Open Thread

Trump came back from Vietnam empty handed – seems that the North Korean’s tried to pull a fast one and Trump walked. Neither Trump nor the North Koreans are saying this is the end. I figure the North Koreans were testing to see how far Trump would go to get a deal. They found out: not too far.

Here’s the thing that our Experts are missing: the proper goal for American foreign policy vis a vis North Korea is to detach North Korea from China. I’m starting to see some hints that Chinese realizes this might be Trump’s goal, and they don’t like it one bit. China likes having a crazy North Korea around to muck up things in east Asia. Makes it easier for China to do things…at least they aren’t crazy, right? That Trump went to Vietnam to meet Kim is also interesting: in relation to China, we need the Vietnamese as allies. I’m wondering if Trump is working on a grand realignment in Asia? Hope so. It is long overdue.

Now, if we could just get everyone to see that our proper policy in Syria is to detach it from Iran…even if this means making a deal with Assad.

In a very quiet way on a Friday night, the Washington Post issued a correction regarding its original reporting on the Covington Catholic boys. I don’t think this will be good enough. I do think that they’ll eventually settle out of court for a large sum of money in order to avoid a crushing loss in Court. Either way, the MSM is being instructed that they must not slander regular folks. I like this.

Seems that religious believers don’t like it when their parish or synagogue gets all SJW. My parish is mostly free of overt Progressivism, but there is still the jarring note from time to time. I understand that in some parishes, it is quite SJW…one friend of mine going to a Church for Mass and the first thing she noticed was no crucifix. If you’ve ever been to a Catholic Church, you know the most prominent thing is usually a gigantic statue of Christ crucified right over the altar. I can’t imagine why anyone calling themselves Catholic would find such a thing inappropriate, but apparently some do. The bottom line is that when religious bodies seek to become part of the world, they die. The end. I know the Catholic Church is in sorry shape right now, but I also know plenty of young Catholic men and women are rising up to rebuild the Church. This Progressive drivel shall pass. Don’t know about the old mainline Protestant congregations…they seem to be gone for good.

The Tru Cons sent a pro-choice liberal to cover CPAC. That’s all you really need to know about the Tru Cons. As Glenn Reynolds points out:

“Conservatism conserved?” They haven’t even conserved women’s sports without penises. And, more tellingly, they haven’t even tried.

Governor Northam’s (D-Minstrel Show) wife handed out cotton balls to African-American children.

No, I did not make that up.

49 thoughts on “Open Thread

  1. JeremiahTMM March 2, 2019 / 1:20 am

    Very interesting, this…

    I had no idea that communist headquarters have always been in New York, as opposed to “Moscow.” Wow!

  2. Cluster March 2, 2019 / 11:23 am

    I saw Never Trumper Evan McMullin on MSNBC this morning lecturing us “conservatives” that it is in our best interests to abandon Trump and the “damage” he is doing to the Republican party. On the same panel was “conservative” Joyce Vance who was doing her best to sensationalize the Cohen hearing and how damaging his testimony was …. even though Cohen’s testimony actually served to exonerate Trump from all things Russia.

    They have thrown every thing they have at Trump and nothing has stuck so now they are resorting to lying to begging … fun to watch

    • Retired Spook March 2, 2019 / 12:07 pm

      What we’ve witnessed in the last two years is nothing short of historic. The Progressives have ripped off the mask that has concealed who they really are for the last century or more, and the Neo-Left, ie., Leftists disguised as Republicans, in non-stop attempts to destroy a guy who has accomplished much of what they claimed to believe in, have been revealed for the phonies they really are. Let’s hope that the majority of Americans, at least the ones who vote, have been paying attention.

      • Cluster March 2, 2019 / 2:29 pm

        Agreed. What we are experiencing is the emergence of indoctrinated generation and the leftist politicians who are now poised to take advantage of them. This has been decades in the making for the left and they don’t want to blow it, hence the all out push for socialism.

        The next two years will be even more interesting

      • Retired Spook March 2, 2019 / 2:50 pm

        I wish it were only ONE generation. Sadly, I think it more like 2 or 2-1/2. A majority of those born since 1980 and quite a few who were born in the late 60’s and 70’s. If they start turning out to vote in a greater percentage than their historic norm, it could end very badly. Most of them haven’t got a clue as to what will happen if they achieve power. I don’t think most of them understand that it will require force to implement their ideas. OK, maybe “ideas” is not the right word. That would indicate the ability to think.

