Category: Politics

BLM Proposes

Last week, I agreed with Hillary Clinton that if Black Lives Matter wanted to make a difference, they needed to propose actual laws and policies, not just “raise awareness”. This week, they’ve come out with a list of proposals and … it’s actually pretty reasonable. They propose things like better police training, an end to asset forfeiture and broken windows policing, independent investigation of police shootings, body cameras. There are a few things I would disagree with but, overall, this is pretty mainstream and in line with what many conservatives have been talking about, especially asset forfeiture reform and demilitarization.

Radley Balko notes that while these proposals are reasonable, they are likely to portrayed as radical by police unions who are used to having the media and politicians mindlessly parrot their spokesmen. But:

There is at least some reason to be more optimistic this time around. The main reason is that the problems in policing are starting to affect people who have the status and power to do something about them. One reason we’re starting to see conservative opposition to police militarization, for example, is that police militarization is starting to affect conservatives. We’re seeing regulatory agencies with armed police forces, some even with tactical teams. We’re seeing SWAT-like tactics used to enforce zoning laws and low-level crimes. We’re seeing heavy-handed force used to collect cigarette taxes or to enforce regulatory law.

Similarly, while how and when police use lethal force has a disproportionate effect on communities of color, there has been no shortage of stories about unarmed white people killed by police. There are problems in policing that are directly related to race, such as profiling, bias and an irrational fear of black criminality. But there are also problems in policing that affect people of all races, such as the use of lethal force, unnecessary escalation and the prioritizing of officer safety over all else. (Even these problems disproportionately affect black and brown people.)

Do we dare say that … all lives matter? A government that can launch an armed SWAT raid against Okra plants is a danger to everyone, black white or Dolezal.

In my original post, I said that the best way to address the problems in law enforcement is for government to “make itself less powerful, less intrusive, more accountable and more respectful of our basic civil liberties.” Black Lives Matter’s proposals do exactly that. Ultimately, we will have to address the massive size and scope of government. The less the law is involved in our lives, the less chance there is for that involvement to go wrong. But shaping reform around BLM’s proposals would be a great first step toward addressing the problems and building a better relationship between police and their communities.

The EPA Knew

You’re probably aware of the recent ecological disaster the EPA caused in the Gold King Mine. While cleaning up the heavily polluted site, they caused a blowout that put millions of gallons of toxic water into the Animas and San Juan Rivers, turning them yellow. I’ve been waiting for more details on the event. Accidents happen, particularly when you’re working at a poorly known site. The EPA wasn’t just screwing around with the mine; they were trying to clean up an ongoing environmental problem that had killed many of the fish in the upper Animas river. Acid mine drainage is a huge environmental problem and is one of the reasons we have the EPA in the first place (I was just reading an article about the Berkeley Pit mine, a potential time bomb tat the EPA is defusing).

Well, we’re finding out some things now. And it looks very bad:

U.S. officials knew of the potential for a catastrophic “blowout” of poisonous wastewater from an inactive gold mine, yet appeared to have only a cursory plan to deal with such an event when a government cleanup team triggered a 3-million-gallon spill, according to internal documents released by the Environmental Protection Agency.

The EPA released the documents late Friday following weeks of prodding from The Associated Press and other media organizations. While shedding some light on the circumstances surrounding the accident, the newly disclosed information also raises more questions about whether enough was done to prevent it.

A May 2015 action plan produced by an EPA contractor, Environmental Restoration LLC, also noted the potential for a blowout.

The May plan also called for a pond that would be used to manage the mine water and prevent contaminants from entering waterways. That pond was not completed.

A 71-page safety plan for the site included only a few lines describing what to do if there was a spill: Locate the source and stop the flow, begin containment and recovery of the spilled materials, and alert downstream drinking water systems as needed.

Note that the EPA has actually redacted parts of the documents as if there are national security issues at stake. They have also not revealed what happened immediately before and after the blowout or why they waited for over a day to let local governments know that their water was turning to poison.

I expect, in the end, no one will be held accountable. “Stuff happens” is the way of the Obama Administration, at least when it comes to their own people. But this is just the tip of the iceberg. It’s going to get a lot worse for the EPA.

