And naturally, the response was, "Gee, there's a lot of people of color in that video! The republicans are RACIST!"
Trump's lawyers obviously forgot a seminal rule in American politics: any time a republican says anything about a black person which is less than 100% worshipful and hagiographic--or even if he just disagrees with the black person!--it just shows how racist he is.
This horseshit comes on the heels of the democrats getting caught in the act of falsifying evidence.
Meanwhile, the Washington Post engages in terrorist rhetoric. You see, that's what terrorists and criminals say: "If you don't do what I want, then it's your fault that bad stuff happens." If the republican senators don't vote to find Trump guilty, then it's their fault that antifa goes on a tear, you see, not the fault of whoever's holding antifa's leash. (By the way, the bit about the video being racist came from that link, as well.)
I don't think any of these idiots gave this a hell of a lot of thought.
Getting caught faking evidence: you just gave political cover to all the republicans to vote against your stupid impeachment.
Threatening political violence: it's as if 2020 didn't happen, or something.
"Racist": that card is so overplayed you can practically see through it.
* * *
Still: Did the Democrats deliberately sabotage the hearings? Hell no. They didn't bother to do anything that article recommends because they don't need to. Sixty votes to convict; they have fifty-six in the bag and need only four. There are more than four republican senators who will fall all over themselves to show what "statesmen" they are and vote to convict.
I told you, the conviction will be fortified. Don't doubt me.
* * *
The moron over at Jalopnik who writes the "Morning Shift" page today said he thinks the best course for the country would be to let nature reclaim the roadways. Talk about your complete lack of awareness of how anything gets delivered anywhere--and this moron writes for a car site, to boot.
But the dickhead also wanted to know what Trump had done, claiming that Trump had "accomplished nothing" in his time in office.
Here's a list, shithead.
* * *
Andrea Mitchell has a freaking English degree from University of Pennsylvania. Guess the English department at U of P back in 1842 was staffed by idiots.
* * *
Aunt Jemima is now "Pearl Milling Co." which--yes--sounds like a plantation.
* * *
Take a look at that chart. Millennials have 3% of household wealth.
Baby Boomers in the US grew up in an environment of enormous economic growth in one of the world's wealthiest countries. Yet, those prodigious benefits seemed not to be enough; massive debts got used to boost consumption even further. From a historical perspective (and to younger generations), Baby Boomers' generation appears rapacious in its consumption, like locusts stripping the country bare.Remember all those bumper stickers, "We're spending our kids' inheritance!"
It's the result of "conspicuous consumption".
* * *
What Sarah Hoyt is suggesting here is nothing less than "going Galt". The concept came from one of Ayn Rand's books (I don't know because I read twelve pages of Atlas Shrugged and had to stop). The idea is that the huge-ass government is funded primarily by taxes, so you reduce your taxable activity to the absolute bare minimum. If everyone does that, it starves the beast. This is known as "going Galt" and the more people who do it, the better it works.
Trimming consumption to the bare necessities--I don't know if I can do that, but I'm going to try.
Yo, Winnie the Pooh's dumb twin, listen up: value is not raw materials plus labor. You genius[es] always forget ultimately things are worth what someone is willing to pay for them. I guess Winnie the Pooh's head is full of fluff and Xi's is full of shit. Marxist shit, to be exact. We can't blame him too much, so are the heads of most of our college graduates. It takes a lot of education to believe such dumb crap.Marx's theory of value insists that labor is what makes things valuable. Raw materials have an arbitrarily low value, and labor is what makes them valuable.
By that theory, if I spend thirty hours refurbishing an IBM PC XT, it's worth more than the Core i5 system I spent two hours refurbishing. And maybe in a command economy where you can't get the Core i5 system because those are reserved for Party members, that's true; but in a capitalist economy, no one's going to want to spend $2,000 on a PC XT when they can spend $500 on the Core i5.
* * *
If you want to sum up why western civilization is so advanced I can think of no better paragraph to use than this:
One resident says: "If white people were still here, this wouldn't happen." That's true. Because the white people wouldn't put up with it, the white people would fix it. There are 5,000 people living there and absolutely none of them are willing and able to do anything about it.Emphasis mine.
Centreville, Illinois, has a severe sewage problem. The article that Vox quotes there says it's "just a 12-minute drive from downtown East St Louis." My oldest sister lived not far from there, as her husband is from that area (Belleville, to be exact) and ESL is a shithole. Back in the day, when I was heavily into trains, my brother-in-law would take me out to see the trains in action, as he was also heavily into that hobby, and we'd have a grand old time watching trains and talking about them and so forth. Since he was from around there he knew which areas to avoid, and we never went into areas like ESL, or Centreville, because they were bad, bad neighborhoods.
There was plenty of train action in Saint Louis and in the industrial areas in Illinois, so we didn't have to go to the bad areas to see interesting and fun things happening. I barely remember any of it, but I do remember how much fun it was.
