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
Wednesday, January 25. 2017
DOOMSDAY PREP FOR THE SUPER-RICH
For ten years he has refused to debate anybody
Jonah on the Pussy March: I think this is all really quite inane and morally grotesque.
Yazidi Women Sold As Sex Slaves as Vulgar, Privileged, Liberal Women March Against Trump
Z-man on American regionalism:
Nice, tolerant, inclusive
Morning Joe to Aides Who Counseled Trump’s Combativeness: ‘You’re a Disgrace, Leave Today’
Trump can never stop stepping on his message with petty nonsense
Sounded exactly like Trump
Governor Greg Abbott hammers a Texas sheriff after she refuses to comply with immigration laws
In 2009, media drooled over Obama. To Trump they bare their teeth.
Trump is typical, a pragmatist
Kerry Says Repressive Vietnam 'Embracing' Freedom
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Silly Abbott, heroic Democrat local officials have the right to ignore Republican governors. If the shoe was on the other foot, though, we'd be talking about a racist Republican sheriff ignoring the wise laws of the Democrat overlords.
Do you remember back when Republicans talked about local control and how we were mocked for being wrong and not going along with the rightful authorities? Oh, how the worm turns.
And now California is edging toward secession. My family was still in Germany in the 1860s, but when Southern states left the union Abe Lincoln sent soldiers down to shoot Southern boys until the states were dragged back into the union. Made him a hero. I wonder if Trump will be a hero to the same people if sends the army to brutalize enough Left Coasters to drag them back into the union? What's good for the goose is good for the gander, they say.
As I remember from history the South fired the first shot to start the civil war not the North. And I also believe that for the first year or so the battle took place in Northern states not Southern states.
It is interesting and good fodder for SNL that some in California want to secede. But as a matter of law it is likely impossible and quite doubtful it will come to armies being formed to fight. I think thhe most likely outcome is eventually California will run out of other peoples money and declare bankruptcy after which the federal government will be forced to bail them out and hopefully mandate some needed changes including deporting the 10 million illegal alien bloodsuckers that are destroying California. Sadly I don't think this will happen soon enough to help the many good people in California.
The basic premise of Lincoln resupplying Fort Sumter (where those first shots were fired) was that no state (including South Carolina) had the right to secede. I am positive that Washington, Madison and the other founding fathers intended states to have that right. Virginia and New York both wrote the ability to do so into their ratification statements when joining the new Constitution. So while I think Lincoln saved the union, I am convinced he broke both the law and intent of the framers.
And yes, I do recognize that states can't legally secede. I have been teaching my students for 20+ years that the Civil War settled that issue when it was written in blood at places like Vicksburg and Shiloh.
Which makes it even more interesting that California wants to fly in the face of that precedent.
"Jonah on the Pussy March: I think this is all really quite inane and morally grotesque."
There was actually a good piece by David Brooks of The New York Times reprinted in the editorial section of my National Post (Canadian newspaper) this morning.
Essentially, he states the Women's March just doesn't represent effective opposition to Trump and was entirely wrong-headed in terms of the issues it proclaimed, especially identity politics.
I don't think the Democrats have much chance of providing a political counterbalance to the Trump administration until they shed the nostalgic allure of the Clinton and Obama eras.
I find it hard to believe there are no fresh young voices in that party ready to step to the fore unencumbered by past baggage. The eclipse of the Clinton clan ought to provide the Democrats with the ideal opportunity to clean house, revise their strategy and move forward.
You say that as if you don't realize that Clinton has her talons buried deep in the party machinery. Yes, it would make strategic sense for Dems to give the power to someone who isn't a known criminal like Hillary. But Hillary didn't seize the power for the good of the party. And she won't give it up for the good of the party. They'll have to take it from her cold, dead hands.
JJM: Essentially, he states the Women's March just doesn't represent effective opposition to Trump
Apparently, it had a significant effect on the new President. Trump felt compelled to tweet about it, and then went on another conspiracy theory tirade concerning the popular vote.
