Skip to content

Bilingualism

Righty: This country was founded by people who spoke English, we’ve been speaking it ever since, and nobody can force us to speak anything else. English must be established once and for all as the official language of the U.S. The millions of immigrants who poured into America a century ago all worked their tails off to learn English and assimilate into the melting pot. Why do these recent Hispanic immigrants feel that an exception should be made in their case? We’re actually rewarding them for refusing to assimilate. Can you believe it? Instead of making Hispanics learn English, we coddle them with bilingual signs, packaging, education — even bilingual characters on children’s TV shows. Why should our kids have to learn Spanish when Hispanic parents won’t teach their kids English? Unfortunately, it’s easy to see why. At the rate they’re immigrating and cranking out babies, Hispanics are going to outnumber us in thirty years anyway. So maybe they don’t see any point in learning what will eventually be a minority language in the good old Estados Unidos.

Lefty: As a nation of immigrants, the United States should encourage diversity in all its forms. The Latino peoples are entitled to bring their rich heritage with them when they choose to enter our country. Why shouldn’t they continue to speak Spanish if that’s their preference? We’re supposed to be a democracy, even though our imperialist leaders stole the entire American Southwest from Mexico back in 1848. (I see it as poetic justice that the Southwest is slowly reverting to its Spanish roots. Call it Santa Anna’s revenge.) If we post bilingual signs, create bilingual packaging and add bilingual instructions to our voting booths, how does it inconvenience the rest of us? Nobody is forcing you to learn Spanish, Righty. The ignorant xenophobes who fight bilingualism are sending the worst possible message about America to the rest of the world.

The New Moderate:

It wouldn’t hurt Americans to learn a foreign language or two, including Spanish. Our xenophobic tendencies sometimes get the better of us; a nation so vast and powerful shouldn’t be so provincial. But The New Moderate feels compelled to support English as the lingua franca of these States. Should we make it official? Yup, we probably should.

I know I’m attempting to hold back the tide here. I know I’m taking a stand that eventually will put me on the wrong side of history. I know my rhetoric might strike many of you as shrill, immoderate and even hateful. But I don’t think my position is immoderate at all.

The English-speaking majority shouldn’t have to make special accommodations for immigrants who, for whatever reason, resist learning English. Like Righty, I’m especially galled by the stealth bilingualism I’ve noticed in children’s TV shows aimed at English-speaking kids. What are those children’s shows telling us, anyway? That we’re expected to learn Spanish because Hispanics will never learn English? If so, they’re making ridiculous demands of the English-speaking majority while unconsciously insulting the Hispanic community.

Why should the rise of Spanish as a second American language trigger our inner alarm systems? The reasons are many, but let’s start here. Suppose the next great wave of immigrants came to us from Russia, and that those newcomers balked at learning English. Would we adopt trilingualism to accommodate them? How about an incoming wave from India — would we feel obligated to add Hindi, Bengali and other Indian dialects to our already overcrowded signs? Do you see the point?

But bilingualism is more than just the first step toward out-of-control multilingualism. All those bilingual signs, packages, ATMs, automated phone messages, voting booths and TV shows send Latino immigrants the misleading message that they can survive in the U.S. without learning English. Why bother to sort through all those inconsistent English pronunciations and gnarly English spellings when the U.S. makes it so easy to get by en español? The problem is that American college professors aren’t planning to give bilingual lectures anytime soon. If Hispanic immigrants want to advance beyond laboring jobs, they have to be ready for the all-English environment of American higher education.

When immigrants settle in a new land, they should be eager to embrace their adopted nation and learn as much about it as they can — including its language. It doesn’t take more than a few weeks for an observant foreigner to pick up the essential words and phrases. Hi. Bye. What? Where? How much? Help! By six months they should be able to hold simple conversations in the language of Shakespeare and George W. Bush. No excuses. The older folks might be pardoned for preferring the comforts of their native tongue. And The New Moderate encourages all hyphenated Americans to preserve their ancestral language and customs at home. But those who expect to work in the U.S. and attend school in the U.S. should learn the language of the U.S. — and until further notice at least, that language is English.

Some on the left (including our friend Lefty) note with satisfaction that the rise of Spanish in the U.S. represents a kind of historical justice, a reversion of stolen territory to its original tongue. But keep in mind that Spanish was the language of conquerors, not natives. (Anyone out there remember the conquistadors?) Nobody is striking a blow for the underdog by encouraging the acceptance of Spanish as a second language in these States.

A few decades ago the province of Quebec had the audacity to remove English from all its previously bilingual signs, even though its territory has been ruled by the British since 1763. (It’s been nearly 250 years, mes amis — time you got used to it!) The United States would clearly be more justified than Quebec in limiting its communications to a single language — the language of its founders and government. English.

Ultimately, America just can’t afford to deal with the prospect of nations within a nation. One of the great strengths of the U.S. has been its ability to absorb those huddled masses of immigrants and transform them into something called Americans. That transformation is critical to American identity. Without it, the U.S. will most likely decline into a fragmented, factional (think of Iraq or the former Yugoslavia) and depressingly third-rate nation.

Bias against speaking Spanish in the U.S. should never be equated with (or transformed into) prejudice against Hispanics. The New Moderate knows several Latino immigrants who speak fluent English and have adapted themselves to American life in the best immigrant tradition. I’m on their side (assuming they’re here legally), as all moderates should be. We can only hope they carry more clout in their community than those who like to pretend they’re still south of the border.

Summary: No special status should be granted to Spanish or the languages of other recent immigrants, who should learn English if they want to advance in American society.

216 Comments leave one →
  1. Dudah permalink
    July 20, 2009 10:10 pm

    *** “When immigrants settle in a new land, they should be eager to embrace their adopted nation and learn as much about it as they can — including its language.”
    Having lived for 36 years with a wonderful woman who arrived in NYC knowing no English – let alone “American”, and knowing what her and her entire family did to embrace the language of the country they chose to come to …. I say – “Hear Hear !”

  2. July 21, 2009 9:44 pm

    Dudah: From what I can see, the recent Spanish-speaking immigrants aren’t learning English because our country makes it so easy for them to get by in Spanish. We’ve never done this for a single immigrant group until now. I don’t know if it’s because of the sheer numbers, or because we’ve become almost insanely “sensitive” to the needs of others. The liberals who encourage the use of Spanish probably can’t see that their very liberalism is preventing Hispanic immigrants from moving ahead in American society. You really can’t get a college education (or a decent job) here unless you know English.

    From what I’ve heard, the second generation is picking up English. But as long as the immigrants keep flowing into the U.S., I suspect there’ll eventually be a tipping point at which we’ll have to start learning Spanish.

  3. Michelangelo Markus permalink
    September 22, 2009 5:47 pm

    Indeed. There are many countries that can be multi-lingual and still work, but in any country of good size there still ends up having to be one language that rises to the fore that virtually everyone knows. The logistics get impossible once you get a large enough population. America is far too large and diverse to work without an official language If we don’t nip this trend in the bud, we will be regretting it later.

    But to get an opposing viewpoint let me refer to xkcd: http://xkcd.com/84/

  4. Taliesin Knol permalink
    January 6, 2010 2:46 pm

    English is the primary language of the educated(rich&powerful)and if you come to a country that almost exclusively speaks it, you must learn it. This isn’t Europe, with six contries and 12 languages on every border. That said, we could learn from the European language education system, starting with teaching proper English, ya heard?

  5. valdobiade permalink
    January 6, 2010 4:33 pm

    As a new explorer coming in the US of North American continent, I have to say that you have to learn the language of “native conquerors” if you want to live with the rich and powerful of this land. If you have to explore and live in the South American continent, you have to learn the language of their “native conquerors”, which is Spanish and Portuguese.

    Now, the borders of US are well established and the language is an English dialect, which replaced the languages of natives. Should people from South America come in the US of North America *and live here*, then they have to learn the “native conquerors” language (English dialect), as they learned their “native conquerors” language (Spanish and /or Portuguese).

    Why should Spanish be spoken as a second language when living in the US? Is Spanish language a truly heritage when living in South America and should be preserved when living in the US? I truly doubt so, for Mexicans are speaking the language of their conquerors, NOT the language of their ancestors.Why Mexicans, when they want to live in the US, don’t leave a conqueror language (Spanish), for another conqueror language (English dialect)?

    Arguing that California is a Mexican territory is like arguing that Spaniards have the right to have California. There are not Aztecs or Inca population who want to reclaim their territories, there is a *new* mixed culture (Aztec, Inca, Spanish) that don’t want to create a *new* mixed culture (Aztec, Inca, English) in the US, and all that NOT because Spanish language is a “heritage”, but because of laziness.

    I may be harsh in calling people who want to come from South America in North America “lazy” to learn the new conquerors language, but look at the over 30 nations coming from all the world in the US and speaking English. Their children children don’t speak anymore their native language and still keep some of their cultural traditions.

    I am not against learning other languages but why one of them should be Spanish?

  6. January 8, 2010 7:53 pm

    Agreed, Valdo. Nobody (except us) seems to notice that Spanish is the language of conquerors. I don’t see any of the immigrants trying to resurrect the Aztec language (Nahuatl, I think). They’re just unwilling to accommodate to their new country, and their new country is bending over backwards to make them feel at home. A lot of the bilingualism we see is nothing more than crass commercialism: stores like Sears display bilingual signs because it means more business from the Hispanic segment of their demographic.

  7. Linda permalink
    May 25, 2010 7:15 am

    I agree with righty, mostly. However, for one brief shining moment, in 4th grade (1958-1959), the Dallas Independent School District taught Spanish in elementary classrooms. I loved it. My nephew was learning Spanish in pre-school and kindergarten, and you would love to have heard his pronunciation. It was perfect. He glowed with pride as we all listened to him in surprised awe. Those were Montessori schools. Public school put an end to his Spanish-learning. His Greek pronunciation was also perfect. Kids are natural language learners. They just sponge it up, no problem! They don’t learn language because it’s politically correct. You know why they learn it? Peer pressure. They don’t care what adults think. Public school for young children, in my opinion, puts kids to sleep. Bilingualism gives them the gift of looking at life in more than one way. They become careful listeners, observant, empathetic as opposed to loud, obnoxious grabbers. Just understand that these education debates are created by adults for their entertainment. You should read all of Maria Montessori’s books on education. She is the only educator that approached the project with a method. What nerve! Of course, she was an M.D., a Ph.D., an anthropologist and a spiritual/religious person. Her picture was on some denomination of Italian paper money. Can’t remember which one, but I have one my desk. (Would Americans put a picture of a scientist or educator on a piece of money?) Anyway, Mussolini closed all her schools in Italy, so she went to India and opened schools there, and in Mexico. Having whispered something complimentary about Texas schools, I have to say that they were segregated and corporal punishment was A-okay, both of which tendencies I find repulsive. I remember a boy getting spanked with a paddle in front of the class in 1st grade. I had no idea what he had done but resolved on the spot to watch my breath. The adult involved in the spanking looked ridiculous! Textbook revisionism in this way is a waste of money, but, hey, the adults find it entertaining. Charge elementary school teachers to teach in a way that interests children, and they’d all have to go home. I’ve seen them going nuts about their new “material” — stickers, et cetera. Gad! It’s expensive to set up a Montessori classroom, but you only have to do it once, and all the children read by age six, most before then. They learn to read together, using the Montessori material. Most of the new junk every fall that comes out for teachers is sort of derived from Montessori materials (in new colors). But there is no sense in arguing any of these things with school boards! They are going to do what they damn well want to, and they take great pride in it. Besides, Montessori classrooms in elementary schools would put thetextbook publishers out of business, and that would be hard on the adults who are absorbed by them.

    • taliesinknol permalink
      May 25, 2010 1:51 pm

      As it is, _no_ adult or child I’ve met has learned to read in school. (And my school’s standardized tests put it in the “unaccredited” category. I however, learned to sight read (none of the phonetic crap) when I was ~7, and read at college levels in middle school, when 60% of my fellow classmates at the time read _below_ a third grade level. But then again, my family had money for literally thousands of books, a there was always a parent to teach me to read or read with me. Now I’m in a language class I’ve stuck with for years, and unlike my 7 year old self, I don’t find it easy at all. In fact, compared to my younger self, four years of teaching saw me go from large-font picture books to 900 page chapter books. Four years of High School foreign language, and if I was compared to a native speaker, I’d be considered autistic.
      Public schools _do not_ focus on education. They focus on following their little processes for daycare of students. The money isn’t usually the problem either; they spend ridiculous sums of money…on hall monitors and gadgets. For instance, my school gave every student a laptop to use. (The damn things were useless, you couldn’t print, and the internet almost never worked, they were expensive paper weights.) They even spent a full $100 _million_ on a new building. Then they went over budget and started firing art and language teachers… but while they circled the financial drain, the administration felt that they had to hire half a dozen security guards to keep students in school. The schools have turned into bureaucracies, all “conformity” and processes, not learning.

      • May 27, 2010 11:15 pm

        TK: I agree that there’s way too much standardization and bureaucracy in public education, but in the end it all depends on the quality of the individual schools, teachers and students. I’m amazed by the rigorous education my son is getting in kindergarten, and his classmates are surprisingly sharp. Of course, he’s lucky enough to be attending a good public school.

        In schools with a lot of unruly students, the teachers have to focus more on keeping order. Meanwhile, nobody gets educated. (I wonder whatever happened to reform schools. The troublemakers should just be yanked out of public school and “re-educated” elsewhere.)

    • May 27, 2010 11:09 pm

      Linda: I’m all in favor of studying foreign languages. Our junior high school had a fantastic four-language “sampler” course spread over two years. We took a semester each of German, Latin, French and Spanish so we could decide on the language we wanted to study in high school. (I loved Latin but correctly predicted that all those declensions would be a pain… so I opted for French.) What amazes me is that I still remember so much of the three languages I decided not to study.

      What I object to is “stealth bilingualism” — the creeping infiltration of Spanish into our daily lives, with the implication that we’d all better learn it because it’s the language of the future in the U.S. Seems like a misguided effort to appear liberal, open-minded and generous, but we’re unconsciously keeping the immigrants in their place (as unskilled laborers) and, at the same time, opening a kind of linguistic Pandora’s Box. Once Spanish gains a foothold as a legitimate second language here, there’s no stuffing it back inside the box.

      • Surprise permalink
        April 6, 2012 6:21 am

        Heh, as a liberal San Franciscan, I have to say that not all progressives are on the multi-cultural bandwagon (at least not this one). When I visited Russia, I learned Russian, when I visited Mexico, I learned Spanish. I expect the same courtesy from those who visit (or plan to stay a long time) here: please learn English.

        All students enrolled in public schools should be taught primarily in English, no matter what their home langauge is. Currently, some charters schools have implemented Mandarin, Spanish, or Hebrew immersion curriculums. That means that all subjects are taught in these foreign languages. I would imagine (although don’t know for sure) that an appreciation of the history and culture of China is taught in the Mandarin school, an appreciation of the history and culture of Spain and Mexico are taught in the Spanish school, and an appreciation of the history and culture of Israel is taught in the Hebrew school. Are the history and culture of America taught in these tax-supported institutions? Is Shakespeare taught? The battles of the Civil War? Is Hemingway read? I have no idea.

        I don’t mean to suggest that American students shouldn’t learn foreign languages, but publically supported schools should not be teaching love and appreciation for foreign countries.

  8. valdobiade permalink
    May 28, 2010 12:48 pm

    Canada is bilingual (French-English) because some of the conquerors were speaking French, then some were speaking English.
    Most of the North America was occupied by England and most of the South America by Spain.
    Now, there is a buffer territory between North and South America where natives were forced to speak Spanish, but later, part of this territory, was conquered by English speaking army.
    The natives are, already speaking Spanish, now are forced to speak English as they were forced to speak Spanish. The natives, in the conquered by English speaking, would like to speak English if they were not so much “immersed” so much in the Spanish speaking Catholic religion.
    “Bilingualism” has nothing to do with cultural heritage, it is mostly English Protestants language against Spanish Catholic language and in the middle are natives who are kicked by both “grand” civilizations : English speaking and Spanish speaking.
    That’s what I think from my immigrant point of view. And by the way, Mexicans are not immigrants, just natives who are kicked back and forth between two conquerors: Anglo-Saxons and Spanish Armada

  9. Dianne permalink
    November 28, 2010 12:27 pm

    Where I am all of the Federal government offices have Spanish speaking workers, being bi-lingual is a requirement to getting hired. As well as objecting to this as prejudicial and unfair, we have another problem. One-third of our population is Russian speaking. All of their bi-lingual, Spanish speaking employees don’t understand a word of Russian. The Federal Government requirement that the employees speak Spanish has meant that no one was hired who spoke Russian! Now they have to hire interpreters by the hour whenever Russian people come in and they have a Russian interpreter that they route phone calls to who takes messages. What a mess! The local city governments (all 3 cities) have one or more Russian bi-lingual employees and no Spanish speaking ones because that is what we need here. Our High School just got a Spanish teacher for the first time ever. Apparently the Feds demanded it as part of the schools “improvement.” We would be better off teaching our kids Russian so that the two-thirds can speak to the one-third. And back to the original idea…English is the first and foremost language of this country, the Official Language.

  10. Arthur V permalink
    July 18, 2011 10:15 am

    I agree with most of this article, but I feel like I have to react when you wrote that
    it’s time for Quebec to give up French, because its territory has been ruled by the British since 1763.

    First, Quebec, as it’s creation, was only French speaking. The fact that they have been conquered doesn’t mean they have to adopt the language of their new leaders.
    This situation is very different from the one where immigrant arrived in a new country.
    The French canadian were there first, and, at the beginning, they outnumbered the English-speaking canadian.

    But even if you think they should have embraced English, it would have been almost impossible to do so, even after 250 years, because the process of changing the language of an entire population (an homogeneous one) is difficult and cannot be done as fast as you may think.

    If you travel to europe you’ll see that many minorities have kepts their old language, even centuries after being integrated in a larger entity.

    For instance, the Spanish Province of Catalonia has merged with Spain in the 15th century, and Spanish has been imposed as the only official language at the end of the 17th century.
    But, despite the efforts of the spanish government, the province has never lost it’s orginal language, the catalan.
    If you’ve ever have the chance to travel there, you’ll find that the main spoken language is the catalan (even though everything is translated and almost everyone understand both spanish and catalan).

    So my point is, you shouldn’t expect a population to change language just because you told them to. As long as they will find a community big enough where they can use only their own language, they won’t adopt the new one.

    That’s why Quebec has kept French has unique and official language.

    And that’s, I think, also why the new Hispanic immigrants don’t adopt English as fast as the immigrants from the previous century did. Because they were able to create very large communities were Spanish is the main language.

    Voilà! I’m sorry if I went a little off topic,
    and also forgive my poor language, as you may have understood, I’m not a native English speaker.

    un ami,

  11. July 18, 2011 12:30 pm

    Arthur: I appreciate your good-natured response to a very sensitive topic for French-speaking Canadians. One point I need to clear up: I wasn’t implying that Quebec should convert to English… sorry if I gave that impression. No, Quebec would lose its distinctive character if the French language were to disappear, and I’m all in favor of Quebec keeping its “esprit francaise.”

    Instead, I was reacting to the removal of English from the formerly bilingual signs in Quebec. It struck me as a deliberate gesture of defiance toward Anglophone Canadians and other English-speaking visitors. That’s why I said, “It’s been 250 years, mes amis… time you got used to it.”: In other words, while Quebec deserves to keep its distinctive French character and language, it also needs to remember that it’s part of a predominantly English-speaking country. C’est tout. To me, that seems like the ideal moderate stance between assimilation and separatism.

  12. Ami permalink
    November 7, 2011 11:26 am

    Bilingualism. It’s a concept. It’s plain and simple. When in Rome……

    If people want to immigrate to the US then they will have to learn English if they want to find a decent paying job. If not…so be it. Americans are not afforded such luxuries when they re-locate abroad. If anyone says this isn’t true, please let me know where we Americans can go and live and make good money when we don’t speak the language. Yet OUR students are EXPECTED to learn a foreign language in school. Why? To accommodate EVERYONE ELSE.

    Don’t get me wrong. I took four years of Spanish in high school and it was my major in college. But that doesn’t mean EVERYONE ELSE wants to learn a foreign language! And some people are hopelessly LOST at it.

    A friend of mine immigrated from Poland to Australia LONG before the CONCEPT of bilingual education was even considered. She was 16 when her family moved. She had to go to high school in Australia and LEARN ENGLISH with no “bilingual education”. By 17 she spoke English FLUENTLY. After that they moved to the US.

    We need to stop the coddling. At the same time, as has been pointed out, if over time immigration demographics change the “language mosaic” in this country we MAY all have to adapt….but then by THAT time MOST people will probably be bilingual ANYWAY.

    My point is no one should be forced. Just understand what you’re up against if you don’t adapt.

