Hillary Clinton is a trained, licensed, and former practicing lawyer. As such, she knows that no investigative agency, such as the FBI, is ever going to release evidence in a case prior to the conclusion of an investigation because, to do so, could prejudice a potential trial or possible exoneration.
But, hours after it was revealed that the FBI had reopened the investigation of Hillary's emails based on newly found evidence on a Weiner/Abedin laptop, Hillary called for the complete release of any and all evidence the FBI is holding. Of course, the makes her look as if she has nothing to hide and implies innocence. I wish she used the same "get it all out" judgement when she BleachBit all her emails on her personal server. This is simply Clinton politics as usual and she knows it. And, she damn well knows that FBI Director Comey will never do what she is asking him to do because that would be unethical. Of course, "ethics" has never been one of Hillary's strong points.
Further, she is also fond of referring to the FBI action as a "review" rather than an investigation. It sounds much less serious that way. Another, political and very lawyerly tactic.
Lastly, the evidence that the FBI suspects is there, must be particularly damning for them to announce these actions just 10 days before the election. Logically, one can assume that the heat they're taking now may pale in comparison to whatever heat they may receive for not disclosing this highly explosive investigation until after the election.
References:
Clinton calls on FBI to release 'full and complete facts' of email review: http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/28/politics/fbi-reviewing-new-emails-in-clinton-probe-director-tells-senate-judiciary-committee/
pb
Monday, October 31, 2016
Friday, October 28, 2016
Not Another AT&T Monopoly!
Prior to 1982, AT&T had a literal monopoly on communications in the U.S. and Canada. While there were some small independent phone companies, they still had to connect to the rest of the world through AT&T. As a result of this monopoly, long distance rates were unbearably high. In addition, all kinds of restrictions were placed on customers who wanted to buck-the-system (the Bell System) and install a non-AT&T phone system. Over time, AT&T lost its monopoly control of the long distance network, and today, they have morphed themselves into a national cell phone call carrier.
Well, as we know, the cell phone business is quite competitive, With competition not being in AT&T's historical DNA, it now appears they are on the prowl to monopolize the cable and satellite channel business. The first step took place when it bought DirecTV. DirecTV has 19 million customers. Then, this year, they announced a tentative agreement to buy Time Warner, which is subject to approval by the federal government. If allowed, they would control one of the largest entertainment conglomerates in the world that includes a cable company and powerhouse services such as HBO, CNN, TBS, the CW, Warner Brothers, D.C. Comics and so much more.
To me, and others, this is a deal that should not go through in its entirety. It concentrates too much power in the hands of AT&T. In fact, I've always questioned the concentration of power by Time Warner, and if the deal is approved, what's next? Disney? Another massive conglomerate, that would give AT&T massive control of entertainment in this country and around the world.
References:
AT&T-Time Warner deal would create the nation's largest entertainment company and is already raising antitrust concerns: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-trump-att-time-warner-20161022-snap-story.html
Breakup of the Bell System: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakup_of_the_Bell_System
DirecTV: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirecTV
Time Warner: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Warner
The Walt Disney Company: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Walt_Disney_Company
pb
Well, as we know, the cell phone business is quite competitive, With competition not being in AT&T's historical DNA, it now appears they are on the prowl to monopolize the cable and satellite channel business. The first step took place when it bought DirecTV. DirecTV has 19 million customers. Then, this year, they announced a tentative agreement to buy Time Warner, which is subject to approval by the federal government. If allowed, they would control one of the largest entertainment conglomerates in the world that includes a cable company and powerhouse services such as HBO, CNN, TBS, the CW, Warner Brothers, D.C. Comics and so much more.
To me, and others, this is a deal that should not go through in its entirety. It concentrates too much power in the hands of AT&T. In fact, I've always questioned the concentration of power by Time Warner, and if the deal is approved, what's next? Disney? Another massive conglomerate, that would give AT&T massive control of entertainment in this country and around the world.
References:
AT&T-Time Warner deal would create the nation's largest entertainment company and is already raising antitrust concerns: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-trump-att-time-warner-20161022-snap-story.html
Breakup of the Bell System: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakup_of_the_Bell_System
DirecTV: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirecTV
Time Warner: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Warner
The Walt Disney Company: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Walt_Disney_Company
pb
Thursday, October 27, 2016
Will You Lose Your Medicare Doctor? Probably!
Quietly, last year, President Obama signed a bill into law that could greatly affect Medicare patients. Called the Medicare Access and Chips Reauthorization Act (MACRA), it will substantially change how doctors and clinicians are paid for treating Medicare patients.
This innocuous sounding law will move payments from a fee-for-service system, to one based on the "quality" of services performed. Doctors exceeding their peers in the "quality" of care given, will receive bonuses. Doctors who fail to meet the average score of their peers will receive, initially, a 4% penalty on the billings being submitted. This is already below the average of 11% that Medicare underpays doctors. In other words, our government will start picking winners and losers among our base of doctors; and hopefully yours won't be on the losing side. Using a 100 score potential, anyone scoring 49 will be the penalized, although this does not mean that half the docs will be dinged on their billing. For example, if 75% score 50 or better, only 25% will be penalized. Doctors who bill less than $10,000 and have fewer than 100 Medicare patients are exempt from the program.
The biggest problem with the system is that a computer will take all the scoring data being submitted by doctors in 2017, and apply an applicable bonus or penalty starting in 2019. And, in typical government fashion, the doctors won't get their quality score until they submit their billing. Of course, there's no recourse for contending their status.
When I learned of MACRA's nearly 2500 pages of final rulings submitted by Health and Human Services, it was a day before I had a doctor's appointment. From what I read about the law, a number of doctors may stop taking Medicare patients; especially those slightly above the $10,000/100 patient threshold. God help you if your doctor has, say, 105 patients. You just may be one of the 6 unlucky patients that he/she may stop seeing to avoid the law altogether.
So, when I saw my doctor the next day, I asked him if he will continue to take Medicare patients when MACRA kicks in and, to my relief, his response was "yes". However, that was short lived when he continued on to say that any Medicare patients may be changed to a cash only basis because that is one of the options that he and his partners are looking at in order to avoid the onerous penalties and paperwork that they would be subjected too with MACRA.
I could go into all the problems with MACRA that could ultimately result as doctors, either stop treating Medicare patients, or just retire early; but, that is best explained in the link referenced below. As of 2014, a Merritt Hawkings survey found that only 76% of the doctors surveyed took Medicare patients. Will this law make it less than 50% or, even, 40%? Needless to say, MACRA, like ObamaCare, is another government intervention that won't work and will probably need to be repealed before too much damage is done.
