Newly released emails show the pressure brought by the White House on both former Attorney General Bill Barr and his brief successor, acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen, to intervene in the 2020 election. Both Barr and Rosen refused to intervene and pushed aside numerous efforts to arrange meetings with Trump counsel and to file federal complaints. What is astonishing is the degree to which these pressures continued in the brief period in which Rosen served as acting Attorney General in the final days of the Administration.
The emails given to the House Oversight Committee show how Barr refused to give credence to the electoral fraud claims of individuals like Rudy Giuliani before Trump forced him out in the waning days of the Trump Administration. The pressure was then brought on Rosen to do what Barr refused to do including filing a complaint drafted by the Trump legal team. The pressure was highly inappropriate and Rosen continued the position of Barr in refusing special efforts.
When Barr was pushed out by Trump after public attacks, it appeared entirely gratuitous and unnecessary. After all, there were only a few days left to the Administration. However, it now appears that Trump counsel used the substitution to resume the pressure for an intervention. Many of the emails reference the theory that Dominion Voting Systems were used to change votes and the more recently discussed theory that Italy was using satellites and military technology to change votes.
The pressure on Rosen came from a number of sources, including Trump’s chief of staff, Mark Meadows, who asked about investigating the Italian satellite allegations. When Meadows’ email was forwarded by Rosen to Rich Donoghue, the acting deputy attorney general, Donoghue wrote back that it was “pure insanity.” Rosen responded that he was pressed to arrange a meeting between the FBI and a Giuliani associate, but refused. He told them to use the FBI tip line — a suggestion that Rosen recounted was viewed as “insulting” by Giuliani. It was a clear message that there would be no back channel to the DOJ.
What is troubling is that the pressure on Rosen started as soon as Barr announced his resignation for later that month. This included the sending of a draft complaint for the Justice Department to file to “declare that the Electoral College votes cast” in the six battleground states that Trump lost “cannot be counted.” The draft was reportedly sent to Acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall and is highly unusual and, in my view, highly improper. One email leaves no question of where the pressure is coming from, stating “As I said on our call, the President of the United States has seen this complaint, and he directed me last night to brief AG Rosen in person today and discuss bringing this action,” he wrote in one email. “I have been instructed to report back to the President this afternoon after this meeting.”
Not only do the emails further vindicate Barr in this protection of the integrity of the Department but the disclosures follow Attorney General Merrick Garland adopting some of the Barr positions previously denounced as raw political abuses by legal experts on networks like CNN and MSNBC.
595 thoughts on “New Emails Show Unsuccessful and Unrelenting Pressure on Barr and Rosen from Trump to Intervene in the Election”
“Biden oversaw the Recovery Act for Obama starting in 2009.”
I would not be bragging about presiding over the worst recovery since the great depression.
“They pulled the American banking system out of the fire,”
Nope. The banking system was fine – it did exactly what idiots in government expected – it wrote loans to people who could not repay them.
“rescued the American auto industry.”
You do not understand how economics works.
If you fail – you go bankrupt – that is how we learn not to fail.
Bail outs teach us that failure will be rewarded.
“Biden oversaw a $465 million loan to Tesla in 2009 to modernize the Fremont plant and build the S.”
Government should not be loaning anyone money.
First you rant at banks because at governments insistance they made bad loans.
Then you jump to government sticking its nose where it does not belong.
Elon did not need government money.
“Tesla went public, paid that loan back years early and that one loan has created tens of thousands of jobs and hundreds of billions of dollars.”
Nope – things that are going to succeed – succeed without government assistance – that has been true for all of human history.
While again – as your bank example proves – government is capable of making things that work fine fail.
“That was just one of many successes Biden had a hand in working with Obama.”
Not something anyone should be proud of.
Average growth under Obama was 1.65%/year – I do not beleive we have had 8 years that bad since the great depression.
Obama took office at the valley of a recession – he had no where to go but up.
He failed. Doing nothing would have inarguably done better.
“Name one thing Trump attempted or achieved that comes even close to just that one deal made by Biden, hmmmm?”
Pretty much anything Trump did. You seem to be proud of a deal you should NOT be.
I have nothing against Musk. But you are an idiot if you think that a government loan was critical – ever to anything.
“Go one: NAme it.”
The mid eastern peace deals.
cleaning up our taxes.
Building the wall.
Getting NATO to start paying more of its own defense costs.
Releasing the Fracken – that alone was economically huge – which should be obvious to you as you watch inflation spiraling.
Not starting any new foreign conflicts.
Not blackmailing foreign governments to buy his son nose powder and hookers.
“Biden did a lot more than that,”
Not that you have named so far.
“I would not be bragging about presiding over the worst recovery since the great depression.”
Why not? The 2008 economic crash was the worst since the Great Depression.
“Why not? The 2008 economic crash was the worst since the Great Depression.”
The decline in output was just barely worse than the 1980’s recession – which took longer to reach bottom but had a far far stronger recovery.
The decline in number of hourse worked in 2008 was just about the least of any recession ever.
On the recovery side – the recovery of productivity of the 2008 recession was just about the worst ever.
In fact we never recovered.
In the late 70’s early eighties the misery index was the worst it has ever been.
If you say so, bud.
Statistical reality fully disagrees with you, but have it.
Your source has myriads of errors.
Here is Wikipedia on growth during the early 80’s recession – which – as your source is measuring the 2008 recession started in 1978 and ended in 1983 – FAR longer than the 2008 recession.
While the 2008 recession peaked at -8.4% – imperceptably worse than the -8% in 1980,
There were fewer negative growth quarters and the average negative growth was much larger in the early 80’s.
My guess it it was written by some juvenile whose only personal experience of recession was 2008 ansd is therefor deluded into beleiving it was really bad.
I would note that even your source says the 2020 recession – which is NOT an actual recession – there were only 2 q’s of negative growth an official recession requires 3 – regardless your source calls the 2020 recession the worst since the great depression.
In fact the 2020 “faux recession” is the worst single quarter drop in GDP in us history, The great depression took far more time to lose the same amount of growth.
I would note the 2nd greatest drop was NOT the great depression either – it was the 1921 depression. That would be the 2nd largest loss in a single quarter in US history.
Your source entirely omits the 1921 depression – so much for “the balance”
If you are going to cite sources – find good ones.
While I just cited wikipedia – which is NOT a good source – I did so merely to prove that the 1921 depression actually happened – and to prove your source is not credible.
Your source SOMETIMES refers to BEA data. What is wrong with using that ?
Or the FED ? or NBER ?
There are myriads of sources for good data.
Trading economics is an excellent source for very high quality US and global data.
“If you are going to cite sources – find good ones.”
Says the guy who posts Wikipedia entries. Can’t make this stuff up. You’re a funny guy, John Say. Not in the way you may think, but funny nonetheless.
Yes, i frequently post wikipedia entries.
First there are areas wikipedia can be trusted. Quite alot of them.
Though not with any that touch on politics.
But equally important – when wikipedia rejects left wing nut nonsense – you KNOW it must be horse $hit.
Wikipedia is not a reliable source – but it is a reliable source for the most left credible position.
If you are making left arguments that even wikipedia will not echo – you are way out on the left fringe.
Next – I have no idea and do not care about the biases of the specific source you cited.
What i do know – what is obvious is the quality of their analysis is much WORSE than wikipedia.
Wikipedia is atleast aware there was a depression in 1920. An economic decline more than 50% larger than 2008 or 1980.
Your source was not.
Further YOUR source rejected YOUR claim.
From the article, best way to look at the 20’s/30’s…
[1929–38 (The Great Depression)
The biggest economic crisis in U.S. history was two closely related recessions. The first downturn was from August 1929 to March 1933, with a record 12.9% contraction in 1932. The second downturn lasted from May 1937 to June 1938. Unemployment reached 24.7% in 1933 and remained in the double digits until WWII began.1 10
Year 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939
Growth Rate -8.5% -6.4% -12.9% -1.2% 10.8% 8.9% 12.9% 5.1% -3.3% 8.0%
Unemployment 8.7% 15.9% 23.6% 24.9% 21.7% 20.1% 16.9% 14.3% 19.0% 17.2%
Several factors combined to create the Great Depression. The Fed raised interest rates in the spring of 1928 and continued despite the recession. The 1929 stock market crash destroyed businesses and life savings. A 10-year drought in the Midwest created the Dust Bowl that devastated farmers.
The New Deal ended the first recession, boosting growth by 10.8%. The second recession ended when the drought did, and the government increased spending for World War II.1]
So, your claim about 1921 is bogus. Not just because you were off by 8 years in regard to when the Great Depression occurred, but also by not acknowledging what has led to why the 20’s are considered to be the “roaring 20’s”, a period of time post WWI that were an economic boom, no?
John, I find you to be painfully clueless.
Is “clueless” leftwing nut speak for – I can not get past your facts, so I will resort to insults ?
I have no idea why you seem to think that this post is interesting.
There are several obvious errors in analysis, but the basic facts are right.
US Unemployment did not drop below 10% until 1941.
Real GDP/Capita did not return to 1929 levels until 1941
The stock market did not recover until 1955.
No, the new Deal did not work.
You constantly make this stupid argument that but for government action some bad thing would continue forever.
Is there a single economic downturn EVER that did not have a recovery ?
The economy ALWAYS recovers after a downturn.
Sometimes faster than others.
There is no question the New Deal did not work.
Just as there is no question Obama;s policies did not work.
The real question is how much WORSE did those policies make things.
I noted the 1921 depression – steep, severe and SHORT – government cut spending and taxes.
In 1980 the recession was protracted, but the recovery was strong and enduring – government cut spending and taxes.
The two historical instances in which we dumped massive stimulus – resulted in a long weak recovery.
You are a complete idiot – the 1921 Depression was NOT the great depression.
I provided a Wikipedia Link to it – but I guess you are unable to read.
The 1921 depression occured during the HARDING presidency.
Absolutely it was more than 8 years before the great depression.
Because it was an entirely different economic event.
It was steep severe and SHORT.
The Federal response was spending and tax cuts and despite being 3 times as severe as the “great recession” – it was over very quickly.
I would further note that the Recession in late 1945 had more than twice the GDP drop of 2008 – but unemployment only rose to 5.8%.
The POINT which you are clueless regarding is that you can not measure the severity of a recession by a single metric.
If you use GDP – the 2008 recession was barely worse than 1980. But only half as bad as 1945.
If you use unemployment – 1980 was worse. If you use consequtive qtrs of negative growth – 1980 was much worse.
If you use first negative qtr to last negative qtr – 1980 was much worse.
But if you use rate of recovery – 2008 was really really bad – as was the great depression.
Are fact that alien to you ?
If you are unable to grasp that when I say “1921 depression” – and provide a wikipedia like to the 1921 depression – that I am not misdating the 1929 great depression – how can any of the rest of your arguments be meaningful ?
You wasted several posts on this. If you do not have a clue about what depression I was refering to – how can what you replied be meaningful.
Further – how can you make such an egregious error.
I specifically state the 1921 depression was severe and short and that federal response was to cut spending and taxes.
The 1929 depression took far far far longer, and nobody cut taxes or federal spending.
How can you make such a stupid error ?
Why should you be trusted – about anything ?
Can you read ?
If you make such basic and ovious errors in this – why should I beleive you have the facts of anything correct ?
Why should I beleive you have read any of the posts you claim to have responded to ?
No, idiot talking heads on the left do not disagree with me.
All that is necescary for the left to beleive anything is a single often cooked statistic that appears to reflect their personal viewpoint
The FACT is that 2008 was pretty tame as actual recessions go.
I am 63 – I have been through MANY recessions. They were common place before Reagan.
The 2008 recession was pretty tame overall – and would not have occured at all but for idiotic monetary policy at the Fed.
And yes, there is massive statistical and other evidence to support that.
The 2008 recession does share many things with the great depression.
1). It was caused by the bursting of a bubble in a long term asset created by government easy money policy.
2). There was a fiscal policy response – stimulus and other government efforts to “Fix” what it broke.
3). The recovery was weak and drawn out.
4). The crash occured on the watch of a progressive republican.
5). the abysmal recovery occured on the watch of a progressive democrat.
If you wish to claim that 2008 was really really bad – then you must accept that the two worst recoveries in US history occured as a result of interventionist progressive democrats.
The 1980’s recession was within a fraction of a percent of the same loss in GDP – it was far worse by every single other metric.
One distinguishing factor is that it was deliberately caused in order to wring inflation from the economy,
The “crash” portion was much longer than the 2008 recession – starting during the Carter administration, and ending well into Reagan’s first term.
But the misery index was brought down from 10% unemployment, 10% inflation and 10% interest rates to single digits and was followed by the longest sustained period of consequential prosperity in US history. Bush I and Clinton at the very least get credit for not blowing it.
Many republicans celebrate the Trump economy – yet the Trump economy – at its best, was worse than under Bush I, Reagan or Clinton – as anyone who lived through either knows.
Trump;s economy was only good compared to Obama and Bush II.
And there are myriads of statistics to back that up.
It is too early to tell if Biden is merely pissing all over what should be a strong recovery – or whether he has actually started the economy heading south. But it is inarguable that the strong expectations of post pandemic recovery are gone with Biden.
We already have inflation – much higher and earlier than expected – and debate over whether it will be bad or worse.
If course inflation is the natural consequence of the Fed’s poor monetary policy and the Federal governments rapacious spending.
And absolutely Trump gets the blame for some of the spending. But Biden is doubling and trippling down on Trump.
Jobs growth is tepid. We finally managed to get over 800K new jobs last month – when we need and have been expecting millions of new jobs per month – but even that minor victory was swallowed in a net DECLINE in employment.
If you can not get strong jobs growth now – it is never coming.
But what do you expect from a president that does not grasp that economic growth is inextricably linked to energy costs.
We had to listen to left wing nuts claim Trump was a Putin puppet for years – yet Biden has choked US energy and is doing everything he can to grow Russia’s energy. And you thought Trump was Putin’s puppet ?
“”Why not? The 2008 economic crash was the worst since the Great Depression.”
John, the lack of scholarship Bug provides is fantastic, or should I say fantasy. I will not talk about the quality of the article Bug posted, but the article disputes Bug’s words. It says, “The 2020 recession was the worst since the Great Depression.” Bug said otherwise.
The article also is an indicator of how badly the Obama administration handled the recession. It “lasted from December 2007 to June 2009, the longest contraction since the Great Depression.” If it lasted only until 2009, what took so long to get us back on our feet? We know the answer, poor economic policy by Obama.
The Bug also writes, “Statistical reality fully disagrees with you, but have it.” You dealt with numbers and relationships while the Bug dealt only with words picked out randomly from the sky while he tried to make a point absent of content.
Now the Bug will call me a moron again but won’t be able to say why.
Posted a statistical source above but forgot to type my initials. It has the red letters. Lol. But thanks for name checking me yet again, Stupid Meyer.
We assumed it was your source and if you were able to read and understand John’s note, you would have realized that both of us thought it was a poor article and a poor source. Reasons were given, but I guess you aren’t up to the slightest bit of rigor when it comes to reading.
The link was NOT a source. It was bad and inconsistent analysis done with data from an actually valid source.
And worse it contradicted EB’s claim.
There is a difference between an actual source and analysis of that source.
That does not mean that links to analysis are not useful.
But the standard of a source is accuracy of the facts.
The standard for analysis is logical correctness.
An error is fact and an error in logic are significantly different.
Left wing nuts constantly post links to reporting that quite often is correct on the facts, but bat$hit crazy on analysis.
Svelaz keeps trying to claim that the Boogaloo boys are anti-police and that makes them right wing – that is a non-sequitur.
The link was NOT a source. It was bad and inconsistent analysis done with data from an actually valid source.
And worse it contradicted EB’s claim.”
John, all those things are true. These guys don’t Google to find the truth. They Google to get confirmation from one that might be dumber than they are. You are right, this source and a lot of their sources contradict their positions and they don’t even recognize that.
We are debating with insulting fools.
Amen and Awomen.
To be clear, I posted that data in response to your claim that the 2008 recession was not as bad as the 80 and 81 recession, which is a ridiculous claim on your end. Not just because you won’t find a reputable economist who would make that claim with any degree of seriousness, no matter what lens the fall out would be viewed through. But I posted it because it literally took 10 seconds to research it, being at the top of google’s list, which I knew you would check, and hopefully realize how your claim could be so easily disproven. Hell, it even listed not just a comparison between the 2008 recession to the early 80’s, but ranked all recent recessions in list form…
So, John, you proudly join Allan on moron patrol. Just know I’m LMAO watching you guys work.
You guys are awesome…
You have the patience of a saint. Unfortunately, you are flooding my Inbox. Spare us!
My bad! Apologies!
You know I am a big fan of your writing style, but I am trying to lead an S.Meyer and JohnSay free life!
Yes, style over substance while sticking your head in the sand.
Whatever his patience – he can not get his facts right – not ANY of them.
He conflated the 1921 depression with the 1929 depression.
Makes claims regarding experts – without providing support.
And Cited a source that rejected his own claim.
And has been wrong about just about ever fact.
All this in just a few posts.
“To be clear, I posted that data in response to your claim that the 2008 recession was not as bad as the 80 and 81 recession, which is a ridiculous claim on your end.”
But you are not clear. YOU made the claim that the 2008 recession was the worst since the great depression.
YOUR own source does not back that claim up.
As to comparing 2008 and 1980 – If the myriads of facets that dictate the severity of a recession – there is only a single one in which the 2008 recession just barely exceeds the 1980 recession – and only for a single quarter.
By every other measure the 1980 recession was WORSE – MUCH WORSE.
You can toss all the insults you wish – but the FACTS do not support your contention.
“Not just because you won’t find a reputable economist who would make that claim with any degree of seriousness, no matter what lens the fall out would be viewed through.”
Both a false and stupid claim. Is there anyone who beleives that you are familiar with the work of a single reputable economist ?
It took only moments to find an article in “The Economist” where leading economists were saying that the 2008 recession was overhyped.
Regardless since when are FACTS decided by appeals to authority ?
An appeal to authority is a FALLACY – it is an invalid argument.
“But I posted it because it literally took 10 seconds to research it”
I have no doubt – because you constantly think that idiotic appeals to authority are proof of something.
Have you learned nothing from the past several years ?
There was no Russian collusion – no matter how many talking heads and purported experts were certain otherwise.
There were no Russian Bounties – no matter how many authorities claimed otherwise.
Covid did NOT come from batts at the wet markets in Wuhan – no matter how many experts claimed otherwise.
The Vaccine was developed in 9 months – no matter how many experts claimed it could not be done.
Absolutely we should hear the views of “experts” – though it would help if the left did not censor and silence any experts that disagreed with them. With Socia Media just recently getting caught censoring one of the creators of the mRNA vaccines because he disagreed with CDC on policy.
I am not here to piss over experts – they serve an important function – though that function is severly damaged when idiots like you silence everyone who disagrees with you.
At the same time – there is excellent reason – and plenty of historical evidence that “experts” get things WRONG – ALOT. Frequently more often than they are right.
That is actually intrinsic in the nature of expertise and truth.
In the end if you do not ground your arguments in FACTS – those arguments do not have merit.
“being at the top of google’s list, which I knew you would check,”
I do not use google.
“and hopefully realize how your claim could be so easily disproven.”
There is not a single claim of any kind that can be “disproven” by an appeal to authority.
This argument ended a long time ago – with the FACTS.
You are on the wrong side of them.
You are likely WRONG even in your appeals to authority.
“Hell, it even listed not just a comparison between the 2008 recession to the early 80’s, but ranked all recent recessions in list form…
So, John, you proudly join Allan on moron patrol. Just know I’m LMAO watching you guys work.”
It is no wonder you are so ill informed about nearly everything.
You are not dissuaded in your religious beliefs by actual facts about ANYTHING – so long as you can find some ideolgoically like minded “expert” to blind you to reality.
There are gazillions of “experts” and faux experts. There is only ONE reality.
Experts are often wrong.
Actual FACTS are not.
So far the only “source” you provided was ludicrously bad and contradicted you.
Regardless – it is 2021 – both 2008 and 1980 are long ago. We KNOW the FACTS about both these and other recessions.
We do not need guesses by experts.
I would note that it is a common fallacy – both on the left and the right – to be certain that events within their own recent experience are WORSE than those of the past.
We have idiots rioting and committing arson – in the moronic beleif that racism today is worse than it has ever been.
We still have idiots pretending that C19 is the worst epidemic ever – it is probably not the worst epidemic in my lifetime.
But those like you have to beleive that what little you have experienced is worse than anything else.
No you did not post a statistical source. You posted bad third party analysis of select sttistics.
Your source did not even list the 1921 depression at all.
Your source measured the 2008 recession using nonstandard criteria and then compared it to the 1980 recession measured using traditional criteria – this is piss poor analysis – or more accurately – it is just hypocracy and bias.
Any consistent metric for the duration of the 1980 recession has it lasting twice as long.
But by the standard measure – consequtive negative quarters it was short.
And your own source calls 2020 the worst recession since the great depression – despite the fact that the so called pandemic recession does NOT meet the standard definition of a recession.
Regardless, use whatever critieria you want – but use that criteria CONSISTENTLY.
If you can not manager that you are a hypocrit and a liar.
I do not know what the biases of “the balance” are – but not only are they engaged in fake and misrepresentative analysis – but you actually went farther than they did.
What does that say about you ?
Have you no shame ?
Yes, Bug source both disagrees with him and is poor.
Recessions are measured as consequitve quarters of economic decline.
The definition of a recession requires 3 quarters,
2020 world be the worst – but it was only 2 quarters.
“The Balance’s” assessment of the 2008 crash includes 2 qtrs that occured before a qtr of 2.1% growth.
If we are going to measure a recession end to end with short periods of growth – the 1980’s recession was over twice as long.
In fact the 2008 recession only had a single qtr of really bad decline. Decline that was BARELY worse than 1980’s
But the 1980s recession had many quarters of significant negative growth.
Further that was not the only bad economic pattern in 1980.
I trust the source I posted, not you, John. I’ve seen you routinely post the most convoluted and confused reasoning on a number of issues so I don’t take what you have to say seriously. Sorry.
“I trust the source I posted, not you”
Then you have lost the argument – you used a source that is not an actual source, that has obvious serious errors, that does not measure consistently and that rejects your claim.
This is your idea of a source you should trust ?
And you wonder why you are constantly being accused of spouting religious dogma ?
“I’ve seen you routinely post the most convoluted and confused reasoning on a number of issues so I don’t take what you have to say seriously. Sorry.”
And yet you have never demonstrated that. You seem to constantly think you can just say something is true to make it true.
EB most here know what you do not like about my arguments – that is that they demonstrate the failure of your ideology.
You are a religious nutjob.
You want to debate recessions – yet your OWN source – as bad as it is rejects your claim.
You want to debate recessions – as noted there are numerous primary sources – your faux source cites one of them for data – but then uses its own inconsistent standards to evaluate the data.
