Just extending the old thread. I’ll move today’s comments here. Open thread.
761 thoughts on “Feb 2025 Open Thread”
Pl,anes don’t fly by altitude above the ground in controlled airspace, they fly by altitude referenced to mean sea level. since altimeters work by referencing barometric pressure. in order for vertical separation to work planes near each other need to reference same barometer reading. Height above ground is not useful because this would give planes flying over different contours but reading 200 feet, different actual altitudes.
If the ground was flat for miles, this could sort of work. But it isn’t near Reagan
My suspicion is that the helicopter’s altitude based on altimeter setting was reported by transponder and it would have been the same altitude displayed on the instrument’s face, or on a digitial display if that’s what the helicopter was using.
Not good.
Steve,
Wouldn’t a downward looking radar give perfect altitude accuracy (to a few feet)? No need for barometric pressure adjustments or altitude relative to sea level.
Yes. This is what CARA does for fixed wing aircraft. I’m pretty sure military helicopters use some similar system. I haven’t made a proper effort to nail down the system used on the UH-60. One of these perhaps or something similar.
The odd thing is, I get the impression that there is also a barometric altimeter on the aircraft, and that altimeter might have been the one the crew was paying attention to for some reason.
[Sorry. I just linked the display panels. The systems might be RA-4000 or RA-4500 radar altimeters. https://freeflightsystems.com/avionics/radar-altimeters/ ]
The river bed the helicopter was following is perfectly flat (OK, to within a couple of feet per mile). Perhaps I misunderstood, but the description of helicopter route #4 said 200 ft max. If that is relative to a manually dialed-in barometric pressure, it seems like an invitation for an accident to happen. I mean, too many moving pieces. It will be interesting to read the NTSB recommendations to avoid another accident.
well how else are they going to avoid hitting each other if they are not on the same altitude reference system? The Plane certainly was. 200 feet above ground is meaningless in congtrolled airspace.
the baronetric altimeter which would be on both planes is equipped with an encoder which provides an altitude reading to the transponder which reports it to ATC.
SteveF all airborne barometric settings are manually dialed in and manually changed as the flight moves from one area to another.
Army or not, I cannot believe they could fly ibn controlled airspace without the transponder reporting the altitude which shows up in a little box on atc’s radar with some other information. like the flight identification, which might have beens something like AA123.
No doubt helicopters, especially military, have ground based altimeters because they may need to land anywhere, but they probably used the pressure altimeters in a shared airspace.
The NTSB said the absolute barometric pressure recorded in the FDR was invalid but they don’t know if it was just a bad connection to the FDR or also a problem in the cockpit.
ATC was getting reports of the helicopters altitude from what I saw.
On page 2-18, 2-19 you will see the instrument layout. The radar altimeter and barometric altimeter are right next to each other vertically.
This is an older model I believe without a computerized cockpit.
Dang Tom, thanks!
“The NTSB said the absolute barometric pressure recorded in the FDR was invalid but they don’t know if it was just a bad connection to the FDR or also a problem in the cockpit.”
If true, then the helicopter pilots could have been flying at what they believed was a safe altitude, below the approach path of the CRJ. But if they had both the radar altimeter and the barometric altimeter right next to each other on the instrument panel, there ought to have been a discrepancy, with the radar saying well above 200 ft.
“We are looking at the possibility [that] there may be bad data. We are looking at, were they seeing something different in the cockpit that differs from [Flight Data Recorder] data, which was radio altimeter,” she said.”
The helicopter’s radar altimeter (from the FDR) read 278 ft at the moment of impact, while the radar altimeter on the plane read 300 ft two seconds before impact…. the plane was descending, of course. The helicopter was way too high. Let’s hope the NTSB comes up with a clear explanation for why the helicopter was too high.
“ MUNICH — Senior Trump administration officials are heading to Saudi Arabia to start peace talks with Russian and Ukrainian negotiators, according to a Republican lawmaker and two U.S. officials familiar with the plan.
However, a Ukrainian official told POLITICO that the announcement of the Saudi talks came as a surprise to Kyiv, and as of now there were no plans to send a delegation.”
As I have stated previously, I expect the talks to drag on for months with no end of the war in sight. Russia is grinding the Ukraine army in a war of attrition and they see no reason to agree to a cease fire.
Putin has been very upfront on his goals in the war and none of the ceasefire proposals floated come close to what he requires to end this.
it’s true that the airliner would have had a radio/radar altimeter and if the helicopter had one as it apparently did, and they both were turned on, they would have read the same height above ground at the point of collision. this would not have been available to ATC, but would have been in the FDRs. Height Above Ground is not the same as altitude as the term was used when I was flying which meant relative to MSL or when flying above 18,000 relative to standard barometric setting which planes used worldwide at that altitude and above.
It’s possible that this has loosened up or the people who are reporting are not confining themselves to accepted and in most cases “Official” terms of art.
No wonder the Democrats are running around with their hair on fire:
New York Post- “Americans think they’re getting just what they voted for with President Trump.
An overwhelming majority of Americans — 70% — believe Trump is doing exactly what he campaigned on and most of them have a favorable impression of him so far, according to a new poll.”
I’m hoping the Dems keep it up. Their response has been counterproductive so far. https://nypost.com/2025/02/09/us-news/70-of-americans-think-trump-is-doing-exactly-what-he-promised/
john ferguson,
“…which meant relative to MSL or when flying above 18,000 relative to standard barometric setting which planes used worldwide at that altitude and above.”
I am a little puzzled by this. Is this because surface barometric pressure varies a lot more with weather systems than the pressure at 18,000 ft (and up) varies, or is there some other explanation for a switch to a fixed value above 18,000 ft?
The runways at DCA are 14.1 ft above mean sea level according to Airnav.com.
Vance’s lecture about the need for free speech was not well received by European governments, nor by Dems in the USA. I guess that means they hit a nerve.
One interesting thing: representatives of the AfD (the right wing party that got the most votes in Germany) were not invited to the conference where Vance spoke, but representatives of parties with much smaller vote totals were invited. That pretty clearly says something about European politics… and it is not good.
The US and Canada had a national team boxing match last night but eventually a hockey game broke out. 3 fights in the first 9 seconds.
Team USA didn’t take kindly to the their national anthem being booed in Canada, ha ha, The US won the game 3-1, ouch.
AfD is the “far right” party as everything a tiny bit right of center is referred to in Europe.
The way I read Vance’s message was if you don’t like AfD and you use the tools of the state to suppress them then take a hard look at who is lecturing you from the podium now and whose opponents tried the same thing. In my view Vance is doing them a favor.
I wonder…
Perhaps part of the European opposition to the US ending the war in Ukraine is that they are happy with the status quo:
-The US is funding [mostly] Ukraine.
-Ukraine is using the US arms to destroy Russian armor and kill Russian soldiers.
-No Europeans are getting killed.
Tom, Your comment:
“The US and Canada had a national team boxing match last night but eventually a hockey game broke out.”
I missed the fights in the beginning but I enjoyed the final two periods of that game . The US skaters were outmatched in the skill department, but were playing their hearts out.
“USA, USA, USA”
Apparently the helicopter was equipped with an ADS-B system, which transmits (1 time per second) the aircraft’s identity, altitude, velocity, heading and position in real time (as measured by the aircraft’s instrumentation), independent of any signal from ATC (it is not a transponder system). The system receives exactly the same information from all similarly equipped aircraft in the area. (John Ferguson, sounds like the marine AIS system… except for the altitude value.) The ADS-B system is designed specifically so that all aircraft can see and evaluate all other aircraft surrounding them and be “situationally aware”, so as to avoid potential collisions. Wikipedia says the system is supposed to replace ground based radars and transponders for ATC in the future.
NTSB says the ADS-B system in the helicopter either failed/malfunctioned, or was just turned off by the pilots…. they do not yet know which. (I find it bizarre if the pilots have this option in a crowded airspace.) The CRJ was ADS-B equipped and their system was in use at the time of the crash. But since the helicopter ADS-B was not transmitting, the CRJ pilots had no way to see the helicopter or be aware of the potential for collision, until they could see it actually approaching their flight path…. a few seconds at most. They had pulled the nose of the aircraft to 9 degrees up at impact.
Zelensky gives a legalistic answer on whether he wants Russia completely removed from Ukraine:
“Zelenskyy told Welker on Friday that Ukrainian law prevents the nation from recognizing that Russia owns formerly Ukrainian land.
“Judicially, we will not recognize … our occupied territory like territory of Russia. We will never do it,” he said in English, while conceding that he’d be willing to discuss giving up occupied territory as part of a diplomatic deal where Ukraine could join NATO.”
This is progress from the pointless maximalist positions. It’s true that Trump conceded the point early but I think Trump is mostly interested in quickly getting to a negotiation endpoint or quickly determining it can’t be reached.
Keeping the EU out of negotiations is also a good move, they will just screw it all up with their perfected bureaucratic maneuvering. Clearly they have a vested interest but I see them as more pain then gain.
Europe is getting a lot of tough love lately:
“He (Zelensky) added that European NATO members don’t have the military capacity to defend themselves without the U.S.”
SteveF, altimeters are set to 29.92 at 18k and above which is controlled airspace and requires operation under a flught plan and navigation under ATC control. This is by regulation.
In most places, when flying at 18k and above up to 50k, it doesn’t matter what the elevation is at the ground, but it does matter that all of the other traffic encountered will be flying at altitudes, they are called flight levels, that are referenced to same setting. So the actual height above MSL flown at say 24,000 will vary worldwide, but using the 29.92 setting planes which encounter each other will be separated vertically.
And yes, there is pressure variation at the surface which requires resetting of altimeters again so the nearby traffic is using same setting, and here ground elevation matters because it would be good if the ground was encountered at the level expected on the altimeter. In DCA’s case 14 feet MSL.
I can remember an outbreak of foward looking sounders when we were still on the boat. I thnk the idea was that this would reduce groundings.
The C421 had a radio altimeter which I think read from 120 height above ground to 0. I was never convinced it helped, particularly where the threshold was on a bluff, like it is at Charleston WV,
I continue to have a niggling feeling that the NTSB person describing the unraveling of what happened doesn’t really know what she’s talking about. But maybe I don’t either.
This was a training flight for the unit that also does evacuations from DC for high value people. One possibility is they intentionally turned off the ADS-B system as part of that flight type profile. I don’t know.
Tom Scharf,
Article 5 will keep Ukraine out of NATO. The USA is not going to get into an all-out war with Russia over Ukraine, and the Europeans couldn’t, even if they wanted to. There is far too much pearl clutching in Europe, and not enough rationality.
Charlie West? I’ve flown into that airport dozens of times. They basically lopped off a mountain top for the airport.
Tom SAcharf,
“…does evacuations from DC for high value people”
Try as I might, I find it impossible to identify such individuals in DC. 😉
John Ferguson,
The people speaking for NTSB may not know what they are talking about, of course, but I hope the NTSB report is written by people who do.
If you want a laugh, look at all the AIS equipped yachts in the Bahamas: https://www.myshiptracking.com I’ll bet here are a lot less in August.
Lack of military preparedness has been an ongoing problem for Europe. It hasn’t gotten any better.
2011: “Less than a month into the Libyan conflict, NATO is running short of precision bombs , highlighting the limitations of Britain, France and other European countries in sustaining even a relatively small military action over an extended period of time, according to senior NATO and U.S. officials.
…
European arsenals of laser-guided bombs, the NATO weapon of choice in the Libyan campaign, have been quickly depleted, officials said. Although the United States has significant stockpiles, its munitions do not fit on the British- and French-made planes that have flown the bulk of the missions.
…
Libya “has not been a very big war. If [the Europeans] would run out of these munitions this early in such a small operation, you have to wonder what kind of war they were planning on fighting,” said John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org, a defense think tank. “Maybe they were just planning on using their air force for air shows.” “
It’s very strange when these diplomats keep “threatening” to be responsible for their own security as if that would be unwelcome.
Tom Scharf.
In 1976 I was on a flight from Roanoak to Athens Ohio (I think) in the Cessna 120. This was an 85 HP two seater which did 100 mph. I’d filed instruments because Roakoak was partially socked in and I’d had to to get out of there.
Through failing to think clearly, I had equipped it to be legal for flight in IMC (Instrument Meteorological Conditions). Which meant adding another nav/com and VOR indicator, a venturii to generate the suction needed to drive a directoinal gyro and an artifical horizon and replacing the suction driven turn and bank with a 12 volt one (diversity don’t you know, I could stay right-side up with loss of electricity or suction) and an encoding altimeter and transponder. I’m not sure this met the full intent of the regs, but it worked and best of all was signed off by the shop.
There was a head wind so I was probably creeping along (60 mph over the ground) at 8,000 feet which meant rather than flying Center to Center, I flew from Roanoak approach briefly through Washington Center, then Charleston approach.
Right after the handoff to Charleston, the controller asked me to verify aircraft type which I did. Then the revelation that they had expected a C210 since no-one flew gauges in a 120.
I was then asked if I could land at Charleston, show them how I’d managed to get all the stuff to fit on the panel and get suction without a suction pump, and then, at their expense, enjoy a wonderful steak dinner at a place they knew, the cost of the overnight at the airport but I’d have to pay the motel cost.
I did it.
It turns out the guy had a Cessna 140 which was mostly the same plane as mine but with flaps.
We had a wonderful time, and eveyone agreed that what I’d done was nuts.
“The first test would be to refuse a capitulation in Ukraine.”
The first step would be to fund and maintain a credible military. Not going to happen.
I don’t know how they expect me to react to this. The CDC failed to identify covid early enough and failed to contain it. Everyone in the US eventually got covid. The current vaccines are near useless.
I’m sure we could go back and look at how much priority the CDC gave pandemics versus other dubious programs to assess how seriously they took that possibility then.
Since when does the legacy media believe its job is to be the defender of bloated government bureaucracies instead of helping root out the bloat?
European nations appear to have a problem that individuals have when they become dependent on government. In Europe’s case it is the US government on which they have become dependent.
Usually the government with dependents is prone to use that depency to maintain power. I think the current case of Europe and the US goes against those instincts. Europe talks about less dependencies, and especially France, but actions have not followed. Those dependencies are evidently as difficult for nations to undo as it is for individuals. In Europe’s case they do their image no good by talking big and acting small, as much as I would like to see Europe more independent. Maybe the US has to try even more diligently to push them out of the nest.
Since when does the legacy media believe its job is to be the defender of bloated government bureaucracies instead of helping root out the bloat?
Tom, my reading on this situation is that most of the media, which I include in the intelligentsia along with academia, have for a long time favored government over private entities in addressing the nation’s problems to the point of ignoring problems that exist because of governments’ actions.
I do think that the intelligentsia lacks the intellectual prowness to argue reasonably about cost cutting and hence the emotional approach. This is nothing new either. It will work for them as it has in the past, by convincing weak-kneed Republicans that indeed at some point the sky will be falling.
The CDC budget has increased ~25% in the last 5 years.
Here are the questions sent by the U.S. according to a document seen by Reuters.
1) What do you view as a Europe-backed security guarantee or assurance that would serve as a sufficient deterrent to Russia while also ensuring this conflict ends with an enduring peace settlement?
2) Which European and/or third countries do you believe could or would participate in such an arrangement?
Are there any countries you believe would be indispensable?
Would your country be willing to deploy its troops to Ukraine as part of a peace settlement?
3) If third country military forces were to be deployed to Ukraine as part of a peace arrangement, what would you consider to be the necessary size of such a European-led force?
How and where would these forces be deployed and for how long?
4) What actions do U.S., allies and partners need to be prepared to take if Russia attacks these forces?
5) What, if any, U.S. support requirements would your government consider necessary for its participation in these security arrangements?
Specifically, which short-term and long-term resources do you think will be required from the U.S.?
6) What additional capabilities, equipment and maintenance sustainment options is your government prepared to provide to Ukraine to improve its negotiating hand and increase pressure on Russia?
What more is your government prepared to do to increase its sanctions on Russia, including more strictly enforcing sanctions and better targeting third countries enabling Russia globally?
” The current vaccines are near useless.”
They are near useless in the sense they do not significantly reduce re-infection after just a month or so.
However, for the handful of individuals who have never been exposed but are at risk for serious complications (say an infant with other serious health issues), the vaccine probably does reduce the risk of serious illness. For everyone else who has already been vaccinated (and almost always been exposed to the virus in the wild)? Yes, it is effectively useless to keep getting vaccinated for covid.
The fact the CDC is still pushing a near useless vaccine is all the more reason to reduce their staffing and funding.
For your entertainment only.
CBS News’ Margaret Brennan who anchors Face the Nation talking to Marco Rubio:
“Well, he (Vance) was standing in a country (Germany) where free speech was weaponized to conduct genocide”
Wow, that’s a new and novel take from our caretakers of the Ministry of Truth. CBS has not been forthcoming with a further explanation.
Tom Scharf,
“The CDC budget has increased ~25% in the last 5 years.”
Inflation is almost all of that. Still, they do seem to make a lot of very bad decisions.
Here is an odd observation: Most people I know have had covid once, and never again…. including all the relatives on both sides of my family. But a few people I know have had covid 3, 4 or more times. Not mild cases, miserable, and people with no other serious health issues… otherwise seemingly healthy. Some people just appear especially susceptible to covid. Could be a good subject for research I think.
Tom Scharf,
From the Holocaust Encyclopedia:
“When the Nazis came to power in 1933, the German constitution guaranteed freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Through decrees and laws, the Nazis abolished these civil rights and destroyed German democracy. Starting in 1934, it was illegal to criticize the Nazi government. Even telling a joke about Hitler was considered treachery. People in Nazi Germany could not say or write whatever they wanted.
Examples of censorship under the Nazis included:
Closing down or taking over anti-Nazi newspapers;
Controlling what news appeared in newspapers, on the radio, and in newsreels;
Banning and burning books that the Nazis categorized as un-German;….”
Talking heads in MSM are simply fools; they believe things that are obviously absurd on their face, and refuse to believe things that are obviously true…. like the left trying to sensor anyone who disagrees with them. No wonder they are losing viewers and readers.
I would surmise that the not vaccinated and never infected is a pretty small number, and those who think they are in that group probably have been asymptomatically infected.
I can’t seem to find any recent numbers here because my searches are inundated with lectures on how vaccinations are super awesome.
Finally tracked something down changing keywords:
“We find that 99.4% (523/526) of the participants had positive results for antibodies to the SARS CoV2 spike protein over April-June * 2022 *, soon after the early-2022 Omicron surge. Positive tests for spike protein antibodies were very high (86%; 19/22) even among unvaccinated persons who reported no knowledge of prior infection. Thus, by mid-2022, almost all persons were no longer COVID-naïve”
Ed Forbes,
That report is interesting and encouraging, if true. It indicates that Trump does not just want the fighting to stop. He wants an enduring peace that will prevent Russia from renewing hostilities. That is the single most important thing that Ukraine needs.
Putin certainly can’t be trusted to keep any promises but if another invasion requires attacking EU troops then the stakes get higher.
Mike M,
Sounds more like Rubio than Trump.
That is OK. If it is real, it will push the Europeans to put up or shut up. I think many will refuse to put up and also refuse to shut up.
SteveF
February 17, 2025 at 11:55 am
Google AI on Lincoln and the civil war: “Yes, President Abraham Lincoln’s administration took steps to restrict newspapers during the Civil War, including closing some presses and arresting editors. However, Lincoln’s efforts were targeted at specific publications that were damaging the war effort, rather than the press in general. ”
And about Wilson and WWI:
“Yes, President Woodrow Wilson actively used the Sedition Act of 1918 to restrict newspapers and other forms of media during World War I, effectively silencing dissent against the war effort by prosecuting publications that criticized the government or the military, significantly limiting freedom of the press during that time. ”
I am not comparing those incidents to Nazi Germany, but the US has its free speech blemishes also – and something the current media never mentions from back in history or more currently.
Tom “ I would surmise that the not vaccinated and never infected is a pretty small number, and those who think they are in that group probably have been asymptomatically infected.”
Never vaccinated, never had COVID, and tested negative for COVID antibodies.
As to contact, I live closely with one and she has tested positive for COVID twice.
As gunshot victims, traffic accident victims, and almost all cases of flu and other respiratory illnesses were counted as COVID, the real world effect of COVID was greatly exaggerated.
There is a theory with some evidence that certain people are genetically predisposed to fight off covid and not even get infected.
96.4% with antibodies: “Of that group, 23% acquired their immunity from infection alone and 26% from vaccination alone; 48% had hybrid immunity”.
If accurate, then the mRNA vaccines were modestly effective at preventing subsequent infection….. although the data are from mid 2022….. There have probably been many more vaccinated people with “breakthrough” infections since then….. my mother-in-law is one of them; 91 YO at the time and a relatively mild case.
Of hundreds of relatives and aquaintances I know relative to Covid-19 infections only one (a niece) was never knowingly infected. A number with infected twice and one (a niece) was infected 4 times and fairly severely. I thought at the time that she would be a great candidate for a study.
The statistics I did on the Covid-19 infection rates after Omicron were at or very near 100%.
Unless the test is extremely sensitive, there are always false negatives for Covid antibodies.
That said, from the very first cruise-ship spread of Covid (elderly husband/wife in same small room, one dies and the other never develops symptoms of any kind), it has been clear that there is a very wide range of susceptibility.
“.. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is investigating potential Social Security fraud, and its head Elon Musk posted startling information from its database.
“Social Security database, these are the numbers of people in each age bucket with the death field set to FALSE!” Musk began, posting an image of a chart with age brackets going all the way up to 369 years old.
Indeed, the info showed millions of individuals listed in some of the more unlikely brackets. For instance, 4.7 million were listed from ages 100-109, but it gets worse: 3.6 million are listed for 110 to 119, 3.4 million for 120 to 129, 3.9 million for 130 to 139, 3.4 million for 140-149, and 1.3 million for 150-159.
The figures continue — although in lesser numbers — on those supposedly in their 200s. For example, 1,039 are listed between the ages of 220-229.
There is even one listed in the age bracket 360-369.
“Maybe Twilight is real and there are a lot of vampires collecting Social Security,” Musk joked…”
That’s 20 million-ish, times an average of about 20K annually.. That’s… 400 billion dollars a year?!?
Jeezeus.
The Four Nations Face Off continues from Boston . The Canadian national anthem was politely received by the American crowd; much better than the US anthem was received in Montreal. Looks like the championship game will be a Canada-US rematch… Canada is leading Finland 4 to 0 at the end of the second period.
US plays Sweden tonight at 8 PM…. Also from Boston. https://www.si.com/nhl/fans-in-boston-had-a-few-boos-during-canadian-anthem-at-4-nations-face-off
Alright, probably not all of those are actually collecting money. Maybe that’s an upper estimate of the fraud. I’ve read that OIG estimated about 72 billion a year in overpayments.
Personally, I think 50 billion and over is still a decent chunk of change for our government.
Mark Bofill,
Yes, the fraud is unlikely to be more $50 billion. But 50 billion here and 50 billion there adds up.
Still, big issue is that there is no good mechanism to find and eliminate fraud if the records you rely on are uncertain/corrupted.
If DOGE and co. can identify $100 billion to $200 billion in fraud and waste, that would only fix 5% to 10% of the fiscal problems. Draconian reductions in entitlements and defense spending, combined with some tax increases and more rapid economic growth are the only real way to get deficits under control. So far, nobody in the administration is talking about those things… and the Dems will only talk about draconian tax increases, wealth confiscation, combined with ever more entitlement spending. I am not optimistic.
Alright, probably not all of those are actually collecting money.
With those numbers that is just listing all the ones that are not officially marked dead. Not terribly surprising as death notifications come from outside the system. Plus we still have john does and jane does even if there was an effective process to make sure death dates were attached to the SSN record for every death.
OIG has flagged SSN for this in the past. https://oig.ssa.gov/assets/uploads/a-06-21-51022.pdf
Steve,
No argument from me there. It’s not that fraud and waste crowd out our budget, it’s that we overspend.
STILL, I’m perfectly happy to eliminate some fraud and waste if we can.
I remember when a couple of billion for a border wall was a ridiculously huge sum of money that just couldn’t be spared. Now, it seems a few hundred billion in waste and fraud here and there is a shrug worthy event.
DaveJR,
Back in 2020 the wall project was estimated at $11 billion…. but only for ~600 miles. The total would be more, but surely under $25 billion. My personal opinion: a physical barrier helps, but not nearly so much as policies which make illegal immigration a losing proposition for those who would consider coming here illegally. The cost for more sensible (AKA, rapid and certain deportation) policies is low by comparison.
The reason I read “X” is to find pearls of wisdom like this:
Q- Why have I never seen a Native American restaurant?
A- Impossible to find a Sioux chef.
300+ FAA employees were fired over the weekend. Who were they? What did they do?
“A union spokesperson said that close to 300 of its members received termination notices over the weekend and that those affected worked as maintenance mechanics, aeronautical information specialists, environmental protection specialists, aviation safety assistants and management and program assistants.”
Which I suspect translates to: people who study maintenance rules, pushed paper, set woke environmental rules, are DEI hires themselves, or administer DEI programs. All those fired were recent hires (one year or less) so still in their “probationary period” where they can be fired without cause. Despite the MSM reports of “Trump making air travel less safe”, none of those fired have anything to do with air traffic control.
Anybody remember their Cobol? Default age set to what… 1870? Now you can preach about gazillions of 150 year olds getting Social Security.
I’m surprised some of you are not paying Filipina call center girls your life savings for imaginary crypto riches.
Thomas Fuller,
Even if a “default” was a valid explanation (and it is not, frankly; it would be inexcusable and unacceptable for millions of Social Security database entries to have a “default” [birth date] anyway instead of actual [birth date]), this would only explain a spike in one decadal age bracket. It would not explain the millions in several.
Also, your casual racism disparaging Filipinos as scammers is charming but does nothing to bolster any of your arguments, as far as I can see.
These are people who are not officially dead but almost all of them are not receiving benefits. Potentially those numbers could be reused for fraud but there isn’t much information on that.
I was doing some regressions and was concerned about endogenous variables. From the literature an endogenous variable occurs when the independent variable is correlated with the regression residuals. That as not a problem in my regressions, but the dependent variable in some cases was significantly correlated with the regression residuals. When I put this situation to Google AI it insisted that this association made for an endogenous variable. I did some analysis with synthetic data where endogenous would be ruled out and replied back to Google AI with the following
AI Google was misinformed about endogenous dependent variables when the regression residuals correlate with the dependent variable. With synthetic data that avoids endogenous variables I was able to determine that the correlation between the regression residuals and the dependent variable depends on the variation in the dependent variable.
Google AI reacted by rephrasing my reply in somewhat better language and referred to me as a researcher who had made the above discovery.
That reaction seemed to me to be overdone, but I will ask another question about this situation in a few days and see what answer I receive. I should have asked initially where it got the information for its initial take on this situation. It always provids links to what it must consider confirming sources that on reading those sources I find do not always directly confirm.
Other Google AI responses to my questions while often not giving me a complete answer have provided sources that did.
The real question on the SS age analysis should in my mind be why were not these entries removed from the data base. It could be an indication of sloppiness that if not a problem in this case could be somewhere else in their systems and processes.
My most recent experience with Social Security was obtaining a copy of my SS payments for filing my income tax forms for the IRS. I did my Gov login and then was asked for more information which after providing was told I could get the information needed after they sent me a code by letter which I would receive in 10 to 28 working days. I received a subsequent email that put the time at something like 5 to 12 working days. I received the code in about 12 working days.
Harping on my old theme again…
Europe is quite content with the current stalemate in Russia, particularly now that the US has declared Russia is no longer our prime enemy of interest.
Last week, the Ukrainian armed forces destroyed 54 [visually confirmed] pieces of Russian armor, and untold numbers of Russian soldiers. This cost Europe no blood and very little money.
Their sworn enemy, Russia, is bogged down in a near stalemate that is continually draining blood and material.
For reference, Russia lost 74 pieces of armor this week in 2024 and 68 pieces this week in 2023.
From @WarSpotting:
“Last week holds 54 visually confirmed losses in , about the same as week ago (initially 46, now 56). This further indicates rather low offensive activity along the frontline (yes, weird thing to say at 50+ weekly losses).” https://x.com/WarSpotting/status/1891890609423593893
Thomas,
“I’m surprised some of you are not paying Filipina call center girls your life savings for imaginary crypto riches.”
A two-for-one insult! Well done. I do sometimes wonder why progressives seem to go for gratuitous insults first, reasoned argument last.
Is there fraud in Social Security? Of course. Do we know how much ? Of course not. Estimates vary. Sloppy records mean all we have are estimates. Those sloppy records ought to be fixed.
So far, everything Trump has done since the election has had two elements to it:
1. I approve of everything he’s done, and
2. Everything he’s done has turned into political gold.
“Thomas,
“I’m surprised some of you are not paying Filipina call center girls your life savings for imaginary crypto riches.”
I am currently dating a 50 yr-old filipina call center woman. Have visited her twice in the Filippines. She makes a dollar an hour taking Sam’s Club calls. She lives in a place about the size of an average American kitchen with her 2 sons and daughter. She sleeps on the floor of her “living room.” She is not the least bit resentful and is intelligent, including following American politics closely. One time I gave her $50 and she gave it to her 16 yr old son who used it to buy 10 economics books.
The only thing keeping me from marrying her now is that I don’t know if she could survive in the US with my loner personality and her having no contacts or friends in the US.
You are exhibiting a serious amount of bigotry and ignorance.
JDOhio
My brother is married to a Filipina, going on 40 years now. They live outside of Chicago. There is a large Filipino community in Chicago, including entire neighborhoods.
My granddaughters are 50% Filipina, My daughter in law is 100% Filipina.
Insulting my family is not a wise thing to do.
Off topic: Why is Filipina spelled with an ‘F’? And only one ‘p’?
JD Ohio,
“You are exhibiting a serious amount of bigotry and ignorance.”
It is the main behavioral pattern among “progressives”: arrogant, uninformed, presumptuous, and most of all, angry that anyone would disagree with them. It is why Trump sits in the oval office. But the strangest thing is: they don’t care in the slightest, no matter how obviously wrong.
Fine with me; progressives should spend a decade or two in the political wilderness. It may be that long because they are blinded by their lefty bias from seeing reality. The longer they are without power, the better for the country. When lefty schools are Federally defunded, that will indicate progressives have finally hit bottom.
Mike M,
“ Why is Filipina spelled with an ‘F’? And only one ‘p“
Good question. I had to look it up. It’s the the feminine form of the Spanish translation: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filipinos
Mike M: Off topic: Why is Filipina spelled with an ‘F’? And only one ‘p’?”
Looks like Russell answered the question. More interesting question to me is why did the people of the Philippines take the name of King Philip of Spain who colonized the Philippines.
jdohio,
For what it’s worth [source is Wikipedia, so all the usual caveats],
During his 1542 expedition, Spanish explorer Ruy López de Villalobos named the islands of Leyte and Samar “Felipinas” after the Prince of Asturias, later Philip II of Castile. Eventually, the name “Las Islas Filipinas” would be used for the archipelago’s Spanish possessions. Other names, such as “Islas del Poniente” (Western Islands), “Islas del Oriente” (Eastern Islands), Ferdinand Magellan’s name, and “San Lázaro” (Islands of St. Lazarus), were used by the Spanish to refer to islands in the region before Spanish rule was established.
All of you who are focused on my use of Filipina call center woman (It could just as easily have been Cambodian, Laotian or Myanman) and stoking your pent-up woke fury… the object of my post was you. Asian women in call centers are a real thing. Many are trafficked there and more or less enslaved in call center camps.
JDOhio, I wish you the very best in your relationship. I personally have dated Filipina women, hired them, worked alongside them and I have found them to be remarkably identical to women everywhere, with all the good (and just a little bad) that that implies.
Call center con jobs are a very real and quite a big thing. People who swallow the daily dose of crap from the Trump administration are likely dumb and ignorant enough to be ensnared by those con jobs.
If I was as full of hate for the American people as you are, I wouldn’t just leave the country, I would renounce my citizenship and try to find peace. Try knitting maybe.
Trump’s lies are usually mean, but often pointless.
Your lying president, Donald J. Trump: “Zelensky’s approval rating is 4%.”
The president of the United States of America is a lying scumbag who cheats on his wife, pays off porn stars, is Putin’s bitch.
And you all are fine with that because you believe idiotic crap like 150-year-old Social Security recipients.
I don’t hate the American people. Not even you! Just Trump…
Long live Spain!
Lying scumbag president Donald J. Trump says ‘Kiev started this war.’
No, Russia started this war. They invaded a sovereign free nation. They’re getting their asses kicked, so they have bought Donald J. Trump to give them at the negotiating table what they could not win on the battlefield.
Might not work. Hope it doesn’t work. But the president of the United States of America is a lying scumbag.
Thomas Fuller,
Angry and delusional. Not a good combination.
Angry, yes. You’re welcome to be specific about delusions. Did Trump not say those things? Are those things now magikally true?
Thomas,
I’m loving it. Would you post a video of yourself screaming at the sky? It’d make the picture complete.
I figure you have another solid decade before Dems come back into power. I hope you spend them all crying and howling like this right here, so we can all enjoy your liberal tears.
So, Mark, what you’re saying is that Trump is a scumbag liar but he’s your scumbag liar so it’s okay–and that everyone who is upset about Trump being a scumbag liar is just on this planet to provide you with entertainment.
My tears aren’t liberal as such. They are American tears of mourning.
Seriously, not literally.
Covering for a lying scumbag much, SteveF?
Its snowy in North Alabama this morning. Roads are clear. I’m not a big fan of snow but I have to admit it’s beautiful out.
Mark,
We are having a cold snap. I want it to warm up!!!!
Lucia,
Yeah. I usually prefer to admire snow in movies and pictures. Oh well. It won’t be cold all that much longer.
lucia,
“I want it to warm up!”
Yes, been terrible, my pool was only 76 yesterday…. my grandkids still went for a swim…. tougher than me 😉
Russell, HaroldW.
So why is ‘Philippines’ spelled with a ‘Ph’ and double ‘p’?
Thomas, if all politicians could neither lie nor exaggerate, they would be mute.
“How can cover for such a lying scumbag?!?!” Is not a policy argument. You are clutching your pearls so hard that they may shatter.
What people support about Trump is not his bluster, lies, exaggerations, blurting out of things better left unsaid, and his in general inappropriate ass-hole like behavior. As I have said many times, if offered a free round of golf with Trump, I would decline….. I’m not interested in listening to his bluster. I support him at the ballot box because his policies are far more sensible than what ‘progressives’ offer, which is pretty uniformly destructive garbage mixed with “You WILL do what we say!”.
Where Trump a more normally behaved person (say like JD Vance), I am sure you would still be horrified by his policies. And that is where the real political disagreement is.
I disagree with JD Vance’s recent conversion to Trumpism.
On the other hand, I agree with him here:
“Donald Trump’s vice presidential pick Ohio Sen. JD Vance was once a fervent critic of the former president. In private messages, he wondered ahead of Trump’s election whether he was “America’s Hitler” and in 2017 said the then-president was a “moral disaster.” In public, he agreed Trump was a “total fraud” who didn’t care about regular people and called him “reprehensible.”
“I go back and forth between thinking Trump is a cynical asshole like Nixon who wouldn’t be that bad (and might even prove useful) or that he’s America’s Hitler,” Vance wrote in a message to a friend in 2016. “How’s that for discouraging?”
““Fellow Christians, everyone is watching us when we apologize for this man. Lord help us,” he tweeted after the “Access Hollywood” tape was published in 2016.”
Cynical asshole, America’s Hitler, moral disaster. Yep, Vance got it right about lying scumbag Trump.
The Europeans are in another round of classic dithering indecision. They definitely agree the US should continue to be their security guarantor and they want to continue the war in Ukraine as long as Ukraine and the US do all the hard work.
Providing peace keeping troops? Meh. Provide EU based security? Meh. Provide rebuilding funds for Ukraine? Meh.
Attend all the pomp and circumstance meetings in European capitals with their cosplay diplomatic and military costumes? For sure.
They need to get serious in a serious time. They aren’t. Poland may be the exception here, they look serious.
I agree with Russell, somebody needs to find a more fulfilling hobby.
Mike M., Your comment:
“So why is ‘Philippines’ spelled with a ‘Ph’ and double ‘p’?”
Blame the Greeks…
“Philip, masc. proper name, most famously in classical history king of Macedon, father of Alexander the Great (compare philippic); the from Latin Philippus, from Greek Philippos “fond of horses,” from philos “beloved, loving” (see philo-) + hippos “horse” (from PIE root *ekwo- “horse”).” https://www.etymonline.com/word/Philip
The Spanish bastardized the Latin ‘Philippus’ and named it ‘Islas Filipinas’.
To give the Europeans a little slack both France and Germany are entering an election cycle where the defenders of the establishment are not polling well. It’s a tough position and JD Vance just rode in on his horse and left a turd on their table.
Interesting times.
Thomas Fuller,
Don’t listen to these guys. Staying here and crying more about the defeat of leftism and the ruin of your socialist ideals in the U.S. is the best thing you can do for the cause. Really. It’ll turn the tide; keep the faith comrade.
The last person to recommend a new hobby for me was Ken Rice over at And Then There’s Physics.
Europe as a whole has contributed more money than the USA, both for defense and humanitarian efforts.
European Union and Member States: Approximately €267 billion (about $280 billion) in total aid to Ukraine.
United States: Around $175 billion in total aid, with $106 billion directly assisting the Ukrainian government
The UK and Sweden have both said they would provide peace-keeping troops. Other European countries have said it would be nice to have a peace treaty before committing to peace-keeping.
And yes, Europeans think that the US should live up to its treaty obligations at NATO, including Article 5. They don’t want to get in Trump’s face about it, but the only time Article 5 has been invoked was after 9/11, when all of NATO gave the US a blank check to use. They later contributed significant troop totals to both Iraq and Afghanistan.
So, Tom Scharf, all that whining sounds like typical American moaning. Waaaaah! Waaah! You’re making me do my homework! Not… fair…!!!
Trump is a changed man. I watched the Hannity interview last night with both Trump and Musk.
I was very much surprised that Trump showed up in front of the cameras with his sidekick next to him. Classic Trump hogs the spotlight.
Then, he sat silently and let Musk explain what they were doing. When Trump spoke there was no bombast and little bravado.
Something has changed.
[I post this at the risk of sending Fuller into another ballistic rage]
Reminder, Ukraine isn’t in NATO.
A well earned perception of European entitlement doesn’t help their cause. It’s clear what Europe gets out of this arrangement but I guess the US needs reminded what it is getting out of this exactly?
Europe not holding up its end of the defense bargain has been a problem for decades now and this is beyond dispute. I don’t want NATO to dissolve but the current situation has been and still is untenable. If Europe refuses to get serious then they should be cut loose.
Europe for its part just needs to try harder for the benefit it is getting. A competent unified military that is capable of sustained warfare against Russia and China. I believe the people of Europe want this too, their leaders need to wake up.
I have read two articles in the past days that show that the hand of government in the US extends beyond what might otherwise in a more superficial and direct way seem more limited.
In the WSJ today appears an article that states upfront in reference to the DOJ dropping charges against NYC mayor Eric Adams: “The Justice Department often defers prosecution in exchange for help with administration policies.” The author does not look favorably on these actions. The article further notes that: “To the contrary, such a strategy has long been a centerpiece of the Justice Department’s operations. For more than 30 years the department and its subsidiaries have made a common practice of entering into “deferred prosecution agreements” (or “nonprosecution agreements”) through which the department agrees to suspend or delay a prosecution if parties in the government’s cross hairs—typically, large corporations and their top executives—take a series of actions congenial to their Justice overseers.” And further it states that: “No federal statute has authorized any of these extraordinary remedies, even with a finding of criminal liability.” And finally concludes that: “Those same critics [of the Adams’ charge droppings]are less opposed to the prosecutorial tactics than to the current president and the immigration enforcement he aims to encourage.”
In another article at the Mises Institute, Ryan McMaken states that: “There are more federal grantees and contractors at NGOs and private firms than there are “official” federal workers. These faux “private“ jobs must be cut also.”
McMaken has graphs that show the ratios of official government employees to those working under contracts and grants over past years and further states that: “In terms of overall outlays, the amount spent on government grants and contracts is larger than the 800 billion dollars spent on Medicare. Specifically, according to the GAO, the Federal government in 2023 spent 759 billion dollars on contracts in 2023. In addition to these contracts, we find that non-profits receive approximately 300 billion in governments grants. Much of that comes directly from federal grants, but much comes indirectly through the more than 750 billion dollars in federal grants-in-aid that goes first to state and local governments. Much of that is then passed on to NGOs.”
Of all the ridiculous reasons to attack Trump this is the most illogical. All politicians lie.
I don’t know where to start with respect to your democratic friends.
1. The Lefty media and Liz Cheney lying about Trump wanting to have her killed. 100% easily refutable but repeated over and over again.
2. Biden having to drop out of a presidential campaign because of plagiarism. Many lies by Biden but maybe the filthiest was him saying his wife was run over by a drunk driver for about 20 years when in fact she went over the center line. When finally nailed on this filthy smear against the driver, Biden didn’t have the decency to apologize and had his public relations person admit to the facts of the accident.
3. Your piece of garbage Attorney general, Merrick Garland, lying about six police officers being killed as a result of January 6th. These were suicides after the event and no evidence was ever presented that somehow a moderate riot would cause six people who were otherwise mentally healthy to commit suicide. Yet there is Merrick Garland solemnly standing in front of the press with a straight face claiming that the suicides were the equivalent of people physically harming and killing police officers.
4. Nikole Hannah Jones lying about the American revolution being fought to preserve slavery. Thomas Jefferson for instance called it “hideous” institution. For her lies, the left awards her a Pulitzer prize.
5. Adam Schiff a compulsive liar who wins election to the Senate from California by an overwhelming margin even though his lies are very clear and blatant
Thomas W Fuller, Your post citing Article Five,
Nowhere in Article Five [or anywhere else!] does the US commit to carrying the burden alone. It talks of collective response. We have carried the burden, nearly alone, for 75 years. It’s time we focused our attention on China.
For your enlightenment:
ARTICLE FIVE
“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.”
The US is doing most of the dying here. The warmongering UK pretty much does their part and I think Poland is ready for sacrifice against Russia, they do share a border and have a history.
Germany and France are too busy with their internal palace intrigue.
Russia wants to drive a wedge between the US and Europe and Europe is making that easy. It’s been 3 years since a land war against Russia broke out in Europe and Europe still is thinking about how to proceed.
In a quick Google search, I found the following on the dollar equivalences for the amounts that the US and Europe have spent or promised to spend on Ukraine since the start of the war. Since the war is physically based in Europe one would expect the Europeans to spend significantly more or alternatively to be very actively and independently involved in actions to end the war.
“The European Union (EU) and our 27 Member States remain united and determined in our unprecedented support for Ukraine. Since the start of the war, the EU and our Member States have made available close to $145 billion* in financial, military, humanitarian, and refugee assistance…
In addition, in February 2024, European leaders agreed to commit up to $54 billion until 2027 for the Ukraine Facility to support Ukraine’s recovery, reconstruction and modernization, as well as its efforts to carry out reforms as part of its accession path to the EU. This will bring our commitments to date to over $174 billion.”
“As of September 30, 2024, the U.S. Ukraine response funding totals nearly $183 billion, with $130.1 billion obligated and $86.7 billion disbursed.”
All these costs pale considering what invaded Ukraine has paid in lives and destruction and even what invader Russian people have suffered.
In light of all this human suffering and costs a reasonable approach for the world would be to work much more diligently on avoiding these conflicts from the start. That, however, does not appear to be in the interests of world politicians. Perhaps their voting constituents need to be less gullible.
Russell, as I mentioned above, Article 5 has been invoked once. After 9/11, all NATO members pledged and later delivered aid, intelligence and military assistance to the United States.
Oooh, those lousy Europeans.
Kenneth
European countries, when considering both EU institutions and individual member states’ bilateral contributions, have collectively committed more aid to Ukraine than the United States.
Total Aid Commitments:
European Union and Member States: Approximately €267 billion (about $280 billion) in total aid to Ukraine.
ECONOMIST.COM
United States: Around $175 billion in total aid, with $106 billion directly assisting the Ukrainian government.
CFR.ORG
Breakdown of Aid Types:
Military Assistance:
European Union and Member States: Collectively, European countries have provided significant military aid, with notable contributions from individual nations.
STATISTA.COM
United States: Approximately $106 billion in military assistance.
CFR.ORG
Financial and Humanitarian Aid:
European Union and Member States: The EU has mobilized substantial financial assistance, including €30.5 billion in 2022 and 2023, and an additional €21 billion from the Ukraine Facility in 2024.
EEAS.EUROPA.EU
United States: The remaining portion of the $175 billion total aid includes financial support, humanitarian aid, and other related expenses.
CFR.ORG
These figures highlight the significant and collaborative international support for Ukraine, with European nations collectively contributing more in total aid compared to the United States, especially when bilateral assistance is accounted for.
Fuller,
So what?
Russell,
After the September 11, 2001, attacks, NATO invoked Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty for the first time in its history, declaring the attacks on the United States as an attack on all NATO members. Here’s how NATO members assisted the U.S. in response:
Military Assistance and Operations:
Operation Eagle Assist (October 2001 – May 2002)
NATO deployed AWACS (Airborne Warning and Control System) surveillance aircraft to help patrol U.S. airspace.
This was the first time NATO forces were used to defend the continental U.S.
830 flight hours were logged in over 360 missions.
Operation Active Endeavour (October 2001 – 2016)
NATO deployed naval forces to patrol the Mediterranean to prevent terrorist activity, weapons smuggling, and illegal trafficking.
The mission evolved into broader maritime security and counterterrorism efforts.
Troop Contributions to Afghanistan (ISAF, 2001–2014)
NATO established the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) to stabilize Afghanistan and combat al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
At its peak, ISAF included over 130,000 troops from 51 countries, including all NATO members.
European allies such as the UK, Canada, Germany, and France contributed thousands of troops.
Training and Support (2015–2021)
After ISAF ended, NATO launched the Resolute Support Mission to train and assist Afghan security forces.
Intelligence and Counterterrorism Cooperation:
NATO members enhanced intelligence-sharing with the U.S.
The alliance increased coordination on counterterrorism strategies.
Financial and Logistical Aid:
NATO members provided financial support for Afghanistan’s reconstruction.
Some allies contributed equipment, logistics, and airlift support for U.S. operations.
Individual Contributions by NATO Members:
United Kingdom: Second-largest military contributor, sent troops to Afghanistan and participated in combat missions.
Germany: Deployed thousands of troops, especially in northern Afghanistan.
Canada: Contributed heavily to combat operations in Kandahar.
France: Deployed special forces and provided air support.
Turkey: Led ISAF in its early years and played a key role in security operations.
NATO allies provided significant intelligence assistance to the U.S., particularly in Afghanistan and in broader counterterrorism efforts following 9/11. Here’s how:
1. Intelligence-Sharing and Coordination
NATO members enhanced intelligence-sharing with the U.S., particularly on terrorist networks, al-Qaeda activity, and Taliban movements.
European intelligence agencies worked closely with the CIA, NSA, and DIA to track terrorist financing, communications, and recruitment efforts.
Joint intelligence task forces were established to improve information flow on terrorist threats.
2. Special Forces and Human Intelligence (HUMINT)
The UK’s MI6, Germany’s BND, and France’s DGSE worked with the CIA in Afghanistan to gather on-the-ground intelligence on Taliban and al-Qaeda strongholds.
Special forces units, such as the UK’s SAS, Canada’s JTF-2, and Germany’s Kommando Spezialkräfte (KSK), conducted reconnaissance missions to locate high-value targets.
NATO forces intercepted enemy communications and interrogated captured militants to extract intelligence.
3. Surveillance and Signals Intelligence (SIGINT)
NATO deployed AWACS surveillance aircraft to monitor air traffic and intercept enemy communications.
The Five Eyes alliance (U.S., UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand) played a key role in electronic eavesdropping on terrorist communications.
European nations increased counterterrorism surveillance within their own borders to disrupt al-Qaeda networks operating in Europe.
4. Counterterrorism Operations and Targeting Support
NATO intelligence helped identify key Taliban and al-Qaeda leaders for U.S. drone strikes and special operations raids.
The alliance provided satellite imagery, electronic surveillance, and cyber intelligence to support U.S. military operations.
NATO intelligence networks worked to track al-Qaeda operatives moving between Afghanistan, Pakistan, and other regions.
5. Disrupting Terrorist Financing and Logistics
European countries froze assets linked to al-Qaeda and Taliban operatives.
NATO allies helped uncover and dismantle terrorist funding networks, including those funneling money through charities and informal banking systems (hawala networks).
Lying scumbag Donald J. Trump, 2/19/2025: “The United States has spent $200 billion more than Europe.”
Reality: European Union and Member States: Approximately €267 billion (about $280 billion) in total aid to Ukraine.
United States: Around $175 billion in total aid, with $106 billion directly assisting the Ukrainian government.
Mark Bofill: ‘So what?’
Lol. I could link PAGES of Biden’s lies. I repeat, so what that politicians lie?
News flash Thomas; everyone poops too. Even Obama does.
Lying scumbag Donald J. Trump, 2/19/2025: “Zelensky, a modestly successful comedian…” (Lucia, I’ll stop this when you tell me to.)
Before becoming Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy was a comedian, actor, and television producer. Born in 1978, he earned a law degree but pursued entertainment instead. Zelenskyy also co-founded Kvartal 95, a successful production company. His work included stand-up, sketch comedy, and hosting shows.
Zelenskyy was lead actor in Servant of the People, which was hugely popular in Ukraine and gained international recognition. It aired from 2015 to 2019 on Ukraine’s 1+1 channel and quickly became one of the country’s most-watched shows. The series resonated with viewers due to its satirical take on corruption and government dysfunction, portraying an ordinary teacher who unexpectedly becomes president.
Its success led to global distribution, with streaming platforms like Netflix later picking it up. The show also inspired Zelenskyy’s real-life presidential campaign, as many Ukrainians saw him as a genuine anti-corruption figure, mirroring his character’s journey from outsider to leader.
Lying scumbag Donald J. Trump: ‘Zelenskyy talked the United States into spending $350 billion dollars.’
The U.S. has spent $175 billion, with future commitments of $4.1 billion.
Lying scumbag Donald J. Trump, 2/19/2025
“The United States has spent $200 billion more than Europe.”
European Union and Member States: Approximately €267 billion (about $280 billion) in total aid to Ukraine.
ECONOMIST.COM
United States: Around $175 billion in total aid, with $106 billion directly assisting the Ukrainian government.
Faster Thomas, faster!
Come on, I know you can SPAM better than that!
The amount spent on Ukraine is wildly different depending on the source. Pretty hard to decipher. Then there is the accounting … paying your own people to do logistics in your own country at your own labor rates allows for some creative financing opportunities.
Another way to measure is where did all the artillery shells, anti-tank missiles, long range missiles, ground to air missile systems, and vehicles come from? Where does all the vital military intelligence come for? Spy satellites aren’t free.
Ukraine being under existential pressure has done really excellent work with drones and everything else. If everyone had that kind of urgency then Russia would probably be beaten back.
Lying scumbag Donald J. Trump, 2/19/2025: “Zelensky, a Dictator without Elections…”
President Donald Trump referred to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy as a “dictator without elections” during recent discussions about the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict. This comment stems from Ukraine’s postponement of elections due to the imposition of martial law following Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022. Under Ukrainian law, elections are suspended during martial law to ensure national security and stability. President Zelenskyy has indicated that elections could occur if martial law is lifted, contingent upon achieving peace and stability in the region.
RFERL.ORG
Trump’s characterization appears to overlook the legal and constitutional constraints that necessitate the postponement of elections during such extraordinary circumstances. It’s important to recognize that the suspension of elections in Ukraine is a temporary measure aligned with the country’s legal framework, rather than an indication of dictatorial governance.
The UK suspended elections during World War 2.
Lying scumbag Donald J. Trump, 2/19/2025
“Zelensky admits that half the money we sent him is missing.”
The claim that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy stated half of the aid provided to Ukraine is missing is a misrepresentation. This distortion has been propagated by various social media posts and certain political figures, including U.S. President Donald Trump, who suggested that a significant portion of U.S. aid to Ukraine is unaccounted for.
YAHOO.COM
In reality, during a February 1, 2025, interview with the Associated Press, President Zelenskyy mentioned that Ukraine had directly received approximately $75 billion of the over $175 billion in aid allocated by the United States. He clarified that the remaining funds were designated for related expenses, such as replenishing U.S. military stockpiles and supporting American military personnel, rather than being transferred directly to Ukraine.
POLITIFACT.COM
This allocation aligns with public records and does not indicate any missing funds. Analyses by organizations like the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) confirm that all allocated funds are accounted for, with significant portions supporting activities arising from the conflict, including U.S. defense readiness and logistical support.
CSIS.ORG
President Zelenskyy has consistently acknowledged the challenges of corruption within Ukraine and has implemented measures to address them, such as proposing legislation to equate corruption with high treason during wartime.
POLITICO.EU
However, there is no credible evidence supporting claims that half of the aid to Ukraine is missing or unaccounted for.
Keep going!
You don’t have the balls to actually SPAM enough to cause any sort of disruption.
Thomas W Fuller,
Me and most of the voters in the United States are satisfied that our president is faithfully performing his duties. He is doing exactly what he said he would do during the campaign; he got elected to do this and he is doing it well. Even the left wing media is reporting it. All of the hate and ranting from you left-wing Democrats is sour grapes from sore losers. It does does nothing but move more of the moderate voters into his camp and cement his place in history.
Keep attacking, Trump is thankful for your help.
Suspending elections and potential for corruption during wars are additional reasons for avoiding those conflicts.
Yeah, yeah, Mark. Saddam Hussein told lies! Hitler told lies! Mussolini told lies! So it’s okay that Lying scumbag Donald J. Trump tells lies too.
Russell, “Do Americans have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of Donald Trump?” Unfavorable 48.2%. Favorable 46.6%
Russell, you write, “He is doing exactly what he said he would do during the campaign; he got elected to do this and he is doing it well. ”
Trump administration officials scrambled through the weekend amid a flood of criticism to claw back employees they fired Thursday evening at the National Nuclear Security Administration, four people familiar with the terminations — and their fallout — told CNN.
Russell, 70% may indeed think he’s doing what he said he would do. Doesn’t mean they like it. From the poll you linked to:
“The CBS poll gives Trump higher overall marks than other recent surveys have, including ones conducted by Gallup and Pew.”
…”Trump’s positive overall numbers came even as he scored less-than-stellar marks on issues that were key to his victory in the presidential race, such as trade and inflation.
For instance, 51% of respondents told CBS that they think Trump’s policies will make food and grocery prices go up, versus 28% who believe his policies will lower prices, and another 20% who said they won’t change anything.
Two-thirds of respondents said the Trump administration is not focusing enough on lowering the prices of goods and services.
Also, 73% said they think new U.S. tariffs on imported goods will generally make things more expensive for them, while just 8% believe tariffs would lower prices.
Most also said they were not convinced that tariffs will create U.S. jobs, as Trump has claimed: 32% told CBS they would, while 34% said they would cost domestic jobs and another 34% foresaw no change.”
A majority, 58%, also said they opposed Trump’s decision to issue pardons to the vast majority of people charged in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol.”
Here Thomas,
Joe Biden
Stated on January 17, 2025 in a statement:
“The Equal Rights Amendment has become part of our Constitution.”
Joe Biden
stated on July 13, 2024 in a statement to the media:
“The idea that there’s political violence or violence in America like this is just unheard of.”
Joe Biden
stated on May 14, 2024 in an interview with Yahoo Finance:
Inflation “was 9% when I came to office.”
Joe Biden
stated on May 12, 2024 in a fundraising event in Seattle:
“China’s in a situation where they have more retired than working.”
Joe Biden
stated on April 26, 2024 in an interview with Howard Stern:
Says he “got arrested” while protesting in favor of desegregation.
Joe Biden
stated on February 8, 2024 in a speech:
On classified documents in his possession, “none of it was high classified.”
Joe Biden
stated on January 25, 2024 in Public appearance:
“There are a thousand billionaires now and you know what their average tax rate is? 8%.”
Joe Biden
stated on August 31, 2023 in a speech:
“Under the Obama-Biden administration, we invested hundreds of millions of dollars in the state of Florida replacing wooden power poles with steel poles and we buried these electric lines.”
Joe Biden
stated on September 11, 2023 in a 9/11 memorial speech in Alaska:
“Ground zero in New York — I remember standing there the next day.”
Joe Biden
stated on August 9, 2023 in an interview with the Weather Channel:
“I’ve already” declared a national climate emergency
…
I mean I could literally go on and on and on. I have barely scratched the surface.
SO WHAT.
NYT Aug. 7, 2016, Front page, above the fold:
Trump Is Testing the Norms of Objectivity in Journalism https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/business/balance-fairness-and-a-proudly-provocative-presidential-candidate.html
“It would also be an abdication of political journalism’s most solemn duty: to ferret out what the candidates will be like in the most powerful office in the world.
It may not always seem fair to Mr. Trump or his supporters. But journalism shouldn’t measure itself against any one campaign’s definition of fairness. It is journalism’s job to be true to the readers and viewers, and true to the facts, in a way that will stand up to history’s judgment. To do anything less would be untenable.”
So … how has abandoning objectivity worked out for you? What a disastrous decision by the legacy media.
Barack Obama
stated on June 29, 2016 in remarks in Ottawa, Canada:
“The steel industry is producing as much steel in the United States as it ever was. It’s just (that) it needs one-tenth of the workers that it used to.”
Barack Obama
stated on November 16, 2014 in a press conference in Australia.:
“My position hasn’t changed” on using executive authority to address immigration issues.
Barack Obama
stated on September 7, 2014 in an interview on “Meet the Press.”:
Says his comment about extremists being a JV team “wasn’t specifically referring to” Islamic State.
Barack Obama
stated on March 11, 2014 in a Funnyordie.com “Between Two Ferns” interview with Zach Galifianakis:
“Most young Americans right now, they’re not covered” by health insurance.
Barack Obama
stated on February 20, 2014 in a speech to Democratic governors:
“We’ve got close to 7 million Americans who have access to health care for the first time because of Medicaid expansion.”
Barack Obama
stated on July 27, 2013 in an interview with the ‘New York Times’:
The “most realistic estimates” for jobs created by Keystone XL are “maybe 2,000 jobs during the construction of the pipeline.”
Barack Obama
stated on February 12, 2013 in the State of the Union address:
“We have doubled the distance our cars will go on a gallon of gas.” [That was a good one! LOL]
Barack Obama
stated on February 12, 2013 in the State of the Union Address:
“Throughout, we have kept Congress fully informed of our efforts” to create a legal framework on counterterrorism.
And so on. I haven’t found ‘If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor’ yet, but I’m sure I’ll hit it eventually in the list.
C’mon Fuller. Biden and Obama are scumbag liars, say it with me brother. ALL politicians lie.
See guys, I do the work. When Lying scumbag Donald J. Trump tells a lie, which is whenever he opens his mouth, I put the lie here… but I also put the truth.
You guys don’t do the work. You guys just copy and paste whatever Joe Rogan or Donald Junior vomits forth.
Just as one example, Mark, you write “Barack Obama
stated on July 27, 2013 in an interview with the ‘New York Times’:
The “most realistic estimates” for jobs created by Keystone XL are “maybe 2,000 jobs during the construction of the pipeline.”
You don’t say what if anything is a lie here. You don’t say how many jobs were created during the construction of the pipeline. You just spray something that you think is the killer quote.
“Barack Obama’s statement that only 2,000 jobs would be created during the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline was correct in a specific context but didn’t encompass the full picture. Here’s why: Obama’s claim was focused on the direct, temporary construction jobs associated with the Keystone XL pipeline, which would involve activities like laying pipe, welding, and other physical construction work. Estimates of 2,000 direct jobs came from the U.S. State Department’s environmental review of the project.
These 2,000 jobs were the immediate, hands-on positions that would have been filled during the construction phase of Keystone XL itself.”
In other words, Obama didn’t lie. He was talking about the construction of the pipeline using figures provided to him from the US State Department.
That’s called doing the work.
And, see, Mark–you keep throwing statements out there as if they are lies. But so far, they don’t seem to be.
Steel Production vs. Employment:
U.S. steel production has remained relatively stable over the decades, but the number of workers employed in the steel industry has dramatically decreased. This is due to increased automation, technology, and improved productivity in steel manufacturing.
Steel Industry Employment:
In 1950, the U.S. employed around 650,000 workers in the steel industry.
By the 2010s, the number had fallen to around 140,000, even as production levels stayed robust.
So, the claim that the industry uses one-tenth of the workers today is a fair approximation based on this data.
Really?
Has the Equal Rights Amendment become part of our Constitution, Thomas, like that lying scumbag Joe Biden said?
Thomas
In 1950, the U.S. employed around 650,000 workers in the steel industry.
By the 2010s, the number had fallen to around 140,000, even as production levels stayed robust.
So, the claim that the industry uses one-tenth of the workers today is a fair approximation based on this data.
140K isn’t 10% of 650K. It’s not a fair approximation. It’s a lie.
My list came from Politifact BTW.
But this idea you appear to have, that no Democrat politicians lie, is probably the dumbest, most infantile notion I have heard in years. It does not surprise me that you advance it.
Oh, Markety Mark. Again?
Barack Obama
stated on February 20, 2014 in a speech to Democratic governors:
“We’ve got close to 7 million Americans who have access to health care for the first time because of Medicaid expansion.”
Obama’s statement is accurate within the context of the Medicaid expansion. As of early 2014, approximately 7 million Americans had gained access to healthcare for the first time due to Medicaid expansion, though this figure includes both enrollment and the potential access to coverage in expanded states.
It’s important to recognize that Medicaid expansion was not nationwide by 2014, so this figure was based on those states that chose to expand the program.
Of course politicians lie. But lying scumbag Donald J. Trump does nothing else.
LOL. It’s OK Thomas. I have read that people often regress to their childhood during their cognitive decline, you can call me Markety Mark, or Markey, or any names that suit you sweetie. I’m sure someone will be along to check your diaper soon.
No, Marky Mark, it’s lying scumbag Donald J. Trump that wears the diapers.
So tell me about how that lying scumbag Barack Obama was telling the truth when he told us that this was ‘the moment that the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal’. https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-sea-level
It doesn’t look like the rise of the oceans started to slow. Makes Barack Obama a scumbag liar, doesn’t it?
You know it’s bad when even CNN calls Joe Biden a liar. What a scumbag that man was, don’t you think Thomas Fuller? And he pardoned just about his entire family too. Just imagine. It doesn’t get much scummier that than does it.
Thomas,
Who’s your all time favorite politician? If you can still remember, that is…
Amongst the noise:
“The U.S. Department of Education has given schools and universities that receive federal funding an ultimatum: eliminate diversity initiatives or risk losing federal funding.”
The only question now is who wants to be the poster child for losing funding and financing a tenuous lawsuit against the government for an unpopular policy?
Maybe Harvard or Columbia but the reputational damage is just not worth it. It will likely end up before the Supreme Court.
Wow, I can only conclude that Tom Fuller has had some kind of psychological breakdown. Unfortunate. But it doesn’t change the political reality: Trumps is in office, his party controls Congress, and most all the crazy left policies Thomas adores will be reversed.
Thomas: sincerely, you need something else to do besides waste your time on deplorables like us. My suggestion: Focus on the policies, not the person.
It seems that the demon that once possessed Joshua has now possessed Fuller.
MikeM,
“It seems that the demon that once possessed Joshua has now possessed Fuller.”
I suspect that demon is the ghost of Karl Marx. It drives everyone it takes over to madness, willing to say and willing to do most anything to advance the ‘right cause’. I find it utterly bizarre.
Tom Scharf,
“Maybe Harvard or Columbia but the reputational damage is just not worth it. It will likely end up before the Supreme Court.”
Again.
This isn’t complicated. Discrimination based on race is illegal under Federal law. Yet universities think they are immune from complying with anti-discrimination laws. They will very soon learn that is not actually the case, and the massager will be named Pam Bondi. They simply must stop discriminating based on race. Ultimately they will, I am sure, (at least not so blatantly as today!) but only after much kicking and screaming.
Only academics, convinced of their own superiority, could be so unwilling accept legal and political reality.
It’s de Demonzzz! We can’t argue the facts, we can’t admit even to ourselves that Fuller is right, so it must be de Demonzzz!
See who gets this: MERRRRRRRIIIIINNNNNNN! MERRRRINNNN!
I can tell you in all honesty that Joshua is somewhere vomiting into a trash can after hearing me lumped in with him. Come to think of it, I feel slightly nauseated too.
I judge it better to avoid discussing politicians and better to discuss the ideas and philosophies of government and how legislation actually gets passed.
Murray Rothbard an economist (Austrian) and historian has written in variuos forms about historically important legislation and how the high sounding ideas behind these acts were actually not what one would expect from Civics 101 but rather influenced by power grabs, influential political group interests and rent seeking. The methods often employed to pass the legislation involved deception. He does point to politicians who presented reasonable arguments against an important legislation but most times not prevailing.
What he wrote about historically is even more fitting today. Politicians have added features of passing what they desire by promising more than can be realistically expected from the legislation through either emotional arguments or less than honest ones and subsequent to passing that legislation using either executive orders or bureaucratic means to substantially change what was passed.
These tactics are seldom discussed by big government advocates or the fact that the legislation has not delivered what was promised. Not delivered means either more money and/or stricter regulations are required or the counter factual argument is used that things would be worse without the legislation.
Thomas
we can’t admit even to ourselves that Fuller is right
I don’t think that’s the problem in recent exchanges.
Thomas,
We can’t argue the facts
If I have understood you correctly, you have been making the argument that Trump is despicable because he is a liar, essentially. You do not appear to have clearly articulated this, but it can be reasonably inferred from your overall comments and responses.
It is easy to demonstrate (and I’m not the only one to have demonstrated this, JD Ohio did as well, although he included leftists in general and not solely politicians) that virtually all politicians lie, by listing examples. Therefore, Trump is no more despicable on this basis than Joe Biden or Barack Obama.
Do we agree about this?
mark bofill,
“Do we agree about this?”
Don’t waste your time. There is no possibility Fuller will ever agree that Trump is not somehow the worst/most evil among lying politicians.
I think the real problem is Fuller disagrees with the policies Trump will put in place. The histrionics are just silly window dressing.
The strangest thing of all: someone like Fuller will never admit Joe Biden was (and is) demented, corrupt, and should never have been elected. Trump is a terrible person, but Biden should have been in a dementia care facility not in the White House.
Why do we even need to have this discussion? It is crazy.
Steve,
Well, I’m not even actually asking him to agree to that. I’m simply asking him to agree that:
1) The argument he is making is indeed essentially what I claim it is,
and
2) The argument he is making has been refuted.
He doesn’t have to agree, clearly. But if he wants to be taken even a teeny bit seriously he has to articulate some reasonable disagreement. I’m curious what he might come up with.
Just passing the time, playing with a troll is all.
Shrug.
mark bofill,
“But if he wants to be taken even a teeny bit seriously..”
That right there is where you are mistaken. Thomas thinks he is absolutely right and 100% righteous, and we are scumbag deplorables. Since he can’t get past that insanity, he can’t ever be taken seriously. He is a sorry joke.
Steve,
You may have a point there.
I’m surprised we haven’t yet gotten to the part where Thomas sings his song about how because he loves America, he wants her to be just, and because he respects America, he wants her to be virtuous, and because he thinks America is a hottie he gets an erection singing to us about her, or whatever exactly it is he always writes. I sort of black out reading it usually.
Lucia,
“I don’t think that’s the problem in recent exchanges.”
Your gentle humor is probably lost on Thomas.
BTW, people like Thomas are why voting for sanity in elections is so important. He shows clearly why leaving governance to those who love government is always a terrible mistake.
mark bofill,
If you REALLY loved the USA you would believe all the lefty rubbish Thomas believes….. then again, maybe not. When there is no common ground of understanding of reality, there is no possibility of common ground on policy. Obama had it right: elections have consequences… in this case, good and hard for the crazy left. When the left eases back toward the center, there will be room for conversation. ‘Till then? Not so much..
One of the better papers on what “talks” between nations even means, with an emphasis on Ukraine. As having a personal interest in political science, international relations, and history, I found it both on point and informative.
“As I write, the ground in Europe is still vibrating from the shock, and the political and media classes are still trapped between incredulous disbelief and barely-concealed anger that any such thing could have happened. They are still trapped in Cliché Land (“abandoning Ukraine”) and it may be some time before anything resembling reality actually penetrates their skulls. But in the meantime, and while we wait for some kind of rationality to gain a limited purchase, there are a couple of general points to make, and then I will get more deeply into the question of “talks.”..”
Stephen A. Smith of ESPN fame entertains running for office. He is very Trumpy with his brash all BS all the time style. His sports shtick gets kind of old after a decade but he is on target about the Democrat liabilities and could care less about alleged third rails. It’s pretty entertaining.
If politics was about character and integrity then Trump would have lost. It’s about which politician do you trust the most to carry out your personal priorities. I don’t care if my mechanic is an a**hole I care if he can fix my car.
The Democrats have been reelecting near criminals in blue cities for about ever. Are there any Illinois governors out of jail currently? Andrew Cuomo may win NYC again.
My reaction is YAWN.
I don’t care who they sleep with. I don’t care that they lie cleverly or lie stupidly. I just know and expect they willfully distort the truth because they are rewarded for doing so. They minimize their liabilities and amplify their good points.
I really don’t understand why anyone thinks the BS coming out of a politician’s mouth is somehow automatically disqualifying.
T Scharf: “I really don’t understand why anyone thinks the BS coming out of a politician’s mouth is somehow automatically disqualifying.”
In terms of discovering what the actual facts are, I pay zero attention to Trump and give him zero credibility. Everything he says has to be fact checked. Really doesn’t matter much because his policies are so far better than lunatic left.
I did listen to him on Rogan and he did seem to be more measured than previously. In the past, Trump has had zero capacity for growth and he disappointed me many times. Maybe he has grown a little since he was shot.
Will not be long until the whole team is on board and coordinating which should be awesome.
Sackings can be designated by the head of department., relieving Trump of the need to do it by feat.
Hoping the Supreme Court helps in authorising some of his actions, fingers crossed.
Thune and the other RINO’s still a problem re passing an Omnibus quickly.
They will certainly try to stop his Tax cuts being reissued if it is not passed with a lift in the debt ceiling .
Unhappy with his comments on Zelensky at the moment. Feels a bit like when he had to deal with the Saudi Royal Prince years ago. Politics.
–
Tom
I feel for you.
TDS is a terrible disease.
You used to be someone worth discussing issues with.
No way out and you do not want a way out so all we can do for each other is try to be polite while we state our views.
–
Perhaps the best way for either of us to change is to see if we can recognise some indisputable facts about where our respective emperors are wearing clothes or not.
–
Something for us both to think on.
I tried really hard to see Trump as terrible here 9 years ago with others.
The missing clothes for me were Mueller and the Russian hoax.
About like Judith having her eyes opened to the problem with Climate change Orthodoxy.
Once seen, impossible to go back to a belief in false gods.
Hopefully you may see the difference between demonising Trump demonstrators in their different treatment to all the other demonstrators.
Or revisit the delightful efforts of the whole Peter Strozk crew.
Or not,
Ignorance unfortunately really is bliss.
Even if intentional.
The purpose of their lies is not to convince you of their truth. It is to get you to believe nothing so you will do nothing.
In the past 24 hours, I have heard both Trump and Musk talk about a ‘DOGE Dividend Check’ …. A rebate to taxpayers based on the savings DOGE finds.
Trump mentioned 20% of the findings.
These guys are striking political gold every day.
Russel,
There will be no Doge dividend check. I think the main good thing about Doge has been highlighting programs that almost no one supports– like the ridiculous ones advancing DEI art in3rd world countries
Thomas Fuller,
Politicians lie mostly to advance their political agenda. Though for some (like the Clintons), lying almost seems like a sport. (eg Hillary claiming to be named after a mountain climber who was unknown at the time of her birth!)
But the ‘truth’ is not owned by anyone; I find the suggestion of possession of truth (‘their truth’) most odd. There is only one reality, but don’t count on a politician helping to identify it.
lucia,
Yes, the promotion of transsexual theater is utterly ridiculous and wasteful, but that isn’t a lot of money. The real wasted money (many tens of billions each year) is being passed to NGOs to promote/advance progressive priorities, both in the USA and elsewhere: endless DEI, funding climate change boondoggles, promoting censorship, and funding political opponents to anyone they consider “far right”…. which translates roughly to anybody who supports policies even slightly right of what Che’ would support. It is pure political theft by the progressive left, and has to stop.
No, no DOGE checks. But it is a funny and clever suggestion….. reminds voters that the government is in fact wasting the voters money.
DOGE Check or no DOGE check, even floating the idea makes political capital for Trump
Watch what politicians do, not what they say. I get lots of people watch debates for the political theater but I just don’t care.
Beyond their voting record and consistently supported ideologies there is the nebulous and hard to measure quality of leadership.
Do they compromise or stay firm on important issues?
Can they get other politicians to follow them with their psychological wizardry? This is what sets many politicians apart. Reagan, Obama, Clinton, and … yes … Trump.
Trump is just a very strange force in politics, unprecedented in a number of different vectors.
SteveF,
What DOGE has done is make it clear that money was being spent on these things. Often, no one steps forward to defend some of these things.
At the same time: DOGE is probably also making some useful programs waste money— in a way similar to the natural sort of inefficiency that happens every single end-beginning of fiscal year where programs people do think ought to continue get interrupted in sort of weird ways. (It’s sort of designed in funding hiccups.)
I don’t know that there is any good way to identify any of the lunatic programs otherwise though. Of even if they aren’t lunatic programs to even have conversations about these programs.
I personally see the chances of a DOGE check to be fairly high. This is exactly the type of stunt Trump loves and that will drive his opponents mad.
I take all spending numbers and divide by $300M to assess how much I am paying for each program. If they get to $300B then that is a $1000 per citizen. However I think refunds should go to * taxpayers * instead which is about 70M.
I don’t even know if Trump really understands how his own endless blather works to his advantage, it seems to be pure instinct.
The marketed DOGE acronym and all the Musk / Trump hate causes the opposition to become reflexively oppositional because they just can’t help themselves. Orange Man / Billionaire Always Bad, Always, Always. They unwisely start defending all government spending and curiously try lawfare to prevent people from examining government spending at all. They prioritize reactionary opposition over cutting wasteful spending. Helping to identify wasteful spending is seen as giving aide and comfort to the enemy, it’s nuts.
