Month: June 2017

“Mirabile dictu” is a Latin phrase often used many years ago by my freshman Algebra teacher, Father Conway. Although Father Conway had multiple eccentricities and was known affectionately as Crazy George to his students, he was an excellent algebra teacher. I recall that I had him in first period, and he was my initial exposure to high school on my first freshman day. After about five minutes into that first class on that first day, I surely thought, “What have I gotten myself into?”He used multiple other Latin phrases, but “mirabile dictu” was his favorite. Loosely translated it means, “It’s a miracle!”, and he would use it most often when a student would do something unexpected, like solving a problem on the blackboard or having all the correct answers on his homework.

Today when initially looking at the front page of my local liberal “newspaper”, I said to myself, “Mirabile dictu!”, as there actually was an article on the front page (albeit in the lower left-hand corner) that was a pro-Trump article. Although I do not keep a running tally, in my recollection, this was the first pro-Trump article on the front page of my local WaPo wannabe – on this the 158th day of the Trump presidency.                                                                                              Surely, this was close to a miracle . . . “Mirabile dictu.”

Why would the front page of a “newspaper” seemingly purposely not print positive stories about Mr. Trump?

From my perspective there are limited answers, and all of them include biased reporting and an intense dislike for our president – but why this intense dislike?

Could it be that the animus against President Trump is because he IS actually fulfilling or attempting to fulfill his campaign promises? He is keeping his word to those who voted for him, and I think that each kept promise just infuriates the left more!

 

What campaign promises has he kept thus far?                                                            Let’s list a few:

– Suspend immigration from terror prone places (Supreme Court)

– Reverse B.O.’s Cuba policy (scaled back)

– Terminate B.O.’s immigration executive orders (DAPA rescinded)

– Create private White House veteran’s hotline (announced start on 6/1)

– Cancel Paris Accord (cancelled)

– Invest $550B in infrastructure and create infrastructure fund (rough outline)

– Appoint conservative Supreme Court Justice (Neil Gorsuch)

 

Like I said earlier, Father Conway was eccentric, but he got the job done. His job was to teach us algebra, and when we were finished with his yearlong class, we knew and understood algebra – indeed he was successful at his job.

Donald Trump is a bit eccentric, and is getting the job done. His job is to fulfill his campaign promises, and he is moving right along on this, and thus far he has been successful. Remember that he has only been in office for 158 days, and thus I foresee many more days with him accomplishing what he said he would accomplish with no corresponding  positive front page headlines.

Illegals Voting

“On the picture ID, the one thing I have thought of in that space is that if you show up on Election Day with a driver’s license with a picture, attest that you are a citizen, you have a right to vote in an Federal election”. (This quote was referring to the potential of illegals voting in a presidential election.)

To this the liberals would say, “balderdash” as this must have been said by some “right wing nut job”, after all it is only conservative Republicans that imply that there could be any voter fraud in any U.S. elections. Actually this was said by John Podesta, former chairman of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, in a February 2015 email. This email was leaked by Wikileaks, and it was written one day after Donald Trump said that the system was rigged. (Keep in mind that the Democrats never disputed the veracity of the contents of the Wikileaks emails.)

Is it a surprise that a prominent Democrat like Podesta would think, in essence, that driver’s licenses provide a potential for illegals to vote?  No, no surprise here, as it is common sense that providing driver’s licenses for illegals opens the door to these illegals voting. The only real question is, “How wide is this door opened, and how many illegals are passing through it”.

How many, indeed?

An editorial in Investors Business Daily (Nov. 2016) stated that there could be as many as 20-30 million illegals in the U.S., instead of the often quoted number of 11-12 million. The Electoral Studies Journal postulated that there may have been 2.8 million illegal votes in the 2008-2010 elections, and there are certainly many more illegals residing here than were in 2010.