And he has now manipulated the press into investigating HOW MUCH illegal voting took place (not if).
NJSoldier: And he has now manipulated the press into investigating HOW MUCH illegal voting took place (not if).
It's reasonable to suppose there was some illegal voting. Such cases come to the fore periodically. It is not reasonable to claim that there were millions of illegal votes cast exclusively for the opposition without evidence.
I'd say it's time to quantify it, and eliminate as much of it as possible.
The folks who fight hard against even examining it... somehow that just rubs me wrong. It's like Samsung refusing to examine its phones to see why they were blowing up.
JLawson: I'd say it's time to quantify it, and eliminate as much of it as possible.
Voter integrity mechanisms have been subject to judicial oversight. The biggest problems today are legalized barriers to the franchise, such as in North Carolina.
United States Court of Appeals: "Although the new provisions target African Americans with almost surgical precision, they constitute inapt remedies for the problems assertedly justifying them and, in fact, impose cures for problems that did not exist."
Then there's this. Of course, it was 2015, so I'm sure the number dropped to 0 for this election, right?
"As we always knew, California and American elections are filled with fraud and corruption. Thanks to a new poll, we now know that approximately 13% of illegal aliens vote. Since they are already criminals, stealing ID’s or using phony ID’s. lie to get welfare, steal jobs—why not vote as they to lose. Since they can not be deported or jailed, they have nothing to lose."
JLawson: we now know that approximately 13% of illegal aliens vote
We've reviewed the poll, but don't see where that result is found. Perhaps you can point us to it.
To check after an election and find how many votes were cast illegally is doable. Every voter who votes is recorded in a computerized system that is public record. You could go to your city or county and ask to look at the public record of who voted. It typically gives full names, party affiliation and addresses of voters. These lists can be cross referenced to other lists to narrow down to a smaller list of questionable voters that could be looked at more closely. IMHO I believe every state should do this after every election to insure the integrity of the vote. AND most importantly anyone found to have voted illegally should be jailed and where appropriate deported.
SweetPea: To check after an election and find how many votes were cast illegally is doable.
And has been done. Generally, very few illegal votes are uncovered. We agree, though, that voting integrity should be subject to verification.
"Very few illegal votes" are a big deal at any time, and particular so in a close election. For me, it also is a question of maintaining some honesty in the public discourse. For years I've listened to people agitate against completely reasonably voter i.d. laws on the curious ground that there is simply no evidence of voter fraud anywhere at any time. Bizarrely wrong, obviously, but a nice, broad investigation of voter fraud would be very helpful in dispelling some of that fog of ignorance and misinformation.
Texan99: "Very few illegal votes" are a big deal at any time, and particular so in a close election.
The claim is 3-5 million illegal votes, which is contrary to the evidence we have. We also have evidence that jurisdictions previously covered by the Voting Rights Act have used voter laws to make voting more difficult for eligible thousands of minorities.
Texan99: For me, it also is a question of maintaining some honesty in the public discourse.
Which is why making the dishonest claim about 3-5 million illegal votes being cast in the previous national election is wrong.
Texan99: For years I've listened to people agitate against completely reasonably voter i.d. laws on the curious ground that there is simply no evidence of voter fraud anywhere at any time.
That is incorrect. The claim is that in-person voter fraud is rare.
Texan99: Bizarrely wrong, obviously, but a nice, broad investigation of voter fraud would be very helpful in dispelling some of that fog of ignorance and misinformation.
Presumably then you would also support efforts to make it easier for eligible minority voters to vote.
Illegals are eligible to voter in CA. When they go get their driver's licences, they are also registered to vote.
Somewhere north of 800k illegals have CA licences. How many voted?
NJSoldier: Illegals are eligible to voter in CA.
To say it's been done is to slander and demean the good name of the saying "a lick and a promise".
