we should in any way, shape or form help rivet shackles on other people, nor that we should in any way strengthen a nation we may have to fight at some future date.

2. Tyrannical regimes cheat. All the time. It is just the nature of the beast. No matter what you put down on paper with them, they will take whatever opportunities arise to put one over on you. Remember: a tyranny is only imposed by dishonest people. If you think that they’ll be honest with you, you’re being a fool.

3. Tyrannical regimes are almost invariably corrupt. That is, it is impossible for our people to do business in a tyrannical nation without, in one way or another, greasing official palms. The people who run tyrannical regimes are, as noted, dishonest – and as there is no free press or an opposition party to expose them, they’d have to be saints to refuse to squeeze us for all we’re worth. By doing business in tyrannical regimes, we are corrupting our own people.

So, if you’re all huffing and puffing about deals with Russia, then you’d also better be on my side about cutting off all economic ties with tyrannical regimes. If you’re not, then all you really care about is opposing Trump.

Al Gore is coming out with a sequel…he has to; his predictions in the first film are being proved wrong day by day, and if he wants to keep on the AGW gravy train, he needs to update his Doomsaying.

Trump signs four bills rolling back Obama-era regulations. That real world thing: it keeps happening. Don’t be too distracted by whatever shiny object the MSM is harping on…they are only harping on it because the DNC tells them to. Try to dig a little deeper and see what is really happening.

Democrats are still trying to work out how they can have a Presidential succession which doesn’t include Trump, or anyone associated with him (Peter Daou went particularly bizarre on this notion). Here’s the trick, Democrats – you’ll have to amend the Constitution. Sorry, that is the only way…I guess it would have to be something along the lines of, “if the President be removed from office, the successor shall be the person who lost the last elections”. I realize this might be a bit difficult to get enacted…but, do go on: it’ll keep you busy for Trump’s 8 years in office.

Turns out if you and the other half are “getting busy” from time to time, you’ll be happy. Who knew?

Powerline captures the Democrat mood:

I think Trump is the first president since Lincoln who has received no “honeymoon” period in Washington as is typical for new presidents—and for the same reason as in 1861: Democrats have essentially seceded from the American people, and won’t accept the results of a national election. (I’m also tempted to ask whatever made anyone think the thrice-married Trump would get a honeymoon? C’mon.) Democrats control so little territory that they can’t act literally on their secessionist impulses—though note deep blue California, where Democrats are actually talking about secession. But you can swap out “resistance” today for “rebellion” in 1861 and capture the Democratic Party mood accurately.

Once a Confederate, always a Confederate? Or is it just that Democrats, starting with Jackson’s first, failed, attempt at the White House have never inhabited a world where they are comfortable with losing an election?

The New York Times has come out with a revised list of The Bad Words – because there is no end to Political Correctness, folks. Why? Because part of the reason the Party has a party-line is to force you to jump to it. You see, it isn’t just a matter of putting forth the ideology…it is about forcing you to jump through mental hoops to prove your loyalty to the Party. If you fail, then you were never a true believer…

Students have been instructed to write an essay on 9/11 from the terrorist’s perspective. Look, I can understand this sort of thing – it is useful, for instance, to write about the settlement of the American West from the Native’s point of view. But this is because both Native and Settler had their good points and their bad points and by getting the full story, we can learn to be better people…but there are some times some sides which have no redeeming qualities. The 9/11 terrorists are in this group. There’s nothing a decent person can learn from people who were motivated to murder innocent people in cold blood.

Advertisements

28 thoughts on “Out and About on a Monday

  1. Cluster March 28, 2017 / 10:38 am

    This is how insane California has become:

    A new bill introduced in California’s state Senate requires nursing homes and similar long-term care facilities to implement transgender bathroom policies. The bill makes it unlawful to require transgender residents to use the biologically correct bathroom, and prohibits nursing home employees from calling residents anything other than their chosen name and pronoun.

