Tough Questions In Palm Beach

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mar-a-lago-remains-a-top-destination-for-charities-despite-concerns-about-trump/2016/12/25/3dd6b886-c7c0-11e6-bf4b-2c064d32a4bf_story.html?utm_term=.c1a2430fb683

There was a period in my career when I flew in and out of Palm Beach quite regularly -- often for full week business meetings. We would pull in Sunday night and leave on Friday afternoon. Even earlty PM there were 50+ BIG private jets on the ground, and coming in steadiy. Not little ones -- full sized ones like Trump's. Often they would land, go over to the private terminal, and a nice helicopter would shortly lift off taking them to their estate or their yacht.

But those poor folks have a HUGE problem!

The question of whether to use Trump’s estate during the charity season has rattled Palm Beach society. But the consensus seems to be that, whatever they may think of Trump, Mar-a-Lago is a great place to party and raise money.

To Mar-a-Lago or to not Mar-a-Lago, what a quandry. When I was travelling down there, one of the planes that was well known and pointed out when it was on the ground was Ted Kennedy's. The Kennedy's have a big compound down there where Joe used to drink and womanize to his hearts content. In 1991, Ted, Patrick and "William Kennedy Smith" were out drinking and carousing and Smith ended up accused of rape.

The clan circled the wagons like they always do -- but in their case with the entire MSM to help them. Apparently now dead "John John" needed a little blackmail to get him onboard, but hey, it's a crime family founded on bootlegging, what do you expect?

Isn't it lovely how Teddy could drown his secretary and walk away, but "locker room talk" is supposed to be disqualifying for attending charity events at a venue where they have been going for 20 years?  Good old JFK kept a whole harem, including two staffers pretty much entirely for his sexual pleasure nicknamed "Fiddle and Faddle". He was BOTH a Democarat and a Kennedy, nuff said, whatever a guy wants sexually is A - OK for guys that can check those two boxes. Slick Willie? No less than Arianna Huffington of lefty Huffpo fame said she knew 20 women in DC who would be happy to give Slick a BJ -- he had such "high regaurd for women", including a very creditable rape accusation.

How WILL the mega-rich be able to sort it all out? Oh the morality! Oh the humanity!

Aleppo, American Alpo

http://www.richmond.com/opinion/their-opinion/charles-krauthammer/article_e19e4501-c172-54bb-a05b-e8d723a4e422.html

The old programming saw about running on your own software is "eating your own dogfood" -- the actual execution of imagined great software, if you are lucky, hopefully just the early versions, can be some poor puppy chow!

The media and BO have brayed for 8 years about how bad a hole W left us in. It has become far clearer the last couple years that BO has left not just BOistan, but the world in a real crater.

The fall of Aleppo just weeks before Barack Obama leaves office is a fitting stamp on his Middle East policy of retreat and withdrawal. The pitiable pictures from the devastated city showed the true cost of Obama’s abdication. For which he seems to have few regrets, however. In his end-of-year news conference, Obama defended U.S. inaction with his familiar false choice: It was either stand aside or order a massive Iraq-style ground invasion.

BO was the master of the false choice and the straw-man argument. He was more fake than any news -- and a lot of the news the last 8 years has been VERY fake!

Sir Charles points out the obvious ... there are always lots of choices between doing nothing, ground troops or launching the nukes.

The U.S. could easily have destroyed the regime’s planes and helicopters on the ground and so cratered its airfields as to make them unusable. That would have altered the strategic equation for the rest of the war. 

And would have deterred the Russians from injecting their own air force — they would have had to challenge ours for air superiority. 

Facing no U.S. deterrent, Russia stepped in and decisively altered the balance, pounding the rebels in Aleppo to oblivion. The Russians were particularly adept at hitting hospitals and other civilian targets, leaving the rebels with the choice between annihilation and surrender. 

They surrendered.