There are numerous sources of good economic data.
And even sources that have inherent biases can usually be trusted to show patterns properly.
While you can not reliably mix BEA, NBER, or TE data, they still show exactly the same patterns.
So long as you compare patterns rather than raw data you can mix sources.
As an example there are multiple different sources with different values for economic growth under Trump vs Obama.
Those sources vary by atleast 10%. But they all show the same pattern, they all show growth under Trump – 25-50% higher that under Obama ever AFTER the pandemic.
A recession is typically defined as 3 or more consequtive qtrs of negative growth.
By that defintion – there was no pandemic recession.
By that defintion the 1980’s recession was almost twice that of the 2008 recession, and the recovery was 4 times faster and far stronger.
But by the defintion your sources uses for 2008 – the 1980’s recesion is more than 2 full years longer than it is typically counted and STILL longer than 2008 by alot.
So your clear the POINT is not these specific facts.
The POINT is that you are obviously wrong – by any consistent set of measures.
Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus
Just because you do not like the outcome, does not make an argument convoluted or wrong.
In fact – even a convoluted argument is not inherently wrong.
A few years ago a mathematicial proved that 1 + 1 = 2 – it took 300 pages.
But it was a valid mathematical proof.
Why is it that you have so much difficulty yourself staying “on point”
Whether true or false – calling an argument convoluted or complex – is a FALLACY – even if true it says nothing about the truth of the argument.
Are you capable of saying “Your wrong and this is why” ?
I do veriations of that with you all the time.
As have others here.
SM said – “Your wrong, your source said 2020 was the worst recession since 1929”
I said – “your wrong – your source used different standards to measure 1980 and 2008”
I said “your wrong – your source is not a source, it is bad analysis”.
I did not say “your argument is confusing, or complex or convolutied” – though often they are.
I say YOUR WRONG – and this is why.
Try doing that some time.
It is interesting that the two worst recoveries in US history both occured with democratic presidents heavily engaging government in recovery efforts.
And the strongest US recoveries ever – until recently that of 1921 which was twice as bad as the 2008 recession – lasted less than 18 months total and was followed by the roaring 20’s.
And the government response to the 1921 recession – cut taxes, and cut spending.
The actual record for the deepest deep and the fastest recovery is now held by Trump.
The pandemic decline was larger than anything we have ever seen before – a 1/3 drop in the economy. It was also the fastest recovery we have ever seen. So fast that we did not even get an official recession – 3 qtr’s of negative growth – We only had two and only barely that – Despite an over 20% decline.
The ‘recession” was so short that 2020 GDP did not decline from that of 2019. And that Trump’s 4 year average growth was STILL 0.5% higher than Obama’s.
Again, statistical reality fully disagrees. But I can tell that won’t deter you from making the point you’re trying to make.
“Again, statistical reality fully disagrees. “
Take note, Bug, how easily you make such statements and have no content to back up anything you say.
In the university we had students like that. They were the ones that got an F and went to play basketball. Others provided the needed information and got an A. Then, they also went to play basketball.
Allan, you went to a college? I took you for for having a tutor at the institution you found yourself a resident of.
“statistical reality fully disagrees.”
Then you would be able to demonstrate that.
I provided actual figures. You have provided personal assertions.
BTW statistics are not reality – there is no such thing as “statistical reality” – there is just reality.
Statistics are a MEASURE of reality.
Each statistic is ONE measure of reality.
At any given time there are positive statistics and negative statistics. It is ALWAYS possible to find some statistic that appears to make any claim valid – home prices dropped after the collapse of the housing bubble – that sounds good doesn’t it ?
It does if you have a job, money in the bank and are looking to buy a home.
But it is pretty $hitty if your mortgage is underwater and you must sell.
I would also note regarding analysing 2008 and Obama that are two aspects.
What was Obama’s role in causing the mess – fortunately for him he was not even in the Senate when the seeds of destruction were sewn. While it is certain that had Obama been in congress before the great recession he would have shared in the responsibility of all other progressives – including the republican ones. The fact is that he was not, and therefore has no culpability in creating that mess.
But he was elected to clean it up – and he failed MISERABLY
Average 1.6% growth over 8 years is unforgiveable.
I beleive the only president who has ever done that badly before was FDR.
And just to be clear – neither the great depression nor the 2008 recession needed to be especially bad.
FDR actually triggered a recession in the middle of the great depression by raising taxes.
And Even FDR had better Growth than Obama – before he choked it.
So you are clear – ALL recessions/depressions are MONETARY – Since the early 20th century that means they are caused by the Fed,
In the 19th century they were caused by congress.
A recession or depression has an absolute requirement that only government monetrary policy can drive – that is getting nearly the entirety of a single significant segment of the economy moving in nearly the same direction.
Recessions are like waves in a bathtub. The private sector can splash arround – but creating waves that spill over the tub reguires everything moving together – only government can do that.
“Yeah I cut and pasted an article supporting my argument.”
It wasn’t cut and paste. It was complete plagiarism interspersed with some of you words.
As I said: You are nothing more than a pig wearing lipstick.
Anyone can go to lipstickalley and see for themselves.
No the election was not particularly secure. That is just more of the silly fact free naratives of left wing nuts.
Anyone right or left claiming that – is an idiot.
I have provided a number of the MANY examples of serious election insecurity that are undisputed in 2020.
There were unattended – i.e. INSECURE ballot boxes all over the country.
The mailin ballot rejection rate for 2020 was 1/25th that of past experience with mailin elections in states that have been doing them for years.
It was 1/1000 that of the democratic primaries in may of 2020
Inarguably we counted far more bogus votes that ever before.
Did that change things – I do not know, and we probably will never be able to know.
Was it massively insecure ? Inarrguably.
If you continue to deny reality – and beleive those who OBVIOUSLY are denying reality – then why should anyone trust you ?
Typical leftist – issuing orders to others.
Attacking spelling or grammar – is a fallacy – it is an effort to avoid addressing the actual argument.
“Attacking spelling or grammar – is a fallacy –”
Also petty and juvenile.
It is proper spelling and grammar that distinguish us from the Mongol races.
If your spelling and grammar are flawed, so are your arguments.
And your arguments are even more flawed than your spelling and grammar.
“It is proper spelling and grammar that distinguish us from the Mongol races.”
They do ? Are you sure that Ghengis Khan had poor grammar and spelling ?
Didn’t Khan and mongols preside over the largest empire in world history ?
If you are going to make this racial – isn;t the worst gramar spelling and english that of blacks ?
The left tells me all the time that blacks can not compete in standardized testing – because their grasp of grammar spelling and inglish is inferiour – isn’t that a racist claim ?
“If your spelling and grammar are flawed, so are your arguments.”
“And your arguments are even more flawed than your spelling and grammar.”
You are welcome to demonstrate that with facts, logic and reason.
[“If your spelling and grammar are flawed, so are your arguments.”
I’m sorry, can I just take a moment to point out how beautiful this passage is? Bahahahahahaha
There has been a debate over spelling and grammar here.
And what has been determined is that those not on the left – only care about spelling and grammar when those on the left are hypocritical about it.
While those on the left only care about spelling and grammar when someone on the right makes a mistake.
Worse still – those on the left are often WRONG about their claims of gramatical error.
This is directed at DB’s comments criticizing Turley’s post as a fluff piece:
Turley wrote in an earlier article:
“As I have previously said, Barr remains more sinned against than sinner and history will vindicate his tenure at the Justice Department.”
We shall see. But the larger point is that Trumpists are willing to vilify Barr because they believe he was not loyal to Trump. Yet Turley resolutely defends him against Trump’s attacks.
As seen in DB’s post, he resents Turley defending what he thinks is indefensible. I have vehemently criticized Turley’s hypocrisy, but I have never once doubted his rationality. The problem Turley will increasingly face is his trying to persuade “people of faith” with reason. When he defends the prosecution of Trump and his allies, the Trumpists will not hear of it. They will demand that that you are either with them or against them- that you either call Trump’s prosecution a “witch-hunt or you are a “Never Trumper.”
In order for Trumpism to flourish, there can be no middle ground. A middle ground which Turley has deftly been able to maneuver until now. I hate to say, but I actually pity the poor guy for what is in store for him.
This is a fluff piece to cover for your weekly lunch buddy, Bill Barr. It only talks about Barr’s insolence toward POTUS 45, and avoids the now overwhelming amounts of evidence that vindicates President Trump and his legal team regarding the election fraud brought upon the American People.
The Italian angle was always rubbish, and never pushed by Trump. Interesting that you insert that as the sole source to thicken your smokescreen for AG Barr, yet craftily avoid everything else that proves Trump — as in most cases, about most things — was right.
There was no election fraud.
Trump lost the popular vote by 7 million votes – a clear message from the American people: GET LOST, YOU’RE FIRED!!!
Election fraud is now up there with Chem Trails, Deep State, PizzaGate and all the other dumb things you propeller heads obsess about.
No American should be that dumb, and yet, here you are.
“There was no election fraud.”
D.A.F. you are.
Did you know ChemTrails are a government conspiracy designed to make Americans so gullible and dumb, they actually believe Chemtrails are a government conspiracy?
And they also believe in Deep State and Election Fraud and Pizzagte and all the other propeller head BS.
No American should be that dumb. There’s no excuse.
There is proven democratic gerrymandering, including irregularities and fraud, in several Democrat districts. Other cases were denied judicial review (demos-cracy is aborted at the Twilight fringe) or are pending review. What remains unknown is if these cases, separately, and together, would overturn an alleged consensus.
I ran your paragraph through Google Translate and translated it out of Fullashit into English and it came out: “Yadda yadda yadda. Whine whine whine. Wrong wrong wrong. I don’t know what I’m talking about because I inhaled too many Chemtrails.”
Democrats don’t care about the audits, because they aren’t idiots.
Trump lost, fair and square, because he failed the American people.
All is right with the world.
“Democrats don’t care about the audits, because they aren’t idiots.”
I think there is a difference between “not caring” about the audits [indifference?] and waging desperate war in law, politics and media to stop, suppress or discredit an audit.
That reeks of a frantic desire to conceal wrongdoing.
If everything were legit an audit would truly be a matter of indifference.
But everytime someone here says or hints the election was stolen we get immediate and rude denials from a group likely to include one or two paid trolls who are part of the general effort to stop audits.
The clearest evidence that audits are needed is the massive effort to stop [rather than ignore] them.
The Democrats aren’t trying to stop anything.
They don’t care.
They know it’s a waste of time and are laughing in their sleeves as the right waste oodles of time and money chasing windmills.
Trump lost. Biden is president. All is right with the world.
Seven million popular votes.
Election Fraud is now up there with ChemTrails and Deep State and Agenda 21 and New World Order and all the other nonsense spouted by ignorant fools.
Thanks! On cue as predicted.
Ben you are clueless.
If Democrats were not seeking to stop anything – we would have had myriads of audits of this election in November.
Recently a democrat interest group won 7 or 9 challenges to the audit in GA.
Sounds impressive. Except all they accomplished was changing the plantifs from the members of the election boards collectively as officers fo the government to the same people individually.
The point was to stop the entire audit.
The core democratic claim was – “it does not matter if there was fraud – these people as agents of the state have soveriegn immunity – they can not be sued for fraud”
Really ? Democrats actually arguing there is no remedy at all for fraud ? That you are not allowed to sue the government for election fraud ?
That is the rock you wish to hide behind ?
Every election should have a well designed post election audit process ALWAYS.
Not when there is an agreeived loser.
We did not find “fraud” in Windham NH.
But what was found was egregious.
In 2020 – the serious errors found JUST BARELY did not change the outcome – but it easily could have.
Further what was found is a problem statewide, It is also a problem that has been there for almost 20 years.
Yet, because the Windham audit merely found a serious problem that did not alter the results in windham – barely.
Nothing more is being done.
The rest of NH – which certainly has the same error – has not been audited.
The past 20 years of election have not been checked.
And the big problem in Windham was a technical problem with voting machines that would ALWAYS favor one candidate or party.
Whose ox got gored would depend on the layout of the ballot.
But the error would ALWAYS be one sided.
It does not matter if this is innocent – it is still unacceptable.
A picture that should warm everyones heart.
When Some, Select [Black] Lives Matter invades neighborhoods with motivations of spreading fear through intimidation, it is good to remember that the Founding Fathers stood up for the common man and woman, the socially “deplorable”, the “flyover” populations, with the passage of the Second Amendment, overturning diverse social and legal precedents to deny the People their God-given right and means of self-defense.
“When he resigned in the waning days of the Trump administration morale at the DOJ was at its lowest point in a generation. That’s the reality you choose to ignore.”
Turley regrettably does a lot of “ignoring.” That is his great sin. It’s ironic that Turley prefaces his posts by stating “We have been discussing….” “We” does not include Turley, for he will not engage in any discussion with us. Turley is lecturing us because he will not address our questions. That is the reason he can blithely ignore issues and inconvenient truths. He will not allow himself to be confronted and held accountable for his hypocrisies.
I wish there were students of his here who could inform us of his classroom. Does he ever entertain questions about his articles? Is he approachable outside the classroom?
When will Turley appear in public to actively debate and defend his criticism of the MSM while working for the rage-filled Fox network? Will he submit to being interviewed on C-span to give his followers an opportunity to question him?
Turley has been walking a tight-rope working for a network which fills the airwaves with the rage he decries while trying to maintain his academic integrity and intellectual honesty. It’s easier to do so when you shield yourself from your critics.
“does not include Turley, for he will not engage in any discussion with us. “
Jeff, if your head gets any bigger it will explode and Dennis will be part of the clean up committee.
Why would Professor Turley wish to engage with you? What do you have to offer? So far, nothing but complaints and an inability to defend anything you say.
Given the affidavits and other evidence of democratic gerrymandering, including irregularities, perhaps fraud, in several Democrat districts, Trump expected Barr et al to oversee public servants performance of audits. Nothing illegal (e.g. affirmative discrimination motivated by diversity), not even untoward (e.g. Some, Select Black Lives Matter invading neighborhoods to intimidate people… persons a la KKK). Demos-cracy is aborted at the Twilight fringe. #BabyLivesMatter
Trump is gone. Barr is gone. Giuliani is going going….
A bunch of fat old white men with one foot in the grave, still pretending they’re powerful.
They’re not. They’re just old.
The long national nightmare is over.
President Kamala is coming (eeegads!) and this will be the national nightmare –beyond what we are already experiencing.
Kamala probably wont be president but even if she is there’s no way she’ll screw it up as bad as Trump did.
And there’s nothing nightmarish about the present experience.
Republicans screw it up. Democrats clean it up.
Trump left behind an even bigger mess than Bush43 and now Biden and Team have their heads down to fix it all.
LEt’s see how America is at the end of four years.
“Kamala probably wont be president ”
I keep expecting her to have the pow and pizazz of Obama, but so far, Obama is Lebron James and Kamala is the WNBA.
Is she exciting? Charismatic?
Can she deliver a speech like Obama?
Quote me any great one liners or speech lines from Kamala Harris.
America isn’t ready for a female president I don’t think, and the woman who gets elected will have to be an Obama-class superstar.
And that’s not Kamala – yet.
You’ve either got “it” or you don’t.
Kinda, yes. PEople that age aren’t thinknig about the future because they don’t have a future.
Biden is an exception.
His American Jobs Plan looks 20 – 30 years off into the future and prepares for it.
Remember when that man from the old age home told us if we were good we could see our families outdoors for a BBQ on July 4th?
Whatever happened to him?
“The long national nightmare” you speak of was actually a completely fabricated narrative spun and promoted by those people with agendas and interests in the status quo circa November 2016. You know who I’m talking about- the grifters, the warmongers, the frauds, the child traffickers, the USAID dependents, the communists, the satanists, the power hungry bureaucrats and the list goes on. All of whom have driven the Republic into unsustainable debt, caused worldwide distrust, sold our god given rights to globalists and self enriched at the expense of `we the people’.
The really sad part is, those people stupid enough to subscribe unquestioningly to their fabricated narrative, still believe their political heroes are doing good and virtuous acts that benefit the people as a whole. In fact, they’ve invested everything, including their belief system into a scam run by immoral criminals. I just wonder whether they’ll wake up and be too embarrassed to say anything or remain asleep until we’ve become the exactly as the China model – a total slave surveillance state, with no rights, justice or equality under law ruled by unaccountable elites.
There are people fighting against this. But to you they would be conspiracy theorists. Continue enjoying your Potemkin Village of democracy, chances are you’ll only notice somethings wrong when you realize there is no difference in policies between left and right.
Jonathan: One thing can be said for certain. You have been ever loyal to your friend Bill Barr. But your long time friendship with the former AG has blinded you to the realities. When Trump selected Barr to replace Jeff Sessions he said he had finally found his “Roy Cohn”. He was not disappointed. Barr dutifully was Trump’s “fixer”. Barr sought to undermine Robert Mueller’s report and took decisions to benefit Trump personally and his allies. After Sessions left Barr continued to interfere with Congressional investigations into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Following Trump’s orders Barr seized the communications of Congressmen Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell, their staffs, family members and journalists. Nothing was ever turned up that would justify this vendetta against Trump’s enemies. Former DOJ inspector general Michael Bromwich has said of Barr’s tenure at the Department: “…Barr proved a willing accomplice on issues ranging from distorting the Mueller report to taking insupportable positions in cases [Flynn and Stone] in which Trump took a personal interest”.
I guess you see your role here as trying to rehabilitate Barr’s discredited reputation as AG by focusing solely on Barr’s resistance to Trump’s unfounded claims that he lost the 2020 election only because of massive election “fraud”. Barr’s last final act is an exception to the rest of he tenure as AG. For the most part Barr acted as Trump’s “fixer” and in the process degraded the integrity and independence of the Department. When he resigned in the waning days of the Trump administration morale at the DOJ was at its lowest point in a generation. That’s the reality you choose to ignore.
Trump, Barr, Giuliani, etc: These old, fat men with one foot in the grave had their four years to slime America.
They did that, America voted them out, they’re gone.
The Trump administration was a stress test for Democracy, and Democracy survived.
You are an example of ‘systemic stupidity.’
No dear, I am a victim of reality.
America just had the dumbest administration in 50+ years making a mess of everything.
You might want to see America become a Third World kleptocracy run by Banana Republicans, but there are forces opposed to that.
You’re probably an old, fat white man with one foot in the grave – like them.
You just like Trump because you’re just like him.
Thank Odin they’re all gone. and the smart folks are back in charge.
“You’re probably an old, fat white man with one foot in the grave – like them.”
No dear, I am a fairly young ‘looker’ (as the old folks say) with a big beautiful brain. Sitting here enjoying my MAGArita and messing wit you.
If you support Trump then I’m sorry but there is something seriously wrong with your intellect and/or your integrity.
Or you’re just greedy and blind to anything but your own needs.
A typical American more obsesses with appearance than content, perhaps?
Trump is a charlatan and a fraud who appeals to the sad, the lost, the corrupt.
The support for Trump helps me understand how the Germans could have supported Hitler and Naziism out of arrogance, ignorance, fear, insecurity, greed, racism and self interest.
None of the above. Like you I do some writing, traveling, teaching, learning, soaking up “life”….even spent five years working for the Peace Corps. You cannot put Trump supporters all in your one little box. Cheers!
Yes, I can. If you support Trump there is something wrong with you. Simple as that.
If you can’t recognize the guy is a fraud and a charlatan, there is something wrong with you.
And what’s wrong with you essentially is you aren’t too bright.
Yes you can! Si se pwodway!
Or you are as old and corrupt as he is.
You just like him because you’re just like him.
Say it with me! Si se pwodway! (In case anyone missed the reference)
“And what’s wrong with you essentially is you aren’t too bright.”
Look up the definition of ‘psychological projection.’
Michael Bromwitch man he’s so credible, he represented whats her name, the one who thought Kavanagh had done something as a teen. Jesus, talk about brainwashed by the media psyop. Just for once try some alternative sources for your info, you’ll come across so much less ignorant.
PS. It was/is Durham who seized all the comms. Durham did so much earlier than your limited imagination can believe. It was in 2017 when Durham was tasked with leak investigation. Imagine that? While doing the leak investigation he was tasked with the Russia origins. Do you even understand what that means? It means Durham was investigating the entire Mueller circus in real time, as it was happening. Before you even reply, it would be wise to see exactly what the outcome of all that investigating is. I believe we will know shortly. Allowing the gag order on the comms warrants to expire kinda indicates it’s not required any longer. Meaning they have all they need.
What is astonishing is the degree of denial. Why not investgate? I have alwais appreciated Bill Barr, but I’m a little perplexed: this is very confusing.
Yes, from the consensus perspective, they could only gain ground. Barr and Rosen refused to provide oversight of these public servants and processes.
The best thing Bill Barr did was to quit early and show he had a twinge of conscience that he was doing the bidding of a fat, vulgar, corrupt antiChrist.
He’s gone, and good riddance.
This is the treatment Trump and all of his henchpeople deserved: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMMGDQXRie8
The user manual for Dominion voting machines is here:
Section 8 describes how to manually manipulate vote totals.
The user manual for the Diebold voting system (the precursor to Dominion, Smartmatic and others) is here:
The instructions for setting the machines for ‘weighted voting’ are on page 2-126.
The letters sent by Sen. Warren, Sen. Klobuchar, Sen. Wyden and Congressman Pocan in December 2019 requesting investigations into vulnerabilities in the Dominion and other voting systems are here:
There were over 1,000 sworn affidavits alleging major fraud. There was video of poll workers pulling out suitcases of ballots from under a table and counting them after the partisan poll watchers had been sent home. The Anterim County audit that showed that the Dominion voting machines had been programmed to reject 68 percent of the ballots, which then went to adjudication, where a poll worker would decide, without any log or audit trail, who the voter meant to vote for. In Fulton County, GA., 106,000 of the 113,000 ballots cast went to adjudication.
These are serious allegations of massive election fraud that cries out to be investigated and litigated in court where it would be subject to the rules of evidence, cross-examination and rebuttal. So far, this hasn’t happened.
In my state, Pennsylvania, Gov. Wolf signed a ‘no excuse mail-in voting’ bill on 10/31/2019 that appears to violate Article 7, Section 14 of the state constitution (it doesn’t provide an exception for pandemics). Apparently, there is a plan to amend this section of the PA Constitution in 2021 or 2022.
It would have been nice if the DOJ had taken all of this seriously. As it is, half the country thinks the election was ‘stolen’.
You are just repeating claims of fraud that have been proven to be meritless. Suitcases with ballots? That’s how they transport ballots in that county. Nothing nefarious about it at all. They did a hand count of the actual paper ballots which confirmed the Dominion machine totals. So that theory goes out the window.
This is all just a bunch of BS. Trump lost the election. If Biden and the Democrats rigged it, why did they only rig the vote for the President? They lost several House seats. Trump lost the election when other Republicans won because there was a sizable percent of Republicans (like me) who weren’t about to vote for that fool to remain in offic.e
Al B– Good post. We are supposed to believe that oil pipelines can be held hostage to ransomware and that the Pentagon can be penetrated but these machines with what appear to be documented vulnerabilities are somehow supernaturally secure.