      • M. Noonan March 2, 2019 / 11:44 pm

        People are rather raving about Trump’s CPAC speech – I’ll have to watch it, but I guess it clocks in at two hours! But what people are saying is that he was funny and earnest and serious and playful and interesting to watch. And what people are also saying is that the Democrats just don’t have anyone who can compete with him. Trump only loses in 2020, in my view, because people hate him…we’ll find out if an electoral majority does.

      • casper3031 March 3, 2019 / 7:08 pm

        “Let’s hope that the majority of Americans, at least the ones who vote, have been paying attention.”
        They have. That’s why the Democrats flipped the house the last election by historic margin.

      • Retired Spook March 3, 2019 / 7:30 pm

        First of all, it wasn’t a historic margin, about 2/3 of the number of seats the GOP won in 2010. When Trump says stuff like that the Left calls it a lie. Second, the biggest reason was that over 40 GOP incumbents either retired or ran for another office (ie., Senator, Governor). And the vast majority of Freshmen Democrat congressmen are moderates, not Democratic Socialists, which was the only way they could win in swing districts. Nice try, though.

      • Amazona March 3, 2019 / 7:34 pm

        Awwww, ain’t Cappy just the most darling thing? He actually thinks the Dems won in 2018 because the public overwhelmingly approved of their policies. That’s so cute.

        1.) Most Dems avoided any reference to anything overtly POLITICAL. At least in Colorado it was all about the Politics of Personal Destruction.
        2.) It was far more about hating Trump than liking the Dem candidates
        3.) 45 pseudo-conservatives made it much easier to take over their seats by bailing out but not resigning early enough to have substitutes appointed, so the seats would be defended by incumbents. That lost the GOP a major advantage, as 45 members of Congress made the statement that the couldn’t care less about the direction of the country, they just wanted to make a statement about how much they hated Trump.

        Here in Colorado, people are looking at each other and going WTH? I don’t remember any Dem running on a promise to strip Coloradans of our vote by turning over the entire Electoral College votes of Colorado to whoever was most popular in California or New York.

        Here in Colorado people are looking at each other and going WTH? I don’t remember any Dem running on a promise to teach five year olds about transgenderism or kids only a couple of years older how to have gay sex.

        There is a rising tide of anger and a feeling of being duped, of being caught in a bait and switch scam, and there is already talk of recall petitions being put together. Not based on the sour grapes of the Left when Trump got elected, but on being deceived by people who ran as one kind of candidate and almost immediately stripped off their masks of decency and moderation and went full-tilt radical Left.

        In the meantime we have weasels like Jason Crow lying low, keeping under the radar, hoping people will forget that he ran one of the most vile, dishonest, despicable campaigns ever, against a good man with a solid record in Congress. It was disgusting. Now Jason has to convince us he is not really a vile, dishonest, despicable disgusting person—but his campaign speaks for itself.

        But you just keep your head firmly planted where it is, awkward as that position is. I can tell where it is, based on the stench of what you see and report here.

    • M. Noonan March 2, 2019 / 11:42 pm

      What they are really missing is something to make us drop Trump for – I mean, I know they want us to drop Trump for them but, come on! A bunch of suited weenies who never won anything? They need a Reagan…they’ve got Kasich (his Dad was a mailman, you know?).

  3. Cluster March 2, 2019 / 12:06 pm

    This would actually be a very positive and constructive use of their time. So you can be rest assured that it wont happen …

    If the newly divided Congress would like to do something actually useful that both parties should be able to get behind, here’s a suggestion. How about you examine just how astronomically health insurance costs have skyrocketed over the past seven years

    https://hotair.com/archives/2019/03/01/suppose-congress-investigate-health-insurance-got-expensive/

    • Amazona March 2, 2019 / 9:10 pm

      If the Right had a brain among them, we would be racking up the costs of Leftism for EVERYTHING.

      How much is the Mueller “investigation” costing?

      How much has the health insurance scam cost?

      What will it cost each state to fight the Executive Order about the emergency on the border? All these states have filed to block it—–who is paying for these lawsuits, and how much will they cost?

