Category: Politics

Trying not to start the public floggings

Woke Up

Eco-Crap, Watermelons

I guess we can all sleep easier in our beds now:

Billionaire Bill Gates has dramatically changed his position on climate change, acknowledging for this first time there is no “doomsday” risk from global warming.

In a memo published by Gates Notes Monday night, the Microsoft co-founder, who has poured billions into combating global warming, urged a move away from what he called a “doomsday outlook” and toward improving living conditions in developing nations.

“Although climate change will have serious consequences — particularly for people in the poorest countries — it will not lead to humanity’s demise,” Gates wrote. “People will be able to live and thrive in most places on Earth for the foreseeable future.”

Hey Bill:  as long as you use your money and not taxpayer money to improve living conditions in developing nations (what we call “shitholes”), knock yourself out.

I wonder what made him change his mind about the looming catastrophe that is Global Warming Climate Cooling Change©?

Whatever it was, it has to do with money.  Count on it.

Well, Now

Immigration, Legal Stuff

Seems as though there’s a teeny hole in the Constitution after all:

Twenty-five Republican attorneys general have filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court, challenging birthright citizenship.

“The idea that citizenship is guaranteed to everyone born in the United States doesn’t square with the plain language of the Fourteenth Amendment or the way many government officials and legal analysts understood the law when it was adopted after the Civil War.

“If you look at the law at the time, citizenship attached to kids whose parents were lawfully in the country. Each child born in this country is precious no matter their parents’ immigration status, but not every child is entitled to American citizenship. This case could allow the Supreme Court to resolve a constitutional question with far-reaching implications for the States and our nation.”

I have to say that this little feature always nagged at me (despite being a one-time immigrant myself).  The idea that anyone born in the U.S. had automatic citizenship seemed on its face to be unreasonable — I mean, I think that we are the only country in the world that allows for this in our legal system.  (There might be a couple of others, but I suspect that these might be countries where nobody wants to live anyway.)

Whatever, I’d like to see this whole “anchor baby” situation disappear.  The child should be a citizen of the home country of either the mother or the father (if known).  If nobody knows who the father is (a regrettably-common feature of modern-day life) and the mother were to die during or soon after childbirth, then I might be prepared to accept automatic citizenship for the baby, if only for humanitarian reasons.

Anyway, I’m glad to see that the issue may soon be resolved one way or the other.  I’ll leave it to your imagination to figure out who might oppose this initiative by the various attorneys-general.

Nazzo Fast, Guido

Foreign Affairs, Politics, Subsidies

I’m not so sure that this is a good idea.

President Donald Trump told reporters on Sunday that his administration is considering importing beef from Argentina to lower its price at home and help Argentina stabilize its struggling economy, which he described as being in critical condition.

Dear  King  God-Emperor Donald:  Those are both laudable goals, i.e. to help a loyal ally and simultaneously help U.S. consumers who are being flattened by stratospherically-high beef prices at home.

However, I can’t help but think that you should also consider trying to ease the crushing burden of federal regulations that beef farmers — actually, all farmers — have to deal with, regulations that are a legacy of the Leviathan State you’ve inherited.  That will lower their cost of production, and should make beef less expensive.

Lowering beef prices through imports will simply make our beef farming less profitable — not that it’s all that profitable to begin with — and frankly, I care more about our farmers than about the Argies.

After all, it’s Make America Great Again, not Make Argentina Great Again.  With all due respect to Señor Presidente Milei, he has to deal with problems of his country’s own making, just as we have to beat back the Commies Over Here.  We can and should help him, but not at our own expense.

Just a thought.

Nazzo Fast, Guido (Part 2)

Foreign Affairs

I also have reservations about this one.

President Donald Trump and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese signed a rare earths and critical minerals deal Monday at the White House.

On the surface of it, this is a Good Thing in that it very much loosens the stranglehold that the fucking ChiComs have on rare earth production, which they have signaled as a boycott threat in dealing with the U.S.

However, I note with some displeasure the comment also made after the signing:

Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum praised the deal.

“Critical mineral independence is essential to our national security, and thanks to @POTUS, America is finally prioritizing the resources essential to our defense, technology, and energy sectors!”

That statement is quite true… but there are a couple of home truths we have to deal with here.

The first is that when it comes to rare earth reserves, the United States has the largest such in the entire world, much larger than the next two or three countries combined.

The second home truth is that while we have all the rare earth minerals we need, we are prevented from producing it because of the raft of ecological and NIMBY regulations and barriers hamstringing its mining.

So it’s all very well to sign agreements with countries like Australia, but that’s not actually “mineral independence”, is it?  Lest anyone forget, the Australia of today is far from the Australia of, say, post WWII.  Now their government is a bunch of frigging Commies — politically speaking, OzPM Albanese is at about the same level as Nancy fucking Pelosi, their diplomats are just as bad — and I don’t trust Commies of any stripe, furriners especially.

Of course, I mean no disrespect to my several Oz Readers, because judging from the tone and temper of their many emails to me, I gather that they (and many other Strylians) have an even deeper loathing for their Lefty government types than I do.  But these politicians, lest we forget, have nevertheless been elected by the populace, so my Oz readers are in the distinct minority.