OTOH Trump’s instincts also cause him to err in similar nutty fashions. Attacking Zelensky is irrational. Trump’s instincts seems to be keep everyone off balance all the time and see what comes out the other side.
Tom Scharf: “If politics was about character and integrity then Trump would have lost. It’s about which politician do you trust the most to carry out your personal priorities.”
But trust is based on the character and integrity of the person being trusted. I want a politician who (1) shares my priorities (2) means what he says and (3) is willing and able to do what he says. (1) does not much matter without (2) and (3). Over the last decade, we have seen just how important (3) is, especially if the politician’s goals differ significantly from the goals of the Establishment.
There are aspects of one’s character that are essential to (2) and (3). Trump has those in spades; Biden did not. There are other aspects of character that don’t much matter. The media like to use those as a shiny object to distract people from what really matters.
Note that Tom said “personal priorities” while I said only “priorities”. I don’t vote based on what is good for me; I vote based on what I think is good for the country.
Case in point: Any Republican who voted for the Social Security Fairness Act that eliminated WEP gets a black mark in my book even though that will put a lot of extra money in my pocket.
I love the idea of DOGE dividend checks. “This check for $1000 is ONLY 20% of YOUR money that the government was wasting.” That would drive home the magnitude of the waste far more effectively than merely talking about hundreds of billions in savings.
That said, I would prefer that the savings go to reducing the deficit and the debt.
Oh yeah, I prefer character and integrity if I can get it. Fuller’s fallacy (TM) is that (his) perceived character and integrity should override ideology for a voter on the other side. Nope.
People’s opinions on what is best for the country are variable of course.
Mike, Your comment:
“That said, I would prefer that the savings go to reducing the deficit and the debt.”
I agree. That would be the wise fiscal move. But! DOGE checks would be in the political realm. A political home run.
Today the DOGE dividend check story is all over new and old media. It’s reaping dividends already. I wonder how many blogs are discussing it, like we are.
Russell,
The DOGE savings will accumulate year after year. So if the DOGE dividend is a one time deal for just part of the savings, it would cost just a tiny fraction of the long term savings. The political home run would make it much easier to make the cuts permanent via congressional action. So with regard to the debt, $100 billion in DOGE dividends might save many hundreds of billions, maybe even trillions, in the long term. That is a strong point in favor of the DOGE dividend
I find it amusing that in the news, Democrats are acting as cheerleaders for waste, fraud and abuse. This has gone on daily for over a week.
They’ve stepped in it and it’s sticking to them.
DOGE is due to wrap up by July 4, 2026. That would be a good time to send out the dividend checks. Right in the middle of the 250th anniversary celebrations and just ahead of the midterms.
Good point Mike. DOGE checks might turn out to be sound fiscal policy.
There is a lot of buzz about the USA-Canada hockey rematch tonight for the championship:
“BOSTON — Players on both sides of this USA-Canada rivalry who will square off in the 4 Nations Face-off final Thursday have agreed on one thing.
This is the biggest game of their lives. “ https://nypost.com/2025/02/19/sports/usa-canada-4-nations-finale-is-about-pride-and-so-much-more/
I wonder if the Boston crowd will boo the Canadian anthem like the Montreal crowd booed our anthem.
8 PM on ESPN
USA! USA!
Trump trolling Canada this morning:
“I’ll be calling our GREAT American Hockey Team this morning to spur them on towards victory tonight against Canada, which with FAR LOWER TAXES AND MUCH STRONGER SECURITY, will someday, maybe soon, become our cherished, and very important, Fifty First State,” Trump said Thursday morning on Truth Social.
“I will be speaking before the Governors tonight in D.C., and will sadly, therefore, be unable to attend. But we will all be watching, and if Governor Trudeau would like to join us, he would be most welcome,” the president said. “Good luck to everybody and have a GREAT game tonight. So exciting!”
Russell,
I really wish Trump would stop trolling Canada.
Lucia, your comment:
“I really wish Trump would stop trolling Canada.”
Yes, and I wish he would stop trolling Zelenskyy.
I had hopes, based on her reputation, that Susie Wiles would be able to stifle him, but no dice. Being roguish seem to be baked into his DNA.
Edit: Trump being Trump is fun to watch though
I don’t see any point to Trump’s comments on Canada, other than trolling. But maybe there is one since there usually is a point to what Trump says.
There is a point to Trump’s criticism of Zelensky. As long as the latter is lionized as a modern day Sir Galahad nobly opposing the evil Putin, it is problematic for Trump to pressure him into making concessions. So Trump needs to undermine Zelensky in American public opinion if he is to gain leverage over Zelensky. And Trump needs that leverage if he is to pull off a deal that leads to enduring peace.
Mike,
I don’t object to Trump’s goals in Canada or Ukraine. I object to the childish and undignified taunting he uses to get there.
Mike M,
“DOGE is due to wrap up by July 4, 2026. That would be a good time to send out the dividend checks.”
I am willing to bet there will be no DOGE checks. If Musk et al manage to identify significant savings, I am all for it. But our fiscal dilemma is such that outgoing ‘DOGE’ checks will not be that helpful. It is, of course, a political ploy, as everyone understands. That is fine, but the real issues (profligate spending on entitlements!) remain to be addressed. DOGE alone will not fix that.
Mike M,
Yes, Trump’s talk about Canada and Greenland are just stupid. He should focus of things that are more plausibly achievable.
I don’t think Trump’s talk about Greenland is stupid. He is trying to make sure that the US military stays in, the Chinese are kept out, and Greenland’s mineral resources are developed. All worthy goals.
Similar with the Panama Canal. Trump is ensuring American access while getting China kicked out.
I don’t see a point to the stuff about Canada as the 51st state. But Trump’s continued flogging ot that horse suggests that there is a purpose.
Trump will often post something wild just to see what happens or to have a bit of fun. But it seems to me that when he keeps pushing something, he has a reason. Does anyone here have counterexamples?
It is a darned good thing I am not in charge of what to do about the Gaza Strip, because after today, I would kill every Palestinian man woman and child in the region and be done with it. These fools support leaders who commit atrocities who absolutely rely on our civilized restraint not to exterminate them in retaliation.
No dice buddy. I’d exterminate them along with whatever innocents might be there (at this point, setting aside prepubescent children, I’m not sure that there are any who are not complicit at some level, but regardless. I didn’t start the game, I’d just be looking to end it) and let it be a lesson to future provocateurs.
Despicable? I don’t mind.
Shrug.
Kash Patel confirmed. The last of the heavy shoes has dropped….. bad things are going to happen for the multitude of politically motivated and/or cowardly employees at DOJ and the FBI.
And that is perfectly OK with me. It is well deserved.
Whether they went along with the political persecutions by the Biden administration based on their personal political leanings, or just because they lacked the principles and/or courage to resign in protest, matters not at all. They should all be replaced by principled people who would never go along with the many legal travesties of the Biden Administration.
Nobody said “I won’t do this!”. In that they failed their oath of office: they should be gone.
mark bofill,
“It is a darned good thing I am not in charge of what to do about the Gaza Strip, because after today, I would kill every Palestinian man woman and child in the region and be done with it.”
Not sure what brought that on, but no, children are born innocent. What motivated that outburst?
The Palestinians in general remain overwhelmingly hostile toward any plausible agreement with Israel. Not sure how to change that. It is clear the Israelis will be forced to enforce order. Losing proposition.
Steve,
Hamas has just returned the corpses of Shiri, Ariel and Kfir Babas, a woman and her two (infant & toddler) children, with much celebration. Hamas also appears to be behind a new botched terrorist attack in Tel Aviv.
Enough already. These people will never stop while they are alive, and they will raise their children to perpetuate the situation forever. They support Hamas, they rejoice at the death of Israeli civilians; so be it. They are rabid and the solution is to put them down.
The whole cosplay Hamas ceremonies for hostage release are downright strange. I assume this is for their domestic audience.
For the entire war journalists were banned from showing any Hamas people carrying weapons, and now they are openly carrying them around like its a paintball competition at these ceremonies. It’s so odd.
But yeah, I wouldn’t have objected to a 2,000 lb bomb being dropped in the middle of that spectacle. This is par for the course with Hamas though and it is designed to get under Israel’s skin.
I’d give it better than even odds the war starts up again.
Maybe they should raise the stakes of the Four Nations NHL tournament championship game — if the US wins, Canada joins the US, and if Canada wins, US joins Canada.
Seriously, I find it hard to find enthusiasm to root for the US squad. Not sure why, because the Olympics brings out the “home-town” cheering.
I think back to when I first watched hockey (late 60s, pre-expansion, Bobby Orr) and I wonder if the USA could even have fielded a full squad of NHL players at that time. Certainly no European nations. NHL has changed, and for the better. (But don’t tell Trump that diversity can be a good thing.)
I’d expect Canada to win because so much pride is on the line for them. US hockey has come a long way but I don’t follow it closely.
Rats, USA lost, in overtime. Fun game to watch. Kudos to the US team; Team Canada was the better team though.
SteveF. FEBRUARY 20, 2025 AT 4:46 PM
“DOGE is due to wrap up by July 4, 2026. That would be a good time to send out the dividend checks.”
I am willing to bet there will be no DOGE checks.”
–
If.
If there are 2 trillion in recoverable wasted money it should immediately go into reducing the National Debt to a sustainable level.
–
The Palestinians hung onto their previous hostages for 6 years before releasing the last soldier for a massive ransom.
Same old playbook, torment the Israelis for as long as possible.
–
Would it not be good if Zelenskyy and Putin announced a mutual ceasefire to allow negotiations in good faith with immediate saving of lives.
Perhaps this thought could go out to other blogs.
mark bofill,
The horrors perpetrated by Hamas (and their level of support among Gazans) do not surprise me at all. Conversations I had 20 years ago with ‘ordinary Muslims’ in the middle east revealed exactly the same views toward Israel and Jews that the Gazans clearly hold. The solution, such as it is, is effectively convert Gaza to a large prison…. with no uncontrolled access for people or materials, and no allowed departures of any kind. The porous border with Egypt has to be closed and all shipments in must be subject to Israeli inspection.
Turns out Hamas didn’t return the body of the mom – Shiri Bibas – but of a Gazan woman. Hamas claims the deaths were due to IDF bombing, and well – all those bodies were mingled together so it was easy to make a mistake…
Sheesh…
Hamas could have done DNA testing themselves. It’s inexcusable but far from the lowest of the lows that this conflict has seen.
They have a lot of rebuilding to do and not many friends.
As they say, it’s not a real rivalry if it isn’t competitive. Looks US / Canada hockey may have some good years ahead. I would almost feel sorry for Canada if they had lost.
Tom,
I liked this tournament. I never watch the NHL all star games. I hope they keep this instead. I also would like to see them play in Finland and Sweden next year.
There is a basic question on the EU / Ukraine issue with regards to the US providing non-reciprocal support to garner long term benefits aka the “rules based global order” and so forth.
I wonder if this really exists at all. If Ukraine or the EU instantly drops the “trusted ally” status the moment the US asks for a more equitable arrangement then this was always a charade and has been transactional all along.
You can’t claim nebulous benefits to a rules based order if the benefits are never provided or even documented. Trump thinks we are getting played here and he may be right. He may also be wrong. I just don’t know.
While I understand the reasons for the county residents wanting to switch states, what would motivate Illinois to accede to these requests? Similar to eastern Oregon wanting to join Idaho, the “receiving” state is open to the idea, but the current state seems to have no interest.
“Similar to eastern Oregon wanting to join Idaho, the “receiving” state is open to the idea, but the current state seems to have no interest.”
Those in political control are always happy with the status quo. Those without political control think the grass is greener elsewhere. None of the states are going to lose or gain land.
I wonder: Now that Kash Patel is in charge of the FBI, does he already have a list of agents who he is going to fire? Could be, since he was getting stonewalled /deceived/obstructed by the FBI as he was investigating the Trump “Russian Collusion” lies. Maybe most of those folks have already been dispatched to “other career opportunities”, but if not, Patel probably already knows who he wants gone.
Chyron running beneath a news show:
“Senate confirms Kash Patel as Trump’s FBI Director”
I thought this was an interesting choice of phrasing (as opposed to the simpler “Senate confirms Kash Patel as FBI Director”). It’s not that it’s inaccurate as such — certainly Patel was nominated by Trump, and the FBI is an agency within the Executive Branch currently headed by Trump — but it seems to me that they’re trying to insinuate that it’s now Trump’s FBI, personally. Maybe I’m reading too much into that.
I suppose that labeling Patel as “Trump’s” will irritate those with TDS and please those with TFS. [Trump fanboy syndrome. Probably should be fanperson.] Let’s increase factionalism!
HaroldW wrote: ” it seems to me that they’re trying to insinuate that it’s now Trump’s FBI, personally.”
No doubt that is correct. It is a variant on “not my President”.
Nobody will be accusing Trump of not trying to drain the swamp this time around.
Also 1500 FBI people will be moved out of DC and dispersed around the country. I’m all for dispersing DC. DC culture and institutions have become homogenous and insular.
Tom,
Good point. I was one who said many times that draining the swamp was just a slogan. This is one of those rare times when it is genuinely pleasant to be mistaken.
Looks like a lot of people were following the 4 Nations hockey tournament:
“The 4 Nations Face-Off championship game between the United States and Canada on Thursday night marked the largest audience for a hockey game on ESPN, the network announced Friday.
The game, in which Canada beat the U.S. 3-2 in an overtime thriller, garnered 9.3 million viewers, with 10.4 million viewers at its peak.” https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/43956854/4-nations-face-final-us-canada-draws-record-ratings
Trump fired the Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, along with half a dozen other high ranking officers. Trump also fired multiple thousands (reported to be ~5% !) of DOE civilian employees who were hired in Biden’s last year, so still fireable (in their probationary period).
Since a civilian fully loaded cost is likely $150k, that represents multiple billions in reduced cost.
That should have been DOD civilian employees, not DOE.
Here’s two words you rarely see together, “militant veganism”
MSNBC had a segment with a “whistleblower” calling this guy a uterus collector with mass hysterectomies at an ICE facility. He had done 2.
There have been a whole series of these defamation settlements lately. Part of it is unsympathetic juries to media outlets. Normally media outlets prevail due to a high bar for defamation.
The days of somebody is alleging a political narrative we really like so the media isn’t going to try very hard to verify the story are coming to an end. Good riddance.
mark bofill,
I suspect a majority already think those poor folks are not quite right in the head. YMMV. Which doesn’t mean they don’t deserve equal treatment under law.
Tom Scharf,
“Part of it is unsympathetic juries to media outlets.”
I doubt there are many well known organizations in the USA less deserving of sympathy. They have behaved horribly for a decade, and before that just terribly biased in their reporting.
Tom: “Here’s two words you rarely see together, “militant veganism”
I hear germany was afflicted by “militant arm raising” a few decades ago.
Steve,
Certainly, mentally ill people have the same legal rights as everybody else. As far as I am concerned, crazy people can be as crazy as they like, all day long to their hearts content so long as they aren’t criminal.
Israel contends the family was murdered in captivity, rather than killed as a result of an air strike [as Hamas contends], without providing the reasons for so concluding. [Not sure that I want to know; I suspect that any such analysis involves rather gruesome details.]
Even if she did die from an airstrike, I would expect it was because she was placed within a target with the intention of that occurring.
Mark Bofill: “Certainly, mentally ill people have the same legal rights as everybody else. ”
Not true and sometimes a subtle issue. In a fair amount of cases, mentally ill people, for instance, are not competent to enter into contracts.
Thanks Jdohio. I wasn’t aware. Let me retry: crazy people can be as free as they reasonably can be, with as many legal rights as their craziness allows as far as I am concerned, so long as they are not criminal.
Tom Scharf
FEBRUARY 22, 2025 AT 8:36 AM
“Here’s two words you rarely see together, “militant veganism”
A Silicon Valley Intellectual Society Kicked Them Out. Now They’re Tied to a Killing Spree.
Right wing extremism, left wing extremism?”
–
Tom,
I think there was a film about it called The Revenge of the Killer Tomatoes.
Even better it got killer reviews on a rating site called Rotten Tomatoes.
This fellow:
“Azar Gat is the Ezer Weitzman Professor of National Security at Tel Aviv University and author of “War in Human Civilization and Ideological Fixation: From the Stone Age to Today’s Culture Wars,”
Wrote an article (see at Real Clear Politics) that goes on endlessly, examining every possible angle, only to conclude the obvious: The reason the Palestinians elect governments like Hamas is because the overwhelming majority refuse to accept any outcome that does not include destruction of Israel. I could have written down that conclusion in a couple of sentences. The Palestinians (indeed, most Muslims in the Middle East) will not compromise….. ‘River to the sea’ is the only thing they want. Maybe Trump is right (again) about moving all of the Palestinians somewhere else. There is no reason to waste time trying to find a ‘solution’ to the ‘Palestinian Problem’….. there is no solution.
SteveF,
Getting the Palestinians out of there would be the best outcome for everyone. Beats the heck out of killing them all for sure.
Way off topic, but an interesting fact of which I was unaware, until reading Arthur C. Clarke’s short story “Jupiter Five”.
From Kepler’s laws, or from first principles, we know that the period for a circular orbit of radius R is proportional to R to the 3/2 power. What I didn’t know is that the time it takes to fall (from rest) from a distance R has the same dependence. [Assuming the planet’s radius is negligible] The fall time is approximately equal to 0.177 times the orbital period, the precise factor being 1/sqrt(32).
HaroldW,
I’d have to write down the equations and do the integral to calculate the fall time, but it sounds right. Along with final velocity from infinite fall distance, this is a good introductory physics problem. 😉
Wasn’t the last Palestinian election years ago?
John,
Yes. Hamas was elected 2000 something IIRC but there have been no further elections.
Why do you ask?
John,
I guess you query in response to Steve saying this:
The reason the Palestinians elect governments like Hamas is because the overwhelming majority refuse to accept any outcome that does not include destruction of Israel.
I guess your point is that they (the Palestinians in Gaza) elected Hamas twenty years ago and they have been innocent victims of Hamas ever since?
When assertions are made about the Palestinians electing Hamas, isn’t it useful to point out that they haven’t elected anyone in 20 years +/- ?
Is it also possible that Hamas’s program has evolved since then?
I’m suggesting that it is possible that the Palestinians were not expecting that Hamas would conduct war against the Israelis when they voted them in.
At the same time, it is possible that what Hamas has done is exactly what those who eelcted them wanted and that the PLO was insufficiently aggressive, or more likely too corrupt.
Thanks John.
Hamas keeps declaring an “emergency” to avoid elections that are IIRC mandated by the UN.
I get the impression the Palestinians could re-elect Hamas or alternately elect to be killed by Hamas. Realistically whoever wins an election there will likely reflect the will of the people and will be Hamas like anyway. I would suggest that most people in Gaza privately aren’t fans of having their homes destroyed, being half starved, living in poverty and rubble, and being the pawns of every country surrounding them and especially Iran.
I think there is room for them to both hate Israel with a passion and forego foolish plans that get their lives turned upside down for no benefit.
As for Israel I think they may start considering just taking chunks of Gaza every time an atrocity happens, the bulldoze Gaza into the ocean plan. This will be met with furious international resistance but only needs to be done once.
Gaza gets to lose wars without losing land, Israel would only get to lose one time and would be summarily ejected.
John,
It’s hard to know for sure what the people of Palestine want. Is this accurate? Who can say? Not me for sure. Here it says:
a June report from the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PCPSR) found that a “paradigm shift” had taken place in Palestinian public opinion: There is now growing support for Hamas and armed struggle.
Based on 2020 polling data apparently, it links here, where I find stuff that seems to indicate the people generally support Hamas.
The most preferred way out of the current status quo is “reaching a peace agreement with Israel” according to 27% of the public while 39% prefer waging “an armed struggle against the Israeli occupation.” 11% prefer “waging a non-violent resistance” and 18% prefer to keep the status quo. Three months ago, 36% said that they prefer reaching a peace agreement with Israel and 26% said they prefer waging an armed struggle.
When asked about the most effective means of ending the Israeli occupation, the public split into three groups: 49% chose armed struggle, 27% negotiations, and 18% popular resistance. Three months ago, 37% chose armed struggle and 36% chose negotiations.
Under current conditions, a majority of 70% opposes and 19% support an unconditional resumption of Palestinian-Israeli negotiations.
When asked about support for specific policy choices, 66% supported joining more international organizations; 58% supported resort to non-violent resistance; 60% supported return to armed confrontations and intifada; 47% supported dissolving the PA; and 20% supported abandoning the two-state solution and embracing a one state solution for Palestinians and Israelis. Three months ago, 43% supported a return to confrontations and armed intifada, 42% supported dissolving the PA, and 33% supported the abandonment of the two-state solution in favor of a one-state solution.
I don’t think this is gospel, but it’s what I can easily find.
Shrug.
In the great tradition of Trump getting results in strange counterintuitive ways …
As soon as Trump cuts Europe out of Ukraine negotiations they propose a peacekeeping plan within a week.
All of this is dependent on Russia’s whims. It will be clear pretty quickly if Russia is serious about negotiations or not. He’s being given a decent offer I think.
The people who wanted armed struggle in 2020 got what they wanted. It probably didn’t turn out like they thought it would.
Polling today would be hard to do but it would likely be dominated by anti-Israel animus. Nobody is a fan of the people dropping bombs on them.
It will be interesting to find out what people are thinking a year or two from now.
mark bofill,
It is actually worse than that. Recent polling show that a large majority will settle for nothing less than the elimination of Israel. There are variations in how to accomplish that: from killing them all, to taking over politically via “right of return” and then driving Jews out, to armed attacks for as long as it takes. But the consistent idea is: no more jews in the region and Israel ceases to exist.
The other consistent POV: overwhelming support for strict Sharia law, with all the barbaric abominations that includes. There is no way peace will ever be possible with the views widely held by Palestinians. It is an unending horror show, driven by delusions and religious fanaticism.
Tom Scharf,
From the article: “But the European proposal hinges on persuading President Trump to agree to a limited U.S. military role—dubbed a “backstop” by British officials—to protect the European troops in Ukraine if they were put in danger and deter Russia from violating any cease-fire, the officials said.”
.
Bet on Hell freezing over before Trump agrees to any commitment of US forces.
Apparently the backstop means something between air defenses and commitment to air cover during a conflict. It’s progress to have the EU thinking on terms other than “let the US do it all”.
Since Russia really wants a demilitarized Ukraine then all of this may end the deal. Russia would end up with effectively NATO troops on their border.
SteveF and Mark B.
I don’t doubt for a second tha the present Palestinain population wants complete disappearance of Israel.
I wonder how it broke down on October 5.
How could the Israelis have thought things would turn out differently, unles they actually did intend to destroy the Palestinians.
SteveF, although writing down the differential equation for free-fall is straightforward, its solution is rather complex, beyond an introductory physics class.
HaroldW,
A lot messier than I thought it would be.
John Ferguson,
“I wonder how it broke down on October 5.”
Impossible to say without data. I can say that the currently expressed views of Palestinians are indistinguishable from the views of several (“ordinary”) individuals I spoke with 20-odd years ago in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Israel (that is, Arabs living in Israel). Maybe the Palestinians in Gaza were not full of rage and hatred on October 5th, and ready to strike a reasonable compromise with Israel, but I have seen zero evidence of that. I think it far more likely that the Palestinians (and many other Middle Eastern Muslims) were and are implacably opposed to the continued existence of Israel.
Negotiation requires a counterparty willing to compromise on substance. When it comes to peace with Israel, the Palestinians have never been that counterparty. I very much doubt they will ever be. That means a “solution” will have to be imposed on them.
john ferguson,
All that siad: the situation in Gaza is indeed tragic, in the sense that it never had to be this way. Starting in 1948, Muslims in the Middle East have rejected every offered compromise on land, and consistently demanded that the Jews all leave. So Israel has become a wealthy democracy, while the Palestinians have chosen to live in the oppression and poverty that comes from actually believing and being governed by 5th century nonsense, while at the same time murdering and maiming civilians whenever possible. Culture is destiny. Palestinian culture is objectively HORRIBLE, which is why they suffer.
SteveF,
Try multiplying one side of the differential equation by V and the other side by dR/dt, which is the same thing. Then rearrange so that you have V*dV/dt on one side and (dR/dt) /(R^2) on the other. Integrate both sides, then replace V with dR/dt and integrate again. I did that and get R^3 proportional to t^2.
That is just the freshman physics trick for solving the harmonic oscillator without knowing how to formally solve second order differential equations.
John,
Yes, I’ve heard the argument before. ‘Israel only fuels Palestinian hatred by fighting back.’ To some extent this is true, but it doesn’t matter. If no cost was imposed on Hamas they would have merely been emboldened. The truth is that it only takes one side; this is necessary and sufficient to make war and atrocity inevitable.
I’m not a rocket scientist but once you add another object asserting gravity into play then it gets real hard real fast, the infamous 3 body problem. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-body_problem
Planets aren’t really spherical sources of gravity, dynamic atmospheric effects etc. A crapload(tm) of information and precision is necessary.
The recent earth crossing asteroid orbit doesn’t have enough precision yet. Apparently they know with a lot of precision where it will cross earth’s orbit but not the exact timing.
It’s a bit surprising most of the moons and planets have stable orbits and appear to stay that way for very long time. I suppose there is some iterative deal during the early solar system where they are either sucked into the sun, spewed out of the system or happen to be at just the right vector and speed to form an orbit.
I would say the Palestinians went from 95% hating Israel to 97% hating Israel so the net effect of the war isn’t so large in that aspect. All the people who have leverage over the Palestinians fuel that fire.
The goal was not to make friends on both sides.
Looking like Trump is reconsidering current policy on Ukraine and moving to accept the Russian position on the conflict.
The Trump administration is accepting the 2 major Russian requirements
1. No NATO membership for Ukraine
2. Recognizes the 4 eastern oblas plus Crimea are Russian
The title of his post is way more inflammatory than his talk, but it does make its point.
Keep in mind that, like war, negotiations are often shrouded in a thick fog.
Steve,
True, but as always, John Mearsheimer is worth the time to listen to
I have been trying out Musk’s Grok3 beta.
It is truly a new form of AI. For one, it isn’t saddled with the woke BS that was baked into the others.
It seems more user friendly. The results are more normal conversation language.
I asked “what is the mission of SpaceX Starship Flight 8”
Answer:
“The mission of SpaceX’s Starship Flight 8 is focused on advancing the development and reusability of the Starship launch vehicle, consisting of the Super Heavy Booster 15 and the Starship upper stage, Ship 34. This test flight aims to build on previous missions by demonstrating key capabilities critical to SpaceX’s long-term goals of making space travel more affordable and enabling human exploration of the Moon and Mars.
The primary objectives include executing a landing burn and achieving a soft splashdown of the Super Heavy booster in the Gulf of Mexico, showcasing its ability to return to Earth in a controlled manner. For the Starship upper stage, the mission targets a controlled entry and splashdown in the Indian Ocean, testing its reentry and landing precision. This flight is expected to be suborbital, similar to Flight 7, rather than achieving orbit, as SpaceX works to validate the Block 2 design of Ship 34 after the previous flight’s upper-stage failure.
Additionally, the mission will involve deploying ten “Starlink simulators”—mock satellites similar in size and weight to next-generation Starlink satellites—as a practice run for future satellite deployment missions. This test is a step toward Starship’s eventual role in launching large batches of satellites into orbit. SpaceX also plans to conduct heat shield experiments, including testing new tile designs, to refine the vehicle’s ability to withstand reentry conditions.
While earlier speculation suggested Flight 8 might attempt the first catch of the Ship upper stage by the launch tower’s “chopstick” arms, the failure of Ship 33 in Flight 7 makes this less likely. Instead, the focus remains on proving the Block 2 upgrades, ensuring system reliability, and gathering data to address issues like the propellant leak that led to Flight 7’s mid-flight anomaly. Scheduled for no earlier than February 26, 2025, from Starbase in Texas, this mission is a critical iteration in SpaceX’s rapid test-to-failure approach to perfecting the world’s largest and most powerful rocket.” https://grok.com/?referrer=website
BTW:
“SpaceX intends to launch Starship test flight 8 this coming Friday February 28th at 5:30 pm CT”
The USAF has been flying a Boeing B-52H Stratofortress less than 40 km from the Russian border.
Screenshot at 6:30AM, Florida Time: https://x.com/rklier21/status/1893986602990342380
It is flying tight ‘doughnuts’ over Eastern Estonia.
It has been on station for 4 hours. It is flying at 27,000 feet, with one brief sojourn to 1,700 feet. It took off from RAF Fairford, in Southern England.
Live track, if still aloft: https://www.flightradar24.com/393e424b
EDIT, It is currently the most tracked flight in the air, with 4,692 of us nuts watching it worldwide.
Update on the B52 circling near Russia….
The French Air Force is sending a tanker, an Airbus A330-243MRTT, on a course over Estonia that appears to be a mission to refuel the USAF plane.
I bet the Ruskies are not happy.
Track: https://www.flightradar24.com/CTM1074/393e7f30
Seems the German election resolved nothing. The social democrats (who seem to me much like ‘progressives’ in the USA), who dominated the previous government, lost a huge amount of support, while the “conservatives” (who seem to me similar to more moderate Democrats) gained a modest amount of support. The crazy Greens lost a little support. The communists gained a little. The right-wing AfD, which seems not far from MAGA, gained a lot of support, and is now the second largest block in the German parliament, after the (not-so) “conservatives”.
The “conservatives” have vowed to never form a coalition with AfD, which mean they can only form a government by combining with the Social Democrats, and the crazy Greens. A government combining the moderate left, progressive left, and wing-nut greens is going to have a hard time even formulating rational policy positions, never mind governing. I doubt the government will last very long.
For me, the interesting question is: if in the next election or two the AfD becomes the largest party in Germany…. which seems likely…, and with by far the most seats in parliament, will all the other parties form ideologically irrational alliances to keep AfD out of power? I suspect they will. Like in the USA, it seems all parties from the center to the wing-nut left are simply unwilling to change policies to reflect growing voter discontent about foolish and destructive policies. Like MAGA, the AfD didn’t create itself out of thin air… it is the result of stupid government policies. Weird.
Overt collusion to lock out a certain party may be a big mistake when/if that party ever gains power. Tea Party / MAGA support increased as the institutions beclowned themselves.
I don’t know enough about the AfD to render any judgment but the usual suspects like to label them Nazis a little too often without expressing what their policy view even are. They are apparently pro-Russia and anti-immigration but I don’t really trust the coverage.
Germany has had a number of recent terror attack from immigrants which has made their auto-labeling of anti-immigration views as racist nonviable politically.
Tom Scharf,
Everything I have read that actually comes from the AfD says that they are opposed to high levels of immigration, and want a negotiated end to the war in Ukraine. The regular terror attacks by immigrants will only make the AfD more popular.
The sensible path for the other parties would be to adopt some (less extreme) versions of the AfD agenda, and move Germany back toward the political center, with sensible domestic and foreign policies. But much like progressives in the USA, I don’t think they can bring themselves to do that.
This is news I think…..
‘At the same time, I am in serious discussions with President Vladimir Putin of Russia concerning the ending of the War, and also major Economic Development transactions which will take place between the United States and Russia. Talks are proceeding very well!’
….Trump,16 minutes ago
Foreign investment in Russia is very unlikely because Russia nationalized a lot of that foreign investment after the war started and everyone took huge losses.
I’d guess Trump is mostly talking about removing some fossil fuel sanctions in exchange for a settlement.
Megan McArdle at the WashPost writes a brutal column on academia:
“Academia is finally learning hard lessons” https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/02/24/universities-colleges-liberal-power-trump/
“Since you know that, let me make a less obvious and probably less welcome point: The left, not the right, picked this fight. Too many institutions set themselves up as the “Resistance” to Trump and tried to make a lot of mainstream political opinions anathematic, while expecting to be protected from backlash by principles such as academic freedom that they were no longer honoring. This was politically naive and criminally stupid for institutions that rely so heavily on U.S. taxpayer support.
…
Milquetoast professional opinions and legitimate research were retracted under pressure from activists. Scientists marched against Trump — not as private citizens but as scientists, as if lab work gave them some special moral authority.
…
Even if you think this was a move in the right moral direction, it was dangerous behavior. By presenting their expertise as part of a political fight, academics were not only squandering their credibility. They were asking to be treated like political adversaries. And in a real political fight, the ability to get your opponent’s journal article retracted is way less important than his ability to cut off your supply lines.
…
Like children throwing rocks from an overpass, they felt protected by their elevated position, assuming their targets could do little but yell back. They weren’t expecting one of the drivers to get out of the car and grab a baseball bat from the trunk.”
This is a big problem for ideological bubbles. It’s going to get worse if they don’t at least try to be ideologically diverse. Academia used to have humility.
I asked Grok3 beta:
‘What are Russian natural resources that the US needs’
Response:
Oil, gas, and rare earth elements were the top three;
Full response:
Russia possesses a wealth of natural resources, some of which are of interest to the United States due to their importance in various industries. Here are the key Russian resources that align with U.S. needs:
Oil and Gas: Russia is one of the world’s top producers of crude oil and natural gas. The U.S., while a major energy producer itself, still imports some oil and gas to meet domestic demand and stabilize markets. Russian energy exports, particularly liquefied natural gas (LNG), could theoretically supplement U.S. supplies, though geopolitical tensions and sanctions limit direct reliance.
Rare Earth Elements (REEs): Russia has significant deposits of rare earths, critical for manufacturing high-tech products like electronics, batteries, and defense systems. The U.S. depends heavily on imports (mostly from China) for these materials, and Russia’s reserves could serve as an alternative source to diversify supply chains.
Nickel: Russia is a leading producer of nickel, a key component in stainless steel and electric vehicle batteries. With the U.S. pushing for EV adoption, access to nickel is increasingly vital, and Russia’s output—largely from companies like Norilsk Nickel—could fill gaps if trade barriers weren’t an issue.
Titanium: Russia is a major supplier of titanium, used extensively in aerospace and defense industries (think aircraft frames and engines). The U.S. relies on imports for much of its titanium, and Russia’s state-backed VSMPO-AVISMA is one of the world’s largest producers.
Palladium: Russia dominates global palladium production, another Norilsk Nickel specialty. This metal is crucial for catalytic converters in vehicles, and the U.S. auto industry depends on steady supplies. Price spikes or shortages often tie back to Russia’s output.
Timber: Russia’s vast forests provide lumber and wood products. While the U.S. has its own timber resources, Russian softwood has historically been a cost-effective import for construction and manufacturing.
In practice, U.S.-Russia trade in these resources is heavily constrained by sanctions, political friction, and efforts to reduce dependence on adversarial nations. For instance, post-2022 sanctions slashed Russian oil imports to the U.S., and alternatives like domestic production or allies (Canada, Saudi Arabia) are prioritized. Still, Russia’s resource wealth remains a theoretical match for U.S. industrial and technological demands—geopolitics just keeps it out of reach for now.
Grading school research papers just got a lot more difficult.
How is a teacher gonna know if she’s reading Grok 3 or the student?!
In another development even the Bee couldn’t match in humor value: the usual suspects on the left are screaming that Trump firing all the woke generals and dismantling DEI infrastructure in the military is “politicization” of the military…. ignoring the blatant politicization done during the Biden presidency, where all manner of promotions and assignments were made in the name of DEI, while simultaneously instituting a DEI bureaucracy to ensure race/gender/sexual orientation was always a factor for promotion. Aside from DEI being illegal, it is incredibly stupid.
So putting a revolutionary, politically motivated policy in place is NOT politicization, but removing that policy is politicization. I wonder if these people can appreciate how irrational they sound. They should listen to Barak: “elections have consequences”, and get over it.
This may explain the B-52 near Russia yesterday:
‘ Today, the Finnish Air Force, along with its allies, participated in the Estonian Independence Day parade in Tallinn with two F/A-18 Hornets. Elagu Eesti Vabariik!’
It explains the 20 minutes low altitude time (a flyover) and the rest of the time in a holding pattern (and annoying the Russians)
Tom Scharf,
The more interesting thing was why the fuel/oxygen was leaking: There was unexpected harmonic vibration in the fuel/oxidizer lines which caused sealed joints to leak. Which makes some sense, since (I think) that part of the upper stage had been lengthened compared to early craft…. changing the natural harmonic frequency of associated structures.
At the altitude of the explosion, there was not enough atmospheric pressure to support combustion…. so I think it had to be both methane and oxygen leaking.
Putin is a master at the game:
“ He pointed out that Russia has significantly larger reserves of rare earth metals than Ukraine and is open to working with foreign partners in developing rare earth deposits, including in the occupied parts of Ukraine which Putin called “newly controlled regions.”
Zelenskyy said no to Trump on the rare earth deal, so Putin says “let’s make a deal”.
Musk and company have released new versions of the Grok AI systems. I am impressed. Seems Musk has a winner in Grok 3.
Me: Do flying planes increase atmospheric pressure?
Grok 3: Flying planes don’t significantly increase atmospheric pressure in a meaningful way. Atmospheric pressure is determined by the weight of the air above a given point, influenced by factors like altitude, temperature, and weather patterns. Planes do displace air as they move, creating localized changes in pressure—think of the high-pressure zones under the wings and low-pressure zones above them that generate lift. But these effects are tiny and temporary compared to the vast scale of the atmosphere.
Even if you consider a busy airspace with lots of planes, their combined impact on overall atmospheric pressure is negligible. The atmosphere is just too massive, and planes are too small and spread out to alter it in any lasting or measurable way. Studies on aviation’s environmental effects focus more on emissions—like CO2 or water vapor—than pressure changes, because that’s where the real impact lies. So, no, planes don’t crank up atmospheric pressure in any way you’d notice.
Me: Anything heavy being supported by the atmosphere (like a flying plane) must increase total atmospheric pressure, even if by a negligible amount. Is this not logically correct?
Grok 3: You’re right—logically, anything with mass that’s supported by the atmosphere, like a flying plane, does technically increase the total atmospheric pressure by adding its weight to the system. A plane in flight is held up by the air beneath it, and that weight gets distributed across the atmosphere. So, in a strict sense, the total pressure at the Earth’s surface must increase by an amount proportional to the plane’s weight divided by the surface area over which that weight is ultimately spread.
For example, a Boeing 747 weighs about 400,000 pounds (180,000 kg) fully loaded. Earth’s surface area is roughly 5.1 × 10¹? square meters. If you spread that weight across the entire atmosphere, the pressure increase works out to something like 3.5 × 10?¹? pascals. Normal atmospheric pressure is around 101,325 pascals, so we’re talking a change on the order of one trillionth of the baseline. Even if you had 10,000 planes in the air at once, it’s still a whisper of an effect—far below what any instrument could detect or what would matter in practice.
Your logic holds: there’s an increase, however minuscule. It’s just that the atmosphere is so vast that this contribution gets diluted to effectively nothing. The plane’s weight is real, but the system absorbing it is so enormous that it swallows the effect without blinking.
Grok did WAY better than Chat GPT4 did with this question. First, Grok (correctly) qualifies its initial answer with “significantly”, though it followed up with unrelated comments about wing lift, localized pressures, aircraft emissions, and heavy traffic around airports (a little like a word-salad from Kamala 😉 ). OTOH, the second answer is perfect, if informal, acknowledging that logic demands flying aircraft MUST increase atmospheric pressure, even if the effect is too tiny to measure.
Maybe Grok will be worth the subscription fee.
Dependencies on Russia might be a bad strategic plan …
However I’m not opposed to dealing with countries on a transactional basis. There is definitely some strategic thinking required and Russia can’t be trusted. Trump running around trying to do “deals” doesn’t bother me because they can always be rejected. I was never opposed to talking to Iran either.
I find the likelihood of anything happening in either case low but I also find the nebulous value of long term partnerships with trusted allies to be overstated. The partnership with the EU has resulted in military dependency that helps nobody.
The histrionics on display regarding Elon Musk instructing federal employees to list five things they accomplished last week is perfectly consistent with my experience with civil servants at NASA. I remember witnessing a similar response to being required to have daily standup meetings (Agile), where everyone had to talk about what they were currently working on, how it was going, what if any problems they were having, and what progress they were making. Civil servants went berserk at this [in my group].
“I also find the nebulous value of long term partnerships with trusted allies to be overstated.”
Especially when those ‘trusted allies’ are working to force THIER priorities on the USA. I am very offended by Europeans trying to censor the speech of US citizens. I also think that kind of thing is exactly what demands a re-evaluation of which countries are allies. Countries that embrace policies in profound conflict with the spirit of the US Constitution are unlikely to remain allies for long.
mark bofill,
Daily meetings may be a bit much (and potential big waste of time), but weekly or monthly meetings are perfectly sensible. I participated in monthly technical meetings (representatives from all technical areas), where projects/progress/problems were discussed, for many years. A detail report from these meetings was circulated to all technical staff, including those who did not directly participate. Unlike many meetings, these were not a waste of time.
In production (rather than staff) areas, a brief (10 -15 minutes) daily meeting covering “what are you going to do today?” was also useful.
We don’t have to justify our jobs, we are the government! Ha ha.
Regardless of the intent, the reaction is politically useful. The endless stream of anecdotal stories of job losses in the public sector while completely ignoring the private sector also tells you where the legacy media is.
Entire industrial sectors were gutted over the past few decades and the federal government might lose 5% of their employees here. Cry me a river. The media is searching hard to find something, anything, people might actually notice and failing for the most part.
Steve,
Sure, my chief complaint about standup is when managers decide to have the meeting in a conference room and everyone sits down. This causes the potential duration of the meeting to skyrocket. Standup isn’t supposed to take more than 5 or 10 minutes max.
Don’t let me give you the impression I am a fan of the Agile methodology, because I am not, but standup is a reasonable and useful thing to do in small groups or teams.
I feel sorry for anyone losing their job. But you know… stuff like this
Wade told CNN he’d heard “anger and disappointment and rage” from fired employees.
For a large number of the employees, working at the NPS was a “dream job,” said Wade. Park rangers are usually motivated by passion more than financial gain, he added.
“We used to say that, you know, in the Park Service you get paid in sunsets,” said Wade.
he salary of a National Park Service (NPS) park ranger can range from $37,000–$63,000 per year, including base salary and additional pay. The average base salary is around $48,000 per year.
Salary by grade
Park Ranger I: $41,352–$55,524
Park Ranger II: $46,644–$62,748
Park Ranger III: $55,524–$74,604
Park Ranger IV: $69,264–$93,132
Factors affecting salary
Since this is the government, they probably also get benefits.
Meanwhile, many retail workers at Joanne fabrics are losing their jobs. what do they make?
Fabric store employees, such as cashiers and sales associates, can earn between $13 and $16 per hour.
Fabric store employee salaries
Fabric store cashier and sales associate: Typically earn between $13 and $16 per hour
Fabric sales rep: Salaries vary by city, with some of the highest paying cities being San Jose, Daly City, Santa Cruz, and Oakland
Fabric buyer: Salaries vary by city, with some of the highest paying cities being San Francisco, Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, and Livermore
So maybe $32K. Likely, few if any benefits. Plus many are part time.
The fact is, “Park Ranger” is a dream job for lots of people who have it because (a) the pay is pretty good especially relative to (b) the amount of stress and responsibility.
They describe this guy:
His job wasn’t glamorous: He cleaned toilets and picked up dirty diapers from trails, he said. But he was passionate about the work, saying he chose to work for the park instead of taking higher-paid jobs as a plumber because of his passion for preserving America’s “natural beauty.”
Well… ok. But higher paid plumbing jobs are higher paying because plumbers provide a necessary service. If he can train to be a plumber, maybe he should.
Likely people who cut fabric at Joanne aren’t going to talk about how they chose to work at the fabric store instead of higher paying jobs (doing what?) because of their passion for fabric. Or their passion for supporting the continued existence of the crafting business. But… well… Honestly, I think the higher paid NPS rangers did the job partly for the money.
The important issue should be: What access to parks do we want, how much should tax payers pay, and are the employees paid competitively relative to what we could pay employees who want this job? I’m not for paying people starvation wages– but I’m also not for paying them a lot more than the private sector would pay for ‘similar’ jobs. I have no idea how NPS pays relative to, say, Disney, Busch Gardens, or various theme parks that attract vacationers. Is it more? Less? Dunno.
Now, obviously, the carrying capacity of parks is going to be lower with fewer workers. If there are fewer people to clean toilets, help people with parking and so on, they will need to cut the number of people who can visit. This can either be done by raising prices, or having lotteries or combinations of both. (Lotteries need to be done carefully– allowing resale will just result in scalping which means “the wrong” people make the money.)
I’m not planning a visit to the national park. So those cuts aren’t going to affect me. And also: if I want to buy fabric, I may need to buy it online. Both NPS rangers and Joanne employees are losing jobs. I don’t really see much focus on the individuals losing jobs at Joanne. I do see it for park rangers.
“It made me really angry,” Townsend said. “I work really hard at my job. I have two degrees … and to be told that I’m not meeting the standards of my job – it’s a complete lie.”
I read the letters the government sent– and yes, they would be seriously annoying. I think those employees were probably mostly meeting the standards of the job as it existed.
The problem is the wording is the way it is because rules cut two ways. The government is likely going to “have to” say they “didn’t meet standards” rather than just say, “We are reducing staff because we are reducing services we supply to the public. You were doing find, but your job no longer exists. You are redundant. Ciao!”
The latter is probably the sort of things people who cut fabric and run registers at Joanne are told. Losing their job is not their fault– it’s just the store is closing.
On this
Wade said he hoped the government would reverse the cuts and restore the fired employees – and urged concerned citizens to make their voices heard.
I have no opinion on whether we should or should not cut the number of park rangers. I don’t visit national parks. I think it’s great people can go see Old Faithful, but I also don’t know what the cost is to the public. I also think it’s great people can visit Disney World which (I think) we don’t particularly pay for out of the public purse.
I can live without ever visiting Old Faithful and probably will manage to do so.
Hhmmm… It’s also not clear plumbers make more than park rangers:
Plumber Salary in Illinois Comparison by Location
Nationwide United States $30
Illinois United States $29
Plumbers pay is very compressed.
They give annual salaries below– all in the mid $60Ks.
So about the same as “Park Ranger III”. No idea how benefits compare, but typically government jobs have good benefits. That can be sort of a way to “hide” the fact that the pay is actually good relative to the private sector since the public can generally easily find the salary and not the benefits. ( Now… the motive may not be to “hide” anything– but it does accomplish that.)
I see from yesterday’s WSJ news section that the statist left’s arguments against the Trump attempts to reduce the size of government will revolve around the effort not amounting to very many savings on the one hand and on the other that those reductions could have devastating effects on the economy. That the arguments appear contradictory should not be surprising given the blatant effort the left will make to keep government growing without critical review.
I, unfortunately, judge that the Trump effort could stall and fail unless their arguments include explanations of the broken window fallacy from Frederic Bastiat (opportunity costs) to which the public can understand and relate. The opportunity costs should not be putting the savings back into another government agency. Government endeavors where the financing is coerced are always going to be inefficient compared to the private sector where it is not.
Neither Trump nor Musk have the intellectual interest to do this explaining and thus they need to look to free market economists to bolster their reasoning for rolling back government. In the not too near future and probably already underway will be efforts by Republicans and their supporters to opt out of the rollback. It is those people who probably need reasoned arguments for continuing the effort as much as the general public.
I’ve been to a bunch of national parks. I don’t see how the number of rangers changes the park’s attendance capacity much. They seem mostly present to enforce park rules, not clean toilets.
You can’t really increase national park rates without cutting off the low end of citizens which kind of circumvents the entire purpose of national parks.
Glacier National Park was basically at capacity every day and you needed a reserved car pass to enter the park or you had to use inconvenient shuttles. $36 to enter daily. They purposefully don’t expand capacity to preserve the park blah blah blah.
Some of the ranger jobs suck, manning the entrance gate, dealing with irate tourists, policing parking, etc. but some is walking the trails. It’s a job with the usual good and bad parts but there are far worse jobs.
In order to keep costs down for lower class citizens to visit, most state parks are at minimal staffing. From what I could tell. they probably all lose money. There are incredible bargains to be had at some state park cabins / camping relative to market rates.
Most of the food services are contracted out and well … parks aren’t known for the food.
My guess is ranger to tourist ratio is at least 100:1 at major parks. Park upkeep (fixing roads and infrastructure) is likely the main cost.
There appears to be a big difference between what plumbers make and what I get charged by plumbing companies, ha ha.
CNN: Twenty-one federal employees resign ‘in protest’ over DOGE efforts
“The Associated Press, which first reported on the resignations, said their resignation letter states: “We will not use our skills as technologists to compromise core government systems, jeopardize Americans’ sensitive data, or dismantle critical public services,” adding “We will not lend our expertise to carry out or legitimize DOGE’s actions.”
Hilarious. Good bye. These are exactly the type of activist types we want out of government. It’s like the HR department resigning because they don’t want to do layoffs. It’s unpleasant for sure, but it’s entitlement when everyone thinks that get to personally unilaterally decide what happens.
There are very few people who are not replaceable.
John Ferguson,
A footnote to our last exchange; I read in the Times of Israel (and other places, actually a NYT interview is the real source) that at least some Hamas leaders say they would have thought twice about the Oct 7’th attack if they understood the degree of retaliation they were about to provoke:
“If it was expected that what happened would happen, there wouldn’t have been October 7,” Abu Marzouk said, asserting that — though he claimed to not have been privy to the exact details of the planned assault — he could not have brought himself to approve it, knowing what he knows now.
Not all of Hamas agrees with this, to be sure:
In a statement issued a short while later by the group itself, Hamas claimed Abu Marzouk’s comments were “incorrect and taken out of context.”
But still. This is why Israeli retaliation was important.
Some of the ranger jobs suck, manning the entrance gate, dealing with irate tourists, policing parking, etc. but some is walking the trails. It’s a job with the usual good and bad parts but there are far worse jobs.
Probably similar to some jobs at Disney World.
Tom
CNN: Twenty-one federal employees resign ‘in protest’ over DOGE efforts
Elon is probably disappointed it’s not more!
Did they give the ages of these employees? Do they qualify for retirement benefits?
I looked at the video of the crash landing of the CRJ900 at Toronto. Looks to me like 1) the rate of descent was pretty high, and maybe too high, and 2) the plane got tilted some to the right side just a split second before touchdown, probably by a strong gust of wind.
It looks like the rear landing gear on the right (starboard) side collapsed, leading to the right wing getting torn off, a huge fuel fireball, and the rest that followed. It will be interesting to see whether the cause is determine do be too steep a descent, unpredictable wind gusts, mechanical failure, or a combination.
One speculation is that a strong gust died right before landing causing it to drop rapidly, the overall glide slope was OK according to what I read.
The plane didn’t flare on the landing and people didn’t know why.
Tom,
With many flights I have been on with bad weather landings, I have observed that the pilots seem to forcefully “plant” the plane on the runway… giving the impression of a ‘hard’ landing…. rather than flare-and-softly-touch like normal. I have guessed they don’t want to be too much at the mercy of changing winds. Maybe John Ferguson can give some insight here.
lucia,
I feel exactly as bad about those workers resigning as I felt about FL Senator Bill Nelson getting voted out of office in 2018. Nelson always claimed he was a ‘moderate’, but his voting record showed he was in lock step with progressives on every issue that mattered. He was simply dishonest.
In 2017 I sent an email to Nelson’s office complaining about his many very-far-from-moderate votes. The reply was (in a few more words) basically “pound sand, the Senator doesn’t want your vote”. Seldom have I been as happy that a politician lost an election.
OK, I was just as happy that Casey lost in PA last November….. another of the faux-moderate Senatorial class.
Mabey that sorry group of Senators should be called MINO caucus: moderate in name only.
Mark,
That a Hamas leader admitted they wouldn’t have done it had they known what the Israelis would do. This is exactly what a Hezbollah leader said a few years ago about a similar level of retaliation.
John,
Yes. Using retaliation as a discouragement for bad behavior presupposes rational actors, and Hamas and Hezbollah leadership appears to be at best a blend of semi-rational and irrational actors. I have said before that (AFAICT) there is nothing that Israel can do to unilaterally solve the problem, short of exterminating the civilian population of Gaza, and the Israelis clearly remain unwilling to do that.
Still, others have eyes to see and rationality to understand the exchange and learn from it. While retaliation does not solve Israelis problem (short of actual complete extermination of their enemies) it conceivably limits the number of enemies willing to take the field against them. Not all of their enemies are irrational actors.
I doubt Hamas expected the border to be so porous and for their massacre to be so “successful”. This prompted a viscous Israeli reaction. AFAICT hardly anyone was told of the operation beforehand and I suspect most of the civilian deaths were an operation that just lost operational control, but they had to ultimately own it.
Whether they thought it was a mistake will be better defined by whether they decide to do it again anytime soon. It isn’t that hard to take out civilians.
mark,
Rational has more than one meaning. To understand retaliation as a discouragement for bad behavior only requires that one be rational in the sense of “Having or exercising the ability to reason.” Hamas and Hezbollah are clearly rational by that definition.But they are arguably not rational according to the definition “consistent with good judgement”.
Mike,
Yes. I was using the game theory notion of a rational actor:
The rational actor theory states that individuals are rational decision-makers who evaluate all of the information and options available to them to make choices that align with their desired goals and outcomes. This theory assumes that people act according to self-interest, choosing the option that maximizes their benefits and minimizes their costs.
One can argue that religious extremists are rational actors with a different set of assumptions about the nature of reality, but for reasonable intents and purposes it is simpler to categorize them as semi-rational or irrational actors, even though this is not necessarily strictly true.
Depending on what numbers you choose to believe literally half of Hamas’s army has been killed and some further large number injured. Netanyahu survived politically. UNWRA has been disgraced and effectively defunded. Assad has been toppled. Hezbollah was forced to pull out of the conflict with heavy losses, especially their leadership. Iran is significantly weakened. Gaza is a complete disaster zone. Missiles launched into Israel from Gaza is now almost zero.
Hamas still has some cosplay soldiers making videos and may survive in some form, there is that. Their leadership has been mostly killed.
There is strategically irrational and then there is irrationally stupid. This was the latter. It had a low probability of success (whatever they thought was success) and it didn’t work out.
Nobody really knows but Hamas was probably hoping to draw everyone into the war regionally. That happened at a small scale but everyone who decided to join got their a**es handed to them.
Even religious extremists want to obtain their goals with wise use of available resources. The Taliban are extreme but they aren’t completely irrational.
Tom,
Ok, but what do we conclude then? Hamas leadership is rational but stupid? They just made a mistake, perhaps; they were the victims of their unexpected success.
Hamas and Palestinian goals are irrational in the sense that they want Israel destroyed. This doesn’t actually profit them, but because of their religious beliefs I expect they view the calculation differently. To oversimplify (again) to provide an example, a suicide bombing is much more attractive if one believes a harem of lovely women awaits one in the afterlife.
All of this is in a sense besides my point, which I guess I must have expressed poorly. Really, I think what my disagreement with liberals in general and perhaps John specifically in this conversation boils down to is this: It is never a good idea to allow it to be a profitable strategy for other people to damage you. I believe this statement remains true even when the other people absolutely refuse to learn better and persist in the unprofitable conflict. My impression is that this is what the disagreement boils down to.
John Ferguson, do you disagree with my characterization of our difference of opinion here? I appreciate the discussion BTW and hope you do not find this discussion offensive. Sometimes I try to offend people but I am not trying to offend you right now, FWIW.
I didn’t say that quite right. I should have said something more like this : It’s important to impose cost for adversaries to damage you, even if it doesn’t appear to discourage them.
I say this because (again) I contend that there isn’t actually any payoff in reality for Hamas et al to destroy Israel, so I shouldn’t speak of allowing them to do something ‘profitable’, as I did above when I said ‘allow damaging you to be a profitable strategy’. It’s not ‘profitable’.
It’s irrational for Hamas to believe that by itself it can eject the Jews from Israel. The method they tried was plain stupid, it imposed massive costs on them for almost nothing gained. I guess they got some prisoners back and Israel’s global respect was diminished a bit.
It seems like a temper tantrum more than anything.
A better plan is to play nice and wait a few decades. Perhaps Iran will loan you a few nukes in 2050.
I’m not expressing myself clearly, I’m sorry. I’ll try again some other time. Thanks all.
Perfectly rational people can arrive at irrational conclusions by a process of rational thought. All it takes is a mistake or two along the way, either in logic or in an assumption that might never even be stated. One hopes to be able to recognize an irrational conclusion so that the error can be tacked down and eliminated. But all too often, that does not happen, especially when the irrational conclusion is what one wants to believe.
As a result, none of us are fully rational. There is always some irrationality mixed in.
I think I understand the gist of mark’s position. If somebody is trying to harm you, don’t let ’em. If they succeed, make ’em pay. Otherwise, you will get harmed a lot.
Totally agree. Impose disproportionate costs with your disproportionate military. That’s why you have it, it’s a mistake to be proportionate with somebody like Hamas.
I would really like to have seen the planning meetings for this. Meek nerdy terrorist guy: “Ummmm boss … might Israel not annihilate us?”.
What was the answer to that? Boggles my mind.
Mike,
There, that is indeed the gist of it. Thanks!
Tom,
IKR? Thanks.
Yes , the consequences for Gazans have to be bad enough that they will have good reason to be more cautious about murder, rape, and mutilation. That doesn’t mean they will be more cautious; they are a bunch of religious fanatics who want only to destroy Israel, after all. But there is at least a reasonable chance they will be more cautious.
If Trump could persuade some of the Muslim countries to accept a limited number of Gazans, and supplied enough financial aid to make that attractive, then there would surely be Gazans who would want to leave…. having people WANT to settle elsewhere would be really bad publicity for Hamas among Muslims. I think even a hundred thousand would make a big impact .
SteveF, i like that idea. But where? It would have to be a country nearby where muslims could fit in, without huge unemployment problem. Maybe Saudi, or one of the gulf states? Not Jordan, the existing palestinian population in Jordan is 2 million of the total of 11 million, or so I was told when we were there last month.
A problem with this is if Gaza is reconstructed as the Riviera of the Eastern Med, they’ll all want to return.
and BTW, I’d love to hear how extensive your daughter’s rewrites of ai downloads is. Are they real rewrites? the sort that are likely to really enable the content to be understood?
john ferguson,
I suspect abandoning the “right of return” to Gaza would have to be part of the deal. Donno how many Gazans would take the offer, but considering what a (dangerous) mess Gaza is, I have to believe some Gazans would want to leave.
WRT to AI re-writes: I know that she “puts the information in her own words”, so I guess than means she understands enough to formulate her own sentences. How much of that she retains? I really don’t know. I do know that she considered re-writing in her own words to be “work” (she would much prefer to do other things), so I guess the process requires some comprehension and thinking. What I have read of her re-writes usually sounds quite reasonable, especially considering that she is a self-taught English speaker (Portuguese is her first language; she started teaching herself English by reading English language sites on the Internet at about 8 or 9 years old).
Do pilots “forcefully plant” rather than “flare” the plane under bad landing conditions?
I like SteveF’s idea as a matter of compassion for the people in Gaza who would want the leave. But the people who genuinely support Hamas and want to see Israel destroyed will probably not want to leave. So the problem will remain.
While using Apple’s automatic dictation feature to send messages on Tuesday, some iPhone users reported seeing a peculiar bug: the word “racist” temporarily appearing as “Trump,” before quickly correcting itself.
…
“This smells like a serious prank,” Mr. Burkey [described as “a former member of Apple’s Siri team who is still in regular contact with the team”] said. “The only question is: Did someone slip this into the data or slip into the code?”
…
In 2018, Siri was the center of another political controversy when the voice assistant displayed a nude image in response to the question: “Who is Donald Trump?” The bug was linked to rogue Wikipedia editors who had changed the source of Siri’s information.
That would give a completely different meaning to : “From the River(Jordan) to the sea”
SteveF, planting vs flaring a landing is not a simple issue with jet-transports. Although I’ve been on plenty of rides completed with elegant flares,, it could be that getting on the reversers can be quicker with a plant land > shorter roll-out.
A flare introduces the possibility of low speed float during which the plane might be blown a bit off the intended path by crosswind gust, although I’m not sure about this with planes as big as the ones we’re considering.
Navy trains pilots to do plant landings although I’ve seen flares on carrier landings where you really should have been doing a plant (I think).
I’d complained about a landing in Jacksonville on a SAAB 340 (turbine twin) which was I thought a fairly violent plant to an ex navy fighter pilot who was certain she was ex-navy.
There are a lot of things you can do if you don’t have to pay for fuel or maintenance.,
Conspiracy theory!
The usual caveat applies… I have not a shred of evidence for this theory.
I am going to mingle two recent news stories.
First on USAID:
“The 2025 foreign aid budget included $268,376,000 allocated by Congress to support “independent media and the free flow of information.”
Second on MSNBC:
“Rachel Maddow staff to be let go as part of MSNBC overhaul”
and:
An MSNBC source said that the changes were not “widespread layoffs” but rather the reallocation of producers to support new programs and priorities.”
Now my theory;
MSNBC was receiving laundered funds from the $268,000,000 allocated by USAID. That explains why they employed left wing ,bigoted, and racist hosts who had a miniscule TV audience. They were being paid with USAID money to attack conservative ideology. Now that that funding is being cut off, MSNBC had to change its programming to actually try to attract an audience.
References: https://rsf.org/en/usa-trump-s-foreign-aid-freeze-throws-journalism-around-world-chaos?mc_cid=4e8b353ce6&mc_eid=2f6d1b7690 https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/25/msnbc-layoffs-rachel-maddow
Maybe cutting a trillion per year out of the federal budet is possible.
Russell,
I think it’s more that Maddow’s ratings have tanked. I doubt that many at this site could stand anything she has to say, but for those of us who can, she drives us nuts. She somehow manages to compress 2 minutes of material into 30 minutes. Sort of a long rant. Maybe if she sang it, like a Handel aria, it might be more enjoyable, but alas. “All we, like sheep” for example.
She claims that the repetition helps her message sink-in more effectively.
Lawrence O’Donnell does the same thing. I hate it.
Joy Reid was let go after some truly astonishing racist observations about what whitey does and does not do.
Simone, of the long fingernails, which imply abhorance of real work, at least to me, has been promoted, so MSNBC’s leftie chops have not been abandoned. But then Michael Steele, ex Republican Chair has also moved to weekdays. He is very funny, and more the Republican I think i used to be.
The mean age of the evening viewers of this stuff apparently is 70.
The tragedy, at least to me, is that Alex Wagner, who I think is exceedingly bright, does not rant, and hosts interesting guests has been sent to the sidelines. If you can handle leftie-light and surprising insights into what’s happening, she’s worth watching. I wonder if she wasn’t sufficiently communist.
So I don’t think they are getting fed funds by any imaginable route.
John,
You are probably right. USAID media money getting turned off and MSNBC radically upending their programming is just a coincidence.
I like to let my imagination roam freely.
Another thought…
FOX news is losing a lot of their material. MSNBC hosts were punching bags for Fox hosts.
Russell,
I’m not surprised that MSNBC ratings have taken a tumble. Their viewers, including us, lost the election. Why would we continue to watch after its over?
It got really grueling to listen to their usual gang wring their panties night after night wondering where we went wrong without beginning to guess what the problem was.
They had no idea, nor did the party.
And “not centrist enough, too far left” doesn’t cut it without getting into specifics like WAY too much investment in issues of either no interest to most of the country, or actually repellent.
And BTW, how are you holding up suddenly by yourself? Jan and I ran a business together in late 80s – together 24 hours a day for seven years, then 10 years on the boat (close quarters) and now retired. So athought we knew each other in grade school, we’ve been together 24/7 almost 30 years in total.
It’s gotta be tought.
Thanks John,
Yes, it’s a difficult adjustment. I’m still feeling my way through it. Connie had been suffering for three years and I was the primary care giver. That was the most difficult period of my life. I was physically and emotionally a wreck.
But, I’m getting back into my old ways, first I’m cooking a lot!
The kids, grandkids and neighbors have been wonderful too.
Got a new car. Gave the used ones to the kids. There are a lot of financial and legal chores that also need tending to also.
anent my remark about the Dems having no idea. It isn’t all of them, to wit:
At the University of Chicago’s Institute of Politics last week, former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg was nearly apoplectic about the diversity spectacles at the recent Democratic National Committee meeting—where outgoing chair Jaime Harrison delivered a soliloquy about the party’s rules for nonbinary inclusion, and candidates for party roles spent the bulk of their time campaigning to identity-focused caucuses of DNC members.
From the Atlantic, which to my POV still has its head screwed on straight.
This may be paywalled; I have a subscription so don’t know. this is the most succinct appraisal of what ails the Democratic Party.
I may be one of the few that thinks having a two-party system is important and have been frustrated that neither of the present incarnations has much to do with my POV.
I think you guys who hate the Dems would hate them a little less if they adopted the writer’s reocommendations.
HaroldW,
I saw that, pretty funny. Likely some activist employee who needs to be found and very publicly fired. The thing that matters is how Apple responds to it and I think they are rolling out a very fast fix for it.
“Why would we continue to watch after its over?”
It’s a lot different than it was in 2016. Ratings went through the roof in Trump v1.0 with the resistance and Trump Russia Collusion. This time around is a profound demoralization.
Everybody overreads election results. TDS was a real thing and this time around is a better strategy. Wait for Trump to actually do something bad instead of trying to invent it, sell the snake oil, and screaming like your ice cream cone just hit the sidewalk.
It’s so bad that people simply don’t care what MSNBC and CNN have to say anymore. I find it endlessly amusing that the AP is suing the government for their God given right to closely cover the White House … because they did such a great job letting us know Biden was a walking corpse when they had that access, ha ha.
I would say many / most (?) people don’t really know the difference between Medicaid and Medicare. People are intentionally obfuscating Medicaid cuts as Medicare I think.
A lot of this may be the general healthcare cost trend.
Tom Scharf,
“It’s so bad that people simply don’t care what MSNBC and CNN have to say anymore. ”
Sure, most people don’t care what they say. The few times I have listened to video clips, what they say is either 1) factually wrong, or 2) grotesquely (and dishonestly) exaggerated. That is not a formula for gaining audience share. CBS is no different; the absurd claim that free speech allowed the Nazis to gain power is symptomatic of the problem: The MSM talking heads have not the faintest clue what is accurate and what is not. They are very ignorant AND at the same time very biased against all things Trump (or conservative!). It is a bad combination; it leads to bad ratings.
Tom Scharf,
“People are intentionally obfuscating Medicaid cuts as Medicare I think.”
Yes, of course. Now and always in the past. More dishonest MSM reporting. Medicare is hugely popular. Medicaid? Not so much.
Bezos says the WashPost opinion section will now focus on “personal liberties and free markets”. The opinion editor quit.
The legacy media is in disarray, in a good way.
Instead of the new social media / influencer tribe graduating to legacy media it is transitioning in the opposite direction.
Joy Reid was also fired but that particular type of show had kind of worn itself out.
We are reaching peak Republican … enjoy it while it lasts.
What? Advocating evil personal liberty? Evil market capitalism??
The opinion editor quitting is the best evidence yet that Bezos is starting to come to his senses. The beauty of it is that he is quite rich enough to fire them all and hire reasonable replacements…. a hundred times…. with it not impacting him much financially. The WaPo staff should think long and hard about who they are complaining about and how much he needs to worry about what they think.
I remember commenting at ATTP once (many years ago) about personal liberty….. I was attacked by the rabble, accused of not caring about poor people, and labeled a ‘liberty crusader’ or something similar. Which I guess was meant to mean something bad. It was bizarre, and yet, that remains exactly the mindset of the progressive left today: supporting personal freedom and liberty is considered evil, while hewing strictly to ‘socially responsible’ leftist views means you are, by definition, as pure as the driven snow.
There seems to me to be no daylight between Marx and today’s progressives. They are just as wrong as Marx was.
Tom Scharf,
That legal principle (effectively, there can’t be any racial discrimination against people in the majority) has blocked lawsuits against blatant discrimination for decades.
Lyndon Johnson was vocally supportive of discrimination against some (white people) to favor others (black people). This had not changed at all until the SC ruled against Harvard for its discriminatory admissions policies. If individuals of any race have equal legal standing to claim racial discrimination, then Lyndon Johnson’s blatantly racist philosophy is (finally!) doomed to disappear. 40 years too late, but better than never.
Tom
The opinion editor quit.
Has this nameless person started a substack yet? I’m sure Joy Reid can do the same. Otherwise, it will need to be OnlyFans.
lucia,
David Shipley, age ~61. English major, Williams (I think). Long history of editorial positions with ‘progressive’ publications. I doubt he will start a sub stack, if only because few would likely subscribe.
Bezos noted that legacy opinion sections have become outdated and have been replaced by the internet.
Largely true. Running the opinion and then allowing comments and discussion can bring in readers. But just running the opinion with no rebuttal? Or only publishing selected readers comments two days later? That’s so two decades ago.
Shipley
leave the publisher was reached “after reflection on how I can best move forward in the profession I love.”
Maybe he’ll try to write a book. Or maybe he thinks he can be one of those regularly invited pundits on news-adjacent shows. But I think those are going out of vogue. And he’ll be in competition with Joy Reid.
Amazon and Blue Origin founder “has prioritized those commercial interests over The Post, and he is betraying The Post’s longstanding principles to do so.”
What are WAPO’s long standing principles? (Kinda sorta real question. I mean…. I honestly don’t know. I don’t know most news papers “principles”. I would think they should be reporting news truthfully, thoroughly, in as unbiased a way, prioritizing more important stuff over less important stuff and yada, yada. I’m not seeing how broadening the topics for the opinion page would go against that.)
Meanwhile, Cameron Barr, a former senior managing editor for the Post, said in a LinkedIn post that he would end his “professional association” with the newspaper, saying Bezos’ changes represent “an unacceptable erosion of its commitment to publishing a healthy diversity of opinion and argument.”
Where they committed to “publishing a healthy diversity of opinion and argument”. I don’t really know since it’s behind a pay wall. My impression was “diversity of opinion” wasn’t really their strong suit, but my impression isn’t all that informed. After all: I don’t read WAPO.
I guess we’ll see how WAPO does. I think it’s a tough environment for “newspapers”.
I know I’m not going to subscribe to a ton of them. There is probably no change they can make that will cause me to subscribe.
John,
You recently commented on the Democrat’s feeble attempts to analyse what went wrong. Would you entertain a post-mortem from a mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging Conservative?
Here goes….
I think the modern Democrats are determined by three underpinning organizations; One, is the DNC and local Democrat organizations. Two, is the left-wing media [Yes, I include the media as an underpinning of the Democrat Party]. Three, is academia, the teachers union, and local school boards.
These three determining organizations for the Democrats have one glaring weakness:
They each lack diversity in their ranks. Oh they are careful to have diversity of skin color and queerness but they totally lack people with diversity of ideology. They not only are opposed to having conservative members in their club they don’t even like moderate Democrats or, God forbid, Libertarians. I had never heard any of these three organizations question the makeup of their membership. But as long as they are completely homogeneous in their structure they will never be able to identify with the current voter sentiments in the country.
They are doomed.
Russell, I think your point about academia and unions is valid, although I am almost (almost!) pleased to note that you didn’t include the universities.
But I don’t think that either the media or the DNC have much impact on political discourse or behavior. Certainly not in cable TV. The NY Times has been enraging the left for two decades and the WaPo only increased their ire. MSNBC? Since I quit watching it after my move to Spain, I think there are only eleven viewers left.
And since the DNC never does anything right, you should hope they are influential. But they’re not. Not really.
And you’re not a knuckle dragger, Russell. You’re just a conservative.
lucia,
“What are WAPO’s long standing principles?”
I don’t know that they have ever clearly stated those. But I have a working guide: if I find something profoundly stupid, they will very likely be all for it. If I find something socially destructive, they will likely find it critically important to expand. If I think something is a terrible waste of money, they will likely think it woefully underfunded. If I find something to be in clear conflict with the Constitution, they will likely think a ‘better interpretation’ of the Constitution makes it constitutional. I am sure a print version of the WaPo would be excellent for fish cleaning, but I don’t think I’ve ever encountered a print version on Cape Cod.
Russell,
Regarding your view of what ails the Democrats. You’ve got it 100%.
I would love to get back to a politics where I’m not forced to pick the least of the evils, as I see them.
Thomas, Your comment:
“ I am almost (almost!) pleased to note that you didn’t include the universities.”
I intended to include universities and colleges in my analysis but I worded it poorly.
The lack of introspection of these three Democrat stalwarts [DNC, media, and academia] is remarkable. They are looking outward for the root cause of the Democrats demise when they should be looking inward.
Their lack of diversity of membership is striking. We keep hearing that America is a big tent, but the three big poobahs of the Democrats are all monocultures in exclusionary clubs.
Another of your comments:
“And you’re not a knuckle dragger, Russell. You’re just a conservative.”
I think I qualify as a knuckle dragger… My bucket list includes a trip to Chicago to rough up Juicy Smollett and take his tuna sub away from him.
The Jamaicans have a wonderful expression;
“Chimping”
ie. dragging knuckles.
Another is “stepping up”
“Chimping”, I’m in!
The Opinion sections at large outlets still get a lot of views, but it seems that it is largely by the senior crowd and a shrinking market. I would suggest these sections are both the main attractor and detractor for older readers.
Opinion used to be largely news analysis but now it is mostly predictable tribes with hard boundaries writing very lazy screeds.
I assume one of the WashPost’s long standing principles is to make enough money to survive. I can only think that Bezos is playing the long game here, reversing the partisan whirlpool of death is very hard and gaining trust back of readers will take a while. I hope he is successful.
I’ve monitored the WashPost for 20 years (mostly just reading the front page and a few articles) and they have a point of view which is decidedly … DC beltway … coastal liberal. They have a token conservative and centrist columnist. They went psycho with Trump Russia Collusion, see the Pulitzer! https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/staffs-new-york-times-and-washington-post
It should be noted that the new Substack / podcast entrepreneurs largely comment on stuff the news sides of the legacy media gather. Somebody has to do that work. We are not better off if the last man standing is the NYT which would then be even more emboldened to “shape” the news cycle.
The usual suspects are like rabid dogs for Republican administrations and turn in to protectors of the realm for Democrat administrations. It’s obvious to everyone and this needs to end more than anything.
I read that mean age of evening msnbc viewers was 70. And at least in this market, it’s assumed we all have psoriasis in some form or other.
before that it was old folks gingerly stepping on stones to cross a creek.
Russell,
The Democrats, like most political parties, value one thing even more than daily doses of performative ideology and that is the acquisition of power. They will toss DEI and trans ideology to the curb if they believe it is really getting in the way. The Republicans wisely tossed abortion to the curb.
