So, the polling season has already begun.  A new Harvard/Harris Poll shows the following results:

Percentage of people who would vote for a candidate who supports:

  • America First – 75%
  • Strong immigration policy – 75%
  • A nationalistic trade policy (pro-tariffs) – 65%
  • Anti-war – 74%

That doesn’t bode well for socialist candidates like AOC.

However, on the bright side, socialist candidates will have a strong appeal among the poor, unemployed workers, students and millennials who are willing to trade personal freedoms for cradle-to-grave support from the government.  Also, socialists will appeal to various “cause groups” like Women’s Rights groups and LGBT. One other group worth mentioning that will support the socialist cause is the bi-coastal elites who are critically important because they will provide the money to sustain socialist political efforts, especially for a national election.

Why would the elites support socialist causes? Why, indeed. It sounds counterintuitive to say that the elites support socialism. Everyone knows that the elites prefer capitalism, right? Actually, the elites are for any system that puts money in their pockets and allows them to exert greater control over the masses. Capitalism has served its purpose (as far as the elites are concerned). In today’s world, they would actually prefer socialism so that they could do away with personal freedoms. You see, the middle class can really get in the way of their plans for total control.

With such a strong split in political preferences, 2020 does offer the outside possibility of a third-party candidate. I guess that Howard Schultz would like to be that somebody.  Hank Adler wrote a novel entitled From Three To Five talking about how a third-party candidate could throw the election into the House of Representatives where arcane rules would come into play. Those rules could well lead to the election of a third-party candidate.

Welcome to the jungle. Let the polling begin.

Advertisements

 

So, AOC got it half right. Got to give her props for that.

  • It’s true that the system doesn’t work because both political parties are corrupt and the 1% is in charge.
  • We’ve got to think big, really big and we need the Green New Deal.  Wrong. Dead wrong (no pun intended).

Here’s another idea that is half right. From AOC: “It’s not a CEO that’s actually creating four billion dollars a year. It is the millions of workers in this country that’s creating billions of dollars of economic productivity a year.”

  • The CEO doesn’t create company profits. That’s true (generally speaking).
  • The workers in this country create billions of dollars of economic productivity.  That’s false.

For example, what is AOC going to say when robotics run factories? Is she going to still say that workers produce the profits? I think not. Profits are, in actuality, a function of investment (of the owner/stockholders). Problem is that AOC wants to do away with profits by giving the profits to the workers. However, in that case there will be no new investment and eventually – no profits. That’s what capitalism is all about.  Investors take the risk of making the investments and in return are rewarded with the profits, if there are any.

With AOC, however, capitalism will be replaced with socialism because capitalism is “irredeemable”, as she puts it. It apparently doesn’t matter that the Industrial Revolution has been driven by capitalism which is responsible for almost all of the progress in the world over the last 200 years.  Let’s just kill the goose that laid the golden egg (capitalism and freedom). Why? Simply, because it wasn’t her idea.  You can’t take over (and become the boss) unless you come up with a new system, a new way to run everything.  After all, revolutions have to have a rallying cry.

As Waleed Shahid, a former aide to AOC, put it, “ You run an insurgent anti-establishment campaign to get into office to become the establishment.”  So, the objective is to become the establishment, displacing everything and everyone in the process. Here’s the strategy: attack the status quo, create division, appeal to the have-nots and use wealth transfers as a way to create “social justice.” You create the problem, then you propose the solution…and, then, you take over, or as Waleed Shahid said you become the establishment.  It’s right out of the playbook of Saul Alinsky’s “Rules For Radicals.”

So, AOC, microphone in hand, recently addressed an audience about her Green New Deal saying,  “You try. You do it. Cause you’re not. Cause you’re not.  Until you do it, I’m the boss.” The audience laughed, but you should not be laughing. She’s dead serious (again, no pun intended). She created the problem and she has proposed the solution (the Green New Deal). She threw down the challenge.  The thing is, though, none was really necessary.  By that, I mean that a solution isn’t required. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.  The Constitution isn’t broke.  Capitalism isn’t broke.  Sure there are problems, but be careful of radical solutions to something that has basically worked for 200 years.  It’s the most successful and longest running governmental and economic system in history.