    I think we should all chip in some money and help California secede.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2017/03/27/california-bill-forces-transgender-bathrooms-into-nursing-homes/#ixzz4cco8lKc5

    • Retired Spook March 28, 2017 / 10:48 am

      Cluster,

      looking back at everything that’s happened in the last decade or so, can you imagine your reaction if someone had predicted it up front?

      • Cluster March 28, 2017 / 11:40 am

        No! I am honestly at a loss for words on how far down the rabbit hole the left has gone. Case in point is the failure of the ACHA bill, which the left is celebrating. Meaning, they are celebrating the fact that newly elected representatives disagree on how to fix a healthcare bill that the left passed on purely partisan votes, and of which has caused premiums and deductibles to sky rocket in addition to restricting access to care because of low reimbursement rates. And to the left, this is a victory.

        The left has unequivocally become the enemy within.

  2. Retired Spook March 28, 2017 / 11:38 am

    Too bad Congressman Brooks didn’t introduce this a couple months ago.

    A bill filed in the House of Representatives by Congressman Mo Brooks of Alabama cuts to the heart of the Obamacare problem with more brevity than most would expect.

    Over the course of just two pages, the congressman from Huntsville laid out what is to be called the “Obamacare Repeal Act”. In even more tact, the meat and potatoes of the bill are boiled down to one sentence:

    “Effective as of Dec. 31, 2017, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is repealed, and the provisions of law amended or repealed by such Act are restored or revived as if such Act had not been enacted.”

    • Cluster March 28, 2017 / 11:43 am

      Before the ACA was passed, several surveys showed that 83% of population had healthcare coverage and were happy with their policies. So let’s get back to that, and then we can figure out a sensible way to cover the remaining 17%.

      • Retired Spook March 28, 2017 / 12:22 pm

        The first thing they should have asked was, how many of that 17% were actually being denied access to healthcare — very few. Next they should have asked, how many of that 17% actually wanted insurance but couldn’t afford it. Next, how many of that 17% were young and healthy and didn’t feel the need to have health insurance? When it came right down to it, I saw several studies that indicated the number of people who either wanted insurance but couldn’t afford it as well as those who couldn’t get insurance because of preexisting conditions was a fairly small number, and the cost to cover all of them was a few billion dollars. Remember how few people with preexisting conditions actually signed up when they were able to — way fewer than what was predicted by Democrats. Bottom line, ObamaCare was never really about healthcare or affordability as much as it was about a massive redistribution of wealth.

      • Cluster March 28, 2017 / 2:37 pm

        Game. Set. Match.

        And now it’s a political football. Note that all elected representatives chose not to subject themselves to the ACA.

      • Retired Spook March 28, 2017 / 5:13 pm

        It sounds like that could be about to change.

        Fortunately, what President Obama did in directing the Office of Personnel Management to authorize Congress’s illegal exemption can be reversed by President Trump directing them to enforce the law as written. By doing so, Trump can send a clear message to Congress that their failure to move a repeal bill forward will impose very personal, very costly consequences on themselves and their staff – consequences from which they have been illegally shielded for years.

      • Cluster March 28, 2017 / 5:49 pm

        Poetic Justice

      • Retired Spook March 28, 2017 / 10:23 pm

        Remember how few people with pre-existing conditions actually signed up when they were able to — way fewer than what was predicted by Democrats.

        I got to thinking, I’ll bet that information is available on-line. Sure enough it is, and the number over the first 3-1/2 years of ObamaCare doesn’t even amount to a rounding error. If the government simply gave each person with pre-existing conditions $50,000 per year, it’s less than a billion dollars a year.

    • simoneee9 March 28, 2017 / 7:38 pm

      They had no trouble voting to repeal when Obama could veto anything they did, making it symbolic but ineffective.

      They had a Republican president who promised to get rid of the ACA on his first day, and suddenly they won’t even hold a vote?

      What the hell is going on?

      • Amazona March 28, 2017 / 7:58 pm

        What the hell is going on?

        Rational people thinking, debating and being thoughtful about the best way to deal with a colossal disaster created by mindless Dem sock puppets who obediently voted en masse for a bill written by a special interest (not even by a legislator) which none of them had read, which upended one sixth of the American economy and created misery for tens of millions of people.