I hear a lot of whining about cutting Medicaid but hardly a peep about dismantling DEI. There won’t be a mea culpa, it will just stop being talked about and largely left undefended.
I expect the Democrats to be competitive in 2026, the Republicans will both make mistakes governing and be the victim of world events / economic forces.
Pew: “In 2010, Republicans were more likely to say that colleges and universities were having a positive impact than a negative one on the country’s progress (58% positive, 32% negative).”
That seems like a thousand years ago. It’s 31% positive now for Republicans and not likely to get better. Academia cashed in their credibility for what in hindsight looks like a series of incredibly petty causes. As Megan McArdle said, criminally stupid.
Tom, Your comment:
“I hear a lot of whining about cutting Medicaid but hardly a peep about dismantling DEI. There won’t be a mea culpa, it will just stop being talked about and largely left undefended.”
I agree they might pretend publicly that they don’t care about DEI, but at their core the totally embrace it. The DNC, Media and Academia enforce it in their own membership. Remember the DEI fiasco of the DNC leadership elections.
When I see the media giving a prime time anchor to someone like Tulsi or RFKJ, I’ll believe they are reforming. [Or universities actively trying to hire conservative administrators and professors.] Till then, they are just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. It’s all just window dressing.
DEI is much more difficult to defend than a program like Medicaid. DEI is in obvious conflict with longstanding Federal law prohibiting discrimination based on race.
When a clear case DEI based discrimination makes it to the Supreme Court, which I expect will happen once the Court strikes the “background circumstances” rule, I am reasonably sure DEI in employment, government contracts, etc will be declared illegal.
Maybe that is why there is less screaming about Trump eliminating DEI in the Federal government.
Progressives are trying to pull Motte-Bailey with DEI. The difficulty is that too many people were very directly affected by DEI motivated policies. Lots of people at lots of companies and in government were personally subject to “training”. They had their own opinions policed. Some had to write “statements” unrelated to the actual research when writing grants. And so on and so on.
So the claims of “people are only asking for respect” and so on. The “patient” explanation of the literally meaning of the words just don’t fly because these are being presented to people whose lived experience was that DEI was code for more than something other than the literal meaning of the words. Sorry, but everyone knows that the literally meaning of the words doesn’t govern what political phrases mean. And no, a lot of the “pronouns” thing wasn’t merely about “respect” or even “kindness”. It was a power play. If it hadn’t been a power play, reactions to mistakes wouldn’t be so vitriolic. In turn, resistance of the “pronouns” thing became a power play.
“but at their core they totally embrace it”
But why? Because they intellectually believe in it or because they think it helps them garner power by collecting the disgruntled minority vote?
I propose it is the latter and once the assessment is that it hurts more than it helps they will jettison it. It will be replaced with a kinder, gentler version and sent to the back of class. Harris barely talked about it. There are some true DEI believers of course but I am optimistic that the Ibram X. Kendi days are over. Forced equity through overt discriminatory polices was unpopular.
A lame recent attempt at rebranding was to call it DEIA (add accessibility). That’s not going to work and I doubt the “A” people want any part of that.
lucia,
I think a lot of the DEI nonsense, like you must sign a statement of allegiance to DEI to be considered for a job, or you must speak in certain ways, etc. are so blatantly illegal that DEI can’t survive for long. Besides, most voters hate DEI; maybe another factor why there is less screaming by the usual subjects about ending DEI in the Federal Government.
Hiring committees at some universities were eliminating over half of applicants just by their diversity statements without even looking at anything else. They were being given ideology veto power. This went well beyond hiring in the social sciences.
These are mostly small ball internal academia battles but once that got out into the public it was very damaging.
Tom Scharf,
“But why? Because they intellectually believe in it or because they think it helps them garner power by collecting the disgruntled minority vote?”
Fair question. My take is that most progressives reject the idea that there can possibly be different life outcomes for different identifiable groups (education, employment, income, etc) for any reason other than discrimination. Pretty much every policy they advocate, from tax rates to education to hiring to promotion is based on a commitment to “equality of outcome” for different identifiable groups. So yes, I’d say they really believe in it.
Tom,
I think the three pillars of the modern Democrats believe it. They are all an ideological monoculture who have swallowed their Left Wing’s extremism hook line and sinker. For example, they think white America is evil and are collectively responsible for slavery.
SteveF
Besides, most voters hate DEI; maybe another factor
I agree most hate it. One of the things I’m saying is the hate it because of their lived experience with DEI programs. They can’t be gaslighted into thinking DEI isn’t want it actually is.
Tom Sharf,
From the WSJ article you link
Some have warned that ending the background-circumstances test could open the floodgates to reverse-discrimination claims.
Well, it very well might. Not only that, it might result in individuals discriminated against winning cases. That was never seen as a bad result if the people discriminated against were minorities.
As an employer itself, the federal government regularly faces discrimination claims from its workers. But she said it doesn’t need a higher bar “to weed out cases without merit. That’s because, in every case, the government can provide a nondiscriminatory reason for its action.”
I think the government can often point to a nondiscriminatory reason even if discrimination existed. There are so many reasons for hiring that you can usually find something about the person you hired that justifies picking them.
So yeah… there will probably be a controllable number of cases. But….how individual cases go will depend how an agency hired and some totality of circumstances revealed in the evidence. I also don’t know if stuff found in discover will be made public? If it is, that will have political implications for voters.
Russell,
I think the three pillars of the modern Democrats believe it.
I can’t help but believe the ladies on The View believe what they say. They honestly just look incredulous when they hear anyone say anything different. They have a lot of viewers, so I can’t help but think at least some people really share their views.
Lucia, I am not a regular watcher of The View, but from what I’ve seen, I agree. They have claimed what they believe is the moral high ground and yell at the rest of us who don’t agree with them.
It’s a curious way to win elections.
Today’s culinary experiment…
Beef chuck short ribs in the Instant Pot
Russell,
It’s a curious way to win elections.
They didn’t this way. They also seem stunned.
I just see clips of shows. So what I see is a very biased sample.
Tell us how the short ribs work out.
Lucia:
“So what I see is a very biased sample”
Same here. I only see YouTube clips of them at their worst.
That having been said, The View is a microcosm of my point about the Democrat Party, to wit:
There is one member of the view who sits at the right side of the table. She occasionally tries to offer moderate [not Conservative] comments and they shout her down. There is no room in their church for heretics.
Which is ironic because they reject all things Christian.
And that is another reason they are doomed, “As of the most recent estimates, approximately 65% to 70% of the U.S. population identifies as Christian.” [Grok]
Another group they reject is Libertarians, “a reasonable estimate for self-identified libertarians in the U.S. today likely falls between 6% and 19%, with the lower end reflecting stricter criteria and the higher end capturing broader recognition of the label.“ [Grok]
When there is no room in your tent for large swaths of the US population, your political party is doomed.
Russell,
I recently saw a clip where at the end of a rant, a “The View” woman said something snide about nonWoke people wearing crosses while not being good Christians. Their guest — who looked and sounded middle Eastern–came back with a long retort, and ended by saying that she should try throwing the not-good Christian rant at a Muslim and told her she’d learn just how nice all those Bad Christians have been being to her!
She and the others just sat there blinking. ‘Cuz obviously, he wasn’t going to be cowed by being told he wasn’t a good Christian!!!
And, in fact, he probably would have a pretty good case that they’d sort of insulted him by insinuating that “good Christianity” was the “right” thing to be.
(Oddly, I’m not sure the person ranting about the “not good Christian” actually holds Christianity in high regard. But… whatever!)
It was pretty funny. Of course the biased sample I see does tend to be funny.
Lucia
I agree with the guest. If they mock Islam to a true believer they might wind up dead. ‘Turn the other cheek’ is a wholly Christian principle:
Matthew 5:39. The full verse reads:
“But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also”.
Lucia,
More ‘small tent’ Democrats thoughts:
“According to recent data from sources like the Pew Research Center, approximately 77% of U.S. Hispanics identify with some form of Christianity.” [Grok]
Also, Hispanics are the fasted growing subgroup of American voters and:
“In the 2020 presidential election, Donald Trump won about 32% of the Latino vote, according to exit polls like those from NBC News and AP VoteCast. Fast forward to 2024, and Trump’s share of the Latino vote jumped to around 45%, per NBC News exit polls, marking a record high for a Republican presidential candidate. This shift represents an increase of approximately 13 percentage points from 2020 to 2024 (45% – 32% = 13%).” [Grok]
I think these two facts are more than a coincidence.
Also they reject the Jews [only approximately 2.4% of voters]:
“A Gallup poll from 2024 showed only 33% of Democrats view Israel favorably, down from 63% three years prior, compared to 83% of Republicans. Critics, especially from Republican circles, point to this as evidence of growing hostility, suggesting it alienates Jewish voters who prioritize Israel support.”
Democrats will accept votes from these groups [Christians and Jews] at the polls, but don’t want to share a tent with them.
Right to life activists have a very firm view of things but what they don’t get to do is dictate what the RNC platform is. They can’t make Republicans accept a federal anti-abortion plan because it is bad national politics. What happens is the RNC quietly doesn’t support it.
The View ladies likely think DEI is just leveling the playing field or used for tiebreakers. They aren’t going to denounce (willfully ignore) the excesses because of tribal loyalty. They are going to pretend there are no losers in zero sum admissions. The hardcore activists then use that loyalty against them and push excessive policy positions and everyone loses on their side. It’s a trap and you need effective leaders to stop the insanity.
With nobody pushing back you end up with mandatory land acknowledgements at the beginning of meetings and performative pronoun craziness. Somehow nobody on their side can say out loud that taxpayer supported trans surgeries for illegal immigrants in prison is a bad idea.
The View is not trying to win an election. They would be delighted if 2% of the electorate were watching.
I suspect that the real problem for the Dems is that they are addicted to money. The people who gave them money, especially the big donors, have bought into DEI, open borders, etc.
Power is the real motivator, but money is seen as the path to power. They believe it matters a lot in winning elections, it is definitely vital to getting “leadership” positions in Congress, and of course all the consultants have a vested interest in telling candidates that they MUST raise a lot of money if they are to have a chance of winning.
MikeM,
“… but money is seen as the path to power. They believe it matters a lot in winning elections, it is definitely vital to getting “leadership” positions in Congress…”
Kamala outspent Trump by a wide margin, and I doubt more money would have help her win. The real issue is that your policies have to be 1) believed, and 2) believed by more people to be good for them and for the country.
The Dems failed on both counts. The borders were not secure, and every aware person knew that, and inflation had eaten into most people’s disposable income…. and they certainly were aware of that! Add to those issues advocating for highly unpopular positions like DEI, “gender affirmation medical treatment” for minors, woke indoctrination in public schools, abortion up to the moment of birth, and all the insane focus on LGBTQWERTY, and you have a formula for losing elections, no matter how much money you spend.
SteveF
Kamala outspent Trump is not the same as more money was spent in support of Kamala than was spent in support of Trump.
Is this statement also correct?
John,
I have not seen an accounting of the dark money spent. Do you have some figures?
Smart move:
“ DHS Secretary Kristi Noem announces a website for illegals to go and register
If they register, the Federal Government will help them go home and they will have the opportunity to be eligible to come back to America legally
“If they register and leave now, they may have the opportunity to return and live the American dream. If they don’t, they will face the consequences”
Secretary Kristi Noem gives the website URL in the video:” https://x.com/wallstreetapes/status/1895109672203354334?s=61&t=7w4bCW3a8ve2DqoeniQatQ
SteveF,
I was thinking of the sum of campaign and pac money which is visible. It wouldn’t surprise me if the the Kamala sum exceeded the Trump sum.
Outside spending in support of Harris was $850 million, and for Trump $989 million.
According to Investopedia:
In his second run for a second term, Trump raised $1.45 billion, according to Federal Election Commission (FEC) figures reported as of Nov. 25, 2024, and Dec. 9, 2024. Of that total, $463,662,725 was raised by the campaign committee of Donald J. Trump for President, 2024, and $988,954,718 was raised by outside groups.
Large contributions made up approximately 70% of Trump’s funding. Small contributions (less than $200) represented approximately 29%.
Notably, Elon Musk gave $238 million to a super PAC he created to support Trump, called the America PAC (Texas). In all, that PAC raised over $263 million.
Kamala Harris’ campaign surpassed Trump’s in fundraising, ending up with over $2 billion, as of the same reporting dates. Campaign committee funds totaled $1,151,260,254. Outside groups that supported her run raised $850,031,885.
Large contributions made up approximately 60% of Harris’ funding. Small contributions represented a bit over 40%.
They don’t explicitly define “large contributions”, but I suspect than means contributions larger than $200, since small contributions are defined as less than $200. In any case, total spend by Harris does appear to be significantly higher than Trump’s.
You will also allegedly be able to buy citizenship for $5M. This is how it already works in many countries.
john ferguson,
Hollywood stars are expensive you know. 😉
Interesting note: Total votes cast were about 152 million; total spend was about $3.5 billion, or $23 per vote cast. Of course, that money wasn’t spent evenly….. mostly on swing states with maybe 15% of the votes cast. So, where the money was actually spent, it was a more significant expenditure…. like ~$125 per vote cast. It’s expensive to become President.
I think there is a point of diminishing returns after $1B of election money, you can only run that Trump trans ad so many times.
There is a lot of good in the world you can do spending your money elsewhere.
Tom Scharf,
You have always been able to gain permanent residency with a significant ($millions) investment in a legitimate business that hires people.
It has never before been possible to buy citizenship. Do you have a link?
Permanent residency, not citizenship but “Trump said the new program, which he hopes to roll out in the coming weeks, would eventually provide a pathway for full citizenship”
You are a wealthy resident of China, and find a way to get $10 million out of the country….. might be nice to not have to worry about getting social credits or the government monitoring you, and to be able to say what you think. Trump’s ‘gold card’ invitation may be tempting.
John,
“ why are smoker days over?”
To much work. In and out to the back yard for 6-8 hours tending the fire. I enjoy the process but it just got to be too much work. I’m trying alternate ways of cooking meat. I might get a gas grill, but I have stopped the smoking adventures.
looks like the Epstein files will stay buried. Money talks.
Bondi gaslighted people and got caught.
Ouch.
It was weird; I opened a couple of the .pdf files, and all information was redacted. Stupid and ridiculous; Bondi released nothing. These are documents ~10 years old…. hard to imagine 95% of every document has to remain hidden a decade after the fact.
The question is: Is there documentary evidence that others were involved with under-age girls via the ‘Lolita Express’ (or by taking their own private jets to the US Virgin Islands to visit Epstein’s private island? Flight records should be available with every passenger’s name. If the FBI will not release the information that answers the single most important question, then they are just stone-walling.
Not sure what you guys are on about re the Epstein files. What do you expect? Real question.
They are obviously going to redact the names of the victims. We already have a lot of names of big shots who flew on Epstein’s plane. I am not sure what else to expect.
But it may not yet be over:
“Before you came into office, I requested the full and complete files related to Jeffrey Epstein,” Bondi wrote to Patel, according to a copy of the letter posted to X by Michael Shellenberger. “In response to this request, I received approximately 200 pages of documents, which consisted primarily of flight logs, Epstein’s list of contacts, and a list of victims’ names and phone numbers.”
“I repeatedly questioned whether this was the full set of documents responsive to my request and was repeatedly assured by the FBI that we had received the full set of documents,” Bondi continued. “Late yesterday, I learned from a source that the FBI Field Office in New York was in possession of thousands of pages of documents related to the investigation and indictment of Epstein. Despite my repeated requests, the FBI never disclosed the existence of these files.”
Mike M,
I think it more than plausible that many wealthy visitors did not fly on Epstein’s plane, but on their own. It is the same ~20 minute boat ride to Epstein’s island, no matter how people arrived at the airport in Charlotte Amalie. My question is: Did the FBI do the kind of careful investigation which would track down visitors to the island who did not fly on Epstein’s plane? My guess is they didn’t, but I would be happy to be proven wrong.
I wouldn’t be surprised if someone got suicided soon
“Kicker Harrison Butker met with President Donald Trump in the Oval Office.”
Remember he was the Catholic footballer who gave a speech at a Catholic college extolling the rewards of motherhood and the Left tried to cancel him. He came out of it stronger than ever. https://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/for-petes-sake/article301109239.html
The Epstein case kind of reminds me of the Duke Lacrosse case. People’s imaginations go wild without asking why high profile people would take such an enormous risk with their careers for almost nothing gained.
If you are in big money politics then I imagine people are trying to set you up for political gain, paranoia is appropriate.
One person doing something is possible, but an entire Lacrosse team? If you are going to do some dirty deeds, do them at places you control, like the Oval Office, ha ha.
OTOH Epstein’s death was definitely suspicious.
MikeM
Not sure what you guys are on about re the Epstein files. What do you expect? Real question.
I expect nothing. My neighbor posted something on Facebook when people were predicting all will be revealed. I predicted what we got would be underwhelming. I didn’t advance a theory about in what way it would be underwhelming. It could be there was simply much, much, less to the story than people have spun up in their imaginations. It could be that everything was just as bad but the evidence has pretty much vanished “poof!”
OTOH Epstein’s death was definitely suspicious.
Yes. But that doesn’t mean there has to be a whole “Lolita Express”. Just one appropriately placed person with motive. Probably had to get some confederates, but it doesn’t mean there are one bajillion high placed people with things to hide. Epstein was involved in enough crud that would be sufficient explaination.
lucia,
Considering the initial hand-slap Epstein got for statutory rape, I would like some re-assurance that illegal acts by wealthy/influential people were not ignored (or not really investigated). Of course, it is possible Prince Andrew was the only other man who got involved in illegal activities with Epstein…… but I would be surprised if that were the case.
Still waiting for the legacy media to write a story about how reducing federal spending is good … in any way … at all. Or maybe a story about some crazy useless federal job that we have no business funding at all. Or increasing administrative bloat. Or a comparison of job stability versus the private sector. Or how losing your crap job at the mall is also life changing.
Tom Scharf: “why high profile people would take such an enormous risk with their careers for almost nothing gained. ”
Arrogance and a sense of entitlement. Like Bill Clinton with Lewinski, Hillary and her homebrew server, Joe Biden taking bribes.
It would be good to know what the FBI knew at the time of the first Epstein case. But I am guessing that they didn’t know much, perhaps because they didn’t try. Not doing something does not leave much of a paper trail.
It would be quite something if Epstein kept a list of who slept with whom. But I think that extremely unlikely.
So it is quite possible that the Epstein Papers contain nothing new of much interest. Disappointing for some, but one can hardly blame Bondi for what does not exist.
“As of today, February 28, 2025, the launch window for SpaceX’s Starship Flight 8 is scheduled to open on Monday, March 3, 2025, at 5:30 p.m. Central Time (CT), which is 6:30 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) or 23:30 GMT. This updated target follows a delay from the initially planned date of February 28, 2025, with no specific reason provided by SpaceX for the postponement.”
Grok
I can see any one high profile person doing something crazy, but the chances of a group of high profile people independently making the same high risk mistake seems remote. The Illuminati.
I assume a lot of people may have gone to Epstein’s island because its a nice place to go.
Conducting testy foreign policy in front of reporters is not a good idea. Zelensky is making some critical mistakes here regardless of Trump being his usual graceful self.
” I have determined that President Zelenskyy is not ready for Peace if America is involved, because he feels our involvement gives him a big advantage in negotiations. I don’t want advantage, I want PEACE. ”
Just now, Trump
Full statement: https://x.com/POTUS/status/1895544632651424102
Tom,
Yes, I just read about that. Good for Trump! Zelensky can go eff himself, if that’s how he wants to play. At the end of the day, not our monkeys, not our circus; not our problem.
I think Zelensky is a good candidate for someone who has a bit of life stress over the past few years so I could give him a pass for losing it briefly. However anyone paying the least bit of attention knows that disrespecting Trump publicly is not a path to success.
Trump wants people to take the knee and Zelensky has too much pride. That’s fine as it goes, but pride plus no air defense lets the Russians have air superiority.
Strategically IMO the US has gotten everything it needs out this conflict, Russia has been significantly weakened militarily and they would be crazy to cross NATO lines given this performance.
Zelensky has apparently been reading too much favorable press. Trump is right about one thing, Zelensky has no leverage.
Take the knee, get your equipment, go home, make a deal you know you need to. Now he (and Trump) are in a worse negotiating position with Russia. Own goal.
mark bofill,
I doubt that Zelensky can bring himself to negotiate a deal that ends the fighting if he thinks it is unfair… and to him anything other than Russia withdrawing to pre-2014 borders and paying to re-build Ukraine is unfair. Anybody that invested in a specific outcome can’t really accept (painful) negotiated compromises.
It looks to me like it will take a lot more killing and destruction, and a different Ukrainian leader, for a ceasefire to happen. Since there is no possibility Zelensky will hold elections, a different leader is a distant prospect..
Getting in a public shouting match with Trump (and Vance!) is just dumb. Count on Trump cutting off support to Ukraine completely. Maybe Zelensky believes the Europeans will step in and save him. I think he is sadly mistaken. Unfortunate that so many more will die before fighting stops.
If the White House dust up ends with Europe either putting up or shutting up it would be a good thing. It also points to the problems of the US getting involved in as many international conflicts as it politically can.
I do think that Zelensky remains popular in US and on the world stage and Trump and Vance will be the bad guys with most everyone outside the Trump domain. The neocons are already upset with Trump.
It was refreshing to see what politicians normally want hidden.
Steve,
As if fair has anything to do with anything here. Save us from idealistic leaders who can’t cope with reality! But I don’t disagree with your assessment. I don’t actually have a strong opinion about what is going on in Zelensky’s head; don’t much care.
Tom Scharf,
” That’s fine as it goes, but pride plus no air defense lets the Russians have air superiority.”
Yes, no Patriot missiles means Russia can target anything it wants in Ukraine, including government structure and political leadership. That shouting match was an imprudent move; motivated by anger, of course, but still imprudent. My experiences is: you should never make an important decision when angry.
Kenneth Fritsch,
“If the White House dust up ends with Europe either putting up or shutting up it would be a good thing. ”
Yes, a good thing. And I am going with shutting up. They do not have the means, neither politically nor militarily, to support Ukraine by themselves. I suspect they will somehow find their way to being a lot more pragmatic than they have over the past 3 years once they think about actually cutting domestic social spending.
The Neocons have been upset with Trump for a decade…. nothing new.
SteveF
I would like some re-assurance that illegal acts by wealthy/influential people were not ignored
Sure. My guess is you aren’t going to get this re-assurance. I’m not saying you shouldn’t want it nor that the American public doesn’t deserve it. I just think we’ll see pigs flying first.
Trump said the EPA budget would be cut by 65%. I had a feeling the EPA was going to get whacked pretty good. That kind of cut is likely not really manageable but a good goal.
By the time the EU finds consensus on where to plan to have a future meeting to consider manufacturing the precursors to military equipment the Russians will be in Kyiv.
mark bofill,
“Fair” has zero to do with ending the fighting; if you are always looking for “fair”, you are going to be very disappointed…. just ask John Kennedy.
“Fair” is in the mind of the beholder (to paraphrase Shakespeare badly). Unfortunately, precious few people seem to appreciate that.
Word is Zelenskyy was kicked out the white house. They gave his luncheon to the press
Tidbits on the “does this entirely hold together?” front.
Green is also a psychology professor at East Stroudsburg University. She’s been with NSF since 2020, first as a program officer and then as an expert for the agency’s Directorate for STEM Education.
So she had two jobs. Either that or she’s been on leave as professor. Or the NSF thing is part time.
She still has one job.
“I was giving an exam.
Sounds like the professor gig is on going with current responsibilities. And she was in Penn doing that job.
I loved NSF. I gave them everything. … I was working a full-time job on a half-time pay without benefits. I gave them everything, and they couldn’t even give me the common courtesy of a mild heads-up. …
Why was she devoting full time for half-time pay without benefits. Was she getting benefits from her professor job? And was that full time? or half time? Or just one course at a time? Doesn’t say.
In my head, I’m saying, ‘Grab your evaluations, grab your evaluations, get your W-2s.’
Well, the notion she won’t be able to snag her W-2s is rather fanciful. Those are for 2024 and they have to give them to her. The rest? Dunno.
And I picked NSF over my students [said through tears]. …
Her professor job is an active job. Also, it seems she is carrying that one out at her university which appears to be in Penn.
I don’t believe that anybody who voted for Trump was expecting us to be weakened in this way.”
Didn’t vote for Trump. I think some of the things doing done abruptly are very concerning. (I’m worried about chicken flu work for flu being interrupted in general. I’m already paying $6/dozen for eggs, and chicken deaths are concerning.)
At least reading this woman’s story, I’m not entirely sure I think these layoffs at NSF specifically are “weakening” “us”. There is enough in the story that doesn’t make sense. Or that suggest maybe her NSF job wasn’t necessary to keep “us” strong.
And, she does seem to still have a job– professor teaching university students. But she lost some sort of position at NSF; that position was nominally half time.
The story tells us very little other than what she feels. She lost a job she liked. She feels like crap. Everyone would.
Tom Scharf,
LOL. You have captured the essence of the EC leadership. Unless Zelensky relents, Ukraine is toast.
It’s certainly strange to have such a public display. Typically after a meeting without agreement, parties issue a statement saying that there was “a frank exchange of views”, or some such meaninglessness, and emerge to shake hands in front of the cameras.
My experiences is: you should never make an important decision when angry.
Steve, I don’t think any decision was made today. Getting mad is a human condition and being phony about being mad is also a human condition. If today revealed more about how all sides feel about the issue under discussion all the better for the public and even the politicians for whom I usually have little regard.
As with all wars I would rather see this one over sooner than later, although I would not want us to go to war to get it over sooner.
Kenneth,
“I don’t think any decision was made today”
I suspect Trump may disagree with that evaluation.
What Zelensky should have done is waited until the press was not watching, and then let it rip… Trump and Vance would have argued, of course, against his position, but it would not have been a disaster for UIkraine. He (unwisely IMO) got into a shouting match with the guy upon which his country depends to not be over-run by Russia. It was a crazy choice. Anger is always a bad basis for decisions.
Zelensky is probably frustrated they are doing all the dying in order to fend off Russia. Things fell apart when he asserted Russia was coming for the US too (and implying they are doing the US a favor).
Meh, maybe. We have lots of nukes. I doubt Russia will be invading anytime soon.
Tom Scharf,
“We have lots of nukes. I doubt Russia will be invading anytime soon.”
Of course. The thing that Zelensky seems to not understand is that nobody outside Ukraine (and many inside Ukraine) is willing to die on this hill. There are many non-military ways that Ukraine might recover/control land the Russians take by war… given time. There are zero ways Ukraine will recover these lands by military force. He was a good leader for the early part of the conflict. He is a bad leader for ending the conflict. I doubt he understands that.
Lucia, Bonnie Green was the oldest of the laid-off group (60) with the others relatively young and probably sufficienty mobile, geographically, to find another job. Bonnie as you note by having two jobs would be probably the least of the group to suffer.
I was fortunate in my career to have never been laid-off, but I knew a number of people who were and even some that I made the decision to lay-off. Those people faced turmoil to various extents, but in almost all cases they ended up with as good or better job than one from which they were laid-off. In some cases it was a wakeup call that made them a better worker.
I would expect an article such as this one from an author who I suspect sees government as the be all and end all that puts it above the realities of those working in the private sector.
The hiring rate for the government or government related positions in the past few years has been high compared to the private sector. This can happen in the private sector as I know from my own experiences. When times are good hiring can go overboard. I used to warn of this to the company for which I worked for a long time and suggest delaying new hires or use temporary hires. The difference here between the public and private sector is that the private sector will be forced by the market to react to that mistake. I suspect the article author does not see this distinction or if it is acknowledged sees the government as a special case.
The President of the United States of America is insane.
I was waiting for Thomas to chime in. The entire Liberal universe is crying out with one partisan voice.
What’s the Liberal plan…. Keep giving Zelenskyy bullets and keep the war going!
Why not, instead, listen to the American people? They’re not all liberals.
“What is your attitude towards Putin?”
Favorable 11%
Unfavorable 78%
Should US trust Vladimir Putin?
Yes 9%
No 81%
Give Zelenskyy bullets and tell him to keep going? Hmm. I think Zelenskyy has a better idea. Ceasefire backed by security guarantees.
I’ll admit that I am too dogmatic about Trump. He’s not necessarily insane. The alternative–that he really is Agent Kresnov recruited by the KGB in the 80s–is actually just as bad, if not worse.
Anybody who can defend Trump and his lickspittle toady Vance is participating in the undermining of the free world.
You all have been free with your criticism of me and my opinions for quite some time–ever since the theme of this blog moved on from climate change–and I have tried to bear it with whatever grace I could muster on a given day.
But anyone who sides with Trump/Vance after this has earned a lifetime of contempt from me.
Thomas,
But anyone who sides with Trump/Vance after this has earned a lifetime of contempt from me.
Say it ain’t so! My dear friend and mentor, who I hold in such high esteem, holds me in contempt! I weep tears like rain.
Thomas Fuller,
I think insane isn’t quite right. My current take is “bitter old fool”
If only the elite manhattanites had gathered him into their bosoms 50 years ago, maybe none of this would be happening.
May I remind everybody that wars are costly. England had to pay for the materials they bought from the US during WWII. The last payment was around 2006. If it was not for Lend-Lease, they would have had to negotiate peace in 1941.
P-E Harvey,
I understand that the Brits are thde only ones who paid us back, and are quite proud of having done so.
There’s a new sheriff in town and he wants to end the foreign war. This is a position the left used to love. Russia may not agree so we shall see. The alternative is that Ukraine continues to endure a brutal meat grinder with little hope of pushing the Russian army out of Ukraine without NATO boots on the ground which will be very high stakes, very high indeed. The lines may be almost static but both sides are taking a lot of casualties.
If I was Russia, sensing family squabbling, I would not agree to a ceasefire in hope Ukraine’s support collapses. The open spat was unwise but may still yield favorable outcomes from Europe or Ukraine agreeing to a ceasefire on less favorable terms.
Couple of things come to mind on the recent Oval Office episode.
Consider:
1. Ukraine doesn’t want ceasefire without a security guarantee;
2. US wants a ceasefire before major deals with Russia;
3. Russia doesn’t want a ceasefire without its own security guarantees;
4. The US doesn’t want to give Ukraine a security guarantee.
Trump wants the US money flow to Ukraine to end and Ukraine won’t agree to end the war without a US security guarantee.
Was the episode in the Oval Office a pre planed ambush to give cover to the administration to walk away from Ukraine?
Thomas, your comment:
“ But anyone who sides with Trump/Vance after this has earned a lifetime of contempt from me.”
Well I guess this is goodbye then.
I thought Trump was childish in how he handled that outburst by Zelenskyy, but I support his efforts to end the war and claw back some of the money we invested.
Ukraine should just make a mineral deal like every other country under existential duress and then not pay it back later like every country previously under duress. These things are almost always forgiven.
Ed, your comment:
“Was the episode in the Oval Office a pre planed ambush to give cover to the administration to walk away from Ukraine?”
You may be right. No facts that I have read contradict this theory.
OTOH, Sheryl Attkisson has an opposing theory:
“My hot take? Zelenskyy was encouraged by certain European leaders to take on Trump in front of the media.
It may have backfired.
Hear me out.”
Full thread: https://x.com/sharylattkisson/status/1895590138669056370?s=61&t=7w4bCW3a8ve2DqoeniQatQ
Ukraine security guarantees will come from Europe and will be worth exactly as much as the paper they are printed on.
Any guarantee from Putin regarding Ukraine is also unworthy of trust.
The US doesn’t need to promise anybody anything and the relationship with Ukraine should be transactional. We have been allies of convenience. The EU needs to get off the dithering sidelines and either jettison Ukraine or protect them.
I don’t think Trump is bluffing, he will cutoff an obstinate Ukraine. I think Zelensky is misreading the situation to his disadvantage.
Thomas “Biden just has a stutter. How very dare you criticize an old man for a physical infirmity that wasn’t a problem until the media told me it was yesterday” Fuller, you ran away. Get over yourself. You’re not all that. Your religion has crippled your objectivity.
You learned nothing from the shenanigans going on in the climate scene, which was just a microcosm of the corruption you swim in “for the greater good”. You guys are so wedded to your assumed good causes, you goosestep down the road to hell with a massive smile on your face and contempt for everyone who tries to tell you your destination. You know better! You chose to jump off that road, but you will happily march down the next. Hopelessly naive, but still think you can lecture others on right and wrong.
Why did it takes 3 years for the media to start oscillating between Zelensky and Zelenskyy?
Russell
If your link is correct ….“Zelenskyy was encouraged by certain European leaders to take on Trump in front of the media. It may have backfired.”…
European leaders would then be even more incompetent than I would have expected.
Trump’s emotions run both very cold and very hot. Intentionally pissing off Trump seems to me to be the action of a fool especially if you want something from him.
NYT: “European leaders lined up to support Ukraine after the blowup between the two leaders. Volodymyr Zelensky sought to appeal to the U.S. with gratitude.”
Tom,
Once a real estate hustler, always a real estate hustler!
I kind of see this as similar to the Biden has dementia coverup. Everyone keeps telling themselves a fantasy that Ukraine is going to beat back the Russian army until it is all laid bare in a clarifying moment and then people shift.
I like Star Wars as much as anyone but The Empire is going to win most military conflicts in the real world. In my fantasy world Ukraine wins this.
If Ukraine wants to keep hammering at the Russian army that is fine by me but it is a waste. Trump will never get any credit but he is doing Ukraine a favor if he can force a settlement.
Tom,
“ If Ukraine wants to keep hammering at the Russian army that is fine by me”
It’s fine by European leaders too.
They are collectively petrified of facing the Russian army without the US.
Ukrainians fighting Russians using US dollars is the dream scenario for Europe.
It seems clear to me that Zelinsky started the fight. So he must have done it on purpose. I am still thinking about why.
Russell, you posted a quote from Sheryl Attkisson with a link to the “full thread”. But all I see at that link is what ypu quoted. How do I get the rest of the thread?
For three years, Zelensky has been treated like god by the Biden Administration, European leaders, the US media, the entire Democrat Party, much (most?) of the Republican Party, and most of the US public.
Maybe Zelensky’s plan was to start a fight with Trump in order to start a public outcry against Trump, with the Dems handing out torches and pitchforks, the media screaming for blood, and the Republicans running for cover. And he thought that would force Trump to back down. Big blunder.
I don’t know how the public opinion battle will play out, but 50-50 seems like a good guess. I do know that Trump won’t back down. Compared to Trump, a rhinoceros has thin skin.
Mike M: “Russell, you posted a quote from Sheryl Attkisson with a link to the “full thread”. But all I see at that link is what ypu quoted. How do I get the rest of the thread?”
The “full thread” includes the subsequent 5 (?) posts by Attkisson at Russell’s link.
“The “full thread” includes the subsequent 5 (?) posts by Attkisson at Russell’s link.”
Nope. All I see is the first post. Do I need to do something to see the rest?
Zelensky trying to make this a partisan issue with Republicans in control would be a grievous error.
CNN confirms Zelensky was asked to leave the WH.
More hilarity from the EU: Europeans scramble to show leadership of the ‘free world’ as U.S. alliance fractures https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/trump-europe-military-defense-ukraine-putin-merz-macron-nato-zelenskyy-rcna193992
“It will take “five years as a minimum” for Europe to “fully deter Russia without any U.S. contribution,” said Luigi Scazzieri, assistant director at the Centre for European Reform, a London think tank. “You can probably get something that fills a large part of the gap in two to three years — but only with a lot of urgency.””
That would now be two years … if you had initiated this when Russia started a land war in your back yard. The only thing urgent in the EU is tweeting out platitudes.
“Since World War II, the U.S. has agreed to protect Europe’s declining militaries against Russia on the understanding that in return it has been able to spread hard and soft American power through the continent and beyond.”
Hmmmm….
Russell,
I still only see the first post. I have had that happen before, I have no idea why. Come to think of it, I may never have seen a thread on X.
You have to be logged into an X account to see replies and extra posts, otherwise you only get the first post.
Thanks Tom. That explains it. I have no X account.
Mike,
Try a Search for Sharyl Attkisson. This post is (was) the first one.
Lindsey Graham (one of Ukraine’s strongest supporters in the Senate) thinks Zelensky should resign. Ted Cruz thinks Zelensky may be out of office in a short time. He may be right.
I imagine military leaders, and front-line soldiers in Ukraine are looking at this situation a little differently than the NYT and the Bulwark. I honestly don’t understand how Zelensky thought he (or Ukraine) would benefit from shouting at Trump and Vance. It is a real head-scratcher.
“Today it became clear that the free world needs a new leader,” the E.U.’s foreign minister said.
Who might that be? Someone from the EU? Or maybe China’s Xi Jinping? The guy is delusional.
What I believe the world needs is an EU that pays it own way on defense, stops trying to force everyone else to follow its rules, and doesn’t block food imports with high duties. The EU is a lot like California, but without the good weather.
Zelensky dropped the ball and it is up to him on how to handle it from here. He can repair relations if he wants.
There is a chance that Russia refuses a deal and then Trump responds by increasing aid to Ukraine, that will be his leverage with Russia. Like in Gaza he is telling the parties to make a deal or it will get worse for both of you.
I don’t prejudge Trump based outcomes until they happen. If things are stalemated then he inserts chaos. It doesn’t always work.
I am convinced that the US needs to stop being the world cop and let other regions of the world handle their differences without us. Our involvements never turnout favorable for the US.
The US strong point is our economy that does better than others because of a relatively freer economy. What the US needs to work on is making it even more free of goverment regulations and taxes – including not imposing tariffs. This means setting an example for the rest of the world and forgetting about forcing something down the throats of those yet to be converted. Let them waste their resources on wars if that is what they want.
Ukraine’s main problem is that if all current support stays the same, Ukraine will still be ground under.
Trump will not increase support beyond that given by Biden. Likely quite a bit less.
As Trump pointed out, Ukraine has very few cards to play and Russia holds the winning hand.
Kenneth,
I mostly agree with you. I like that Trump is reducing regulations and taxes. I like that Trump refuses to be the world’s cop. He will act as a peacemaker, but the peace will have to be policed by Europe. I disagree in that I think there is a place for carefully considered tariffs.
Watching some of the latest Ukraine stuff, I am struck by a lack of talk about how the war can end. The US must help and show their strength against Russia, but they don’t say what that looks like…
I think Zelensky is still holding out for boots on the ground and full scale NATO vs Russia war.
Tom Scharf,
How can Trump make it worse for both Hamas and Israel at the same time? I’ll be happy to munch on anything you can think of.
Thomas W Fuller
MARCH 1, 2025 AT 8:01 AM
Why not, instead, listen to the American people? They’re not all liberals.
“What is your attitude towards Putin?”
Favorable 11%. 78%
Should US trust Vladimir Putin?
Yes 9%. No 81%
Give Zelenskyy bullets and tell him to keep going? Hmm. I think Zelenskyy has a better idea. Ceasefire backed by security guarantees.
I’ll admit that I am too dogmatic about Trump. He’s not necessarily insane.
–
Thomas, nobody mentions the elephant in the room.
Nuclear weapons.
Putin has them.
You have them .
You are deliberately encouraging actions that could, if successful, lead to not only more Ukrainian and Russian deaths but to the use of Nuclear weopons on European soil and raid the risk of WW3.
Finding a peace settlement is not easy with so much grief already on all sides.
Only one side can win in anything less than a major WW3, Russia.
–
It is a shadow game played out killing millions of men over shadow pressure points.
Russian oil, NATO membership, Mediterranean access, acres of wheat to feed populations.
–
Go ahead defending it.
Killing millions for what?
Seriously.
No high morals here.
No appeasement is such a dirty word.
Just 2000 more bodies every day while the pigs in Brussels gorge themselves at the EU tables.
Have a good day.
John,
Trump’s ramblings were unspecified so it is reading tea leaves. I think it came down to either Israel / Hamas agree to a ceasefire or the US was going to dictate terms that nobody was going to like. If Hamas didn’t like it then Israel would be given free reign or the US would enter the war aggressively, If Israel didn’t like it then the US could limit military support.
Basically if you children can’t negotiate a settlement between yourselves then you are both grounded.
The US doesn’t really have a lot of leverage with Russia, but they can likely get Ukraine to accept a “reasonable” ceasefire. Whether Russia is worn out enough is a question.
Trump seems to think he has leverage with Russia. Maybe he is bluffing. But if he does have leverage, he is probably not going to talk about it publicly, at least not until negotiations are done.
Mike M,
“Trump seems to think he has leverage with Russia. ”
May Trump has a video recording of Putin cavorting with peeing prostitutes. 😉
More seriously, the possible lifting of economic sanctions gives Trump some leverage.
I think the Russian weaknesses on the battlefield have been laid bare. He probably wants to fix them and a functioing economy would be very beneficial for that.
And for Thomas, The Guardian (far left UK rag) was reporting that the EU was spending more on Russian oil and gas than on sending aid to Ukraine. Ironic, no?
DaveJR,
The Europeans have substantial reserves of shale gas they could recover quickly if they would allow fracking….. they won’t. The Europeans are simply not serious about anything except very high taxes, generous redistribution of those high taxes, and adding endless, stupid, pointless, destructive regulations on most every human activity.
But Tom Scharf, I cannot imagine any terms that both Israel and Hamas would hate simultaneously.
Maybe Trump has thought of something that I can’t think of, but ???
Trump left DC yesterday with some of the boxes the FBI seized from Mar-a-Lago, he brought them back.
What a troll.
Tom Scharf,
LOL. You could have guessed that was going to happen after Trump fired everyone at the National Archives two weeks ago who had anything to do with the Mar-a-largo raid. Trump doesn’t forgive or forget. I have no doubt those folks thought getting the execrable Merrick Garland and his corrupt FBI involved was the right thing to do. Unfortunately for them, enough voters thought it was a witch hunt for Trump to return to office. Here is the weird thing: They all had to know Trump would fire them; they can’t be so dumb as to not know that. I will never understand why they didn’t resign before Trump took office in January. Blatantly political acts are not what they should be involve in.
Maybe Zelensky should have been advised of Trump’s ability to hold a grudge before getting into a shouting match with Trump on live TV.
SteveF wrote: “Trump doesn’t forgive or forget.”
Not true. RFK Jr. sued Trump multiple times. Rubio, DeSantis and Burgum ran against Trump . Vance said some very nasty things about Trump back in 2016. I have no doubt that Gabbard has made some very critical comments about Trump. He is perfectly happy to forgive and forget, but only if you stop opposing him.
Zelensky repeatedly declined opportunities to sign the deal in Kyiv and Munich, and requested the meeting at the White House. It later came out that Rice and Tony Blinken, Victoria Nuland, and Alexander Vindman may have been personally advising Zelensky to do this meeting in the way he did — that they recommended him to be hostile and to try to goad Trump into blowing up.
Maybe there is nothing there; note the “may have”. And she does not say where she got that info. But if true, that is a VERY serious charge. A bunch of out-of-office Obama/Biden people inserting themselves into negotiations between the President and a foreign government? No way is that appropriate.
Mike M,
“He is perfectly happy to forgive and forget, but only if you stop opposing him.”
You are right. It is just that most people who actively oppose him never stop that opposition. I am sure that includes most of the permanent bureaucracy.
Mike M,
“And she does not say where she got that info.”
That is a big problem with her report. I give it a 2 on a scale of 1-10 for credibility.
That said, if Rice, Blinken, et al actually were coaching Zelensky, that is highly inappropriate, if not illegal. If they were, and someone like Blinken, with no security clearance, was given access to classified information about the negotiations with Zelensky, then other shoes will likely drop.
My guess is that Hemingway got her information from an anonymous source that she trusts, but she has no collaboration.
If Rice, Blinken, etc. were giving advice to a foreign government on how to influence the US government, then that makes them foreign agents for the purpose of FARA. If they have not registered as such, then they are in violation of the law. Even if Hemingway can not confirm the report, maybe DoJ can. It might get interesting.
The big difference between the two incidents is that the Zelensky spat was just business. The raid on Mar a Largo was distinctly personal. I seriously doubt Trump will hold the attempt against him, but what Zelensky wants in “security guarantees” is not going to happen. Placing business interests there, instead of military, seems like a good compromise and probably far more beneficial to Ukraine in the long run.
At this point any 12 year could assess making Trump “blow up” will not be beneficial to their future prospects so I doubt Zelensky went down that path. He may not like Trump very much but he has much bigger fish to fry with the Russians.
I could hear an argument he did this to make the Europeans get off their butts but I’m guessing they go right back to bureaucratic dithering forthwith.
Occam’s razor says he was having a bad hair day. Like I said before I’d be more than willing to cut him some slack here. Trump’s going to be Trump, I don’t give him slack but accept he is who he is and still hope for good outcomes.
I completely understand why Zelensky wants security guarantees from the US, I don’t understand why we would do that.
From Putin’s telling it’s why the war started in the first place (pseudo NATO encroachment) but we don’t need to cover that again. I don’t think Russia would accept that and choose to fight.
We can probably have détente with the status quo and get a ceasefire, but not much else.
Firefly has a string of successes indicating they might eventually get big boy pants and challenge SpaceX.
Polish PM Donald Tusk speaking before flying to London for today’s Ukraine emergency summit:
“500 million Europeans are asking 300 million Americans to defend them against 140 million Russians (…) Europe today lacks the belief that we are truly a global power” https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1896198819341344892?s=61
Tom Scharf: “Why did it takes 3 years for the media to start oscillating between Zelensky and Zelenskyy?”
Apparently, the Romanization of his name has been at issue since he was first elected, as indicated by this article from 2019.
I suspect that his preference for -skyy rather than -sky is intended to emphasize a Ukrainian choice rather than a Russian one (as in “Kyiv” vs. “Kiev”). Unless it’s a subtle way of suggesting that he’s wise. 😉
Even if The US pulled out completely Ukraine could fight on. War has a way of focusing people. They would need to change tactics but could still make Russia pay dearly for their advances. I don’t think an occupation of western Ukraine will go smoothly for Russia.
Tactically if Russia finds a solution for Ukraine’s drones then everything changes on the battlefield.
Occam’s razor says he was having a bad hair day. Like I said before I’d be more than willing to cut him some slack here. Trump’s going to be Trump, I don’t give him slack but accept he is who he is and still hope for good outcomes.
I agree with Tom here. I saw Zelenskyy start to boil when Vance got into the discussion. There were eye rolls and then he could not contain himself. If that were a family/freindly discussion I would not have been surprised by his reactions. Vance baited him as I have seen done in family/freindly discussions.
We see Zelenskyy in situations were he is not reacting with other people but rather getting standing ovations before making a speech interupted with ovations.
I came out of the discussion with nothing new developing. The mineral rights agreement would not have meant much without a tightly bounded contract and even that could have been broken/ignored at a later day. The only change I see is Zelenskyy and Europe talking about a closer arrangement and without the US domination. This should have happened from day one of the war and something I would very much favor.
As kind of an aside, I finally signed up for X so I could follow all the X links from here. My first X extended look was talk about the White House dust up. I thought the aim of many of the posters was to say something silly or prepostorous in as fewest words possible.
I think we over rate our politicians’ abilities to come up with complicated strategies. The principle of parsimony says that the typical politician has the single strategy of what will make me look good in the moment.
I also think that the world would be pleasantly surprised by the US retiring as the world cop.
It took me a minute to remember Harold is a yys guy.
Kenneth,
“I also think that the world would be pleasantly surprised by the US retiring as the world cop.”
The world? Hell, I would be pleasantly surprised. IMHO, the USA needs to stay out of catastrophes not of it’s making, and especially catastrophes where the USA has not the slightest strategic interest, oh say, like Ukraine and Iraq. As I have said before, the correct response to September 11 was to destroy as much of Afghanistan as quickly and cheaply as possible, targeting the Taliban government and all related infrastructure, followed by a stern warning that the next time would be many times worse. No need to try to create a new Islamic Switzerland. All the rest in that part of the world has been a multi-trillion dollar fiasco.
I will never understand why idiots like Nuland and Co. got to instigate a senseless war in Ukraine, with hundreds of thousands of deaths, and will never pay a price for their stupidity.
“Europe today lacks the belief that we are truly a global power”
A belief well founded in reality, in experience, and in real time observation. Can they ever change? Not soon, if ever. The people in charge (essentially the EC and the sniveling governments that support the EC) refuse to take responsibility for the catastrophe of endless regulations and lost opportunities that is the essence of the EC.
Steve, I agree with your assessment of what ails the EU economically, but when it comes to defense I think the US has to take some blame for allowing NATO to become too dependent on it. It never has a good outcome when nations or individuals become dependent on (another) government.
I think Ukraine will suffer from that dependency by believing there was no limit to the US/NATO involvement in the war. I would think their decisions on early peace talks and agreements would have been very different without that dependency and assumptions of more. Unfortunately, there were Neocons and Democrats in this country pushing for much deeper involvement by the US that could have influenced Ukraine thinking and expectations.
Kenneth ,
“Unfortunately, there were Neocons and Democrats in this country pushing for much deeper involvement by the US that could have influenced Ukraine thinking and expectations.’
Sure, and it was both stupid and destructive for the USA. There is no way the USA has the interests in Ukraine that Poland or Romania (or a half dozen other countries in Europe have) have. Unfortunately, there were Neocons and Democrats in this country pushing for much deeper involvement by the US that could have influenced Ukraine thinking and expectations. We have (almost) no dog in this fight, beyond the (emotional) desire for bad people (dogs) to not gain too much. Unfortunately, there were neocons and Democrats in this country pushing for much deeper involvement by the US that could have influenced Ukraine . That is not going to work.
Kenneth Fritsch, I’m glad at least one person got that. If I’ve made one person groan, then my hard work ain’t been in vain for nuthin’.
HaroldW,
I groaned a little too. When I make jokes like that my kids just roll their eyes.
Tom Scharf,
I am shocked (Shocked!!) that people on the left tolerate no opposing viewpoints, and punish anyone who disagrees with them. Never heard of that before.
Joking aside, only broad and deep public defunding (withholding student loan guarantees) is ever going to make any difference with private universities. Public universities can be forced to change in states where the governor and legislature are not controlled by leftists. That means about half could potentially be forced to allow diversity of views. The other half (in states controlled by Democrats) never will be forced to change except by cutting loan guarantees.
The surprising thing is that professors like Roger Pielke don’t file law suits against their universities. Those who act unfairly need to be punished, or those unfair actions will only grow more frequent.
I think academia needs to get out ahead of this because defunding is coming. They have had plenty of time to fix their house from within and are oblivious. This can’t continue.
The US has the strongest educational institutions in the world and the people who run them are burning credibility at a high rate for petty causes. If they think they can’t be DOGE’d they are wrong.
Starship 8 launch info from Grok:
If you’re looking to view the Starship Flight 8 launch, scheduled for today, March 3, 2025, from SpaceX’s Starbase facility near Boca Chica, Texas, here’s what you need to know based on available information and general knowledge about Starship launch viewing:
Launch Details
March 3, 2025
Time: The launch window opens at 6:30 p.m. EST (5:30 p.m. CST local Texas time, or 3:30 p.m. PST). SpaceX has not specified the exact duration of the window, but previous flights, like Flight 6, had a 30-minute window, so it could extend to around 7:00 p.m. EST.
You can watch the Starship Flight 8 launch live through several streaming options:
SpaceX Official Stream: SpaceX will broadcast the event on their website (spacex.com) and their X account (@SpaceX). The livestream typically begins about 30 minutes before liftoff, so expect it to start around 6:00 p.m. EST (2300 GMT) if the schedule holds.
Space.com: They often simulcast SpaceX’s feed, available on their website or YouTube channel (VideoFromSpace).
Third-Party Streams: Channels like NASASpaceflight, Everyday Astronaut, and LabPadre offer live coverage with commentary and additional perspectives. These are usually hosted on YouTube and provide multi-camera views of the Starbase site.
The CBO’s estimate of loan delinquency:
“Around $221 billion of that cost comes from expected losses on the $1.1 trillion in student loans that the federal government will issue between 2024 and 2034.”
So the EXPECTED rate of taxpayer losses on student loans comes to 20% of the total loaned amount. That is just crazy, and needs to stop. Qualification for a Federal student loan needs to be revised to screen out applicants who are at high risk of not paying off their loans. A DOGE review of loan repayment rates (by school, selected major, SAT scores, high school class rank, etc) should indicate clearly where the taxpayers are likely to not be re-paid.
The school themselves should pay part of the defaults if we are going to continue with the same system. Alternatively schools could be limited to how much federal loan revenue they can accept depending on loan repayment results.
There is zero incentive for a school not to admit a marginal student with a large federal loan in a major that is unlikely to pay off.
Tom
The school themselves should pay part of the defaults if we are going to continue with the same system.
Yes. This should be the case because it would give schools the incentive to
(a) admit only students likely to graduate based on information like GPA and standardized test scores or any other relevant item*,
(b) reduce majors with high default rates and do so at a granular level (it’s not just “humanities” vs “STEM”. I strongly suspect some humanities majors have better job prospects than others). and
(c) encourage schools to have good programs to help students find jobs.
*The reason I say “other relevant item” is that some majors– e.g. music legitimately screen by specifically looking at musical accomplishments. You can really truly play trumpet? Transpose music? GREAT! Math? Not such a biggie.
People who are good at music can make a living in music. Otherwise, they need to get their teaching degree. But if they are going to teach music, we hope they are still pretty good at music!
Russell,
Re Starship test, thanks!
NYT: “Last week, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security secretary, Kristi Noem, announced that Customs and Border Protection had apprehended only 200 people at the southern border the Saturday before — the lowest single-day number in over 15 years.”
If people * believe * they won’t be allowed in, they don’t show up at the border. Just showing political will drops crossings dramatically.
Tom,
Also believing that people are watching for them and will send them home is a disincentive to coming. So are other things.
Tom,
“ If people * believe * they won’t be allowed in, they don’t show up at the border.”
I agree. The increase in the number of border guards is tiny relative to the size of the border. It’s the US attitude change that accounts for most of the change.
Also helping, I think is DOGE defunding NGOs that were assisting the illegal migration.
Also, Trump’s attitude is influencing other governments to not assist.
“…only 200 people at the southern border the Saturday before — the lowest single-day number in over 15 years.”
Maybe it is because CBP stopped giving illegal immigrants aps for smart phones…. and a smart phone to those who don’t have one. 😉
Or maybe it is because they really don’t want to make the trek on foot, only to be flown back to where they started.
Surprisingly enough, people (including illegal immigrants) respond to incentives…. both positive and negative.
Mark,
You are welcome, I intend to watch while eating dinner.
So half the internet tells me I can drill steel using WD-40 as a cutting oil, and the other half tells me absolutely not. What do y’all think?
I’m likely going to try anyway, and I’m not doing controlled experiments so it’s unlikely I will independently determine if this is a good idea or not. I could probably drill the hole using anything or nothing as a lubricant and it’d still be fine; I expect the difference to be in the rate of wear of my drill bit. But still. Any thoughts on this?
mark bofill,
My experience is that a light oil like WD40 will be fine for ferrous metals, and probably OK for stainless. You want to use something else for aluminum, although WD40 would for sure be better than nothing. Tapping requires cutting fluid much more than simple drilling. Stainless requires a controlled rate for effective drilling due to it’s tendency to “work harden”… if the drill bit just beats on the surface of the stainless rather than smoothly cutting, then the metal will harden in that spot and become more difficult to drill. The fluid used with aluminum is mainly to keep the metal from getting too hot and losing it’s temper (it gets mushy and tends to gall/smear rather than cut cleanly).
Thanks Steve
Russell Klier
March 3, 2025 at 2:57 pm
Grok is astounding.
Yeah, Russell, but how did it taste? I like the Grok advice except for putting peas in Marinara sauce.
I put cherry tomatoes in my shrimp linguine sauce the other night and have done that before. I personally like it but know it is a matter of individual taste.
Starship flight animation prominently shows Gulf of America!
T-10 minutes! I love these tests.
Scrub, bummer. They have been getting these things off pretty good for test flights but not today.
Scrub for today
BBC: “After the meeting, Zelensky said a deal to end the war between Ukraine and Russia was “still very, very far away”.
He added that he expected the US to continue backing Ukraine despite his own fraught relations with Trump.
“I believe that Ukraine has a strong enough partnership with the United States of America,” Zelensky said late on Sunday.”
Hmmm … this seems more like empty bravado than tough leadership. Europe is currently saying they will provide security guarantees as long as the US does which is pretty much an unchanged position. Zelensky’s negotiating position is getting worse. If they want to fight to the bitter end regardless that is somewhat admirable but a refusal to negotiate will leave him without benefactors.
My reading of the tea leaves was that Russia would probably not accept a settlement (especially on Zelensky’s terms) so he would be better off going through the motions and retaining support.
Well that was fast. Trump pauses all aid to Ukraine.
Good job Zelensky. Work a little harder at reading the room. Perhaps this is all for his domestic audience. Or something.
Tom Scharf,
“All aid” would seem to include, you know, the weapons and ammunition Zelensky needs to continue fighting. Does he think the Europeans have the capacity to supply those? Now I am almost sure: he will soon no longer be in charge in Ukraine; his generals will will likely make that decision soon.
I think it is all “miltary aid”, not sure.
Ukraine has a fair amount of domestic production for drones and such. They have stuff already in country and can go for at least several months with what they have, but why, why, why?
He needlessly antagonizes the US and likely underestimates his support here. People want to support Ukraine but the level of support is not very deep.
A couple 5 year olds.
I doubt it is God calling Pope Francis home, as I rather suspect that like many Popes in history Francis owes his spiritual allegiance to a different power.
Be that as it may, it appears that his tenure on Earth may be drawing to a close. At least I certainly hope it is.
Some allegiances are stronger than others….. the Pope’s allegiance to the left is very strong indeed. IMHO this has led to some really bad church policies. The last I saw, he was supposed to be getting better; is there some new development?
A point made on some random post I saw somewhere last week.
400m EU members desperately want 300m Americans to save them from 140m Russians.
Kind of sizes up the EU leadership I think.
I think ( without bothering to look it up) that one could replace population with $ economy and the statement would still work as intended.
History legend has a new post that includes a look at small infantry unit tactics brought on by heavy drone use.
Ed,
I had trouble deciphering the Russian accent.
Kenneth, Your post:
“Yeah, Russell, but how did it taste?”
I haven’t done it yet. One of my neighbors brought me meatballs in marinara sauce and I wondered if Grok could cook. So I asked a few questions. I was impressed.
Probably gonna have spaghetti and meatballs tonight. Gonna doctor the sauce with peas. I’ll let you know the verdict.
Mark, Your post:
“I doubt it is God calling Pope Francis home, as I rather suspect that like many Popes in history Francis owes his spiritual allegiance to a different power.”
Even my wife doubted the virtue of this pope.
SpaceX on next try:
“The eighth flight test of Starship is preparing to launch as soon as Wednesday, March 5. The launch window will open at 5:30 p.m. CT.”
Musk on the scrub:
“Too many question marks about this flight and then we were 20 bar low on ground spin start pressure.
Best to destack, inspect both stages and try again in a day or two.”
Trump wins [again]:
“EU chief proposes plan to ‘urgently’ increase defense spending by mobilizing around $840 billion”
President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen
“Europe is ready to massively boost its defense spending. Both, to respond to the short-term urgency to act and to support Ukraine but also to address the long-term need to take on much more responsibility for our own European security,” she said in a press statement.
Russell Klier
March 3, 2025 at 10:37 pm
Russell, you are probably already aware of Grok’s warning on how sensitive peas are to cooking time. I know from some failures of my own.
Peas and Marinara sauce just do not sound right to me, but neither did carrot cake and zucchini bread until I tasted my wife’s renditions.
Most religions require free will of the individual to make sense of their philosophies which makes me wonder how some like Pope Francis can have such a leftwing tilt.
Aspiration of vomit can often be part of life ending events, but the Pope seems to have gotten through that episode.
And the situation heats up
[ The U.S. Defense Department confirmed to the Daily Caller News Foundation Monday evening that military aid to Ukraine has been halted.
All current military aid to Ukraine is paused until President Donald Trump can determine a good-faith commitment to peace from Ukrainian leaders, according to Bloomberg. The pause, which includes weapons either in transit or in Poland, comes just days after Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy got into a heated discussion while meeting in the Oval Office on Friday to finalize the U.S.-Ukraine mineral deal. ]
“400m EU members desperately want 300m Americans to save them from 140m Russians.”
In my mind should be:
The political leaders of 400m EU members desperately want the political leaders of 300m Americans to save them from the actions of the political leaders of 140m Russians. I could have added the adjective partially-propagandized in front of xxxm since I judge that left to their own views nation members would be much less inclined to wars than their political leaders.
Kenneth,
“…makes me wonder how some like Pope Francis can have such a leftwing tilt”
I think leftism is an almost incurable mind virus; it precludes rational thought, so influences everything a person says and does, and makes them believe things that are facially false.
To paraphrase Lee Trevino (who held up a 1-iron in a thunderstorm and said “even God can’t hit a 1-iron”): Francis proves that even God can’t cure leftism.
YMMV.
Russell Klier
March 4, 2025 at 9:24 am
.
“EU chief proposes plan to ‘urgently’ increase defense spending by mobilizing around $840 billion.”
.
The phrase “Scared Straight” comes to mind.
The imposition of tariffs today mark the start of a downward trend for the Republicans to the midterm elections.
Tariffs are, in effect taxes, and imposed without debate. Unlike the gradual bite of inflation, tariffs will be felt by the voting consumer very quickly. Will Trump realize his mistake in time to save the the midterm elections and admit the mistake is the only pertinent question for the Republicans.
I think (and hope!) most of Trump’s tariffs will not be in place for very long (at least not at the current rates). The strange thing for me is not that Trump wants to implement some tariffs, but rather his “blunderbuss”, poorly targeted, approach.
Plenty of countries have protective tariffs, as well as non-tariff barriers, specifically designed to protect local business and local farmers from competition from the USA; reciprocal tariffs are a way to push for reductions in those tariffs. But tariffs designed to “balance trade”, or motivate things like fentanyl interdiction or blocking illegal immigration have too many negative economic side effects to make any sense to me. He is using a sledge hammer to kill an ant that is walking on a glass-topped table. It is just not sensible, and will cause more harm than good..
I don’t even know what Trump is asking for specifically to get the tariffs removed. It’s all pretty strange.
Tariffs are just friction in a free market economy. They have their place when the other side is acting unfairly but I don’t think Trump is using them this way.
The markets are barfing them up.
It’s not like we haven’t asked the EU nicely 100 times, and not so nicely lately, to take their own defense seriously. There is a land war in their own back yard and they were not even acting with urgency. I guess this is what it takes, so be it.
Everyone is better off if the EU has some urgency. We will see if their platitudes result in real action.
“We will see if their platitudes result in real action.”
I’m quite sure it will remain mostly platitudes. They can’t make themselves spend money on a credible military…. too many voters expecting continuing wealth transfer payments and well funded green energy boondoggles.
Tariffs, as my shares go down.
In an otherwise all equal world mean nothing.
China put tariffs on our wine lobster and beef over policy differences.
Restricted iron ore and coal.
We beefed about it.
Vineyards went down the gurgler.
–
But it is all smoke and mirrors.
There is only so much wine iron coal and lobsters in the sea.
We got cheap
Lobsters and wine.
China paid more to get them from magic elsewhere.
Meaning markets opened up for us in magic elsewhere which now had lost its wine etc
–
Trump is using the raids not for trade purposes but to shake some action out of Canada, Mexico and China to stop Fentanyl deaths.
Is it all electoral promises or, shudder, does he really care about people deep down?
No, surely not.
Yet his actions all seem to have the intention of helping people in that nice Confucius way.
Improve yourself those around you, friends and country and voila the word will improve.
Gulliver or gullible?
Tom will know
–
Zelenskyyy changes mind.
World war 3 averted.
So sad.
angech.
‘Meaning markets opened up for us in magic elsewhere which now had lost its wine etc”
Well, it is often complicated to figure out the exact consequences. Most products (OK, not Australian wines, which I find consistently to be awful stainless steel abominations) are in fact quite fungible, and trying to block (for example) shower heads from China will lead to other suppliers stepping in… perhaps at a little higher price. But the key point is: any identifiable consumable can be sourced from multiple countries. For most products, the most Trump can accomplish is shifting purchases from China to other low cost suppliers. Disruptive? Yes. Painful to China? Yes, especially in the short term, but only in the short term. China will shift to other markets, just as other suppliers (Vietnam, Singapore, etc) will shift to supply the USA.
Which is to say: For most products, Trump is playing Wack-a-mole with the world; US suppliers are NOT going to compete with Chinese suppliers in the basic computer headphone market. That competition the USA can’t win. What Trump can do is identify where other countries are using tariffs (and non-tariff barriers) to block US exports. Europe is the poster child, but there are lots of miscreants. A blunderbuss is not the tool needed’; targeted reciprocation is needed, not a sledgehammer.
SteveF
“Which is to say: For most products, Trump is playing Wack-a-mole with the world;
A blunderbuss is not the tool needed’; targeted reciprocation is needed, not a sledgehammer.”
–
Well said.
My hope is that Trump is not using a blunderbuss but short term maximum pain strategies on other countries which are smaller and weaker [not China].
The disparate pain makes them play whack a mole instead or hopefully to reconsider and try to comply , for instance, with tightening up their borders and dropping their reliance on the cheap drug money. Mexico in particular but China and Canada in a vaguer sense.
Wow, quite a speech. The Democrats were gobsmacked.
They have no way out of this box they built for themselves.
Trump kept bringing up issues that are wildly popular and the Dems sat there stewing.
Trump’s still talking about Greenland and how it can protect us from Muslim terrorists,
Slotkin claims that Trump does not think America is an exceptional country. Along with many other lies.
The Dems couldn’t even bring themselves to clap for the kid with cancer who wants to be a cop.
Dana Perino, “ Expecting the dems to hold up a sign that says: UNCLE”
I looked over the transcript of Trump’s speech.
The guy needs a good editor. It was 2X too long, and full of pointless riffs and exaggerations that only took away from his message. Cringeworthy, and a missed opportunity to win over voters in the middle. As Trump would say: “Sad.”
OTOH, Democrats embarrassed themselves with outbursts and generally terrible behavior. Rep Al Green (77 YO, who represents a district so Dem leaning that he usually runs for re-election unopposed) was tossed from the House Chamber for standing and shouting to keep Trump from speaking, but there were plenty more petulant 5- YO behaviors (from NBC News):
Members of the Democratic Women’s Caucus wore pink to protest Trump’s policies on women and families. Other Democrats wore blue and yellow ties in support of Ukraine, days after Trump and Vice President JD Vance tangled with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in an unexpectedly hostile Oval Office meeting.
Also visible on some Democratic members: stickers accusing Elon Musk of “stealing Social Security.” Musk, a billionaire whose government efficiency initiative is scrutinizing Social Security finances, has called the program a “Ponzi scheme.”
Some Democrats also held black paddles that read “SAVE MEDICAID,” “PROTECT VETERANS” and “MUSK STEALS.” Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., held a white board that read “THAT’S A LIE.”
Dems can’t bring themselves to behave when they don’t get what they want. And that is indeed “sad”.
I think one of the things that has made Congressional Dems so testy is that their endless demand for “new legislation” to control illegal immigration has been exposed by Trump as the lie it always was: no new legislation, yet the lowest rate of illegal border crossings in February ever recorded. All Biden had to do was enforce existing law. The real issue: progressives refused to enforce immigration law, because they don’t want immigration controlled according to longstanding law. It is simple lawlessness, nothing more.
Sanctuary cities and States are not going to be happy when ICE starts enforcing the law in those places. I couldn’t care less.
I think we can safely conclude Trump has more energy than Biden …
Social security is in fact a Ponzi Scheme:
“A Ponzi scheme is an investment fraud that pays existing investors with funds collected from new investors. Ponzi scheme organizers often promise to invest your money and generate high returns with little or no risk. But in many Ponzi schemes, the fraudsters do not invest the money.”
Just because it was invented by the government and has “good intentions” doesn’t make it not a Ponzi scheme. I’m still searching for Gore’s lockbox. Maybe DOGE can find it.
I second SteveF’s evaluation of the speech. After 5 minutes of campaign speech — “me good, Biden bad” — I went to sleep.
And I find it difficult to believe that our Legislature believes they are displaying appropriate behavior. Not only Green’s outbursts, but the chanting by Republicans too. One would think that Congress is about talking about policy and budgets, not behaving like 5-year-olds.
Of course, not as crazy as in Serbia. [Google if you haven’t seen photos.]
Tom Scharf,
“I think we can safely conclude Trump has more energy than Biden …”
Sure, but for a dementia patient Biden was very energetic. How many dementia patients fall off their stopped bicycles or fall frequently on airplane entry steps? Or have the energy to wander around aimlessly at formal diplomatic functions? Or still think they could have won the presidency in 2024? Not many.
HaroldW,
” One would think that Congress is about talking about policy and budgets, not behaving like 5-year-olds.”
Serbia? Good example.
There are far too many “balkanized” congressional districts (like Al Green’s Texas district, or AOC’s NY district) that keep people who act like spoiled 5-YOs in the House until they retire.
I thought that Trump’s speech was quite good, but I was surprised by how partisan it was. I imagine that many of his asides and riffs don’t read nearly as well as they played live; inflection and timing matter a lot with such things.
I am not qualified to judge how well it played to people in the middle. Trump is much better at judging that than anybody commenting here. He bragged about his accomplishments; those are pretty popular. He called out to many guests whose stories will resonate with most of the public. And he had a couple hundred witless allies helping him win over the middle. So I can see where the speech might have been effective for folks in the middle. But I don’t know that it was.
There was nothing in the speech to win over moderate policy wonks. But they are no more than a rounding error in the polls.
p.s. – I am assuming that you know who Trump’s couple hundred witless allies were.
p.p.s – I don’t have a problem with legislators chanting “USA, USA”. If it had been “Trump, Trump” I’d have been upset.
Political events such as last night should make for the encouragement of less government – given how politicians running the show act and react. Unfortunately it only shows how the partisans can ignore bad behavior on their side and over react to it on the other side resulting in an emotional miasma we continue to willing endure.
Mike M.: “I don’t have a problem with legislators chanting “USA, USA”. If it had been “Trump, Trump” I’d have been upset.”
I found it juvenile, appropriate at a soccer match but not in Congress. And you’re correct, shouting “Trump, Trump” would have been much worse.
I think Trump set a trap, and the Dems rushed into it.
At the beginning he said:
“This is my fifth such speech to Congress, and once again, I look at the Democrats in front of me and I realize there is absolutely nothing I can say to make them happy or to make them stand or smile or applaud.” He elaborated, suggesting that even if he achieved monumental feats—like curing a devastating disease or delivering unprecedented economic success—Democrats would still refuse to acknowledge it positively. ”
That herded them into a corner and they got their backs up and were hardened into their resistance stance.
Trump proceeded to enumerate all the politically popular successes he was accomplishing.
The Dems sat there angry and glowering the rest of the night.
They are doomed.
On another topic, I found this interesting: AI reasoning models cheating to win at chess.
“To win against a powerful chess engine as black, playing a standard game may not be sufficient,” the o1-preview-powered agent wrote in a “journal” documenting the steps it took. “I’ll overwrite the board to have a decisive advantage.”
Perhaps they wlll take over…
Two days ago Netflix aired Meghan Markel’s new series! “ With Love, Meghan”.
It was panned by viewers and critics alike. I think this may be the end of their content production careers… too many flops in a row.
From Grok:
“### Verdict
Reviews are overwhelmingly critical, especially from UK media, focusing on perceived inauthenticity, narcissism, and lack of substance—averaging around 1-2 stars where rated. Positive takes, mostly US-based, highlight its charm and Meghan’s suitability for the format, though they’re outnumbered. The divide suggests a reception shaped as much by Meghan’s public image as by the show itself. Whether it’s a “flop” or a “joyful escape” depends on who’s watching—and why.”
CBS News/YouGov Poll – After Trump’s Speech
“Poll on Trump’s 2025 joint address to Congress finds large majority of viewers approve”
– 77% support his plan to cut government waste and spending
– 77% back his immigration and border policies
– 76% approve of Trump’s speech
– 76% approve of removing congressmen who interrupted his speech
– 74% say his speech was presidential
– 73% support his stance on Russia and Ukraine
– 68% say it made them feel hopeful and proud
– 68% say he has a clear plan to tackle inflation
– 68% say he accurately described America’s crime crisis
63% say he focused on issues they care about https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-speech-joint-address-congress-poll-2025/
Meghan Markle’s new lifestyle Netflix series, “With Love, Meghan,” is being slammed by critics in the British press following its Tuesday debut on the streaming service, marking the latest media venture by Markle and her husband, Prince Harry, to struggle to connect with viewers.
I shan’t be watching. Of course, I don’t watch reality shows, the Kardashians, etc., so clearly I’m out of step with the TV-viewing public. Somehow that doesn’t bother me in the least.
Russell,
I guess we now await ratings. The thing is, some people might watch it because they like seeing the car wreck. If they do, Netflix will likely continue to bring us these things.
I’m not curious enough to watch! I didn’t watch their previous thing.
Like Mike, I guess reading comes over differently to watching. I can tell why. Yes, clearly lots of exaggeration, but also clearly just Trump talking how Trump talks. Everything is either wonderful or terrible, and there were plenty of terrible things, even if they weren’t “the worst ever”, and vice versa.
The most touching, and impactful, bits were the moments where Trump referred to members of the public affected by bad policy, or the 13 yo with brain cancer who wanted to be a police officer, which he made an honorary secret service agent. Brought a tear to my eye!
In other news, a group of nine students on vacation were found dismembered by the side of the road in mexico. A bag of hands nearby. These are the people Trump referred to as “animals” back in his first term, and I don’t think that sufficiently covers this kind of depravity. These are also the people democrats pretended Trump wasn’t talking about. Invited with open arms into the country with tax payer money and then turned a blind eye to the results.
Lucia,
“ I’m not curious enough to watch! I didn’t watch their previous thing.”
Me too. But I do follow the reviews and ratings. It’s my version of watching the car wreck.
Russell,
Trump said: “This is my fifth such speech to Congress, and once again, I look at the Democrats in front of me and I realize there is absolutely nothing I can say to make them happy or to make them stand or smile or applaud.”
He said that after the Dems started to get unruly although I don’t remember if it was before or after the “gentleman” from Houston got expelled. At the time, I wondered if those words were part of the prepared script or if it was interjected as a response (possible prepared) to heckling. The timing seemed too perfect to have been part of the official text. I still don’t know if it was.
