Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Monday, October 3. 2016
The 100th Anniversary of the Income Tax…and the Lesson We Should Learn from that Mistake
Happy 445th Birthday, Caravaggio
Site new to me: Real Clear History. Fun
My sis recommends Ron Howard's new film: 8 Days a Week
Arizona’s War on Barbers
Libs Wrong Again: Humans Are Naturally Violent
Easy money has not helped anything
I’m a feminist who’s attracted to ‘manly men’
US university offers course for men to 'deconstruct toxic masculinities'
What about toxic femininities? A lot of that going around these days
When you do not know that it is a felony
How much income is underreported?
Professors who voiced conservative views reported to university’s bias response team
Parents Pull Son From School Because ‘Hateful’ Third Graders Don’t Think He’s A Girl
Have trannies put an end to Feminism?
Minnesota to Raise Obamacare Rates by Half
Democrats on FEC Vote Privately to Ban FOX News, WSJ from Covering Politics
A "Grand Bargain" on Immigration Reform? An alliance of pro-immigrant Democrats and anti-immigration Republicans could finally fix our broken system
Broken? As far as I can see, law is just being flouted. What is broken is laws.
MN Housing Board to Pay Monthly Rent for Migrants Traveling Back to East Africa
How about my friend's visits back to Scotland?
Texas A&M ‘anti-racism’ group demands mandatory ‘racism awareness’ classes
Where Democrats Learned the Art of Racial Tribalism - A "civil rights" icon's contribution to her party's moral collapse.
White House wants to add new racial category for Middle Eastern people
I suggest Semitic
Doctor Links ‘Low Testosterone Levels’ to Men Who Support Clinton
Trump May Have Had the Worst Week in Presidential Campaign History
If Trump thinks debate prep is for chumps, his advisers can’t save him from himself
He ain't Nigel Farage
Hillary, they have many names.
Gingrich and Hannity stage an intervention with Trump over Alicia Machado
Cher: Millennials ‘Don’t Trust’ Hillary Clinton Because Her ‘Sins Are Really Enormous’
Former Producer: SNL Has ‘Moral Obligation’ to Show Trump’s Dark Side
NY Times and Clinton Crime Family Commit Criminal Act – Publish Donald Trump’s 1995 Tax Returns
Yes, please, a new Cold War. We need one desperately, a conflict responsibly managed in place of the reckless, insane drive for world hegemony emanating from the crazed, evil criminals in Washington who are driving the world to Armageddon.
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Cher: Millennials ‘Don’t Trust’ Hillary Clinton Because Her ‘Sins Are Really Enormous’
The quote-mine was by Breitbart. It attempts to ascribe to Cher the claim that Clinton's "sins are really enormous", when, in fact, she is ascribing that as a feeling among millennials.
Those "hateful" third graders obviously need some sensitivity training if they don't believe a boy is a girl.
Those parents need a royal beatdown by the third graders for f'ing up that kid.
The best way for a transgender child to avoid the consequences of ze's mother's action is to move to California.
I'm in an educatable mood today....why is the income tax a mistake? Why would tariffs be a better way for the government to siphon money off the middle class?
Before we call for a review of the tax code; shouldn't we curtail the spending habits that the government has?
There's the general principle of 'tax what you don't want people to do'.
A tariff is a form of consumption tax, in that you don't pay it unless you consume and specifically consume goods subject to tariff, assuming acceptable substitutes are available. I agree there are issues with implementing consumption taxes but they would, in general, be a better way to fund the government without creating many of the perverse incentives illustrated by Trump's tax situation.
They'll never give up the nationalization of income in the US. It's not your income, it's the national income, the tax rates are just how much they let you keep to spend as you see fit.
I think this would be a plan. Let's discuss and change the structure of the tax system, then let Congress define the rates after we change the system. We can have a tax code and a subsidy code. With direct deposit, there is no reason to not have one check that is sent to pay the taxes, then government send out another check to people for things we decide to subsidize.
John Cochrane: But I think you need to discuss the--I think you can come to agreement, Left and Right, on the structure of the tax code, if you are not simultaneously arguing about the progressivity of the tax code. And, the subsidy code. So, for example, we should get rid of the--and let me take a sacred cow, the mortgage interest deduction. The mortgage interest deduction is equivalent to taxing middle class, hard-working people and sending checks to people in Palo Alto who just refinanced million dollar homes. It subsidizes high-income people who pay high tax rates, and therefore can take a big deduction. It subsidizes people who have big houses. And people borrow money for big houses. If you said, 'We're going to do this on budget as a subsidy,' the peasants with pitchforks would be out in the streets. And properly so. So--but how do you get rid of this? Well, let's change the discussion. We'll have the tax code and raise revenue; and we'll have the subsidy code. Sure. As we'll sit down with Bernie and fill in the rates later? We'll sit down with all the interests and say, 'Fine. We're not going to rule out the mortgage interest deduction. We're just going to do it as a subsidy. On budget.' You want to propose that we send checks to people who want to borrow a lot of money for their house? Fine. We'll talk about that. It's just, it's going to be on budget; and it's going to be a check. Non-profits--we should get rid of that--I hate to say this, in this Institution. I might get fired. The charitable interest, the charitable deduction is a similar--we should get rid of that. And of course if we get rid of the corporate tax there would be no such thing as non-profit versus profit, so this whole business would go away.