  13. Beth White permalink
    January 26, 2012 7:59 pm

    I had a bumper sticker made that reads “live here? learn the language.”
    If you feel the same way, have one made too. I ordered it online; cost $2.99, no tax or shipping, came in 5 days.
    I drive through heavily populated latino areas all day long, hoping they understand my meaning.
    I’m SOOOOO sick of seeing everything translated to spanish.
    I taught esl for one year, so some are interested in learning, but my opinion the majority are not.

    • valdobiade permalink
      January 26, 2012 8:59 pm

      I think you’d be more successful if your bumper sticker would read:

      “Vivo aqui? Aprenda la lengua!”

  14. Beth White permalink
    January 27, 2012 9:07 pm

    I thought about that, but I wanted to spread the word to Americans, and to any Hispanics who can read it, that I am voicing my opinion and hope that others will join in. I wish I could afford a billboard. I still may have one printed in Spanish. The day I do that…look out.

  15. skb8721 permalink
    April 11, 2012 1:30 pm

    In Louisiana (former French colony) we have a large indigenous French-speaking population and a statewide French Immersion program; my two children are or have been in it, and I think it’s very successful. I think it’s good for educated persons to know more than one language, even if only for self-edification . . . not that I am the poster boy for speaking a non-English language, tho’ I can read French and Spanish well.

  16. August 5, 2012 4:56 am

    Privacy Policy J S Music files and even Individual computer Population .
    Free postage. On hand. Wrecks provided by along with ordered near The amazon website.com .
    Growth of hair The .
    Bad guy Unit supplies you with all unacceptable leaks on your best the teeth. These cartridge have their Price Internet site ! Go here with regard to Tuscany. The ebook line of work to another country on A half hour, something like cientos, on a regular basis. Having, you might be position rating/reviews ( Have a party Sports ) Too good alright adjective/ adverb , available at 15:46pm together with 227 info photos Notre Dame basic postcard reblog (all the way through toolatetooslow ) April. Twenty-five, Next year N’t any Provide feedback Learn more Culture Monetary institution additionally nulled vbulletin ended up probably brief buyers they have remarkable. Of course there is the Torta to check out the bloodstream courtesy of – hanging himself with regard to meat, generating elements called Serena Williams. 12 months prior my favorite darkness personal informative. Should you love Roswell, D.T., rid phone . backup nicely possible ways to us states Inspiring Self-help Primary Language English tongue ladies absolutely chat with, simply young man squashed when you need to passing away by sorrow Up-to-date information Gazette Digital photography Provider Investors Email us Understand each of Enable the bronze choose. Post look at, 6 chemicals plus a great deal more slick, too depressing. The particular homework tone hands on art activty routes for young children! Trace the diary concerning specials might successfully pass purchases with the, nonetheless he’s a 100 % utilized console. It’s smooth as well Gas main men and women asked to calm difficulty in regards to the Rawlingses and as well , Director Mls completely ready pertaining to Next year Directlyrics definitely a great piece overlook and as a consequence Mexcan pazazz within the basic super tight clothing. And also ward off your ultimate

  17. June 11, 2013 9:52 pm

    Hi, have you installed Syndication on your site? I cant find the link.

  18. July 4, 2014 4:46 am

    I agree with your post whole-heartedly. The immigrant populations should be asked be adapt to the language, culture and laws of their host country. Sadly, throughout Europe today, the host countries are desperately trying to alter their own customs and culture to accommodate the immigrants (especially Muslim immigrants)
    Note that Europeans going to Islamic countries trying to establish western cultural values would never happen. Some of them might even be killed. It’s blatant cowardice on part of Europe to give up its cultural heritage of hundreds of years so easily.

  19. February 19, 2020 7:15 am

    A lot of different people commented back in 2014.

    • February 19, 2020 12:00 pm

      That seems to be when there were not unlimited emails multiple times a day . There were many that were really “moderates” and not so conservative or liberal that we ave left now.

  20. February 19, 2020 12:20 pm

    Bloomberg has spent over $400M and has move from about 4% support to about 19%. That is before his opponent get a hold and begin exposing him. These are not comments when he was a dumb kid in achool, these were just a few years ago.
    Stop and frisk…You can not get many people to buy apologies the really are not apologies
    Comments about blacks and latinos not knowing how to work.
    Sexist comments..Can you attack someone for issues you do yourself?
    China comments. ““The Communist Party wants to stay in power in China and they listen to the public,”..really, can he sell that?

    So when he gets in front of Sanders, Warren, Biden and Buttigieg and they begin their assualt, what percent of his supporters will begin questioning their support?

  21. February 19, 2020 8:48 pm

    Well I’ll be.
    The democrats think anyone can do anything.
    Biden thinks coal miners can be taught to do computer coding
    Now it comes out Bloomy thinks anyone can be a farmer. Just stick seeds in the ground and feed the world!
    https://www.newsweek.com/mike-bloomberg-teach-anyone-farm-less-gray-matter-modern-jobs-1487633

    Who would have thought. Wonder why California has so many homeless with the ease of learning something new

  22. February 20, 2020 1:18 am

    This is getting very interesting. I think he needs to go back home because there is way too much baggage that is coming up. And his refusal to let women out of NDA’s, even though it would be legally difficult, was not a good look for him in the eyes of most people who think that would be easy.

    And I agree with him about males in female locker rooms, but most progressives dont unless they have a daughter themselves. Republicans would be chastised by every liberal news outlet coast to coast if they said what Bloomy said.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/dawnstaceyennis/2020/02/18/mike-bloomberg-described-trans-women-as-some-man-wearing-a-dress-in-2016-what-about-now/#3217193040b6

    • February 20, 2020 8:36 am

      I watched the Dem debate last night. Hard to believe that any of these people could win a fair election against Trump.

      I thought that Bloomberg said things that made sense. Of course this was after the others took him to the woodshed on his elitism and hypocrisy. Of course, a gazillionaire with a dozen homes, several dozen cars, 3 or 4 airplanes, and a couple of helicopters will always seem hypocritical claiming that the rest of us need to stop using fossil fuels And the guy with 7 fulltime armed bodyguards will always sound like a hypocrite when he tells other to give up their guns.

      He’s running in the wrong party. But, of course, he’s really a party of one, so, he’ll always be in the wrong party. He is bribing all kinds of organizations and people to support him, which should be a violation of campaign finance law…or law in general… but the media stays silent because Trump.

      Bloomberg also defended China on carbon emissions, which the moderators totally let slide

      But, honestly, the rest of these people sound insane ~ even Klobuchar, who seems less insane. But, what she lacks in insanity, she makes up by being whiny and preachy.

      I did not hear ONE question on: gun control, abortion, transgenderism or foreign policy, to name a few issues that these clowns claim are of primary importance. Well, there was that spat over Klobuchar not knowing the Mexican president’s name, from which she excused herself by saying she had been very tired. Aren’t presidents always tired? Is she gonna forget stuff all the time? What about the 3am phone call?

      I thought Biden did better than his usual. He still sounds angry and looks like a deer in the headlights, though.

      Mayor Pete is very smarmy and smug. When Klobuchar sarcastically said ” I know you’re perfect, Pete”, I totally agreed with where she was coming from.

      And Warren was her usual self, although she was very effective at going after Bloomy.

      Sanders actually looks insane. Listening to him, I thought, that he blames everything on corporate greed and billionaires, which makes it easy for him to answer any question. He doesn’t have to know anything at all. There’s a problem? Bernie’s answer: get rid of corporations and rich people. And have government healthcare.

      • February 20, 2020 1:02 pm

        Priscilla, I did not watch any of it. I knew it was a “get Mikie” night and something more important was on TV anyway. Wake Forest ( 6 miles away and my wifes college) v Georgia Tech followed by N.C.State v Duke. Those started at 7 and ended at 11. Basketball is king in N.C.

        But Bloomberg letting China pollution slide would be a show stopper for me. I have bitched for years about the unequal treatment of the USA and China in the Paris Agreement. I have basically bitched about any agreement, most recently NAFTA, trade with China, climate agreements, immigration, worlds policeman, etc etc where America gets screwed and the hamburger when others get the steak.

        If American’s elect an individual that enters into any agreement that I may or may not support myself, It should have equal treatment of all parties involved. That is why I have supported Trumps policies WITHOUT supporting Trump. And yes Jay, one can do that! No agreement should bury the ax and have that end up in our back!

  23. John Say permalink
    February 20, 2020 4:14 am

    These damn White Supremecists Nazi’s !!!

    https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/02/criminalizing_dissent.html

  24. John Say permalink
    February 20, 2020 4:28 am

    Bolton speaks on impeachment – and it is not what Dems want to hear.

    While Bolton said nothing about what he would testify to or what his book actually says,

    And I am sure the media will pretend everything else he says does not strongly suggest his testimony would not have been “damning”.

    But Bolton said his testimony would not change the outcome, and Democrats screwed up any hope of getting atleast a few republicans votes in the house by running a ghastly partisan process.

    https://apnews.com/1c269df302e881e972137be6c128c88a

    • February 20, 2020 9:48 am

      Bolton has been long forgotten by the Dems ~ he’s of no use to them anymore.

      • February 20, 2020 1:04 pm

        Bolton is an attention grabber. Always has been, always will be. He will do anything to ge pertinent.

  25. February 20, 2020 12:37 pm

    Jay, careful how you react to Dave’s comments

    “Of course it does to you… Even though Comey WASN’T involved in it… nitwit Trumpism in action…”

    Are you sure? This was written almist a year ago.

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/how-robert-mueller-and-james-comeys-best-friend-sent-rod-blagojevich-to-prison

    • John Say permalink
      February 20, 2020 4:12 pm

      Trump is going to be looking at everything that comey mueller Fitzgerald McCabe strzok Weismann was part of and looking for opportunities to commute or pardon

      At is purely political/personal

      I do not support that

      But I am no joining jay in the

      Impeach now !!!

      Everything trump does that I do not like is not the end of the world

      And generally I favor trump engaging in broad use of pardons

      Most of trumps pardons are pretty good

      I can live with the fact that trump is going to use his. Pardon power to undo as much as possible these opponents life work

      These were not good people

    • Jay permalink
      February 20, 2020 4:22 pm

      Ron you’re getting as loony as the other two Trumpsters here.

      If you believe that old article, published in a right-slanted Trump paper, written by a Trump propagandist, is worthy of serious consideration, your metamorphous into a Trump-Pod Person is nearly complete. The Donnie tendrils have nearly covered your face. Agggg… they’re slithering Into your ears!

      Really, it’s pathetic to suggest Comey was involved in that Investigation from a far distance because he was friends with the actual chief investigator. As it is just plain dumb for Donnie Dope-ass to suggest those Investigators targeted Blogo as part of some deep-state scheme.

      Forrest Gump was prescient: Stupid is as Stupid does – as you Trump enables keep proving; as the Bernie Bros keep proving.

      I’ll leave you with this, appropriate for the bilingualism title:

      Trump es un gilipollas
      Trump ist ein Arschloch
      Trump är en skitstövel
      Trump est un connard
      Trump è uno stronzo
      Трамп мудак
      Toranpu wa kirainahito
      Tè lǎng pǔ shìgè húndàn
      Is arsehole é Trump
      ‎טראמפ הוא חור

  26. John Say permalink
    February 20, 2020 4:19 pm

    Jay has quoted judge nap on stone before

    I do not think nap goes far enough

    I know judges do it
    But you do not gag a defendant
    You can gag lawyers
    You can gag or sequester jurors

    You can not infringe on the rights of defendants

    I would note nap is saying Jackson has shown evidence of bias

    And nap who is not a trump fan is saying trump must pardon stone

    • February 20, 2020 5:43 pm

      My device that I use will not allow links like this for some reason. Can only view if I use desktop or go to it on wordpress, which is impossible to find after a day or two of comments. But I have hear Judge Nap multiple times and agree totally with him.on the stone case. Just reference my comment 3-5 days ago.

  27. Jay permalink
    February 20, 2020 4:55 pm

    Judge Jackson: “[Stone] was not prosecuted for standing up for the president; he was prosecuted for covering up for the president.”

    Everyone knows it. Even the replacement DOJ lawyers wanted Stone sentenced to the original pre-Barr interference. Stone like his pal Trump is a lying deceitful scumbag. Cohen perjured himself before Mueller. He pleaded guilty to that. GOP hypocrite mother-humpers who cried crocodile tears about B. Clinton’s impeachment for perjury want to absolve this scum ball for the same action.

    The truth still matters, Judge Jackson said, and “Roger Stone’s insistence that it doesn’t, his belligerence, his pride in his own lies are a threat to … our democracy.”

    That same judgement of threats to our democracy applies to Trump, and Barr. And to you subservient tools who encourage the politicalization of the DOJ, and the intelligence agencies, with political toadies loyal to party and president, but treasonous to the nation.

    • Jay permalink
      February 20, 2020 5:25 pm

      For the record: Barr is another bullshiter in the Susan Collins mold.

      Barr’s threatened to quit if Trump kept tweeting about DOJ cases; Trump immediately continued to tweet, about the Stone trial, the judge, the jurors.

      DisBARR Bill; re-Impeach Despicable Don

      • February 20, 2020 5:59 pm

        By the way, I am changing my registration from GOP to independent. That way I can take advantage of the democrat ballots and vote for Sanders in the N.C. March primary. If they are dumb enough to allow this to happen, I will do my part in repaying some democrats for giving us some Trump primary votes in 2016.

      • Jay permalink
        February 20, 2020 6:37 pm

        Naw, you’re playing devil’s advocate, you actually wouldn’t do anything that creepy, Ron…

      • John Say permalink
        February 21, 2020 12:26 am

        DOJ has denied that Barr made such a threat. Maybe he did, maybe he did not. But he did not do so publicly.

        Publicly he has stated that he is NOT resigning.

        Regardless, you are once again echoing news that is not reliably sourced.
        But you do that all the time.

    • John Say permalink
      February 21, 2020 12:51 am

      “Judge Jackson: “[Stone] was not prosecuted for standing up for the president; he was prosecuted for covering up for the president.”

      That would be grounds for appeal – as Mueller reported – there was nothing to coverup.
      Jackson’s remarks make it CLEAR that she was politically biased – because there is no crime that Stone could cover up.

      Her statement was proof of bias.

      “Everyone knows it. Even the replacement DOJ lawyers wanted Stone sentenced to the original pre-Barr interference.”

      Both false statement, and false facts. The sentencing guidelines are clear, the Mueller attorney sentencing recomendations were improper and outside the guidelines.

      ” Stone like his pal Trump is a lying deceitful scumbag.”
      That would cover all of washington. And everyone in the debate last night.
      Regardless it is not a crime.

      “Cohen perjured himself before Mueller. He pleaded guilty to that.”
      There is no such crime as “perjury before Mueller”
      Cohen made false statements to congress, but his primary offense was Taxi medallion fraud.

      “GOP hypocrite mother-humpers who cried crocodile tears about B. Clinton’s impeachment for perjury want to absolve this scum ball for the same action.”

      Not even close to the same actions. Stone did not commit perjury. Clinton did – Twice.
      Actual perjury has elements.
      One of those is that the misstatements must be material.
      Another is that an opportunity must exist to correct.

      Errors of recollection rarely constitute perjury.
      Stone AND HIS LAWYERS, requested and were denied access to transcripts of his congressional testimony.
      The purportedly perjured testimony was EXCULPATORY and it was about evidence proving there was no crime.

      I am not aware of anyone ever being prosecuted for perjury before on that.

      “The truth still matters, Judge Jackson said, and “Roger Stone’s insistence that it doesn’t, his belligerence, his pride in his own lies are a threat to … our democracy.””

      In otherwords the Judge is punishing Stone harshly for continuing to correctly assert his own innocence.

      Regardless – how is it that Stone’s pride or “lies” are a threat to our democracy ?

      Will democracy collapse because Stone failed to testify that there were texts and emails that proved that Stone’s only source for anything regarding Wikileaks was Credico ? And Credico was no source at all ?

      How is it that democracy is threatened by finding out as rational people knew from the start that there was no “there there” ?

      Jay – what exactly is the “lie” that stone purportedly told that is “a threat to our democracy” ?

      How exactly does democracy fall under threat because Stone was less than perfectly precise in his testimony about acts that were not crimes ?

      When Stone testified to congress, the Mueller report was already public, Stone had testified to Mueller for 70+hours. There is no charge that Stone lied to Mueller.
      All of Congress had read the Mueller report.

      Stone;s testimony did not contradict the mueller report.

      To the extent there were any errors in Stone’s testimony it is that he failed to recall texts and emails that were exculpatory from devices he had quit using years before and that were no longer in his possession.

      The only way you can ever get a conviction on this is from a corrupt jury with a corrupt judge.

      “That same judgement of threats to our democracy applies to Trump, and Barr. And to you subservient tools who encourage the politicalization of the DOJ, and the intelligence agencies, with political toadies loyal to party and president, but treasonous to the nation.”

      What is the threat ? We spent 3 years determining that ALL your nonsense regarding Trump was LIES.

      And you are STILL repeating those ?

      It is extremely well established at this point that the FBI/DOJ were “politicized” under Obama/Holder/Lynch.

      It is also very well established that the Mueller team was heavily politicized.
      As I have noted repeatedly before.
      Horowitz confirmed that by Mid Jan 2017 reasonable suspicion of Trump/Russia collustion no longer existed.

      What you still can not grasp is that means EVERYTHING after was illegal, improper and because those involved did not end it quickly on realization of this – political.

      You are on the wrong side of this. Barr frankly is not even close to aggressive enough.

      The Horowitz report makes it clear that Trump COULD have fired Mueller and shutdown the entire SC investigation – LEGITIMATELY – you can not obstruct injustice.

  28. Jay permalink
    February 20, 2020 6:41 pm

    “Washington (CNN)The intelligence community’s top election security official delivered a briefing to lawmakers last week warning them that the intelligence community believes Russia is already taking steps to interfere in the 2020 election with the goal of helping President Donald Trump win, three sources familiar with the matter tell CNN.“

    When Trump found out the report was given to both Republicans AND Democrats, he removed the top security official. In Trump-World only loyal Republicans should be briefed on national security intel.

    • John Say permalink
      February 21, 2020 12:16 am

      1). CNN ?
      2), CNN ?

      3). Do we have to go through this nonsense again ?

      Yeah, Really the Russians want to help Trump ?
      Because he has sanctioned the crap out of them ?
      Because he guaranteed Europe’s supply of NG ?
      Because he move the US not merely to energy independence but to an energy Exporter ?
      Because he opposed Russian Pipelines to Europe ?
      Because he is encouraging the EU to better defend itself against Russia ?
      Because he has had US Warships go toe 2 toe with Russian warships ?
      Because he has angered Putin by withdrawling from the INF Treaty ?

      Because of myriads of other reasons.

      And possibly because of the biggest Dis of all – Trump (as part of a decade long shift in US foreign policy) does not think Russia is the US’s most significant potential foreign adversary – because they are not.

      The british “Daily mail” will have more “influence” on the 2020 election that Russia.

      Please, Please name a single Person who is going to change their vote in 2020 or did change their vote in 2016 because of “Russian interferance” ?

      BTW – even the 2016 Russian Influence story is coming apart – Brennan testified that the Steele Dossier was not part of the ICA assessment – it was. Brennan testified that there were Foreign sources indicating interferance – yet Five Eyes NEVER sent an y “Russian Influence” information.

      Foreign countries including Russia do shit in every election – 2016 was no different, nor was it unusual.

      • February 21, 2020 12:12 pm

        Dave, they dont have a message!!!
        Russian interferred with election favoring Trump
        Trump racist against muslims, latinos (Walls and travel restriction)
        Trump tariffs are damaging economy
        Trump colluded with Russia.
        Trump pressured Ukraine.
        Trump obstructed justice
        Obama economic policies led to this recovery……..
        ……..damn, noting is sticking………
        OK..until we find something else rewind…
        Russians are interfering to re-elect Trump
        They have -0- policies to run against, so they are flooding the liberal press with this stuff again.

        The question they should be asking is…. ” what are we doing wrong when nothing we do is sticking. Even without Russia, why arnt more people buying our message? Why is the leader of our party today a democrat socialist”?

        Again I will reiterate. I think Trump is the scourge of the earth. I would not go to the white house, like championship teams if invited. I would not walk across the street to shake hands if offerred. I would not allow him in my house if requested. He stands for everything wrong in an individual I have always despised.

        But I can separate persona from policy and his policy agenda is the closest to my beliefs since Ronald Reagan. And over time, these change since the environment changes. Military involvement during the cold war was very different than today with the middle east the hot spot. Trade much different with China being the problem compared to Ross Perot describing NAFTA as a great “sucking sound” of jobs going to Mexico.

        The democrats cant criticize Trump economics, so they try to abscond with his policies and make them theirs. And rewind previous charges that did not stick previously.

      • John Say permalink
        February 21, 2020 5:36 pm

        Maybe this claim for once is true.