So perhaps in response to his suspicions that the system may be rigged, on May 10, 2017, President Trump issued an executive order creating a commission to investigate voter fraud. The Democrats condemned this new commission as a ‘witch-hunt’, and academics have rejected the notion that fraudulent voting is widespread. All I need at this time to make me sure that there is some truth in Trump’s allegations is for the ACLU to chime in  . . . Oops, the ACLU has just chimed in! It filed a legal request to the White House for records showing “concrete evidence” of fraudulent voting that would warrant the creation of such a commission. Indeed with this trifecta (Democrats, academics, and the ACLU) arguing against the possibility of voter fraud, you can almost guarantee that there is some truthfulness to Trump’s allegations.

So what is the situation in California?

How will the new “Motor-Voter” law affect voting in this state?                                    First off as a result of Cal. AB60, implemented in 2015, approximately 806,000 illegal immigrants have received driver’s licenses.                                           Then AB1461 (the “motor-voter ” law) which took effect in 2017 greased the skids for these illegals to vote. The “estimate” is that there are about 2.4 million illegal immigrants in California! How many of these will eventually get driver’s licenses, and how many of these will end up voting?

From the LA Times in June, 2016 on AB 1461:                                                                   “The new law, slated to take effect next year, is supposed to streamline the way citizens register to vote at Department of Motor Vehicles offices. Once fully implemented, drivers applying for or renewing licenses and completing other DMV transactions will have their information electronically transmitted to the secretary of State, as long as they’ve confirmed they’re eligible to vote and don’t opt out of registering.”

The key here is the last part which means that these illegals are asked if they can legally vote – they have broken the law by being here, and so, of course, the best thing to do is to ask them if they are eligible to vote?!

“If you are talking about California, the state is apparently relying on the illegal alien to tell the state they shouldn’t be registered. This is still an honor system,” said Mr. Hans A. von Spakovsky, co-author of the book “Who’s Counting? How Fraudsters and Bureaucrats Put Your Vote at Risk”.                          In other words, applicants can check a box affirming they are citizens, and this is not checked against any other government database such as federal immigration records.

I say this is insanity! But then when you have a Democratic legislature and a Democratic governor, this is the kind of insanity that we, in California, have come to expect. Since illegal aliens vote overwhelmingly Democratic, the question in California is not “if” – but how many Republican votes are nullified by illegal immigrants voting for Democrats?

Many years ago one of my wife’s aunts, Sister Ann, was staying overnight at one of my daughters. As conversation was becoming increasingly awkward, my daughter decided to rent a movie. So which movie to rent? As Ann was a nun the movie had to be non-violent, non-sexual, non-political, and ‘non’ just about everything! So she rented “Babe, Pig in the City”, which was an innocent movie about a talking pig. Perfect she thought, as both her great aunt and her young children could watch it.                                                                                                       After about one hour into the movie, Sister Ann queried, “Who’s talking?”

I happened to recall this cute story the other day when I was thinking about the ‘over-the-top’ bad coverage that Donald Trump is receiving from the mainstream media.                                                                                                                              “Who’s talking?”

Well of course, the talking is being done by the left both in print and on T.V., but is this what the average middle-class American wants to hear and read about?

I think that we can all agree that the military is a highly respected and admired institution in the U.S. Yet on May 30th, the day after Memorial Day, there was nothing on the front page of the ‘Dueling Banjos’ (New York Times and the Washington Post) about Memorial Day celebrations. Not only that, but neither of the ‘dueling banjos’ had anything on their front pages about the military being honored on Memorial Day.

Our local dueling banjo wannabe “newspaper” (San Diego Union Tribune – heretofore to be known as “the lemming”) followed suit, with nothing on the front page about the military. Neither the ‘dueling banjos’ or the ‘lemming’ mentioned President Trump’s wonderful speech at The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at Arlington National Cemetery on the front page. Amazingly, the front page of the ‘lemming’ had articles titled “Electricity Regulators Preparing for the Effects of Eclipse”, “Woman Taming Her Anxiety”, and, of course, an anti-Trump story, “Inquiry Turns to Kushner’s Motives in Contacts”.