The Democrat eye-rolling, spitttle-flinging terror at the mere thought of an audit does nothing to reassure the country that the election was not stolen.
Trump’s either a sore loser or a guy trying to preserve democracy. Let’s see what happens with the audits.
Oh and Barr’s either a stalwart for representative government or the bank guard asleep when the robbers show up even as the tellers try to awaken him.
The recounts and audits are over. Trump lost. The AZ “audit” is not a real audit.
Paul Ogden, you have been seriously brain washed by the main stream media, the radical leftists and the rino republicans. The Arizona audit is a real audit….they don’t just recount ballots over and over again they are doing a forensic audit. If the dems and rinos are so sure it was an honest election why are they fighting so hard to stop the audits? There are now about a dozen states that have come to Arizona to look and how they have been auditing and they have said they are blown away by the integrity with which this is being done. I live in Arizona and I know what’s going on while you speak words without knowledge. The msm is refusing to report on this truthfully.
A court-ordered audit, with court oversight, is not a “real audit”?! What, then, are the standards of a “real audit”?
Is the Fulton County, GA court-ordered audit also not a “real audit”?
Something that doesn’t involve a firm named “Cyber Ninjas”.
It is a legally sanctioned audit that should have taken place earlier. Why do you think it isn’t?
Because no one with any brains or sense thinks an Arizona audit is necessary.
By seven million votes.
Stop beating a dead horse.
He lost because he failed America.
He lost because he couldn’t con his way out of a pandemic, and America lost faith.
“Because no one with any brains or sense thinks an Arizona audit is necessary.”
That is the type of response one expects from a person without any brains. I rest my case. Nothing else need be said.
Seven million votes.
You don’t see that as some kind of statement or mandate?
America gave a shot to a vulgar game show host.
America voted him out – decisively.
“You don’t see that as some kind of statement or mandate?”
Not at all based on the left’s attempts to prevent a look at what the irregularities caused.
True did a good job on the economy, jobs, increased take-home pay, peace in the middle east, China being restrained, Russia being restrained, Iran and NK being restrained. He did so much more.
What did Biden do? He let the Russian pipeline go thorough while denying America the Keystone pipeline. Sounds like Biden is under the thumb of Russia who recently probably permitted a cyber attack on one of our oil pipelines. That tells us we need more quickly. It stabbed Ukraine in the back along with the rest of eastern Europe. But, who cares Obama Biden already permitted Russia to take chunks of Ukraine and Biden involved himself with the Internal affairs of Ukraine.
I just got started, need I say more? Biden has already started one war in the middle east and is about to participate in a possible nuclear mid east war in the future all this while China eats our lunch and pays for the Biden family’s drugs, sex and everything else.
Sore loser. Trump has never been about preserving democracy. He signed off on a member of the press being didmembered.
With the revelations of:
-The forensic audit in Antrim Co Michigan,
-The fraud found in a town in Mississippi triggering an election redo,
– The Maricopa County audit,
-The numerous irregularities in Georgia including many counties unable to produce chain of custody records, Fulton Co video, Fulton Elections Board hiring criminal defense attorneys and the SOS dropping 100,000 from voter roles AFTER the election
– The fact that of the cases where the judges actually looked at the evidence, Trump won 65% of his elections lawsuits,
-The previous revelations of election fraud such as LA County admitting their registration numbers were 144% of the population
– More votes in Habersham Co GA than residents.
-Judges releasing violent criminals over and over to prey on the citizenry while mostly trespassers languish in DC jails from Jan 6
-75 days of continuous violence in Portland with no consequences for the perpetrators
– Continuous Fauci backflips, new revelations about the efficacy of HCQ and Ivermectin and Fauci’s suppression of those lifesavers
And you wonder why citizens no longer have confidence in the government?
Add to your list —
Numerous batches of ballots (about 100 ballots per batch) in Fulton County, GA: Ballots double- and triple-counted. Ballots not counted, at all. Batches with *identical* vote tallies, a statistical impossibility.
All now being uncovered during the *court-appointed* audit, by the *court-appointed* auditor.
The SEB watchdog raised numerous red flags about Fulton County, on election night.Apparently, the SoS sat on that report.
To borrow a line from Perry Mason: Fraud is usually very simple. It’s the getting away with it that’s real complicated and tricky.
Here is the election fraud:
Anonymous the Stupid provides a link again. But, what did the article say? Nothing much like ATS.
No, dude, “citizens” aren’t the ones who don’t have confidence in the government. That would be Trump disciples like you who believe the lies told by Trump and his Republican and alt-right media enablers. Trump has “won” exactly ZERO election lawsuits. Hydroxychloroquine is not effective in either preventing or treating COVID 19. Trump lied about that. In fact, a study published in February of this year and available on the website of the National Library of Medicine, recommended no further testing because Hydroxychloroquine is not just ineffective, it is dangerous when used for conditions other than for which it has been approved by the FDA. And…Trump and his enablers need a foil: someone to get the deplorables to hate to deflect against Trump’s lies and failures. In 2016, it was Hillary Clinton, in 2020, it was Biden, but all of the false accusations of him being “senile” and the rest are not working, so they attack Dr. Fauci because he pushed back against Trump and his stupidity. As a matter of fact, if Hydroxychloroquine was effective, it would be the FDA that would allow it to be used and promoted as a COVID treatment. Dr. Fauci works for the CDC–a completely different agency over which he has no control or influence, but hey, don’t let little facts like that get in the way. Fauci did NO “backflips”, either. Recommendations he has made in regard to the novel coronavirus were based on scientific consensus at the time. Recommendations changed as new information became available. That’s how science works.
Trump lost the election fair and square because the majority of Americans didn’t like him. They saw him for the showy, braggadocious, serial bankrupter of businesses and overall failure that he is. None of the “evidence” you claim exists is valid.
Good, the Democrats have learned how to cheat and use dirty tricks to win.
Who do you think they learned that from?
Trump lost by seven million votes.
America voted him out because he’s a fraud and a screwup.
There was no election fraud.
America is much better off, with competent, professional leadership.
Who are the competent professionals you are referring to?
Because there are no competent people running the shit show we are watching right now.
Biden. Harris. Obama in the shadows most likely.
And a lot of good people who helped Obama clean up the mess are helping Biden clean up the new mess.
Shitshow? The shitshow just ended. The Trump shitshow.
The biggest shitshow in the history of shitshows.
The dumbest 50% of America elected a vulgar game-show host when it needed leadership.
Trump thumbed his lips while America burned – a conman who couldn’t con his way out of a pandemic.
Trump managed to screw things up even worse than Bush43, and no one thought that was possible.
Biden and Team are cleaning up that mess, rolling out the vaccine without playing politics, opening America for business.
California is opening up and we even have a $15.5 billion tax windfall from the middle of an economic meltdown.
The silver lining in Coronavirus is it swept Trump out of office and stifled him and we don’t have to listen to his blather anymore.
“The dumbest 50% of America elected a vulgar game-show host when it needed leadership.”
More correctly said this way: The dumbest 50% of America selected an incompetent, corrupt, coattail-riding, nasty little liar to ‘coronate’ as president when it needed leadership.
And so the country wisely chose Trump.
You think choosing Trump was “wise?”
Everything he touches turns to shit.
A 100% failure of leadership in the face of a serious economic, humanitarian and constitutional crisis.
A fraud voted in by gullible proles.
Thankfully the country came to its senses and voted him out.
Biden and Team are reminding America what leadership is all about.
Go read the American Jobs Proposal.
Did Trump attempt anything like that?
What did Trump attempt?
Nothing. He just talked a bunch of BS for four years and walked around with a stupid red hat.
What Biden is proposing is long term MAGA.
Thank Odin Trump is gone.
A fraudulent screwup voted in by fools.
“You think choosing Trump was “wise?”
I don’t ‘think’ it was wise.
I know it was wise.
We saw how Hillary and Bill Clinton monetized the State Dept during her tenure there. The country only had to imagine what a corrupt shitshow it would be having the Clintons back in the White House, this time with the god-awful Hillary in charge.
Trump was the wise choice. No question about it. The country chose wisely.
Biden’s handlers will soon be unable to contain and control his every word. Then the extent of his feebleness and senility will become even more apparent to the world. He will be forced out and Kamala, the Heiress, will be installed. She will be an epic disaster. No question.
Much of the country (and the media) misses Trump every single day.
Next ‘Junteenth’ the whites, Asians and Hispanics need to stay home and lock the doors. This might become an annual festival of attacking other races.
White girl beaten by a mob of ‘white supremacists’ as the DOJ defines them.
There are 3 girls, 1 of whom is white. The white girl is briefly held by her hair by one of the other girls who is fighting with the third girl, but then the second girl lets go of the white girl’s hair, the white girl moves away, and the other two girls continue fighting. The white girl wasn’t hit by either of the other 2 girls.
That you’re capable of watching that and concluding that it shows a “White girl beaten by a mob” tells us you either need to have your eyesight or attention to detail checked, or you’re just lying.
Two light-skinned girls and a black girl. The black girl is assaulting one of the girls, then the third girl intervenes and the black girl loses her grip. Diversity (e.g. racism), even rabid diversity, probably.
Charles Murray says something I said once or twice here. When the core of society begins to lose faith in the institutions of government the government is in danger of coming apart. Unfortunately we now have a political class that appears to be a mix of stupidity, cowardice, radicals, and hustlers who are unlikely to see where we are drifting. The bagpipe player, Barr, is louder than Nero was when he fiddled, but both are failures.
Here is the quote from Murray:
Young cautions: “When the core of society begins to lose faith in the institutions of government, the government is in danger of coming apart.“
And I’m sure the Trumpists’ demonization of the federal government as a nefarious “Deep State” had absolutely NO effect on the Republicans losing faith in our federal leadership.
Trump was because faith was being lost, not the cause of it.
You have inverted cause and effect.
My comments were not intended to convince you. I know you are a lost cause.
Trolls sometimes raise a subject that leads me to comment for others, as in this case, not for the troll.
Young, such comments are very useful to those that are casual readers. They may not realize that Jeff’s first appearance as one seeking unity only held until he was pushed to prove his inane statements. From that point on he became a troll and his full character was revealed.
S. Meyer, when you say “From that point on he became a troll and his full character was revealed,” you are describing yourself and your daily slew of comments insulting others, making false claims about others, pretending to read people’s minds and attacking them for your imagined faults, …
Anonymous the Stupid, the collective notes that you have been on a roll of stupidity today. We lost count of the number. Can you provide the figure. What was amazing to us was the fact that despite the number of posts you said virtually nothing.
“You have inverted cause and effect.”
Unlike Democrats, the Republican voter has a thinking functional brain.
They are not indoctrinated, conditioned zombies.
President Trump is right. Reporting over the last 5+ years proves the deep state is real, and actively working outside the constitution. A wide swath of Govt, worked against a political candidate running tor the office of President, then the transition team, and of course the office of President.
Never forget that Traitor Lt Col, Alex Vindman launched an impeachment because he was mad the President of the United States was working against the desires of the “working group” while advancing the Presidents Foreign Policy Initiatives.
And you are so blind you think its funny.
Vindman was not a traitor, and Trump deserved to have been impeached and removed.
Elizabeth deVos is the sister of Erik Prince who started Blackwater.
There’s your Deep State.
If there was a Deep State they didn’t have to do anything but sit back and watch Trump turn everything to shit.
He didn’t need any help.
He screwed it up all on his own.
America woke up and voted him OUT!!!
I disagree. Perhaps I’m too cynical, but it looks like we are being played. Wink, wink…we’ll hand it off to you, then you hand it off to me and we will slowly take power from the little people. Can’t do it quickly or they will raise a fuss. Better yet, we should convince them to hand over power of their own volition. Then they will happily play our game…
America works pretty well compared to most of the rest of the world.
Norway is one of the few countries I’ve seen that has it’s act together more than America, but Norway is only 5 million people.
The Little People are as bad at handling power as The Big People.
Name me a freedom or liberty you don’t have in America.
How are you being held back?
This is about the best deal you’re gonna get, anywhere.
“The Little People are as bad at handling power as The Big People.”
Then the big people should stop meddling with self-governance.
I am pissed on behalf of Iowans who lost their local control, their local self-governance, of whether or not they want charter schools operating in their districts. Enter taxation without representation because these boards are not comprised of elected representatives like public school boards are.
Talk about more entities feeding at the public trough!
Iowa has schools? Since when?
Charter schools are going to be forced on Iowans.
Prairie, I don’t know much about Iowa schools, but what I have read is that choice and vouchers are being promoted.
Forced? You HAVE to attend Charter Schools? Or you can CHOOSE to attend Charter Schools.
There’s a big difference.
If its a choice, no big deal.
“Forced? You HAVE to attend Charter Schools? Or you can CHOOSE to attend Charter Schools.”
Wrong focal point. This is taxation without representation. Taxpayers and members of the community do not get a choice regarding the education in their community if charters schools get to bypass them and head to the state level for approval. Who decides there? All the legislators (who do not have the whole story regarding said communities)? Or, a bureaucrat? Either way it increases the power of the state and decreases the self-governance of local communities. Are the community members and parents on these public charter school boards elected or appointed? I doubt it. They aren’t in my neck of the woods. I have no idea how MY tax dollars are being spent in charter schools because that information is not well-advertised whatsoever, nor do I have any recourse if I did disagree because I have no representation that I can communicate with or vote against. Besides, it is pretty darn hard keeping up with the issues in my public school district, let alone trying to keep up with all the charter schools using MY tax dollars.
I absolutely agree that lousy districts need to be dealt with. However, a broad brush affecting ALL the districts in the state and all the citizens is NOT the way to go. Some other means of improving problem schools needs to be figured out such that the self-governance of the majority is not trampled upon and taxpayers are represented (and not trampled upon either).
The smart kids need to be separated and proteced from the dummies, as the dummies are mutating and multiplying at an alarming rate.
How else did Trump get elected?
Taxes pay for Charter Schools?
“what I have read is that choice and vouchers are being promoted”
That bothers me. How are taxpayers given a choice? How do they fit into the equation? As far as I can tell, it is the unelected parents who would get to decide where and how the money is spent–not an elected representative.
Prairie, I understand your questions regarding taxation without representation, but I think that is misapplied for multiple reasons. What would concern me is community control which I favor. If in a small community the charter school would leave no room for public schools, I would have to consider the issue in much greater depth. However, if there was competition where both types of schools competed and met specific standards, I would have no problem with charter schools being added as a choice.
The reason we pay taxes for lower education is not to fund public school. It is to educate our children. I understand the position of those who want to end school taxes and those that support competition with charter schools. I do not understand your position.
University of Iowa post grad writing programs. Very good for a long time.
Iowa? Ain’t nothing there but steers and craft beers.
“I understand your questions regarding taxation without representation, but I think that is misapplied for multiple reasons. ”
Why is is misapplied? What are your reasons?
“Why is is misapplied? What are your reasons?”
Prairie, much of what you asked was incorporated into the rest of my answer. Maybe you need to reread it.
I said, What would concern me is community control which I favor. If in a small community the charter school would leave no room for public schools, I would have to consider the issue in much greater depth. However, if there was competition where both types of schools competed and met specific standards, I would have no problem with charter schools being added as a choice.”
I will add that many agree with what I am saying. That same group of people voted for the politicians that are now permitting charter schools. That is active taxpayer representation
I also said, The reason we pay taxes for lower education is not to fund public school. It is to educate our children. I understand the position of those who want to end school taxes and those that support competition with charter schools. I do not understand your position.
Isn’t it taxation **without** representation if in an area the children are not learning yet the public is paying taxes, so they should learn? Shouldn’t the politicians that have been voted in consider charter schools if the reasons for school taxes are not being fulfilled?
I don’t understand how you can say, public school systems that don’t educate are taxation with representation but a politician trying to educate with the use of charter schools represents taxation without representation.
If you note, I even discussed community control over education, but taxes are part of the larger group that in prior discussions you said was what mattered. In that discussion, I explained that the minority students weren’t getting adequate representation. Still, you didn’t seem to care, nor did you seem to care about their communities where the parents wanted charter schools because those charter schools were teaching their children something the public schools failed to do.
You can’t have it both ways.
“That same group of people voted for the politicians that are now permitting charter schools. That is active taxpayer representation”
They voted away their right to determine how best to manage education in their community. Citizens, foolishly, can end up voting away their rights when they don’t carefully think something through.
That is the last of their active taxpayer representation in the issue of charter schools, then. After that, they no longer have representation.
“However, if there was competition where both types of schools competed and met specific standards”
The manner in which they are set up, it is not a fair competition. As I understand it, the specific standards are not equally applied.
“What would concern me is community control which I favor”
If you favor this, then why remove taxpayer control which extends through the representation of fellow community members elected to the school board. School board members promote a vision of education, vote on matters affecting taxation, budgets, curriculum, etc.
“Shouldn’t the politicians that have been voted in consider charter schools if the reasons for school taxes are not being fulfilled?
“I don’t understand how you can say, public school systems that don’t educate are taxation with representation but a politician trying to educate with the use of charter schools represents taxation without representation.”
Even the lousy public schools have elected representatives. People need to make demands of their elected representatives and make sue their voices are heard even at the administrative level. Whose fault is it if the schools are lousy? The people living in the community who weren’t paying attention. It is possible, however, that the administration and school board are corrupt and are trying to hide the deterioration by trying to teach to the tests so there is a veneer of quality education. That still is the responsibility of parents and community members to try to notice such defects.
Politicians are not representing the taxpayers anymore because the taxes are paid into the public school and then disappear into wherever parents decide to send their children in the charter school system. No more school board, no more school board elections, no more oversight of the expenditures and budgets and curriculum because charter schools are not answerable to the public. This is flipped on its head. The PEOPLE undergird the whole system, not the politicians.
“If you note, I even discussed community control over education, but taxes are part of the larger group that in prior discussions you said was what mattered. In that discussion, I explained that the minority students weren’t getting adequate representation. Still, you didn’t seem to care, nor did you seem to care about their communities where the parents wanted charter schools because those charter schools were teaching their children something the public schools failed to do.”
Many school districts are WAY too large to effectively represent their communities (how do they get broken into smaller, more neighborly chunks?). And, in some communities, the spirit of self-governance has been hamstrung or demoralized by corruption and incompetence and perhaps ignorance of the duties of citizens towards their communities. I am absolutely sympathetic to these concerns (and they are not just the concerns of minorities–I’d say they are concerns of people in low-income communities who care about education, no matter their race). These parents need to talk with their neighbors to raise the alarm; they need to go to school board meetings, meet with the administration, maybe even run for the school board.
I am *very* sympathetic towards anyone in a struggling school district. I have said that charter schools might be appropriate in very badly dysfunctional and disadvantaged communities. But I do not think they should be pushed carte blanche everywhere. Public schools could perhaps learn from the best practices of charter schools to get themselves educationally re-oriented.
I would like to find a way that balances these concerns without eroding self-governance.
“They voted away their right to determine how best to manage education in their community.”
Prairie, that statement means you have given up your argument of taxation without representation.
Your comment is subjective, not objective. Look at my comments again. I am looking for the best education and permitting standards to be applied to all.
“That is the last of their active taxpayer representation in the issue of charter schools, then. After that, they no longer have representation.”
Again, I answered that in my last response. I said I would have to think about the situation if a charter school meant no public school would exist. I want competition where possible.
“The manner in which they are set up, it is not a fair competition. As I understand it, the specific standards are not equally applied.”
That depends on the state. The same educational standards should apply, but you are talking about other standards. I am not concerned with those standards when they impede the education of our children.
“That is the last of their active taxpayer representation in the issue of charter schools, then. After that, they no longer have representation. ”
No, it isn’t. Each parent can decide for themselves whether they want charter schools or the public school system. Your method denies maximum representation for those most involved by placing a system in front of the needs of children.
“That is the last of their active taxpayer representation in the issue of charter schools, then. After that, they no longer have representation.”
The whole idea of competition is to compete differently and survive based on the results. It sounds like you want a demand economy.
“If you favor this, then why remove taxpayer control ”
The taxpayer was represented. Now it is time to represent the student and its parent. All the things you are talking about are already controlled before the choice. You seem not to want to give parents a choice.
“I don’t understand how you can say, public school systems that don’t educate are taxation with representation but a politician trying to educate with the use of charter schools represents taxation without representation.”
We have areas in the nation that are not educating the children. Charter schools, specifically in NYC, enhanced the education of students who previously graduated lacking proficiency in English and Math. Most are proficient or above proficient, and some go to college. Education is the object of school taxes, and charter schools have fulfilled that task better than public schools, so they are filling the desires of the voters that vote for school taxes to educate the young.
I don’t know how that cannot be completely understood. The taxpayers did not vote for school taxes to pay off teacher’s unions, administrators and teachers. All recognize that some of these costs are involved. At least in NYC, per capita payments to charter schools are lower than per capita payments for public schools.
“Even the lousy public schools have elected representatives. People need to make demands of their elected representatives and make sue their voices are heard even at the administrative level. Whose fault is it if the schools are lousy?”
The bureaucracy of the public schools and their desires to promote ideas that should not be enabled with tax dollars is prominent.
Elected representatives can leave out the groups that have the least money, power and education. Let parents and students vote with their feet. Your rhetoric wants to exclude a good portion of these people from an education they require and desire. You are taking your personal beliefs and forcing them on people who, with a lack of education, face more poverty, more crime and more death. That is not a position I would want to be known for.
“Politicians are not representing the taxpayers anymore because the taxes are paid into the public school and then disappear into wherever parents decide to send their children in the charter school system.”
Are you telling me that educating children is not representing why taxpayers vote for school taxes? That is an odd idea. These charter schools are following the educational requirements of the state or county.
No one in this discussion is advocating pushing charter schools onto students. I was very clear in my prior response. I want choice and have already said that if there is room for a charter school and a public school, and the parents want a charter school that meets or exceeds standards, they should get into a charter school. The competition will likely improve the public schools.
I cannot see any justification for your arguments that prevent charter schools from existing when desired by the parent and student. I think what I have said “balances these [your] concerns without eroding self-governance.”
““They voted away their right to determine how best to manage education in their community.”
Prairie, that statement means you have given up your argument of taxation without representation.”
I disagree. It is still taxation without representation. The people of Iowa (or most other states for that matter) did not vote on these bills that allowed for charter schools to use public funds–state representatives. Taxpayers will continue to not have control over how their monies are spent at charter schools.
“I want competition where possible.”
Not with public dollars! Bids are one thing, charter schools are quite another. Parents are not elected to make decisions with anyone else’s tax dollars except their own. If they want to take their fraction of the school tax and apply it somewhere, fine. If taxpayers choose to send their portion of taxes to support a charter, all on their own, fine. Either it needs to go through an elected representative (as in the system now) or it needs to go whereever the tax payer chooses to send it–NOT at the discretion of unelected parents.
