Woke stupidity has already been in Australia for quite a long time

This is from Instapundit

WOKE STUPIDITY COMES TO AUSTRALIA: Governor General’s staff to be asked to do woke ‘privilege walk’ so they can identify how entitled they are while being asked bizarre questions like ‘were your parents ever addicted to drugs?’ Proper response: “I’m entitled not to be subjected to this idiocy.” 103

There is also the following string of comments that are worth noting. But bear in mind as your read these comments that for myself, the second best decision I have ever made was coming to Australia in 1975 (with the best, getting married to my blesséd wife five years later). Nevertheless, I understand what these people mean by their comments, even agree with many of them. But we in Australia are a minor political entity, one that has supported by sending troops to fight side by side with the United States in every single war the US has found itself in the midst of since 1900. No exception to that, and I also think there is no other nation that can say the same.

And Australia has proven, with the Wuhan virus and their totally hysteric reaction to it, that it is the world’s most insane country – which is no easy feat in this crazy world.

You’re thinking of Melbourne. The rest of Australia has been open and business as usual almost the entire time. Melbourne had the hysterical reaction and the lockdowns and curfews and arrests over Facebook posts – and also had 90% of the total COVID deaths in Australia.

Does Melbourne have a disproportionate percentage of folks with shiny, slip-on, shoes and PERFECT hair and nails?

Of course, Australia was already known as the country that sanctioned their swimmers because they took pictures with some guns in Texas. Friggin pictures!!

Melbourne is the only state or province or whatever it is that went into the latest insane lockdown house arrest of the citizenry (and others unlucky enough to be there) but the whole country is crazy and acting as if the Wuhan virus is Ebola or something.

Sydney is New South Wales. Their state governments are basically run exactly like they’re running Britain. Heavy on the government emergency powers and light on anything respecting constitutional rights

Our constitution is frankly utter shit when it comes to civil rights. I’ve long supported stealing the US Bill of Rights, and just:

1. Cross out “Congress” and write in “Parliament”.
2. Add enough profanity to make it clear we mean it.

Everyone in the world seems to be doing the Communist Chinese Wuhan virus dance on their citizens’ heads That’s no surprise for 90% of the world, but some in the West (ideologically, speaking) have gone particularly apeshit with it. We’ve got New York and California and Minnesota and Washington and others who are competing for “World’s craziest tyranny” award. I’m just saying that Australia is in the lead by a decent amount. I’ve been watching the Australian Open and it’s been a total joke what they did to the players (and are doing). Of course, most of the tennis players are scumbag leftists and BLM supporters and America-haters, so they deserve it.

I get what you’re saying though its a huge embarrassment all over. I’ve not had any hope for Australia for the last couple of years because of their idiocy they imported from Europe (Britain in particular). Australians should be way better than this. Heck their Constitution was almost entirely based off the American Constitution with influences from Canada added in to keep it within the Westminster style.

If you judge us by our news media, you get about as accurate an impression as if you did the same for the US.

The US has its (many) lunatic states, too, that have been doing fantastic impressions of COmmunist China and worse. But Australia is still crazier.

Seriously, I live here. I can walk straight over to the shops, sit down in a restaurant, without a mask, without any fuss at all. I have never once needed to wear a mask. I got some just in case when there was an outbreak near where I live, but I still have them all, unused. No, I don’t live in Melbourne. I have a colleague who does, who basically couldn’t leave her home for weeks.

Look, when people point to what New York did with trying to quarantine people from out-of-state (totally un-American and un-Constitutional) and stalking out-of-state license plates, and say that the US has gone nuts, I wouldn’t argue with them. Things are not that bad around me … but the fact is that they very easily could be … because the US went nuts. Biden in the White House just shows how truly nuts this country is. This is the worst time for the whole world. The stuff going on, now, is so dangerous and evil … this time in history is going to be a cautionary tale millenia into the future. The insanity and stupidity and evil that pervade the West, right now, … is really something else.

Yes, and Australia doesn’t even have the constitutional protections you guys do. There’s no law preventing the rest of this country going nuts the same way Melbourne has; it just hasn’t happened yet. I think Western Australia would have rioted if their lockdown had lasted more than five days, particularly since it was on fire at the time.

