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
Thursday, July 7. 2016
Jonah Lehrer is back: Does a disgraced writer deserve another shot at nonfiction?
Stick to fiction
Virtue du Jour: The Virtue of Restraint
Boston Globe Accidentally Reports That Raising the Minimum Wage Kills Jobs
The government subsidizing food is working out about as well as their other subsidy programs
Chicago on the Brink - A retreat from proactive policing has unleashed mayhem in the city.
Austria Throws Out Its Presidential Election and May Throw Out Jihadists, Too
This Might Be The Most Absurd Quote In The New York Times’ 164-Year History
Did Hillary Get a "Pussy Pass"?
Like Everything Else, Obama´s Campaign For Hillary Is Unprecedented
Clinton Desperately Seeking the Sanders Vote, Offers Free College
Student Loans, New Jersey Style
Saucier attorney on Hillary non-indictment: “Clearly a double-standard”
Fmr AG Mukasey: Hillary Violated Felony Standard of ‘Gross Negligence,’ Others Have Been Prosecuted ‘For Far Less’
The only mistake of the Iraq war was that we didn't get rid of Saddam Hussein sooner
I still think Iraq was a mistake
Can The EU Survive As A Prison? Who Has The Keys?
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
The fix is in. Not only did Hillary break multiple laws multiple times but so did her staff and her lawyers who took extra ordinary efforts to make sure her hard drive was wiped clean. Incredible! Just in case you think anything will come of the congressional investigation into Comey and Lynch I can only say; you gotta be kidding. That is part of the scam too. It calms us down just when we are most likely to rise up because we collectively believe the Republicans are doing something about this obvious miscarriage of justice. Yeah, right! They are doing something alright. They will hold hearing all during the two conventions right into September and October but in the end nothing will come of it. It is intended to take the focus and the heat off Clinton so she is free to run unimpeded.
Why! you ask? Did you not believe the Rinos when they said they wouldn't support Trump? Did you really believe they would roll over or just quietly go away? The fix is in, we all saw it! That's how confident and blatant they all are. Screw you is the message, it's not YOUR country it is their's and they will do with it what they want.
Sometime ago I read that Trump vowed to go after the criminals in this administration. That would be one YUGE reason to vote for him. If he actually follows through with that, it would be a good first step in the right direction.
Newt tried to set up term limits on congress in '94. Congress ought to pass them this time and set the vesting of pensions one year past the term limit. We are so far away from the 'citizen legislature' we're supposed to have.
Why save the post-industrial town? Because there is much history and community there, and not everyone wants to live in an E Coast megalopolis.
That doesn't mean subsidies for every Muncie, Bucyrus and Kenosha out there, but it does mean a real examination of statutes and regulations that have done the region harm.
WR Mead points to specific laws that were enacted with the express intent of harming the south after the Civil War. Similar things have happened to hurt Middle America.
In looking for something else, I found an interesting column by Jonathan Turley (who is certainly no conservative or even Republican). It doesn't directly relate to the HRC-Comey issue, but it is a pretty interesting take on her: http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/06/03/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-richard-nixon-aides-fawning-column/85297456/
I am not sure what to think. On the one hand, I cannot imagine that Republicans, no matter how corrupt, would want 3 or 4 liberal justices added to the Supreme Court with a Hillary administration.
I would think these conservatives in Congress could see that it would be much better to work with Trump than Clinton. I think they believe the Trump knows less about how government works and that he would be persuadable. Clinton would just run roughshod over Congress for certain. Especially with the road map laid out by Obama about how to circumvent the Constitution and drag one's feet when challenged in court.
I think part of it is that some want to appear "reasonable" or "principled" so they are appalled at some of what Trump has said or how he said it. They seem to think their "reasonableness" or "principles" exist in a vacuum.
I also think some are just spoiled and believe there must always be choice between "good" and "better", "good" and "bad" and never a choice between "bad" and "worse" (as defined by them).
And there are probably a couple who really think we need to be ruled by another elite since they know what's good for all of us.
Trump simply throws their beliefs back at the DemProgs. The controversy over the judge was straight horror at fundamental Marxist Doctrine. Basically that people are driven by the "interests" of their groups which supersedes their personal beliefs and desires. That's straight out of Marx.
