Codger on Politics

Saturday, April 26, 2014

Doubling down on stupid

Doubling down on stupid
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117531/obamacare-debate-president-trolls-republicans-says-its-over

""Political strategy isn't my speciality. I'm a policy guy. But in this environment, it seems to me, the most sensible approach for Obama and Democrats is to defend the Affordable Care Act aggressively—as they areincreasingly doing—while trying to promote other causes, like a higher minimum wage and immigration reform, where Democratic positions are more popular. The more Republicans insist that the big debate over Obamacare is not over, the more they look like obstructionists whose agenda consists largely of trying to undo what Obama has done. 

That perception would line up neatly with reality. And it'd probably help Democrats in November—enough that, just maybe, Obama is baiting Republicans into it.""

This lines up with the Republican strategy up holding democrats accountable for ObamaCare.  ObamaCare itself will provide the continuing problem stream, and Democrats are increasing seen as neither capable nor trustworthy enough to  govern.

Friday, April 25, 2014

It is time to threaten a credible response.

It is time to threaten a credible response.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/nato-still-answer_787373.html?utm_campaign=Washington+Examiner&utm_source=washingtonexaminer.com&utm_medium=referral

The threat should be the cutting of the Russian oil connection to Europe. This will not only be a threat to Russia but to the European states, which have refused to participate in their own defense.

Liberal Europe, should welcome this forceable return to green energy, but they won't.

"" When the alliance's 2008 Bucharest Summit rejected the U.S. plan for Ukraine and Georgia, the defeat was widely attributed to Bush's unpopularity, stemming from the Iraq war, a convenient excuse for both Europeans and America's media. The real reason, however, was Europe's growing reliance on Russian oil and gas, and its barely concealed fear of Moscow's response to NATO admitting two critical constituent parts of the former USSR.

Moscow has long understood Western cowardice. Just four months after Bucharest, in a laboratory-like causal connection rare in global politics, Russia dramatically escalated its simmering conflict with Georgia, bombing its tiny neighbor and surging troops to within 30 miles of the capital, Tbilisi. Faced with a U.S. response that looks robust compared with our reaction today in Ukraine, Russia withdrew to Abkhazia and South Ossetia, the two provinces it most wanted to hive off, and hunkered down into the stalemate that Georgia still endures. ""

If the Russian pipeline were mined in the western part of the Ukraine, and control were given as a fail-safe territorial defense, the Ukrainians would have a weapon against both Russia and the European states. Wouldn't be ironic if Russian forces rushed in and set off the pipeline themselves?

With the mines in place, the west could rapidly increase oil supplies with an eye toward a soon to be new market. Liberal solidarity could be used to overcome the self destructive green movement. A hostage to Green cooperation would be the threat to have a massive release of green house gasses. (This would be a nice demonstration of the immunity of the environment to such a release or the end of the world, whichever)

Russia would notice. Not that we were resolute, but that we are genuinely crazy, a much more motivating stance.

In conjunction with the mined section, would be a valve. Now Russia can cut off oil, or the Ukraine cut cut off oil, (and turn it back on) and a genuinely crazy Ukraine is a credible threat.

""Some argue that NATO should never have admitted any ex-Warsaw Pact members, and most certainly should not have added former Soviet republics, because geography and history relegated these countries to Russia's sphere of influence. That argument has the virtue of consistency, but nothing more. In fact, it proves too much. One could as easily argue that Poland is in Germany's sphere of influence rather than Russia's. That kind of dispute, in short form, is why Europe saw two world wars in the 20th century. It is precisely to prevent such wars, and thus further effusions of American blood, that we bring otherwise vulnerable countries into NATO, thereby simultaneously protecting U.S. interests and stabilizing Europe.""

The answer to this argument is a drive to utterly destroy Russia. Then they can be removed from the equation. The Russians have done a reasonably well job of this themselves. Removing the Oil income and further isolating Russia could do the trick. Maybe the Russians will realize they are all truly Ukrainian and move there. A Russia that actually works could evolve (Unlike the Crimea, which now doesn't work at all)






Dave Farnsworth

Wednesday, April 23, 2014

Progressives give themselves too much credit

Progressives give themselves too much credit
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/23/climate-change-fight-of-our-lives-naomi-klein

""The good news is that, unlike reindeer and songbirds, we humans are blessed with the capacity for advanced reasoning and therefore the ability to adapt more deliberately – to change old patterns of behaviour with remarkable speed. If the ideas that rule our culture are stopping us from saving ourselves, then it is within our power to change those ideas. But before that can happen, we first need to understand the nature of our personal climate mismatch.""

To assert this when his argument concerning climate change, hasn't been discussed is self contradicting.  The climate is changing, and always has been.  The adaptation to this change is more complex than indicated.

The mismatch is science versus dogma. Both sides think the other side is using dogma.

No prudent person would allow the proposed course, without further study.

Wednesday, April 16, 2014

America the uppity

America the uppity
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/16/opinion/game-of-drones.html?ref=opinion&_r=0

How can Google and Facebook contemplate anything not put forward by government? Don't they know that government knows best.

"A single, giant company responsible only to its managers can't claim to have the world's interests at heart. Ultimately, what Google does is for Google.""
Where as we all know the government is committed to supporting the governing class- me, Maureen Doud.

Actually, the fact that Google is focused on Googles' interest is in line with the intentions of the founders, the "Hidden Hand" works in this way to make all things better.

"My friend Jim Gleick, the author of "The Information" who is working on a book about time travel, is as leery as I am about the company whose unofficial motto is "Don't Be Evil.""

"Don't be Evil" an obvious anti government dog whistle.