Our Constitution is a dead letter, now. It’s gone.

Not quite ready to give you guys up yet. I’ll do what I can. Like, um, release an indestructible social network.

Heh. It’s a start. There’s going to be a reckoning coming for the Western world. Very soon. This is what we are all seeing right now. But it’s a crapshoot as to which way it all turns out. But, things are broken.

“A perspective on the operation of an economy that has unfortunately entirely disappeared”

Here is a very nice review of my Classical Economic Theory and the Modern Economy in The History of Economics Review, written by Nathan Saunders, linked here. I can only say how grateful I am to find a review of the book written in sympathy with its aims and arguments. Here is his opening para:

The aim of Steven Kates’s latest book – Classical Economic Theory and the Modern Economy – is for readers to appreciate John Stuart Mill’s deep and broad understanding of economics along with the whole of the classical school from around the middle of the nineteenth century through to its final and complete disappearance with the publication of The General Theory in 1936. Moreover, Kates argues, it is our loss that we have primarily ignored the timeless principles embedded within classical theory. Presented between the covers are many arguments as to why Mill and his classical contemporaries should be front and centre within the economics discipline to this day. The following are five arguments from his book, presented in no particular order, with which I strongly agree.

He then goes through the five reasons why classical theory should be at the forefront of our understanding of how economies work. Of course the main reason is that modern economic theory, with its Keynesian demand management ethos embedded at every stage in the process, has never been able to provide a solution to a single economic downturn on even a single occasion since The General Theory was published. As discussed in the review:

Kates presents Mill’s fourth proposition on capital: ‘Demand for commodities is not demand for labour’. This proposition has not been refuted by the Keynesian revolution, nor by anyone else for that matter. Kates states: ‘The level of employment was unrelated to the level of aggregate demand … [and Mill] understood the errors embedded in any such attempt’ for policy-makers (221). Mill emphasized the harm embedded in such policies, an understanding that has disappeared, even as an issue to be debated. Mill kept all four of his propositions on capital pragmatic, commonsensical, and timeless. Moreover, Kates defends this momentous fourth proposition not only by drawing upon his knowledge of the history of economic thought, but also through a discussion of the many failed efforts to short-circuit recessions through increases in public spending.

Dead on. Let me recommend the book to you, but also might I suggest that you ask your local library to order a copy both for yourself to read along with others.

BTW the heading is taken from Nathan’s own text.

Daniel Andrews feeling loss of relevance or perhaps just a lunatic

From The Oz: Victorian lockdown slammed as ‘sheer lunacy’. I don’t know who said it but anyone who didn’t has a very bad case of the Melbourne Syndrome. Also this:

As millions of Victorians enter a snap- five-day lockdown in a bid to curb the growing Holiday Inn cluster, Premier Daniel Andrews is facing criticism from business leaders and scientists who have accused him of overreacting. Meanwhile, a WHO team investigating the origins of COVID-19 in Wuhan say China refused to provide data on the first victims.

We are in the hands of crazies.

Who shot Ashli Babbitt is still an unknown

You will have to go to the link to see the moment that Ashli Babbitt was shot by some unknown monster from inside the Capitol and even how long such footage will remain available is an unknown: Video shows fatal shooting of Ashli Babbitt in the Capitol. This is what you will see:

  • two unknown idiots pounding on the glass and breaking the glass
  • an arm with a pistol taking aim at Ashli rather than at the people who are actually breaking the glass

The near certainty is that she was not going through the broken window at the moment she was murdered. She was just a random victim.

Why does no one know who the murderer was? Why has he not been identified and why is he not facing prosecution?

Might note that the person who took the video has been identified which ought to be of interest if we are thinking the entire crew at the door were Trump supporters: Black Activist Who Filmed Ashli Babbitt Shooting Speaks Out.

