Down With The Global Progressive Consensus

I was going to include the latest (maybe the greatest) Pat Condell video in a comment section here, is response to Cress still whining about the Brexit vote and how somehow Brits standing up to authoritarianism, wanting more control over their own affairs, and wanting a separation from a government entity that did not have their best interests at heart, that somehow this was voting “against” something instead of “for”. But since Pat is addressing his video to Americans and the upcoming election, it was well worth a tussle;

When Trump first hit the mashed potato circuit, his calling card was border security, given the refugee crisis that is turning Europe into a garbage dump (as championed by Sweden before them) this is not a model I want to emulate. Many Brits did not like it either, thus, Brexit.

And in yet another example of the EU wanting to be more like the Soviet Union in it’s hay day, they now want to pass a uniform (code for increase) corporate tax rate for all EU members;

France and Germany are pushing plans to introduce a minimum corporation tax rate across the continent, it was reported today, in a move that could result in higher taxes on British companies.
European officials will debate plans to set a EU-wide floor on corporation tax in order to crack down on tax havens such as Ireland and Luxembourg, it emerged.

See, some EU countries, specifically Ireland and the Eastern European nations, have figured out that lower corporate tax rates makes them more competitive, provides incentives for big corporations to settle there, which not only provides much needed tax revenue, but it hires their workers and buys their goods. These upstart countries figured out that 15% of a lot provides more tax dollars than 40% of a little.

Well, we can’t have that. So now the EU will use it’s iron fist and autocratic power to compel these other nations to raise their corporate tax rates, more in line with the crazy European model of taxation thru the kazoo. And you wonder why some Europeans are fed up with Brussels telling them what to do. A few hundred years ago 13 peep squeak colonies felt the mother country no longer had their best interest at heart, desired and fought for a separation. How lucky the Brits were that they did not need to shed blood in order to achieve autonomy.

As usual. Pat make a compelling case for Trump. I think he is somewhat mistaken in saying Trump speaks his mind and that is a good indicator of what he believes. Most of the time Trump does not even know what he believes. But the “American way vs. the European way” is accurate.

My prediction has not changed, Trump will lose, but how delicious would it be to see the left, academia, MSM, and Hollywood all self combust in a fiery conflagration?

Comments are closed.

  1. Iconoclast

    Well, I expect Hal to show up any minute to tell us how this guy is full of shit, and then go on another TDS rampage…..

    …..followed by another “I Feel For Ya Bro” CM moment…..

    …..and maybe RepMom can again remind us how the very thought of Trump makes her wanna projectile-hurl…..

    Seriously, why the FUCK is this place still called Right-Thinking?????

    We get it.  Y’all hate Trump.  But he’s all we got whether you like it or not.  You can pine for Rubio or Kasich or Cruz all you want, but none of them are on the fucking ballot.

    And Mr. “What is Aleppo?” may be on the ballot, but he ain’t a real choice.  He’s a mental masturbation, “I’m Better Than You ‘Cause I Didn’t Vote For Trump” choice.  Nothing more.

    Thumb up 2

  2. Iconoclast

    A bit, yes.  But since I still expect H to win, my over-arching depression still has its iron grip.

    When I was a kid, I watched Americans walk on the surface of the moon.  I read about how America was instrumental in winning two world wars.  American medicine was conquering devastating diseases here and around the world.

    Now we’re going to become a banana republic.  We won’t go to Mars. Ever. No permanent moon base as depicted in 2001: A Space Odyssey. Can’t even dream about it any more.

    Because global warming.  And bathrooms.  And refugees.  “Moving Forward” really means “let the new dark age descend”.

    So I guess I lied — I don’t really feel much better at all.

    Thumb up 1

  3. AlexInCT

    Now we’re going to become a banana republic.

    Hate to burst your bubble bro, but this sitting president already made us that. If Hillary wins it will get much worse, of course, and do so much faster. Trump might be a mediocre president, but at least he will not be as destructive as the cabal now in charge and desperate to keep power so they can avoid the consequences of the criminality of the past 8 years coming to light.