      All the states signing onto the compact to strip votes away from states and allocate all electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote will be defending those bills in court. What will that cost the states?

      If, for example, this goes through what will it cost a state like Colorado in lost advertising revenue during the presidential campaign—-after all, there would be no reason to advertise in state whose votes are meaningless and dictated by California or New York. What other campaign-related businesses would suffer if there is no presidential campaigning done here, such as the hospitality industries?

      What would it cost to “retrofit” an average 2000 square foot single story house, and BTW to what standards? Multiply that by the number of houses in the United States.

      Cost of inspections for compliance?

      Do the same for commercial buildings.

      Any graft or corruption possible in any of this? Nahhh….nothing to see here, folks.

      What would an impeachment hearing cost? And is it appropriate to use the House of Representatives to further a political agenda on taxpayer time and funding? As even an agreement to impeach would only be a statement that all the Dems hate Trump, with no legal impact at all, just the emotional advantage of being able to smear him under the guise of official investigation, why should we pay for any of it?

  4. Amazona March 3, 2019 / 12:31 am

    When I hear of the things the Dems are focusing on, regarding Trump and pursuing impeachment, it seems that they are always talking about things he either did or is alleged to have done before he was president. I’m just baffled by the idea that people think he can be impeached for things that predated his election.

    Of course, the real goal is probably not to actually impeach him but to drag out all his old sins to display them to the public to try to smear him. The thing is, we already knew about all of this.

  5. Cluster March 3, 2019 / 10:14 am

    I watched some of Trump’s CPAC speech and it was entertaining. The one thing I love about Trump is that his constituency is just the American people and he speaks the unvarnished, politically incorrect truth. He doesn’t pander to identity groups or categories, he doesn’t victimize people, and he calls “a spade a spade” – and the pampered and polished political class don’t know how to combat that.

    By contrast, did anyone hear Bernie’s speech? That was an embarrassment and could have easily been delivered by Josef Stalin or Fidel Castro. Class warfare littered throughout the speech, funny though that there was no mention of the fact that Bernie has been a “public servant” his entire life yet is a multi millionaire. I don;t know how that happens on a “servant of the people” salary. But getting back to the speech, near the end of his list of grievances, was his call for unity of “black people, hispanic people, asian people, native American people, gay, straight”, etc. …… there was no mention of white people. Did he forget about us? LOL

  6. Cluster March 3, 2019 / 10:29 am

    I just watched Chuck Todd interview Jim Jordan on Meet The Press and it was a hostile interview. Chuck Todd is not a journalist. Chuck Todd is a Democrat operative playing the role of a journalist on TV. Jordan was fantastic. At one point Todd asked, “why do you not want the Mueller investigation to conclude”, to which Jordan just looked at Todd in disbelief. What a loaded question. Jordan simply said that he does want the investigation to conclude and the report to be public. Todd then asked why Trump surrounds himself with people who can’t tell the truth, to which Jordan replied by pointing out that none of those “process crimes” have anything to do with Russia or the administration. Then Jordan pointed out Comey’s lies, McCabe’s lies, etc. to which Todd moved on quickly from.

    Our media is dangerous.

  7. Cluster March 3, 2019 / 11:58 am

    The Mueller investigation will never end? Why? Because he has nothing. The only thing Mueller has is the prospect that he does have something … which allows the media to run wild and speculate. That is all that this has become ….

    • Retired Spook March 3, 2019 / 12:35 pm

      There’s some speculation that that POS Adam Shiff will call Mueller to testify before the house Intelligence Committee. Gil Gutknecht at Town Hall poses some excellent questions that Republican members of the committee should ask Mr. Mueller.

      • Cluster March 3, 2019 / 1:15 pm

        From the article, these are the questions I want to hear Mueller answer:

        Wouldn’t you agree that these raids with agents in full commando gear were unnecessary, especially considering that the individuals had already agreed to cooperate and surrender voluntarily? Was this just for show or was it about intimidation? Does this kind of thing square with your view of good police work? Or does it look more like something you’d expect from a Police State?

      • Retired Spook March 3, 2019 / 1:47 pm

        From your linked article:

        However, Mueller hasn’t yet alleged any crimes directly connecting the two — that is, alleging that Trump advisers conspired with Russian officials to impact the election.