There’s a reason why the Founding Fathers in their wisdom gave us the system that they did.  I don’t see why a 29 year-old former bartender would know better although obviously she thinks that she does. That’s why she’s for giving economic security to those that are unwilling to work or getting Americans to not eat meat because cows fart.  By the way, has anyone figured out how we’re going to grow food to feed 7 billion people and transport that food to market, all without the use of fossil fuel? Not a problem; as AOC says, “Just think big.”

 

Epilogue

The thing about a social welfare state is that it is incompatible with an “open borders” policy, although AOC is insisting on both. With both, everyone in the world will come here until we’re a third world nation ourselves.  In fact, we won’t even be a nation because nations are defined as having borders. Let that sink in.  We won’t even be a nation. Maybe, that was really the idea all along.

 

Nothing’s for free in the world. Somebody has to pay for it. The people who are going to to pay for it are us — the millennials and young people…”socialism is what destroyed Venezuela.”  – Daniel Martino, who was born and raised in Caracas, Venezuela.

 

 

There’s a new sheriff in the House by the name of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC). She’s young, bright, good-looking, and oozing with personality.  In short, she’s a superstar.  Oh, did I mention that she says things that no one can quite figure out? She would have been perfect for Art Linkletter’s TV show “Kids Say The Darndest Things”, except that AOC is 29 years old.  Here’s a sample:

AOC called out Fox News as being  “AOC TMZ” (whatever that means) and blamed Fox for her poor favorability rating in a new poll. She added: “If you want to know what subconscious bias looks like, it’s a headline saying “AOC is underwater with every group EXCEPT women, nonwhites, and 18-34 year olds’. So older, conservative white men are considered “everyone” and everyone else is discounted as an exception. Cool.” So, here’s all the problems with her tweet.

  • Fox had nothing to do with the poll (which was reported by Gallup) and nothing to do with the purported “headline” which was buried in a tweet from a person discussing the Gallup Poll.
  • AOC blames Fox for her bad poll numbers because the whole world supposedly listens to Fox and they have biased reporting. Note: As if, the other networks don’t have biased reporting and haven’t subconsciously biased their viewers to like AOC.  To be fair, more people by far watch all other media news shows than watch Fox.
  • AOC comments that the headline says that older, conservative white men are considered ”everyone” and everyone else is discounted as an exception. Well, no one actually said that, certainly not Fox News. That’s simply her own bias showing through in the words that she chose.

AOC commented on the mass shooting in New Zealand at a mosque saying: “What good are your thoughts & prayers when they don’t even keep the pews safe?” I guess AOC doesn’t have much respect for people of faith as she appears to be mocking religion, especially Islam.  That is, praying to your god doesn’t work. Yikes!

AOC says that, because of climate change, we have to implement the Green New Deal or we’ll all be dead in twelve years.  Well, AOC forgot to mention that there is no scientific consensus on climate change.  In fact, all the recent news on climate change says that the weather is getting colder, not hotter.  Besides, even if you believe the global warming doomsday scenario, it won’t do the world any good if the U. S. implements the Green New Deal because the rest of the world isn’t going to follow suit. Other countries are not going to get rid of fossil fuels, airplanes, cars and cows.  Simply, not going to happen.

In a House committee meeting, AOC made the following statement: “…the lack of the citizenship question leads to the problem that aliens that do not actually reside in the United States are still counted for congressional apportionment services. Of course, they do reside in the United States. They reside in my district. They’re my constituents.” The problem with that statement is that illegal aliens are not citizens and therefore have no representation in Congress.  Fact check: Therefore, AOC does not have illegal aliens who are her constituents.  However, she feels that she has a need to represent them anyway which is obvious to anyone who watched the proceedings of that meeting.

Oh, well, Art Linkletter is off the air but at least we have AOC to give us a few laughs.

 

Epilogue

Greenpeace Co-Founder Patrick Moore has an interesting take on the Green New Deal. He says that if we DO implement the Green New Deal, half the people in the world will die whereas AOC thinks that we’ll all die if we don’t. I wonder who I should believe, a politician or an environmentalist?

