Author: admin

The Russians are to blame…

…for the data leaks that cost Democrats the election. That’s what the Clinton team is implying as they try to convince electors to cast their vote for someone other than their specified candidate. However, it’s just another shell game; don’t fall for it.

What was exposed – not how –  cost Clinton the election. Blaming the Russians (even if they are found to be behind the leaks) is like blaming a confidential informant for your prison sentence. The important point to remember here is that there would have been nothing to expose had it not been for Clinton’s own actions.

Get over it, Madame Secretary.

Dylann Roof and gun control

Since Dylann Roof’s horrific murder spree against people of color at a church in South Carolina, he has been a poster boy for both the pro and anti gun movements (read more here,  here, and here). In truth, we don’t need more gun laws; we just need existing gun laws to work.

However, an important point was revealed during Roof’s subsequent FBI interview that supports the position that guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens may well prevent such attacks. It turns out that he selected his target in part based on whether or not they could defend themselves. From an AP article in the Statesman about Roof’s FBI interview:

“He thought about attacking drug dealers, but they might shoot back.”

Note that he changed his target from a group who would be armed and able to defend themselves to that of an unarmed, helpless group that he was free to slaughter. If that’s not an argument – straight from the horse’s mouth – for arming the populous against such killers, than what is?

Pizzagate and the “fake” news problem

In a story on NPR, Hillary Clinton is calling for action in the form of new laws to deal with the “fake” news problem:

“Bipartisan legislation is making its way through Congress […] It’s imperative that leaders in both the private sector and the public sector step up to protect our democracy and innocent lives.”

More laws? To protect ourselves from fake news? Really?

Do you remember when people actually considered the source of their news when determining its reliability? Or when reputation was paramount for success as a news reporter or anchorman? Are people really so stupid now, and reporters so untrustworthy, that we have to screen the news for people? And isn’t it laws such as those described by Clinton that have made the American public so damn stupid? I mean, if the government (or, more correctly, politicians) will think for you, what makes you think people will think for themselves?

I am much more concerned, though, over who will determine which news is “fake”. The power to make that determination could sway elections, and would be a very handy tool for silencing your opposition. Can you imagine how such a law might be used by the more nefarious elements of our political system?

In any event, be sure to tell your congressman that you are in fact a grown-up who can manage their own affairs and make their own decisions, thank you very much… and that more laws are not a solution for stupidity.

 

 

“Miners”, not “minors”!

Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va.,and Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio are blocking the advancement of legislation through the senate, ostensibly over health benefits for miners (as in coal – not minors, as in children). They (and others) want Americans to pay up to $3 billion over the next 10 years into the health care and pension funds for miners via the “Miners Protection Act”. What they don’t tell you is that this is essentially a bail-out of the miner’s union-run pension fund using public (that’s you and me, folks) money. Read more about this issue here.

This is a very dangerous precedent, and essentially sets the stage to use tax money to bail out union-run pensions. It is an end-run around the move towards defined contribution plans (over defined benefit plans), since it allows the union to overpay benefits while forcing the public to bail out the resulting insolvent union retirement programs.

I urge you to contact your senators and advise them to kill the Miners Protection Act. Don’t reward poorly managed pension plans by bailing them out!

Why the secrecy?

Interesting: The Obama administration has made a “secret” deal  for the U.S. to accept some 2500 refugees awaiting settlement in Australia. Public details are lacking, although the countries of origin of these refugees have been confirmed to be Iran, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq and Sudan, as well as some deemed “stateless.”

My first question: Why weren’t these refugees acceptable to Australia? My second question: Why the secrecy? We should all be concerned about back-door, secretive agreements regarding refugees rejected by other nations.

Transparency from the Obama administration? Yeah, right.

Grandstanding at its best…

From The Times Herald in Norristown, PA:

“We know that Donald Trump won the vote of machines in Pennsylvania. We want to know who won the vote of the people,” Maazel said.

This was a quote from Jill Stein’s campaign attorney, Ilann Maazel. Here’s another one of his insights:

“The Republican Party is saying that over 27,000 people in 9,000 districts have to request a recount or there can’t be a recount anywhere. What kind of system is that? That is a disgrace.”

No, it’s the law that requires (only) three voters from each district to request a recount; Republicans have no say in the matter. Can’t get three voters from each district to request a recount? Just 27,000 out of over 6 million votes cast? Less than 1/2 of one percent? Then maybe it shouldn’t happen…

 

Us vs. them continues…

Pelosi commented after her re-election as the house minority leader:

She has winning brought “a special spring in my step” because it gives her the opportunity to “differentiate between us and the administration coming in January.”

I guess we can expect more of the same, evidenced by her “…differentiate between us and [them] …” comment. What will it take before “they” learn that this is not in the best interest of the country?

Are these the same polls….

… that predicted a win for Trump?

A piece on Federalism and how it may protect sanctuary cities is provided on the Washington Post website. It makes the following claim:

Election exit polls suggest that mass deportation is not a popular policy, with 70% of the public believing that undocumented migrants working in the US should be offered permanent residency, and only 25% indicating they should be deported.

Really? Are these the same exit polls that suggested a Clinton victory in the last presidential election? Maybe we should reconsider the results of such a poll.

Government oversight run amok

I can understand the requirement for police officers to be U.S. citizens. After all, if we allow someone to wield police powers then they ought to have a genuine vested interest in upholding the constitution, the document from which all our laws flow.

However, the U.S. Justice department has decided otherwise. They have fined the Denver, Colorado police department for making citizenship a condition of hire.