Saturday, December 30, 2017

Well Done, Hollywood Left: You Just Got The Second Amendment Totally Wrong (Again)

Townhall.com ^ | Dec 29, 2017 | Matt Vespa 


If there’s a reason why Hollywood should just stay out of politics, especially gun politics, and this is your classic example. Ed Asner and Ed Weinberger, a screenwriter, decided to teach the National Rifle Association a history lesson on the left wing site Salon. It dropped a little before Christmas, and it ended with both men getting a face full of buckshot. They argued that our Founders were pro-gun control, which is odd given that the first shots fired in our American Revolution at the battles of Lexington and Concord, were in response to British soldiers trying to seize our guns. Still, let’s go through their arguments:
Now that we have your attention, let’s consider the case made by the NRA, its Congressional hired hands, the majority of the Supreme Court, and various right wing pundits who claim the Second Amendment is not simply about state militias but guarantees the unfettered right of everyone to own, carry, trade and eventually shoot someone with a gun.
[…]
First, here’s that elusive Second Amendment as it now appears in the Bill of Rights: “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Arguably not the clearest amendment in the Constitution. And that’s the problem with it: While stating the need for a “well-regulated Militia,” does it at the same time also guarantee the individual citizen the personal right to “keep and bear arms?” In 2008, Justice Antonin Scalia, ruling for the Majority, said that it was. Ignoring over 200 years of precedent, historical context, the Framers’ Intent and the D.C. laws of its elected officials, Scalia relied solely on the text, arbitrarily dividing the Amendment into two parts. The first – “a well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State” — he called the prefatory clause. The second part – “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” — he called the operative clause. Claiming that second part was all that really mattered; Scalia discarded as irrelevant that inconvenient reference to a “state militia.
[…]
Here is Madison’s first draft of the Second Amendment:
“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, a well-armed and well-regulated militia being the best security of a free country; but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person.”
Madison’s intent could not be more obvious: his Second Amendment refers only to state militias. If not, why include that exemption for what we now call “conscientious objectors?”
When Madison’s amendment was rewritten by a joint committee from the House and Senate in 1791, the “religious” exemption was lopped off as too cumbersome in language and too complex to enforce. Thus, the Amendment as it now stands.
Okay—what am I missing here? Asner and Weinberger really just ignore the Supreme Court to peddle a recycled liberal talking point. Of course, the anti-gun Left peddled the tired and disregarded state militia provision, just as they ignore the Citizens United decision and its implications on expanding free speech rights. Also, this line, “the unfettered right of everyone to own, carry, trade and eventually shoot someone with a gun” is just pure trash. Law-abiding gun owners are not killers in waiting. Second, it’s not an unfettered right; Justice Scalia said so in the Heller decision, which they don’t mention in their piece:
Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of fire- arms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.
You hear that guys. You have the right to own a firearm unconnected to a militia, but states have the right to impose their own restrictions, like on concealed carry rights. This is a rather explicit recognition of federalism, along with limiting the Court’s impact so as to not produce challenges to laws prohibiting domestic violence abusers, the mentally ill, and convicted felons from owning firearms—all common sense provisions. Stephen Gutowski found some of Madison’s quotes about the Second Amendment as well. It doesn’t help the pro-gun control hypothesis that’s rather shoddy in this piece. In fact, if these two guys had read Heller, they would see it’s not some SCOTUS opinion intended to turn the country into the Wild West. Anti-gunners, you guys have lost this debate. Gun rights have expanded since this landmark 2008 decision. Every state recognize concealed carry rights, even in Washington D.C. The Second Amendment isn’t going anywhere. Deal with it.
Stephen Gutowski @StephenGutowski Replying to @StephenGutowski "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials." - George Mason, during debates in the Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788
Stephen Gutowski @StephenGutowski Here's a little more on the history of the 2nd Amendment. During the debate on whether to ratify the Constitution several states offered amendment suggestions. Here's Virginia's own from June 27, 1788. pic.twitter.com/CryqVO2rqG
Stephen Gutowski @StephenGutowski Replying to @jnuzzi08 State militias weren't the intention of the 2nd Amendment. The 2nd Amendment protects the right of "the people" from infringement by the federal government. The militia referenced is, as George Mason said, the whole of the people.

EU chief's dream of a 'United States of Europe' collapses

Daily Mail ^ | Dec 29, 2017 | Tim Sculthorpe 

Plans for a United States of Europe by 2025 suffered a damning blow today after a new poll revealed they have little support across the major nations.
German politician Martin Schulz - the former President of the European Parliament and domestic rival to Angela Merkel - promoted the plan at a party conference.
He called for a rapid development of the EU after Britain leaves, accelerating integration and leaving behind those who do not want it.
But the plan is supported by less than a third of people in seven major nations - and just 10 per cent in Britain, in a vindication of last year's Leave vote.

Germans are the most enthusiastic but even there only 30 per cent back the idea. In France supporters number 28 per cent, while several Scandinavian nations barely register support in double figures.
Britons, in a likely reflection of why they voted Leave, oppose the plan 90 per cent to 10 per cent.
Germans are the most enthusiastic but even there only 30 per cent back the idea. In France supporters number 28 per cent, while several Scandinavian nations barely register support in double figures.
Britons, in a likely reflection of why they voted Leave, oppose the plan 90 per cent to 10 per cent.
The findings were made in a huge YouGov Germany poll which sampled thousands of people across seven nations a week before Christmas.
Mr Schulz announced his plans for a United States of Europe by 2025 at an SPD party convention.
He said that once a constitutional treaty was drafted, it would 'be presented to the member states, and those who are against it will simply leave the EU'.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...

Dave Barry’s 2017 Year in Review: Did that really happen?

