Tag: Democratic Party

Monday Quick Hits

BLM Disses Dems; Makes Me Happy:

Last week, the Democratic Party expressed support for Black Lives Matter. Here is BLM’s heartening response:

A resolution signaling the Democratic National Committee’s endorsement that Black lives matter, in no way implies an endorsement of the DNC by the Black Lives Matter Network, nor was it done in consultation with us. We do not now, nor have we ever, endorsed or affiliated with the Democratic Party, or with any party. The Democratic Party, like the Republican and all political parties, have historically attempted to control or contain Black people’s efforts to liberate ourselves. True change requires real struggle, and that struggle will be in the streets and led by the people, not by a political party.

More specifically, the Black Lives Matter Network is clear that a resolution from the Democratic National Committee won’t bring the changes we seek. Resolutions without concrete change are just business as usual. Promises are not policies. We demand freedom for Black bodies, justice for Black lives, safety for Black communities, and rights for Black people. We demand action, not words, from those who purport to stand with us.

While the Black Lives Matter Network applauds political change towards making the world safer for Black life, our only endorsement goes to the protest movement we’ve built together with Black people nationwide — not the self-interested candidates, parties, or political machine seeking our vote.”

Again, I might take issue with some of the verbiage and emphasis. But they are forcing the Democratic Party to admit that they supported the militarization of police and the ramping up of criminal penalties. They are forcing the Democratic Party to face their long history of pandering to black votes while screwing black people. While we might disagree on policy, I applaud any movement that refuses to associate itself with a political party.

Speaking of Keynesianism:

Tyler Cowen reminds us that the growing sinkhole that is the Chinese economy was the subject of praise just a few years ago:

Remember back in 2009, and a bit thereafter (pdf), when so many people were praising China’s very activist, multi-trillion fiscal stimulus?

Yet some of us at the time insisted this would only push off and deepen China’s adjustment problems. There was already excess capacity and high debt and favored state-owned industries, and the stimulus was making all of those problems worse and only postponing a needed adjustment. The Chinese incipient contraction was based on structural problems, not a simple lack of aggregate demand.

How’s that debate going? While the final outcome remains uncertain, Austrian-like perspectives on China are looking pretty good these days.

Just as you go to war with the army you’ve got, so must a country conduct fiscal stimulus with the policy instruments it has. And most forms of Chinese fiscal stimulus make their imbalances worse rather than better. Yet dreams of fiscal stimulus as an answer to the macro problems on the table never die.

To the Keynesians — or, as I call them, the pseudoKeynesians — it is always time to spend money.

Was Segregation Made or Did it Just Happen?:

I’ve been sitting on this link for weeks but there’s not much I can add. It details how our inner city slums didn’t just happen. They were made and the men who made it were Democrats.

Hmm. I should pass that on the BLM folks.

Denali Denial

Obama officially reverted Mt. McKinley back to being named Denali. A few people are trying to whip up some outrage but I don’t see the point. Everyone in Alaska calls it Denali and Congress appears to have punted this kind of authority to the bureaucracy long ago.

Bad Plebs! Bad bad plebs!

So last night was a big deal for the Republicans. In the Senate, they surged to 52 seats, with one run-off (Louisiana) and two races that are too close to call (Alaska and Virginia). We’re probably looking at 53-54 seat majority. They will probably also gain about ten seats in the House. They won governor’s mansions in Maryland, Illinois and Massachusetts. They lost Pennsylvania mostly because Corbett was extremely unpopular (and deservedly so).

On ballot initiatives, fetal personhood was rejected in two states, legal pot won in two states (and fell shy of supermajority in Florida). Minimum wage hikes also passed in four states.

Anyway, the best part of any election is always the rending of garments, gnashing of teeth and making of excuses by the losing side. Here are just a few things I have learned since the Republicans won the election last night, with my responses in italics:

We shouldn’t be having midterms anyway (For example, the 2006 midterm: WTF?).

The Republicans only won because of evil dirty money (The Republican spending advantage was about 10%. Democrats raised nearly $2 billion in campaign funds).

