Category Archives: Politics

Quote of the day—Jovan Pulitzer

Posted on by

We would be able to tell if they were folded, if they were counterfeit, whether they were filled out by a human hand, whether they were printed by a machine, whether they were batch-fed continually over and over, we can detect every bit of that.

…

All of these problems that you’ve heard today can be corrected and detected now by the simplest of things. It takes you days or weeks to recount votes. Give me these 500,000 ballots, we’ll have them done in two hours.

Jovan Pulitzer
December 30, 2020
Georgia Senate Panel Requests Forensic Audit of Fulton County Absentee Ballots
[This should settle this issue:

One of the county’s polling managers previously told state lawmakers that she opened a box of mail-in ballots with a batch of 110 that were “pristine” and not folded, indicating that they were never put in secrecy envelopes, as is required.

Pulitzer said that he and his team can detect if that’s the case.

I will feel a lot more comfortable about the next few months, perhaps years, being relatively peaceful if this issue is resolved to the satisfaction of the vast majority of people.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Natalie Andrews

Posted on by

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said they would get the Covid-19 vaccine within days to ensure the continuity of government during the pandemic.

In addition to the two leaders, all members of Congress will be able to receive the coronavirus vaccine produced by Pfizer Inc. and Germany’s BioNTech SE in the coming days, according to a letter sent to lawmakers Thursday from congressional physician Brian Monahan. He said he was notified by the National Security Council that vaccines were available to members of Congress, the executive branch and the Supreme Court.

Natalie Andrews
December 17, 2020
Nancy Pelosi, Mitch McConnell Plan to Get Covid-19 Vaccine in Coming Days
[Interesting. I guess ensuring “the continuity of government” is more important that ensuring the continuity of food, water, transportation, and communication.

This makes it extraordinarily clear they have a much higher opinion of themselves than I do. I would be inclined to put members of Congress and the executive branch priority in the vaccine queue just below Marxist Hollywood celebrities and just above prisoners on death row.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Dangerous Liberty @DangerousLiber1

Posted on by

It’s true. Self-reliance is the enemy of the State.

Dangerous Liberty @DangerousLiber1
Tweeted on December 27, 2020
[Via sacrebleu14 / SA Hinchcliffe.

If you want to decrease the power of the state encourage and enable self-reliance in others.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Patrick J. Buchanan

Posted on by

American politics will be even more poisoned and polarized than it has been for the last four years. Tens of millions of Americans will see themselves as disfranchised and believe that the greatest champion they have had in decades was illegally driven from power by the same deep state-media conspiracy he fought for four years.

…

What lies ahead?

Some see secession. But though secession is unlikely, a secession of the heart has already taken place in America. We are two nations, two peoples seemingly separated indefinitely. Can a nation so divided as ours, racially, ideologically, religiously, still do great things together, as did the America of days gone by, to the amazement of the world?

Patrick J. Buchanan
December 10, 2020
Is Our Second Civil War — also a ‘Forever War’?
[Via email from Chet.

Good questions. I have no answers. I only have half-baked guesses.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Joshua Eaton

Posted on by

Almost everyone agrees that the ATF is in trouble. But this obscure federal agency may be President-elect Joe Biden’s best chance at having a real impact on gun policy—if he takes the opportunity to restore the beleaguered agency’s reputation and revive its mission. In fact, experts told The New Republic that the ATF may be Biden’s best bet at leaving a mark on federal gun policy without having to rely on an intransigent Congress.

Joshua Eaton
December 25, 2020
This Beleaguered Federal Agency Is America’s Best Hope to Curb Guns
[I find it very telling the author and people quoted in the article don’t even suggest there might be something wrong with restrictions on a specific enumerated right. Let alone making such changes without going through the legislative process.

This is literally the encouragement of a single politician to be a tyrant and restrict the rights of hundreds of millions of people who have a written guarantee their rights would not be infringed.

Such people, and the tyrants they help create, should be prosecuted.—Joe].

Quote of the day—David Codrea

Posted on by

Why citizens wanting to know what the rules are even had to ask – and why that was being evaded – only becomes clear when you come to grips with the obvious: ATF knows it doesn’t have a consistent set of standards by which to apply its evaluations. And it’s not like everyone hasn’t been aware of the problem for a long time.

David Codrea
December 23, 2020
ATF Rules Capricious, Arbitrary, Political, and Stupid
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Brad Smith

Posted on by

As much as we appreciate the commitment and professionalism of so many dedicated public servants, it is apparent to us that the current state of information-sharing across the government is far from where it needs to be. It too often seems that federal agencies currently fail to act in a coordinated way or in accordance with a clearly defined national cybersecurity strategy. While parts of the federal government have been quick to seek input, information sharing with first responders in a position to act has been limited. During a cyber incident of national significance, we need to do more to prioritize the information-sharing and collaboration needed for swift and effective action. In many respects, we risk as a nation losing sight of some of the most important lessons identified by the 9/11 Commission.