John Sullivan, a.k.a. Jayden X, is a civil rights activist and crowdfunded video journalist. On January 6th, he donned a bulletproof vest and embedded himself in the masses that President Trump had incited to storm the Capitol. Sullivan scrambled up scaffolding and repeatedly weaved through a crush of rioters to record clashes between the mob and law enforcement. He emerged with a raw, hour-and-a-half frontline documentary of the day’s violent and chaotic events. He captures now-notorious figures from the riot, including the shirtless, face-painted “QAnon Shaman” and the bearded rioter dressed in a grotesquely anti-Semitic “Camp Auschwitz” sweatshirt. Crucially, Sullivan’s camerawork captured the shooting of 35-year-old mob member and Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt, who was killed by the Capitol Police while attempting to clamber through a broken window into the Speaker’s Lobby of the House floor.

More recent articles no longer say that she was “attempting to clamber through a broken window into the Speaker’s Lobby of the House floor”. They used to, but no longer. Don’t know if you can reach it, but you might go to Ashli Babbit was murdered.

31 reasons not to take the “vaccine”

1.   It’s not a vaccine. A vaccine by definition provides immunity to a disease. This does not provide immunity to anything. In a best-case scenario, it merely reduces the chance of getting a severe case of a virus if one catches it. Hence, it is a medical treatment, not a vaccine. I do not want to take a medical treatment for an illness I do not have.

2.   The drug companies, politicians, medical establishment, and media have joined forces to universally refer to this as a vaccine when it is not one, with the intention of manipulating people into feeling safer about undergoing a medical treatment. Because they are being deceitful, I do not trust them, and want nothing to do with their medical treatment.

3.   The presumed benefits of this medical treatment are minimal and would not last long in any case. The establishment acknowledges this, and is already talking about additional shots and ever-increasing numbers of new “vaccines” that would be required on a regular basis. I refuse to turn myself into a chronic patient who receives injections of new pharmaceutical products on a regular basis simply to reduce my chances of getting a severe case of a virus that these injections do not even prevent.

4.   I can reduce my chances of getting a severe case of a virus by strengthening my immune system naturally. In the event I catch a virus, there are vitamins and wellestablished drugs that have had wonderful results in warding off the illness, without the risks and unknowns of this medical treatment.

5.   The establishment insists that this medical treatment is safe. They cannot possibly know this because the long-term effects are entirely unknown, and will not be known for many years. They may speculate that it is safe, but it is disingenuous for them to make such a claim that cannot possibly be known. Because they are being disingenuous, I do not trust them, and I want no part of their treatment.

6.   The drug companies have zero liability if anything goes wrong, and cannot be sued. Same for the politicians who are pushing this treatment. I will not inject myself with a new, experimental medical device when the people behind it accept no liability or responsibility if something goes wrong. I will not risk my health and my life when they refuse to risk anything.

7.   Israel’s Prime Minister has openly admitted that the Israeli people are the world’s laboratory for this experimental treatment. I am not interested in being a guinea pig or donating my body to science.

8.   Israel agreed to share medical data of its citizens with a foreign drug company as a fundamental part of their agreement to receive this treatment. I never consented for my personal medical data to be shared with any such entity, nor was I even asked. I will not contribute to this sleazy enterprise.

9.   The executives and board members at Pfizer are on record that they have not taken their own treatment, despite all the fanfare and assurances. They are claiming that they would consider it unfair to “cut the line”. This is a preposterous excuse, and it takes an unbelievable amount of chutzpah to even say such a thing. Such a “line” is a figment of their own imagination; if they hogged a couple of injections for themselves no one would cry foul. In addition, billionaires with private jets and private islands are not known for waiting in line until hundreds of millions of peasants all over the world go first to receive anything these billionaires want for themselves.

10.   The establishment media have accepted this preposterous excuse without question or concern. Moreover, they laud Pfizer’s executives for their supposed selfsacrifice in not taking their own experimental treatment until we go first. Since they consider us such fools, I do not trust them, and do not want their new treatment. They can have my place in line. I’ll go to the very back of the line.

11.   Three facts that must be put together:
Bill Gates is touting these vaccines as essential to the survival of the human race. Bill Gates believes the world has too many people and needs to be “depopulated”. Bill Gates, perhaps the richest man in the world, has also not been injected. No rush.
Uh, no. I’ll pass on any medical treatments he wants me to take.

12.   The establishment has been entirely one-sided in celebrating this treatment. The politicians and media are urging people to take it as both a moral and civic duty. The benefits of the treatment are being greatly exaggerated, the risks are being ignored, and the unknowns are being brushed aside. Because they are being deceitful and manipulative, I will not gamble my personal wellbeing on their integrity.