References:
Physician payment in Medicare is changing: Three highlights in the MACRA proposed rule that providers need to know: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/health360/2016/05/04/physician-payment-in-medicare-is-changing-three-highlights-in-the-macra-proposed-rule-that-providers-need-to-know/
MACRA Proposed Rule Creates More Problems Than It Solves: http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2016/10/12/macra-proposed-rule-creates-more-problems-than-it-solves/
How Physicians Can Prepare for the Financial Impact of MACRA: https://www.healthcatalyst.com/physicians-must-prep-for-the-financial-impact-of-macra
50% of physicians have never heard of MACRA, Deloitte finds: http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/50-of-physicians-have-never-heard-of-macra-deloitte-finds.html
Beleaguered by electronic record mandates, some doctors burning out: http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-doctors-hate-records-mandate-1213-biz-20151211-story.html
Medicare vs. private insurance: Which costs less: http://money.cnn.com/2014/04/21/news/economy/medicare-doctors/
American Hospital Association: Payment Facts: http://www.aha.org/research/policy/finfactsheets.shtml
How MACRA will decimate the private practice physician: http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2016/07/macra-will-decimate-private-practice-physician.html
The Mess That is MACRA: http://www.pnhp.org/news/2016/april/the-mess-that-is-macra
Risk of ‘Mass Exodus’ of Doctors from Medicare: http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/risk-of-mass-exodus-of-doctors-from-medicare/
With MACRA looming, doctors can't afford waiting to plumb its intricacies: http://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20160723/MAGAZINE/307239981
Physician Frustration and Fear of MACRA: http://catalyst.nejm.org/physician-frustration-fear-macra/
Merritt Hawkins Medicare Medicaid Acceptance and Wait Times: http://www.merritthawkins.com/uploadedfiles/merritthawkings/surveys/mha2014waitsurvpdf.pdf
The MACRA rule: Not what Congress ordered: http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2016/06/macra-rule-not-congress-ordered.html
pb
This innocuous sounding law will move payments from a fee-for-service system, to one based on the "quality" of services performed. Doctors exceeding their peers in the "quality" of care given, will receive bonuses. Doctors who fail to meet the average score of their peers will receive, initially, a 4% penalty on the billings being submitted. This is already below the average of 11% that Medicare underpays doctors. In other words, our government will start picking winners and losers among our base of doctors; and hopefully yours won't be on the losing side. Using a 100 score potential, anyone scoring 49 will be the penalized, although this does not mean that half the docs will be dinged on their billing. For example, if 75% score 50 or better, only 25% will be penalized. Doctors who bill less than $10,000 and have fewer than 100 Medicare patients are exempt from the program.
The biggest problem with the system is that a computer will take all the scoring data being submitted by doctors in 2017, and apply an applicable bonus or penalty starting in 2019. And, in typical government fashion, the doctors won't get their quality score until they submit their billing. Of course, there's no recourse for contending their status.
When I learned of MACRA's nearly 2500 pages of final rulings submitted by Health and Human Services, it was a day before I had a doctor's appointment. From what I read about the law, a number of doctors may stop taking Medicare patients; especially those slightly above the $10,000/100 patient threshold. God help you if your doctor has, say, 105 patients. You just may be one of the 6 unlucky patients that he/she may stop seeing to avoid the law altogether.
So, when I saw my doctor the next day, I asked him if he will continue to take Medicare patients when MACRA kicks in and, to my relief, his response was "yes". However, that was short lived when he continued on to say that any Medicare patients may be changed to a cash only basis because that is one of the options that he and his partners are looking at in order to avoid the onerous penalties and paperwork that they would be subjected too with MACRA.
I could go into all the problems with MACRA that could ultimately result as doctors, either stop treating Medicare patients, or just retire early; but, that is best explained in the link referenced below. As of 2014, a Merritt Hawkings survey found that only 76% of the doctors surveyed took Medicare patients. Will this law make it less than 50% or, even, 40%? Needless to say, MACRA, like ObamaCare, is another government intervention that won't work and will probably need to be repealed before too much damage is done.
References:
Physician payment in Medicare is changing: Three highlights in the MACRA proposed rule that providers need to know: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/health360/2016/05/04/physician-payment-in-medicare-is-changing-three-highlights-in-the-macra-proposed-rule-that-providers-need-to-know/
MACRA Proposed Rule Creates More Problems Than It Solves: http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2016/10/12/macra-proposed-rule-creates-more-problems-than-it-solves/
How Physicians Can Prepare for the Financial Impact of MACRA: https://www.healthcatalyst.com/physicians-must-prep-for-the-financial-impact-of-macra
50% of physicians have never heard of MACRA, Deloitte finds: http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/50-of-physicians-have-never-heard-of-macra-deloitte-finds.html
Beleaguered by electronic record mandates, some doctors burning out: http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-doctors-hate-records-mandate-1213-biz-20151211-story.html
Medicare vs. private insurance: Which costs less: http://money.cnn.com/2014/04/21/news/economy/medicare-doctors/
American Hospital Association: Payment Facts: http://www.aha.org/research/policy/finfactsheets.shtml
How MACRA will decimate the private practice physician: http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2016/07/macra-will-decimate-private-practice-physician.html
The Mess That is MACRA: http://www.pnhp.org/news/2016/april/the-mess-that-is-macra
Risk of ‘Mass Exodus’ of Doctors from Medicare: http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/risk-of-mass-exodus-of-doctors-from-medicare/
With MACRA looming, doctors can't afford waiting to plumb its intricacies: http://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20160723/MAGAZINE/307239981
Physician Frustration and Fear of MACRA: http://catalyst.nejm.org/physician-frustration-fear-macra/
Merritt Hawkins Medicare Medicaid Acceptance and Wait Times: http://www.merritthawkins.com/uploadedfiles/merritthawkings/surveys/mha2014waitsurvpdf.pdf
The MACRA rule: Not what Congress ordered: http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2016/06/macra-rule-not-congress-ordered.html
pb
Wednesday, October 26, 2016
Obama on Hillary: Now and in 2008
In a joint campaign stop, President Obama said this about Hillary Clinton:
Reference:
Obama: Hillary Clinton Most Qualified Presidential Candidate Ever: http://chicagotonight.wttw.com/2016/07/27/obama-hillary-clinton-most-qualified-presidential-candidate-ever
pb
"And that’s why I can say with confidence there has never been a man or a woman—not me, not Bill, nobody—more qualified than Hillary Clinton to serve as president of the United States of America.”Apparently, the President forgot this little video from his 2008 campaign against Hillary:
Reference:
Obama: Hillary Clinton Most Qualified Presidential Candidate Ever: http://chicagotonight.wttw.com/2016/07/27/obama-hillary-clinton-most-qualified-presidential-candidate-ever
pb
Tuesday, October 25, 2016
Is Trump Hoping for a "Dewey Wins" Moment?
In 1948, Thomas E. Dewey was running against the incumbent President Harry S. Truman. All the polls had Dewey in the lead and there was no doubt he wouldn't win. The Chicago Daily Tribune was facing a printer's strike and was so sure of a Dewey win that they pre-published this now-famous headline:
That's Truman, the then-winner, holding up what is the biggest mistake in newspaper history.
When I listen to Trump say he's going to win and that the polls have it wrong, I think about that "Tribune" headline. Of course, that was most likely a one-off situation. There are just too many polls with Trump losing by double digits or by at least 6 percentage points. It really doesn't matter if Truman and Trump have, coincidentally, the same first four letters in their names. Which is weird in itself.
References:
Dewey defeats Truman: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/chi-chicagodays-deweydefeats-story-story.html
Clinton Vaults to a Double-Digit Lead, Boosted by Broad Disapproval of Trump (POLL): http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/clinton-vaults-double-digit-lead-boosted-broad-disapproval/story?id=42993821
RealClearPolitics: Polls: General Election: Trump vs. Clinton: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html
pb
That's Truman, the then-winner, holding up what is the biggest mistake in newspaper history.
When I listen to Trump say he's going to win and that the polls have it wrong, I think about that "Tribune" headline. Of course, that was most likely a one-off situation. There are just too many polls with Trump losing by double digits or by at least 6 percentage points. It really doesn't matter if Truman and Trump have, coincidentally, the same first four letters in their names. Which is weird in itself.