Has Maureen Doud indicated she would not be evil?

Tuesday, April 15, 2014

Is the federal government concerned with the constitution?

Since when is the federal government concerned with the constitution
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/04/the-irony-of-cliven-bundys-unconstitutional-stand/360587/
 1, Section 2 of the Nevada Constitution:
""All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for the protection, security and benefit of the people; and they have the right to alter or reform the same whenever the public good may require it. But the Paramount Allegiance of every citizen is due to the Federal Government in the exercise of all its Constitutional powers as the same have been or may be defined by the Supreme Court of the United States; and no power exists in the people of this or any other State of the Federal Union to dissolve their connection therewith or perform any act tending to impair, subvert, or resist the Supreme Authority of the government of the United States. The Constitution of the United States confers full power on the Federal Government to maintain and Perpetuate its existence, and whensoever any portion of the States, or people thereof attempt to secede from the Federal Union, or forcibly resist the Execution of its laws, the Federal Government may, by warrant of the Constitution, employ armed force in compelling obedience to its Authority.""

"have been or may be defined by the Supreme Court of the United States" is not found the us constitution. To say the slavish deference to federal law is primary, when the federation government generally fails to follow the constitutition and the federal executive do not faithfully implement the laws passed by congress, is to bow to arbitrary authority

Monday, April 14, 2014

Standing tall, hats off to the Cliven Bundy

Standing tall, hats off to the Cliven Bundy family

http://townhall.com/columnists/kevinmccullough/2014/04/13/why-the-feds-chickened-out-on-a-nevada-ranch-n1823838/page/full

 Shades of Branch Davidian massacre.

"It is telling that in the Nevada case the feds pulled out so quickly, given all they had indicated they were willing to do to resolve the matter to their satisfaction. They had set up a perimeter around the Bundy's family land, ranch, and home. They had brought in extra artillery, dogs, and snipers. They were beginning the process of stealing..."

We all need to stand up to federal oppression. We all need to fight in every venue.

Monday, April 07, 2014

If you aren't free to be wrong, you aren't free

If you aren't free to be wrong, you aren't free

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/media-608400-many-one.html

""But when it comes to authoritarian expression of "true" beliefs, it's the progressive Left that increasingly seeks to impose orthodoxy. In this rising intellectual order, those who dissent on everything from climate change, the causes of poverty and the definition of marriage, to opposition to abortion are increasingly marginalized and, in some cases, as in the Steyn trial, legally attacked.

A few days ago, Brendan Eich, CEO of the web browser company Mozilla, resigned under pressure from gay rights groups. Why? Because it was revealed he donated $1,000 to the campaign to pass Proposition 8, California's since-overturned ballot measure defining marriage as between one man and one woman.

In many cases, I might agree with some leftist views, say, on gay marriage or the critical nature of income inequality, but liberals should find these intolerant tendencies terrifying and dangerous in a democracy dependent on the free interchange of ideas.

But what started as liberation and openness has now engendered an ever-more powerful clerisy – an educated class – that seeks to impose particular viewpoints while marginalizing and, in the most-extreme cases, criminalizing, divergent views.

Today's clerisy in some ways resembles the clerical First Estate in pre-revolutionary France, which, in the words of the historian Georges Lefebvre, "possessed a control over thought in the interests of the Church and king." With today's clerisy, notesessayist Joseph Bottum, "social and political ideas [are] elevated to the status of strange divinities ... born of the ancient religious hunger to perceive more in the world than just the give and take of ordinary human beings, but adapted to an age that piously congratulates itself on its escape from many of the strictures of ancient religion." ""

Science doesn't accept anything as settled. There is no truth, only assumptions. I have beliefs, which I consider settled, but which I grant others a right to their opinion.

I have rights, some of which are listed in the US constitution. I believe in the literal interpretation of the constitution. I believe in my right to my understanding of the constitution.

Violating my rights, is a big fucking deal.

Saturday, April 05, 2014

Deviant mozillions, do the right thing, leave

Deviant mozillions, do the right thing, leave
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/brendan-eich-gay-rights-mccarthyism/

"Our organizational culture reflects diversity and inclusiveness. We welcome contributions from everyone regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, gender-identity, language, race, sexual orientation, geographical location and religious views. Mozilla supports equality for all.

No you don't, you liars. You don't want contributions from anyone who doesn't subscribe to gay-rights orthodoxy. You don't care how they behave, or how they treat others. All you care about is what they think — or how they once thought, even after they have long since ceased being a threat to you and your political goals. You don't want them in your workplace. No traditional Christians, Jews, or Muslims need apply — or if they do, they had better stay deeply closeted."

So, if you don't , or in the past didn't, agree with the consensus thought of the culture, perhaps, for the good of all you should leave.  If you are one of those who "think outside the box" you are by definition a deviant. Save the consistency of the collective leave, taking your funky friends with you.

And Brendan Eich, to make up for your deviant self, take your fellow non conformists away to do what ever, we don't want them at Mozilla.

Tuesday, April 01, 2014

Defending Religious Liberty From the State

Defending Religious Liberty From the State Religion.

"Nothing comes close to environmentalism in generating left-wing enthusiasm. It is the religion of our time. For the left, the earth has supplanted patriotism. This was largely inevitable in Europe, given its contempt for nationalism since the end of World War I and even more so since World War II. But it is now true for the elites (almost all of whose members are on the left) in America as well."

Read more: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/04/01/judaism_christianity_environmentalism__122127.html#ixzz2xfF35sqn 
Follow us: @RCP_Articles on Twitter

Progressives don't realize their belief system is a religion , just that is obvious, and non believers are to be destroyed. This may be why they are partial to Islam.