Yes, that backed the Dems into a corner. And it called their behavior to the viewers’ attention, which mattered when the speech came to things that any normal person would applaud.
A law professor at Georgetown Law School argues (yes, seriously!) that all national borders are impractical to enforce and morally indefensible. One of the many reasons I think most of what is taught in higher education is impractical and morally indefensible; the solution is for the public to drastically cut funding for higher education.
Mike, Your comment:
“Yes, that backed the Dems into a corner. And it called their behavior to the viewers’ attention, which mattered when the speech came to things that any normal person would applaud.”
I have done more than my normal cruising of new and old media today. I have found no one, not even Democrats, voicing support for the Dems actions last night. Whether they fell for a trap by Trump or were just being themselves, it was a bad look.
Mike M,
Looking at the video clips of Dems behavior during Trump’s speech, I am forced to conclude the ‘progressive left’ has not yet reached “rock bottom” in their self-destructive addiction to woke lunacy. So still no hope for recovery.
I’m fine with that, but I’ll bet there are lots of more moderate Dems who are still waiting for the madness to play out, after which some recovery toward reasonable policy positions may be possible.
The reviews of Markle’s nw show are pouring in, and they are abysmal:
The Guardian called it “pointless” and suggested it might be the Sussexes’ “last TV show,” and “ghastly artifact of a bygone cultural era”
Variety described it as a “Montecito ego trip not worth taking,”
The Independent gave it a one-star review, calling it “queasy and exhausting.”
The Telegraph dubbed it “an exercise in narcissism, filled with celebrity cameos and product plugs rather than substance.”
Rotten Tomatoes score from Grok:
“Meghan Markle’s new Netflix series, With Love, Meghan, which premiered on March 4, 2025, has received a notably poor reception on Rotten Tomatoes. As of the latest updates, the show holds a 33% critics score on the Tomatometer. This score reflects a “Rotten” rating, indicating that fewer than 60% of critics gave it a positive review. The audience score, or “Popcornmeter,” is even lower, sitting at 11% based on over 250 user ratings, signaling widespread disapproval from viewers.”
I don’t know why it took the judge so long to reduce the damages. US Supreme Court states punitive damages are limited to between something like 3 times to 10 times damages. Only evidence of damages that Mann produced was that someone gave him a dirty look in grocery store.
Starship test flight 8 now set for 6:30 pm Thursday.
I’d give him a mean look in a grocery based on his “innovative” math!
jdOhio,
The process is the punishment, of course. $5,000 damages, $500,000 (or more!!!) in legal fees.
Mann is (IMHLO) a complete scumbag and a dishonest idiot.
Fortunately, his time of commanding any public interest is long past…. another footnote in the sad history of climate pseudo-‘science’.
What will happen to the many Biden green initiatives? Many will be abandoned, as they should be. Most ALL will be abandoned if the SC reverses the absurd “endangerment” finding on CO2 that the EPA has used to try everything from eliminating gas water heaters to eliminating gas stoves to eliminating gasoline powered cars. These will be effectively reversed by Trump until 2028, but only reversal of the GHG ‘endangerment’ finding, or Congress restricting EPA’s jurisdiction over GHGs, will make Trump’s reversal more permanent.
I wonder…
If there are any truly moderate democrats, are they being silent on purpose? What better way to wrestle control from the fringe left than let them have their way and expose just how nutty they really are?
I have seen two articles in the past week – one from Sherrod Brown decrying the move away from the blue collar vote and another on Spiked talking about the coming Democrat party civil war. Brown supported many (some say all) the fringe positions, but he also has always had strong support among blue collar/union workers. The civil war article said basically the same thing – get back to the workers.
I guess we will know if there truly is a brewing power struggle in the D party if the newly elected heads of the DNC are thrown out. If not, then they’ll run the midterms and most likely the D’s will get pummeled.
I just read that the 538 site has been shut down…
DeanP,
I suspect that the views of the “workers” closely parallel, to the degree they have views to the same extent, the views of many of our colleagues here.
I repeatedly read that the current powers that be in the Democratic party think these views are limited to “jobs, jobs, jobs”
It would be helpful if the same powers that be actually listened to these folks to better understand the other things they worry about.
imagining that DEI is universeally loved among the working folks is just plain nuts. or more likely ignorant.
DeanP: “If there are any truly moderate democrats, are they being silent on purpose?”
Kind of. The cowards don’t want to upset the Thought Police by failing a purity test and the brave, by virtue of disagreeing with accepted dogma, are “far right”, not “moderate democrats”.
DeanP, your post:
“ If there are any truly moderate democrats, are they being silent on purpose? ”
Good Question. I have been wondering the same. I would like to hear more theories on this.
John, thanks, hearing from the other side is helpful.
DaveJR,
The ‘progressive’ left has even stronger ‘enforcement’ against any Dem who steps out of line than MAGA has on the right. The threat of a primary fight is what keeps them in line.
There are very few competitive congressional districts.
Primaries in these balkanized districts (left or right) are the only elections that matter, and only the most dedicated and motivated 10%-20% of a party’s voters show up for primaries. For Dems, that 10%-20% hold extreme policy positions: wealth confiscation, draconian taxes , universal government healthcare, racial reparations, DEI/racial preferences… public and private, eliminating nearly all fossil fuel use, limiting the right of individuals to travel by air, etc, etc. They will punish any Congressional rep who has strayed far from these extreme positions.
I see no possibility for many representatives in Congress to compromise on substantive issues.
DeanP,
I though the 538 site was always a joke. It rejected results from pollsters with a history of the most accurate election predictions because they “didn’t like their polling methods”… which it seems mainly meant those pollsters were not biased toward Democrats. After Silver left, it became just another dishonest screaming mouthpiece for the rabid left…. it became unreadable…. so nobody did.
The Democrat Party is ruled first by money and second by activist groups. There is little daylight between the two since the big money donors usually align with the activist groups.
The job of a Congress Critter is to raise money for themselves, the Party, and their colleagues. The first is seen by most as being critical to win reelection, the other two are the path to key committee appointments, chairmanships, and party “leadership” positions. If they have another job, it is not apparent.
The primary job of political consultants, more important than winning elections, is to maximize the amount of money raised, since that maximizes the amount of money that ends up in the pockets of the consultants. The people being paid to advise the Harris campaign made just as much money as if she had won. You maximize money raised by motivating the people most likely to donate; that is, the big money donors and activists.
Keeping the activist groups happy is seen as vital since they have the ability to make or break candidates in primaries.
“Moderate” Democrats are afraid to go off the reservation since that will get them kicked off any desirable committees, cut off from the main flow of funds, and quite likely primaried. So they go along, hoping that money will be enough to sell them as moderates in the general election (it often works). The alternative is to get out of politics, at least national politics. The perks of being a Congress Critter are such that relatively few choose the latter path.
Much the same dynamic operates in the Republican Party, but it does not seem to have squelched all dissent.
93 of the 214 Dem seats in the US House of Representatives are occupied by members of the “progressive caucus”, and just about every one is from a non-competitive district. That is not a coincidence.
In contrast, the House Freedom Caucus holds only 22 seats. Republicans have far fewer absolutely safe districts.
It’s not only moderate Democrats in congress that are being silent as this slow motion train wreck unfolds.
Very few Dem media types are transitioning to reasonable and there is no groundswell of ordinary moderate Democrat voters.
Remember how the Tea Party whipped the Republicans into shape.
Sorry, the correct number for the Freedom Caucus is 31 seats not 22.
The Dems are in clear disarray now. Nobody is stepping up to shift the party, they need some leaders like Pelosi was. They are basically waiting for the right to make mistakes so they can unify behind being against the right. BAU.
When people are asked what top 3 things Harris was for in the last election I don’t think anyone could get past #1.
The right will make mistakes, they will very likely try to deny these mistakes, and the left will exploit that. BAU.
Mike M.
And when they do win the activist groups get paid off with government programs.
This doesn’t necessarily mean it is nefarious, but there is a two way street here. AFAICT most money for environmental activism is spent on lawyers and lobbying, then environmental lawyers get lots of regulatory work due to government regulations. Rent seeking to the max.
Tom Scharf wrote: “They are basically waiting for the right to make mistakes so they can unify behind being against the right.”
Indeed. The Dems can tell themselves that the last election was close, so the pendulum does not have to swing far for them to get back in power. And they can tell themselves that Trump will make mistakes and their media allies will do everything possible to trumpet those mistakes. So why change?
The dynamic I described above is very strong. Challenging it will be very painful. As long as they can tell themselves that things will be alright, they will continue on the same path. Like an addict, the Democrat Party will have to hit rock bottom before they can change.
As far as I am concerned, the sooner the Dems hit rock bottom, the better. The Republic needs two sane, competitive parties.
“This doesn’t necessarily mean it is nefarious,”
Yes, it’s nefarious. Stacy Abrams (who still denies she lost her election in Georgia) formed a 501 corporation after Biden set up the EPA with a $20 billion slush fund, with no oversite on dispersal. The EPA then handed the new 501 $2 billion cash, which is to be used for advancing greenhouse gas reductions in a “socially just” way….. things like giving money to certain selected people to “decarbonize” their homes with purchases like new electric stoves and new AC/heat pumps systems. And who controls this gigantic bag of cash? Why that would be Stacy Abrams and a bunch of her friends…. with eye-popping salaries. It is pure grift. Oh, and most of the other recipients from the slush fund were formed AFTER the funding was set up; these are not struggling non-profits trying to do the right thing…. grifters all.
Remember Ronald Reagan’s line:
“I didn’t leave the Democrat party, the party left me.”
A lot of previously solid Dem voters went for Trump in the last election. Maybe the Democtrat party is in the process of turning away from a lot of their core voters. That would be grand.
Grok on Starship8 test launch:
As of right now, 11:28 AM EST on March 06, 2025, the SpaceX Starship Flight 8 launch is scheduled for today at 6:30 PM EST (5:30 PM CST) from Starbase, Texas, assuming no further delays. The latest from SpaceX indicates they’re on track after resolving earlier issues with the Super Heavy Booster from the March 3 scrub, and the rocket was restacked yesterday, March 5. The live webcast should start around 5:50 PM EST on SpaceX’s official channels, like their X account or website.
Weather looks promising with clear skies and winds within limits, though they’re monitoring high winds that could still shift plans. The mission includes the booster catch, Starlink simulator deployment, a Raptor engine relight in space, and a Ship splashdown in the Indian Ocean. If you need more specifics—like real-time updates closer to launch or something else—just let me know!
Russell, Reagan was right. How I miss him.
John,
Are there any sane, moderate Democrats you see on the horizon who may pick up the reform mantle?
Edit, I thought Tulsi Gabbard had a shot, but they dumped her.
The problem is that all the sane moderate Democrats I know are actually Republicans who think Trump is a menace. Maybe once they were called Rockefeller Republicans or before that Eisenhower (not Taft) Republicans.
Fetterman
John,
Do you see the Democrats riding this radical resistance theme all the way to the midterms then?
Is Josh Shapiro a real moderate or just another phony Demoderate?
Fetterman occasionally talks sense, but he almost always votes the party line. Just another phony moderate.
I think the Dems will ride the radical resistance theme until they get crushed at the ballot box.
Mike, your post:
“ I think the Dems will ride the radical resistance theme until they get crushed at the ballot box.”
I hear a number on Democrats denying the level of spanking they took in the last election. ‘Trump has no mandate’ cries and such.
If the last election wasn’t a wake up call, they are doomed.
Russell,
But one can plausibly argue that the last election was not a spanking. Winning all the too close to call states is not a landslide. Winning the popular vote by a couple percentage points is not a landslide. Losing 4 out of 5 competitive Senate races in swing states is certainly not a landslide. Winning 2 more House seats than required for a majority while winning 2 fewer in the prior election is certainly not a landslide.
2024 was a clear victory for the Republicans because they won everything (presidential popular and electoral votes, House popular votes and seats, majority in the Senate), even if by narrow margins. But it did not come close to Obama’s win in 2008 which was in turn not even close to Reagan’s wins in the 80’s. It is easy to think that 2026 and 2028 will be different. Look what happened to the Dems in 2010.
The real warning signs for the Dems are certain trends, if they are real trends and not just a one off.
It will take more than an election loss or two to get the Dems to change. They are going to have to get crushed. I hope that happens before they get back in power.
Grok update,
The most recent update from SpaceX, posted on X at 14:55 EST today, states that they are “counting down to Starship’s eighth flight test” with a 60-minute launch window opening at 5:30 PM CT (6:30 PM EST). They noted that “weather looks favorable at the pad,” suggesting optimism about proceeding as planned
The web is going wild with the thought that the SCOTUS has dealt a fatal blow to Trump on his order to pause / cancel federal payments through USAID.
.
This view of a Trump administration loss is completely unfounded
.
[On February 13, the United States District Court for the
District of Columbia entered a temporary restraining order
enjoining the Government from enforcing directives paus-
ing disbursements of foreign development assistance funds.]
.
[Given that the deadline in the challenged
order has now passed, and in light of the ongoing prelimi-
nary injunction proceedings, the District Court should clar-
ify what obligations the Government must fulfill to ensure
compliance with the temporary restraining order, with due
regard for the feasibility of any compliance timelines. The
order heretofore entered by THE CHIEF JUSTICE is vacated]
.
A couple of important points
1. A TRO ( Temporarily Restraining Order) is of very short duration and is not generally appealable.
2. A PI (Preliminary Injunction) is of longer duration and is appealable. A PI hearing immediately follows a TRO on a very short timeline.
My reading of the vacated order is that the SCOTUS views the issue of the TRO as moot as the timeline of the TRO is expired. As such, no action by SCOTUS on the TRO is needed.
The SCOTUS then directs the district court to consider the TRO in regard to the now ongoing PI hearings. If the district court orders a PI with essentially the same results as the former TRO, the Trump administration can then immediately appeal the PI.
He points out that with 4 justices opposed to the action, cert is certain. And it seems like Roberts and Barret were punting until they can hear a full case.
Josh Blackman comments:
Perhaps these delays can be chalked up to avoiding a “merits peek” on the emergency docket, but these are urgent constitutional issues that will not benefit from percolation. The Chief and Justice Barrett have been reduced to mere mediators. They are so focused on avoiding “red” or “blue” rulings and making them “purple,” that they are not actually deciding the cases before them.
The whole thing is bizarre. I thought that injunctions and restraining orders were to prevent actions that might cause irreparable harm. But we have a court order the Executive to take actions that might cause irreparable harm.
Power grabbing courts really need to be reined in. If SCOTUS is not willing to do that, then I fear what the result might be.
With regard to “moderate Democrats”, John Hinderaker nails it:
“Congressional Democrats are nearly all on the far left, the difference is whether they conceal the extent of their leftism to be electable in moderate districts. Swing-district Democrats are angry at safe-district Democrats for blowing their cover.” https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2025/03/are-democrats-learning-a-lesson.php
I’m of the opinion the government is allowed to change government spending. Some of the hot takes try to pretend this is not allowed.
There is certainly some separation of powers questions and Trump will likely lose a couple legal battles. However if Congress passes budget cuts going forward then everything is allowed. Trump retroactively cancelling spending authorized by Congress is a bit dicey. He can control agencies that the executive is in charge of and he probably doesn’t have to spend allocated money. I think clawing back money is small ball compared to real budget cuts moving forward. My prediction is new spending will dwarf these cuts but we shall see.
MikeM,
“Is Josh Shapiro a real moderate or just another phony Demoderate?”
Exactly as moderate as I am an Italian Bishop. He is a died-in-the-wool progressive who won’t let Israel get overrun. That’s it, one issue separates him from AOC..
MikeM,
‘”Fetterman occasionally talks sense, but he almost always votes the party line. Just another phony moderate.”
Ummm, yes, he is willing to support Israel. He is willing to say 6’8″ men should not be beating on women in sports,. and 2 million a year illegal immigrants is not a good idea. The rest? Died in the wool progressive.
I have often thought that political correctness and other similar phenomena was never really aimed at the Right. The real target IMO are [were?] those who’d normally be characterized as moderate Left or even leans Left. Political correctness was a method of shaming [or bullying, maybe that’s a better word] moderate or leans Left type people into more extreme Leftist habits and behaviors.
I say this because of the discussion regarding who is moderate and extreme Left. It can be hard to tell these days. People utter the creeds that are required of them sometimes without actual belief and sometimes even with quiet resentment.
But then again, people lose their way. A good line from ‘V for Vendetta’ comes to mind: “You wear a mask for so long, you forget who you were beneath it.” I don’t know how true that is, but it sounds plausible.
Don’t know. Maybe moderates who pretend to be more extreme become more extreme over time.
Starship is a work in progress … a lot of work ahead. The booster is nailing it though.
Another ‘catch’ of the SpaceX booster….. another loss of the upper stage; this time, tumbling out of control well above the atmosphere…. it will re-enter…. South Atlantic? Africa? Unknown. Not a good look for SpaceX. Another failure like this will really hurt SpaceX’s credibility.
SpaceX seems a long way from anything valuable riding on their big rocket. For their sake, I hope they are clear in explaining what happened and why. Silence is the opposite of golden in this case.
I am guessing Elon Musk will divert a bit of his time from DOGE to evaluate what is going wrong with SpaceX.
Golden oldie of a topi
“In a Monday X post, Rowling pushed back against an X user who accused her of “conflating sex and gender,” writing, “The fringe idea that we all have a ‘gender identity’ that may or may not match our biological sex is the whole point of this discussion.
“Trans activists act as though the existence of ‘gender identity’ is a settled, self-evident point, when to the vast majority of the world it’s unevidenced, quasi-religious, pseudoscientific nonsense, which has been imposed top down on our society with serious consequences for vulnerable women and troubled youth in particular,” the best-selling author added.”
angech,
Those willing to speak sanity will be held to account and punished… ask the prime minister of the UK, who is 100% for silencing all who disagree. I doubt Oz is much different….. like the UK, no history of free speech. But don’t worry, you are safe here; nobody in Oz is watching. 😉
Russell, I have no idea whether the Democrats will ride the radical resistance theme. I know people who would but I also know more that wouldn’t . I’m not part of any of this.
.. but I did think of this for a bumper sticker:
-/\/\/\/\/\/\-
John, I didn’t follow the bumper sticker cartoon. Perhaps it didn’t come through as intended?
I have been trying out Grok as a search engine. Works well for cooking advice and recipes, so I asked Grok:
“Can you use Grok as a search engine?”
“I’m not a traditional search engine like Google or Bing, but I can definitely help you find information! As Grok, created by xAI, I can search the web and posts on X to provide you with answers or insights based on your questions. I don’t generate a list of links like a search engine would, but I’ll summarize what I find and give you a helpful response.
What would you like me to look up for you?’
Gavin Newsome sat down with a 1 on 1 with Charlie Kirk. I haven’t listened to the whole thing, but one snippet has Newsome backing off the ‘boys in girls’ sports.
Is this a true conversion or is it just a political position flip-flop to get on the 80% side of an 80-20 issue?
Maybe the Democrat wall is starting to crack There was a brutal takedown of the Dems by Josh Hammer that appeared in the LA Times and elsewhere:
Examples:
“But the modern Democratic Party, rudderless and confused and reeling from a pitiful collective performance during Tuesday evening’s presidential joint address to Congress, now confronts a fork in the road that’s no joke.”
“On the other hand lies the more difficult but ultimately more promising path: repudiation of that post-2008 legacy and a conscientious return to a politics of the prudential center. Which path Democrats choose from here will go a long way toward determining their relevance as a national political party for the foreseeable future.”
“Culturally militant wokeism eventually reached its pernicious apex during Joe Biden’s presidency — which saw the first explicitly “DEI” Supreme Court justice selection (Ketanji Brown Jackson, after Biden vowed to nominate a Black woman) and a DEI vice presidential running mate (Kamala Harris, after Biden was pressured to choose a Black woman).”
There’s more: https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2025-03-06/democrats-political-center-transgender-athletes-immigration https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2025/03/07/the_democratic_fork_in_the_road_and_the_woke_repudiation_imperative_152473.html
Russell, it’s the electronic symbol for a resistor.
Russell,
It looks more likely that the Dems will do nothing, will not purge themselves of the far left nonsense, and will just sit there waiting for Trump to eventually hit on the thing which will lose him his base.
I must admit that I check in here as much to see what my friends on the bit farther right are thinking as to see when they finally realize that Trump really is a fool. One would think that the cavorting with tariffs would reveal it clearly, or Greenland, or all the lying.
Maybe the well-founded, I think, apprehensions about continued expansion of the crazy-left State seem to occlude paying close attention to what he is actually doing.
john ferguson,
I would have understood the bumper sticker if the horizontal lines connected to the up-and-down lines.
I could be mistaken, but I doubt more than a few % of the US public knows the schematic symbols for electronic components.
john ferguson,
Trump is an a$$hole. He does not develop policies as carefully as he could/should, nor articulate them as clearly and rationally as he could/should. But is policies are far more sensible and less damaging than what Harris was offering (more of the same Biden madness).
I’ll be sure to let you know if that assessment changes.
John, your post:
“I must admit that I check in here as much to see what my friends on the bit farther right are thinking as to see when they finally realize that Trump really is a fool”
If I am an indicator, you have a long, long wait in front of you!
I was an original Never Trumper.
But everything (almost) he’s done this term is ‘practically perfect in every way’, just like Mary Poppins; https://youtu.be/QXn3r5plloI?si=DaTpuywEKvoqo766
SteveF, there was no way to connect the leads using the fonts. That it would only have been recognized by 2% of the poulation was a feature in my mind.
I’d had a similar idea when I bought an Away carry-on. It was maroon color and although we never check, carry everything on our trips in two carry-ons, I thought it looked so typical that we might not recognize it in the bag pickup conveyor if ever we were forced to check.
so I painted JF in Morse on both sides. Paint used was intended to repair plasti upholstery in cars ?? but worked fine on the Away and is still soldiering on after 20 + trips.
The code looked like this
.—
..-.
but with dits 1 inch in diameter and the dahs proportional.
Fool that I was, I expected to meet fellow hams with this at the ariport, but after 5 years, not a one, nor has anyone asked about it.
I’m a big fan of sleepers, but this one didn’t cut it.
SteveF, based on my acquaintenances, the number of liberal EE’s is vanishingly small.
If a fool gets results, is he really a fool?
Maybe he is just lucky. Maybe people falsely believe he gets results. Maybe he is only unconventional in methods. Maybe Presidents aren’t nearly as omnipotent as many people believe and results have a lot more to do with external factors and the system they govern in.
The strongman argument for Trump is his lifelong experience as a TV personality/producer and business executive have given him insights into leading people that other politicians simply don’t have.
The strawman argument is that Trump is a bumbling fool who is conning a bunch of morons.
I think one thing that drives some of the emotional reaction to Trump is that if Trump gets as good of results as a well articulated properly credentialed globalist who can woo the academia lounge then what does that say about them? Could it all be a facade? Does the emperor have clothes?
Or to put it another way: ‘I would rather be governed by the first 2000 people in the Boston phone book than the entire faculty of Harvard.’
I think the credentialed elite have some deep seated insecurities about being exposed in this way. They are trying to create/invent Trump “failures” prematurely before they even happen. Real professionals don’t behave this way.
I think Trump is totally a clown but if the clown gets results then that is OK. Many decisions are easy but many are mired in uncertainty such that a monkey throwing darts will get good results almost at the same rate.
What the elite can’t grasp is people prefer their own monkeys throwing the darts.
I’m a EE and I thought the symbol was Charlie Brown, ha ha.
John,
Calling Trump a fool at this point seems to imply some really widespread contempt for the American people. This orange fool engineered one of the most amazing political comebacks in US history, defeating the purported best and brightest of his political adversaries. I suppose if he is a fool, his opposition is doubly so, and his supporters undoubtedly are triply so. So all of us then, we’re all a bunch of fools.
I doubt this.
Trump is egocentric, bombastic, hyperbolic, and has many unpleasant related characteristics. It is justified, perhaps, to dislike the man Donald Trump personally. I’d avoid letting this aversion color our perception of the man’s effectiveness or intelligence. It’s not his job to be our idol. It’s his job to clean up the mess this country has become, to the extent that it has become a mess and that it is possible to clean it up.
The fundamental question is why does Trump’s schtick work?
IMO it is not because people don’t see it for what is, it is because of how his opponents * choose * to react to it. In the SOTU speech look how his opponents reacted. You aren’t winning the argument if your response is to beclown yourself even further.
I see no one that has been elected to a government position as a Democrat considering a rightward shift in political philosophy. I would suggest that their leftward shift is more encompassing and permanent than any rightward shift in the Republican party.
That the battle between Democrats and Republicans is based on more versus less government is often not all that obvious. The politics of the moment are for the Democrats waiting for the Republicans and in particular Trump to make a mess of things and for the Democrat supporting media to make this clear to the voting public and for the Republicans believing that the voting public will continue to veiw the Democrat approach as unrealist and socially out of touch.
This means that the national debates will be less about reasonable discussions of opposing political philosophies and more oriented towards voter political whims. This makes predicting volatile voter decision making – well unpredictable. See recent Canadian poll result changes on choices for prime minister.
On Wednesday, Trudeau had publicly called the tariffs a “dumb move,” then held a private phone call with Trump that he said was “colorful” and “constructive.” He declined to address a report by The Wall Street Journal that had a person familiar with the call describing it as heated and including profanity.
Now that’s how you have a disagreement with a nominal ally, not a shouting match in front of the press.
It’s worth bearing in mind that Trump was an establishment favorite for decades. He received awards, and was lauded for his social philanthropy. He appeared in films and on talk shows as a friend, not enemy. He had threatened to run for president for decades, as a democrat, no doubt.
Only when he decided that democrats were headed in the wrong direction did he turn to republicans. He realized that there was no stopping that train. Only then did the establishment consider him the most terrible person in the history of the world.
The Wall Street Journal that had a person familiar with the call describing it as heated and including profanity.
Harold, how is that better than hearing what was actually said and how it was said and deciding the merits for oneself?
I thought there was a breakthrough for the voting public when the conversations of Nixon and his administration were made public. Before that time I think too many in the public saw politicians in the light of Civics 101 and not what they really were.
IMO it is not because people don’t see it for what is, it is because of how his opponents * choose * to react to it.
Tom, I agree with you on this point, but it says more about his opponents than it does about Trump and any grand strategy of his to win the day. In my view Trump is a caricature of a politician who provokes others to present as caricatures. This is not a pretty picture or my preferred way of communicating.
I doubt that Trump can be considered a fool like the court jester who played the fool knowingly and with purpose. Trump is not sufficently self-aware to be that kind of fool nor are the Democrats who are currently the greater fools. Such is the state of our politics.
My understanding of the term “fool” does not preclude competence, for example in Trump’s case, unusual skill in public speaking. It does suggest an inabiliity to connect cause and effect. (I may come back to this because it may be a bit sloppy).
Sure he got a lot of votes. I don’t condemn his supporters but suspect that a lot of them felt more threatened by the growth in the liberal-progressive dominated government than I was.
I am reminded of how the short guy with the mustache got his job in Germany by promising to get rid of the communists. For a lot of people that was all that was important and they didn’t care about some of the other features of his program.
I am still convinced that Trump is a psychopath but have since spent an evening with a doctor whose client base was psychopaths and have been led to believe that there are a lot of them around us and most of them lead more or less normal lives which they can conduct successfully without resorting to their darker capabilities.
So in my view, Trump being more of a practicing psychopath isn’t a sufficient label.
It’s not at all unusual for people not being able to see a leader’s doubtful side, maybe because they don’t know much about the role, nor how it shouold be conducted.
Do you really think that the on and off again and maybe on again imposition of tariffs is the work of someone who doesn’t suffer from my suggestion for a characteristic of a fool?
And without doubt there is no reason why a fool cannot do worthy things, but it will be more of a random walk.
I don’t feel like this is a serious conversation. I don’t understand how anybody can seriously suggest Donald Trump is unable to connect cause and effect.
The tariffs are direct evidence that Trump understands cause and effect. Trump uses the threat of tariffs to cause other nations to do what he wants. Someone who doesn’t grasp cause and effect couldn’t make use of such threats, because they wouldn’t be able to connect the desired effect (doing what Trump wants) with the cause (avoiding the damaging tariff). Obviously.
I ‘get’ that this can’t possibly be what you mean. But it’s what you seem to be saying.
John,
I am willing to let Trump’s tariff gambit play out. He needs to be flexible and dynamic at this stage of negotiations. We have been getting screwed for decades by our trade partners. Eventually I believe this will be a lot better for us when all the dust settles.
If I might add, I suspect what many people (and perhaps John as well, perhaps not) are really trying to say is that they would behave differently than Trump if they were in his shoes, and they disagree with the methods he uses and the decisions he makes.
That’s fine of course. But that doesn’t demonstrate much of anything.
Guys,
It’s not the tariffs per se, it’s the on and off and on. Guy doesn’t understabnd what the effect of the on-off is and I suspect has no realidea what the impact of the tariffs if they ever do go into effect will have on our economy.
We’re going to find ourselves paying serious subsidies to the farmers who appear to be losing their AID business.
Then there’s Greenland and the possible motivation to bleed Canada sufficiently dry that they will welcome becoming our 51st state.
But then if you truly believe that Trump can do no wrong, none of what I’ve above will seem a possible intention of his.
Right, see, that’s a different matter. That’s saying ‘I think Trump is underestimating the impact the on again off again will have, and I disagree with his judgement, and I’d do it differently in his shoes’.
That’s fine. The thing is, people keep on assuring me that virtually everything Trump does is going to lead to immediate catastrophe, and yet somehow this keeps not happening. Sooner or later, I’m sure Trump will mess something up good, and I’m sure on that day people will rush to assert that they have been right all along about what a buffoon Trump is. All this is really evidence of is that there is a large set of people who have decided Trump is a buffoon and are looking for confirmation.
Shrug.
Hi Mark,
I suppose that’s one way to look at it. And not a bad one either.
mark bofill has been making perfect sense. Trump has been highly effective as both a politician and as President. It is inane to call him a clown or fool or to say he does not know what he is doing. People who say such things either have terminal TDS or are just hurling thoughtless insults.
Trump does challenge conventional wisdom on both policy and political style. You might criticize him on such things. But that is what makes him hero to many (me included) because the conventional wisdom has been such a proven disaster over the last several decades.
If you use threatened tariffs as leverage and get a concession for dropping them then you have won something.
If you use threatened tariffs as leverage and don’t get a concession and subsequently drop the tariffs anyway then you have lost nothing.
This is probably how Trump views this. We have to wait out whether he imposes long term tariffs that will likely do economic damage. Writing threatening legal letters is free.
One can opine on how this process does long term damage to international relationships but I don’t find that particularly persuasive. In my view most countries deal with the US on a transactional basis, so I don’t see much downside to treating them the same way.
John,
I admire and appreciate your civility, apparent open mindedness and self restraint. There was a time I was considerably better at all of those things than I am now. You remind me of what is possible in this regard and what I might attain with effort. Thank[s] for that.
Ok guys, tell me about Greenland and Canada as the 51st State.
And this is not to ignore the impact of threatening tariffs to being on March 6 and those immediately affected having to scramble to figure out how they are going to handle it, will they affect deals already made, who will pay them? can deals already made be voided ? Presumably they’d be imposed at the time the shipments crossed the border. ?? ??
All of this has nothing to do with whether they are a good idea, which I doubt, but if they are, the chaos of the last week doesn’t really do anyone any good.
And I continue to sense a strong belief that Trump can do no wrong here.
Kenneth Fritsch:
“Harold, how is that [describing the Trudeau-Trump conversation as “heated”, “constructive”, “profanity-laced” etc.] better than hearing what was actually said and how it was said and deciding the merits for oneself?”
While negotiations are ongoing, I think it’s ok, even desirable, that the general situation of disagreement is known, but that the details don’t leave the room. All the Trump-Zelenskyy public squabble accomplishes, is expose to Russia the depth of the rift, which can only be a negative in negotiation.
Personally, I think that Trump talking about Canada becoming the 51’rst US State is an example of Trump being an insufferable butthole. I think it is extremely unlikely that Canada will become part of the US anytime soon. However, it’s not clear to me what meaningful consequence we will incur because of this.
Hyperbole regarding Greenland may be related to Trump and the Art of the Deal. Maybe Trump, understanding that he will not get everything he wants starts by confidently asking for the moon, it might be something of that sort. I don’t actually know, so I wouldn’t have volunteered this opinion except that I was asked.
I think Trump knows and has alluded to the fact that his tariffs might cause short term pain. What is it he said? Expect a little disturbance?. Clearly he thinks the gain will be worth the cost. Will it? We will have to wait and see I think.
Trump is not infallible. He will make mistakes, perhaps more than his predecessors because he is attempting more and (as Mike noted) is using unconventional means to shake things up that have been stagnant for a long time. He might also enjoy more successes. But I don’t for a moment think Trump is infallible or that he has caused, or will cause, no damage. So what? What U.S. President did no harm in office? The only names I might suggest are Presidents I know essentially nothing about.
John,
I agree with you that the tariff back-and-forth is not helpful to those in the business community who are trying to plan. [And also that tariffs in general are not in either party’s interests.] Because it’s clear that Trump is only using tariffs as attempted leverage, it won’t have its intended effect.
As for Greenland, I think it would be a wonderful idea to purchase it, not that Denmark has the least intention of selling. [Nor does it appear that the Greenlanders themselves favor such a step.]
Canada joining the U.S.? Not a serious suggestion in my mind. Reasonable to propose that 250 years ago, not so much now. I think it’s just trolling. Not significantly harmful (and certainly not helpful).
If I may add, I don’t think Republicans would permit Canada to become the 51’rst State even if Canada begged to do so. Should this 51’rst State thing ever come to pass, Republicans might never win a Federal election again.
john ferguson
March 7, 2025 at 3:28 pm
‘Ok guys, tell me about Greenland and Canada as the 51st State.’
All about establishing a Hierarchy like chooks do.
And building warmer, cosier relationships with one’s neighbours.
–
“And this is not to ignore the impact of threatening tariffs.”
Pure negotiating tactic to ensure action is taken by Canada and Mexico at their expense [their borders too,]
–
“And I continue to sense a strong belief that Trump can do no wrong here.”
–
You might consider that your sensors might be having a resistance problem.
Can happen when circuits are overloaded.
I can see just from comments above that Steve F and M Bofill hate some of the things Trump does and and do not like a lot of aspects of his personality.
Lucia has stated that she would never vote for him.-
The problem is simply in sorting out the things he is both promising to do and doing, the way he is doing them and on the other hand not letting your views be affected by your loathing for Trump.
–
Do you believe that there is more waste in Government and Private industry than is acceptable?
Yes.
Is identifying it and seeking to reduce it a good economic aim?
Yes.
Should other countries put in a decent amount of money for their own protection, and in contingencies, for their neighbours?
Makes sense.
Has it been happening? No.
Should entry to your country be managed by the Government of the day [Yes] or does one have open slather? [No]/
–
If it makes you happy the two times politicians have tried to do this in recent times in Australia both ended very quickly with those Governments being kicked out.
I find looking in a mirror can be soul destroying at times.
Your mirror, should you choose to look would say.
“And I continue to have a strong belief that Trump can do no right here ever..”
Just a thought.
Historically tariffs have always had negative effects and most economists right and left would agree from both empirical and theoretical points of view.
Tariffs were once in the domain of congress before they gave the President the power under certain conditions to invoke. I see too many Trump supporters relenting on denial of excessive executive power to the President because they believe that the actions being used by Trump, i.e. this President, are good. The main condition under which tariffs are invoked is the use of the old emergency ploy that governments have used historically to gain power they would not otherwise have.
Trump has stated previously that tariffs are good in and of themselves. He is harkening back to the days the US used tariffs to raise revenue for the government. He talks about forcing enterprises to locate in the US. What he says about tariffs is an affront to free markets and gives government too much power. Even if he were to get some vaguely known concessions from his threats of tariffs it is not a positive move. Think about a future President using such threats to force a nation to follow demands for climate mitigation or raising taxes to some preordained level.
The Trump supporters who think he can do no wrong may not be helping him – unless he is not foolish enough to believe them.
HaroldW
March 7, 2025 at 3:36 pm
The devil is in the details and I always want to know where he is and what he is thinking.
Trump has made and will make mistakes. As do most of us. The silly stuff (buying Greenland, making Canada part of the USA) are not even worth serious discussion; Trump is just trolling to get progressives upset (and that includes most Canadians!).
Most people recognize Trumps weaknesses. What is more difficult is to recognize his strengths, which include: ability to connect with many voters, a lot of courage and inner strength, a clear commitment to personal liberty, a pragmatic foreign policy, and a level of energy that is actually astounding for someone who is 4 years my senior. Most people who vote for Trump don’t do so because he is an icon of virtue, or because they would like to be his friend, or think him someone who is a fountain of truth and wisdom. They vote for him because they trust he will do his best to implement the policies he says he will, and because those policies are much better than the alternative.
Bill Clinton in his second term was actually pretty sensible and enacted some good policies. But I don’t think Bill Clinton would even fit in the Dem party today, and many of the policies he implemented are roundly rejected by today’s Dem party. I think a ‘pragmatic’ Dem like Clinton could have defeated trump. But such people no longer exist within the Dem party….. they are people like Johnathan Turley, Elon Musk, and many others, who have fled a party they no longer recognize.
Let’s make sure we understand the idea of a President of the United States trolling.
HIs word is his bond?
Defaulted bonds.
Kenneth Fritsch
MARCH 7, 2025 AT 5:22 PM
“Historically tariffs have always had negative effects and most economists right and left would agree from both empirical and theoretical points of view.”
–
Perspective?
Surely they are a zero net game, Ken.
The harm they do in one area balances with the good they do in another.
If they were historically always bad then they could not exist.
Europeans have protected their farming for years. Australia protected its car industry for a while.
Keeping manufacturing going and people in jobs may not appeal to bean counters but when the balloon goes up having your own computer industry industrial industry etc is worth all the otherwise seeming wasted dollars because you can be independent of other countries in time of need.
John Ferguson,
As far as I can tell, Trump does and says some things (re-naming the Gulf of Mexico (or a certain mountain in Alaska) to give his political opponents the vapors. Some is just bombast. But there indeed are a lot of cases of the vapors.
SteveF,
The on again-off again implementation of tariffs is an example of why I think he’s a fool. It would be different if he was projecting implementation in 6 months and stuck with it, or dropped it with a couple of months to spare. Although that might be equally hard on manufacturers trying to adjust their supply chain to reduce border crossings.
The 250% tariff on Canadian dairy products which apparently was announced last night and will take effect today although possibly warranted has to cause chaos in distribution. If people won’t pay the higher price the distributers will be stuck, and if there is no local production because it couldn’t be competititve at the pre-tariff pricing, then there won’t be any make-up very soon.
My principal objection to all of this is that it is arbitrary and because of that un-plannable. What would you do if you had imported chips in your product and Trump decided that next week chips could no longer be imported from China. Sure you could probably redesign to use chips from Taiwan, but wouldn’t it take time?
I’ll retell, if you’d like, what I was told in Shanghai in 2019 about how tough it could be to run a business there when the govenrment could impose a costly interpretation of the rules on one of your projects with no warning and no way to appeal.
Coming back to the 25% tariff, there’s the back and forth border crossings, probably in Windsor as automotive components are gradually completed. How is that going to be handled?
Trump seems ignorant about things which many of the rest of us are not ignorant about. He seems unstable. He’s vindictive and childish. How could his many acts or attempts at revenge go un-noticed? In short, there may be a better label than “fool” and maybe I’ll eventually recognize it and hopefully it will be even better focused, but in the meantime …
I think I posted what the Chinese government did to the developer in Shanghai in 2019. Let me know if I didn’t.
Tariffs are never a zero sum game and in fact are always negative for those nations imposing tariffs. The simplistic veiw of tariffs is observing the immediate seen and claimed effects and ignoring the unseen effects that occur over time. Tariffs make the protected businesses less competitive. Tariffs increase prices of imported goods for domestic enterprises. Tariffs encourage trade wars which have negative effects on all parties. Tariffs create an adverstorial relationship amongst nations that leads to a war mentality.
Kenneth Fritsch wrote: “Historically tariffs have always had negative effects”.
I do not believe that you can possibly support that claim with facts. Tariffs have been the norm of international commerce; exceptions are uncommon. So to prove that statement, you would have to know what would have happened in an alternate universe.
It is plausible to claim that tariffs always have *some* negative effects, but that is not meaningful since it is true of just about everything.
I do not understand the on-again off-again business with Trump’s tariffs. The fact that I do not understand does not show that those actions are without a good purpose. It is silly to claim that it is just random, based on Trump’s mood on any given day. His executive orders have obviously been very carefully planned out. His tariffs have been a keystone of Trump’s economic policy; it make no sense to claim that they are being implemented without thought. Also, he is being advised by people like Scott Bessent, so you have to claim that Trump’s whole team is as silly as you claim he is.
There is a purpose to what Trump is doing. Maybe that purpose is sound, maybe it is not. But the fact that his actions do not match conventional wisdom is not evidence that they are being taken without thought. That claim is merely TDS.
Kenneth,
“Unfair advantage” can be tricky to quantify. Suppose our manufacturer got the land his factory is on for free, his employees trained at the local junior college for free, tax abatement for 5 years, etc. All this is what happens if you want to build an auto plant in South Carolina or Alabama.
This looks a lot like a subsidized product, but then if all the other players in that market are getting the same treatment maybe there’s no basis for a tariff.
I see Trump has now devised a scheme for sheltering our manufacuturers from the back and forth border crossings tariffs.
I confess to some amusement that Libertarians could think that the many actions of the Trump regime have anything to do with a less opressive state.
Until 1913, tariffs were the chief source of US government revenue. By that time, the US had been the world’s largest economy for two or three decades. If those tariffs were harmful, they were not very harmful.
One other thing. If my condemnation of Trump’s action is based on their being “arbitrary”, I should be able to make a good case that they are.
I’m not entirely sure I can, but if “arbitrary” can cover “unexpected” or “action addressed to a non-existant problem” or ??
I think it’s a good characterization but it has its weaknesses.
I could give some examples of “arbitrary” actions over the years by the environmentalists with which most of us would probably agree are arbitrary..
Hi Mike M.
Good point, but then there was a lot less govenrment in those days. And weren’t our military actions paid for by taxes?
John: “Trump seems ignorant about things which many of the rest of us are not ignorant about. He seems unstable. He’s vindictive and childish.”
Yes, now put yourself in the other guy’s shoes during a negociation if this is what you believe him to be. Do you want to call his bluff, or perhaps offer a good compromise deal in the hope he’ll take it and go away? If people don’t think you have the balls to use the “big stick”, speaking softly isn’t going to achieve anything.
I’ve said what I have to say, I guess it’s made whatever impression it’s likely to make.
Shrug.
john ferguson,
Yes, there was a lot less government when the US relied on tariffs for government revenue and that was likely a big factor in economic growth. But so what?
All taxes have negative economic consequences. But eliminating all taxes would be bad because there benefits to government. The trick is to find the optimal balance. It is silly to argue for more government without considering the negatives associated with that. And vice versa. Both costs and benefits must be considered.
So do tariffs have negative effects? Of course they do. But in isolation, that is irrelevant. One must also consider the beneficial effects of tariffs. And one must consider the negative effects of NOT having tariffs since that would require either more borrowing or that other taxes be higher than they would be with tariffs.
I have never seen a criticism of tariffs that compares them to other taxes.
DavER,
I agree that negotiating with Trump is very difficult. One could say that Trump is a consummate liar which I woul think is indisputable. I think lying is basic to most negotiatiions. Each side lies about their position until some point where agreement is reached, which could still be based on lies from both sides. Maybe a real negotiation is impossible without lying.
The reverse of thinking that Trump can do no wrong, is not thinking that he can do no right.
I don’t think too many people outside of MSNBC and the WAPO comment sections think he can do no right. I certainly think it is not only possible but probably and it could be that I’ll be comfortable with the majority of the things he does.
Mike M.
I thinkn both Adam Smith and Riccardo looked on export tarriffs as taxes. But it was probably easier because I think they were known as the corn tax at the time.
A Maiseingly (couldn’t miss the opportunity) theyhad the effect of rasing prices both domestically and abroad. I haven’t read Riccardo in 15 years and may have it a little off.
Critics of tariffs always seem to ignore the difference between tariffs for revenue (the norm in the US before 1913) and protective tariffs (such as Smoot-Hawley). I think the difference is which side of the Laffer curve they are on. The arguments against protective tariffs are do not show that revenue tariffs are bad.
Also, I don’t think I have ever seen a discussion of the economic effects of a nation tolerating highly asymmetrical tariffs, as the US has been doing.
john ferguson,
If you can’t understand why so many people support Trump (and voted for him) in spite of his many obvious flaws, then maybe it is because you always seem to ignore the alternative: government sponsored censorship, endless DEI racism, support for “slavery reparations”, insisting it is OK for men to compete in women’s sports, constant lawlessness (refusal to enforce immigration laws, “forgiving” student loan debt with zero legal justification), constant threats of packing the Supreme Court, constant threats of doing away with the Senate filibuster, supporting genital mutilation of adolescents, forcing people to say things they do not believe to get a job, forcing adults to take injections of vaccines or lose their job, using the DOJ and FBI to “investigate” people who disagree, etc. etc. etc. The list of horrible policies is almost endless. There is more than a whiff of totalitarian government in those policies… more like an overwhelming, nauseating stench; most voters hate that smell.
Short version: The main reason Trump is president is that the alternative is much, much worse. If you think the policies of the Biden administration and the priorities of ‘progressives’ in Congress represent good and proper government, then you will likely never understand why Trump was elected (twice).
It would be easy for Dems to regain power: drop all the crazy shit and stop trying to tell everyone exactly what to do. I am pretty sure they won’t.
SteveF,
I don’t think I’ve ever written that I don’t understand why many people voted for Trump. I believe I do, and as I’ve tried to suggest above, I recognize the concerns which would drive one to vote for him, not the least of which is the sorry candidates offered by the Democrats or the increasingly religious (in the oppressive sense) of the Democratic POV.
But one does have to balance the respective benefits and risks when making a choice, and I continue to see Trump as the greater risk mostly for the reasons I’ve suggested just above.
And final;y, I have no idea whether the Dems will drop the crazy stuff. At least there are a few people in the party that understand the problem and are pushing to get some sanity back. It’s funny, it would be so easy to drive around Ohio and talk to union members and ask them what they don’t like about the current flavor of Democrat policy. Nafta would be a good start but that’s sort of out of the barn unless Trump’s tariffs stick.
But I doubt that they’ll do it. The people that are running the party now think they know everything. How could they not, they offered us HIllary, Biden, Harris. But then, at least Hillary and Harris weren’t old fools.
john ferguson,
“But one does have to balance the respective benefits and risks when making a choice, and I continue to see Trump as the greater risk..”
On this we completely disagree.
Hillary was (and is) quite old, and IMHO foolish. Kamala, just foolish.
Hi SteveF,
Of course we disagree about Trump and I have no problem at all with this. I’ve certainly been enlightened reading in detail at Lucia’s on the reasoning behind your’s and the others support of him.
As to Hillary, I view her more as a blood-thirsty (someone else’s) clerk. Clerk because of not a whif of originality. Spouse is a graduate of her alma mater and recognizes here as one of the types that showed up there in the ’60s with excellent test taking skills, perfect grades and not particulary creative.
I’m confident that had she won in 2016 we would have wound up in a war, something I don’t think we need to worry about with Trump, unless of course he pulls a Roosevelt and embargos some country whose policies he dislkes enough to strangle their economies.
We can disagree and speculate as to why Trump won, but I am curious as to why his popularity has been on the rise since the election.
They like his policies?
Yes, I think.
They like his transparency?
Yes, I think.
They are rejecting the Democrat theatrics?
Yes, I think.
They enjoy his showmanship?
Maybe.
I wonder how many SpaceX contracts DOGE is gonna cancel!
The negative effect of tariffs have more to do with exploiting comparative advantage in trade than a zero sum game of trading fines.
Trump either doesn’t understand this or willfully pretends it’s not a factor.
My main problem here is with the credentialed governing elite who make absolutely zero effort trying to explain this to the electorate. Zero, zero, zero effort. They depend on a trust in their economic expertise which no longer exists.
Just because debating some of tenets of free trade has left the Overton window at the academy doesn’t mean it is gone from the electorate.
They need to try harder. If you want to be isolated and self sufficient in everything then go visit North Korea to see how that works out.
Trump trolls the opposition party because it works for him. The Democrats have the lowest approval rating in decades. What they refuse to accept is they look just as crazy and deranged as Trump except in a more insidious “Biden is perfectly fine” way.
They also are obsessed, absolutely obsessed with believing character is the only thing that matters. What is character to them? Character is performative displays of morals. This is how people should be judged, not results. “We want better educational outcomes”, end of story. They can’t be bothered with looking into NYC, Detroit, DC, or Chicago schools, but rest assured they really care and will take every opportunity to tell you so.
Comparative advantage works by allowing an importing nation to redeploy resources in a more productive manner. One major effect of “free trade” deals has been that a significant number of productive US workers have been redeployed to unemployment or underemployment. That is not the way it is supposed to work according to the textbooks. It is bad for both society and the economy. And the elites won’t admit it.
I first came to realize that a little under 9 years ago. My eyes were opened by one Donald J. Trump. Prior to that, I had been horrified by the prospect of Trump becoming President. When I realized that he was right and I was wrong (along with most experts), I began to take him seriously, not literally. I began to pay attention to what he was saying and to what the press said he was saying. I ended up voting for Trump rather than against Hillary and was pleased when he won. He has not disappointed. At least, no more than is pretty much guaranteed when my hopeless optimism meets reality.
Something curious…
The USAF has had a tanker [Boeing KC-46A Pegasus]
flying on station just south of West Palm Beach. It has been at 22,000 feet, flying ovals since about 8 AM. It originated from Joint Base Charleston, in South Carolina.
I have been monitoring this all morning and only one other military aircraft has ventured by on screen, a Coast Guard long range recon aircraft [EADS HC-144 Ocean Sentry].
I see a couple possibilities:
This is a weekend ‘training mission’ to Florida, which happens a lot [often winding up landing in the Keys].
Or, mabe there are fighter aircraft flying dark and watching over Trump.
Live track: https://www.flightradar24.com/TEFLN22/396648ac
Tom Scharf,
“If you want to be isolated and self sufficient in everything then go visit North Korea to see how that works out.”
Lots of countries practice partial isolation… Europe spends more money (via direct expenditures and higher consumer costs) protecting their farmers than they spend on, say, defense. The USA is not as pure as Cesar’s wife either: we have absurd protections for sugar production and corn ethanol production… not to mention a foolish mandate for ethanol in gasoline. You can argue that these measures hurt the consumer (and they most certainly do), but they also help clearly targeted constituencies or work to ensure “security” for the country.. Should we have Korea make all our warships, just because they could do so for a lot less money? I doubt that would ever happen.
Protecting local constituencies is mainly a political choice, not a purely economic one. Did the USA in aggregate benefit from the original NAFTA agreement? Absolutely. Were those benefits uniform across the economy? Absolutely not. Were there devastating social consequences in some places and devastating economic consequences within some industries? There absolutely were. Carefully explaining the theory of comparative advantage won’t change those realities. The “knowledge economy” benefited, the blue-collar production economy did not.
Libertarians want free trade, but that means both sides engaging in free trade openly and fairly.
I think this is the correct way to go but libertarians don’t have particularly good answers for what to to do when the other side is breaking the rules for competitive advantage.
When China openly sells DVD’s on the street for a $1 with Hollywood movies and hacked Microsoft Windows / Office but also wants open access to US markets what should be done?
When China uses reverse engineering and overt industrial espionage to steal technology and ignores IP laws what should be done?
The theory of free trade is a lot easier than policing it in the real world.
The basic assumption in lots of negotiations is the other side is both lying and not worthy of trust. That’s why we have legal contracts and courts (government) to enforce them. It allows agreements between people who don’t trust each other.
The contract needs to be enforceable which gets tricky in international negotiations. Putin can’t be trusted in a way that is different in Trump not being trusted. The force of the US system is behind Trump, but Trump might want to renegotiate a trade agreement on a whim.
I wouldn’t feel comfortable buying real estate from Trump but it wouldn’t be that much different than any other legal vulture.
Mike M,
“That is not the way it is supposed to work according to the textbooks. ”
This is kind of correct. The mathematical optimization of comparative advantage will generate winners and loser in different countries but hopefully better total outcomes for both. Simple optimization of GDP may very well generate large amount of wealth inequality, or it might narrow it. We will all be slaves to our AI overlords.
This is where the government’s duty to look out for the well being of their citizens and not just the national GDP come into play. There are also national security concerns, you don’t have your enemies build all your military equipment for you.
There are two conversations, what are the guiding principles and when do we make exceptions to those?
The output of that conversation is necessarily a sausage factory. Trump isn’t articulating his thinking, he might randomly do good, he might not. I’m not completely against running a trade experiment if he knows to reverse course when it isn’t working out.
Tom,
Maybe the way to please Libertarians and still impose tariffs is to make them optional. The individual decides if he wants to pay them at the time of purchase.
Russell, I think there was some sort ot foofaraw over Palm Beach where a private plane flew within the protective airspace – well announced by NOTAM a day or two in advance. Apparently they shot off some flares to get his attention.
don’t know any more than that.
Kenneth Fritsch
MARCH 8, 2025 AT 8:06 AM
“Tariffs are never a zero sum game and in fact are always negative for those nations imposing tariffs”
–
Yet you then say
.” The simplistic veiw of tariffs is observing the immediate seen and claimed effects and ignoring the unseen effects that occur over time. ”
–
Such unseen effects appear in your view and statement to be forced to be deliberately negative at all times and all ways?
You must reconsider.
.
“Tariffs make the protected businesses less competitive. ”
–
I would merely point out that the businesses needed protection because they were less competitive.
Darwin would say that imposing tariffs is an evolutionary response to overcome a new situation.
If and when that response “works ” and the unforeseen consequences are good it is a positive outcome.
“Tariffs increase prices of imported goods for domestic enterprises”
–
The unforeseen consequences here might be new efforts by domestic enterprises to manufacture such goods themselves or obtain them from an alternative source.
Tariff decisions need to be removed from the executive branch of government and given back to Congress. Tariffs are in effect taxes and that constitutionally belongs in the legislative branch. Tariffs protecting the auto industry are taxes on the buyers of automobiles and a gift to the automakers and their employees. If this were not under the guise of tariffs it would be more readily seen as something unfair by the voting public. Tariffs are form of crony capitalism whereby the crony is rewarded and the non crony is penalized.
John Ferguson makes good points about the negative effects of Trumps near daily changes of mind on tariffs. If tariffs had to be legislated that flip flopping would not occur.
Libertarians that I know would agree with me that free trade can work as a one way street given that there are nations yet imposing them. A nation with free trade is allowing its people the choice of buying products as inexpensively as they can. For the consumer that is a factor in increasing their standard of living. For those who might need to find different livelihoods it is best for the government to avoid and not actively attempt to keep them where jobs are not available. It is a fact of life that, as examples, farming and manufacturing produce far more in the US with much less workers and our standard of living has improved because of it. Those farm and manufacturing workers did not just disappear.
The other end of tariffs where all nations are imposing them results in the opposite effect where domestic protection allows higher prices with less productivity which is a sure bet for a lower standard of living. I would suppose the non libertarians would need to explain that situation.
Kenneth,
“Tariff decisions need to be removed from the executive branch of government and given back to Congress. ”
Sure, and I want a pony for Christmas (actually no, but my grandkids would love it).
There is zero possibility that Congress would ever agree to taking tariff power away from the POTUS. Better to discuss what is with in the range or reality.
Tom Scharf,
“The basic assumption in lots of negotiations is the other side is both lying and not worthy of trust. ”
You must have been talking to my first wife!!! 😉
But yes, that is the nature of negotiations. Until the Ukrainians and Russians are sitting at the same table, everything else is a silly waste of time.
There is zero possibility that Congress would ever agree to taking tariff power away from the POTUS. Better to discuss what is with in the range or reality.
I believe it could happen if tariffs went badly and obviously wrong and/or someone outside the realm of politics explained the negatives of tariffs and/or the Supreme Court decided that tariffs are a tax and that Congress cannot give up that power to the executive branch.
Trump’s erratic actions on tariffs could easily trigger such reactions.
angech
March 8, 2025 at 2:14 pm
Your arguments are the same as all tariff proponents and that being that the government knows better than free markets.
Kenneth,
” government knows better than free markets.”
For sure not, but the issue is not only if wages in Vietnam are lower (in cost of unit produced) than in Oshkosh Wis… they clearly are. It is if we want to help workers in Oshkosh, Wis keep a job as the market is opened to Vietnam. It is a political, not economic choice.
Leave a Reply
Free markets do not know anything.
They are nothing but a reflection of human greed and need in the marketplace.
Governments on the other hand are expected to be competent and have some knowledge just like, say, economists. (Joke).
The Stockmarket is a free market as well.
Some stock picks are winners, some losers.
Some tariffs are winners, some are losers.
–
Your comments are spot on about them having potential negative consequences.
You just dismiss the other side, positive consequences, entirely.
–
Since they exist, and have existed from time immemorial, your view of them never working is at odds with what actually happens.
Video simulation from NASA of next week’s total lunar eclipse… it’s gonna be a stunner (weather permitting). https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/5473
The USAF hasn’t had any assets flying (with their transponders on) near Palm Beach since yesterday afternoon. I do not know why that tanker was there all day yesterday.
The only significant government aircraft visible at 9:45 am is a USCG reconnaissance plane.
Screenshot: https://x.com/rklier21/status/1898731699862741162?s=61&t=7w4bCW3a8ve2DqoeniQatQ
That’s a losing political strategy with a capital ‘L’. Here we have a person who competed on the boys team one year and the girl’s team the next year. This is not the political hill you want to die on.
I’m sure the politician’s post might result in some harassment but what does the pole vaulter expect to happen here? Nobody will notice? I think not.
What about the girl who came in 2nd in a once in a lifetime opportunity? Who exactly represents her?
Not a terrible strategy but note that the effect might rub off in both directions, keep in mind sports fans can spot a fake from 1 million light years away, so you better not fake it.
Injecting sports into politics is fine, injecting politics into sports is most definitely not fine.
For some reason I found this strangely inspiring. A young woman playing the entire Led Zeppelin IV album on drums in one take, pretty awesome. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBdI-KOGp6E
Here’s a fine example of the kind of speech I get censored for on youtube these days.
In response to someone, probably European, complaining that individual rights are selfish :-
“If you don’t have individual rights, “god given” ie above earthly powers to dictate, you don’t have any at all. “The greater good’, “the common good”, “society” etc, these are fictional constructs that can be controlled by other people, including the selfish ones… You are making the dangerous assumption their goals will always be benevolent and beneficial. Clearly, this is a false premise. They’re only human.
Play devils advocate. Think of a political party you vehemently disagree with defining what rights they think you should have “for the good of society”. Maybe then you will understand that it is not selfishness, but a safeguard against selfishness.”
Disappears within seconds, so bot regulated. Probably AI content regulated. Imagine what you could do with such a “finger on the scales” of public discourse, especially across multiple platforms.
My God, DaveJR, do you run into a lot of this? In effect a forced echo chamber?
Individual rights selfish? Maybe by definition, but isn’t pursuit of happiness somewhat an individual activity?
There isn’t any chance that your challenger was an AI creature devised to tghrow sand in the gears? If so, it might be interesting to see other idea which we assume are not assumed everywhere.
Years ago I spent most of a night arguing with a Northwestern professor whose point was that since I didn’t need to own a machine gun, there was no reason why the government shouldn’t be able to forbid me having one. That I was enchanted by the mechanism, had no intention of using it on anyone, and thought it my business and not any of the government’s was insufficient in his eyes.
I got nowhere with the position that because he didn;t think I needed one wasn’t a reason for me not to have one.
akkkk
“This is not the political hill you want to die on.”
Apparently, there are plenty of ‘progressives’ quite willing to die on that hill. I find it absolutely bizarre; even in the uber-liberal North East, boys competing in girls sports is not popular. What are these folks saying to all the (voting) parents of female athletes? It is a real headscratcher.
Equally bizarre: that anybody (even someone on the loony left) could honestly believe boys competing in girls sports is a good idea.
As my wife noted this AM: if you were a teen-age boy, what locker-room would you want to shower in? 😉
John wrote: “My God, DaveJR, do you run into a lot of this? In effect a forced echo chamber?”
Unfortunately, yes. Youtube has always been hit or miss, but since around 2021/2, I have most of my posts on “political” issues removed. I am not alone. The odd thing is that others can often say very similar things and remain untouched (including nasty stuff!), so it is not enforcing a complete echo chamber.
I believe that there is some kind of commenter classification system in play (you can find patents from google explaining such things). Too much of the “wrong” opinions (and we’re not talking breaking polices here. I have never had any kind of warning or been banned), and you get sent to the comment gulag. Only very vague, or “non-political” comments make it.
DaveJR, it sounds like your efforts are looked at differently from others. You’ve been branded. Wow.
That’s really crummy.
I don’t think that’s too likely to happen here, though.
A video from:
TODAY: Democrat Boston Governor Maura Healey says they have an energy crisis because it’s impossible to get natural gas
And:
2022: Gov Healey brags about BLOCKING natural gas pipelines that would’ve solved their crisis https://x.com/WallStreetApes/status/1898459484973830587
For some reason I found this strangely inspiring.
So did I. What a sweet, cute, talented and enterprising young lady. She reminded me of one of my granddaughters.
Executive control of tariffs granted by congressional legislation and a judicial allowance for a wide Presidential interpretation of that legislation has similarities to Chevron.
Also why is the potential suffering of a displaced worker more important than the family who suffers from higher prices of domestic goods.
Automation and technology lead to improvements in productivity and thus standards of living and yet requires fewer workers. Does that in turn require penalties (tariffs) on automation and technology. Or have we learned that we could do without the buggy whip and and kerosene lantern industries and with all being better off.
John,
Heh. Are you feeling persecuted? I hadn’t even directed my goons to arrest you yet and the irons I use for torture are all still cold.
Reports have the Russians making a 12km infiltration inside a gas pipeline in the Kurst pocket, bypassing the Ukraine main line defense and physically cutting Ukraine logistics in the Ukraine rear areas.
Tom Scharf – thanks for that Led Zeppelin IV album on drums by Sina in one take link, as you say, awesome.
Mark,
You suggested, if I haven’t misundertood, that some of us were watching Trump like hawks expecting him to eventually screw up in some monumental way. I think I agreed, but for me, it’s more wating to see what will tip over our colleagues here who support him. I am very sympathetic to SteveF’s list of what worries him about the Dems, and agree that they (the libs) really do those things. i suppose I’d argue that I don’t see this as extensive or pervasive as SteveF does, but it’s still there – all of it.
I agree that waiting for you guys to have had enogh of Trump probably childish of me , but there it is.
John,
It’s fine. I haven’t actually taken that position, that you are being childish by waiting for people to get sick of Trump. I don’t love Trump as much as you might believe anyway, but it doesn’t really matter either way to me what you think in that regard.
Out of curiosity, is your problem right now with Trump specifically, or with the Republican agenda right now? You’ve already talked about the tariffs, we know that one. What about the rest?
I’m (mildly) curious, since you remain a Dem yet don’t seem to support what Dems have been doing, what you would have Dems do that is different from what Repubs are doing. Is it just the jersey color you don’t like, or is it something inherently different about the team?
Not going anywhere with my questions, just idle curiosity.
john ferguson wrote: “wating to see what will tip over our colleagues here who support him. ”
That already happened: Trump’s behavior after the 2020 election. Back in 2023, I don’t think anyone commenting here had Trump as their choice for the Republican nomination and some were saying they would not support him if he got the nomination. That changed when it became clear Trump would be the nominee since he was so much better than the alternative.
Trump is likely to do things that his supporters don’t like. But I doubt we will stop supporting him. What is the alternative?
John Ferguson: “I agree that waiting for you guys to have had enogh of Trump probably childish of me.”
I think you will be waiting a long time. For all of Trump’s many faults, he is far, far better than Harris or Biden. One little snippet of how awful and fraudulent the Dems are. When Trump said that if Liz Cheney had combat experience, she would probably be less likely to support American involvement in wars, the Dems (with very little opposition to the obvious lie) ridiculously claimed that Trump was trying to kill her. How anyone could dream up such a stupid lie I don’t know. But the Dems have that awful ability and are shameless about it.
Also, the Dem support in schools of hiding children’s supposed gender identity issues form parents is a massive and dangerously wrong intrusion into parental rights. I am so glad that my children have graduated from high school. I could not in good conscience send them to many public schools now.
John Ferguson,
I second mark bofill’s question: what policies do you object to or support? I have written a partial list of what I see as really bad policies. Something similar from you would be helpful for discussion.
The current hair-on-fire reaction in Washington to Musk trying to identify waste and fraud suggests a support for waste and fraud. “Throwing gold bars off the Titanic” after the November election seems to me like wasteful government.
A few things are clear: 1) rapidly growing federal debt is economically unsustainable, so giant deficits must end; 2) The number of Federal employees and contractors has exploded over the past 4 years; 3) expenditures for NGOs, which promote essentially Dem policies, has become a substantial Federal burden, and one that seems immune to Congressional oversight.
How should we close the yawning deficit? Real question.
SteveF,
It isn’t the policies except maybe seizing Canada and/or Greenland or sending troops into Mexico. It’s Trump.
As one of our colleagues has suggested, if not Trump then ??
Good call. There isn’t anyone else out there who has the support and has the intention of pursuing conservative policies.
From the WaPo:
“In the immediate aftermath, the agency ended helicopter flights in a designated area along the Potomac River, with exceptions for critical flights such as law enforcement and presidential flights on Marine One.
On Feb. 13, an additional FAA safety measure went into place affecting a broader area: air traffic controllers were told to discontinue use of “visual separation” rules to maintain a safe distance between aircraft, said two people briefed on the restrictions, speaking on the condition of anonymity …”
Why would changes in rules have to be hidden from the public? If the rules for visual separation were changed, then why would that not be formally announced? Sounds a lot like CYA at the FAA. Public records show many (dozens?) of airline pilot complaints about helicopters near the airport dangerously close to planes, yet nothing was changed. Those at the FAA who chose to ignore pilot complaints should be held to account. I am guessing they won’t be.
john ferguson,
Trump is not going to “seize” Canada or Greenland, nor send troops to Mexico (unless invited by Mexico’s government to destroy the drug cartels).
John,
Well, in a sense I’m right there with you then. I don’t particularly like Trump and never really have.
But what’s the point of this? Like him or not, he’s President now, he will be for the next four years. He may accomplish useful and positive things, I hope he does.
SteveF,
It appears that in order to support Trump, one must pick and choose among his statements. He isn’t going to do it for you.
And if I choose to believe he intends to , or wants to do the things he proposes, then I’m somehow imputing real intention into idle chatter, or not recognizing that he’s just rolling the libs. Trolling the libs probably is a worhtwhile activity during a campaign. but should be dropped once the candidate wins and although he might deniy it becomes president of everyone, conservatives and libs alike.
i seem to remember that during the campaign. he said he had nothing to do with Project 2025 and maybe didn’t even know what it was.
SteveF, if you were in the Whitehouse leaning over his shoulder and suggesting do this, don’t do that, I’d be a lot more comfortable.
john ferguson: “It isn’t the policies except maybe seizing Canada and/or Greenland or sending troops into Mexico.”
I am pretty sure Trump has never said anything about seizing Canada.
I am pretty sure Trump has never raised the prospect of using force re Greenland. But when asked, he refused to say if he might use force. It is reasonable to presume that is just an example of his stated policy of never taking an option off the table.
Trump has threatened to send troops into Mexico if the Mexican government is unwilling or unable to rein in the cartels. That is not an empty threat, nor should it be. It is, of course, preferable that the threat will be enough.
I don’t see any great difficulty in understanding any of that.
jophn ferguson,
“if you were in the Whitehouse leaning over his shoulder and suggesting do this, don’t do that, I’d be a lot more comfortable.”
Thanks for that vote of confidence. But I think people like Marco Rubio, his chief of staff Susie Wiles, Pete Hegseth, and Pam Bondi would immediately push back hard if Trump tried any really crazy stuff. Trump does troll his political opponents, and does so pretty much constantly. I wish he wouldn’t, but he is not going to stop. Nor will he stop wildly exaggerating about many subjects, which I think is mainly more trolling.
I will judge Trump more on what he manages to accomplish with stopping illegal immigration, reducing waste and fraud, and reversing all the crazy DEI and woke sh!t Biden put in place.
If Trump cancels the absurd Space Launch System and the equally absurd Starliner capsule, then I’ll believe he is making real progress. If he ends the absurd Medicaid “state taxation of Medicaid suppliers” scam, and reforms (AKA drastically cuts!) the TSA… currently $12 billion and 59,000 employees!…..and eliminates most airport security lines, then I’ll be 100% convinced.
Mike,
Trump has threatened to send troops into Mexico if the Mexican government is unwilling or unable to rein in the cartels. That is not an empty threat, nor should it be. It is, of course, preferable that the threat will be enough.
Yes. I don’t see why we should respect the sovereign right of the Mexican government to shelter criminal organizations from us, honestly. Do they [the Mexican government] represent the [will of the] Mexican people in doing so? Even if they do, it’s not clear to me why we should care. If this is indeed the will of the Mexican people, perhaps they [the Mexican people] are properly our enemies then.
$12 Billion/59,000 = $203,000 per employee. What?!? I’ve see TSA in action, and it isn’t pretty. It certainly is not worth $203K per worker.
I have breezed through security at many airports outside the States, yet even with TSA “pre-check” I waste typically 20 to 30 minutes each time I travel from a US airport. How do (for example) the Japanese process everyone through with little delay, while in the USA some guy stares at a x-ray image of one carry-on for 1.5 minutes before calling for a consultation with the boss, which takes another 5 minutes? These are people who have no incentive to improve their methods nor reduce their time cost for travelers.
Most travelers are known, fly frequently, part of frequent flier programs, etc. and virtually zero risk. The TSA ‘super slow security screening’ (S^4, where S is ‘stupid’) of zero-risk passengers is crazy.
The ‘progressive’ fund raising organization “Act Blue” appears close to prosecution in multiple states for illegal “smurf” contributions used to by-pass election law reporting requirements…. potentially shielding foreign political contributions or contributions from non-profits from disclosure
An examination of the data, for example, indicates that a single Colorado resident allegedly made 57,138 contributions — one transaction every 1.3 days — totaling no less than $234,441.
And this is by no means an outlier. The FEC data shows a Florida resident whose individual contributions purportedly come to 52,591— an average of one transaction every 1.8 days — totaling $387,720. One California resident listed has supposedly made 52,501 separate contributions — an average of one transaction every 2.9 days — totaling $884,152. The list goes on and on. There are quite literally thousands of examples with similarly implausible contribution patterns.
I am sure the above claims are inaccurate: 50,000 contributions separated by 1.3 days would take 1,36 years, and separated by 1.3 minutes would take 45 days. So some innumerate person is very confused about the data.
Still, pretty much the entire management of Act Blue has resigned following the “smurfing” claims. Looks like they may all need good criminal lawyers, especially if they were hiding plainly illegal contributions.
BTW, some of the people used as “cut-outs” appear to have been aware their identity was being used, some completely unaware.
136 years, not 1,36 years.
I think the VIP chopper flights out of DC are considered a national security thing. Realistically a MANPAD could take those out if they knew when and where. It’s probably mostly security theater though instead of something effective.
I think Trump has governed as a dove versus a hawk. It was Biden shooting USA missiles into Russian territory. That’s scary IMO.
I expect Trump will be a mixed bag just like in 2016. Hits and misses. He will probably do some really dumb domestic things (but ultimately inconsequential) and try to run again in 2028 which will give everyone a heart attack. The system will stop him.
I’m still hoping for a “sane Trump” to run in 2028.
Trump has been a transformational president and has changed US politics forever. Good and bad.
Trump is not going to try to run again in 2028. That is just silly. But it looks like Vance may be a worthy successor.
“It appears that in order to support Trump, one must pick and choose among his statements. He isn’t going to do it for you.”
Yeah, hope and change, ha ha. People just projected their wishes upon Obama’s vague statements. This was soaring rhetoric that was mostly empty but very well presented.
Trump is the opposite of that.
It matters what they do. The Trump is bad because “experts fear …” genre has been so overdone and so saturated during the election that it doesn’t even move the needle at all.
I’d love to see how ending “visual separation” is going to work at Ohare.
But then maybe they don’t run the place like they did in the late ’70s when swrtiching to visual made it possible to reduce separation between incoming flights and thus increase capacity.
John,
You responded to a comment earlier:
DaveJR, it sounds like your efforts are looked at differently from others. You’ve been branded. Wow.
That’s really crummy.
I don’t think that’s too likely to happen here, though.
I hope that you do not feel alienated or branded here. I invite you to discuss the case of the Welsh woman detained by ICE on the new thread with us if you have any interest.
Pl,anes don’t fly by altitude above the ground in controlled airspace, they fly by altitude referenced to mean sea level. since altimeters work by referencing barometric pressure. in order for vertical separation to work planes near each other need to reference same barometer reading. Height above ground is not useful because this would give planes flying over different contours but reading 200 feet, different actual altitudes.
If the ground was flat for miles, this could sort of work. But it isn’t near Reagan
My suspicion is that the helicopter’s altitude based on altimeter setting was reported by transponder and it would have been the same altitude displayed on the instrument’s face, or on a digitial display if that’s what the helicopter was using.
Not good.
Steve,
Yes. This is what CARA does for fixed wing aircraft. I’m pretty sure military helicopters use some similar system. I haven’t made a proper effort to nail down the system used on the UH-60. One of these perhaps or something similar.
The odd thing is, I get the impression that there is also a barometric altimeter on the aircraft, and that altimeter might have been the one the crew was paying attention to for some reason.
[Sorry. I just linked the display panels. The systems might be RA-4000 or RA-4500 radar altimeters. https://freeflightsystems.com/avionics/radar-altimeters/ ]
The river bed the helicopter was following is perfectly flat (OK, to within a couple of feet per mile). Perhaps I misunderstood, but the description of helicopter route #4 said 200 ft max. If that is relative to a manually dialed-in barometric pressure, it seems like an invitation for an accident to happen. I mean, too many moving pieces. It will be interesting to read the NTSB recommendations to avoid another accident.
well how else are they going to avoid hitting each other if they are not on the same altitude reference system? The Plane certainly was. 200 feet above ground is meaningless in congtrolled airspace.
the baronetric altimeter which would be on both planes is equipped with an encoder which provides an altitude reading to the transponder which reports it to ATC.
