Archive for 2019

HARSH, BUT FAIR:

KRUISER’S MORNING BRIEF: Merry Impeachmentmas! “Schiff’s Folly finally gets its vote, and all that remains to be seen is if Grandma Nan was able to talk vulnerable red state Democrats into tossing their careers away the way she did with the Obamacare vote back in the day.”

Lemmings.

POLITICAL PANEL RIPS NEW JOE BIDEN POLITICAL AD: ‘ONE OF THE WORST SLOGANS I’VE EVER HEARD:’

A panel of political experts on Fox Nation’s “Deep Dive” ripped a new political ad released by former Vice President Joe Biden’s campaign on Tuesday.

“If Donald Trump is reelected, he will forever and fundamentally alter the character of this nation,” narrated Biden over images of Trump supporters followed by video of men marching with torches and Confederate flags. “We can’t. And I will not let this man be reelected president of the United States of America,” said Biden at the end of the ad.

“This is, I think, a reflection of the statement that Biden made when he entered this race, which is essentially saying Donald Trump is an irredeemable bigot and destructive force and he needs to be stopped,” observed Wall Street Journal editorial board assistant editor James Freeman.

“Is that a good theme for a campaign in 2020?” he asked the “Deep Dive” panel.

“One of the worst slogans I’ve ever heard in a commercial is ‘I will not let Donald Trump be president,'” said Brad Blakeman, who is an adjunct professor at Georgetown University and a former member of President George W. Bush’s senior staff. “That’s not the way our country works. We will decide — the people — as to who our president’s going to be.”

Torches and confederate flags? Somebody nudge Biden — his brain is stuck in a Möbius loop; that’s right out of the same playbook he used on milquetoast Mitt Romney of in 2012:

OK, CHIEF: Keir Starmer lays out case for ‘radical Labour government.’

While the leadership race has not yet formally been launched, the shadow Brexit secretary confirmed to the Guardian that, as widely expected in Westminster, he was “seriously considering” running to succeed Jeremy Corbyn.

In a wide-ranging interview, Starmer said Labour did not do enough to tackle the Conservatives’ central election pledge to ‘get Brexit done’ nor sufficiently deal with antisemitism, and urged his party to return to being a “broad church”.

He insisted Labour could win the next general election; but only if it sticks to its values. “There’s no hiding from it. It is a devastating result, but it’s important not to oversteer. The case for a bold and radical Labour government is as strong now as it was last Thursday. We need to anchor ourselves in that,” he said.

Maybe “doubling down on stupid” sounds smarter when said with an English accent.

FIGHT THE POWER: Virginia Now Has 95 Second Amendment Sanctuaries (And More To Come).

Plus: Virginia: County Board of Supervisors Forms an Active Militia.

“Our position is that Article I, Section 13, of the Constitution of Virginia reserves the right to ‘order’ militia to the localities,” Young said. “Therefore, counties, not the state, determine what types of arms may be carried in their territory and by whom. So, we are ‘ordering’ the militia by making sure everyone can own a weapon.”

Also: Five More Texas Counties Pass ‘Second Amendment Sanctuary’ Resolutions.

UPDATE: Now Virginia is up to 101 counties. It’s gonna be nearly all of them except the DC ring counties, isn’t it? LATER: Sorry, my mistake: I conflated “counties” and “communities” here.

BYRNE OFFERS AMENDMENT TO TRUMP IMPEACHMENT RULES: OBAMA, HOLDER ‘SHOULD HAVE BEEN IMPEACHED.’

Representative Bradley Byrne (R-AL) wants to point out the double standard President Donald Trump is facing with impeachment to his Democrat congressional colleagues and the public.

On Tuesday during deliberations of how the House of Representatives should proceed with impeachment before the body’s Rules Committee, Byrne put forth an amendment stating that former President Barack Obama and former Attorney General Eric Holder “should have been impeached” for the Obama administration’s response to congressional into the “Fast and Furious” gun-running scandal.