From a global realpolitik  perspective, of course we should strengthen our ties with nations like Australia who are threatened by ChiCom expansion plans.  But let’s also tread carefully all the same, because in the end, Commies are Commies and there’s no telling how they may behave in future.

Nazzo Fast, Guido (Part 3)

Foreign Affairs, Military, Trumpism

The problem with Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky) is that he’s a firm believer in this Constitution Nostra.  In a way, he’s like the Constitution Goblin that sits on our shoulder whispering, “Show me where in the Constitution it says you can do that”.

As he does now.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) claimed President Donald Trump’s military strikes against suspected drug boats were not legal.

Host Kristen Welker said, “President Trump has authorized military strikes against suspected drug boats in the Caribbean, as you know, so far more than 20 people, senator, have been killed in six different strikes. Do you believe that these strikes against these suspected drug boats are legal?”

Paul said, “No, they go against all of our tradition. When you kill someone if you’re not in war, and not in a declared war you really need to know someone’s name, at least. You have to accuse them of something and you have to present evidence. All of these people have been blown up without us knowing their name and without evidence of a crime. For decades and if not centuries when you stop people at sea in international waters or in your own waters you announce that you’re going to board the ship and you’re looking for contraband, smuggling or drugs. This happens every day off of Miami, but we know from Coast Guard statistics that about 25% of the time the Coast Guard boards a ship there are no drugs. So if our policy now is to blow up every ship we suspect or accuse of drug running, that would be a bizarre world in which 25% of the people might be innocent.”

And I agree with him.

In the first place, these are not Venezuelan Navy ships that our boys are sending off to that Big Drydock In The Sky;  they’re privately-owned.  And yes, they may have been sponsored by that godless Commie VenPres Maduro, but we don’t really know that, do we?

Me, I’d rather have the Navy board a ship when intercepted, and if they find evidence of drugs — like, sacks of cocaine powder in the hold — they should thank the ship’s crew politely, get off the ship… and then blow it the shit out of the water.

I don’t agree with this part of ol’ Rand’s little diatribe, though:

“The other thing about these speed boats is they’re 2,000 miles away from us. If they have drugs they’re probably peddling drugs to one of the islands of Trinidad or Tobago off Venezuela.”

Don’t care where the destination of the drugs may be:  la coca  is illegal in pretty much every country on earth — oh, and by the way, just because the drugs may be headed for Trinidad or Tobago, that doesn’t mean that those islands are their final destination:  they might just be a stop over, en route to the U.S. (and probably are, being just part of the distribution network).

I also suspect that the “25%” of the time statistic is because the drug runners see the USN or USCG ships coming, and dump the contraband overboard — which is fine because whatever, the drugs aren’t going to reach their destination.

I know why The Donald is doing this:  it’s to create a negative incentive for drug smuggling, a way to persuade these assholes to find another way to earn a living.  It might work;  but it’s not legal.

And we’re not (yet) at war with Venezuela, last time I looked, and given the craven nature of Congress as it stands right now, I doubt very much whether they’d give the go-ahead to nuke Caracas, tempting though that prospect might be.

It’s a tough problem, but I’m not sure that bombing ships out in the middle of the ocean is the correct one.  Rand Paul doesn’t;  and I think in this case, he has the right of it.

I am prepared to hear opinions to the contrary, of course.

Stopping The Tax Tide

Taxes and Theft, Trumpism, UN and other scum

Last week I ranted about this “Global Emissions Tax” nonsense emanating from the U.N., and it is with great glee that I see that God-Emperor (not King) Trump has nipped that issue in the bud:

A global tax on shipping emissions won’t take effect after pressure from the Trump administration to abandon the climate activist-fueled proposal.  

The International Maritime Organization had been set to vote on Friday on adopting a global carbon tax aimed at pushing the shipping industry to stop using fossil fuels. But that vote did not happen after President Donald Trump on Thursday called for other countries to oppose the tax, saying that the United States would not “tolerate” or “adhere” to the measure. 

From what I can understand, Trump threatened the voting nations with stuff like trade embargoes and tariffs if they voted in support of the thing, whereupon they said “Yes, Massa”  and did what he told them to do.

However, let’s not crack open the champagne just yet:

Instead, the International Maritime Organization, an agency of the United Nations that regulates shipping, moved Friday to postpone the vote on the tax for a year. 

“Now you have one year, you will continue to work on several aspects of these amendments,” said Arsenio Dominguez, the secretary general of the International Maritime Organization. “You have one year to negotiate and talk and come to consensus.”

So next year, it’ll come up for a vote again, and again we’re going to have to rap their nose with a rolled-up newspaper.

I have a simple suggestion to end this thing, forever.  Tell the United Nations that if they ever try to impose a global tax system on the world (and on us, of course), this action will automatically trigger the United States’s immediate withdrawal from the UN, and the expulsion of the UN organization in toto  from the United States.

Then get Congress to pass a law to enable the action.  Shouldn’t be that difficult, even with the expected opposition from federal judges.

Message to the UN:  We don’t do taxes.

End of story.