The Republicans only won because young people didn’t turn out (This is what happens when you confuse the Cult of Obama with a Permanent Democractic Majority).

The Republicans only won because they suppressed the black vote (The Republicans also elected the South’s first black senator in South Carolina).

This was not a rejection of any liberal ideas. (If you identify liberal issues solely by the ones that are popular, sure. But while the public may broadly agree with the Democrats on some specific issues, they disagree with massively with the Democrats’ performance.)

Republicans only won because the adopted liberal positions. (You should read that article, because it basically agrees with everything we’ve been saying: that Democratic policies harm the causes they supposedly support.)

Republicans only won because of redistricting (Apparently, you can redistrict states now).

Democrats only lost because of hate and racism (That’s half true. People do hate $18 trillion in debt and skyrocketing insurance rates).

Republicans only won because the map was unfavorable (It’s the same map Democrats won on six years ago.).

The next few are from various comments sections and I’ll just throw up there for the LOLs:

Republicans only won because we don’t have mandatory voting. Republicans won because of the skewed the polls, making Democrats overconfident. Democrats lost because they didn’t run on their awesome liberal record. Republicans won because they lied about Obama’s record. Republicans won because they had more virgins to sacrifice to the great electoral god, Gerrymaunderkin.

Ok, I made that last one up.

For what it’s worth, I think Republicans won for a variety of reasons. They put together a broader and more appealing party; they stayed away from divisive issues and concentrated on the economy; they let the Democrats beclown themselves. But mostly, I think, it was simple fatigue. The country is tired of Barack Obama. It is tired of Nancy Pelosi. It is tired of Harry Reid. Hell, I’m tired of blogging about them. These three clowns have dominated our politics for almost a decade now and the American people are tired of them. They aren’t over-eager for the Republicans. But the new faces of the GOP — Nikki Haley, Tim Scott, Scott Walker, John Kasich, etc. — are certainly a lot less depressing than the Democrats.

The Phantom Koch Menace

Let’s face it: the Democrats are scared. Polling shows them down, Nate Silver now projects the Republicans to gain the Senate this year and while Hillary is popular in Democrat circles, it is quite likely she would lose a general election. There is a very real possibility the Republicans could control both Houses and the White House in 2017.

There are many ways for the Democrats to respond to this downturn in their political fortunes. They could work on getting their message out. They could change their agenda to be more in tune with reality and the needs of the … spttt … teeheeehee …. OK, I can’t finish that sentence with a straight face. I actually think the best political strategy for anyone, regardless of party, is just to shut the hell up and let your opponents defeat themselves.

But no, they’ve decided that the path to electoral victory is … attacking the Koch Brothers. I’m not joking. Harry Reid has been lambasting them on the Senate Floor. A progressive group incorrectly accused them of being behind the Keystone XL pipeline (said group being under the impression that Americans oppose it). That turned into a hilarious incident in which the WaPo mindlessly repeated their bogus claims. When called on it, they said:

The Powerline article itself, and its tone, is strong evidence that issues surrounding the Koch brothers’ political and business interests will stir and inflame public debate in this election year. That’s why we wrote the piece.

In short, the Democrats are going to make the Koch Brothers an issue so we are going to make them an issue, facts be damned.

There’s only one problem. Most Americans could give a rat’s backside about the Koch Brothers. Half of Americans don’t even know who they are. Another fifth don’t care. The only people who really care about them are … passionate partisan Inside the Beltway Democrats and their adherents.

This a perfect distillation of how the Democrats have gone from the Party of Destiny to the Party of Density. They are constantly railing about side issues that no one cares about, constantly glomming onto some issue that they think will propel them to victory. They do this because when it comes to the most important issue right now — the economy — they haven’t the faintest foggiest fucking clue as to what to do about it.

If the Democrats think they’re going to ride Koch hatred to victory, they are deeply mistaken. But then again, they’re mistaken about almost everything.

