Protection for Republican majorities in the House and Senate

I am a free trader by nature but not a big fan of economic forms of self-harm. And I am certainly for Trump basing his decisions on political calculation, since I am also against political forms of self harm. PDT is shifting towards a slight increase in protection for American products, as summed up in this article from The Wall Street Journal: ‘Every day is a new adventure’: Trump upends Washington and Wall Street with shifts on trade, guns. Pulling the various bits from the article, there are two sides to it, always bearing in mind that if it’s in the WSJ the story will be shaped by a free-trade ethos. So why, according to the story, would protection levels be increased. This is part of the Trump calculation:

  • foreign countries are stealing American jobs with cheap imports – tariffs are one of the only ways to punish other countries for practices that disadvantage U.S. manufacturers
  • impose tariffs on steel and aluminum in the name of national security – large amounts of cheap steel and aluminum posed a national security risk for the United States
  • Trump has also been keeping a close eye on the special election this month for a U.S. House seat in western Pennsylvania. Voters in places such as Pennsylvania’s 18th District are looking for more to be done by the administration. The president has noted that the Republican in the race is struggling in a district where he won by a large margin.

And why leave things alone. Again from the WSJ and part of the White House debate:

  • tariffs could spark a trade war – other countries would retaliate, imposing tariffs on U.S. exports, damaging an economy that Trump was trying to build up through his tax cuts
  • the stock market was doing well [as is the economy as a whole].

This is hardly a return to Smoot-Hawley, and if it protects Republican majorities in the House and Senate, the small ripple effects on the American and world economies will be worth the extra few cents Americans pay for the goods and services they buy. Meanwhile, this is the stated threat from Europe:

“We will put tariffs on Harley-Davidson, on bourbon and on blue jeans – Levi’s,” European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker told German television.

Meanwhile public spending rises another trillion and no one says a word.

The greatest woman of the twentieth century

In reviewing The Iron Lady I made the offhand comment that Margaret Thatcher had been the Greatest Woman of the Twentieth Century. The debate over the greatest man had taken place at the end of 1999 and the choices, at least in the English speaking world, were narrowed down to Sir Winston Churchill and Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Although there was some debate over which may have been the greater of the two, there did seem to be a distance between them and whoever might have been third.

Oddly, however, there was no one chosen as the Greatest Woman, and I suspect it is because there was no one who stood out to the same extent as Margaret Thatcher. She was clearly so far ahead of the rest that even to raise the question shows how much she stood out from all other possible choices. Whether you loved her, hated her or were merely indifferent, she along with Ronald Reagan, dominated the events of her time. But because she is a woman of the right, a classical liberal in the conservative tradition, those who typically hand out such laurels refused to raise the subject so that they could avoid even having to acknowledge how significant her role had been.

Margaret Thatcher inherited a Britain devastated by industrial mayhem following the Winter of Discontent and within half a decade returned sound governance to the UK. She endured the full impact of the miners’s strikes and restored industrial relations sanity by sheer force of will. She took on and prevailed against Argentina in the War in the Falklands. She strode like a colossus during the Cold War which she, along with Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul II, were instrumental in bringing to a peaceful end through an unbending moral crusade against political evil. She demanded fiscal and monetary disciplines that ended the economic chaos of the 1970s. She drove privatisation and defended our entrepreneurially-driven system of free enterprise. She was a model for others to follow as many have done. She remains to this day the gold standard of a conviction politician on the right side of history. If being a force for good is what matters, Margaret Thatcher was undoubtedly the greatest woman of the twentieth century.

In reviewing The Iron Lady I made the offhand comment that Margaret Thatcher had been the Greatest Woman of the Twentieth Century. The debate over the greatest man had taken place at the end of 1999 and the choices, at least in the English speaking world, were narrowed down to Sir Winston Churchill and Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Although there was some debate over which may have been the greater of the two, there did seem to be a distance between them and whoever might have been third.

Oddly, however, there was no one chosen as the Greatest Woman, and I suspect it is because there was no one who stood out to the same extent as Margaret Thatcher. She was clearly so far ahead of the rest that even to raise the question shows how much she stood out from all other possible choices. Whether you loved her, hated her or were merely indifferent, she along with Ronald Reagan, dominated the events of her time. But because she is a woman of the right, a classical liberal in the conservative tradition, those who typically hand out such laurels refused to raise the subject so that they could avoid even having to acknowledge how significant her role had been.

Margaret Thatcher inherited a Britain devastated by industrial mayhem following the Winter of Discontent and within half a decade returned sound governance to the UK. She endured the full impact of the miners’s strikes and restored industrial relations sanity by sheer force of will. She took on and prevailed against Argentina in the War in the Falklands. She strode like a colossus during the Cold War which she, along with Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul II, were instrumental in bringing to a peaceful end through an unbending moral crusade against political evil. She demanded fiscal and monetary disciplines that ended the economic chaos of the 1970s. She drove privatisation and defended our entrepreneurially-driven system of free enterprise. She was a model for others to follow as many have done. She remains to this day the gold standard of a conviction politician on the right side of history. If being a force for good is what matters, Margaret Thatcher was undoubtedly the greatest woman of the twentieth century.