13.   There is an intense propaganda campaign for people to take this treatment. Politicians and celebrities are taking selfies of themselves getting injected (perhaps in some cases pretending to get injected), the media is hyping this as the coolest, smartest, most happy and fun thing to do. It is the most widespread marketing campaign in history. This is not at all appropriate for any medical treatment, let alone a brand new one, and it makes me recoil.

14.   The masses are following in tow, posting pictures of themselves getting injected with a drug, feeding the mass peer pressure to do the same. There is something very alarming and sick about this, and I want no part of it. I never took drugs just because “everyone’s doing it” and it’s cool. I’m certainly not going to start now.

15.   Those who raise concerns about this medical treatment are being bullied, slandered, mocked, censored, ostracized, threatened, and fired from their jobs. This includes medical professionals who have science-based concerns about the drug and caregivers who have witnessed people under their charge suffering horrible reactions and death shortly after being injected. When the establishment is purging good people who risk everything simply to raise concerns about a new medical treatment — even if they don’t outright oppose it — I will trust these brave people over the establishment every time. I cannot think of a single similar case in history when truth and morality turned out to be on the side of the establishment.

16.   This is the greatest medical experiment in the history of the human race.

17.   It is purposely not being portrayed as the greatest medical experiment in the history of the human race, and the fact that it is a medical experiment at all is being severely downplayed.

18.   Were they up front with the masses, very few would agree to participate in such an experiment. Manipulating the masses to participate in a medical experiment under false pretenses violates the foundations of medical ethics and democratic law. I will not allow unethical people who engage in such conduct to inject me with anything.

19.   The medical establishment is not informing people about any of this. They have become marketing agents for an experimental drug, serving huge companies and politicians who have made deals with them. This is a direct conflict with their mandate to concern themselves exclusively with the wellbeing of the people under their care. Since the medical establishment has become corrupted, and has become nothing more than a corporate and political tool, I do not trust the experimental drug they want so badly to inject me with.

20.   We are being pressured in various ways to get injected, which violates medical ethics and the foundations of democratic society. The best way to get me not to do something is to pressure me to do it.

21.   The government has sealed their protocol related to the virus and treatments for THIRTY YEARS. This is information that the public has a right to know, and the government has a responsibility to share. What are they covering up? Do they really expect me to believe that everything is kosher about all this, and that they are concerned first and foremost with my health? The last time they did this was with the Yemenite Children Affair. If you’re not familiar with it, look it up. Now they’re pulling the same shtick. They didn’t fool me the first time, and they’re definitely not fooling me now.

22.   The government can share our personal medical data with foreign corporations, but they won’t share their own protocol on the matter with us? I’m out.

23.   The establishment has recruited doctors, rabbis, the media, and the masses to harangue people who don’t want to get injected with a new drug. We are being called the worst sort of names. We are being told that we believe in crazy conspiracies, that we are against science, that we are selfish, that we are murderers, that we don’t care about the elderly, that it’s our fault that the government continues to impose draconian restrictions on the public. It’s all because we don’t want to get injected with an experimental treatment, no questions asked. We are even being told that we have a religious obligation to do this, and that we are grave sinners if we do not. They say that if we do not agree to get injected, we should be forced to stay inside our homes forever and be ostracized from public life. This is horrific, disgusting, a perversion of common sense, morality, and the Torah. It makes me recoil, and only further cements my distrust of these people and my opposition to taking their experimental drug. How dare they?

24.   I know of many people who got injected, but none of them studied the science in depth, carefully weighed the potential benefits against the risks, compared this option to other alternatives, was truly informed, and decided this medical treatment was the best option for them. On the contrary, they got injected because of the hype, the propaganda, the pressure, the fear, blind trust in what “the majority of experts” supposedly believed (assuming THEY all studied everything in depth and were completely objective, which is highly dubious), blind trust in what certain influential rabbis urged them to do (ditto the above), or hysterical fear that the only option was getting injected or getting seriously ill from the virus. When I see mass hysteria and cult-like behavior surrounding a medical treatment, I will be extremely suspicious and avoid it.