Miami Herald ^ | Dec 29, 2017 | Dave Barry 

Looking back on 2017 is like waking up after a party where you made some poor decisions, such as drinking tequila squeezed from the underpants of a person you do not really know. (At least you hope it was tequila.)
The next day finds you lying naked in a Dumpster in a different state, smeared from head to toe with a mixture of Sriracha sauce and glitter. At first you remember nothing. But then, as your throbbing brain slowly reboots, memories of the night before, disturbing memories, begin creeping into your consciousness. As the full, hideous picture comes into focus, you curl into a ball, whimpering, asking yourself over and over: Did that really happen?
That’s how we feel about 2017. It was a year so surreal, so densely populated with strange and alarming events, that you have to seriously consider the possibility that somebody — and when we say “somebody,” we mean “Russia” — was putting LSD in our water supply. A bizarre event would occur, and it would be all over the news, but before we could wrap our minds around it, another bizarre event would occur, then another and another, coming at us faster and faster, battering the nation with a Category 5 weirdness hurricane that left us hunkering down, clinging to our sanity, no longer certain what was real.
Take “covfefe.” Remember? For a little while, it was huge. Everybody was talking about it! Covfefe! But then, just like that, it was gone. What the hell WAS it? Did it even really happen?
Another example: We have this vague memory that, for the briefest flicker of a moment, the White House communications director was a pathologically bronze man named Anthony Scaramucci, who — remember, this was the White House communications director — called up a reporter for the New Yorker and informed him, on the record, that he, Anthony Scaramucci, differed from White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon in that he, Anthony Scaramucci, THE WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR, was not trying to commit an act of self-gratification that would be extremely challenging even for a professional contortionist.
Did THAT really happen?
And were there really thousands of people marching around Washington wearing vagina hats?
And did the Secretary of State really call the President of the United States a “moron?”
And did the president (of the United States!) respond by challenging the Secretary of State to compare IQ tests?
We want to believe that we imagined these things. But we fear we did not.
There’s one thing we definitely remember happening in 2017: the “fidget spinner” fad. This was huge, and for a good reason: It was extremely stupid. In terms of mental stimulation, fidget-spinning makes nose-picking look like three-dimensional chess. You mindlessly spin the thing around and around, accomplishing nothing. It’s an idiotic, brain-cell-destroying waste of time.
So it was the perfect fad for 2017.
The perfect artistic achievement was “The Emoji Movie,” which was released in July and was widely hailed by critics as possibly the stupidest movie ever made. It was the fidget spinner of movies. One of the emoji voices was provided by the distinguished British actor Patrick Stewart, who has been awarded many honors, including a knighthood from Queen Elizabeth II.
The role played by Sir Patrick Stewart was: Poop.
If that wasn’t the essence of 2017, we don’t know what was.
So now, finally, it is time to flush this turd of a year down the commode of history. But before we do, let’s don eclipse glasses to prevent retina damage, then take one last flinching look back at the events of 2017, starting with …

Tuesday, December 26, 2017

Texas Again Leads Nation in Total Growth, Says Census Bureau

breitbart ^ | MERRILL HOPE 

Texas marks another year where it leads the nation in total population growth, adding nearly 400,000 new residents, according to the latest figures by the U.S. Census Bureau.

Between July 2016 and July 2017, the Lone Star State grew by 399,734 people, boosting its population to 28.3 million the census data showed. Breitbart Texas reported the state added 432,957 people during July 2015 to July 2016, increasing the population to almost 28 million. By comparison, the number of Texans in 2000 reflected 21 million. In 2010, the population totaled 25.1 million.

The Census Bureau’s State Data Center noted that each year between 2010 and 2016, Texas garnered the nation’s largest annual population growth, a mixture of births and net migration. Same held true for 2017.
Following Texas in this year’s population gains were Florida (327,811), California (240,177), Washington (124,809), North Carolina (116,730), Georgia (115,759), Arizona (107,628), Colorado (77,049), Tennessee (66,580), and South Carolina (64,547).
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

Popcorn Worthy – President Trump Has Rejected McCabe’s Terms…

CONSERVATIVE TREEHOUSE ^ | 12/25/2017 | SUNDANCE 

To put a fine point on the anticipatory fireworks for mid-January, let us remind ourselves of what can be anticipated when everyone gets back to DC from the holiday break.
Following a week of growing pressure and sunlight, last week Asst. FBI Director Andrew “Andy” McCabe used The Washington Post -the PR transmission media of the Deep State Intelligence Community- to announce his career saving terms. Essentially McCabe presented the deal that he would leave office in March, in exchange for no returning fire.
President Trump, immediately spotting the intent of the public resignation announcement, responded by saying on Twitter: “NO DEAL“.
On January 15th, 2018, the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General Michael Horowitz will deliver approximately 1.2 million pages of documentation and evidence gathered in the year-long investigation into the politicization of the DOJ and FBI, by senior leadership and upper-level career leadership lawyers and bureaucrats.
IG Horowitz, having utilized the OIG’s vast 500+ investigative agents, is giving that preliminary evidence -in advance of pending full report- to the congressional committee in charge of DOJ/FBI oversight: House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte. –OUTLINED HERE–
(Excerpt) Read more at theconservativetreehouse.com ...

Embattled FBI admits it can’t verify dossier claims of Russia, Trump campaign collusion

Washington Times ^ | Dec 25, 2017 | Rowan Scarborough 

The FBI is declining to repudiate the Russia dossier on which it partially relied to start an investigation into the Trump campaign, but it concedes the document’s major core charges of election collusion remain unsubstantiated.
Sources familiar with House and Senate investigations say this is the FBI’s dossier talking point 17 months after agents were first briefed in July 2016 as Donald Trump battled Hillary Clinton for the White House.
The most recent FBI witness was Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who spent nearly eight hours last week in a closed session before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
Republicans believe they have unearthed a scandal inside the bureau’s top echelons over its determination to target Trump associates based on flimsy evidence and improper Justice Department contacts.
Republican committee members pressed Mr. McCabe about a dossier that was financed by the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign based on gossip-tinged information from paid, unidentified Kremlin operatives.
Mr. McCabe declined to criticize the dossier’s 35 pages of salacious and criminal charges against Donald Trump and his aides, but he said it remains largely unverified, according to a source familiar with ongoing congressional inquiries.
Sources speculated to The Washington Times that it would be embarrassing for Mr. McCabe to condemn a political opposition research paper on which his agents based decisions to open a counterintelligence investigation and interview witnesses. Some press reports said the FBI cited the dossier’s information in requests for court-approved wiretaps.
The Washington Post reported Saturday that Mr. McCabe plans to retire early next year.
Justice Department Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz is investigating whether Mr. McCabe should have recused himself from the Clinton email investigation in 2015 and 2016.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...