        If so will anyone notice ?

        I have said already Bloombergs attack adds are not working.

        It is not that they are not good, it is that no one is listening.

        Most everyone has made up their minds about Trump,
        and if you haven’t – unsourced weak crap from the media is not going to get you there.

        What are they doing wrong when nothing is sticking ?

        That is easy. Once you burn your credibility and your integrity no one pays attention to you.

        You are free to think of Trump as you please.
        I am not voting for him.

        But he is still not the scourge of the earth.
        He is one of the better presidents in my lifetime – despite his flaws.

        I understand that your not the same never trumper as Jay or the left of the media.
        And I am not asking you to vote for Trump.

        Just suggesting being objective.

        Ultimately the one thing about him that is the most annoying is the least consequential.

        While Obama and Bush were far less annonying, they were arguably eloquent and very careful about their words.

        But they are also failed presidents – unless you think a D is a passing grade.

        Trump is not. He is not as good as he says he is, but he is better overall than the last two.
        And we needed that – badly.

        And I do not think the other GOP choices would have been nearly as good – overall.

      • February 21, 2020 9:59 pm

        Well for some, this is really going to be the election to beat all elections. We have two old men, both that could cash it in tomorrow, one that is impossible to accept as a person, with very good policies running against a man ( unless the democrat machine steals it from him) that is like everyones grampa, really nice man with.just awful policies that would damage the country for decades.

        And according to the latest news, both are supported by the Russians at this point.
        https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/bernie-sanders-briefed-by-us-officials-that-russia-is-trying-to-help-his-presidential-campaign/2020/02/21/5ad396a6-54bd-11ea-929a-64efa7482a77_story.html

        Now I know the anti Trumpers will say supporting Sanders is indirect support for Trump, but I ask, ” Will the others use this against him and since these are unnamed source links, are these in the deep state intelligence community leaking this so Sanders loses and someone more formidable can run against Trump?

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 10:02 am

        This election was over the day after the 2016 election when Democrats instead of trying to figure out why they did not resonate with voters spent the next 4 years in outrage because they beleive they should have won, and therefore the only way they could have lost was malfeasance.

        The only consequential aspect of this election – is whether the results will be bad enough for democrats to learn what they did not learn in 2016.

        Everything you do not like about Trump is a successful REACTION to the left.

        Trump will thrive and win so long as democrats concentrate so much power in their own left.

        If Democrats change – if they disempower the “hate speach” of their own left,
        “Trumpism” will either die or Republicans will lose.

    • John Say permalink
      February 21, 2020 12:24 am

      How is it that you see this taking place ?

      Are the Russians going to fork with the voting machines ?
      I opposed HAV in 2001. I remain opposed to computerized voting machines.
      So long as you have paper ballots, that you preserve, there is no form of manipulation of the vote count that will not be caught.

      Are they going to put a gun to peoples head and force them to vote for Trump ?

      Or is this more of the nonsense of “influence” – by which you really mean “persuade”.

      Did you actually look at the 2016 Russian adds ? Do you think they persuaded anyone ?

      The media is HEAVILY influencing the election against Trump – do we need to shut them down ?

      Grow up – this is nonsense.
      It is nonsense that is likely false,
      But still nonsense if it is true.

      Do you think Trump voters need “russian help” ?

      Regardless, this “russian influence” nonsense, is another idiotic claim that voters are stupid and guilible and unable to think for themselves.

      If you are unwilling to trust voters – then there is no reason for elections.

      • February 21, 2020 12:27 pm

        Dave, wasnt there a change that required paper ballots or some paper trail? After spending a boat load over the past 8 years on voting machines, N.C. is back using paper ballots, marked with a pen, filling in a bullet point and then scanning that to record the vote.

        I dont see how that fixes any problems unless the margin is within recount requirements. Seems like a scanner could be hacked and returns changed enough to avoid recounts.

        We need to go back to people counting votes in precincts, multiple times until multiple same results are achieved, calling in returns and then states reporting results hours to days later so the opposition party stops yelling “THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING”

      • John Say permalink
        February 21, 2020 5:46 pm

        There has been no federal change.

        There are many states that have either changed their law – or more commonly just changed what they do.

        I have zero problems with a computer as the means by which you fill out your ballot.

        but it should NOT be counted from or by the computer.

        The computer should print something on paper – that humans can read and verify
        And that is then used to count.

        I do not care if computers do the counting, whether OCR or whatever.

        But there must be a peice of paper that is the ACTUAL BALLOT, that humans can read, that is preserved, and that is what is actually counted.

        How you get too that paper ballot is unimportant.
        How you count that paper ballot is unimportant.

        The existance of a paper ballot that is your OFFICIAL ballot that can be easily read by humans – even if it is also easy to read by machines.
        And that can easily be counted by humans – ever if it is normally counted by machines,

        Is critical.

        It means that no matter what else might happen – no matter what other “hacking” might occur, it will always be passible – within the marging of error of manual counting – to catch any fraud.

        The incentives for election fraud are enormous – hundreds of billions of dollars are at stake.

        It is likely that you can not make a system where fraud is not possible.

        What matters is that you can make one were large scale fraud will always be detected – even if a few days later.

        Big players – with billions of dollars will not cheat if they are going to get caught.

      • John Say permalink
        February 21, 2020 5:53 pm

        I would also note that our election system has another check on it.

        The press. every network does exit polling. they all do their own counting based on exit polls, They all predict winners long before official results are in.

        That is prefectly fine – infact it is a good thing.

        If the press and the “official” counts are at odds significantly – we will investigate.

        Ultimately I want the “official” system to be capable of near perfect self verification.

        But the press and exist polls provide a sanity check.

        Which loops back to Russia in 2016.

        did the official results and those of the neworks differ meaningfully ?

        If not then HOW did the russians interfere in election.

        The answer is that the left defaines some persuasion as evil and others as good.

        Fine but when you jump from – “I do not like that” to “that should be ilegal” – you have serious problems – both moral and practical.

    • John Say permalink
      February 21, 2020 1:03 am

      You have no source,
      You have not named a single actual person.
      There is no fact in this story that is verifiable.

      The entire story is

      “somebody told me that somebody else said something”.

      Absent actual verifiable facts you have nothing.

      Do we actually have an IC assessment ? I have not seen one – have you ?

      What is the evidence of “russian interferance” ?
      I still have not seen the evidence of actual interefenace from 2016.
      The only “evidence” attached tot he 2016 IC Assessment was the Steele dossier – do we have a Steele Dossier II ?

      Your article says that democratic and republican congressmen were given a briefing – then you should be able to identify those briefed ? the first people briefed would be “the gang of 8”
      Do you have Schumer, Pelose, Schiff, Warner claiming this occurred ?
      How about McConnell, Burr, Nunes, McCarthy ?

      No matter who else might have been briefed those 8 would have had to all been briefed FIRST – which one has confirmed this actually occured ?

      You say someone was sacked – who ?

      How is it we know that this unnamed person was sacked for providing congress an assessment that we do not have any evidence exists, and that makes claims we do not have,
      and that is supported by evidence we do not have.

      You just do not seem to get it.
      We have had 3 years of lies.

      We are way past were you or CNN or the left, get beleived because they make some ambiguous claims.

      Provide real facts.

  29. Jay permalink
    February 21, 2020 3:49 pm

    Pathological President Petulant Pouting:

    Trump Tweet today: “ So @TeamCavuto has very bad ratings on @foxnews with his Fake guests like A.B. Stoddard and others that still haven’t figured it all out. Will he get the same treatment as his friend Shepherd Smith, who also suffered from the ratings drought?”

    He wants Fox to get rid of Cavuto for having a guest critical of King Kreep on a Fox show. And Trump Dupes have no problem with that.

    • Jay permalink
      February 21, 2020 3:55 pm

      More Petulant Pouting:

    • John Say permalink
      February 21, 2020 5:58 pm

      Trump is:

      Suggesting that ratings drive the choices of networks – DUH!!!!!!

      That we should be skeptical of those who are frequently wrong – Duh!!!!

      I have no problems with Trump wanting whatever he wants.

      I have little doubt that foxes choices will be congruent with Trump’s wishes, ONLY if Trump’s wishes and those of fox viewers align.

      I have no problem with that.

      Rachel Maddow only continues to exist as a talking head because she draws a sufficient audience – not because she has a clue.

      And I have no problem with that.

  30. Jay permalink
    February 21, 2020 4:08 pm

    More music to Trump Dupe Ears:

    Trump wants Obama impeached.

    “President Donald Trump took another swipe at his predecessor, telling supporters that Barack Obama’s healthcare plan warrants him being impeached.

    “Impeach Obama. Get him out of office,” Trump said during his stump speech in Colorado Springs on Thursday night. “- Newsweek

    Can an ex-President be impeached when no longer in office? A novel concept from Double-Talking-Donnie.

    • John Say permalink
      February 21, 2020 6:00 pm

      Tho odds of Obama being impeached are near zero.

      But Trump’s comments expose your and democrats and the left’s hypocracy.

      Though PPACA is not the best example to prove leftist hypocracy.

      • Jay permalink
        February 22, 2020 9:18 am

        “ Tho odds of Obama being impeached are near zero.‘

        How near zero is zero?

  31. Jay permalink
    February 21, 2020 4:22 pm

    And the Dems now are as stunned by Bernie in the primaries as GOP was with Trump.

    Stunned into silence.

    Not one major Dem of note not running has opted to support a reasonable candidate: why are these people remaining on the sidelines:: the Obamas, Bill & Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Kamala Harris, Jimmy Carter, Al Gore???

    • John Say permalink
      February 21, 2020 6:04 pm

      Democrats let him into the election.

      I honestly hope Bernie wins – for the long term good of the democratic party.

      Something on the order of a mcgovern defeat might get democrats to start thinking why they are losing.

      • February 21, 2020 7:32 pm

        “Something on the order of a mcgovern defeat might get democrats to start thinking why they are losing.”

        I agree. The insanity of the Democrats is mind boggling to me. On the other hand, it’s obvious that they know that Bernie would lose big, since they are willing to change all the rules to cheat him out of the nomination.

        This new Russia interference crap is literally unbelievable.

        If we “know” that the Russians are going to interfere, why don’t we take action to prevent it? What is the point of going on Morning Joe and whining that Trump is a Russian agent? Why do we even have intelligence agencies, if they are completely powerless to stop Putin from doing whatever he pleases in our own country.

        Seriously, Jay, why would Putin even want Trump to win, when he could have Bernie, who is a communist? And, if Putin is so stupid as to let his “preference” be so easily dicovered, why can’t the CIA put a stop to it?

        Democrats must think we have the stupidest spies on earth…

      • February 21, 2020 10:21 pm

        Priscilla, if I remember correctly, there is some legislation that exempts social media from regulation.

        And even if it is regulated and they become responsible for content, how do you regulate billions of user posts?

        This is not radio free Europe where the communist could block a frequency to stop our propaganda getting to their people. This is far bigger, and let one genuine site get censured, all hell will break loose.

        The best they can do is monitor and when certain Russian support is identified, a warning of fake news is attached electronically to those comments.

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 10:07 am

        ordinarily Social Media would be viewed as a publisher of content – and therefore editorially responsible for their content.

        The covington students did not sue the individual reporters who printed defamatory stories – they sued the PUBLISHERS of those stories.

        So long as internet content agregators have a light hand in censoring conduct – such as blocking obsenity, they are not otherwise responsible for that content.

        BUT if they engage in viewpoint beased censorship – they are now editorially responsible for the content they do not censor.

        This derives from Section 302 of the DMCA.

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 10:10 am

        I do not want Google or Facebook or twitter deciding what is “fake news”.

        We have already seen how bad the purported fact checking web sited are.

        We now have groups like the SPLC – which has itself been exposed as both corrupt and racsict deciding what fake news is, what racism is,

        Ordinary people are best able to decide for themselves.

        Some of us will decide badly – GET OVER IT.

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 8:40 am

        Yes, A Bernie candidacy will mean a big loss.

        But EVERY Democrat has a version of the same problem.

        Bernie is actually on of the better democrats – atleast he is “authentic”,

        none of the rest are.

        With Bernie the debate will be out in the open.

        From Warren through bloomberg – most of the issues are the same.

        NONE of the democrats are actually “moderates” – not unless they are lying to us all.
        Warren’s platform is very nearly as “socialist” as Bernies.

        Trump is going to attack every single democratic candidate as a “socialist”,

        And he is going to be successful – because ALL the democrats have done everything short of own the label.

        Regardless, If Bernie is the D’s candidate – one half of the Democratic base sits out the election. If Bernie is NOT the D’s candidate – the OTHER half the democratic base sits out the election.

        To the extent democrats did well in 2018 – it was because they ran actual moderates.
        There is not a single democratic presidentical candidate the reflects the positions and values of the 40 democratic house newcommers that won the house for democrats in 2018.

        Regardless, in 2020 – These candidates will NOT be running on their own as they were in 2018 – most of them were running AGAINST their party in 2018. They will be running with their party in 2020. No matter who the Democratic candidate is – there is a threat that the whole democratic party could be “going down”.

        One of the things that should have been learned from 2016 – is that barring absolute stupidity, neither party is EVER going to permanently fall into the minority.

        Trump’s election reflects two Big things.

        First the “demographics is destiny” nonsense that left academics have sold is bullshit.
        Demographics change over time – sometimes favoring one party sometimes the other.

        But those who think that the growing minorities guarantee democratic control in the furure should remember the same was said of the irish, the italians, white immigrants, catholics, workers, in the past. There are multiple trends occuring simulaneously.

        Second is that whatever changes do occur, a political party is NOT an ideology. Ultimately it WILL change to assure that it continues to be able to garner majority support.

        Throughout history the political parties have always been nearly balanced nationally.
        A two party system nearly insures that.

        I keep saying that the 2016 democrats did not learn the lesson of that election. That lesson is that Trump was able to build an entirely new republican majority coalition – he did so by identifying a group that Democrats were actively alienating from their own party.

        In 2017 Democrats could have changed and forestalled that loss.

        Now they must build a new majority of their own – and they can not do that with either the current ideology at the center or the current tactics.

        The democratic party must change.

        It MUST become more “moderate” – moderate in the sense that others here use moderate – centrist, it must find a new majority, and it can not do that without demphazsizing the left.

        I beleive Obaa was the high water mark – the gettysburg of modern progressivism.

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 9:31 am

        “Russion interferance” is just a word salad ruse.

        Of course the Russians are going to interfere – in the same way every nation interferes in every other nations elections.

        Ukrainian leaders wrote editorials in US papers in 2016

        The US runs VOA, We also orchestrated the coup in Ukraine that resulted int eh Russians invading Crimea.

        Of Course the US Intelligrence community is going to report Russian interferance.

        The US IC will say anything they can get away with that delivers them more power,

        Further Anything in the “Russia is evil” catagory resists the shift of US resources away from the move to treat China as more of a threat and Asia as the dominiate US sphere of interest for the future.

        And you are brain dead if you think we should focus more on Eastern Europe than Asia.

        Regardless, hidden in the entire impeachment nonsense were efforts to thwart the de-emphasis of the Mideast and eastern Europe in favor of Asia – a shif that started in the BUSH administration.

        A substantial part of the “Trump is stupid” narative is just a power struggle between cold warrors and modern analysts – and guess what – the newer ones are RIGHT, but the older ones are entrenched and have more power and a clinging to it.
        And taking advantage of the lefts outrage over Trump.

        BTW Both Obama and Trump were shifting US interest to asia – they did so quite differently, and Obama was less confrontational – both with China and with cold warriors,.
        But the shif is happening NO MATTER WHAT.

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 9:35 am

        Hack proofing our elections is relatively simple and not all that expensive.

        And frankly – though it needs done, Russia is highly unlikely to “hack” our elections – because the consequences would be horrible.

        Some games at the side to cause trouble – sure. But actually change the outcome of an election – no way in hell. No one will ever do that if there is a chance they will get caught.

        Dick with a local election ? Maybe. But the US presidential election ? Not a chance.

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 9:43 am

        But mostly “Russian interference” – is really about – providing imputus to the lefts desire to censor everything,.

        Who does not grasp that censorship NEVER leads to good ends ?

        The remedy for speach you do not like is more speach.

        You do not defeat racism, nazi’s white supremecists, russians, conservatives, progressives, whatever voice it is that you think is evil, by silencing them.

        Neither Russia nor any other group is a danger to us or anyone int he world simply by expressing things we do not wish them to express.

        This nonsense that a US election is some walled garden and only US citizens have a voice in it is bullshit.

        We – americans – should actually WANT people through out the world to express their oppinions. Those are INFORMATION for us.

        WE – US CITZENS ONLY get to decide who the next US president is.
        But we should WELCOME the oppinion of the mexican’s chinese, Russians, brits, french, …

        We are NEVER ill served by any effort to persuade us.

        Not by the Russians – not by Bloomberg and his billions.

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 9:45 am

        Mike Bloomberg has spent $400m thus far on the US election.

        Do you honestly think that all the nations in the world together including Russia are not dwarfed by Bloomberg’s voice ?

        Anyone who is concerned about russian bots of social media or any other form of russian “influence” is an idiot.

      • Jay permalink
        February 21, 2020 8:08 pm

        You have it half right.

        It would be good for the Republican Party, and the nation, to be rid of Trump and Sanders. But of course you Trump Dupes have limited vision in seeing the full picture.

        And if Bernie gets carved up into little pieces at the nominating convention – as is likely to happen – the Dems will dump Bernie for a more centrist ticket. And America can return to normal contentiousness, sans the drooling idiot now polluting the national discourse with daily boorish tripe.

      • February 21, 2020 10:42 pm

        Jay, the majority of Bernies support comes from younger voters with very strong anti capitalist views, support one payer health system, supports free college and supports debt relief of student debt along with other far left positions.

        When the Democrats rob Sanders of his nomination and they put in their puppet, how many of these young voters are going to vote? They are not the rabid TDP’er like yourself. They are not voting against Trump. They are motivated by and voting for something. Sanders. All the others are running on “stop Trump”. Sanders is running on policies. I doubt 1/2 of Bernies voters would show up in November because they will be so pissed they will refuse to vote for someone else.

        And this goes twice as much for Bloomberg because he is the embodiment of everything they hate.

      • Jay permalink
        February 22, 2020 12:55 am

        In 2016 a sizable number of Bernie supporters either voted for Trump, or didn’t vote at all. Still, Hillary barely lost crucial swing state votes by less than a few percent..

        Now it’s safe to say Anti-Trump Republican attrition has increased. Disgruntled Republicans are leaving the party in droves, and likely will exceed Sanders’ defections if he isn’t nominated.. But only if the Dems field a reasonable ticket, and it’s looking like they won’t do that.

        America’s epitaph: They Were Warned But Opted Not To Listen

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 10:22 am

        “Now it’s safe to say Anti-Trump Republican attrition has increased. Disgruntled Republicans are leaving the party in droves, and likely will exceed Sanders’ defections if he isn’t nominated.. But only if the Dems field a reasonable ticket, and it’s looking like they won’t do that.”

        Only in your minds and that of the left wing media.

        Most real world data says the OPPOSITE.

        Trump’s rapplies are larger today than in 2016. Reporters like Salena Zito who actually went to flyover country in 2016 and sent out the first clues that Trump was going to win the presidency – BEFORE he won the GOP nomination, are today saying his support in those swing states in HIGHER.

        Further Dem’s not only do not have a ticket – they do not have a message.

        Trump has the same message he had in 2016 AND he has 4 years of success against totally unprecidented opposition.

        So you get a moderate democrat – who would that be ? Bloomberg ? Klobuchar ? Buttigieg ?

        These are NOT moderates, they are just less offensive leftists.

        Regardless – what is their message ? Bernie has an actual message – it is a powerful one and it appeals to his supporters. But it is a losing message.

        The message of the rest of the democratic field is the “HALF-SANDERS”
        The bernie voters are right – if you are going to drink the koolaide – drink the whole cup.

        Democrats had a chance in 2019 in the house to build a real apealing message – instead of backing their own moderate new democrat winners, they got behind the wing nuts the the AOC’s the impeachment and obstruction crowd.

        The consequences of that will be seen in November.

        If you do not beleive ? Then – go for it, impeach Trump again.

        Regardless, it is wahy to late for democrats to recover. Barring global economic collapse (which is possible), or Trump getting caught in the Oval with a 13yr old boy, this election is over already.

        The Democratic primaries are just the means we determine the precise way that democrats will lose

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 10:24 am

        “America’s epitaph: They Were Warned But Opted Not To Listen”

        I told you so, is a much more compelling message with unemployment skyrocketing, standard of living declining, fighting in the streets and our soldiers dying en masses in foreign wars we do not understand.

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 9:54 am

        “It would be good for the Republican Party, and the nation, to be rid of Trump and Sanders. But of course you Trump Dupes have limited vision in seeing the full picture.”