        That’s what’s going on. You, of course, would not recognize this, because it is so far outside your area of experience. It’s what happens in a legislature that does its job, instead of meekly taking its marching orders from a Central Authority.

        Barry and the Boyz pretty much destroyed the insurance industry in the United States and screwed up health care coverage so badly it may take many incremental steps to get back to a functioning system. What do you suggest?

        Do you HAVE ideas? Or is your goal to just be a mindless speed bump spewing out regurgitated talking points fed to you by your masters?

        Which reminds me—what exactly IS your area of experience, anyway? Are you a Democrat? Do you vote? How do you define your political philosophy? Why do you pretend to care what Americans do or say?

        Read Retired Spook, 12:22 p.m. and respond to the facts he presents. Or shut up and go away.

      • simoneee9 March 28, 2017 / 9:52 pm

        Well the President was putting “the finishing touches” on his own Obamacare replacement plan in mid-January which would cover more people and cost less money. So I’m sure he’ll deliver on that.

      • Amazona March 29, 2017 / 8:37 pm

        …what exactly IS your area of experience, anyway? Are you a Democrat? Do you vote? How do you define your political philosophy? Why do you pretend to care what Americans do or say?

        Read Retired Spook, 12:22 p.m. and respond to the facts he presents. Or shut up and go away.

  3. simoneee9 March 28, 2017 / 9:55 pm

    The reason the AHCA bill was so terrible, and the reason it was rammed through committee to the floor so quickly, is because Republicans decided to play party politics instead of working with their colleagues.

    The reason Trump can try to “distance himself” from this (operative word: try) is partially because it doesn’t even resemble the bill he floated talking about removing state lines as restrictions and other provisions that may have helped Americans.

    The reason AHCA was so terrible, the reason it failed so miserably, and the reason it was rammed through are all one in the same: Republicans didn’t want to do the work to build a plan that could get 60 votes in the Senate. Why not? Because that’d involve a protracted process of negotiations, mark-ups, bringing in experts – all sorts of things that are necessary for governing but don’t play well with the base or Twitter. (There’s a reason the ACA took so much time to get through.

    Overhauling healthcare takes actual work.)

    Instead, Republicans opted for the quick and dirty option: get a bill that can repeal Obamacare and pass the Senate as “budget reconciliation”, which would only take 50 votes, meaning they can even afford defections from within their own party.

    Because new things, like removing state lines for marketplaces, would never get past parliamentary regulations as “budget reconciliation” in the Senate, these had to be scrapped.

    This bill was never about giving healthcare to anyone. This bill was “we’re going to deliver on a campaign rallying-cry if it kills us – well, more specifically, even if it kills you, millions of you” because we can’t get 60 votes in the Senate on a real bill, so we’ll try and get a 50-vote, reconciliation rush job.

    Of course, none of these nuances will stop Trump from blaming Democrats, Trump supporters from blaming Ryan and Democrats, or anything else. But if you want to wrap your head around the issue, keep in mind that Republicans COULD have done healthcare reform (in a protracted process that’d need 60 votes in the Senate), but they chose to be partisan hacks instead (and go for a 50-vote rush job via reconciliation), and it all blew up when they couldn’t even whip enough votes in the House.

    • simoneee9 March 28, 2017 / 10:04 pm

      Trump couldn’t “negotiate” a bill that was already supposed to have been written and perfected by others over the past seven years into passing congress, even with a clear majority in both chambers. It is absolutely absurd how magnificent a failure that is for someone who claims to be a master of the “art” of the deal. This was a sure thing, and the Donald managed to fuck it up completely.

      Trump did not write a word of that bill, nor did he read it, nor did he even understand what it was about. If he had, it would have been different. He could barely be bothered to defend and promote it all before the vote. When it failed, he didn’t even bother attacking the bill itself, he just went straight to “I had nothing to do with it”.

      I think it’s difficult to overstate how enormous of a failure this is on his behalf. Ryan has problems now, sure, but Trump is supposed to be the actual leader of the group. He can’t even half-ass support for his own team members, opting instead to blame anyone within his line of sight, like a petulant 7-year old.