Is this what the active or retired military, here in San Diego wanted to read about?                                                                                                                                                   The story, “Trump Honors the Nation’s Fallen” was relegated to page four – and this in a Navy town!

The above examples of the front pages of liberal newspapers on the day after Memorial Day are merely egregious examples of what is happening just about every day. The last time that the SDUT had a picture of our president on the front page was about a month ago, and this was near the headline, “Comey: Trump Tried to Influence Probe” – which BTW is not even true!

So back to “Who’s talking?”, and it’s important corollaries of “Who’s reading?” and “Who’s listening?”

Here in San Diego many of my non-liberal friends have stopped our local “newspaper” because of its overwhelmingly, and sometimes nauseating leftward slant. Outside of the liberal coastal elites, who is continuing to read the NYT and WaPo? I doubt that many in the Mid-Atlantic States, the Rust Belt, or the Deep South were ever regular readers of the ‘dueling banjos’. So the answer to, “Who’s reading?” is . . . those that voted for Hillary are reading the left’s propaganda newspapers. Likewise, “Who’s listening?” Those that tune into CNN, MSNBC, and ABC are listening and these are also the ones that voted for Hillary.

I think that the typical American is becoming more and more turned off by the obvious mainstream bias. Middle America is just not buying what the ‘dueling banjos’, etc. are selling.

The photojournalist Chris Arnade reported on Twitter what he was seeing in Mountain Grove, Mo., on the morning while Mr. Comey was testifying. The conversation topics at the local McDonald’s : “1.)Yard work/lawn mowers,          2) Danger of bees, 3) Cardinals sucking” . . .

The Comey hearings were not in the top five. Missourians are just not interested in what’s going on in Washington politics. It is rumored that CNN was polling whether or not Trump should be impeached . . . but they stopped, and did not report the results when it was running 70% “No”.                      America is not buying this impeachment charade that CNN and MSNBC are selling.

On 6/20/17, Republican Karen Hendel defeated Democrat, Jon Ossoff, in Georgia’s 6th, despite millions of dollars coming in from outside of Georgia for Ossoff.                                                                                                                                              Georgians did not buy what the outside elites were selling!

Is there any buying goin’ on?

This leads me to the all important issue of Trump’s tweets. Most everybody on T.V. and in the newspapers are of the opinion that our president should stop tweeting.

However, who’s talking in these tweets? The President is talking.                             I say, “Go for it, Mr. President!”

This is not just because I am a contrarian.

I say, “Right on, Mr. President”, because tweeting is his way of talking to his fellow Americans – those who voted for him, and they’re buying what Donald Trump is selling.

These millions who read his tweets, surely are not buying what the ‘dueling banjos’ or any of their wannabes and lemmings are selling!

Well, the South side of Chicago
Is the baddest part of town
And if you go down there
You better just beware
Of a man called Leroy Brown!

 

“Bad, bad Leroy Brown” was a notorious South side of Chicago resident in the 1973 song by Jim Croce, and back then the South side of Chicago was a very bad part of town. When I got my driver’s license my father gave me a stern warning to stay off the Dan Ryan expressway that cut across Chicago’s South side. He said, “Do not go onto the Dan Ryan, and if you end up on the Dan Ryan by mistake, do not get off of it for any reason!”

In 2017 the South side of Chicago is still the baddest part of town. However this dubious honor is now being challenged by the West side of Chicago – in and around the area in which I grew up. In fact when I went back to my old neighborhood in 2008, I was afraid to get out of my car, and instead took pictures through my open driver’s side window.

As I am sure most everybody is aware, Chicago is the “murder capital of the US”.

Why is all this mayhem happening on both the South side and the West side of Chicago? The answer lies basically in three words . . . the 3-D words (but you do not need special glasses to see the facts clearly). These 3-D words are “drugs”, “delincuentes” (delinquent gangs), and Democrats.