    I always wondered why throughout history great empires/nations always fell from within first. Having to see it play out, live, has educated me about those who do evil under the guise of meaning well.

     “let the new dark age descend”.

    Funny how that always happens and the very people that dragged us there are going to be crying the worst about it. After all, they only meant well!

    Thumb up 0

  4. richtaylor365 *

    Now we’re going to become a banana republic.

    Hate to burst your bubble bro, but this sitting president already made us that.

    I know the usual suspects here (you know who you are) will scoff at this notion and label it nothing more than ODS, but it clearly holds merit.

    For me (and everyone can have their own definition) what separates world class democracies from banana republics is the rule of law, the notion that laws govern, not men, that nobody is above the law, and that even the most powerful leaders must subordinate their will to laws that came way before they did. Obama has stretched any semblance of this to the breaking point, hence his lecture to the Congress about SCOTUS appointments, how they must have empathy above all other attributes, that who you are, what particular demographic you represent should somehow matter in determining justice, utter nonsense. He looks at laws as means to promote social justice, to even playing fields, a respecter of persons for the purposes of restitution. To him justice should never be blind, should never treat everyone equally because some folks need that thumb on the scale. Laws are to be manipulated for the good of the social order, hence, we see that he has no regard for The Constitution or the separation of powers, he thinks he has the power to do an end run, to usurp congressional authority by unilaterally enacting thru fiat an immigration policy that Congress rejected. Factor in his pursuit of weaponize the executive branch, the IRS and Justice, against his enemies, yes this is stuff tin horn dictators do.

    But we could survive all this if the new guy had an appreciation for the rule and law and an affection for  the order it provides, we are out of luck in that regard.

     

     

    Thumb up 0

  5. ilovecress

    is response to Cress still whining about the Brexit vote and how somehow Brits standing up to authoritarianism, wanting more control over their own affairs, and wanting a separation from a government entity that did not have their best interests at heart, that somehow this was voting “against” something instead of “for”.

    But the Brexit campaign wasn’t about solutions, it was about voting against the problem. My issue was that the campaign wasn’t “this is what should be happening” it was “this is what shouldn’t be happening”. The chaos right now is around the UK trying to work out what the fuck they’re going to do now. The UK has less control over its future now than it did as part of the EU.

    So let’s take sovereignty. I’m all for it. I’m all for decisions affecting me being closer to me. The problem I have is that leaving the EU doesn’t actually achieve that. Or rather we’re able to make more decisions, but those decisions mean less. The leave campaign promised to throw out the bathwater, and hope that the baby is ok.

    Take your example above (your link is from 2015 by the way) the corporate tax plan died in the main because the UK opposed it.

     

    But now, the UK doesn’t have a seat in those negotiations. But we’ll still be affected by the decision, because of pure geography. Not being involved in decisions that affect us, actually gives us less sovereignty, not more.

    Thumb up 1

  6. richtaylor365 *

    Sorry Cress, but every one of your examples could have been used by parliament in our own revolution, “What do you colonists know about governing yourselves, England provides stability and structure, you are against taxation without representation but you have nothing better to replace it, you will never survive on your own”.

    You guys have it much better than we did, already a thriving well established independent nation (How quickly you forget ,”The empire in which the sun never sets”) I think you guys will be fine.

    But now, the UK doesn’t have a seat in those negotiations

    Put on your big boy pants and make your own negotiations, You wanted sovereignty, this is what it means. Now, instead of  one of many being told what to do, you get to make your own decisions, chart your own course, quit being just a follower.

    Take your example above (your link is from 2015 by the way) the corporate tax plan died in the main because the UK opposed it.