SteveF all airborne barometric settings are manually dialed in and manually changed as the flight moves from one area to another.
Army or not, I cannot believe they could fly ibn controlled airspace without the transponder reporting the altitude which shows up in a little box on atc’s radar with some other information. like the flight identification, which might have beens something like AA123.
No doubt helicopters, especially military, have ground based altimeters because they may need to land anywhere, but they probably used the pressure altimeters in a shared airspace.
The NTSB said the absolute barometric pressure recorded in the FDR was invalid but they don’t know if it was just a bad connection to the FDR or also a problem in the cockpit.
ATC was getting reports of the helicopters altitude from what I saw.
I found the user manual, ha ha
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA409934.pdf
On page 2-18, 2-19 you will see the instrument layout. The radar altimeter and barometric altimeter are right next to each other vertically.
This is an older model I believe without a computerized cockpit.
Dang Tom, thanks!
“The NTSB said the absolute barometric pressure recorded in the FDR was invalid but they don’t know if it was just a bad connection to the FDR or also a problem in the cockpit.”
If true, then the helicopter pilots could have been flying at what they believed was a safe altitude, below the approach path of the CRJ. But if they had both the radar altimeter and the barometric altimeter right next to each other on the instrument panel, there ought to have been a discrepancy, with the radar saying well above 200 ft.
Short Donbas/Russian history that Tomas needs –
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/04/15/europe/donbas-region-ukraine-war-russia-explainer-intl/index.html#:~:text=The%20Donbas%20region%20is%20at%20the%20heart%20of,stage%20on%20which%20Russia%E2%80%99s%20war%20could%20be%20decided.
“We are looking at the possibility [that] there may be bad data. We are looking at, were they seeing something different in the cockpit that differs from [Flight Data Recorder] data, which was radio altimeter,” she said.”
The helicopter’s radar altimeter (from the FDR) read 278 ft at the moment of impact, while the radar altimeter on the plane read 300 ft two seconds before impact…. the plane was descending, of course. The helicopter was way too high. Let’s hope the NTSB comes up with a clear explanation for why the helicopter was too high.
“ MUNICH — Senior Trump administration officials are heading to Saudi Arabia to start peace talks with Russian and Ukrainian negotiators, according to a Republican lawmaker and two U.S. officials familiar with the plan.
However, a Ukrainian official told POLITICO that the announcement of the Saudi talks came as a surprise to Kyiv, and as of now there were no plans to send a delegation.”
https://www.politico.eu/article/trump-team-to-start-russia-ukraine-peace-talks-saudi-arabia-putin-zelenskyy/
As I have stated previously, I expect the talks to drag on for months with no end of the war in sight. Russia is grinding the Ukraine army in a war of attrition and they see no reason to agree to a cease fire.
Putin has been very upfront on his goals in the war and none of the ceasefire proposals floated come close to what he requires to end this.
it’s true that the airliner would have had a radio/radar altimeter and if the helicopter had one as it apparently did, and they both were turned on, they would have read the same height above ground at the point of collision. this would not have been available to ATC, but would have been in the FDRs. Height Above Ground is not the same as altitude as the term was used when I was flying which meant relative to MSL or when flying above 18,000 relative to standard barometric setting which planes used worldwide at that altitude and above.
It’s possible that this has loosened up or the people who are reporting are not confining themselves to accepted and in most cases “Official” terms of art.
No wonder the Democrats are running around with their hair on fire:
New York Post- “Americans think they’re getting just what they voted for with President Trump.
An overwhelming majority of Americans — 70% — believe Trump is doing exactly what he campaigned on and most of them have a favorable impression of him so far, according to a new poll.”
I’m hoping the Dems keep it up. Their response has been counterproductive so far.
https://nypost.com/2025/02/09/us-news/70-of-americans-think-trump-is-doing-exactly-what-he-promised/
john ferguson,
“…which meant relative to MSL or when flying above 18,000 relative to standard barometric setting which planes used worldwide at that altitude and above.”
I am a little puzzled by this. Is this because surface barometric pressure varies a lot more with weather systems than the pressure at 18,000 ft (and up) varies, or is there some other explanation for a switch to a fixed value above 18,000 ft?
The runways at DCA are 14.1 ft above mean sea level according to Airnav.com.
Vance’s lecture about the need for free speech was not well received by European governments, nor by Dems in the USA. I guess that means they hit a nerve.
One interesting thing: representatives of the AfD (the right wing party that got the most votes in Germany) were not invited to the conference where Vance spoke, but representatives of parties with much smaller vote totals were invited. That pretty clearly says something about European politics… and it is not good.
The US and Canada had a national team boxing match last night but eventually a hockey game broke out. 3 fights in the first 9 seconds.
Team USA didn’t take kindly to the their national anthem being booed in Canada, ha ha, The US won the game 3-1, ouch.
AfD is the “far right” party as everything a tiny bit right of center is referred to in Europe.
The way I read Vance’s message was if you don’t like AfD and you use the tools of the state to suppress them then take a hard look at who is lecturing you from the podium now and whose opponents tried the same thing. In my view Vance is doing them a favor.
I wonder…
Perhaps part of the European opposition to the US ending the war in Ukraine is that they are happy with the status quo:
-The US is funding [mostly] Ukraine.
-Ukraine is using the US arms to destroy Russian armor and kill Russian soldiers.
-No Europeans are getting killed.
Tom, Your comment:
“The US and Canada had a national team boxing match last night but eventually a hockey game broke out.”
I missed the fights in the beginning but I enjoyed the final two periods of that game . The US skaters were outmatched in the skill department, but were playing their hearts out.
“USA, USA, USA”
Apparently the helicopter was equipped with an ADS-B system, which transmits (1 time per second) the aircraft’s identity, altitude, velocity, heading and position in real time (as measured by the aircraft’s instrumentation), independent of any signal from ATC (it is not a transponder system). The system receives exactly the same information from all similarly equipped aircraft in the area. (John Ferguson, sounds like the marine AIS system… except for the altitude value.) The ADS-B system is designed specifically so that all aircraft can see and evaluate all other aircraft surrounding them and be “situationally aware”, so as to avoid potential collisions. Wikipedia says the system is supposed to replace ground based radars and transponders for ATC in the future.
NTSB says the ADS-B system in the helicopter either failed/malfunctioned, or was just turned off by the pilots…. they do not yet know which. (I find it bizarre if the pilots have this option in a crowded airspace.) The CRJ was ADS-B equipped and their system was in use at the time of the crash. But since the helicopter ADS-B was not transmitting, the CRJ pilots had no way to see the helicopter or be aware of the potential for collision, until they could see it actually approaching their flight path…. a few seconds at most. They had pulled the nose of the aircraft to 9 degrees up at impact.
Zelensky gives a legalistic answer on whether he wants Russia completely removed from Ukraine:
“Zelenskyy told Welker on Friday that Ukrainian law prevents the nation from recognizing that Russia owns formerly Ukrainian land.
“Judicially, we will not recognize … our occupied territory like territory of Russia. We will never do it,” he said in English, while conceding that he’d be willing to discuss giving up occupied territory as part of a diplomatic deal where Ukraine could join NATO.”
This is progress from the pointless maximalist positions. It’s true that Trump conceded the point early but I think Trump is mostly interested in quickly getting to a negotiation endpoint or quickly determining it can’t be reached.
Keeping the EU out of negotiations is also a good move, they will just screw it all up with their perfected bureaucratic maneuvering. Clearly they have a vested interest but I see them as more pain then gain.
Europe is getting a lot of tough love lately:
“He (Zelensky) added that European NATO members don’t have the military capacity to defend themselves without the U.S.”
SteveF, altimeters are set to 29.92 at 18k and above which is controlled airspace and requires operation under a flught plan and navigation under ATC control. This is by regulation.
In most places, when flying at 18k and above up to 50k, it doesn’t matter what the elevation is at the ground, but it does matter that all of the other traffic encountered will be flying at altitudes, they are called flight levels, that are referenced to same setting. So the actual height above MSL flown at say 24,000 will vary worldwide, but using the 29.92 setting planes which encounter each other will be separated vertically.
And yes, there is pressure variation at the surface which requires resetting of altimeters again so the nearby traffic is using same setting, and here ground elevation matters because it would be good if the ground was encountered at the level expected on the altimeter. In DCA’s case 14 feet MSL.
I can remember an outbreak of foward looking sounders when we were still on the boat. I thnk the idea was that this would reduce groundings.
The C421 had a radio altimeter which I think read from 120 height above ground to 0. I was never convinced it helped, particularly where the threshold was on a bluff, like it is at Charleston WV,
I continue to have a niggling feeling that the NTSB person describing the unraveling of what happened doesn’t really know what she’s talking about. But maybe I don’t either.
This was a training flight for the unit that also does evacuations from DC for high value people. One possibility is they intentionally turned off the ADS-B system as part of that flight type profile. I don’t know.
Tom Scharf,
Article 5 will keep Ukraine out of NATO. The USA is not going to get into an all-out war with Russia over Ukraine, and the Europeans couldn’t, even if they wanted to. There is far too much pearl clutching in Europe, and not enough rationality.
Charlie West? I’ve flown into that airport dozens of times. They basically lopped off a mountain top for the airport.
Tom SAcharf,
“…does evacuations from DC for high value people”
Try as I might, I find it impossible to identify such individuals in DC. 😉
John Ferguson,
The people speaking for NTSB may not know what they are talking about, of course, but I hope the NTSB report is written by people who do.
If you want a laugh, look at all the AIS equipped yachts in the Bahamas: https://www.myshiptracking.com I’ll bet here are a lot less in August.
Lack of military preparedness has been an ongoing problem for Europe. It hasn’t gotten any better.
2011: “Less than a month into the Libyan conflict, NATO is running short of precision bombs , highlighting the limitations of Britain, France and other European countries in sustaining even a relatively small military action over an extended period of time, according to senior NATO and U.S. officials.
…
European arsenals of laser-guided bombs, the NATO weapon of choice in the Libyan campaign, have been quickly depleted, officials said. Although the United States has significant stockpiles, its munitions do not fit on the British- and French-made planes that have flown the bulk of the missions.
…
Libya “has not been a very big war. If [the Europeans] would run out of these munitions this early in such a small operation, you have to wonder what kind of war they were planning on fighting,” said John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org, a defense think tank. “Maybe they were just planning on using their air force for air shows.” “
Today: WSJ
https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/squeezed-between-putin-and-trump-europe-sees-a-moment-of-truth-b265a5e5?st=ot11Td&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
“Denial is no longer possible. The message is clear: It’s time to take our responsibilities, to safeguard our own security,” said France’s European affairs minister, Benjamin Haddad. “The first test would be to refuse a capitulation in Ukraine.”
It’s very strange when these diplomats keep “threatening” to be responsible for their own security as if that would be unwelcome.
Tom Scharf.
In 1976 I was on a flight from Roanoak to Athens Ohio (I think) in the Cessna 120. This was an 85 HP two seater which did 100 mph. I’d filed instruments because Roakoak was partially socked in and I’d had to to get out of there.
Through failing to think clearly, I had equipped it to be legal for flight in IMC (Instrument Meteorological Conditions). Which meant adding another nav/com and VOR indicator, a venturii to generate the suction needed to drive a directoinal gyro and an artifical horizon and replacing the suction driven turn and bank with a 12 volt one (diversity don’t you know, I could stay right-side up with loss of electricity or suction) and an encoding altimeter and transponder. I’m not sure this met the full intent of the regs, but it worked and best of all was signed off by the shop.
There was a head wind so I was probably creeping along (60 mph over the ground) at 8,000 feet which meant rather than flying Center to Center, I flew from Roanoak approach briefly through Washington Center, then Charleston approach.
Right after the handoff to Charleston, the controller asked me to verify aircraft type which I did. Then the revelation that they had expected a C210 since no-one flew gauges in a 120.
I was then asked if I could land at Charleston, show them how I’d managed to get all the stuff to fit on the panel and get suction without a suction pump, and then, at their expense, enjoy a wonderful steak dinner at a place they knew, the cost of the overnight at the airport but I’d have to pay the motel cost.
I did it.
It turns out the guy had a Cessna 140 which was mostly the same plane as mine but with flaps.
We had a wonderful time, and eveyone agreed that what I’d done was nuts.
“The first test would be to refuse a capitulation in Ukraine.”
The first step would be to fund and maintain a credible military. Not going to happen.
NBC: CDC and Homeland Security are hit by staffing cuts
CDC ‘disease detectors’ among hundreds fired as cuts ramp up
Federal workers responsible for training laboratory staffers and supporting outbreak response efforts are among those who have been fired, sparking fears over the impact on public health.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/doge/cdc-disease-detectors-fired-trump-administration-agency-cuts-doge-rcna192420
I don’t know how they expect me to react to this. The CDC failed to identify covid early enough and failed to contain it. Everyone in the US eventually got covid. The current vaccines are near useless.
I’m sure we could go back and look at how much priority the CDC gave pandemics versus other dubious programs to assess how seriously they took that possibility then.
Since when does the legacy media believe its job is to be the defender of bloated government bureaucracies instead of helping root out the bloat?
European nations appear to have a problem that individuals have when they become dependent on government. In Europe’s case it is the US government on which they have become dependent.
Usually the government with dependents is prone to use that depency to maintain power. I think the current case of Europe and the US goes against those instincts. Europe talks about less dependencies, and especially France, but actions have not followed. Those dependencies are evidently as difficult for nations to undo as it is for individuals. In Europe’s case they do their image no good by talking big and acting small, as much as I would like to see Europe more independent. Maybe the US has to try even more diligently to push them out of the nest.
Tom, my reading on this situation is that most of the media, which I include in the intelligentsia along with academia, have for a long time favored government over private entities in addressing the nation’s problems to the point of ignoring problems that exist because of governments’ actions.
I do think that the intelligentsia lacks the intellectual prowness to argue reasonably about cost cutting and hence the emotional approach. This is nothing new either. It will work for them as it has in the past, by convincing weak-kneed Republicans that indeed at some point the sky will be falling.
The CDC budget has increased ~25% in the last 5 years.
US looking at EU Ukraine political positions
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/politics/government/u-s-questions-for-european-governments-on-ukraine-security/ar-AA1z9Rep
Here are the questions sent by the U.S. according to a document seen by Reuters.
1) What do you view as a Europe-backed security guarantee or assurance that would serve as a sufficient deterrent to Russia while also ensuring this conflict ends with an enduring peace settlement?
2) Which European and/or third countries do you believe could or would participate in such an arrangement?
Are there any countries you believe would be indispensable?
Would your country be willing to deploy its troops to Ukraine as part of a peace settlement?
3) If third country military forces were to be deployed to Ukraine as part of a peace arrangement, what would you consider to be the necessary size of such a European-led force?
How and where would these forces be deployed and for how long?
4) What actions do U.S., allies and partners need to be prepared to take if Russia attacks these forces?
5) What, if any, U.S. support requirements would your government consider necessary for its participation in these security arrangements?
Specifically, which short-term and long-term resources do you think will be required from the U.S.?
6) What additional capabilities, equipment and maintenance sustainment options is your government prepared to provide to Ukraine to improve its negotiating hand and increase pressure on Russia?
What more is your government prepared to do to increase its sanctions on Russia, including more strictly enforcing sanctions and better targeting third countries enabling Russia globally?
” The current vaccines are near useless.”
They are near useless in the sense they do not significantly reduce re-infection after just a month or so.
However, for the handful of individuals who have never been exposed but are at risk for serious complications (say an infant with other serious health issues), the vaccine probably does reduce the risk of serious illness. For everyone else who has already been vaccinated (and almost always been exposed to the virus in the wild)? Yes, it is effectively useless to keep getting vaccinated for covid.
The fact the CDC is still pushing a near useless vaccine is all the more reason to reduce their staffing and funding.
For your entertainment only.
CBS News’ Margaret Brennan who anchors Face the Nation talking to Marco Rubio:
“Well, he (Vance) was standing in a country (Germany) where free speech was weaponized to conduct genocide”
Wow, that’s a new and novel take from our caretakers of the Ministry of Truth. CBS has not been forthcoming with a further explanation.
Tom Scharf,
“The CDC budget has increased ~25% in the last 5 years.”
Inflation is almost all of that. Still, they do seem to make a lot of very bad decisions.
Here is an odd observation: Most people I know have had covid once, and never again…. including all the relatives on both sides of my family. But a few people I know have had covid 3, 4 or more times. Not mild cases, miserable, and people with no other serious health issues… otherwise seemingly healthy. Some people just appear especially susceptible to covid. Could be a good subject for research I think.
Tom Scharf,
From the Holocaust Encyclopedia:
“When the Nazis came to power in 1933, the German constitution guaranteed freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Through decrees and laws, the Nazis abolished these civil rights and destroyed German democracy. Starting in 1934, it was illegal to criticize the Nazi government. Even telling a joke about Hitler was considered treachery. People in Nazi Germany could not say or write whatever they wanted.
Examples of censorship under the Nazis included:
Closing down or taking over anti-Nazi newspapers;
Controlling what news appeared in newspapers, on the radio, and in newsreels;
Banning and burning books that the Nazis categorized as un-German;….”
Talking heads in MSM are simply fools; they believe things that are obviously absurd on their face, and refuse to believe things that are obviously true…. like the left trying to sensor anyone who disagrees with them. No wonder they are losing viewers and readers.
I would surmise that the not vaccinated and never infected is a pretty small number, and those who think they are in that group probably have been asymptomatically infected.
I can’t seem to find any recent numbers here because my searches are inundated with lectures on how vaccinations are super awesome.
Finally tracked something down changing keywords:
“We find that 99.4% (523/526) of the participants had positive results for antibodies to the SARS CoV2 spike protein over April-June * 2022 *, soon after the early-2022 Omicron surge. Positive tests for spike protein antibodies were very high (86%; 19/22) even among unvaccinated persons who reported no knowledge of prior infection. Thus, by mid-2022, almost all persons were no longer COVID-naïve”
Ed Forbes,
That report is interesting and encouraging, if true. It indicates that Trump does not just want the fighting to stop. He wants an enduring peace that will prevent Russia from renewing hostilities. That is the single most important thing that Ukraine needs.
Putin certainly can’t be trusted to keep any promises but if another invasion requires attacking EU troops then the stakes get higher.
Mike M,
Sounds more like Rubio than Trump.
That is OK. If it is real, it will push the Europeans to put up or shut up. I think many will refuse to put up and also refuse to shut up.
SteveF
February 17, 2025 at 11:55 am
Google AI on Lincoln and the civil war: “Yes, President Abraham Lincoln’s administration took steps to restrict newspapers during the Civil War, including closing some presses and arresting editors. However, Lincoln’s efforts were targeted at specific publications that were damaging the war effort, rather than the press in general. ”
And about Wilson and WWI:
“Yes, President Woodrow Wilson actively used the Sedition Act of 1918 to restrict newspapers and other forms of media during World War I, effectively silencing dissent against the war effort by prosecuting publications that criticized the government or the military, significantly limiting freedom of the press during that time. ”
I am not comparing those incidents to Nazi Germany, but the US has its free speech blemishes also – and something the current media never mentions from back in history or more currently.
Tom “ I would surmise that the not vaccinated and never infected is a pretty small number, and those who think they are in that group probably have been asymptomatically infected.”
Never vaccinated, never had COVID, and tested negative for COVID antibodies.
As to contact, I live closely with one and she has tested positive for COVID twice.
As gunshot victims, traffic accident victims, and almost all cases of flu and other respiratory illnesses were counted as COVID, the real world effect of COVID was greatly exaggerated.
There is a theory with some evidence that certain people are genetically predisposed to fight off covid and not even get infected.
96.4% with antibodies: “Of that group, 23% acquired their immunity from infection alone and 26% from vaccination alone; 48% had hybrid immunity”.
If accurate, then the mRNA vaccines were modestly effective at preventing subsequent infection….. although the data are from mid 2022….. There have probably been many more vaccinated people with “breakthrough” infections since then….. my mother-in-law is one of them; 91 YO at the time and a relatively mild case.
Of hundreds of relatives and aquaintances I know relative to Covid-19 infections only one (a niece) was never knowingly infected. A number with infected twice and one (a niece) was infected 4 times and fairly severely. I thought at the time that she would be a great candidate for a study.
The statistics I did on the Covid-19 infection rates after Omicron were at or very near 100%.
Unless the test is extremely sensitive, there are always false negatives for Covid antibodies.
That said, from the very first cruise-ship spread of Covid (elderly husband/wife in same small room, one dies and the other never develops symptoms of any kind), it has been clear that there is a very wide range of susceptibility.
Its looking like vampires are real 🙂
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2025/02/17/doge-investigating-potential-social-security-fraud-millions-ages-130-on-rolls/
“.. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is investigating potential Social Security fraud, and its head Elon Musk posted startling information from its database.
“Social Security database, these are the numbers of people in each age bucket with the death field set to FALSE!” Musk began, posting an image of a chart with age brackets going all the way up to 369 years old.
Indeed, the info showed millions of individuals listed in some of the more unlikely brackets. For instance, 4.7 million were listed from ages 100-109, but it gets worse: 3.6 million are listed for 110 to 119, 3.4 million for 120 to 129, 3.9 million for 130 to 139, 3.4 million for 140-149, and 1.3 million for 150-159.
The figures continue — although in lesser numbers — on those supposedly in their 200s. For example, 1,039 are listed between the ages of 220-229.
There is even one listed in the age bracket 360-369.
“Maybe Twilight is real and there are a lot of vampires collecting Social Security,” Musk joked…”
That’s 20 million-ish, times an average of about 20K annually.. That’s… 400 billion dollars a year?!?
Jeezeus.
The Four Nations Face Off continues from Boston . The Canadian national anthem was politely received by the American crowd; much better than the US anthem was received in Montreal. Looks like the championship game will be a Canada-US rematch… Canada is leading Finland 4 to 0 at the end of the second period.
US plays Sweden tonight at 8 PM…. Also from Boston.
https://www.si.com/nhl/fans-in-boston-had-a-few-boos-during-canadian-anthem-at-4-nations-face-off
Alright, probably not all of those are actually collecting money. Maybe that’s an upper estimate of the fraud. I’ve read that OIG estimated about 72 billion a year in overpayments.
Personally, I think 50 billion and over is still a decent chunk of change for our government.
Mark Bofill,
Yes, the fraud is unlikely to be more $50 billion. But 50 billion here and 50 billion there adds up.
Still, big issue is that there is no good mechanism to find and eliminate fraud if the records you rely on are uncertain/corrupted.
If DOGE and co. can identify $100 billion to $200 billion in fraud and waste, that would only fix 5% to 10% of the fiscal problems. Draconian reductions in entitlements and defense spending, combined with some tax increases and more rapid economic growth are the only real way to get deficits under control. So far, nobody in the administration is talking about those things… and the Dems will only talk about draconian tax increases, wealth confiscation, combined with ever more entitlement spending. I am not optimistic.
With those numbers that is just listing all the ones that are not officially marked dead. Not terribly surprising as death notifications come from outside the system. Plus we still have john does and jane does even if there was an effective process to make sure death dates were attached to the SSN record for every death.
OIG has flagged SSN for this in the past. https://oig.ssa.gov/assets/uploads/a-06-21-51022.pdf
Steve,
No argument from me there. It’s not that fraud and waste crowd out our budget, it’s that we overspend.
STILL, I’m perfectly happy to eliminate some fraud and waste if we can.
I remember when a couple of billion for a border wall was a ridiculously huge sum of money that just couldn’t be spared. Now, it seems a few hundred billion in waste and fraud here and there is a shrug worthy event.
DaveJR,
Back in 2020 the wall project was estimated at $11 billion…. but only for ~600 miles. The total would be more, but surely under $25 billion. My personal opinion: a physical barrier helps, but not nearly so much as policies which make illegal immigration a losing proposition for those who would consider coming here illegally. The cost for more sensible (AKA, rapid and certain deportation) policies is low by comparison.
Von Trapp Family Crosses The Alps Into Switzerland To Escape Free Speech
“We can’t stay here. The Nazis are using free speech to round up Jews,” Von Trapp reportedly said. “And that’s horrifying.”
https://babylonbee.com/news/von-trapp-family-crosses-the-alps-into-switzerland-to-escape-free-speech
The reason I read “X” is to find pearls of wisdom like this:
Q- Why have I never seen a Native American restaurant?
A- Impossible to find a Sioux chef.
300+ FAA employees were fired over the weekend. Who were they? What did they do?
“A union spokesperson said that close to 300 of its members received termination notices over the weekend and that those affected worked as maintenance mechanics, aeronautical information specialists, environmental protection specialists, aviation safety assistants and management and program assistants.”
Which I suspect translates to: people who study maintenance rules, pushed paper, set woke environmental rules, are DEI hires themselves, or administer DEI programs. All those fired were recent hires (one year or less) so still in their “probationary period” where they can be fired without cause. Despite the MSM reports of “Trump making air travel less safe”, none of those fired have anything to do with air traffic control.
Anybody remember their Cobol? Default age set to what… 1870? Now you can preach about gazillions of 150 year olds getting Social Security.
I’m surprised some of you are not paying Filipina call center girls your life savings for imaginary crypto riches.
Thomas Fuller,
Even if a “default” was a valid explanation (and it is not, frankly; it would be inexcusable and unacceptable for millions of Social Security database entries to have a “default” [birth date] anyway instead of actual [birth date]), this would only explain a spike in one decadal age bracket. It would not explain the millions in several.
Also, your casual racism disparaging Filipinos as scammers is charming but does nothing to bolster any of your arguments, as far as I can see.
These are people who are not officially dead but almost all of them are not receiving benefits. Potentially those numbers could be reused for fraud but there isn’t much information on that.
Pretty sure I am tracking Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on his return trip to Moscow. He left Riyadh, Saudi Arabia at 5:25 PM [Saudi time] onboard a Russian AF Ilyushin Il-96-300.
Screenshot at 11:00 AM [Florida time]:
https://x.com/rklier21/status/1891881441081901234
Track it live:
https://www.flightradar24.com/RSD808/392c1ede
No info on Marco Rubio’s travel.
I was doing some regressions and was concerned about endogenous variables. From the literature an endogenous variable occurs when the independent variable is correlated with the regression residuals. That as not a problem in my regressions, but the dependent variable in some cases was significantly correlated with the regression residuals. When I put this situation to Google AI it insisted that this association made for an endogenous variable. I did some analysis with synthetic data where endogenous would be ruled out and replied back to Google AI with the following
AI Google was misinformed about endogenous dependent variables when the regression residuals correlate with the dependent variable. With synthetic data that avoids endogenous variables I was able to determine that the correlation between the regression residuals and the dependent variable depends on the variation in the dependent variable.
Google AI reacted by rephrasing my reply in somewhat better language and referred to me as a researcher who had made the above discovery.
That reaction seemed to me to be overdone, but I will ask another question about this situation in a few days and see what answer I receive. I should have asked initially where it got the information for its initial take on this situation. It always provids links to what it must consider confirming sources that on reading those sources I find do not always directly confirm.
Other Google AI responses to my questions while often not giving me a complete answer have provided sources that did.
The real question on the SS age analysis should in my mind be why were not these entries removed from the data base. It could be an indication of sloppiness that if not a problem in this case could be somewhere else in their systems and processes.
My most recent experience with Social Security was obtaining a copy of my SS payments for filing my income tax forms for the IRS. I did my Gov login and then was asked for more information which after providing was told I could get the information needed after they sent me a code by letter which I would receive in 10 to 28 working days. I received a subsequent email that put the time at something like 5 to 12 working days. I received the code in about 12 working days.
Harping on my old theme again…
Europe is quite content with the current stalemate in Russia, particularly now that the US has declared Russia is no longer our prime enemy of interest.
Last week, the Ukrainian armed forces destroyed 54 [visually confirmed] pieces of Russian armor, and untold numbers of Russian soldiers. This cost Europe no blood and very little money.
Their sworn enemy, Russia, is bogged down in a near stalemate that is continually draining blood and material.
For reference, Russia lost 74 pieces of armor this week in 2024 and 68 pieces this week in 2023.
From @WarSpotting:
“Last week holds 54 visually confirmed losses in , about the same as week ago (initially 46, now 56). This further indicates rather low offensive activity along the frontline (yes, weird thing to say at 50+ weekly losses).”
https://x.com/WarSpotting/status/1891890609423593893
Thomas,
“I’m surprised some of you are not paying Filipina call center girls your life savings for imaginary crypto riches.”
A two-for-one insult! Well done. I do sometimes wonder why progressives seem to go for gratuitous insults first, reasoned argument last.
Is there fraud in Social Security? Of course. Do we know how much ? Of course not. Estimates vary. Sloppy records mean all we have are estimates. Those sloppy records ought to be fixed.
So far, everything Trump has done since the election has had two elements to it:
1. I approve of everything he’s done, and
2. Everything he’s done has turned into political gold.
“Thomas,
“I’m surprised some of you are not paying Filipina call center girls your life savings for imaginary crypto riches.”
I am currently dating a 50 yr-old filipina call center woman. Have visited her twice in the Filippines. She makes a dollar an hour taking Sam’s Club calls. She lives in a place about the size of an average American kitchen with her 2 sons and daughter. She sleeps on the floor of her “living room.” She is not the least bit resentful and is intelligent, including following American politics closely. One time I gave her $50 and she gave it to her 16 yr old son who used it to buy 10 economics books.
The only thing keeping me from marrying her now is that I don’t know if she could survive in the US with my loner personality and her having no contacts or friends in the US.
You are exhibiting a serious amount of bigotry and ignorance.
JDOhio
My brother is married to a Filipina, going on 40 years now. They live outside of Chicago. There is a large Filipino community in Chicago, including entire neighborhoods.
My granddaughters are 50% Filipina, My daughter in law is 100% Filipina.
Insulting my family is not a wise thing to do.
Off topic: Why is Filipina spelled with an ‘F’? And only one ‘p’?
JD Ohio,
“You are exhibiting a serious amount of bigotry and ignorance.”
It is the main behavioral pattern among “progressives”: arrogant, uninformed, presumptuous, and most of all, angry that anyone would disagree with them. It is why Trump sits in the oval office. But the strangest thing is: they don’t care in the slightest, no matter how obviously wrong.
Fine with me; progressives should spend a decade or two in the political wilderness. It may be that long because they are blinded by their lefty bias from seeing reality. The longer they are without power, the better for the country. When lefty schools are Federally defunded, that will indicate progressives have finally hit bottom.
Mike M,
“ Why is Filipina spelled with an ‘F’? And only one ‘p“
Good question. I had to look it up. It’s the the feminine form of the Spanish translation:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filipinos
Mike M: Off topic: Why is Filipina spelled with an ‘F’? And only one ‘p’?”
Looks like Russell answered the question. More interesting question to me is why did the people of the Philippines take the name of King Philip of Spain who colonized the Philippines.
jdohio,
For what it’s worth [source is Wikipedia, so all the usual caveats],
All of you who are focused on my use of Filipina call center woman (It could just as easily have been Cambodian, Laotian or Myanman) and stoking your pent-up woke fury… the object of my post was you. Asian women in call centers are a real thing. Many are trafficked there and more or less enslaved in call center camps.
JDOhio, I wish you the very best in your relationship. I personally have dated Filipina women, hired them, worked alongside them and I have found them to be remarkably identical to women everywhere, with all the good (and just a little bad) that that implies.
Call center con jobs are a very real and quite a big thing. People who swallow the daily dose of crap from the Trump administration are likely dumb and ignorant enough to be ensnared by those con jobs.
https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/rescued-virtual-slavery-myanmars-online-scam-centers-260-118777271
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2024/12/09/russias-fsb-raids-alleged-scam-call-center-arrests-israeli-ukrainian-head-a87265
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/ahmedabad/gujarat-call-centre-scam-11-arrested-for-defrauding-us-citizens/articleshow/113820448.cms
Thomas W Fuller, your post:
“People who swallow the daily dose of crap from the Trump administration are likely dumb and ignorant enough to be ensnared by those con jobs.”
Those ‘dumb and ignorant’ people you referred to are most US voters according to the Democrat rag CNBC:
“A large majority, 70%, said they believe Trump is doing what he promised during the 2024 campaign.”
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/02/10/trump-approval-rating-president-poll.html
You people should start worrying about losing in the midterms. Other Democrat news outlets share this view:
“What’s keeping Trump popular?
Despite the chaos, most Americans like what the president is doing ”
https://www.vox.com/politics/399960/trump-popularity-favorability-poll-agenda-immigration-inflation-doge-musk-chaos
“President Donald Trump has received one of the highest job approval ratings of his decades long political career,”
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/02/10/trump-approval-rating-president-poll.html
“CBS News poll — Trump has positive approval amid “energetic” opening weeks; seen as doing what he promised”
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-approval-opinion-poll-2025-2-9/
If I was as full of hate for the American people as you are, I wouldn’t just leave the country, I would renounce my citizenship and try to find peace. Try knitting maybe.
Trump’s lies are usually mean, but often pointless.
Your lying president, Donald J. Trump: “Zelensky’s approval rating is 4%.”
Zelensky’s approval rating: 69% (Combined strongly approve and somewhat approve) https://www.statista.com/statistics/1100076/volodymyr-zelensky-s-approval-rating-ukraine/
Lying Donald J. Trump’s approval rating: 48.1%
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/donald-trump/
The president of the United States of America is a lying scumbag who cheats on his wife, pays off porn stars, is Putin’s bitch.
And you all are fine with that because you believe idiotic crap like 150-year-old Social Security recipients.
I don’t hate the American people. Not even you! Just Trump…
Long live Spain!
Lying scumbag president Donald J. Trump says ‘Kiev started this war.’
No, Russia started this war. They invaded a sovereign free nation. They’re getting their asses kicked, so they have bought Donald J. Trump to give them at the negotiating table what they could not win on the battlefield.
Might not work. Hope it doesn’t work. But the president of the United States of America is a lying scumbag.
Thomas Fuller,
Angry and delusional. Not a good combination.
Angry, yes. You’re welcome to be specific about delusions. Did Trump not say those things? Are those things now magikally true?
Thomas,
I’m loving it. Would you post a video of yourself screaming at the sky? It’d make the picture complete.
I figure you have another solid decade before Dems come back into power. I hope you spend them all crying and howling like this right here, so we can all enjoy your liberal tears.
So, Mark, what you’re saying is that Trump is a scumbag liar but he’s your scumbag liar so it’s okay–and that everyone who is upset about Trump being a scumbag liar is just on this planet to provide you with entertainment.
My tears aren’t liberal as such. They are American tears of mourning.
Seriously, not literally.
Covering for a lying scumbag much, SteveF?
Its snowy in North Alabama this morning. Roads are clear. I’m not a big fan of snow but I have to admit it’s beautiful out.
Mark,
We are having a cold snap. I want it to warm up!!!!
Lucia,
Yeah. I usually prefer to admire snow in movies and pictures. Oh well. It won’t be cold all that much longer.
lucia,
“I want it to warm up!”
Yes, been terrible, my pool was only 76 yesterday…. my grandkids still went for a swim…. tougher than me 😉
Russell, HaroldW.
So why is ‘Philippines’ spelled with a ‘Ph’ and double ‘p’?
Thomas, if all politicians could neither lie nor exaggerate, they would be mute.
“How can cover for such a lying scumbag?!?!” Is not a policy argument. You are clutching your pearls so hard that they may shatter.
What people support about Trump is not his bluster, lies, exaggerations, blurting out of things better left unsaid, and his in general inappropriate ass-hole like behavior. As I have said many times, if offered a free round of golf with Trump, I would decline….. I’m not interested in listening to his bluster. I support him at the ballot box because his policies are far more sensible than what ‘progressives’ offer, which is pretty uniformly destructive garbage mixed with “You WILL do what we say!”.
Where Trump a more normally behaved person (say like JD Vance), I am sure you would still be horrified by his policies. And that is where the real political disagreement is.
I disagree with JD Vance’s recent conversion to Trumpism.
On the other hand, I agree with him here:
“Donald Trump’s vice presidential pick Ohio Sen. JD Vance was once a fervent critic of the former president. In private messages, he wondered ahead of Trump’s election whether he was “America’s Hitler” and in 2017 said the then-president was a “moral disaster.” In public, he agreed Trump was a “total fraud” who didn’t care about regular people and called him “reprehensible.”
“I go back and forth between thinking Trump is a cynical asshole like Nixon who wouldn’t be that bad (and might even prove useful) or that he’s America’s Hitler,” Vance wrote in a message to a friend in 2016. “How’s that for discouraging?”
““Fellow Christians, everyone is watching us when we apologize for this man. Lord help us,” he tweeted after the “Access Hollywood” tape was published in 2016.”
Cynical asshole, America’s Hitler, moral disaster. Yep, Vance got it right about lying scumbag Trump.
The Europeans are in another round of classic dithering indecision. They definitely agree the US should continue to be their security guarantor and they want to continue the war in Ukraine as long as Ukraine and the US do all the hard work.
Providing peace keeping troops? Meh. Provide EU based security? Meh. Provide rebuilding funds for Ukraine? Meh.
Attend all the pomp and circumstance meetings in European capitals with their cosplay diplomatic and military costumes? For sure.
They need to get serious in a serious time. They aren’t. Poland may be the exception here, they look serious.
I agree with Russell, somebody needs to find a more fulfilling hobby.
Mike M., Your comment:
“So why is ‘Philippines’ spelled with a ‘Ph’ and double ‘p’?”
Blame the Greeks…
“Philip, masc. proper name, most famously in classical history king of Macedon, father of Alexander the Great (compare philippic); the from Latin Philippus, from Greek Philippos “fond of horses,” from philos “beloved, loving” (see philo-) + hippos “horse” (from PIE root *ekwo- “horse”).”
https://www.etymonline.com/word/Philip
The Spanish bastardized the Latin ‘Philippus’ and named it ‘Islas Filipinas’.
To give the Europeans a little slack both France and Germany are entering an election cycle where the defenders of the establishment are not polling well. It’s a tough position and JD Vance just rode in on his horse and left a turd on their table.
Interesting times.
Thomas Fuller,
Don’t listen to these guys. Staying here and crying more about the defeat of leftism and the ruin of your socialist ideals in the U.S. is the best thing you can do for the cause. Really. It’ll turn the tide; keep the faith comrade.
The last person to recommend a new hobby for me was Ken Rice over at And Then There’s Physics.
Europe as a whole has contributed more money than the USA, both for defense and humanitarian efforts.
European Union and Member States: Approximately €267 billion (about $280 billion) in total aid to Ukraine.
United States: Around $175 billion in total aid, with $106 billion directly assisting the Ukrainian government
The UK and Sweden have both said they would provide peace-keeping troops. Other European countries have said it would be nice to have a peace treaty before committing to peace-keeping.
And yes, Europeans think that the US should live up to its treaty obligations at NATO, including Article 5. They don’t want to get in Trump’s face about it, but the only time Article 5 has been invoked was after 9/11, when all of NATO gave the US a blank check to use. They later contributed significant troop totals to both Iraq and Afghanistan.
So, Tom Scharf, all that whining sounds like typical American moaning. Waaaaah! Waaah! You’re making me do my homework! Not… fair…!!!
Trump is a changed man. I watched the Hannity interview last night with both Trump and Musk.
I was very much surprised that Trump showed up in front of the cameras with his sidekick next to him. Classic Trump hogs the spotlight.
Then, he sat silently and let Musk explain what they were doing. When Trump spoke there was no bombast and little bravado.
Something has changed.
[I post this at the risk of sending Fuller into another ballistic rage]
Reminder, Ukraine isn’t in NATO.
A well earned perception of European entitlement doesn’t help their cause. It’s clear what Europe gets out of this arrangement but I guess the US needs reminded what it is getting out of this exactly?
Europe not holding up its end of the defense bargain has been a problem for decades now and this is beyond dispute. I don’t want NATO to dissolve but the current situation has been and still is untenable. If Europe refuses to get serious then they should be cut loose.
Europe for its part just needs to try harder for the benefit it is getting. A competent unified military that is capable of sustained warfare against Russia and China. I believe the people of Europe want this too, their leaders need to wake up.
I have read two articles in the past days that show that the hand of government in the US extends beyond what might otherwise in a more superficial and direct way seem more limited.
In the WSJ today appears an article that states upfront in reference to the DOJ dropping charges against NYC mayor Eric Adams: “The Justice Department often defers prosecution in exchange for help with administration policies.” The author does not look favorably on these actions. The article further notes that: “To the contrary, such a strategy has long been a centerpiece of the Justice Department’s operations. For more than 30 years the department and its subsidiaries have made a common practice of entering into “deferred prosecution agreements” (or “nonprosecution agreements”) through which the department agrees to suspend or delay a prosecution if parties in the government’s cross hairs—typically, large corporations and their top executives—take a series of actions congenial to their Justice overseers.” And further it states that: “No federal statute has authorized any of these extraordinary remedies, even with a finding of criminal liability.” And finally concludes that: “Those same critics [of the Adams’ charge droppings]are less opposed to the prosecutorial tactics than to the current president and the immigration enforcement he aims to encourage.”
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/precedents-for-the-eric-adams-case-justice-department-prosecution-defer-6fa6c017?mod=opinion_lead_pos5
In another article at the Mises Institute, Ryan McMaken states that: “There are more federal grantees and contractors at NGOs and private firms than there are “official” federal workers. These faux “private“ jobs must be cut also.”
McMaken has graphs that show the ratios of official government employees to those working under contracts and grants over past years and further states that: “In terms of overall outlays, the amount spent on government grants and contracts is larger than the 800 billion dollars spent on Medicare. Specifically, according to the GAO, the Federal government in 2023 spent 759 billion dollars on contracts in 2023. In addition to these contracts, we find that non-profits receive approximately 300 billion in governments grants. Much of that comes directly from federal grants, but much comes indirectly through the more than 750 billion dollars in federal grants-in-aid that goes first to state and local governments. Much of that is then passed on to NGOs.”
https://mises.org/mises-wire/trump-must-cut-millions-tax-funded-private-jobs?
T Fuller . — Trump is a lying scumbag.
Of all the ridiculous reasons to attack Trump this is the most illogical. All politicians lie.
I don’t know where to start with respect to your democratic friends.
1. The Lefty media and Liz Cheney lying about Trump wanting to have her killed. 100% easily refutable but repeated over and over again.
2. Biden having to drop out of a presidential campaign because of plagiarism. Many lies by Biden but maybe the filthiest was him saying his wife was run over by a drunk driver for about 20 years when in fact she went over the center line. When finally nailed on this filthy smear against the driver, Biden didn’t have the decency to apologize and had his public relations person admit to the facts of the accident.
3. Your piece of garbage Attorney general, Merrick Garland, lying about six police officers being killed as a result of January 6th. These were suicides after the event and no evidence was ever presented that somehow a moderate riot would cause six people who were otherwise mentally healthy to commit suicide. Yet there is Merrick Garland solemnly standing in front of the press with a straight face claiming that the suicides were the equivalent of people physically harming and killing police officers.
4. Nikole Hannah Jones lying about the American revolution being fought to preserve slavery. Thomas Jefferson for instance called it “hideous” institution. For her lies, the left awards her a Pulitzer prize.
5. Adam Schiff a compulsive liar who wins election to the Senate from California by an overwhelming margin even though his lies are very clear and blatant
Thomas W Fuller, Your post citing Article Five,
Nowhere in Article Five [or anywhere else!] does the US commit to carrying the burden alone. It talks of collective response. We have carried the burden, nearly alone, for 75 years. It’s time we focused our attention on China.
For your enlightenment:
ARTICLE FIVE
“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.”
Coalition casualties in Afghanistan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_casualties_in_Afghanistan
Casualties of the Iraq War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War
The US is doing most of the dying here. The warmongering UK pretty much does their part and I think Poland is ready for sacrifice against Russia, they do share a border and have a history.
Germany and France are too busy with their internal palace intrigue.
Russia wants to drive a wedge between the US and Europe and Europe is making that easy. It’s been 3 years since a land war against Russia broke out in Europe and Europe still is thinking about how to proceed.
In a quick Google search, I found the following on the dollar equivalences for the amounts that the US and Europe have spent or promised to spend on Ukraine since the start of the war. Since the war is physically based in Europe one would expect the Europeans to spend significantly more or alternatively to be very actively and independently involved in actions to end the war.
“The European Union (EU) and our 27 Member States remain united and determined in our unprecedented support for Ukraine. Since the start of the war, the EU and our Member States have made available close to $145 billion* in financial, military, humanitarian, and refugee assistance…
In addition, in February 2024, European leaders agreed to commit up to $54 billion until 2027 for the Ukraine Facility to support Ukraine’s recovery, reconstruction and modernization, as well as its efforts to carry out reforms as part of its accession path to the EU. This will bring our commitments to date to over $174 billion.”
“As of September 30, 2024, the U.S. Ukraine response funding totals nearly $183 billion, with $130.1 billion obligated and $86.7 billion disbursed.”
All these costs pale considering what invaded Ukraine has paid in lives and destruction and even what invader Russian people have suffered.
In light of all this human suffering and costs a reasonable approach for the world would be to work much more diligently on avoiding these conflicts from the start. That, however, does not appear to be in the interests of world politicians. Perhaps their voting constituents need to be less gullible.
Russell, as I mentioned above, Article 5 has been invoked once. After 9/11, all NATO members pledged and later delivered aid, intelligence and military assistance to the United States.
Oooh, those lousy Europeans.
Kenneth
European countries, when considering both EU institutions and individual member states’ bilateral contributions, have collectively committed more aid to Ukraine than the United States.
Total Aid Commitments:
European Union and Member States: Approximately €267 billion (about $280 billion) in total aid to Ukraine.
ECONOMIST.COM
United States: Around $175 billion in total aid, with $106 billion directly assisting the Ukrainian government.
CFR.ORG
Breakdown of Aid Types:
Military Assistance:
European Union and Member States: Collectively, European countries have provided significant military aid, with notable contributions from individual nations.
STATISTA.COM
United States: Approximately $106 billion in military assistance.
CFR.ORG
Financial and Humanitarian Aid:
European Union and Member States: The EU has mobilized substantial financial assistance, including €30.5 billion in 2022 and 2023, and an additional €21 billion from the Ukraine Facility in 2024.
EEAS.EUROPA.EU
United States: The remaining portion of the $175 billion total aid includes financial support, humanitarian aid, and other related expenses.
CFR.ORG
These figures highlight the significant and collaborative international support for Ukraine, with European nations collectively contributing more in total aid compared to the United States, especially when bilateral assistance is accounted for.
Fuller,
So what?
Russell,
After the September 11, 2001, attacks, NATO invoked Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty for the first time in its history, declaring the attacks on the United States as an attack on all NATO members. Here’s how NATO members assisted the U.S. in response:
Military Assistance and Operations:
Operation Eagle Assist (October 2001 – May 2002)
NATO deployed AWACS (Airborne Warning and Control System) surveillance aircraft to help patrol U.S. airspace.
This was the first time NATO forces were used to defend the continental U.S.
830 flight hours were logged in over 360 missions.
Operation Active Endeavour (October 2001 – 2016)
NATO deployed naval forces to patrol the Mediterranean to prevent terrorist activity, weapons smuggling, and illegal trafficking.
The mission evolved into broader maritime security and counterterrorism efforts.
Troop Contributions to Afghanistan (ISAF, 2001–2014)
NATO established the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) to stabilize Afghanistan and combat al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
At its peak, ISAF included over 130,000 troops from 51 countries, including all NATO members.
European allies such as the UK, Canada, Germany, and France contributed thousands of troops.
Training and Support (2015–2021)
After ISAF ended, NATO launched the Resolute Support Mission to train and assist Afghan security forces.
Intelligence and Counterterrorism Cooperation:
NATO members enhanced intelligence-sharing with the U.S.
The alliance increased coordination on counterterrorism strategies.
Financial and Logistical Aid:
NATO members provided financial support for Afghanistan’s reconstruction.
Some allies contributed equipment, logistics, and airlift support for U.S. operations.
Individual Contributions by NATO Members:
United Kingdom: Second-largest military contributor, sent troops to Afghanistan and participated in combat missions.
Germany: Deployed thousands of troops, especially in northern Afghanistan.
Canada: Contributed heavily to combat operations in Kandahar.
France: Deployed special forces and provided air support.
Turkey: Led ISAF in its early years and played a key role in security operations.
NATO allies provided significant intelligence assistance to the U.S., particularly in Afghanistan and in broader counterterrorism efforts following 9/11. Here’s how:
1. Intelligence-Sharing and Coordination
NATO members enhanced intelligence-sharing with the U.S., particularly on terrorist networks, al-Qaeda activity, and Taliban movements.
European intelligence agencies worked closely with the CIA, NSA, and DIA to track terrorist financing, communications, and recruitment efforts.
Joint intelligence task forces were established to improve information flow on terrorist threats.
2. Special Forces and Human Intelligence (HUMINT)
The UK’s MI6, Germany’s BND, and France’s DGSE worked with the CIA in Afghanistan to gather on-the-ground intelligence on Taliban and al-Qaeda strongholds.
Special forces units, such as the UK’s SAS, Canada’s JTF-2, and Germany’s Kommando Spezialkräfte (KSK), conducted reconnaissance missions to locate high-value targets.
NATO forces intercepted enemy communications and interrogated captured militants to extract intelligence.
3. Surveillance and Signals Intelligence (SIGINT)
NATO deployed AWACS surveillance aircraft to monitor air traffic and intercept enemy communications.
The Five Eyes alliance (U.S., UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand) played a key role in electronic eavesdropping on terrorist communications.
European nations increased counterterrorism surveillance within their own borders to disrupt al-Qaeda networks operating in Europe.
4. Counterterrorism Operations and Targeting Support
NATO intelligence helped identify key Taliban and al-Qaeda leaders for U.S. drone strikes and special operations raids.
The alliance provided satellite imagery, electronic surveillance, and cyber intelligence to support U.S. military operations.
NATO intelligence networks worked to track al-Qaeda operatives moving between Afghanistan, Pakistan, and other regions.
5. Disrupting Terrorist Financing and Logistics
European countries froze assets linked to al-Qaeda and Taliban operatives.
NATO allies helped uncover and dismantle terrorist funding networks, including those funneling money through charities and informal banking systems (hawala networks).
Lying scumbag Donald J. Trump, 2/19/2025: “The United States has spent $200 billion more than Europe.”
Reality: European Union and Member States: Approximately €267 billion (about $280 billion) in total aid to Ukraine.
United States: Around $175 billion in total aid, with $106 billion directly assisting the Ukrainian government.
Mark Bofill: ‘So what?’
Lol. I could link PAGES of Biden’s lies. I repeat, so what that politicians lie?
News flash Thomas; everyone poops too. Even Obama does.
Lying scumbag Donald J. Trump, 2/19/2025: “Zelensky, a modestly successful comedian…” (Lucia, I’ll stop this when you tell me to.)
Before becoming Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy was a comedian, actor, and television producer. Born in 1978, he earned a law degree but pursued entertainment instead. Zelenskyy also co-founded Kvartal 95, a successful production company. His work included stand-up, sketch comedy, and hosting shows.
Zelenskyy was lead actor in Servant of the People, which was hugely popular in Ukraine and gained international recognition. It aired from 2015 to 2019 on Ukraine’s 1+1 channel and quickly became one of the country’s most-watched shows. The series resonated with viewers due to its satirical take on corruption and government dysfunction, portraying an ordinary teacher who unexpectedly becomes president.
Its success led to global distribution, with streaming platforms like Netflix later picking it up. The show also inspired Zelenskyy’s real-life presidential campaign, as many Ukrainians saw him as a genuine anti-corruption figure, mirroring his character’s journey from outsider to leader.
Lying scumbag Donald J. Trump: ‘Zelenskyy talked the United States into spending $350 billion dollars.’
The U.S. has spent $175 billion, with future commitments of $4.1 billion.
Lying scumbag Donald J. Trump, 2/19/2025
“The United States has spent $200 billion more than Europe.”
European Union and Member States: Approximately €267 billion (about $280 billion) in total aid to Ukraine.
ECONOMIST.COM
United States: Around $175 billion in total aid, with $106 billion directly assisting the Ukrainian government.
Faster Thomas, faster!
Come on, I know you can SPAM better than that!
The amount spent on Ukraine is wildly different depending on the source. Pretty hard to decipher. Then there is the accounting … paying your own people to do logistics in your own country at your own labor rates allows for some creative financing opportunities.
Another way to measure is where did all the artillery shells, anti-tank missiles, long range missiles, ground to air missile systems, and vehicles come from? Where does all the vital military intelligence come for? Spy satellites aren’t free.
Ukraine being under existential pressure has done really excellent work with drones and everything else. If everyone had that kind of urgency then Russia would probably be beaten back.
Lying scumbag Donald J. Trump, 2/19/2025: “Zelensky, a Dictator without Elections…”
President Donald Trump referred to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy as a “dictator without elections” during recent discussions about the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict. This comment stems from Ukraine’s postponement of elections due to the imposition of martial law following Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022. Under Ukrainian law, elections are suspended during martial law to ensure national security and stability. President Zelenskyy has indicated that elections could occur if martial law is lifted, contingent upon achieving peace and stability in the region.
RFERL.ORG
Trump’s characterization appears to overlook the legal and constitutional constraints that necessitate the postponement of elections during such extraordinary circumstances. It’s important to recognize that the suspension of elections in Ukraine is a temporary measure aligned with the country’s legal framework, rather than an indication of dictatorial governance.
The UK suspended elections during World War 2.
Lying scumbag Donald J. Trump, 2/19/2025
“Zelensky admits that half the money we sent him is missing.”
The claim that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy stated half of the aid provided to Ukraine is missing is a misrepresentation. This distortion has been propagated by various social media posts and certain political figures, including U.S. President Donald Trump, who suggested that a significant portion of U.S. aid to Ukraine is unaccounted for.
YAHOO.COM
In reality, during a February 1, 2025, interview with the Associated Press, President Zelenskyy mentioned that Ukraine had directly received approximately $75 billion of the over $175 billion in aid allocated by the United States. He clarified that the remaining funds were designated for related expenses, such as replenishing U.S. military stockpiles and supporting American military personnel, rather than being transferred directly to Ukraine.
POLITIFACT.COM
This allocation aligns with public records and does not indicate any missing funds. Analyses by organizations like the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) confirm that all allocated funds are accounted for, with significant portions supporting activities arising from the conflict, including U.S. defense readiness and logistical support.
CSIS.ORG
President Zelenskyy has consistently acknowledged the challenges of corruption within Ukraine and has implemented measures to address them, such as proposing legislation to equate corruption with high treason during wartime.
POLITICO.EU
However, there is no credible evidence supporting claims that half of the aid to Ukraine is missing or unaccounted for.
Keep going!
You don’t have the balls to actually SPAM enough to cause any sort of disruption.
Thomas W Fuller,
Me and most of the voters in the United States are satisfied that our president is faithfully performing his duties. He is doing exactly what he said he would do during the campaign; he got elected to do this and he is doing it well. Even the left wing media is reporting it. All of the hate and ranting from you left-wing Democrats is sour grapes from sore losers. It does does nothing but move more of the moderate voters into his camp and cement his place in history.
Keep attacking, Trump is thankful for your help.
Suspending elections and potential for corruption during wars are additional reasons for avoiding those conflicts.
Yeah, yeah, Mark. Saddam Hussein told lies! Hitler told lies! Mussolini told lies! So it’s okay that Lying scumbag Donald J. Trump tells lies too.
Russell, “Do Americans have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of Donald Trump?” Unfavorable 48.2%. Favorable 46.6%
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/donald-trump/
“A large majority, 70%, said they believe Trump is doing what he promised during the 2024 campaign.”
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/02/10/trump-approval-rating-president-poll.html
Russell, you write, “He is doing exactly what he said he would do during the campaign; he got elected to do this and he is doing it well. ”
Trump administration officials scrambled through the weekend amid a flood of criticism to claw back employees they fired Thursday evening at the National Nuclear Security Administration, four people familiar with the terminations — and their fallout — told CNN.
Russell, 70% may indeed think he’s doing what he said he would do. Doesn’t mean they like it. From the poll you linked to:
“The CBS poll gives Trump higher overall marks than other recent surveys have, including ones conducted by Gallup and Pew.”
…”Trump’s positive overall numbers came even as he scored less-than-stellar marks on issues that were key to his victory in the presidential race, such as trade and inflation.
For instance, 51% of respondents told CBS that they think Trump’s policies will make food and grocery prices go up, versus 28% who believe his policies will lower prices, and another 20% who said they won’t change anything.
Two-thirds of respondents said the Trump administration is not focusing enough on lowering the prices of goods and services.
Also, 73% said they think new U.S. tariffs on imported goods will generally make things more expensive for them, while just 8% believe tariffs would lower prices.
Most also said they were not convinced that tariffs will create U.S. jobs, as Trump has claimed: 32% told CBS they would, while 34% said they would cost domestic jobs and another 34% foresaw no change.”
A majority, 58%, also said they opposed Trump’s decision to issue pardons to the vast majority of people charged in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol.”
Here Thomas,
Joe Biden
Stated on January 17, 2025 in a statement:
“The Equal Rights Amendment has become part of our Constitution.”
Joe Biden
stated on July 13, 2024 in a statement to the media:
“The idea that there’s political violence or violence in America like this is just unheard of.”
Joe Biden
stated on May 14, 2024 in an interview with Yahoo Finance:
Inflation “was 9% when I came to office.”
Joe Biden
stated on May 12, 2024 in a fundraising event in Seattle:
“China’s in a situation where they have more retired than working.”
Joe Biden
stated on April 26, 2024 in an interview with Howard Stern:
Says he “got arrested” while protesting in favor of desegregation.
Joe Biden
stated on February 8, 2024 in a speech:
On classified documents in his possession, “none of it was high classified.”
Joe Biden
stated on January 25, 2024 in Public appearance:
“There are a thousand billionaires now and you know what their average tax rate is? 8%.”
Joe Biden
stated on August 31, 2023 in a speech:
“Under the Obama-Biden administration, we invested hundreds of millions of dollars in the state of Florida replacing wooden power poles with steel poles and we buried these electric lines.”
Joe Biden
stated on September 11, 2023 in a 9/11 memorial speech in Alaska:
“Ground zero in New York — I remember standing there the next day.”
Joe Biden
stated on August 9, 2023 in an interview with the Weather Channel:
“I’ve already” declared a national climate emergency
…
I mean I could literally go on and on and on. I have barely scratched the surface.
SO WHAT.
NYT Aug. 7, 2016, Front page, above the fold:
Trump Is Testing the Norms of Objectivity in Journalism
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/business/balance-fairness-and-a-proudly-provocative-presidential-candidate.html
“It would also be an abdication of political journalism’s most solemn duty: to ferret out what the candidates will be like in the most powerful office in the world.
It may not always seem fair to Mr. Trump or his supporters. But journalism shouldn’t measure itself against any one campaign’s definition of fairness. It is journalism’s job to be true to the readers and viewers, and true to the facts, in a way that will stand up to history’s judgment. To do anything less would be untenable.”
So … how has abandoning objectivity worked out for you? What a disastrous decision by the legacy media.
Who is laughing now?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G87UXIH8Lzo
Barack Obama
stated on June 29, 2016 in remarks in Ottawa, Canada:
“The steel industry is producing as much steel in the United States as it ever was. It’s just (that) it needs one-tenth of the workers that it used to.”
Barack Obama
stated on November 16, 2014 in a press conference in Australia.:
“My position hasn’t changed” on using executive authority to address immigration issues.
Barack Obama
stated on September 7, 2014 in an interview on “Meet the Press.”:
Says his comment about extremists being a JV team “wasn’t specifically referring to” Islamic State.
Barack Obama
stated on March 11, 2014 in a Funnyordie.com “Between Two Ferns” interview with Zach Galifianakis:
“Most young Americans right now, they’re not covered” by health insurance.
Barack Obama
stated on February 20, 2014 in a speech to Democratic governors:
“We’ve got close to 7 million Americans who have access to health care for the first time because of Medicaid expansion.”
Barack Obama
stated on July 27, 2013 in an interview with the ‘New York Times’:
The “most realistic estimates” for jobs created by Keystone XL are “maybe 2,000 jobs during the construction of the pipeline.”
Barack Obama
stated on February 12, 2013 in the State of the Union address:
“We have doubled the distance our cars will go on a gallon of gas.”
[That was a good one! LOL]
Barack Obama
stated on February 12, 2013 in the State of the Union Address:
“Throughout, we have kept Congress fully informed of our efforts” to create a legal framework on counterterrorism.
And so on. I haven’t found ‘If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor’ yet, but I’m sure I’ll hit it eventually in the list.
C’mon Fuller. Biden and Obama are scumbag liars, say it with me brother. ALL politicians lie.
See guys, I do the work. When Lying scumbag Donald J. Trump tells a lie, which is whenever he opens his mouth, I put the lie here… but I also put the truth.
You guys don’t do the work. You guys just copy and paste whatever Joe Rogan or Donald Junior vomits forth.
Just as one example, Mark, you write “Barack Obama
stated on July 27, 2013 in an interview with the ‘New York Times’:
The “most realistic estimates” for jobs created by Keystone XL are “maybe 2,000 jobs during the construction of the pipeline.”
You don’t say what if anything is a lie here. You don’t say how many jobs were created during the construction of the pipeline. You just spray something that you think is the killer quote.
“Barack Obama’s statement that only 2,000 jobs would be created during the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline was correct in a specific context but didn’t encompass the full picture. Here’s why: Obama’s claim was focused on the direct, temporary construction jobs associated with the Keystone XL pipeline, which would involve activities like laying pipe, welding, and other physical construction work. Estimates of 2,000 direct jobs came from the U.S. State Department’s environmental review of the project.
These 2,000 jobs were the immediate, hands-on positions that would have been filled during the construction phase of Keystone XL itself.”
In other words, Obama didn’t lie. He was talking about the construction of the pipeline using figures provided to him from the US State Department.
That’s called doing the work.
And, see, Mark–you keep throwing statements out there as if they are lies. But so far, they don’t seem to be.
Steel Production vs. Employment:
U.S. steel production has remained relatively stable over the decades, but the number of workers employed in the steel industry has dramatically decreased. This is due to increased automation, technology, and improved productivity in steel manufacturing.
Steel Industry Employment:
In 1950, the U.S. employed around 650,000 workers in the steel industry.
By the 2010s, the number had fallen to around 140,000, even as production levels stayed robust.
So, the claim that the industry uses one-tenth of the workers today is a fair approximation based on this data.
Really?
Has the Equal Rights Amendment become part of our Constitution, Thomas, like that lying scumbag Joe Biden said?
Thomas
140K isn’t 10% of 650K. It’s not a fair approximation. It’s a lie.
My list came from Politifact BTW.
But this idea you appear to have, that no Democrat politicians lie, is probably the dumbest, most infantile notion I have heard in years. It does not surprise me that you advance it.
Oh, Markety Mark. Again?
Barack Obama
stated on February 20, 2014 in a speech to Democratic governors:
“We’ve got close to 7 million Americans who have access to health care for the first time because of Medicaid expansion.”
Obama’s statement is accurate within the context of the Medicaid expansion. As of early 2014, approximately 7 million Americans had gained access to healthcare for the first time due to Medicaid expansion, though this figure includes both enrollment and the potential access to coverage in expanded states.
It’s important to recognize that Medicaid expansion was not nationwide by 2014, so this figure was based on those states that chose to expand the program.
Of course politicians lie. But lying scumbag Donald J. Trump does nothing else.
LOL. It’s OK Thomas. I have read that people often regress to their childhood during their cognitive decline, you can call me Markety Mark, or Markey, or any names that suit you sweetie. I’m sure someone will be along to check your diaper soon.
No, Marky Mark, it’s lying scumbag Donald J. Trump that wears the diapers.
So tell me about how that lying scumbag Barack Obama was telling the truth when he told us that this was ‘the moment that the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal’.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-sea-level
It doesn’t look like the rise of the oceans started to slow. Makes Barack Obama a scumbag liar, doesn’t it?
You know it’s bad when even CNN calls Joe Biden a liar. What a scumbag that man was, don’t you think Thomas Fuller? And he pardoned just about his entire family too. Just imagine. It doesn’t get much scummier that than does it.
Thomas,
Who’s your all time favorite politician? If you can still remember, that is…
Amongst the noise:
“The U.S. Department of Education has given schools and universities that receive federal funding an ultimatum: eliminate diversity initiatives or risk losing federal funding.”
They have two weeks to comply.
Hilariously it starts with the infamous phrase “Dear Colleague”.
https://www.ed.gov/media/document/dear-colleague-letter-sffa-v-harvard-109506.pdf
The only question now is who wants to be the poster child for losing funding and financing a tenuous lawsuit against the government for an unpopular policy?
Maybe Harvard or Columbia but the reputational damage is just not worth it. It will likely end up before the Supreme Court.
Looks like we finally are going to get some rain.
https://x.com/rklier21/status/1892314392877805932?s=61&t=7w4bCW3a8ve2DqoeniQatQ
I haven’t had significant rain since last summer’s hurricanes.
It’s also supposed to turn bitter cold on Friday (50 degrees)
Wow, I can only conclude that Tom Fuller has had some kind of psychological breakdown. Unfortunate. But it doesn’t change the political reality: Trumps is in office, his party controls Congress, and most all the crazy left policies Thomas adores will be reversed.
Thomas: sincerely, you need something else to do besides waste your time on deplorables like us. My suggestion: Focus on the policies, not the person.
It seems that the demon that once possessed Joshua has now possessed Fuller.
MikeM,
“It seems that the demon that once possessed Joshua has now possessed Fuller.”
I suspect that demon is the ghost of Karl Marx. It drives everyone it takes over to madness, willing to say and willing to do most anything to advance the ‘right cause’. I find it utterly bizarre.
Tom Scharf,
“Maybe Harvard or Columbia but the reputational damage is just not worth it. It will likely end up before the Supreme Court.”
Again.
This isn’t complicated. Discrimination based on race is illegal under Federal law. Yet universities think they are immune from complying with anti-discrimination laws. They will very soon learn that is not actually the case, and the massager will be named Pam Bondi. They simply must stop discriminating based on race. Ultimately they will, I am sure, (at least not so blatantly as today!) but only after much kicking and screaming.
Only academics, convinced of their own superiority, could be so unwilling accept legal and political reality.
It’s de Demonzzz! We can’t argue the facts, we can’t admit even to ourselves that Fuller is right, so it must be de Demonzzz!
See who gets this: MERRRRRRRIIIIINNNNNNN! MERRRRINNNN!
I can tell you in all honesty that Joshua is somewhere vomiting into a trash can after hearing me lumped in with him. Come to think of it, I feel slightly nauseated too.
I judge it better to avoid discussing politicians and better to discuss the ideas and philosophies of government and how legislation actually gets passed.
Murray Rothbard an economist (Austrian) and historian has written in variuos forms about historically important legislation and how the high sounding ideas behind these acts were actually not what one would expect from Civics 101 but rather influenced by power grabs, influential political group interests and rent seeking. The methods often employed to pass the legislation involved deception. He does point to politicians who presented reasonable arguments against an important legislation but most times not prevailing.
What he wrote about historically is even more fitting today. Politicians have added features of passing what they desire by promising more than can be realistically expected from the legislation through either emotional arguments or less than honest ones and subsequent to passing that legislation using either executive orders or bureaucratic means to substantially change what was passed.
These tactics are seldom discussed by big government advocates or the fact that the legislation has not delivered what was promised. Not delivered means either more money and/or stricter regulations are required or the counter factual argument is used that things would be worse without the legislation.
Thomas
I don’t think that’s the problem in recent exchanges.
Thomas,
If I have understood you correctly, you have been making the argument that Trump is despicable because he is a liar, essentially. You do not appear to have clearly articulated this, but it can be reasonably inferred from your overall comments and responses.
It is easy to demonstrate (and I’m not the only one to have demonstrated this, JD Ohio did as well, although he included leftists in general and not solely politicians) that virtually all politicians lie, by listing examples. Therefore, Trump is no more despicable on this basis than Joe Biden or Barack Obama.
Do we agree about this?
mark bofill,
“Do we agree about this?”
Don’t waste your time. There is no possibility Fuller will ever agree that Trump is not somehow the worst/most evil among lying politicians.
I think the real problem is Fuller disagrees with the policies Trump will put in place. The histrionics are just silly window dressing.
The strangest thing of all: someone like Fuller will never admit Joe Biden was (and is) demented, corrupt, and should never have been elected. Trump is a terrible person, but Biden should have been in a dementia care facility not in the White House.
Why do we even need to have this discussion? It is crazy.
Steve,
Well, I’m not even actually asking him to agree to that. I’m simply asking him to agree that:
1) The argument he is making is indeed essentially what I claim it is,
and
2) The argument he is making has been refuted.
He doesn’t have to agree, clearly. But if he wants to be taken even a teeny bit seriously he has to articulate some reasonable disagreement. I’m curious what he might come up with.
Just passing the time, playing with a troll is all.
Shrug.
mark bofill,
“But if he wants to be taken even a teeny bit seriously..”
That right there is where you are mistaken. Thomas thinks he is absolutely right and 100% righteous, and we are scumbag deplorables. Since he can’t get past that insanity, he can’t ever be taken seriously. He is a sorry joke.
Steve,
You may have a point there.
I’m surprised we haven’t yet gotten to the part where Thomas sings his song about how because he loves America, he wants her to be just, and because he respects America, he wants her to be virtuous, and because he thinks America is a hottie he gets an erection singing to us about her, or whatever exactly it is he always writes. I sort of black out reading it usually.
Lucia,
“I don’t think that’s the problem in recent exchanges.”
Your gentle humor is probably lost on Thomas.
BTW, people like Thomas are why voting for sanity in elections is so important. He shows clearly why leaving governance to those who love government is always a terrible mistake.
mark bofill,
If you REALLY loved the USA you would believe all the lefty rubbish Thomas believes….. then again, maybe not. When there is no common ground of understanding of reality, there is no possibility of common ground on policy. Obama had it right: elections have consequences… in this case, good and hard for the crazy left. When the left eases back toward the center, there will be room for conversation. ‘Till then? Not so much..
One of the better papers on what “talks” between nations even means, with an emphasis on Ukraine. As having a personal interest in political science, international relations, and history, I found it both on point and informative.
“What We Talk About, When We Talk About Talks.”
https://aurelien2022.substack.com/p/what-we-talk-about-when-we-talk-about?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=841976&post_id=157334181&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjo3NDAxMzM5NCwicG9zdF9pZCI6MTU3MzM0MTgxLCJpYXQiOjE3Mzk5NDg1NDksImV4cCI6MTc0MjU0MDU0OSwiaXNzIjoicHViLTg0MTk3NiIsInN1YiI6InBvc3QtcmVhY3Rpb24ifQ.CKE_cpQhTCfJCWjsHHzEZHeFNIYPD2GjAeVIllLCL20&r=182d3m&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
“As I write, the ground in Europe is still vibrating from the shock, and the political and media classes are still trapped between incredulous disbelief and barely-concealed anger that any such thing could have happened. They are still trapped in Cliché Land (“abandoning Ukraine”) and it may be some time before anything resembling reality actually penetrates their skulls. But in the meantime, and while we wait for some kind of rationality to gain a limited purchase, there are a couple of general points to make, and then I will get more deeply into the question of “talks.”..”
The Democratic Trump has been found! Ha ha.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7J9dqLUIL6c
Stephen A. Smith of ESPN fame entertains running for office. He is very Trumpy with his brash all BS all the time style. His sports shtick gets kind of old after a decade but he is on target about the Democrat liabilities and could care less about alleged third rails. It’s pretty entertaining.
If politics was about character and integrity then Trump would have lost. It’s about which politician do you trust the most to carry out your personal priorities. I don’t care if my mechanic is an a**hole I care if he can fix my car.
The Democrats have been reelecting near criminals in blue cities for about ever. Are there any Illinois governors out of jail currently? Andrew Cuomo may win NYC again.
My reaction is YAWN.
I don’t care who they sleep with. I don’t care that they lie cleverly or lie stupidly. I just know and expect they willfully distort the truth because they are rewarded for doing so. They minimize their liabilities and amplify their good points.
I really don’t understand why anyone thinks the BS coming out of a politician’s mouth is somehow automatically disqualifying.
T Scharf: “I really don’t understand why anyone thinks the BS coming out of a politician’s mouth is somehow automatically disqualifying.”
In terms of discovering what the actual facts are, I pay zero attention to Trump and give him zero credibility. Everything he says has to be fact checked. Really doesn’t matter much because his policies are so far better than lunatic left.
I did listen to him on Rogan and he did seem to be more measured than previously. In the past, Trump has had zero capacity for growth and he disappointed me many times. Maybe he has grown a little since he was shot.
Will not be long until the whole team is on board and coordinating which should be awesome.
Sackings can be designated by the head of department., relieving Trump of the need to do it by feat.
Hoping the Supreme Court helps in authorising some of his actions, fingers crossed.
Thune and the other RINO’s still a problem re passing an Omnibus quickly.
They will certainly try to stop his Tax cuts being reissued if it is not passed with a lift in the debt ceiling .
Unhappy with his comments on Zelensky at the moment. Feels a bit like when he had to deal with the Saudi Royal Prince years ago. Politics.
–
Tom
I feel for you.
TDS is a terrible disease.
You used to be someone worth discussing issues with.
No way out and you do not want a way out so all we can do for each other is try to be polite while we state our views.
–
Perhaps the best way for either of us to change is to see if we can recognise some indisputable facts about where our respective emperors are wearing clothes or not.
–
Something for us both to think on.
I tried really hard to see Trump as terrible here 9 years ago with others.
The missing clothes for me were Mueller and the Russian hoax.
About like Judith having her eyes opened to the problem with Climate change Orthodoxy.
Once seen, impossible to go back to a belief in false gods.
Hopefully you may see the difference between demonising Trump demonstrators in their different treatment to all the other demonstrators.
Or revisit the delightful efforts of the whole Peter Strozk crew.
Or not,
Ignorance unfortunately really is bliss.
Even if intentional.
The purpose of their lies is not to convince you of their truth. It is to get you to believe nothing so you will do nothing.
In the past 24 hours, I have heard both Trump and Musk talk about a ‘DOGE Dividend Check’ …. A rebate to taxpayers based on the savings DOGE finds.
Trump mentioned 20% of the findings.
These guys are striking political gold every day.
Russel,
There will be no Doge dividend check. I think the main good thing about Doge has been highlighting programs that almost no one supports– like the ridiculous ones advancing DEI art in3rd world countries
Thomas Fuller,
Politicians lie mostly to advance their political agenda. Though for some (like the Clintons), lying almost seems like a sport. (eg Hillary claiming to be named after a mountain climber who was unknown at the time of her birth!)