25.   The drug companies have a long and glorious history of causing mass carnage with wonder drugs they thrust on unsuspecting populations, even after serious problems had already become known. Instead of pressing the pause button and halting the marketing of these drugs until these issues could be properly investigated, the drug companies did everything in their power to suppress the information and keep pushing their products. When companies and people have demonstrated such gross lack of concern for human life, I will not trust them when they hype a new wonder drug. This isn’t our first rodeo.

26.   Indeed, the horror stories are already coming in at warp speed, but the politicians are not the least bit concerned, the medical establishment is brushing them aside as unrelated or negligible, the media is ignoring it, the drug companies are steaming ahead at full speed, and those who raise a red flag continue to be bullied, censored, and punished. Clearly my life and my wellbeing are not their primary concern. I will not be their next guinea pig in their laboratory. I will not risk being the next “coincidence”.

27.   Although many people have died shortly after getting injected — including perfectly healthy young people — we are not allowed to imply that the injection had anything to do with it. Somehow this is anti-science and will cause more people to die. I believe that denying any possible link, abusing people who speculate that there might be a link, and demonstrating not the slightest curiosity to even explore if there might be a link is what is anti-science and could very well cause more people to die. These same people believe I am obligated to get injected as well. No freaking thanks.

28.   I am repulsed by the religious, cult-like worship of a pharmaceutical product, and will not participate in this ritual.

29.   My “healthcare” provider keeps badgering me to get injected, yet they have provided me no information on this treatment or any possible alternatives. Everything I know I learned from others outside the establishment. Informed consent has become conformed consent. I decline.

30.   I see all the lies, corruption, propaganda, manipulation, censorship, bullying, violation of medical ethics, lack of integrity in the scientific process, suppression of inconvenient adverse reactions, dismissal of legitimate concerns, hysteria, cult-like behavior, ignorance, closed-mindedness, fear, medical and political tyranny, concealment of protocols, lack of true concern for human life, lack of respect for basic human rights and freedoms, perversion of the Torah and common sense, demonization of good people, the greatest medical experiment of all time being conducted by greedy, untrustworthy, godless people, the lack of liability for those who demand I risk everything… I see all this and I have decided they can all have my place in line. I will put my trust in God. I will use the mind He blessed me with and trust my natural instincts. Which leads to the final reason which sums up why I will not get “vaccinated.”

31.   The whole thing stinks.

The above list was created by the Israeli rabbi Chananya Weissman.

“Tim Blair is a Newscorp columnist”

That’s what comes at the end of this article by Tim Blair today which is titled: “The riot they did notice”. He begins:

WE’RE all agreed then. Last week’s riot in Washington was a disgrace and police should round up and charge everybody who participated in this shocking affront to democracy. On this, conservatives and leftists speak as one. It’s just that conservatives have had a little more practice. We’ve been condemning political violence for years. Our friends on the left, however, are new to this game. They ignored or downplayed riots across the US throughout last year, sometimes hilariously….

Last week’s deadly assault on the Capitol Building was different to riots in Portland, Seattle, Kenosha, Minneapolis and elsewhere, so people keep claiming, because it was incited by Trump. You’ll have noticed, though, that claims of incitement are never supported by any actual quotes….

And they acted contrary to Trump’s words: “I know everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol Building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” Presumably his critics feel Trump incited events by rejecting the 2020 election’s legitimacy. You know, exactly as his critics have done for the past four years.

All this is very unusual for Newscorp. Apparently it is the wife of one of Murdoch’s sons who is the rabid lefty who has shifted the whole of the Newscorp orientation and Fox News especially. Such is the way of the modern world.

Code breakers

I grew up on Morse Code which I learned from my Dad who had been in the 2nd Divisional Signals during World War II. But it’s not a joke since the effort to shut down communications from the President is relentless. Ultimately without a feedback mechanism in the form of public discourse and debate, a free society cannot function.

Women and the history of economics

Here is an invitation to contribute to a symposium that absolutely mirrors everything about the academic world of today.