“Each parent can decide for themselves whether they want charter schools or the public school system.”
They are not elected to use other people’s monies.
“Your method denies maximum representation for those most involved by placing a system in front of the needs of children.”
I will grant you that systems can indeed become corrupted. Businesses are a system. They can become corrupted, too. And, there is no citizenry oversight to even possibly address it. For communities who care about the effectiveness of their school districts, that failsafe is in place–school board meetings, elections. The citizenry (the taxpayers) can vote in or out school board members who make lousy decisions in the leadership of the district. The citizenry can participate in school board meetings, they can attend school-wide events, they can meet with the administration, they can examine the curricular materials–all that information is FOIA-available if the administration does not share it willingly.
None of that is available through a charter, as far as I know. They are private entities using public funds. No one is elected by the community to serve on the board to make decisions regarding the use of public funds.
I do not understand what you mean by “maximum representation”. There is NO representation when it comes to charter schools. Parents need to get their neighbors involved if the system is that broken. Maybe the community isn’t paying attention like it should. Parents do not get to override fellow taxpayers. We get equal representation.
“I disagree. It is still taxation without representation. The people of Iowa (or most other states for that matter) did not vote on these bills that allowed for charter schools to use public funds”
I think you need to review your understanding of how our government functions. We are not a democracy. We are a Constitutional Republic. Did you vote on the Afghan War?
“Taxpayers will continue to not have control over how their monies are spent at charter schools.”
Who do you think permitted charter schools? Elected leaders. Maybe you want to end school taxes because those taxes support private individuals.
>>“I want competition where possible.
>Not with public dollars!”
The state determines educational standards. If charter schools improve education standards, what is wrong? The money is for education, not to support the public school system and private individuals within that system.
Did you ever ask for speed bumps in your area? Do you think legislators vote on speed bumps? No.
“And, there is no citizenry oversight to even possibly address it.”
That is not true.
“None of that is available through a charter, as far as I know.”
You think citizens going in front of a school board are participants. Parents choosing charter schools for their children because those schools are better than the public schools is a better indicator of public desire unless you think the public doesn’t want its tax dollars to buy the best education.
I can’t believe you will accept 80% failure over 80% success.
What works in NYC does not work everywhere.
Iowans were circumvented by the state. State bureaucrats now get to decide whether a charter school gets to operate in a given district. They lost their local control. Many of the districts are small enough that people can far more easily effect change (whereas, in NYC, which is a huge district, people cannot do so very easily at all).
“The competition will likely improve the public schools.”
It is still taxation without representation. Also, the playing field should be equal in order for iron to sharpen iron. Get rid of unwieldy regulations on schools rather than institute charters. Geez. The federal government has caused plenty of problems (NCLB was a doozy and it hasn’t seemed to have gotten any better since). How about we not wrest control away from the communities by loading on more state or federal baggage.
“What works in NYC does not work everywhere.”
Public schools aren’t functioning in most places.
I am talking about areas where public schools will co-exist with charter schools. If charter schools improve educational standards, then I don’t see the problem.
“It is still taxation without representation.”
You voted for your state officials.
“How about we not wrest control away from the communities by loading on more state or federal baggage.”
How about not wresting control from the parents?
“You seem not to want to give parents a choice.”
Not with other people’s money. If they want to make choices with their own money, then let them. Parents were not elected to make this decision.
Whose money is it?
I will have to return to the discussion, hopefully tomorrow. It is late and I am tired.
Prairie, you need not say any more. Taxpayers got their representation because the people voted for the politicians in charge. I am not asking to abolish public schools; instead, you stand firmly affixed to the statist belief that charter schools should not exist. Charter schools in NYC (my model) are a voluntary program. People vote with their feet. That too is taxpayer representation and tells the government what the community at the lowest level wants.
Whose money is it? The citizens, of course. In NYC, charter schools have been so successful that they leave the public schools behind and educate young people so that when they graduate, they are proficient in math and English.
You have to ask yourself, where should the taxpayer dollar go? Into the pockets of those not educating our children or those educating our children. In the case I am discussing, charter schools save lives, families and make the streets safer. Most importantly, they can give a better life to those kids shooting one another on the streets today.
Public schools should not exist. Education would be much cheaper and much better if educators had to answer directly to parents.
I would further ask you who got richer – Sam Walton – or Harry Winston.
There is always far more money to be made delivering more for less to the poor than to the 1%.
Given that we have public schools – Charter Schools are the next best thing to ending public schools.
As a rule they ARE public schools, BUT they exist only at the satisfaction of parents.
My kids were cyber chartered – many of their classmates were from single parent inner city families.
Cybercharters get 75% of what the local public school gets for each student – so they save public funds.
They also deliver far better outcomes than public schools.
They are not perfect, they are not for everyone. One size does not fit all.
But short of an entirely private education system – they are the next best thing we can do.
“Taxpayers got their representation because the people voted for the politicians in charge.”
No. No one is representing taxpayers regarding how that money is spent–not even that politician.
“instead, you stand firmly affixed to the statist belief that charter schools should not exist.”
It is more of a federalist belief, a republican belief. People are the masters of their own life and property (which is an extension of their life through labor). In order to secure liberty and property and benefit the general welfare of the community, people come together to elect representatives for themselves to govern, in this case, community-supported public schools. The elected representatives discuss with the hired administration the budget needed to effectively educate the community’s children. This budget is wrangled over and eventually voted upon. Taxpayers can watch the discussion, examine the budget, bring concerns to the table, and watch how their elected representatives vote. If enough people dislike how school board members are making these decisions on their behalf (anything ranging from the hiring of teachers and administrators, to the approval of curriculum, to budgetary matters and tax raises, then they can contact their representatives to complain or complain at the board meetings or VOTE THEM OUT. Then, someone else can rise up to run for the school board.
I don’t think you realize that it is rather corporatist that charter schools should exist.
“Charter schools in NYC (my model) are a voluntary program. ”
It is not voluntary for taxpayers. They don’t get a say in how their money is spent.
“People vote with their feet.”
With other people’s money. That is not appropriate.
“That too is taxpayer representation and tells the government what the community at the lowest level wants.”
What if they are not taxpayers? How is that fair?
I want everyone to have an opportunity to get an excellent education. Believe you me, I think this is vital to the health of the nation! However, I think all parties should be part of the solution. Taxpayers should not be hung out to dry and used like a public trough.
“Whose money is it? The citizens, of course.”
Nope. Individuals earn the money by their own sweat. Then, as a community, through elected representatives, it is pooled by citizens via taxation to pay for a community service that promotes the general welfare. Parents are not elected. If enough individuals in a community are irked about how their hard-earned money is being utilized, they can bring their concerns to the public meetings and vote. Being an American in a republic means bearing the responsibility of your own self-governance. It means you have to pay attention. It means having a government small enough you can wrap your mind around it.
“You have to ask yourself, where should the taxpayer dollar go?”
Where individual taxpayers choose their hard-earned money to go–could be by pooling it with their fellow citizens to support the community and promote the general welfare (and, if they don’t like how the money they have added to the pool is being spent, they can vote in representatives who represent them better). They do not get that opportunity with charter schools.
The issue of charter schools and taxation without representation gets especially problematic when businesses are involved. Business owners are not represented either. They are with public schools, though. Business owners can vote for their representatives on public school boards, too, but no community-member is elected to the boards of charter schools.
“No. No one is representing taxpayers regarding how that money is spent–not even that politician. ”
Prairie, please tell me how you are represented as to how the money in Afghanistan is spent? Why don’t you call for an end to the public school system if you feel that way?
“It is more of a federalist belief, a republican belief. ”
Only the convenient part of federalist belief seems to exist in these discussions.
“I don’t think you realize that it is rather corporatist that charter schools should exist.”
Why? Do we not hire companies to fix roads. Is that corporatist as well?
“It is not voluntary for taxpayers. They don’t get a say in how their money is spent.”
Tell us, out of the trillions of dollars spent by the federal and state governments, where taxpayers get to say how their money is spent?
>> “People vote with their feet.”
>With other people’s mone y. That is not appropriate.”
That is what happens in a capitalist society. Are you against capitalism? When the government is involved, we are generally dealing with other people’s money.
How does insurance work? You are dealing with other people’s money. How are roads built? You are dealing with other people’s money.
“Taxpayers should not be hung out to dry and used like a public trough.”
Of course not, but you seem satisfied with that in other areas. However, suddenly you become dissatisfied if a parent is given control over his child. In the ghettos of NYC, many parents know their children are near doomed whether or not the public schools exist, but they also understand that the charter schools give their children a chance.
Could you spare me the lessons in civics? What you are complaining about would normally sound as if you were one who is far advanced in the libertarian world. That is something I understand. The only problem I see is that this libertarianism seems only to exist when you see parents voting with their feet.
I am surprised you would promote a corporatist model for education rather than a federalist or republican model.
I am not a federalist or republican. I am libertarian.
I am often but not always freindly to federalism.
But I am not interested in trading a tyrant in washington for one in the state capital – and my governor is pretty bad.
As to education – I would end public education entirely given the choice. Most people would pay less per year to educate their kids than their property taxes.
But the odds of my getting that choice are nil.
Of what is possible all forms of charter schools are demonstrably better than traditional public schools.
With respect to you spat with SM – you are correct – all states are not equal and all charter systems are not the same.
Many are bad. But none as as bad as traditional public schools.
Given I can not kick government out of education entirely – I favor the most private I can get.
“With respect to you spat with SM – you are correct – all states are not equal and all charter systems are not the same.”
John, all states are not equal is correct, and that is why I named NYC when discussing data. Charter schools are not all the same, which is demonstrated in NYC as well. However, results in proficiency in NYC were so much better than that shown in the public schools that we conclude that charter schools can likely benefit schools all over the nation to some degree. They are not a guarantee as a lot of things affect how charter schools perform.
Since you recognize that the public school system will likely not disappear, I think you can, at a minimum, see the advantage of competition where charter schools and public schools compete.
Prairie is against charter schools. At various times she has made different arguments, including unfair competition, taxation without representation etc. She brought up a New Orleans school system in one instance, saying they didn’t do well there. That is true, but my understanding is they did better than the public school system. Further, the restrictions outside of requiring academic achievement considerably affect how charter schools perform. My understanding is they were not run in the best fashion.
If you haven’t listened to Thomas Sowell on Charter schools, I think you will be most interested. Uncommon knowledge interviewed him when his latest book was released. The data might be in the public domain. I have it because I purchased it with the book. Take a listen and if you have time, let me know what you think. The audio is less than an hour, and the transcript exists as well for faster reading.
First – no matter whether schools are publicly funded or not – one size education does not fit all.
My family has had excellent results with Cyber Charters. The one we started with turned out to be corrupt – it was STILL better for my kids than the local public school.
But everyone can not do cyber charters. For K-6 it absolutely requires that one parent be available and involved.
Many people can not do that. At upper grades it requires students to learn self motivation – an incredibly valuable skill that ALONE will lead to success.
Last year much of the country conducted an online education experiment – it was a failure. Despite the excellent success rate of cyber charters – converting all public schools to online overnight was mostly a failure – and it was worst for the poor and working class.
Worse still – most states would not allow students to shift from online public schools – that did not know what they were doing, to cyber charters that did. But even if public schools knew what they were doing with online education – it is still NOT for everyone.
One of the reasons to privatize education as much as possible is that it will result in greater choice and an increased likelyhood of a child finding a good fit.
Free markets are very good at tayloring to our needs and preferences – if you doubt that – look at the choices in the breakfast aisle of the grocery store.
Bernie once commented that we could improve the lot of the poor if we only made one type of sneaker, one type of deoderant.
This is the epitomy of the stupidity of the left – they think that economies of scale are EVERYTHING, and they think perfect equality in every single way is good rather than evil.
Economies of scale have diminishing returns. Ultimately it does not cost more to produce diverse goods. More importantly – we do not have the same values. You can go to the grocery store today in the US and buy fair trade, high fiber, non-GMO organic Kashi – or whatever other idiotic combination floats your boat. It does not matter whether I or others think your choice is stupid – if enough people want it – someone will deliver it.
That is what we want for education.
My daughter is smart. But she spent her first 2 years in a chinese orphanage and has some severe developmental issues that have lifelong impact. The public schools solution was to shift her to the slow learners group – where everything got much worse.
We moved her to a cyber charter – that did allow her to learn at her own pace (efforts by the left to regulate cyber charters have eliminated that as an option for most cyber charters today). Anyway she graduated from HS with a 3.91 GPA from a cyber charter ranked eqqual to the top 1/4 of public HS.
Isnt that what we should want – every student to acheive the best they can ?
That will not happen with one size fits all education.
I would note that most of the other students in her cyber charter were from minority single parent poor families.
These were not perfect fits. These students did poorly. But the data shows that they did dramatically better than their local public schools.
If I were a poor single minority mother and my choice would be for my child to be pushed into a world of gangs, criminality, drugs and violence – in their public schools and face a future worse than my own or to get into a cyber charter that was not a good fit that they would do poorly in – but still many times better than the public school alternative – I would jump at that choice.
But if you create a REAL free market in education – there will be schools that taylor themselves to meet the educational needs of every group of students.
Walmart does not exist to serve the top 1% or 10% or even 50%. Walmart provides better choices to people who can afford very little.
Most idiots on the left do not grasp that free markets ALWAYS serve best the largest portion of the people.
Sam Walton became far richer than Harry Winston – but both got rich the same way – by delivering what THEIR customers wanted.
The less government controls anything – the more customers will control it.
And we see that everywhere – if we bother to look.
I have debated you about regulation before. We are still talking the same thing.
All government action is a push towards homogenity – that is what government is very good at.
WE WANT homegentiy with respect to the use of force against others. We want all of us on exactly the same page with respect to when killing another person is permissable and when it is not.
But we do NOT want homogenity in all things.
Order and liberty are a yin/yang. If they are out of balance – we are worse off. Though I would note that the balance point is NOT equal.
The balance point – the optimum leans heavily towards liberty and away from order. We do NOT want order in all things – we want it is SOME things. Even where we do want it – for the most part we want individualized order. Each business has its own rules, each family has its own. Only in a few areas do we have or want homogenous order imposed by FORCE.
“You have to ask yourself, where should the taxpayer dollar go?”
Here is an idea that would balance out things out a bit better, maybe. What if taxpayers had a a choice as to where to direct their tax dollars? When it came time to pay taxes, they can select from a short list–local public school district, charter school A, charter school B. That way, the people who pay taxes to support the education of the community’s children are still in control of their money (rather than unelected parents). I’d still like there to be locally-elected school boards to make sure the oversight of public monies is working, though.
There might be snafus with this idea, but it removes the problem of unelected people directing other people’s money.
I haven’t decided whether it’s still corporatist, though…
Prairie, would you be comfortable in letting each taxpayer divvy up how much of their defense dollars go to different parts of defense spending? How much to Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Nato, ships, planes, and you get the point.
Assume that the public school system had to close because they weren’t getting enough of the budget under your plan. Would you still support your strategy?
Or what if we did not collect taxes for things that people should have choices over ?
What if we left charity to individuals ?
You pick what you want to give your money to.
I pick what I want.
No govenrment middleman.
Then i need not question or challenge your choices nor you mine.
When government is involved – not only are we FORCED to support what we do not want.
That limits supporting what we do, and it inspires competition to swill at the government slop trough.
I do not want businesses competing to serve politicians better.
I want them competing to serve me.
If government stuck to its bounds – there would be no reason for businesses to lobby or contribute to politicians.
They would have to succeed by meeting the needs of consumers – not senators.
Whenever government regulates – it is a giant lighted billboard saying “Buy me” to businesses.
“Prairie, please tell me how you are represented as to how the money in Afghanistan is spent?”
I have representatives voted for amongst the citizens of my state in the House of Representatives and the Senate. The House is supposed to sort out the budget for the federal government, vote on it, and then send it on over to the Senate. Now, if I disagree with decisions my representatives make on such things (or any bill for that matter), my duty as a citizen is to contact my representatives with my concerns (or, if I think they made good decisions, they would probably appreciate a thumbs up). I can also contact them before the budget is put together, when they make proposals to spend money and voice my opinion at that time. If my representative makes enough bad decisions, I vote for someone else to represent me (and try to get friends and neighbors to do so, too). I do try to pay attention, but, mea culpa, I need to do a better job of contacting my federal representatives when I have concerns about how things are going (I think the Senators should answer to the state legislature, though, as was the original intention). However, I do try to pay attention to the various bills and I do vote in elections and I do talk to my friends and neighbors about the goings-on up at Capitol Hill.
“Why don’t you call for an end to the public school system if you feel that way?”
That does not follow. I like the public school system. It has gotten corrupted in some ways and needs to be cleaned up (which takes the citizenry to assert their authority). How the system works now, people are represented (often badly, I grant you, but that can be changed by a loud vote). I think the public school system, by and large, does promote the general welfare. It seems to me that it badly breaks down in the mega-school districts. When districts get so large (e.g., multiple high schools with huge numbers of students) that you no longer know people, then problems seem to arise more easily.
“Only the convenient part of federalist belief seems to exist in these discussions.”
“Why? Do we not hire companies to fix roads. Is that corporatist as well?”
That is not corporatist. Bids by these companies were voted on by the representatives. If people in the community have problems with the selected company or how well the roads got fixed, they can let their representatives know. People don’t tolerate potholes for very long.
“Tell us, out of the trillions of dollars spent by the federal and state governments, where taxpayers get to say how their money is spent?”
By calling up their elected representatives regarding proposed legislation, about problems they see in government offices, and at the voting booth. It is hard to follow all the money, but some of that seems to be a function of the size of the federal government. It is so large as to make it nigh on impossible to wrap your head around all the alphabet soup departments (etc). There are lots of balance sheets and lots of little details that can get lost and lots of people trying to hedge their bets, so they aim high on budgets. But, FOIA requests can be made, people can broach these discussions.
>> “People vote with their feet.”
>With other people’s mone y. That is not appropriate.”
That is what happens in a capitalist society.”
In the private sector, people get to completely decide where they wish to spend their money or not. If they dislike one grocery store, they go try another. They get to make choices with their own money. In our republic, we elect people to make choices with our pooled money for things that will promote the general welfare. We get to debate what constitutes general welfare and how much ought to be spent. We elect representatives to debate these things officially. Capitalism does not equal corporatism.
“When the government is involved, we are generally dealing with other people’s money.”
Yes, and all those people get to contact their representatives about how they think that ought to happen. If the representative makes lousy decisions, people need to vote that person out.
“How does insurance work? You are dealing with other people’s money.”
That is a product purchased by an individual or offered to an individual by a company (and purchased by the company or other group). If people complain to the company or organization about the quality of insurance, the company may try to negotiate a better deal or they will chose different insurance.
“Taxpayers should not be hung out to dry and used like a public trough.”
Of course not, but you seem satisfied with that in other areas.”
Huh? What are you talking about?
“However, suddenly you become dissatisfied if a parent is given control over his child.”
Parents DO (or should) have control over their children. They just should not have control over other people’s money. Who elected them?
“In the ghettos of NYC, many parents know their children are near doomed whether or not the public schools exist, but they also understand that the charter schools give their children a chance.”
And I am very sympathetic to this problem. Maybe the NYC school district should be broken up into a bunch of smaller, more manageable, less corruptible districts? Maybe taxpayers should start holding their elected representatives accountable. Maybe taxpayers should get to select where, exactly, they’d like their money to go? Would they like to support the long-standing traditional public school district? Or, would they like to send a portion (or all) of their school tax dollars to Charter School A instead?
“parents voting with their feet”
Parents can vote with their feet; they just shouldn’t do so with other people’s money. Morgan Freeman says the bus runs every day. In this case it’s if they want to leave their lousy district.
“With respect to you spat with SM”
Good heavens! I don’t feel it is a spat and I hope S. Meyer does not feel that way either.
“all states are not equal and all charter systems are not the same.
Many are bad. But none as as bad as traditional public schools.”
That brush stroke is too broad. A majority of the school districts in my area are pretty strong. There are only a couple that are struggling.
“That brush stroke is too broad. A majority of the school districts in my area are pretty strong. There are only a couple that are struggling.”
Prairie, I know your comment is directed to John, but I want to answer. You are basing your comment on brush strokes being too broad based solely on your personal knowledge. If I am correct you live in Iowa, total population a little more that 3 million covering a huge area. My experience is based on an area where the **student population** is a little over 1 million in a tiny area. Your “strong” assumptions are based on an extremely small sample.
What I wrote – does not contradict what you wrote.
Though I think that fewer traditional public schools are that good.
I know the education I received 50 years ago. That could have been better.
But what i have seen today is worse.
It is easy for us to see the past as better – mostly it was not.
But education is one of few areas we have gotten worse.
Prairie, I think your basic assumptions are erroneous. Private and public money blend when the government is involved. Whether deciding on roads or the types of schools to be offered, it goes through the legislative process, which we commonly refer to as taxation with representation.
You can’t call a vote by representatives (roads) taxation with representation and then another vote by representatives (charter schools) taxation without representation.
You are saying you can. Tell me, how?
I will try to give proper replies to your questions and posts tomorrow. I have been burning the candle at both ends.
Briefly, I have lived in quite a few places, so my perspectives are based on my observations of a range of district sizes in places of very high population density and places with much lower population density.
I will try to elaborate further tomorrow.
“Prairie, would you be comfortable in letting each taxpayer divvy up how much of their defense dollars go to different parts of defense spending? How much to Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Nato, ships, planes, and you get the point.
Assume that the public school system had to close because they weren’t getting enough of the budget under your plan. Would you still support your strategy?”
I am undecided right now. Lots to consider…
After doing some more thinking, I actually deleted a rather long reply regarding my proposal. This proposal, which would help solve the taxation without representation issue (because, yes, taxpayer money is NOT represented when it comes to charter schools) does introduce other problems. It would erode the important element of community in the use of public funds. There is something to a community joining together to support the education of the community’s children. When a sufficiently high percentage of the community is paying attention in its participation and support of the school district, that not only strengthens the school district but it strengthens the community. If funding begins to fragment amongst many schools, that could very potentially fragment the community because people are not joined together to the same degree in a mutual goal, a common cause. Lack of community spirit does seem to be an element of our many problems.
It could also encourage some degree of tribalism. I see this in communities that are split with two high schools. The rivalry is not always just a friendly rivalry–it can be darn near tribalistic with one feeling generally superior to the other instead of two powerful, pretty equally matched competitors balancing each other.