References:
Dewey defeats Truman: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/chi-chicagodays-deweydefeats-story-story.html
Clinton Vaults to a Double-Digit Lead, Boosted by Broad Disapproval of Trump (POLL): http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/clinton-vaults-double-digit-lead-boosted-broad-disapproval/story?id=42993821
RealClearPolitics: Polls: General Election: Trump vs. Clinton: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html
pb
Monday, October 24, 2016
Climate Change Alarmists Fret Over the Lack of Media Coverage
In a recent article for Investor's Business Daily, Kerry Jackson speculated that climate alarmists were upset that hurricane Matthew didn't do more damage, and as a result, wasn't able to advance their cause. In a later article, she also told us that these same people want to change the way hurricanes are measured. Not just by wind, but by rainfall too. This was so they could seem more threatening and more frequent. All of which could signal even more "climate change".
Then, Brad Plummer at Vox.com was dismayed that in the 4 debates -- three presidential and one vice presidential -- the subject wasn't even mentioned. Additionally, Michael Mann of "hockey stick" temperature projections speculated that the main stream media has been "compromised" and are intentionally ignoring climate change. Boo hoo!
The simple fact, is that people don't care about it. It's not an important issue. Generally, jobs and the economy are the number one concerns. When you look at polling for the top issues on people's minds, climate change hardly ever comes up, and when it does, the percentage of people worried about it are in the single digits.
In my opinion, the main reason that people are turned off by the topic, is that "alarmists" literally blame everything on climate change. Even wars, and every hurricane and tornado as if they didn't exist before, along with other endless declarations. People like me, just find this too unbelievable. Especially, when you consider that many declarations and predictions contradict each other. Hell, the Green Party candidate, Jill Stein, is running around predicting a 9 foot sea rise by 2050, when in fact, seas are only rising about 14 inches a century. Then, we were told by NASA earlier this year, that the rise in sea levels has slowed because the rains are heavier over land. Tell that to California and the rest of the Southwest who are in a multi-year drought.
It's not the media that is losing interest. It's the people who are and the media just plays to the interests of the public.
References:
Are Global Warming Alarmists Disappointed Hurricane Matthew Wasn't Worse? http://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/are-global-warming-alarmists-disappointed-hurricane-matthew-wasnt-worse/
Warming Alarmists Redefine What A Hurricane Is So We'll Have More Of Them: http://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/warming-alarmists-redefine-what-a-hurricane-is-so-well-have-more-of-them/
That's 4 straight debates without a single question on climate change. Good job, everyone: http://www.vox.com/2016/10/19/13342250/presidential-debates-climate-change
Mann on the Lack of MSM Climate Coverage: “One has to wonder if television networks are compromised…” https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/10/19/mann-on-the-lack-of-msm-climate-coverage-one-has-to-wonder-if-television-networks-are-compromised/
Polls: Priorities: http://www.pollingreport.com/prioriti.htm
Could climate change lead to a WAR? Global warming will increase the risk of armed conflict between ethnic groups: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3707108/Could-climate-change-lead-WAR-Global-warming-increase-risk-armed-conflict-ethnic-groups.html
Jill Stein just went way overboard on sea level rise: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/08/17/jill-stein-just-went-overboard-on-sea-level-rise/?utm_term=.9e8aeaf48736
NASA, University Study Shows Rising Seas Slowed by Increasing Water on Land: http://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-university-study-shows-rising-seas-slowed-by-increasing-water-on-land
Scientists Finally Admit Climate Models Are Failing To Predict Global Warming: http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/26/scientists-finally-admit-climate-models-are-failing-to-predict-global-warming/
Then, Brad Plummer at Vox.com was dismayed that in the 4 debates -- three presidential and one vice presidential -- the subject wasn't even mentioned. Additionally, Michael Mann of "hockey stick" temperature projections speculated that the main stream media has been "compromised" and are intentionally ignoring climate change. Boo hoo!
The simple fact, is that people don't care about it. It's not an important issue. Generally, jobs and the economy are the number one concerns. When you look at polling for the top issues on people's minds, climate change hardly ever comes up, and when it does, the percentage of people worried about it are in the single digits.
In my opinion, the main reason that people are turned off by the topic, is that "alarmists" literally blame everything on climate change. Even wars, and every hurricane and tornado as if they didn't exist before, along with other endless declarations. People like me, just find this too unbelievable. Especially, when you consider that many declarations and predictions contradict each other. Hell, the Green Party candidate, Jill Stein, is running around predicting a 9 foot sea rise by 2050, when in fact, seas are only rising about 14 inches a century. Then, we were told by NASA earlier this year, that the rise in sea levels has slowed because the rains are heavier over land. Tell that to California and the rest of the Southwest who are in a multi-year drought.
It's not the media that is losing interest. It's the people who are and the media just plays to the interests of the public.
References:
Are Global Warming Alarmists Disappointed Hurricane Matthew Wasn't Worse? http://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/are-global-warming-alarmists-disappointed-hurricane-matthew-wasnt-worse/
Warming Alarmists Redefine What A Hurricane Is So We'll Have More Of Them: http://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/warming-alarmists-redefine-what-a-hurricane-is-so-well-have-more-of-them/
That's 4 straight debates without a single question on climate change. Good job, everyone: http://www.vox.com/2016/10/19/13342250/presidential-debates-climate-change
Mann on the Lack of MSM Climate Coverage: “One has to wonder if television networks are compromised…” https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/10/19/mann-on-the-lack-of-msm-climate-coverage-one-has-to-wonder-if-television-networks-are-compromised/
Polls: Priorities: http://www.pollingreport.com/prioriti.htm
Could climate change lead to a WAR? Global warming will increase the risk of armed conflict between ethnic groups: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3707108/Could-climate-change-lead-WAR-Global-warming-increase-risk-armed-conflict-ethnic-groups.html
Jill Stein just went way overboard on sea level rise: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/08/17/jill-stein-just-went-overboard-on-sea-level-rise/?utm_term=.9e8aeaf48736
NASA, University Study Shows Rising Seas Slowed by Increasing Water on Land: http://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-university-study-shows-rising-seas-slowed-by-increasing-water-on-land
Scientists Finally Admit Climate Models Are Failing To Predict Global Warming: http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/26/scientists-finally-admit-climate-models-are-failing-to-predict-global-warming/
Friday, October 21, 2016
London News Flash: The Queen is Dead..Lower the Union Jack!
Flag protocol in Britain requires that the "Union Jack" be flown at half staff from the day a sovereign's
death is announced, until the day of the funeral. So, why hasn't the flag been lowered? Well, it isn't "the" queen who has died, but instead, the queen of leaf cutter ants at the London Natural History Museum.
Apparently, her colony is dying along with her. All that remains is litter, dead bodies, and this sign:
This, as being reported by the Guardian news. It seems this ant colony was one of the main attractions at that museum. Hell! If I knew that, I could have sold tickets to my backyard. The little buggers are all over the place! Usually, twice a year, they manage to come inside, and I use bait that is actually intended to kill the queen. I guess things are a little different in Britain.
References:
British Flag Protocol: http://www.flaginstitute.org/wp/british-flags/flying-flags-in-the-united-kingdom/british-flag-protocol/#index21
Museum posts 'queen has died' notice to explain vanished ant colony: https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2016/oct/19/museum-queen-died-notice-ant-colony-natural-history-london
death is announced, until the day of the funeral. So, why hasn't the flag been lowered? Well, it isn't "the" queen who has died, but instead, the queen of leaf cutter ants at the London Natural History Museum.