 

First, the Democrats. Why should they be included in this “why Chicago is the Murder Capitol” list? Why besmirch the Democrats?  Well to start with, Democrats have controlled The Windy City since 1931, when William Thompson, a Republican, finished his third term as mayor. Since that time every mayor has been a Democrat! Presently Rahm  Emanuel, is the Democratic mayor of Chicago and the Democrats control the City Council. Certainly after 85 straight years of control, the Democrats “own” the city and own responsibility for what happens in the city. The City Council and the mayor proclaim Chicago to be “a sanctuary city” and while this sounds good, they certainly should be responsible when things go awry.

Chicago has a multitude of street gangs, but last month the “Two Sixers” made the news. The Two-Sixers started on the near southwest side of Chicago in 1964 as a neighborhood baseball team in and around 26th Street, and hence the name. Early on they were befriended by the Mexican Mafia and over the years its name has morphed into the ‘Gangster Two Six Nation’. It has become national in scope, but is particularly prevalent on Chicago’s South side. It is a very violent Latino street gang that is well known for just shooting its enemies.

Last month federal authorities and Chicago police culminated a 3 year investigation of the Two-Sixers, called “Operation Bunny Trap”, which resulted in the seizures of roughly 118 firearms, including several assault rifles and shotguns, 25 rounds of ammunition, more than 800 grams of cocaine, more than 250 grams of fentanyl, and more than 280 grams of crystal meth. There can be little argument that “drugs” and “delincuentes” are a major part of Chicago’s “murder problem”, and that they go together.

As twenty-seven of those arrested will be arraigned in Cook County Criminal Court and twenty-one will be arraigned in federal court, the answers to two pertinent questions will soon come out:

“Are any of these arrested delincuentes in the country illegally?”

“If so,  have any of these illegal delincuentes been arrested before?”

If the answer to either of these questions is “yes”, then the sanctuary city protagonists have a problem.

But still there is still an additional critical question:

“If any of these “delincuentes” had been arrested before, were they turned over to federal immigration authorities?

If the answer to this question is, “No, they were not turned over to federal immigration authorities when they should have been”, now we have a significant moral problem. Whose responsibility is it that innocent bystanders have been killed as a result of these illegal delincuentes having gotten a “second chance”. I do not really care very much if these delincuentes want to shoot and kill each other, but I do care about the innocents that are killed as a consequence of their drugs and the their weapons. In addition if I was a friend or a family member of an innocent child, an innocent sibling, or an innocent parent that was killed because an illegal delincuente got a “second chance”, I would demand my day in court.”

 

“We’ve been doing CPR for 45 minutes and there is still no response”, said the intern. “Perhaps a pacemaker would help. Call the cardiologist!” The cardiologist, who had just entered the hospital room, evaluated the patient and responded, “This patient has been chronically ill for years, and now he’s dead. You can’t pace a steak.”

Obamacare has been chronically ill for years and is now in critical condition. Death is near! Democrats still want to try to resuscitate it, even as the costs of the ACA are accelerating in almost logarithmic fashion. A new survey of health insurers found that 43% were planning to propose rate increases greater than 20%, while another 36% were looking at rate increases of 10-20%. The average increase was around 20% even with the assumption that cost-sharing payments would continue. If cost-sharing payments cease (one court has already found them to be not legal), insurance premiums will rise even more. By 2018 Obamacare will be near death, or even dead.

Do not resuscitate!

During the campaign Donald Trump promised to repeal and replace Obamacare, while the Republicans had been vowing to do the same if given the chance. However, I do not recall ever hearing that ‘the repeal’ and ‘the replace’ were promised to be done at the same time. The Democrats pushed through a badly designed health-care law in 2010 without any bipartisan support. They subsequently paid a big price and were slaughtered in the 2012 elections.

Should the Republicans follow the same potential path to slaughter?

