Wednesday, March 22, 2017
They're doing it again, for the umpteenth time since the Truman administration. The same play, the same playbook.
It is unconscionable how Democrats have pulled out all the stops to delay the Trump administration at every turn. They cannot win, so they are using their tired old tactics to obfuscate the issues and lend confusion to the topics concerned: make up facts to delay nomination of a superlative supreme court nominee, and try to co-opt the health care debate. It causes Republicans to waste a lot of manpower countering their specious arguments.
That is the purpose. There is no high moral goal.
It's the best they have.
With all the sleight of hand, they have only succeeded in doing one thing: subverting the news cycle. They're good at that and their accomplices in the MSM help where they can, but they are not good at winning the argument, and the vote will not be theirs.
But, that isn't new. Democrats have owned control of the news cycle for all of living memory. Going back to the days of Walter Cronkite and Roger Mudd, they have owned the news cycle. They have been 100% in charge. Notable exception: Fox News since the early 90s.
Fox News has even been co-opted by their tactics and is using much of their news time to cover stories that the MSM had seen fit to run. Fortunately, I think that the Trump administration is refusing to be fooled by these tactics.
Yesterday, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, friend of John McCain – who no one thought would beat Barack Obama in 2008 – confessed her true thoughts on the role of Supreme Court justices. She stated in no uncertain terms that judges should be free to make up their own rules depending on the circumstances. It was a perfect example of why we need conservative justices.
This was in the same hearing where Al Franken and Pat Leahy reminded us of their presence through their utterances of absolute nonsense.
And this morning, there was news that Hillary Clinton is entering the fray for the 2020 election. God she's old. Nearly as old as me.
Democrats continue to tell us why we should vote against them. It's hard to believe that so many do not listen.
Sunday, March 19, 2017
"Architect" has taken on a completely new meaning in the world of current events. It now means "sleazeball." The panelists on the Fox News Sunday program that I just watched illustrate the point.
This is the cast of characters: Ezekiel Emanuel and Karl Rove were on today's program; Jonathan Gruber is a frequent guest on talk shows; he was not on today's show.
1) Ezekiel Emanuel is a physician and oncologist who has been hired by Fox News to present his obnoxious self as an expert on health care programs. He has a very strong slant toward this goal: he is a liberal Democrat, and is not averse to speaking his highly partial opinions using projections of healthcare spending for five and eight years hence. Opinions of this sort are 100% bullshit – no one knows what expenditures will be on healthcare next year, and any further projections simply cannot be done. Dr. Emmanuel is brother of Rahm Emanuel, mayor of Chicago, which he has declared to be a sanctuary city. They are the bullshit brothers.
2)Karl Rove is a Republican whose opinions are no less suspicious. He famously carries a small white board with him to his panel engagements, and frequently illustrates his bullshit points with bullshit data. He is usually proven wrong by time.
3)Jonathan Gruber is an economist who somehow gained the appellation 'Architect' during the crafting of obamacare. He is not an architect, and has none of the qualifications to be an architect. I take serious umbrage at labeling him with the name of my profession. He was famously wrong about everything having to do with health care.
I suppose that calling these people architects lends credence to their badly informed opinions. Perhaps I should be flattered that the position I worked so hard to obtain is conferred gratuitously upon these individuals as a symbol of their prestige.
Or perhaps, I should continue to take an inferred relationship with them as a slap in the face.
The latter is what I will do.
The term "wiretap" has been occurring fairly frequently in news reports over the last few years. The term used to refer to a physical wire attached to a telephone line or other physical communication line.
In the world of surveillance, a distinction is being drawn between current methods used to listen in on communications and wiretaps.
Thus an individual in surveillance can answer truthfully that he is not performing wiretaps, even if he has been participating in surveillance activities.
It seems that the evolution of some terms goes from the general to the specific, and in some other uses it goes from the specific to the general.
Politicians take advantage of this fact in whatever circumstance suits them, of course.
Democrats and Establishment Republicans were firmly rejected in the last election. Neither group is able to recognize that fact.
Republicans have a history that goes back to the Bill Clinton presidency of accepting a role as the rebuilding party, offering the excuse 'we weren't in charge' as their reason for not being blamed for the failures of the day. They have been the party out of power for so long that many of them seem to have gotten comfortable with it.
Democrats have seized the opportunity, put forth an ambitious agenda, and failed miserably at the polls.The numbers of elected offices that the Democrats have lost since 2010 is in the thousands. Republicans have been trouncing them.
Both groups are acting like they know what they need to do to seize control of the helm and chart a new course for the country.
But they don't. That is why they were rejected in the 2016 elections. Neither Republicans nor Democrats have a clue WHY they were defeated. But they are responding in the same way.
Neither will admit that they were defeated because of their core arrogance and unfitness for the job. Neither will admit that they don't have a clue where the country is headed.
There are new forces at hand as our country seeks a new equilibrium and a new direction.
1) Communism – in the wake of Bernie Sanders – must be defeated once more.
2) The 'Social Conservatives,' the anti-abortion, anti-gay right must satisfy itself with an emphasis upon a local rather than national influence.
3) Teachers unions will remain strong in certain areas. The way to defeat them is also local rather than national.
4) The hooliganism of the left is reminiscent of the 1960s radicals, only more widespread and more violent. Perhaps it is dying down. I hope so.
Those are but a few of the major issues that face us.
We are a society in transition. We can't go back. No one knows where ahead is.
The biggest dangers are from foreign sources, North Korea and Iran. Bush the latter and Obama were guilty of kicking the can down the road when it came to dealing with North Korea. Obama's complicity with Iran is coming back to haunt us in a way that was eminently foreseeable by anyone paying attention.
Secretary of State Tilllerson has given the North Koreans and Chinese an ultimatum in diplomat speak that makes it plain that they are no longer dealing with do-nothings, that the Trump presidency has every intention of making them toe the line.
The world has become a very dangerous place, and the politics of the past will no longer work. We aren't sure what the future will be, but it will be new with old alliances no longer valid.