 

Reprinted from January 20, 2012 which I was reminded about in writing the previous post on Winston Churchill.

How Turnbull made up with Trump

For the morons who wrote this story to imply that it was PDT who changed his tune and not Malcolm shows what an out-of-touch bunch of clowns they are: How Trump made up with Australia’s prime minister after a ‘most unpleasant call’. This bit is OK, however:

When Turnbull visits the White House today, February 23, it will mark a stark turnabout from his contentious row with Trump last January 28. The Australian leader has now become one of the U.S. president’s closest partners, as they work on issues ranging from the North Korean nuclear threat to infrastructure plans in their respective countries.

This, from the opening paras, is also OK:

On his eighth day in office, President Donald Trump blasted and badgered Australia’s leader over an immigration dispute, telling Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, “this is the most unpleasant call,” and then abruptly hanging up on the head of one of America’s staunchest allies.

But what is not OK is to imply that it was PDT who had seen the error of his ways. Here’s the reality.

Turnbull has never had the slightest feel for politics, has no evident ability to assess things from a conservative perspective, assumed from the start that PDT would be a failure and expected those on the right side of the political divide in Australia to support his disdain for the President. Wrong on all counts. What his reation to the election and his initial conversation with the President did instead was reinforce the disdain from everyone Turnbull counted on for support, who never gets anything right. Other than being the nominal figurehead Prime Minister, he has only limited authority over those who the Liberal-National parties are counting on to vote for them. That his own party, plus a twelve-month series of Trump successes, has made him change his tune is proof only that he wishes to be Prime Minister some more.

It is also more evidence of what a success PDT has actually been.

ALP sent people to the US to work for the Democrats in 2016

They think it’s a scandal because of foreign influence on the American election on the side of the Democrats, which in this case from Australia, while I think it’s a scandal that the Labor Party has lined up so closely with the Democrats in the US.

Breaking: Australian Labor Party Sent Operatives to Work Against Trump During 2016 Campaign …When Will They Be Indicted?

The story was well documented and raised a bit of a stink in Australia because the operatives were funded by Aussie taxpayers.

When will Dirty Cop Robert Mueller indict these foreign nationals?
This makes the Russian influence pale in significance.

In February 2016 Project Veritas released video of Australian Labor Party activists assisting Democrats in the US. The activists are seen assisting the Bernie Sanders campaign.
This is a clear violation of FEC laws.

Will Robert Mueller indict this foreign interference with US elections?

For myself, I don’t recall this being mentioned here, but it should be. Probably been quiet because Malcolm had sent his own people to work with the Democrats as well.

The collapse of the blue church consensus

A new web-based insurgency that is taking down the media/left. Delusional non-thinking is the new norm. Jordan Peterson’s interviewer on BBC4 was a “crack in the matrix”. The BBC interviewer had “no capacity to see reality correctly.” She had only “pre-fab set of possible responses” to what Peterson was saying. She was thus “delusional” in that she represents moving from a fluid intelligence into a functional intelligence.

The notes to the video:

Jordan Greenhall wrote one of the most compelling and widely shared analyses of the political landscape in the wake of the Trump election – ‘Deep Code’ – about how the consensus mainstream media reality “Blue Church” was being disrupted by a new insurgent “Red Religion”. He believes the recent viral interview between Jordan Peterson and Cathy Newman on Channel 4 News was another example of the consensus reality breaking down – a “glitch in the matrix”. He talks to Rebel Wisdom’s David Fuller – who made the first documentary about Jordan Peterson AND used to work at Channel 4 News for many years.

Eventually, he says, “reality is reality” and will reassert itself. In a sense that’s true, but it can sometimes take a long long time. And why should the left not be the victor here since they have an enormous ability to shape the events that matter.

As I looked upon the chair

As I looked upon the chair
I saw a pres who wasn’t there!
He wasn’t there again today,
Thank the Lord he’s gone away!

The poem, such as it is, is my own adaptation from William Hughes Mearns, but the picture I owe to SDA and Clint Eastwood

AND WITH THESE AS WELL: Many more takes on the portraits at Powerline: THE WEAK IN PORTRAITS: OBAMA EDITION, but without the poetry.

 

Ho hum; trillion dollar deficit

us fed debt

Here’s the US debt story with a bit of historical perspective. Here we find an example of Change You Can Believe In care of the blessedly departed Barack Obama. Consequences include slower growth, limited if not actually negligible increases in the real wage, additional upwards pressure on the price level and some additional increases in rates of interest. But really, where’s the constituency to do anything else? How many non-Keynesians are there, never mind anti-Keynesians?