Apparently, her colony is dying along with her. All that remains is litter, dead bodies, and this sign:
This, as being reported by the Guardian news. It seems this ant colony was one of the main attractions at that museum. Hell! If I knew that, I could have sold tickets to my backyard. The little buggers are all over the place! Usually, twice a year, they manage to come inside, and I use bait that is actually intended to kill the queen. I guess things are a little different in Britain.
References:
British Flag Protocol: http://www.flaginstitute.org/wp/british-flags/flying-flags-in-the-united-kingdom/british-flag-protocol/#index21
Museum posts 'queen has died' notice to explain vanished ant colony: https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2016/oct/19/museum-queen-died-notice-ant-colony-natural-history-london
Thursday, October 20, 2016
Hillary Clinton Has the Peter Principal Hanging Over Her Head
In 1969, a man by the name of Laurence J. Peter shocked the business world with his book titled "Peter Principle". Essentially, he claimed that managers stop being promoted when they reach a level of incompetence. Incompetence that is a result of promoting people on the basis of what they have done in their current job and not how well they are equipped to handle the job they're being promoted into.
On that assumption, Hillary Clinton reached her level of incompetence when she became Secretary of State. In an interview with ABC News' Diane Sawyer in 2014, she could not name one accomplishment during her stint as Secretary of State. This, after she flubbed the same question in a New York Times interview two months earlier. Apparently, two months wasn't enough time to prepare her for a similar question.
More importantly, during that time, she demonstrated pure incompetence on many key issues:
Now, she wants to demonstrate her further incompetence and completely validate the concept of the "Peter Principle" by becoming President of the United States.
references:
Peter Principle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_principle
Hillary Can't Name Top Accomplishment As Secretary of State: http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidadesnik/2014/06/10/hillary-cant-name-top-accomplishment-as-secretary-of-state/#73b4b91246a4
Is Hillary Clinton 'Qualified'? What is troubling about Clinton’s record is that she has left behind a trail strewn with failures and even catastrophes: https://consortiumnews.com/2016/04/08/is-hillary-clinton-qualified/
Secretary Clinton in 2009: "I really consider President and Mrs. Mubarak to be friends of my family": http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2011/01/secretary-clinton-in-2009-i-really-consider-president-and-mrs-mubarak-to-be-friends-of-my-family.html
Hosni Mubarak: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosni_Mubarak
Mary Anastasia O'Grady: Hillary's Half-Baked Haiti Project - WSJ: https://www.google.com/search?q=Mary+Anastasia+O%27Grady%3A+Hillary%27s+Half-Baked+Haiti+Project+-+WSJ&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
Russian reset - Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_reset
8 major warnings before Benghazi terrorist attacks | Sharyl Attkisson: https://sharylattkisson.com/8-major-warnings-before-benghazi-terrorist-attacks/
James Comey Says Clinton's Server Put US Secrets At Risk: http://dailycaller.com/2016/07/07/fbi-director-comey-clintons-email-system-made-us-vulnerable-to-hostile-elements/
On that assumption, Hillary Clinton reached her level of incompetence when she became Secretary of State. In an interview with ABC News' Diane Sawyer in 2014, she could not name one accomplishment during her stint as Secretary of State. This, after she flubbed the same question in a New York Times interview two months earlier. Apparently, two months wasn't enough time to prepare her for a similar question.
More importantly, during that time, she demonstrated pure incompetence on many key issues:
- The Russian Reset. Besides embarrassing herself and our country by getting the spelling wrong for the Russian word for "reset" on a symbolic gift to the Russian Foreign Minister, the relations have "reset" us back to looking more like the days of the "Cold War" and not something better than when Bush was in office.
- Following the 7.0 earthquake in Haiti, she authorized millions to be spent to create 65,000 jobs by building a gleaming industrial park in a country that had more than a million unemployed. To date, only 11,000 workers have been employed with no more growth in sight.
- 9/11 Benghazi Attacks. We all know she lied about the reason for the attacks. However, the fact that we were even in Benghazi on 9/11 is due to incompetence. Long before the attack, multiple warning signs clearly showed that things were quickly degrading in Libya. She and her appointees disregarded Ambassador Stevens' communications of security concerns. Additionally, she ignored the fact that both the International Red Cross and the Brits left the country because of increasing concerns over the security of their people. Yet, we stayed and 4 Americans died.
- Then, there was the complete incompetence of Hillary's private email server which put this country's top secrets at risk.
We look forward to President Mubarak coming as soon as his schedule would permit. I had a wonderful time with him this morning. I really consider President and Mrs. Mubarak to be friends of my family. So I hope to see him often here in Egypt and in the United States.Friends of her family? In 2011, Mubarak was forced to step down over massive protests in the streets of Egypt. In that same year, he was sentenced to life imprisonment for his abuse of power and corruption while President. Maybe that's why Hillary and Mubarak were such good friends?
Now, she wants to demonstrate her further incompetence and completely validate the concept of the "Peter Principle" by becoming President of the United States.
references:
Peter Principle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_principle
Hillary Can't Name Top Accomplishment As Secretary of State: http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidadesnik/2014/06/10/hillary-cant-name-top-accomplishment-as-secretary-of-state/#73b4b91246a4
Is Hillary Clinton 'Qualified'? What is troubling about Clinton’s record is that she has left behind a trail strewn with failures and even catastrophes: https://consortiumnews.com/2016/04/08/is-hillary-clinton-qualified/
Secretary Clinton in 2009: "I really consider President and Mrs. Mubarak to be friends of my family": http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2011/01/secretary-clinton-in-2009-i-really-consider-president-and-mrs-mubarak-to-be-friends-of-my-family.html
Hosni Mubarak: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosni_Mubarak
Mary Anastasia O'Grady: Hillary's Half-Baked Haiti Project - WSJ: https://www.google.com/search?q=Mary+Anastasia+O%27Grady%3A+Hillary%27s+Half-Baked+Haiti+Project+-+WSJ&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
Russian reset - Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_reset
8 major warnings before Benghazi terrorist attacks | Sharyl Attkisson: https://sharylattkisson.com/8-major-warnings-before-benghazi-terrorist-attacks/
James Comey Says Clinton's Server Put US Secrets At Risk: http://dailycaller.com/2016/07/07/fbi-director-comey-clintons-email-system-made-us-vulnerable-to-hostile-elements/
Tuesday, October 18, 2016
Hillary Clinton's Climate Change B.S. on Hurricane Matthew
Campaigning with Al Gore in Florida, Hillary Clinton said this about hurricane Matthew:
References:
Al Gore and Hillary Clinton just strongly linked Hurricane Matthew to climate change: http://www.myajc.com/news/news/national-govt-politics/al-gore-and-hillary-clinton-just-strongly-linked-h/nsqC4/
30 peer reviewed studies show no connection between climate change and hurricanes: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/10/14/30-peer-reviewed-studies-show-no-connection-between-climate-change-and-hurricanes/
"Hurricane Matthew was likely more destructive because of climate change. Right now the ocean is at or near record high temperatures, and that contributed to the torrential rainfall and the flash flooding that we saw in the Carolinas."Hillary the lawyer, and I guess now, a climatologist, is simply wrong. As Anthony Watts is reporting on his website "Watts Up With That", 30 peer reviewed scientific studies have have found no correlation to the frequency and intensity of hurricanes and global warming (see link below for the full list). Hillary's attempt to link Matthew to climate change is just a bunch of political B.S.