      • casper3031 March 3, 2019 / 2:07 pm

        Yet. Then again, it shows that Trump doesn’t exactly hire the best people. Meanwhile it’s becoming more obvious that Trump and his family have committed far more crimes than expected.

      • Amazona March 3, 2019 / 4:20 pm

        Sorry, Maxine Casper, but as usual, you are wrong. It not only NOT “obvious that Trump and his family have committed” ANY crimes, it’s just the kind of silly mind-rot we expect from people like you.

        Yes, I know, you yearn for the glory days when a president DID hire and surround himself with the “best” people. People like Bill Ayers and Bernadette Dohrn. People like the guy who advocated and advised adolescent homosexual boys to have sexual relations with older men. People like the tax cheat made Secretary of the Treasury. People like Hillary Clinton, with her trail of crimes and bodies going all the way back to Arkansas, put into a position where she could leverage her power to enrich herself.

        The Peter Principle is the concept that people can do really well at whatever they are doing, up to a certain point, at which the demands on them exceed their abilities. Usually, they stay at this point, instead of dropping back to the last level at which they were competent, which is why we have so many incompetent or marginally competent people—-they have remained at the level beyond their level of competence.

        Do you know how to find out if you have what it takes to work in the White House, in that pressure cooker of magnified responsibility and expanded expectations? The only way to find out is to try it. And then some find out it is beyond their level of competence, and their weaknesses show up.

        You are a perfect example of someone who made it a level or two above your level of competence, and then, instead of dropping you back to where you were at least marginally competent the school administrators just kept you where you landed and tasked you with babysitting marginal students, playing game with them and making them feel “special” while the real teachers did the real work.

      • Cluster March 3, 2019 / 2:38 pm

        Really? Please list those crimes Casper.

      • Cluster March 3, 2019 / 2:42 pm

        I hope you realize that the Vox list of people who committed process crimes have NOTHING to do with the Russia collusion. NOTHING.

        Care to try again?

      • Amazona March 3, 2019 / 4:23 pm

        Cluster, come on! You KNOW Maxine can’t answer that question!

        He is probably just tickled pink, peeing down his leg and chortling into his chins now that the United States has moved from being a nation where a crime is identified and then investigated to try to find a suspect into being a nation where a person is identified and then investigated to try to find a crime.

        It’s a Lefty’s wet dream, and he couldn’t be happier.

      • Retired Spook March 3, 2019 / 3:09 pm

        Then again, it shows that Trump doesn’t exactly hire the best people.

        That’s the stretch of all stretches. Of the 36 indictments, the only ones actually “hired” by Trump were Manafort during the campaign, Flynn during the transition and for a short time after the inauguration, and Cohen a decade prior to Trump even running for President. Not sure if Trump hired Rick Gates or if Manafort brought him along. The rest are all peripheral figures, the majority of whom will never even be prosecuted.

      • casper3031 March 3, 2019 / 7:05 pm

        “Of the 36 indictments, the only ones actually “hired” by Trump were Manafort during the campaign, Flynn during the transition and for a short time after the inauguration, and Cohen a decade prior to Trump even running for President.”
        His campaign manager, his personal lawyer, and his National Security Advisor. Not a very good record. Of course that doesn’t include all of his cabinet members who were either fired or forced to resign. Not very good at picking people is he?

      • JeremiahTMM March 3, 2019 / 9:20 pm

        President Trump has to bring his enemies, and coincidentally, the enemies of the American people in close so that he can expose them. It’s all part of the plan. Hopefully soon there will be some military tribunals so we get rid of some of these treasonous people, and Im hoping Hillary Clinton is the first one on the list. These people have sucked the life out of this country, and it’s time they are brought to justice.

    • Amazona March 3, 2019 / 2:04 pm

      The Mueller “investigation” is all that stands between temporary safety for Mueller, Comey, et al or indictment of all of them for various crimes.

      The legal beagles of the Left know perfectly well that Trump has done absolutely nothing even approaching obstruction of justice, but they have planted that concept in the minds of its sheeple and linked it to firing people, etc. So if anyone even remotely connected to the alleged basis of the “investigation” is charged, instantaneous outrage and howls for impeachment will follow, based on the claim that Trump is trying to obstruct justice by going after the people who (they claim) have dirt on him.

