We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Friday, March 4. 2016
Today's masters of the universe are less likely to work on Wall Street and more likely to work in Silicon Valley.
The Ultimate working lunch: Inside the envy-inducing canteens at companies like Dropbox, Google and Pixar that offer free food, extensive menus, and gourmet desserts
If I have lunch I fall asleep
Teaching economics to the sixth grade
Why Billions of Patients Worldwide Lack Access to Opioid Pain Meds
Teaching economics to the sixth grade
Chaos Set to Return to Big Apple Streets
Blue town follies
Yale’s Crime Wave
Very dangerous school, esp. for women and minorites. Remember its history as a school for white boys who wanted to become scholarly ministers in the Congregational Church. At the time, even scholarly ministers had to learn chemistry, physics, math, Latin, Greek, history, etc.
REVERSE THE ROLES AND YOU’LL UNDERSTAND ANTI-SEMITISM - Anti-Jewish hatred has become increasingly acceptable in the West.
Don't Look Now, But The European Union Is Now Calling for... A Wall
Insuring Crony Capitalism Obamacare leads trade groups to fight for a bigger place at the trough
Labor unions gave $420 million to Democrats, left-wing groups from 2012-14, report shows
Washington Post Columnist Takes ‘Islamophobia’ Bait
Romney is from another era
Ted Cruz Shines
Who is more personally (not politically) unappealing - Cruz or Hillary! ? Mrs. BD and I were thinking about about which candidates we'd be glad to have as next-door neighbors. We came up with Carson and Bernie. Maybe Kasich. Nothing to do with political preferences.
GOP Comes Into Focus As Yet Wide Open, Particularly for Ted Cruz
Could Trump Win the Election?
Trump is the voters' tool
Donald Trump defends size of his penis
Show us, Don
Calais orders up to 1,000 residents of Jungle camp to leave by Tuesday
Neocons declare war on Trump - Prominent Republican hawks are debating whether to hold their noses and vote for Clinton instead
Do neocons want more US war in the middle east? Then Hillary! is their gal.
French Diplomacy on 'Palestine' Will Run Aground
NATO commander says ISIS spreading like cancer among Syrian refugees
Tracked: Mar 06, 09:29
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Trump, the Tool
I agree that Trump didn't create this constituency, it already existed. He just gave it a voice; it may be a crude voice, but it is heard and maybe even sucking the air out of the room.
Bernie in a way is the flip side. There is speculation and it is possible, but probably premature to say so, that we could be witnessing a realignment of the political factions. Imagine the real people of Main St vrs the "K Street" types and their minions, who are insulated from the negative effects of their policies.
Trump is definitely a voice and definitely a crude voice but maybe that's what's needed today. Our last "voice(s)" were Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan. They were too gentlemanly and got nowhere. In fact, many would argue that Ryan switched sides. Things have only gotten worse so the crude voice is the sound needed today. In another eight years the sounds we might hear are riots in the streets.
I agree that Carson would be my first choice as a neighbor.
No way would I want Sanders near me - seems like the kind of guy who would call the town on people with Christmas lights or a trailer in the driveway.
I like the cranky old Vets I shoot with at the range. I don't like cranky old commies who think they should have my stuff.
Thanks. When I hit 90 in five years, I'm changing my handle to cranky old fart ©.
Ha Ha Yes! Then he'd want to borrow your lawn mower on Saturday and return it empty. No fun being next to the Bern.
Nah, he'd want you to come over and mow his lawn - for free - because you have the lawn mower and it should belong to the community, but you also know how to work it so you should do the labor.
Wow, I was going to say the same thing about Sanders - he seems like the kind of guy that every morning you'd find a note on your car windshield politely pointing out "I didn't want to say anything, but...." your grass is a half inch too long, you're not supposed to leave your garage door open overnight, you left your trash can out by the curb ten minutes longer than the rules say, your kid left his bike laying out by the sidewalk where somebody could have tripped over it, just a nightmare of a neighbor. Carson would be interesting to talk to, Kasich seems like the sort of guy who would be quick to say "well, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that" and change the subject to find something we can agree on, an affable enough kind of guy but kind of boring. The rest of them? Meh, just a neighbor I'd try to avoid talking to. Trump would make it his business to make sure your attempts to avoid him fail, just because he knows you find him annoying and he thinks it's fun to annoy you. Hillary, I'd sell my house and move - not that she would ever deign to live in any sort of neighborhood that allowed the likes of me.