 

Republicans, keep your word – Repeal Obamacare . . . effective in 2019, and between now and 2019 work to finalize a ‘replace’ plan. Once Obamacare is dead and buried, encourage cooperation from the other side of the aisle, so that in the end a bipartisan law can be crafted.  If the Democrats don’t want to cooperate, let them pay the price for their recalcitrance in the 2018 election.

Meanwhile a bipartisan group of governors is criticizing the House GOP health bill’s proposed cuts to Medicaid, and is urging bipartisan action to stabilize the insurance market.

Ahh . . . “bipartisan support”!

So here is my proposed solution:

First, as I have already said, Repeal Obamacare now, effective as of January, 2019.

The Republicans should continue discussing the Replacement Plan, and after ACA has been repealed and buried, again invite the Democrats to participate. If the Democrats continue to refuse to contribute to a solution or if a bipartisan group cannot agree on a Replacement during 2017-18, then they will have to explain their positions to the electorate in 2018.

There are those who will argue that with the present far-left (Pelosi and Schumer) and the present far-right (Rand Paul and also the Freedom Caucus), there will never be a bipartisan agreement. My solution to this is to exclude ten Senators and twenty House members from each party from this bipartisan health-care bill discussion. Those Congressmen who represent the extremes in their party as judged by past voting records would be excluded (and told to “shut up!”).

If I could be spared the pain of having to see Pelosi and Schumer regularly on T.V., any compromise would be well worth it!

 

“How ’bout those Chargers?”

If one takes this question at face value, the answer would be, “They’re horrible! They’ve left. Why would anyone even think about discussing the Chargers?” But this is generally not meant to be a real and sincere question, but merely a way to change the direction of the conversation. Usually the phrase is uttered by someone who is uncomfortable with the topic or by someone who finds him/herself on the losing end of a political “discussion”.

In the liberal press various forms of a phrase like this are now being silently spoken, as James Hodgekinson’s attempt to kill multiple Republican Congressmen, and their staffs  at a morning baseball practice is the top news story of the week, and for such a committed liberal to do something this despicable is against their usual political slant.

But it is not football season now, so it would be, “How ’bout those Xxxxxx?” – where Xxxxxx is a Major League Baseball Team.

From the Chicago Tribune, “How ’bout those Cubs!”

From The Boston Herald, “How ’bout those Red Sox!”

From The San Francisco Chronicle, “How ’bout those Giants!”

This deranged fanatic through his actions, multiple prior letters-to-the-editor, and posts on social media was a true “left-wing nut job” (to borrow my cousin’s phrase). However, my local “newspaper’s” editorial board went after those who dared to say that Hodgekinson’s motives were political!! . . . “How ’bout those Padres?”

The New York Times had an editorial in which they directly placed the blame for the actions of Hodgekinson on Sarah Palin!! . . . “How ’bout those Mets?”

Seriously though, I think that it is fair to ask the NYT if anybody (other that Sarah Palin) is actually responsible for someone like  Hodgekinson and his actions?

Okay, partially responsible?

Hodgekinson appears to have been very borderline as far as his mental stability was concerned, and this is exactly the type of individual that can easily be pushed over the edge by what the left considers to be humor . . . macabre humor.

Should we, as a society, hold leftists responsible if some unstable individual commits a violent act after listening to them speak? Should we expect them to be aware that their words could be the proverbial straw . . . the straw that pushes someone over the edge.

Should  Kathy Griffin have been aware of this?

Should Shakespeare in the Park have been aware of this?

When Madonna said, “Yes, I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House”, should she have been aware that some might take her seriously?

What about Robert De Niro saying about President Trump, “He’s been an embarrassment to this country . . . I’d like to punch him in the face.” Should he have been aware that when Vito Corleone and/or Raging Bull speaks, certain people might take him/them seriously?

Was Snoop Dogg trying to give a message to some deranged person when he pointed a pop-gun at Trump dressed as a circus clown, and then pulled the trigger?

