Post #3100 M

Quote of the Day

Not a day passes over this earth but men and women of note 
do great deeds, speak great words and suffer noble sorrows.
Charles Reed  

Tweet of the Day

Reason reminds us "Number of Americans Killed by Terrorists Who've Entered U.S. as Refugees? ZERO." Can you say, Trump is a fearmonger?

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) February 1, 2017

Cato Institute:"America may have no moral duty to put out fires around the world, but it does have a moral duty not to block the fire exits"

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) February 1, 2017

This is Soft Rock America. Billy Joel may be right, but Trump shouldn't block the fire escape: https://t.co/ywp9Bwa3vW

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) February 1, 2017

I find myself getting increasingly annoyed at abused statistics by progressive hacks, like Trump doesn't matter since he lost the plurality.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) February 1, 2017

Let's point out that there are 325M Americans, roughly 235M eligible voters, about 60% which voted. Neither Clinton nor Trump won a majority

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) February 1, 2017

The unethical Trump cultists are at it again, this time calling for a boycott of Starbucks because of a pledge to hire refugees.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) February 1, 2017

Kudos to Starbucks for its noble pledge to give people without a home country an opportunity.As for the boycotting lowlife: talk to the hand

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) February 1, 2017

Congratulations to SCOTUS Apprentice winner Neil Gorsuch, a solid, worthy successor to Justice Scalia. Good choice by Trump.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) February 1, 2017

A New, Outstanding SCOTUS Nominee

Why Trump Is Wrong on Trade

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Steve Breen via Townhall

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Pat Benatar, "Shadows of the Night"

Post #3099 J

• Why I Unsubscribed to Liberty Pen on Youtube. Let's be clear: I don't expect people to agree with all my political positions or even most of them. I think I am different from most people; during my undergraduate days I was more of a political liberal (who was pro-life and fiscally conservative), while my folks were more social and military conservatives; during my graduate studies starting with the MBA I become more of a laissez-faire conservative, as I grew ever more skeptical at the government's meddling with the economy. I maintained my Democrat registration during this period, but the writing was on the walls as progressives dominated politics nationally. As a military brat, I had been supportive of a strong military and American leadership in global affairs. However, I did have some reservations, e.g., over our involvement in Vietnam. I had my doubts over Bush's interventions but gave him the benefit of the doubt as having better information than I had access to. But then a Woodward biography of Bush's post-invasion policy, not to mention Bush's massive deficits and dysfunctional leadership during the 2008 economic tsunami made it clear my faith in politicians was misplaced. To give a policy example: whereas I had always favored immigration, I had been more focused on the zero-sum politics of quotas, e.g., the displacement of merit-based immigrants, vs. the concept of quotas themselves. Thus, in a number of ways, I independently migrated to a more libertarian perspective. I certainly had not followed other people with similar views; if so, I would never have left the groupthink of academic progressivism. Do I have strong views? Yes. Might they change in the future? Perhaps, although I don't see myself embracing an authoritarian Statist perspective. On certain issues, like my pro-life and fiscal conservatism, I have remained consistent my whole life. When I have modified my views, it's usually the result of having educated myself on the issues. The University of Houston did not preach a conservative perspective; in fact, I don't recall ever hearing an academic there, including my economics profs, sharing his political beliefs. In many ways, I was embracing a more consistent political philosophy along with an increasingly critical perspective on the State.

When I hear some argue that I am "close-minded", I have to laugh. It's usually just a typical ad hominem argument by someone losing the debate. For example, two of my best friends happen to be pro-abort. At least 2 of my closest relatives voted for Trump. I've shifted my original view on a number of issues and topics over the years (e.g., Lincoln, the atom bombs at the end of WWII) based on the evidence. 