References:
Al Gore and Hillary Clinton just strongly linked Hurricane Matthew to climate change: http://www.myajc.com/news/news/national-govt-politics/al-gore-and-hillary-clinton-just-strongly-linked-h/nsqC4/
30 peer reviewed studies show no connection between climate change and hurricanes: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/10/14/30-peer-reviewed-studies-show-no-connection-between-climate-change-and-hurricanes/
Monday, October 17, 2016
.Pence Commits Political Suicide By Not Leaving The Ticket
I believe that Trump will not recover from his "pu**y" assault video I think he will lose and lose big in November. Of course, he has a business that he can go back to.
But, Mike Pence is still in politics, and politics can be unforgiving; especially if Pence has any thoughts of running for president in 2020. By not leaving the Trump ticket, he will be seen as condoning that behavior, and no amount of "forgiveness" is going to help his political career going forward. Forevermore, he's now tainted by Donald Trump. Just as Billy Bush's career will never be the same.
References:
Pence emerges in NC with praise, ‘forgiveness’ for Trump: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/pence-emerges-in-nc-with-praise-forgiveness-for-trump/2016/10/10/0bca144c-8f34-11e6-bc00-1a9756d4111b_story.html
Pence: I never considered leaving Trump ticket: http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/10/politics/mike-pence-donald-trump/
Mike Pence’s Fellow Parishioners Are Furious at Donald Trump: The parishioners I spoke to are angry with Trump for exposing the Pence family to such shame: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/10/10/mike-pence-s-fellow-parishioners-are-furious-at-donald-trump.html
'Devastated' Billy Bush 'Can't Recover' from Leaked Donald Trump Tape: http://people.com/tv/devastated-billy-bush-cant-recover-from-leaked-donald-trump-tape/
Billy Bush is reportedly leaving NBC after vulgar Donald Trump tape leak: http://www.businessinsider.com/billy-bush-is-leaving-nbc-donald-trump-tape-2016-10
pb
But, Mike Pence is still in politics, and politics can be unforgiving; especially if Pence has any thoughts of running for president in 2020. By not leaving the Trump ticket, he will be seen as condoning that behavior, and no amount of "forgiveness" is going to help his political career going forward. Forevermore, he's now tainted by Donald Trump. Just as Billy Bush's career will never be the same.
References:
Pence emerges in NC with praise, ‘forgiveness’ for Trump: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/pence-emerges-in-nc-with-praise-forgiveness-for-trump/2016/10/10/0bca144c-8f34-11e6-bc00-1a9756d4111b_story.html
Pence: I never considered leaving Trump ticket: http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/10/politics/mike-pence-donald-trump/
Mike Pence’s Fellow Parishioners Are Furious at Donald Trump: The parishioners I spoke to are angry with Trump for exposing the Pence family to such shame: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/10/10/mike-pence-s-fellow-parishioners-are-furious-at-donald-trump.html
'Devastated' Billy Bush 'Can't Recover' from Leaked Donald Trump Tape: http://people.com/tv/devastated-billy-bush-cant-recover-from-leaked-donald-trump-tape/
Billy Bush is reportedly leaving NBC after vulgar Donald Trump tape leak: http://www.businessinsider.com/billy-bush-is-leaving-nbc-donald-trump-tape-2016-10
pb
Friday, October 14, 2016
Farmers are Really, Really Crying over Spilled Milk
In this country and around the world, dairy farmers are losing money because of a glut of milk. Prices for raw milk are down 40% from a high two years ago. You might not have noticed it since grocers haven't lowered their prices in kind. It was record high prices in 2014 that attracted farmers to bring more cows on line to produce more milk for more profits. Now, they are paying for that greed and some are going broke in the process.
This year alone, 43 million gallons of milk have been dumped in fields, and used as animal feed. Cows are being killed off in order to keep prices from falling any further. The fear is that there will be an uncoordinated overreaction, milk shortages will result, and prices will soar. One has to wonder why the Department of Agriculture hasn't stepped in to manage the situation on a coordinated basis.
References:
Got milk? Dairy farmers dumped 43 million gallons of milk this year: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/10/13/got-milk-dairy-farmers-dumped-43-million-gallons-milk-this-year.html
America’s dairy farmers dump 43 million gallons of excess milk: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/americas-dairy-farmers-dump-43-million-gallons-of-excess-milk-2016-10-13
Why Do Milk Prices Spike And Crash? Because It's Like Oil: http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/08/05/488708017/why-do-milk-prices-spike-and-crash-because-its-like-oil
Killing Off American Cows to Keep Milk Prices High: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-08/cow-killing-and-price-fixing-in-your-supermarket-dairy-aisle
This year alone, 43 million gallons of milk have been dumped in fields, and used as animal feed. Cows are being killed off in order to keep prices from falling any further. The fear is that there will be an uncoordinated overreaction, milk shortages will result, and prices will soar. One has to wonder why the Department of Agriculture hasn't stepped in to manage the situation on a coordinated basis.
References:
Got milk? Dairy farmers dumped 43 million gallons of milk this year: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/10/13/got-milk-dairy-farmers-dumped-43-million-gallons-milk-this-year.html
America’s dairy farmers dump 43 million gallons of excess milk: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/americas-dairy-farmers-dump-43-million-gallons-of-excess-milk-2016-10-13
Why Do Milk Prices Spike And Crash? Because It's Like Oil: http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/08/05/488708017/why-do-milk-prices-spike-and-crash-because-its-like-oil
Killing Off American Cows to Keep Milk Prices High: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-08/cow-killing-and-price-fixing-in-your-supermarket-dairy-aisle
Thursday, October 13, 2016
What Do Food Prices and Restaurant Sales Say About Our Economy?
In an unprecedented fashion, in a non-recessionary period, food prices have fallen for 9 straight months, and the trend is actually accelerating:
Many analysts blame the Wal-Mart effect, where grocery chains are slashing prices to maintain or perhaps even gain market share. At the same time, fast food and restaurant sales are "dropping off a cliff" because with lower grocery prices, people are choosing to dine at home.
But, to all of that I say "bull". The reason is because retail sales are also falling and have been falling for decades.
Today, retail sales growth is at non-recession lows as noted by the trend line in the above graph. Simply, low food prices, falling restaurant sales, and falling retail sales, all point to the fact that American's wages are stagnant. Dining out and buying things has become a luxury. In fact, 7 out of 10 Americans surveyed said they have less than $1,000 in their savings accounts.
References:
Olive Garden just signaled an ominous threat to the restaurant industry: http://www.businessinsider.com/olive-garden-darden-ceo-restaurant-industry-closures-2016-10
Grocery Prices Are Plunging: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-27/eight-cent-eggs-consumers-gobble-cheap-food-as-grocers-squirm
There's a simple reason fast-food sales are slowing: http://www.businessinsider.com/simple-reason-fast-food-sales-slowing-inflation-groceries-2016-9
United States Retail Sales: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/retail-sales-annual
Analysts Say Food Prices Have Tumbled to a ‘Completely Unprecedented’ Low: http://www.grubstreet.com/2016/09/food-prices-are-now-at-a-completely-unprecedented-low.html
Nearly 7 in 10 Americans have less than $1,000 in savings: http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2016/10/09/savings-study/91083712/
Many analysts blame the Wal-Mart effect, where grocery chains are slashing prices to maintain or perhaps even gain market share. At the same time, fast food and restaurant sales are "dropping off a cliff" because with lower grocery prices, people are choosing to dine at home.
But, to all of that I say "bull". The reason is because retail sales are also falling and have been falling for decades.
 |
| Click on Image to See an Enhanced Image |
Today, retail sales growth is at non-recession lows as noted by the trend line in the above graph. Simply, low food prices, falling restaurant sales, and falling retail sales, all point to the fact that American's wages are stagnant. Dining out and buying things has become a luxury. In fact, 7 out of 10 Americans surveyed said they have less than $1,000 in their savings accounts.