She must think she is royalty or something

One of our credentialed intellectual superiors that thinks they belong to a special class that absolves them from the plethora of laws and regulations they foist on us peons, again showed us how broken our legal system really is. Mrs. Clinton, whom believes America owns her the title of POTUS because it is her turn, again shows how little respect she has for the system she seeks the highest office of. In a display of disconnect with reality that should frighten anyone with a modicum of intelligence, she answered questions querying the possibility that her people, under her direction, had wiped her highly illegal mail servers with the stupid kind of snark she believes shows her superiority to the rest of us rubes who she would have no problem turning the partisan legal system out on. Note that having such servers, let alone destroying evidence like she did when people found out about them and asked her to deliver that evidence for legal evaluation, would have landed anyone else in jail because they would be violation of congressional laws put in place to safeguard sensitive and secret information. Others have been punished – harshly – for far less than what is obvious to everyone was done by her and her staff.

I am not sure if she was just flaunting the fact that she believed she was above the law by wearing that ugly orange jump suit, or if she subconsciously was making another snarky remark for the jail time anyone else that had committed this string of crimes would be facing. This medusa must have some serious shit on the Obama administration. The lack of action by the legal entities in this administration, especially after they so vigorously crucified others for far less, is astounding. They have to know how the general populous is viewing this freak show, but its as if they don’t care. Then again, Obama is also a crime boss and believes himself royalty as well, so maybe it is just one crime boss helping out another. I for one have held for a long time that I would never trust the corrupted system run by agents of the left to fairly treat someone like me while on the other hand allowing one of their own to get away with practically anything, and so much of what has transpired over the last 7 years prove that I was right to feel that way.

Making Black Lives Really Matter

I can’t believe I’m going to say this but … ahem … is this thing on? … I agree with Hillary Clinton.

Last week, she met with members of the Black Lives Matter movement. Hillary has a lot to answer for. As First Lady and then as Senator she actively supported the harsh prison sentences and militarized police tactics that have led to two million Americans being incarcerated, millions more under some kind of supervision and cops with assault weapons and body armor assaulting Americans mostly for drugs.

The 2016 candidate even gave suggestions to the activists, telling them that without a concrete plan their movement will get nothing but “lip service from as many white people as you can pack into Yankee Stadium and a million more like it.”

“Look, I don’t believe you change hearts,” Clinton said, arguing that the movement can’t change deep seated racism. “I believe you change laws, you change allocation of resources, you change the way systems operate. You’re not going to change every heart. You’re not. But at the end of the day, we could do a whole lot to change some hearts and change some systems and create more opportunities for people who deserve to have them, to live up to their own God-given potential.”

She is absolutely correct, although probably for reasons she would disagree with. I think it was P.J. O’Rourke who defined a statist as someone who thinks government can change human nature. Government can not make people less racist, assuming that racism is the problem here. Government can, however, make itself less powerful, less intrusive, more accountable and more respectful of our basic civil liberties. In other words, it can create a system whereby human weaknesses and failings — greed, power-lust or even racism — have less ability to damage the lives of its citizens.

She’s also right about Black Lives Matter. Right now, they don’t have any solid proposals for how to deal with any of the problems they are worried about. They are reminding me increasingly of Occupy Wall Street which had an issue (wealth inequality, bailouts) but no idea of what to do about it.

Raising awareness is a good thing. But ultimately, it has to be followed by concrete action or it’s just noise. And I’ll give Mrs. Clinton credit for saying so.

The Biggest Corporate Welfare

Scott Walker — supposed conservative — has become just the latest politician to dole out a few hundred million in corporate welfare:

Last year, two New York City hedge fund owners purchased the Milwaukee Bucks, a down-at-the-heels N.B.A. team. The new owners smiled, took a victory lap around this handsome lakeside city and laid down their terms.

We’ll keep the Bucks in Milwaukee, the owners said, if the public foots half the cost of a $500 million arena. (The owners spoke of their “moral obligation” to the city and pledged $100 million toward their arena, with the remainder coming from other private funds.) N.B.A. officials acted as muscle for the owners and warned that if Wisconsin did not cough up this money within a year’s time, the league would move the team to Las Vegas or Seattle.

These opening feints were right out of the professional sports owner handbook. From start to desultory end, Milwaukee offered a case study in all that is wrong with our arena-shakedown age.

Gov. Scott Walker signed a bill Wednesday to subsidize the arena, which could cost the public twice as much as originally projected. Echoing the owners’ arguments, the governor proclaimed that the arena, a practice complex and a promised “entertainment district” would spur a renaissance for downtown Milwaukee and attract tourists. Income taxes paid by the pro athletes, the governor said, would fill local coffers.

The governor is repeating the standard mantra of stadium extortionists everywhere. It is categorical nonsense. Twenty years of economic research has shown that the economic benefits of stadiums are somewhere between non-existent and slightly negative. Sports teams mostly affect how people spend their money, not if. It is true that that taxes paid by the athletes would pay for a stadium … in a century.