This being said,Victor Davis Hanson, a registered conservative Democrat, former classics professor and columnist (often featured on National Review). Enter LibertyPen, a Youtube content provider I've long subscribed to, even before I started this blog. I've probably embedded dozens, if not hundreds of Liberty Pen over the life of the blog. However, recently Liberty Pen  released two clips featuring the work of Hanson: the first involved Hanson's rants on "illegal" Mexican immigration drawing on his California roots and the "need" to restrict it.; the second I didn't even bother listening to, but from context Hanson seemed to find inspiration in how the mainstream media seem to have gone ballistic in response in the just-begun Trump Administration. I was unnerved by Liberty Pen featuring an anti-immigrant rant which is anything but pro-liberty. (I responded with a critical comment and found myself being harassed by anti-immigrant Know Nothings.) Then when Liberty Pen featured a clip praising the authoritarian-leaning Trump, spitting out Executive Orders like a candy dispenser, it was a step too far. I sent the group moderator a note explaining my decision to unsubscribe. Here is their response:

"LibertyPen is primarily an Objectivist channel uses a libertarian perspective as a starting point. We don't aim to please the narrow audience of true libertarian believers. Instead, we seek to present worthwhile messages for consideration. In our view, reality sometimes gets in the way of tight libertarian doctrine. Sorry to see you go. Perhaps you will be back if your paradigm expands. Also, LibertyPen does not support/endorse/promote Hanson or any other presented speaker per se. We only endorse the messages. That is why you will find all range of speakers on LibertyPen. Truth is truth whether uttered from a hero or a scoundrel. Best wishes."

This is full of hubris. My issue was not a personal one with Hanson, who was solidly behind Bush's interventionist policies (among other positions I disagree with). It was precisely because of the messages, which I feel contradict the very thesis of liberty. Note that I don't mind honest debate, but xenophobic or right-fascist perspectives are ably presented by other media and I find it incongruous that a purported pro-liberty site is promoting them. The moderator suggests that I'm a close-minded, extremist libertarian; in fact, as a minarchist, I find myself under attack by right-anarchists as a heretic for allowing the State a minimal foothold. I am also pro-life, which is a position supported by maybe a third of libertarians. Arguing that a pro-liberty perspective is too limiting for popular appeal or inconsistent with reality is rather curious, and the moderator was defensive and didn't seem all that motivated to address my concerns. I am not ruling out embedding future clips from LibertyPen, but they will no longer serve as one of my primary feeds.

• The iPhone and Trumpism. Trump made Apple campaign fodder:

 “I’m going to get Apple to start making their computers and their iPhones on our land, not in China,” Mr. Trump said in March, a theme he repeated throughout his campaign. “How does it help us when they make it in China?”

Trump has a very naive understanding of modern manufacturing and economics and seems to be unduly fixated on final assembly. First of all, by some estimates, Apple has a gross profit margin of about 40% on a $600 iPhone. Its assembly cost in China is in the range of about $8/phone. It's not just about saving maybe $50/phone in assembly costs vs. the US. A lot of the components are sourced to other Asian companies (in South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, etc.), and others (like computer chips) (America). Since most of its supply chain is in Asia, it is much more efficient and effective to assemble near the supply chain. There simply isn't a comparable supply chain in the US, and Apple would face an enormous logistics problem in coordinating with Asian suppliers. Second, even if Trump tried to target China for assembling phones, Apple could easily shift assembly to a different Asian country (say, Vietnam), so Trump would be playing Whac-a-Mole, unless he starts a trade war with all of Asia. Third, in many cases, the Asian economies are very competitive. In one case, Steve Jobs made a design change  but had a tight production window of a few months; US suppliers argued the window was infeasible. Their Asian competitors promised they could make it happen and did. Experts also point out that China  has a larger supply of available production engineers and can deploy a large supply of relocatable workers on demand.

 In the highly competitive market of smartphones, Apple must deliver on timely product cycles. Yes, it wants its labor costs under control, But to remain competitive, it needs to push out improved products on accelerated schedules, and local suppliers can't deliver it on them. American-based supply chains must reach more of critical mass to drive local assembly, and that's more of a long-term competitive response. Trump can facilitate the process, not by bullying Apple and other companies, but by lowering taxes and the regulatory burden.