References:
Olive Garden just signaled an ominous threat to the restaurant industry: http://www.businessinsider.com/olive-garden-darden-ceo-restaurant-industry-closures-2016-10
Grocery Prices Are Plunging: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-27/eight-cent-eggs-consumers-gobble-cheap-food-as-grocers-squirm
There's a simple reason fast-food sales are slowing: http://www.businessinsider.com/simple-reason-fast-food-sales-slowing-inflation-groceries-2016-9
United States Retail Sales: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/retail-sales-annual
Analysts Say Food Prices Have Tumbled to a ‘Completely Unprecedented’ Low: http://www.grubstreet.com/2016/09/food-prices-are-now-at-a-completely-unprecedented-low.html
Nearly 7 in 10 Americans have less than $1,000 in savings: http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2016/10/09/savings-study/91083712/
Wednesday, October 12, 2016
Obama's 15 Million Job Creation Claim
Last week, the Employment Report was issued and an anemic 156,000 jobs were created when 176,000 were expected. The President immediately decided to put some lipstick on that pig of a number by claiming that he had created 15 million new jobs. Thus, the economy is doing great.
The problem with that 15 million number is that it ignores the first 13 months of his first term in office, when a total of 4.3 million jobs were lost. Something that was not supposed to happen because of his stimulus package. But it did, and now Obama doesn't want it on his record.
However, what is on his record is slow wage recovery. That was born out in a recently released polling report that states 7 out of 10 Americans have less than $1,000 in their savings accounts. This follows an earlier poll that found that 63% of Americans would be unable to handle a surprise bill of just $500.
The bottom line is that America is broke and living paycheck to paycheck. That is the real state of the economy President Obama will be leaving us with.
References:
US created 156,000 jobs in Sept vs. 176,000 jobs expected - CNBC.com: http://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/07/nonfarm-payrolls-sept-2016.html
The Obama economy has now created 15 million jobs: http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/07/news/economy/obama-15-million-jobs/
Nearly 7 in 10 Americans have less than $1,000 in savings: http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2016/10/09/savings-study/91083712/
Most Americans can't handle a $500 surprise bill: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/most-americans-cant-handle-a-500-surprise-bill/
The problem with that 15 million number is that it ignores the first 13 months of his first term in office, when a total of 4.3 million jobs were lost. Something that was not supposed to happen because of his stimulus package. But it did, and now Obama doesn't want it on his record.
However, what is on his record is slow wage recovery. That was born out in a recently released polling report that states 7 out of 10 Americans have less than $1,000 in their savings accounts. This follows an earlier poll that found that 63% of Americans would be unable to handle a surprise bill of just $500.
The bottom line is that America is broke and living paycheck to paycheck. That is the real state of the economy President Obama will be leaving us with.
References:
US created 156,000 jobs in Sept vs. 176,000 jobs expected - CNBC.com: http://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/07/nonfarm-payrolls-sept-2016.html
The Obama economy has now created 15 million jobs: http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/07/news/economy/obama-15-million-jobs/
Nearly 7 in 10 Americans have less than $1,000 in savings: http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2016/10/09/savings-study/91083712/
Most Americans can't handle a $500 surprise bill: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/most-americans-cant-handle-a-500-surprise-bill/
Tuesday, October 11, 2016
Enough About Hurricane Matthew and Climate Change
Hurricane Matthew was barely approaching the East coast of Florida when an opinion writer for CNN essentially said this is what the future of climate change looks like. Of course, there were plenty of others in the media and in politics expressing the same opinion. Then, there was Hillary Clinton. A month ago, when Hurricane Hermine, hit parts of Florida, she said this: “[Hermine] is not the last one that’s going to hit Florida given what’s happening in the climate.”
The simple problem with statements like this is that it doesn't fit the history of hurricane activity in Florida. For one thing, there have only been 18 years that a hurricane "hasn't" hit Florida since 1851. 10 of those years occurred in the 10 consecutive years before 2016. Also, Matthew's Category 4 was no match for Andrew's Category 5 that occurred 24 years ago. Before that, there was an unnamed Category 5 in 1935. So much for Al Gore's 2005 predictions that hurricanes would increase in both frequency and intensity.
Trying to blame every weather event on climate change is politics and not science. Not a single scientist can accurately draw the conclusion that Matthew is a direct result of global warming and climate change.
References:
CNN: Hurricane Matthew looks a lot like the future of climate change: http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/07/opinions/sutter-hurricane-matthew-climate-change/index.html
Hillary blames Hurricane on climate change; says Trump ‘totally unfit’ to protect USA from ‘the threat of climate change’: http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/09/06/hillary-blames-hurricane-on-climate-change-says-trump-unfit-to-protect-usa-from-the-threat-of-climate-change/
List of Florida hurricanes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Florida_hurricanes
Al Gore, laughingstock: A look back at his hurricane predictions: https://www.ihatethemedia.com/al-gore-laughingstock-a-look-back-at-his-hurricane-predictions
The simple problem with statements like this is that it doesn't fit the history of hurricane activity in Florida. For one thing, there have only been 18 years that a hurricane "hasn't" hit Florida since 1851. 10 of those years occurred in the 10 consecutive years before 2016. Also, Matthew's Category 4 was no match for Andrew's Category 5 that occurred 24 years ago. Before that, there was an unnamed Category 5 in 1935. So much for Al Gore's 2005 predictions that hurricanes would increase in both frequency and intensity.
Trying to blame every weather event on climate change is politics and not science. Not a single scientist can accurately draw the conclusion that Matthew is a direct result of global warming and climate change.
References:
CNN: Hurricane Matthew looks a lot like the future of climate change: http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/07/opinions/sutter-hurricane-matthew-climate-change/index.html
Hillary blames Hurricane on climate change; says Trump ‘totally unfit’ to protect USA from ‘the threat of climate change’: http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/09/06/hillary-blames-hurricane-on-climate-change-says-trump-unfit-to-protect-usa-from-the-threat-of-climate-change/
List of Florida hurricanes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Florida_hurricanes
Al Gore, laughingstock: A look back at his hurricane predictions: https://www.ihatethemedia.com/al-gore-laughingstock-a-look-back-at-his-hurricane-predictions
Monday, October 10, 2016
After "Locker Room Talk", Will Trump Call It Quits?
Unless you're living under a rock, I doubt very seriously that anyone hasn't heard of Trump's disgusting hot mic talk about women. I don't think apologies are going to work and any fence sitters have probably shifted to Hillary because they had to be offended by his comments. He should quit. But, if he does, I seriously think Hillary would be in trouble. Anyone else that the Republicans could come up with could beat her. That's because, as terrible a candidate that Trump is, she is struggling to maintain a lead. Hillary should pray that Trump doesn't quit.
Reference: Trump recorded having extremely lewd conversation about women in 2005: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-recorded-having-extremely-lewd-conversation-about-women-in-2005/2016/10/07/3b9ce776-8cb4-11e6-bf8a-3d26847eeed4_story.html
Reference: Trump recorded having extremely lewd conversation about women in 2005: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-recorded-having-extremely-lewd-conversation-about-women-in-2005/2016/10/07/3b9ce776-8cb4-11e6-bf8a-3d26847eeed4_story.html
Friday, October 7, 2016
Another Renewable Power Disaster
On September 15th, I wrote about how unreliable and uncontrolled wind and solar was putting our electrical grids at risk. The focus of that blog was on a near meltdown of the power grid that occurred earlier this year due to the overproduction of solar power in Germany.