BO's only competence was the same finger wagging pseudo arguments that the lapdog press lapped up like some rotting gelatinous once upon a time sea life polluting the air on the beach of reality. That millions have died due to his incompetence is of no concern to the left -- few of them were BOistanis, so that is "win". BOistan has no honor to defend -- only the pursuit of "pleasure", ideal if it is a pleasure that would turn the stomach of the carrion munching canine.

The 20th of January really can't get here fast enough!

Democracy Of The Dead

So little of life, so many great thinkers to understand. Our biases are many, with a great many of them so fundamental that it is very difficult for mere mortals to realize we have them. Along with a profound bias for our own pwersonal POV, the general bias for the small set of people that happen to be alive now is similarly entrenched.

“Tradition means giving a vote to most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead.” Chesterton goes on to say: “Tradition refuses to submit to the small and arrogant oligarchy of those who merely happen to be walking about. All democrats object to men being disqualified by the accident of birth; tradition objects to their being disqualified by the accident of death. Democracy tells us not to neglect a good man’s opinion, even if he is our groom; tradition asks us not to neglect a good man’s opinion, even if he is our father.”

In our perverted age, "The Party" ( TP-D) tends to be all in favor of giving the dead the vote, ncompletely secure in their knowledge that they vote 100% TP. They also find that little things like ciicizenship, not being a felon, being able to prove who you are, or essentially any restriction is too onerous to prevent the sacred vote.

Freedom Of Association ala Trump

Freedom of association isn’t just for the Rockettes - The Boston Globe:\



Trump has reminded the left of this wondrous and recently important right known as Freedom of Association. As always, when the left identifies a "right", it is a "right" as long as you agree with them.

The right to discriminate — to choose with whom we will and won’t associate — is vital to human liberty. A dressmaker who can’t say no to a commission to design a gown isn’t free, and it doesn’t matter whether the gown is for a first lady or for the brides in a lesbian wedding. A liberal baker who declines to create a lavish cake decorated with the words “Congratulations, President Trump” is entitled to as much deference as a black baker who declines to decorate a cake with the Confederate flag, or a Muslim baker who declines to decorate a cake with the message “No Muslim Immigrants.” 

Freedom of association, like all freedoms, isn’t absolute. Common carriers, innkeepers, and vendors open to the public are barred by law from refusing to serve customers because of their race, religion, or sex, for example. But when it comes to providing personal services to others — whether the service is cleaning homes or singing the national anthem or taking photos — coercion is anathema. It would be ludicrous for the Trump committee to sue Andrea Bocelli or Phoebe Pearl to compel their involvement in the inaugural. It is just as ludicrous, or ought to be, to sue florists and bakers to compel their involvement in weddings they prefer to avoid.

So Associational Freedom is now important. As I wrote in 2015 however, it was NOT important in 2015 and whole states were put in the sites of the powerful for failing to bow to celebrate the bold new order of gay "marriage".

In my universe, Assosicational Feedom would in fact approach "absolute". You may well go out of busniness if you push the boundaries, but the state would not be breating down your neck. 

Also in my world, when the "popular culture" decides that they will define new norms and beat down the minority that disagrees with them, turnabout is absolutely fair play. What the left wanted was a society WITHOUT Associationa Freedom when they assumed they were always going to win and be in the majority.

What is good for the goose is good for the gander in the relativistic world that the left thought they had created. In EXACTLY the same way as fining a baker for not baking a cake, fining a dancer for not dancing is perfect turnabout. The left wanted the civil servant in Kentucky JAILED for not giving out a license for a gay "marriage" -- putting EPA employees in jail who fail to comply with the edicts of President Trump is exactly the same. 

EITHER we return to rule of law and transcendent principles, or we MUST make sure that those out of power are punished for being out of power. Without riule of law, raw application of power is the only way to get the point across that doing what the left has been doing since Roe V Wade and longer MUST have consequences when they lose! 

My belief is that a return to rule of law is STILL the right thing to do, but treating Rockettes differentlyt than Bakers is acceptible withut a FIRM agreement with the left people that we really don't trust because they have proven themselves untrustworhty over and over. 