Post #3098 M

Quote of the Day

Think as you like, but behave like others.
Robert Greene 

Tweet of the Day

The progressive morons have their history wrong. Nixon was obstructing justice. This was someone who opposed policy. "Monday Night Massacre"

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 31, 2017

Personally I do not agree with Trump's immigration/refugee policies. In Yates' position, I would have resigned in protest.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 31, 2017

Eliot Richardson resigned vs. fire Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox. Sally Yates is no Eliot Richardson.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 31, 2017

Obama's Justice Department lost a record number of shutout SCOTUS decisions. Yet the AG's did not refuse to defend Obama's policies in court

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 31, 2017

Yates was following a disturbing pattern we have seen since then California AG Jerry Brown refused to defend California's Proposition 8.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 31, 2017

Whether or not you agree with the concept of "gay marriage", Brown and Schwarzenegger knowingly engaged in dereliction of duty over Prop 8.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 31, 2017

Ugly guys are grateful #ReasonsToLoveMeIn4Words

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 31, 2017

Something is scratching at the door... Do me a favor: open the door, Let 'em in #DogSongs

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 31, 2017

Is Noninterventionist Policy "Retreat"?

The Story of Brexit

Choose Life

Antisemitism and the Middle East

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Steve Breen via Townhall

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Pat Benatar, "Promises In the Dark"

Post #3097 M

Quote of the Day

Don't let what you cannot do interfere with what you can do.
John Wooden  

Tweet of the Day

The remaining principled Republicans in this corrupt Age of Trump, remain silent in the face of evil. Revised Niemöller: "came for refugees"

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 29, 2017

The Congress and Trump are complicit in this unspeakable evil of US weapons used against civilians; then they refuse to take in refugees.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 29, 2017

Whatever happened to the principle "you broke it, you own it"? If you meddle in the Middle East, you must take responsibility for it, GOP!

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 29, 2017

Putting an unqualified political hack like Bannon on the National Security Council while downgrading the military chiefs is another blunder.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 29, 2017

Trump is once again following the evil FDR's lead in a modern day retelling of the MS St. Louis, where Jewish refugees were turned back.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 29, 2017

Trump wants to stop immigration until HE figures out what's going wrong?He doesn't know squat about the economy but he's signing exec orders

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 29, 2017

Trump doesn't know anything about unintended consequences of starting trade wars with the rest of the world, but that doesn't stop him.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 29, 2017

Trump doesn't seem to know most imports he would tax are for businesses and raising business costs hurts profits and jobs.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 29, 2017

Image of the Day

I'm On the Side Of these Protesters

Facebook Corner

(Justin Amash). Many supporters and opponents of President Trump's executive order are conflating the terms "immigrant" (which encompasses green card holders), "nonimmigrant," and "refugee."
It's not lawful to ban immigrants because of "nationality, place of birth, or place of residence." This nondiscrimination provision comes from a 1965 law (8 U.S.C. 1152 Sec. 202(a)(1)(A)) that limits the 1952 law (8 U.S.C. 1182 Sec. 212(f)) that the president cites.
It's lawful to ban nonimmigrants for almost any reason. These are people who are temporarily visiting the United States, like tourists or students.
It's lawful to ban refugees for almost any reason. But banning all refugees from particular countries is harsh and unwise. We still should admit well-vetted persons.
Understanding these distinctions is important because supporters of President Trump's executive order continue to wrongly insist that the order is lawful and that President Obama did almost the same thing in 2011. And opponents of President Trump's executive order continue to wrongly insist that banning refugees violates the Constitution or the law.
President Trump's executive order covers not only refugees but also immigrants and nonimmigrants. As noted above, it's not lawful to discriminate in the issuance of an *immigrant* visa because of the person's "nationality, place of birth, or place of residence."
President Obama's action (which wasn't disclosed at the time) covered only refugees and, therefore, did not violate the Constitution or the law, even if one finds it objectionable for other reasons.
Wrong. Arbitrary actions by the government, whether at the federal, state or local levels, violate the rule of law and equal protection. Human rights are not State-based but natural.