Who was David Simon (creator of HBO’s ‘The Wire’) trying to influence when he said, “If Donald Trump fires Robert Mueller and is allowed to do so, pick up a goddamn brick . . .”

Should Snoop Dogg and/or David Simon have been aware that certain people might take their “suggestions” seriously?

Those on the left will not ascribe any degree of responsibility for these veiled calls for violence, but the irony here is that I think that all of the aforementioned were likely very aware that someone might take them seriously.

 

BTW, I found it quite surprising that the day after Hodgekinson was taking aim at and wounding Republicans in Virginia, the on-line Washington Post did not list this story among its five most read stories . . . perhaps its front-page headline that day read . . . “How ’bout those Nationals!!”

 

There was a TV show back in the 70s called Dragnet, which always started with the main character, Joe Friday, saying, “The story that you are about to hear is true. The names have been changed to protect the innocent.”

Well what you are about to read is true. The writer’s name has been changed. He lives in Northern California, and he sent this letter to a bunch of his neighbors.

Dear Trumptards and Republicans,

I have been struggling with sending this message because many of you are/were my dear friends. Unfortunately it has become clear that you either voted for Trump or voted Republican which indicates you are stubbornly ignorant and/or have denial for owning what and who you voted for. Your purposeful decision to vote Trump or Republican this time goes way beyond Politics. It is truly a matter of very poor morals, ethics and complete denial.

Under this Trump/ Republican Administration numerous repeals and acts have been enacted to literally assault wildlife, the environment, and so many people’s rights and healthcare.  Many of these repeals were made specifically to erase the Obama Legacy – purposely without any regard to consequences. Others were made specifically to cater to Trump’s special interests and his psychopathic base of supporters.

Regardless of which of these continued assaults on animals, environment and human rights – this absurd government behavior is what YOU voted for and YOU OWN IT !

The dignity I have left dictates I reprimand people with seemingly no morals or ethics.   Please consider yourselves out of my circle of friends until you admit that this asshole of a President and his administration’s policies and principles were a complete mistake to vote for.

It is my sincere wish that this decision you made (politically, morally and ethically) comes back to haunt you personally – so that you may feel the effects you have inflicted upon others.

Very Sincerely,

John Xxxxxxx ( Registered Non-Partisan Voter)

 

What makes this letter especially interesting to me is that the writer lives in California where a vote for Trump was a meaningless vote. If his now “ex-friends” had actually voted for Trump, it did not matter one iota.

The vitriol in this letter makes me wonder if John, the writer, was drinking a lot of liquid refreshment (other than the Kool-Aid) when he wrote it. On the other hand it is a signature of the left to resort to ad hominem attacks instead of addressing the issues. There is not a single specific issue addressed here, but he feels comfortable calling Trump voters, “psychopathic”, with “no morals or ethics”, and of course there is the often used wish (by the left) that some harm might come to anyone who voted republican – “It is my sincere wish that the decision that you made comes back to haunt you”.

I do feel somewhat sad for John as it seems that he must spend a lot of his time watching CNN and MSNBC, and perhaps that is where he learned that the tone and phrases in this letter are appropriate.

 

What, you say, no one on the left speaks or acts like this!

Let’s first mention Kathy Griffin (CNN) who thought that holding the severed bloody head of Donald Trump was funny.                                                                   Classy? . . . No! Class dismissed.

Then there is Rezan Aslan (CNN) who on one of his recent Sunday shows called President Trump “a piece of sh**), and who in the past publicly wished that Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo) would be raped.                                                             Classy? . . . No! Class dismissed.

Of course let’s not forget Joe Scarborough (MSNBC) who said that “Donald Trump looked like a goon” at a recent NATO meeting.                                        Classy? . . . No! Class dismissed.

Not to be outdone his sidekick, Mika Brzezinski (MSNBC) likened the accomplishments of Donald Trump to a child defecating “in their pants and then saying [they] meant to do that”.                                                                            Classy? . . . No! Class dismissed.

These are just a few examples of what passes for “class” on the left.