      I think of Comey, etc. as cowering on one side of a minefield, with the mines labeled “obstruction of justice”, knowing that as long as Mueller is pretending to run an investigation into Trump that minefield will be active and DOJ can’t reach them. End the investigation and the mines go away, clearing the way for prosecutions.

  8. Retired Spook March 3, 2019 / 12:48 pm

    TownHall.com has a lot of talented writers, but on any given day I don’t generally read more than 2 or 3 of the couple dozen articles. Today’s offering, however, has a bunch, including this one.

    • Cluster March 3, 2019 / 1:18 pm

      Young ignorant people like AOC have no idea what socialism is. They always refer to Sweden, etc., as their shining example but Sweden is not a socialist country. Sweden has a very generous social welfare system which is supported by a healthy capitalist economy. Someone needs to point this out to them …

      • casper3031 March 3, 2019 / 6:58 pm

        What AOC and Bernie are proposing is a system that is more like Sweden and the other Nortic countries. If you don’t want to call it socialism, then don’t. By your definition then, AOC isn’t a Socialist. She identifies as a Democratic Socialist. “The key difference between socialism and democratic socialism is that democratic socialists don’t want the government to own the means of production and socialists do. They believe that certain general social goods like health care should be run by the government, but otherwise support capitalism.” https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-a-socialist-and-a-democratic-socialist

      • Retired Spook March 3, 2019 / 7:23 pm

        What AOC and Bernie are proposing is a system that is more like Sweden and the other Nortic countries.

        That must be why, in 2011, Sanders said this:

        “These days, the American dream is more apt to be realized in South America, in places such as Ecuador, Venezuela and Argentina…”

        I guess he was a supporter of socialism in Venezuela until he wasn’t.

      • casper3031 March 3, 2019 / 8:04 pm

        “These days, the American dream is more apt to be realized in South America, in places such as Ecuador, Venezuela and Argentina…”

        Wow, you take a single sentence out of a speech that is out of context from 8 years ago about wealth inequity to suggest Bernie was advocating for a system like Venezuela when he has been quite clear through does of speeches that what he is advocating for is like the Nortic model. Did yo read the whole speech? Of course you didn’t.

      • Amazona March 3, 2019 / 8:18 pm

        Casper, why do you insist on saying “Nortic”? Just curious.

        Have you ever heard any of the lectures by Swedish politicians about the death spiral of the nation as it has gutted itself through its redistributionist policies? It was one of these Swedish politicians I heard on the radio last week who provided the quote You can have a welfare state or you can have open borders but you can’t have both and went on to discuss, in great detail, the damage done to the nation of Sweden as it moved farther and farther left. He said they are dangerously close to losing any sense of a Swedish culture as the financial drain of its largesse combined with its open-arms attitude toward immigration and its increasing lawlessness are making the country almost unrecognizable.

        You silly little meat puppets just parrot what you are told.

        BUT…why don’t YOU explain to us, please, just what is this “Nortic system” you find so compelling and desirable. And why is it better than the free market system of the United State?

      • Amazona March 3, 2019 / 8:40 pm

        Casper, what is it about a political system based on the concept of a federal government severely restricted as to size, scope and power with most authority left to the people that you find so unacceptable?

        It still allows states to implement any laws they want, as long as they don’t violate the Constitution, so people can still vote for all sorts of Leftist ideas and policies. It’s a system of freedom, as it provides people with options. We are seeing this now as people flee the burdens of the political systems of California and New York, while people who like those systems have somewhere compatible to go.

        State control over policies is more advantageous as it puts power closer to the people, allows for closer oversight of policy administration and eliminates the bleeding off of so much of any program budget by a federal agency. Policies are more easily tweaked to meet the needs of the state, as changes don’t depend on shifting a behemoth federal government.

        But you seem to prefer the system that puts a massively powerful Central Authority in charge, imposing the same rules and regulations on everyone regardless of need or geography. Will you please explain why?

      • Amazona March 3, 2019 / 8:09 pm

        They “support capitalism” so there will be money to confiscate to build the size, scope and power of the State.

        And make no mistake about it, it is all about building the size, scope and power of the State. Bleating mindless sheeple like Casper nitipick at details like not immediately taking over the means of production—Casper parrots it because he’s just too bone-deep stupid to see past the lies, his masters promote it to try to gloss over the inevitable outcome of an increasingly massively powerful Central Authority.