But the ‘truth’ is not owned by anyone; I find the suggestion of possession of truth (‘their truth’) most odd. There is only one reality, but don’t count on a politician helping to identify it.
lucia,
Yes, the promotion of transsexual theater is utterly ridiculous and wasteful, but that isn’t a lot of money. The real wasted money (many tens of billions each year) is being passed to NGOs to promote/advance progressive priorities, both in the USA and elsewhere: endless DEI, funding climate change boondoggles, promoting censorship, and funding political opponents to anyone they consider “far right”…. which translates roughly to anybody who supports policies even slightly right of what Che’ would support. It is pure political theft by the progressive left, and has to stop.
No, no DOGE checks. But it is a funny and clever suggestion….. reminds voters that the government is in fact wasting the voters money.
DOGE Check or no DOGE check, even floating the idea makes political capital for Trump
Watch what politicians do, not what they say. I get lots of people watch debates for the political theater but I just don’t care.
Beyond their voting record and consistently supported ideologies there is the nebulous and hard to measure quality of leadership.
Do they compromise or stay firm on important issues?
Can they get other politicians to follow them with their psychological wizardry? This is what sets many politicians apart. Reagan, Obama, Clinton, and … yes … Trump.
Trump is just a very strange force in politics, unprecedented in a number of different vectors.
SteveF,
What DOGE has done is make it clear that money was being spent on these things. Often, no one steps forward to defend some of these things.
At the same time: DOGE is probably also making some useful programs waste money— in a way similar to the natural sort of inefficiency that happens every single end-beginning of fiscal year where programs people do think ought to continue get interrupted in sort of weird ways. (It’s sort of designed in funding hiccups.)
I don’t know that there is any good way to identify any of the lunatic programs otherwise though. Of even if they aren’t lunatic programs to even have conversations about these programs.
I personally see the chances of a DOGE check to be fairly high. This is exactly the type of stunt Trump loves and that will drive his opponents mad.
I take all spending numbers and divide by $300M to assess how much I am paying for each program. If they get to $300B then that is a $1000 per citizen. However I think refunds should go to * taxpayers * instead which is about 70M.
I don’t even know if Trump really understands how his own endless blather works to his advantage, it seems to be pure instinct.
The marketed DOGE acronym and all the Musk / Trump hate causes the opposition to become reflexively oppositional because they just can’t help themselves. Orange Man / Billionaire Always Bad, Always, Always. They unwisely start defending all government spending and curiously try lawfare to prevent people from examining government spending at all. They prioritize reactionary opposition over cutting wasteful spending. Helping to identify wasteful spending is seen as giving aide and comfort to the enemy, it’s nuts.
OTOH Trump’s instincts also cause him to err in similar nutty fashions. Attacking Zelensky is irrational. Trump’s instincts seems to be keep everyone off balance all the time and see what comes out the other side.
Tom Scharf: “If politics was about character and integrity then Trump would have lost. It’s about which politician do you trust the most to carry out your personal priorities.”
But trust is based on the character and integrity of the person being trusted. I want a politician who (1) shares my priorities (2) means what he says and (3) is willing and able to do what he says. (1) does not much matter without (2) and (3). Over the last decade, we have seen just how important (3) is, especially if the politician’s goals differ significantly from the goals of the Establishment.
There are aspects of one’s character that are essential to (2) and (3). Trump has those in spades; Biden did not. There are other aspects of character that don’t much matter. The media like to use those as a shiny object to distract people from what really matters.
Note that Tom said “personal priorities” while I said only “priorities”. I don’t vote based on what is good for me; I vote based on what I think is good for the country.
Case in point: Any Republican who voted for the Social Security Fairness Act that eliminated WEP gets a black mark in my book even though that will put a lot of extra money in my pocket.
I love the idea of DOGE dividend checks. “This check for $1000 is ONLY 20% of YOUR money that the government was wasting.” That would drive home the magnitude of the waste far more effectively than merely talking about hundreds of billions in savings.
That said, I would prefer that the savings go to reducing the deficit and the debt.
Oh yeah, I prefer character and integrity if I can get it. Fuller’s fallacy (TM) is that (his) perceived character and integrity should override ideology for a voter on the other side. Nope.
People’s opinions on what is best for the country are variable of course.
Mike, Your comment:
“That said, I would prefer that the savings go to reducing the deficit and the debt.”
I agree. That would be the wise fiscal move. But! DOGE checks would be in the political realm. A political home run.
Today the DOGE dividend check story is all over new and old media. It’s reaping dividends already. I wonder how many blogs are discussing it, like we are.
Russell,
The DOGE savings will accumulate year after year. So if the DOGE dividend is a one time deal for just part of the savings, it would cost just a tiny fraction of the long term savings. The political home run would make it much easier to make the cuts permanent via congressional action. So with regard to the debt, $100 billion in DOGE dividends might save many hundreds of billions, maybe even trillions, in the long term. That is a strong point in favor of the DOGE dividend
I find it amusing that in the news, Democrats are acting as cheerleaders for waste, fraud and abuse. This has gone on daily for over a week.
They’ve stepped in it and it’s sticking to them.
DOGE is due to wrap up by July 4, 2026. That would be a good time to send out the dividend checks. Right in the middle of the 250th anniversary celebrations and just ahead of the midterms.
Good point Mike. DOGE checks might turn out to be sound fiscal policy.
There is a lot of buzz about the USA-Canada hockey rematch tonight for the championship:
“BOSTON — Players on both sides of this USA-Canada rivalry who will square off in the 4 Nations Face-off final Thursday have agreed on one thing.
This is the biggest game of their lives. “
https://nypost.com/2025/02/19/sports/usa-canada-4-nations-finale-is-about-pride-and-so-much-more/
I wonder if the Boston crowd will boo the Canadian anthem like the Montreal crowd booed our anthem.
8 PM on ESPN
USA! USA!
Trump trolling Canada this morning:
“I’ll be calling our GREAT American Hockey Team this morning to spur them on towards victory tonight against Canada, which with FAR LOWER TAXES AND MUCH STRONGER SECURITY, will someday, maybe soon, become our cherished, and very important, Fifty First State,” Trump said Thursday morning on Truth Social.
“I will be speaking before the Governors tonight in D.C., and will sadly, therefore, be unable to attend. But we will all be watching, and if Governor Trudeau would like to join us, he would be most welcome,” the president said. “Good luck to everybody and have a GREAT game tonight. So exciting!”
Russell,
I really wish Trump would stop trolling Canada.
Lucia, your comment:
“I really wish Trump would stop trolling Canada.”
Yes, and I wish he would stop trolling Zelenskyy.
I had hopes, based on her reputation, that Susie Wiles would be able to stifle him, but no dice. Being roguish seem to be baked into his DNA.
Edit: Trump being Trump is fun to watch though
I don’t see any point to Trump’s comments on Canada, other than trolling. But maybe there is one since there usually is a point to what Trump says.
There is a point to Trump’s criticism of Zelensky. As long as the latter is lionized as a modern day Sir Galahad nobly opposing the evil Putin, it is problematic for Trump to pressure him into making concessions. So Trump needs to undermine Zelensky in American public opinion if he is to gain leverage over Zelensky. And Trump needs that leverage if he is to pull off a deal that leads to enduring peace.
Mike,
I don’t object to Trump’s goals in Canada or Ukraine. I object to the childish and undignified taunting he uses to get there.
Mike M,
“DOGE is due to wrap up by July 4, 2026. That would be a good time to send out the dividend checks.”
I am willing to bet there will be no DOGE checks. If Musk et al manage to identify significant savings, I am all for it. But our fiscal dilemma is such that outgoing ‘DOGE’ checks will not be that helpful. It is, of course, a political ploy, as everyone understands. That is fine, but the real issues (profligate spending on entitlements!) remain to be addressed. DOGE alone will not fix that.
Mike M,
Yes, Trump’s talk about Canada and Greenland are just stupid. He should focus of things that are more plausibly achievable.
I don’t think Trump’s talk about Greenland is stupid. He is trying to make sure that the US military stays in, the Chinese are kept out, and Greenland’s mineral resources are developed. All worthy goals.
Similar with the Panama Canal. Trump is ensuring American access while getting China kicked out.
I don’t see a point to the stuff about Canada as the 51st state. But Trump’s continued flogging ot that horse suggests that there is a purpose.
Trump will often post something wild just to see what happens or to have a bit of fun. But it seems to me that when he keeps pushing something, he has a reason. Does anyone here have counterexamples?
It is a darned good thing I am not in charge of what to do about the Gaza Strip, because after today, I would kill every Palestinian man woman and child in the region and be done with it. These fools support leaders who commit atrocities who absolutely rely on our civilized restraint not to exterminate them in retaliation.
No dice buddy. I’d exterminate them along with whatever innocents might be there (at this point, setting aside prepubescent children, I’m not sure that there are any who are not complicit at some level, but regardless. I didn’t start the game, I’d just be looking to end it) and let it be a lesson to future provocateurs.
Despicable? I don’t mind.
Shrug.
Kash Patel confirmed. The last of the heavy shoes has dropped….. bad things are going to happen for the multitude of politically motivated and/or cowardly employees at DOJ and the FBI.
And that is perfectly OK with me. It is well deserved.
Whether they went along with the political persecutions by the Biden administration based on their personal political leanings, or just because they lacked the principles and/or courage to resign in protest, matters not at all. They should all be replaced by principled people who would never go along with the many legal travesties of the Biden Administration.
Nobody said “I won’t do this!”. In that they failed their oath of office: they should be gone.
mark bofill,
“It is a darned good thing I am not in charge of what to do about the Gaza Strip, because after today, I would kill every Palestinian man woman and child in the region and be done with it.”
Not sure what brought that on, but no, children are born innocent. What motivated that outburst?
The Palestinians in general remain overwhelmingly hostile toward any plausible agreement with Israel. Not sure how to change that. It is clear the Israelis will be forced to enforce order. Losing proposition.
Steve,
Hamas has just returned the corpses of Shiri, Ariel and Kfir Babas, a woman and her two (infant & toddler) children, with much celebration. Hamas also appears to be behind a new botched terrorist attack in Tel Aviv.
Enough already. These people will never stop while they are alive, and they will raise their children to perpetuate the situation forever. They support Hamas, they rejoice at the death of Israeli civilians; so be it. They are rabid and the solution is to put them down.
The whole cosplay Hamas ceremonies for hostage release are downright strange. I assume this is for their domestic audience.
For the entire war journalists were banned from showing any Hamas people carrying weapons, and now they are openly carrying them around like its a paintball competition at these ceremonies. It’s so odd.
But yeah, I wouldn’t have objected to a 2,000 lb bomb being dropped in the middle of that spectacle. This is par for the course with Hamas though and it is designed to get under Israel’s skin.
I’d give it better than even odds the war starts up again.
Hamas Turns Handover of Dead Hostages Into a Grim Spectacle
https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/hamas-turns-handover-of-dead-hostages-into-a-spectacle-d6049540?st=F59q3P&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
Maybe they should raise the stakes of the Four Nations NHL tournament championship game — if the US wins, Canada joins the US, and if Canada wins, US joins Canada.
Seriously, I find it hard to find enthusiasm to root for the US squad. Not sure why, because the Olympics brings out the “home-town” cheering.
I think back to when I first watched hockey (late 60s, pre-expansion, Bobby Orr) and I wonder if the USA could even have fielded a full squad of NHL players at that time. Certainly no European nations. NHL has changed, and for the better. (But don’t tell Trump that diversity can be a good thing.)
I’d expect Canada to win because so much pride is on the line for them. US hockey has come a long way but I don’t follow it closely.
Rats, USA lost, in overtime. Fun game to watch. Kudos to the US team; Team Canada was the better team though.
SteveF. FEBRUARY 20, 2025 AT 4:46 PM
“DOGE is due to wrap up by July 4, 2026. That would be a good time to send out the dividend checks.”
I am willing to bet there will be no DOGE checks.”
–
If.
If there are 2 trillion in recoverable wasted money it should immediately go into reducing the National Debt to a sustainable level.
–
The Palestinians hung onto their previous hostages for 6 years before releasing the last soldier for a massive ransom.
Same old playbook, torment the Israelis for as long as possible.
–
Would it not be good if Zelenskyy and Putin announced a mutual ceasefire to allow negotiations in good faith with immediate saving of lives.
Perhaps this thought could go out to other blogs.
mark bofill,
The horrors perpetrated by Hamas (and their level of support among Gazans) do not surprise me at all. Conversations I had 20 years ago with ‘ordinary Muslims’ in the middle east revealed exactly the same views toward Israel and Jews that the Gazans clearly hold. The solution, such as it is, is effectively convert Gaza to a large prison…. with no uncontrolled access for people or materials, and no allowed departures of any kind. The porous border with Egypt has to be closed and all shipments in must be subject to Israeli inspection.
Turns out Hamas didn’t return the body of the mom – Shiri Bibas – but of a Gazan woman. Hamas claims the deaths were due to IDF bombing, and well – all those bodies were mingled together so it was easy to make a mistake…
Sheesh…
Hamas could have done DNA testing themselves. It’s inexcusable but far from the lowest of the lows that this conflict has seen.
They have a lot of rebuilding to do and not many friends.
The US national anthem last night was stunning. Performed by American mezzo-soprano Isabel Leonard and the Boston Pops orchestra.
Video:
https://x.com/dennd68/status/1892754695225008201?s=61&t=7w4bCW3a8ve2DqoeniQatQ
(This may be a copyright violation so it might disappear)
As they say, it’s not a real rivalry if it isn’t competitive. Looks US / Canada hockey may have some good years ahead. I would almost feel sorry for Canada if they had lost.
Tom,
I liked this tournament. I never watch the NHL all star games. I hope they keep this instead. I also would like to see them play in Finland and Sweden next year.
There is a basic question on the EU / Ukraine issue with regards to the US providing non-reciprocal support to garner long term benefits aka the “rules based global order” and so forth.
I wonder if this really exists at all. If Ukraine or the EU instantly drops the “trusted ally” status the moment the US asks for a more equitable arrangement then this was always a charade and has been transactional all along.
You can’t claim nebulous benefits to a rules based order if the benefits are never provided or even documented. Trump thinks we are getting played here and he may be right. He may also be wrong. I just don’t know.
33 Illinois counties have passed “advisory” referendums since 2020 expressing their desire to leave the state.
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/indiana-illinois-secession-boundary-adjustment-commission-todd-huston-j-b-pritzker-a3c18977?st=LuCXvZ&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
This is mostly a cost of living / tax issue as I understand it.
Speaking of Illinois, it’s not only governors who are convicted of corruption; the former Speaker Michael Madigan was convicted a week ago.
While I understand the reasons for the county residents wanting to switch states, what would motivate Illinois to accede to these requests? Similar to eastern Oregon wanting to join Idaho, the “receiving” state is open to the idea, but the current state seems to have no interest.
“Similar to eastern Oregon wanting to join Idaho, the “receiving” state is open to the idea, but the current state seems to have no interest.”
Those in political control are always happy with the status quo. Those without political control think the grass is greener elsewhere. None of the states are going to lose or gain land.
I wonder: Now that Kash Patel is in charge of the FBI, does he already have a list of agents who he is going to fire? Could be, since he was getting stonewalled /deceived/obstructed by the FBI as he was investigating the Trump “Russian Collusion” lies. Maybe most of those folks have already been dispatched to “other career opportunities”, but if not, Patel probably already knows who he wants gone.
Chyron running beneath a news show:
“Senate confirms Kash Patel as Trump’s FBI Director”
I thought this was an interesting choice of phrasing (as opposed to the simpler “Senate confirms Kash Patel as FBI Director”). It’s not that it’s inaccurate as such — certainly Patel was nominated by Trump, and the FBI is an agency within the Executive Branch currently headed by Trump — but it seems to me that they’re trying to insinuate that it’s now Trump’s FBI, personally. Maybe I’m reading too much into that.
I suppose that labeling Patel as “Trump’s” will irritate those with TDS and please those with TFS. [Trump fanboy syndrome. Probably should be fanperson.] Let’s increase factionalism!
HaroldW wrote: ” it seems to me that they’re trying to insinuate that it’s now Trump’s FBI, personally.”
No doubt that is correct. It is a variant on “not my President”.
Nobody will be accusing Trump of not trying to drain the swamp this time around.
Also 1500 FBI people will be moved out of DC and dispersed around the country. I’m all for dispersing DC. DC culture and institutions have become homogenous and insular.
Tom,
Good point. I was one who said many times that draining the swamp was just a slogan. This is one of those rare times when it is genuinely pleasant to be mistaken.
Looks like a lot of people were following the 4 Nations hockey tournament:
“The 4 Nations Face-Off championship game between the United States and Canada on Thursday night marked the largest audience for a hockey game on ESPN, the network announced Friday.
The game, in which Canada beat the U.S. 3-2 in an overtime thriller, garnered 9.3 million viewers, with 10.4 million viewers at its peak.”
https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/43956854/4-nations-face-final-us-canada-draws-record-ratings
Trump fired the Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, along with half a dozen other high ranking officers. Trump also fired multiple thousands (reported to be ~5% !) of DOE civilian employees who were hired in Biden’s last year, so still fireable (in their probationary period).
Since a civilian fully loaded cost is likely $150k, that represents multiple billions in reduced cost.
That should have been DOD civilian employees, not DOE.
Here’s two words you rarely see together, “militant veganism”
A Silicon Valley Intellectual Society Kicked Them Out. Now They’re Tied to a Killing Spree.
https://www.wsj.com/us-news/zizians-group-jack-lasota-killings-6f3aa40a?st=EzT59k&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
Right wing extremism, left wing extremism?
Tom,
The day will come when people will marvel that anybody ever thought transgendered people were not mentally ill.
NBC settles defamation lawsuit with doctor falsely labeled “uterus collector”
https://www.npr.org/2025/02/21/nx-s1-5305268/nbc-settles-lawsuit-ice-doctor-msnbc-maddow-georgia-detainee
MSNBC had a segment with a “whistleblower” calling this guy a uterus collector with mass hysterectomies at an ICE facility. He had done 2.
There have been a whole series of these defamation settlements lately. Part of it is unsympathetic juries to media outlets. Normally media outlets prevail due to a high bar for defamation.
The days of somebody is alleging a political narrative we really like so the media isn’t going to try very hard to verify the story are coming to an end. Good riddance.
mark bofill,
I suspect a majority already think those poor folks are not quite right in the head. YMMV. Which doesn’t mean they don’t deserve equal treatment under law.
Tom Scharf,
“Part of it is unsympathetic juries to media outlets.”
I doubt there are many well known organizations in the USA less deserving of sympathy. They have behaved horribly for a decade, and before that just terribly biased in their reporting.
Tom: “Here’s two words you rarely see together, “militant veganism”
I hear germany was afflicted by “militant arm raising” a few decades ago.
Steve,
Certainly, mentally ill people have the same legal rights as everybody else. As far as I am concerned, crazy people can be as crazy as they like, all day long to their hearts content so long as they aren’t criminal.
Hamas released the body of Shiri Bibas today, as confirmed by the Israelis.
Israel contends the family was murdered in captivity, rather than killed as a result of an air strike [as Hamas contends], without providing the reasons for so concluding. [Not sure that I want to know; I suspect that any such analysis involves rather gruesome details.]
Even if she did die from an airstrike, I would expect it was because she was placed within a target with the intention of that occurring.
Mark Bofill: “Certainly, mentally ill people have the same legal rights as everybody else. ”
Not true and sometimes a subtle issue. In a fair amount of cases, mentally ill people, for instance, are not competent to enter into contracts.
Thanks Jdohio. I wasn’t aware. Let me retry: crazy people can be as free as they reasonably can be, with as many legal rights as their craziness allows as far as I am concerned, so long as they are not criminal.
Tom Scharf
FEBRUARY 22, 2025 AT 8:36 AM
“Here’s two words you rarely see together, “militant veganism”
A Silicon Valley Intellectual Society Kicked Them Out. Now They’re Tied to a Killing Spree.
Right wing extremism, left wing extremism?”
–
Tom,
I think there was a film about it called The Revenge of the Killer Tomatoes.
Even better it got killer reviews on a rating site called Rotten Tomatoes.
This fellow:
“Azar Gat is the Ezer Weitzman Professor of National Security at Tel Aviv University and author of “War in Human Civilization and Ideological Fixation: From the Stone Age to Today’s Culture Wars,”
Wrote an article (see at Real Clear Politics) that goes on endlessly, examining every possible angle, only to conclude the obvious: The reason the Palestinians elect governments like Hamas is because the overwhelming majority refuse to accept any outcome that does not include destruction of Israel. I could have written down that conclusion in a couple of sentences. The Palestinians (indeed, most Muslims in the Middle East) will not compromise….. ‘River to the sea’ is the only thing they want. Maybe Trump is right (again) about moving all of the Palestinians somewhere else. There is no reason to waste time trying to find a ‘solution’ to the ‘Palestinian Problem’….. there is no solution.
SteveF,
Getting the Palestinians out of there would be the best outcome for everyone. Beats the heck out of killing them all for sure.
Way off topic, but an interesting fact of which I was unaware, until reading Arthur C. Clarke’s short story “Jupiter Five”.
From Kepler’s laws, or from first principles, we know that the period for a circular orbit of radius R is proportional to R to the 3/2 power. What I didn’t know is that the time it takes to fall (from rest) from a distance R has the same dependence. [Assuming the planet’s radius is negligible] The fall time is approximately equal to 0.177 times the orbital period, the precise factor being 1/sqrt(32).
HaroldW,
I’d have to write down the equations and do the integral to calculate the fall time, but it sounds right. Along with final velocity from infinite fall distance, this is a good introductory physics problem. 😉
Wasn’t the last Palestinian election years ago?
John,
Yes. Hamas was elected 2000 something IIRC but there have been no further elections.
Why do you ask?
John,
I guess you query in response to Steve saying this:
I guess your point is that they (the Palestinians in Gaza) elected Hamas twenty years ago and they have been innocent victims of Hamas ever since?
When assertions are made about the Palestinians electing Hamas, isn’t it useful to point out that they haven’t elected anyone in 20 years +/- ?
Is it also possible that Hamas’s program has evolved since then?
I’m suggesting that it is possible that the Palestinians were not expecting that Hamas would conduct war against the Israelis when they voted them in.
At the same time, it is possible that what Hamas has done is exactly what those who eelcted them wanted and that the PLO was insufficiently aggressive, or more likely too corrupt.
Thanks John.
Hamas keeps declaring an “emergency” to avoid elections that are IIRC mandated by the UN.
I get the impression the Palestinians could re-elect Hamas or alternately elect to be killed by Hamas. Realistically whoever wins an election there will likely reflect the will of the people and will be Hamas like anyway. I would suggest that most people in Gaza privately aren’t fans of having their homes destroyed, being half starved, living in poverty and rubble, and being the pawns of every country surrounding them and especially Iran.
I think there is room for them to both hate Israel with a passion and forego foolish plans that get their lives turned upside down for no benefit.
As for Israel I think they may start considering just taking chunks of Gaza every time an atrocity happens, the bulldoze Gaza into the ocean plan. This will be met with furious international resistance but only needs to be done once.
Gaza gets to lose wars without losing land, Israel would only get to lose one time and would be summarily ejected.
John,
It’s hard to know for sure what the people of Palestine want. Is this accurate? Who can say? Not me for sure.
Here it says:
Based on 2020 polling data apparently, it links here, where I find stuff that seems to indicate the people generally support Hamas.
I don’t think this is gospel, but it’s what I can easily find.
Shrug.
In the great tradition of Trump getting results in strange counterintuitive ways …
As soon as Trump cuts Europe out of Ukraine negotiations they propose a peacekeeping plan within a week.
European Leaders Draft Peacekeeping Plan for Ukraine With U.S. Forces as ‘Backstop’
Macron and Starmer head to Washington as Europe designs a force to deter Russia
https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/european-leaders-draft-peacekeeping-plan-for-ukraine-with-u-s-forces-as-backstop-0dda78bc?st=eatXBd&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
All of this is dependent on Russia’s whims. It will be clear pretty quickly if Russia is serious about negotiations or not. He’s being given a decent offer I think.
The people who wanted armed struggle in 2020 got what they wanted. It probably didn’t turn out like they thought it would.
Polling today would be hard to do but it would likely be dominated by anti-Israel animus. Nobody is a fan of the people dropping bombs on them.
It will be interesting to find out what people are thinking a year or two from now.
mark bofill,
It is actually worse than that. Recent polling show that a large majority will settle for nothing less than the elimination of Israel. There are variations in how to accomplish that: from killing them all, to taking over politically via “right of return” and then driving Jews out, to armed attacks for as long as it takes. But the consistent idea is: no more jews in the region and Israel ceases to exist.
The other consistent POV: overwhelming support for strict Sharia law, with all the barbaric abominations that includes. There is no way peace will ever be possible with the views widely held by Palestinians. It is an unending horror show, driven by delusions and religious fanaticism.
Tom Scharf,
From the article: “But the European proposal hinges on persuading President Trump to agree to a limited U.S. military role—dubbed a “backstop” by British officials—to protect the European troops in Ukraine if they were put in danger and deter Russia from violating any cease-fire, the officials said.”
.
Bet on Hell freezing over before Trump agrees to any commitment of US forces.
Apparently the backstop means something between air defenses and commitment to air cover during a conflict. It’s progress to have the EU thinking on terms other than “let the US do it all”.
Since Russia really wants a demilitarized Ukraine then all of this may end the deal. Russia would end up with effectively NATO troops on their border.
Stunning graphic from Andrew McAfee, a Principal Research Scientist at the MIT Sloan School of Management. It compares the market cap of US vs EU companies started in the last 50 years. The US has as a handful of companies whose individual worth is greater than all the EU companies combined.
Check it out:
https://x.com/rklier21/status/1893699590643130466?s=61&t=7w4bCW3a8ve2DqoeniQatQ
From:
“A Visualization of Europe’s Non-Bubbly Economy”
https://geekway.substack.com/p/a-visualization-of-europes-non-bubbly
Even worse is the yearly shakedowns the EU regulatory thieves do to US companies. It’s effectively a tax on US tech.
https://thehill.com/policy/technology/5102654-trump-criticizes-eu-tech-fines/
Tens of billions of dollars. Their latest scheme is gigantic data sharing fines, GPDR and a new Digital Markets Act.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/eu-apple-google-meta-investigation-new-digital-markets-act-antitrust-law/
SteveF and Mark B.
I don’t doubt for a second tha the present Palestinain population wants complete disappearance of Israel.
I wonder how it broke down on October 5.
How could the Israelis have thought things would turn out differently, unles they actually did intend to destroy the Palestinians.
SteveF, although writing down the differential equation for free-fall is straightforward, its solution is rather complex, beyond an introductory physics class.
HaroldW,
A lot messier than I thought it would be.
John Ferguson,
“I wonder how it broke down on October 5.”
Impossible to say without data. I can say that the currently expressed views of Palestinians are indistinguishable from the views of several (“ordinary”) individuals I spoke with 20-odd years ago in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Israel (that is, Arabs living in Israel). Maybe the Palestinians in Gaza were not full of rage and hatred on October 5th, and ready to strike a reasonable compromise with Israel, but I have seen zero evidence of that. I think it far more likely that the Palestinians (and many other Middle Eastern Muslims) were and are implacably opposed to the continued existence of Israel.
Negotiation requires a counterparty willing to compromise on substance. When it comes to peace with Israel, the Palestinians have never been that counterparty. I very much doubt they will ever be. That means a “solution” will have to be imposed on them.
john ferguson,
All that siad: the situation in Gaza is indeed tragic, in the sense that it never had to be this way. Starting in 1948, Muslims in the Middle East have rejected every offered compromise on land, and consistently demanded that the Jews all leave. So Israel has become a wealthy democracy, while the Palestinians have chosen to live in the oppression and poverty that comes from actually believing and being governed by 5th century nonsense, while at the same time murdering and maiming civilians whenever possible. Culture is destiny. Palestinian culture is objectively HORRIBLE, which is why they suffer.
SteveF,
Try multiplying one side of the differential equation by V and the other side by dR/dt, which is the same thing. Then rearrange so that you have V*dV/dt on one side and (dR/dt) /(R^2) on the other. Integrate both sides, then replace V with dR/dt and integrate again. I did that and get R^3 proportional to t^2.
That is just the freshman physics trick for solving the harmonic oscillator without knowing how to formally solve second order differential equations.
John,
Yes, I’ve heard the argument before. ‘Israel only fuels Palestinian hatred by fighting back.’ To some extent this is true, but it doesn’t matter. If no cost was imposed on Hamas they would have merely been emboldened. The truth is that it only takes one side; this is necessary and sufficient to make war and atrocity inevitable.
I’m not a rocket scientist but once you add another object asserting gravity into play then it gets real hard real fast, the infamous 3 body problem.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-body_problem
Planets aren’t really spherical sources of gravity, dynamic atmospheric effects etc. A crapload(tm) of information and precision is necessary.
The recent earth crossing asteroid orbit doesn’t have enough precision yet. Apparently they know with a lot of precision where it will cross earth’s orbit but not the exact timing.
It’s a bit surprising most of the moons and planets have stable orbits and appear to stay that way for very long time. I suppose there is some iterative deal during the early solar system where they are either sucked into the sun, spewed out of the system or happen to be at just the right vector and speed to form an orbit.
I would say the Palestinians went from 95% hating Israel to 97% hating Israel so the net effect of the war isn’t so large in that aspect. All the people who have leverage over the Palestinians fuel that fire.
The goal was not to make friends on both sides.
Looking like Trump is reconsidering current policy on Ukraine and moving to accept the Russian position on the conflict.
The Trump administration is accepting the 2 major Russian requirements
1. No NATO membership for Ukraine
2. Recognizes the 4 eastern oblas plus Crimea are Russian
The title of his post is way more inflammatory than his talk, but it does make its point.
John Mearsheimer: Trump BACKS Russia as NATO COLLAPSES Ukraine LEFT to fight alone Europe in CHAOS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQeRPNRFyQI
Ed Forbes,
Keep in mind that, like war, negotiations are often shrouded in a thick fog.
Steve,
True, but as always, John Mearsheimer is worth the time to listen to
I have been trying out Musk’s Grok3 beta.
It is truly a new form of AI. For one, it isn’t saddled with the woke BS that was baked into the others.
It seems more user friendly. The results are more normal conversation language.
I asked “what is the mission of SpaceX Starship Flight 8”
Answer:
“The mission of SpaceX’s Starship Flight 8 is focused on advancing the development and reusability of the Starship launch vehicle, consisting of the Super Heavy Booster 15 and the Starship upper stage, Ship 34. This test flight aims to build on previous missions by demonstrating key capabilities critical to SpaceX’s long-term goals of making space travel more affordable and enabling human exploration of the Moon and Mars.
The primary objectives include executing a landing burn and achieving a soft splashdown of the Super Heavy booster in the Gulf of Mexico, showcasing its ability to return to Earth in a controlled manner. For the Starship upper stage, the mission targets a controlled entry and splashdown in the Indian Ocean, testing its reentry and landing precision. This flight is expected to be suborbital, similar to Flight 7, rather than achieving orbit, as SpaceX works to validate the Block 2 design of Ship 34 after the previous flight’s upper-stage failure.
Additionally, the mission will involve deploying ten “Starlink simulators”—mock satellites similar in size and weight to next-generation Starlink satellites—as a practice run for future satellite deployment missions. This test is a step toward Starship’s eventual role in launching large batches of satellites into orbit. SpaceX also plans to conduct heat shield experiments, including testing new tile designs, to refine the vehicle’s ability to withstand reentry conditions.
While earlier speculation suggested Flight 8 might attempt the first catch of the Ship upper stage by the launch tower’s “chopstick” arms, the failure of Ship 33 in Flight 7 makes this less likely. Instead, the focus remains on proving the Block 2 upgrades, ensuring system reliability, and gathering data to address issues like the propellant leak that led to Flight 7’s mid-flight anomaly. Scheduled for no earlier than February 26, 2025, from Starbase in Texas, this mission is a critical iteration in SpaceX’s rapid test-to-failure approach to perfecting the world’s largest and most powerful rocket.”
https://grok.com/?referrer=website
BTW:
“SpaceX intends to launch Starship test flight 8 this coming Friday February 28th at 5:30 pm CT”
The USAF has been flying a Boeing B-52H Stratofortress less than 40 km from the Russian border.
Screenshot at 6:30AM, Florida Time:
https://x.com/rklier21/status/1893986602990342380
It is flying tight ‘doughnuts’ over Eastern Estonia.
It has been on station for 4 hours. It is flying at 27,000 feet, with one brief sojourn to 1,700 feet. It took off from RAF Fairford, in Southern England.
Live track, if still aloft:
https://www.flightradar24.com/393e424b
EDIT, It is currently the most tracked flight in the air, with 4,692 of us nuts watching it worldwide.
Update on the B52 circling near Russia….
The French Air Force is sending a tanker, an Airbus A330-243MRTT, on a course over Estonia that appears to be a mission to refuel the USAF plane.
I bet the Ruskies are not happy.
Track:
https://www.flightradar24.com/CTM1074/393e7f30
Seems the German election resolved nothing. The social democrats (who seem to me much like ‘progressives’ in the USA), who dominated the previous government, lost a huge amount of support, while the “conservatives” (who seem to me similar to more moderate Democrats) gained a modest amount of support. The crazy Greens lost a little support. The communists gained a little. The right-wing AfD, which seems not far from MAGA, gained a lot of support, and is now the second largest block in the German parliament, after the (not-so) “conservatives”.
The “conservatives” have vowed to never form a coalition with AfD, which mean they can only form a government by combining with the Social Democrats, and the crazy Greens. A government combining the moderate left, progressive left, and wing-nut greens is going to have a hard time even formulating rational policy positions, never mind governing. I doubt the government will last very long.
For me, the interesting question is: if in the next election or two the AfD becomes the largest party in Germany…. which seems likely…, and with by far the most seats in parliament, will all the other parties form ideologically irrational alliances to keep AfD out of power? I suspect they will. Like in the USA, it seems all parties from the center to the wing-nut left are simply unwilling to change policies to reflect growing voter discontent about foolish and destructive policies. Like MAGA, the AfD didn’t create itself out of thin air… it is the result of stupid government policies. Weird.
Overt collusion to lock out a certain party may be a big mistake when/if that party ever gains power. Tea Party / MAGA support increased as the institutions beclowned themselves.
I don’t know enough about the AfD to render any judgment but the usual suspects like to label them Nazis a little too often without expressing what their policy view even are. They are apparently pro-Russia and anti-immigration but I don’t really trust the coverage.
Germany has had a number of recent terror attack from immigrants which has made their auto-labeling of anti-immigration views as racist nonviable politically.
Tom Scharf,
Everything I have read that actually comes from the AfD says that they are opposed to high levels of immigration, and want a negotiated end to the war in Ukraine. The regular terror attacks by immigrants will only make the AfD more popular.
The sensible path for the other parties would be to adopt some (less extreme) versions of the AfD agenda, and move Germany back toward the political center, with sensible domestic and foreign policies. But much like progressives in the USA, I don’t think they can bring themselves to do that.
This is news I think…..
‘At the same time, I am in serious discussions with President Vladimir Putin of Russia concerning the ending of the War, and also major Economic Development transactions which will take place between the United States and Russia. Talks are proceeding very well!’
….Trump,16 minutes ago
Foreign investment in Russia is very unlikely because Russia nationalized a lot of that foreign investment after the war started and everyone took huge losses.
I’d guess Trump is mostly talking about removing some fossil fuel sanctions in exchange for a settlement.
Megan McArdle at the WashPost writes a brutal column on academia:
“Academia is finally learning hard lessons”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/02/24/universities-colleges-liberal-power-trump/
“Since you know that, let me make a less obvious and probably less welcome point: The left, not the right, picked this fight. Too many institutions set themselves up as the “Resistance” to Trump and tried to make a lot of mainstream political opinions anathematic, while expecting to be protected from backlash by principles such as academic freedom that they were no longer honoring. This was politically naive and criminally stupid for institutions that rely so heavily on U.S. taxpayer support.
…
Milquetoast professional opinions and legitimate research were retracted under pressure from activists. Scientists marched against Trump — not as private citizens but as scientists, as if lab work gave them some special moral authority.
…
Even if you think this was a move in the right moral direction, it was dangerous behavior. By presenting their expertise as part of a political fight, academics were not only squandering their credibility. They were asking to be treated like political adversaries. And in a real political fight, the ability to get your opponent’s journal article retracted is way less important than his ability to cut off your supply lines.
…
Like children throwing rocks from an overpass, they felt protected by their elevated position, assuming their targets could do little but yell back. They weren’t expecting one of the drivers to get out of the car and grab a baseball bat from the trunk.”
This is a big problem for ideological bubbles. It’s going to get worse if they don’t at least try to be ideologically diverse. Academia used to have humility.
I asked Grok3 beta:
‘What are Russian natural resources that the US needs’
Response:
Oil, gas, and rare earth elements were the top three;
Full response:
Russia possesses a wealth of natural resources, some of which are of interest to the United States due to their importance in various industries. Here are the key Russian resources that align with U.S. needs:
Oil and Gas: Russia is one of the world’s top producers of crude oil and natural gas. The U.S., while a major energy producer itself, still imports some oil and gas to meet domestic demand and stabilize markets. Russian energy exports, particularly liquefied natural gas (LNG), could theoretically supplement U.S. supplies, though geopolitical tensions and sanctions limit direct reliance.
Rare Earth Elements (REEs): Russia has significant deposits of rare earths, critical for manufacturing high-tech products like electronics, batteries, and defense systems. The U.S. depends heavily on imports (mostly from China) for these materials, and Russia’s reserves could serve as an alternative source to diversify supply chains.
Nickel: Russia is a leading producer of nickel, a key component in stainless steel and electric vehicle batteries. With the U.S. pushing for EV adoption, access to nickel is increasingly vital, and Russia’s output—largely from companies like Norilsk Nickel—could fill gaps if trade barriers weren’t an issue.
Titanium: Russia is a major supplier of titanium, used extensively in aerospace and defense industries (think aircraft frames and engines). The U.S. relies on imports for much of its titanium, and Russia’s state-backed VSMPO-AVISMA is one of the world’s largest producers.
Palladium: Russia dominates global palladium production, another Norilsk Nickel specialty. This metal is crucial for catalytic converters in vehicles, and the U.S. auto industry depends on steady supplies. Price spikes or shortages often tie back to Russia’s output.
Timber: Russia’s vast forests provide lumber and wood products. While the U.S. has its own timber resources, Russian softwood has historically been a cost-effective import for construction and manufacturing.
In practice, U.S.-Russia trade in these resources is heavily constrained by sanctions, political friction, and efforts to reduce dependence on adversarial nations. For instance, post-2022 sanctions slashed Russian oil imports to the U.S., and alternatives like domestic production or allies (Canada, Saudi Arabia) are prioritized. Still, Russia’s resource wealth remains a theoretical match for U.S. industrial and technological demands—geopolitics just keeps it out of reach for now.
Grading school research papers just got a lot more difficult.
How is a teacher gonna know if she’s reading Grok 3 or the student?!
Current launch status, From Grok:
‘The two-hour launch window opens at 3:30 PM PT (Pacific Time), which is 6:30 PM ET (Eastern Time) or 23:30 UTC.’
Interesting infographic on Starship8 (I can’t vouch for its accuracy):
https://x.com/spacesudoer/status/1893737615918034993?s=61&t=7w4bCW3a8ve2DqoeniQatQ
In another development even the Bee couldn’t match in humor value: the usual suspects on the left are screaming that Trump firing all the woke generals and dismantling DEI infrastructure in the military is “politicization” of the military…. ignoring the blatant politicization done during the Biden presidency, where all manner of promotions and assignments were made in the name of DEI, while simultaneously instituting a DEI bureaucracy to ensure race/gender/sexual orientation was always a factor for promotion. Aside from DEI being illegal, it is incredibly stupid.
So putting a revolutionary, politically motivated policy in place is NOT politicization, but removing that policy is politicization. I wonder if these people can appreciate how irrational they sound. They should listen to Barak: “elections have consequences”, and get over it.
SpaceX details what happened on Test Flight 7
https://www.spacex.com/updates/#flight-7-report
TLDR: Fuel leak + fire = bad.
Video regarding my B-52 near Russia posts from yesterday …..
Here it is flying over Estonia, escorted by six F25s:
https://x.com/polymarketintel/status/1894004473346867240?s=61&t=7w4bCW3a8ve2DqoeniQatQ
Fandamntastic!
This may explain the B-52 near Russia yesterday:
‘ Today, the Finnish Air Force, along with its allies, participated in the Estonian Independence Day parade in Tallinn with two F/A-18 Hornets. Elagu Eesti Vabariik!’
It explains the 20 minutes low altitude time (a flyover) and the rest of the time in a holding pattern (and annoying the Russians)
Tom Scharf,
The more interesting thing was why the fuel/oxygen was leaking: There was unexpected harmonic vibration in the fuel/oxidizer lines which caused sealed joints to leak. Which makes some sense, since (I think) that part of the upper stage had been lengthened compared to early craft…. changing the natural harmonic frequency of associated structures.
At the altitude of the explosion, there was not enough atmospheric pressure to support combustion…. so I think it had to be both methane and oxygen leaking.
More:
LOn 24 February, the Finnish Air Force trained together with a B-52 Stratofortress bomber and F-35s in Estonian airspace. The training session was concluded with a flyover above Tallinn in honour of Estonia’s Independence Day.”
Images:
https://x.com/finnishairforce/status/1894082720214425963?s=61&t=7w4bCW3a8ve2DqoeniQatQ
Putin is a master at the game:
“ He pointed out that Russia has significantly larger reserves of rare earth metals than Ukraine and is open to working with foreign partners in developing rare earth deposits, including in the occupied parts of Ukraine which Putin called “newly controlled regions.”
Zelenskyy said no to Trump on the rare earth deal, so Putin says “let’s make a deal”.
Musk and company have released new versions of the Grok AI systems. I am impressed. Seems Musk has a winner in Grok 3.
Grok did WAY better than Chat GPT4 did with this question. First, Grok (correctly) qualifies its initial answer with “significantly”, though it followed up with unrelated comments about wing lift, localized pressures, aircraft emissions, and heavy traffic around airports (a little like a word-salad from Kamala 😉 ). OTOH, the second answer is perfect, if informal, acknowledging that logic demands flying aircraft MUST increase atmospheric pressure, even if the effect is too tiny to measure.
Maybe Grok will be worth the subscription fee.
Dependencies on Russia might be a bad strategic plan …
However I’m not opposed to dealing with countries on a transactional basis. There is definitely some strategic thinking required and Russia can’t be trusted. Trump running around trying to do “deals” doesn’t bother me because they can always be rejected. I was never opposed to talking to Iran either.
I find the likelihood of anything happening in either case low but I also find the nebulous value of long term partnerships with trusted allies to be overstated. The partnership with the EU has resulted in military dependency that helps nobody.
The histrionics on display regarding Elon Musk instructing federal employees to list five things they accomplished last week is perfectly consistent with my experience with civil servants at NASA. I remember witnessing a similar response to being required to have daily standup meetings (Agile), where everyone had to talk about what they were currently working on, how it was going, what if any problems they were having, and what progress they were making. Civil servants went berserk at this [in my group].
“I also find the nebulous value of long term partnerships with trusted allies to be overstated.”
Especially when those ‘trusted allies’ are working to force THIER priorities on the USA. I am very offended by Europeans trying to censor the speech of US citizens. I also think that kind of thing is exactly what demands a re-evaluation of which countries are allies. Countries that embrace policies in profound conflict with the spirit of the US Constitution are unlikely to remain allies for long.
mark bofill,
Daily meetings may be a bit much (and potential big waste of time), but weekly or monthly meetings are perfectly sensible. I participated in monthly technical meetings (representatives from all technical areas), where projects/progress/problems were discussed, for many years. A detail report from these meetings was circulated to all technical staff, including those who did not directly participate. Unlike many meetings, these were not a waste of time.
In production (rather than staff) areas, a brief (10 -15 minutes) daily meeting covering “what are you going to do today?” was also useful.
We don’t have to justify our jobs, we are the government! Ha ha.
Regardless of the intent, the reaction is politically useful. The endless stream of anecdotal stories of job losses in the public sector while completely ignoring the private sector also tells you where the legacy media is.
Entire industrial sectors were gutted over the past few decades and the federal government might lose 5% of their employees here. Cry me a river. The media is searching hard to find something, anything, people might actually notice and failing for the most part.
Steve,
Sure, my chief complaint about standup is when managers decide to have the meeting in a conference room and everyone sits down. This causes the potential duration of the meeting to skyrocket. Standup isn’t supposed to take more than 5 or 10 minutes max.
Don’t let me give you the impression I am a fan of the Agile methodology, because I am not, but standup is a reasonable and useful thing to do in small groups or teams.
I feel sorry for anyone losing their job. But you know… stuff like this
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/02/24/us/national-park-rangers-layoffs
googling:
“https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=salary+park+ranger+NPS”
Since this is the government, they probably also get benefits.
Meanwhile, many retail workers at Joanne fabrics are losing their jobs.
what do they make?
So maybe $32K. Likely, few if any benefits. Plus many are part time.
The fact is, “Park Ranger” is a dream job for lots of people who have it because (a) the pay is pretty good especially relative to (b) the amount of stress and responsibility.
They describe this guy:
Well… ok. But higher paid plumbing jobs are higher paying because plumbers provide a necessary service. If he can train to be a plumber, maybe he should.
Likely people who cut fabric at Joanne aren’t going to talk about how they chose to work at the fabric store instead of higher paying jobs (doing what?) because of their passion for fabric. Or their passion for supporting the continued existence of the crafting business. But… well… Honestly, I think the higher paid NPS rangers did the job partly for the money.
The important issue should be: What access to parks do we want, how much should tax payers pay, and are the employees paid competitively relative to what we could pay employees who want this job? I’m not for paying people starvation wages– but I’m also not for paying them a lot more than the private sector would pay for ‘similar’ jobs. I have no idea how NPS pays relative to, say, Disney, Busch Gardens, or various theme parks that attract vacationers. Is it more? Less? Dunno.
Now, obviously, the carrying capacity of parks is going to be lower with fewer workers. If there are fewer people to clean toilets, help people with parking and so on, they will need to cut the number of people who can visit. This can either be done by raising prices, or having lotteries or combinations of both. (Lotteries need to be done carefully– allowing resale will just result in scalping which means “the wrong” people make the money.)
I’m not planning a visit to the national park. So those cuts aren’t going to affect me. And also: if I want to buy fabric, I may need to buy it online. Both NPS rangers and Joanne employees are losing jobs. I don’t really see much focus on the individuals losing jobs at Joanne. I do see it for park rangers.
On this:
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/02/24/us/national-park-rangers-layoffs
I read the letters the government sent– and yes, they would be seriously annoying. I think those employees were probably mostly meeting the standards of the job as it existed.
The problem is the wording is the way it is because rules cut two ways. The government is likely going to “have to” say they “didn’t meet standards” rather than just say, “We are reducing staff because we are reducing services we supply to the public. You were doing find, but your job no longer exists. You are redundant. Ciao!”
The latter is probably the sort of things people who cut fabric and run registers at Joanne are told. Losing their job is not their fault– it’s just the store is closing.
On this
I have no opinion on whether we should or should not cut the number of park rangers. I don’t visit national parks. I think it’s great people can go see Old Faithful, but I also don’t know what the cost is to the public. I also think it’s great people can visit Disney World which (I think) we don’t particularly pay for out of the public purse.
I can live without ever visiting Old Faithful and probably will manage to do so.
Hhmmm… It’s also not clear plumbers make more than park rangers:
https://www.ziprecruiter.com/Salaries/Plumber-Salary–in-Illinois
Plumber Salary in Illinois Comparison by Location
Nationwide United States $30
Illinois United States $29
Plumbers pay is very compressed.
They give annual salaries below– all in the mid $60Ks.
So about the same as “Park Ranger III”. No idea how benefits compare, but typically government jobs have good benefits. That can be sort of a way to “hide” the fact that the pay is actually good relative to the private sector since the public can generally easily find the salary and not the benefits. ( Now… the motive may not be to “hide” anything– but it does accomplish that.)
I see from yesterday’s WSJ news section that the statist left’s arguments against the Trump attempts to reduce the size of government will revolve around the effort not amounting to very many savings on the one hand and on the other that those reductions could have devastating effects on the economy. That the arguments appear contradictory should not be surprising given the blatant effort the left will make to keep government growing without critical review.
I, unfortunately, judge that the Trump effort could stall and fail unless their arguments include explanations of the broken window fallacy from Frederic Bastiat (opportunity costs) to which the public can understand and relate. The opportunity costs should not be putting the savings back into another government agency. Government endeavors where the financing is coerced are always going to be inefficient compared to the private sector where it is not.
Neither Trump nor Musk have the intellectual interest to do this explaining and thus they need to look to free market economists to bolster their reasoning for rolling back government. In the not too near future and probably already underway will be efforts by Republicans and their supporters to opt out of the rollback. It is those people who probably need reasoned arguments for continuing the effort as much as the general public.
I’ve been to a bunch of national parks. I don’t see how the number of rangers changes the park’s attendance capacity much. They seem mostly present to enforce park rules, not clean toilets.
You can’t really increase national park rates without cutting off the low end of citizens which kind of circumvents the entire purpose of national parks.
Glacier National Park was basically at capacity every day and you needed a reserved car pass to enter the park or you had to use inconvenient shuttles. $36 to enter daily. They purposefully don’t expand capacity to preserve the park blah blah blah.
Some of the ranger jobs suck, manning the entrance gate, dealing with irate tourists, policing parking, etc. but some is walking the trails. It’s a job with the usual good and bad parts but there are far worse jobs.
In order to keep costs down for lower class citizens to visit, most state parks are at minimal staffing. From what I could tell. they probably all lose money. There are incredible bargains to be had at some state park cabins / camping relative to market rates.
Most of the food services are contracted out and well … parks aren’t known for the food.
My guess is ranger to tourist ratio is at least 100:1 at major parks. Park upkeep (fixing roads and infrastructure) is likely the main cost.
There appears to be a big difference between what plumbers make and what I get charged by plumbing companies, ha ha.
CNN: Twenty-one federal employees resign ‘in protest’ over DOGE efforts
“The Associated Press, which first reported on the resignations, said their resignation letter states: “We will not use our skills as technologists to compromise core government systems, jeopardize Americans’ sensitive data, or dismantle critical public services,” adding “We will not lend our expertise to carry out or legitimize DOGE’s actions.”
Hilarious. Good bye. These are exactly the type of activist types we want out of government. It’s like the HR department resigning because they don’t want to do layoffs. It’s unpleasant for sure, but it’s entitlement when everyone thinks that get to personally unilaterally decide what happens.
There are very few people who are not replaceable.
John Ferguson,
A footnote to our last exchange; I read in the Times of Israel (and other places, actually a NYT interview is the real source) that at least some Hamas leaders say they would have thought twice about the Oct 7’th attack if they understood the degree of retaliation they were about to provoke:
Not all of Hamas agrees with this, to be sure:
But still. This is why Israeli retaliation was important.
Probably similar to some jobs at Disney World.
Tom
Elon is probably disappointed it’s not more!
Did they give the ages of these employees? Do they qualify for retirement benefits?
I looked at the video of the crash landing of the CRJ900 at Toronto. Looks to me like 1) the rate of descent was pretty high, and maybe too high, and 2) the plane got tilted some to the right side just a split second before touchdown, probably by a strong gust of wind.
It looks like the rear landing gear on the right (starboard) side collapsed, leading to the right wing getting torn off, a huge fuel fireball, and the rest that followed. It will be interesting to see whether the cause is determine do be too steep a descent, unpredictable wind gusts, mechanical failure, or a combination.
One speculation is that a strong gust died right before landing causing it to drop rapidly, the overall glide slope was OK according to what I read.
The plane didn’t flare on the landing and people didn’t know why.
Tom,
With many flights I have been on with bad weather landings, I have observed that the pilots seem to forcefully “plant” the plane on the runway… giving the impression of a ‘hard’ landing…. rather than flare-and-softly-touch like normal. I have guessed they don’t want to be too much at the mercy of changing winds. Maybe John Ferguson can give some insight here.
lucia,
I feel exactly as bad about those workers resigning as I felt about FL Senator Bill Nelson getting voted out of office in 2018. Nelson always claimed he was a ‘moderate’, but his voting record showed he was in lock step with progressives on every issue that mattered. He was simply dishonest.
In 2017 I sent an email to Nelson’s office complaining about his many very-far-from-moderate votes. The reply was (in a few more words) basically “pound sand, the Senator doesn’t want your vote”. Seldom have I been as happy that a politician lost an election.
OK, I was just as happy that Casey lost in PA last November….. another of the faux-moderate Senatorial class.
Mabey that sorry group of Senators should be called MINO caucus: moderate in name only.
Mark,
That a Hamas leader admitted they wouldn’t have done it had they known what the Israelis would do. This is exactly what a Hezbollah leader said a few years ago about a similar level of retaliation.
John,
Yes. Using retaliation as a discouragement for bad behavior presupposes rational actors, and Hamas and Hezbollah leadership appears to be at best a blend of semi-rational and irrational actors. I have said before that (AFAICT) there is nothing that Israel can do to unilaterally solve the problem, short of exterminating the civilian population of Gaza, and the Israelis clearly remain unwilling to do that.
Still, others have eyes to see and rationality to understand the exchange and learn from it. While retaliation does not solve Israelis problem (short of actual complete extermination of their enemies) it conceivably limits the number of enemies willing to take the field against them. Not all of their enemies are irrational actors.
I doubt Hamas expected the border to be so porous and for their massacre to be so “successful”. This prompted a viscous Israeli reaction. AFAICT hardly anyone was told of the operation beforehand and I suspect most of the civilian deaths were an operation that just lost operational control, but they had to ultimately own it.
Whether they thought it was a mistake will be better defined by whether they decide to do it again anytime soon. It isn’t that hard to take out civilians.
mark,
Rational has more than one meaning. To understand retaliation as a discouragement for bad behavior only requires that one be rational in the sense of “Having or exercising the ability to reason.” Hamas and Hezbollah are clearly rational by that definition.But they are arguably not rational according to the definition “consistent with good judgement”.
Mike,
Yes. I was using the game theory notion of a rational actor:
One can argue that religious extremists are rational actors with a different set of assumptions about the nature of reality, but for reasonable intents and purposes it is simpler to categorize them as semi-rational or irrational actors, even though this is not necessarily strictly true.
Depending on what numbers you choose to believe literally half of Hamas’s army has been killed and some further large number injured. Netanyahu survived politically. UNWRA has been disgraced and effectively defunded. Assad has been toppled. Hezbollah was forced to pull out of the conflict with heavy losses, especially their leadership. Iran is significantly weakened. Gaza is a complete disaster zone. Missiles launched into Israel from Gaza is now almost zero.
Hamas still has some cosplay soldiers making videos and may survive in some form, there is that. Their leadership has been mostly killed.
There is strategically irrational and then there is irrationally stupid. This was the latter. It had a low probability of success (whatever they thought was success) and it didn’t work out.
Nobody really knows but Hamas was probably hoping to draw everyone into the war regionally. That happened at a small scale but everyone who decided to join got their a**es handed to them.
Even religious extremists want to obtain their goals with wise use of available resources. The Taliban are extreme but they aren’t completely irrational.
Tom,
Ok, but what do we conclude then? Hamas leadership is rational but stupid? They just made a mistake, perhaps; they were the victims of their unexpected success.
Hamas and Palestinian goals are irrational in the sense that they want Israel destroyed. This doesn’t actually profit them, but because of their religious beliefs I expect they view the calculation differently. To oversimplify (again) to provide an example, a suicide bombing is much more attractive if one believes a harem of lovely women awaits one in the afterlife.
All of this is in a sense besides my point, which I guess I must have expressed poorly. Really, I think what my disagreement with liberals in general and perhaps John specifically in this conversation boils down to is this: It is never a good idea to allow it to be a profitable strategy for other people to damage you. I believe this statement remains true even when the other people absolutely refuse to learn better and persist in the unprofitable conflict. My impression is that this is what the disagreement boils down to.
John Ferguson, do you disagree with my characterization of our difference of opinion here? I appreciate the discussion BTW and hope you do not find this discussion offensive. Sometimes I try to offend people but I am not trying to offend you right now, FWIW.
I didn’t say that quite right. I should have said something more like this : It’s important to impose cost for adversaries to damage you, even if it doesn’t appear to discourage them.
I say this because (again) I contend that there isn’t actually any payoff in reality for Hamas et al to destroy Israel, so I shouldn’t speak of allowing them to do something ‘profitable’, as I did above when I said ‘allow damaging you to be a profitable strategy’. It’s not ‘profitable’.
It’s irrational for Hamas to believe that by itself it can eject the Jews from Israel. The method they tried was plain stupid, it imposed massive costs on them for almost nothing gained. I guess they got some prisoners back and Israel’s global respect was diminished a bit.
It seems like a temper tantrum more than anything.
A better plan is to play nice and wait a few decades. Perhaps Iran will loan you a few nukes in 2050.
I’m not expressing myself clearly, I’m sorry. I’ll try again some other time. Thanks all.
Perfectly rational people can arrive at irrational conclusions by a process of rational thought. All it takes is a mistake or two along the way, either in logic or in an assumption that might never even be stated. One hopes to be able to recognize an irrational conclusion so that the error can be tacked down and eliminated. But all too often, that does not happen, especially when the irrational conclusion is what one wants to believe.
As a result, none of us are fully rational. There is always some irrationality mixed in.
I think I understand the gist of mark’s position. If somebody is trying to harm you, don’t let ’em. If they succeed, make ’em pay. Otherwise, you will get harmed a lot.
Totally agree. Impose disproportionate costs with your disproportionate military. That’s why you have it, it’s a mistake to be proportionate with somebody like Hamas.
I would really like to have seen the planning meetings for this. Meek nerdy terrorist guy: “Ummmm boss … might Israel not annihilate us?”.
What was the answer to that? Boggles my mind.
Mike,
There, that is indeed the gist of it. Thanks!
Tom,
IKR? Thanks.
Yes , the consequences for Gazans have to be bad enough that they will have good reason to be more cautious about murder, rape, and mutilation. That doesn’t mean they will be more cautious; they are a bunch of religious fanatics who want only to destroy Israel, after all. But there is at least a reasonable chance they will be more cautious.
If Trump could persuade some of the Muslim countries to accept a limited number of Gazans, and supplied enough financial aid to make that attractive, then there would surely be Gazans who would want to leave…. having people WANT to settle elsewhere would be really bad publicity for Hamas among Muslims. I think even a hundred thousand would make a big impact .
SteveF, i like that idea. But where? It would have to be a country nearby where muslims could fit in, without huge unemployment problem. Maybe Saudi, or one of the gulf states? Not Jordan, the existing palestinian population in Jordan is 2 million of the total of 11 million, or so I was told when we were there last month.
A problem with this is if Gaza is reconstructed as the Riviera of the Eastern Med, they’ll all want to return.
and BTW, I’d love to hear how extensive your daughter’s rewrites of ai downloads is. Are they real rewrites? the sort that are likely to really enable the content to be understood?
john ferguson,
I suspect abandoning the “right of return” to Gaza would have to be part of the deal. Donno how many Gazans would take the offer, but considering what a (dangerous) mess Gaza is, I have to believe some Gazans would want to leave.
WRT to AI re-writes: I know that she “puts the information in her own words”, so I guess than means she understands enough to formulate her own sentences. How much of that she retains? I really don’t know. I do know that she considered re-writing in her own words to be “work” (she would much prefer to do other things), so I guess the process requires some comprehension and thinking. What I have read of her re-writes usually sounds quite reasonable, especially considering that she is a self-taught English speaker (Portuguese is her first language; she started teaching herself English by reading English language sites on the Internet at about 8 or 9 years old).
Do pilots “forcefully plant” rather than “flare” the plane under bad landing conditions?
I like SteveF’s idea as a matter of compassion for the people in Gaza who would want the leave. But the people who genuinely support Hamas and want to see Israel destroyed will probably not want to leave. So the problem will remain.
From NYTimes (paywalled?):
That would give a completely different meaning to : “From the River(Jordan) to the sea”
SteveF, planting vs flaring a landing is not a simple issue with jet-transports. Although I’ve been on plenty of rides completed with elegant flares,, it could be that getting on the reversers can be quicker with a plant land > shorter roll-out.
A flare introduces the possibility of low speed float during which the plane might be blown a bit off the intended path by crosswind gust, although I’m not sure about this with planes as big as the ones we’re considering.
Navy trains pilots to do plant landings although I’ve seen flares on carrier landings where you really should have been doing a plant (I think).
I’d complained about a landing in Jacksonville on a SAAB 340 (turbine twin) which was I thought a fairly violent plant to an ex navy fighter pilot who was certain she was ex-navy.
There are a lot of things you can do if you don’t have to pay for fuel or maintenance.,
Conspiracy theory!
The usual caveat applies… I have not a shred of evidence for this theory.
I am going to mingle two recent news stories.
First on USAID:
“The 2025 foreign aid budget included $268,376,000 allocated by Congress to support “independent media and the free flow of information.”
Second on MSNBC:
“Rachel Maddow staff to be let go as part of MSNBC overhaul”
and:
An MSNBC source said that the changes were not “widespread layoffs” but rather the reallocation of producers to support new programs and priorities.”
Now my theory;
MSNBC was receiving laundered funds from the $268,000,000 allocated by USAID. That explains why they employed left wing ,bigoted, and racist hosts who had a miniscule TV audience. They were being paid with USAID money to attack conservative ideology. Now that that funding is being cut off, MSNBC had to change its programming to actually try to attract an audience.
References:
https://rsf.org/en/usa-trump-s-foreign-aid-freeze-throws-journalism-around-world-chaos?mc_cid=4e8b353ce6&mc_eid=2f6d1b7690
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/25/msnbc-layoffs-rachel-maddow
According to the CBO, $277 billion per year of federal spending is going to benefits for illegals. Trump has issued an executive order to put a stop to that.
https://chroniclesmagazine.org/web/trump-ending-benefits-to-illegals-is-a-game-changer/
Maybe cutting a trillion per year out of the federal budet is possible.
Russell,
I think it’s more that Maddow’s ratings have tanked. I doubt that many at this site could stand anything she has to say, but for those of us who can, she drives us nuts. She somehow manages to compress 2 minutes of material into 30 minutes. Sort of a long rant. Maybe if she sang it, like a Handel aria, it might be more enjoyable, but alas. “All we, like sheep” for example.
She claims that the repetition helps her message sink-in more effectively.
Lawrence O’Donnell does the same thing. I hate it.
Joy Reid was let go after some truly astonishing racist observations about what whitey does and does not do.
Simone, of the long fingernails, which imply abhorance of real work, at least to me, has been promoted, so MSNBC’s leftie chops have not been abandoned. But then Michael Steele, ex Republican Chair has also moved to weekdays. He is very funny, and more the Republican I think i used to be.
The mean age of the evening viewers of this stuff apparently is 70.
The tragedy, at least to me, is that Alex Wagner, who I think is exceedingly bright, does not rant, and hosts interesting guests has been sent to the sidelines. If you can handle leftie-light and surprising insights into what’s happening, she’s worth watching. I wonder if she wasn’t sufficiently communist.
So I don’t think they are getting fed funds by any imaginable route.
John,
You are probably right. USAID media money getting turned off and MSNBC radically upending their programming is just a coincidence.
I like to let my imagination roam freely.
Another thought…
FOX news is losing a lot of their material. MSNBC hosts were punching bags for Fox hosts.
Russell,
I’m not surprised that MSNBC ratings have taken a tumble. Their viewers, including us, lost the election. Why would we continue to watch after its over?
It got really grueling to listen to their usual gang wring their panties night after night wondering where we went wrong without beginning to guess what the problem was.
They had no idea, nor did the party.
And “not centrist enough, too far left” doesn’t cut it without getting into specifics like WAY too much investment in issues of either no interest to most of the country, or actually repellent.
And BTW, how are you holding up suddenly by yourself? Jan and I ran a business together in late 80s – together 24 hours a day for seven years, then 10 years on the boat (close quarters) and now retired. So athought we knew each other in grade school, we’ve been together 24/7 almost 30 years in total.
It’s gotta be tought.
Thanks John,
Yes, it’s a difficult adjustment. I’m still feeling my way through it. Connie had been suffering for three years and I was the primary care giver. That was the most difficult period of my life. I was physically and emotionally a wreck.
But, I’m getting back into my old ways, first I’m cooking a lot!
The kids, grandkids and neighbors have been wonderful too.
Got a new car. Gave the used ones to the kids. There are a lot of financial and legal chores that also need tending to also.
anent my remark about the Dems having no idea. It isn’t all of them, to wit:
At the University of Chicago’s Institute of Politics last week, former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg was nearly apoplectic about the diversity spectacles at the recent Democratic National Committee meeting—where outgoing chair Jaime Harrison delivered a soliloquy about the party’s rules for nonbinary inclusion, and candidates for party roles spent the bulk of their time campaigning to identity-focused caucuses of DNC members.
From the Atlantic, which to my POV still has its head screwed on straight.
This may be paywalled; I have a subscription so don’t know. this is the most succinct appraisal of what ails the Democratic Party.
I may be one of the few that thinks having a two-party system is important and have been frustrated that neither of the present incarnations has much to do with my POV.
I think you guys who hate the Dems would hate them a little less if they adopted the writer’s reocommendations.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/02/democrats-dei-dnc-buttigieg/681835/
HaroldW,
I saw that, pretty funny. Likely some activist employee who needs to be found and very publicly fired. The thing that matters is how Apple responds to it and I think they are rolling out a very fast fix for it.
“Why would we continue to watch after its over?”
It’s a lot different than it was in 2016. Ratings went through the roof in Trump v1.0 with the resistance and Trump Russia Collusion. This time around is a profound demoralization.
Everybody overreads election results. TDS was a real thing and this time around is a better strategy. Wait for Trump to actually do something bad instead of trying to invent it, sell the snake oil, and screaming like your ice cream cone just hit the sidewalk.
It’s so bad that people simply don’t care what MSNBC and CNN have to say anymore. I find it endlessly amusing that the AP is suing the government for their God given right to closely cover the White House … because they did such a great job letting us know Biden was a walking corpse when they had that access, ha ha.
I would say many / most (?) people don’t really know the difference between Medicaid and Medicare. People are intentionally obfuscating Medicaid cuts as Medicare I think.
I imagine that almost all people who are upset about Medicaid cuts couldn’t tell you what the budget actually is or what the trend of that budget has been over the past 20 years.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/217090/medicaid-spending-and-forecast-in-the-us/
A lot of this may be the general healthcare cost trend.
Tom Scharf,
“It’s so bad that people simply don’t care what MSNBC and CNN have to say anymore. ”
Sure, most people don’t care what they say. The few times I have listened to video clips, what they say is either 1) factually wrong, or 2) grotesquely (and dishonestly) exaggerated. That is not a formula for gaining audience share. CBS is no different; the absurd claim that free speech allowed the Nazis to gain power is symptomatic of the problem: The MSM talking heads have not the faintest clue what is accurate and what is not. They are very ignorant AND at the same time very biased against all things Trump (or conservative!). It is a bad combination; it leads to bad ratings.
Tom Scharf,
“People are intentionally obfuscating Medicaid cuts as Medicare I think.”
Yes, of course. Now and always in the past. More dishonest MSM reporting. Medicare is hugely popular. Medicaid? Not so much.
Bezos says the WashPost opinion section will now focus on “personal liberties and free markets”. The opinion editor quit.
The legacy media is in disarray, in a good way.
Instead of the new social media / influencer tribe graduating to legacy media it is transitioning in the opposite direction.
Joy Reid was also fired but that particular type of show had kind of worn itself out.
We are reaching peak Republican … enjoy it while it lasts.
The Supreme Court todays look ready to rule that the majority isn’t required to meet a heightened burden in reverse discrimination lawsuits. I wasn’t even aware that this was required.
https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/supreme-court-reverse-discrimination-case-complaint-edab2cbf?st=QoBTdV&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
“The opinion editor quit.”
What? Advocating evil personal liberty? Evil market capitalism??
The opinion editor quitting is the best evidence yet that Bezos is starting to come to his senses. The beauty of it is that he is quite rich enough to fire them all and hire reasonable replacements…. a hundred times…. with it not impacting him much financially. The WaPo staff should think long and hard about who they are complaining about and how much he needs to worry about what they think.
I remember commenting at ATTP once (many years ago) about personal liberty….. I was attacked by the rabble, accused of not caring about poor people, and labeled a ‘liberty crusader’ or something similar. Which I guess was meant to mean something bad. It was bizarre, and yet, that remains exactly the mindset of the progressive left today: supporting personal freedom and liberty is considered evil, while hewing strictly to ‘socially responsible’ leftist views means you are, by definition, as pure as the driven snow.
There seems to me to be no daylight between Marx and today’s progressives. They are just as wrong as Marx was.
Tom Scharf,
That legal principle (effectively, there can’t be any racial discrimination against people in the majority) has blocked lawsuits against blatant discrimination for decades.
Lyndon Johnson was vocally supportive of discrimination against some (white people) to favor others (black people). This had not changed at all until the SC ruled against Harvard for its discriminatory admissions policies. If individuals of any race have equal legal standing to claim racial discrimination, then Lyndon Johnson’s blatantly racist philosophy is (finally!) doomed to disappear. 40 years too late, but better than never.
Tom
Has this nameless person started a substack yet? I’m sure Joy Reid can do the same. Otherwise, it will need to be OnlyFans.
lucia,
David Shipley, age ~61. English major, Williams (I think). Long history of editorial positions with ‘progressive’ publications. I doubt he will start a sub stack, if only because few would likely subscribe.
The State Department and USAID had a combined budget of just under $100 billion. Rubio has made $60 billion in cuts. That is mostly in multiyear grants, so it is not clear how much the cuts come to per year.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/rubio-cuts-60-billion-in-waste-from-state-department-usaid
A trillion in cuts seems more and more possible.
SteveF
https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/26/media/washington-post-opinion-jeff-bezos-david-shipley/index.html
Largely true. Running the opinion and then allowing comments and discussion can bring in readers. But just running the opinion with no rebuttal? Or only publishing selected readers comments two days later? That’s so two decades ago.
Shipley
Maybe he’ll try to write a book. Or maybe he thinks he can be one of those regularly invited pundits on news-adjacent shows. But I think those are going out of vogue. And he’ll be in competition with Joy Reid.
What are WAPO’s long standing principles? (Kinda sorta real question. I mean…. I honestly don’t know. I don’t know most news papers “principles”. I would think they should be reporting news truthfully, thoroughly, in as unbiased a way, prioritizing more important stuff over less important stuff and yada, yada. I’m not seeing how broadening the topics for the opinion page would go against that.)
Where they committed to “publishing a healthy diversity of opinion and argument”. I don’t really know since it’s behind a pay wall. My impression was “diversity of opinion” wasn’t really their strong suit, but my impression isn’t all that informed. After all: I don’t read WAPO.
I guess we’ll see how WAPO does. I think it’s a tough environment for “newspapers”.
I know I’m not going to subscribe to a ton of them. There is probably no change they can make that will cause me to subscribe.
John,
You recently commented on the Democrat’s feeble attempts to analyse what went wrong. Would you entertain a post-mortem from a mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging Conservative?
Here goes….
I think the modern Democrats are determined by three underpinning organizations; One, is the DNC and local Democrat organizations. Two, is the left-wing media [Yes, I include the media as an underpinning of the Democrat Party]. Three, is academia, the teachers union, and local school boards.
These three determining organizations for the Democrats have one glaring weakness:
They each lack diversity in their ranks. Oh they are careful to have diversity of skin color and queerness but they totally lack people with diversity of ideology. They not only are opposed to having conservative members in their club they don’t even like moderate Democrats or, God forbid, Libertarians. I had never heard any of these three organizations question the makeup of their membership. But as long as they are completely homogeneous in their structure they will never be able to identify with the current voter sentiments in the country.
They are doomed.
Russell, I think your point about academia and unions is valid, although I am almost (almost!) pleased to note that you didn’t include the universities.
But I don’t think that either the media or the DNC have much impact on political discourse or behavior. Certainly not in cable TV. The NY Times has been enraging the left for two decades and the WaPo only increased their ire. MSNBC? Since I quit watching it after my move to Spain, I think there are only eleven viewers left.
And since the DNC never does anything right, you should hope they are influential. But they’re not. Not really.
And you’re not a knuckle dragger, Russell. You’re just a conservative.
lucia,
“What are WAPO’s long standing principles?”
I don’t know that they have ever clearly stated those. But I have a working guide: if I find something profoundly stupid, they will very likely be all for it. If I find something socially destructive, they will likely find it critically important to expand. If I think something is a terrible waste of money, they will likely think it woefully underfunded. If I find something to be in clear conflict with the Constitution, they will likely think a ‘better interpretation’ of the Constitution makes it constitutional. I am sure a print version of the WaPo would be excellent for fish cleaning, but I don’t think I’ve ever encountered a print version on Cape Cod.
Russell,
Regarding your view of what ails the Democrats. You’ve got it 100%.
I would love to get back to a politics where I’m not forced to pick the least of the evils, as I see them.
Thomas, Your comment:
“ I am almost (almost!) pleased to note that you didn’t include the universities.”
I intended to include universities and colleges in my analysis but I worded it poorly.
The lack of introspection of these three Democrat stalwarts [DNC, media, and academia] is remarkable. They are looking outward for the root cause of the Democrats demise when they should be looking inward.
Their lack of diversity of membership is striking. We keep hearing that America is a big tent, but the three big poobahs of the Democrats are all monocultures in exclusionary clubs.
Another of your comments:
“And you’re not a knuckle dragger, Russell. You’re just a conservative.”
I think I qualify as a knuckle dragger… My bucket list includes a trip to Chicago to rough up Juicy Smollett and take his tuna sub away from him.
The Jamaicans have a wonderful expression;
“Chimping”
ie. dragging knuckles.
Another is “stepping up”
“Chimping”, I’m in!
The Opinion sections at large outlets still get a lot of views, but it seems that it is largely by the senior crowd and a shrinking market. I would suggest these sections are both the main attractor and detractor for older readers.
Opinion used to be largely news analysis but now it is mostly predictable tribes with hard boundaries writing very lazy screeds.
