Categories
national politics & policies partisanship

Hypocrisy’s Cash Value

Donald Trump, Joe Biden, court, campaign contributions

“If these corrupt Democrats didn’t have HYPOCRISY,” the Republican National Committee explained, “they’d have NOTHING!”

After months of Biden surrogates savaging former President Donald Trump for the dastardly deed of using campaign monies to cover his mounting legal fees from the plethora of trumped-up indictments brought by partisan Democratic prosecutors, it turns out the Democrats have been doing the same thing.

The BBC noted: “Democratic donors paid at least $1.7m (£1.35m) of U.S. President Joe Biden’s legal fees during the investigation into his handling of classified documents, records show.”

“We are not spending money on legal bills or hawking gold sneakers,” Rufus Gifford, finance chair of the Biden campaign, told MSNBC only days before the news broke.

Highly questionable that Biden could sell anyone a sneaker, but the other claim was a provable lie.

“The use of party funds to cover Biden’s legal bills is not without precedent and falls within the bounds of campaign finance law,” the Associated Press article quickly informed, before adding that it “could cloud Biden’s ability to continue to hammer former President Donald Trump over his far more extensive use of donor funds to cover his legal bills.”

How unfortunate! The hypocrisy could ruin the piling on by Democrats.

“Democrats say the cases are nothing alike,” The Washington Post reported.

“There is no comparison,” offered a Democratic National Committee spokesman. “The DNC does not spend a single penny of grass-roots donors’ money on legal bills, unlike Donald Trump, who actively solicits legal fees from his supporters . . .”

Let’s get this straight: the difference is that Trump is upfront in asking his middle-class supporters for help, while Biden’s money came surreptitiously from wealthy Democrats?

This must be the proverbial dime’s worth of difference between the parties.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
Thought

Mary Wollstonecraft

Rousseau exerts himself to prove that all was right originally: a crowd of authors that all is now right: and I, that all will be right.

Mary Wollstonecraft, A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792), chapter one.
Categories
Today

Nobel Laureate Economist

On April 30, 1902, economist Theodore W. Schultz was born. His work studying the quick post-war recovery in Germany and Japan led to his development of “human capital theory” in several major papers, including “Investing in human capital” (1961) and “Transforming traditional agriculture” (1964). In a book written for a more general audience, Investing in People (1981), he invested in a wider readership by surveying the main themes of his research.

He was co-winner (with William Arthur Lewis) of the 1979 Alfred Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences. Schultz died in 1998.

Categories
crime and punishment First Amendment rights general freedom regulation

Criminal Discrimination?

The Joker, Uncle Sam, racism, business, regulations, quota

It’s okay.

You don’t have to associate with criminals. You don’t have to employ them and worry how they’ll act on the job. It’s not your duty to give criminals or persons with a criminal record access to your life or property and hope for the best.

If only we could leave it at that. 

That’s not our world though. In our world, our government, working hard to rip America apart in every way possible, is suing the Sheetz chain of convenience stores because it doesn’t hire applicants with a criminal record.

The “problem” is that too many such failed applicants are nonwhite.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission accuses Sheetz of “disproportionately screening out Black, Native American/Alaska Native and multiracial applicants.” The agency babbles that “employment practices causing a disparate impact because of race or other protected classifications must be shown by the employer to be necessary to ensure the safe and efficient performance of the particular jobs at issue.”

Of course, the “disparate impact” exists not because of these classifications but because the denied applicants have criminal records. Sheetz didn’t decline these applicants because of their skin colors.

Nevertheless, Sheetz is supposed to have somehow “shown” that refusing to hire applicants with criminal records reduces Sheetz’s own risks and the risks for customers.

Elon Musk, commenting on this story, has it right: “You know The Joker is running things when the law-abiding are being prosecuted by the government for not hiring criminals!”

These days Uncle Sam and The Joker do look alarmingly similar.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
Thought

Theodore W. Schultz

Whereas the governments of some low-income countries are improving their economics policies, in the United States the proliferation of political movements that view economics with disdain, along with apparent general public support for government market interventions, are in considerable measure contributing to the decline in the performance of the U.S. economy.