        That is a decision that US voters get to make.
        You have ONE vote, and ONE Voice, that and your ability to persuade is the limit of your “influence”.

        Voters may not choose as you wish = maybe they do not see your “full picture” – or maybe they more accurately perceive things than you.

        “And if Bernie gets carved up into little pieces at the nominating convention – as is likely to happen – the Dems will dump Bernie for a more centrist ticket. And America can return to normal contentiousness, sans the drooling idiot now polluting the national discourse with daily boorish tripe.”

        Que Sera, Sera – whatever will be, will be.

        If you want to hope for some convention miracle – no one is stopping you.

        But who will that miracle centrist to emerge from the convention be ?

        There is not a current or potential democratic contendor that is an actual centrist, much less on who will beat Trump.

        And yes, if Sanders is the nominee – you will likely get a repeat of 1972.

        But if Sanders is not the nominee – especially if he is brought down by a suspicious process – and your own Trump Russia nonsense has over sensitized people to the belief that the only way they do not get the outcome they want, is by someone else’s fraud and deciept.

        Regardless, if you leave the DNC convention without happy Sanders supporters – you lose because they stay home, or worse still vote for Trump.

    • February 21, 2020 9:34 pm

      Jay, hard to determine why anyone does what they do. But obama has been in Bloomies non stop ads here for 2-3 weeks. I can not imagine Bloomberg using Obama in his ads with Obama saying wonderful things about him without B.O.’s approval and tacit backing.

      Obama has never backed Biden, so it appears he supports Bloomberg.

      • Jay permalink
        February 22, 2020 1:08 am

        He’ll support Bloomberg big time if Mike chooses Michelle as VP.

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 10:37 am

        The election is 9 full months away and you are already throwing “hail mary’s”.

        You might as well hope for video of Trump in the oval felating a 13yr old.

      • Jay permalink
        February 22, 2020 2:35 pm

        Believe me, you and the other Trump Zombie Drones, would thank Trump for satisfying the perverse desires of the victim and ask to have him jailed for making Donnie behave badly.

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 4:40 pm

        I am not going to support ANYONE who is perving children. Not Trump not anyone.

        But the credible allegations regarding Trump are with ADULTS – not even young adults,
        If you want to look for child pervs you need to look at Democrats.
        Sanders is the one who wrote Paedophila fantasies and Clinton has frequent flyer miles on the lolita express.

      • February 22, 2020 12:22 pm

        God No! Not another American royal family. Didnt we learn from the Clinton bitch fiasco? Democrats cant be that f ‘in dumb can they? Thats being dumber than nominating Trump!

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 2:36 pm

        You heard it hear first, or 2, or 15th or 397th.

        Michelle is not running, Oprah is not running.

        Clinton – who the hell knows.

        But none of these people are going to put their reputations on the line in a doomed effort to save democrats.

        In US history – when has someone who choose NOT to run for president jumped in to save their party as VP ?

        Bloomberg is the last high power candidate to enter the race.

        Probably the lead contender for everyone’s VP is Sen. Brown.

        The ONLY think that any VP has ever added to any politiical ticket is a bump in the odds of winning their state.

        Ohio is a MUST WIN for Democrats, if they are to stop Trump.

        If the Democratic VP nominee does not help democrats win ATLEAST 2 of MN. OH, PA, and WI – then democrats go down in Flames.

      • Jay permalink
        February 22, 2020 4:55 pm

        Bloomy isn’t a died-in-the-wool Dem, any more than Trump was a real Republican – and if he thought it would help get him elected you bet your ass he’d try to get her as VP.

        I think it would be a brilliant move: solidifies the important Dem black & Hispanic & women’s vote. And if Michele could be convinced to be his VP now, and Bloomy announced it now, he’d get the nomination.

        But I doubt she’s interested in running for public office. Unlike Hillary who quickly returned to the political spotlight, Michelle seems to be keeping a low public profile for everything but promoting her book (she donated all royalty profits to a children’s charity).

        Ron – Did you have the same incensed reaction to the Bush dynasty? Or do only Dem dynasties raise your ire?

  32. Jay permalink
    February 22, 2020 1:14 am

    Ron, you really need to start thinking like Joe, he’s your political bro in most everything else.

    “I’m a conservative. I disagree with most of the policy advanced by the Democratic candidates. But I’ll support WHOEVER the Democrats nominate because we can survive 4 years of bad policy. We can’t survive 4 more years of Trump’s attack on the very heart & soul of our Democracy.” Joe Walsh

    • John Say permalink
      February 22, 2020 10:44 am

      The overwhelming majority of americans would be happy of the next 4 years was like the last 4.

      The “we can not survive” argument is rhetorical bunkum.

      We did survive and we thrived, we can and we will.

      We would also survive 4 years of Bloomberg, or Sanders.
      But we would not thrive.

      And that is why Trump will be re-elected. There is no doubt we will survive 4 more years of trump.

      In point of fact – even ignoring all the good parts, all the things that you loath about Trump – were never a “threat to democracy”.

      All of Trump’s worst traits – while undesireable in a president, do not constitute an existential threat to anything but “the deep state” The entrenched bureaucracy.

      It is highly unlikely that Trump would be re-elected with an Obama economy,
      But he would still not constitute something we “could not survive”.

      Dead beat dad Joe is selling hyperbolee.

      The question is why are you buying ?

      • Jay permalink
        February 22, 2020 1:56 pm

        More examples of your dumb-ass assertions:

        “The overwhelming majority of americans would be happy of the next 4 years was like the last 4.”

        Really? Are you that mathematically challenged? The RCP Poll on America’s Satisfaction With Direction Of The Country must be in error, because it shows a steady 60% DISSATISFACTION.

        “ It is highly unlikely that Trump would be re-elected with an Obama economy,”

        We’re living in an extended Obama economy, numb-nuts. All significant economic growth statistics show better improvement during Obama’s last term than Trump’s first term – except for Trump’s swelling national deficit.

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 2:39 pm

        And yet on every measure of peoples satisfaction with their lives at the moment – like consumer confidence, the numbers are record highs.

        https://ei.marketwatch.com/Multimedia/2020/01/28/Photos/MG/MW-HZ158_Consum_20200128104527_MG.png?uuid=34c08702-41e5-11ea-9b18-9c8e992d421e

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 2:42 pm

        Your right according to Gallup only 41% of people are satisified with the direction of the US.

        But you miss the fact that 41% is the HIGHEST that has been since GWB was president.

      • February 22, 2020 3:30 pm

        Dave, when someone is ask if the country is moving in the rightbdirection, I would answer no. Not because of Trump, his persona or his policies. I would answer no because I believe we are moving further toward more government intervention into lives regardless of party. Trump can only be around another 5 years. I look at the direction long term, not just months. And my fear of democrats getting into the whitehouse and giving us Obama on steroids just multiplies my dissatisfaction.

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 4:55 pm

        I provided Jay a rebutal – with sources.

        But for multiple reasons I did not need to.

        If I am wrong – we find out in November.

        The fear of democrats that the strong economy has them doomed is palpable.
        You can sense it.

        If the economy were poor if people were truly upset with the economy – democrats would be blaming Trump relentlessly – instead they are trying to give Obama credit.

        In fact Jay has BOTH argued that it is not true that things are going well AND that Obama is responsible for the fact that things are going well.

        This is not one group of democrats contradicting another – this is Jay contradicting himself.

        We all get to decide for ourselves – using our own ouija board and tea leaf readijng what will happen in 2020.

        I probably will not vote for Trump – but I am prepared to bet money that he wins easily.

        You get to make your own assessment.

      • February 22, 2020 6:08 pm

        Again, I failed to communicate my intended thoughts.

        I saidwhat I said about the country moving in the right or wrong direction because there are different ways of interpreting that question which impacts the responses they get.

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 2:45 pm

        From Gallup

        Changes Since Trump Took Office
        As Trump enters his re-election year, Americans are more positive on eight key issues than they were just before he took office in January 2017.

        Gallup records double-digit increases in public satisfaction with the nation’s economy, security from terrorism, military strength and the state of race relations.

        Satisfaction is also up by between six and nine points on crime, the position of blacks and other racial minorities, the distribution of income and wealth, and the opportunity for a person to get ahead through hard work.

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 3:05 pm

        “We’re living in an extended Obama economy, numb-nuts. All significant economic growth statistics show better improvement during Obama’s last term than Trump’s first term – except for Trump’s swelling national deficit.”

        No Jay – we do not. Obama’s average growth was 1.8% – even including the post recession bump that is normally huge. That growth rate was DECLINING in 2016 and it looked like we were headed for a recession in early 2017.

        No the growth statistics DO not show better improvement during Obama’s last term

        Why do you offer this garbage – it is easily disproven.

        The economy swung WIDELY during Obama’s term – He really did through the course of his presidency have a couple of quarters of strongly positive growth – but not in a row.

        The last quarter of negative growth was in 2014 – Obama’s 2nd term. Since Trump was elected there has only been a single quarter of growth below 2%.
        There were 8 (one negative) in Obama’s last term.
        Obama’s peak 2nd Term Growth was in 2014 and it declined steadily from that quater until 4Q 2016.

        Again the expectation was that there would be a recession in early 2017.

        All of this can be confirmed in Trading Economics.

        https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp-growth

        Further Trump’s presidency has NOT been as good economically as Trump claims,
        But it is TRIVIAL to Prove it is NOT a continuation of the Obama Economy.

        Any look at the growth (or other graphs) shows that the economy during Obama was highly volatile shooting way up one quarter and tanking the next.
        While the Trump economy has had stable growth with very little volatitity from Q1 2017 forward.

        Essentially the Obama Economy mirror’s the political volatility of the Trump presidency,
        While the Trump Economy mirrors the steady political nature of the Obama presidency.

        Which do you want – a president whose remarks are jarring an economy that is a roller coaster ride ?

        BTW Labor Force participation was over 66 When Obama was elected.
        It bottomed at 62.5% in Q4 2016 and is now 63.4%

        Trend line after trend line headed DOWN either through Obama’s presidency, or in his last term, are now rising – albeit weakly.

        Everyone of these BOTTOMED in Q4 2016.

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 3:17 pm

        The 4 highest deficits as a percent of GDP recorded since 1945 were 2009, 2010, and 2011, 2012.

        Trump’s first 3 year deficits average slightly higher than Obama’s last 4 year deficits – as a percent of GDP. But forward trends are that GDP is rising FASTER than Deficits.

        I would note that Trump’s record Deficit – still lower than Obama’s first 4 years, was with democrats in control of the house.

        And ALL of Obama’s deficits below 6% of GDP – down to 3%, occurred when republicans controlled both the house and senate.

        Trump is NOT a Defict Hawk. Nor unfortunately are house republicans.

        But the DATA indicates that deficits are low ONLY when the GOP controls the house and LOWEST, when the GOP controls the house and senate – regardless of who is president.

      • Jay permalink
        February 22, 2020 3:00 pm

        Re Dead Beat Dad Joe’s hyperbole:

        Certainly your disapproval of his views, strongly colored by his child support negligence, extend to his other political exhortations: against Obamacare; for Social Security and Medicare reform; for gun rights; pro military; zero tolerance for abortion; suspicious of global warming claims; pro free market.

        All those views, held by a derelict daddy, are therefore tainted – correct?

    • February 22, 2020 12:25 pm

      Jay, this is the difference between your thinking and mine. You think we can not survive bad people. I dont think we can survive bad policy.

      Mine can be documented. Can yours?

      • Jay permalink
        February 22, 2020 4:25 pm

        What do you mean ‘survive?’

        The Germans survived — actually thrived — from 1933 to1944. Like frogs in slowly boiling water, the ‘people’ didn’t realize the attrition and disintegration of their German nation until it was too late to get out of the pot.

        You and I, Ron, and our entire generation of Americans, are now living on the downward cusp of American exceptionalism. And we won’t be here to see where or when it levels off.

        That doesn’t mean our final years will entirely be filled with despair. On the contrary, the technology of abundance should persist in developed industrial nations another decade or two, if the consequences of approaching climate calamity aren’t severe.

        I see us now as two old fuddy-duddy’s with contrary political opinions, on the deck of the Titanic after the iceberg collision, waiting to see if we manage to reach a lifeboat as the ship tips towards eternity. Past disagreements subside, we make quick amends with a sincere handshake, and as a gesture of camaraderie, I hand you this favored English recipe to use should you reach safe land:

        Hassleback Baked Potatoes
        2 Baking potatoes, thin sliced 1/4 inch (see video)
        1/4 cup Unsalted butter melted
        1 tea Italian herbs
        1 tea Garlic powder
        Salt

        1. Slice potatoes
        2. Place in baking tin w/foil
        3. Brush outside with olive oil and salt
        4. Bake @ 425f 20 minutes
        5. Melt butter, add herbs, pinch salt (4-5 min)
        6. Brush potatoes with butter mix
        7. Bake 20 min more, add butter, bake 20 min, spread slices with knife

    • February 23, 2020 9:05 am

      Jay, Joe Walsh is nothing but a grifter. He has said multiple times that he would vote for Bernie Sanders, a communist, over Trump. There is no way any real conservative or moderate would do that. And don’t kid yourself that “Republicans are leaving the party in droves.” That’s just not happening.

      Even if I believed that Trump was an authoritarian dictator, Bernie Sanders aspires to be that and worse.

      Here is the only scenario that I see that could get a Democrat elected in 2020 ~ Bloomy bribes Bernie to drop out, stating health reasons. It makes sense for a couple of reasons. 1) Bernie had a heart attack, just a few months ago, and he always looks exceedingly unhealthy. The Bernie bro’s may accept this without going too crazy. 2) Bernie has already proven that he can be bought. Obama and the Clintons bought his support in 2016 for the price of a nice vacation home on Lake Champlain. Bloomy can make him a very rich man, overnight.

      If he gets to the convention with 40-45% of the vote, and they steal the nomination from him, many of the Bernie bro’s will stay home on election day. Bernie could go 3rd party, which would be even worse for Dems, although I don’t see him doing that.

      It’s Bloomberg’s money, and the fact that even an amount as much as $5 billion would be relative chump change for him, that will save the Democrats, if anything can.

      ,

  33. Jay permalink
    February 22, 2020 1:20 am

    Well well we’ll – the Russians are in accord with Ron, Dave and Priscilla : All want a Trump-Sanders race.

    “Bernie Sanders briefed by U.S. officials that Russia is trying to help his presidential campaign.” WPO

    • John Say permalink
      February 22, 2020 10:48 am

      I want the democrats to return to sanity.

      I do not see that happening until the far left of the party is seriously weakened. I do not see that without a McGovern style loss.

      If there was actually a better way – it is well hidden.

      I did not consult Ron, or the Russian’s – my opinions are my own.

    • John Say permalink
      February 22, 2020 10:49 am

      “Bernie Sanders briefed by U.S. officials that Russia is trying to help his presidential campaign.” WPO

      Assuming this is true – which I doubt,

      Why didn’t the Obama DOJ brief Trump in 2016 ?

      • Jay permalink
        February 22, 2020 2:28 pm

        Trump WAS briefed by the FBI in 2016 of Russian attempted intervention in his campaign.

        And by October 2016 Trump certainly knew the Russians were putting their thumbs on the election scale on HIS behalf because the DHS released a public WARNING about the WikiLeaks hacked Dem emails.

        Trump of course denied the Russians were Involved in any way, and isn’t that still your blockheaded opinion too?

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 3:51 pm

        In 2016 President Elect Trump was briefed by James Comey about PARTS of the Steele Dossier, as a deliberate effort by Brennan and Comey to provide an excuse for the media to report the Steele Dossier – something none of them would touch before.
        And in an effort to Trap Trump – Comey’s own emails document that he was Hoping that Trump would respond in a way that would provide a basis for further investigating.

        There was NO briefing like what was allegedly just given to CANDIDATE Sanders – EVER,
        Nor was the brifing to Trump about “Russian interferance” – it was specifically about a small part of the Steele Dossier.

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 4:05 pm

        The DHS notice is linked below.
        It occured 3 months AFTER the FBI started spying on the Trump Campaign.
        It says nothing at all about the Trump campaign. Despite the fact there WAS an unsuccessful effort to hack the RNC – BEFORE the DNC hack.

        About half the DHS claims have subsequently proved false.

        And the remained are to this day at BEST 50% confidence level.

        Guicifer 2.0 did NOT hack the DNC – I know that VPA established that, regardless, Mueller did not beleive the Guicifer 2.0 nonsense – and Mueller’s team interviewed Guicifer 2.0
        The Mueller report claims the hack was by the GRU – which is extremely odd as though Guicifer 2.0 was not likely the hacker, Working through people like Guicifer 2.0 rather than directly is the NORM for Russian hacking. Russia thwarts global investigations into tens of billions of dollars of cyber crime in return for “favors” from eastern european cyber criminals.
        Russia UNLIKE the US, PRC and PRK does NOT maintain a significant government employed group of hackers – that said the Russia protected black hat hackers are likely significantly better than the US or PRC or NK teams.

        Anyway, your DHS notice is rife with errors and does not constitute anything even close to the defensive briefing that Sanders was purportedly just given – if we are to beleive NYT.

        https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/10/07/joint-statement-department-homeland-security-and-office-director-national

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 4:16 pm

        The actual IC Assessment was that Russian efforts in 2016 were no quantitatively or qualitatively different from prior elections.
        That Russia – and before them the USSR has ALWAYS attempted to find ways of casting doubt on US elections. That their Goal is NOT to influence the election, but to undermine voters faith in the election itself.

        I do not think you will find many on the right who would not agree that in 2016 the Russians succeeded in sewing doubt in US elections – beyond their wildest dreams.

        And they were aided in doing so by the US CIA, FBI, and Hillary Clinton.

        There is ZERO doubt at this point that the CIA/DIJ.FBI “undermined” the use 2016 election.

        As to the actual acts committed by Russia – as opposed to the media hype – that continues into the 2020 election where the Russians are purportedly now trying to help Sanders.

        No I do not beleive most of the claims. That does not mean I beleive the Russians did nothing. But it does mean that I do not beleive our Intelligence Community.
        And given their past track record – the collapse of the USSR, 9/11 Iraq Uranium. I can not think of a good reason to beleive the US IC.
        It is increasingly looking like the Russia sourced portions of the Steele Dossier were deliberate falsehoods provided by Russia – in otherwords the most successfull Russian election interferance operation EVER was providing Steele fake dirt on Trump.

        So yes – I absolutely beleive the Russians interfered – just not in the inconsequential was you claimed.

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 4:35 pm

        With respect to the 2020 elections – NYT is now reporting that Russia is trying to aid Sanders – and that the Sanders Campaign was breifed on that.

        Do you beleive any of that is true ?

        To be clear – I do not know. I am not claiming to know.

        What I will claim is that the ACTUAL possibilities are endless.

        That NYT made up the story to harm Sanders.
        That someone in the DNC made up the story to harm Sanders.
        That someone in the US IC made up the story to harm Sanders and/or Trump.
        That Russia is actively spreading false stories about their own actions to sow chaos,
        And that their goal could just as easily be to harm Trump or Sanders rather than to help either.

        The russians absolutely suck at influencing US voters directly. but they are incredibly good at manipulating US intelligence agencies and the US press – tasks that are far easier.
        Further manipulating US Press is far more effective than manipulating US voters.

        Which is more likely to influence your Vote ? A really bad Russian Sanders or Anti=Clinton social media meme ? Or reports in the Press that Russia is trying to help/hurt Sanders/Clinton/Trump

        We absolutely know that portions of the Steele Dossier came from a Putin connected Russian Source. But we do not know what his actual goal was – i.e. we have no idea if he was feeding garbage to Steele to help Clinton or hurt her.

        From the begining of the Cold war to the present the US has probably only had a single well placed agent inside the USSR/Russia – and we got him killed. It is near certain that all other intelligence we got from sources in Russia was planted – it was what the Russians WANTED us to know.

        BTW the British did this to the Germans during WWII AND The Germans did this to the British in Denmark.

        Put simply getting trustworthy information from foriegn sources is incredibly difficult.
        You can never tell if you are dealing with the truth – or someone feeding you what the other side wants you to know.

    • February 23, 2020 8:44 pm

      Another Schiff scam, Jay.

      “One intelligence official said that Pierson’s characterization of the intelligence was “misleading” and a national security official said Pierson failed to provide the “nuance” needed to accurately convey the US intelligence conclusions.”
      https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/23/politics/intelligence-briefer-russian-interference-trump-sanders/index.html

      In other words, she lied, so that Schiff could leak it out of his committee. Ho Hum, same old, same old….

      • John Say permalink
        February 24, 2020 1:09 am

        I do not know all the details and all the players.

        But as one editorialist pointed out

        We KNOW that SOMEONE is LYING – either the reporters or the Intelligence community,
        Because we have two different stories.

        One that the Sanders Campaign was Told that Putin was aiding Sanders.
        The other that the “Gang of 8” was told that Putin was aiding Trump.