One indicator of the current situation is reflected in the federal government’s insistence on restricting through its contracts our ability to let even one part of the federal government know what other part has been attacked. Instead of encouraging a “need to share,” this turns information sharing into a breach of contract. It literally has turned the 9/11 Commission’s recommendations upside down.

Brad Smith
December 17, 2020
A moment of reckoning: the need for a strong and global cybersecurity response
[Free markets have their faults. But if you want something really messed up then have a government do it. Why else do you think they are so good at war? You send your government to some other country and they mess up that country.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Egon von Greyerz

Posted on by

It is quite ominous that 100 years after Weimar, the world is standing on the cusp of a  similar debt and currency collapse with hyperinflation as a consequence.

100 years ago it was primarily the problem of one country whose debt the world could afford to write off. Well they had no choice since it was worthless anyway.

But this time it is a global problem with every country in the same situation. There will be no one to save individual countries or the global financial system. Yes, all major central banks will print endless amounts of money. But that will only exacerbate the situation.

A debt problem can never be solved with more debt. And a dying currency cannot be resurrected.

So the world is in for a major shock in the next few years. The problems will be at all levels – financial, social, political and geopolitical.

Egon von Greyerz
December 2020
Gold Vs Bitcoin & The Death Of Money
[Chet and I used to discuss this sort of thing for hours back in the 2009 to 2010 timeframe. It was impossible for us to put a due date on the implosion we imagined we saw coming. One could claim that since it hasn’t happened yet that we were wrong about it happening at all.

Perhaps.

Still, it seems to be impossible that the national debt can ever be paid off. And from a political standpoint I doubt it can even be reduced. And that has to have consequences, doesn’t it? I keep seeing a reset of some sort in the future. And no matter how the reset goes down I see rough times for a lot of people.

We live in interesting times.—Joe]

This is what they think of you

Posted on by

Via Hank Archer and Matthew Bracken @Matt_Bracken.

From the Washington Post:

RepublicansAsRats

Toastrider comments:

Once again, WaPo dives in where even Occasional Cortex fears to tread.

Not the sharpest tools in the toolbox, are they?

Bracken comments:

So now the Washington Amazon Bezos Post is printing propaganda cartoons comparing Republicans to Rats.

Anybody remember what followed this kind of propaganda in Germany in the 1930s?

If you don’t remember here are some clues:

jewrat

“udryd den” is Danish for “eradicate it”.

nazi-germany-rats-cartoon

“deutschland den deutschen” is German for “Germany for the Germans”.

“demokratische lander” is German for “democratic countries”. I’m not sure about the rest of the text. But you should be able to get the idea.

One has to wonder if the Washington Post cartoonist has a final solution to the problem of the Republicans.

Quote of the day—Thomas Sowell

Posted on by

If the election goes to Biden there’s a good chance that the Democrats will then control the two branches of Congress and the White House. And considering the kinds of things that they’re proposing, that could well be the point of no return for this country.

Thomas Sowell
July 13, 2020
[H/T Kevin Baker.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Doug Casey

Posted on by

The government has no alternative but to “do something.” They will—they have to—print more money to keep the rotten house of cards from collapsing on itself.

The Democrats have already said that they want to increase the next stimulus to over $3 trillion. The fact that most of the last round of stimulus was either overtly wasted, went to cronies, or can’t be accounted for, is completely lost on them. They recognize that unless they give a lot of money directly or indirectly to the hoi polloi, there are going to be millions of them on the streets.

Approximately 11 million renters and 4 or 5 million mortgagees are now in forbearance. They’ll be kicked out of their houses and apartments come January 1, barring a huge bailout. Where are those people going to go?

If Obama had made good on his ridiculous promise about shovel-ready projects, there’d be a lot more bridges that they could camp out under. But he didn’t. They have a real problem on their hands. Millions of people have been living above their means and have no savings. At this point, if they let landlords and banks kick all those people out, a number of things will happen. Residential property prices will collapse. Millions of people will be scrambling for somewhere to live. Lots of banks and landlords would go bust.

The longer the government kicks the can down the road, the bigger the inevitable bust will be. The stimulus money will have to continue because Biden doesn’t want it all to come unglued on his watch. The State is not only going to have to pay individuals and business owners that their idiotic policies have busted. They’ll be subsidizing banks, landlords, and utility companies—because you can’t live in a house or an apartment without water and electricity.

It’s worse than that because even if you cover the bare essentials, there’s no money leftover for maintenance. There will be millions of buildings across the country suffering from deferred maintenance. The South Bronx, East St. Louis, and Baltimore will be replicated across the country.

Doug Casey
December 2020
Doug Casey on What Happens When the Suspension on Evictions Ends
[You might also want to watch Fight for the Soul of Seattle and The Worst Economic Collapse Is Starting Now. And this is real:

If someone trespasses by pitching a tent on private property or walks out with a handful groceries from the corner market or steals power tools with the intent of reselling them online in order to pay for a basic need like food or rent, the city of Seattle may be OK with that.

The cities are driving productive people out and inviting the lazy and criminals in. The tax revenue is way down and is responding by raising taxes.

I can’t imagine it improving with their mindset. They are in a death spiral that is likely to pull the entire country, if not the world, into it.

Another data point is that, as a construction guy I know was telling me recently, “No one wants to work anymore. They just want to stay home and collect their checks.”

Free money isn’t free. There will be a price paid. And the one, probably, good thing that may come out of the Biden/Harris administration is that the coming collapse will be easier to place on the heads of the Marxist rather than the free market advocates.

We live in interesting times.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Sean D Sorrentino

Posted on by

When people talk about rioting if the Supreme Court takes any action, they’re not talking about Republicans rioting. They’re talking about the Left. You know that, I know that, everyone knows that. So when people tell you they’re worried about “unrest” they’re telling you two things.

1. That they know the Left will riot.

2. That they know the Right will not.

So game it out.

If everyone knows that the Right will calmly accept the decision to give the win to Biden despite evidence (though not “proof”) of election irregularities, and they know that the Left will react with violence to anything but a Biden presidency, why should they choose anything but a Biden presidency?

I’m not advocating violence. I’m sure not going to start rioting. But haven’t we taught them that they can ignore us and suffer no consequences while the Left has taught them to fear? Haven’t we allowed them to take our kindness for weakness? Haven’t we basically told them that there’s zero consequences for making us mad?

Sean D Sorrentino
Posted on Facebook December 17, 2020
[The above is in reference to this.

A1: I can think of some reasons. Like, it’s their job to do the legally correct thing.
A2: Yes.
A3: Yes.
A4: Yes.

This isn’t a tough quiz. Lots of other people will figure it out too and take away “interesting” lessons from it.

We live in interesting times.—Joe]

Update: The basis for this is probably false.

Moral cowardice

Posted on by

Via daughter Jaime:

The following is my transcript in case the original goes away:

It was written by someone is a current staffer for one of the Supreme Court Justices…

I’ll just describe the report to you the report which I just read and you can make of it what you will.

He said that the Justices they always do [sic] went into a closed room to discuss, you know, cases they are taking or to debate. There’s no phones, no computers, no nothing, no one else is in the room except for the nine Justices.

It’s typically very civil. They usually don’t hear any sound. They just debate what they are doing.

But when the Texas case was brought up, he said he heard screaming through the walls as Justice Roberts and the other liberal justices were insisting that this case not be taken up.

And the reason, the words that were heard through the wall when Justice Thomas and Alito were citing Bush versus Gore, from John Roberts were, “I don’t give a [blank] about that case. I don’t want to hear about it. At that time we didn’t have riots!”

So what he was saying, was that he was afraid of what would happen if they did the right thing. And I’m sorry, but That. Is. Moral. Cowardice.

And we, in the SREC, I’m a SRC member, we put those words in very specifically because the charge of the Supreme Court is to openly be our final arbitrator, our final line of defense, for right and wrong. And they did not do their duty.

So I think we should leave these words in because I want to send a strong message them.

See also 1:32:31 (Its Texas Congressman Matt Patrick Texas Cong. Dist. 32) for more context.

This is, literally, hearsay evidence. But if true, SCOTUS is sending a very clear message of how to get your way if the law and evidence isn’t on your side. The message will be heard loud and clear and the lesson learned will have dire long term consequences.

Update: This is probably false, at least in part. They have been meeting via video conferencing for months.

H/T to https://twitter.com/AdamPiersen/status/1339804928479473665

It’s possible something like this happened on a video call, but we have no evidence of that.

Quote of the day—Alex Woodward

Posted on by

Mr Biden’s platform includes a proposed ban of AR-style rifles and high-capacity magazines as well as implementing universal background checks, closing “loopholes” allowing gun sales to at-risk individuals, and hold gun manufacturers accountable for their products – all of which are expected to face uphill battles from a GOP-dominated Congress and legal challenges from a ruthless gun lobby.

Alex Woodward
December 14, 2020
Joe Biden pledges ‘common sense’ gun control on anniversary of Sandy Hook massacre
[“Ruthless gun lobby”?

Bias? What bias?—Joe]

Quote of the day—Tom Luongo

Posted on by

The arguments against the electoral college are simply veiled arguments against Federalism. And while I’m happy to entertain arguments against any coercive form of government, in the case of the U.S. our Federal system is a flawed but robust system which has given ground slowly to these political terrorists over the past couple hundred years.