Women, Economics and History: Diversity within Europe

The literature on the history of economics that focuses on the presence of
women in economics has recently grown exponentially. Suffice it to think of
the volumes edited by Dimand, Dimand and Forget (1995 and 2000), the huge
bibliographic work by Madden, Pujol and Seiz (2004), the handbook by Madden
and Dimand (2019), as well as the very recent book by Becchio (2020).
Moreover, numerous studies on women’s participation in economic debates or on
the role of women in economic institutions in the historical perspective are
currently in progress.

Some of these works cover a very wide area. For example, The Routledge
Handbook of the History of Women’s Economic Thought includes studies on the
USA, India, Latin America, Japan, China, Africa, the Arab world and Europe
(Italy, Austria, the UK, Russia and the Soviet Union). While recognizing the
urgent need for an inclusive global perspective, this call for papers narrows
its focus to the diversity within Europe for two main reasons. First, there
are no historical works on women in economics specifically devoted to this
geographical area. Second, a broader coverage would make it more difficult to
analyse the complexity of the different European contexts, especially the less
studied ones, which is the main aim of this special issue of Œconomia.

This call for papers seeks to stimulate the reconstruction of the divergent
historical paths of the many European realities that are likely to have
produced a differentiated substratum of thinking about women in economics and
their place within the economy. We intend to attract papers that discuss the
deep diversities within Europe with the aim of linking the analysis of women
in the history of economic thought to the focus on their intellectual
traditions, properly contextualizing it within women’s different countries,
regions and periods. The special issue aims at covering a wide time span,
taking as a starting point the Enlightenment, the period when associations by
women activists were created. We welcome and encourage contributions on any
later period, including recent and contemporary history, considering
specificities linked to the two World Wars, the Cold War, revolutionary
movements, the creation of the European Union, and other major historical and
political events and processes that have marked the history of Europe.

Examples of different perspectives that can be adopted to tackle the
heterogeneity of European histories include:

.  Women as economic researchers. We know that women were not absent, even in
the early developments of the discipline, but they were erased from its
official history. The greatest effort made by historians of economic thought
to date has been to bring the names of women out of the darkness, to give them
visibility, and it is worth continuing to do so. Thus, biographies of European
women interested in economic topics across different time periods and analysis
of their writings are welcome.

.    Cultural history and intellectual history. Women did not write and publish
like men, and very often we cannot find their economic thought in published
books or articles. They often worked in economic institutions, seldom in
universities, and they often did not sign their writings. Here intellectual
history intertwines with cultural history, and hence attention has to be paid
to private and personal sources in order to reconstruct women’s economic
thought.

.    Impact, influences and traditions. The history of economic thought deals
with ideas, their impact and their reception. The historical reconstruction of
the impact of women’s ideas on reality, their influence on subsequent
interpreters, and their links with traditions of thought is a very difficult
task in women’s studies (Fuster and Birulés 2021). Here the relevant
categories are those of network (within a generation) and transmission (among
generations), in order to trace the circulation and the survival of their
ideas.

.    History of women’s emancipation. We welcome contributions that study
women’s commitment to emancipation (when it involves economic reflections)
from a historical perspective. The analyses might also examine the history of
economic institutions for the promotion of gender equality in various European
countries.

.   History of gender economics. Investigations of the roots, the origins and
the development of the economics of gender in European countries are
encouraged. Influenced by home economics and household economics, the new home
economics adopted a standard microeconomic approach to study household
economic decisions, labour and demographic issues. The same neoclassical
analytical framework was then extended by the new discipline of gender
economics in order to study gender differences and their economic
implications, especially in the labour market and in marriage.

. History of feminist economics. It is equally important to look at the
roots, the origin and the development of feminist economics in European
countries, uncovering gender-aware conceptions of economics long before the
institutionalization of feminist approaches. All analyses that use history in
order to adopt a feminist perspective and to propose a reformulation of
economic theory based on the idea that economic agents are not gender neutral
are welcome. Here a broad definition of economics should be adopted in order
to avoid the distinction between the formal and informal sector, to consider
the hidden contribution of women to the growth of wealth, to look at the
labour market from a feminist perspective, to take into account the labour of
caring, to elaborate on alternative indicators of human development, and to
propose new economic explanations of gender discrimination (see Jacobsen
2020).