Can’t say I am surprised

I have dealt with plenty of libs that have made the argument that stupid rednecks vote against their own interests when they don’t vote for nanny state democrats, the assumption being that nanny state democrats and their massive vote buying scheme is something that benefits people the left feels are too stupid to do things on their own. And you bet that rednecks, along with minorities, are all seen as people that can’t do anything for themselves and need donkeys to keep them alive. But if you really ignore the appeal to emotion and look at facts, you get a different picture:

The top five states with the highest income inequality rates all voted to reelect President Barack Obama, though no state boasted a higher rate of inequality than Washington, D.C. This ia according to a study released this week by MoneyRates.com.

The study used data from the Bureau of Labor statistics to measure how many times more money the top-earning income bracket of a state made than bottom earners. Researchers compared the top 25th percentile earner to the bottom 25th percentile earner and divided the sums into each other, then ranked states by number. California, in which a top 25th percentile earner makes 2.55 times more than a bottom 25th percentile earner, is by far the most unequal state, followed by New York, New Jersey, Michigan, and President Obama’s home state of Illinois.

In Washington, D.C., however, a top 25th percentile earner makes 2.6 times the amount of money a bottom 25th percentile earner makes, which represents the biggest gap in the nation. Maryland and Virginia both make the top ten group of biggest gaps in income, and Maryland experienced the largest gap increase in the past decade of any state: 12.05%. Breitbart News has previously reported that eight of the 13 wealthiest counties in the U.S.A. are in the D.C. region. Texas and Louisiana are the only red states in the top ten.

Can’t say I am surprised. I do have to point out that D.C. isn’t a state however, but it is definitely a democratic stronghold the left would love to make into a state. I live in a blue state where the gap is brutal and blatant. Some of the biggest donors to the democratic machine are the loaded fat cats that live in Greenwich and Fairfield, commuting to NYC to do their thing. Then you have cities like Hartford, Bridgeport, or Waterbury that have the bulk of their personal residents sucking on the government’s teat, and do nothing but make more people to suck at the government’s teat, be the welfare or the prison system. This last group also votes for democrats. In fact, they vote for a living. The rest of us in the middle get the shaft. The state is hemorrhaging money and skilled people, the economy keeps shrinking, people keep getting laid off, and the democrats keep doing more of the same while pretending they are actually trying to help. And yet, these two blocks keep these crooks in power.

One could make the argument, based on facts, not the usual emotional drivel, that if anything, the states that elect the class warriors are the ones with the most inequality and the worst economic conditions. And these are clearly caused by the class warriors and their policies. From minimum wage hikes that cost the young & inexperienced, especially amongst minorities, to have limited employment opportunities, to insane and rigged pro-business schemes to favor those industries they want to see win and anti-business practices, mostly based on insane taxation, to destroy the businesses they don’t like. Especially upstart small businesses that might compete with their favorite big crony corporation’s monopolistic grip on the serfs. It is not coincidental that the businesses they favor are the ones that donate big to them.

In the quest to force equality of outcome, while making sure they succeed far beyond anything they would have been able to doing honest work, the class warriors have produced exactly the opposite of what they promise, and have done so while causing economic ruination. And it seems that the places that suffer the worst from their practices are the ones more likely to keep them in power. Look at Detroit, Chicago, or Washington D.C. if you doubt me. If you ask me, these people are the ones that vote against their own interests.

The Threat of Liberty

Via Reason, I found this article which digs into the spate of vehemently anti-Libertarians screeds which have been recently popping up on liberal websites and publications. Salon became a hard-core anti-libertarian site so gradually I hardly even noticed. Slate has been shifting against libertarians. The New Republic published a rancid little article trying to dig into the supposed libertarian ideals of Glenn Greenwald, Julian Assange and Edward Snowden. LGF and Balloon Juice have been screaming about us for years with a horde of liberals in their wake blaming libertarians for the financial crisis, the government shutdown, income inequality, global warming and the failure of the Cubs to win the World Series.