The ability of extremely rich men who own extremely successful business to extract hundreds of millions in public welfare from cash-strapped cities and states is baffling. The lack of benefits of stadium building has been known for years, but sports teams, including my Braves, are still able to work this scam to perfection.

In reality, the power should flow the other way. Sports teams benefit from being in big cities way more than the big cities benefit from having sports teams. Do you think the Yankees would be making hundreds of millions of dollars if they moved to Louisville? They still got a billion dollars in subsidies for their stadium. Would the Milwaukee Bucks, sans subsidies, make more money in Vegas or Seattle than they do in Milwaukee? I doubt it. Seattle just gave up a basketball team and Las Vegas has … um … a lot more than a sports team going for it.

The most recent baseball team that moved was the Montreal Expos. That move benefited the Expos way way more than it benefited Washington. They went from an empty stadium and minimal revenue to a full stadium and overflowing coffers. Sports teams should be begging to play in the big markets, not holding them for ransom.

There are two problems that underlay the subsidies to sports. The first is plain ordinary corruption. It’s not just sports stadiums; cities invest tens of millions into “big projects” that are going “stimulate the economy” and “revitalize downtown”. When I was growing up in Atlanta, we heard those same arguments dragged out for Underground Atlanta, World of Coca Cola and the Olympics. Yet, somehow, it didn’t work. The area around the Olympic Stadium (later Turner Field) was still a dump. Sports teams have an advantage in terms of visibility and the ability to give guaranteed luxury seats to powerful politicians. But fundamentally, this shakedown goes on every day. And sports teams have become very skilled in doling out cash to local community groups and working lobbyists so that they can ride that well-greased track.

The problem that is more specific to sports teams is a basic prisoner’s dilemma. Everyone knows that cities would be better off not caving into the demands of sports teams. But the cities and states are afraid of losing their teams to other cities and states that give in. They could say “no” but it only works if everyone else does too. What you would need is for state and city governments to sign onto a compact: no city or state will subsidize a sports stadium … ever.

That won’t happen, of course, because politicians love this. Scott Walker is far, far from the only politician doling out this particular brand of corporate welfare. The political class love it because they get to claim credit for keeping a sports team in town and building a huge stadium. They love it because it sounds good to say your going to stimulate the economy, even if the stimulus never happens (see Obama, Barack). They get wined and dined by rich team owners and corporate sponsors.

It’s a win-win. The only people who lose are the taxpayers and, really, who cares what those plebs think?

She obviously did this because she had nothing to hide!

Democrats are fucking criminals. Have no doubt about it. The son of a bitch in the WH has been running his administration like a crime syndicate boss for close to 7 years now, and his underlings are no better. In fact, the leading democrat according to all the intelligentsia, just had to professionally wipe her illegal email servers because she didn’t want anyone to know the depths of these people’s depravity. In fact, I suspect that the main reason the Obama admin does nothing about this is because this stuff was horribly damaging to their racket as well. This nation no longer is one of laws, but one of connected people, and the only people getting privileged treatment are those that serve the democratic machine.

Can anyone imagine any republican getting away with the dismantling of the US legal system, the abuses of power by government agencies, and the outright disregard for the people of this country like these democrats get away with? I know we get told they are evil and bad, but even Nixon got stopped for asking the IRS to do something illegal. These crooks are breaking the law every fucking second of the day, and the media gives them a pass. This country is doomed.

Clinton on Education: MAWR MONEY!

One of the reason I harp on Trump: Hillary Clinton is slowly unveiling her ideas for running the country. And they are terrible:

Today, Hillary Clinton is beginning the launch of her plan to allegedly make college more accessible to Americans without forcing them into huge loads of debt. Her plan has a price tag estimate of $350 billion over 10 years.

Half that money would be granted to states that agree to increase their own education spending with the goal of having “no loan” four-year degrees. It would be made for by tax hikes on the rich, as always.

This is mind-bogglingly stupid. The reason college costs have gone up so dramatically is because of the bottomless promise of the Feds to pay for it. Yes, states have cut the amount they spend on higher ed. But between grants and loans, the Feds have more than made up for it. And by simply pouring trainloads of money into higher ed, the Feds have eliminated any incentive for efficiency.