Tip Regulations Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)

Federal Regiser ^ | 12/05/2017 | Wage and Hour Division, Department of Labor. 

The Department of Labor (Department) is proposing to rescind portions of its tip regulations issued pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act that impose restrictions on employers that pay a direct cash wage of at least the full federal minimum wage and do not seek to use a portion of tips as a credit toward their minimum wage obligations.

This Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) seeks the views of the public on the Department's proposed rescission of those portions of the regulations.
(Excerpt) Read more at federalregister.gov ...

Juan Williams: GOP will suffer for tax giveaway (LoL!)

The Hill ^ | Dec 25, 2017 | Juan Williams (a raging liberal)

Republicans say the big news on Capitol Hill last week was that they passed tax cuts.
Wrong.
The bigger news on Capitol Hill was that Americans now trust Democrats more than Republicans to handle taxes and the economy, according to a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll.
For the last 40 years, Republicans have consistently outperformed Democrats when voters were asked which party is the better steward of taxes and the economy.
Now, the Journal poll has voters favoring Democrats by 33 percent to 29 percent on taxes, and by 35 percent to 30 percent on the economy.
This is a total 180-degree, world is upside down, hell just froze over reversal.
How can this be happening when Republicans are lining up to praise the president and the tax cuts?
“Exquisite presidential leadership,” said Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.). “One heck of a leader,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah).
That sycophantic acclaim for a president who just destroyed voters’ trust in the GOP’s ability to deliver good economic results is strong evidence the party has lost its identity as the standard-bearer of fiscal conservatism.
The new Republican Party is a supporting cast for a bombastic salesman of a president who won the White House with a grand promise to cut taxes and create jobs to benefit working class people.
With his tax plan now signed into law, the curtains are finally pulled back on the Wizard of Trump Tower.
Voters can see that he has handed tax cuts to the very rich, the top 1 percent, and shareholders of large corporations — not the middle class or the poor.
Cutting corporate taxes — from 35 percent to 21 percent — is “probably the biggest factor in our plan,” and not tax reform to benefit the middle class, the president admitted as the bill made its way to his desk.
Voters can also see that Republicans who once trashed President Obama over increases in the federal deficit are now happy to look the other way.
And what about creating new jobs?
A Yale University survey of corporate chiefs in mid-December found only 14 percent planning to make new capital investments and hire more workers as a result of their tax cut windfall.
The man who did the survey of corporate leaders, Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, told CNN Money that Trump’s claim that tax cuts will result in more jobs is “a lot of smoke and mirrors.”
Sonnenfeld pointed to the already low rate of unemployment across the nation as well as record corporate profits to make the point that big firms could already be expanding and hiring more people if that was in their plans.
Not a single Democrat voted for Trump’s tax cuts.
House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) summed up the new tax cuts in a fiery tweet last week:
“By the end, the #GOPTaxScam will… raise taxes on 86 million middle class households, hand 83% of the benefits to the wealthiest 1% of Americans. This will go down as one of the most scandalous, obscene acts of plutocracy ever,” Pelosi tweeted.
Pelosi was citing data from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center which found that under the law, the wealthiest one percent of Americans will get 83 percent of the tax cuts and the wealthiest zero point one (0.1) percent will get almost 60 percent of the tax cuts, both by 2027.
With so much money concentrated in the hands of so few Americans, it is no wonder that polls show this law is wildly unpopular, with support ranging in major polls only from 26 to 32 percent.
“Don’t let your Uncle Bob be fooled: Republicans are voting for this because their wealthy patrons demand it,” former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich wrote last week on his website. “Their tax plan will weaken our economy for years — reducing demand, widening inequality, and increasing the national debt by at least $1.5 trillion over the next decade.”
And now for the political fall-out:
Before the tax cut vote, Democrats led Republicans on the generic Congressional preference ballot question by 15 points. Fifty-one percent said they would vote or lean towards voting Democratic, while just 36 percent said the same about Republicans, according to Monmouth University.
Look for those numbers to sink even lower when Trump voters realize they’ve been had. They were sold a bill of goods by his party when they voted for Trump-style economic populism in 2016.
And that is not the end of the story. The White House and Ryan intend to go after entitlement programs next year to cut federal spending. That means social programs for the elderly and the poor are now in immediate danger, including Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.
The Trump party argues they have to make the cuts to keep the deficit from ballooning.
So, the party of Trump has created a spending problem with a give-away to the rich — and now proposes to solve it by cracking down on the poor.
It is beginning to look a lot like a wave election coming in 2018.

In Case You Missed It Dept.:

President Trump stood by a ten foot pile of typewriter paper full of government regulations on Thursday to show what he's trying to eliminate. Enduring the bureaucrats is brutal. Government regulators are like my Christmas lights, half of them don't work and the other half aren't that bright.

Gloria Allred's daughter, lawyer Lisa Bloom, was reported Friday to have paid women to come forward against Trump. The media needs to calm down. It is NOT evidence of past sex misconduct when TV reporters see Judge Roy Moore emerge from 7-Eleven carrying a sack full of Little Debbie's.

NBC faced more sexual misconduct revelations about NBC's on-air news hosts Sunday. It was reported NBC paid tens of thousands of dollars due to complaints of unwanted sexual advances by Chris Matthews. The big surprise is that none of these complaints were made by President Obama.

President Trump expressed cautious optimism about his chances of getting the tax cuts passed this week. Comedians are naturally cynical. Am I the only one who believes that John McCain would fake his own death to keep from casting the deciding vote to give Trump a victory on anything?

President Trump saw the Churchill movie The Darkest Hour Monday. It inspired him. Trump declared that we shall fight the mainstream media on Twitter, we shall fight them on Snapchat, we shall fight them on Facebook we shall fight them on Instagram, we shall never ever, ever surrender.

President Trump on Monday laid out his National Defense Strategy that will increase military spending to stand down China and Russia, and then back down North Korea and finish destroying radical Islam. Right now, al-Qaeda is kicking itself for not sending a third plane into Trump Tower.