It’s odd that so much ire is now focused on libertarians. The Libertarian Party has precisely zero elected officials at the national level. The most libertarian member of Congress is probably Rand Paul, who is pro-Life and somewhat culturally conservative. And these “libertarians are destroying the country” articles alternate with “libertarians are a fringe movement and have no real power” articles. Apparently, we’re invisible but powerful. We’re silent guardians, watchful protecters.

Libertarians are Batman.

I don’t agree with everything that is in Borders’ article but I think he finds the real reason for the anti-Libertarian screeching:

Progressivism’s cracks have finally been exposed. Progressives will urge that Obama is not the change they hoped for. But the Affordable Care Act should have been progressivism’s shining moment. Of course, it was anything but. First the president lies to the population, then joins his party in forcing Americans to swallow the bitter pill of Obamacare. He then unleashes the technocrats and gives contracts to his crony buddies to create a $500 million non-functioning Web site (and that’s just the start of the crony bonanza). The president then assures everyone that the wasted resources, high premiums, and diminished options are for the greater good. People start to get wise to it. Progressivism’s cracks are exposed. Add the failure of Cash for Clunkers, the failure of Solyndra, all the bailouts of banking cartels, and the “rescue” of the auto manufacturers and unions. The list goes on and on. The more progressive technocrats try to do, the more they botch it. Of course, something similar can be said about all the faith-based initiatives of the Republican years: you know, like the creation of the TSA, the War in Iraq, “stimulus” packages, and all manner of pork barrel projects. Progressive purists will try to argue that all of this has been a series of pragmatic patches to a failing system. For America to truly be great, they say, Republicans must not be so “obstructionist.” But President Obama, with his pen and his phone, has seized dictatorial power. Apparently, the ends justify the means. This is the foundation of progressive ideology. And it’s failing.

For all the lip service progressives pay to the “problem” of income inequality, they consistently back the most illiberal and inegalitarian policies. Is there anything fair about showering taxpayer resources upon this energy company or that—and making their CEOs’ wealth more secure in the process? Is there anything equitable about shoring up the U.S. banking cartel with permanent legislation like Dodd-Frank? And what chosen “one-percenters” are benefitting from the crony-infested Obamacare legislation, which rains goodies down on drug-makers, healthcare providers, and insurance companies in equal measure? On the other hand, while libertarians don’t mind the sort of inequality that comes from people successfully creating happy customers, wealth, and jobs, we really—no really—don’t like collusion between business interests and government power.

Exactly. Barack Obama’s election was supposed to herald the final triumph of progressivism. We were supposed to get New Deal II (remember Time’s cover with Obama as FDR?). We would see single payer healthcare, the end of global warming, the end of income inequality, abortions for everyone, impoverishment of the wealthy. And it would be so awesome and amazing that the American people would never again turn aside from the One Truth Path. This was when the rise of the oceans would begin to slow and the planet would begin to heal. We were the ones we had been waiting for.

Now, we’re five years in. Obamacare is a mess, at best. The economy is stagnant, at best. Income inequality is rising, cronyism is greater than ever, big money is more powerful than ever. The Democratic Congress got tossed out on their ear. Obama narrowly won re-election but his poll numbers are approaching Bush levels.

And so the progressives, faced with the failure of their last great push toward paradise, need to blame someone. Because it certainly can’t be their calcified ideas or their bumbling messiah.

The progressives would like to blame Republicans for their failure to create a progressive utopia but … that doesn’t really go very far. The Republicans are basically Democrat Lite these days with a little religion thrown in. And the Democrats’ biggest failures — Obamacare, the stimulus and Dodd-Frank — took place when the Republicans were still in their “clown car on fire” stage. They can complain about Fox News all they want, but in the end … it’s just Fox News.

Moreover, while the American people are turning away from the Democrats, they aren’t exactly turning toward the Republicans. More than ever, Americans are getting sick of both parties. Congressional control has been more volatile in the last 20 years than it was in the previous 80. The electorate has taken turns thwacking each party at the polls. And millions are abandoning both parties for independence.