It hasn't been done. And it hasn't been done for a very, very good reason; it would uncover serious voter fraud. What has been done is occasionally someone stumble bums into voter fraud and it becomes public knowledge and the Democrat DA and Governor swear in public they will investigate and you never hear about any investigation. Voter fraud is rampant and 99% of it is done by the left. I'm not saying Republicans are above doing it but they suck at it while Democrats through their surrogates have been doing if for over 100 years. NO election in this country is free of voter fraud by the Dems and no close election is not swayed by voter fraud by the left. Ask B-1 Bob who proved in court the massive illegal alien voter fraud perpetrated by La Raza but still lost the election to the fraud who is still in congress today.
True The Vote is doing the research. Say they have uncovered a lot of information about people registered in more than one state, non-citizens voting and dead people still on the rolls.
I will mention just a few things that squeaked through into the media lately:
1) Over 1000 non-citizens found registered to vote in VA after only reviewing a handful of counties. This did not include the most populated counties in Northern VA.
2) Michigan basically gave up trying to conduct a recount in Detroit at the vote totals were so messed up. Overcounted by at least hundreds, if not more.
3) An elderly woman discovered a stack of dozens of absentee ballots in her mailbox in California with different names on all the ballots using her address...she handed them over, and no one has heard anything since.
4) Even SLATE reported this phenomena: people registered to vote in two states. Just in NY and FL alone in 2004, there were 46,000 people registered to vote in both:
Guess Slate is a crappy news source, Zach? How can you not see that our voter rolls are messed up and can easily result in fraud?
MissT: The Vote is doing the research. Say they have uncovered a lot of information about people registered in more than one state, non-citizens voting and dead people still on the rolls.
It's not uncommon for people to be registered in more than one state. Very few people actually take the time and trouble to de-register when they move. That doesn't necessarily imply illegal voting.
Similarly with dead people, who rarely de-register after they die.
MissT: 1) Over 1000 non-citizens found registered to vote in VA after only reviewing a handful of counties. This did not include the most populated counties in Northern VA.
According to the study by the Virginia Voters Alliance, 1046 noncitizens were removed from the voter rolls over a ten-year period. Of those only 31 had cast votes.
MissT: 2) Michigan basically gave up trying to conduct a recount in Detroit at the vote totals were so messed up. Overcounted by at least hundreds, if not more.
It was 3-12 ballots per precinct, which indicates a problem with the machines, not a concerted effort at fraud. Some precincts had overcounts, some had undercounts. More than 80 optical scanners broke down on election day.
MissT: 3) An elderly woman discovered a stack of dozens of absentee ballots in her mailbox in California with different names on all the ballots using her address...she handed them over, and no one has heard anything since.
The office of Registrar indicated it was a computer problem that sent out duplicates to a single voter.
MissT: 4) Even SLATE reported this phenomena: people registered to vote in two states. Just in NY and FL alone in 2004, there were 46,000 people registered to vote in both
According to the article only 400-1000 of those voted in both states. The rest probably changed their registration, and never de-registered. Voting twice would be clearly illegal, of course. Most were probably citizens rich enough to own two homes.
Sure there's voter fraud, but it doesn't constitute anywhere near 3-5 million illegal votes. Fraud should be rooted out, while also making sure that eligible voters have an opportunity to cast their ballots.
MissT: Say they have uncovered a lot of information about people registered in more than one state
Heh. Now that's funny. Today it's being reported that Steve Bannon, Steven Mnuchin, and even Tiffany Trump have been registered to vote in more than one state at a time.
Guess that means evidence of Republican voter fraud goes straight to the White House.
Probably everyone who has ever lived in and voted in two different states is registered in two different states. This is not the fault of the individual it is the fault of the system. To blame Bannon out of ignorance or malice is a disservice to the man.
GoneWithTheWind: Probably everyone who has ever lived in and voted in two different states is registered in two different states.
Now you got it. So "uncovering a lot of information about people registered in more than one state" doesn't imply much of anything about voter fraud, and that "It's not uncommon for people to be registered in more than one state. Very few people actually take the time and trouble to de-register when they move."
(Did you read the comments before posting?)
Apparently, you don't know what the word "significant" means.
What's it like to be wrong?
DrTorch: Apparently, you don't know what the word "significant" means.
significant, large enough to be noticed or have an effect.
