Archive for the ‘politics’ Category

A trifecta of anti-Trump organizations—DaTimes, DaPost, and the Council on Foreign Relations—has endorsed the president’s policy on China.

As I have noted in the past, China has used government support illegally to dump cheap exports to the United States. Moreover, President Xi has claimed the South China Sea, one of the richest waterways in the world, as his own. His Belt and Road Initiative is intended to open up markets on nearly every continent. And then there’s Hong Kong.

“China can’t join all the right international clubs and go on playing by its own rules. It can’t make some trade ‘deal’ and then not be held fully accountable, relying on the infinite global capacity to turn a blind eye to its predations,” Roger Cohen writes in DaTimes.

“The president’s statement linking a trade deal and the Hong Kong demonstrations — ‘It would be very hard to deal if they do violence. I mean, if it’s another Tiananmen Square, it’s — I think it’s a very hard thing to do if there’s violence’ — was perhaps his finest hour.”

In DaPost, a Chinese dissident goes even further.

“[A]s someone who has spent years with the knife edge of the Chinese Communist Party bearing down on my throat for my human rights work, I know that the president is on to something. Tariffs and economic threats may be blunt tools, but they are the kind of aggressive tactics necessary to get the attention of the CCP regime, which respects only power and money. It’s not just about ‘winning,’ as the president sometimes puts it, and it’s not simply about trade: It’s about justice, and doing what’s right for ordinary Chinese and American people,” writes Chen Guangcheng, a professor at Catholic University.

The Council on Foreign Relations gives Trump a B+ on his China policy, noting that “his administration has taken the lead in awakening the United States to the growing threat that China poses to U.S. vital national interests and democratic values.”
Although the trade war will cost almost every American some amount of cash depending on the electronics, textiles, and shoes we buy, I think the policy will save us a great deal of money in the long run. And with DaTimes, DaPost, and the Council actually praising Trump, we may finally have something that conservatives and liberals can finally agree upon.

Vincent Gambini: I object to this witness being called at this time. We’ve been given no prior notice he’d testify. No discovery of any tests he’s conducted or reports he’s prepared. And as the court is aware, the defense is entitled to advance notice of any witness who will testify, particularly those who will give scientific evidence, so that we may properly prepare for cross-examination, as well as give the defense an opportunity to have the witness’s reports reviewed by a defense expert, who might then be in a position to contradict the veracity of his conclusions.
Judge Chamberlain Holler: Mr. Gambini?
Vincent Gambini: Yes sir?
Judge Chamberlain Holler: That is a lucid, intelligent, well-thought out objection.
Vincent Gambini: Thank you, your honor.
Judge Chamberlain Holler: Overruled.

My Cousin Vinny 1992

Our friends on the left are getting increasingly worried about Justice Ginsberg’s health and are terrified that Donald Trump will get a chance to replace her when she dies.

In this panic they are making an argument that because the GOP congress decided to use what they called at the time the Biden rule namely to, with an election pending, wait till the results of the election so the decision will have the sanction of the people and they point to the “fairness” argument that if Garland didn’t get a hearing during such a year then neither should a Trump nominee.

It doesn’t happen often but that final argument is actually not an unreasonable one, here is why we should ignore it:

1.  It’s not yet the election year

Justice Scalia died on Feb 13th 2016 and Judge Garland was nominated on March 16th 2016.  2016 was an election year 2019 is not.

If Justice Ginsberg hangs on till then then call me

2.  The election is not in full swing.

Debates not withstanding, by the time Justice Scalia died the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primaries had taken place meaning the election had offically begun.  As of today, debates not withstanding it has not.

If Justice Ginsberg hangs on till Iowa votes then call me

3.  Obama was a lame Duck Trump is not

In the 2016 election the person picking the nominee would regardless of the result be gone and unaffected by the people’s decision.  Donald Trump will not be a lame duck so his decision would have consequences for him

4.  It would be a valid voter metric for him and others

Not quite a separate point but because he Trump on the ballot his pick would be a valid metric for voters to decide on his re-election just as the Senate’s decision to not have a vote was a valid metric for their election or re-election

5.  Democrats crying fairness NOW?

Am I to understand that after 3 years of treating this president in ways unprecedented from the day of his election from trying to game the electoral college to the with help from the Obama administration trying to frame him as a Russian against they expect to have him answer the “fairness” argument.