Another major concern is connected to my first one in regards to governance: if taxpayers get to choose to place their money in the district or schools of their choice, that erodes the federalist/republic form of governance. (Charter schools do the same thing in a different manner.) We erode this at our peril. This form of self-governance has been balancing the rights of the individual with our common bounds in communities rather effectively unless we began to shirk our duties. Cicero spoke eloquently about duties in “On Duties” and I hoped he might have some wisdom for such concerns. I flipped in my book and a line that I had underlined years ago flashed out at me:
“If only the government had stood firm on the lines it was starting to follow! Instead of succumbing to creatures who were not seeking its reform at all, but its total obliteration.” (Cicero: On the Good Life, 121)
I am not including this because I think that is the intent of those who are proponents of charter schools. I have said that particularly in the circumscribed situations of very broken school districts and communities, I am very sympathetic and even supportive of charter schools. Rather, my concerns are is it very likely will be the unintended outcome. Many school reforms have had detrimental and unintended outcomes.
Cicero further notes, “People have always wanted equal rights before the law; for otherwise whatever rights they might happen to possess would not be worthy of the name.” (141)
The charter school model does not guarantee this. Students should have an opportunity to be well-educated. But, taxpayers’ should have representation and a voice when it comes to the use of their tax dollars.
“This proposal, which would help solve the taxation without representation issue (because, yes, taxpayer money is NOT represented when it comes to charter schools) does introduce other problems.”
Prairie, all proposals have the seen and the unseen components.
Charter schools fit a similar description of taxation with representation as the war in Afghanistan does. To date, you haven’t shown how it doesn’t. Until you can establish a big difference there and elsewhere, your argument of taxation with representation is unusable in this discussion.
We have talked about the community before, and I clearly stated that I like decisions made far from the center of power.
“concerns are is it very likely will be the unintended outcome.”
That is why I hedged my bets where there was not enough population to support both charter schools and public schools. Competition is essential and can make those competing better.
“The charter school model does not guarantee this.”
One never has guarantees of success. That is why evaluations have to be carefully performed. When you argued against charter schools that New Orleans charter schools were terrible, you did so without knowing the quality of the public schools they replaced (the charter schools were an improvement). You also didn’t know how much bad public school baggage those charter schools were forced to carry. Instead, you used those charter schools in the argument where the evidence I saw showed improvement. IMO we frequently fail because we are afraid to throw bad baggage overboard.
Charter schools provide the same taxation with representation that most things have, so that argument should cease until you prove the argument’s validity.
“You can’t call a vote by representatives (roads) taxation with representation and then another vote by representatives (charter schools) taxation without representation.
You are saying you can. Tell me, how?'”
Representatives vote on getting the roads fixed. They get bids from several companies. They vote on the bids (typically the lowest one unless it seems especially lowball or they have concerns about the likely quality). Following the vote, the company is hired to fix the road. This is all public information. If the public does not like the quality of the roads (e.g., potholes were haphazardly filled in and reappeared quickly), they call up their representative to let them know that the road work was poorly done and that it needs to be rectified. People have access to the minutes and the discussions and the dollar amounts. If people want new representatives who’ll make better decisions about the roadwork (etc), then they can vote for new people at the next election. They can talk to their neighbors about who they think will do a better job and why.
Representatives might vote in favor of allowing charter schools in a particular state (some states had way too much state control and too little local control by communities so said vote occurred at the state level). However, beyond that singular decision, there is no representation for the tax dollars being spent. Public schools have public discussions about the budget, finances, taxes (raise them or not) and curriculum. Representatives not only make decisions about these things, but they must field calls by their fellow community members about it. They might even face such discussions while in line at a cashier! Neighbors can talk to each other and can talk to parents with kids at the local district about the quality of the textbooks, curriculum, and other school supplies, they can talk about the salaries (which are public). From such discussions, they can get an idea as to whether or not their money is being used prudently. This information is also often published in the newspapers for wider dissemination to the public.
For charter schools, parents in a local school district simply go to a charter school and the local public school district is told that a sum of money left the district (this number is different depending on the state). There is no vote, there is no oversight. They money goes to the charter school and taxpayers have no way to easily (and publicly) assess the budget, finances, salaries, and prudent use of their tax dollars. If the charter school is cyber, then it is really operating quietly. For charter schools, despite using taxpayer dollars, there are no representative to chat with in the check-out line. There often aren’t even any newspaper articles about these schools either.
Parents are somehow unilaterally in charge of making decisions with *other people’s money*–parents get to decide where and how their neighbor’s money is spent. They choose the school. They are expected to assess the quality of the school and assess how financially responsible they are with taxpayer dollars. None took an oath of office. Not one is charged with paying attention to budget, finances, salaries, choice of textbooks or anything. Some might pay attention but since they were not elected to pay attention, it is unlikely that they are. They leave the school when they decide for whatever reason it isn’t a good fit, they get kicked out, or the school goes out of business. None of these scenarios give any recourse to taxpayers and the use of their hard-earned money, including people heading to the charter schools in the first place.
In Iowa, local control had been strong. People had been shouldering the responsibility of supporting and directing their local school districts. Then State Representatives in Iowa voted to allow the State to approve whether or not charter schools could operate in a particular district rather than having just the local community and district decide for themselves. An important part of local control, local self-governance, was wrested from the citizenry. Local communities know their situation better than people at the state level. Sure, those local communities have a representative at the state level, but, that state representative represents quite a few communities, and, that person is just one voice. People totally unfamiliar with the situation on the ground get to make decisions.
State representative are supposed to make decisions for the WHOLE STATE, not for local communities. If such decision-making is handed off to a bureaucrat in the state department of education, that is even worse because someone really not connected to the local community (and not even elected by them) has been handed control! Self-governance has been eroded!
“However, beyond that singular decision, there is no representation for the tax dollars being spent. ”
What are you talking about, Prairie? States and localities have different rules as to how they manage different things. In some instances, the lowest bid gets the job. In other instances, committees vote on who gets the job, but that is after they interview all of them.
Come to think of it, at least in NYC (In all discussions, I am using NYC exclusively in all discussions since that is where the data is), the amount of money to be spent per child is known. A committee sets out the basic curriculum and many other rules that are required.
Many would like to open a new charter school, but those eventually chosen are chosen by representatives or agents of our representatives.
“Public schools have public discussions about the budget, finances, taxes (raise them or not) and curriculum. Representatives not only make decisions about these things, but they must field calls by their fellow community members about it. ”
Things can differ in various locations, but success depends on the proficiency of the students. The locality or state can revoke a charter if they haven’t met the goals of society.
The state determines budgets and standardized testing utilized by public and charter schools. Charter schools are paid substantially less than public schools, yet the education provided is better and proven by the mandatory standardized testing.
The public, through its officials, can revoke charters if they do not meet the standards set. The parents can refuse to sign up with the charter schools if they see no advantage for their children. Charter schools are far more transparent concerning the education of children than public schools. Since charters have to please both the parents and government, there is a greater emphasis on education.
Much you have inferred in your response is not true or misinterpreted how the charter school responds to the government and the community. I can’t correct them item by item, for that would take a response to the length of a book. However, I can provide the most important data. Charter school children graduate with proficiency, while the compared public school students do not.
“There often aren’t even any newspaper articles about these schools either.”
That is a rubbish argument. The news media is heavily oriented towards the left, supporting big government and public schools whether they fail or not. I provided the data that the news media can quickly obtain. The teacher’s unions spend a lot of money trying to prevent a better education for our young.
Lets presume for the sake of argument – that government can legitimately fund schools (they can’t and shouldn’t, but those are different arguments).
Even if government pays for education – it would STILL be the last thing we want for government to decide how to educate our kids.
Rather than have ordinary public schools and charter schools – we should ALWAYS opt for markets as the most efficient means to deliver high quality affordable services.
All schools should be completely private – Parents should decide what schools to send their children to, what curiculum they wish.
Svelaz keeps trying to force CRT on all of us. I have no problems with parents INDIVIDUALLY choosing to send their kids to a school where the curricula includes CRT, just as i have no problems with other parents picking a school that does not.
When government – even at the behest of a majority – which is actually rare, imposes its will on us – while SOME get their way – many of us have our rights violated by FORCE.
I would note that increasingly parts of europe have exactly this. In Sweden parents choose the schools for their kids and the government pays – private, public. I beleive 50% of the schools in sweden are now private. And parents are happy – the schools respond to the wishes of the parents.
My kids went to Cyber Charters.
I do not recomend that for everyone. they FACT is one size does not fit all. What I want is for schools to be like the grocery aisle in the store – lots of choices with parents able to pick what suits them.
The overall data on charter schools – particularly cyber charters – does not on first glance appear to be impressive.
The average performance of cyber charters in my state is about the same as the average for all public schools.
Sounds like they are not doing better ? Except that cyber charters end up with pretty much all the discipline problems in the state, and are otherwise disproportionately attended by students from the worst school districts in the states.
On the whole cyber charter students are performing about 40% better than other students from the school districts they came from.
But AGAIN I do NOT want a one size fits all solution – that is common of government and the left. And it is a major factor in government failure. We are not equal, we are not the same.
Even Cyber charters are not the same. My kids started in a vyber charter that was excellent for lower grades but changed to a different one that was better at HS when they were older.
It was very interesting watching traditional publice schools FAIL in dealing with the pandemic.
Nearly all kids were cyber chartered last year. Interestingly among traditional public schools that switched to online education – the better public schools across the country did well. The worse one did abysmally.
The wealthy do not need school choice – they already have it, further most public schools in the top quarter of the country do well.
It is the bottom half that are screwed by abysmal and usually extremely expensive public schools.
““However, beyond that singular decision, there is no representation for the tax dollars being spent. ”
What are you talking about, Prairie? States and localities have different rules as to how they manage different things. In some instances, the lowest bid gets the job. In other instances, committees vote on who gets the job, but that is after they interview all of them.”
I am well aware of that. However, the people are still part of the discussion. With charter schools, the people paying the taxes are NOT part of the discussion. They cannot speak their piece, they cannot effect change via the ballot box, they cannot petition a representative to consider anything because there is NO representative who can represent how or where that portion of their tax dollars spent at charter schools. They have representation at the public school board, at city council, at their township, borough, county, state, etc.
“that is where the data is)”
There is data from elsewhere, too.
“the amount of money to be spent per child is known.”
Yes, that is correct elsewhere, too. However, taxpayers cannot petition anyone regarding how that money is spent. The only thing they could do is petition the state to end charter schools so they get representation back over their own money.
“A committee sets out the basic curriculum and many other rules that are required.”
Of whom are these committees comprised? Are they built, in part at minimum, of representatives elected by the citizenry and taxpayers? I do not think this is the case, generally, because that is most certainly NOT the case where I live.
“those eventually chosen are chosen by representatives or agents of our representatives.”
Too many layers, too far removed from the citizenry and their ability to hold people accountable. They are too far removed from the locale, the particular community and district where said charter school would be allowed to operate. State representatives should make decisions that affect the whole state; they should not make decisions that affect particular communities.
“The locality or state can revoke a charter if they haven’t met the goals of society.”
Oversight is not as stringent, perhaps, as it should be. How can ‘society’/citizens/taxpayers petition their state or locality about the charter school if it operates, essentially, as a black box? Many people do not even know how many charter/cyber charter schools are operating in their districts because that information is not widely known or disseminated. The accountability to taxpayers has broken down.
“yet the education provided is better and proven by the mandatory standardized testing.”
This is NOT across the board, and, that still does not fix the accountability to taxpayers issue.
“The public, through its officials, can revoke charters if they do not meet the standards set.”
This is NOT transparent to the public, to the taxpayers whose funds they are using.
“Charter schools are far more transparent concerning the education of children than public schools.”
How? Many people are not even aware that (cyber charter schools in particular) are using their tax dollars. Information about these schools is not widely disseminated in communities.
“Since charters have to please both the parents and government, there is a greater emphasis on education.”
That is what traditional public schools are supposed to do, too. Parents have to put the emphasis on an actual, good quality education. The government just demands a certain minimum bar for test scores. Schools, if not watched carefully by the citizenry, will end up teaching to the tests and shirking their duty to teach things not emphasized on those d@mn tests. History? History ain’t on those tests so who needs to know any history outside the smattering mandated by a state? Gotta keep those math and reading scores high so we look good on paper! Art? What’s art for anyway? Who needs beauty? It isn’t tested either–unless, of course, you consider scantron bubble art to be a new art form.
“Charter school children graduate with proficiency, while the compared public school students do not.”
This is NOT true across the board for either means of educating children. Charter schools may help kids in rotten public school districts. Not all public schools are rotten. Many are quite good and graduate kids with a high degree of proficiency.
“There often aren’t even any newspaper articles about these schools either.”
“That is a rubbish argument. The news media is heavily oriented towards the left, supporting big government and public schools whether they fail or not.”
It is not a rubbish argument. We could agree that the media, the fourth estate, is failing in its duties in multiple ways. Taxpayers don’t see all the holes their money is disappearing into. Maybe if they could see all the holes, they’d pay more attention.
“With charter schools, the people paying the taxes are NOT part of the discussion.”
Not true. There is no essential representative difference in the mechanisms that provide government money to fund various projects, whether roads, sewage or schools.
You have to prove your case.
“There is data from elsewhere, too.”
Then produce the data, not anecdotes from a friend. Not a news article that only prints half the story.
“Yes, that is correct elsewhere, too. However, taxpayers cannot petition anyone regarding how that money is spent.”
“NOT the case where I live. ”
“Too many layers, too far removed from the citizenry and their ability to hold people accountable. ”
That depends on the particular laws in place. The public school system (only utilizing the NYC example with excellent data) is distant from the community. When charter schools exist, the community can vote with their feet. That method has the least number of layers.
“State representatives should make decisions that affect the whole state; ”
“they should not make decisions that affect particular communities.”
Yet, you want the smallest of communities not to have decision-making power.
“Oversight is not as stringent, perhaps, as it should be”
Oversight? The children graduating from public schools fail proficiency testing in math and English. Is that what you call oversight?
“Many people do not even know how many charter/cyber charter schools are operating in their districts because that information is not widely known or disseminated.”
That is an argument that doesn’t even deserve discussion. The information on charter schools is far more informative than what is available in public schools. The proficiency of students provides a lot of information. The schools have to appeal to the parents, or they won’t send their children.
The public schools will teach CRT and sex education without the parent’s knowledge or permission. They will indoctrinate the students. Are cameras or audio permitted in the classroom? Nowadays we need such cameras so that parents can know what the public schools are teaching.
“This is NOT across the board”
We don’t know if it is or isn’t.
“This is NOT transparent to the public, to the taxpayers whose funds they are using.”
It is more transparent than the penalties public school teachers have negotiated after abusing a student.
“How? Many people are not even aware that (cyber charter schools in particular) are using their tax dollars. Information about these schools is not widely disseminated in communities.”
Many people don’t know that teachers accused of sexual molestation are still being paid their salaries while their future pensions are enhanced.
What people know or don’t know is up to them. Look at some of the people on this blog. They are lost and swimming in false information.
“That is what traditional public schools are supposed to do, too.”
“This is NOT true across the board for either means of educating children.”
Would you please show me your data? The last time you tried, you showed half the data and left out the more important half.
“Many are quite good and graduate kids with a high degree of proficiency.”
Many homeschooled children do the same. Stop with the generalities.
“It is not a rubbish argument. ”
We disagree. You haven’t proven your case.
We need to move in the direction of less government and more personal responsibility. In this area, you are pushing for more government and less personal responsibility.
“Lets presume for the sake of argument – that government can legitimately fund schools (they can’t and shouldn’t, but those are different arguments).”
Why not? If people in a community vote to support such things with their pooled tax dollars, then what is the issue? Also, this is an odd argument to have when you seem to simultaneously give Sweden accolades (they have rather high taxes to support many, many public/community endeavors).
“Even if government pays for education – it would STILL be the last thing we want for government to decide how to educate our kids.”
We are the government. I do think there is a middle ground that can be met as to what constitutes a balanced education for an American.
“we should ALWAYS opt for markets as the most efficient means to deliver high quality affordable services.”
Good gracious. I think you are overlooking some problems if education was market-driven.
“All schools should be completely private – Parents should decide what schools to send their children to, what curiculum they wish.”
I disagree. There are problems with this sort of system, too. A great many parents do not have the inclination to select such things. Yet, they must be educated. If they parents are going to let this important decision go by the wayside, then other people in the community are rather left with this decision (because they will be affected by the consequences of letting children grow up ignorant or poorly educated).
“When government – even at the behest of a majority – which is actually rare, imposes its will on us – while SOME get their way – many of us have our rights violated by FORCE.”
I am not sure to what you are referring in regards to education. I do think education has gotten out of whack and gotten a bit too far into the weeds of indoctrination, but the meaning of your sentence above could be alluding to like 50 different issues. Please clarify.
“I would note that increasingly parts of europe have exactly this. In Sweden parents choose the schools for their kids and the government pays – private, public. I beleive 50% of the schools in sweden are now private. And parents are happy – the schools respond to the wishes of the parents.”
Sweden is tiny compared to the United States. It is also a rather communal country. I do like some things about Sweden, but, if I recall, homeschooling is not legal there. It sounds to me like it is the culture that is making the parents primarily happy with their children’s education. Their culture is geared towards balancing the public and the private. Ours seems to be in a war, which means we do not have balance. I think the concept has gotten foggy of how individuals fit into a community and how individual rights fit into living in a community.
“Why not? If people in a community vote to support such things with their pooled tax dollars, then what is the issue? ”
Can 9 of 10 people vote to rob the tenth ?
Voting is not alone sufficient to justify the use of force.
“Also, this is an odd argument to have when you seem to simultaneously give Sweden accolades (they have rather high taxes to support many, many public/community endeavors).”
Sweden still has High taxes – but they are down dramatically from their failed peak socialism in the 80’s.
Regardless, I am NOT justifying Sweden’s taxes. I would note that Sweden and most of europe have fairly regressive taxes today.
While they do tax the rich – sometimes higher than we do. They also tax the crap out of the middle class – as you can not support big government otherwise. And frankly Sweden does not actually have big government – their government is pretty small, It MOSTLY imposes less restrictions on individuals and business than the US. BUT like much of Europe and particularly nordic countries they have a deep social safetynet. And like most of Europe they KNOW that was a mistake but can not find a way out of it.
As with most social safetynets they have found that they have incentivized bad behavior.
Regardless, I do not wish to remake the US as Sweden – though we are rapidly moving towards all the worst aspects of European social democracy.
If the members of your community wish to come together to voluntarily accomplish most anything – I have no objections.
But community and government are NOT the same thing.
I have had a long debate with others here over whether humans are a social animal – while ultimately that depends on the meaning of words. Regardless, humans value the individual over the community – or communism and socialism would actually work – they do not.
We are not ants or bees.
That is not to say that many of us do not voluntarily work together on many things.
I would further note that the left constantly confuses social and community with government.
When your church “votes” to do something – you can choose not to fund it, or to leave the church.
You can give your time and money to the sierra club, Rotary, or Greenpeace – or not as you choose.
Community does not inherently mean FORCE – Government does.
Myriads of things that are moral done individually or in voluntary groups are immoral when done using force.
51 of 100 voting away the rights or the other 49 is not moral – no matter how good the “cause”.
Sweden is NOT some wonderous example for the world.
But i constantly use Sweden as a counter example – because we are under the delusion that Sweden is some social democratic paradise.
It is not. Sweden as well as most of the nordic countries reversed course in the 80’s – because they had to. They were going bankrupt.
They have still not fixed all the problems that their dalliance with socialism caused. Many inefficient government programs are popular – despite the fact that they have bead incentives and reduce overall standard of living.
But Sweden is STILL a useful counter example – especially against left wing nuts. Because they are far less socialist today than the left thinks. Sweden ranks higher on both of the freedom indexes than the US does.
Most are aware that Sweden did NOT lock down over covid. So far they have done significantly better than either the US or the rest of Europe. In fact Swedish data sugest that the decline in Covid is the result of approaching herd immunity BEFORE the vaccine became available. Sweden did NOT “flatten the curve” as much as the rest of the world – as a result they had a more traditional epidemic curve – C19 passed through Sweden somewhat faster than the rest of the world and it wound down sooner than the rest of the world.
They made mistakes – as we all did. But Sweden – as well as some other countries prove that the draconian measures most governments imposed were ineffective.
Regardless it is useful – should they actually pay the slightest attention to point out to left wing nuts that the social democratic utopias in europe they so love are less socialist, and sometimes more capitalist than they beleive or even the US is.
We should look at all countries. We should learn from their mistakes and from their successes.
Rather than repeat their mistakes and avoid their successes – as the left is intent on.
The actual data accross the world regarding what works and what does not – is DAMNING to the left.
It is also damning to some republican ideas.
If as the left likes to say – we “followed the science” – the entire world would be libertarian.
That is what the data tells us works – even when badly implimented.
“We are the government.”
No we are not – we are the governed and we MIGHT still have some voice in how we are governed.
But if you think we govern ourselves – look arround.
On issue after issue a super majority of americans want almost the opposite of what is being imposed on them by force.
Government exists at our consent – we are NOT the government.
It is an independent entity. It acts on its own and it does so with FORCE always.
“I do think there is a middle ground that can be met as to what constitutes a balanced education for an American.”
Of course there is NOT.
This is a common fallacy – similar to that we can decide all things by voting and elide the fact that when we act through government we are using force.
The educational needs and wants of every child and the wishes of every parent are NOT the same.
We are NOT equal. Equal rights and actual equality are radically different. The former is a necescity, the latter a disaster.
There is only one system in all of human history that has ever maximized the extent to which each of us gets as much of what each different one of us wants and needs – and that is free markets. Absolutely nothing else comes close.
Very few things are “one size fits all” – education is not one of those.
Government is for those few things that actually are or must be “one size fits all”
Prosecuting and punishing crime.
Enforcing binding agreements.
and compelling those who actually harm others to make them whole.
Everything else we are better off providing for ourselves.
That includes education.
Despite the fact that my kids went to cyber charters – I am NOT a fan of charter schools.
They are merely an improvement over a broken status quo.
SM accuses me of being unwilling to compromise.
I will enthusiastically support ANYTHING that moves education farther from the homogenous government institution it is now.
But should we succeed – I will then strive to go farther – until government has nothing to do with education.
Charter schools are a step in the right direction – but they are not an END, just a waypoint towards free markets in education that will affordably offer each of our children the best approximation of the education that each of them needs.
You are not obligated to agree – but you are morally obligated to justify the use of force – and that means EVERYTHING that government does – including education.
“There are problems with this sort of system, too.”
Of course there are – the world is not perfect, humans are not perfect. Utopian systems ALWAYS fail because humans are not perfect.
As noted before – if humans were an actual social animal – socialism would work. We are not.
“A great many parents do not have the inclination to select such things.”
I would suggest reading “Weeping in the play time of others” – it is quite old, though if anything things have gotten worse.
That book is an emotionally devastating survey of government services.
Do you know that a child removed from a sexually or physically abusive parent into the care of the state is significantly MORE likely to be sexually or physically abused than if they are left in the care of the abusive parent ?
There are bad parents, almost universally government does WORSE.
“Yet, they must be educated.”
Must they ? We need not go there now, but you presume that what is now is what must be.
The universal school education of children is relatively new – and it was created by the germans to improve complaince and produce better cannon fodder.
