I am very much for free trade and the exchange of goods and services between states. It helps to ensure peace between peoples and often brings higher quality and lower cost products to market, thereby raising the quality of life for the average person. But it’s hard to see what advantage opening things up with Cuba gives us right now. We certainly shouldn’t be legitimizing the regime. At the very least we should have waited until Castro died.
Also why are we saving Cuba’s lunch? Venezuela is dying thanks to the bottom falling out of oil prices. Venezuela finances much of the Cuban economy. Now would be a time where we should be dictating very strident terms to the island nation. Cuba is running out of money. And we are about to give these guys, and they are communists, a new infusion? It doesn’t make much sense to me.
Don’t get me wrong, though I am for free trade I am not for intervening in the affairs of other nations, which we did quite a lot in Cuba. But this regime should be hung out to dry, not rewarded.
I care about the 1 trillion dollars but I care about the human cost much more. What are we still doing in the West Virginia of Asia? (No offense to wild and wonderful West Virginia.) How many men and women are dead who didn’t need to die? How many children? Why is the opium/heroin crop bigger this year than ever before? Why are palaces being erected throughout Kabul with US taxpayer dollars? Why are bases being built by contractors only to be abandoned months later? Why did the US military allow Al-Qaeda linked groups to bid for, and get contracts?
Lots of “whys.”
Kudos to Phillip Bump at the Washington Post for this one.
We at ACC often talk about the fracturing going on within the 2 main parties. The Tea Party for instance is a de facto party within the GOP which the author takes into account. He also identifies an increasingly active fault line within the Democratic Party. (We think he’s wrong on who falls on which side of this line to some degree however.)
A thought experiment to be sure, but one which isn’t that “out there.” Very interesting.
(From The Washington Post)
If we assign members of Congress to political parties based on the spending votes, we end up with four parties. The Liberals bucked the Democratic president to oppose the spending package. The Democratsvoted for it. The Republicans followed Boehner and McConnell’s lead. TheConservatives didn’t. It gives us maps of the House and Senate that look like this, with the actual party composition underneath. (Note that this is only based on 1) people who voted on the spending package and 2) are returning to the 114th Congress.)
Click here for the article.
So at one point on Thursday, according to the ranking member on the House Financial Services Committee Maxine Waters, Barack Obama and JPMorgan’s CEO were on the phone with congresspeople whipping votes. The President and the chief of America’s largest bank were calling members of Congress making deals.
“If you’re a state and you don’t set up an exchange, that means your citizens don’t get their tax credits.” -Jonathan Gruber, Obamacare’s “architect
We shall see. Gruber has had plenty of help. The President, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Kathleen Sebelius are more to blame for Obamacare’s troubles than Mr. Gruber even if he is the program’s “architect.”
Jonathan Gruber in his now famous panel discussion at Penn simply told the truth as he saw it. A key reason, the key reason, Obamacare limped its way across the finish line was because of the deception employed by its champions. The ignorance of the American people, Gruber explained, was to be manipulated for their own good, and it was.
It’s not that Obamacare is a horribly complicated program which has screwed up healthcare for millions of people, which increased rates rather than decreasing them as promised, which was passed without even 50% of the American people supporting it, which has proven to be a crony capitalist vehicle for the big health insurance companies. No, you don’t like Obamacare because you are ignorant of the program’s genius.
All I can say is the Dems had better hope Rand Paul becomes president because he’s the only likely GOP presidential contender who will try (we believe) to reestablish the proper (limited) roll of the president. If a big government or particularly vindictive Republican president comes in the Dems are going to rue the day the current president went all despot-lite. Say goodbye to EPA regs. Say goodbye to all sorts of things. President Obama in his ongoing temper tantrum is messing up the country for everyone Dem, Republican, or otherwise. It’s going to be hard to wind this back.
(From The Washington Post)
The White House has defended President Obama’s unilateral decision to legalize the presence of nearly 4 million undocumented immigrants as consistent, even in scope, with the executive actions of previous presidents. In fact, it is increasingly clear that the sweeping magnitude of Mr. Obama’s order is unprecedented.
Click here for the article.
In fairness Obama’s not the first president to appoint unqualified ambassadors. There’s a long history of this. Let’s just hope nothing really goes wrong in The Bahamas or Andorra.
6 Years ago while watching a video of Ron Paul on Youtube and while reading a fairly sophisticated debate below the video on the nuances of Austrian economic theory I was hit with a bolt of lightning. Social media was about to revolutionize everything. I soon founded a tiny company which specializes in developing social media strategies.
But just 6 short years ago social media was still a fairly tough sell to businesses. It’s hard to imagine but just a few years ago Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, Pintrest, Instagram, and the rest generally weren’t seen as important to almost anyone in the non-tech business world. There was some understanding of social media’s power, but most couldn’t see how vital it would become for pretty much everything. Just 6 years ago.
Fast forward to today and now everyone sees social media’s power including the enemies of information exchange. In the attached article The New York Times examines one such enemy, China’s social media commissar, Lu Wei, and he is not playing around.
This essay is pretty good with a couple of important exceptions.
Even though Moyers and Winship take the Dems to task for being a part of the crony capitalist game in Washington DC they still clearly see the Dems as preferable to the GOP which they refer to as the Guardians of Privilege. Though there is some truth to this jab the Dems are absolutely a party of privilege also, perhaps even worse than the GOP. That said, both parties are terrible.