Anyway--point being, Centreville is poor because of high crime, and the high crime is what happens when the "white flight" cascade takes place. It starts when a few whites move out and their houses get sold to middle-class blacks. Those blacks are solid citizens, people who work hard and pay their taxes and maintain their homes. Professionals, or well-established in the trades; they make good money and don't commit crimes. But then a few more whites leave because of racism, because they simply don't want to live near blacks; but as more people start to leave the neighborhood, property values start to drop simply because of supply and demand: more houses on the market means lower prices. So then lower-class people move in, and these people don't make as much money and they don't care for their properties as well. People (white and black) see that the neighborhood is starting to get kind of...seedy...and they move out, lowering property values further, letting even less-affluent people move in.
Eventually it gets to the point that the only people living in the neighborhood are people with very short time preferences. People with very short time preference tend to be criminals, because they literally don't think about the consequences of their actions. It's basically, "I want that," or "I want to do that," and that's as far as their thoughts go--and so they steal or take drugs or do a whole host of other stupid things that make them very poor neighbors.
Big surprise, these people don't earn a lot of money, and the property values in the neighborhood are low enough that they don't pay much property tax. The city has a lot less money to spend on anything, including infrastructure.
It doesn't have to be blacks who move in. It could be Hispanics, it could be Koreans, it could be Irishmen, it could be Martians. The main difference in those groups, though, is that some of them have long time preference, some have short ones. If the influx of new residents generally has a short time preference, though, they're going to trash the neighborhood. It then doesn't matter who comes after them, because the mere fact that it's a high-crime area will keep property values low and that will basically mean low-income people will select those neighborhoods.
The only way to reverse it is to gentrify, but of course that's a dirty word. If you get rid of the crime, property values rise, and the low-income folks are no longer be able to afford to live there.
I realize that by laying all this out this way, I'm going to be accused of "blaming the victim", but in 21st century America there is absolutely no reason for anyone to be living in a high-crime area unless they have chosen the quick and easy way every last time. If you don't want to do your schoolwork, and just goof off instead, and party every weekend? That's your choice, but it has long-term consequences. If you don't want to hold down an actual job but instead you sell drugs on a street corner, because you make in a night what you'd make in two weeks at a burger joint? Again, that's your choice, but that has long-term consequences. And in that latter case your choices not only affect you, but everyone in your neighborhood.
One of the things I find most incredible is how many of these "poor" people manage to afford things like iPhones and full sleeve tattoos and $200 sneakers and big-screen televisions and so forth. It's almost as if they have income that doesn't show up on a W-2 or something.
Meanwhile, if you want an example of how helpless people can be, just take a look at all the people who were utterly helpless when Katrina hit New Orleans. A lot of people were just sitting around waiting for the government to tell them what to do.
This comment describes life in Centreville, Illinois.
The junior senator from Illinois gets blown off by the mayor of Centreville when she seeks to discuss possible solutions to the problem.
"They still need to do some basic things, and they could not answer my basic questions, which were what is your priority list of projects that need to be done, and have you made that priority list based on cost versus severity and urgency?" [senator Tammy] Duckworth said during an interview Friday. "They couldn't give me an answer there."Making that priority list, that's work, and no one in the city government wants that.
"Duckworth said it's concerning that a U.S. senator has been more responsive to residents than their local leaders."
Exactly. And why do you think that is?
* * *
So, here's a story about the horrors of communism.
Apparently the communist regime in China is making bank selling organs. The people they take them from are still alive and aren't given anasthesia before their organs are removed, because anasthesia apparently makes the organ less healthy, or something?
The post concludes, "Even though I know it's true, it's very, very difficult to wrap my brain around the fact that this kind of evil exists in our world."
I had to drive to my near off-site today, and about 60% of the way there I was thinking about this and trying to come to grips with the demonic horror of it. And even though I managed to get some kind of handle on it, I'm still just utterly gobsmacked by it. It's...there's just no reason, other than the marxist "justification" that dissidents have to be made to contribute something to the glorious workers' paradise.
I have absolutely no trouble believing that a communist nation which already disposed of sixty million of its own people in political murders is doing something hideous like that. It further does not surprise me. It horrifies me, it grieves me, but this is what communism does. It murders people by the millions, and it treats them like disposable parts, and it considers all its subjects to be the property of the state, to be disposed of however the state sees fit.
If you ever needed to understand why I hate socialism with all the fire of a thousand hells, this kind of thing is why. This is where it leads: the vivisection of people whose only crime was not to follow the approved state ideology with fanatical devotion.
* * *
By the way, This is what Joe Biden has done for America. Under Trump, the diabetes medicine that her son needs was $60 a month. Biden signs one executive order and it's now five times the cost with a coupon. But without that coupon? FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS.
Can anyone explain to me why the medicine that cost $60 suddenly went up nine times to cost $500? Can anyone explain it to me in terms of "cost to manufacture"? Or is this just an example of predatory drug companies putting a price on peoples' lives, solely because they can?
That is the explanation, of course: because the manufacturer can charge that much, that's why it costs that. Trump had emplaced an executive order which forced drug companies to charge reasonable prices, but because that's not socialized medicine, one of the very first things the democrats had Biden do was to revoke that EO, and allow companies to charge whatever the market will bear.
And if some people have to die to get the Gangster Party their socialized medicine, well, it's not like it's any of them who will suffer, right?
As I've said and said, America is being "fortified".
* * *
Damn it, now my pies are roasted. Well, I can use that energy to wash the dishes and tidy up the kitchen, I guess.