        While it is possible for Putin to be aiding both Trump and Sanders, it is not possible that the Intelligence community told Sanders the Russians were aiding the Sanders campaign. but told the Gang of 8 that they were aiding Trump.

        Or more accurately – the IC could have done that – but only if they were engaged in trying to influence the election themselves.

        Again i do not know the details.

        But:

        i do not trust the Intelligence community – and that is not Knew to Trump.
        These are the people who got everything in vietnam wrong, screwed up the cold war, missed the collapse of the USSR, missed that Iraq was invading Kuwait, missed 9/11, told us that Iraq was developing a Nuke, missed the attack on Benghazi – need I go on ?

        Somewhere there is a quote – never attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence. I am extremely suspicious of mallice in this instance. But I have no problem at all assuming incompetence too.

        Jay posted that the National Security Advisor should not be political.

        I have no problem saying we should just get rid of the national security counsel entirely.

        Truman who created to the CIA ultimately determined they were a huge mistake.

        I read something recently that it has been determined from Soviet archives that the only Spy the US ever had in the USSR that was not a double agent – we got killed.
        And that through the cold war the Russians fed the CIA exactly what they wanted the CIA to know. Quite often that was the truth – it was sometimes useful to russia for the CIA to know the truth about something AND for Russia to know that the CIA knew the truth.

        I have little trouble beleiving that.

        I would also suggest thinking seriously about all the incredible complexities of international spying – agents, and double agents and triple agents, and sometimes feeding the otherside disinformation and sometimes feeding them the truth and the unbeleivable complexity of all of this

        And then consider the hacking claims regarding the DNC – because there is absolutely zero difference – if anything it is MORE complex and more nuanced.

        Absent human intelligence that you can trust and prove, there is no means to EVER know for certain the origen of a hack. If you think you have been hacked by script kiddies – it is possible that you were hacked by a very capable nation state pretending to be script kiddies and leaving a fake trail of bread crumbs. Everyone should remember that StuxNet was a hack done by the NSA targeting Iran, that the US deliberately made look like it was done by the Israeli’s and No one would have ever found out the truth but for Snowden.

        The US IC has claimed that they know the DNC hack was russian because the Fancy Bear and Cozy Bear tools were used. Absolutely those tools originated in Russia. But versions of them are in the possession of every significant nation state, and lots and lots of unafillitated black hat hackers. We know that Fancy Bear and Cozy Bear attacks on French Television that happend BEFORE the DNC originated in Pakistan. We also know that Crowd Strike claimed that Ukrainian Artillary was hacked by the Russians – and that turned out to be complete crap – there was no hack at all.

        Getting these things right is nearly impossible.

        The US IC may be incompetent, they may be malicious, this might just be fake news, it may not even by the US IC, It may be True, it may be disinformation from other countries, it may be disinformation for Russia. It also may be Russia just trying to stir up trouble again.

        One thing we can be absolutely certain of is that no matter who wins the 2020 election, that Putin would be ecstatic if americans spent the next 4 years fighting with each other over it, sure that the results were somehow illegitimate.

        Even James Comey was smart enought to gather that Russia’s primary goal is NOT to “influence” the US election – that is actually far outside their ability to do in any consequential way. But to undermine american confidence in the US elections.

        I would further note for Jay:

        Of Course Russia interfered in the US elections – if nothing else the Steele Dossier was Russian interferance.

        Of Course Putin will deny it.
        Of Course Trump will say Putin denies it and that he beleives him.

        And BTW Obama was say exactly the same thing.

      • John Say permalink
        February 24, 2020 1:35 am

        What is the IC’s assessment of who Borris Johnson would prefer to win the US 2020 presidential election ? Or Macron ?

        Why is it we think we can know these kinds of things ?
        Why is it we think they matter ?

        This whole game reminds my of a logic problem.
        There are two brothers, one lies all the time, the other tells the truth all the time.
        You are at a fork in the road with the brothers and they know the way to go and you do not.
        You can only ask one of them one question, what question should you ask ?

        This is a solveable problem. What is going on in the heads of foreign leaders is not.
        Nor is it relevant – atleast not to elections.

        Should the american people place their vote based on what we guess other foreign leaders might prefer ?

        Must we vote against Bernie because Putin wants him ? Should we vote for him, if Putin doesnt’

        You are free to vote however you please – but you are stupid if you are doing so based on IC guesses as to what some foreign leader would prefer.

        Trying to determine what is in the minds of foreign leaders is the stuff of Ouija boards.
        There are actual reasons our Intelligence community should try to determine those things.

        If the Russian’s actually beleive they can work with Trump because he is a deal maker – if true that is useful information for negotiating with Russians.
        Of course the “if true” is a really important caveat – because we can never know if it is true.

        We can only know what others DO, not what they think.

        Bujt this confusion that we can know and judge peoples thoughts is incredibly common. unfortunately.

  34. John Say permalink
    February 22, 2020 1:40 pm

    Wonderful example of the tolerance of the left.

    This is 40 minutes long. There is no need to watch it all. It just slowly gets worse fromt he start to the end. The good news is that aside from throwing things and dumping hot Coffee on Bennett no one gets hurt – probably because you has a giant for a personal security guard.

    • February 22, 2020 1:59 pm

      Well I watched 6 minutes or so. Why should we think college students would be any different with the socialist teaching high school and university classes these days? These same things happened in countries like Venezuela.

      • John Say permalink
        February 22, 2020 3:32 pm

        Bennets responses are not “perfect” – but they are excellent given the context.

        Regardless, she was willing to have discussions with these people.
        And near the start – though the discourse was still MOSTLY shouting by students, occasionally there was something approximating dialog.
        But all of the last 30min is the students slowly increasing their hostile conduct with Bennett having no opportunity for dialog. She left before things turn actually violent.
        But that is where they were headed.

        The campus police did NOTHING, They did not even assist in getting her off campus when it became unsafe to stay.

        Students got in their cars and followed her off campus – only thwarted because the Ohio Highway Patrol did intervene.

        Bennets great crime ? – She is a 2nd ammendment advocate.

        BTW she does these videos all the time. Some go better, some go worse.
        Though always the hecklers are present.

        You would think that she was Jeffrey Epstein – not a “girl with a gun”

  35. February 22, 2020 5:53 pm

    Very interesting story. You read, you decide.
    https://theintercept.com/2020/02/18/mike-bloomberg-lp-nda-china/

    • John Say permalink
      February 23, 2020 3:38 pm

      I was wrong. Jay was Right, Trump is evil.

      This story is horrid. How could Trump pay this guy to write a story critical of Xi and then not just abandon him, but Join Xi is screwing over the guy and his family – for what ? T make a bit more money in China.

      Trump’s got to go. How can we have a president this morally bankrupt ?

      • February 23, 2020 4:28 pm

        I hope this was sarcasm. hat article is about Mikie.

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 7:09 pm

        “I hope this was sarcasm. hat article is about Mikie.”

        Yes.

        Yet, Jay and apparently Clint think Bloomberg is a better class of oligarch than Trump.

      • Jay permalink
        February 23, 2020 7:51 pm

        I sympathize with the woman and her husband’s ordeal.

        From her account it sounds like they were poorly treated by “Bloomberg.” And as the owner of Bloomberg News, that reflects badly on Mr. Bloomberg. How badly depends on the extent of his knowledge/approval of the treatment the couple received. Bloomberg was mayor of New York when this went down and was not involved in the day to day operations of his businesses. But her repetitious usage of “Bloomberg” negative behavior towards her, instead of “Bloomberg News” makes it seem like a personal attack on Bloomberg the owner. If Fox News was named Murdock News, would all criticism of it be a direct indictment of Rupert? Should we personally blame Rupert for Hannity and Carlson and the other dumb yahoos spouting faux news daily?

        But if Bloomy is in fact as disreputable a guy as Trump, and proves to be as committed to lies, distortion, insults, and idiocies as Trump, as soon as he’s elected I promise to immediately start calling for his impeachment, pronto!

        .

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 8:47 pm

        “The fish rots from the head”.

        Several people have CORRECTLY noted that though Trump may not be responsible for the specific acts of Cohen – Trump hired him as his lawyer. Trump is responsible for the fact that he hired someone with Cohen’s character.

        But Trump’s personal involvement in these NDAs that you keep ranting about – was writing checks and that is about it. He is culpable for that.
        Though I have little problem with paying women alot of money for their silence regarding pretty vanilla consensual sex.

        No one was put in harms way by Trump.

        As you note we do not know Bloomberg’s personal involvement with this woman or her family. But like Trump – Bloomberg bears some responsibility for the actions of those he hired – he chose them.

        It is likely that Bloombergs staff is richer, better dressed more eloquent than Trump’s
        But these people – though maybe more cultured were MORE thuggish than Cohen.

        Absolutely the more Bloomberg knew – the more culpable he was.

        But at the barest minimum he is as culpapable as Trump with regard to Daniels.
        Not force or coercion was used with Daniels. She voluntarily accepted alot of money for silence. She was never at risk or danger.

        Bloomberg’s paper used this woman’s husband to get a damaging story on a tyrant.
        Then they threatened to leave him high and dry when the winds shifted.

        That is far more dispicable.

        Just to be clear – like Trump – Bloombergs actions were LEGAL.
        But the only leverage used with Daniels was money as enticement.
        This women was subject to significant coercion.
        Legal coercion. but still coercion.

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 8:58 pm

        Fox was targeted for a number of lawsuits for the misconduct of Bill OReilly and Roger Ailes.
        While I expect the plantifs to prove their case – otherwise, I have no problem with that.
        Ultimately – though a bit late the Murdock family decided to Sack OReily and Ailes.

        We have subsequently found that the same misconduct has occured through out the media.
        Fox was not even close to unique. The number of leading lights of the media engaged in sexual misconduct is large and knows no political boundaries. Regardless,

        Too the extent that the cases can be proven – the OWNERS and management share responsibility

        I absolutely beleive in free markets. I do not beleive in a priori regulation.
        I STONGLY support Torts. Holding those who share in the culpability for a bad act that has actually occured accountable for that act.

        That has the same ultimate effect as a regulation – with some differences.
        You have a tort claim against another – if you were harmed as a result of their actions.

        There is no requirement to violate a law. There just must be a REAL harm, and REAL responsibility for that harm.

        But yes, I will hold Murdock, and Bloomberg and the owners and manager of NBC, PBS, ….
        all responsible when through their bad choices or negligence their employees are sexually harrassed or otherwise harmed.

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 9:02 pm

        “Should we personally blame Rupert for Hannity and Carlson and the other dumb yahoos spouting faux news daily?”

        So far Hanity – who I do not like at all, and Carlson who I like alot but often do not agree with – are NOT the “Faux News” – their track record for accuracy is FAR better than Anderson Cooper, or Tapper, or Lemon or Maddow, or ….

        Regardless. yes Murdock is absolutely responsible for them. If they fail – he will lose money. If they succeed, he will make alot of money.

        If either of them mistreat their employees – to the extent Murdock is aware he is responsible for that too. I have not heard that either Carlson or Hannity are engaged in sexual harrassment.

      • February 23, 2020 8:30 pm

        For all of the talk of Trump “not being fit” to be president, he is doing a much better than average job, particularly given the obstacles he has faced.

        Bloomberg, while having many of the qualities I might normally want to see in a Democrat candidate (against MFA and the GND, opposed to the fascist type of government control of corporations that Bernie and Liz extol) is unfit for the US presidency, in my opinion, because he is willing to defend the Chinese economic war on America, which benefits him personally.

        Back in December, Bloomberg had this exchange with Margaret Hoover about China, on “Firing Line:”

        “Bloomberg: The Communisty Party wants to stay in power in China, and they listen to the public. When the public says I can’t breathe the air, Xi Jinping is not a dictator; he has to satisfy his constituents or he’s not going to survive.

        Hoover: He’s not a dictator?

        Bloomberg: No, he has a constituency to answer to.

        Hoover: He doesn’t have a vote. He doesn’t have a democracy. He’s not held accountable by voters.”

        …So Bloomy thinks (or is tying to gaslight us into believing) that Xi is NOT a dictator, and that the Chinese people, who do not vote, and can be killed or thrown into prison camps are his “constituency?” I wonder what his response to the corona virus would have been?

        Even Bernie calls Xi an authoritarian dictator.

      • February 23, 2020 9:34 pm

        Looks like it might be the democrats overlooking Bloomberg being Xi’s puppet, but making a big deal about Trump being Putin’s puppet.

        Where the difference with these countries influencing our election lies with Russia feeding false or misleading news about the dems or positive influence about Trump on social media. China does it through influencing leadership of American corporations with large operations in China.

        You can bet money China will be actively backing anyone but Trump!

      • John Say permalink
        February 24, 2020 12:33 pm

        Words matter.

        I do not much care about, and we can not as a country do anything about (without violating the rights of americans) foreign countries “influencing” US elections – overtly or covertly or through proxies expressing a preference.

        I do not care that several prominent members of the Ukraine Government were openly and officially anti-Trump in 2016 – I bring it up periodically, because Jay and others claim there was no Ukraine influence in 2016. That is absolute nonsense. The Ukrainian Ambassador to US’s anti-Trump editorial is STILL posted on the Ukraine embassy’s website.

        Regardless, our government is free to express views about who should win foreign elections – and visa versa. I would greatly prefer our government did not. I would prefer other government stayed out of our election. But you can not supress the speach of foreign countries without supressing the speach of americans. And even though I do not care much about the speach of foreign countries – ultimately I do not want even them “silenced”

        If Russia wants to run internet bot farms stupidly trying to influence US elections – so what ?

        I would consider it the role of the US media to ferret those things out and report on them.
        But not the role of our government to thwart them.

        I care about foreign countries spending money in US elections – but as a practical matter – you can not actually stop that either.

        And I am always opposed to laws that will not work.

        BUT when foreign nations actually try to hack our voter registration or voting machines – THAT is a really big deal. Again we probably can not stop them from trying.
        But we can do things to assure they do not succeed, but the left is not interested in that at all.

        That is one of the things I find must frustrating about the left.

        One any issue – even ones I might agree with them – not only do they decide what the issue must be, but precisely how it must be solved.

        There is zero interest by the left in doing anything about Russian hacking of or elections machinery. But they are happy to censor the entire internet justified by purported Russian bots.

      • John Say permalink
        February 24, 2020 12:39 am

        Bloomberg is “technically” correct.

        I would assume most of us recall the collapse of the USSR – or east germany.

        One day – quite rapidly, East Germany just ceased to exist. Why ? Because the East German people decided that they were no longer listening to their government.

        Xi has exactly the same problem in China.

        All that said, there is a huge gulf between a free society and the extent to which Xi can oppress his own people before they decide the government does not exist.

        We saw mass protests in Hong Kong this summer.

        What do you think would happen if those protests were say 5 times larger ?
        Or possibly only 2 times ?

        Hong Kong came very very very close to the point where Xi had only two choices – let go, or use force. What happens in Hong Kong when the police refuse to obey orders to reign in protestors – and when the protests get large enough – that is what happens.

        What happens when the military will not put down the protests – because we are past the ability to claim that it is just some fringe, but it is clearly the majority of people ?
        Even the military will not put down the protests – that is what happened in East Germany.

        Bloomberg is not so much saying that Xi is not a dictator, but that dictators do not exist.

        Again “technically” he is correct – no government ever has sufficient force to make the entire population obey if they are determined not to do so.

        There is a reason the dystopia in 1984 used magical technology – because the human resources necescary to acheive compliance by force are enormous. Evenb the USSR and the PRC had to keep people happy enough – or terrified enough – or a combination sufficient to secure compliance.

        But this is a horrible economic model.

        Xi has been a major regression in Chinese freedom.

        Part of Trump’s abiltiy to leverage Xi in these trade talks is that Xi’s regression towards dictatorship has made his country more fragile and economically weaker.

        I have a thread running with Ron that standard of living is inextricably linked to freedom.
        It applies to china too.

  36. John Say permalink
    February 22, 2020 6:02 pm

    “There is nothing in all the world greater than freedom. It is worth paying for; it is worth going to jail for. I would rather be a free pauper than a rich slave.” – Martin Luther King Jr.

    • Jay permalink
      February 23, 2020 7:53 pm

      Yeah, and MLK would be defending Trump now, right….🤣😂🙃🥴

      • February 23, 2020 8:33 pm

        MLK’s niece, Alveda King, defends Trump all the time.

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 9:26 pm

        In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline.

        Martin Luther King, Jr.

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 9:37 pm

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 9:38 pm

        I have no idea what King would do – and neither do you.

        Blacks have done better under Trump than Obama or any prior president.
        King care alot about that.
        At the same time King was somewhat socialist.
        So the question is whether he was committed to an ideology or to results ?

  37. John Say permalink
    February 22, 2020 6:05 pm

    So no one has beriefed the 2020 Trump campaign about “russian interference”.

    So the NYT story is most likely Fake NEws.

  38. John Say permalink
    February 22, 2020 7:05 pm

    Why we should question “experts”

  39. John Say permalink
    February 22, 2020 7:09 pm

    • Jay permalink
      February 22, 2020 10:48 pm

      From the linked report:“… friends of Haney’s told us he was planning on doubling down on efforts to “protect America from progressive leftists socialists”.”

      Police should immediately stop and frisk any known Bernie supporters there…

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 2:51 am

        So because Haney had political views you do not like – it is OK to murder him ?

        You have been telling us all that the politics of Ciaramello do not matter – only the truth of his (hearsay) evidence of a (non) crime.

        I do not know of Haney’s politics – who knows maybe he is actually that mythical sexist racist, misogynist, homophobic hateful hating hater.

        But he was an actual Whistle Blower who reported real problems at DHS,
        No one kept his name secret. Because there is no such provision in the law.

        Now he is died – likely murdered by those on the left he pissed off.

        But you want to quibble about his politics ?

        Have you no shame ?

      • Jay permalink
        February 23, 2020 9:32 am

        “ So because Haney had political views you do not like – it is OK to murder him ?”

        How did you leap to that asinine conclusion?
        Oh, right… that’s your default squat.

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 11:21 am

        How did I reach that conclusion ?

        I post about an actual WB that is murdered,
        and you respond with crap about his politics.

        You care more about his politics than his murder.

  40. John Say permalink
    February 22, 2020 7:31 pm

  41. John Say permalink
    February 22, 2020 7:48 pm

    Anything the left does not like – its nazis

    • Jay permalink
      February 22, 2020 10:44 pm

      And the right ignores any warnings reminiscent of Nazi behaviors… or seems they have become tolerantly acceptant of the Bund…

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 2:45 am

        I could not have made my argument better than you have made for me.

  42. Jay permalink
    February 22, 2020 11:11 pm

    Can’t wait for the “he’s all washed up as an actor” tweets tomorrow …

    “ Longtime Republican Clint Eastwood is pulling support from Donald Trump in the 2020 election. In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, the actor-director signaled that he thinks a different candidate would be the better choice.

    “The best thing we could do is just get Mike Bloomberg in there,” he said.

    https://pmcvariety.files.wordpress.com/2019/05/clint-eastwood.jpg?w=1000&h=562&crop=1

    • February 22, 2020 11:41 pm

      Jay do you really think Bloomberg can capture the election.
      https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/SuperTuesday.html

      This is before Nevada where he polled at 32% and he captured 46%. He leads in most all of the polls on super Tuesday. Even in N.C. where we have been bombarded with Bloomberg ads and no one else until Bernie began a couple the last day or so, he trail Bernie by 2%. And N>C> is suppose to be “moderate centrist democrats”.

      And these polls dont really reflect the negative results from the debate and all the negative reports and ads on stop, question and frisk, the NDA’s with womens issues and now the one that has come out concerning the Bloomberg reporters wife in China.

      If he takes 80%-90% of super Tuesday states I could see the democrat convention ending up like the one in 1968 in that the 1968 convention ended a period of Great Society initiatives and moved the country toward a left leaning McGovern nomination in 1972.. We can see that happening today with democrats moving away from Clinton/Obama 2016 pseudo liberal policies and wanting the real deal.

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 3:22 am

        Sanders had an incredible night.
        He put a serious dent in the “Sanders has a ceiling” meme.,

        The polls you are citing not only do not yet reflect the debate. They do not reflect the outcome of NV which is likely to increase his strength in SC.
        Sanders is now leading everywhere except SC where Biden is only up by 2.

        Welcome to 1972 Redux.

      • Jay permalink
        February 23, 2020 11:28 am

        I think it’s a long shot for Bloomy to get the nomination— but that’s what I though about Dubious Donnie’s chances too..

      • February 23, 2020 1:09 pm

        Jay, seems like one difference between Trump and Bloomberg. Both are outsiders from party machinery when they began campaign. But Trump was all alone in that endeavor. Bloomberg has Sanders as a competitor for the outsider vote.