CBS Late Show's host Stephen Colbert sold Showtime a ten-episode animated TV series that makes fun of Trump that's called Our Cartoon President. It's sure to anger Republicans. There's already an animated TV series about Trump that makes fun of Democrats, it's called the Roadrunner.

Congress passed the GOP tax cuts Wednesday which also ended the Obamacare mandates and opened oil drilling on the Alaskan North Slope. It gave Donald Trump the first big victory of his presidency. You had to watch it on Fox News, because CNN and MSNBC went dark and played Wagner.

President Trump looked happily confused hosting GOP House Members and GOP senators at the White House Wednesday where they celebrated the passage of the trillion-dollar tax cuts he promised the voters. Something finally went Trump's way and he had no one to blame. He looked lost.

House and Senate Republicans passed the tax cut bill, which will drive a stake into the heart of Obamacare. The program's been jinxed since website's roll-out disaster four years ago. I once went on the website and tried to enroll in Obamacare and I wound up watching porn for forty-five minutes.

Rosie O'Donnell offered GOP senators two million to vote against the tax cuts. It recalled her promise last year to leave the U.S. if Trump won. Only one Hollywood actress has made good on her promise to leave the U.S. if Trump got elected, and Prince Harry couldn't marry her unless she did.

Congress passed the tax cuts Wednesday night but had to pass the bill again the next morning for reasons no one understood. During the first vote, a woman protestor stood up in the gallery and exposed her breasts. That explains why the House decided to vote on the bill again the next morning.

-- Argus Hamilton

Me: "MERRY CHRISTMAS!"

Liberal: "You can't say that. You're excluding other religions."

Me: "HAPPY HOLIDAYS!"

Liberal: "You can't say that. The word 'Holidays' originates from 'Holy Days', and religion must be out of the public view."

Me: "HAPPY DAYS!"

Liberal: "You can't say that. 'Happy Days' was a sitcom in the 1970s featuring a nearly all-white cast, which is not Diverse."

Me: "HAPPY!"

Liberal: "You can't say that. I'm a liberal, and I'm never happy."

Me: ""

Liberal: "Perfect."

Spending

wdyPTue.jpg

Taxes Cut!

X8bWLYv.jpg

Unhappy?

t5OsBBv.jpg

Finally...leadership in the UN

Haley-Wonder-Woman.jpg

Contained?

KS9Nc7T.jpg

Hey! Hillary!

DRrghN1VwAA6-SV.jpg

If you are offended...

vxxw7Tw.jpg

Kiss it

EaN7c0V.jpg

Democrats

BQpee93.jpg

Progressives

VK7rrE2.jpg

Go home!

7Hf25ui.jpg

BUT...

bonus-check-600-cdn.jpg

Shovel-Ready

Dl1oRY9.png

Monday, December 25, 2017

Nikki Haley Announces $285 Million USA Reduction to U.N. Funding

Breitbart News ^ | December 25,2017 

Nikki Haley, United States Ambassador to the United Nations (U.N.), announced Sunday night that the federal government has reduced its contribution to the U.N.’s annual budget by 285 million dollars.
The Christmas Eve statement reads in full:
Today, the United Nations agreed on a budget for the 2018-2019 fiscal year. ‎Among a host of other successes, the United States negotiated a reduction of over $285 million off the 2016-2017 final budget. In addition to these significant cost savings, we reduced the UN’s bloated management and support functions, bolstered support for key U.S. priorities throughout the world, and instilled more discipline and accountability throughout the UN system.
“The inefficiency and overspending of the United Nations are well known. We will no longer let the generosity of the American people be taken advantage of or remain unchecked. This historic reduction in spending – in addition to many other moves toward a more efficient and accountable UN – is a big step in the right direction. While we are pleased with the results of this year’s budget negotiations, you can be sure we’ll continue to look at ways to increase the UN’s efficiency‎ while protecting our interests,” said Ambassador Haley.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

Democrats are fooling themselves about how the tax cut will play out

NY Post ^ | Dec 24, 2017 | David Harsanyi 

According to political analysts, 2018 Democrats will use the just-passed tax reform as a way to argue that the Republican Party is the party of the plutocracy, which is another way of saying that Democrats are going to use the same argument they’ve been using for the past three decades with varying degrees of success. A number of liberals have claimed that the passage of “unpopular” tax reform is historically analogous to the passage of Obamacare, which triggered the loss of hundreds of Democrat seats and, perhaps, control of the presidency.
MORE ON: TAX REFORMS Trump tells Mar-a-Lago guests: 'You all just got a lot richer' The movement to impeach Trump is just beginning Rate hikes have negative impacts on the economy What to expect from the GOP tax bill roll out This is wishful thinking for a number of reasons.
Yes, the tax bill is unpopular. Then again, I’m not sure you’ve noticed that everything Washington, D.C., tries to do is unpopular. Nothing polls well. Not the president. Not Congress. Not Democrats. Not legislation. Not even erstwhile popular vote-winning candidates. Certainly, a bill being bombarded with hysterical end-of-the-world claims that are rarely debunked by the political media is not going to be popular. Republicans won’t pass anything if they wait around for things to be popular.
However — apologies to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi — they can be somewhat content knowing that voters will probably like it once they find out what’s in it..
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...

Sunday, December 24, 2017

CBS News Finds Three Families Who Will Be Getting Serious Relief Thanks To Trump's Tax Cuts

Townhall.com ^ | December 24, 2017 | Matt Vespa 


Well, Democratic spin surely has the middle class skeptical of the Republican tax bill. 