      What’s devastating for him is that not only did he not know the particulars of the bill, he did an absolutely atrocious job of rallying support for it. Every story that’s come out about what happened behind closed doors (from being called on his bluff, to telling people to “ignore the little shit” to having Bannon go in there and bully people) just paints him and his administration as complete amateurs.

    • Retired Spook March 29, 2017 / 8:32 am

      Fixed it for you.

      The reason the AHCA ACA bill was so terrible, and the reason it was rammed through committee to the floor so quickly, is because Republicans Democrats decided to play party politics instead of working with their colleagues.

      An interesting read on just HOW ObamaCare was passed.

      • Cluster March 29, 2017 / 9:00 am

        Simon’s self awareness is as weak as his memory, but that is very common character trait amongst progressives. Case in point, I heard a Democrat partisan hack last night blame republicans for “obstructing” comprehensive immigration reform, to which I thought – what immigration reform? In 2008 Obama strongly campaigned on immigration reform and in the two years that followed where he had the House and the Senate, the Democrats proceeded to do absolutely nothing on immigration reform. In fact the person that did the heaviest lifting on immigration reform during Obama’s presidency was Marco Rubio. And just a little dose of reality to Democrats, the reason why our immigration system is broken, is because you won’t enforce the laws. The current laws on the books are actually good laws that would resolve a lot of problems if they were enforced.

        Let’s get back to Simons mild retardation though, which is clearly shown with his comment – This bill was never about giving healthcare to anyone. This bill was “we’re going to deliver on a campaign rallying-cry if it kills us. Note to Simon – First of all the ACA does not cover everyone, and secondly the AHCA was never billed as “giving” healthcare to anyone. It will eventually be designed to make healthcare more accessible and affordable. Two rather important concepts that the ACA obliterated. And finally, please read Spook’s link because you obviously need to be reminded how the ACA was passed, ultimately at the 11th hour on Christmas Eve on a purely partisan vote by people who never read the bill.

        So Simon, you’re really going to have become a lot smarter for anyone here to take you seriously.

    • Amazona March 29, 2017 / 8:19 pm

      There’s a reason the ACA took so much time to get through.

      What reason? (Did you read Spook’s link?) How much time? How much time was devoted to debate on its various contents? How much time was spent working with Republicans? What “experts” weighed in on it? (Other than the SEIU, that is.) How much time was spent explaining it? What were the objections to it? What do you think of the objections to it? Do you think it was a good bill? Why? Why do you think it was necessary?

      I’ve realized that calling Simoneeeeeeeek a wannabe speed bump is too complimentary. It is clear his real goal is the be the turd in the punch bowl.

      Note that he has yet to answer a single question or put forth a single idea. The only things that Simoneeeeeeeek has been able to project through his whining, bitching, moaning and groaning is that he hates Trump, hates Republicans, and is convinced that none of is worth a damn. It’s a tired old whine, but it’s all he’s got.

      Still no response on who he is, why he cares, what is his standing in opining on things American, his political affiliation or philosophy, if he even voted, etc. Just whining and bitching and moaning.

  4. Cluster March 29, 2017 / 9:11 am

    The Democrats and progressives have clearly shown over the last 90 days that they want war, to which I reply – let’s do this. I am really in the mood to destroy some of these people. Adam Schiff has no neck and couldn’t scare a girl scout troop. Schumer is obviously bi polar considering his hypocrisy over the years. Pelosi’s botox has clearly seeped into whatever gray matter she is working with, Bernie Sanders has dementia, and the entire Democrats caucus is as old as dirt and as dumb as a bag of hammers. Why they think their opinions matter anymore is beyond me.

  5. Cluster March 29, 2017 / 9:24 am

    Here’s a little something special from the high intellect of Maxine Waters:

    “We fight against this president and we point out how dangerous he is,” Waters said on the floor. “…We’re fighting for democracy. We’re fighting for America. We’re saying to those who say they’re patriotic, but they turn a blind eye to the destruction he is about to cause to this country. You are not nearly as patriotic as we are.”