 

 

 

 

When is a democracy not a democracy? Answer: When it’s the United States of America.  Let me explain.

Everyone thinks that the U. S. is a democracy – political commentators, talking heads and most members of Congress. Really.  Maybe, even you too.  Here’s why they’re all wrong.

From Differ: “In a republic, a constitution or charter of rights protects certain inalienable rights that cannot be taken away by the government, even if it has been elected by a majority of voters. In a ‘pure democracy’, the majority is not restrained in this way and can impose its will on the minority.”

Well, the Constitution of the United States did not establish a democracy. What it has established, however, is a republic – for each state. A republic distributes power through citizen participation in government. So, the government is composed of our elected representatives, who are us, the people.  That’s where the phrase the government is of the people (and by the people and for the people) comes from.

The term democracy gets kicked around a lot these days. The use of the term democracy in this country suggests that some of those that use that term want our country to be a democracy rather than a republic.  For example, Nancy Pelosi has mentioned that the 2ndAmendment should be ditched by the next Democratic president (through executive order I presume).

It’s kind of important for the voters to understand what they might be voting for. Do they want to vote for those that would turn our republic into a democracy or do they want to keep the republic? The biggest difference is the inalienable rights.  Do you want the people in power in Washington to tell you what your rights are or do you want the protection offered by The Constitution?

You should know what your elected officials stand for.  After all, those representatives are, in effect, us. They represent us. They are supposed to pass legislation that reflects the will of the people (their constituents). They work for us, on our behalf and not the other way around.  So, the next time one of your representatives tells you “I’m the boss”, tell them to go read the Constitution.

 

 

 

 

 

First of all, what’s not to love about Socialism.  Lots of free stuff courtesy of the government.  Problem is that someone has to eventually pay for it.  As Margaret Thatcher reputably said, “The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.”

Socialism has a solution for everything. Problem is that those kind of solutions never work. Government is not the answer to a problem…it usually is the problem. National Economics Editorial.com published an article on solutions proposed by Socialism. Here’s a few excerpts:

 “Unemployment?  Create jobs.  Poverty?  Provide welfare.  High rents?  Impose rent controls… socialism is redistributive: the government taxes productive industries and individuals and gives the proceeds to unproductive or non-productive industries and individuals… redistribution virtually guarantees that our economic resources will be used inefficiently, and this makes everyone a little bit poorer.”

“A 2017 study from Stanford University looked at the effect of rent control laws in San Francisco.  They found that… rent control hurt the very people it was supposed to help.”

“…studies from Harvard University and the National Bureau of Economic Research conclusively show that minimum wage increases hurt minimum wage earners the most.”

Regardless of how many gain or lose from Socialism, what’s not to love, though, about getting paid for not working. That’s what Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is promoting. At least, that’s what she says now. Later, who knows. You can never trust a politician, now can you?

Worldviews do change, though. I should know since I was a socialist once.  I was young and idealistic…and stupid. After all, what did I know?  Never had a real job.  Took economics in college, but economics demonstrated that socialism didn’t work. Didn’t matter.  I simply knew better.  Ditto the millennials.  Like me, then, they’ve rarely had a real job and have been brainwashed by universities and social media. So, how would they know? They don’t, but they are willing to blindly follow the Pied Piper down the road to oblivion as long as the government promises to pay for everything, especially the student loans.

California has already paved that road to oblivion with its own socialist brand which has turned the state from being a shining example of everything that was right with America to everything that is wrong with America. California, despite taxing its residents to death, has literally become a s***hole, with tent cities sprouting up everywhere (even downtown San Francisco and Los Angeles). People are leaving the state by the droves. Eventually, this is what the entire country will look like under Socialism, except that there will be no where to leave to.

So, despite the fact that Socialism has never worked, socialists say that “this time” it will. Of course, there is absolutely no reason to believe them. Socialism is simply their ticket to power. Viva Venezuela!