It is often used, unconsciously now, where minorities are involve. Example, after the Trump blow up, many cited the fact that the judge, prosecutor and defendant in the Freddie Gray van driver case were all Black so their could be no discrimination.
All Trump did was state the judge in the case was anti-Trump and then later separate from that statement said the judge was he though "Mexican" leaving off the "-American". And the little Marxists lost their bowels over the implication that the judge might be controlled by his Mexican(-American) group "interests".
First, many GOP congress critters are Conservatives-in-Name-Only. As soon as they were elected, they became large government, Globalists responding to the cabal of lobbyists promising the good life -- now and after their terms as congress critters. Look at the junkets taken overseas to amass more information on policy. Why don't they wander the south side of Chicago to find out why Black LIves Don't Matter?
Second, most believe they get trophies for passing more and more legislation, so they can go back home to say "See, I'm working on that for you!" or "Look at the pork I bring back to the state!" never realizing that we now have laws and regulations running our lives that NO ONE HAS EVER READ! Hey, The Ten Commandments has worked rather well for a long time.
When you want to cut the size of government, which will require firing a lot of people; insist on a budget and insist it restrain spending so we are not a risk by being in other country's debt; demand border regulation, which cuts new voter populations and drugs/guns that DO make money for a politicians; negotiate sound trade deals that keep critical industries and their patents within our border -- this does not make for lining one's overseas bank account. Greed is good, as Michael Douglas said in a movie, and continues to rock our world.
Most of the dying industrial towns won't repeal their union favoring laws, won't deregulate to allow innovation and worst of all, immediately seek to pick any business clean with taxes and licenses to restore their fading fortunes.
You can't revive a fading town. You must let it die and then recover the salvageable parts. But as long as it breaths it will suck the life out of any enterprise that enters its clutches.
Antiliberal policy is a policy of capital consumption. It recommends that the present be more abundantly provided for at the expense of the future.
Mises, Ludwig von (1927). Liberalism (p. 9).
Mises is talking of classical liberalism. The modern Liberal is as antiliberal (classical) as they come. The modern Liberal descends upon any productive enterprise seeking to extract its capital. Some enterprises can generate enough profit to pay tribute and still prosper, but only after some period of gestation protected from the vampiric Liberals (and sadly, Conservatives) in government.
The sooner pubbies stop being afraid of being called a racist - and maybe start throwing it back at them - the better. Trump seems to have mastered the former. We'll see about the latter. He certainly doesn't mind calling a flag on "the woman card" which is a good start.
Democrats demand—and receive—amendment votes, while Republican amendments are stifled. Appropriations bills, ostensibly written by Republicans, come to the floor lacking any GOP priorities, while conservative efforts to amend the bill are set up to fail.
Even more troubling are the policies coming out of this Republican-led Senate. Appropriations bills are passed, but at higher spending levels than even President Barack Obama requested. Just this week, the Senate voted to bail out the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico—without considering any of the economic reforms supported by conservatives.
Things really took a turn last week, however, when the Senate Appropriations Committee advanced its 2017 foreign aid bill.
In a sign that principles were about to be shelved, all 16 Republicans and 14 Democrats on the committee unanimously supported an amendment by Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., to provide $500 million to the U.N. sponsored Green Climate Fund—the principle funding mechanism for Obama’s international climate change treaty.
For the record, this is the same treaty that the Obama administration imposed upon taxpayers without the advice and consent of the Senate, and the same funding mechanism that GOP Senators previously swore up and down that they would fight tooth and nail to oppose.
But the committee action got even worse with the passage of an amendment offered by Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., to add $37.5 million to the United Nations Population Fund, which provides services for “international family planning and reproductive health”—that is, taxpayer funded abortion performed overseas.
In a Republican controlled committee, this amendment supporting abortion passed 17-13, thanks to the votes of Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine; Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska; and Mark Kirk, R-Ill.
Most disturbing, however, was that the entire bill—containing language to fund abortion, and to fund the president’s climate change treaty—passed the committee 30-0.
Some will argue that this is just a committee process, and that the real consideration of the bill will be on the Senate floor, where all senators will have the opportunity to weigh in. Perhaps—but only if Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., allows senators to participate in an open process (which he has lately been loath to do).