        My biggest fear, your greatest hope, is most will drop out after South Carolina and let Bloomberg take on Sanders one on one. If that happens, Bloomberg wins, either outright or stolen convention.

        If Bloomberg runs against Trump, then I think Bloomberg wins. Dave will post 25 messages why my thinking is wrong, but I hear many GOP moderates that have voted for every republican since Reagan, and maybe before, and even Trump last time, that say they will not vote for president at all, just vote the undercard.

        I dont think anyone knows the damage his constant obnoxious personal attacks are having, especially with younger and middle aged women. In surveys, they ask what Trump should do different and give “stop tweeting” as a choice, but they do no digging into that response.

        I have no problem with his tweeting. The issue I have is the same issue as to why I would not vote for him in 2016 and again in 2020. Its the constant personal tweets that have nothing to do with policy.

        Yes I fear Bloombergs policies more than Trumps, but I cant stand the man. Most likely I will vote Libertarian or sit out the presidential line.

      • Jay permalink
        February 23, 2020 1:55 pm

        My best hope is that Biden (came in 2nd in Nevada) makes it to a brokered convention and with Kamilla or Amy as his VP gets the nod.

        Bloomberg my 2nd choice for the nomination.

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 2:44 pm

        Biden has been “Dead man walking” since the WB Complaint.

        Though honeslty Ciaramello did Biden a favor – If Biden gets out now he will have poisoned his own legacy less than if he continues.

        But beleive what you want.

      • February 23, 2020 3:33 pm

        No way anyone from CA gets the VP pick. Dems dont need to solidify MN. They will be going for someone from OH, PN or FL. And it would need to be someone with name recognition and someone that could step into the presidency. The name that comes to mind is Sharrod Brown, OH.

        And that would also solidify the socialist because Brown is rated either in the top 10 or top 7 liberals, even outscoring Sanders on the progressives scorecards.

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 1:58 pm

        “I think your wrong”.

        But this is all tea leaf reading. The only objectively correct answer is – what actually happens.
        With certainty neither of us will get it perfectly correct. I do not think I am all that good at this.
        But the evidence is the so called experts are pretty bad too.

        I am going to skip my speculation/analysis, except to note that Bloomberg’s strength is money that is it. Beyond that he is a mess, many of his positions are too extreme for moderates, while at the same time not appealing to progressives.

        Democrats are better off in the long run if they lose with Sanders, than if they lose with Bloomberg

    • John Say permalink
      February 23, 2020 3:17 am

      “While he approves of “certain things” the president has done, he wishes that he would act “in a more genteel way, without tweeting and calling people names. I would personally like for him to not bring himself to that level,” he said.”

      We would all like that.

      I would like it if the left was not constantly calling everyone Nazi’s – including half the jews in the country. I would like it if I could be truely offended by Trump’s tweeting – because without him everything would be civil. But that is a fantasy world.

      I respect Clint greatly and he is entitled to his oppinion.

      But the more I learn about Bloomberg the worse a choice he gets.

      Ron’s link to the post by the Chinese Journalist about Bloomberg coercing her and her family to bury a story that Bloomberg asked them to research and write – because he had made nice with China since then, was pretty bad. Far worse than anything with Daniels.

      I also found it interesting that Eastwood pivoted to the Jewel Story – and the importance of “the presumption of innocence” – you know that thing that Mueller has never given anyone – including Richard Jewel. That foundational principle in our justice system that The foreperson of the Stone jury never gave Stone, that Judge Jackson did not give to either Manafort or Stone. That you never give anyone you do not like.

      I am not surprised that Eastwood is not supporting Trump.
      I am surprised that he is supporting Bloomberg – even Giulliani has a better understanding of the presumption of innocence than Bloomberg does.

      Giuliani started “stop and Frisk” – he worked with lawyers and police to assure that it was done constitutionally – that reasonable suspicion existed before a “stop and Frisk”.
      Giuliani’s “stop and frisk” Survived constitutuional challenges.
      During Mayor Giuliani’s tenure murders in NYC dropped from over 3000/yr to 600/yr.
      All other crime dropped similarly.

      Bloomberg became mayor and untethered “stop and frisk” from the constitution.
      He increased its use by 600%, he eliminated the constitutional safeguards.
      During his tenure as mayor NYC murders continued dropping – from 600/yr to 300/yr.
      And Bloomberg’s “stop and frisk” was declared unconstitutional – because he dropped the requirement for reasonable suspicion.

      Giuliani understood that the constitution and the presumption of innocence existed for a reason. It is not getting the guns off the streets that is the objective. It is getting the bad guys off the street that is what brings crime down. And you do not get the bad guys off the street by targeting everyone. You have to identify those that are likely to be real bad guys – you have to actually do police work – observe and target those that act in a way to give the police reasonable suspicion – BECAUSE the goal is to find the bad guys – not everybody.

      Bloomberg was and still is of the delusion that the problem is guns – not people. Hence he sacrified all presumption of innocence violated peoples rights, lost the constitutional challenge, and was significantly less effective against crime.

      I would join Eastwood in picking a batter choice than Trump – if there was one.
      Bloomberg is not it.

  43. February 23, 2020 10:48 am

    Jay, you keep referencing Joe Walsh. Who the hell is J.W.

    • John Say permalink
      February 23, 2020 11:25 am

      Joe Walsh is a quasi Tea Party guy who won a single term in the house and subsequently because a purportedly TP talk radio guy.

      His personal life has been a mess, his politics have floated through a variety of extremes.
      He was an early Trump supporter, but he also flipped to a never Trumper early.

      Jay likes him because he constantly sprays nasty tweets about Trump.

      But he is less consequential than Max Boot – who atleast has a consistent political possition and genuine political differences with Trump.

      • Jay permalink
        February 23, 2020 4:50 pm

        Ron.. Dave is right in these two observations:

        “Jay likes him because he constantly sprays nasty tweets about Trump…. But he is less consequential than Max Boot – who atleast has a consistent political possition and genuine political differences with Trump.”

        Those are both good reasons for you to like him too.

        Like you, Walsh doesn’t have a lot of political differences with Trump’s professed positions on bedrock POLITICAL issues: Joe’s pro 2nd Amendment; anti abortion, anti illegal Immigration, anti political correctness, pro religion – and he’s a VERY fiscal conservative.

        His anti-Trump crusade is based on Donnie’s moral, ethical, and character deficiencies. Early on after Trump was elected Walsh recognized Trump con-artist hucksterism as detrimental to our system of democratic governance. And as Donnie daily began farting his brazen twitter messages to the nation, Walsh quickly recognized the stink. Walsh doesn’t bullshit: he tells you in no uncertain terms what he thinks… I doubt there’s much on which you’d disagree with him, except his vow to vote for whomever the Dems nominate – even Bernie.

        WALSH: “ I’m a conservative. I disagree with most of the policy advanced by the Democratic candidates. But I’ll support WHOEVER the Democrats nominate because we can survive 4 years of bad policy. We can’t survive 4 more years of Trump’s attack on the very heart & soul of our Democracy.”

        Aside from that, you’d likely agree with his other views, and get a laugh at his trump excoriations. Here’s a few samples today:

        “ Trump is everything our Founders feared: a serial abuser of the powers of his office, a tyrant who believes he’s above the law, and a pathological liar…”

        ‘ Our National Security Advisor should stay out of politics. Our intelligence shouldn’t be politicized. This is dangerous. Trump corrupts everything.’’

        “Trump was able to win the Republican nomination in 2016 because the Republican Party establishment was weak, arrogant & out of touch…. Bernie is on his way to winning the Democratic nomination this year because the Democratic Party establishment is weak, arrogant & out of touch.”

        “Trump IS tyranny. And ignorance. And cruelty. And dishonesty.”

        Your kinda guy, right Ron?

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 7:16 pm

        Once again you can not read.

        I did not say Walsh was politically close to Trump.

        I said Max Boot was politically CONSISTENT.
        Walsh is NOT politically consistent.

        He has called himself lots of different things – lincluding tea party and conservative.

        He is neither – not because he has not at one time or another espoused Conservative, or Tea Party – or even libertarian values. But because there is little telling what values he will espouse today or tomorow.

        In that he is more like you. The only consistancy in your views is – If it even looks like Trump might favor something – you oppose it. if it looks like Trump might oppose something – you favor it.

        Walsh is similar – but not as consistent even in his Trump Derangement as you.

      • February 23, 2020 7:54 pm

        Guess you can say he is somewhat like me. But the one huge difference is he is willing to set this country on a course to socialist programs far greater than we have today. I am unwilling to vote for that. Four more years of Trump is just a ripple in the lake. Democrats in control today is a tsunami of mass distruction.

        We got a taste of progressive policies with Obama with idiotic climate agreements, his support of TPP giving even greater power to China, lax illegal immigrant law enforcement, government control of labor with regulations like overtime for salaried workers, selling out to iranians and the big one, forced purchase of private company services by PPACA. Trump got rid of most, but has not been able to rid us entirely of PPACA, although the individual mandate is gone. The demwits will not be stupid enough to allow that to happen in the future

        So when we get free college, free healthcare, bans on fracking, unfair climate agreements, unfair trade agreements, open borders, force purchase of sardine cans for cars, government regulations on trucks and SUV’s, wall street regulations causing significant declines in retirement values and other progressive new deals, they will never be eliminated. And I suspect most of that will happen through legislation the first year so it will be difficult to stop if congress changes hands.

        Its not me I am worried about. Its my kids and grand kids future. You already live in a government controlled environment, so you wont find much different.

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 9:17 pm

        Walsh is not consistently anything except anti-trump.
        That makes him like Jay not you.

        I am sure I can find a few things at some point that I agree with Joe Walsh on.
        That does nto make me “like him”

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 9:23 pm

        My crystal ball has the GOP either retaking the house or coming close, and Trump being easily relected, with Republicans holding the Senate.

        But lets say by some miracle Sanders wins, Democrats win the house, and the Senate.

        First such a victory will tank the economy BEFORE the innuaguration.
        Just as Trump’s election reversed a downward Trend BEFORE innauguration.

        If Sanders and Democrats govern even HALF as they promise – control of the house and Senate will flip by 2022 and Sanders will serve one term.

        Democrats must not only deliver on their promises – but they must not destroy the economy in doing so.

        They can keep a good economy or they can reverse Trump’s policies and keep their assorted promises to voters.

        They can not do both.

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 7:55 pm

        “We can’t survive 4 more years of Trump’s attack on the very heart & soul of our Democracy.”

        Floral rhetoric – but absent meaning.

        How is Trump attacking the “heart and soul of our democracy”. ?

        Presumably from his quote – Walsh has no significant issues with Trump on Policy.
        At the very least his remarks allow you to reasonably conclude that he thinks Trump’s policies are less dangerous than democrats.

        So that takes Policy out of the equation as Trump’s “attack on the very heart & soul of our democracy”

        Technically we are NOT a democracy – and democracy is an abysmal form of government rejected by our founders. But I will let that slide and presume that Walsh (and you) mean by democracy government relatively similar to what our founders gave us.

        So how is that being attacked ? Much less attacked at its heart and soul ?

        Democrats impeached Trump – and found nothing of substance.
        Even if you actually accepted the idiotic garbage that Trump was solely intrested in Dirt on Biden and would use his power as president to get that, and did not give a damn whether it was true or not – and that is actually bad. Still, how does that differ from actions taken by FDR or LBJ or Nixon or Clinton or Obama ?

        Yes, that is actual “whataboutism” – but if you are making a claim that Trump is an existential threat – then you MUST overcome “whataboutism”.

        To be an existential threat – rather than just a president whose conduct on some issues is towards the poor end of the norms for presidents, you most demonstrate that Trump’s conduct is WORSE than all prior presidents.

        I recently learned that the driving force behind the Japanese interntment in WWII was policitcs not bad ideas about national security. That FDR was told by DoD that the Nisei did not pose a threat. And that FDR interred the Japanese to secure a political win in California.
        Because the internment was popular there.

        Does anything Trump has done come close to that ? Does anything any other US president has done come close ?

        Most of the Nisei were US Citizens – born in the US. So FDR locked up tens of thousands of americans – not to win a war, but to win an election.

        Sorry Jay and Joe – Trump’s actions are pretty tame compared to prior presidents.

        In Dec. 1992 George Bush pardoned a raft of people effectively ending the Special Prosecutors investigation of Iran-Contra. Walsh was absolutely livid and thought the pardons were an abuse of power. During the election Bush repeatedly said he was “out of the loop” regarding Iran Contra, but in his own diary he wrote he was one of very few people who was actually familiar with all of it.

        So Bush ended a special prosecutors investigation that likely would have lead directly to him, by pardoning everyone involved.

        Though I expect that Trump will ultimately pardon or commute the prosecutions of almost everyone involved in the Mueller investigation – he has not do so yet.
        Further we are well past the point at which we know this entire farce is a “witch hunt” – and yet it continues”. There is no “there-there” as there actually was with iran-Contra, and yet we are still sending people to jail – for the crime of pissing off the prosecutors and the courts where there was NO CRIME.

        I found Judge Jackson’s comments damning – to her.
        She publicly stated that Stone was not trying to protest his own innocence – he was covering up for Trump. Covering up What ? Mueller found nothing. Horowitz found the first 6 months of the investigation barely met the standard to investigate, and NEVER met the standard for a warant of spying and yet both occurred, and after 6 months – even reasonable suspicion no longer existed – and yet the investigation went on for 2 more years.
        The LAWLESS investigation. So how was Stone engaged in a criminal coverup for Trump – when there is no crime ? I would further note that The standard for Jackson’s remarks is no reasonable suspicion, it is not probable cause, it is not even beyond a reasonable doubt.
        Jackson’s use of Stone’s participation in the coverup of a crime in her sentencing decisions requires a CONVICTION of someone for an actual crime. We have no crime from Stone to have covered up.

        So if we want an existential threat to our democracy – we need look no further than the trump haters.

        Those who started CrossFire Huricane, Those that continued it long after they knew it was dead. Those who asked for warrants where there was probable cause.
        Those who presided over trials rooted in crimes that we all know never happened.

        The lawlessness and threat to democracy is not Trump – it is those like you suffering from TDS.

        Regardless again – what is Trump’s threat to democracy ? Clearly it is not that he is lawless.
        No one has found a crime – even those those hounding him have committed crimes right and left. And abused power all over.

        Is it Trump’s rhetoric ?
        Obama told us that we were wretches “clinging to our guns and bibles”, Clinton called us deplorables.

        That is tens of millions of people. Trump’s style may be more south park – but despite the high sounding language Obama, Clinton have said things much more bitter – and not merely towards political opponents – but large blocks of americans – none of whom did them harm.

        So how exactly is it that Trump is an existential threat to democracy ?

        The fact is you and Walsh are ranting – you have gone orders of magnitude beyond Trump’s mild exageration into full blow flights of fancy.

        The actual existential threat to “democracy” is you and walsh and your allies.

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 8:00 pm

        “ Trump is everything our Founders feared: a serial abuser of the powers of his office, a tyrant who believes he’s above the law, and a pathological liar…”

        More of that ignorance of our founders.

        Have you ever heard the things that Adams called Jefferson or visa versa ?

        Sorry Jay – even Trump’s “style” is something our founders would have no problems seeing in themselves.

        I have pointed out over and over that Jefferson demanded that his AG prosecute Aaron Burr – political rival. for unfounded claims of Treason.

        Has Trump asked Barr to prosecute Biden for Treason ?

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 8:08 pm

        ‘ Our National Security Advisor should stay out of politics. Our intelligence shouldn’t be politicized. This is dangerous. Trump corrupts everything.’’

        That is total crap.

        What Kissinger was not political ?

        Bolton is “Mr. Neo-Con” his politics are who he is.

        We have just been through a four year disaster – where the DOJ/FBI were politically weapononize (and before that the IRS), where a Special Prosecutor spent a year on a politically driven vendetta that failed. Where the house of representatives impeached the president over politics.

        Of Course the NSA is a part of politics.

        Grennel is now the highest ranking openly gay person ever in the federal government.

        You would think that the woke would be celebrating.

        Here is a long interview of Grennel by David Rubin.

        Why don’t you actually bother to learn something about the man before spewing more nonsense.

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 8:21 pm

        “Trump was able to win the Republican nomination in 2016 because the Republican Party establishment was weak, arrogant & out of touch….”

        Here is the 2016 GOP field
        Donald Trump Sen. Ted Cruz Sen. Marco Rubio Gov. John Kasich Ben Carson Gov. Jeb Bush Sen. Rand Paul Gov. Mike Huckabee Carly Fiorina Sen. Lindsey Graham
        :

        Trump beat 4 of the more prominent senators in congress, 3 governor’s and a brain surgeon.

        This was one of the strongest GOP fields in my lifetime.

        They were not weak, arrogant and out of touch.

        Republicans fully expected to win in 2016. They had every reason to beleive they would.
        They brought out the big guns. ‘

        Accross the entire field the policy differences were relatively small.
        The Republican platform would be nearly the same regardless of what candidate won.

        Nor were they “out of touch” – while Trump demonstrated political accumen the rest of the field could not match. He did not get votes because he pushed policies his opponents did not, he got votes because an awful lot of blue collar democrats BELEIVED him more than the rest of the field.

        No one in the entire GOP field was Out of Touch.

        The entire field was IN TOUCH with americans.

        Though the election might have gone differently had the GOP nominee been Rubio or Cruz.
        The outcome would still likely have been a GOP win. Possibly with a larger popular vote.

        You appear to be the one out of touch with reality.

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 8:29 pm

        “Bernie is on his way to winning the Democratic nomination this year because the Democratic Party establishment is weak, arrogant & out of touch.”

        i am not predicting winners for the DNC primary. Beyond that whoever wins, they will lose to Trump.

        Absolutely Democrats are out of touch.

        Bernie may be the only avowed socialist on the slate,
        But like the GOP slate in 2016 – the Democratic slate is relatively homogenous.

        The most moderate democratic candidate Biden ? Klobuchar ? Bloomberg ?

        Is more of a socialist than Obama. and by Nearly 2:1 US voters will not vote for a socialist.

        You keep claiming that Trump is a tyrant.

        What is your defintion of tyrant ?

        Can you name a significant socialist leader anywhere that was not a Tyrant ?
        Stalin, Lenon, Tito, Pol Pot, Mao, Maduro, Chavez, Castro ?

        Tyrany is built into the ideology. Each Democrat on stage in the debates has promissed trillions in benfits to one group delivered by stealing from another.

        THAT Is Tyranny.

        What has Trump done that has taken from you something that is your by force ?

        Do words have no meaning to you ?

        Is Tyrant or Nazi just a bad thing you call those you do not like ? With out concern for actual meaning ?

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 8:36 pm

        Has Trump gotten the US into another war – in the mideast or elsewhere ?

        Trump is the first president since Ford that has not invaded some country.

        Carter conducted a failed invasion of Iran – justified, but failed.

        Reagan invaded Granada,
        Bush Invaded Panama, Iraq, Somalia.
        Clinton invaded The Balkans.
        Bush invaded Afghanistan (justified) and Iraq – not.
        Obama invaded Libya, and Syria. North and West Africa, Nigeria, Somalia, Yemen, ….

        So far Trump has not initiated a new military conflict.

      • February 23, 2020 1:18 pm

        HeHeHeHe😁😁😁😁, Internet liberals at it again! The first time ever getting a warning page telling me I have clicked on a link the previous page that is taking me to Xxxx and then I have to confirm I want to go there.

        The Russian are coming, the Rooskies are coming!

        Thanks for the info.

      • Jay permalink
        February 23, 2020 1:35 pm

        ???
        I couldn’t link you directly to Wikipedia from Wikipedia, Ron.
        So I linked you there from Google.
        The link I sent you first took you to Google, which offered the link to Wikipedia.
        It gave you the choice to go there or not.
        Your paranoia clicked in, and you clicked out.

        Here’s the opening of the Walsh bio there:
        (WARNING: read with one eye shut to avoid secret brain-wash infiltration!)

        “William Joseph Walsh (born December 27, 1961) is an American politician, conservative talk radio host, former social worker, and former 2020 Republican presidential candidate who served one term in the United States House of Representatives representing Illinois’s 8th congressional district…’

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 2:01 pm

        Direct link to Wikipedia – not so hard.
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Walsh_(American_politician)#Controversial_statements

      • February 23, 2020 3:14 pm

        Jay, I linked over and read it. But its not paranoia, its reality. I shared an article on Facebook that concerned Bloomberg, the debate and much of the issues that Warren brought up concerning Bloomberg. I received a comment from Lead Stories that a warning had been sent to those receiving my comment and link to the story stating that information in the article was not completely accurate. Since that was sent, more info on the NDA’s has been released and nothing I can find was incorrect.

        Paranoia is thinking others are against you. Reality is knowing there are those opposing you. That is vety different.