 

“Socialists cry ‘Power to the people’ and raise the clenched fist as they say it.  We all know what they really mean – power over people, power to the State.” – Margaret Thatcher

 

It’s interesting the different ways that different people have reacted to the continuing drama that is Rep. Ilhan Omar.  The latest is David Duke, the former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, an acknowledged racist and an anti-Semite. Duke publicly defended Rep. Ilhan calling her the “most important member of the US Congress.” So, now we have one racist defending another racist. Well, two because Louis Farrakhan supports her too.  For that matter, the racist Congressional Black Caucus group is defending her as well.

However, let’s be brutally honest.  All people discriminate and a majority of people are racist.  All races discriminate against other racial groups.  So, the majority of them are racist too.  Politicians?  Of course, they are racist, Republicans and Democrats alike.

While it’s not surprising that racism has reared its ugly head in Congress, it is surprising to see the way the Democratic Party has handled it.  Columnist Joel Pollak put it this way, “Five months after an antisemitic gunman murdered eleven Jews at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, the worst attack on Jews in American history, the Democratic Party is struggling to condemn antisemitism…Democrats cannot bring themselves to offer a simple, straightforward condemnation of the hatred of Jews. Nor can they find the political courage to punish Omar, who has repeatedly used antisemitic rhetoric even after objections from party leaders and intervention by her own constituents.”  Rep.Ted Deutch, a Florida Democrat, echoed those sentiments as he criticized his party’s leaders for their failure to  condemn Omar, “Why are we unable to singularly condemn anti-Semitism?” Yeah, tell everyone why.

So, do they deny that members of their Party are racist? In a word, no. Instead of condemning anti-Semitism, the Democratic Party would rather point fingers at the racism of others as a defense.  Of course, we understand that the people they are referring to may well be racist too. However, it doesn’t matter.  When you tolerate racism, that makes you a racist. The Democratic Party has spoken loud and clear with their House resolution on bigotry, especially with what it failed to mention. I can only imagine what the world-wide ramifications will be with respect to anti-Semitism now.  If we can’t defend minorities in this country, what might happen to them elsewhere?

 

Epilogue

The Middle Eastern Women’s Coalition, a distinguished group of American women from Middle Eastern descent, recently called for the resignation of Rep. Omar. So, apparently not every Middle Eastern Woman is an anti-Semite.  In fact, far from it.  Apparently, it’s only those in Congress.

 

“Racism does not have a good track record. It’s been tried out for a long time and you’d think by now we’d want to put an end to it instead of putting it under new management.”  – Thomas Sowell

The Democrats would love everyone to believe that they stand for social justice, but their actions belie their platitudes.  You just can’t say one thing and do another.  That’s the definition of political suicide.  Here’s the problem.

Rep. Ilhan Omar suffers from a serious political disease.  It’s called foot-in-mouth disease. She doesn’t even seem to understand the seriousness of her public comments. That’s because she is who she is – a racist pure and simple.  The question is what, if anything, are the Democrats going to do about her.

If Omar is allowed to keep her seat in Congress, it will signal to the world that the Democratic Party tolerates, and maybe even supports, racism. Motions of censure are pathetic, at best. If you are going to be the champion of minority groups, you have to be true to your beliefs. It’s sort of like #MeToo. It has to be applied equally to everyone and I do mean everyone.  Otherwise, people will see the situation for what it is – pandering for votes.

And yet…Kamala Harris and Bernie Sanders publicly support Omar and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Omar are best friends (politically speaking). So, who speaks for the average American regarding anti-Semitism? Who speaks for the Jewish people? Apparently, not the Democratic Party. Not anymore at least.

However, the racism issue doesn’t stop there for Democrats. Jussie Smollett has all but disappeared from the headlines, but the stain remains.  Democrats came out immediately and supported his claims before any facts were even available, and then backed away when the truth became known. However, they never publicly renounced him.  That’s the problem. So, the world sees the actions of the Democratic Party for what it is – tacit support for racism.

The Democratic Party is bleeding voter loyalty everywhere.  Hispanics are leaving because the Party supports unlimited immigration, costing them employment opportunities.  Blacks (Blexit) are leaving for a multitude of reasons.  Many blacks feel ripped off by Obama because he never really supported the black community (e.g. jobs, crime). They also oppose immigration for the same reason that Hispanics do.  Then, there is prison reform which the blacks say is needed because of legislation which discriminated against them, legislation which was the brainchild of then President Bill Clinton back in 1994.