Remember this? Remember how it ends?

What’s changed and how you gonna change it? Still, there are  regulations going and public spending is being better targeted. Large numbers are being peeled from the welfare rolls. Not good, but if the deficit is rising and you’re a Keynesian, what’s the problem? And if you’re not, what are you going to say to convince them otherwise?

Of course, there is then this from Drudge yesterday:

Then there’s this from today:

But then there’s this also from today.

Really, you only wish people knew how things worked, as in some business comes up with an idea, borrows some money to buy in some capital and labour, and then produces that are sold on the market for a profit. There is endless entrepreneurial drive in the US. With a President who is an entrepreneur, who knows what’s possible.

Sunrise in Pyongyang

Not quite “Wake up, you sleepyhead”. From EVERY MORNING IN NORTH KOREA, THE MASSES ARE AWOKEN BY CREEPY SYNTH MUSIC BLASTING OVER LOUDSPEAKERS. Only a handful of comments at the site, but a quite interesting specimen of the mindset of the left. Marty must work for the ABC.

Marty Krog · 
JUst some more Western media hype painting a negative light over a culture they have no fucking understanding about, but just happy to the stir the shit for some Western agenda. Maybe a bit of chilled music in the morning will stop your retards from shooting each other at school.
Oh please. There are many criticisms to be made about the West but North Korea is a totalitarian dictatorship, with concentration camps, torture and collective punishment. Maybe you should read the plethora of books there are written by North Korean refugees and the horror they had to endure and then come back and make an informed comment.
Like · Reply · Sep 24, 2017 12:11pm
 Marty Krog · 
Peggy Whitfield Not sure what makes you think I am uninformed, other than your own ignorance. Does Guantanomo Bay mean anything to you? And if you call them terrorists, then do a bit of reading yourself. They were illegally siezed and transported from their places of domicile as a result of 911 which we all know was really guilty of that shit show, and the invasion of Iraq under the false pretenses of WMD.
Like · Reply · Sep 24, 2017 3:52pm

The epic Clinton scandals and cover-ups currently under investigation

It’s not just the story but the source that is remarkable. From The Sunday Guardian: How Obama’s Hillary Clinton cover-ups destroyed DOJ and FBI. It starts:

The epic Clinton scandals and cover-ups currently under investigation in Washington will make Nixon’s Watergate and subsequent cover-up look like kindergarteners playing in a sandbox.

My columns over the past few years have detailed how Washington DC, under twenty-five years of neoliberalism and the iron-fisted rule of the Clinton/Obama regime, have corrupted and weaponised senior members of Washington’s most bureaucratic law enforcement and intelligence agencies to act against the law and against the principles of democracy. Making matters much worse, senior members of the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the National Security Agency, and the Central Intelligence Agency have been operating a “shadow government”, which is only accountable to the “deep state.”

The Obama/Clintons’ shadow government operatives will stop at nothing to cover up their crimes against democracy, including the destruction of evidence and obstruction of justice. Destruction of evidence has been a big theme throughout the Bill/Hillary Clinton era. Just take a look at scandals involving the missing emails, Benghazi, and the Clinton Foundation. Based on the recent announcement from the Department of Justice regarding the 50,000 missing texts written by Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, it appears this trend is continuing. The announcement states, “There was a problem with Strzok and Page’s bureau-issued SamsungGalaxies—that ‘firmware upgrades’ and other technical issues deleted records of texts sent from not only their phones but many phones across the bureau. We regretfully report that these text messages were lost.” This occurred during a crucial time in the Russia investigation that included Michael Flynn’s resignation due to lies about his Russian ties and FBI Director James Comey’s firing.

But it’s only when you see stories like this in the NYT, WP, and on the mainstream media will you know the jig is up. Meantime, it’s the largest conspiracy in history, involving the Democratic Party and everyone who is willing to tolerate, and indeed actively support, the descent of the United States into a one-party state, which includes a large number of nominally Republicans as well. And for further interest, here is a list of some of the author’s other columns.

 

 CORRECTION: I did think it was a near impossibility that the Guardian had broken ranks but that is how it looked. From Tom in the comments:

Don’t get too excited, Steve: the Sunday Guardian is an Indian outfit and has nothing to do with the Green communist propaganda rag in the UK. The fanciful idea that the Graniaud would use a Ben Garrison cartoon should have alerted you. They are up to their necks in Steve Bell and his ilk. Steve used to be amusing in a nihilistic way, but has become a parody of himself since Trump sent him around the bend.

So we are back to where we were, a near universal media silence on the greatest political scandal of our lifetimes. It’s not even that virtually none of it is reported, but that the left and their minions prefer not to know.