Well, we have yet another example of the impact of unreliable renewable power. This time in South Australia, where the problem was wildly fluctuating winds on September 28, that resulted in the complete shutdown of wind power and the triggering of a blackout:
Simply, the quick and wild fluctuations in wind energy could not be managed with the insertion of conventional power, and the result was a blackout. In fact, because the winds were so strong, the turbines actually shut themselves down to keep from ripping themselves apart.
Of course, the Energy Minister of Australia -- a liberal politician and advocate of renewable power -- refuses to believe that the lack of wind power had anything to do with the resulting massive blackout, and therefore, Australia should continue to pursue its aggressive wind and solar plans. Really?
References:
Roof-Top Solar Is Putting Our Electrical Grid at Risk: http://cuttingthroughthefog.blogspot.com/2016/09/roof-top-solar-is-putting-our.html
Renewables 'not to blame' for South Australia blackout, but energy debate rages: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/renewables-not-to-blame-for-south-australia-blackout-but-energy-debate-rages-20161002-grt4lo.html
Source of above chart: South Australia’s blackout apparently ‘triggered by the violent fluctuations from the Snowtown wind farms’: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/10/01/south-australias-blackout-apparently-triggered-by-the-violent-fluctuations-from-the-snowtown-wind-farms/
SA power outage: How did it happen?: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-28/sa-power-outage-explainer/7886090
pb
Well, we have yet another example of the impact of unreliable renewable power. This time in South Australia, where the problem was wildly fluctuating winds on September 28, that resulted in the complete shutdown of wind power and the triggering of a blackout:
Of course, the Energy Minister of Australia -- a liberal politician and advocate of renewable power -- refuses to believe that the lack of wind power had anything to do with the resulting massive blackout, and therefore, Australia should continue to pursue its aggressive wind and solar plans. Really?
References:
Roof-Top Solar Is Putting Our Electrical Grid at Risk: http://cuttingthroughthefog.blogspot.com/2016/09/roof-top-solar-is-putting-our.html
Renewables 'not to blame' for South Australia blackout, but energy debate rages: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/renewables-not-to-blame-for-south-australia-blackout-but-energy-debate-rages-20161002-grt4lo.html
Source of above chart: South Australia’s blackout apparently ‘triggered by the violent fluctuations from the Snowtown wind farms’: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/10/01/south-australias-blackout-apparently-triggered-by-the-violent-fluctuations-from-the-snowtown-wind-farms/
SA power outage: How did it happen?: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-28/sa-power-outage-explainer/7886090
pb
Thursday, October 6, 2016
More Proof That Hillary Can't Tell the Truth
During the first Presidential Debate, Hillary Clinton made this statement attempting to discredit Trump regarding his payment of taxes.
Fortunately, PolitiFact caught the deception and awarded Hillary a mostly false for her statement. Read their analysis at this link: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/sep/27/hillary-clinton/debate-hillary-clinton-tax-claim-ignores-years-whe/
"Maybe he doesn't want the American people, all of you watching tonight, to know that he's paid nothing in federal taxes, because the only years that anybody's ever seen were a couple of years when he had to turn them over to state authorities when he was trying to get a casino license, and they showed he didn't pay any federal income tax."So, the assumption left with the audience is that Trump only released two tax returns in his lifetime and, in both cases, he paid no taxes. This is another Hillary lie. In 1981, in order obtain a gambling/casino license, Trump was required to release the last five years of his tax returns. The two that Hillary mentioned were the only two of that five that he didn't pay taxes on, due to "Net Operating Losses". In this country we pay taxes on profit and not losses. Hillary purposely ignored that fact to deceive the audience. As usual, the deed was done, and that impression is left in the minds of the more than the 80 million who watched the debate.
Fortunately, PolitiFact caught the deception and awarded Hillary a mostly false for her statement. Read their analysis at this link: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/sep/27/hillary-clinton/debate-hillary-clinton-tax-claim-ignores-years-whe/
Wednesday, October 5, 2016
Obama's Scrutiny of Gun Show Attendees
President Obama has made it quite clear that he would like to take American's guns away. So, it was no surprise that he would use a "backdoor" means to do this. As the Wall Street Journal is reporting, the Obama Administration is pushing the use of automobile license plate scanners in order to gather data on people attending gun shows. While there are no known arrests that resulted from this activity, the possibility is certainly there.
The larger problem with this "program" is that it violates our Constitutional right of freedom of assembly and association. One has to wonder where it would stop. For example, would data be collected on people attending political campaign events or protests? This shows, once again, that the President and his people don't respect our Constitution, and why he has so often lost Supreme Court cases brought against actions he and his Administration have taken.
References:
Gun-Show Customers’ License Plates Come Under Scrutiny: Federal agents enlisted local police to scan cars’ plates at shows’ parking lots: http://www.wsj.com/articles/gun-show-customers-license-plates-come-under-scrutiny-1475451302
Annotation 12 - First Amendment: Right of Association: http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment1/annotation12.html
Obama’s Abysmal Record Before the Supreme Court: http://www.cato.org/blog/obamas-abysmal-record-supreme-court
The larger problem with this "program" is that it violates our Constitutional right of freedom of assembly and association. One has to wonder where it would stop. For example, would data be collected on people attending political campaign events or protests? This shows, once again, that the President and his people don't respect our Constitution, and why he has so often lost Supreme Court cases brought against actions he and his Administration have taken.
References:
Gun-Show Customers’ License Plates Come Under Scrutiny: Federal agents enlisted local police to scan cars’ plates at shows’ parking lots: http://www.wsj.com/articles/gun-show-customers-license-plates-come-under-scrutiny-1475451302
Annotation 12 - First Amendment: Right of Association: http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment1/annotation12.html
Obama’s Abysmal Record Before the Supreme Court: http://www.cato.org/blog/obamas-abysmal-record-supreme-court
Tuesday, October 4, 2016
The Truth About NY City's Stop and Frisk Constitutionality
During the first Presidential Debate, Lester Holt initiated this dialog with Donald Trump:
First, "Stop and Frisk" (aka "Terry Stops") was found to be constitutional in an 8-1 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in a decision concerning "Terry vs. Ohio". As a consequence no U.S. District Judge in New York can overrule that decision. Thus Trump is right.
Lester Holt is also right because that District Judge did find it unconstitutional on the basis of how NY City was conducting those stops in violation of the 4th Amendment protection against "unreasonable" search and seizure. In addition, the judge contended that it was also unconstitutional on the basis of the 14th Amendment's equal protection rights and that was a form of racial profiling.
When the decision came down, the then-Mayor Bloomberg vowed to appeal the decision but never did; and stop and frisk remained in effect until Mayor De Blasio essentially ended it when he came into office. But, today, stop and frisk continues widely in cities across the U.S. A fact that Trump was trying to explain before Holt interrupted him.
I guess we will never know if that District Judge's unconstitutionality decision was correct unless the City of New York appeals it all the way to the Supreme Court. That certainly isn't going to happen with De Blasio in office. After all, he ran on ending stop and frisk if elected.