(National Review). Arguments to the contrary ignore the Constitution and misstate federal law.
No, it's not. Only a morally bankrupt fascist could believe such a thing. Constitutionally, the government cannot discriminate; that's what the Fourteenth Amendment explicitly states. Don't forget the Fourteenth Amendment made it clear that the Bill of Rights applies to the states as well as the federal government; to argue the Feds were leaving themselves above the same standards they apply to the states is irrational. Trying to weasel out with all sorts of technicalities, like US citizens or residents are "more equal" than aliens flatly contradicts equal protection and the rule of law. Disparate standards are not morally or legally justifiable. Our Constitution is based on NATURAL rights, which preexist legally-conferred rights.

Via Pro-Life Libertarians

Actually, when Gallup looked at this question in 2014, about 41% of women considered themselves pro-life, and 44% of men were pro-abort. Whereas 9 points more women were pro-abort, it was due principally to a lopsided majority in the Northeast region, principally younger women. Moreover, only about 28% of people believe in the unconditional legal right to abort. http://www.gallup.com/poll/170249/split-abortion-pro-choice-pro-life.aspx

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Nate Beeler via Townhall

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Pat Benatar, "Fire and Ice"

Post #3096 M

Quote of the Day

The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert  

Tweet of the Day

Trump believes that the American people are stupid. When he talks about slapping tariffs on Mexican goods, it's about taxing Americans.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

While a sales tax applies equally to goods, domestic or foreign, a tariff is applied to imports, with the US government pocketing proceeds.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

"Tax the other guy" is manifestly corrupt and unjust. If Trump slaps a tariff on Mexican goods, who pays the tariff and the Great Wall?

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

Do you think Trump pays for his fair share of the Great Wall on the border? Hell no. How many Mexican products does Trump buy? You pay.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

Trump's obsession with voter fraud is about the most unpopular candidate in recent history trying to rationalize losing the popular vote.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

The fact is George W. Bush won a higher percentage of the legal Latino vote than Trump did. He had won 2 elections in Texas with Latinos.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

Trump's Mexican Tariff is a variation of the corrupt Tea Act of 1773. When central government taxes unjustly, it flirts with revolution.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

When Trump talks of a trade war with Mexico and China, guess who are the second and third largest buyers of US goods and services?

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

Guess who loses besides the US consumer when Trump picks a fight with Mexico and China over trade? There will be retaliation against the US.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

Trump's war on trade is a direct assault on the standard of living for the average American. Exports are the price we pay for imports

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

Imports are significant resources for American businesses, and our capital surpluses invest in American businesses and finance deficits.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

Trade war shrinks competition for the average American consumer. That means higher prices and a less efficient economy. It can hurt jobs.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

The best thing Trump could do for the economy is keep his hands off it. The economy after the 1929 crash had started to recover on its own.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

The fact is the overwhelming loss of jobs in the manufacturing sector has more to do with rising productivity, not foreign competition.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

What is Trump going to do? Outlaw progress in industrial technology, which brings lower prices & a higher standard of living for consumers?

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

Trump seems to be reinventing the toxic recipe that Hoover & FDR followed in prolonging the Depression: trade war, infrastructure, meddling.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

Under the Congressional Review Act, the Trump Administration can submit to Congress bureaucrat rulemaking to nullify https://t.co/tTQXyq0Nxw

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

Thank God that the judiciary is a check on Trump's autocratic violations of due process. Trump's unfair treatment of refugees is shameful.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 29, 2017

Just when we thought that Trump had ended the Bush/Clinton era, he decides he wants to resurrect the safe zone notion for meddling in Syria.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

The people who cheer on Trump's unconscionable treatment of refugees are the scum of the earth. Trump's political exploitation: disgusting.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 29, 2017

Trump's political exploitation of xenophobia is an abomination, and he has permanently abdicated moral leadership of the free world.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 29, 2017

While Obama remains responsible for enabling Saudi war crimes against Yemenis, Trump rejects their refugees and continues drone attacks.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 29, 2017

I wonder what the libertarians who cheered on "anti-Establishment" Trump now think of their naivete in light of Trump's executive orders.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 29, 2017

Image of the Day

Nullify Bureaucratic Rulemaking!