So, while espousing their ideals for social justice and the improvement of the lives of disadvantaged people everywhere, the Democrats have proven that they don’t always live up to those ideals, not for Hispanics, not for blacks and certainly not for Jews. So, good luck writing the party’s 2020 presidential platform.  Who’s going to believe them?

 

Epilogue

So, the other day, AOC accused CPAC of Islamophobia.  Well, the context of her remarks was the deadly 2015 shooting in California carried out by Muslim terrorists. So, if being afraid of Muslim terrorists makes one a Islamophobe, then I suspect that we may have a country full of Islamophobes.  In a time of political turmoil, AOC chose to support Muslims, in general, and her colleague Omar, who is a Muslim, in particular instead of directly addressing the anti-Semitic remarks of Omar. Therefore, how long can she pretend that she, herself, isn’t a racist too?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I’ve posted about the Tulsi Gabbard Effect before.  That is, the Establishment stacks the deck for their preferred candidate, the candidate who will stick to the controlled narrative.  In 2016, it was Hillary Clinton, so Bernie Sanders got screwed.

This time around we already have a number of people who have already been rejected by the Establishment, as follows:

  • Tulsi Gabbard – anti-war candidate
  • Howard Schultz – running as an independent
  • Bernie Sanders – well, he’s Bernie Sanders

Now, Joe Biden has declared himself a candidate and the press is already attacking him.  CNN staged a six-person focus group of supposedly average Democratic voters.  I said supposedly. Even though Biden leads all other Democratic presidential candidates in the polls, no one in the focus group supported him.  Not one.  Thank you CNN for more fake news.  Huffington Post joined in the chorus of boos against Biden saying, “Joe Biden’s primary problem is Joe Biden.”  Of course, the true reason just might be because Biden suffers from a condition now referred to as white, male privilege.

Politics does have a mind of its own, though.  Take the 1960 presidential election, for example.  Richard Nixon, an Establishment candidate, lost to JFK.  Four years later in 1964, Republicans eschewed the Establishment candidate, Nelson Rockefeller, for right-wing candidate Barry Goldwater. Goldwater promptly lost to Lyndon Johnson, carrying only six sates.

Fast forward to the 1972 presidential election. The Democrats had previously lost the White House in 1968 to Richard Nixon by running an Establishment candidate (Hubert Humphrey). So, the Democrats rejected Ed Muskie, the Establishment candidate in 1972 and, instead, cast their lot with a far-left ideologue named George McGovern.  McGovern promptly lost every state but one (Massachusetts) to Nixon in the presidential election.

So, history has shown that parties can move further left or right if they lost the prior election with an Establishment candidate. Fast forward to 2016 when Hillary Clinton, the Establishment candidate, lost to Donald Trump. Having lost with an Establishment candidate in 2016, the party then lurched decidedly to the left in the mid-term elections. So, could the Democrats now be looking for the next George McGovern?

.

Epilogue

The irony in all of this is that if the Establishment hadn’t been so heavy-handed, Donald Trump may not have become president.  We might be talking about a President Sanders now and how he was taking us all down the road to socialism.  In the future when we look back at the 2020 election, assuming there even is one, I’m pretty sure that a large number of people won’t be happy with that result either. That’s politics for you folks.

Life is all about cycles. When the planet warms up, life flourishes.  When it gets cold, crops don’t grow and survival is a struggle. Life is totally dependent on the sun.

Over the last 400,000 years, the earth has been mostly in a cooling phase.  About every 100,000 to 125,000 years there is a brief warming phase. The current warming phase began approximately 12,500 years ago.

Even during the last 12,500 years, there have been a number of cold periods.  For example, there was a cold period that lasted for about 300 years that roughly fits with the time frame of the Dark Ages. Then, around 1400 AD, the world experienced a mini ice-age which lasted approximately 400 years. So, for the last 1,400 years, half of that time it was warm and half the time it was cold.