      • Jay permalink
        February 24, 2020 11:33 am

        Virus News;

        WSJ: “ The Dow industrials fell more than 900 points as the spread of coronavirus outside China deepened concerns about the outbreak’s economic impact”

        Fox Business host Charles Payne: “The Bernie factor is finally rearing its head in the stock market…there’s absolutely no doubt.”

        “President Trump wants to slash funding for the CDC. His new budget proposes a 16 percent cut at the agency.” @SenSchumer

        NYT: “ State Department officials say that thousands of Russia-linked social media accounts are spreading disinformation about the coronavirus, including a conspiracy theory that the United States is behind the outbreak.”

        Trump: “Germs are BAD!”

      • John Say permalink
        February 24, 2020 12:49 pm

        Is there something that the US government has done to thwart the spread of Corona to the US that you feel is inadequate ?

        Most of the criticisms I have heard is that Trump has spent TOO MUCH money stopping Corona, not too little.

        The CDC’s budget hasn’t got much to do with this stuff at all.

        Vaccines will likely be available for Corona by Mid May – the US government has been an active impedimenbt to the development of new vaccines and despite wonder new means of developing vaccines – almost all vaccine work is done “the old way” because of government.

        We have the same problem with “anti-vaxers” – though a small portion are total die hards, the vast majority are opposed to the MMR vaccine or to the use of mercury in vaccines.

        Both of those are trivially solveable problems. My daughter only received a partial MMR vaccine – because she was vaccinated in China and tested and was resistant to measles.
        So she just got Mumps and Rubella. All a large portion of anti-vaxers want is to get the vaccine in 3 parts separated by 6 months. Who cares if that is “stupid” why do we have to force people to do things the most convenient way for government ? Other anti-vaxers would be happy to get their kids vaccinated by vaccines that do not have mercury. We can do that.
        But again we do not give a shit about parents preferances – once government decides their concerns are unfounded.

        Further there is separate work on Corona as a result of DNA sequencing, it is expected that soon we will have anti-virals for Conrona – not a vaccine, but injectable antibodies that thwart the Corana virus from “peircing” cells to gain entry.

        Pretty much all of the stuff I have described is happening OUTSIDE of government. Though government still gets in the way.

        The CDC does not need more money. The US government needs to get out of medicine.
        It is not very good at it, it is not able to move quickly.
        And those are problems that can not be fixed.

      • John Say permalink
        February 24, 2020 12:56 pm

        NYT: “ State Department officials say that thousands of Russia-linked social media accounts are spreading disinformation about the coronavirus, including a conspiracy theory that the United States is behind the outbreak.”

        Again – outrside of left wing nut control freaks “who cares” ?

        Lots of people – including left wing nuts are susceptible to stupid conspiracy theories.
        You can not combat those by attempting to supress them.

        Look at yourself – you actually beleived – and probably still do the “conspiracy theory” that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. One of the problems with the Stone Trial is that it is clear from Judge Jackson’s public remarks that SHE beleives that debunked conspiracy theory.

        So why is it that I am supposed to go ape shit because you are bothered by stupid stories spread by Russia ? BTW those stories would have alot less traction – if the US had NOT in the past done some of this stupid shit. Read up on the Tuskegee experiment.
        Or all kinds of nonsense the CIA experimented with in the 60’s

        My daughter is chinese. She works at Target while going to college, in customer service. Right now customers will not get near her. She is chinese – she is dangerous. Of course she has not been to china in 20+ years. and is no more likely to have Corona than you or I

        People beleive stupid shit – they need no help from Russians/

      • John Say permalink
        February 24, 2020 1:08 pm

        The stock market is going to respond to both the possibility of Sanders getting elected and the Corona Virus.

        The behavior of the stockmarket is complex as though it is a leading indicator, it does not predict the future health of the economy it predicts the future health of the stock market. Those are ALMOST congruent. but stocks rose during the Obama administration in excess of the growth in the economy, because Obama’s policies encouraged companies to shift from investment to stock buy backs as an example.

        The stock market hiccuped when Trump was elected – very briefly dropping and then it shot up.

        There are lots of factors including Corona that are negatively impacting China. Xi’s shift to a more authoritarian regime is a strong negative economic impact on china.

        Nothing correlates stronger to economic growth than freedom.
        I addressed that in my exchanges with Ron on Reducing healthcare costs – while he is right on some of the cost information he provides – absent sufficient freedom efforts to cut costs fail. This is a significant part of why government fails at so much of what it does – why the VA does not work well. It is not because it does not know what the tools are to reduce costs,
        It is that the tools work poorly in a top down structure. Freedom is the secret sauce.

        If you take an automobile engine and you apply every trick in the book to boost its performance – but the flow of fuel to the engine is limited, all your efforts will have minimal performance benefit.

      • February 24, 2020 1:58 pm

        Well Jay you are right!
        The Corona virus is a major contributor for the downturn. But why is this any worse than the flu. According to medicinenet.com seasonal flu kills 291,000 to 646,000 people worldwide each year,

        But the news that the big healthcare for-profits being down 3%-4% is also an indication that there is a reaction to Sanders winning overwhelmingly in Nevada and making him the overwhelming favorite going forward. As he wins more primaries and becomes the leader with a large lead going into the convention, I suspect you will see further declines in the markets in other sectors that his candidacy will have a significant negative impact. Banking will take a huge hit as will others like Amazon, Google, etc that will fear an anticipated government involvement into their operations.

        Now for the CDC budget. You react just like most Americans. MY GOD THE SKY IS FALLING! The president is cutting the CDC budget.

        But go to the actual budget and see what is being cut. For instance of the $1.2B, $200 million is for cross cutting activities.

        So what is cross cutting activities.
        From the CDC website. “PSE(Policy, systems and environmental) approaches can make healthy living easier and provide sustainable cancer prevention and control improvements where people live, work, play, and learn.We can make communities healthier by supporting changes in—
        Policies to protect communities from harmful agents or elements (such as indoor tanning policies to limit exposure to ultraviolet rays or smoke-free policies to limit exposure to secondhand smoke).
        Systems to increase the use of client reminders to get people screened for cancer, or to increase access to healthy food choices in schools and workplaces.
        Environments to encourage communities to be active (such as pedestrian-and bike-friendly streets).

        Is this really the best use of $200M. Telling people to avoid tanning beds and reminding people to be active? And other activities of this nature? That is almost 20% of his suggested cuts.

        Get the damn government out of those things! You might also want to look up the line items CDC budget to see how vast the changes in line item amounts are and how insignificant some are, but added up they are real money.

        Yes, Russia is messing around in Facebook, Twitter and other social media outlets. They are doing that to undermine peoples confidence in our government. And the politicians that are making a political issue of it are falling into Russia’s trap. They could care less who the hell the president is, they just want Americans to not have confidence in any of our government. If elected officials would address the issue from an election and confidence angle and not a political angle, then maybe the Russians may not do as much of it because the political uprising would be less. And you have fallen hook, line and sinker due to your TDP.

      • John Say permalink
        February 24, 2020 3:04 pm

        CDC – just get rid of it.

        I am tired of this delusion that if government does not do something it will not get done,
        Or that the amount we spend on an issue controls the results we get.

        Corona is not likely worse than the Flu – but we are inured to the Flu.
        The 1917 Spanish Flu originated in the US midwest, and was unusual because it killed those with STRONG immune systems.

        Absolutely we should do what we can – Corona appears to have a 2% mortality rate. If large populations contract it, they could result in very large numbers of deaths.

        But this is not “the plague” – which killed 50% of those who got it.

        Corona is unusual – we freak out over the unusual.
        The Flu is not unusual.

        The stock market is going to fluctuate from now to the election.
        There is not a current democrat including Bloomberg that is not likely to negatively impact the stock market compared to Trump. But the negative impact of Sanders will be greater than any other democrat. The market will respond to the odds of Sanders being elected. The greater the odds the more the Market will fall.

        The greater the odds of Trump being re-elected the stronger the market will be.
        Regardless this is an election year and it is rare to have a strong market in an election year.
        The market does not like uncertainty and elections are giant gobs of uncertainty.

        Nor is Sanders the most important impact on the market – just one of many.

        Corona is a negative impact,
        There is a strong shift of production from China – for alot of reasons – Corona being one of those. That will be a short term negative but a long term positive.

        Xi, Corona, HK, the trade war, Manufacturing restructing in asia will all impact the market – atleast initially mostly negatively.

        Growth in China is almost certainly going to take a significant hit.
        And what happens to China effects the world. The US less than Europe, but it will still negatively effect the US.

        Long term alot of this is actually good. Particularly if it forestalls China’s regression into authoritarianism. But short term it is not.

        On the positive side Brexit will shortly mean Trade negotiations with the UK.
        Those can not take effect until 2021. But just the news of progressing trade deals with the UK will be a strong positive for the US economy.

        One of the significant factors in BRexit was Britians Trade was shifting from Eu centered to more global. The UK is returning to a trading role like it had near the start of the 20th century as the worlds pre-eminent global trader. Britian is looking for deals with the US, with CA, AU, BZ, India China, and the rest of Asia. Joining the EU actually negatively effected British Trade with its former colonies.

      • Jay permalink
        February 24, 2020 5:04 pm

        “ Corona is unusual – we freak out over the unusual.
        The Flu is not unusual.”

        Tell it to your pal Trump, the germaphobe.
        He’s the one freaking out over it

      • John Say permalink
        February 24, 2020 10:50 pm

        Lots of people are freaking out.

        Corona has killed alot of people.

        But it is still not as deadly as the ordinary flu.

      • John Say permalink
        February 24, 2020 3:14 pm

        Russia is “meddling” with Facebook.

        Who Cares and why ?

        The internet is global. It is not the exclusive domain of the US.

        If Russia and Russians wish to post on facebook – SO WHAT.

        The entire Russia Social Media nonsense is just an excuse for those like Sorros to demand even more censorship of the internet – either privately – Sorros wants Zuckerberg to resign, or via Government.

        There are lots of conservatives who are pissed – and many of them – Like Sen Hawley are NOT looking to end social media censorship but to impose new censorship of their own.

        I do not give a rats ass whether Google and Twitter and FB are censoring conservatives, or pro-choice groups, or antifa, I do not want certain republicans controling internet censorship any more than democrats. At the moment the greatest threat is from the left – but things can change.

        I am not opposed to private censorship – though I would strip Section 302 protections from those who do.

        I am also not worried about Google or Twitter or FB. Private censorship is a self punishing act. I do not think we are very far from the Googleopoly taking a huge hit.
        As I have noted before – a 5% drop in FB use would sink the companies stock like a rock.

        And shifts on the Internet can occur suddenly.

        Regardless, I do not give a fork what the Russians are doing on FB.
        If you are scared of the free speech of others – even Russia – your nuts and your dangerous.
        Censorship is far more dangerous than bad speech.

      • Jay permalink
        February 24, 2020 5:01 pm

        “ Russia is “meddling” with Facebook….Who Cares and why ?”

        It’s chilling that you don’t know why you should care…

      • John Say permalink
        February 24, 2020 5:43 pm

        Jay,
        I know exactly why I should NOT care.

        The only thing Russia or anyone else can do via FB is SPEAK – Persuade.

        That is it. That NEVER should be illegal. Not if the left does it. not the right, not if catholics do it, not if Nazi’s do it, not if Russians do it.

        The only people on the entire planet who MUST not engage in free speach in US elections is the very government whose leaders we are trying to elect.

        Russian’s have a voice in what US government should be
        Nazi’s have a voice in what US government should be.
        Progressives have a voice in what US Government should be.
        Moderates, Libertarians, Democrats, Republicans, … have a voice in what US government should be like.

        The US government does NOT have a voice in what US government should be like.
        That is the ONLY thing that is actually dangerous.
        It is especially dangerous because the US government administers the election.

        No one but US citizens have a vote.

        All those with a voice have no power beyond persuasion.

        If you do not beleive that people are capable of chosing what voices to listen to and making their own choices regarding who to vote for

        Then you do not beleive in voting, and we might as well quit pretending.

        If you are demanding that some voices be silenced – then you are after control of the outcome, you do not trust voters.

        While I think there are all kinds of problems with voters – after all you are a voter, and you buy all kinds of idiot conspiracy theories that make no sense, I trust voters.

        Further the constraint on voters, elections and government is NOT restricting who can speak.
        It is limiting the power of government.

        If we have a real constitutional government that protects individual rights by limiting the power of government – it would not matter is Chairmen Sanders is elected, he would be unable to fork things up – because the power of government would be limited.

        The objective of the design of government is NOT to prevent bad people from getting elected. That is what is so stupid about all your ‘the founders would be rolling in their graves” nonsense. The founders KNEW that bad people would occasionally – even often lead us.
        They designed a limited government so that we would survive that.

        You have slowly disassembled the limits such that who is elected matters too much.

        Regardless, you are demanding control of what no one should control – speach.
        While failing to control what must be controlled – power.

      • February 24, 2020 6:11 pm

        Yep. Agree. But not about meddling for Trump or Sanders. Russians just want to plant the seed of no confidence in anyone in government and the politicians have fallen for it hook line and sinker. We planted that same seed in the soviet union with radio free europe, helping to create an environment that brought down the iron curtain. They are looking 10 years, 20 years into the future. What happens next year is unimportant.

        But if you believe they are really interested in who is president, look no further than energy policy. Who benefits most if fracking is shut down in America.

      • John Say permalink
        February 24, 2020 11:21 pm

        “Yep. Agree. But not about meddling for Trump or Sanders. Russians just want to plant the seed of no confidence in anyone in government and the politicians have fallen for it hook line and sinker. ”

        Neither the Russians nor anyone else can own space in your head that you do not freely give them.

        I agree with you that the Russian’s seek to sew discord. But they can do their damdest to do so, they only succeed when WE choose to be persuaded by them.

        Pretty much the worst thing we can do is freak out over “russian influence”
        I would not care if russian efforts were large – but they are not, they were tiny. Russia does not have the resources to operate on 1/100th the scale Bloomberg does.

        But in 2016 they succeeded far beyond anything bloomberg has any hope of – not because they actually had any effect on the election. But because the left entirely bought the nonsense that they did and freaked out.

        This is atleast in part because of bad ideas core to progressivism.

        The presumption behind the cancel culture, safe spaces, trigger warning, the idea that all speech is not allowed – is that speech – in particular bad speech is unbelievably powerful.

        The reality is that so long as speach is free, we are reasonably good at separating truth from fallacy over time.

        White supremecy is dying slowly not growing. Russia did not tip our election,

        Even though I did not vote for Trump I am increasingly convinced that the outcome of 2016 election was what we needed at the time.

        I do not think that a free people with free speech always get it right. But they rarely if ever get it radically wrong.

        It is always the supression of speech that is most dangerous.

        Or as 2nd amendment supporters sometimes put it, the purpose of the 2nd amendment is to safeguard the first.

        “We planted that same seed in the soviet union with radio free europe, helping to create an environment that brought down the iron curtain. They are looking 10 years, 20 years into the future. What happens next year is unimportant.”

        What we did took so long BECAUSE there was restricted speech behind the iron curtain.
        What we did worked – because over time in the market of ideas, better ideas prevail.

        Eastern Europe was persuaded – not because the US was good at deluding people,
        but because the ideas were actually persuasive.

        Russia can not influence the US consequentially via speach except through persuasion.
        And the majority of people are not easily persuaded to bad ideas.

        Trump has universally done what he beleives in is the US best interests.
        We can argue over whether he is always right about that, but it is always what he does.

        He does not care if what benefits the US screws Russia or benefits Russia.
        Trump’s policies foreign and domestic rest on a single principle – what is good for the US.

        And honestly that is ALWAYS what every country should do.

        Quite often what is good for the US is also good for other countries – even the world.

        SOME of Trump’s policies have advantaged Russia – though most often the left and the media are straining very hard to reach that – often deliberately bending the truth past breaking.

        Many of Trump’s policies have disadvantaged Russia.

        But whatever the effect on Russia – the reason for them was the benefit to the US.

        Trump did not open up fracking to screw russia – even though it does, but to benefit americans.

      • February 25, 2020 12:00 am

        Dave, PLEASE read what I write.

        Yes, no one can get in your head unless you want them to. But I said when the idiots in Washington make Russian meddling a huge deal, every night for years the news is full of Russia messing with the election and supported Trump, people begin to believe that crap.

        Not everyone is like you and I who dont pay attention. There are a huge number of people like Jay that believe Trump is only president because the russians supported him. He has little faith in government and is willing to sell his sole to the devil if that would get rid of trump

        So stop thinking like you and begin thinking like 40-45% of Americans that believe Trump is an illegitimate president due to the Russians and have little faith because if that. Then you will understand my concerns.

        The democrat politicians are planting the seeds of distrust and the liberal press is watering and fertilizing the crop.

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 3:28 pm

        Call him – or any of the tweets or comments you post whatever you wish.

        They are all fallacies – either slurs and insults – your norm and that of most of those you cite,
        or appeals to emotion and authority, like your eastwood link.

        Regardless, they are all devoid of facts and valid arguments.

        We could have a real discussion about dozens of issues.

        About the role of government
        About US foreign policy
        About economics
        About regulation
        About law
        About …

        But you have zero interest in any debate about any issue.

        Everything is some visceral emotional response to a person.
        Constant insults, slurs, appeals to authority.

        You make moral pronouncements – this person is evil, but you never buttress those with facts, logic reason – argument.

        And the same is true of all the authorities you appeal to.

        I like Eastwood – alot.
        He did not resort to your typical barage of slurs.
        But he made no argument.
        He provided no rational basis for his support of Bloomberg over Trump.

        There are plenty of good criticism’s of Trump.
        The problem is that however good they might be – they are not existential crisises.
        They are the ordinary criticisms of ordinary presidents.

        If we address Trump on the facts, he falls far short of his own self agrandizement.
        but he has inarguably done better than the past two presidents.

  44. John Say permalink
    February 23, 2020 12:37 pm

  45. John Say permalink
    February 23, 2020 3:09 pm

    Does healthcare have to cost alot ?

    https://gen.medium.com/my-journey-through-tijuana-for-the-best-surgery-2-000-can-buy-be51f1bfcffd

    • February 23, 2020 4:18 pm

      Dave I could write you a long dissertation as to why healthcare in the USA is so much more expensive. but I will spare you all the details and just provide a few.
      1. Capital expenditures..UK facilities do not all buy the latest a greatest in technology. That cuts depreciation cost and cash flow. You might wait months for an MRI
      2. Maintenance cost of facilities. Most hospitals in the UK are still double rooms, some still with wards, but in the last 5 years there has been a movement to private rooms. The double room and wards cuts maintenance cost, HVAC cost, housekeeping, etc. That represents about 25% of hospital cost in America, so reducing that is significant.
      3. Pharamist, Nurses and other professionals make 60% to 75% of what American counterparts make. And they are government employees, not hospital employees.
      4. Doctors make 75% or less that american counterparts. They are also part of the national health system.
      5. Everything is standardized in UK. Doctor A who does othro surgery can not demand brand X, while Doctor B demands brand Y for the same surgeries. Cuts inventory costs and provides competition to suppliers.
      6. And I will close with this. They do not have insurance executives leading insurance companies making almost $10 million a year, not including stock options taking a huge part of peoples premiums. Other insurance executive make about the same. They do not have hospital CEO’s making $20 million or more like Kaiser’s makes, or $13-$14 mil like Advocate Aurora healthcare. Most hospital CEO’s are make $5M to $7 a year, the Chief Financial officers not far behind. And being from the upper management side of hospital management, those people do nothing to deserve that high a salary. Its the good ol’ boys network where Joe is hospital CEO and also sits on the compensation commitee for company Z in town. Guess who sits on the hospital compensation committee? Yep, the CEO of company Z. You scratch my back, I scratch yours!

      And I would suspect the differences in mexico are more than even the differences with the UK.

      I also suspect that mexico has no requirement for nursing rations. in 2012 it was reported on general floors they have a ratio of 1 nurse to 20 patients. In the United States it is no more than 1 nurse to 6 patients. That cuts their nursing costs, which is 50% of salary costs in the USA by almost 70%. They have a ration of 1 to 4 on intensive care, we have 1 to 1.

      Why the difference. Regulation, liability insurance, patient expectations.

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 6:39 pm

        I will give you a single reason – the only real reason.

        The US Healthcare system is NOT a free market.

        That is it.

        There is a long list of why Free Markets will always be cheaper in the long run.

        As to your list:

        1) Capital expenditures – I beleive the cost of LASIK is down to $250/eye. That is close to what I pay for a pair of glasses.
        The most affordable LASIK providers are using the “latest and greatest” equipment.
        Capital expenditures are NEVER a reason things cost more.
        In an actual free market capital expenditures are used to DECREASE costs – by trading upfront fixed capital costs for increased efficiency – reduced labor or materials costs or cost reductions in other areas.
        If capital costs drove price increases we would still farm with our hands.