Executive Order Mania Is Authoritarianism

A Baby Is Worth More Than the Price of Her Parts

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Ken Catalino via Townhall

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Pat Benatar, "Treat Me Right"

Post #3095 M

Quote of the Day

God help those who do not help themselves.
Wilson Mizner  

Tweet of the Day

Trump's ban on refugees is an ugly, immoral, dark moment in American history, if not in fact unconstitutional for targeting Muslims.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

It was bad enough that Trump scapegoated Muslim refugees while playing politics last year. But to do this as POTUS is heinous & un-American

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

Dick Cheney is right: what Trump has done in his executive order IS "Against Everything We Stand For". Trump has stained the Presidency.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

"Extreme vetting" of immigrants/refugees violates the concept of cost/benefit analysis. Trump is throwing taxpayer money down the toilet.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

The anti-immigrant Republicans who support Trump's xenophobic policies are morally bankrupt.They'll tell you they support the 10th amendment

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

The presumption that a refugee is a terrorist is like assuming a rape victim is the aggressor. Blaming the victim is monstrous, unjust.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

If Ryan and McConnell enable Trump's declaration of economic war on Mexico and China, they deserve to lose the midterm election.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

@aileenbie I'm a REAL conservative, not unprincipled National Review. The federal government must not discriminate https://t.co/6xRw8Q159G

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

McConnell's argument for sustaining economic sanctions on Russia is unprincipled & immoral: "When goods do not cross borders, soldiers will"

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

Trump's demand that the Mexican treats the US (Trump) with respect (capitulation) is nothing less than trying to bully other countries.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

Trump: you want the respect of other countries and peoples? You need to earn it. You don't get it by demands and threats of war or sanctions

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 28, 2017

Image of the Day

Brexit vs. Trump

Charity For the Benefit of Children Is Blessed By God

A Libertarian Discussion On Trumpism: Woods and Deist

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Lisa Benson via Townhall

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Pat Benatar, "Hit Me With Your Best Shot"

Post #3094 M

Quote of the Day

One picture is worth a thousand words.
Fred R. Barnard  

Tweets of the Day

Well, I never thought I would be debating public policy with a cancer patient on Twitter. I am not unsympathetic with the experience of cancer patients; my maternal grandmother (and godmother) died from the complications of colon cancer when I was 2 years old and my mom was 22. I don't usually publish extended Twitter dialogues but I made some crucial points during the exchange.

Rand Paul is once again proving why he, not Donald Trump, should be POTUS. Torture of suspects is immoral. counterproductive public policy.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

"C4L Is Lobbying To Get Ron Paul Appointed To The Federal Reserve Board". Oh, God, YES!

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

Unlike politics, any scientific theory is subject to evidence and its standard validated measurement. #whysciencematters

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

Abolish executive orders & make lawmakers fully accountable for the unintended economic consequences of bad regulations. #MyExecutiveOrder

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

Trump's edict on sanctuary cities is as unconstitutional as Obama's abuses of power. Does GOP believe in federalism? https://t.co/y8yUzTQEhE

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

Leave it to the maid #HouseholdTVShows

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

Trump's edict on sanctuary cities is as unconstitutional as Obama's abuses of power. Does GOP believe in federalism? https://t.co/y8yUzTQEhE

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

Is it too early to talk about impeaching Donald Trump?

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 Nobody seriously believes that the public grant system works as intended. Govt spending is risk-averse https://t.co/e9otfOIBI5

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 @mic You don't see the chilling effect of government on innovative research in the private sector, e.g.,delays of drug approval

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 @mic But would that have emerged without government intervention? Absolutely. Companies don't grow on killing their consumers.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 @mic So you're saying government scaled back its preexisting dysfunctional regulations this one time, and you're grateful?

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 @mic And tell me--did your cure come from a government-produced drug?

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 @mic Gee, your drug may have been released EVEN EARLIER during your illness. That's a bad thing?

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 @mic The point is,FOR THE GENERAL PATIENTS, they have to wait until the FDA gives its imprimatur. Other patients like you died.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 @mic What use is a drug once the patient passes away unable to take it? The govt gave her a death sentence for her own good.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 @mic Government grants aren't distributed by risk-takers. The private sector spends far more. Private science is bigger.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 @mic Do you know how many hurdles you have to go through to market a drug? Who wins the race--the sprinter or the hurdler?