Lucky for you – if you are reading this, it means that you probably do have real class, as you certainly have better things to do with your time other than spending  it watching CNN or MSNBC!

 

 

Let’s go back to Brooklyn in 1955 as a nine year old boy is talking to his friend.

“Let me make sure that I understand the deal that you worked out with my brother and his friends. They promised that I would give you $30 a year for the next fifteen years, and if Duke Snider makes the Baseball Hall of Fame by that time, you will give me his rookie baseball card.

Why would I ever do that? For me that is a really bad deal, so despite what you were promised by my brother, I am pulling out of the deal.”

The boy could have been Donald Trump. He recognized a bad deal back then, when his brother and his brother’s cronies were trying to convince him to put up a lot of money over many years for something that might or might not happen. Fast forward 60+ years and he is still able to spot a bad deal. He was able to recognize the Paris Accords for what they really were . . . a bad deal, a really bad deal for the U.S.

How so?

Well to start with as of May 2017 the U.S. had put $1 billion into the Green Climate Fund, whereas China, India, and Russia combined had put $0 into this United Nations fund. Christopher Horner (a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute) argued that this agreement is more about wealth redistribution than climate change, and the U.N.’s chief economist, Ottmar Edenhofer, admitted that they de facto redistribute the world’s wealth through climate policy.

How much was this Paris Accord going to cost? The price tag would have been approximately $1.2 trillion per year! 1.2 trillion per year in order to achieve a temperature reduction of 0.3 F by 2100 according to the U.N. Climate Prediction Model! That sure doesn’t sound like much bang for the buck! Steve Forbes commented that Trump was right in pulling out, “It would have had a devastating effect on our economy.”

Now I am not a Steve Forbes, but to me if it sounds like a bad deal, and looks like a bad deal, then it probably is a bad deal!

On the other hand, you had “twinkle-toes”, John Kerry, advising President Trump to “think of all the grandkids who will have to live with his decision”. I wonder if he has ever thought about all the grandkids who will have to live with his decision to give Iran nuclear weapons?

How do you spell “hypocrisy”?  . . . K-E-R-R-Y !

In the same vein Barack Hussein Obama said we were joining “a small handful of nations that reject the future”. Speaking of the future, I wonder why President Obama did not place his agreement to this treaty before the U.S. Senate in 2015 as is mandated by law. If he had put this before The Senate, then the future President Trump would not have been involved, and we would not be having this blast of hot air by those on the left. Back then The Senate would have given it a thumbs up or thumbs down, and it would have been a fait accompli. When asked why he did not put this to a Senate vote, Barack Obama responded that it was not a treaty! When I heard this weak attempt at an explanation, I thought, “If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck . . . then it probably is a duck!” But then again who can expect a community organizer to recognize a duck?

Kudos to the nine year old back then, and the seventy-one year old, now 62 years later, as they both recognized a really bad deal and refused to be sucked in.

 

 

I received a chart in a recent email that alluded to the relationships between photo IDs and racism. It listed about 30 things for which requiring a photo I.D. is not racist.

These included:

Buying alcohol

Opening a bank account

Applying for Social Security

Buying or renting a house

Driving a car

Getting a prescription

Getting married

Using a credit card

Apply for a hunting or fishing license

Etc., etc.

Then shortly after I received this email, I read with interest a story by Manny Fernandez (N.Y.Times) concerning a Texas voter I.D. Law. On April 10 Nelva Gonzales Ramos, a US District Court judge, ruled that the voter-identification law passed by the Texas legislature in 2011 was enacted with the intent to discriminate against black and Hispanic voters.

“This is an exciting ruling . . .” said Myrna Perez, an deputy director of a group that represented two of the groups that sued the state. In his article Mr. Fernandez opined that Texas has a history of voter discrimination. I thought that it was interesting that the writer of the article, the deputy director, and the Texas judge all had Hispanic surnames, and presumably were all Hispanic.