It's a dilema -- somebody has to take the moral high ground and defer to law EVEN when they are in power! The left has shown us it isn't going to be them -- can the right do so and manage to make it stick again?




'via Blog this'

High Kicks, Anthems and Cake

http://www.mediaite.com/online/in-shameful-display-jim-dolan-and-msg-forces-the-rockettes-to-perform-at-trumps-inauguration/

So some of the Rockettes want to boycott performing at the Trump inauguration.

And Pearl is exactly right; the shameful decision was made for the woman, not with their input. Their union — the American Guild of Variety Artists (AGVA) — firmly ruled out the possibility of a boycott by any of the performers either, handcuffing at least the dozen full-time dancers to the presidential obligation.

Got that? See, if it was a gay "marriage" celebration of some sort and some of the Rockettes wanted to boycott for say, religious reasons, it is THEIR action that would be "shameful", and they ought to be fired, ostracized, and maybe fined  or imprisoned. Religious freedom is not something BOistan honors.

Say one of the Rockettes wanted to sit down during the National Anthem? THAT would be "protected speech" -- within her "First Amendment rights", and the same can be said here. She wants to make a political statement against Trump, so they want her protected.

How about if someone had said that they did not want to perform for BO because he had said in his book that he wanted to destroy the colonial powers which included the US and Britain? I think we know the answer to that -- obvious racism! Nobody would opppose the great BO for any other reason!

Who You May Harass, Ivanka

Next Time It’ll Be Jet Black and Blue | The American Spectator:

The biggest piece of this story for me is that Ivanka Trump was flying COACH on Jet Blue! So much for lavish lifestyle!

The second part is trying to even imagine Obama's daughters being harassed. The level of media outcry would be horrific, and I'd argue it ought to be. Politics is politics and selling used cars is selling used cars. Our founders worked very hard to keep both of them as something we dealt with nationally every few years and the bulk of the population cared little about the rest of the time.

An actual father holding their child while going after a mother with their children would not happen. Possibly a woman would do this, but unlikely. Such behavior must be explainable somehow in the scope of gay "marriage", but I know I don't care to hear the explanation! What part of the psyche has to be broken to be holding a child -- even a child that is obviously not "yours" in any natural human sense, and to somehow see it has reasonable to verbally attack an actjual mother with her children.

Back when BO ascended to power, any criticism of "The One" was racist. The fact that the Team Party was against his policies meant they were, ...., yes, this gets boring, RACIST!

You verbally accosted a woman with her children, tough guys. Here is the issue for now, and just for now it is words, but what will we see next? People throwing stuff at her? Is that okay, libs? Would a smack be okay, if it were done by a woman? I just want to know where you draw the line, because I want to know what the line is when a Trump supporter or a Trump himself again gets accosted and then kicks the living crap out of his accoster from here to kingdom come.

So where is the line? The MSM doesn't seem to think this is even a problem at all. So what WOULD be a problem? Anything? Or is the entire Trump family open for "whatever" since they have been suitably labled by the left?

Naturally, if Ivanka baked cakes, she would be legally obligated to bake a cake for these "men", since they are a protected class!

'via Blog this'

Walker, Wisconsin Not Washington

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443214/federal-state-balance-walker-letter

I wanted Scott Walker to be president, I think he would have been great, but he would never have had a chance against Hillary. If Trump can take Walkers advice on States Rights as given  here, as well as breaking up government workers unions, maybe Walker can win in 2024.

The separation of state and federal authority is one of the most essential principles of our Constitution. It explains the Constitution’s structural allocation of powers as much as the division between legislative, executive, and judicial functions. If we lose the separate and independent existence of state governments, we will lose our Constitution. 

Hence the potentially historic importance of the initiative just announced by Governor Scott Walker, under the heading “Wisconsin, Not Washington.” This morning Governor Walker sent a letter to President-elect Trump, asking for Trump’s help in restoring the federal structure of the Constitution.

The natural order for human society is intended for power to flow from God ->Family (people) -> Church/Community -> State -> Federal.