Theodore W. Schultz, Investing in People: The Economics of Population Quality (1981), p. 143-4.
Categories
Today

Dachau

On April 29, 1945, U.S. troops of the Seventh Army liberated the Dachau concentration camp.

Categories
FYI

Extreme Protest in What Cause?

He set himself on fire as a protest. 

Self-immolation may be on the rise, but we of the older generation remember the classic case, of Thích Quảng Đức, the Mahyana Buddhist monk who set himself on fire to protest the persecution of Buddhists by the U.S.-supported government of South Vietnam.

The most recent self-immolator was outside the “Trump trial in Manhattan,” and he has been accused of being “crazy” and “right-wing.” To make up your mind about those accusations, you should read his own testimony:

My name is Max Azzarello, and I am an investigative researcher who has set himself on fire outside of the Trump trial in Manhattan.

This extreme act of protest is to draw attention to an urgent and important discovery: 

We are victims of a totalitarian con, and our own government (along with many of their allies) is about to hit us with an apocalyptic fascist world coup.

Let us hope he is incorrect. Still, a lot of people are saying things like this. And the Great Reset is promoted and worked towards right out in the open.

But it is mostly anti-leftists who make such claims. And, as we all know, according to Left Pole Theory, anything “not leftist” is “right wing”! But was Max Azzarello really a right-wing extremist? (We can safely call anyone who burns themselves to death in protest an extremist, surely.)

The now-deceased and burnt-to-a-crisp protester believed the proof lies in the nature of our financial order: “If you learn a great deal about Ponzi schemes, you will discover that our life is a lie.”

Like many other critics of the current American order, he notices that the current political order is bipartisan: “That Bill Clinton was secretly on (former CIA Director) George H. W. Bush’s side, and that the Democrat vs. Republican division has been entirely manufactured ever since: Clinton is with Bush; Gore is with Bush; Trump is with Hillary, and so on.”

Max Azzarello called the current order a “totalitarian doomsday cult,” and asked why the elites are pushing us to disaster. “There are many reasons,” Max answered, “but the simplest is because capitalism is unsustainable, and they knew it: Climate change and resource extraction would catch up eventually. So, they never intended to sustain it. They knew all along that they would gobble up all the wealth they could, and then yank the rug out from under us so they could pivot to a hellish fascist dystopia.”

This does not sound very right-wing, does it?

More important, though, is the truth. Surely not all of Max Azzarello’ claims are true. But how much?

Categories
Thought

Mary Wollstonecraft

Society . . . as it becomes more enlightened, should be very careful not to establish bodies of men who must necessarily be made foolish or vicious by the very constitution of their profession.

Mary Wollstonecraft, A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792), chapter one.
Categories
Today

Maryland Makes Seven

On April 28, 1788, Maryland became the seventh state to ratify the United States Constitution.

Categories
Update

High-Placed Rumors About Government Programs to Retrieve and Study Crashed UFOs

A lot of people still express incredulity over the UFO subject, are exasperated that Congress is spending any time on it, and simply deny that the Pentagon is honestly worried about the issue. This is all more than understandable, but it is the case that incredulity over why we are talking about this is completely misplaced. For a lot of highly connected professionals are talking UFOs these days. People with deep connections to Pentagon research.

Take Chris Mellon.

Here is Richard M. Dolan, author of UFOs and the National Security State: Chronology of a Coverup, 1941-1973, talking about Mellon’s recent Substack article:

This is a snippet from a longer Dolan video from just a few days, where he appraises the issue of crashed UFO retrievals. Mellon disclosed some information about an alleged UFO crash in Kingman, Arizona, back in the 1950s.

So who is Christopher Mellon? Here is the beginning of his Wikipedia biography:

Christopher Karl Mellon (born October 2, 1957), is a private equity investor, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence in the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations and later for Security and Information Operations. He formerly served as the Staff Director of the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. He is a member of the influential Mellon family out of the Greater Pittsburgh area.

And Mellon is not alone. The number of government officials, military personnel, armament contractors, airline pilots, and many others say really odd things about phenomena we would normally associate with science fiction. They could all be lying, but they are talking this way. So one can no longer honestly express shock at the issue coming up.

And if they are all lying — if there is nothing to UFOs — then that is quite the conspiracy, too. There is a conspiracy here no matter how you look at it.