    Ah, nothing died, the goal to socialize the EU’s corporate tax rate to the detriment of it’s members is alive and thriving;

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/08/29/britain-could-be-next-target-in-the-eus-corporate-tax-fight/

    After our revolution there were a number of Tories that went back to England, folks that could not stomach self rule, were not up to the task and felt safer having their lives manged for them. But freedom is all about having the opportunity to prosper (or fail) of your own devices.

     

     

    Thumb up 0

  7. AlexInCT

    But the Brexit campaign wasn’t about solutions, it was about voting against the problem.

    You mean the unelected miscreants in Brussels that were more concerned with their globalist agenda than the welfare of the people of the EU countries, Cress?

    Because if like me, you think the problem is the global elite not only being downright despicable and uncaring, working only to enrich and abrogate powers to themselves, while fucking the rest of us over, and that this is why the entire world is heading to hell in a hand-basket, then leaving the EU was the perfect solution.

    Yeah, you still have a cabal of globalist doucebags running GB to content with, but at least you can unelect them for now (unless your elections are rigged like the ones in the US are heading for).

    Thumb up 0

  8. ilovecress

    “What do you colonists know about governing yourselves, England provides stability and structure, you are against taxation without representation but you have nothing better to replace it, you will never survive on your own”.

    You have a fair point – but I’m not confident comparing Boris Johnson to Thomas Jefferson is a great move. Like I said, I’m not against Britain taking back more sovereign power – I just don’t think ‘let’s leave and then we’ll hopefully figure it out’ is a good plan.

    I think it’s worth also outlining how much of ‘sovereignty’ we ‘lost’ through bring in the EU. It’s not really comparable to the US revolution. It’s less about taxation and representation and more about regulating fisheries and things. And also we’re totally represented.

    Put on your big boy pants and make your own negotiations, You wanted sovereignty, this is what it means

    Yep – but we’re in an (arguably) weaker position now with no bargaining power.

    Anyway – my overall point being that the vote was against being in the EU, with no decisions put forward about what would go in its place. We voted to leave the EU, and now we’re experiencing a ‘shit, what now?’ moment. Maybe it’ll turn out fine. But it’s a hell of a gamble to take.

    Ah, nothing died, the goal to socialize the EU’s corporate tax rate to the detriment of it’s members is alive and thriving

     

    Apologies – reading that back it looks like I was implying this wasn’t an issue any more. I was just showing that when we were in the EU we were able to kill it, and now we may not be. My bad. Must proof read.

    Thumb up 0

  9. richtaylor365 *

    Question, Cress, in your retirement plan or 401K (if you guys have such animals down under) do you have any stock/equity investments or is it all money market funds? Much safer in money market, no risk, no chance of you losing money (except the deleterious effect of inflation). but you can sleep at night, right? Sure stocks are risky, might lose all of it, but where else can you create an inflation hedge that will create wealth? Maybe this a bad analogy, and maybe this is why I pick my own stocks sans stockbroker, but I prefer the freedom to make my own decisions, in all things.

    This is probably cultural, our differences here. You were raised ( I assume) European. Americans are a different breed. Franklin said ,”We are a new nation, more enterprising, more violent, less refined, we need our own country” We ALLOW government to form to protect our rights, it has our consent and can be revoked at anytime. We would never countenance another entity dominion over us, it is anathema to our cultural and our history. Condell understands this. The EU overstepped it’s authority and became destructive to Brits, it was time to severe the ties.

    Thumb up 0

  10. ilovecress

    You mean the unelected miscreants in Brussels

    Sort of. The commission is nominated and ratified by the governments of the member states – directly modelled on how you guys sort out your cabinet. Also they can only propose legislation – elected officials are the ones who pass it. All those EU laws ‘imposed’ on us? We voted for them.

    then leaving the EU was the perfect solution.

    OK – maybe this is a better way to put it. We haven’t left Europe. We’re still there. We still trade with, negotiate with, holiday in, fight terrorists with and drink their beer. What we voted to do is to step out of the decision making. It’s not like what the EU does will no longer affect us, just because we don’t have any MEPs in the building.