As a nation shifts to the Satanic, we naturally see another inversion -- all power  moves to the Federal level , and it seeks to destroy all authority "below" it, especially God.

The question is not what functions the federal government should give back to the states, but what functions should the federal government have in the first place. The federal government was originally created to be a small, central government of limited powers, with everything else left to the states. Through years of federal overreach, this model has been turned on its head, and now is the time to right the ship. Power flows from the people to the government, not the other way around.

It is a great time to do this because Democrats in their typically inconsistent fashion have weirdly started it already with "sanctuary cities" that thumb their noses at existing immigration laws and marijuana havens that invalidate federal drug laws. At the same time, a state trying to declare that men and women should use bathrooms and locker rooms for their actual rather than imagined sex is declared a national pariah!

What an optimistic Christmas surprise to see this like of positive thinking arise from the wreckage of BOistan!

Hillary Most Faithless In History

It's official: Clinton swamps Trump in popular vote - CNNPolitics.com:

http://time.com/4607933/clinton-trump-faithless-electors-precedent/

http://www.westernjournalism.com/thepoint/2016/12/21/krauthammer-demolishes-hillarys-historic-electoral-college-failure-with-2-perfect-words/

The media will continue to bray about Hillary "swamping" Trump in the popular vote. The figure is completely useless, we don't do presidential elections by popular vote and never have. They will naturally also say that Trump has "no evidence" of millions of illegal votes. Later they will no doubt scream even louder that there is "no such thing as voter fraud" and that all attempts at voter ID "suppress the vote" -- well, what they "suppress" is voter fraud and the ability to hide it!

What we DO know is that Hillary takes her place in history as the loser with the most faithless electors in over 100 years. In fact, with 5, she is one less than the TOTAL faithless vote in over 100 years! Nobody can compete with God on irony -- Crooked Hillary is the hands down faithless winner!

 In Between 1900 and 2012, the count is six faithless electors abandoning a losing presidential candidate—though one perhaps by accident—and three abandoning a winner.

'via Blog this'

If I Were Putin

One of my standard mental devices in understanding the world is to attempt to put myself into the minds of other people and think what I might try to do if I was sitting where they are. There is nothing "factual" about this, it is a pure thought exercise.

Given the BO / CIA opening to question the integrity of our election POST election, why would Putin NOT come forward in any manner he desires with "irrefutable evidence"  that Trump worked with the Russians to tilt the election to himself? Why not help his adversary throw itself into a complete rat hole, possibly even something approaching civil war?

My strong suspicion is that the actual Russian "involvement" in the US election was none to minimal. There are hackers acting for their own purposes around the world for as many reasons as there are hackers. In many cases it is a pure profit motive, in others it is loosely "political", but often only in the sense of being anti-political ... anarchist. Breaking "the system" -- both the technical one of networks and computers, but certainly the corporate, political and financial system as well. But that is all moot now.

My sense is that Putin is a ruthless power player that WELL knows the real world as a result of both his old KGB role and current and past leadership roles. He knows that both his own and the US governments are morasses of bureaucratic  intransigence impossible to "control" in the sense that common people believe and media organizations like to imagine. A brontosaurus with Einstein's brain is still going to look and act much like a brontosaurus -- even Einstein can't make it's vocal apparatus speak, nor it's giant appendages type.

Who leads the US, especially Trump vs Hillary, is nearly meaningless for Putin. Hillary attempted the odd "Russian Reset" in '08 for unknown reasons beyond an idiots attempt to put down "W" ( when our ham handed state department translated "reset" into Russian, they translated it as "overload"). The Clinton foundation accepted payments approaching at least $50million to transfer 20% of US uranium assets to Russia ... so it isn't like Putin didn't know how cheaply she was willing to sell out the US.

One would imagine that Putin assumes that as a businessman, Trump will be someone easier to deal with -- or who knows, maybe just "cheaper" in the sense that decent dealings won't always require transferring millions of dollars into the "Clinton Fund". Putin can talk to Trump as a fellow multi-billionaire as opposed to a grasping mere 100 millionaire. It may just be the desire to talk to a fellow NFL QB vs a junior college QB like Hillary (really more like a junior college water girl, but let's be generous).

If I were Putin, I would make sure that the CIA "found irrefutable evidence" that Trump made promises to the Russians for dropping sanctions, allowing them to annex territory and possibly even allowing them free reign in Europe. I see the left and the BO administration as willing to treat ANYTHING as complete gospel if it reflects negatively on Trump at this point, and it is completely obvious that the left wing of the Democrat party is more than ready to riot in the streets over Trump cutting a fart.

So I for one will be completely UNsurprised if prior to the inauguration, "definitive proof" of Trump negotiating with the Russians for "whatever" doesn't come to light. In fact, I will be somewhat surprised if it does not. If it does not, my guess is that Putin feels that his personal and business interests would be too negatively impacted by throwing the US into THAT much disarray -- which is also not that surprising.  BO has handled him the largest opportunity to sow discontent in BOistan that I can recall on the proverbial silver platter.

I consider BO to be intelligent. I simply can't imagine that he would come out with the "investigate the Trump / Russia connection" ploy AFTER the election if he did not see finding "evidence" of  Trump working with the Russians as "something he could benefit from".  He HAS to realize it it is a HUGE opening for a foreign power to have devastating short and  long term negative impact on the US, and this was one of the very few times he was willing to "lead from in front", even after declaring in October that what he just did is essentially treason of the worst kind.

BO made it clear long ago in "Dreams" that destruction of the US and it's conversion into BOistan was his goal. He succeeded at his goal, but Trump is certainly something that NOBODY expected -- he has a giant opportunity to turn us back toward someday becoming America again -- maybe even being "great" in a few decades.

I think BO has now shown us exactly how far he will go to maintain his legacy of destruction -- the only question remaining is if Putin finds an even more crippled BOistan to be in his best interests.

Lame Duck Totalitarianism

Obama Permanently Blocks Arctic, Atlantic Drilling | The Huffington Post:

NEVER trust anyone on the left -- they declare they have no morals, and that is the single thing they tend to follow through on. Democracy? Well, the US was never a "democracy", but rather a Constitutional Republic. Naturally, while braying about how much they love "democracy", the left has shredded the Constitution and used executive power to bypass congress at every opportunity.

And now, they honor the people speaking by ...

President Barack Obama will use his executive authority to permanently block offshore drilling in large swaths of the Arctic and Atlantic oceans, the White House announced Tuesday.

The move to protect the planet in the face of climate change ― just weeks before President-elect Donald Trump, who appears set on sidelining America’s climate fight, takes office ― is among Obama’s most noteworthy.

How is that for paying attention to "the will of the people"? BO nor "The Party" has NEVER been concerned with "people" -- only sheep that bleat whatever they decree. POWER is what they love.


Hopefully Trump will kick some ass here. We just had an election, it DAMNED well better have consequences this time! "Permanent protections"? You can sure be permanently dead, otherwise, things change.


We are nice guys. Make sure the UN is empty before we blast it to rubble, and then do the same with the "World Court" -- wherever it is. Perhaps Putin will help us -- he was never going to listen to it either. Saves us a bunch of dues, ambassadors, and people not paying parking tickets with immunity in NYC. Build the sucker in Venezuela -- but take your own toilet paper!

Then who is going to tell us we can't drill baby drill? Lucky Pierre?

'via Blog this'

The Trump Card

Powerline does the "week in pictures" every week, it is always good, but this week was especially good. A couple really fit here. 

Over at the Washington Examiner, it was summed up as follows with a Baseball analogy that I really like.

Yes Hillary Clinton got more votes than Trump, the bulk of which are located in two states, but that is not how you win. In the 1960 World Series the New York Yankees scored 55 runs to the Pittsburgh Pirates 27; out-hit them as well .328 verses .256, but the Pirates won when it counted and all those superior numbers meant nothing.

In short, you win by the rules of the game, not by the rules of your bias. 

The media miss the things that matter to voters like how Trump thanks his voters verses Clinton's thank you; he holds rallies in the very regions that provided him with a win, while Hillary thanks the big dollar donors in Manhattan.

The end of the Constitution, the Separation of Powers and the Rule of Law all fit in that highlighted line. The left wants to create a world based on their biases by total destruction of what was once America -- they are at least well on their way, if not already successful, but they hit a solid bump int he road named Trump.

This analogy for rules vs "something we just thought would be a good way to call a loss a win" is good as well. In general, I think Trump played this election with 3 dimensional chess strategy while Hillary played it with Tic-Tac-Toe level strategy.

Tolerance, Moral Responsibility, Refugees

https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/who-we-are-as-a-people-the-syrian-refugee-question/2/?hootPostID=0a9a9841e6c2af5cd8bc7155b67e6683

. First, disconnect rights from responsibility (obligation).

The idea that every right has a corresponding duty or obligation was essential to the social compact understanding of the American founding. Thus whatever was destructive of the public good or public happiness, however much it might have contributed to an individual’s private pleasures or imagined pleasures, was not a part of the “pursuit of happiness” and could be proscribed by society. Liberty was understood to be rational liberty, and the pursuit of happiness was understood to be the rational pursuit of happiness—that is to say, not only a natural right but a moral obligation as well.

When there are no morals, "tolerance" -- allowing relativism becomes the only "moral".

Over the past century and more, this morality grounded in the American founding has been successfully eroded by Progressivism. This erosion is manifested today in the morality of value-free relativism. According to this new morality, all value judgments are equal. Reason cannot prove that one value is superior to or more beneficial than another, because values are not capable of rational analysis; they are merely idiosyncratic preferences. In this value-free universe, the only value that is “objectively” of higher rank is tolerance. Equal toleration of all values—what is called today a commitment to diversity—is the only “reasonable” position. And note that it is always called a commitment to diversity. It is a commitment because it cannot be rational in any strict sense—it exists in a value-free world from which reason has been expelled. The only support it can garner under such circumstances is the simple fact that it is preferred.

Values precede reason. They either exist in the fabric of an ordered universe,  or they do not. If they exist, they transcend existence. If they do not exist, then might is right.

The article proceeds to argue that it is obvious that the admission of Syrian refugees is neither a moral or a Constitutional issue in a world with values. I agree -- self defense is a basic human right. Unless refugees, especially Islamic refugees can be properly vetted, there is not obligation to accept them.

October BO vs December BO On Election Meddling

In last-shot bid, thousands urge electoral college to block Trump at Monday vote - The Washington Post:

Here is BO on Thursday October 20th, just over 2 weeks before the elction, lecturing about the danger of not having faith in elections.

“I want everybody to pay attention here. That is dangerous,” Obama continued, as supporters in the crowd cried out. “Because when you try to sow the seeds of doubt in people's minds about the legitimacy of our elections, that undermines our democracy. Then you’re doing the work of our adversaries for them. Because our democracy depends on people knowing that their vote matters, that those who occupy the seats of power were chosen by the people.”

You got that? BO wagging his finger and pontificating on the seriousness of questioning elections as being essentially treason ("undermines our democracy").

But wait!!!!  TP lost, so NOW we have BO talking "investigations" into "Russian election interference"and "retaliation" ... is that like a "red line"??? !!! The danger here is HUGE, if I were Putin, I would make CERTAIN that BO finds his "evidence" -- because it is harder to imagine a cheaper more deadly weapon to launch into the soul of the US. Talking to the bride about some concerns over the groom PRIOR to the wedding is dangerous, but could be required -- AFTER? Hello?

This is a great summary of how "The Party" (TP-D) operates.

"The role of elector has intensified this year, in the wake of a bitter election in which Trump lost the popular vote to Democrat Hillary Clinton by a margin of nearly 3 million votes and the revelation of a secret CIA assessment that Russia interfered to help Trump get elected."

First  we have the fake news ... Hillary won the "popular vote", which is meaningless because we have the Electoal College (EC). Always have, that is how we run elections, and that is how we ran this one. Change the rules, (smart) people campaign differently! Change pro-football so you win or lose on time of possession vs score, and teams play different! Duh!

But TP lost. So although they claim to want a popular vote election with no EC, they are perfectly willing, demanding even,  to try to use the EC to subvert the will of over 60 million people that took part in the election under the rules specified in the Constituion and in force for over 200 years.

In fact, TP, the party famous for using the Constitution to wipe their soiled asses, is now a YUGE fan of Alexander Hamilton! A Federalist that was far from keen on there being any sort of popular vote at all!

He looked to see Federalist No. 68, written by Hamilton to describe the need for the electoral college. 

“We have been getting a civic lesson we weren’t prepared to get,” Koller said. “They gave us the fail-safe emergency brake, in case the people got it wrong. And here we are, 200 years later. It’s the last shot we have.”

My God,! Trump is enough to get lefties to read Federalist 68! He is a total miracle worker! The next thing you know they will be reading Plato, or even the Bible! Holy crap, the American mind might be trying to open!

But it may well be shut HARD if Putin plays his cards smartly!

Public Union Bubble to Burst?

http://www.economist.com/node/17849199

Excellent article worth reading all of. A sample.

Many people have jobs for life and performance measures are rare. The result is a paradox: the typical public worker is better off than the people he is supposed to serve, and the gap has widened significantly over the past decade. In America, pay and benefits have grown twice as fast in the public sector as they have in the private sector.

 How much does all this cost us? Hard to calculate, but consider ...

It is impossible to calculate the cost of the unions' inflexibility. But several recent studies provide some indications. Policy Exchange, a conservative think-tank, calculates that people in the British private sector work 23% more hours than their public-sector counterparts over their lifetimes, thanks to public-sector strikes, sick days and early retirement. Barry Bluestone, a left-wing economist, calculates that the price of America's public services increased by 41% in 2000-08, while that of private services rose by 27%. Eric Hanushek, an economist at Stanford University, argues that replacing the bottom 5-8% of American teachers with merely average performers could move the United States from near the bottom to near the top of the international maths and science rankings.

If  Trump can accomplish a single thing, a huge weakening of public unions would be very high on my priority list!

How The Russians Did It!

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443000/russia-election-hack-plan-revealed-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-only-pawns-kremlin

We know that Russia is a technologically superior nation since we hitch rides with them to the Space Station so we can pretend like we are still an advanced nation. This article lays out exactly how they managed to elect Trump president. I think the following was their most brilliant move! 

The men from Moscow hacked into Clinton’s teleprompter last September 9. In a fundraising speech that she delivered to donors at Cipriani restaurant, literally on Wall Street, her original reference to half of Trump’s supporters as “hard-working Americans thirsty for economic growth and tired of being lectured to by condescending, out-of-touch elites in Washington” disappeared. Instead, Clinton was amazed to find herself calling them a “basket of deplorables.” She was as stunned as anyone to find her lips forming the words “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic — you name it.”

This one is also brilliant ... the whole article is worth reading.

The Russians drilled into the navigation system of Stronger Together, Clinton’s campaign plane, and erased Wisconsin from its map of the USA. This prevented her from landing and stumping even once in that entire state during the fall election campaign.

"Stronger Together" what a lame name for a plane. Why not "Herself"... or just "I'm a woman, Affirmative Action says you HAVE to elect me!"

Since BO openly tried to influence the Brexit vote, the election in Israel, and no doubt a few others that I'm forgetting, I'm surprised he is not pleased to see that BOistan has achieved "not exceptional" -- we are just one more nation whose elections other nations work to influence!

Note, that just because they might have thought that Trump would be easier to influence than Hillary, (who they had already bought and paid for in at least one urainium deal), doesn't mean they are right.

Hillary WANTED to run against Trump -- and look at how well that worked out for her!