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 @mic No, there are bureaucratic incentives against innovation. Innovators often think out of the box--not rewarded by govt.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 @mic It's not just groupthink, but government is monopoly. You have people scared of approving a "bad" drug and getting blamed.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 @mic Yes, but govt doesn't take the risk. Over 90% of drugs don't make it to market. Who foots the bill for their costs?

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 @mic For too many patients, their only lifeline is getting access to new drugs. And while regulators hesitate, real people die.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 @mic Again, the government is de facto making a judgment of life and death. The government gets in the way of saving lives.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 @mic If Shkreli made the drug that's made the difference for you, would you really care about purported securities fraud?

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 @mic Better than a 4-1 kill ratio for drug delay vs. bad drugs. https://t.co/73zVJFaMnZ

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 @mic If your issue is Big Pharma, you should logically be calling for a free market and more market competition.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 @mic Government employees or the private sector (including charities, nonprofits, etc.)?

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 @CatoInstitute If you read the article, they were making reference to statistics from countries with less restrictive approvals

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 Not companies like Celgene, right? This isn't funny anymore. I'm getting bored.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

@PamCollier2 Most science is privately-funded. You are blinded by your political dogma. Educate yourself. https://t.co/sPEzMN97hp

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 27, 2017

Image of the Day

Great Examples of Failed US Government-Owned Businesses

End the Public School Monopoly

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Jerry Holbert via Townhall

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Pat Benatar, "You Better Run"

Post #3093 M

Quote of the Day

Fear not for the future, weep not for the past. 
Percy Bysshe Shelley 

Tweet of the Day

Kudos to Trump once again for reversing Obama on major pipeline projects like Keystone.We will now be able to rely less on Mideast oil.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 25, 2017

You would never want to graduate and have to eat the cost of bad college loans as a taxpayer #IfCollegeWereFree

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 25, 2017

Your bartender may actually hold an advanced degree in psychology #IfCollegeWereFree

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 25, 2017

This is Soft Rock America in tribute to the great sitcom actress Mary Tyler Moore: https://t.co/sQnFsUu6zp

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 26, 2017

Rand Paul's great ObamaCare replacement plan shows why I supported his POTUS run. https://t.co/5Gbs3pOyMK

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 26, 2017

Thank you, "living wage" supporters, for pricing me into a cashier job. I never get your order wrong and give you exact change. pic.twitter.com/jJUhdLpFcn

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 26, 2017

So much for being the next Reagan.... Mr. Trump, tear down this wall!

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 26, 2017

Trump's Great Wall is just another corrupt politician's taxpayer-financed boondoggle, just like Jerry Brown's money-losing SuperTrain.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 26, 2017

Trump will do anything to keep US taxpayers from escaping from their prison at the southern border or Mexicans from paying US taxes.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 26, 2017

Imagine the graffiti on the Mexican side of the Great Wall of Trump pic.twitter.com/lT09J1yMZq

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 26, 2017

Education Savings Accounts

Napolitano, Trump, and SCOTUS

Busting Liberal Myths: Is IQ Fixed By Ethnicity?

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Gary Varvel via ZeroHedge

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Pat Benatar, "Heartbreaker"

Post #3092 M

Quote of the Day

If you wish to travel far and fast, travel light. 
Take off all your envies, jealousies, unforgiveness, selfishness, and fears.
Glenn Clark  

Tweet of the Day

Big shock: fellow economic illiterate economic nationalist Bernie Sanders & protectionist unions praise Trump for putting an end to TPP.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 24, 2017

Obama never really promoted TPP correctly. He posed it as a counterbalance policy to China, not part of the TPP, not as great for consumers.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 24, 2017

It would be harder to think of anything worse that Trump could do to worsen the economy (short of planning) than to sabotage win-win trade.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 24, 2017

It just goes to prove how Trump is trying to resurrect the failed Depression-era economic policies of Hoover & FDR (Smoot-Hawley, etc.)