So in the absence of the usual villains, they are turning toward libertarians. For a long time, I’ve been tweeting a response to the anti-libertarian idiocy: to many people, libertarianism is whatever it is they don’t like. The progressives really don’t like the way the political winds are blowing. It’s a rude shock in the Age of Obama. So whatever the nature of the opposition — the Tea Party, religious conservatives, moderates, Occupiers, Koch Brothers, constitutionalists, Green Party, rustlers, cut throats, murderers, bounty hunters, desperados, mugs, pugs, thugs, nitwits, halfwits, dimwits, vipers, snipers, con men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers, bushwhackers, hornswogglers, horse thieves, bull dykes, train robbers, bank robbers, ass-kickers, shit-kickers and Methodists — at the bottom, it’s really got to be those evil libertarians and especially their Koch Brothers fifth column.

And maybe they’re a little bit right. I won’t say that Americans are becoming libertarian, per se. Medicare and Social Security enjoy massive support and our country is very socially conservative, in morals if not in law. But the country is moving in a liberty-ish direction: against the war on drugs, live-and-let-live on culture issues, deeply cynical of big grand government programs. Libertarians are still on the fringe, but the fringe has been growing very large in the last few elections.

And that’s the real problem for progressives. Progressives think of themselves of the future, but they are really the past. The future of politics is not some illusory progressive center. The American people have seen where that leads — crony capitalism, rising inequality and corruption. No, the future is the fringe. The two main parties will always dominate, but a growing chunk of America wants nothing to do with them. They would rather build broad coalitions around specific issues: NSA surveillance, taxation, government spending, school choice, SOPA/PIPA. On all of these issues, we see growing trans-partisan coalitions that are not terribly interested in the politics qua politics but interested in the right thing being done no matter who is in charge. If the party currently in power won’t do the right thing, then *thwack*. Out you go. Let’s give the other guys a chance to not be stupid.

So, yeah, libertarians deserve some blame. And we’re easy to kick since we’ve been around a while. But in the end, libertarians are just the leading edge of a growing political movement — a movement that ranges from hard-core conservative to hippy-dippy liberal – that is saying, “To hell with both of yous.”

The Democrats Open the Gubernatorial Clown Car

One thing I’ve mentioned in this space before is that while I frequently despair of Republicans on the national level, there has been a surge of Republican governors who are competent, conservative and effective. This can not, however, be said of their Democratic counterparts. Last week, I countered the assertion that Jerry Brown is the Best. Governor. Ever. But two more races are drawing attention to the complete dearth of ideas that is the Democratic Party.

The first is in New Jersey, where Chris Christie looks ready to easily win a second term. Christie is winning because of his first term performance and popularity in the state. But if I were a Democrat, I would be embarrassed by the opposition. I showed last week how Buono completely muffed a softball question in the debate. Her performance has been so bad, however, that the Star-Ledger spends half of its governor endorsement slamming Christie as a fraud only to endorse him because Buono is so awful:

Begin with education. Buono’s close alliance with the teachers union is a threat to the progress Christie is making in cities such as Newark and Camden. She is hostile to charter schools, which now educate nearly 1 in 4 kids in Newark.

Buono opposes the Newark teacher contract, which freezes the pay of the worst teachers and grants bonuses to the best. She wants a traditional union deal, in which no distinction is made. She would return control of the schools to Newark, which would spell the end of Superintendent Cami Anderson’s promising stewardship.

Her critique of Christie centers on property taxes and jobs, but she lacks a convincing strategy to do any better herself. She has a long list of expensive plans, from universal preschool to more aid for public colleges. But she can’t name a single spending cut beyond the traditional promise to attack “fraud and abuse.”

(I think it’s hilarious that the Star-Ledger, in criticizing Buono, inadvertently highlights Christie’s achievements. It’s like they can’t quite bring themselves to admit he’s been pretty good.)