On Friday, President Trump signed the most extensive tax reform in 30 years. It was framed as a giveaway to the wealthy and something akin to the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse by congressional Democrats. Not a single Democrat voted for the bill. In reality, it’s a middle class tax cut. Eighty percent of Americans for at least the next eight years will be paying less. The analysis says it. And now CBS News spoke to three families from Providence, Rhode Island, Fresno, California, and Cary, North Carolina to see how they would fare under Trump’s plan. Jeffrey Levin, a certified CPA at Blueprint Wealth, analyzed all three families’ tax returns and found that all three, each from different backgrounds and income levels, would be receiving serious relief.
Marcie George is a single mom, renter, and works as an administrative assistant. She lives paycheck-to-paycheck and thought the tax bill wouldn’t benefit her. Levine said because of the doubling of the child tax credit, she would be saving $1,300. George makes a little under $40,000 a year.
In Providence, Rhode Island, homeowners Amber and Jason Edwards earn a combined income of more than $150,000 a year. They’re not financially struggling, but worried they would pay more in taxes under Trump’s plan. Both are college educators and have no kids. They’re working to pay down their college loans. Levine said they would pay tax on $12,000 more in income, but due to the lower rates—they save around $650.
Then we go to deep-blue California, where Melissa and Layne Lev live in Fresno with their three children. They’re homeowners and started a small business together, recently opening a cycling studio. Melissa also works as a pharmaceutical sales representative. The couple’s combined income was $300,000. Levine said their itemized deductions will be lower, but no longer will be subject to the alternative minimum tax. And the child tax credits allow the Lev family to save $13,000.
“Well, that’s good,” said Melissa. “I like the sound of that,” added Layne.
All three families from different income brackets seem to have bought into the Democratic spin about tax cuts. All three received relief. From the single working class mother to the married upper-class business owning family—everyone is getting a cut. Not only that, but as soon as this tax bill was primed for passage, scores of companies announced that they were going to invest more in their employees, hand out bonuses, boost wages, and increase philanthropic donations. Economic growth this quarter is at a solid four percent. The Dow Jones made its greatest annual gain ever this year with a 5,000-point surge. Consumer confidence is at a 17-year high. Unemployment is at its lowest point in nearly twenty years. The economy is booming under Trump, who gets zero credit. The dust will have to settle, but there will be extensive relief to Americans with this tax reform, a lot of it going to America’s middle class, who the Democrats abandoned by voting against this legislation. They threw their lot betting against America, against the American worker, and private businesses in order to screw over the president.
Democrats are bad for business and the American family. That could be the emerging narrative when families start seeing the savings in their taxes, which will be quite a political pickle for the Left.
MSNBC Covers The Multitude Of Businesses Giving Bonuses And Boosting Wages After Tax Reform
ake Rep. Jacky Rosen (D-NV) for example, she will have to explain why she voted against a tax bill that helped create 11,000 jobs in her state (via Bloomberg):
For New York developer Steven Witkoff, the tax overhaul signed today by President Donald Trump will have an immediate effect: he’s plowing ahead with his plan to develop the stalled Fontainebleau resort in Las Vegas.
[…]
As soon as it became clear to Witkoff that the bill had a good chance of clearing both houses of Congress, he began seeking financing for as much as 60 percent of the estimated $3 billion in development costs, he said. He plans a resort with 4,000 rooms, a casino and a restaurant on the property, purchased for $600 million in August, more than seven years after billionaire Carl Icahn acquired it out of bankruptcy. The project will create 6,000 hotel jobs and 5,000 construction jobs, Witkoff said.

Henry .44-40 rifle. Remarkable design in its time.

American Rifleman ^ 

The eyes of soldiers, notables and frontiersmen, posing with their sleek, efficient Henry repeating rifles in century-and-a-half-old photographs, typically reflect pride and confidence, and imply that the rifle’s users know they’re holding something special. Such feelings are understandable. The 16-shot Henry lever-action set the owner above the norm. It was truly one of the mechanical wonders of its era.

During a time when most military and sporting arms were single-shots or cumbersome percussion repeaters, a gun that effortlessly spat out a rapid stream of bullets with only one charging of handy, self-contained cartridges was something to be admired and coveted. Originally made in relatively limited numbers between 1860 and 1866, the Henry .44 Rimfire rifle, which was devised, built and primarily carried in the United States, eventually fell into disuse. Nearly a century-and-a-half later, a modern resurgence of interest in Civil War arms and the rise of cowboy action shooting have given many vintage arms a new lease on life-including the Henry. Replicas of the rifle began to be successfully made overseas in the 1970s. Now the process has returned full-circle thanks to Henry Repeating Arms of Bayonne, N.J., which has brought the manufacturing of this all-American firearm back home.

The Henry rifle has one of the most tortuous histories of any firearm ever. Even though its official production lasted a scant half-dozen years, its antecedents and descendants extended for many years. In 1848 inventor Walter Hunt introduced an odd-looking lever-action long arm that chambered an early incarnation of the metallic cartridge.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanrifleman.org ...

How to Determine If You Should Talk About Politics in Public

Scott Adams Blog ^ | 22 Dec, 2017 | Scott Adams 

When candidate Trump first set about the job of redefining politics (and reality) back in 2015, people had lots of predictions about how things would turn out. One year isn’t long enough to know everything we need to know about his presidency, but it’s long enough to to check some of our predictions. As a public service, I put together a list of predictions that various people made about Trump that you can use to evaluate your own predictive powers. Count the number of items on the list that you once predicted would be true. I’ll tell you how to evaluate your score at the end.

Did you once believe…

Trump will never win the GOP nomination.
Trump will never win the presidency.
Stocks will drop if Trump is elected.
President Trump will deport ten million illegal immigrants.
Trump will be gone (impeached, jailed, or quit) by end of 2017.
Trump’s immigration ban on several Muslim countries will be found unconstitutional.
Trump colluded with Russia, and that’s a crime.
Trump obstructed justice (a crime) by firing Comey.
Trump’s skills as a “con man” might get him elected but it won’t transfer into doing the job of president.
Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel will cause huge problems...............

GDP will never stay above 3%.
— end —
I didn’t get any of those predictions wrong. But if you got 15 or more wrong, you might want to consider never saying anything about politics out loud again for the rest of your life. Just a suggestion.
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.dilbert.com ...