. Historiography. We invite contributions on how and why women have been
represented, misrepresented or absent not only from most economic studies, but
also from the history of economics. Contributions could investigate how
historical studies approached, or ignored, the topic, and how feminist
perspectives could inform, or change the way in which women are addressed in
the history of economics and the history of economic thought.

. Orthodoxy/heterodoxy. The economics of gender stands in the realm of
neoclassical economics, while feminist economics is considered to be a
heterodox approach. The latter shares its dissent regarding the neoclassical
tradition with other heterodoxies, but it shows elements of misalignment with
them as well. In order to deepen and articulate their possible interrelations,
contributions from a range of perspectives (Socialist, Marxist, Institutional,
Evolutionary, Austrian, Post-Keynesian, and other) are encouraged.

Fair weather friends and I’m not so sure they were friends at all

This post by John Hinderaker on why PDT has gone over the top is the last straw for me to think of Powerline as a source of political sense. My response is summed up by the respondents who are listed under the heading “Best”, starting from the top:

I’m rarely disappointed by the PL posts, but this one is abominable. Donald Trump is fighting on principle. We live and die by our principles. To go down fighting is a virtue. There is no virtue in rolling over and exposing a vulnerable underbelly. The Dems will exploit and destroy wherever they see weakness. At this point, the Senators and House members don’t have to believe that the results will be overturned. They will be making the case to the American people and going on record that Biden/Harris deserve a double asterisk in history, and the electorate needs to mobilize to pressure their Reps to close the illicit avenues where fraud has been perpetrated. I look forward to hearing the case as it is challenged tomorrow. I also know that we now have a clearer line drawn in the sand as to who will stand for our Constitution and who will compromise the Republic.

President Trump is right in saying that the 2020 election was rife with voter fraud. I think he is quite likely right, although no one knows for sure, in alleging that absent fraud he would have been re-elected. But his conduct has nevertheless become indefensible.

You have gone off the rails, Mr. Hinderaker. I’m too mad to do more than scan this post at the moment, but I caught enough of the gist to realize You Just Don’t Care. I’ve been saying prayers for President Trump and his family ever since this whole sorry episode began. I can’t imagine what it feels like to be him. He has been under relentless, serous attack and under illegal and sham investigations since the moment he announced his candidacy, he has been impeached, he has watched his friends and associates be imprisoned and suffer great financial harm just for being his associates. He has watched his family be tormented by investigators and the media. At the same time, he has probably worked harder for the American people than any other President with the probable exception of Lincoln. I see nothing going wrong with his post below, and in fact I think it is remarkably mild-mannered considering that the election has been stolen from him by a man with likely progressing dementia who hardly ever left his basement and is being run by handlers who do not like America or our Constitution. The whole thing reeks to high heaven and was an obvious set-up from the get-go. That you are more upset at Trump than those who have in all likelihood permanently destroyed our Constitutional Republic says more about you than him.

Trump has my total support in NOT conceding, EVER!

I am sure this is going to tick a bunch of you off, but I am past caring. Between Mr. Mirengoff and the rest of you, this site has become just another bastion of RINO cave and bow down behavio

Where is YOUR ire for the SCUM in Congress … like Swalwell, Ocasio-Cortez, Omar, Pressley, Tlaib, Maxine Waters, Pelosi, Schumer, and so many others? Where is YOUR ire for the CHINESE COMMUNISTS who created and unleashed a world-wide pandemic that continues to inflict uncounted financial and personal suffering. 20% (and counting) of small business are gone. Their destruction is to the benefit of the huge corporations; Amazon, Walmart, etc. Where is the praise for a President who directed the creation and distribution of a vaccine that is now being administered inside of one year to relieve this pandemic? Where is the praise for a President who created the best economic growth in our lifetimes if not ever? What President defeated ISIS which had its ‘caliphate’ spread across the Middle East while not starting a single war? What President has created what has been “impossible” over the past 70 years: peace sweeping through the Middle East with fierce enemies of Israel now signing peace agreements with them? I could go on and on. John, do you get a sense of why at least 75 million people voted to re-elect this President and are enraged with the way he has been treated? Name a single person that could have gone through this unwarranted political destruction and handled it better than DJT?