I assume one of the WashPost’s long standing principles is to make enough money to survive. I can only think that Bezos is playing the long game here, reversing the partisan whirlpool of death is very hard and gaining trust back of readers will take a while. I hope he is successful.
I’ve monitored the WashPost for 20 years (mostly just reading the front page and a few articles) and they have a point of view which is decidedly … DC beltway … coastal liberal. They have a token conservative and centrist columnist. They went psycho with Trump Russia Collusion, see the Pulitzer!
https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/staffs-new-york-times-and-washington-post
It should be noted that the new Substack / podcast entrepreneurs largely comment on stuff the news sides of the legacy media gather. Somebody has to do that work. We are not better off if the last man standing is the NYT which would then be even more emboldened to “shape” the news cycle.
The usual suspects are like rabid dogs for Republican administrations and turn in to protectors of the realm for Democrat administrations. It’s obvious to everyone and this needs to end more than anything.
I read that mean age of evening msnbc viewers was 70. And at least in this market, it’s assumed we all have psoriasis in some form or other.
before that it was old folks gingerly stepping on stones to cross a creek.
Russell,
The Democrats, like most political parties, value one thing even more than daily doses of performative ideology and that is the acquisition of power. They will toss DEI and trans ideology to the curb if they believe it is really getting in the way. The Republicans wisely tossed abortion to the curb.
I hear a lot of whining about cutting Medicaid but hardly a peep about dismantling DEI. There won’t be a mea culpa, it will just stop being talked about and largely left undefended.
I expect the Democrats to be competitive in 2026, the Republicans will both make mistakes governing and be the victim of world events / economic forces.
Pew: “In 2010, Republicans were more likely to say that colleges and universities were having a positive impact than a negative one on the country’s progress (58% positive, 32% negative).”
That seems like a thousand years ago. It’s 31% positive now for Republicans and not likely to get better. Academia cashed in their credibility for what in hindsight looks like a series of incredibly petty causes. As Megan McArdle said, criminally stupid.
Tom, Your comment:
“I hear a lot of whining about cutting Medicaid but hardly a peep about dismantling DEI. There won’t be a mea culpa, it will just stop being talked about and largely left undefended.”
I agree they might pretend publicly that they don’t care about DEI, but at their core the totally embrace it. The DNC, Media and Academia enforce it in their own membership. Remember the DEI fiasco of the DNC leadership elections.
When I see the media giving a prime time anchor to someone like Tulsi or RFKJ, I’ll believe they are reforming. [Or universities actively trying to hire conservative administrators and professors.] Till then, they are just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. It’s all just window dressing.
DEI is much more difficult to defend than a program like Medicaid. DEI is in obvious conflict with longstanding Federal law prohibiting discrimination based on race.
When a clear case DEI based discrimination makes it to the Supreme Court, which I expect will happen once the Court strikes the “background circumstances” rule, I am reasonably sure DEI in employment, government contracts, etc will be declared illegal.
Maybe that is why there is less screaming about Trump eliminating DEI in the Federal government.
Progressives are trying to pull Motte-Bailey with DEI. The difficulty is that too many people were very directly affected by DEI motivated policies. Lots of people at lots of companies and in government were personally subject to “training”. They had their own opinions policed. Some had to write “statements” unrelated to the actual research when writing grants. And so on and so on.
So the claims of “people are only asking for respect” and so on. The “patient” explanation of the literally meaning of the words just don’t fly because these are being presented to people whose lived experience was that DEI was code for more than something other than the literal meaning of the words. Sorry, but everyone knows that the literally meaning of the words doesn’t govern what political phrases mean. And no, a lot of the “pronouns” thing wasn’t merely about “respect” or even “kindness”. It was a power play. If it hadn’t been a power play, reactions to mistakes wouldn’t be so vitriolic. In turn, resistance of the “pronouns” thing became a power play.
“but at their core they totally embrace it”
But why? Because they intellectually believe in it or because they think it helps them garner power by collecting the disgruntled minority vote?
I propose it is the latter and once the assessment is that it hurts more than it helps they will jettison it. It will be replaced with a kinder, gentler version and sent to the back of class. Harris barely talked about it. There are some true DEI believers of course but I am optimistic that the Ibram X. Kendi days are over. Forced equity through overt discriminatory polices was unpopular.
A lame recent attempt at rebranding was to call it DEIA (add accessibility). That’s not going to work and I doubt the “A” people want any part of that.
lucia,
I think a lot of the DEI nonsense, like you must sign a statement of allegiance to DEI to be considered for a job, or you must speak in certain ways, etc. are so blatantly illegal that DEI can’t survive for long. Besides, most voters hate DEI; maybe another factor why there is less screaming by the usual subjects about ending DEI in the Federal Government.
Hiring committees at some universities were eliminating over half of applicants just by their diversity statements without even looking at anything else. They were being given ideology veto power. This went well beyond hiring in the social sciences.
These are mostly small ball internal academia battles but once that got out into the public it was very damaging.
Tom Scharf,
“But why? Because they intellectually believe in it or because they think it helps them garner power by collecting the disgruntled minority vote?”
Fair question. My take is that most progressives reject the idea that there can possibly be different life outcomes for different identifiable groups (education, employment, income, etc) for any reason other than discrimination. Pretty much every policy they advocate, from tax rates to education to hiring to promotion is based on a commitment to “equality of outcome” for different identifiable groups. So yes, I’d say they really believe in it.
Tom,
I think the three pillars of the modern Democrats believe it. They are all an ideological monoculture who have swallowed their Left Wing’s extremism hook line and sinker. For example, they think white America is evil and are collectively responsible for slavery.
SteveF
I agree most hate it. One of the things I’m saying is the hate it because of their lived experience with DEI programs. They can’t be gaslighted into thinking DEI isn’t want it actually is.
Tom Sharf,WSJ article you link
From the
Well, it very well might. Not only that, it might result in individuals discriminated against winning cases. That was never seen as a bad result if the people discriminated against were minorities.
I think the government can often point to a nondiscriminatory reason even if discrimination existed. There are so many reasons for hiring that you can usually find something about the person you hired that justifies picking them.
So yeah… there will probably be a controllable number of cases. But….how individual cases go will depend how an agency hired and some totality of circumstances revealed in the evidence. I also don’t know if stuff found in discover will be made public? If it is, that will have political implications for voters.
Russell,
I can’t help but believe the ladies on The View believe what they say. They honestly just look incredulous when they hear anyone say anything different. They have a lot of viewers, so I can’t help but think at least some people really share their views.
Lucia, I am not a regular watcher of The View, but from what I’ve seen, I agree. They have claimed what they believe is the moral high ground and yell at the rest of us who don’t agree with them.
It’s a curious way to win elections.
Today’s culinary experiment…
Beef chuck short ribs in the Instant Pot
Russell,
They didn’t this way. They also seem stunned.
I just see clips of shows. So what I see is a very biased sample.
Tell us how the short ribs work out.
Lucia:
“So what I see is a very biased sample”
Same here. I only see YouTube clips of them at their worst.
That having been said, The View is a microcosm of my point about the Democrat Party, to wit:
There is one member of the view who sits at the right side of the table. She occasionally tries to offer moderate [not Conservative] comments and they shout her down. There is no room in their church for heretics.
Which is ironic because they reject all things Christian.
And that is another reason they are doomed, “As of the most recent estimates, approximately 65% to 70% of the U.S. population identifies as Christian.” [Grok]
Another group they reject is Libertarians, “a reasonable estimate for self-identified libertarians in the U.S. today likely falls between 6% and 19%, with the lower end reflecting stricter criteria and the higher end capturing broader recognition of the label.“ [Grok]
When there is no room in your tent for large swaths of the US population, your political party is doomed.
Russell,
I recently saw a clip where at the end of a rant, a “The View” woman said something snide about nonWoke people wearing crosses while not being good Christians. Their guest — who looked and sounded middle Eastern–came back with a long retort, and ended by saying that she should try throwing the not-good Christian rant at a Muslim and told her she’d learn just how nice all those Bad Christians have been being to her!
She and the others just sat there blinking. ‘Cuz obviously, he wasn’t going to be cowed by being told he wasn’t a good Christian!!!
And, in fact, he probably would have a pretty good case that they’d sort of insulted him by insinuating that “good Christianity” was the “right” thing to be.
(Oddly, I’m not sure the person ranting about the “not good Christian” actually holds Christianity in high regard. But… whatever!)
It was pretty funny. Of course the biased sample I see does tend to be funny.
Lucia
I agree with the guest. If they mock Islam to a true believer they might wind up dead. ‘Turn the other cheek’ is a wholly Christian principle:
Matthew 5:39. The full verse reads:
“But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also”.
Lucia,
More ‘small tent’ Democrats thoughts:
“According to recent data from sources like the Pew Research Center, approximately 77% of U.S. Hispanics identify with some form of Christianity.” [Grok]
Also, Hispanics are the fasted growing subgroup of American voters and:
“In the 2020 presidential election, Donald Trump won about 32% of the Latino vote, according to exit polls like those from NBC News and AP VoteCast. Fast forward to 2024, and Trump’s share of the Latino vote jumped to around 45%, per NBC News exit polls, marking a record high for a Republican presidential candidate. This shift represents an increase of approximately 13 percentage points from 2020 to 2024 (45% – 32% = 13%).” [Grok]
I think these two facts are more than a coincidence.
Also they reject the Jews [only approximately 2.4% of voters]:
“A Gallup poll from 2024 showed only 33% of Democrats view Israel favorably, down from 63% three years prior, compared to 83% of Republicans. Critics, especially from Republican circles, point to this as evidence of growing hostility, suggesting it alienates Jewish voters who prioritize Israel support.”
Democrats will accept votes from these groups [Christians and Jews] at the polls, but don’t want to share a tent with them.
Right to life activists have a very firm view of things but what they don’t get to do is dictate what the RNC platform is. They can’t make Republicans accept a federal anti-abortion plan because it is bad national politics. What happens is the RNC quietly doesn’t support it.
The View ladies likely think DEI is just leveling the playing field or used for tiebreakers. They aren’t going to denounce (willfully ignore) the excesses because of tribal loyalty. They are going to pretend there are no losers in zero sum admissions. The hardcore activists then use that loyalty against them and push excessive policy positions and everyone loses on their side. It’s a trap and you need effective leaders to stop the insanity.
With nobody pushing back you end up with mandatory land acknowledgements at the beginning of meetings and performative pronoun craziness. Somehow nobody on their side can say out loud that taxpayer supported trans surgeries for illegal immigrants in prison is a bad idea.
The View is not trying to win an election. They would be delighted if 2% of the electorate were watching.
I suspect that the real problem for the Dems is that they are addicted to money. The people who gave them money, especially the big donors, have bought into DEI, open borders, etc.
Power is the real motivator, but money is seen as the path to power. They believe it matters a lot in winning elections, it is definitely vital to getting “leadership” positions in Congress, and of course all the consultants have a vested interest in telling candidates that they MUST raise a lot of money if they are to have a chance of winning.
MikeM,
“… but money is seen as the path to power. They believe it matters a lot in winning elections, it is definitely vital to getting “leadership” positions in Congress…”
Kamala outspent Trump by a wide margin, and I doubt more money would have help her win. The real issue is that your policies have to be 1) believed, and 2) believed by more people to be good for them and for the country.
The Dems failed on both counts. The borders were not secure, and every aware person knew that, and inflation had eaten into most people’s disposable income…. and they certainly were aware of that! Add to those issues advocating for highly unpopular positions like DEI, “gender affirmation medical treatment” for minors, woke indoctrination in public schools, abortion up to the moment of birth, and all the insane focus on LGBTQWERTY, and you have a formula for losing elections, no matter how much money you spend.
SteveF
Kamala outspent Trump is not the same as more money was spent in support of Kamala than was spent in support of Trump.
Is this statement also correct?
John,
I have not seen an accounting of the dark money spent. Do you have some figures?
Smart move:
“ DHS Secretary Kristi Noem announces a website for illegals to go and register
If they register, the Federal Government will help them go home and they will have the opportunity to be eligible to come back to America legally
“If they register and leave now, they may have the opportunity to return and live the American dream. If they don’t, they will face the consequences”
Secretary Kristi Noem gives the website URL in the video:”
https://x.com/wallstreetapes/status/1895109672203354334?s=61&t=7w4bCW3a8ve2DqoeniQatQ
SteveF,
I was thinking of the sum of campaign and pac money which is visible. It wouldn’t surprise me if the the Kamala sum exceeded the Trump sum.
john ferguson,
According to this site: https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2025/02/2024-in-review-total-outside-fundraising-for-presidential-candidates
Outside spending in support of Harris was $850 million, and for Trump $989 million.
According to Investopedia:
They don’t explicitly define “large contributions”, but I suspect than means contributions larger than $200, since small contributions are defined as less than $200. In any case, total spend by Harris does appear to be significantly higher than Trump’s.
You will also allegedly be able to buy citizenship for $5M. This is how it already works in many countries.
john ferguson,
Hollywood stars are expensive you know. 😉
Interesting note: Total votes cast were about 152 million; total spend was about $3.5 billion, or $23 per vote cast. Of course, that money wasn’t spent evenly….. mostly on swing states with maybe 15% of the votes cast. So, where the money was actually spent, it was a more significant expenditure…. like ~$125 per vote cast. It’s expensive to become President.
I think there is a point of diminishing returns after $1B of election money, you can only run that Trump trans ad so many times.
There is a lot of good in the world you can do spending your money elsewhere.
Tom Scharf,
You have always been able to gain permanent residency with a significant ($millions) investment in a legitimate business that hires people.
It has never before been possible to buy citizenship. Do you have a link?
Trump Proposes $5 Million ‘Gold Card’ That Would Grant U.S. Residency
https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/trump-proposes-5-million-gold-card-that-would-grant-u-s-residency-a639aa17?st=BoWm7o&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
Permanent residency, not citizenship but “Trump said the new program, which he hopes to roll out in the coming weeks, would eventually provide a pathway for full citizenship”
Beef chuck short ribs worked in the Instant Pot. Turned out a lot like pot roast. Not the same as all day in the charcoal smoker, but my smoker days are over.
Image:
https://x.com/rklier21/status/1895242757628973262?s=46&t=ZvqHpxBnQGny72gLoGhKXw
Wealthy people have always been able to gain US residency. See for example https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/permanent-workers/eb-5-immigrant-investor-program
Russell,
why are smoker days over?
You are a wealthy resident of China, and find a way to get $10 million out of the country….. might be nice to not have to worry about getting social credits or the government monitoring you, and to be able to say what you think. Trump’s ‘gold card’ invitation may be tempting.
John,
“ why are smoker days over?”
To much work. In and out to the back yard for 6-8 hours tending the fire. I enjoy the process but it just got to be too much work. I’m trying alternate ways of cooking meat. I might get a gas grill, but I have stopped the smoking adventures.
looks like the Epstein files will stay buried. Money talks.
Bondi gaslighted people and got caught.
Ouch.
It was weird; I opened a couple of the .pdf files, and all information was redacted. Stupid and ridiculous; Bondi released nothing. These are documents ~10 years old…. hard to imagine 95% of every document has to remain hidden a decade after the fact.
The question is: Is there documentary evidence that others were involved with under-age girls via the ‘Lolita Express’ (or by taking their own private jets to the US Virgin Islands to visit Epstein’s private island? Flight records should be available with every passenger’s name. If the FBI will not release the information that answers the single most important question, then they are just stone-walling.
Not sure what you guys are on about re the Epstein files. What do you expect? Real question.
They are obviously going to redact the names of the victims. We already have a lot of names of big shots who flew on Epstein’s plane. I am not sure what else to expect.
But it may not yet be over:
https://www.dailywire.com/news/kash-patel-responds-to-pam-bondi-letter-about-jeffrey-epstein-documents
Mike M,
I think it more than plausible that many wealthy visitors did not fly on Epstein’s plane, but on their own. It is the same ~20 minute boat ride to Epstein’s island, no matter how people arrived at the airport in Charlotte Amalie. My question is: Did the FBI do the kind of careful investigation which would track down visitors to the island who did not fly on Epstein’s plane? My guess is they didn’t, but I would be happy to be proven wrong.
I wouldn’t be surprised if someone got suicided soon
“Kicker Harrison Butker met with President Donald Trump in the Oval Office.”
Remember he was the Catholic footballer who gave a speech at a Catholic college extolling the rewards of motherhood and the Left tried to cancel him. He came out of it stronger than ever.
https://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/for-petes-sake/article301109239.html
The Epstein case kind of reminds me of the Duke Lacrosse case. People’s imaginations go wild without asking why high profile people would take such an enormous risk with their careers for almost nothing gained.
If you are in big money politics then I imagine people are trying to set you up for political gain, paranoia is appropriate.
One person doing something is possible, but an entire Lacrosse team? If you are going to do some dirty deeds, do them at places you control, like the Oval Office, ha ha.
OTOH Epstein’s death was definitely suspicious.
MikeM
I expect nothing. My neighbor posted something on Facebook when people were predicting all will be revealed. I predicted what we got would be underwhelming. I didn’t advance a theory about in what way it would be underwhelming. It could be there was simply much, much, less to the story than people have spun up in their imaginations. It could be that everything was just as bad but the evidence has pretty much vanished “poof!”
Yes. But that doesn’t mean there has to be a whole “Lolita Express”. Just one appropriately placed person with motive. Probably had to get some confederates, but it doesn’t mean there are one bajillion high placed people with things to hide. Epstein was involved in enough crud that would be sufficient explaination.
lucia,
Considering the initial hand-slap Epstein got for statutory rape, I would like some re-assurance that illegal acts by wealthy/influential people were not ignored (or not really investigated). Of course, it is possible Prince Andrew was the only other man who got involved in illegal activities with Epstein…… but I would be surprised if that were the case.
It’s getting absurd. They are trying a little too hard.
https://www.nbcnews.com/specials/federal-workers-fired-emotional-toll-doge-trump-elon-musk/index.html
Still waiting for the legacy media to write a story about how reducing federal spending is good … in any way … at all. Or maybe a story about some crazy useless federal job that we have no business funding at all. Or increasing administrative bloat. Or a comparison of job stability versus the private sector. Or how losing your crap job at the mall is also life changing.
Tom Scharf: “why high profile people would take such an enormous risk with their careers for almost nothing gained. ”
Arrogance and a sense of entitlement. Like Bill Clinton with Lewinski, Hillary and her homebrew server, Joe Biden taking bribes.
It would be good to know what the FBI knew at the time of the first Epstein case. But I am guessing that they didn’t know much, perhaps because they didn’t try. Not doing something does not leave much of a paper trail.
It would be quite something if Epstein kept a list of who slept with whom. But I think that extremely unlikely.
So it is quite possible that the Epstein Papers contain nothing new of much interest. Disappointing for some, but one can hardly blame Bondi for what does not exist.
“As of today, February 28, 2025, the launch window for SpaceX’s Starship Flight 8 is scheduled to open on Monday, March 3, 2025, at 5:30 p.m. Central Time (CT), which is 6:30 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) or 23:30 GMT. This updated target follows a delay from the initially planned date of February 28, 2025, with no specific reason provided by SpaceX for the postponement.”
Grok
I can see any one high profile person doing something crazy, but the chances of a group of high profile people independently making the same high risk mistake seems remote. The Illuminati.
I assume a lot of people may have gone to Epstein’s island because its a nice place to go.
Conducting testy foreign policy in front of reporters is not a good idea. Zelensky is making some critical mistakes here regardless of Trump being his usual graceful self.
” I have determined that President Zelenskyy is not ready for Peace if America is involved, because he feels our involvement gives him a big advantage in negotiations. I don’t want advantage, I want PEACE. ”
Just now, Trump
Full statement:
https://x.com/POTUS/status/1895544632651424102
Tom,
Yes, I just read about that. Good for Trump! Zelensky can go eff himself, if that’s how he wants to play. At the end of the day, not our monkeys, not our circus; not our problem.
I think Zelensky is a good candidate for someone who has a bit of life stress over the past few years so I could give him a pass for losing it briefly. However anyone paying the least bit of attention knows that disrespecting Trump publicly is not a path to success.
Trump wants people to take the knee and Zelensky has too much pride. That’s fine as it goes, but pride plus no air defense lets the Russians have air superiority.
Strategically IMO the US has gotten everything it needs out this conflict, Russia has been significantly weakened militarily and they would be crazy to cross NATO lines given this performance.
Zelensky has apparently been reading too much favorable press. Trump is right about one thing, Zelensky has no leverage.
Take the knee, get your equipment, go home, make a deal you know you need to. Now he (and Trump) are in a worse negotiating position with Russia. Own goal.
mark bofill,
I doubt that Zelensky can bring himself to negotiate a deal that ends the fighting if he thinks it is unfair… and to him anything other than Russia withdrawing to pre-2014 borders and paying to re-build Ukraine is unfair. Anybody that invested in a specific outcome can’t really accept (painful) negotiated compromises.
It looks to me like it will take a lot more killing and destruction, and a different Ukrainian leader, for a ceasefire to happen. Since there is no possibility Zelensky will hold elections, a different leader is a distant prospect..
Getting in a public shouting match with Trump (and Vance!) is just dumb. Count on Trump cutting off support to Ukraine completely. Maybe Zelensky believes the Europeans will step in and save him. I think he is sadly mistaken. Unfortunate that so many more will die before fighting stops.
If the White House dust up ends with Europe either putting up or shutting up it would be a good thing. It also points to the problems of the US getting involved in as many international conflicts as it politically can.
I do think that Zelensky remains popular in US and on the world stage and Trump and Vance will be the bad guys with most everyone outside the Trump domain. The neocons are already upset with Trump.
It was refreshing to see what politicians normally want hidden.
Steve,
As if fair has anything to do with anything here. Save us from idealistic leaders who can’t cope with reality! But I don’t disagree with your assessment. I don’t actually have a strong opinion about what is going on in Zelensky’s head; don’t much care.
Tom Scharf,
” That’s fine as it goes, but pride plus no air defense lets the Russians have air superiority.”
Yes, no Patriot missiles means Russia can target anything it wants in Ukraine, including government structure and political leadership. That shouting match was an imprudent move; motivated by anger, of course, but still imprudent. My experiences is: you should never make an important decision when angry.
Kenneth Fritsch,
“If the White House dust up ends with Europe either putting up or shutting up it would be a good thing. ”
Yes, a good thing. And I am going with shutting up. They do not have the means, neither politically nor militarily, to support Ukraine by themselves. I suspect they will somehow find their way to being a lot more pragmatic than they have over the past 3 years once they think about actually cutting domestic social spending.
The Neocons have been upset with Trump for a decade…. nothing new.
SteveF
Sure. My guess is you aren’t going to get this re-assurance. I’m not saying you shouldn’t want it nor that the American public doesn’t deserve it. I just think we’ll see pigs flying first.
Trump said the EPA budget would be cut by 65%. I had a feeling the EPA was going to get whacked pretty good. That kind of cut is likely not really manageable but a good goal.
By the time the EU finds consensus on where to plan to have a future meeting to consider manufacturing the precursors to military equipment the Russians will be in Kyiv.
mark bofill,
“Fair” has zero to do with ending the fighting; if you are always looking for “fair”, you are going to be very disappointed…. just ask John Kennedy.
“Fair” is in the mind of the beholder (to paraphrase Shakespeare badly). Unfortunately, precious few people seem to appreciate that.
Word is Zelenskyy was kicked out the white house. They gave his luncheon to the press
https://www.nbcnews.com/specials/federal-workers-fired-emotional-toll-doge-trump-elon-musk/index.html
Tidbits on the “does this entirely hold together?” front.
So she had two jobs. Either that or she’s been on leave as professor. Or the NSF thing is part time.
She still has one job.
Sounds like the professor gig is on going with current responsibilities. And she was in Penn doing that job.
Why was she devoting full time for half-time pay without benefits. Was she getting benefits from her professor job? And was that full time? or half time? Or just one course at a time? Doesn’t say.
Well, the notion she won’t be able to snag her W-2s is rather fanciful. Those are for 2024 and they have to give them to her. The rest? Dunno.
Her professor job is an active job. Also, it seems she is carrying that one out at her university which appears to be in Penn.
Didn’t vote for Trump. I think some of the things doing done abruptly are very concerning. (I’m worried about chicken flu work for flu being interrupted in general. I’m already paying $6/dozen for eggs, and chicken deaths are concerning.)
At least reading this woman’s story, I’m not entirely sure I think these layoffs at NSF specifically are “weakening” “us”. There is enough in the story that doesn’t make sense. Or that suggest maybe her NSF job wasn’t necessary to keep “us” strong.
And, she does seem to still have a job– professor teaching university students. But she lost some sort of position at NSF; that position was nominally half time.
The story tells us very little other than what she feels. She lost a job she liked. She feels like crap. Everyone would.
Tom Scharf,
LOL. You have captured the essence of the EC leadership. Unless Zelensky relents, Ukraine is toast.
Ukrainian Ambassador to the USA during the shouting match:
https://x.com/kaitlancollins/status/1895529604338892805
The photo says it all.
It’s certainly strange to have such a public display. Typically after a meeting without agreement, parties issue a statement saying that there was “a frank exchange of views”, or some such meaninglessness, and emerge to shake hands in front of the cameras.
Steve, I don’t think any decision was made today. Getting mad is a human condition and being phony about being mad is also a human condition. If today revealed more about how all sides feel about the issue under discussion all the better for the public and even the politicians for whom I usually have little regard.
As with all wars I would rather see this one over sooner than later, although I would not want us to go to war to get it over sooner.
Kenneth,
“I don’t think any decision was made today”
I suspect Trump may disagree with that evaluation.
What Zelensky should have done is waited until the press was not watching, and then let it rip… Trump and Vance would have argued, of course, against his position, but it would not have been a disaster for UIkraine. He (unwisely IMO) got into a shouting match with the guy upon which his country depends to not be over-run by Russia. It was a crazy choice. Anger is always a bad basis for decisions.
Zelensky is probably frustrated they are doing all the dying in order to fend off Russia. Things fell apart when he asserted Russia was coming for the US too (and implying they are doing the US a favor).
Meh, maybe. We have lots of nukes. I doubt Russia will be invading anytime soon.
Tom Scharf,
“We have lots of nukes. I doubt Russia will be invading anytime soon.”
Of course. The thing that Zelensky seems to not understand is that nobody outside Ukraine (and many inside Ukraine) is willing to die on this hill. There are many non-military ways that Ukraine might recover/control land the Russians take by war… given time. There are zero ways Ukraine will recover these lands by military force. He was a good leader for the early part of the conflict. He is a bad leader for ending the conflict. I doubt he understands that.
Lucia, Bonnie Green was the oldest of the laid-off group (60) with the others relatively young and probably sufficienty mobile, geographically, to find another job. Bonnie as you note by having two jobs would be probably the least of the group to suffer.
I was fortunate in my career to have never been laid-off, but I knew a number of people who were and even some that I made the decision to lay-off. Those people faced turmoil to various extents, but in almost all cases they ended up with as good or better job than one from which they were laid-off. In some cases it was a wakeup call that made them a better worker.
I would expect an article such as this one from an author who I suspect sees government as the be all and end all that puts it above the realities of those working in the private sector.
The hiring rate for the government or government related positions in the past few years has been high compared to the private sector. This can happen in the private sector as I know from my own experiences. When times are good hiring can go overboard. I used to warn of this to the company for which I worked for a long time and suggest delaying new hires or use temporary hires. The difference here between the public and private sector is that the private sector will be forced by the market to react to that mistake. I suspect the article author does not see this distinction or if it is acknowledged sees the government as a special case.
The President of the United States of America is insane.
I was waiting for Thomas to chime in. The entire Liberal universe is crying out with one partisan voice.
What’s the Liberal plan…. Keep giving Zelenskyy bullets and keep the war going!
A thoughtful analysis from a relatively neutral party, The Times of India:
How Trump-Vance-Zelenskyy dispute led to the collapse of a c ..
Read more at:
http://m.timesofindia.com/articleshow/118646837.cms#?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
Why not, instead, listen to the American people? They’re not all liberals.
“What is your attitude towards Putin?”
Favorable 11%
Unfavorable 78%
Should US trust Vladimir Putin?
Yes 9%
No 81%
Give Zelenskyy bullets and tell him to keep going? Hmm. I think Zelenskyy has a better idea. Ceasefire backed by security guarantees.
I’ll admit that I am too dogmatic about Trump. He’s not necessarily insane. The alternative–that he really is Agent Kresnov recruited by the KGB in the 80s–is actually just as bad, if not worse.
Anybody who can defend Trump and his lickspittle toady Vance is participating in the undermining of the free world.
You all have been free with your criticism of me and my opinions for quite some time–ever since the theme of this blog moved on from climate change–and I have tried to bear it with whatever grace I could muster on a given day.
But anyone who sides with Trump/Vance after this has earned a lifetime of contempt from me.
Thomas,
Say it ain’t so! My dear friend and mentor, who I hold in such high esteem, holds me in contempt! I weep tears like rain.
Thomas Fuller,
I think insane isn’t quite right. My current take is “bitter old fool”
If only the elite manhattanites had gathered him into their bosoms 50 years ago, maybe none of this would be happening.
May I remind everybody that wars are costly. England had to pay for the materials they bought from the US during WWII. The last payment was around 2006. If it was not for Lend-Lease, they would have had to negotiate peace in 1941.
P-E Harvey,
I understand that the Brits are thde only ones who paid us back, and are quite proud of having done so.
Fuller supports a ceasefire now?
The US is split on Ukraine and the trend is not in Zelensky’s favor.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/02/14/americans-views-of-the-war-in-ukraine-continue-to-differ-by-party/
There’s a new sheriff in town and he wants to end the foreign war. This is a position the left used to love. Russia may not agree so we shall see. The alternative is that Ukraine continues to endure a brutal meat grinder with little hope of pushing the Russian army out of Ukraine without NATO boots on the ground which will be very high stakes, very high indeed. The lines may be almost static but both sides are taking a lot of casualties.
If I was Russia, sensing family squabbling, I would not agree to a ceasefire in hope Ukraine’s support collapses. The open spat was unwise but may still yield favorable outcomes from Europe or Ukraine agreeing to a ceasefire on less favorable terms.
Couple of things come to mind on the recent Oval Office episode.
Consider:
1. Ukraine doesn’t want ceasefire without a security guarantee;
2. US wants a ceasefire before major deals with Russia;
3. Russia doesn’t want a ceasefire without its own security guarantees;
4. The US doesn’t want to give Ukraine a security guarantee.
Trump wants the US money flow to Ukraine to end and Ukraine won’t agree to end the war without a US security guarantee.
Was the episode in the Oval Office a pre planed ambush to give cover to the administration to walk away from Ukraine?
Thomas, your comment:
“ But anyone who sides with Trump/Vance after this has earned a lifetime of contempt from me.”
Well I guess this is goodbye then.
I thought Trump was childish in how he handled that outburst by Zelenskyy, but I support his efforts to end the war and claw back some of the money we invested.
Ukraine should just make a mineral deal like every other country under existential duress and then not pay it back later like every country previously under duress. These things are almost always forgiven.
Ed, your comment:
“Was the episode in the Oval Office a pre planed ambush to give cover to the administration to walk away from Ukraine?”
You may be right. No facts that I have read contradict this theory.
OTOH, Sheryl Attkisson has an opposing theory:
“My hot take? Zelenskyy was encouraged by certain European leaders to take on Trump in front of the media.
It may have backfired.
Hear me out.”
Full thread:
https://x.com/sharylattkisson/status/1895590138669056370?s=61&t=7w4bCW3a8ve2DqoeniQatQ
Ukraine security guarantees will come from Europe and will be worth exactly as much as the paper they are printed on.
Any guarantee from Putin regarding Ukraine is also unworthy of trust.
The US doesn’t need to promise anybody anything and the relationship with Ukraine should be transactional. We have been allies of convenience. The EU needs to get off the dithering sidelines and either jettison Ukraine or protect them.
I don’t think Trump is bluffing, he will cutoff an obstinate Ukraine. I think Zelensky is misreading the situation to his disadvantage.
Thomas “Biden just has a stutter. How very dare you criticize an old man for a physical infirmity that wasn’t a problem until the media told me it was yesterday” Fuller, you ran away. Get over yourself. You’re not all that. Your religion has crippled your objectivity.
You learned nothing from the shenanigans going on in the climate scene, which was just a microcosm of the corruption you swim in “for the greater good”. You guys are so wedded to your assumed good causes, you goosestep down the road to hell with a massive smile on your face and contempt for everyone who tries to tell you your destination. You know better! You chose to jump off that road, but you will happily march down the next. Hopelessly naive, but still think you can lecture others on right and wrong.
Why did it takes 3 years for the media to start oscillating between Zelensky and Zelenskyy?
Russell
If your link is correct ….“Zelenskyy was encouraged by certain European leaders to take on Trump in front of the media. It may have backfired.”…
European leaders would then be even more incompetent than I would have expected.
Trump’s emotions run both very cold and very hot. Intentionally pissing off Trump seems to me to be the action of a fool especially if you want something from him.
NYT: “European leaders lined up to support Ukraine after the blowup between the two leaders. Volodymyr Zelensky sought to appeal to the U.S. with gratitude.”
All good.
This is my impression of Trump diplomacy from Fargo:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2LLB9CGfLs
Tom,
Once a real estate hustler, always a real estate hustler!
I kind of see this as similar to the Biden has dementia coverup. Everyone keeps telling themselves a fantasy that Ukraine is going to beat back the Russian army until it is all laid bare in a clarifying moment and then people shift.
I like Star Wars as much as anyone but The Empire is going to win most military conflicts in the real world. In my fantasy world Ukraine wins this.
If Ukraine wants to keep hammering at the Russian army that is fine by me but it is a waste. Trump will never get any credit but he is doing Ukraine a favor if he can force a settlement.
Tom,
“ If Ukraine wants to keep hammering at the Russian army that is fine by me”
It’s fine by European leaders too.
They are collectively petrified of facing the Russian army without the US.
Ukrainians fighting Russians using US dollars is the dream scenario for Europe.
It seems clear to me that Zelinsky started the fight. So he must have done it on purpose. I am still thinking about why.
Russell, you posted a quote from Sheryl Attkisson with a link to the “full thread”. But all I see at that link is what ypu quoted. How do I get the rest of the thread?
For three years, Zelensky has been treated like god by the Biden Administration, European leaders, the US media, the entire Democrat Party, much (most?) of the Republican Party, and most of the US public.
Maybe Zelensky’s plan was to start a fight with Trump in order to start a public outcry against Trump, with the Dems handing out torches and pitchforks, the media screaming for blood, and the Republicans running for cover. And he thought that would force Trump to back down. Big blunder.
I don’t know how the public opinion battle will play out, but 50-50 seems like a good guess. I do know that Trump won’t back down. Compared to Trump, a rhinoceros has thin skin.
Mike M: “Russell, you posted a quote from Sheryl Attkisson with a link to the “full thread”. But all I see at that link is what ypu quoted. How do I get the rest of the thread?”
The “full thread” includes the subsequent 5 (?) posts by Attkisson at Russell’s link.
Sorry Mike,
Try this:
https://x.com/sharylattkisson/status/1895590138669056370?s=46&t=ZvqHpxBnQGny72gLoGhKXw
“The “full thread” includes the subsequent 5 (?) posts by Attkisson at Russell’s link.”
Nope. All I see is the first post. Do I need to do something to see the rest?
Zelensky trying to make this a partisan issue with Republicans in control would be a grievous error.
CNN confirms Zelensky was asked to leave the WH.
More hilarity from the EU: Europeans scramble to show leadership of the ‘free world’ as U.S. alliance fractures
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/trump-europe-military-defense-ukraine-putin-merz-macron-nato-zelenskyy-rcna193992
“It will take “five years as a minimum” for Europe to “fully deter Russia without any U.S. contribution,” said Luigi Scazzieri, assistant director at the Centre for European Reform, a London think tank. “You can probably get something that fills a large part of the gap in two to three years — but only with a lot of urgency.””
That would now be two years … if you had initiated this when Russia started a land war in your back yard. The only thing urgent in the EU is tweeting out platitudes.
“Since World War II, the U.S. has agreed to protect Europe’s declining militaries against Russia on the understanding that in return it has been able to spread hard and soft American power through the continent and beyond.”
Hmmmm….
Russell,
I still only see the first post. I have had that happen before, I have no idea why. Come to think of it, I may never have seen a thread on X.
You have to be logged into an X account to see replies and extra posts, otherwise you only get the first post.
Thanks Tom. That explains it. I have no X account.
Mike,
Try a Search for Sharyl Attkisson. This post is (was) the first one.
Here is a take on yesterday’s kerfuffle from a Polish diplomat.
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2025/03/a-perspective-on-the-oval-office-blowup.php
Short version: Zelensky started the fight on purpose.
Lindsey Graham (one of Ukraine’s strongest supporters in the Senate) thinks Zelensky should resign. Ted Cruz thinks Zelensky may be out of office in a short time. He may be right.
I imagine military leaders, and front-line soldiers in Ukraine are looking at this situation a little differently than the NYT and the Bulwark. I honestly don’t understand how Zelensky thought he (or Ukraine) would benefit from shouting at Trump and Vance. It is a real head-scratcher.
“Today it became clear that the free world needs a new leader,” the E.U.’s foreign minister said.
Who might that be? Someone from the EU? Or maybe China’s Xi Jinping? The guy is delusional.
What I believe the world needs is an EU that pays it own way on defense, stops trying to force everyone else to follow its rules, and doesn’t block food imports with high duties. The EU is a lot like California, but without the good weather.
Zelensky dropped the ball and it is up to him on how to handle it from here. He can repair relations if he wants.
There is a chance that Russia refuses a deal and then Trump responds by increasing aid to Ukraine, that will be his leverage with Russia. Like in Gaza he is telling the parties to make a deal or it will get worse for both of you.
I don’t prejudge Trump based outcomes until they happen. If things are stalemated then he inserts chaos. It doesn’t always work.
I am convinced that the US needs to stop being the world cop and let other regions of the world handle their differences without us. Our involvements never turnout favorable for the US.
The US strong point is our economy that does better than others because of a relatively freer economy. What the US needs to work on is making it even more free of goverment regulations and taxes – including not imposing tariffs. This means setting an example for the rest of the world and forgetting about forcing something down the throats of those yet to be converted. Let them waste their resources on wars if that is what they want.
Ukraine’s main problem is that if all current support stays the same, Ukraine will still be ground under.
Trump will not increase support beyond that given by Biden. Likely quite a bit less.
As Trump pointed out, Ukraine has very few cards to play and Russia holds the winning hand.
Kenneth,
I mostly agree with you. I like that Trump is reducing regulations and taxes. I like that Trump refuses to be the world’s cop. He will act as a peacemaker, but the peace will have to be policed by Europe. I disagree in that I think there is a place for carefully considered tariffs.
Watching some of the latest Ukraine stuff, I am struck by a lack of talk about how the war can end. The US must help and show their strength against Russia, but they don’t say what that looks like…
I think Zelensky is still holding out for boots on the ground and full scale NATO vs Russia war.
Tom Scharf,
How can Trump make it worse for both Hamas and Israel at the same time? I’ll be happy to munch on anything you can think of.
Thomas W Fuller
MARCH 1, 2025 AT 8:01 AM
Why not, instead, listen to the American people? They’re not all liberals.
“What is your attitude towards Putin?”
Favorable 11%. 78%
Should US trust Vladimir Putin?
Yes 9%. No 81%
Give Zelenskyy bullets and tell him to keep going? Hmm. I think Zelenskyy has a better idea. Ceasefire backed by security guarantees.
I’ll admit that I am too dogmatic about Trump. He’s not necessarily insane.
–
Thomas, nobody mentions the elephant in the room.
Nuclear weapons.
Putin has them.
You have them .
You are deliberately encouraging actions that could, if successful, lead to not only more Ukrainian and Russian deaths but to the use of Nuclear weopons on European soil and raid the risk of WW3.
Finding a peace settlement is not easy with so much grief already on all sides.
Only one side can win in anything less than a major WW3, Russia.
–
It is a shadow game played out killing millions of men over shadow pressure points.
Russian oil, NATO membership, Mediterranean access, acres of wheat to feed populations.
–
Go ahead defending it.
Killing millions for what?
Seriously.
No high morals here.
No appeasement is such a dirty word.
Just 2000 more bodies every day while the pigs in Brussels gorge themselves at the EU tables.
Have a good day.
John,
Trump’s ramblings were unspecified so it is reading tea leaves. I think it came down to either Israel / Hamas agree to a ceasefire or the US was going to dictate terms that nobody was going to like. If Hamas didn’t like it then Israel would be given free reign or the US would enter the war aggressively, If Israel didn’t like it then the US could limit military support.
Basically if you children can’t negotiate a settlement between yourselves then you are both grounded.
The US doesn’t really have a lot of leverage with Russia, but they can likely get Ukraine to accept a “reasonable” ceasefire. Whether Russia is worn out enough is a question.
Trump seems to think he has leverage with Russia. Maybe he is bluffing. But if he does have leverage, he is probably not going to talk about it publicly, at least not until negotiations are done.
Mike M,
“Trump seems to think he has leverage with Russia. ”
May Trump has a video recording of Putin cavorting with peeing prostitutes. 😉
More seriously, the possible lifting of economic sanctions gives Trump some leverage.
I think the Russian weaknesses on the battlefield have been laid bare. He probably wants to fix them and a functioing economy would be very beneficial for that.
And for Thomas, The Guardian (far left UK rag) was reporting that the EU was spending more on Russian oil and gas than on sending aid to Ukraine. Ironic, no?
DaveJR,
The Europeans have substantial reserves of shale gas they could recover quickly if they would allow fracking….. they won’t. The Europeans are simply not serious about anything except very high taxes, generous redistribution of those high taxes, and adding endless, stupid, pointless, destructive regulations on most every human activity.
But Tom Scharf, I cannot imagine any terms that both Israel and Hamas would hate simultaneously.
Maybe Trump has thought of something that I can’t think of, but ???
Trump left DC yesterday with some of the boxes the FBI seized from Mar-a-Lago, he brought them back.
What a troll.
Tom Scharf,
LOL. You could have guessed that was going to happen after Trump fired everyone at the National Archives two weeks ago who had anything to do with the Mar-a-largo raid. Trump doesn’t forgive or forget. I have no doubt those folks thought getting the execrable Merrick Garland and his corrupt FBI involved was the right thing to do. Unfortunately for them, enough voters thought it was a witch hunt for Trump to return to office. Here is the weird thing: They all had to know Trump would fire them; they can’t be so dumb as to not know that. I will never understand why they didn’t resign before Trump took office in January. Blatantly political acts are not what they should be involve in.
Maybe Zelensky should have been advised of Trump’s ability to hold a grudge before getting into a shouting match with Trump on live TV.
SteveF wrote: “Trump doesn’t forgive or forget.”
Not true. RFK Jr. sued Trump multiple times. Rubio, DeSantis and Burgum ran against Trump . Vance said some very nasty things about Trump back in 2016. I have no doubt that Gabbard has made some very critical comments about Trump. He is perfectly happy to forgive and forget, but only if you stop opposing him.
Mollie Hemingway comments on the Zelensky blow up:
https://x.com/MZHemingway/status/1895872853930545214
Maybe there is nothing there; note the “may have”. And she does not say where she got that info. But if true, that is a VERY serious charge. A bunch of out-of-office Obama/Biden people inserting themselves into negotiations between the President and a foreign government? No way is that appropriate.
Mike M,
“He is perfectly happy to forgive and forget, but only if you stop opposing him.”
You are right. It is just that most people who actively oppose him never stop that opposition. I am sure that includes most of the permanent bureaucracy.
Mike M,
“And she does not say where she got that info.”
That is a big problem with her report. I give it a 2 on a scale of 1-10 for credibility.
That said, if Rice, Blinken, et al actually were coaching Zelensky, that is highly inappropriate, if not illegal. If they were, and someone like Blinken, with no security clearance, was given access to classified information about the negotiations with Zelensky, then other shoes will likely drop.
My guess is that Hemingway got her information from an anonymous source that she trusts, but she has no collaboration.
If Rice, Blinken, etc. were giving advice to a foreign government on how to influence the US government, then that makes them foreign agents for the purpose of FARA. If they have not registered as such, then they are in violation of the law. Even if Hemingway can not confirm the report, maybe DoJ can. It might get interesting.
The big difference between the two incidents is that the Zelensky spat was just business. The raid on Mar a Largo was distinctly personal. I seriously doubt Trump will hold the attempt against him, but what Zelensky wants in “security guarantees” is not going to happen. Placing business interests there, instead of military, seems like a good compromise and probably far more beneficial to Ukraine in the long run.
At this point any 12 year could assess making Trump “blow up” will not be beneficial to their future prospects so I doubt Zelensky went down that path. He may not like Trump very much but he has much bigger fish to fry with the Russians.
I could hear an argument he did this to make the Europeans get off their butts but I’m guessing they go right back to bureaucratic dithering forthwith.
Occam’s razor says he was having a bad hair day. Like I said before I’d be more than willing to cut him some slack here. Trump’s going to be Trump, I don’t give him slack but accept he is who he is and still hope for good outcomes.
I completely understand why Zelensky wants security guarantees from the US, I don’t understand why we would do that.
From Putin’s telling it’s why the war started in the first place (pseudo NATO encroachment) but we don’t need to cover that again. I don’t think Russia would accept that and choose to fight.
We can probably have détente with the status quo and get a ceasefire, but not much else.
Firefly’s Blue Ghost becomes the second commercial spacecraft to successfully land on the moon, and the first to do so right side up. That should count for something.
https://x.com/Firefly_Space/status/1896158394295390367/photo/1
Firefly has a string of successes indicating they might eventually get big boy pants and challenge SpaceX.
Polish PM Donald Tusk speaking before flying to London for today’s Ukraine emergency summit:
“500 million Europeans are asking 300 million Americans to defend them against 140 million Russians (…) Europe today lacks the belief that we are truly a global power”
https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1896198819341344892?s=61
Tom Scharf: “Why did it takes 3 years for the media to start oscillating between Zelensky and Zelenskyy?”
Apparently, the Romanization of his name has been at issue since he was first elected, as indicated by this article from 2019.
I suspect that his preference for -skyy rather than -sky is intended to emphasize a Ukrainian choice rather than a Russian one (as in “Kyiv” vs. “Kiev”). Unless it’s a subtle way of suggesting that he’s wise. 😉
Even if The US pulled out completely Ukraine could fight on. War has a way of focusing people. They would need to change tactics but could still make Russia pay dearly for their advances. I don’t think an occupation of western Ukraine will go smoothly for Russia.
Tactically if Russia finds a solution for Ukraine’s drones then everything changes on the battlefield.
I agree with Tom here. I saw Zelenskyy start to boil when Vance got into the discussion. There were eye rolls and then he could not contain himself. If that were a family/freindly discussion I would not have been surprised by his reactions. Vance baited him as I have seen done in family/freindly discussions.
We see Zelenskyy in situations were he is not reacting with other people but rather getting standing ovations before making a speech interupted with ovations.
I came out of the discussion with nothing new developing. The mineral rights agreement would not have meant much without a tightly bounded contract and even that could have been broken/ignored at a later day. The only change I see is Zelenskyy and Europe talking about a closer arrangement and without the US domination. This should have happened from day one of the war and something I would very much favor.
As kind of an aside, I finally signed up for X so I could follow all the X links from here. My first X extended look was talk about the White House dust up. I thought the aim of many of the posters was to say something silly or prepostorous in as fewest words possible.
I think we over rate our politicians’ abilities to come up with complicated strategies. The principle of parsimony says that the typical politician has the single strategy of what will make me look good in the moment.
I also think that the world would be pleasantly surprised by the US retiring as the world cop.
It took me a minute to remember Harold is a yys guy.
Kenneth,
“I also think that the world would be pleasantly surprised by the US retiring as the world cop.”
The world? Hell, I would be pleasantly surprised. IMHO, the USA needs to stay out of catastrophes not of it’s making, and especially catastrophes where the USA has not the slightest strategic interest, oh say, like Ukraine and Iraq. As I have said before, the correct response to September 11 was to destroy as much of Afghanistan as quickly and cheaply as possible, targeting the Taliban government and all related infrastructure, followed by a stern warning that the next time would be many times worse. No need to try to create a new Islamic Switzerland. All the rest in that part of the world has been a multi-trillion dollar fiasco.
I will never understand why idiots like Nuland and Co. got to instigate a senseless war in Ukraine, with hundreds of thousands of deaths, and will never pay a price for their stupidity.
“Europe today lacks the belief that we are truly a global power”
A belief well founded in reality, in experience, and in real time observation. Can they ever change? Not soon, if ever. The people in charge (essentially the EC and the sniveling governments that support the EC) refuse to take responsibility for the catastrophe of endless regulations and lost opportunities that is the essence of the EC.
Steve, I agree with your assessment of what ails the EU economically, but when it comes to defense I think the US has to take some blame for allowing NATO to become too dependent on it. It never has a good outcome when nations or individuals become dependent on (another) government.
I think Ukraine will suffer from that dependency by believing there was no limit to the US/NATO involvement in the war. I would think their decisions on early peace talks and agreements would have been very different without that dependency and assumptions of more. Unfortunately, there were Neocons and Democrats in this country pushing for much deeper involvement by the US that could have influenced Ukraine thinking and expectations.
Kenneth ,
“Unfortunately, there were Neocons and Democrats in this country pushing for much deeper involvement by the US that could have influenced Ukraine thinking and expectations.’
Sure, and it was both stupid and destructive for the USA. There is no way the USA has the interests in Ukraine that Poland or Romania (or a half dozen other countries in Europe have) have. Unfortunately, there were Neocons and Democrats in this country pushing for much deeper involvement by the US that could have influenced Ukraine thinking and expectations. We have (almost) no dog in this fight, beyond the (emotional) desire for bad people (dogs) to not gain too much. Unfortunately, there were neocons and Democrats in this country pushing for much deeper involvement by the US that could have influenced Ukraine . That is not going to work.
RPJ relates a rather sad and bizarre tale of being forced out of the University of Colorado
https://reason.com/2025/03/02/how-to-get-rid-of-a-tenured-professor/
The only thing missing here is a red stapler.
The version from his Substack:
https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/how-to-get-rid-of-a-tenured-professor?utm_source=publication-search
Kenneth Fritsch, I’m glad at least one person got that. If I’ve made one person groan, then my hard work ain’t been in vain for nuthin’.
HaroldW,
I groaned a little too. When I make jokes like that my kids just roll their eyes.
Tom Scharf,
I am shocked (Shocked!!) that people on the left tolerate no opposing viewpoints, and punish anyone who disagrees with them. Never heard of that before.
Joking aside, only broad and deep public defunding (withholding student loan guarantees) is ever going to make any difference with private universities. Public universities can be forced to change in states where the governor and legislature are not controlled by leftists. That means about half could potentially be forced to allow diversity of views. The other half (in states controlled by Democrats) never will be forced to change except by cutting loan guarantees.
The surprising thing is that professors like Roger Pielke don’t file law suits against their universities. Those who act unfairly need to be punished, or those unfair actions will only grow more frequent.
I think academia needs to get out ahead of this because defunding is coming. They have had plenty of time to fix their house from within and are oblivious. This can’t continue.
The US has the strongest educational institutions in the world and the people who run them are burning credibility at a high rate for petty causes. If they think they can’t be DOGE’d they are wrong.
Starship 8 launch info from Grok:
If you’re looking to view the Starship Flight 8 launch, scheduled for today, March 3, 2025, from SpaceX’s Starbase facility near Boca Chica, Texas, here’s what you need to know based on available information and general knowledge about Starship launch viewing:
Launch Details
March 3, 2025
Time: The launch window opens at 6:30 p.m. EST (5:30 p.m. CST local Texas time, or 3:30 p.m. PST). SpaceX has not specified the exact duration of the window, but previous flights, like Flight 6, had a 30-minute window, so it could extend to around 7:00 p.m. EST.
You can watch the Starship Flight 8 launch live through several streaming options:
SpaceX Official Stream: SpaceX will broadcast the event on their website (spacex.com) and their X account (@SpaceX). The livestream typically begins about 30 minutes before liftoff, so expect it to start around 6:00 p.m. EST (2300 GMT) if the schedule holds.
Space.com: They often simulcast SpaceX’s feed, available on their website or YouTube channel (VideoFromSpace).
Third-Party Streams: Channels like NASASpaceflight, Everyday Astronaut, and LabPadre offer live coverage with commentary and additional perspectives. These are usually hosted on YouTube and provide multi-camera views of the Starbase site.
The CBO’s estimate of loan delinquency:
“Around $221 billion of that cost comes from expected losses on the $1.1 trillion in student loans that the federal government will issue between 2024 and 2034.”
So the EXPECTED rate of taxpayer losses on student loans comes to 20% of the total loaned amount. That is just crazy, and needs to stop. Qualification for a Federal student loan needs to be revised to screen out applicants who are at high risk of not paying off their loans. A DOGE review of loan repayment rates (by school, selected major, SAT scores, high school class rank, etc) should indicate clearly where the taxpayers are likely to not be re-paid.
The school themselves should pay part of the defaults if we are going to continue with the same system. Alternatively schools could be limited to how much federal loan revenue they can accept depending on loan repayment results.
There is zero incentive for a school not to admit a marginal student with a large federal loan in a major that is unlikely to pay off.
Tom
Yes. This should be the case because it would give schools the incentive to
(a) admit only students likely to graduate based on information like GPA and standardized test scores or any other relevant item*,
(b) reduce majors with high default rates and do so at a granular level (it’s not just “humanities” vs “STEM”. I strongly suspect some humanities majors have better job prospects than others). and
(c) encourage schools to have good programs to help students find jobs.
*The reason I say “other relevant item” is that some majors– e.g. music legitimately screen by specifically looking at musical accomplishments. You can really truly play trumpet? Transpose music? GREAT! Math? Not such a biggie.
People who are good at music can make a living in music. Otherwise, they need to get their teaching degree. But if they are going to teach music, we hope they are still pretty good at music!
Russell,
Re Starship test, thanks!
NYT: “Last week, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security secretary, Kristi Noem, announced that Customs and Border Protection had apprehended only 200 people at the southern border the Saturday before — the lowest single-day number in over 15 years.”
If people * believe * they won’t be allowed in, they don’t show up at the border. Just showing political will drops crossings dramatically.
Tom,
Also believing that people are watching for them and will send them home is a disincentive to coming. So are other things.
Tom,
“ If people * believe * they won’t be allowed in, they don’t show up at the border.”
I agree. The increase in the number of border guards is tiny relative to the size of the border. It’s the US attitude change that accounts for most of the change.
Also helping, I think is DOGE defunding NGOs that were assisting the illegal migration.
Also, Trump’s attitude is influencing other governments to not assist.
“…only 200 people at the southern border the Saturday before — the lowest single-day number in over 15 years.”
Maybe it is because CBP stopped giving illegal immigrants aps for smart phones…. and a smart phone to those who don’t have one. 😉
Or maybe it is because they really don’t want to make the trek on foot, only to be flown back to where they started.
Surprisingly enough, people (including illegal immigrants) respond to incentives…. both positive and negative.
Mark,
You are welcome, I intend to watch while eating dinner.
Grok is astounding.
I asked if I could add peas to pasta sauce.
Grock responded and asked what kind of sauce I was making.
Full conversation below.
https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5_91fe4f8d-42eb-4cf6-9db2-6f6b1346b713
So half the internet tells me I can drill steel using WD-40 as a cutting oil, and the other half tells me absolutely not. What do y’all think?
I’m likely going to try anyway, and I’m not doing controlled experiments so it’s unlikely I will independently determine if this is a good idea or not. I could probably drill the hole using anything or nothing as a lubricant and it’d still be fine; I expect the difference to be in the rate of wear of my drill bit. But still. Any thoughts on this?
mark bofill,
My experience is that a light oil like WD40 will be fine for ferrous metals, and probably OK for stainless. You want to use something else for aluminum, although WD40 would for sure be better than nothing. Tapping requires cutting fluid much more than simple drilling. Stainless requires a controlled rate for effective drilling due to it’s tendency to “work harden”… if the drill bit just beats on the surface of the stainless rather than smoothly cutting, then the metal will harden in that spot and become more difficult to drill. The fluid used with aluminum is mainly to keep the metal from getting too hot and losing it’s temper (it gets mushy and tends to gall/smear rather than cut cleanly).
Thanks Steve
Russell Klier
March 3, 2025 at 2:57 pm
Grok is astounding.
Yeah, Russell, but how did it taste? I like the Grok advice except for putting peas in Marinara sauce.
I put cherry tomatoes in my shrimp linguine sauce the other night and have done that before. I personally like it but know it is a matter of individual taste.
Starship flight animation prominently shows Gulf of America!
T-10 minutes! I love these tests.
Scrub, bummer. They have been getting these things off pretty good for test flights but not today.
Scrub for today
BBC: “After the meeting, Zelensky said a deal to end the war between Ukraine and Russia was “still very, very far away”.
He added that he expected the US to continue backing Ukraine despite his own fraught relations with Trump.
“I believe that Ukraine has a strong enough partnership with the United States of America,” Zelensky said late on Sunday.”
Hmmm … this seems more like empty bravado than tough leadership. Europe is currently saying they will provide security guarantees as long as the US does which is pretty much an unchanged position. Zelensky’s negotiating position is getting worse. If they want to fight to the bitter end regardless that is somewhat admirable but a refusal to negotiate will leave him without benefactors.
My reading of the tea leaves was that Russia would probably not accept a settlement (especially on Zelensky’s terms) so he would be better off going through the motions and retaining support.
Well that was fast. Trump pauses all aid to Ukraine.
Good job Zelensky. Work a little harder at reading the room. Perhaps this is all for his domestic audience. Or something.
Tom Scharf,
“All aid” would seem to include, you know, the weapons and ammunition Zelensky needs to continue fighting. Does he think the Europeans have the capacity to supply those? Now I am almost sure: he will soon no longer be in charge in Ukraine; his generals will will likely make that decision soon.
I think it is all “miltary aid”, not sure.
Ukraine has a fair amount of domestic production for drones and such. They have stuff already in country and can go for at least several months with what they have, but why, why, why?
He needlessly antagonizes the US and likely underestimates his support here. People want to support Ukraine but the level of support is not very deep.
A couple 5 year olds.
I doubt it is God calling Pope Francis home, as I rather suspect that like many Popes in history Francis owes his spiritual allegiance to a different power.
Be that as it may, it appears that his tenure on Earth may be drawing to a close. At least I certainly hope it is.
Some allegiances are stronger than others….. the Pope’s allegiance to the left is very strong indeed. IMHO this has led to some really bad church policies. The last I saw, he was supposed to be getting better; is there some new development?
A point made on some random post I saw somewhere last week.
400m EU members desperately want 300m Americans to save them from 140m Russians.
Kind of sizes up the EU leadership I think.
I think ( without bothering to look it up) that one could replace population with $ economy and the statement would still work as intended.
Steve,
I read this:
https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2025-03/pope-suffers-two-episodes-of-acute-respiratory-failure.html
or headlines relating to this rather and jumped to the conclusion that he was worse than he apparently is.
Russell, I think you may find this interesting
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkuz79GikPI
History legend has a new post that includes a look at small infantry unit tactics brought on by heavy drone use.
Ed,
I had trouble deciphering the Russian accent.
Kenneth, Your post:
“Yeah, Russell, but how did it taste?”
I haven’t done it yet. One of my neighbors brought me meatballs in marinara sauce and I wondered if Grok could cook. So I asked a few questions. I was impressed.
Probably gonna have spaghetti and meatballs tonight. Gonna doctor the sauce with peas. I’ll let you know the verdict.
Mark, Your post:
“I doubt it is God calling Pope Francis home, as I rather suspect that like many Popes in history Francis owes his spiritual allegiance to a different power.”
Even my wife doubted the virtue of this pope.
SpaceX on next try:
“The eighth flight test of Starship is preparing to launch as soon as Wednesday, March 5. The launch window will open at 5:30 p.m. CT.”
Musk on the scrub:
“Too many question marks about this flight and then we were 20 bar low on ground spin start pressure.
Best to destack, inspect both stages and try again in a day or two.”
Trump wins [again]:
“EU chief proposes plan to ‘urgently’ increase defense spending by mobilizing around $840 billion”
President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen
“Europe is ready to massively boost its defense spending. Both, to respond to the short-term urgency to act and to support Ukraine but also to address the long-term need to take on much more responsibility for our own European security,” she said in a press statement.
Russell Klier
March 3, 2025 at 10:37 pm
Russell, you are probably already aware of Grok’s warning on how sensitive peas are to cooking time. I know from some failures of my own.
Peas and Marinara sauce just do not sound right to me, but neither did carrot cake and zucchini bread until I tasted my wife’s renditions.
Most religions require free will of the individual to make sense of their philosophies which makes me wonder how some like Pope Francis can have such a leftwing tilt.
Aspiration of vomit can often be part of life ending events, but the Pope seems to have gotten through that episode.
And the situation heats up
[ The U.S. Defense Department confirmed to the Daily Caller News Foundation Monday evening that military aid to Ukraine has been halted.
All current military aid to Ukraine is paused until President Donald Trump can determine a good-faith commitment to peace from Ukrainian leaders, according to Bloomberg. The pause, which includes weapons either in transit or in Poland, comes just days after Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy got into a heated discussion while meeting in the Oval Office on Friday to finalize the U.S.-Ukraine mineral deal. ]
https://dailycaller.com/2025/03/03/us-aid-ukraine-paused-trump-zelenskyy/
“400m EU members desperately want 300m Americans to save them from 140m Russians.”
In my mind should be:
The political leaders of 400m EU members desperately want the political leaders of 300m Americans to save them from the actions of the political leaders of 140m Russians. I could have added the adjective partially-propagandized in front of xxxm since I judge that left to their own views nation members would be much less inclined to wars than their political leaders.
Kenneth,
“…makes me wonder how some like Pope Francis can have such a leftwing tilt”
I think leftism is an almost incurable mind virus; it precludes rational thought, so influences everything a person says and does, and makes them believe things that are facially false.
To paraphrase Lee Trevino (who held up a 1-iron in a thunderstorm and said “even God can’t hit a 1-iron”): Francis proves that even God can’t cure leftism.
YMMV.
Russell Klier
March 4, 2025 at 9:24 am
.
“EU chief proposes plan to ‘urgently’ increase defense spending by mobilizing around $840 billion.”
.
The phrase “Scared Straight” comes to mind.
The imposition of tariffs today mark the start of a downward trend for the Republicans to the midterm elections.
Tariffs are, in effect taxes, and imposed without debate. Unlike the gradual bite of inflation, tariffs will be felt by the voting consumer very quickly. Will Trump realize his mistake in time to save the the midterm elections and admit the mistake is the only pertinent question for the Republicans.
I think (and hope!) most of Trump’s tariffs will not be in place for very long (at least not at the current rates). The strange thing for me is not that Trump wants to implement some tariffs, but rather his “blunderbuss”, poorly targeted, approach.
Plenty of countries have protective tariffs, as well as non-tariff barriers, specifically designed to protect local business and local farmers from competition from the USA; reciprocal tariffs are a way to push for reductions in those tariffs. But tariffs designed to “balance trade”, or motivate things like fentanyl interdiction or blocking illegal immigration have too many negative economic side effects to make any sense to me. He is using a sledge hammer to kill an ant that is walking on a glass-topped table. It is just not sensible, and will cause more harm than good..
I don’t even know what Trump is asking for specifically to get the tariffs removed. It’s all pretty strange.
Tariffs are just friction in a free market economy. They have their place when the other side is acting unfairly but I don’t think Trump is using them this way.
The markets are barfing them up.
It’s not like we haven’t asked the EU nicely 100 times, and not so nicely lately, to take their own defense seriously. There is a land war in their own back yard and they were not even acting with urgency. I guess this is what it takes, so be it.
Everyone is better off if the EU has some urgency. We will see if their platitudes result in real action.
“We will see if their platitudes result in real action.”
I’m quite sure it will remain mostly platitudes. They can’t make themselves spend money on a credible military…. too many voters expecting continuing wealth transfer payments and well funded green energy boondoggles.
Tariffs, as my shares go down.
In an otherwise all equal world mean nothing.
China put tariffs on our wine lobster and beef over policy differences.
Restricted iron ore and coal.
We beefed about it.
Vineyards went down the gurgler.
–
But it is all smoke and mirrors.
There is only so much wine iron coal and lobsters in the sea.
We got cheap
Lobsters and wine.
China paid more to get them from magic elsewhere.
Meaning markets opened up for us in magic elsewhere which now had lost its wine etc
–
Trump is using the raids not for trade purposes but to shake some action out of Canada, Mexico and China to stop Fentanyl deaths.
Is it all electoral promises or, shudder, does he really care about people deep down?
No, surely not.
Yet his actions all seem to have the intention of helping people in that nice Confucius way.
Improve yourself those around you, friends and country and voila the word will improve.
Gulliver or gullible?
Tom will know
–
Zelenskyyy changes mind.
World war 3 averted.
So sad.
angech.
‘Meaning markets opened up for us in magic elsewhere which now had lost its wine etc”
Well, it is often complicated to figure out the exact consequences. Most products (OK, not Australian wines, which I find consistently to be awful stainless steel abominations) are in fact quite fungible, and trying to block (for example) shower heads from China will lead to other suppliers stepping in… perhaps at a little higher price. But the key point is: any identifiable consumable can be sourced from multiple countries. For most products, the most Trump can accomplish is shifting purchases from China to other low cost suppliers. Disruptive? Yes. Painful to China? Yes, especially in the short term, but only in the short term. China will shift to other markets, just as other suppliers (Vietnam, Singapore, etc) will shift to supply the USA.
Which is to say: For most products, Trump is playing Wack-a-mole with the world; US suppliers are NOT going to compete with Chinese suppliers in the basic computer headphone market. That competition the USA can’t win. What Trump can do is identify where other countries are using tariffs (and non-tariff barriers) to block US exports. Europe is the poster child, but there are lots of miscreants. A blunderbuss is not the tool needed’; targeted reciprocation is needed, not a sledgehammer.
SteveF
“Which is to say: For most products, Trump is playing Wack-a-mole with the world;
A blunderbuss is not the tool needed’; targeted reciprocation is needed, not a sledgehammer.”
–
Well said.
My hope is that Trump is not using a blunderbuss but short term maximum pain strategies on other countries which are smaller and weaker [not China].
The disparate pain makes them play whack a mole instead or hopefully to reconsider and try to comply , for instance, with tightening up their borders and dropping their reliance on the cheap drug money. Mexico in particular but China and Canada in a vaguer sense.
Wow, quite a speech. The Democrats were gobsmacked.
They have no way out of this box they built for themselves.
Trump kept bringing up issues that are wildly popular and the Dems sat there stewing.
Trump’s still talking about Greenland and how it can protect us from Muslim terrorists,
Slotkin claims that Trump does not think America is an exceptional country. Along with many other lies.
The Dems couldn’t even bring themselves to clap for the kid with cancer who wants to be a cop.
Dana Perino, “ Expecting the dems to hold up a sign that says: UNCLE”
I looked over the transcript of Trump’s speech.
The guy needs a good editor. It was 2X too long, and full of pointless riffs and exaggerations that only took away from his message. Cringeworthy, and a missed opportunity to win over voters in the middle. As Trump would say: “Sad.”
OTOH, Democrats embarrassed themselves with outbursts and generally terrible behavior. Rep Al Green (77 YO, who represents a district so Dem leaning that he usually runs for re-election unopposed) was tossed from the House Chamber for standing and shouting to keep Trump from speaking, but there were plenty more petulant 5- YO behaviors (from NBC News):
Dems can’t bring themselves to behave when they don’t get what they want. And that is indeed “sad”.
I think one of the things that has made Congressional Dems so testy is that their endless demand for “new legislation” to control illegal immigration has been exposed by Trump as the lie it always was: no new legislation, yet the lowest rate of illegal border crossings in February ever recorded. All Biden had to do was enforce existing law. The real issue: progressives refused to enforce immigration law, because they don’t want immigration controlled according to longstanding law. It is simple lawlessness, nothing more.
Sanctuary cities and States are not going to be happy when ICE starts enforcing the law in those places. I couldn’t care less.
I think we can safely conclude Trump has more energy than Biden …
Social security is in fact a Ponzi Scheme:
“A Ponzi scheme is an investment fraud that pays existing investors with funds collected from new investors. Ponzi scheme organizers often promise to invest your money and generate high returns with little or no risk. But in many Ponzi schemes, the fraudsters do not invest the money.”
Just because it was invented by the government and has “good intentions” doesn’t make it not a Ponzi scheme. I’m still searching for Gore’s lockbox. Maybe DOGE can find it.
I second SteveF’s evaluation of the speech. After 5 minutes of campaign speech — “me good, Biden bad” — I went to sleep.
And I find it difficult to believe that our Legislature believes they are displaying appropriate behavior. Not only Green’s outbursts, but the chanting by Republicans too. One would think that Congress is about talking about policy and budgets, not behaving like 5-year-olds.
Of course, not as crazy as in Serbia. [Google if you haven’t seen photos.]
Tom Scharf,
“I think we can safely conclude Trump has more energy than Biden …”
Sure, but for a dementia patient Biden was very energetic. How many dementia patients fall off their stopped bicycles or fall frequently on airplane entry steps? Or have the energy to wander around aimlessly at formal diplomatic functions? Or still think they could have won the presidency in 2024? Not many.
HaroldW,
” One would think that Congress is about talking about policy and budgets, not behaving like 5-year-olds.”
Serbia? Good example.
There are far too many “balkanized” congressional districts (like Al Green’s Texas district, or AOC’s NY district) that keep people who act like spoiled 5-YOs in the House until they retire.
I thought that Trump’s speech was quite good, but I was surprised by how partisan it was. I imagine that many of his asides and riffs don’t read nearly as well as they played live; inflection and timing matter a lot with such things.
I am not qualified to judge how well it played to people in the middle. Trump is much better at judging that than anybody commenting here. He bragged about his accomplishments; those are pretty popular. He called out to many guests whose stories will resonate with most of the public. And he had a couple hundred witless allies helping him win over the middle. So I can see where the speech might have been effective for folks in the middle. But I don’t know that it was.
There was nothing in the speech to win over moderate policy wonks. But they are no more than a rounding error in the polls.
p.s. – I am assuming that you know who Trump’s couple hundred witless allies were.
p.p.s – I don’t have a problem with legislators chanting “USA, USA”. If it had been “Trump, Trump” I’d have been upset.
Political events such as last night should make for the encouragement of less government – given how politicians running the show act and react. Unfortunately it only shows how the partisans can ignore bad behavior on their side and over react to it on the other side resulting in an emotional miasma we continue to willing endure.
Mike M.: “I don’t have a problem with legislators chanting “USA, USA”. If it had been “Trump, Trump” I’d have been upset.”
I found it juvenile, appropriate at a soccer match but not in Congress. And you’re correct, shouting “Trump, Trump” would have been much worse.
I think Trump set a trap, and the Dems rushed into it.
At the beginning he said:
“This is my fifth such speech to Congress, and once again, I look at the Democrats in front of me and I realize there is absolutely nothing I can say to make them happy or to make them stand or smile or applaud.” He elaborated, suggesting that even if he achieved monumental feats—like curing a devastating disease or delivering unprecedented economic success—Democrats would still refuse to acknowledge it positively. ”
That herded them into a corner and they got their backs up and were hardened into their resistance stance.
Trump proceeded to enumerate all the politically popular successes he was accomplishing.
The Dems sat there angry and glowering the rest of the night.
They are doomed.
On another topic, I found this interesting: AI reasoning models cheating to win at chess.
Perhaps they wlll take over…
Two days ago Netflix aired Meghan Markel’s new series! “ With Love, Meghan”.
It was panned by viewers and critics alike. I think this may be the end of their content production careers… too many flops in a row.
From Grok:
“### Verdict
Reviews are overwhelmingly critical, especially from UK media, focusing on perceived inauthenticity, narcissism, and lack of substance—averaging around 1-2 stars where rated. Positive takes, mostly US-based, highlight its charm and Meghan’s suitability for the format, though they’re outnumbered. The divide suggests a reception shaped as much by Meghan’s public image as by the show itself. Whether it’s a “flop” or a “joyful escape” depends on who’s watching—and why.”
CBS News/YouGov Poll – After Trump’s Speech
“Poll on Trump’s 2025 joint address to Congress finds large majority of viewers approve”
– 77% support his plan to cut government waste and spending
– 77% back his immigration and border policies
– 76% approve of Trump’s speech
– 76% approve of removing congressmen who interrupted his speech
– 74% say his speech was presidential
– 73% support his stance on Russia and Ukraine
– 68% say it made them feel hopeful and proud
– 68% say he has a clear plan to tackle inflation
– 68% say he accurately described America’s crime crisis
63% say he focused on issues they care about
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-speech-joint-address-congress-poll-2025/
Forbes covers Markle’s new show:
I shan’t be watching. Of course, I don’t watch reality shows, the Kardashians, etc., so clearly I’m out of step with the TV-viewing public. Somehow that doesn’t bother me in the least.
Russell,
I guess we now await ratings. The thing is, some people might watch it because they like seeing the car wreck. If they do, Netflix will likely continue to bring us these things.
I’m not curious enough to watch! I didn’t watch their previous thing.
Like Mike, I guess reading comes over differently to watching. I can tell why. Yes, clearly lots of exaggeration, but also clearly just Trump talking how Trump talks. Everything is either wonderful or terrible, and there were plenty of terrible things, even if they weren’t “the worst ever”, and vice versa.
The most touching, and impactful, bits were the moments where Trump referred to members of the public affected by bad policy, or the 13 yo with brain cancer who wanted to be a police officer, which he made an honorary secret service agent. Brought a tear to my eye!
In other news, a group of nine students on vacation were found dismembered by the side of the road in mexico. A bag of hands nearby. These are the people Trump referred to as “animals” back in his first term, and I don’t think that sufficiently covers this kind of depravity. These are also the people democrats pretended Trump wasn’t talking about. Invited with open arms into the country with tax payer money and then turned a blind eye to the results.
Lucia,
“ I’m not curious enough to watch! I didn’t watch their previous thing.”
Me too. But I do follow the reviews and ratings. It’s my version of watching the car wreck.
Russell,
Trump said: “This is my fifth such speech to Congress, and once again, I look at the Democrats in front of me and I realize there is absolutely nothing I can say to make them happy or to make them stand or smile or applaud.”
He said that after the Dems started to get unruly although I don’t remember if it was before or after the “gentleman” from Houston got expelled. At the time, I wondered if those words were part of the prepared script or if it was interjected as a response (possible prepared) to heckling. The timing seemed too perfect to have been part of the official text. I still don’t know if it was.