Hillary Clinton’s Sad Campaign To Polish Her Image

Townhall.com ^ | 12/22/2017 | Matt Vespa 

Women’s magazines are an area that the conservative movement often overlooks. They’ve become political. And for many young, college-educated women in urban areas it’s their source of news. And yes, it’s entirely liberal.(snip)
Now, I don’t read Teen Vogue of course, but The Wall Street Journal’s Jillian Kay Mechior gave a rundown and asked what the hell happened here:
Hillary Clinton expanded her already impressive résumé by guest-editing the issue that hit newsstands Dec. 5. It was a theme issue, with 36 pages devoted to a single subject: Hillary Clinton. That’s more than the 31 pages of ads in the 97-page magazine.
Mrs. Clinton commissioned several articles about herself. Staff writer Lauren Duca proclaims that “zooming out on Hillary’s 2016 loss reveals the broader contours of women’s oppression,” while Gloria Steinem says that when a woman is elected president, “she will be climbing steps that were carved out by Hillary.” The issue also features contributions from Chelsea Clinton and Betsy Ebeling, identified as Mrs. Clinton’s “BFF.”
There’s a two-page spread of “Love Letters to Hill.” Readers are assured they are “personal notes” selected from more than 100,000 post-election missives Mrs. Clinton received from young women, including singer Miley Cyrus and actresses Chloë Grace Moretz and Lena Dunham. The magazine helpfully advises: “Read with tissues in hand!”
Then there’s Mrs. Clinton’s own love letter to Mrs. Clinton—or rather, to Miss Rodham. Framed as advice to her 18-year-old self, it includes such tips as “when president-elect Barack Obama says he wants to talk to you about a job opportunity in his cabinet, hear him out.”
[…]
Mrs. Clinton’s guest-editorship is emblematic of Teen Vogue’s recent politicization. Last April, Condé Nast appointed 30-year-old Elaine Welteroth as editor in chief. She has presided over a magazine fixated on identity politics.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...

Mass Exodus From States Run By Top Democratic Governors Continues

forbes ^ | Dec 23, 2017 | Patrick Gleason 

The Democratic Governors Association, in an attempt to attack Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner (R) tweeted this week about how 33,000 people left Illinois for another state over the past year, continuing years of outmigration from the Land of Lincoln.
What they won’t be touting is the fact that during the administration of Gov. Pat Quinn (D), Rauner’s predecessor, 247,410 people on net left Illinois for the likes of North Carolina, Texas, Florida, Arizona, and other states that are better stewards of taxpayers dollars. Those 247,410 people, according to IRS migration data, took $13.7 billion with them to states that that are better run and have lower taxes.
The DGA really doesn’t want to dive into interstate migration data, as it does not reflect well on their most prominent governors. Let’s start by looking at what has happened in California since Jerry Brown became governor again in January of 2011.
Since Gov. Brown was sworn in, becoming the oldest governor in state history, 243,099 people have fled California on net for other states, taking $7.794 billion with them to states that don’t have such high taxes and onerous regulations that make housing unaffordable for middle class households.
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D), a 2020 presidential contender, is another prominent Democrat who is chasing families and employers out his state with crushing taxes and onerous regulations.
Since Gov. Cuomo was sworn in, 577,286 people on net have fled New York for other states, taking more than $27 billion with them.
And then there is the Chairman of the DGA, Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy. Since Malloy took office in 2011, 73,676 people on net have left his state. That's a lot of former Nutmeggers and they took $8.543 billion with them to states with more hospitable tax climates.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...

Friday, December 22, 2017

The results are in. Barack Obama was the roadblock to recovery!

Flopping Aces ^ | 12-22-17 | DrJohn 


When he took office, barack obama haughtily demanded the he be handed the economy:
President Obama this summer has repeatedly blamed George W. Bush for the nation’s economic woes, a year after he took ownership of the economy and criticized those who “carp and gripe.”The White House’s effort to tie congressional Republicans to Obama’s predecessor comes less than three months before the midterm elections. But the president’s campaign speeches this summer are in contrast to a speech he delivered in Michigan last year when his approval ratings were 17 points higher.
During a July 14, 2009, address in Warren, Mich., Obama said, “Now, my administration has a job to do, as well, and that job is to get this economy back on its feet. That's my job. And it’s a job I gladly accept. I love these folks who helped get us in this mess and then suddenly say, ‘Well, this is Obama’s economy.’ That’s fine. Give it to me. My job is to solve problems, not to stand on the sidelines and carp and gripe.”
At the time, the AP wrote, “With four simple words — ‘Give it to me’ — President Barack Obama took possession of the economy.”
Except he didn't. The very next day obama went on a Bush blaming binge that lasted eight years during which he did little more than carp and gripe.
Rick Moran:
Obama's constant whining about the bad economy he inherited still finds resonance among a voting public that has been conditioned to ignore the president's ruinous economic policies and concentrate their ire on President Bush.Whatever shortcomings in economic policies Bush promoted - and they were many - the impact of his actions on  our current economy have long since faded. The economy is being driven by economic policies implemented by the Obama administration. The financial meltdown was a horrible event but after 5 years of legislative stimulus and, more imporantly, stimulus implemented by the Federal Reserve, we have yet to dig ourselves out of a hole despite spending trillions of dollars. The fixes applied by the Obama administration have not worked - period.
But try telling the American people that when it is routine for the president and the press to blame his predecessor for the moribund economy and jobless recovery. Perception is reality in politics. And Obama has been successful in feeding the perception that the opposition is to blame for his incompetence and rancid ideas.
Here is obama's economic record in nine charts:

obama was bent on "spreading it around" and making so sure no one got a leg up on anyone else that he largely kept everyone down. He kept his jackboot on the throat of American business his entire tenure and tied the country in knots with regulations.
To see more of what obama blames for his record, see here and here.
The truth obama cannot face is that he was responsible for his moribund economy and worst recovery almost ever.
Deroy Murdock:
Obama’s 2.2 percent annual GDP growth has been just over half the 4.1 percent yearly hike in federal revenues. Between fiscal years 1965 and 2014, federal receipts averaged 17.4 percent of GDP. The figure for fiscal year 2015 was 18.2 percent. Uncle Sam is fat and happy. Meanwhile, only 3.6 percent of Americans under 30 own private businesses, a 24-year low, down from 10 percent in 1989. The 14.3 percent poverty rate for 2009 was 14.8 in 2014, the Census Bureau’s latest reading. Sentier Research reports that in 2015 real median household income, $56,700, was right where it was in 2007. America’s middle class has wasted eight years on the road to nowhere. For this anemia, please thank Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, the war on coal, green mandates, a flopped $833 billion “stimulus,” the 35 percent corporate tax (the civilized world’s highest), class warfare, and Obama’s 77 percent national-debt increase — from $10.6 trillion to $18.8 trillion. Obama and the Democrats typically pin this fine mess on Bush. His compassionate socialism certainly created widespread wreckage. But America hired Obama to change that. If Bush still is to blame, then Obama has accomplished nothing in seven years. As Bill Clinton revealed: Obama is either an economic Typhoid Mary or an economic Rip Van Winkle.
Louis Woodhill:
(Excerpt) Read more at floppingaces.net ...

Clinton Had Secret Deal Over Documents.

TruNews ^ | December 21, 2017 

he government watchdog group Judicial Watch revealed last week it has learned of a secret agreement between the State Department and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that allowed her to walk away with boxes of documents.
Clinton and her then-Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin were allowed to remove electronic and physical records from the department’s Foggy Bottom headquarters, claiming they were “persona and unclassified, non-record materials.” These documents included Clinton’s call logs and schedules, which have never been made public, but could shed light on potential corruption connections with the Clinton Foundation.
Under the agreement, just provided under a Freedom of Information Act request, show the State Department records would not be “released to the general public under FOIA.” Additionally, Abedin was allowed to walk out with five boxes of “physical files” described as “Muslim engagement documents.”
(Excerpt) Read more at trunews.com ...


Fox military analyst: 'Nikki Haley may end up as our first female president!'

The Hill ^ | 12/21/17 | Joe Concha 

Fox military analyst Ralph Peters hailed U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley on Fox Business on Thursday, declaring that the former South Carolina governor "may end up our first female president."
Peters praised Haley for taking a tough stance following the U.N.'s opposition to U.S. recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital but also cautioned against the U.S. making threats it's "not prepared to carry out."
The U.N. in a 128–9 vote on Thursday overwhelmingly rebuked President Trump's decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital. Thirty-five countries abstained from voting.
"Is this like a game of chicken? They’re saying, ‘We don’t want you to do this,’ but we’re saying, ‘We have the money here. If you want to continue to be supported by us, you’re going to let us do what we want,’” said "Intelligence Report" host Trish Regan.
“Well, let me preface it by saying I think Nikki Haley may end up as our first female president," replied Peters, a retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel and Fox contributor.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...

Your new sign

new-sign-600-li.jpg

This is gonna be GREAT!

RXBn7kg.gif

I just saved $2000

25ii.jpg

Stocks

EKCTWzK.jpg

Pay Less Taxes?

pgJnM2q.jpg

Shield Maiden

Dl60vNr.png

Educating Liberals

zhujtiB.jpg

Take Down

9rHK5gp.jpg

Understand?

FuirVLu.jpg

What they need...

1iwvsTn.jpg

Thursday, December 21, 2017

Why Threaten To Cut Off Aid To The United Nations? Why Not Simply Pull Out Of It?

The Washington Standard ^ | 12-21-2017 | Tim Brown 

The United Nations has been nothing more than a totalitarian money pit for the world, especially the united States, and now they have thumbed their collective noses once again at the US.
Recently, the United Nations put forth a resolution to rescind President Donald Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
Trump threatened to cut aid to UN members over the Jerusalem vote.
“All of these nations that take our money and then they vote against us at the Security Council or they vote against us, potentially, at the Assembly, they take hundreds of millions of dollars and even billions of dollars and then they vote against us,” Trump said during a cabinet meeting.
“Well, we’re watching those votes,” he added. “Let them vote against us; we’ll save a lot. We don’t care.”
US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley warned that the US would be "taking names" on the vote and wrote a letter to countries asking them to respect the decision of the US to move it's embassy while not demanding others do the same.
“As you consider your vote, I want you to know that the president and US take this vote personally,” Haley wrote.
“To be clear,” she added, “we are not asking that other countries move their embassies to Jerusalem, though we think it would be appropriate. We are simply asking that you acknowledge the historical friendship, partnership and support we have extended and respect our decision about our own embassy.” "This is bullying," Turkey's Minister of Foreign Affairs Mevlüt ÇavuÅŸoÄŸlu said. "It is unethical to think that our votes are for sale."
Çavuşoğlu added that the U.S. "may be strong, but that does not make you right."
Neither does it make those countries right that disagree.
(Excerpt) Read more at thewashingtonstandard.com ...

See this face?

eTyGnXH.jpg

Republicans cause cancer?

EP67uKn.jpg

The difference

LHuFku3.jpg

Knuckleheads

DRdjqkuV4AAnHcy.jpg

He likes her!

ukx8pDR.jpg

Social Programs

n01cReb.jpg

Wednesday, December 20, 2017

Let me get this straight...

FJNN4dQ.jpg

Bankrupt us?

218832_image.jpg

In This Place...

DRXf92rUQAE_PtB.jpg

A cold one!

1LnqbYH.jpg

BOTH

DRRg23-XcAUYldJ.jpg

30,417,609 Paid $0 Income Taxes, Got $89.6 Billion Back!

Townhall.com ^ | December 20, 2017 | Terry Jeffrey 


Of the 150,493,263 filers who submitted individual income tax returns to the Internal Revenue Service for the 2015 tax year, only 99,040,729 paid any income tax at all.