It gets worse. A substantial amount of the money would be used to encourage colleges to do the very thing that has made higher education so expensive:

To improve the nation’s 60 percent college graduation rate, Clinton would offer grants to schools that invest in child care, emergency financial aid and other interventions to boost completion. Students entering college are older and have more family responsibilities than those a generation ago, yet many institutions have been slow to respond to their needs. Investing in on-campus support systems could help, as could Clinton’s proposal to allow federal student aid to be used for online career training programs offering badges or certificates, rather than degrees.

In other words, Clinton wants college to invest yet more money in administration. This is precisely the problem higher education is having. Over the last two decades, faculty hires have been flat. Many universities now depend on adjunct faculty who are poorly paid. Meanwhile, the number of administrator have soared as have their salaries. And yet Clinton wants them to do more of this.

So, under Clinton, we would basically spend $350 billion to do … exactly what we’ve been doing for the last twenty years. And this is the best the Democratic Party has to offer right now.

First Debate

Surprise! I actually watched (most of) tonight’s debate, around tucking kids into bed. I must say that Fox News did a good job moderating, going after the candidates in a way that the MSM has completely failed to go after Clinton. Megyn Kelly, in particular, asked some tough questions. This is a good thing for the GOP because it will help separate the contenders from the pretenders.

My quick take:

Marcio Rubio did very well (despite the tough abortion question). He was relaxed, genial and had a grasp on the struggles of the middle class. I think — or maybe hope is the right word — that he has put himself back into the conversation.

I was unimpressed by Bush. No one laid a glove on him but he didn’t really make the case to me that he should be the front-runner. To be honest, I was kind of reminded of Romney in 2012. It seemed like Bush just didn’t want to get bloodied while the other candidates took each other out. “Last man standing” worked for Romney, but it may not be enough this time.

I was surprisingly unimpressed by Walker. He didn’t do badly but he didn’t jump out at me either and I’m having trouble, 15 minutes after the debate ended, remembering anything significant he said. This is part of Walker’s style, though.

I have really soured on Mike Huckabee. He’s big government in every way — a massive social conservative and opposed to any meaningful budget cuts. He’s also a supporter of the Fair Tax gimmick, which I oppose.

I liked Ben Carson a lot, not necessarily as a candidate but as a person. Of all the candidates, he seemed the most likable and the least politicized and the most unaffected by the spotlight. But he also didn’t show any credibility on policy and seemed to disappear at times. He would definitely win the “who would you like to have a beer with” competition (Rand would call for straight whiskey). His line about how we are our minds and not our skin was moving.

John Kasich made the case that he belong in the race, giving a great answer on gay marriage and highlighting his solid experience. I expect him to stay in this for a while.

I was once very high on Chris Christie, but I don’t think he brings anything unique to the table (other than flogging his 9/11 experience, which is not as impressive as he thinks). And his record in New Jersey is poor.

Rand Paul didn’t impress me that much either, I must say. I like Paul in the mix and I like him in the Senate. I think his chances of winning the nomination are basically zero.

Ted Cruz and Donald Trump had some one liners but neither seemed to make any real statement that they should be President.

I didn’t see the “kids table” debate earlier in the day but I’m told that the only candidate who did well was Fiorina. I’m not surprised. She’s very smart and savvy and she’s the only one that I think has a chance of getting back onto the big stage. I think there’s a very good chance she will be the Vice Presidential nominee.

So, right now, my impression of the candidates is:

Front-runners: Bush, Walker, Trump
Back in the Coversation: Rubio, Kasich
Call it a Night, Fellas: Christie, Cruz, Paul, Carson, Huckabee

YMMV.

The answer is a resounding “Yes”: next question?

Investors Business Daily has an oped up titled “Clinton Email Scandal: People Need To Know If She’s A Crook” where the question is asked:

Corruption: Some day the Clintons’ over-the-horizon trail of scandals will catch up with them. Given that Hillary might be the target of an FBI probe, that day could arrive soon.

The Clintons became convinced many decades ago that they are above the law. Nothing has persuaded them otherwise, not even that pesky impeachment of Bill. Hillary’s use of a personal email account powered by a private server while she was secretary of state, however, might be her undoing.

And we haven’t even mentioned the Benghazi scandal, and the investigation into that terrorist attack, which led to the uncovering of the private server.

That alone should be enough to bring down Clinton’s presidential ambitions.

As the title of my post indicates, the answer is damned obvious already, and only the usual shitbags pretend it is otherwise. Then again, this is the age of Obama, and stories like this one where the DOJ investigates itself and finds no wrong doing, of course make it evident that lady justice is trapped in the Obama WH basement, with a gimp ball in her mouth, and a train of democrat crooks lining up to take their turn raping her.