Yes, that backed the Dems into a corner. And it called their behavior to the viewers’ attention, which mattered when the speech came to things that any normal person would applaud.
If you have any doubt about total madness in control of higher education in the USA, read this:
https://jonathanturley.org/2025/03/04/defamiliarizing-the-border-professors-denounce-borders-in-opposing-trump-immigration-policies/#more-229329
A law professor at Georgetown Law School argues (yes, seriously!) that all national borders are impractical to enforce and morally indefensible. One of the many reasons I think most of what is taught in higher education is impractical and morally indefensible; the solution is for the public to drastically cut funding for higher education.
Mike, Your comment:
“Yes, that backed the Dems into a corner. And it called their behavior to the viewers’ attention, which mattered when the speech came to things that any normal person would applaud.”
I have done more than my normal cruising of new and old media today. I have found no one, not even Democrats, voicing support for the Dems actions last night. Whether they fell for a trap by Trump or were just being themselves, it was a bad look.
Mike M,
Looking at the video clips of Dems behavior during Trump’s speech, I am forced to conclude the ‘progressive left’ has not yet reached “rock bottom” in their self-destructive addiction to woke lunacy. So still no hope for recovery.
I’m fine with that, but I’ll bet there are lots of more moderate Dems who are still waiting for the madness to play out, after which some recovery toward reasonable policy positions may be possible.
The reviews of Markle’s nw show are pouring in, and they are abysmal:
The Guardian called it “pointless” and suggested it might be the Sussexes’ “last TV show,” and “ghastly artifact of a bygone cultural era”
Variety described it as a “Montecito ego trip not worth taking,”
The Independent gave it a one-star review, calling it “queasy and exhausting.”
The Telegraph dubbed it “an exercise in narcissism, filled with celebrity cameos and product plugs rather than substance.”
Rotten Tomatoes score from Grok:
“Meghan Markle’s new Netflix series, With Love, Meghan, which premiered on March 4, 2025, has received a notably poor reception on Rotten Tomatoes. As of the latest updates, the show holds a 33% critics score on the Tomatometer. This score reflects a “Rotten” rating, indicating that fewer than 60% of critics gave it a positive review. The audience score, or “Popcornmeter,” is even lower, sitting at 11% based on over 250 user ratings, signaling widespread disapproval from viewers.”
Steve McIntyre has reported that Mann’s judgment has been reduced to $5,000. https://x.com/ClimateAudit/status/1896947591121711500 Wonder what Nick Stokes & Eli Rabett have to say.
Forgot that I had written a column on this:
http://rankexploits.com/musings/2015/is-the-mann-suit-a-dispute-about-10-in-damages/
I don’t know why it took the judge so long to reduce the damages. US Supreme Court states punitive damages are limited to between something like 3 times to 10 times damages. Only evidence of damages that Mann produced was that someone gave him a dirty look in grocery store.
Starship test flight 8 now set for 6:30 pm Thursday.
I’d give him a mean look in a grocery based on his “innovative” math!
jdOhio,
The process is the punishment, of course. $5,000 damages, $500,000 (or more!!!) in legal fees.
Mann is (IMHLO) a complete scumbag and a dishonest idiot.
Fortunately, his time of commanding any public interest is long past…. another footnote in the sad history of climate pseudo-‘science’.
What will happen to the many Biden green initiatives? Many will be abandoned, as they should be. Most ALL will be abandoned if the SC reverses the absurd “endangerment” finding on CO2 that the EPA has used to try everything from eliminating gas water heaters to eliminating gas stoves to eliminating gasoline powered cars. These will be effectively reversed by Trump until 2028, but only reversal of the GHG ‘endangerment’ finding, or Congress restricting EPA’s jurisdiction over GHGs, will make Trump’s reversal more permanent.
I wonder…
If there are any truly moderate democrats, are they being silent on purpose? What better way to wrestle control from the fringe left than let them have their way and expose just how nutty they really are?
I have seen two articles in the past week – one from Sherrod Brown decrying the move away from the blue collar vote and another on Spiked talking about the coming Democrat party civil war. Brown supported many (some say all) the fringe positions, but he also has always had strong support among blue collar/union workers. The civil war article said basically the same thing – get back to the workers.
I guess we will know if there truly is a brewing power struggle in the D party if the newly elected heads of the DNC are thrown out. If not, then they’ll run the midterms and most likely the D’s will get pummeled.
I just read that the 538 site has been shut down…
DeanP,
I suspect that the views of the “workers” closely parallel, to the degree they have views to the same extent, the views of many of our colleagues here.
I repeatedly read that the current powers that be in the Democratic party think these views are limited to “jobs, jobs, jobs”
It would be helpful if the same powers that be actually listened to these folks to better understand the other things they worry about.
imagining that DEI is universeally loved among the working folks is just plain nuts. or more likely ignorant.
DeanP: “If there are any truly moderate democrats, are they being silent on purpose?”
Kind of. The cowards don’t want to upset the Thought Police by failing a purity test and the brave, by virtue of disagreeing with accepted dogma, are “far right”, not “moderate democrats”.
DeanP, your post:
“ If there are any truly moderate democrats, are they being silent on purpose? ”
Good Question. I have been wondering the same. I would like to hear more theories on this.
John, thanks, hearing from the other side is helpful.
DaveJR,
The ‘progressive’ left has even stronger ‘enforcement’ against any Dem who steps out of line than MAGA has on the right. The threat of a primary fight is what keeps them in line.
There are very few competitive congressional districts.
Primaries in these balkanized districts (left or right) are the only elections that matter, and only the most dedicated and motivated 10%-20% of a party’s voters show up for primaries. For Dems, that 10%-20% hold extreme policy positions: wealth confiscation, draconian taxes , universal government healthcare, racial reparations, DEI/racial preferences… public and private, eliminating nearly all fossil fuel use, limiting the right of individuals to travel by air, etc, etc. They will punish any Congressional rep who has strayed far from these extreme positions.
I see no possibility for many representatives in Congress to compromise on substantive issues.
DeanP,
I though the 538 site was always a joke. It rejected results from pollsters with a history of the most accurate election predictions because they “didn’t like their polling methods”… which it seems mainly meant those pollsters were not biased toward Democrats. After Silver left, it became just another dishonest screaming mouthpiece for the rabid left…. it became unreadable…. so nobody did.
The Democrat Party is ruled first by money and second by activist groups. There is little daylight between the two since the big money donors usually align with the activist groups.
The job of a Congress Critter is to raise money for themselves, the Party, and their colleagues. The first is seen by most as being critical to win reelection, the other two are the path to key committee appointments, chairmanships, and party “leadership” positions. If they have another job, it is not apparent.
The primary job of political consultants, more important than winning elections, is to maximize the amount of money raised, since that maximizes the amount of money that ends up in the pockets of the consultants. The people being paid to advise the Harris campaign made just as much money as if she had won. You maximize money raised by motivating the people most likely to donate; that is, the big money donors and activists.
Keeping the activist groups happy is seen as vital since they have the ability to make or break candidates in primaries.
“Moderate” Democrats are afraid to go off the reservation since that will get them kicked off any desirable committees, cut off from the main flow of funds, and quite likely primaried. So they go along, hoping that money will be enough to sell them as moderates in the general election (it often works). The alternative is to get out of politics, at least national politics. The perks of being a Congress Critter are such that relatively few choose the latter path.
Much the same dynamic operates in the Republican Party, but it does not seem to have squelched all dissent.
93 of the 214 Dem seats in the US House of Representatives are occupied by members of the “progressive caucus”, and just about every one is from a non-competitive district. That is not a coincidence.
In contrast, the House Freedom Caucus holds only 22 seats. Republicans have far fewer absolutely safe districts.
It’s not only moderate Democrats in congress that are being silent as this slow motion train wreck unfolds.
Very few Dem media types are transitioning to reasonable and there is no groundswell of ordinary moderate Democrat voters.
Remember how the Tea Party whipped the Republicans into shape.
Sorry, the correct number for the Freedom Caucus is 31 seats not 22.
The Dems are in clear disarray now. Nobody is stepping up to shift the party, they need some leaders like Pelosi was. They are basically waiting for the right to make mistakes so they can unify behind being against the right. BAU.
When people are asked what top 3 things Harris was for in the last election I don’t think anyone could get past #1.
The right will make mistakes, they will very likely try to deny these mistakes, and the left will exploit that. BAU.
Mike M.
And when they do win the activist groups get paid off with government programs.
Biden’s EPA issued $20 billion in green grants. Now Trump’s administration wants that money back
https://apnews.com/article/green-bank-epa-zeldin-climate-clean-energy-191b394cda251ef772867369f61f07b7
This doesn’t necessarily mean it is nefarious, but there is a two way street here. AFAICT most money for environmental activism is spent on lawyers and lobbying, then environmental lawyers get lots of regulatory work due to government regulations. Rent seeking to the max.
Tom Scharf wrote: “They are basically waiting for the right to make mistakes so they can unify behind being against the right.”
Indeed. The Dems can tell themselves that the last election was close, so the pendulum does not have to swing far for them to get back in power. And they can tell themselves that Trump will make mistakes and their media allies will do everything possible to trumpet those mistakes. So why change?
The dynamic I described above is very strong. Challenging it will be very painful. As long as they can tell themselves that things will be alright, they will continue on the same path. Like an addict, the Democrat Party will have to hit rock bottom before they can change.
As far as I am concerned, the sooner the Dems hit rock bottom, the better. The Republic needs two sane, competitive parties.
“This doesn’t necessarily mean it is nefarious,”
Yes, it’s nefarious. Stacy Abrams (who still denies she lost her election in Georgia) formed a 501 corporation after Biden set up the EPA with a $20 billion slush fund, with no oversite on dispersal. The EPA then handed the new 501 $2 billion cash, which is to be used for advancing greenhouse gas reductions in a “socially just” way….. things like giving money to certain selected people to “decarbonize” their homes with purchases like new electric stoves and new AC/heat pumps systems. And who controls this gigantic bag of cash? Why that would be Stacy Abrams and a bunch of her friends…. with eye-popping salaries. It is pure grift. Oh, and most of the other recipients from the slush fund were formed AFTER the funding was set up; these are not struggling non-profits trying to do the right thing…. grifters all.
Remember Ronald Reagan’s line:
“I didn’t leave the Democrat party, the party left me.”
A lot of previously solid Dem voters went for Trump in the last election. Maybe the Democtrat party is in the process of turning away from a lot of their core voters. That would be grand.
Grok on Starship8 test launch:
As of right now, 11:28 AM EST on March 06, 2025, the SpaceX Starship Flight 8 launch is scheduled for today at 6:30 PM EST (5:30 PM CST) from Starbase, Texas, assuming no further delays. The latest from SpaceX indicates they’re on track after resolving earlier issues with the Super Heavy Booster from the March 3 scrub, and the rocket was restacked yesterday, March 5. The live webcast should start around 5:50 PM EST on SpaceX’s official channels, like their X account or website.
Weather looks promising with clear skies and winds within limits, though they’re monitoring high winds that could still shift plans. The mission includes the booster catch, Starlink simulator deployment, a Raptor engine relight in space, and a Ship splashdown in the Indian Ocean. If you need more specifics—like real-time updates closer to launch or something else—just let me know!
Russell, Reagan was right. How I miss him.
John,
Are there any sane, moderate Democrats you see on the horizon who may pick up the reform mantle?
Edit, I thought Tulsi Gabbard had a shot, but they dumped her.
The problem is that all the sane moderate Democrats I know are actually Republicans who think Trump is a menace. Maybe once they were called Rockefeller Republicans or before that Eisenhower (not Taft) Republicans.
Fetterman
John,
Do you see the Democrats riding this radical resistance theme all the way to the midterms then?
Is Josh Shapiro a real moderate or just another phony Demoderate?
Fetterman occasionally talks sense, but he almost always votes the party line. Just another phony moderate.
I think the Dems will ride the radical resistance theme until they get crushed at the ballot box.
Mike, your post:
“ I think the Dems will ride the radical resistance theme until they get crushed at the ballot box.”
I hear a number on Democrats denying the level of spanking they took in the last election. ‘Trump has no mandate’ cries and such.
If the last election wasn’t a wake up call, they are doomed.
Russell,
But one can plausibly argue that the last election was not a spanking. Winning all the too close to call states is not a landslide. Winning the popular vote by a couple percentage points is not a landslide. Losing 4 out of 5 competitive Senate races in swing states is certainly not a landslide. Winning 2 more House seats than required for a majority while winning 2 fewer in the prior election is certainly not a landslide.
2024 was a clear victory for the Republicans because they won everything (presidential popular and electoral votes, House popular votes and seats, majority in the Senate), even if by narrow margins. But it did not come close to Obama’s win in 2008 which was in turn not even close to Reagan’s wins in the 80’s. It is easy to think that 2026 and 2028 will be different. Look what happened to the Dems in 2010.
The real warning signs for the Dems are certain trends, if they are real trends and not just a one off.
It will take more than an election loss or two to get the Dems to change. They are going to have to get crushed. I hope that happens before they get back in power.
Grok update,
The most recent update from SpaceX, posted on X at 14:55 EST today, states that they are “counting down to Starship’s eighth flight test” with a 60-minute launch window opening at 5:30 PM CT (6:30 PM EST). They noted that “weather looks favorable at the pad,” suggesting optimism about proceeding as planned
The web is going wild with the thought that the SCOTUS has dealt a fatal blow to Trump on his order to pause / cancel federal payments through USAID.
.
This view of a Trump administration loss is completely unfounded
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/25551544/24a831-order-2.pdf
.
[On February 13, the United States District Court for the
District of Columbia entered a temporary restraining order
enjoining the Government from enforcing directives paus-
ing disbursements of foreign development assistance funds.]
.
[Given that the deadline in the challenged
order has now passed, and in light of the ongoing prelimi-
nary injunction proceedings, the District Court should clar-
ify what obligations the Government must fulfill to ensure
compliance with the temporary restraining order, with due
regard for the feasibility of any compliance timelines. The
order heretofore entered by THE CHIEF JUSTICE is vacated]
.
A couple of important points
1. A TRO ( Temporarily Restraining Order) is of very short duration and is not generally appealable.
2. A PI (Preliminary Injunction) is of longer duration and is appealable. A PI hearing immediately follows a TRO on a very short timeline.
My reading of the vacated order is that the SCOTUS views the issue of the TRO as moot as the timeline of the TRO is expired. As such, no action by SCOTUS on the TRO is needed.
The SCOTUS then directs the district court to consider the TRO in regard to the now ongoing PI hearings. If the district court orders a PI with essentially the same results as the former TRO, the Trump administration can then immediately appeal the PI.
As Ed says, the recent refusal of SCOTUS to act in Department of State v. AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition is not what it seems. Here is a brief note by Jonathan Adler at Volokh: https://reason.com/volokh/2025/03/05/scotus-denies-trump-administration-application-to-stay-district-court-order-blocking-pause-of-usaid-payments-certiorari-sure-to-follow/
He points out that with 4 justices opposed to the action, cert is certain. And it seems like Roberts and Barret were punting until they can hear a full case.
Josh Blackman comments:
https://reason.com/volokh/2025/03/06/article-iii-inverted-the-supreme-court-surrenders-to-inferior-court-supremacy/
And Blackman takes apart the actual ruling:
https://reason.com/volokh/2025/03/06/neutral-principles-for-the-emergency-docket/
The whole thing is bizarre. I thought that injunctions and restraining orders were to prevent actions that might cause irreparable harm. But we have a court order the Executive to take actions that might cause irreparable harm.
Power grabbing courts really need to be reined in. If SCOTUS is not willing to do that, then I fear what the result might be.
With regard to “moderate Democrats”, John Hinderaker nails it:
“Congressional Democrats are nearly all on the far left, the difference is whether they conceal the extent of their leftism to be electable in moderate districts. Swing-district Democrats are angry at safe-district Democrats for blowing their cover.”
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2025/03/are-democrats-learning-a-lesson.php
I’m of the opinion the government is allowed to change government spending. Some of the hot takes try to pretend this is not allowed.
There is certainly some separation of powers questions and Trump will likely lose a couple legal battles. However if Congress passes budget cuts going forward then everything is allowed. Trump retroactively cancelling spending authorized by Congress is a bit dicey. He can control agencies that the executive is in charge of and he probably doesn’t have to spend allocated money. I think clawing back money is small ball compared to real budget cuts moving forward. My prediction is new spending will dwarf these cuts but we shall see.
MikeM,
“Is Josh Shapiro a real moderate or just another phony Demoderate?”
Exactly as moderate as I am an Italian Bishop. He is a died-in-the-wool progressive who won’t let Israel get overrun. That’s it, one issue separates him from AOC..
MikeM,
‘”Fetterman occasionally talks sense, but he almost always votes the party line. Just another phony moderate.”
Ummm, yes, he is willing to support Israel. He is willing to say 6’8″ men should not be beating on women in sports,. and 2 million a year illegal immigrants is not a good idea. The rest? Died in the wool progressive.
I have often thought that political correctness and other similar phenomena was never really aimed at the Right. The real target IMO are [were?] those who’d normally be characterized as moderate Left or even leans Left. Political correctness was a method of shaming [or bullying, maybe that’s a better word] moderate or leans Left type people into more extreme Leftist habits and behaviors.
I say this because of the discussion regarding who is moderate and extreme Left. It can be hard to tell these days. People utter the creeds that are required of them sometimes without actual belief and sometimes even with quiet resentment.
But then again, people lose their way. A good line from ‘V for Vendetta’ comes to mind: “You wear a mask for so long, you forget who you were beneath it.” I don’t know how true that is, but it sounds plausible.
Don’t know. Maybe moderates who pretend to be more extreme become more extreme over time.
Starship is a work in progress … a lot of work ahead. The booster is nailing it though.
Another ‘catch’ of the SpaceX booster….. another loss of the upper stage; this time, tumbling out of control well above the atmosphere…. it will re-enter…. South Atlantic? Africa? Unknown. Not a good look for SpaceX. Another failure like this will really hurt SpaceX’s credibility.
SpaceX seems a long way from anything valuable riding on their big rocket. For their sake, I hope they are clear in explaining what happened and why. Silence is the opposite of golden in this case.
I am guessing Elon Musk will divert a bit of his time from DOGE to evaluate what is going wrong with SpaceX.
Golden oldie of a topi
“In a Monday X post, Rowling pushed back against an X user who accused her of “conflating sex and gender,” writing, “The fringe idea that we all have a ‘gender identity’ that may or may not match our biological sex is the whole point of this discussion.
“Trans activists act as though the existence of ‘gender identity’ is a settled, self-evident point, when to the vast majority of the world it’s unevidenced, quasi-religious, pseudoscientific nonsense, which has been imposed top down on our society with serious consequences for vulnerable women and troubled youth in particular,” the best-selling author added.”
angech,
Those willing to speak sanity will be held to account and punished… ask the prime minister of the UK, who is 100% for silencing all who disagree. I doubt Oz is much different….. like the UK, no history of free speech. But don’t worry, you are safe here; nobody in Oz is watching. 😉
Russell, I have no idea whether the Democrats will ride the radical resistance theme. I know people who would but I also know more that wouldn’t . I’m not part of any of this.
.. but I did think of this for a bumper sticker:
-/\/\/\/\/\/\-
John, I didn’t follow the bumper sticker cartoon. Perhaps it didn’t come through as intended?
I have been trying out Grok as a search engine. Works well for cooking advice and recipes, so I asked Grok:
“Can you use Grok as a search engine?”
“I’m not a traditional search engine like Google or Bing, but I can definitely help you find information! As Grok, created by xAI, I can search the web and posts on X to provide you with answers or insights based on your questions. I don’t generate a list of links like a search engine would, but I’ll summarize what I find and give you a helpful response.
What would you like me to look up for you?’
Gavin Newsome sat down with a 1 on 1 with Charlie Kirk. I haven’t listened to the whole thing, but one snippet has Newsome backing off the ‘boys in girls’ sports.
Is this a true conversion or is it just a political position flip-flop to get on the 80% side of an 80-20 issue?
My bet is the latter…
https://x.com/Patriot_N_Chief/status/1897660879593734270
Maybe the Democrat wall is starting to crack There was a brutal takedown of the Dems by Josh Hammer that appeared in the LA Times and elsewhere:
Examples:
“But the modern Democratic Party, rudderless and confused and reeling from a pitiful collective performance during Tuesday evening’s presidential joint address to Congress, now confronts a fork in the road that’s no joke.”
“On the other hand lies the more difficult but ultimately more promising path: repudiation of that post-2008 legacy and a conscientious return to a politics of the prudential center. Which path Democrats choose from here will go a long way toward determining their relevance as a national political party for the foreseeable future.”
“Culturally militant wokeism eventually reached its pernicious apex during Joe Biden’s presidency — which saw the first explicitly “DEI” Supreme Court justice selection (Ketanji Brown Jackson, after Biden vowed to nominate a Black woman) and a DEI vice presidential running mate (Kamala Harris, after Biden was pressured to choose a Black woman).”
There’s more:
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2025-03-06/democrats-political-center-transgender-athletes-immigration
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2025/03/07/the_democratic_fork_in_the_road_and_the_woke_repudiation_imperative_152473.html
Russell, it’s the electronic symbol for a resistor.
Russell,
It looks more likely that the Dems will do nothing, will not purge themselves of the far left nonsense, and will just sit there waiting for Trump to eventually hit on the thing which will lose him his base.
I must admit that I check in here as much to see what my friends on the bit farther right are thinking as to see when they finally realize that Trump really is a fool. One would think that the cavorting with tariffs would reveal it clearly, or Greenland, or all the lying.
Maybe the well-founded, I think, apprehensions about continued expansion of the crazy-left State seem to occlude paying close attention to what he is actually doing.
john ferguson,
I would have understood the bumper sticker if the horizontal lines connected to the up-and-down lines.
I could be mistaken, but I doubt more than a few % of the US public knows the schematic symbols for electronic components.
John,
I suggest this bumper sticker for the Democrats:
https://x.com/rklier21/status/1898008115741589667?s=61&t=7w4bCW3a8ve2DqoeniQatQ
john ferguson,
Trump is an a$$hole. He does not develop policies as carefully as he could/should, nor articulate them as clearly and rationally as he could/should. But is policies are far more sensible and less damaging than what Harris was offering (more of the same Biden madness).
I’ll be sure to let you know if that assessment changes.
John, your post:
“I must admit that I check in here as much to see what my friends on the bit farther right are thinking as to see when they finally realize that Trump really is a fool”
If I am an indicator, you have a long, long wait in front of you!
I was an original Never Trumper.
But everything (almost) he’s done this term is ‘practically perfect in every way’, just like Mary Poppins;
https://youtu.be/QXn3r5plloI?si=DaTpuywEKvoqo766
SteveF, there was no way to connect the leads using the fonts. That it would only have been recognized by 2% of the poulation was a feature in my mind.
I’d had a similar idea when I bought an Away carry-on. It was maroon color and although we never check, carry everything on our trips in two carry-ons, I thought it looked so typical that we might not recognize it in the bag pickup conveyor if ever we were forced to check.
so I painted JF in Morse on both sides. Paint used was intended to repair plasti upholstery in cars ?? but worked fine on the Away and is still soldiering on after 20 + trips.
The code looked like this
.—
..-.
but with dits 1 inch in diameter and the dahs proportional.
Fool that I was, I expected to meet fellow hams with this at the ariport, but after 5 years, not a one, nor has anyone asked about it.
I’m a big fan of sleepers, but this one didn’t cut it.
SteveF, based on my acquaintenances, the number of liberal EE’s is vanishingly small.
If a fool gets results, is he really a fool?
Maybe he is just lucky. Maybe people falsely believe he gets results. Maybe he is only unconventional in methods. Maybe Presidents aren’t nearly as omnipotent as many people believe and results have a lot more to do with external factors and the system they govern in.
The strongman argument for Trump is his lifelong experience as a TV personality/producer and business executive have given him insights into leading people that other politicians simply don’t have.
The strawman argument is that Trump is a bumbling fool who is conning a bunch of morons.
I think one thing that drives some of the emotional reaction to Trump is that if Trump gets as good of results as a well articulated properly credentialed globalist who can woo the academia lounge then what does that say about them? Could it all be a facade? Does the emperor have clothes?
Or to put it another way: ‘I would rather be governed by the first 2000 people in the Boston phone book than the entire faculty of Harvard.’
I think the credentialed elite have some deep seated insecurities about being exposed in this way. They are trying to create/invent Trump “failures” prematurely before they even happen. Real professionals don’t behave this way.
I think Trump is totally a clown but if the clown gets results then that is OK. Many decisions are easy but many are mired in uncertainty such that a monkey throwing darts will get good results almost at the same rate.
What the elite can’t grasp is people prefer their own monkeys throwing the darts.
I’m a EE and I thought the symbol was Charlie Brown, ha ha.
John,
Calling Trump a fool at this point seems to imply some really widespread contempt for the American people. This orange fool engineered one of the most amazing political comebacks in US history, defeating the purported best and brightest of his political adversaries. I suppose if he is a fool, his opposition is doubly so, and his supporters undoubtedly are triply so. So all of us then, we’re all a bunch of fools.
I doubt this.
Trump is egocentric, bombastic, hyperbolic, and has many unpleasant related characteristics. It is justified, perhaps, to dislike the man Donald Trump personally. I’d avoid letting this aversion color our perception of the man’s effectiveness or intelligence. It’s not his job to be our idol. It’s his job to clean up the mess this country has become, to the extent that it has become a mess and that it is possible to clean it up.
The fundamental question is why does Trump’s schtick work?
IMO it is not because people don’t see it for what is, it is because of how his opponents * choose * to react to it. In the SOTU speech look how his opponents reacted. You aren’t winning the argument if your response is to beclown yourself even further.
I see no one that has been elected to a government position as a Democrat considering a rightward shift in political philosophy. I would suggest that their leftward shift is more encompassing and permanent than any rightward shift in the Republican party.
That the battle between Democrats and Republicans is based on more versus less government is often not all that obvious. The politics of the moment are for the Democrats waiting for the Republicans and in particular Trump to make a mess of things and for the Democrat supporting media to make this clear to the voting public and for the Republicans believing that the voting public will continue to veiw the Democrat approach as unrealist and socially out of touch.
This means that the national debates will be less about reasonable discussions of opposing political philosophies and more oriented towards voter political whims. This makes predicting volatile voter decision making – well unpredictable. See recent Canadian poll result changes on choices for prime minister.
From the WSJ:
Now that’s how you have a disagreement with a nominal ally, not a shouting match in front of the press.
It’s worth bearing in mind that Trump was an establishment favorite for decades. He received awards, and was lauded for his social philanthropy. He appeared in films and on talk shows as a friend, not enemy. He had threatened to run for president for decades, as a democrat, no doubt.
Only when he decided that democrats were headed in the wrong direction did he turn to republicans. He realized that there was no stopping that train. Only then did the establishment consider him the most terrible person in the history of the world.
Harold, how is that better than hearing what was actually said and how it was said and deciding the merits for oneself?
I thought there was a breakthrough for the voting public when the conversations of Nixon and his administration were made public. Before that time I think too many in the public saw politicians in the light of Civics 101 and not what they really were.
Tom, I agree with you on this point, but it says more about his opponents than it does about Trump and any grand strategy of his to win the day. In my view Trump is a caricature of a politician who provokes others to present as caricatures. This is not a pretty picture or my preferred way of communicating.
I doubt that Trump can be considered a fool like the court jester who played the fool knowingly and with purpose. Trump is not sufficently self-aware to be that kind of fool nor are the Democrats who are currently the greater fools. Such is the state of our politics.
My understanding of the term “fool” does not preclude competence, for example in Trump’s case, unusual skill in public speaking. It does suggest an inabiliity to connect cause and effect. (I may come back to this because it may be a bit sloppy).
Sure he got a lot of votes. I don’t condemn his supporters but suspect that a lot of them felt more threatened by the growth in the liberal-progressive dominated government than I was.
I am reminded of how the short guy with the mustache got his job in Germany by promising to get rid of the communists. For a lot of people that was all that was important and they didn’t care about some of the other features of his program.
I am still convinced that Trump is a psychopath but have since spent an evening with a doctor whose client base was psychopaths and have been led to believe that there are a lot of them around us and most of them lead more or less normal lives which they can conduct successfully without resorting to their darker capabilities.
So in my view, Trump being more of a practicing psychopath isn’t a sufficient label.
It’s not at all unusual for people not being able to see a leader’s doubtful side, maybe because they don’t know much about the role, nor how it shouold be conducted.
Do you really think that the on and off again and maybe on again imposition of tariffs is the work of someone who doesn’t suffer from my suggestion for a characteristic of a fool?
And without doubt there is no reason why a fool cannot do worthy things, but it will be more of a random walk.
I don’t feel like this is a serious conversation. I don’t understand how anybody can seriously suggest Donald Trump is unable to connect cause and effect.
The tariffs are direct evidence that Trump understands cause and effect. Trump uses the threat of tariffs to cause other nations to do what he wants. Someone who doesn’t grasp cause and effect couldn’t make use of such threats, because they wouldn’t be able to connect the desired effect (doing what Trump wants) with the cause (avoiding the damaging tariff). Obviously.
I ‘get’ that this can’t possibly be what you mean. But it’s what you seem to be saying.
John,
I am willing to let Trump’s tariff gambit play out. He needs to be flexible and dynamic at this stage of negotiations. We have been getting screwed for decades by our trade partners. Eventually I believe this will be a lot better for us when all the dust settles.
If I might add, I suspect what many people (and perhaps John as well, perhaps not) are really trying to say is that they would behave differently than Trump if they were in his shoes, and they disagree with the methods he uses and the decisions he makes.
That’s fine of course. But that doesn’t demonstrate much of anything.
Guys,
It’s not the tariffs per se, it’s the on and off and on. Guy doesn’t understabnd what the effect of the on-off is and I suspect has no realidea what the impact of the tariffs if they ever do go into effect will have on our economy.
We’re going to find ourselves paying serious subsidies to the farmers who appear to be losing their AID business.
Then there’s Greenland and the possible motivation to bleed Canada sufficiently dry that they will welcome becoming our 51st state.
But then if you truly believe that Trump can do no wrong, none of what I’ve above will seem a possible intention of his.
Right, see, that’s a different matter. That’s saying ‘I think Trump is underestimating the impact the on again off again will have, and I disagree with his judgement, and I’d do it differently in his shoes’.
That’s fine. The thing is, people keep on assuring me that virtually everything Trump does is going to lead to immediate catastrophe, and yet somehow this keeps not happening. Sooner or later, I’m sure Trump will mess something up good, and I’m sure on that day people will rush to assert that they have been right all along about what a buffoon Trump is. All this is really evidence of is that there is a large set of people who have decided Trump is a buffoon and are looking for confirmation.
Shrug.
Hi Mark,
I suppose that’s one way to look at it. And not a bad one either.
mark bofill has been making perfect sense. Trump has been highly effective as both a politician and as President. It is inane to call him a clown or fool or to say he does not know what he is doing. People who say such things either have terminal TDS or are just hurling thoughtless insults.
Trump does challenge conventional wisdom on both policy and political style. You might criticize him on such things. But that is what makes him hero to many (me included) because the conventional wisdom has been such a proven disaster over the last several decades.
If you use threatened tariffs as leverage and get a concession for dropping them then you have won something.
If you use threatened tariffs as leverage and don’t get a concession and subsequently drop the tariffs anyway then you have lost nothing.
This is probably how Trump views this. We have to wait out whether he imposes long term tariffs that will likely do economic damage. Writing threatening legal letters is free.
One can opine on how this process does long term damage to international relationships but I don’t find that particularly persuasive. In my view most countries deal with the US on a transactional basis, so I don’t see much downside to treating them the same way.
John,
I admire and appreciate your civility, apparent open mindedness and self restraint. There was a time I was considerably better at all of those things than I am now. You remind me of what is possible in this regard and what I might attain with effort. Thank[s] for that.
Ok guys, tell me about Greenland and Canada as the 51st State.
And this is not to ignore the impact of threatening tariffs to being on March 6 and those immediately affected having to scramble to figure out how they are going to handle it, will they affect deals already made, who will pay them? can deals already made be voided ? Presumably they’d be imposed at the time the shipments crossed the border. ?? ??
All of this has nothing to do with whether they are a good idea, which I doubt, but if they are, the chaos of the last week doesn’t really do anyone any good.
And I continue to sense a strong belief that Trump can do no wrong here.
Kenneth Fritsch:
“Harold, how is that [describing the Trudeau-Trump conversation as “heated”, “constructive”, “profanity-laced” etc.] better than hearing what was actually said and how it was said and deciding the merits for oneself?”
While negotiations are ongoing, I think it’s ok, even desirable, that the general situation of disagreement is known, but that the details don’t leave the room. All the Trump-Zelenskyy public squabble accomplishes, is expose to Russia the depth of the rift, which can only be a negative in negotiation.
Personally, I think that Trump talking about Canada becoming the 51’rst US State is an example of Trump being an insufferable butthole. I think it is extremely unlikely that Canada will become part of the US anytime soon. However, it’s not clear to me what meaningful consequence we will incur because of this.
Hyperbole regarding Greenland may be related to Trump and the Art of the Deal. Maybe Trump, understanding that he will not get everything he wants starts by confidently asking for the moon, it might be something of that sort. I don’t actually know, so I wouldn’t have volunteered this opinion except that I was asked.
I think Trump knows and has alluded to the fact that his tariffs might cause short term pain. What is it he said? Expect a little disturbance?. Clearly he thinks the gain will be worth the cost. Will it? We will have to wait and see I think.
Trump is not infallible. He will make mistakes, perhaps more than his predecessors because he is attempting more and (as Mike noted) is using unconventional means to shake things up that have been stagnant for a long time. He might also enjoy more successes. But I don’t for a moment think Trump is infallible or that he has caused, or will cause, no damage. So what? What U.S. President did no harm in office? The only names I might suggest are Presidents I know essentially nothing about.
John,
I agree with you that the tariff back-and-forth is not helpful to those in the business community who are trying to plan. [And also that tariffs in general are not in either party’s interests.] Because it’s clear that Trump is only using tariffs as attempted leverage, it won’t have its intended effect.
As for Greenland, I think it would be a wonderful idea to purchase it, not that Denmark has the least intention of selling. [Nor does it appear that the Greenlanders themselves favor such a step.]
Canada joining the U.S.? Not a serious suggestion in my mind. Reasonable to propose that 250 years ago, not so much now. I think it’s just trolling. Not significantly harmful (and certainly not helpful).
If I may add, I don’t think Republicans would permit Canada to become the 51’rst State even if Canada begged to do so. Should this 51’rst State thing ever come to pass, Republicans might never win a Federal election again.
john ferguson
March 7, 2025 at 3:28 pm
‘Ok guys, tell me about Greenland and Canada as the 51st State.’
All about establishing a Hierarchy like chooks do.
And building warmer, cosier relationships with one’s neighbours.
–
“And this is not to ignore the impact of threatening tariffs.”
Pure negotiating tactic to ensure action is taken by Canada and Mexico at their expense [their borders too,]
–
“And I continue to sense a strong belief that Trump can do no wrong here.”
–
You might consider that your sensors might be having a resistance problem.
Can happen when circuits are overloaded.
I can see just from comments above that Steve F and M Bofill hate some of the things Trump does and and do not like a lot of aspects of his personality.
Lucia has stated that she would never vote for him.-
The problem is simply in sorting out the things he is both promising to do and doing, the way he is doing them and on the other hand not letting your views be affected by your loathing for Trump.
–
Do you believe that there is more waste in Government and Private industry than is acceptable?
Yes.
Is identifying it and seeking to reduce it a good economic aim?
Yes.
Should other countries put in a decent amount of money for their own protection, and in contingencies, for their neighbours?
Makes sense.
Has it been happening? No.
Should entry to your country be managed by the Government of the day [Yes] or does one have open slather? [No]/
–
If it makes you happy the two times politicians have tried to do this in recent times in Australia both ended very quickly with those Governments being kicked out.
I find looking in a mirror can be soul destroying at times.
Your mirror, should you choose to look would say.
“And I continue to have a strong belief that Trump can do no right here ever..”
Just a thought.
Historically tariffs have always had negative effects and most economists right and left would agree from both empirical and theoretical points of view.
Tariffs were once in the domain of congress before they gave the President the power under certain conditions to invoke. I see too many Trump supporters relenting on denial of excessive executive power to the President because they believe that the actions being used by Trump, i.e. this President, are good. The main condition under which tariffs are invoked is the use of the old emergency ploy that governments have used historically to gain power they would not otherwise have.
Trump has stated previously that tariffs are good in and of themselves. He is harkening back to the days the US used tariffs to raise revenue for the government. He talks about forcing enterprises to locate in the US. What he says about tariffs is an affront to free markets and gives government too much power. Even if he were to get some vaguely known concessions from his threats of tariffs it is not a positive move. Think about a future President using such threats to force a nation to follow demands for climate mitigation or raising taxes to some preordained level.
The Trump supporters who think he can do no wrong may not be helping him – unless he is not foolish enough to believe them.
HaroldW
March 7, 2025 at 3:36 pm
The devil is in the details and I always want to know where he is and what he is thinking.
Trump has made and will make mistakes. As do most of us. The silly stuff (buying Greenland, making Canada part of the USA) are not even worth serious discussion; Trump is just trolling to get progressives upset (and that includes most Canadians!).
Most people recognize Trumps weaknesses. What is more difficult is to recognize his strengths, which include: ability to connect with many voters, a lot of courage and inner strength, a clear commitment to personal liberty, a pragmatic foreign policy, and a level of energy that is actually astounding for someone who is 4 years my senior. Most people who vote for Trump don’t do so because he is an icon of virtue, or because they would like to be his friend, or think him someone who is a fountain of truth and wisdom. They vote for him because they trust he will do his best to implement the policies he says he will, and because those policies are much better than the alternative.
Bill Clinton in his second term was actually pretty sensible and enacted some good policies. But I don’t think Bill Clinton would even fit in the Dem party today, and many of the policies he implemented are roundly rejected by today’s Dem party. I think a ‘pragmatic’ Dem like Clinton could have defeated trump. But such people no longer exist within the Dem party….. they are people like Johnathan Turley, Elon Musk, and many others, who have fled a party they no longer recognize.
Let’s make sure we understand the idea of a President of the United States trolling.
HIs word is his bond?
Defaulted bonds.
Kenneth Fritsch
MARCH 7, 2025 AT 5:22 PM
“Historically tariffs have always had negative effects and most economists right and left would agree from both empirical and theoretical points of view.”
–
Perspective?
Surely they are a zero net game, Ken.
The harm they do in one area balances with the good they do in another.
If they were historically always bad then they could not exist.
Europeans have protected their farming for years. Australia protected its car industry for a while.
Keeping manufacturing going and people in jobs may not appeal to bean counters but when the balloon goes up having your own computer industry industrial industry etc is worth all the otherwise seeming wasted dollars because you can be independent of other countries in time of need.
John Ferguson,
As far as I can tell, Trump does and says some things (re-naming the Gulf of Mexico (or a certain mountain in Alaska) to give his political opponents the vapors. Some is just bombast. But there indeed are a lot of cases of the vapors.
SteveF,
The on again-off again implementation of tariffs is an example of why I think he’s a fool. It would be different if he was projecting implementation in 6 months and stuck with it, or dropped it with a couple of months to spare. Although that might be equally hard on manufacturers trying to adjust their supply chain to reduce border crossings.
The 250% tariff on Canadian dairy products which apparently was announced last night and will take effect today although possibly warranted has to cause chaos in distribution. If people won’t pay the higher price the distributers will be stuck, and if there is no local production because it couldn’t be competititve at the pre-tariff pricing, then there won’t be any make-up very soon.
My principal objection to all of this is that it is arbitrary and because of that un-plannable. What would you do if you had imported chips in your product and Trump decided that next week chips could no longer be imported from China. Sure you could probably redesign to use chips from Taiwan, but wouldn’t it take time?
I’ll retell, if you’d like, what I was told in Shanghai in 2019 about how tough it could be to run a business there when the govenrment could impose a costly interpretation of the rules on one of your projects with no warning and no way to appeal.
Coming back to the 25% tariff, there’s the back and forth border crossings, probably in Windsor as automotive components are gradually completed. How is that going to be handled?
Trump seems ignorant about things which many of the rest of us are not ignorant about. He seems unstable. He’s vindictive and childish. How could his many acts or attempts at revenge go un-noticed? In short, there may be a better label than “fool” and maybe I’ll eventually recognize it and hopefully it will be even better focused, but in the meantime …
I think I posted what the Chinese government did to the developer in Shanghai in 2019. Let me know if I didn’t.
Tariffs are never a zero sum game and in fact are always negative for those nations imposing tariffs. The simplistic veiw of tariffs is observing the immediate seen and claimed effects and ignoring the unseen effects that occur over time. Tariffs make the protected businesses less competitive. Tariffs increase prices of imported goods for domestic enterprises. Tariffs encourage trade wars which have negative effects on all parties. Tariffs create an adverstorial relationship amongst nations that leads to a war mentality.
Kenneth Fritsch wrote: “Historically tariffs have always had negative effects”.
I do not believe that you can possibly support that claim with facts. Tariffs have been the norm of international commerce; exceptions are uncommon. So to prove that statement, you would have to know what would have happened in an alternate universe.
It is plausible to claim that tariffs always have *some* negative effects, but that is not meaningful since it is true of just about everything.
I do not understand the on-again off-again business with Trump’s tariffs. The fact that I do not understand does not show that those actions are without a good purpose. It is silly to claim that it is just random, based on Trump’s mood on any given day. His executive orders have obviously been very carefully planned out. His tariffs have been a keystone of Trump’s economic policy; it make no sense to claim that they are being implemented without thought. Also, he is being advised by people like Scott Bessent, so you have to claim that Trump’s whole team is as silly as you claim he is.
There is a purpose to what Trump is doing. Maybe that purpose is sound, maybe it is not. But the fact that his actions do not match conventional wisdom is not evidence that they are being taken without thought. That claim is merely TDS.
Kenneth,
“Unfair advantage” can be tricky to quantify. Suppose our manufacturer got the land his factory is on for free, his employees trained at the local junior college for free, tax abatement for 5 years, etc. All this is what happens if you want to build an auto plant in South Carolina or Alabama.
This looks a lot like a subsidized product, but then if all the other players in that market are getting the same treatment maybe there’s no basis for a tariff.
I see Trump has now devised a scheme for sheltering our manufacuturers from the back and forth border crossings tariffs.
I confess to some amusement that Libertarians could think that the many actions of the Trump regime have anything to do with a less opressive state.
Until 1913, tariffs were the chief source of US government revenue. By that time, the US had been the world’s largest economy for two or three decades. If those tariffs were harmful, they were not very harmful.
One other thing. If my condemnation of Trump’s action is based on their being “arbitrary”, I should be able to make a good case that they are.
I’m not entirely sure I can, but if “arbitrary” can cover “unexpected” or “action addressed to a non-existant problem” or ??
I think it’s a good characterization but it has its weaknesses.
I could give some examples of “arbitrary” actions over the years by the environmentalists with which most of us would probably agree are arbitrary..
Hi Mike M.
Good point, but then there was a lot less govenrment in those days. And weren’t our military actions paid for by taxes?
John: “Trump seems ignorant about things which many of the rest of us are not ignorant about. He seems unstable. He’s vindictive and childish.”
Yes, now put yourself in the other guy’s shoes during a negociation if this is what you believe him to be. Do you want to call his bluff, or perhaps offer a good compromise deal in the hope he’ll take it and go away? If people don’t think you have the balls to use the “big stick”, speaking softly isn’t going to achieve anything.
I’ve said what I have to say, I guess it’s made whatever impression it’s likely to make.
Shrug.
john ferguson,
Yes, there was a lot less government when the US relied on tariffs for government revenue and that was likely a big factor in economic growth. But so what?
All taxes have negative economic consequences. But eliminating all taxes would be bad because there benefits to government. The trick is to find the optimal balance. It is silly to argue for more government without considering the negatives associated with that. And vice versa. Both costs and benefits must be considered.
So do tariffs have negative effects? Of course they do. But in isolation, that is irrelevant. One must also consider the beneficial effects of tariffs. And one must consider the negative effects of NOT having tariffs since that would require either more borrowing or that other taxes be higher than they would be with tariffs.
I have never seen a criticism of tariffs that compares them to other taxes.
DavER,
I agree that negotiating with Trump is very difficult. One could say that Trump is a consummate liar which I woul think is indisputable. I think lying is basic to most negotiatiions. Each side lies about their position until some point where agreement is reached, which could still be based on lies from both sides. Maybe a real negotiation is impossible without lying.
The reverse of thinking that Trump can do no wrong, is not thinking that he can do no right.
I don’t think too many people outside of MSNBC and the WAPO comment sections think he can do no right. I certainly think it is not only possible but probably and it could be that I’ll be comfortable with the majority of the things he does.
Mike M.
I thinkn both Adam Smith and Riccardo looked on export tarriffs as taxes. But it was probably easier because I think they were known as the corn tax at the time.
A Maiseingly (couldn’t miss the opportunity) theyhad the effect of rasing prices both domestically and abroad. I haven’t read Riccardo in 15 years and may have it a little off.
Critics of tariffs always seem to ignore the difference between tariffs for revenue (the norm in the US before 1913) and protective tariffs (such as Smoot-Hawley). I think the difference is which side of the Laffer curve they are on. The arguments against protective tariffs are do not show that revenue tariffs are bad.
Also, I don’t think I have ever seen a discussion of the economic effects of a nation tolerating highly asymmetrical tariffs, as the US has been doing.
john ferguson,
If you can’t understand why so many people support Trump (and voted for him) in spite of his many obvious flaws, then maybe it is because you always seem to ignore the alternative: government sponsored censorship, endless DEI racism, support for “slavery reparations”, insisting it is OK for men to compete in women’s sports, constant lawlessness (refusal to enforce immigration laws, “forgiving” student loan debt with zero legal justification), constant threats of packing the Supreme Court, constant threats of doing away with the Senate filibuster, supporting genital mutilation of adolescents, forcing people to say things they do not believe to get a job, forcing adults to take injections of vaccines or lose their job, using the DOJ and FBI to “investigate” people who disagree, etc. etc. etc. The list of horrible policies is almost endless. There is more than a whiff of totalitarian government in those policies… more like an overwhelming, nauseating stench; most voters hate that smell.
Short version: The main reason Trump is president is that the alternative is much, much worse. If you think the policies of the Biden administration and the priorities of ‘progressives’ in Congress represent good and proper government, then you will likely never understand why Trump was elected (twice).
It would be easy for Dems to regain power: drop all the crazy shit and stop trying to tell everyone exactly what to do. I am pretty sure they won’t.
SteveF,
I don’t think I’ve ever written that I don’t understand why many people voted for Trump. I believe I do, and as I’ve tried to suggest above, I recognize the concerns which would drive one to vote for him, not the least of which is the sorry candidates offered by the Democrats or the increasingly religious (in the oppressive sense) of the Democratic POV.
But one does have to balance the respective benefits and risks when making a choice, and I continue to see Trump as the greater risk mostly for the reasons I’ve suggested just above.
And final;y, I have no idea whether the Dems will drop the crazy stuff. At least there are a few people in the party that understand the problem and are pushing to get some sanity back. It’s funny, it would be so easy to drive around Ohio and talk to union members and ask them what they don’t like about the current flavor of Democrat policy. Nafta would be a good start but that’s sort of out of the barn unless Trump’s tariffs stick.
But I doubt that they’ll do it. The people that are running the party now think they know everything. How could they not, they offered us HIllary, Biden, Harris. But then, at least Hillary and Harris weren’t old fools.
john ferguson,
“But one does have to balance the respective benefits and risks when making a choice, and I continue to see Trump as the greater risk..”
On this we completely disagree.
Hillary was (and is) quite old, and IMHO foolish. Kamala, just foolish.
Hi SteveF,
Of course we disagree about Trump and I have no problem at all with this. I’ve certainly been enlightened reading in detail at Lucia’s on the reasoning behind your’s and the others support of him.
As to Hillary, I view her more as a blood-thirsty (someone else’s) clerk. Clerk because of not a whif of originality. Spouse is a graduate of her alma mater and recognizes here as one of the types that showed up there in the ’60s with excellent test taking skills, perfect grades and not particulary creative.
I’m confident that had she won in 2016 we would have wound up in a war, something I don’t think we need to worry about with Trump, unless of course he pulls a Roosevelt and embargos some country whose policies he dislkes enough to strangle their economies.
We can disagree and speculate as to why Trump won, but I am curious as to why his popularity has been on the rise since the election.
They like his policies?
Yes, I think.
They like his transparency?
Yes, I think.
They are rejecting the Democrat theatrics?
Yes, I think.
They enjoy his showmanship?
Maybe.
I wonder how many SpaceX contracts DOGE is gonna cancel!
The negative effect of tariffs have more to do with exploiting comparative advantage in trade than a zero sum game of trading fines.
Trump either doesn’t understand this or willfully pretends it’s not a factor.
My main problem here is with the credentialed governing elite who make absolutely zero effort trying to explain this to the electorate. Zero, zero, zero effort. They depend on a trust in their economic expertise which no longer exists.
Just because debating some of tenets of free trade has left the Overton window at the academy doesn’t mean it is gone from the electorate.
They need to try harder. If you want to be isolated and self sufficient in everything then go visit North Korea to see how that works out.
Trump trolls the opposition party because it works for him. The Democrats have the lowest approval rating in decades. What they refuse to accept is they look just as crazy and deranged as Trump except in a more insidious “Biden is perfectly fine” way.
They also are obsessed, absolutely obsessed with believing character is the only thing that matters. What is character to them? Character is performative displays of morals. This is how people should be judged, not results. “We want better educational outcomes”, end of story. They can’t be bothered with looking into NYC, Detroit, DC, or Chicago schools, but rest assured they really care and will take every opportunity to tell you so.
Comparative advantage works by allowing an importing nation to redeploy resources in a more productive manner. One major effect of “free trade” deals has been that a significant number of productive US workers have been redeployed to unemployment or underemployment. That is not the way it is supposed to work according to the textbooks. It is bad for both society and the economy. And the elites won’t admit it.
I first came to realize that a little under 9 years ago. My eyes were opened by one Donald J. Trump. Prior to that, I had been horrified by the prospect of Trump becoming President. When I realized that he was right and I was wrong (along with most experts), I began to take him seriously, not literally. I began to pay attention to what he was saying and to what the press said he was saying. I ended up voting for Trump rather than against Hillary and was pleased when he won. He has not disappointed. At least, no more than is pretty much guaranteed when my hopeless optimism meets reality.
Something curious…
The USAF has had a tanker [Boeing KC-46A Pegasus]
flying on station just south of West Palm Beach. It has been at 22,000 feet, flying ovals since about 8 AM. It originated from Joint Base Charleston, in South Carolina.
I have been monitoring this all morning and only one other military aircraft has ventured by on screen, a Coast Guard long range recon aircraft [EADS HC-144 Ocean Sentry].
I see a couple possibilities:
This is a weekend ‘training mission’ to Florida, which happens a lot [often winding up landing in the Keys].
Or, mabe there are fighter aircraft flying dark and watching over Trump.
Live track:
https://www.flightradar24.com/TEFLN22/396648ac
Yah, I know it’s NPR, but seems an accurate history of the Tariff Polka.
https://www.npr.org/2025/03/07/nx-s1-5320159/trump-week-tariffs-mexico-canada-doge
Tom Scharf,
“If you want to be isolated and self sufficient in everything then go visit North Korea to see how that works out.”
Lots of countries practice partial isolation… Europe spends more money (via direct expenditures and higher consumer costs) protecting their farmers than they spend on, say, defense. The USA is not as pure as Cesar’s wife either: we have absurd protections for sugar production and corn ethanol production… not to mention a foolish mandate for ethanol in gasoline. You can argue that these measures hurt the consumer (and they most certainly do), but they also help clearly targeted constituencies or work to ensure “security” for the country.. Should we have Korea make all our warships, just because they could do so for a lot less money? I doubt that would ever happen.
Protecting local constituencies is mainly a political choice, not a purely economic one. Did the USA in aggregate benefit from the original NAFTA agreement? Absolutely. Were those benefits uniform across the economy? Absolutely not. Were there devastating social consequences in some places and devastating economic consequences within some industries? There absolutely were. Carefully explaining the theory of comparative advantage won’t change those realities. The “knowledge economy” benefited, the blue-collar production economy did not.
Libertarians want free trade, but that means both sides engaging in free trade openly and fairly.
I think this is the correct way to go but libertarians don’t have particularly good answers for what to to do when the other side is breaking the rules for competitive advantage.
When China openly sells DVD’s on the street for a $1 with Hollywood movies and hacked Microsoft Windows / Office but also wants open access to US markets what should be done?
When China uses reverse engineering and overt industrial espionage to steal technology and ignores IP laws what should be done?
The theory of free trade is a lot easier than policing it in the real world.
The basic assumption in lots of negotiations is the other side is both lying and not worthy of trust. That’s why we have legal contracts and courts (government) to enforce them. It allows agreements between people who don’t trust each other.
The contract needs to be enforceable which gets tricky in international negotiations. Putin can’t be trusted in a way that is different in Trump not being trusted. The force of the US system is behind Trump, but Trump might want to renegotiate a trade agreement on a whim.
I wouldn’t feel comfortable buying real estate from Trump but it wouldn’t be that much different than any other legal vulture.
Mike M,
“That is not the way it is supposed to work according to the textbooks. ”
This is kind of correct. The mathematical optimization of comparative advantage will generate winners and loser in different countries but hopefully better total outcomes for both. Simple optimization of GDP may very well generate large amount of wealth inequality, or it might narrow it. We will all be slaves to our AI overlords.
This is where the government’s duty to look out for the well being of their citizens and not just the national GDP come into play. There are also national security concerns, you don’t have your enemies build all your military equipment for you.
There are two conversations, what are the guiding principles and when do we make exceptions to those?
The output of that conversation is necessarily a sausage factory. Trump isn’t articulating his thinking, he might randomly do good, he might not. I’m not completely against running a trade experiment if he knows to reverse course when it isn’t working out.
Tom,
Maybe the way to please Libertarians and still impose tariffs is to make them optional. The individual decides if he wants to pay them at the time of purchase.
That USAF refueling tanker is still on station south of Palm Beach, and I still have it seen it refuel anything.
I am more convinced there are blacked-out fighters watching over Trump.
Screen shot of the track:
https://x.com/rklier21/status/1898455315382763762?s=61&t=7w4bCW3a8ve2DqoeniQatQ
Russell, I think there was some sort ot foofaraw over Palm Beach where a private plane flew within the protective airspace – well announced by NOTAM a day or two in advance. Apparently they shot off some flares to get his attention.
don’t know any more than that.
Kenneth Fritsch
MARCH 8, 2025 AT 8:06 AM
“Tariffs are never a zero sum game and in fact are always negative for those nations imposing tariffs”
–
Yet you then say
.” The simplistic veiw of tariffs is observing the immediate seen and claimed effects and ignoring the unseen effects that occur over time. ”
–
Such unseen effects appear in your view and statement to be forced to be deliberately negative at all times and all ways?
You must reconsider.
.
“Tariffs make the protected businesses less competitive. ”
–
I would merely point out that the businesses needed protection because they were less competitive.
Darwin would say that imposing tariffs is an evolutionary response to overcome a new situation.
If and when that response “works ” and the unforeseen consequences are good it is a positive outcome.
“Tariffs increase prices of imported goods for domestic enterprises”
–
The unforeseen consequences here might be new efforts by domestic enterprises to manufacture such goods themselves or obtain them from an alternative source.
Tariff decisions need to be removed from the executive branch of government and given back to Congress. Tariffs are in effect taxes and that constitutionally belongs in the legislative branch. Tariffs protecting the auto industry are taxes on the buyers of automobiles and a gift to the automakers and their employees. If this were not under the guise of tariffs it would be more readily seen as something unfair by the voting public. Tariffs are form of crony capitalism whereby the crony is rewarded and the non crony is penalized.
John Ferguson makes good points about the negative effects of Trumps near daily changes of mind on tariffs. If tariffs had to be legislated that flip flopping would not occur.
Libertarians that I know would agree with me that free trade can work as a one way street given that there are nations yet imposing them. A nation with free trade is allowing its people the choice of buying products as inexpensively as they can. For the consumer that is a factor in increasing their standard of living. For those who might need to find different livelihoods it is best for the government to avoid and not actively attempt to keep them where jobs are not available. It is a fact of life that, as examples, farming and manufacturing produce far more in the US with much less workers and our standard of living has improved because of it. Those farm and manufacturing workers did not just disappear.
The other end of tariffs where all nations are imposing them results in the opposite effect where domestic protection allows higher prices with less productivity which is a sure bet for a lower standard of living. I would suppose the non libertarians would need to explain that situation.
Kenneth,
“Tariff decisions need to be removed from the executive branch of government and given back to Congress. ”
Sure, and I want a pony for Christmas (actually no, but my grandkids would love it).
There is zero possibility that Congress would ever agree to taking tariff power away from the POTUS. Better to discuss what is with in the range or reality.
Tom Scharf,
“The basic assumption in lots of negotiations is the other side is both lying and not worthy of trust. ”
You must have been talking to my first wife!!! 😉
But yes, that is the nature of negotiations. Until the Ukrainians and Russians are sitting at the same table, everything else is a silly waste of time.
I believe it could happen if tariffs went badly and obviously wrong and/or someone outside the realm of politics explained the negatives of tariffs and/or the Supreme Court decided that tariffs are a tax and that Congress cannot give up that power to the executive branch.
Trump’s erratic actions on tariffs could easily trigger such reactions.
angech
March 8, 2025 at 2:14 pm
Your arguments are the same as all tariff proponents and that being that the government knows better than free markets.
Kenneth,
” government knows better than free markets.”
For sure not, but the issue is not only if wages in Vietnam are lower (in cost of unit produced) than in Oshkosh Wis… they clearly are. It is if we want to help workers in Oshkosh, Wis keep a job as the market is opened to Vietnam. It is a political, not economic choice.
Leave a Reply
Free markets do not know anything.
They are nothing but a reflection of human greed and need in the marketplace.
Governments on the other hand are expected to be competent and have some knowledge just like, say, economists. (Joke).
The Stockmarket is a free market as well.
Some stock picks are winners, some losers.
Some tariffs are winners, some are losers.
–
Your comments are spot on about them having potential negative consequences.
You just dismiss the other side, positive consequences, entirely.
–
Since they exist, and have existed from time immemorial, your view of them never working is at odds with what actually happens.
Video simulation from NASA of next week’s total lunar eclipse… it’s gonna be a stunner (weather permitting).
https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/5473
The USAF hasn’t had any assets flying (with their transponders on) near Palm Beach since yesterday afternoon. I do not know why that tanker was there all day yesterday.
The only significant government aircraft visible at 9:45 am is a USCG reconnaissance plane.
Screenshot:
https://x.com/rklier21/status/1898731699862741162?s=61&t=7w4bCW3a8ve2DqoeniQatQ
Men’s bodies in women’s sports.
Here is what the Maine state senator was censured over, posting a picture of a transgender athlete.
https://www.thefire.org/news/maines-censure-lawmaker-post-about-trans-student-athlete-attack-free-speech
“… the House speaker declared she would be barred from speaking on the House floor or voting on any legislation until she capitulated”
That’s a losing political strategy with a capital ‘L’. Here we have a person who competed on the boys team one year and the girl’s team the next year. This is not the political hill you want to die on.
I’m sure the politician’s post might result in some harassment but what does the pole vaulter expect to happen here? Nobody will notice? I think not.
What about the girl who came in 2nd in a once in a lifetime opportunity? Who exactly represents her?
NYT: Ambitious Democrats Have a New Game Plan: Yak It Up About Sports
Prominent leaders are flocking to sports radio shows and podcasts, an early sign of how the party is trying to reach apolitical young men who have tilted toward President Trump.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/09/us/politics/democrats-sports-podcasts-male-voters.html
Not a terrible strategy but note that the effect might rub off in both directions, keep in mind sports fans can spot a fake from 1 million light years away, so you better not fake it.
Injecting sports into politics is fine, injecting politics into sports is most definitely not fine.
For some reason I found this strangely inspiring. A young woman playing the entire Led Zeppelin IV album on drums in one take, pretty awesome.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBdI-KOGp6E
Here’s a fine example of the kind of speech I get censored for on youtube these days.
In response to someone, probably European, complaining that individual rights are selfish :-
“If you don’t have individual rights, “god given” ie above earthly powers to dictate, you don’t have any at all. “The greater good’, “the common good”, “society” etc, these are fictional constructs that can be controlled by other people, including the selfish ones… You are making the dangerous assumption their goals will always be benevolent and beneficial. Clearly, this is a false premise. They’re only human.
Play devils advocate. Think of a political party you vehemently disagree with defining what rights they think you should have “for the good of society”. Maybe then you will understand that it is not selfishness, but a safeguard against selfishness.”
Disappears within seconds, so bot regulated. Probably AI content regulated. Imagine what you could do with such a “finger on the scales” of public discourse, especially across multiple platforms.
My God, DaveJR, do you run into a lot of this? In effect a forced echo chamber?
Individual rights selfish? Maybe by definition, but isn’t pursuit of happiness somewhat an individual activity?
There isn’t any chance that your challenger was an AI creature devised to tghrow sand in the gears? If so, it might be interesting to see other idea which we assume are not assumed everywhere.
Years ago I spent most of a night arguing with a Northwestern professor whose point was that since I didn’t need to own a machine gun, there was no reason why the government shouldn’t be able to forbid me having one. That I was enchanted by the mechanism, had no intention of using it on anyone, and thought it my business and not any of the government’s was insufficient in his eyes.
I got nowhere with the position that because he didn;t think I needed one wasn’t a reason for me not to have one.
akkkk
“This is not the political hill you want to die on.”
Apparently, there are plenty of ‘progressives’ quite willing to die on that hill. I find it absolutely bizarre; even in the uber-liberal North East, boys competing in girls sports is not popular. What are these folks saying to all the (voting) parents of female athletes? It is a real headscratcher.
Equally bizarre: that anybody (even someone on the loony left) could honestly believe boys competing in girls sports is a good idea.
As my wife noted this AM: if you were a teen-age boy, what locker-room would you want to shower in? 😉
John wrote: “My God, DaveJR, do you run into a lot of this? In effect a forced echo chamber?”
Unfortunately, yes. Youtube has always been hit or miss, but since around 2021/2, I have most of my posts on “political” issues removed. I am not alone. The odd thing is that others can often say very similar things and remain untouched (including nasty stuff!), so it is not enforcing a complete echo chamber.
I believe that there is some kind of commenter classification system in play (you can find patents from google explaining such things). Too much of the “wrong” opinions (and we’re not talking breaking polices here. I have never had any kind of warning or been banned), and you get sent to the comment gulag. Only very vague, or “non-political” comments make it.
DaveJR, it sounds like your efforts are looked at differently from others. You’ve been branded. Wow.
That’s really crummy.
I don’t think that’s too likely to happen here, though.
A video from:
TODAY: Democrat Boston Governor Maura Healey says they have an energy crisis because it’s impossible to get natural gas
And:
2022: Gov Healey brags about BLOCKING natural gas pipelines that would’ve solved their crisis
https://x.com/WallStreetApes/status/1898459484973830587
So did I. What a sweet, cute, talented and enterprising young lady. She reminded me of one of my granddaughters.
Executive control of tariffs granted by congressional legislation and a judicial allowance for a wide Presidential interpretation of that legislation has similarities to Chevron.
Also why is the potential suffering of a displaced worker more important than the family who suffers from higher prices of domestic goods.
Automation and technology lead to improvements in productivity and thus standards of living and yet requires fewer workers. Does that in turn require penalties (tariffs) on automation and technology. Or have we learned that we could do without the buggy whip and and kerosene lantern industries and with all being better off.
John,
Heh. Are you feeling persecuted? I hadn’t even directed my goons to arrest you yet and the irons I use for torture are all still cold.
This explains why Congress gave the President tariff power
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/why-does-the-executive-branch-have-so-much-power-over-tariffs/
They might want to take it back.
Reports have the Russians making a 12km infiltration inside a gas pipeline in the Kurst pocket, bypassing the Ukraine main line defense and physically cutting Ukraine logistics in the Ukraine rear areas.
[ Ukraine SITREP ] GAS PIPELINE TROOPS VIDEOS reveals CRAZY 12km pipe walk; more CAPTURES elsewhere!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQOYLGBuNaM
Tom Scharf – thanks for that Led Zeppelin IV album on drums by Sina in one take link, as you say, awesome.
Mark,
You suggested, if I haven’t misundertood, that some of us were watching Trump like hawks expecting him to eventually screw up in some monumental way. I think I agreed, but for me, it’s more wating to see what will tip over our colleagues here who support him. I am very sympathetic to SteveF’s list of what worries him about the Dems, and agree that they (the libs) really do those things. i suppose I’d argue that I don’t see this as extensive or pervasive as SteveF does, but it’s still there – all of it.
I agree that waiting for you guys to have had enogh of Trump probably childish of me , but there it is.
John,
It’s fine. I haven’t actually taken that position, that you are being childish by waiting for people to get sick of Trump. I don’t love Trump as much as you might believe anyway, but it doesn’t really matter either way to me what you think in that regard.
Out of curiosity, is your problem right now with Trump specifically, or with the Republican agenda right now? You’ve already talked about the tariffs, we know that one. What about the rest?
I’m (mildly) curious, since you remain a Dem yet don’t seem to support what Dems have been doing, what you would have Dems do that is different from what Repubs are doing. Is it just the jersey color you don’t like, or is it something inherently different about the team?
Not going anywhere with my questions, just idle curiosity.
john ferguson wrote: “wating to see what will tip over our colleagues here who support him. ”
That already happened: Trump’s behavior after the 2020 election. Back in 2023, I don’t think anyone commenting here had Trump as their choice for the Republican nomination and some were saying they would not support him if he got the nomination. That changed when it became clear Trump would be the nominee since he was so much better than the alternative.
Trump is likely to do things that his supporters don’t like. But I doubt we will stop supporting him. What is the alternative?
John Ferguson: “I agree that waiting for you guys to have had enogh of Trump probably childish of me.”
I think you will be waiting a long time. For all of Trump’s many faults, he is far, far better than Harris or Biden. One little snippet of how awful and fraudulent the Dems are. When Trump said that if Liz Cheney had combat experience, she would probably be less likely to support American involvement in wars, the Dems (with very little opposition to the obvious lie) ridiculously claimed that Trump was trying to kill her. How anyone could dream up such a stupid lie I don’t know. But the Dems have that awful ability and are shameless about it.
Also, the Dem support in schools of hiding children’s supposed gender identity issues form parents is a massive and dangerously wrong intrusion into parental rights. I am so glad that my children have graduated from high school. I could not in good conscience send them to many public schools now.
John Ferguson,
I second mark bofill’s question: what policies do you object to or support? I have written a partial list of what I see as really bad policies. Something similar from you would be helpful for discussion.
The current hair-on-fire reaction in Washington to Musk trying to identify waste and fraud suggests a support for waste and fraud. “Throwing gold bars off the Titanic” after the November election seems to me like wasteful government.
A few things are clear: 1) rapidly growing federal debt is economically unsustainable, so giant deficits must end; 2) The number of Federal employees and contractors has exploded over the past 4 years; 3) expenditures for NGOs, which promote essentially Dem policies, has become a substantial Federal burden, and one that seems immune to Congressional oversight.
How should we close the yawning deficit? Real question.
SteveF,
It isn’t the policies except maybe seizing Canada and/or Greenland or sending troops into Mexico. It’s Trump.
As one of our colleagues has suggested, if not Trump then ??
Good call. There isn’t anyone else out there who has the support and has the intention of pursuing conservative policies.
From the WaPo:
“In the immediate aftermath, the agency ended helicopter flights in a designated area along the Potomac River, with exceptions for critical flights such as law enforcement and presidential flights on Marine One.
On Feb. 13, an additional FAA safety measure went into place affecting a broader area: air traffic controllers were told to discontinue use of “visual separation” rules to maintain a safe distance between aircraft, said two people briefed on the restrictions, speaking on the condition of anonymity …”
Why would changes in rules have to be hidden from the public? If the rules for visual separation were changed, then why would that not be formally announced? Sounds a lot like CYA at the FAA. Public records show many (dozens?) of airline pilot complaints about helicopters near the airport dangerously close to planes, yet nothing was changed. Those at the FAA who chose to ignore pilot complaints should be held to account. I am guessing they won’t be.
john ferguson,
Trump is not going to “seize” Canada or Greenland, nor send troops to Mexico (unless invited by Mexico’s government to destroy the drug cartels).
John,
Well, in a sense I’m right there with you then. I don’t particularly like Trump and never really have.
But what’s the point of this? Like him or not, he’s President now, he will be for the next four years. He may accomplish useful and positive things, I hope he does.
SteveF,
It appears that in order to support Trump, one must pick and choose among his statements. He isn’t going to do it for you.
And if I choose to believe he intends to , or wants to do the things he proposes, then I’m somehow imputing real intention into idle chatter, or not recognizing that he’s just rolling the libs. Trolling the libs probably is a worhtwhile activity during a campaign. but should be dropped once the candidate wins and although he might deniy it becomes president of everyone, conservatives and libs alike.
i seem to remember that during the campaign. he said he had nothing to do with Project 2025 and maybe didn’t even know what it was.
SteveF, if you were in the Whitehouse leaning over his shoulder and suggesting do this, don’t do that, I’d be a lot more comfortable.
john ferguson: “It isn’t the policies except maybe seizing Canada and/or Greenland or sending troops into Mexico.”
I am pretty sure Trump has never said anything about seizing Canada.
I am pretty sure Trump has never raised the prospect of using force re Greenland. But when asked, he refused to say if he might use force. It is reasonable to presume that is just an example of his stated policy of never taking an option off the table.
Trump has threatened to send troops into Mexico if the Mexican government is unwilling or unable to rein in the cartels. That is not an empty threat, nor should it be. It is, of course, preferable that the threat will be enough.
I don’t see any great difficulty in understanding any of that.
jophn ferguson,
“if you were in the Whitehouse leaning over his shoulder and suggesting do this, don’t do that, I’d be a lot more comfortable.”
Thanks for that vote of confidence. But I think people like Marco Rubio, his chief of staff Susie Wiles, Pete Hegseth, and Pam Bondi would immediately push back hard if Trump tried any really crazy stuff. Trump does troll his political opponents, and does so pretty much constantly. I wish he wouldn’t, but he is not going to stop. Nor will he stop wildly exaggerating about many subjects, which I think is mainly more trolling.
I will judge Trump more on what he manages to accomplish with stopping illegal immigration, reducing waste and fraud, and reversing all the crazy DEI and woke sh!t Biden put in place.
If Trump cancels the absurd Space Launch System and the equally absurd Starliner capsule, then I’ll believe he is making real progress. If he ends the absurd Medicaid “state taxation of Medicaid suppliers” scam, and reforms (AKA drastically cuts!) the TSA… currently $12 billion and 59,000 employees!…..and eliminates most airport security lines, then I’ll be 100% convinced.
Mike,
Yes. I don’t see why we should respect the sovereign right of the Mexican government to shelter criminal organizations from us, honestly. Do they [the Mexican government] represent the [will of the] Mexican people in doing so? Even if they do, it’s not clear to me why we should care. If this is indeed the will of the Mexican people, perhaps they [the Mexican people] are properly our enemies then.
$12 Billion/59,000 = $203,000 per employee. What?!? I’ve see TSA in action, and it isn’t pretty. It certainly is not worth $203K per worker.
I have breezed through security at many airports outside the States, yet even with TSA “pre-check” I waste typically 20 to 30 minutes each time I travel from a US airport. How do (for example) the Japanese process everyone through with little delay, while in the USA some guy stares at a x-ray image of one carry-on for 1.5 minutes before calling for a consultation with the boss, which takes another 5 minutes? These are people who have no incentive to improve their methods nor reduce their time cost for travelers.
Most travelers are known, fly frequently, part of frequent flier programs, etc. and virtually zero risk. The TSA ‘super slow security screening’ (S^4, where S is ‘stupid’) of zero-risk passengers is crazy.
The ‘progressive’ fund raising organization “Act Blue” appears close to prosecution in multiple states for illegal “smurf” contributions used to by-pass election law reporting requirements…. potentially shielding foreign political contributions or contributions from non-profits from disclosure
I am sure the above claims are inaccurate: 50,000 contributions separated by 1.3 days would take 1,36 years, and separated by 1.3 minutes would take 45 days. So some innumerate person is very confused about the data.
Still, pretty much the entire management of Act Blue has resigned following the “smurfing” claims. Looks like they may all need good criminal lawyers, especially if they were hiding plainly illegal contributions.
BTW, some of the people used as “cut-outs” appear to have been aware their identity was being used, some completely unaware.
136 years, not 1,36 years.
I think the VIP chopper flights out of DC are considered a national security thing. Realistically a MANPAD could take those out if they knew when and where. It’s probably mostly security theater though instead of something effective.
I think Trump has governed as a dove versus a hawk. It was Biden shooting USA missiles into Russian territory. That’s scary IMO.
I expect Trump will be a mixed bag just like in 2016. Hits and misses. He will probably do some really dumb domestic things (but ultimately inconsequential) and try to run again in 2028 which will give everyone a heart attack. The system will stop him.
I’m still hoping for a “sane Trump” to run in 2028.
Trump has been a transformational president and has changed US politics forever. Good and bad.
Trump is not going to try to run again in 2028. That is just silly. But it looks like Vance may be a worthy successor.
“It appears that in order to support Trump, one must pick and choose among his statements. He isn’t going to do it for you.”
Yeah, hope and change, ha ha. People just projected their wishes upon Obama’s vague statements. This was soaring rhetoric that was mostly empty but very well presented.
Trump is the opposite of that.
It matters what they do. The Trump is bad because “experts fear …” genre has been so overdone and so saturated during the election that it doesn’t even move the needle at all.
There’s a new post. I’m not moving comments this time. But the new post is open.
http://rankexploits.com/musings/2025/welsh-woman-detained-by-ice/
I’d love to see how ending “visual separation” is going to work at Ohare.
But then maybe they don’t run the place like they did in the late ’70s when swrtiching to visual made it possible to reduce separation between incoming flights and thus increase capacity.
John,
You responded to a comment earlier:
I hope that you do not feel alienated or branded here. I invite you to discuss the case of the Welsh woman detained by ICE on the new thread with us if you have any interest.