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 24, 2017

It goes to show only in America can someone so utterly clueless in economics like Trump become a billionaire and get elected President.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 25, 2017

Donald "Call Me Herbert Hoover" Trump is so close to Hoover's policies: the same fondness for tariffs, infrastructure, anti-immigrant.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 25, 2017

For putting an end to the Clinton era #ThankYouTrump

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 25, 2017

The only thing left to cement Trump as Herbert Hoover II is a major stock market crash.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 25, 2017

Image of the Day

Why Anti-School Choice?

Political Correctness Run Amok

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Glenn McCoy via Townhall

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Pat Benatar, "We Live For Love"

Post #3091 M

Quote of the Day

Talent works, genius creates.
Robert A. Schumann  

Tweet of the Day

Kudos to Trump for defunding Intenational Planned Parenthood. I as a taxpayer should not be compelled to subsidize crony organizations.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 24, 2017

Trump's executive order withdrawing from TPP is economically illiterate, anti-consumer: a form of self-imposed economic isolationism.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 24, 2017

Trump's executive order freezing non-defense hiring is a good thing, long overdue. But Meat Loaf is wrong: two out of 3 ain't good.it's a D.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 24, 2017

Trump has to let his popular vote loss in last November's contest go. Belief that illegal voters made the difference is a conspiracy theory.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 24, 2017

Image of the Day

Towards Real Child Development: Education Choice and Free Range Kids

Bless the Beasts and the Children

The Failure of Big Government Economics

Facebook Corner

(Pro-Life Libertarians). Taxation is theft, even when a Republican does it.




 I, too. am mystified by this bizarre libertarian infatuation with an economic illiterate authoritarian like Trump. Gary North recently called Trump's inauguration speech as one of the best ever, comparing it to Lincoln, FDR, and JFK's. Lew Rockwell seems to totally buy into Trump's transparent pseudo-populist "anti-Establishment" hype, even as Trump staffs his administration with veteran politicians, political operatives, and generals.

But even worse, Trump's protectionism is anti-consumer and anti-business; it will worsen the standard of living for all except his favored few.

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Gary Varvel via Townhall

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Pat Benatar, "Suffer the Little Children/Hell Is For Children". We're leading off with my favorite Benatar song--and my favorite performance of it with the "Suffer the Little Children" intro. I first heard the latter on a CD or phonograph given to me by my first sister's husband years back (probably in some storage box now). I was searching on Youtube several weeks back and couldn't find it; finally, someone posted it. My RN sister was distraught at having to deal with the results of child abuse on the job. I'm crazy about little kids and babies, although never blessed with my own. I even cringe at the sight of the occasional embarrassed mom slapping a crying or misbehaving child at Walmart.

Post #3090 M

Quote of the Day

Maturity begins when we're content to feel we're right about something, 
without feeling the necessity to prove someone else is wrong. - 
Sydney J. Harris  

Tweet of the Day

The weakest economic recovery in recent US economic history via ZeroHedge #ThankYouObama pic.twitter.com/pIwcQwP4zA

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 22, 2017

The House of Representatives must reject the leftist anti-competitive destination-based border-adjusted tax plan. Origin-based is simpler.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 22, 2017

If you look at taxes as government services, they should be included as part of the cost of goods sold. Competition requires minimizing cost

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 22, 2017

Image of the Day

Trumponomics

The Anti-Trump Riots

The Speech Obama Never Gave

Choose Life

Marriage and Family

Facebook Corner

(An anti-Trump relative). Reposting the below from my cousin's husband Jeff, an F-16 pilot (badass) and otherwise awesome guy. This is the sort of poisonous misinformation we must call out.
Saw this post today- take a look at the source here. It's from 2016, so it was passed under the previous regime. This photo is clearly photoshopped. Trump had nothing to do with this bill. Controlling the media is how Mussolini started it all along with the people believing what they read- stay vigilant for fake news. This website is from some 20-year-old kid named Nicholas Kingsland who lives in Halifax Canada. My guess is we're in some proxy media war with foreign states involved. We can win by recognizing, calling it out, and not believing fake news.