        It’s not all about where the money comes from. It’s where it goes and how it gets there and the power it buys and how that power is used. The problem is political more than economic—the economic disaster comes later. But from the get-go, the money is used to expand the scope and authority of the State.

        Sometimes it is through overt violation of the Constitution. Sometimes it is an effort to just do an end run around the Constitution, such as the compact of states agreeing to allot all their electoral college votes to whoever wins the national popular vote. To actually change the way the Electoral College is structured would require a Constitutional amendment, and the Left don’t amend. The Left just runs right over the Constitution,or tries to sneak around a technicality to get its way even though it blatantly violates the intent of the Constitutional articles on electing the president.

        What we are seeing right now, this early in the two year terms of the House, is a terrifying stampede to the radical Left.

        An example is the gender issues. It all started as simply wanting equal rights for homosexual couples, defined by the Left as the hijacking of the word “marriage”. They did not define equality as equal treatment under the law or anything else. It was all about the WORD and the Left sneered and sniped at those of us who thought the word should retain its traditional meaning even while equal treatment under the law was fair.

        Notice that almost immediately after gay “marriage” became accepted the cascade of rapidly increasing incursions into traditional gender and sexual issues began. Literally within a very few years people were being abused and castigated for using the “wrong” pronouns as the fad of “gender fluidity” provided the Left with a huge emotional weapon to further fragment society and create internal chaos. Men were allowed into restrooms and locker rooms if they merely stated at the time they felt female, stripping away the privacy women and girls should have been able to count on.

        As this whole theme picked up steam it was a very short time before the Left openly came out in favor of having the State take over the role of parenting children. There are now stories of parents losing custody of their children for refusing to allow them to be maimed in the name of the new transgender fad.

        1. The state has a duty to protect minors from serious harm inflicted by their caretakers.
        2. Harm that leads to suicide is a serious harm.
        3. Transgender youth with non-supportive parents are at a high risk of psychological harm leading to suicidal tendencies.
        4. Therefore, the state should pay special attention to, and has a duty to protect, transgender minors from psychological harm inflicted via their caretakers.

        https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/bioethicist-block-transgender-puberty-even-if-parents-say-no

        This is only part of an article written by a “bioethicist” (shades of Orwell and Doublespeak as the Left blithely slaps a word like “ethics” onto a treatise recommending having the State take over custody of children when their parents violate Acceptable Thought) and it goes on to explain that the religious beliefs of the family are meaningless.

        What do the ghouls and masters consider “abuse”? For example, having a child seen by a mental health professional when he or she declares that he or she would like to be the opposite sex. One example of this was the case of the little boy who decided he was really a girl, and insisted on wearing dresses and being called a girl’s name. The therapist asked a few questions and quickly learned that the family had another child, a little girl who was extremely ill and therefore got a lot of attention, and the little boy had come to the conclusion that the way to get more of his parents’ love was to be a girl. Problem solved, A bio”ethicist” like the academic who wrote the article would have the State take this child away from his family, adding to his sense of abandonment, and start him on brainwashing sessions while mutilating his body and causing long-term physical damage by filling him with puberty-blocking drugs—-and possibly charging the parents with child abuse for trying to help and protect him.

        Let the mindless sheeple like Casper bleat the narrative they have been fed. It is simplistic so it is really all they can handle. The rest of us know that the effort to cloak the evils and dangers of radical Leftist governance under the silly and contradictory name of “democratic socialism” is just another scam, just another effort to hide the ugly truth.

      • Retired Spook March 3, 2019 / 10:04 pm

        AOC isn’t a Socialist. She identifies as a Democratic Socialist. “The key difference between socialism and democratic socialism is that democratic socialists don’t want the government to own the means of production and socialists do.

        As usual you seem to be confused, or maybe just misinformed.

        Democratic socialism is further distinguished from social democracy on the basis that democratic socialists are committed to systemic transformation of the economy from capitalism to socialism whereas social democracy is supportive of reforms to capitalism.

      • Cluster March 4, 2019 / 8:21 am

        Casper – AOC isn’t a Socialist. She identifies as a Democratic Socialist. “The key difference between socialism and democratic socialism is that democratic socialists don’t want the government to own the means of production and socialists do.