But it’s worse. The other race is in Virginia. This should be a gimme for the Democrats. The McDonnell Administration has been hit by scandals and the state, thanks to the exploding public sector in the DC/NoVa area, has been trending blue. The Republican nominee is Ken Cuccinelli, a deeply divisive attorney general who only won the nomination by changing the rules. So the Democrats looked around and nominated … you won’t believe this … Terry McAuliffe. McAuliffe is such an awful candidate that the Richmond Times-Dispatch decided to endorse … no one:

The Democrat stumbles when he proposes major spending hikes, which he claims can be financed by the federal dollars the state would receive by expanding Medicaid. He offers an easy answer to a tough question … On energy generally, McAuliffe has spun like a top and now supports items he once opposed, such as the exploration for energy sources off Virginia’s shores … McAuliffe styles himself a businessman and entrepreneur. He inhabits the crossroads where the public and private sectors intersect and sometimes collide. His experience with GreenTech does not generate confidence. He located the plant in Mississippi, which is not known for its social enlightenment. The company has not lived up to expectations. If it eventually does, no credit will accrue to McAuliffe, for he has, he says, stepped away from it. He is not the reincarnation of Henry Ford. His ignorance of state government is laughable and makes Rick Perry, the notorious governor of Texas, look like a Founding Father.

I’ve watched this race for a while and McAuliffe crosses me as someone who thinks it is basically his turn. He’s been involved in politics for a while, dammit, and he thinks he deserves this. He doesn’t know the issues and doesn’t seem terribly interested in learning about them. He doesn’t know Virginia government and doesn’t seem terribly interested in learning about it. And he’s the best the Virginia Democrats could come up with. Seriously.

The T-D comes close to endorsing Libertarian candidate Robert Sarvis but shies away because of his lack of experience. I find that spineless. I endorse Sarvis and if I still lived in Virginia, would vote for him. What he lacks in experience, he makes up for in not being a buffoon. As it is, McAuliffe is leading in the polls. Whatever failings Sarvis may have, he’s got be better than McAullife. If you think McDonnell has had scandals, just wait until that jackanapes is in the Governor’s mansion.

Next year may even more amazing. The Democrats want to run Wendy Davis for governor of Texas. You may remember her from the abortion filibuster earlier this year as well as … well, nothing. Davis’s only real claim to fame is filibustering a bill that had the support of two-thirds of Texans. Whatever you may think about abortion, this is not an issue that is going to win Democrat the Texas state house. In my own state, Tom Corbett has become deeply unpopular but it’s not clear that the Democrats will nominate anyone in 2014 who has more credibility than Shakes the Clown.

The Republicans at the national level have been criticized for being out of ideas. But I think that applies even doubly so to Democrats at the state level. They seem to think that because they see Republicans as evil monsters, everyone else does too and all they need to is prop someone up who can spew liberal bullshit long enough to win. They’re in for a rude shock in the next year.

Democrats Do What Democrats Do

The GOP’s shutdown strategy has predictably failed. Obamacare, despite its disastrous opening, is not going anywhere. The GOP is hemorrhaging at the polls and taking blame for the situation. The business community is bringing increasing pressure on the GOP to make a deal. So for the last few days, the GOP and Obama have been in talks about both the short- and long-term deals they want to make, starting with raising the debt limit.

If you’ve been watching American politics for a while, you are waiting for the other shoe to drop: when are the Democrats going to overplay their hand? Well, wait no more:

Senate Republicans are holding the line against Democratic demands for a framework to alleviate the across-the-board spending cuts established by sequestration as part of any deal to end the government shutdown and raise the debt ceiling.

In talks between Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), the main sticking point is now where to establish funding levels for the federal government and for how long. The Republican offer made on Friday — to set spending at sequestration levels of $988 billion for the next six months -– was rejected by Reid and others on Saturday on the grounds that it was too favorable to the GOP position and discouraged future negotiations.

By Sunday morning, little notable progress toward a resolution had been made. McConnell, according to sources, was adamant that the spending cuts of sequestration be maintained in any final arrangement.

This is stupid. The push for the last few weeks has been to pass a clean continuing resolution — that is funding the government at its current level while a long-term budget is worked out. That long-term deal could include a relaxation of the sequester … but only in exchange for statutory changes to entitlements that address the massive long-term deficits.