References:
AUDIO: Alan Dershowitz fact checks Lester Holt’s fact check on ‘Stop and Frisk’: http://hotair.com/archives/2016/09/27/audio-alan-dershowitz-fact-checks-lester-holts-fact-check-stop-frisk/
Terry vs. Ohio: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_v._Ohio
‘Stop-and-Frisk’ Is All but Gone From New York: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/09/19/nyregion/stop-and-frisk-is-all-but-gone-from-new-york.html
Judge Rejects New York’s Stop-and-Frisk Policy: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/13/nyregion/stop-and-frisk-practice-violated-rights-judge-rules.html
Did Bill de Blasio Keep His Promise to Reform Stop-and-Frisk?: http://www.newsweek.com/did-bill-de-blasio-keep-his-promise-reform-stop-and-frisk-266310
pb
HOLT: “Stop and frisk” was ruled unconstitutional in New York because it largely singled out black and Hispanic young men.But here are the facts.
TRUMP: No, you’re wrong. It went before a judge who was a very against-police judge. It was taken away from her, and our mayor — our new mayor — refused to go forward with the case. They would have won on appeal. If you look at it, throughout the country, there are many places where it’s —
First, "Stop and Frisk" (aka "Terry Stops") was found to be constitutional in an 8-1 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in a decision concerning "Terry vs. Ohio". As a consequence no U.S. District Judge in New York can overrule that decision. Thus Trump is right.
Lester Holt is also right because that District Judge did find it unconstitutional on the basis of how NY City was conducting those stops in violation of the 4th Amendment protection against "unreasonable" search and seizure. In addition, the judge contended that it was also unconstitutional on the basis of the 14th Amendment's equal protection rights and that was a form of racial profiling.
When the decision came down, the then-Mayor Bloomberg vowed to appeal the decision but never did; and stop and frisk remained in effect until Mayor De Blasio essentially ended it when he came into office. But, today, stop and frisk continues widely in cities across the U.S. A fact that Trump was trying to explain before Holt interrupted him.
I guess we will never know if that District Judge's unconstitutionality decision was correct unless the City of New York appeals it all the way to the Supreme Court. That certainly isn't going to happen with De Blasio in office. After all, he ran on ending stop and frisk if elected.
References:
AUDIO: Alan Dershowitz fact checks Lester Holt’s fact check on ‘Stop and Frisk’: http://hotair.com/archives/2016/09/27/audio-alan-dershowitz-fact-checks-lester-holts-fact-check-stop-frisk/
Terry vs. Ohio: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_v._Ohio
‘Stop-and-Frisk’ Is All but Gone From New York: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/09/19/nyregion/stop-and-frisk-is-all-but-gone-from-new-york.html
Judge Rejects New York’s Stop-and-Frisk Policy: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/13/nyregion/stop-and-frisk-practice-violated-rights-judge-rules.html
Did Bill de Blasio Keep His Promise to Reform Stop-and-Frisk?: http://www.newsweek.com/did-bill-de-blasio-keep-his-promise-reform-stop-and-frisk-266310
pb
Monday, October 3, 2016
Hillary's Stupidity on Trickle Down Economics
During the debate, Hillary Clinton criticized Donald Trump's economic plan as "Trumped-up, trickle-down" economics. Then, she went on to say that "trickle-down never worked" and “slashing taxes on the wealthy hasn’t worked. And a lot of really smart, wealthy people know that.”
First of all, let me say, everything she said above is false. While not an economist by title, I have studied economics and economic theory in college and have continued to study it ever since. I can assure you that there is no such thing as "trickle-down" economics. It was a purely political pejorative used by the Democrats to criticize any economic plan that would cut any taxes on the rich or corporations. It was first used during the Great Recession by humorist Will Rogers whom, I am quite sure, was not an economist.
Let me also criticize Hillary's statement that "slashing taxes on the wealthy hasn’t worked." Obviously, she has no idea of what she's talking about. The Bush tax cuts -- including tax cuts on the rich -- helped right the economy following the 9/11-caused recession. But, more importantly, she obviously has no understanding of the history of her own party when she makes a statement like that. In 1963, Democratic President John F. Kennedy proposed tax cuts for both the top wage earners and corporations in order to stimulate the economy. While he was assassinated before he could get passage of his proposal, then-President Lyndon Johnson was successful in getting the Revenue Act of 1964 passed into law. As a result, the top tax bracket was lowered from a rate of 91% to 70%. The corporate rate was lowered from 52% to 48%. In, addition, all other tax rates were lowered by 20%.
The results were remarkable. By 1966, the economy was growing at the unusually high rate of 6.6% and unemployment fell to an almost historical low of 3.8%. In addition, tax revenues increased by 68% and poverty was cut by a third.
So, to Hillary: Trickle-down works. Get your facts straight before you start lecturing, or perhaps lying to us about the history of economics.
References:
Wall Street Journal: Donald Trump vs. Hillary Clinton on Tax Cuts for the Rich: https://www.google.com/search?q=Donald+Trump+vs.+Hillary+Clinton+on+Tax+Cuts+for+the+Rich&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
Trickle-Down Economics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickle-down_economics
Trickle-Down Theory: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/trickledowntheory.asp
Revenue Act (aka Tax Reduction Act) of 1964: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1964
What J.F.K. Knew About Economics And What Most Democrats Today Don't: http://cuttingthroughthefog.blogspot.com/2015/05/what-jfk-knew-about-economics-and-what.html
NPR: JFK's Lasting Economic Legacy: Lower Tax Rates: http://www.npr.org/2013/11/12/244772593/jfks-lasting-economic-legacy-lower-tax-rates
First of all, let me say, everything she said above is false. While not an economist by title, I have studied economics and economic theory in college and have continued to study it ever since. I can assure you that there is no such thing as "trickle-down" economics. It was a purely political pejorative used by the Democrats to criticize any economic plan that would cut any taxes on the rich or corporations. It was first used during the Great Recession by humorist Will Rogers whom, I am quite sure, was not an economist.
Let me also criticize Hillary's statement that "slashing taxes on the wealthy hasn’t worked." Obviously, she has no idea of what she's talking about. The Bush tax cuts -- including tax cuts on the rich -- helped right the economy following the 9/11-caused recession. But, more importantly, she obviously has no understanding of the history of her own party when she makes a statement like that. In 1963, Democratic President John F. Kennedy proposed tax cuts for both the top wage earners and corporations in order to stimulate the economy. While he was assassinated before he could get passage of his proposal, then-President Lyndon Johnson was successful in getting the Revenue Act of 1964 passed into law. As a result, the top tax bracket was lowered from a rate of 91% to 70%. The corporate rate was lowered from 52% to 48%. In, addition, all other tax rates were lowered by 20%.
The results were remarkable. By 1966, the economy was growing at the unusually high rate of 6.6% and unemployment fell to an almost historical low of 3.8%. In addition, tax revenues increased by 68% and poverty was cut by a third.
So, to Hillary: Trickle-down works. Get your facts straight before you start lecturing, or perhaps lying to us about the history of economics.
References:
Wall Street Journal: Donald Trump vs. Hillary Clinton on Tax Cuts for the Rich: https://www.google.com/search?q=Donald+Trump+vs.+Hillary+Clinton+on+Tax+Cuts+for+the+Rich&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
Trickle-Down Economics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickle-down_economics
Trickle-Down Theory: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/trickledowntheory.asp
Revenue Act (aka Tax Reduction Act) of 1964: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1964
What J.F.K. Knew About Economics And What Most Democrats Today Don't: http://cuttingthroughthefog.blogspot.com/2015/05/what-jfk-knew-about-economics-and-what.html
NPR: JFK's Lasting Economic Legacy: Lower Tax Rates: http://www.npr.org/2013/11/12/244772593/jfks-lasting-economic-legacy-lower-tax-rates
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