        So when she calls for an end to fossil fuels, she is just encouraging the private sector to get it done in 10 years? That doesn’t seem very well thought out.

        And Sweden is a homogenous country of about 6 million people. The United States is a very diverse population of about 310 million. Do you think it’s possible to replicate what Sweden does here without any problems?

      • Retired Spook March 4, 2019 / 10:33 am

        What it really boils down to is the tenets of European-style social democracy or democratic socialism, whichever way you want to look at it, are incompatible with the size and demographics of our country and the principles upon which it was founded. We’ve got about half the country that wants to keep those principles and half that wants to abandon them. Sooner or later something has to give. The Left loves to complain about wealth inequality, but if California has shown us anything it’s that the farther left we go the greater the wealth inequality. I saw a list recently showing Forty-six of the fifty weathiest zip codes in the U.S. are in California, while at the same time, 30% of the country’s welfare recipients reside in California.

  9. Retired Spook March 3, 2019 / 1:23 pm

    OK, Last one, I promise. In his list of worst people of the week
    Derek Hunter came up with this absolute gem of a description of Bill Kristol:

    Few people have fallen further than the man who seems to exist solely by convincing wealthy people to give him money to scream his opinions into a void. Kristol has survived on his father’s name and milking every last drop from having serving as Chief of Staff to former Vice-President Dan Quayle. That’s his greatest accomplishment, aside from the wars he helped start.

    When Trump won the nomination, the hamster running in the wheel generating the power in Bill’s head committed suicide and the lights dimmed. Even when issues he’d advocated for his whole adult life were accomplished, Kristol couldn’t get past the fact that the man accomplishing them didn’t need his help to get them done. Discovering he’s not only irrelevant but unnecessary was too much to handle, and he tumbled down the rabbit hole. He now roams the halls of CNN and MSNBC mumbling affirmations to himself until he gets the call preen on camera. But none of these sad truths are why he’s on this list, they were years in the making and this is a list about this week.(emphasis – mine)

  10. Retired Spook March 3, 2019 / 1:30 pm

    I lied — one more.

    So where did so many US citizens get the idea that socialism is just about sharing? I think the answer lies with “milk cow economics.” Starting in middle school, most social studies classes eventually get around to it. Here is a typical example from one of the many sites that popped up in a search of the term:

    Socialism: You have two cows. You give one to your neighbor (share).

    Communism: You have 2 cows. The State takes both and gives you some milk.

    Fascism: You have 2 cows. The State takes both and sells you some milk.

    Nazism: You have 2 cows. The State takes both and shoots you.

    Bureaucratism: You have 2 cows. The State takes both, shoots one, milks the other, and then throws the milk away.

    Traditional Capitalism: You have two cows. You sell one and buy a bull. Your herd multiplies, and the economy grows. You sell them and retire on the income.

    An American Corporation: You have two cows. You sell one and force the other to produce the milk of four cows. Later, you hire a consultant to analyze why the cow has dropped dead.

    A French corporation: You have two cows. You go on strike, organize a riot, and block the roads, because you want three cows.

    A Japanese Corporation: You have two cows. You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk. You then create a clever cow cartoon image called ‘Cowkimon’ and market it worldwide.

    A German Corporation: You have two cows. You re-engineer them so they live for 100 years, eat once a month, and milk themselves.

    An Italian Corporation: You have two cows, but you don’t know where they are. You decide to have lunch.

    A Russian Corporation: You have two cows. You count them and learn you have five cows. You count them again and learn you have 42 cows. You count them again and learn you have 2 cows. You stop counting cows and open another bottle of vodka.

    A Chinese Corporation: You have two cows. You have 300 people milking them. You claim that you have full employment, and high bovine productivity. You arrest the newsman who reported the real situation.

    A British Corporation: You have two cows. Both are mad.

    Clearly, milk cow economics is humorous and based on stereotypes. But why are the definitions of capitalism and socialism always the least funny? That’s because the authors intend to make socialism look much better than it would if people knew the histories of Nazi Germany, the USSR, China under Mao, North Korea, Cuba, etc.

  11. Cluster March 3, 2019 / 3:28 pm

    This is too funny:

    “Yellow cab drivers are in financial ruin due to the unregulated expansion of Uber,” AOC tweeted on March 21. “What was a living wage job now pays under minimum.”