So, guess what?  It has been warm for a while so at some point we will have another cold period.  It’s only a question of when, and not if. The current warming period has lasted 12,500 years and warming periods historically have been quite brief. Therefore, this one could end at any time.  Further, sunspot activity always tracks with the weather cycles.  A high number of sunspots equates to warm weather and a low number relates to cold weather…and we haven’t had any sunspots for the last 32 days. We are entering what scientists refer to as a Grand Solar Minimum.  The sun goes quiet and the weather gets cold.  Real cold, even colder than what it has been this winter.  Even NASA has said that the Grand Solar Minimum is coming soon.

Some scientists have made a big deal about rising CO2 levels because of man-made activity. Yet, civilization has been at its peak during this period.  As reported in a recent scientific study, the planet is actually getting greener.  And why not, CO2 is required in the cycle between humans and plant life. It’s a symbiotic exchange, CO2 for oxygen. Besides, with the weather being cold, CO2 concerns are irrelevant anyway.  In fact, global warming science has become irrelevant…just check outdoors and see for yourself.

 

Epilogue

paper authored by global warming advocate Ben Sauter and published in Nature Geoscience admitted that the computer models used in global warming studies to predict future climate change were way off.  Another study had similar errors. As reported in the San Diego Union-Tribune, Ralph Keeling, a scientist with the Scripps Institute of Oceanography said, Our error margins are too big now to really weigh in on the precise amount of warming that’s going on in the ocean. We really muffed the error margins.”

Yet, global warming still is taken seriously in certain circles, including American politics where it has become part of the platform of certain candidates for president in 2020. At what point do they finally have to concede on this point? I assume that this will only happen after the election when there are serious shortages of food on the grocery shelves, sort of like George H. W. Bush’s, “Read my lips, no new taxes.” We all know how well that one turned out.

 

“Unfortunately, the IPCC (United Nations) climate change documents do not provide an objective assessment of the earth’s temperature trends and associated climate change.” – Dr. Madhav Khandekar, environmental scientist

 

Rep. Elijah Cummings was the chair for the Michael Cohen testimony before a recent congressional investigative committee.  In his closing remarks, he had this to say, “The greatest gift that you and I… can give to our children is making sure that we give them a democracy….”  Here’s the problem with that statement.

A democracy is majority, or mob, rule. It’s where the 51% believe that they have the moral authority to rule over the 49%, by force.  You can tell from Mr. Cummings’ remarks that is the form of government that he wants. The problem is that the U. S. is a republic.  A republic. A nation of laws.  A nation where the mob doesn’t rule.  A nation whose citizens have “inalienable rights” that can not be taken away from them.  A nation whose laws provide for equal rights for all of its citizens.  A nation where a person is considered innocent until they are proven guilty by a court of law…and not by mob rule. Certainly, not by any #MeToo.

The problem is that certain people in this country, including Elijah Cummings, would like to change our form of government.  Yes, change it.  Do away with it.  Dispense with it. Whatever.  They prefer mob rule, especially when they are the mob leaders.  The civil war which rages in this country is a war about power. It’s not about Donald Trump per se. Donald Trump is simply a symbol for something.  He stands in the way of mob rule.  That is, Elijah Cummings cannot be the mob leader as long as Donald Trump is President.

Ditto #PresidentPelosi. Certain people can hardly wait to anoint Nancy Pelosi president.  Why?  Well, for starters, a President Pelosi has already publicly said she would do away with the 2nd Amendment. They just can’t wait to trash the Republic.

So, the next time anyone says that want a democracy, just know that what they really want is to do away with your personal freedoms.  What they want is a nation run by the government, their government, and not a nation “of the people, by the people and for the people.” Remember, that even in a mob rule environment, not all of the 51% participate in the allocation of the nation’s resources (at the expense of the other 49%).  You still wind up with a very small group at the top (the 1% so to speak). They’re the only ones who really profit.

That’s why revolutions always end up with a single person in power, like a Stalin or a Castro. Revolutions are not about the causes that people fight, and die for, so fervently.  Revolutions are about power, plain and simple…and people like Elijah Cummings want that power.

 

“Power is not a means, it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship.”   – George Orwell