6.  They would do it in a second. 

Does anyone seriously believe that if in the same position the Democrats would hesitate for a moment to use this power if they had it?

And the final and clinching argument….

7.  We CAN!

One of the things about elections is they give confer certain powers, those powers do not expire until the said people are officially replaced.  Donald Trump holds the power to appoint a person to fill a Supreme Court Vacancy.  The Senate holds the power to move forward a nomination or to hold it up that power is not dependent on Democrat outrage.

Tomorrow I will explain why democrats might be smart to go along with such an appointment.

There are a lot of things you can say about Nancy Pelosi, but there are two things about her that remain solid.

She knows how to count nationally.

 

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

and as long as those impeachment numbers are below water she isn’t going to risk her majority and give the GOP a 2nd chance to play with all three houses.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi still isn’t ready to launch impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump.

Pelosi told House Democrats on a conference call Friday, “The public isn’t there on impeachment.”

She told them the case needs to be “as strong” as possible.

“If and when we act, people will know he gave us no choice,” Pelosi said, according to an aide granted anonymity to discuss the private call.

Of course the closer you get to an election the less viable impeachment is because you’re basically taking the vote out of the people hands. Pelosi isn’t going to pull the trigger on this until or unless it reaches the point where the party is more likely rather than less likely to lose in 2020 over it.

and the 2nd thing, she knows how to count locally

If there is anything that you would think could generate a liberal revolt in very very liberal San Francisco and generate a primary challenger a “No!” on impeachment would be it, and I suspect if she thought there was one chance in twenty that it would cost her that seat, she might go for it and let the chips fall where they may.

But she just doesn’t know how to count nationally, she know how to count locally and so she is able to stand up to her caucus without fear.

Pelosi’s willingness to stand shows just how empty the deep left’s threats are, it’s a lesson worth learning on the right.

My post on Canon Turner’s 1st Mass got a lot of attention considering it wasn’t instalanched and I wanted to make a point that might have been unclear.  I have been to the Latin mass before just not a high mass of the type that was on display.  Personally I think it would be healthy for both the vernacular and the Latin masses to both be offered in all parishes.  It would be a perfect illustration of Christ as fully human and our brother while also fully Divine as our God.  I think it’s healthy to remember both.


I don’t see why anyone is surprised that Joe Biden got the decade wrong that RFK & MLK were assassinated.  Given the historical ignorance of the young who tend to vote democrat these days and the attempts to re-write history such a mistake makes perfect sense.  Of course, maybe 1968 identifies as a year in the 70’s


Speaking of re-writing history the NYT 1619 project attempt to reframe a false history as true has actually been going on for a long time by the left.  It’s been a full generation since Mary Lefkowitz Not out of Africa and the backlash she got for refusing to teach myth as history the only difference is now their bold enough to admit it and no amount of facts such as the Vice President of the Confederacy’s attack on the founding fathers for opposing Slavery and considering it evil will stop it.  What happened with Lefkowitz was the broken window theory of this type of thing


On a similar subject that’s a pet peeve of mine on twitter this week the subject of Transgenders altering their birth certificates to change their birth sex/name is something I think is very wrong.  A birth certificate is a legal document recording an actual event.  Namely a person was born of a particular sex to a particular set of parents on a particular date at a particular place.  These are all facts and are not subject to the whims or vanity of others.  Now if you wanted to create a document that was a “certification of live birth”  where a city can certify that a person who has a different legal birth name and a different legal birth sex was in fact born at a particular place on a particular year that would be a fair compromise but we have no business changing the written record.


Finally there is word that Dicks Sporting goods which made a big deal about being woke on guns is considering discontinuing guns altogether.  It actually makes perfect sense when you consider the reaction by gun owners to the company’s previous move:

“I’m not furious, not at all. They made a business decision. I get it. They want to step out of their non-political lane and become corporate activists. I can calmly step out of my lane, too. And given every chance I get, I will not use their products,” he said.

If buyers of guns with long memories are still angry and not going to your stores and you have no interest in getting their business back it’s a logical business decision to stop carrying items that might appeal to that customer base, the remaining guns and hunting items in this case,  and move to a set of items that appeal to the customers you still have.

It’s the same principle that MSNBC and the NYT is using when moving away from reality why give facts when your remaining base will only pay for propaganda?