The debt ceiling, however, is only four days away making the wisdom or folly of the sequester irrelevant. For the Democrats to drag this out now is not only ridiculous, it’s politically stupid. The GOP has been getting beat up on the shutdown. Now the Dems are determined that they too must look like idiots.

I would be surprised but … this is utterly consistent with everything we’ve come to expect from the Democrats.

Update: If you want a laugh, trip over to some liberal blogs and witness everyone who has spent the last two weeks talking about petty and vindictive the GOP is suddenly claiming that this is reasonable because the Republicans should be hurt for the shutdown. Notice also how they are re-inventing facts, ignoring that the CR that we’ve been debating for the past three weeks funded the government at sequestration levels.

WaPo gets 4 out of 5 right (accidentally?)..

Well, as was previously mentioned, the latest information about employment in the US is down right shitty. That’s after 5 years of liberals pretending they were going to fix that with green energy jobs, a whole bunch of other nonsense that killed jobs instead, and a whole lot of what not, things are getting worse, and doing so faster. At least they no longer blame Boosh. So WaPo has an article that for once points out the obvious: even the good news is bad.

Anyway, points 1 through 4, surprisingly, are pretty spot on as far as the bad parts, albeit the WaPo authors seem unable to discuss why these numbers suck so bad. See, they would have to blame the democrats for that shit, and that’s not going to happen. Pointing out that the democrats have pursued policies that destroyed jobs? NEAVAH! But that’s the facts. Between the idiotic money wasted on green energy, their all out assault on brown energy – the only sector in the US that is actually functioning and creating both wealth and jobs, and then, despite massive efforts to destroy it – and most important of all, the consequences of the government healthcare takeover scheme, the American job market has been under siege, and the abysmal numbers show it.

Then you get point 5, and boy do these idiots get that wrong. First off, point five seems to solely exist so they can push that the job problem is being caused by republicans and too little government or government spending. How idiotic. Republicans didn’t pass either Obamacare, which will turn us into a part time labor force with fewer people working, or run the EPA’s assault – which is a run around congress which could not pass the carbon tax the left so desperately wanted – on brown jobs. And government doesn’t create jobs: private industry does. Any job that government provides requires money to be taken away from the private sector where it would have been used far more effectively and efficiently. When will these fucking idiots finally understand that? After the last 5 years I would figure that this fact would be obvious to even people as stupid as these Keynesian marxists.

No wonder Black Jesus with the Nobel peace prize insists he is gonna bomb Syria, even if congress “disses” him: he needs people distracted from the reality of how economically destructive these past 5 years of stupid leftists economy crushing social engineering have been.

Clowns are evil!

I knew it. I have always had a problem with clowns. Never understood what was funny about some dude that smells like sweat, puke, and alcohol, is painted up, wears ridiculous shoes, has a big nose and oft freaky hair, and needs a giant smile painted on to get close to children. And now it seems others are catching on. Clowns are evil! And the biggest clowns I know all hold positions of power in the democrat party.

Waters on Fi Services

OK, then:

Democrats just elected Maxine Waters to the top Democratic spot on the House Financial Services committee.

This is really an extraordinary development. “Flabbergasting” might be a more apt word. Leave aside the recent ethics investigation over whether she used her position on the committee to help a bank her husband was involved with (which ended with her chief of staff getting reprimanded). Maxine Waters reliably delivers the craziest questions and the most bizarre speeches on that committee, and tends to demonstrate a stunning lack of grasp of the committee’s core subject matter.

McArdle has some stuff. Maxine has also been a favorite target here at RTFLC. Check out our previous coverage here, here, here and here. My all-time favorite was when she threatened to nationalize the oil companies over high oil prices, displaying a stunning ignorance of markets, the oil industry, history, economics, American law, the Constitution, business and the laws of physics, which are defied by the failure of her skull to implode. Water isn’t just an ignorant liberal. She’s specifically and spectacularly ignorant about the matters her committee deals with. This would be like appointing a creationist to head a … oh.

In case you were wondering how serious the Democrats are about governing, this is a good look at how things would work if they had the majority.