Trump claimed in a meeting with Congressional leaders that 3-5 million illegals voted, and called for an investigation into this imaginary event. That is a noticeable effect.
Trump won BECAUSE of identity politics, not despite them.
The DNC is in freefall - Dems are down to 16 Governors. Keep it up and the Republicans will have to split (which is entirely possible) in order to maintain a 2-party system.
"Trump can never stop stepping on his message with petty nonsense."
LOL!!! You say that, as if its a bug, rather than a feature!
One of TRUMP's tactics is to directly make the MSM look petty and stupid. So now, the MSM is "enjoying" fair polling results that show only 15% of Americans even believe anything the MSM says.
How much more "winning" does TRUMP need, before you see the efficacy of his tactics? A decline to 10%? 8%?
Old Codger: LOL!!! You say that, as if its a bug, rather than a feature!
If you mean Trump lies for political advantage, then sure. That does seem to be the case.
Old Codger: How much more "winning" does TRUMP need, before you see the efficacy of his tactics?
Lying for political advantage has a long history of success.
Your eyes drop millstones, when fools' eyes drop tears: I like you, lads.
Sam L: Indeed it has; that's why so many distrust the media.
Sure. Trump lies. The press calls him out. His supporters are made uncomfortable and try to defend him, even when the lie is apparent. That's why lies work.
"How easy it is to make people believe a lie, and how hard it is to undo that work again!" — Mark Twain
The more I'm watching Trump, the more I'm thinking that he's definitely inside his opponent's OODA loop. They're used to dealing with systems and processes that normally take months or years to slowly squeeze out any sort of result.
Why do they do that? Because it's the way it's always been done. Hey - if you can stretch the amount of work you've got to do out as long as possible, you show how essential you are to the functioning of the country, right?
But Trump comes from a world where results are expected FAST, and the longer something drags out the more it costs. (Hmmm. That could explain why we've got $20 tril in debt...)
He's hit the ground running, and he's getting things done. So far, I don't have anything to complain about. For more info on the OODA loop - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OODA_loop
"The key is to obscure your intentions and make them unpredictable to your opponent while you simultaneously clarify his intentions. That is, operate at a faster tempo to generate rapidly changing conditions that inhibit your opponent from adapting or reacting to those changes and that suppress or destroy his awareness. Thus, a hodgepodge of confusion and disorder occur to cause him to over- or under-react to conditions or activities that appear to be uncertain, ambiguous, or incomprehensible."
The hilarious thing is that Trump TOLD them what he was going to do. Flat out, straight up - and they didn't believe him. This wasn't how it was done in DC! He's playing chess while his opponents can't even figure out how to set up for checkers against him.
The DNC chair candidate wants to shut other white people down
The Democrat party is becoming ghettoized. This happens to small towns across the country. Ghetoization is a slow motion process which fools the eye and the mind, It allows the left to place the blame on whites and the right. The incongruous accusation of “white-flight” as somehow causing the problem is common from the left. We all remember the forced bussing that a district court judge mandated for certain parts of Boston in the 70’s. Do we remember that 100,000 whites moved out of these communities to escape the slow ghettoization that the super intelligent and super liberal judge forced onto them. They had to sell or abandon their homes to get away from this terrible government mandated invasion to their community. Eventually the area became a ghetto unsafe and unmanageable. This has happened to many American cities in our lifetime. Think of the irony that Selma Alabama is a ghetto today the very predictable result of Dr. Martin Luther King’s efforts. San Bernardino is bankrupt today. Over years of liberal rule it became a predominantly black and Hispanic city and lowering home values, defaults and general lawlessness (not to mention drugs) destroyed the tax base and the city went bankrupt. Perhaps you missed it when it happened to Detroit or Buffalo because now it seems it’s always been that way. But once they were bustling middle class cities that were ghettoized and destroyed. It isn’t some accident or ignorance that causes it there is a segment of our political population who like vultures feed on the road kill of the failed cities. This evil segment of our political system is the embodiment of the black caucus. They are there for one reason to extract money and favors using race baiting and threats of violence to accomplish it. They use the process of ghettoization to force the political system to their will under the guise of ‘fixing’ the problem. But the problem never gets fixed and why would it? Why would you kill the golden goose? Race baiting for fun and profit is a perfect scam.