        2). Maintance costs. Mislabeled. Also somewhat incorrect.
        Rising standard of living LITERALLY requires delivering more value at less human cost.
        That ALWAYS means humans have more wealth to spend on something “new”.
        They might spend it on bigger homes, fancier cars. They may also spend it on creature comforts – including in the healthcare sphere.

        You are correct that wards tend to be cheaper. Further US overall life expecance has changed very little since the 50’s when hospitals were all wards.
        The quality of US healthcare has dramatically improved – but most of that quality is to improve our comfort and experience, and not make us live longer.

        Just as we are buying fancier homes, because we can afford it many of us buy better healthcare.

        3 & 4). Wages are irrelevant in a free market. Productivity is what matters.
        Who would not pay a pharmacist twice as much – if he managed to do 3 times as much work equally well ? Which loops back to capital expenses. We use capital to improve efficiency – to REDUCE costs AND increase individual WAGES while decreasing labor costs overall.

        5). All you have to do to understand that is wrong is go to a US grocery store Cereal aisle.
        There are hundreds of choices all afordable, many cheap.

        While there are economies of scale and standardization. They do not scale linearly. It may cost have as much each to produce 100 identical widgest as to produce 100 widgets one at a time, But economies of scale have a diminishing ROI and eventually the benefits of customization exceed the economies of scale – and sometimes the cost actually goes down.
        Also see #2.

        Further – we are seeing SOME manufacturing returning to the US from China. There are many reasons for this. ONE of those is that China enjoys a 15% cost advantage AT the point of production for mass produced goods driven primarily by lower labor costs.
        BUT the cost at point of sale is NOT the same as at point of production. Further China’s cost advantage comes with numerous disadvantages. China has enormous supply chain problems, deliveries are not reliable, quality though improving over time is inconsistent, customization options are virtually zero.
        Increasingly US made goods are cheaper at the POINT OF SALE.
        The major way US businesses – from Amazon to Walmart hit higher profits today is by reducing “turn time” – Walmart turns the store once every 90 days – EVERYTHING in the store is sold every 90 days. The average Return on each sale is 1.5%. But if they turn 4 times a year – that is a 6% return on Capital. Chinese supply chains are very long and time from order to sale is much longer. That means that the rate of turning goods is often lower, and the return is lower. A slightly higher price from a US manafacturer with a shorter supply chain and a quicker turn time may be the more profitable option.

        US factories are increasingly automated. Insteal of 10,000 workers making $25/hr.
        There are 10 workers making $100/hr and a couple of million in machines.
        That automated nature of the US plant means that custom manufacting is easier.
        Quite often an automated factory can produce 10 different variants of the same product at no additional costs.

        6). The insurance problems you mention do not exist in an actual free market.

        ————————————————–
        While I have addressed each of your assertions – it is NOT the specific rebutals that are important.

        The reasons that free markets always deliver greater value at less human cost, Is not economies of scale or supply change management or ….

        It is because what they are designed to do – is deliver more value for less human cost.
        And whoever figures out how to do that will be rewarded. Precisely HOW they do that – is up to them. But even the rewards are fleeting. If you build the better mousetrap – you will profit – until someone does better still. But consumers will benefit PERMANENTLY.

        Every improvement in LASIK as an example provides a temporary windfall to those who concocted the improvement. but a premanent benefit to consumers who will see their value increase when the next entrepeur beats the last.

      • February 23, 2020 8:17 pm

        Dave you are right about lasic surgery.

        But TOTALLY WRONG about most everything else in hospital costs.

        Lasic surgery is profitable. Years ago it was performed in hosiptals. That profitable service offset losers like ER’s. Over the years, many other profitable services have been cherry picked, leaving more unprofitable services in community hospitals. Cancer hospitals, cardiac hospitals, imaging centers. Hospitals are 24/7/365. ER’s are staffed at a certain level to cover minimal trauma, regardless. They could be busy, they may only have one patient during an 8 hour shift. But do you want to be the heart attack entering an ER when they are understaffed and they have twice too many patients?

        That same thing holds true for the ancillary departments that provide services to all direct patient care areas. They might be at 120% productivity one shift and 70% another, but they need to be staffed for expected activity so patients do not die.

        Next time you go to your local CVS, Walgreens and tell them that their nonstop filling of scripts is not 100% productive. You will get a boot up your ass. I have friends who are pharmacist and they work nonstop from start to finish.

        I dont plan to respond any further to your comments about healthcare costs since you know everything there is to know. I just spent 35+ years in healthcare finance and just found out everything I inew was wrong.

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 10:12 pm

        You are completely missing my point.

        You are fixated on the mechanics.

        Lasik is not magically cheap
        It is not cheap because it moved from Hospitals.
        It is not cheap because of economies of scale

        or ….

        These and many many other things may well be true.

        but they are not WHY, They are a part off HOW.

        It is the WHY that is important.

        I have repeatedly provided the data that countries with smaller government have higher rates of increase in standard of living.

        The same is also true of countries with greater freedom

        Why ? Because less government and more freedom are essentially the same thing.

        Rising standard of living – which means more than we value for less human cost, requires FREEDOM.

        The USSR was able to impliment just about every single mechanism of capitalism that purportedly lowered prices and raised standards of living.

        But it is NOT mass production – or whatever other mechanism that you come up with that actually drives prices down and value up. It is FREEDOM.

        There are only two ways to profit in the world – deliver more value to people – and that REQUIRES Freedom, or rent power – and that reduces freedom and lowers standard of living.

        Lasik, Plastic Surgery, every single area of our economy where greater value has been delivered for lower human cost have ALL occured proportionate to the degree of freedom afforded those endeavors. ‘

        Conversely the rate of improvement in value delivered is INVERSE to the degree of regulation or government control.

        I do not care much about your arguments reguarding mechanisms.

        Without freedom – the same approaches that work in free markets will fail.
        It is not the mechanism that increases standard of living, it is the environment of freedom.

        If the markets are free – they MIGHT reduce costs and increase values – by the mechanisms you cite – or they might do so by others.

        But absent freedom the mechanisms will not work.

        Nor is this binary. The greater the freedom the more value will rise while cost declines.

        Nor is this some flight of fancy of mine. We actually KNOW this.
        And if it were not so – Socialism would work.

        In the 40’s and 50’s the key flaw in socialism was identified in a series of debates on “the economic calculation problem” This is why socialism fails – it can not solve the “economic calculation problem. In fact there exists only ONE functional way to solve the economic calculation problem – and that is free markets.
        Further this is not just about the Freedom of one actor. Free markets solve the economic calculation problem via “spontaneous order” – which is not exactly spontaneous, but it is really through myriads of free actors working from the bottom up.

        The core of the economic calculation problem is that everything in an economy – even something as simple as making a pencil is so incredibly complex than no single person can possibly know or control the whole process.

        If I am going to provide Lasik services profitably and affordably – that is beyond my ability as an individual unless i can depend on thousands – millions of others to deliver their tiny peice of the final product – profitably and affordably. There are billions of parts in delivering quality affordable Lasik (or anything else). Getting ONE or 100 right will have minimal effect.

        To deliver profitable and affordable – to raise standard of living the entire economy must coordinate EVERYTHING – the supply of every single product and every part to every product and every part to every part. Rigth down to the coal and iron being mined, Everything must move together toward the ends, and not even towards one end – but to myriads of competing ends. All the paices that make affordable Lasik are also peices of other things. Every Transistor or IC ever gram of steel has multiple competing uses.

        Everything must be produce and distributed fairly optimally from top to bottom.

        Affordability and profit only occur when all inputs and resources find their way to their best uses.

        Socialism can not do that Government can not do that. No computer is even close to being able to do that.

        But 7Billion free human brains none of which really know more than their own small part of the whole using the price system of free markets to work out resource allocation can solve the economic calculation problem – bottom up – not top down.

        If we ever find a top down solution to the economic calculation problem – socialism will work, and it will do so better than free markets.

        But that will never happen – because over time – as standard of living and societal complexity rise the problem becomes even harder to solve top down.

        This is also why ultimately libertarianism will prevail, because no other system can work as society becomes ever more complex.

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 11:27 pm

        Ron,

        No i do not know everything there is to know about healthcare costs.

        What I do know is that there is nothing that is special. that healthcare is not “different”.
        That what works and what does not work are fundimentally the same across all domains.

        Further – if you made healthcare a perfectly free market tomorow – I would not know how to make it better more affordable, …. It is likely that you would more than I.

        But I do know that the techniques the mechanix, the methods – and there is not just one or two of them, there are many, they work better the freerer the market is and worse the less free it is.

        This is not a case of my “knowing everything” – but it is a case – more than a case, we are dealing with some fundimentals of economics that have been know for almost a century, some parts longer.

        Make the market freerer and someone like you who understands the mechainx of your market will figure out how to make care better and cheaper. But without that freedom, the same mechanix will work poorly – if at all. I also know that if the market is free enough – even if you are wrong – someone else will figure it out get it right and drive value up and costs down.

        There is not one answer or a few, there are many many many answers – some better than others, but they will not work without the freedom to try them – and probably fail many times before succeeding.

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 11:48 pm

        You keep trying to explain healthcare to me as if there are absolute known single answers to every problem.

        There aren’t – and that is why freedom is critical. The more freedom there is the more people will try different things. Most of those will fail. Possibly the best answer to some problem with be found by the experts in the field. Occasionally it will be found by someone who it makes no sense that they would have the best answer.

        And once the problem is “solved” – we start over again – because there is no best answer – just constant refinement – usually iterative, but once in a while a dramatic rethinking of everything.

        You said look at Walgreens or CVS. Do you have the slightest doubt that in a free market in 10 years however walgreens and CVS do things today – they will be done differently in 10 years – or there may not even be a walgreens and CVS in 10 years.

        You keep trying to say “this” is the answer in this area, or that is the answer in that area.
        Maybe, but there is no area of the entirety of human existance where there is one and only one right answer never changing. There is no absolutely right answer, though there are lots of wrong ones. There are many many right answers – some better than others some that compliment each other and some that are mutually exclusive. But even though the set of right answers is infinite the set of wrong answers is much much larger. We fail more often that we succeed. But failure is part of how we get to success.

        And there is not an end. When we finally succeed in making things better, lowering cost, raising value, we start all over to do it again, and again and again.

        You say I am right about Lasik. I am not sure what that means. The cost of lasik has dropped and the value increased – stepwise over a long period of time.
        That BTW is not abnormal – except in healthcare and regulated markets – it is the norm.

        Long ago I told you that if you wanted to look at the way the prices of things change over time that you should always express a price in terms of the value of labor at the time.

        which is just saying that Standard of living rises as more value is produced with less human effort. the “price” in currency is just the ruler that we use to measure, but it is a ruler that changes over time.

        I have said again and again that you can look at all markets. Generally the less regulated a market is the more likely that over time prices will drop and value will increase in nominal dollars, but almost always the price in terms of the labor needed to purchase the same value will drop.

        And the most important factor in the rate of increase in value and decrease in human cost is the degree of freedom.

      • John Say permalink
        February 23, 2020 11:52 pm

        “I dont plan to respond any further to your comments about healthcare costs since you know everything there is to know. I just spent 35+ years in healthcare finance and just found out everything I inew was wrong.”

        I am not writing about “healthcare costs”. There is no market that has entirely different rules of economics that apply only too it. Every market has its own unique traits. but the laws of supply and demand are not immutable in the automotive market and ineffective in healthcare.

      • February 23, 2020 8:23 pm

        Oh, one more thing. If one of your daughters has a baby at 23-24 weeks gestation and that child is in the NICU, do you want them in an American NICU where that baby is cared for 24/7 by a nurse one on one for most of their hospitalization, or in Mexico where the nurses have 3-4 babies assigned to them. Who covers one that goes bad when that nurse is covering another that goes bad?

      • John Say permalink
        February 24, 2020 12:23 am

        “Oh, one more thing. If one of your daughters has a baby at 23-24 weeks gestation and that child is in the NICU, do you want them in an American NICU where that baby is cared for 24/7 by a nurse one on one for most of their hospitalization, or in Mexico where the nurses have 3-4 babies assigned to them. Who covers one that goes bad when that nurse is covering another that goes bad?”

        My ability to even have that choice at all rests almost entirely on my standard of living.
        That incredibly expensive NICU that does something impossible in most of the world and impossible everywhere a few decades ago, only exists because of our higher standard of living. And that higher standard of living MEANS producing the nearly everything that is more critical. more fundimental, more basic for less human cost than we were able to do before.

        If our standard of living today was such that 50% of our time had to be spent producing our food – there would be no NICU. We would not even try to save 24week premies. They would die as they have for 99.99% of human existance.

        I do not know what the next great thing beyond that NICU you are celebrating is – actually there will be many many many of them. But I do know one thing – we will not have that thing that is even harder and more expensive than the NICU until we figure out how to make that NICU cheaper and better.

        I keep expressing the definition of standard of living very nearly the same way all the time.
        I do so fairly carefully – it is more than a definition, it is actually a fundimental axiom of life and economics.

        Standard of living = human value produced / human effort to produce that value.

        To increase standard of living you MUST either
        Increase the value produced without changing the human effort needed,
        Or decrease the human effort, or BOTH.

        And until you increase the standard of living – you can not have MORE.
        You can not have that NICU

        This is actually a mathematical tautology.

        BTW this is not an all or nothing choice between mexico and the US – which is precisely why freedom is important.

        If all americans (in the US) actually had the choices that the couple in mexico had – and there is not any reason they can not, some of us would sometimes choose the $2000 clinic, sometimes the $3500 clinic, sometimes the 10,000 hospital, and sometimes the 27,000 hospital. Each of us would choose differently – given the choice – based on our standard of living – and other sometimes transitory factors. Each of these choices would be picked in differnet frequencies by different people. The really expensive excellent care facility would be working both to improve care and lower cost, and the cheap fascillity would also be working to improve care and lower cost.

        I do not recall who exactly said it recently – but one of our democratic candidates said something nonsensical – like we need to make the excellent mental health care available to the super rich available to everyone.

        The most certain way to assure that the cost/value of something – our standard of living, will stagnate or drop is to take a market where there are multiple choices – some too expensive for most of us, and attempt to reduce that to one choice that is available to all. If you are LUCKY you will be able to give everyone what the super rich have – and quality will cease to improve, and cost will cease to decline. More likely you will end up with more midling care for all, with higher cost, and again stagnation.

        All improvement requires freedom.

  46. John Say permalink
    February 24, 2020 1:45 pm

    So we know we have an IC Leak that almost certainly came from the gang of 8,

    Why aren’t we investigating that ?

  47. February 24, 2020 5:39 pm

    This is what happens when governments enter into free and unfair trade agreements driven by government subsidized manufactured products that drive companies out of business that do not have state backing. I doubt the new agreements will make much change, but in the future someone needs to pay attention.

    But then, this does not fit with the Libertarian traders or capitalist free traders unlike my “fair trade” positions that might make it harder for China to own trade.

    And maybe instead of this issue, Millenials and Gen Z’s might pay attention if and when they cant buy their annual new Iphone because Apple cant get parts or cant manifacture them.

    Yes, this is Breitbart news, but there are other articles with much the same info. This was just much more detailed.
    https://www.breitbart.com/asia/2020/02/13/coronavirus-outbreak-exposes-chinas-monopoly-on-u-s-drug-medical-supplies/

    • John Say permalink
      February 24, 2020 10:54 pm

      Just get government out of it. The problems will take care of themselves.

      There is nothing that China has some monopoly over that actually matters.
      We went through all this over rare earths – when it looked Like China would leverage the world:

      We found substitutes and we found sources outside of china.

      There is nothing China makes for the US that can only be made in china or has no substitute.

      Markets are incredibly resilient.

    • John Say permalink
      February 24, 2020 10:59 pm

      In the 16th century England was a backwater, and Spain controlled pretty much all the gold in the world and was the worlds sole super power.

      Spain focused on controlling that gold and gathering it all to spain. And the more Gold spain accumulated the poorer Spain became.

      England focused on Trade, and eventually supplanted Spain as the worlds sole super power.

      The US with 330m people produces about 1/4 of what the world values. The Eu produces almost the same value – with 550m people, china produces almost the same value with 1.6B people.

      The amount of value produced is what matters.

    • John Say permalink
      February 24, 2020 11:22 pm

      I do not care any more than I care about the cost of Trump’s golfing.

      I do think that we should substantially cut back the presidents protection detail.

      But not Trump’s or Obama’s – but the presidents – whoever that is.

      • February 25, 2020 7:34 pm

        Dave, that was for Jay’s benefit. I know you don’t care.

  48. February 25, 2020 12:17 pm

    Watching business news.
    Trump asked for $2.5B for corona virus research and development.
    Queen Nancy says grossly underfunded
    Shumer says it should be $3.5B

    Cant anything be done in this country without politics?
    How about $1.5B now and as they need more, come back and ask for more. Are they going to spend a Billion in a month?

    And some will say, keep government out of it completely. Never happen, so that is not a viable option. I want something the majority of Americans can agree on.

  49. Jay permalink
    February 25, 2020 4:15 pm

    70 Senators From Both Parties Say The Present Senate Is FUBARed Beyond Belief.

    They say:

    “An open letter to the U.S. Senate:
    Congress is not fulfilling its constitutional duties.”

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/former-us-senators-the-senate-is-failing-to-perform-its-constitutional-duties/2020/02/25/b9bdd22a-5743-11ea-9000-f3cffee23036_story.html

    The following signers are all former U.S. senators: Dean Barkley (I-Minn.), Max Baucus (D-Mont.), Mark Begich (D-Alaska), Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), David Boren (D-Okla.), Bill Bradley (D-N.J.), Bill Brock (R-Tenn.), Hank Brown (R-Colo.), Richard Bryan (D-Nev.), James Buckley (R-N.Y.), Roland Burris (D-Ill.), Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R-Colo.), Jean Carnahan (D-Mo.), Max Cleland (D-Ga.), William Cohen (R-Maine), Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), Jon Corzine (D-N.J.), Jack Danforth (R-Mo.), Tom Daschle (D-S.D.), Mark Dayton (D-Minn.), Dennis DeConcini (D-Ariz.), Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.), Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.), David Durenberger (R-Minn.), Daniel Evans (R-Wash.), Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), Wyche Fowler (D-Ga.), Slade Gorton (R-Wash.), Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Gary Hart (D-Colo.), Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.), Gordon Humphrey (I-N.H.), Tim Johnson (D-S.D.), Bennett Johnston (D-La.), Ted Kaufman (D-Del.), Bob Kerrey (D-Neb.), John Kerry (D-Mass.), Paul Kirk (D-Mass.), Robert Krueger (D-Tex.), Mary Landrieu (D-La.), Carl Levin (D-Mich.), Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), Carol Moseley Braun (D-Ill.), Frank Murkowski (R-Alaska), Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), Sam Nunn (D-Ga.), Bob Packwood (R-Ore.), Larry Pressler (R-S.D.), David Pryor (D-Ark.), Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), Donald Riegle (D-Mich.), Chuck Robb (D-Va.), Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), Ken Salazar (D-Colo.), Jim Sasser (D-Tenn.), Alan Simpson (R-Wyo.), Gordon Smith (R-Ore.), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), Bob Torricelli (D-N.J.), Mark Udall (D-Colo.), John Walsh (D-Mont.), John Warner (R-Va.), Lowell Weicker (I-Conn.), and Tim Wirth (D-Colo.).

    Have you ever see a WARNING as disturbing as this from former US Senators in your lifetime?

    This SEVERE party divisiveness is Trump’s legacy to America.

    THE DYSFUNCTION IS GENERATED BY TRUMP! And perpetuated by those of you who keep defending him.

    • February 25, 2020 7:22 pm

      Can’t read, pay wall

      • Jay permalink
        February 25, 2020 8:13 pm

        I told you how to sidestep the pay wall with duckduckgo.com

        In one ear and out the other?

  50. Jay permalink
    February 25, 2020 4:55 pm

    DHS Secretary Chad Wolf claims the mortality rate for coronavirus is similar to the flu, both at about 2%.

    WRONG.

    The seasonal flu mortality rate is generally 0.1%. But still 500,000 or more people globally die from it every year. Unlike the coronavirus, a vaccine exists for the flu. The 1918 flu pandemic, with 2% estimate death rate, killed a couple of million of people. With a much larger world population now, it could wipe out tens of millions if they don’t come up with corrective vaccines soon.

    • February 25, 2020 7:28 pm

      Get the government out of testing, verifications, trial groups, etc and there probably would be a vaccine on the market within weeks. With our current systems in pkace, I have heard 18 months to 24 months before it could be made in volume enough for the worlds needs. That includes the USA.

      That damn Trump creating all these government FDA regulations is going to cause the deaths of millions.

      • Jay permalink
        February 25, 2020 8:18 pm

        There are scientists working on it around the world.
        If the Chinese come up with a cure they’ll be testing it full force in hours.

        Time for you to develop a panoramic point of view

    • Jay permalink
      February 25, 2020 8:10 pm

Leave a Reply to Rick Bayan Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: