POLITICAL: Miners walk on Hillary; when do Black Americans do the same to the Democrats

Wednesday, May 11, 2016

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/05/10/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-west-virginia-trump-nebraska/84185016/

Sanders defeats Clinton in West Virginia
Heidi M Przybyla, USA TODAY 10:29 p.m. EDT May 10, 2016

*** begin quote ***

Bernie Sanders defeated Hillary Clinton in West Virginia’s Democratic primary Tuesday, while Donald Trump, with no remaining challengers, claimed an easy victory there and in Nebraska among Republicans.

At a rally in Salem, Ore., following his win, Sanders, a Vermont senator, told supporters “it appears that we won a big, big victory in West Virginia.”

“West Virginia is a working-class state, and like many other states in this country, including Oregon, working people are hurting,” he said. “And what the people of West Virginia said tonight, and I believe the people of Oregon and Kentucky will say next week, is that we need an economy that works for all of us, not just the one percent.”

*** end quote ***

May I offer Bernie another interpretation?

The D’s have long been anti-coal. Here’s the average working-class joe sixpack sending HRC a message.

I’d be astonished if WV does go big for Trump.

Bill Clinton, for all his faults, was spot on with “It’s the economy, stupid!”

The only think I wonder is when Black Americans will wake up like West Virginians? Their loyalty to the Democratic Party has been both misplaces and abused. Go through the classic Civil Rights legislation and count the Democrats who opposed it and Republican who did. Go through the litany of cities with Democratic mayor and machines, count the ones that for all intents and purposes are little better than war zones. Some Iraqi and Syrian cities look better than Detroit. Finally, go thru the casualties in the “(pseudo) War on (some) Drugs” and the Welfare State’s destruction of the black families and the black churches.

Then tell me how good the D’s are for the country! (Not that the R’s are that much better. But one must pick the prettiest horse in the glue factory coral.)

# – # – # – # – # 


POLITICAL: Negative rights are the only rights we have?

Sunday, April 24, 2016

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/04/walter-e-williams/rights-vs-wishes/

Rights Versus Wishes
By Walter E. Williams
April 20, 2016

*** begin quote ***

Here is what presidential aspirant Sen. Bernie Sanders said: “I believe that health care is a right of all people.” President Barack Obama declared that health care “should be a right for every American.” The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops: “Every person has a right to adequate health care.” President Franklin D. Roosevelt, in his January 1944 message to Congress, called for “the right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health.” And it is not just a health care right that people claim. There are rights to decent housing, good food, and a decent job, and for senior citizens, there’s a right to prescription drugs. In a free and moral society, do people have these rights? Let’s look at it.

*** end quote ***

So how is that “right” to “affordable care” working out for you?

I have no obligation to pay for anyone else’s “stuff”.

Argh!

A “positive” right to something implies that someone must provide it.

In nature, everything has a cost. Even “free health care”.

http://tomwoods.com/d/bernie.pdf

# – # – # – # – #

 


POLITICAL: The Israel Lobby?

Friday, April 22, 2016

http://tomwoods.com/podcast/ep-642-the-israel-lobby-what-it-does-and-how-it-works/

Ep. 642 The Israel Lobby: What It Does and How It Works
18th April 2016
Tom Woods

*** begin quote ***

We are supposed to believe that the network of organizations promoting a particular view of Israel and the U.S. relationship with that country doesn’t exist, and that anyone who says it does is a crank and a hater. Yet it’s precisely the network of organizations that would call such a person a hater that we’re talking about in the first pace. Grant Smith joins me for a rational discussion of this inexplicably sensitive issue.

About the Guest

Grant F. Smith is director of research at the Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy in Washington, D.C.

Book Discussed

Big Israel: How Israel’s Lobby Moves America

*** end quote ***

Basically, I don’t understand anyone who doesn’t have sympathy for Israel after the Shoah considering American actions before it (i.e., rejection of the Saint Louis; the anti-semitism of the US State Department; the failure of the executive to order the US Army Air Corp to stop the trains; the failure to inform the American people of what known facts when it was happening). 