Ms Brown is a race hustler and based on just this clip alone Al Sharpton should be shaking in his boots. Her plan is to ghettoize the Democrat party which of course will cause white flight. It won’t happen overnight. Many liberals will not see it at first and will welcome the race baiters sticking their fingers in the eyes of the less liberal party members. But eventually even these hard core white liberals will have to sell their house in the ghetto and move to the Republican suburbs. They won’t be Republicans of course. After all we have seen the Liberals Californians who moved to Colorado, Washington, Nevada, etc. to get away from California’s liberal failings only to try to implement the same failed policies in their new state. So to the white liberals will be forced out of the ghettoized Democrat party and move over and try to subsequently destroy the Republican party.
The Texas sheriff provides some insight into Trumps aversion to having his Trump University case decided by a hispanic judge. Right to wrong many people choose to identify with their beloved home country and not their adopted country. You don't have to be born outside the U.S. to have this problem. It is often passed on by your parents and reinforced by your social preferences. This sheriff considers herself to be Mexican first and American second. Where does her allegiance lie with America or with Mexico? This problem is common in small communities around the Southwest where town councils and police favor illegal immigration and discriminate against non-hispanics. Governor Abbot would do well to also investigate the sheriffs law enforcement actions since she has been in office. I suspect this is not the first time she allowed hir bias to interfere with the law.
Hernandez is a WASP, she married a hispanic.
It means that your assumptions are wrong, not surprisingly, which destroys your credibility. You trashed her because you assumed she was hispanic, apparently one born in mexico who naturally supports mexicans over Americans. One minute or less of google time would have shown you otherwise. You don't like mexicans, that's your prerogative, but for fuck's sake do a little research first.
My assumptions are wrong and she has no family connection to Mexico? Is that your claim? Oh wait she married a Hispanic. So again I say, and that changes what?
Do you honestly believe this sheriff is doing this because it is how she interprets the law? No! She is doing this because Mexicans and Mexico comes first in her mind. The same reason why Al Sharpton only cares about someone who is fake raped is if they are black. If you are unaware of what is happening in these Southwest cities than you need to check into it before you start offering excuses
Oh the irony. I had to end my reply before I finished because I had to jump in the car and meet my son's Mexican American girl friend and bring her some things they needed tonight.
Soooo, where were we... Oh yeah you were assuming I didn't like Mexicans. WTF Why is it you bigots always go there first. No other possibility in your mind for me to criticize this sheriff except that I hate Hispanics/Mexicans or something. Give me a break. The Supremes ruled on this years ago and decided that an all white jury with blacks excluded could not fairly try a black person because they are not a jury of their peers. Were they bigots too??? The simple fact that most people recognize is that tribalism exists and people favor their own tribe over the other. And where this interferes with the government doing their job it is unconstitutional. This sheriff by her own actions has proven that. Unless you are prepared to make more excuses for her action...
RE DOOMSDAY PREP FOR THE SUPER-RICH
prepping (as illustrated in that article) is beyond belief stupid.
RE Z-man on American regionalism:
Following the Civil War, the South was excluded from having a say in how the nation was governed.
This is not true, unreconstructed democrats and the KKK were excluded from having a say. Its a shame Reconstruction didn't last another 50 years. Civil wars have consequences.
What every nation in the world should be doing right now is closely watching what Donald Trump is doing to "make America great again" because it may very well the model in which they can make their own country prosperous and stable, allowing all its citizens to be successful.
Yes you are right of course. But it presupposes that these nations want to be prosperous and stable. Do you really think Merkle wants to make Germany great again? I think that politicians like here relish the thought of a divided nation and a good crisis. You cannot force Marxist communism on a happy productive population. I think Merkle hates Germany today almost as much as Obama hates America.