    I will remind you that Maxine was the Democrat who openly advocated to nationalize the oil industry. Maxine felt that she and her colleagues could run the oil industry better than their private sector counter parts. I can only imagine she came to that conclusion after seeing how well it worked out in Venezuela.

    Maxine is a really special kind of stupid racist.

  6. Retired Spook March 29, 2017 / 11:53 am

    Glenn Beck had Matt Walsh on his radio show this morning. Matt gave what I think is probably the best description of Liberalism I’ve ever heard — “the rejection of objective moral, intellectual and scientific truths.”

    • M. Noonan March 29, 2017 / 12:13 pm

      If you start a calculation with “1 plus 1 equals 3”, then no matter what you do later on, your calculation will be incorrect. Progressivism start its calculation with, “humanity can be perfected by the actions of humans”, which is as much a self-evident falsehood as “1 plus 1 equals 3″…and, so, all they do after that also goes wrong.

  7. Cluster March 29, 2017 / 7:56 pm

    I am really tired of this Russia/Election Washington partisan game going on. This is why Americans despise Washington. Now to be fair, I have heard Trey Gowdy, who is in my opinion the most decent honest politician in DC, say that there is some valid concern here, so an investigation is warranted but it is secondary to the issues that Americans need resolved and it should be done in a bi partisan method and in the background. I also find it hard to believe that anyone is actually surprised by this. Russia trying to meddle in our affairs should be expected and adequate safeguards should be put in place, which evidently they aren’t and that is the real issue. Why aren’t we protecting our processes? We certainly have the methods and the talent to protect us against anything Russia can throw at us.

    Re: any collusion with Trump, it’s time for the Democrats put up or STFU. So far they have nothing. Nada. Zip. Nine. Nine. Nine.

    But let’s briefly talk about one nation meddling in another nation’s election process. Here’s an interesting read in the Washington Times from last year:

    The State Department paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxpayers grants to an Israeli group that used the money to build a campaign to oust Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in last year’s Israeli parliamentary elections, a congressional investigation concluded Tuesday. Some $350,000 was sent to OneVoice, ostensibly to support the group’s efforts to back Israeli-Palestinian peace settlement negotiations. But OneVoice used the money to build a voter database, train activists and hire a political consulting firm with ties to President Obama’s campaign — all of which set the stage for an anti-Netanyahu campaign, the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations said in a bipartisan staff report.

    • Retired Spook March 29, 2017 / 10:15 pm

      We meddle in other nations’ politics all the time. It’s one of the CIA’s favorite pastimes.

  8. Cluster March 30, 2017 / 3:03 pm

    WHO THE F**K IS THIS EURO TRASH?

    In an extraordinary speech the EU Commission president said he would push for Ohio and Texas to split from the rest of America if the Republican president does not change his tune and become more supportive of the EU.

    The Europeans and even the left in this country HAVE NO IDEA WHO WE REALLY ARE. I have a good friend who personally has an arsenal larger than some small countries, and with the slightest provocation from some POS like this euro trash, we will use that arsenal with delight.

    As Doc Holiday once said, “say when”

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/785813/European-Union-EU-boss-threatens-break-up-US-retaliation-Trump-Brexit-support

    • Amazona March 30, 2017 / 3:15 pm

      Looks like it is time for a Congressional/FBI investigation into EU interference in US politics.

      And really—Ohio? They think there should be a foreign inholding surrounded by the United States? At least Texas is a border state, which could conceivably exist between Mexico and the US. Imagine this, and then imagine Trump’s US refusing to grant visas to Ohiostan and having border crossings for people who want to go to, for example, Kentucky. Would Texas be its own country and Ohio another? Or would they form one nation, just divided by several states?

      What is so funny about this posturing is the multiple levels of ignorance stupidity it represents. Whether ignorance of American history (the last time states tried to secede) or geography or the inability to read the tea leaves in the United States, it’s just bizarre.

      • Cluster March 30, 2017 / 3:20 pm

        I think the entire global left is losing their collective minds

Comments are closed.