Trump as a neighbor would, most likely, be trying to use the government to get your property for himself. E.G.; using eminent domain to expand his driveway.
NJSoldier: No way would I want Sanders near me - seems like the kind of guy who would call the town on people with Christmas lights or a trailer in the driveway.
Sanders did very well with his hometown crowd (86%), so you may have missed the mark on his neighborliness.
They are his kind of people, as he is theirs. Many places are different. He's not MY kind of people.
"Do neocons want more US war in the middle east? Then Hillary! is their gal."
The problem with neocons is they apparently wanted just war and were caught completely off guard when the military handed them a victory in just a couple weeks. Then they held meetings while the opposition in Iraq coalesced.
JK Brown: The problem with neocons is they apparently wanted just war and were caught completely off guard when the military handed them a victory in just a couple weeks. Then they held meetings while the opposition in Iraq coalesced.
They were ideologues. They thought that they just had to remove Saddam for democracy to flourish. However, democracy is built from the ground-up, not from the top-down. The results for Iraq and the region have been devastating.
"The results for Iraq and the region have been devastating."
Or would have been had Saddam not already devastated the place through his own megalomaniac folies de grandeur .
JJM: Or would have been had Saddam not already devastated the place through his own megalomaniac folies de grandeur.
The U.S. provided aid to Saddam during his ill-considered invasion of Iran, including the sale of helicopters capable of delivering chemical weapons. The war was devastating for both sides. Some people never catch a break.
What the U.S. provided Saddam during the Iraq/Iran war was satellite data. To say the U.S. provided "helicopters capable of delivering chemical weapons" is to intentionally damn the U.S. while knowing your statement is inaccurate. Saddam also bought large chippers, the kind used to turn tree limbs into chips. Saddam used these to torture and kill his enemies. Using your slanted left wing thought process you could say the U.S. provided Saddam weapons of torture. Whatever helicopters Saddam purchased were not restricted (or they could not have been sold to him) and how ever he choose to use them was not their intended or stated use when purchased. But it wouldn't serve the same nefarious purpose for you to say he bought small commercial helicopters and repurposed them to deliver his WMDs. Saddam got 99.99% of his conventional weapons from China, France and Russia.
This is the problem I have with all your posts. You are decidedly left wing and neither honest nor honorable (sorry for the redundancy).
Sure. The U.S. sold Saddam commercial helicopters capable of delivering chemicals during a war with Iran that Iran was poised to win, then just happened to provide Saddam with the satellite intelligence used for directing those chemical attacks. Sure.
It's typical. The U.S. keeps secrets, but the only ones fooled are the American public.
Using your logic it would seem that it is Japan who is the largest arms dealer. After all every dictator, revolutionary, terrorist and bad guy mounts a .50 cal on a Toyota pickup to kill and destroy. So I think you are onto something, maybe we should bomb Toyota plants. Do you suppose the Japanese did this intentionally???
He is simply being disingenuous. Saddam's arms brokers were overwhelmingly the Soviet Union, China and France.
So? That other countries piled on with the complicity of the Americans doesn't make it any better. Nor does it mean the U.S. didn't provide helicopters and satellite intelligence for chemical attacks.
OK, simple question. Be honest and don't avoid the question. Do you think the U.S. knew Saddam was going to use chemical weapons when they provided Saddam with the satellite data??
CIA records show that the U.S. was aware of Iraqi use of chemical weapons for years, but provided them satellite intelligence anyway. It led to thousands of Iranian battlefield deaths from chemical weapons.
Again, honest question, not just arguing:
CIA almost never gives up their information to the public and those who get CIA briefings do not have the authority to release what the CIA has told them (except perhaps Hillary). So how do we know that the CIA knew Saddam had chemical weapons? It is not uncommon for the opposition to claim that the CIA knew something to give them creds or to blame the U.S. for something they didn't do. So do you have any proof that the CIA knew about Saddams ability to use chemical weapons at that time and proof that the CIA released this publicly?
I might add that "what the CIA knew" has a different meaning if you both believe that the CIA knew back in 1980 that Saddam had chemical weapons AND don't believe that the CIA knew in 2001 that Saddam had WMDs. It would seem to be willful blindness or something.
GoneWithTheWind: CIA almost never gives up their information to the public and those who get CIA briefings do not have the authority to release what the CIA has told them (except perhaps Hillary). So how do we know that the CIA knew Saddam had chemical weapons?
Because the CIA has to declassify documents after a period of time under the Freedom of Information Act.