     

    Maybe some founding father types will come out of the woodwork to get us through the break up, but right now we’re left with May and Corbyn.

    Thumb up 0

  11. ilovecress

    Good analogy Rich

    This is probably cultural, our differences here

    I think you’re right. You guys are the US of fucking A. So going it alone is actually an option. As much as I love Great Britain, there’s always a cultural worry that we’ve been punching above our weight (or more accurately that other countries have been punching below theirs).

    We may begrudgingly ‘need’ Europe. But as long as we do, we’re going to be the bolshy one in the negotiations and deals that ensures that we get what we want.

    Thumb up 0

  12. RonK

    perspective is a bitch, if you think about the US is already the EU.  really take a good look at it, the US Federal government is kinda the EU central government, the states are the individual countries,  our(US) federal government is assuming more and more authority with out any legal constitutional backing, no where in the constitution does it say or for that matter imply anything about healthcare, but the feds took that over from the states. i’m sure if people really think about it you can find more and more examples.

    Thumb up 0

  13. CM

    Perspective is definitely a bitch – it seems that unless you’re a white male middle-class (or higher) hetero non-disabled Christian then this is a great time to be alive.

    Thumb up 0

  14. Iconoclast

    Perspective is definitely a bitch – it seems that unless you’re a white male middle-class (or higher) hetero non-disabled Christian then this is a great time to be alive.

    I’m sure all the various victims of Islamist brutality and gang-rape would agree whole-heartedly.

    Thumb up 0

  15. richtaylor365 *

    Hey, Cress, it looks like you might get your “soft” exit after all;

     If Thursday’s ruling is upheld, lawmakers would have a chance to pressure Mrs. May to soften her terms in breakup negotiations with the EU. They could also delay the process or even halt it.

    And I thought activist judges overturning the will of the people only happened here.

     

    Thumb up 0

  16. AlexInCT

    Can you demonstrate how this is judicial activism and not just upholding the law?

    For some reason when you cherry pick the laws you will uphold, or for example, cherry pick enforcement of said laws based on political expediency, I think you really have no grounds to claim you are just upholding the law after you just found a way to conveniently interpret it to favor your cause.

    Thumb up 0

  17. ilovecress

    For some reason when you cherry pick the laws you will uphold, or for example, cherry pick enforcement of said laws based on political expediency, I think you really have no grounds to claim you are just upholding the law after you just found a way to conveniently interpret it to favor your cause.

    There’s no law being talked about here, so that (really long) sentence makes no sense.

    What’s being ruled on isn’t whether or not to leave the EU, it’s about constitutionally how to do it. In a nutshell, the argument is that the Queen (via her appointed Government)can’t just have a referendum on something and then act. The ruling says that Parliament and the Lords need to be consulted. It’s kind of like an argument against an executive order without consulting Congress or the Senate.

    It won’t stop Brexit, and the ruling wasn’t about stopping Brexit. But it does make it unclear how this is all going to play out politically

    Thumb up 1

  18. ilovecress

    So ‘technically’ the parliament could completely block Brexit. But given 52% of the population voted for it, MPs would need to represent their constituents wishes. If they didn’t they’d be open to a whole heap of challenges both locally and nationally, electorally and constitutionally.

    The Lords could also stop it, but a) I’d imagine they’re more on the leave side anyway and b) There’s no way they’d want to get in the middle of this.

    So while the left is crowing about this, I think it’s more about Schadenfreude than the left actually getting anything it wants. Although it is fun seeing the Daily Mail get their knickers in a twist.

    It’s unclear the way forward here, but my guess is that the Government would have to propose legislation to be voted on, which would mean more consultation. It’s quite a mess, and again, more indication that the Leave campaign didn’t have their ducks in a row for a plan to leave the EU.

    Thumb up 1

  19. CM

    No cress, that’s all factual detail, easier to just claim ‘activism’. We’re beyond facts now, as they keep showing us.

    LOCK THE WHORE-CUNT UP!

    Thumb up 1