In 2016 I was taking a Spanish language course, and the teacher was born and raised in Mexico. Just prior to the U.S. November presidential election, she passed around her Mexican voter ID card. The laminated card had her name, her picture, and her thumb-print on it. She said that she could only vote in Mexico if she presented this card, and that no other ID could substitute for this card. She also stated that the penalties for voter fraud were substantial in Mexico.

Now here is the part that befuddles me. If Mexico (with some parts being “third world”) requires a government issued voter picture ID card to vote, why is it discriminatory to require picture identification cards in Texas or any other part of the USA?

Is Judge Ramos saying that the getting of a voter ID is easier in Mexico than it could ever be in “discriminating Texas” or in the “discriminatory U.S.A.”, and because it is more difficult in the U.S.A. than it is in Mexico, it is not legal in the U.S.A.? This would be quite a stretch, and certainly no one would or could believe it.

Or,

Is Judge Ramos implying that the Hispanics in Texas are less capable and less self sufficient than those across the border in Mexico?

Who is the racist here?

 

When President Trump pulled the U.S. out of the Paris Accords ( you know that treaty that really wasn’t a treaty), who was one of the first to go into ‘attack-mode’?                                                                                                                               Take a guess!

Why of course it was none other than California’s governor, Jerry Brown, who did not wait long before saying, “Trump is AWOL, but California is on the field, ready for battle”. This is the same Jerry Brown who signed SB 32, which by 2030 targets a goal of 40% of the 1998 greenhouse gas emissions. Who ignores the effects of SB32 on businesses in California?                                                 Take a guess!

Why it is the same uber liberal Governor Brown!  Because of SB32, some business groups have already raised concerns. Allan Zaremberg, president of the state’s Chamber of Commerce, said the law doesn’t require “regulatory agencies to give any consideration to the impacts on our economy, disruptions in everyone’s daily lives or the fact that California’s population will grow.” High energy costs have already driven some businesses out of the state, as businesses that have benefited from Climate-Change are subsidized, like Tesla.

While I do not agree with our liberal governor’s thinking on green energy, is there any data to back up either point of view?

The best prediction of what is going to happen in California is to look at the energy situation in Germany, which made a commitment to green energy many years ago. Keep in mind that the people in Germany are as clueless as the people in California when it comes to the costs of green energy. In a recent survey 37% of Germans had no idea of how much they paid for their power consumption. So pay attention, Californians, while I inform you as to what is happening in Germany with energy costs, as this is what you can anticipate in the near future. In Germany the cost of electricity has gone up considerably. Who do you think is paying for this green energy?                                                      Take a guess!

In Germany the price for power for a family of three is 68% above the price in 1998, as the surcharge for renewable energy has risen 10-fold in that same period. This surcharge is essentially the higher cost for green energy that grid operators pass on to their customers. These customers who are tasked with this rising surcharge are ordinary families – not the ‘energy intensive industries’, which in Germany (and probably also in California in the future) are exempt in order not to damage their international competitiveness. Electrical bills in Germany are about equal to bills in the U.S., despite the fact that Germans use about 1/3 as much energy as Americans – in other words Germans now pay about 3X as much for their energy compared to us.

Keeping in mind that some Germans now consider electricity to be “somewhat of a luxury”, think about who will be hurt the most in California by the rising cost of electricity.                                                                                                                          Take a guess!

In keeping with a familiar theme of mine, the answer, of course, is that the poor will be hurt the most. Why?

Which group of people can afford to install their own solar panels?                           Take a guess!

Who can afford to install new energy efficient windows and doors?                        Take a guess!

Who can install new insulation to keep their power bills low?                              Take a guess!

It is the rich/upper middle class that can afford these measures, and so they will continue to pay lower energy bills. However, when the cost of electricity accelerates who do you think will pay for this expensive green electricity? Take a guess! – Obviously not the rich.

Which present 79 year old governor will probably be dead when these expensive green energy costs hit the fan?                                                                      Take a guess!