Keep in mind that this wasn't to keep U.S. actions from the Iranians. They already knew about Iraq's WMD from first-hand experience. It was to keep it from the American public.
GoneWithTheWind: I might add that "what the CIA knew" has a different meaning if you both believe that the CIA knew back in 1980 that Saddam had chemical weapons AND don't believe that the CIA knew in 2001 that Saddam had WMDs. It would seem to be willful blindness or something.
Not at all. Saddam admitted to having WMD, which he had deployed during the Iran-Iraq War. After the Gulf War, he disbanded his WMD programs per the agreement.
As for the CIA in 2001, the intelligence was cooked. That is, the Bush Administration only wanted the results that they wanted, and ignored evidence which undermined their preconceptions. This involved not just WMD, but lack of understanding of the the sectarian divisions in Iraq, and what would be required for a successful occupation.
I have to say that I think it is probably the truth that the CIA knew Saddam had chemical weapons.
I do disagree with one thing you stated: "Because the CIA has to declassify documents after a period of time under the Freedom of Information Act."
They do not. They get to decide what remains classified and it could stay classified for the next 1000 years if they want it to. That the government does regularly declassify things I won't disagree with but to say they have to is simply incorrect.
Beating a dead horse.
Hillary and the Espionage Act of 1917
“While the spies of yesteryear were motivated by ideology, the thoroughly modern Clintons are totally commercial. How quickly we forget the trading of US weapons designs to ChiCom bundlers of campaign cash, and the DOJ investigations terminated before further treason was exposed. Do not imagine for a second that the home brew server was merely a FOIA foil and not a blame free method of transferring state secrets to our nation’s enemies for cash paid into the Clinton Global Initiative.”
Re opioid medication not available to 5 billion people: Sorry 'bout that. A TV ad touts an anti-opioid constipation med, so when the 5 billion get access to opioids, maybe they can then try to ease constipation as well.
Hillary get out of jail free plan:
1. FBI investigates "Aides and underlings"
2. Hillary says she can't type, so she gave her top secret password to "trusted" underlings.
3. Underlings are indicted to keep non-political FBI staff (who have stuff on most politicians to release if they are unhappy - see Deep Throat.
4. Hillary promises to put Obama on Supreme court or head of the UN.
5. Obama pardons the underlings for their public service (just like Clinton pardoned Marc Rich and other buddies).
6. Obama works hard to elect Hillary.
7. News media praise Hillary underlings for their unstinting public service, and go all out to elect Hillary!!!
That is certainly a possible scenario.
At that point, an indictment of Hillary (if indeed one ever materializes) will be the most meaningless consolation prize ever.
Nicely done! Plus, Warren presumably has a vagina, and will get the fake native american vote, because she built her career on falsely self-identifying as an indian. (I myself can trace my own heritage as out of Africa 50,000 years ago, but have not wanted to take unfair advantage of this privileged fact)
Any Republican that would vote for a Marxist rather than someone who is no less conservative than an old-fashioned JFK Democrat is not---repeat, NOT---a conservative.
"Teaching economics to the sixth grade"
A yutes, they like it when someone tells them what to do, they like certainty. That, of course, structure is the basis of a calm childhood. That is why suburbia is so sedate and predictable, it's for kids. But it also is a construct set apart from the real struggles of life.
On the other hand, uncertainty is the basis of all life. Life and death, today, tomorrow or in 70 years. The ups and downs of trading to determine the best use of scarce resources.
It could be said, regardless of the credentials to your name, you do not know a topic, nor are you fully an adult, until you can face the uncertainty of life. Academic training ends at the dark abyss where the next step is uncertain and the researcher/thinker must tread solely by dead reckoning. Adult life is grasping the wild, unexplored country that is unique to you and carving out an increasingly secure base from which to continue your explorations. And regardless of their proclaimed certainty, no one can ever know the best allocation of scarce resources, but millions of individual choices that are the summation that make the market creates the best and most responsive information.
BTW, I'm just finishing up Thomas Sowell's 'Basic Economics'. Very readable and except for a dreary chapter on GDP and such, engaging. You won't be exposed to econometrics, but you will be exposed to the elements necessary to think economically rather than thinking about economics. Highly recommended and don't be intimidated by the books thickness.
A song about Islam, sung to The Sounds of Silence.
Pretty much true, I think.
Hillary Pushing Racial Warfare: White Are Too Rich And Blacks Too Poor So We Need More Wealth Redistribution……
And she will be glad to tell you this while charging listeners $200,000 for a speech.