“If they parents are going to let this important decision go by the wayside, then other people in the community are rather left with this decision (because they will be affected by the consequences of letting children grow up ignorant or poorly educated).”
Presuming this is actually true – which is not established – that still does not make this a government issue.
Today we are Still capable of grasping that charity is mostly a private matter – we give to our churches, to private charities and/or we volunteer our time. We can not give to everything – so we choose what and how much we will do ourselves – individually.
But we are slowly seeing the role of charity taken over by government. Our children;’s children may only know of private charity by historical reading.
Much of what is the exclusive domain of government today was not the domain of government at all in the past.
The Brooklynn Bridge was one of the last major infrastructure projects to start with private funding and the first to be completed publicly – because Tamney hall found the graft and public corruption oportunities irresistable.
Must of what we call “public transportation” today was completely private through to the 60’s. Buses, passenger trains.
Do not confuse your familiarity with what currently is done through government with the false assumption that is the only way to do anything. And it is nearly never the best or even a good way to.
“I am not sure to what you are referring in regards to education. I do think education has gotten out of whack and gotten a bit too far into the weeds of indoctrination, but the meaning of your sentence above could be alluding to like 50 different issues. Please clarify.”
Why is this confusing ? One size does not fit all – and government is abysmal at solutions that are not one size fits all.
Yes, this could and does refer to 50 or more different issues.
When govenrment acts – we pit each “special interest” against each other.
Using schools as an example – parents of gifted students what the school to serve their kids needs.
Parents of athletic students or artistic students or musically inclined students, or parents of developmentally delayed students, or discipline problems or handicapped students ALL compete to get the attention of governent and to direct public funding to their particular need.
This is a disasterously stupid approach – yet it is how ALL government intrusion into the private domain always works.
Free markets solve precisely these types of problems all the time – and they do so without pitting us against each other in a cage match.
Absolutely nothing ever devised by man has come anywhere close to efficiently meeting the needs of unique humans that free markets have. NOTHING.
I love it when Bernie Sanders rants that he could solve the problems of the world if we did not have 200 different kinds of sneakers or 30 different deoderants. The left fixates on ONE facet of econoics – mass production – and presumes that is the answer for everything.
I would note that if that were actually true – the Chinese WILL dominate the world shortly.
But it is not. Jeff Bezos is richer than God – because he is figuring out how to give each of us what we uniquely want – practically before we know we want it – affordably and efficiently.
Free markets not only produce millions of model T’s in black so that everyone can afford them – but ultimately produce SUV’s and sports cars and myriads of colors and prices and features to suit the wants and needs of every one of us.
Government is abysmal at that. It is one of the many reasons socialism fails.
Yes I am talking about 50, or 100, or 1000 different things – and that is the POINT – we are all DIFFERENT – we are NOT EQUAL
Government is an should be required to treat us EQUALLY – and therefore can only function in those domains where we can be blindly treated as equal. Education is NOT one of those.
This debate started over teaching CRT – present at nearly every conflict over CRT today – are parents that WANT their kids taught CRT.
I have no problem with that. No one should. The problem is that 80% of parents do NOT want their children taught CRT.
Government is abysmal at providing to each of us what we uniquely want. School Boards are bound to fail as they have to sort out the competing wishes of different parents and students.
Yet free markets do exactly this well all the time.
“Sweden is tiny compared to the United States. It is also a rather communal country. I do like some things about Sweden, but, if I recall, homeschooling is not legal there. It sounds to me like it is the culture that is making the parents primarily happy with their children’s education. Their culture is geared towards balancing the public and the private. Ours seems to be in a war, which means we do not have balance. I think the concept has gotten foggy of how individuals fit into a community and how individual rights fit into living in a community.”
I used Sweden as an example of a purportedly socialist country that does ONE thing slightly better than the US.
There is much we could learn from many countries in the world – or from different states in our own country.
What is most disturbing is that those on the left completely miss the ACTUAL lessons.
Post WWII much of europe went more socialist than the US – there are reasons for that. Regardless it FAILED badly.
Since the early 80’s European countries have been trying to extricate themselves from expensive, inefficient and disasterous but sometimes popular socialist programs. With small success – the growth rate of Europe remains almost 1% below the US.
The working class in the US does better in nearly every measurable way than the middle class in europe as a result of decades of lagging growth.
In the US we saw the same under Bush and Obama – after two decades of solide grouth under Reagan and Clinton we had 16 years of poor growth under Bush and Obama.
The right tries to paint Trump’s growth as incredible – it was not. It was just dramatically better than that of Obama and Bush.
Regardless, we get lots of nonsense from the left – most of Europe has mandated health insurance – with teeth – just as in the US auto insurance is mandated. But most of Europe does NOT have state run healthcare or single payer systems. Europe has a wide variety of approaches. Switzerland as an example is more free market in healthcare than the US – but it does have a mandate.
My point is NOT to idylize Sweden or any other country – but to look at the world and learn what works and what does not.
And the universal theme is SOCIALISM DOES NOT WORK.
I would further note that the US is in some areas more socialist than much of europe.
And we are in serious trouble.
Maybe I am wrong and what has never worked anywhere in the world will magically work here in the US.
For a variety of reasons the US is NOT the same as the world. A greece style economic collapse in the US would wipe out the world economy. There is an aphorism that if you owe the bank 100K they have you over a barrel, if you owe them $1B – you have them over a barrel. We owe $20T – we have the entire world over a barrel.
That changes things in ways I do not know how to predict.
But it does not change the fact that what can not continue will ultimately not continue.
Nor does it alter the fact that when things are artificially propped up the failures tend to be more dramatic and disasterous.
I am abit afeild – but the FACT is that it is all connected.
Individual freedom WORKS in nearly all things. Forced collective action (government) FAILS in nearly all things.
“But AGAIN I do NOT want a one size fits all solution – that is common of government and the left. And it is a major factor in government failure.”
How is it a major factor in government failure? There are many elements that go into poor governance. Public school does not have to mean one size fits all. Somehow the education I experienced in public school did not reflect a one-size fits all approach. I saw how my teachers worked to reasonably differentiate. Elements of education should unify people in a country, so there should be at least some portion of everyone’s education that should be sung in unison, even if many of the parts are not a static melody but are rather in harmony.
“We are not equal, we are not the same.”
We are equal before the law. This is quite different from individual abilities, cognition, circumstances, etc.
“It was very interesting watching traditional publice schools FAIL in dealing with the pandemic.”
Not all failed. The ones that had a strong working relationship amongst the teachers, administrators and parents and were highly oriented towards the needs of the children seemed to pull through fine. I have a family member whose district did an outstanding job. Then there were others that didn’t exactly have themselves in order. Most really tried to work through a trying situation. I think the schools that worked WITH their parents and the parents were willing and able to work with the schools probably had the best outcomes.
“It is the bottom half that are screwed by abysmal and usually extremely expensive public schools.”
The citizenry should really look to see why they are so badly served. Is it the leadership? Is it the expectations? The discipline? The parent involvement and support? Probably a mix of all of these things. How do these problems with education reflect the observation that “people will pay more to be entertained than they will to be educated”?
“How is it a major factor in government failure?”
Because government is (and should be) poor at dealing with us as unequal individuals.
Equality before the law – blind justice are core facets of government – they are intrinsic to the nature of government.
“There are many elements that go into poor governance.”
I do not expect govenrment to be good – the nature of government works against that.
That is what government must be small.
“Public school does not have to mean one size fits all.”
Barely true – as noted before the very structure of government makes it abysmal at handling the competing needs of different people.
We see this everyday – at school boards and in congress – with competing groups lobbying for the attention for those with the power to decide regarding public choices. A process that markets manage far better with little friction is practically war inside fo govenrment as special interests compete.
On issue after issue we poll americans and find X% want one thing and 100-X% want another.
Nearly always – government can or will only do what ONE of those groups wants.
But I can go to the breakfast aisle of the grocery store and get fair trade, GMO free, gluten free, high fiber, Organic Kashi or generic corn flakes or bazillions of choices between.
It is unbeleivably ironic that the starbucks generation thinks that socialism actually works. Socialism menas you get ONE choice of coffee, or underwear, or apartment, or car – if your lucky.
Government is by its very nature bad at providing people with choices.
I do not wish to change that. I just seek to limit government to those tasks that can not be done by free markets.
I do not expect better government – thousands of years should have disabused us of the nothing of good government.
“Somehow the education I experienced in public school did not reflect a one-size fits all approach. I saw how my teachers worked to reasonably differentiate. ”
I have repeatedly pointed out to Svelaz that the public education I received 50 years ago taught absolutely everything that he thinks CRT is needed for. My public school education taught me about slavery and lynchings and racism and all the bad aspects of US history.
Inarguably I am more knowledgeable than Svelaz on pretty much all of those things – as the result of a public school education 50 years ago.
But one thing that Svelaz and I likely agree on is that the education today is not what I received 50 years ago.
“Elements of education should unify people in a country, so there should be at least some portion of everyone’s education that should be sung in unison, even if many of the parts are not a static melody but are rather in harmony.”
Why ? Sorry, I do not agree. You are litterally arguing for indoctrination. By changing the words a bit – what you are saying mirrors remarks by Mao (or Hitler).
The purpose of education is the individual interests of parents and their kids.
Any public benefit, any unifying feature is the consequence of individuals meeting their needs.
“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest. We address ourselves not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities, but of their advantages”
― Adam Smith,
Little else is requisite to carry a state to the highest degree of opulence from the lowest barbarism, but peace, easy taxes, and a tolerable administration of justice: all the rest being brought about by the natural course of things.
― Adam Smith,
“The citizenry should really look to see why they are so badly served. ”
They should – that is what my whole discourse with you has been about.
Government is not good at the few things that only government can do.
Why would we expect it to be good at things that we are very good at doing for ourself ?
“Is it the leadership?”
It is the presumption that force and the forms of leadership that come with it are necescary.
In war we need generals. In most other things – we compete. We have no clear single leader, but myriads of competing leaders vying for us.
“Is it the expectations?”
I expect the best of everything. I will not get that. But free markets will deliver me and everyone else more of that than anything else.
And better still will deliver to my children more than to me.
A major part of the problem with your questions is that they ASSUME top down structure – government.
Just to be clear – I am not opposed to hierachies – they have existed for hundreds of millions of years.
But free markets let us choose between competing hierarchies – top down solutions based on our personal values.
You appear to like home schooling – that is concurrently the most authoritarian, top down and the smallest scale form of education.
But there is a radical difference between competing hierachies of difference scales and Top down govenrment arrangements.
Markets always result in competing hierachies of different scales – you have citibank – and you have knaublach private bank – you choose.
There are major advantages to larger providers – they tend to be more efficient but also more fragile and less capable of meeting individual needs. This is one of the reasons that Top CEO’s are paid so much.
I am sure Kodak shareholders would have doubled the compensation of their CEO to avoid bankruptcy.
Regardless, the posibility of failure is an important part of the success of free markets.
And why socialism does not work.
I am not looking for a great leader to run everything.
We do better with competing leaders who must each strive to prove they are better than the others.
“We need to move in the direction of less government and more personal responsibility. In this area, you are pushing for more government and less personal responsibility.”
I agree we need to move in the direction of more personal responsibility. While I think we may agree on some points of less government, I would like to keep self-governance (of the people, by the people, for the people), rather than losing it to bureaucrats and businesses. People do need to exercise more personal responsibility or they will continue to lose their self-governance.
I have been juggling various and sundry things here at home, so my research regarding charter schools and education law has been short-changed. I do intend to follow up.
“I would like to keep self-governance (of the people, by the people, for the people), rather than losing it to bureaucrats and businesses. ”
Prairie, dealing with charter schools (in NYC with a likelihood of extension elsewhere), the ability of people to choose charter schools takes government to the people and away from bureaucrats. It is one of the closest forms of self-government we see residing in a large bureaucracy. By no means does the local community have choice through the legislators where their voice is not loudly heard.
“People do need to exercise more personal responsibility or they will continue to lose their self-governance.”
You talk about people who frequently cannot manage themselves but recognize that charter schools can give their children something the public schools cannot. The charter schools exceed student proficiency at a much greater rate than the public schools that were set up with one focus in mind, to educate the children. That was why the voter voted for school taxes, to educate the children, not as a job program.
“I do intend to follow up. ”
Do not worry. When you spend more than enough time researching, I believe you will still not be able to come up with a reason why the taxpayer should support a job program and not the education of children. Charter schools likely would never be an issue if the public schools were doing their job.
As I said before, in local rural systems, one might not have the numbers for more than one school, so one must discuss their problems individually. They may not have issues, so perhaps nothing needs to be done. However, if enough parents feel a charter school would benefit their children, I am sure integrating that type of competition can be created.
“Everything else we are better off providing for ourselves.
That includes education.”
Not entirely. I am rather Jeffersonian on this point (though, I must quibble with him regarding the minimum number of years students should be educated, considering our far more advanced economy). There is a lower limit to what people can afford to provide for their children. It is promoting the general welfare to educate all children. Many African countries struggle with education because families simply cannot afford the school fees, so the children go uneducated.
Having a people generally educated in the liberal arts, particularly history, is an important element for maintaining self-governance in our constitutional republic.
I particularly like the following passage that not only supports but emphasizes local control:
“For Jefferson, the distribution of power among federal, state, county, and local agencies was indispensable to America’s “system of fundamental balances and checks for the government.” When a person is empowered to control his own destiny at the local level, “he feels that he is a participator in the government of affairs not merely at an election, one day in the year, but every day.” Such a person will defend his liberty; “he will let the heart be torn out of his body, sooner than his power be wrested from him by a Caesar or a Bonaparte.””
Further value to a general education, particularly in history toward maintaining liberty and self-governance under part 2:
“Whereas it appeareth that however certain forms of government are better calculated than others to protect individuals in the free exercise of their natural rights, and are at the same time themselves better guarded against degeneracy, yet experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms, those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny; and it is believed that the most effectual means of preventing this would be, to illuminate, as far as practicable, the minds of the people at large, and more especially to give them knowledge of those facts, which history exhibiteth, that, possessed thereby of the experience of other ages and countries, they may be enabled to know ambition under all its shapes, and prompt to exert their natural powers to defeat its purposes….”
“If once [the people] become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress and Assemblies, Judges and Governors, shall all become wolves. It seems to be the law of our general nature, in spite of individual exceptions….
A person ignorant of history will not understand the tremendous damage caused by the insatiable lust for power and the natural tendency of power to expand beyond its legitimate boundaries. Nor will this person appreciate how the encroachment of power can occur gradually, over time, in a manner that may appear innocent, if not viewed from a broad historical perspective. Instead, ignorant citizens, taking rulers at their word, will be duped time and again.”
“I am rather Jeffersonian on this point”
Obviously you are not on the left – no one on the left would be familiar with Jefferson – or frankly anything – not even their own purported scholars.
Svelaz is cetaint that parents are protesting some right wing nut version of CRT – but he is not able to describe CRT himself.
Regardless – we should learn from the wisdom of others – especially that which has held up for decades – centuries.
That said – education has a value – but making anything “public” corrupts it – even those few things that Must be public such as law enforcement, courts and defense.
Corruption and inefficiency are inherent in government – with the latter preferable to the former.
The Nazi;s are an example of efficient government.
“There is a lower limit to what people can afford to provide for their children.”
Nothing in existance comes close to matching resources with demand as free markets do.
Absent government interferance the cost of EVERYTHING declines.
In fact that MUST be a tautology for standard of living to rise.
We are inarguably bettter off by orders of magnitude than in 1776 – we can afford far more than we could then.
Even the poor.
We managed to provide education to children since the 19th century – even the poor managed to do so – despite poverty.
When the Irish catholics and later italian catholics (and poles and …) came to the US – despite poverty – they built churches and educated their kids.
Even today the average cost of a catholic elementary school is $2500/yr/student – that is less than most of us pay in school taxes.
Get rid of school taxes and we can all afford to educate our kids.
Catholic schools today on average out perform public schools – despite substantially reduced resources.
Education need not cost very much at all.
And everything I have said – presume just matching the low end costs of quality education today.
That is not how markets actually work.
Left alone they deliver what we need and what we want better and cheaper relentlessly.
Again that MUST be true for standard of living to rise.
Adjuested of rinflation – the price of almost everything is lower than it ever was.
In most cases – without adjusting for inflation it is lower.
I got married in 1983 – one of our first purchased was a refridgerator. I purchased a top of the line Amana for $1200
It was energy inefficient by todays standards, it had no water in the door or ice maker or meat and vegetable drawers and pretty much none of the features of fridges today.
Today you can buy a far batter fridge for $999
But since 198 he Minimum wage has nearly trippled.
So a poor person would be 3 times as able to afford a better refridgerator today than in 1983.
I would note that this works for almost everything.
Convert the price in the past to MW hours needed to work to earn that at the time and compare to the same item today.
Pretty much everything requires less work to buy today – To the extent that is less true – it is less true the more heavily government is involved – such as healthcare or education.
This is one of many reasons you want government as far away from anything we can do for ourselves as possible.
“It is promoting the general welfare to educate all children.”
The rule of law means following the law and constitution as written.
But the constitution is not a sacred text. The “general Welfare” clause was a big mistake.
General Welfare is not the business of government. Government involvment in “general welfare” REDUCES general welfare – universally.
Another means of demonstrating the same point – IDEAS RESPEC #4 ranked economist Robert Barro
Compliled a databases of government expenditures and services. He found that pretty much universally – government – not just the US wastes between 65 and 75% of everything it spends on anything. There are a few exceptions – war was one of those. Their efficiency reached 85%.
When you ask government to do anything – you reduce our standard of living.
BTW this is remarkably consistent with other data – again pretty much universal – not just the US. For every 10% of GDP that government spends growth is reduced by 1%. The US government (federal state and local) spends about 40-50% of GDP – economic growth would be 4% higher if government spending was at levels that it was in the 19th century – and growth in the 19th century was about 4% higher.
No I do not want government involved in education.
“Many African countries struggle with education because families simply cannot afford the school fees, so the children go uneducated.”
African countries do as better at educating their children as the US did when its standard of living and level of economic development was the same.
Cave men did little in the way of educating kids.
As with inumable things – there is no magic. You must raise standard of living to be able to afford some of the necescities to raise standard of living further.
I would suggest looking at Maslows hierarchy of needs. We climb the pyramid of needs/wants – as individuals, as countries.
You must (accept very rarely) deliver the lower levels before you can deliver higher needs.
One would not expect Africa to match the west in education.
“Having a people generally educated in the liberal arts, particularly history, is an important element for maintaining self-governance in our constitutional republic.”
True for a country that already has a sufficiently high standard of living.
False if it does not.
“I particularly like the following passage that not only supports but emphasizes local control:”
Usually local is better – though not always.
But Jefferson is wrong. We see plenty of tyrany at the local level. Some of the worst government in this country is local.
“Further value to a general education, particularly in history toward maintaining liberty and self-governance”
There is no question of the value of education.
But costs are actually important.
Your argument – as demonstrated by your own africa example presumes that everyone in every country should by right receive the same education.
That is inherently false. Both the quality, affordability and even value of education is a function of your CURRENT standard of living.
It is the LEFT that constantly presumes that things that are not – are rights.
Healthcare is not a right, nor is education.
Both are something that we can secure for ourselves better as our standard of living rises.
Would you actually expect Africa to match the education of the US ?
You should look for hidden presumptions of equality in your arguments. There are very few ways in which people are actually equal.
Mist arguments with implicit assumptions of equality are FALSE.
We strive to be more productive BECAUSE it allows us to have better education, better healthcare, a higher standard of living.
When you presume something is a right that is not, when you presume something is a right that must actually be earned, you are quite litterally slipping into marxism unnoticed.
With respect to Jefferson and education. As we have seen throughout the world – you can not successfully inflict western self government on other peoples. They must get to the point of providing it for themselves – on their own.
I beleive we have spent $1T on afghanistan – yet we are leaving it no better than we found it.
We can not impose our form of government on other countries and have it magially transform them.
They must arrive there on their own – just as the west had to go through the magna carte and the whole panololy of the development of western governance.
Jefferson is correct about the consequences of ignorance of history.
That does not alter the fact that it is not governments job to teach history.
Love it when the Little People exact justice on the Big People. The phrase “Let ’em eat cake” fits nicely over a guillotine.
Say what? Talk forward. Speak English.
I was thinking banishment to a garbage island instead of Elba.
Trump’s initial Covid policy!! Yes!
The Bug wanted to banish Trump’s initial policy. Chinese entry ban and push the vaccine to less than one year instead of 3-5 years + should not have been instituted according to the Bug. After hearing that, one has to ask themselves should Bug ever be listened to?
Trump mishandled Covid – nearly every govenrment in the world did.
Trump mishandled Covid less than much of the rest of the world as well as less than democrats.
Most disturbing – whether Trump or democrats – is we KNEW before hand that much of what we were forcing people to do was garbage.
The Virus likely came from a lab – hopefully by accident
It is far too contageous to be stopped by lockdowns or masks or even social distancing.
The death rate of C19 has an age curve that is the most radical of any significant infectuous disease.
If you are under 20 – you are almost as likely to die by being struck by lightning.
If you are over 80 – you have a 1 in 3 chance of dying if you get Covid.
These facts alone should have taught us ALOT and directed efforts where they would do some good.
Contra the left – and SOME idiot experts our goal should NOT have been to “flatten the curve” – but the exact opposite.
To protect the most violnerable – the elderly and the sick – and otherwise to let these burn through the country and the world as FAST AS POSSIBLE
Correct – Trump should not have empowered left wing nuts to infringe on peoples rights using covid as an excuse.
We and most of the world did everything wrong – and in many cases still are.
Worse we did most everything wrong – knowing that what we were forcing on people would not work.
Trump too made errors in Covid policy – there never should have been a state of emergency, there never should have been lockdowns, There never should of been Covid stimulus.
But the errors of left wing nuts on Covid greatly exceed those of Trump
I am surprised that anyone on the left would have so little shame as to bring up Covid.
You FOUGHT against Trump’s efforts to bring about vaccines – deriding them and insisting that it could not be done – and yet it was.
You presided over the states with the highest deaths per capita.
You presided over the states with the greatest economic carnage.
You got nearly everything about Covid WRONG.
And WORSE – you got it all wrong PREDICTABLY.
“Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last?”
John, some of those posters are brain dead.
Pfizer and Modena – the makers of the vaccines – wanted nothing to do with Trump.
Why is that?
“Pfizer and Modena – the makers of the vaccines – wanted nothing to do with Trump. Why is that?
I can’t speak for the companies view over a half a year ago, but a lot of people on this blog have at various times complained of high medical costs and high drug costs that were unfair to the consumer.
Trump already formulated legislation to prevent the American citizen from being gouged by the pharmaceutical companies that could be obtained outside the US for a small fraction of what you and I were forced to pay.