That being said, not all the Israeli and USA interests are ALWAYS aligned.

It was an eye opening podcast that exposes how much the Israeli Gooferment manipulates the USA Gooferment to its benefit.

Argh!

Entirely too much Gooferment is my bottom line.

# – # – # – # – # 

SUBSCRIBE TO THE TOM WOODS SHOW

We are supposed to believe that the network of organizations promoting a particular view of Israel and the U.S. relationship with that country doesn’t exist, and that anyone who says it does is a crank and a hater. Yet it’s precisely the network of organizations that would call such a person a hater that we’re talking about in the first pace. Grant Smith joins me for a rational discussion of this inexplicably sensitive issue.

About the Guest

Grant F. Smith is director of research at the Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy in Washington, D.C.

Book Discussed

Big Israel: How Israel’s Lobby Moves America


POLITICAL: Jeanne Shaheen supports the ACA!

Thursday, April 14, 2016

In response to my letter opposing the ACA.

*** begin quote ***

Dear Ferdinand,

 

Thank you for contacting my office about health care reform and the Affordable Care Act. This is one of the most important issues facing our nation and I appreciate hearing your thoughts. 

I support the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and believe that the law was a necessary step toward improving our nation’s health insurance system and broadening access to coverage for individuals in New Hampshire and throughout the country. While I believe the law should be improved, I oppose efforts to repeal or dismantle it. The law makes critical insurance reforms, such as guaranteeing coverage for people with pre-existing conditions, allowing young adults to stay on their parents’ insurance plans until age 26 and limiting annual out-of-pocket costs to consumers. The ACA is providing insurance options to millions of Americans who were previously uninsured, ensuring that many of them have access to health insurance for the first time. 

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projects that the ACA will reduce the federal deficit over the next ten years and into the following decade. However, we must continue to focus on efficient and effective implementation of the ACA to ensure these significant savings. I am pleased that millions of Americans are receiving insurance plans through the online marketplaces, in addition to the millions nationally who have bought plans outside of the health insurance exchanges, and those who benefit from Medicaid expansion in our state. This demonstrates the ongoing need for the essential reforms that this law made. 

Although we have already seen benefits from the ACA, I am very concerned about problems that remain and I am dedicated to making this law work for New Hampshire residents. Last year, I was pleased to author the Protecting Affordable Coverage for Employees (PACE) Act, which is the first bipartisan standalone, health-related fix to the ACA to pass both the House and the Senate, and I’m proud that the President has signed it into law. This legislation amends the ACA to allow New Hampshire and other states the option to treat employers with 51 to 100 employees as large employers for the purposes of health insurance markets, preventing potential rate increases that could have otherwise taken place. 

Furthermore, I remain concerned that some individuals have faced insurance premium increases and understand that the rising cost of health insurance is a burden on many American families and small businesses. While health insurance premiums have typically increased annually in recent years, the ACA includes provisions to rein in insurance company abuses, such as requiring insurance companies to justify extreme cost growths to the consumer and ensuring that they spend a minimum of 80 percent of premium costs on actual health care services as opposed to administrative costs.

As you know, insurance premiums are based on underlying health care costs and a number of factors such as the use of the latest, most expensive technology and our fee-for-service model of health care delivery, where quantity rather than quality is rewarded. The ACA also took important steps to address the cost of health care, and I am hopeful that as the law’s implementation progresses, its innovative reforms and cost-saving measures will result in a more efficient and less costly health care system. 

I am pleased that five insurance companies are selling insurance plans in New Hampshire’s marketplace for coverage in 2016. This will ensure that our residents have access to a broader range of hospitals and providers throughout the state. If you or someone you know is in need of assistance or information related to the health reform law, please contact my Manchester office at 603-647-7500. In addition, Covering New Hampshire is an information resource available to all Granite State residents; please visit www.coveringnewhampshire.org to get in touch with the organization. 

Please be assured that I will continue to look for commonsense ways to improve the law to help ensure that Americans have access to affordable health insurance coverage. Thank you again for sharing your thoughts with me, and please do not hesitate to contact my office with any future concerns.

 

Sincerely,

Jeanne Shaheen
United States Senator

*** end quote ***

Argh!

# – # – # – # – # 

Dear Ferdinand,

 

Thank you for contacting my office about health care reform and the Affordable Care Act. This is one of the most important issues facing our nation and I appreciate hearing your thoughts. 

I support the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and believe that the law was a necessary step toward improving our nation’s health insurance system and broadening access to coverage for individuals in New Hampshire and throughout the country. While I believe the law should be improved, I oppose efforts to repeal or dismantle it. The law makes critical insurance reforms, such as guaranteeing coverage for people with pre-existing conditions, allowing young adults to stay on their parents’ insurance plans until age 26 and limiting annual out-of-pocket costs to consumers. The ACA is providing insurance options to millions of Americans who were previously uninsured, ensuring that many of them have access to health insurance for the first time. 

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projects that the ACA will reduce the federal deficit over the next ten years and into the following decade. However, we must continue to focus on efficient and effective implementation of the ACA to ensure these significant savings. I am pleased that millions of Americans are receiving insurance plans through the online marketplaces, in addition to the millions nationally who have bought plans outside of the health insurance exchanges, and those who benefit from Medicaid expansion in our state. This demonstrates the ongoing need for the essential reforms that this law made. 

Although we have already seen benefits from the ACA, I am very concerned about problems that remain and I am dedicated to making this law work for New Hampshire residents. Last year, I was pleased to author the Protecting Affordable Coverage for Employees (PACE) Act, which is the first bipartisan standalone, health-related fix to the ACA to pass both the House and the Senate, and I’m proud that the President has signed it into law. This legislation amends the ACA to allow New Hampshire and other states the option to treat employers with 51 to 100 employees as large employers for the purposes of health insurance markets, preventing potential rate increases that could have otherwise taken place. 

Furthermore, I remain concerned that some individuals have faced insurance premium increases and understand that the rising cost of health insurance is a burden on many American families and small businesses. While health insurance premiums have typically increased annually in recent years, the ACA includes provisions to rein in insurance company abuses, such as requiring insurance companies to justify extreme cost growths to the consumer and ensuring that they spend a minimum of 80 percent of premium costs on actual health care services as opposed to administrative costs.

As you know, insurance premiums are based on underlying health care costs and a number of factors such as the use of the latest, most expensive technology and our fee-for-service model of health care delivery, where quantity rather than quality is rewarded. The ACA also took important steps to address the cost of health care, and I am hopeful that as the law’s implementation progresses, its innovative reforms and cost-saving measures will result in a more efficient and less costly health care system. 

I am pleased that five insurance companies are selling insurance plans in New Hampshire’s marketplace for coverage in 2016. This will ensure that our residents have access to a broader range of hospitals and providers throughout the state. If you or someone you know is in need of assistance or information related to the health reform law, please contact my Manchester office at 603-647-7500. In addition, Covering New Hampshire is an information resource available to all Granite State residents; please visit www.coveringnewhampshire.org to get in touch with the organization. 

Please be assured that I will continue to look for commonsense ways to improve the law to help ensure that Americans have access to affordable health insurance coverage. Thank you again for sharing your thoughts with me, and please do not hesitate to contact my office with any future concerns.

 

Sincerely,

Jeanne Shaheen
United States Senator


POLITICAL: The definition of DUI and the Gooferment empowering penalties

Tuesday, April 12, 2016

http://nj1015.com/feedback/

Listened to D&D (DEMINSKI & DOYLE) on 101.5 FM the other day.

And, gave them the following “feedback”. (Their webpage prevents cut’n’paste. Argh!)

*** begin quote ***

D&D on “drinking and driving”

I think the penalties are wrong and counter-productive.

First, if drinking and driving are soon bad, then my generation should have died out.

Second, “they” keep lowering the “limits” to capture more revenue. It used to be 1.25 for “DRUNKEN driving”. Now, it’s 0.80 for “DRINKING and driving”.

Third and probably worst, it confuses the definition of “crime” — something that causes death, injury, or damage to property. A driver, who is snagged for the first time in a random stop, has not hurt anyone.

Argh!

*** end quote ***

In a short feedback square, it’s impossible to lay out what is so totally wrong about the biased question. It was designed to get folks talking about increasing the suspension time and prison time for DUI.

Argh!

Even the hosts readily and quickly admitted that their question had no chance of “solving the problem” (i.e., folks drive while on the suspended / revoked list and breath interlock devices can be bypassed).

So, let’s go into a little depth.

Historically, “Drinking and Driving” was a not a “big deal”. In fact, unless there was an accident, it wasn’t enforced.

The politicians and bureaucrats want to get into our pocketbooks to drain more wealth for their unconstitutional activities. More money is always needed!

SO let’s start with reinstating the Fourth Amendment, and end the random capricious checks for “DUI”.

If there is an accident, an injury, or Heaven Forbid a death, then there has been a crime. The accused should be tried and forced to make restitution.

If it’s just an accident with property damage, then the individual should be put on notice that the NEXT time there will be SEVERE penalties. An injury or fatality goes directly to an enhanced punishment!

For a second offense, jail time should be mandatory.

Subsequent offenses should have suitably longer imprisonment.

That will END the problem with a minimum expense to the taxpayer.

 Argh!

# – # – # – # – # 


POLITICAL: NATO — an idea who’s time has past

Monday, April 4, 2016

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2016/03/trump-is-rightdump-nato-now.html

MONDAY, MARCH 28, 2016
Trump Is Right—–Dump NATO Now
By David Stockman

*** begin quote ***

If you want to know why we have a $19 trillion national debt and a fiscal structure that will take that already staggering figure to $35 trillion and 140% of GDP within a decade, just consider the latest campaign fracas. That is, the shrieks of disbelief in response to Donald Trump’s sensible suggestion that the Europeans pay for their own defense.

*** end quote ***

For everything bad “they” say about Trump, dumping NATO and all the costs associated with it would save a very pretty penny!

# – # – # – # – #  


POLITICAL: What Difference Does It Make? Can you spell genocide!

Sunday, April 3, 2016

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/03/robert-ringer/capitalism-communism/

Capitalism or Communism? What Difference Does It Make?
By Robert Ringer
RobertRinger.com
March 29, 2016

*** begin quote ***

Sorry, Barackus, but communism and capitalism are at opposite ends of the liberty-tyranny spectrum. Communism is literal slavery for the masses and thus specifically prevents people from bettering their lives. Capitalism, on the other hand, is the epitome of freedom and provides unlimited opportunity for all. Other than this minor distinction, you don’t have to worry about whether something fits into socialist theory or capitalist theory.

*** end quote ***

This item was not widely reported.

I read a lot of global “news” thanks to Al Gore’s internet.

When I read this, I was blown away.

How stupid can you be?

Like those who wear the Che t-shirts — I have been know to reprimand those I see with those one — like the crazy old fart I am.

Communism / Marxism / Socialism / Fascism all lead to genocidal maniacs in charge.

How utterly ignorant of the cause and effect chain.

Argh!

# – # – # – # – # 


POLITICAL: Legalization is the cure for Heroin

Saturday, April 2, 2016

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/03/mark-thornton/curing-heroin-epidemic/

The Legalization Cure for the Heroin Epidemic
By Mark Thornton
Mises.org
March 29, 2016

*** begin quote ***

The problem of the epidemic rests with two causes. The first is the War on Drugs which creates profit incentives in the black market for the distribution of the most dangerous drugs. The second is the pharmaceutical-medical-FDA complex, or Big Pharma, which profits from treating pain with dangerous pharmaceutical drugs.

*** and ***

Third, in a free market, drugs like heroin would be produced and sold on a commercial basis. It would be a standardized product(s) and companies that sold dangerous and addictive products would do so under several legal constraints, such as liability and negligence law.

*** and ***

With drug legalization, the number of overdose deaths would plummet and tens of thousands of families would not have their lives ruined every year.

*** end quote ***

I’d add that the “(pseudo) War on (some) Drugs” incentivizes the Gooferment to keep the current status quo. 

The “forfeiture laws” provide a huge incentive to the police. And let’s not forget all the profits and employment in the justice / prison industry.

Argh!

It’s a medical problem that can be addressed by letting Walmart become the nation’s “drug dealer”.

Let see a drug ring make a profit competing with Walmart. Hasn’t happened yet to Sears, Kmart, Target, Pennys, or any number of small Mom and Pop stores.

Since Walmart doesn’t sell porn or even cigarettes or booze to youngsters, we can be sure that they won’t sell “drugs” to children. And, I bet it’ll be like eyeglasses, they’ll offer medical services to addict to kick the habits. 

Can you see how “un-cool” drugs will become if they are available fro Walmart? Kids wouldn’t be caught by their peers with them. Might as well wear Walmart jeans to the Gooferment Skrule!

It’s a medical problem that the free market will demolish in no time.

Sigh!

Then the Gooferment can focus on the real criminals — politicians and bureaucrats!

# – # – # – # – # 


POLITICAL: New meaning for “No justice; no peace”

Friday, March 25, 2016

http://nypost.com/2016/03/20/will-hillary-get-charged-or-what/

Will Hillary get charged, or what?
By Charles Gasparino
March 20, 2016 | 8:00pm 

*** begin quote ***

FBI sources say he has no backing from President Obama and Attorney General Loretta Lynch to recommend charges against the former secretary, since a Clinton presidency may be the best chance to preserve the Obama legacy.

That leaves Comey in a bind: Does he do what is politically expedient and deny the reality that Clinton’s email server activities violated the law, or follow the evidence to wherever it takes him?

Here’s hoping he uses the same standards against Clinton as he used against Stewart and Quattrone.

*** end quote ***

If she is not charged, then this is the end of the USA. It would strip away the illusion of equal justice under the law. “No justice; no peace” would take on a new meaning.

# – # – # – # – # 


POLITICAL: Where are the photos of the people of those who can’t?

Wednesday, March 9, 2016

http://www.cato.org/blog/oregon-legislature-repeals-laws-supply-demand

MARCH 4, 2016 9:50AM
Oregon Legislature Repeals Laws of Supply & Demand
By RANDAL O’TOOLE

*** begin quote ***

Buoyed by its success, the legislature yesterday passed a law legalizing inclusionary zoning, that is, forcing homebuilders to sell a certain percentage of their products below cost. This will also lead them to build fewer homes and to sell the market-rate homes they do build for higher prices to offset their losses on the “affordable” homes. In other words, this law relies on the counterintuitive notion that making housing more expensive will make it more affordable.

Once again, the legislature is playing a balancing game. A few people will get–and be very grateful for–more affordable housing. Every other homebuyer and renter will end up paying more, but not enough more for them (the legislature hopes) to complain about it.

The Oregonian, for example, accompanied my article criticizing the urban-growth boundary with a photo of a man who enjoys “affordable” housing provided by the city of Bend that was funded by taxing all other new homes in the city. Where are the photos of the people having to pay higher taxes or who can’t afford to buy a new home because of that tax?

*** end quote ***

This is just a variation of Bastiat’s Broken Window fallacy.

“The broken window fallacy” — Frédéric Bastiat Ce qu’on voit et ce qu’on ne voit pas (That Which Is Seen and That Which Is Unseen) 1850 

The politicians and bureaucrats are always “giving” but we don’t see those “taken from”.

Argh!

# – # – # – # – #