An obviously photoshopped photo of Trump with troops

This deal was announced on Dec. 2, when Obama was a lame duck. Giving Obama credit is totally disingenuous. (He did sign the defense bill on Dec. 23, but the increase was opposed by Obama, and the pay increase mostly comes into play on Trump's watch.) The photo may be phony, but the fact was that Trump was in favor of increasing military manpower and you can't do that on anemic pay and benefits.

This is from the Stars and Stripes (Nov. 10) :

"Congress has been debating whether to risk President Barack Obama’s veto by adding $18 billion to the annual defense budget and giving troops the highest pay raise in years. Trump’s election might now embolden Republican lawmakers to press harder this year for that money, or at least a chunk of it, now that it is certain their party has claimed the White House, according to budget experts.
Military pay raises have been held to less than 2 percent since 2011, below that of private sector wage growth, while troops and families have been stressed by deployments. The pay issue has become a top concern and the nonprofit National Military Family Association wrote an open letter to Trump after Tuesday’s election asking that it be made a priority.
Overworked and feeling “nickel-and-dimed,” the military wants the president and Congress to provide the 2.1 percent raises that it is supposed to receive under law, said Joyce Wessel-Raezer, executive director of the association.
Earlier this year, the Senate Armed Services Committee and its chairman, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., opted to avoid a political fight with the Democrats. It crafted a defense bill that called for the 1.6-percent troop pay raise requested by Obama.
But the House Armed Services Committee and its chairman, Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, spearheaded a 2.1-percent raise and the $18-billion hike despite the veto threat."

In essence, Obama wanted the GOP to allow expansion of non-defense spending away from sequester caps. To explain:

From the Military Times, Nov. 29:

"But that's still about $3.2 billion more than President Barack Obama's request, setting up a potential veto. Obama has said he won't accept an increase in defense spending without corresponding increases in nonmilitary programs. If the president intends to make good on that threat, he'll have to squash several measures that would benefit the military workforce at a time when many troops and their families feel their compensation and overall quality of life have slipped.
That's because the extra money — tucked into overseas contingency funds, to get around defense spending caps — is used mainly to pay for additional pay and personnel costs. It pushes the 2017 military pay raise from the Pentagon-preferred rate of 1.6 percent to 2.1 percent, a mark equal to the projected rise in private sector wages."

   
As much as I dislike Trump (and voted for Johnson), the real fake news here is the myth that Obama made military pay a priority. We have his actual record over the past few years.


(Dan Rather). These are not normal times. These are extraordinary times. And extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures.
When you have a spokesperson for the president of the United States wrap up a lie in the Orwellian phrase "alternative facts”…
When you have a press secretary in his first appearance before the White House reporters threaten, bully, lie, and then walk out of the briefing room without the cajones to answer a single question…
When you have a President stand before the stars of the fallen CIA agents and boast about the size of his crowds (lies) and how great his authoritarian inaugural speech was….
These are not normal times.
The press has never seen anything like this before. The public has never seen anything like this before. And the political leaders of both parties have never seen anything like this before.
What can we do? We can all step up and say simply and without equivocation. "A lie, is a lie, is a lie!" And if someone won't say it, those of us who know that there is such a thing as the truth must do whatever is in our power to diminish the liar's malignant reach into our society.
There is one group of people who can do a lot - very quickly. And that is Republicans in Congress. Without their support, Donald Trump's presidency will falter. So here is what I think everyone in the press must do. If you are interviewing a Paul Ryan, a Mitch McConnell, or any other GOP elected official, the first question must be "what will you do to combat the lying from the White House?" If they dodge and weave, keep with the follow ups. And if they refuse to give a satisfactory answer, end the interview.
Facts and the truth are not partisan. They are the bedrock of our democracy. And you are either with them, with us, with our Constitution, our history, and the future of our nation, or you are against it. Everyone must answer that question.
Coming from the King of False News which led to your termination from CBS...

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Gary Varvel vel via Townhall

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Paul Davis, "Love Or Let Me Be Lonely". This concludes my Davis retrospective. Next up: Pat Benatar.