It is in a terminal state of collapse today and the odds are long that it will survive these challenges in any practical sense.

Tom Luongo
December 9, 2020
Less Electoral College? No, More Electoral College
[I don’t see them as veiled. And not arguments either. More like threats or, on really bad days, telling us this is how they plan to execute us.

I just hope we have enough strength of character to exercise our veto power if it comes down to that.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Ida Auken

Posted on by

Welcome to the year 2030. Welcome to my city – or should I say, “our city”. I don’t own anything. I don’t own a car. I don’t own a house. I don’t own any appliances or any clothes.

It might seem odd to you, but it makes perfect sense for us in this city. Everything you considered a product, has now become a service. We have access to transportation, accommodation, food and all the things we need in our daily lives. One by one all these things became free, so it ended up not making sense for us to own much.

…

All in all, it is a good life. Much better than the path we were on, where it became so clear that we could not continue with the same model of growth. We had all these terrible things happening: lifestyle diseases, climate change, the refugee crisis, environmental degradation, completely congested cities, water pollution, air pollution, social unrest and unemployment. We lost way too many people before we realised that we could do things differently.

Ida Auken
November 11, 2016
Here’s how life could change in my city by the year 2030
[Auken also says:

Author’s note: Some people have read this blog as my utopia or dream of the future. It is not. It is a scenario showing where we could be heading – for better and for worse. I wrote this piece to start a discussion about some of the pros and cons of the current technological development. When we are dealing with the future, it is not enough to work with reports. We should start discussions in many new ways. This is the intention with this piece.

The “devil’s in the details” as they say. If you think about it just a little bit you realize it isn’t even possible. A few examples:

  • Auken’s statements are self contradictory. Everything is free? Then what is “employment” about then? They claim, “It is more like thinking-time, creation-time and development-time.” Do they get paid for this or not? If yes, then who are the consumers and do they pay for the products and/or services? If they don’t get paid, then what is their motivation to product a product and/or service someone is interesting in using?
  • They don’t explicitly say this but it’s implied that all the services are supplied by artificial-intelligence/robots. So what of crime control? Even if one were to concede there was no physical need for sustenance, shelter, entertainment, etc. there will be still be crimes of violence. Conflicts over relationships, insults, broken agreements, etc. Who pays for the cops, lawyers, judges, and prisons? Keep in mind that in a place where everything is free fines are meaningless.
  • Accommodations are not all equal. Who gets the penthouse overlooking the ocean and who gets the street view of the recycling center? They’re both free you know.
  • They don’t own anything, really? Not even clothes they say. Yet, I just demonstrated that a claim on quality of accommodations is going to occur. What about the dress they were married in? Or the food they ordered which just arrived from the robot pizza joint down the street? And what of the food they made themselves? Or the photographs they took, the art object they made, the diary they kept, or the book they wrote?

There will always be markets with sellers and buyers of property. They may be black markets in a time and place where thugs attempt to create a utopian world of free everything and equality for all, but markets will always exist.

Auken vision is not one of “for better or worse”. It’s one of reality or delusion.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Stephen Michael Stirling

Posted on by

Which is why vaccination should be compulsory, unless there’s independently-corroborated medical reasons for not taking it.

And by “compulsory” I don’t mean fines and scolding; I mean the cops will come to your house and physically hold you and your family down while the shot is administered, and if you resist beat you to a pulp or shoot you.

Stephen Michael Stirling
Posted on Facebook December 12, 2020
[Via a private post by Jonathan.

Best response (also private) by Vector Victor:

“Alexa, vacuum the doormat.”

I find it interesting so many people are so casual about advocating egregious violation of basic human rights.

We live in interesting times.—Joe]

Random thought of the day

Posted on by

Via Kevin Baker on Facebook:

Seen elsewhere:

Both sides think they’re right.
Only one side is censoring you.

That doesn’t guarantee one side or the other is telling the truth. Both sides could be wrong.

But it does guarantee which side I’m going to oppose.

Quote of the day—David Kopel

Posted on by

China’s Cultural Revolution began to end in 1976 when Mao died, and the pragmatic totalitarians staged a coup that removed the more idealistic totalitarians. Will the people of the Anglosphere have to wait that long, or longer, for rescue? Or will the hundreds of millions of people who don’t support the totalitarian ultra-left emancipate themselves from mental slavery? Will they end the reign of terror of today’s Maoists?

David Kopel
December 11, 2020
The Cult of Mao 1966 v. 2020
[Good questions.

We live in interesting times.—Joe]

Election questions

Posted on by

From a comment thread:

In many cases if proper procedures are not followed it would be impossible to show fraud occurred even if it were massive. Should the plaintiffs have to prove fraud occurred when the defendants eliminated the possibility of such proof? Do you really want that to be the law of the land?