Ben, you sound like a screwed up guy that knows next to nothing. I don’t think pharmaceutical companies liked the idea of cutting profits. Don’t you think that had something to do with it?
No I think the Pfizer and Modena people were smart, educated professionals who recognized that Trump is a charlatan and a grifter who turns everything to shit.
So they wanted nothing to do with him because it was too important.
Did Pfizer and Modena gouge on the vaccines?
Ben, you are displaying ignorance. You said nothing. Apparently you know nothing about Trump’s ‘threats’ to the pharmaceutical industry which meant significant losses for Pfizer and other pharmaceutical companies. That is a win for the consumer, but I don’t expect you to understand that because you do not understand the various cost structures around the world.
Trump made Pfizer hundreds of millions and now with Biden we could see Pfizer make even more than they expected. We have to be careful because we are pushing shots to the very young when just days ago that wasn’t felt wise. There are over 100 million young people most of which haven’t been vaccinated and less than half the country has been vaccinated. At 150 million people, and $10 a shot (probably closer to $20, we have got $1.5 billion dollars plus the significant possibility of shots every year ($3.5 billion at $10) of which Pfizer owns a significant share.
Follow the money.
No, Pfizer and Modena wanted to distance themselves from Trump because he’s a screwup and a moron, the same reason Trump was voted out by 7,000,000 votes.
That was pretty bold for two drug companies, slapping their buttocks at the president of the United States, although they probably figured he was going to lose.
Whatever. Trump is gone. His lackeys are gone.
Biden is doing an efficient job of rolling out the vaccines and not playing petty politics with it as Trump would most certainly have done.
Both Pfizer and Moderna, the two major drug manufacturers likely to receive emergency authorizations for a Covid-19 vaccine in the coming weeks, have rejected invitations from President Trump to appear at a White House “Vaccine Summit” on Tuesday, according to two sources familiar with the event’s planning.
The Trump administration has openly feuded with Pfizer in recent weeks over its involvement in Operation Warp Speed and the timing of a data release showing its vaccine to be highly effective, but had nonetheless invited CEO Albert Bourla to appear on a panel about the vaccine development process. Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel was also invited, but neither he nor another company executive will attend.
The vaccine manufacturers’ absences will be conspicuous at a “Vaccine Summit,” an event that drug industry figures and one Trump administration official largely viewed as a public relations stunt when STAT first reported the event last week.
The event appeared to be an effort for the administration to claim credit for the rapid development of a Covid-19 vaccine and to pressure the Food and Drug Administration to move quickly on an authorization. The agency’s commissioner, Stephen Hahn, was twice called to the White House to explain the FDA’s slower-than-desired timetable for issuing emergency use authorizations for Pfizer and Moderna’s vaccines, Axios and Bloomberg reported.
The White House scheduled the vaccine summit just two days before a FDA advisory committee is set to publicly examine data submitted by Pfizer. A similar hearing for Moderna’s vaccine is set for Dec. 17, one week later. Both vaccines are highly effective, according to data released by the companies, and are widely expected to receive emergency approvals soon after the FDA formally considers their applications.
Following this story’s publication, a spokesman disputed the circumstances of Moderna’s withdrawal from the event, saying the company “was contacted by OWS to be part of a meeting at the White House concerning COVID-19 vaccine plans and indicated its willingness to participate. Subsequently, Moderna learned that, based on the meeting’s agenda, its participation would not be required.”
Other companies involved in vaccine distribution logistics, but not in vaccine development itself, are still likely to attend, including FedEx, UPS, CVS, Walgreens, and McKesson. Many, however, are likely to send lower-ranking executives as opposed to their CEOs, according to the sources familiar with the event’s planning.
Another Trump administration official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that Peter Marks, the FDA official in charge of the agency division overseeing vaccine approvals, may attend, though the agency has viewed the event with trepidation given its status as the regulator of most companies invited to participate.
In a call with reporters, White House officials acknowledged that they had initially invited drug manufacturers to the event. A spokesman, however, claimed it was Marks’ planned attendance that led the administration to rescind its invitations, as an FDA regulator’s presence alongside drug manufacturers at the event could create a perceived conflict for the agency and the companies it regulates.
Pfizer’s snub in particular is the latest in a series of skirmishes between Trump and the drug giant.
On Nov. 10, Kathrin Jansen, a Pfizer executive, attempted to distance the company from Operation Warp Speed, the Trump administration’s hyper-ambitious coronavirus vaccine initiative. In an interview with the New York Times, she claimed Pfizer was “never part” of Operation Warp Speed, and that the company had “never taken any money from the U.S. government.”
While the company never accepted Operation Warp Speed funding to help develop the vaccine, it did agree to a $1.95 billion purchase order with the federal government, providing the company a massive guaranteed market if the vaccine proved to be safe and effective. Trump later called Jansen’s remark “an unfortunate mistake.”
Related: White House to host Covid-19 vaccine summit, as Trump seeks to burnish record
Bourla later defended the decision to decline federal research and development funding, citing a desire to “liberate our scientists from any bureaucracy” and “keep Pfizer out of politics.”
In a Nov. 20 press conference, Trump accused Pfizer of delaying the release of its final-stage clinical trial data until after Election Day to avoid boosting the president’s reelection odds.
“No, Pfizer and Modena wanted to distance themselves”
Ben, you have no answers and what you say is ignorant. The rest of what you say isn’t even your writing. You interspersed someone else’s writing into your response.
In other words Ben, you are a plagiarizer just like Biden.
What you say comes from https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/leading-covid-19-vaccine-makers-pfizer-and-moderna-decline-invitations-to-white-house-‘vaccine-summi.4174215/
You are nothing more than a pig wearing lipstick.
Yeah I cut and pasted an article supporting my argument.
That’s not plagiarization you mental midget.
Go raid a government building or huff Lysol or something.
Make yourself useful.
Damn you Trumpers are dumb.
You did not attribute the remarks to their source – that is plagarism.
Though frankly – I do not care much.
Your Facts damned your own argument.
Eliminate the spin and the facts he cites are damning to his own argument.
“Pfizer and Modena wanted to distance themselves from Trump”
They are free to do so.
” because he’s a screwup and a moron”
Back to mind reading.
Not because from the start of his presidency Trump has been threatening to either allow drug importation or subject drug companies to price controls.
“That was pretty bold for two drug companies”
Not at all – Trump was a direct threat to their profits. I would expect they would respond.
“Trump is gone. His lackeys are gone.”
Not at all – Press coverage of Trump continues to be high – as an example in the area of election reforms – Trump is getting 20x more coverage than Biden or democrats. the democrats “election reform” bill is getting almost no coverage. While Trump’s remarks, the audits, and state election reform billls are getting massive coverage. Further – decpite the fact that most of the coverage of Trump and republicans is negative – there is super majority support for greater election security. It is not an accident that Manchin included nationwide voter ID in his compromise bill. It is not an accident that numerous democrats like Stacy Abrahms LIED and said they have never opposed voter ID.
“Biden is doing an efficient job of rolling out the vaccines”
Bzzt, Wrong – he has failed to meet either his own or Trump’s goals.
Biden inherited the simplest of tasks – get an existing vaccine out the door and distributed to people.
He also inherited a distribution system that Trump had put into place that was vaccinating over 1M people/day by the time Biden took over,
On 6/23/2020 about 700 people per day were dying of C19. Today 345 people per day are dying.
More than 1/2 of all C19 deaths have occured in 2021 – this year.
Only 46% of those eligable have been fully vaccinated, and only 54% have received 1 dose.
“not playing petty politics with it”
Biden has been playing politics BADLY with everything he has done.
With respect to Vaccines – primarily his handling has just been mildly incompetent.
I can not fault Biden too much – because – for the most part Buying vaccines and getting them to states is his job.
Administering them is the responsibility of the state.
Trump had the same issues as president. There is no general police power or a public health power for the federal government.
These are areas that the constitution has left with the states. NOT the president.
Of course we have subequently learned that Faucci was lying to Trump and the american people.
While we do not know for certain that the virus came from a lab leak – the probability is about 98% that it did and rising.
And we may never know.
What we DO KNOW – is that Faucci LIED – likely to protect his own ass – because Obama shut down Gain of Funcition Birus research and late in the Ibama administration Faucci convinced Obama to reauthorize it – including providing funding to the Wuhan institute of Virology.
Faucci and other participated in covering up what they had done and thwarting all public scrutiny of it for almost a full year.
Further democrats, the left, the media – social media and YOU were all complicit in that.
We were told the virus came from wet markets in Wuhan. Now we learn there were no bats in the Wuhan wet markets.
We were told there were no bats at the WIV – there is now video of Bats in the WIV. We were told there was no humanized mice in WIV – there is video of humanized mice at WIV. We were told there was no US funding for Gain of Function research – there was US funding of gain of function research – both int he US and at the WIV.
Repeatedly the left, the media, social media told us all such claims were “right wing conspiracy theories” and anyone discussing them was CENSORED.
Well they all proved TRUE.
The people you called tin foil hat whack jobs proved RIGHT and YOU were WRONG ?
I also you once again – when Alex Jones, is right more often than Anderson Cooper – who should you beleive ?
I disagree with some of Trump’s policies – while I support drug re-importation, I do not support price controls – not under Trump, not under Biden. They always end badly.
That said – Trump has an incredible track record of accuracy in claims and predictions.
And Biden, the left, YOU have an abysmal record against him.
You are free to choose to beleive whoever you wish.
Most of us are likely to beleive people who have a track record of being correct OVER AND OVER AND OVER.
“The Trump administration has openly feuded with Pfizer in recent weeks over its involvement in Operation Warp Speed and the timing of a data release showing its vaccine to be highly effective,”
That is correct – the data on the effectiveness (and safety) of the vaccine was KNOWN in late september – the drug companies, FDA, CDC refused to make that information public until after the election. Further they scheduled another meaningly 4 weeks of additional testing for the purpose of delaying the release of that information.
Drug companies that engage in politics are answerable to their investors.
But govenrment agencies that engage in politics violate the law.
Do you read your own posts ?
You are absolutely correct – Trump wanted people to hear the good news that the vaccines were effective and safe as quickly as possible.
He wanted that for personal political benefit. and he wanted the nation to KNOW that we were seeing the light at the end of the tunnel.
Further YOUR OWN quotes prove Trump was correct.
You say Trump pressured the FDA – and the evidence shows Trump was CORRECT to do so.
So that we are clear – the critical design of the mRNA C19 vaccine was completed in Feb 2020 – 2 days after the virus Genome was fully determined.
From that moment there were only three things preventing the delivery of the vaccine Again that is FEBRUARY 2020.
1. Figuring out how to produce the vaccine in hundreds of millions of doses.
As early as April 2020 biohackers in the US were offering to provide C19 vaccines that were fundimentally the same as the mRNA vaccines for $25K for 100 people.
2. Testing the safety of the vaccine. Emergency authorization quite litterally means releasing a medicine that has NOT been thoroughly safety tested because the benefits outweight the potential harm.
If the mRNA vaccines were available in June 2020 (and they could have been) with a risk of killing 1 in 1000 people who took them = that is a very high risk – they SHOULD have been released in June – about 200,000 lives would have been saved and several million people would not have been infected.
The delays in approving the mRNA vaccines are a public health FAILURE. Something that is obvious to anyone with a basic understanding of Math.
All that was necescary to approve the vaccine was proof of a minimal level of effectiveness, and a mortality rate of about 1/10th that of C19.
Both of those were KNOW to be true LONG BEFORE the vaccine was publicly announced.
Trump is correct – not only was the vaccine delayed for political reasons – doing so KILLED PEOPLE.
You the left, the media, the FDA, the CDC are responsible for the deaths of possibly hundreds of thousands of people.
And YOUR OWN argument prove your culpability.
Again – do you read your own nonsense ?
First – while you get many facts correct – you spin them impossibly.
As I noted in a prior post – the basic design of the mRNA viruses was complete in February 2020.
While WarpSpeed included research funding – that was NOT its primary goal.
By the time WarpSpeed was announced – the primary research was long complete.
I also find it laughable that you argue that it was good that drug companies did not receive public research funding – when the left tells me constantly that government must fund ALL research – and quite often tries to tell me that government already funds nearly all research and that it needs to fund even more.
This is nonsense. The US government funds less than 1/2 of all research in the US. Further, most successful research is privately funded.
Put simply government funded research is a failure.
Research Was NOT the primary goal of WarpSpeed.
WarpSpeed GUARANTEED that if drug companies were able to deliver a vaccine in an expedited manner – that they would be paid for that vaccine NO MATTER WHAT.
WarpSpeed socialized the risk of the vaccine – again something that the left claims to support.
I would again note that WarpSpeed either inarguably worked – as the vaccine was developed in record time.
Or alternatively – the free market inarguably worked – as the vaccine was developed in record time.
Regardless, what was ABSOLUTELY proven – is that Government is a huge impediment to public health.
Because the NORMAL process would have taken 6 times as long and resulted in millions of deaths.
And Finally NO MATTER WHAT – you have the problem that something that had never been done before occured during the Trump presidency. Not one – but about a dozen different NEW vaccines were developed in a 1/6 the normal time.
You keep trying to spin the claim that Trump had nothing to do with that.
That is an impossible sell.
Further it like other Trump accomplishments raises the bar for democrats.
Trump’s presidency was filled with accomplishments that did not occur before.
Growth increased by 50% over the Obama era. Even after the economic problems caused by the pandemic – Trump’s 4 year economic growth is greater than Obama’s.
Jobs continued to increase and unimployment decline – not merely beyond Obama levels – but below numbers that economists claimed for over a century were not possible.
We had the first peace deal in the Mideast since Carter – and the 2nd and the 3rd and …. – a total of 8 I beleive.
We had the first presidency since Carter that did not start a new conflict somewhere in the world.
We had an entirely new vaccine developed in 1/6 the normal time.
We saw the first reductions in illegal immigration during periods of economic growth EVER.
The wisdom of getting vaccinated is proportionate to the mortality and harm of getting Covid.
The older you are the more the risk associated with the vaccine is lower than the benefits.
If you are 80 or older – getting C19 has a 1:3 chance of killing you.
If you are 16 and in normal health – your odds of getting struck by lightning are greater.
No one should care if younger people get vcaccinated.
It is likely a very bad idea to administer a vaccine that has short circuited extensive long term safety tests to people with very low risks.
Conversely it is likely a good idea for those with high risks.
MOST Covid related issues are the same – they should all be and should always have been CHOICES.
My advice to anyone regarding getting the vaccine is:
First – do what can be done without much risk – work to improve your overall health – 80 or 20, your life with be better if you are healthy.
Get your vitamin D levels to normal. get your weight to normal, excercise, improve your health.
When you have done that look at the covid mortality risks for your age and make your choice on vaccines accordingly.
If you are young and healthy – it is your choice, but even small risks outweight the benefits.
If you are unhealthy or older – the benefits may outweight the risks.
But it should be YOUR choice.
C19 has once again proven libertarians right about everything.
The world works best when people are free to make their own choices.
Because each of us is NOT the same.
“No I think the Pfizer and Modena people were smart, educated professionals who recognized that Trump is a charlatan and a grifter who turns everything to shit.”
No, They cooperated With Trump on project warp speed – because there was an enormous amount of money to be made.
But Big Pharma was generally hostile to Trump from long before – because Trump was moving towards some form of drug reimportation which would have significantly harmed drug company profits.
“So they wanted nothing to do with him because it was too important.”
But they DID work with Trump – this nonsense has already been debunked long ago.
Only a few drug companies received significant vaccine development funding from Project Warp Speed.
All drug companies took advantage of Project Warp Speed’s expedited approval process, and its process to secure govenrment assistance overcoming resource problems.
But MOST IMPORTANTLY – All these drug companies contracted AHEAD to deliver millions of doses at a fixed price.
“Did Pfizer and Modena gouge on the vaccines?
Of course not – they were bound by CONTRACT that they made with Trump.
They agreed to a fixed price to deliver millions of doses – and Trump agreed to buy those doses NO MATTER WHAT.
Trump gambled that C19 would not fade before the vaccine was developed, in return for a better price on the vaccine and expedited delivery.
This is something that Biden or Obama never would have thought of.
Trump was aware of something that you and all leftists in the world are not.
That quite often there is a risk/reward relationship – that you can expedite, and/or secure better prices – if you take a bigger risk.
A major part of project warp speed was the US govenrment taking on the risk associated with an expedited new vaccine.
Trump committed to buy millions of doses at a fixed price – if delivered quickly, even if those doses were no longer needed.
Drug companies were guaranteed BILLIONS in profits with a very low risk.
Everything Trump touched turned to shit. That’s why the drug companies didn’t want to deal with him.
They snubbed the president.
They did that because he’s a buffoon and would have screwed up the vaccines too.
Good for them.
“Everything Trump touched turned to shit.”
You are free to beleive whatever you want.
But that does not make it true.
“That’s why the drug companies didn’t want to deal with him.
They snubbed the president.
They are free to do so – for whatever reasons they wish.
“They did that because he’s a buffoon and would have screwed up the vaccines too.”
And yet he did not. They made massive profits and were able to deliver in record time because of Trump.
Like it or not this is not debateable.
Not only did it never occur before, It was deemed impossible.
You, and the very people claiming trump would have screwed up – are the ones who claimed what he did accomplish could not be done.
The vaccines were developed in 1/6 the normal time.
Not only will this make these companies billions NOW, but also in the future.
mRNA vaccines are an incredible new health technology – in fact it goes far beyond infectuous diseases.
Trump had NOTHING to do with the medical advancdes that mRNA brought and promises.
HOWEVER But for Trump – they would have been delayed about a decade.
We have just conducted a massive global safety test or mRNA medical techigues.
And the results are overwhelmingly possitive.
Approval for mRNA applications in myriads of areas will be orders of magnitude easier in the future – that means getting to market YEARS earlier.
That means drug company profits AND it means better health for americans.
Trump did not develop the technology – but he moved mountains to remove red tape and get it deployed 6 times faster.
You say Trump would have screwed up – yet he actually succeded – tremendously.
The screw up is Biden.
Trump reduced illegal immigration during a period of economic growth.
Biden is setting records – bad ones.
There was more family separation in the short duration of Biden’s presidency than all of Trumps.
There were more kids in cages. There were more deaths. toddlers are being trown into the rio grande.
People are dying in large numbers traveling through central america.
The mideast has become much less table.
And Biden is reviving the incredibly stupid Iran deal that will do nothing beyond assure that Iran becomes a nuclear power.
In the US – we can not build pipelines – but Biden approves Russian pipelines.
You wonder who is paying Biden off ?
The economy was set to boom – it is sputtering.
Inflation is taking over.
Biden is actually actively encouraging policies to make us a nation of renters.
What could make the rich richer than permanently moving millions to being renters.
I laugh at those who claim that renting makes more economic sense – if that were generally true – there would be no apartments.
It will ALWAYS make more sense for most people to buy a home if they can than to rent an apartment.
It will ALWAYS be cheaper.
All an apartment is, is a third party profiting from giving you something you could provide for yourself.
I am a landlord – I know. I provide a valuable service AT A PROFIT.
Who cares ?
Whether YOU like it our note – they participated in Project Warp Speed. While they did not take much up front money – they contracted with Trump according to the provisions of WarpSpeed to deliver millions of doses of vaccine and Trump agreed to buy them.
In addition they participated in the WarpSpeed process to get vaccines expedited development and approval.
They also participated by receiving an assortment of assistance from the government to mow down roadblocks and resolve problems.
I do not care whether anyone LIKES Trump.
The FACT is they worked with him.
The further undeniable FACT is that but for Trump we STILL would not have the Vaccine.
The normal development time for a bad new vaccine for a new pathogen is atleast 4 years.
The normal development time even for pathogens that are closely related to existing vaccine pathogens is 18 months.
Biden took more than a year to get the Swine Flue vaccine into distribution – despite the fact that was a minor permutation of existing Flu vaccines, and despite that still managed to have safety issues that causesd a several month stay that likely cost thousands of lives.
Not only do americans owe Trump a debt of gratitude for the vaccines – but the entire world does.
No country aside from Israel did anything comparable. This is also why much of the rest of the world has had problems getting vaccines.
They did not committ to purchase millions of doses before the vaccine was even developed.
And yet they still wouldn’t meet with Trump. Why is that?
That’s a vote of no confidence.
Why should I care ?
Pelosi had the oportunity to strike a deal on immigration – to deal with the Dreamers, and to clean up immigration laws.
That was her right – and out loss.
People are free to make their own decisions – that does not make those decisions good ones.
Yes, they also lied late in the election cycle about how far along they were to interfere with the election outcome.
While they are a private body and are legally free to do so. Their behavior was clearly immoral.
But that should not be surprising.
The election was lawless – because those on the left have no concept of morality.
Your idea of morality – is whatever political values or outcome appeals to you at the moment.
Love the idiots bringing up how I supposedly was against retooling mrna into a vaccine quickly. I worked in a lab at Yale that did business with Fauci going way back. And anyone who has read my postss on this blog knows that I wasn’t against shutting down travel with China…, in fact I often criticized trumpy bear for being way too slow in shutting down the influx from Europe…, but here I am defending myself against morons. There really isn’t any call for it other than their proven capacity for lying their asses off with Fox talking points given the least bit of space.
You post as anonymous – why should anyone take your word for anything.
BTW – “working with Faucci” – is something i would not put on my resume today.
You will have to forgive the rest of us for equating your positions on a FEW issues with those of the left, democrats and the media – as your positions are nearly always the same as theirs.
And you are constantly touting them – despite a long long track record of error.
With respect to shutting down foreign travel. Trump did act too late – though the left and the media berated him for acting too soon.
If as you say you were critical of the left and the media for that – congradulations – for being right on one thing.
Though I would like evidence, if you expect to be beleived.
Anyone can claim anything after the fact – especially an anonymous poster.
But atleast now you are signing your posts.
As I said Trump acted too late. But he could NOT have acted in time. C19 was already on the West Coast in the first days of January.
It was with near certainty in the US in mid december. Short of shutting the borders in mid december Trump could not have stopped Covid from getting into the US.
I personally had high hopes at the start that contact tracing and quarantines would thwart the spread of the virus.
These are by far the most effective means – if enacted soon enough.
But again – that would have had to occur in December to have worked.
Further had the US kept C19 out at the start – we would be like Japan is now – fighting a never ending battle to keep the virus out of the country. constantly fighting outbreaks. Constantly on edge.
The 4th Amendment has been (and is probably still being) violated by the NSA.
The right to privacy is ensconced in the 4th and 10th Amendments, both of which get violated because the government (and Big Tech, too, probably) can remotely turn on cell phone cameras and mics.
The government (and Big Tech too) have much more important things to think about than what you are saying or thinking about.
They don’t care, so don’t worry.
If that’s the case, then why create the capability?
And, they do care. Makes it easy to figure out possible ways to manipulate people with mis-,dis-, and mal-information. Bernays would have loved all this technology. Meta-data is good fun.
“It’s all about the information, Marty!”