Trump said before the first debate that he was going to be nice. He was. He called HRC "Secretary Clinton,' and he was there to talk about issues. Not petty things. However, HRC and Holt turned it into a debate about petty things.
I think Trump did the right thing. He arrived prepared to discuss actual issues. He didn't know what kind of treatment he would get from Holt. He always talks about being a person who 'hits back' only have he has been hit.
So, we got the first debate. Unfair tag team by Hillary and Holt, clearly coordinated as pointed out by poker expert who noted the 'nose scratching' and 'chin scratching' done by Hillary.
Next debate, Trump is free to go forward and hit back. He did not want to be called 'mean' or 'name caller'...he also didn't know what kind of health concerns might show up on stage...so he would be called awful for targeting a 'sick woman.'
What else could he do here?
Watch the next debate. He will be different. The first one was a test to see what she and the moderator would do. Now he knows.
Trump also did not have a working microphone. How could that possibly happen - it was working immediately before they went on air? - the media wouldn't do anything like that Instead of leaning over to get closer to it, he should have said "My microphone is somehow not working, but my opponent's is. I'll wait to answer until after it is fixed"
"When you do not know that it is a felony"
That article is pure BS. There is mens rea, but there is also negligence. What Hillary did was, at best, negligent. Beside that, she, like everyone granted Secret or Top Secret clearance, signed a document acknowledging that negligent handling of classified materials is a federal crime.
There is a good point to be made about the omission of mens rea in modern law making. Hillary's case does not help make that point.
Hillary's case does help to a degree, in that by not explicitly including mens rea in many laws Congress is enabling selective prosecution. Comey made exactly that point when declining to forward the results of the investigation. If most laws included explicit mens rea standards, or general standards were set by Congress for existing law, he wouldn't have been able hid behind prosecutorial discretion.
Hillary knew her email was "Top Secret". The whole reason she had a secret email server and address was to keep her corrupt dealings secret from the government (IRS, honest Federal Attorneys, honest news media-if any). They were "Hillary Top SECRET"
How could the FBI claim she didn't know that President Obama was writing her phony email name at her phony server using a phony email address, and that these were classified? Many emails, not ever produced because they are classified. Was Obama asking seeking classified yoga exercises?
How could Hillary not know that a thousand emails to and from CIA Director Petraeus through her "secret" server to her phony email name were not classified? Was Petraeus seeking classified yoga exercises? Mens rea concerns knowledge and intent to do the act. It can clearly be inferred.
jaybird: Hillary knew her email was "Top Secret".
There were 110 emails that were classified at the time, but not properly marked. Three had portion markings for confidential, but the markings may have easily been missed. Two were actually marked incorrectly, in any case. Other emails were retroactively classified.
Classified information had also been sent over the personal email account of Colin Powell and also the personal email accounts of aides to Condoleezza Rice.
The problem of using email for classified information is problematic even for dotgov addresses. There's a special intranet system for classified communications.
Lawrence Keeley's War Before Civilization: The Myth of the Peaceful Savage was a big turning point in the literature about prehistoric violence, and the ongoing violence in preliterate societies. He references Napoleon Chagnon's excellent field work and observations, and how hard anthropologists tried to ignore it. The escape-hatch was the contention that none of these tribes had been violent until they had come in contact with evil civilized peoples. The archaeological digs keep inconveniently discovering human bones with evidence of death by violence. Including, BTW, human tooth-marks on some of them.
Because of superior organization and cooperation, I grant that modern civilized man is far better at killing large groups of enemies quickly. But early man was constantly at war, losing a percent or two to violence every year, punctuated by small genocides of neighboring tribes.
Those college spots for deconstructing toxic masculinities...You could go a learn about TM's in order to reconstruct them, too, I imagine. A shy boy might want to go and pick up some reverse pointers. "Don't ever, ever, do this Trevor." "No ma'am, I won't. Have you got any other things I should never, never, do?"
I doubt if that would work in reverse. I signed up for one of those spouse abuse clinics and thought I would learn the latest techniques. Then I found out they were against it. Couldn't get a refund so the money was wasted.