How can that be? All the best people told me Obama’s only scandal was wearing a tan gabardine suit.

 

TEACH WOMEN NOT TO RAPE! (CONT’D): Oklahoma cheerleading coach admits she had sex with two students. “Brandy Lynn Foreman, 29, is facing four counts of sexual battery. . . . Foreman, of Muldrow, pleaded not guilty last week. She was released after posting $20,000 bond and is set to return to court Jan. 29. If convicted, she faces up to 10 years in prison on each count, the Sequoyah County Times reported.”

BRITTLE: Xi Jinping’s annus horribilis.

Xi can blame only himself — or, more specifically, his excessive centralisation of power—for the challenges of the last year. Trade disputes with the US, concerns about Chinese interference in Hong Kong and ethnic tensions in Xinjiang all preceded his rise to power in late 2012. But China’s collective leadership, however corrupt and indecisive, managed to limit the escalation of these crises, thanks largely to their aversion to risk. For example, when more than half a million people in Hong Kong protested against a proposed national security law in 2003, the Chinese government immediately agreed to its withdrawal.

As Xi has concentrated political power in his own hands, however, decision-making has been transformed. Those hoping to influence policy must gain access to Xi himself, and they have every incentive to cherry-pick information to support his preferences. Likewise, Xi’s colleagues on the Politburo Standing Committee, fearful of appearing disloyal, are loath to share information that may contradict his view. They know that proposing an alternate approach could be seen as a direct challenge to Xi’s authority.

Xi’s intolerance of dissent and vulnerability to bad information have made his government much more prone to policy blunders. Making matters worse, because a strongman must maintain an image of virtual infallibility, even demonstrably ineffective or counterproductive policies are unlikely to be reversed.

Lots of good stuff at the link. I’d just add that perhaps the biggest risk of one-man rule is that when things go wrong, there’s only one man to blame — and no peaceful outlet for it.

PARTY OF THE RICH: House Democrats Plan To Pass Huge Tax Break for Wealthy Homeowners. It’s actually a federal subsidy for Democrat-run political machines in high-tax blue states. “Democrats are trying to sell the repeal of the SALT caps as a middle-class tax break, but historical evidence shows that it almost exclusively benefits high-earning homeowners who live in parts of the country where you must pay high taxes. . . . Reducing Americans’ tax obligations is always welcome, of course, but the plan to lift and repeal the SALT deduction cap is still questionable policy at best—a proposal that shifts the tax burden to middle- and lower-class Americans and adds to the budget deficit.”

ON THIS DAY IN 1878, JOSEPH STALIN WAS BORN: But that’s a bit of a downer, so I’m going to go with Betty Grable instead.  She was born on this day in 1916. Unlike Stalin, she was not responsible for the deaths of millions.

LOYALTY OATHS ARE ONLY BAD WHEN THEY INVOLVE LOYALTY TO THE UNITED STATES: Diversity Statements as ‘Litmus Tests.’

“In 1950 the Regents of the University of California required all UC faculty to sign a statement asserting that ‘I am not a member of, nor do I support any party or organization that believes in, advocates, or teaches the overthrow of the United States Government, by force or by any illegal or unconstitutional means, that I am not a member of the Communist Party,’” Thompson says. Those who refused to sign were fired.

Now, “Faculty at universities across the country are facing an echo of the loyalty oath, a mandatory ‘Diversity Statement’ for job applicants.”

The “professed purpose” of these statements is to identify candidates “who have the skills and experience to advance institutional diversity and equity goals,” Thompson wrote. But “in reality it’s a political test, and it’s a political test with teeth.”

What are the teeth, Thompson asks? Nearly all University of California campuses require that job applicants submit a “contributions to diversity” statement as a part of their application, and campuses evaluate such statements using rubrics, “a detailed scoring system.” She doesn’t name names, but says that “several UC programs have used these diversity statements to screen out candidates early in the search process.”

Sounds like a civil rights deprivation to me. I hope the Department of Education will investigate.