Together, those Americans paid a record $1,457,891,441,000 in total income taxes -- for an average of $14,720 per taxpayer.
The other 51,452,534 -- or about 34.2 percent of all filers -- did not pay a penny. Their average income tax payment was $0.
This is a fundamental divide in the American tax system. On one side are those who do pay taxes; on the other, those who don't.
And the divide gets worse.
There were 30,417,609 filers who did not pay income taxes and received $89,614,869,000 in cash back from the federal government.
In other words, they got $89,614,869,000 in welfare payments.
We know this because the IRS tells us so. It calls the $89,614,869,000 in cash that the federal government paid to tax-return filers who paid no taxes the "refundable portion" of "refundable credits."
"Refundable credits were broken out into three parts: the portion used to offset income tax before credits, the portion used to offset all other taxes, and the refundable portion," the IRS explained in its comprehensive report on the individual income taxes it collected for 2015 (the latest year for which the data is available).
"The first portion, which was included in total tax credits, offset income tax before credits," said the IRS report. "The second portion offset all other taxes besides income tax, such as the self-employment tax.
"The IRS treated the last portion, the refundable portion, as a refund and paid it directly to taxpayers who had no tax against which to apply the credits, or whose credits exceeded income tax (and other income-related taxes)," the report said.
"In total, taxpayers claimed $105.3 billion in refundable tax credits," the IRS said. "Of this, $5.7 billion was applied against income taxes and $10.0 billion against all other taxes. The remaining $89.6 billion in refundable credits was refunded to taxpayers."
That is to say it was "refunded" to "taxpayers" who paid no income taxes.
This was not a boon for the "rich."
In fact, according to data published in Table 3.3 of the report, 27,78,931 -- or about 91.2 percent -- of the 30,417,609 tax-return filers who did get a "refundable portion" from the IRS had an adjusted gross income of less than $40,000.
So who paid the taxes the federal government needed to send that $89,614,669,000 to those 30,417,609 who paid no income tax?
One major contributor was a group the IRS calls "married persons filing jointly."
In 2015, according to Table 1.2 in the IRS report, 54,294,820 belonged to this group -- with 41,551,043 joining the side that did pay taxes, and 12,743,777 joining the side that did not.
Thus, while 34.2 percent of all filers paid no income taxes, only 23.5 percent of married couples filing jointly paid no income taxes.
The 41,551,043 married couples filing jointly who did pay income taxes accounted for only 27.6 percent of all 150,493,263 filers. But they made up about 42 percent of the 99,040,729 filers who did pay income taxes.
More tellingly, of the record $1,457,891,441,000 in total income taxes the IRS collected for tax year 2015, married couples filing jointly paid $1,040,684,097,000 of it -- or about 71.4 percent.
So, married couples filing jointly constituted only 42 percent of filers who actually paid income taxes, but they paid 71.4 percent of the income taxes.
These 41,551,043 taxpaying married couples, according to the IRS data, paid an average of about $25,046 in federal income taxes in 2015.
Now, some may say: But there are two people in a married couple who file jointly; of course they should pay more taxes than a single person.
But did single people filing tax returns pay half as much as married couples?
The IRS says 71,086,947 single persons filed tax returns in 2015. Of these, 23,345,062 -- or 32.8 percent -- did not pay any income tax. The 47,741,885 who did paid $326,342,729,000.
That works out to an average of about $6,836 in total income taxes per taxpaying single person.
At that rate, it would take 3.66 taxpaying singles to surrender to the federal government the same income tax as one taxpaying married couple.
The bottom line: The federal government is financially dependent on income tax-paying married couples who jointly file their tax returns, and it has made 30,417,609 filers who pay no income taxes dependent on government by handing them $89,614,669,000 in a single year.
History should apply this test to the Republican tax plan: Did it decrease both the burden on the former and the dependency of the latter?

Socialism Still Popular in US Despite Venezuelan Example

Townhall.com ^ | December 20, 2017 | Jonah Goldberg 


It's a puzzle. Over the last decade, Venezuela has supplanted Cuba as the Shangri-La of the American left. Not long ago, self-declared socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders insisted that the American dream was more achievable in the Bolivarian Republic than in America. A string of Hollywood luminaries made the pilgrimage to visit the socialist Mecca to say ponderous and stupid things.
Today, the praise is more muted, because events have illuminated that stupidity. The government recently advised its citizens to eat their pet rabbits. Inflation in Venezuela is reminiscent of Weimar Germany. Roughly 85 percent of Venezuelan companies have stopped production to one extent or another, in the most oil-rich country in the world.
And yet, socialism is arguably more popular -- in theory -- than at any time in American history, particularly among young people. A Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation poll last November found that 42 percent of young people support capitalism, but 44 percent prefer socialism for a socioeconomic system.
Why the disconnect? For conservatives of my ilk, the most obvious answer is that, for the left, socialism itself is never to blame. One of my favorite guilty pleasures is the Socialist Party of Great Britain's Twitter feed, which insists daily that the socialist ideal has never been tarnished by real-world socialists. A tweet permanently affixed to the top of their page reads: "Are you about to tell us 'Socialism was tried in Russia' or 'Look at Venezuela' etc? It has NEVER EXISTED! It comes AFTER global capitalism!"
Even mainstream liberals don't like to concede any points in socialism's disfavor. The late Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet was a murderer and a tyrant. So was the late Cuban communist Fidel Castro. Pinochet helped his country transition to democracy. Castro, who killed more people, left his country as a police state. But while Pinochet is a demonic figure in the liberal imagination, Castro's status is far more complicated. He is still a hero to many.
For the last decade, the New York Times has covered the socialism of both Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez and his successor, Nicolas Maduro, with the same sophisticated nuance it long applied to Cuba. Over the weekend, it ran a heart-wrenching story on how Venezuela's poor children are dying from starvation. But the culpability of Chavism, Venezuela's brand of socialism, is something the reader has to bring to the page. Such passive detachment between cause (in this case, socialist policies) and effect (mass misery and starvation) is rarely found when the Times reports on, say, Republican economic policy.
The disconnect between socialism's record and its invincible appeal also stems from leftists' denial of what it really entails. Thus, Tony Blair, the former prime minister of Great Britain, dragged the Labor Party away from its official socialist dogma about the need for the "common ownership of the means of production."
"Socialism for me," Blair said, "was never about nationalization or the power of the state, not just about economics or even politics. It is a moral purpose to life, a set of values, a belief in society, in cooperation, in achieving together what we cannot achieve alone."
That's why he rejected socialism in favor of what he called "social-ism."
Similarly, Bernie bros focus on social solidarity rather than political economy.
But even this watered down spirit of "we're all in it together" -- whether you call it socialism or nationalism -- can do enormous damage. It is very hard to reconcile with democracy and the rule of law, unless there's a dire national crisis, and even then it may cause grave damage.
I don't want America to be Denmark. But at least Denmark recognizes that social democracy requires democracy, free speech and the rule of law to keep it from turning into Venezuela on the Baltic. I wouldn't be so concerned about the rising support for socialism among young people in the United States, save for the fact that it's been accompanied by a modest decline in support for democracy, too.

T-Shirt