    Her campaign records show she only used yellow cab seven times in the last year and half. However …. She listed 1,049 transactions for Uber, Lyft, Juno and other car services, federal filings show. The campaign had 505 Uber expenses alone.

    Don’t you just love socialists … do what I say, not what I do

    • Amazona March 3, 2019 / 4:29 pm

      But….but….but…..it won’t matter anyway, because we are going to get rid of cars. It sounds like Che OC is now advocating for the advancement of people who drive cars for a living.

      Well, SOME people who drive cars for a living. For a few years anyway, while we develop the technology to have electric rickshaws.

  12. Cluster March 3, 2019 / 3:40 pm

    Even funnier …. this tweet is from Patrick Moore who founded Greenpeace (not exactly a conservative)

    Patrick Moore
    @EcoSenseNow
    Pompous little twit. You don’t have a plan to grow food for 8 billion people without fossil fuels, or get the food into the cities. Horses? If fossil fuels were banned every tree in the world would be cut down for fuel for cooking and heating. You would bring about mass death.

    I also listened to an interview with another climate activist who has become a realist on wind and solar energy. He simply stated that neither one of these fuel sources could ever be sufficient enough to power our society. Additionally, because of the size of the solar panels and wind turbines, they consume a lot of land and actually do damage.

    One thing we know about socialists though ….. they are definitely not realists

    • Retired Spook March 3, 2019 / 4:07 pm

      Pompous little twit. You don’t have a plan to grow food for 8 billion people without fossil fuels,

      Actually, they do have a plan: kill off most of the earth’s human inhabitants.

      “My three main goals would be to reduce human population to
      about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure
      and see wilderness, with it’s full complement of species,
      returning throughout the world.”
      -Dave Foreman,
      co-founder of Earth First!

      “A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells;
      the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people.
      We must shift our efforts from the treatment of the symptoms to
      the cutting out of the cancer. The operation will demand many
      apparently brutal and heartless decisions.”
      – Prof Paul Ehrlich,
      The Population Bomb

      “A reasonable estimate for an industrialized world society
      at the present North American material standard of living
      would be 1 billion. At the more frugal European standard
      of living, 2 to 3 billion would be possible.”
      – United Nations,
      Global Biodiversity Assessment

      “A total population of 250-300 million people,
      a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”
      – Ted Turner,
      founder of CNN and major UN donor

      “… the resultant ideal sustainable population is hence
      more than 500 million but less than one billion.”
      – Club of Rome,
      Goals for Mankind

      “If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth
      as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”
      – Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh,
      patron of the World Wildlife Fund

    • Amazona March 3, 2019 / 4:27 pm

      BTW—horses fart, too. Trust me. I know.

  13. Cluster March 4, 2019 / 9:57 am

    You know I think Adam Schiff will help reelect Trump as much or more so than AOC. He is completely obsessed with Trump. Here is Schiff from yesterday:

    “I think there is direct evidence in the emails from the Russians through their intermediary offering dirt on Hillary Clinton as part of what is described in writing as the Russian government effort to help elect Donald Trump,” he said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” They offer that dirt. There is an acceptance of that offer in writing from the president’s son, Don Jr., and there is overt acts and furtherance of that,” he added.

    Aside from the irony of this statement which completely ignores Hillary’s real and provable efforts with foreign operatives to get dirt on Trump, ie; Steel Dossier … I will also remind everyone of Schiff’s personal effort to collude with foreigners to get dirt on Trump:

    WASHINGTON — Audio of Russian radio comedians prank-calling Democrat Rep. Adam Schiff shows the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee asking for details about the naked photos of President Donald Trump being offered. In the audio, Schiff repeatedly asks for specifics about the nature of the meetings. “I’ll be in touch with the FBI about this. And we’ll make arrangements with your staff. I think it probably would be best to provide these materials both to our committee and to the FBI,” Schiff says in the audio.

    What’s good for the goose ….

  14. Cluster March 4, 2019 / 1:47 pm

    Rep. Elijah Cummings: ‘We have got to get back to normal’

    LOL what exactly is normal Elijah? When the elites were able to govern unchallenged and unquestioned?

Comments are closed.