That’s Lieutenant Colonel Vindman to you. What a pos that guy is.
My friend’s cousin was an aid to General Mattis.
The American military had about as much faith in Trump as the German military had in Hitler.
And the result was the same: Death and destruction. Economic calamity.
Vindman stood up for truth, justice and the American way in the face of a vulgar game-show host who had zero clue what he was doing.
He should get a Presidential Medal of Freedom or the Medal of Honor.
Trump didn’t demonize the federal government. It did it all by itself. A cursory look at the philosophy of the founders shows they clearly understood this demon even as today’s leftists do not. Can’t wait to see when it “turns ‘round” on the fools.
Mespo– “Trump didn’t demonize the federal government. It did it all by itself.”
Very true, but I give Trump credit for forcing the demon to take its mask off and let us see how monstrous it has become.
I think even Trump was shocked to see how corrupted it is; I surely was.
We are not even seeing the tip of the ice berg.
One of the things that disturbs me is that Republicans still have not mostly gotten it.
Republicans still mostly support the patriot act, the DMCA, Qualified immunity and power to federal law enforcement and the surveilance state.
Republicans still support the demonization of Assange and Snowden and others who should be their natural allies.
Recently it has been uncovered that the most egregious offenses committed on Jan. 6 were likely committed by government agents, and are not being prosecuted.
Why are we surprised ?
43 of 44 federal prosecutions for domestic islamist terrorism were instances of government agents as the lead conspirators.
The case against the Whitmer militia group is falling apart because 3 of the 6 people involved – all the leaders turn out to be government agents.
We learn that Faucci was playing facebook and the media to surpress stories and investigations that would lead to his own culpability.
We learn that he was using his power over federal grants to entice and threaten people who pushed the lab leak story.
We learn that democrats in the california legislature were actively colluding with FB and twitter to censor the political expression of their opponents.
What we KNOW is damning. What we do not know is only likely to be far worse.
How many FBI investigations can you think of that were not incompetent or political or frame jobs ?
Richard Jewel ? Ruby Ridge ? Wacco ? The Anthrax letters ?
I now understand there is new information damning the government regarding OKC.
I am sure that Trump’s demonization of the deep state has a powerful effect on the diminishing faith in government
AS IT SHOULD.
On of the problems with Turley’s editorial is the tacit presumption that the Federal government should NOT look into claims of election fraud.
This election was conducted lawlessly – that is beyond any doubt at all.
That alone REQUIRED DOJ to step in BEFORE the election.
I have been ambivalent about Barr from the start.
While I think he honestly thought he was stepping in to restore integrity to DOJ and FBI – he has FAILED MISERABLY.
Merrit Garland is very effectively proving he is a political shill and I am ecstatic that he was not put onto the supreme court.
He has made it clear that he is using the DOJ and FBI to target the least violent groups of people in the country and is like good leftists everywhere ruhing off to chase mythical white supremecists.
Whatever good Barr might have done was wiped out in an instant.
Never get tired of this interview…
It directly addresses the points you’re making here, particularly this one: “This election was conducted lawlessly – that is beyond any doubt at all.”
Since you’ll rant about ‘what is your argument?’ let’s boil it down. How could you think this election was conducted lawlessly when the paper trail of machine votes jumped up to 96% in ’20 from 82% ’16? Is it that the 4% left was enough to swing the election? If so, then you’re saying that nearly every single one of those 4% was a Trump vote, a statistical improbability of the highest order. You’d also run into another point Krebbs made which was that no Secretary of State, in their own state, flagged election irregurities. A couple of blowhards, most notably in Texas, were big on pointing the finger at other states, made accusations, but then lost decisively in court.
Also, this interview points out that the federal government *did* extensively look into the election previous to it happening, (and that the agencies who did would be the ones who provided evidence to the DOJ should they have picked up on irregularities — which, of course, they didn’t).
This past election was “the most secure in American history”
That should tell one to change channels because BS is coming. One could say Trump lost, and that would be reasonably fair. One could say the election, despite the irregularities, was secure, and that would be tolerable, but one cannot say this election was “the most SECURE in American history”. That is not true. That is opinion, not fact. It is an opinion that I do not believe can be backed up.
That is the type of argument that gullible 6th graders might find adequate, but that is why those 6th graders have at least 6 more years of school to go.
You’re a Chem Trailer. You’re a Conspiracy Theorist. You’re a numbskull.
A classic Trumper – dumb AF.
I sentence you to bathe in your own stupidity.
“You’re a Chem Trailer. You’re a Conspiracy Theorist. You’re a numbskull.”
Ben, this is why you are a joke, and nothing you say can be taken seriously. Stupidity reigns in your side of the woods. You haven’t even learned how to get dressed properly so you can appear decently in public.
Prove: This past election was “the most secure in American history”
Take note, I am not asking you to prove this election was secure. That is a different question. I included this statement because I wasn’t sure you would understand the nature of the of the proof being asked for. You have created a deep intellectual hole that you have to climb out of before anyone can communicate normally with you.
It is trivial to prove the election was not secure.
Ballots were in the hands of people – outside of polling places and election offices.
They were gathered by third parties in much of the country and delivered to unattended ballot drop boxes.
They were lost in the mail – accidentally and deliberately.
PA still has not accounted for about 270,000 votes.
In AZ the number of ballots counted in batches does not match the number actually in those batches.
In GA chain of custody documents have been destroyed – we have no idea where many ballots came from.
The above and many more things MIGHT be evidence of fraud – or they might not.
But they are ALL evidence of incompetence and insecurity.
“You haven’t even learned how to get dressed properly so you can appear decently in public.”
Oh my. How would you know this SM?
Anonymous are you trying to tell us that you and Ben are intimate?
One can only dream of such a conquest, eh?
Actually listen to the interview to find out why.
You make this stupid argument all the time.
It would be more credible if you were not the little boy who cried wolf.
No. Many of us are NOT going to do much work to delve into conspiracy theory nonsense from democrats, the left, the MSM, you.
We have been burned too many times – you are NOT CREDIBLE.
You have lost any presumption of credibility long ago.
If you actually want someone to take something you claim seriously – or to do the work of trying to determine if something you claim is finally actually true – or just more left wing nut nonsense – then YOU are going to have to make a compelling case FIRST.
I have told you repeatedly – that there is no EQUAL standard of proof.
What I and others who have consistently provided credible arguments that have ultimately PROVEN to be correct are expected to provide to support our claims is minimal. We have established a reputation for credibility for truth, for accuracy.
Conversely YOU have been WRONG – on issue after issue.
Seriously – in the past 4 years I can not think of an issue that Trump, the right, libertarians have been wrong about – there must be something. Nor can I think of one in which the left, the media, democrats, you have been right about.
That kind of skew does not occur by accident. It is the product and proof of fundimental errors in your world view.
We are already seeing the Biden administration coming apart – much faster than even I expected.
Biden was NOT elected with a mandate to do anything. But he WAS elected on a rising tide. All he needed to do was not F’it up and take credit for a recovery he had nothing to do with.
Instead it is already clear he has botched what should have been coasting to success.
There is little that constitutes better proof of the failure of the ideology of the left than being able to destroy a recovery in 6 months.
No one is happy about this – this is real damage to real people.
There are almost 10M people Trump had working in 2019 that are not working now – none of them are in the top 1% or 10% or 50%.
You have pissed over the very people you claim to be helping.
Your ideology DOES NOT WORK.
You do not have any credibility, and no one is obligated to take you seriuously.
No one is obligated to read interviews you link to or articles that you provide.
From past experience there is no reason to expect any value from doing so.
Your sources have NOT supported your claims.
You are incapable of distinguishing between narative and spin – and FACTS.
And time after time – you have been on the wrong side of the facts.
If you want anyone to take you seriously – you need to make plausible arguments.
You need to build your credibility – which is not accomplished by repeatedly telling us all to indulge in the fantasy that links to other advocates of your world view will be any more convincing than you are.
It has always been true that the left is better at messaging than the right – because they care less about lying.
In a world where Alex Jones is right more often than the most elite of the democratic propoganda machine – namely the Main Stream Media, I would not be calling Trumper’s stupid.
Whatever the intelligence of the average Trump voter – they beat that of the average Biden voter – hands down.
What have you been right about ?
Do you understand that the FACT that Trump has been right about so many things so often when the left the media, the democrats have been wrong
ALONE is reason to place a great deal of faith in Trump’s election claims – and to NOT give credance to those like you who have been wrong about nearly everything.
Oh my. You are talking to SM about “bathing” and SM is talking about how you haven’t even learned how to get dressed properly so you can appear decently in public…..
Can’t decide if this is….scandalous…..or disturbing.
I’m going with disturbing.
What exactly do you find disturbing?
All. Of. This. Bahahahahahahahahahaha.
“Bathing” is an allegory or a metaphor or a play on words or something.
““Bathing” is an allegory or a metaphor or a play on words or something.”
Ben, I hate to find common ground with you because you are so often wrong, but I agree about “bathing” and “dressing” in this one case. It seems Anonymous the Stupid and perhaps his pretend friends have problems deciphering the meaning. There is some nakedness there, and Anonymous the Stupid likes to be completely hidden, so maybe these fears or fetishes are being revealed in his most recent comments.
Please don’t find common ground with me.
Ben you are wrong or crazy so often, finding common ground with you will always remain uncommon.
You’re a Trumper. You’re a nutcase. You’re a conspiracy theorist.
Did you know Chemtrails are a government conspiracy designed to make citizens so gullible and dumb, they actually think Chemtrails are a government conspiracy?
Same with Deep State and Pizzagate and now Election Fraud and all the nonsense you right wing numbskulls spout.
It doesn’t matter. Trump is out of office, All his followers have slid back into the swamp.
The smart people are in charge again.
You had your chance and your ideal Vulgarian Candidate.
He blew it. Go away.
Or bathe in your own ignorance.
“Or bathe in your own ignorance.”
So says the serial plagiarizer whose claim to fame is crazy ignorant posts interspersed with plagiarism.
Where did I plagiarize?
Cut and pasted maybe.
If you’re a Trumper you have a screw loose.
If you want to see America become a Third World kleptocracy run by Banana Republicans, that’s your flaw.
Go raid a government building or something.
“Where did I plagiarize? Cut and pasted maybe.”
Word for word encompassing more than one paragraph at a time. This isn’t the first time, but anyone can see the change in writing style. I provided the major source of your plagiarism.
I didn’t claim to write any of that.
Anyone with any common sense would see it was me posting an article written by someone else to support an argument.
Oh, did I use the words “common sense” when speaking to a Trump Humper?
Go put on a Viking uniform like your cousin and raid the Capitol.
I fully support your right to free speech.
I am not interested in the debate over whether an unattributed quote is plagiarism.
I agree that “common sense” would inform others that quoted remarks are NOT you trying to claim another’s work as your own.
Though you constantly demonstrate a personal lack of “common sense” or you would realize that you proved that the CDC, FDA, and Big Pharma conspired to influence the election, and that in doing so they likely are responsible for increasing the number of C19 deaths.
But then you have no common sense.
You do not seem to be able to distinguish between spin and facts. The quotes you provided support your contention that Big Pharma disliked Trump. They also support the contention that Big Pharma and “the deep state” conspired to influence the election.
Ultimately in the entire world there is only one group that is forbidden from using persuausion, or whatever power short of force they have to “influence” an election – and that is our government itself.
Big Pharma – can support whoever they please.
Putin can support whoever he pleases.
John oliver can support whoever he pleases.
And all of these can use their money, their power (short of force) to get the result they desire.
But government and those in government may NOT use the power of government to influence an election.
CDC, FDA may not delay approvals or demand more testing to influence elections.
States may not ignore their laws – to influence elections.
Courts may not decide election (or any) cases outside the narrowest reading of the laws.
Courts may not prevent public inquiry into elections ( 0r nearly all actions of government).
There is no government right to privacy – rights belong to individuals.
It is self-evident you plagiarized an article originally penned by Lev Facher, and as quoted in boston.com online news. You edited the content to fit your narrative, did not cite your sources, and attempted to convey the impression that the words were of your own. When others pointed out this fact to you, you replied in a manner that is in violation of the civility policy of this website. I noted that many of your comments are increasingly hostile toward other individuals and those who comment on this website. This will not be permitted to continue.
I caution you to cease this type of behavior immediately.
I would speak in Ben’s defense.
Ben’s post quoted what was not his own.
He merely did not provide attribution.
There was no doubt that the quotes were not his.
While I would prefer links rather than large quotes and I would prefer that quotes were attributed,
Those are preferences that I would not like to see as hard rules.
I personally thought that Ben’s long quotes made one of his arguments – but undermined his larger theme.
I was happy with Ben’s post.
But even if the post had truly damned some claim or argument of mine – I would still prefer as Brandeis noted – more speech as the remedy rather than enforced silence.
Censuring or censoring Ben over failing to note the source of his quotes is little different to me from the gramatical and spelling attacks.
Whether they have merit or not – they are still fallacy. They are attempts to side track the original debate.
Ben made a CORRECT argument – that Big Pharma was antagonistic to Trump. His quotes demonstrate that effectively.
Ben PROVED that part of his argument. I do not want Ben handicapped from proving arguments.
He separately failed to grasp that what he proved seriously undermined the other claims he was making.
But that is a side issue.
Further – we are dealing with comments on a blog article. I do not expect and do not want the same standards for comments as articles.
Ben was NOT trying to claim the work of others as his own – which is my definition of plagiarism.
While I mostly do not have a problem with the policy of blocking posts with huge quotes – more as a matter of efficiency than ethics,
I do not think that the standards regarding “plagarmism” should be applied to blog commnets – I do not care if Ben stole his arguments. I care what merit they have.
Finally numerous posters called Ben out on this already.
The price for bad speech should be more speech – not enforced silence.
I do not care about the cut and past or plagarize debate.
Read your own posts – without the spin – they prove damning.
You seem to think it is OK for FDA, CDC, Big Pharma to delay the vaccine for political reasons.
You revel in the claim that Big Pharma hated Trump – of course they did.
But can not grasp that the very hatred you prove that no one debates also provides an obviously improper motive for their conduct.
You, the left, democrats the media constantly fixate on motives – and yet here – it is OK to have bad motives for actions that likely resulted in more deaths and changed the outcome of an election – because their motives are aligned with your own ?
Many republicans dislike Biden and Harris – is that justification for actively and often illegally thwarting everything they do – even those few things they get right or are empowered to do ?
Your very arguments are that the ends justifies the means. That the FDA, CDC, Big Pharma are free to conspire to thwart Trump even if that kills people – so long as the end – getting rid of Trump is good in your mind.
That is repugnant – and that is why you are driving the country towards violence.
If you think there was no consequential election fraud – why from the day after the election to the present have you fought tooth and nail against any kind of scrutiny ?
The entire history of the Trump presidency has been the excrutiatingly painful process of extracting the actual truth against oppostition from the left, the media, democrats.
Whether it was the collusion delusion, Election Fraud, the origens of C19, the collusion between social media and democtats in govenrment, the Russian bounty claims, Hunter Biden.
One issue after issue – the left, the media, the democrats, the deep state, YOU have actively worked to thwart all efforts to get to the truth.
And in each case so far the result has been YOU were hiding the truth which was damning.
We have two separate impeachments – where Democrats refused to actually bother to get the evidence – for fear of the actual truth.
The Jan. 6th narrative is slowly coming apart. Again despite the fact that the “deep state” is hiding thousands of hours of security video.
“Those who won our independence believed that the final end of the State was to make men free to develop their faculties, and that, in its government, the deliberative forces should prevail over the arbitrary. They valued liberty both as an end, and as a means. They believed liberty to be the secret of happiness, and courage to be the secret of liberty. They believed that freedom to think as you will and to speak as you think are means indispensable to the discovery and spread of political truth; that, without free speech and assembly, discussion would be futile; that, with them, discussion affords ordinarily adequate protection against the dissemination of noxious doctrine; that the greatest menace to freedom is an inert people; that public discussion is a political duty, and that this should be a fundamental principle of the American government. They recognized the risks to which all human institutions are subject. But they knew that order cannot be secured merely through fear of punishment for its infraction; that it is hazardous to discourage thought, hope and imagination; that fear breeds repression; that repression breeds hate; that hate menaces stable government; that the path of safety lies in the opportunity to discuss freely supposed grievances and proposed remedies, and that the fitting remedy for evil counsels is good ones. Believing in the power of reason as applied through public discussion, they eschewed silence coerced by law — the argument of force in its worst form. Recognizing the occasional tyrannies of governing majorities, they amended the Constitution so that free speech and assembly should be guaranteed.”
Justice Brandeis – Whitney V. California.
If as you claim there are all these fake right wing conspiracy threories –
“If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the process of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.”
— Justice Louis Brandeis in the Whitney opinion.
Lets look DEEPLY into these alleged conspiracies. Just as we looked deeply into your Collsion delusion nonsense and found nothing exactly as anyone with common sense would expect.
Let us actually investigate every allegation of election fraud or misconduct.
Let us inquire into the communications of those in govenrment regarding the election – after all the communications and actions of those in government are NOT private.
Let us seek the truth.
Let us have a press that actually investigates – rather than deliberately thwarts investigations.
I am not afraid of the Truth – why are you ?
Actually Ben is right about many of the FACTS in his post – it is his SPIN that is the problem.
He seems to think it is both normal and OK for government agencies and drug companies to conspire together to delay a vaccine and vaccine information for political benefit.
Ben is correct that the Drug companies hated Trump – and for good reason. He was a direct threat to their profits.
He was constantly threatening drug reimportation and price controls.
If Course Big Pharma hated Trump.
And yet he STILL managed to get them to develop vaccines for C19 in 1/6 the normal time.
And If Ben was not so drowning in his own bubble he would grasp that the very facts he cites are DAMNING – to the FDA, the CDC, the drug companines the left, the media and him.
For political reasons these all worked together to the harm of the american people.
Ben makes this about Trump.
But he completely misses that this is about people DYING.
Missing from Ben’s diatribe is the FACT that the CDC, FDA and drug companies extended studies for an additional 6 weeks – when they already knew the vaccine was safe and effective. The results of the extension proved them even MORE safe and effective – great.
But doing so not only delayed the ANNOUNCEMENT by 6 weeks – but it delayed the DEPLOYMENT by 6 weeks.
As a results the decline in deaths started 6 weeks LATER.
PEOPLE DIED because the CDC, the FDA, and drug companies played politics.
Ben omits that from his spin.
These peopel were all happy to kill people to win an election.
The drug companies didn’t delay anything.
They just didn’t want to get involved with a president who turns everything to shit.
And they were right.
“The drug companies didn’t delay anything.”
False, the results from all the planned vaccine tests were excellent. The FDA and the drug companies agreed to continue the tests another 6 weeks beyond what was planned to push the announcement date past the election.
“They just didn’t want to get involved with a president who turns everything to shit.”
They were unavoidably, and he didn;t.
It is the CDEC, FDA and drug companies that delayed by 6 weeks at the cost of likely thousands of lives.
“And they were right.”
Your arguments are constantly of the form – “I am right, because I agree with myself” – that is about the worst appeal to authority there is.
Glad to see Darren’s caution to Ben to reamin within the civility policy after he’s cautioned Allan of it so many times…, oh wait, my bad. I was thinking of something else.
Daren’s caution was for Plagarism – unattributed quotes.
Has Allan done that ?
“He merely did not provide attribution.”
It was much worse than that. He did not use quotation marks to note that he was citing someone else’s words. That’s plagiarism 101.
@ John Say…
Here is the part of Darren’s caution to Ben relating to civility policy:
“…When others pointed out this fact to you, you replied in a manner that is in violation of the civility policy of this website. I noted that many of your comments are increasingly hostile toward other individuals and those who comment on this website. This will not be permitted to continue.”
I have problems with the lack of civility here generally. I can not note Ben as especially hostile.
Those on the left are generally more hostile than the rest.
Those on the left conflate any deviation from dogma is personal hostility.
Franklhy those on the left just start from a position of hostility.
Ben is not unique.
He is only unique in that he is even less well informed than your average leftist.
I am not personally prepared to hold Ben to a higher standard than others here.
If we are going to censor or censure snark and hostility – then lets do so universally – with clear standards.
If we are going to censor and censure unattributed quotes – then lets do so universally.
Whatever the lines – they must be clear and bright and apply equally to all.
Otherwise it is better to have no lines at all.
Ben is uniquely ill informed. He is uniquely a name dropped – and probably a spinner of tall tales.
But he is not uniquely hostile or uniquely plagaristic.
He did quite what he posted. It was obviously not his work. He merely failed to attribute it.
This is not a doctoral work, or paid work – it is blog comments – the standards are lower.
Oooh Benji, we see you were put on notice by the moderator. We might say you have been sentenced to go “bathe in your own stupidity.”
Isn’t this fun?
“”Bathing” is an allegory or a metaphor or a play on words or something.”
Which is it ? I thought you were in the creative fields ?
Are you unfamiliar with your own literary constructs that you can not identify them ?
play on words
… or something
are all distinct.
Frankly your muddled use suggests you do not know what these actually are.
Though you could have looked them up, and hopefully will when you reply.
Personally I do not give a damn about your hygiene or grammar or spelling – except to the extent you attack others for those.
Do you have an argument ?
You’re a Trumper and a conspiracy theory buffoon.
That is my argument.
Never once voted for Trump.
Every single thing that you call a conspiracy that i purportedly beleive in – has another name.
It is called a FACT.
I am not the one who pushed the zoonotic origens of Covid – BTW the odds of that are now less than 1:13000000000
I am not the one who pushed the collusion delusion.
I am not the one who pushed the idiotic claims that Hunter Biden’s laptop or anything else I did not like was Russian disinformaiton.
I am not the one who pushed the idiotic russian bounty nonsense.
Need I go on ?
What are these allegedy conspiracies that I have been wrong about ?
What is it you have been right about ?
You can’t prove it because you don’t have the requisite knowledge. It is not all that different from the lack of knowledge you demonstrated regarding your hip surgery. You relied on people like Karen to subsidize you when there were other ways that would have been better for both you and Karen. One has to wonder how you got into the position you were in.
Election Fraud is now up there with Chemtrails and Deep State and Pizzagate and other dumbass conspiracy theory BS spouted by prole morons.
Scary that those people elected a president, but America survived.
Let them drown in their own stupidity.
What have you been right about in the past year ? the past 4 years ? Ever ?
Why should someone who bought into the collusion delusion be trusted over anything ?
Why should someone who ranted that vaccines could not be delivered in less than a year be beleived ?
Why should someone who thought masks and lockdowns would work and then pooh poohed HCQ, Vitamin D, or myriads of treatments that are ALL inarguably 10 times more effective than any (or all) government policies ?
Why should we beleive someone who thought Hunter Biden’s laptop was “russian disinformation” ?
Or that Joe Biden did not know about his son’s business dealings with China, Russia, the Ukraine ?
Or that did not beleive that Hunter Biden arranged meetings between oligarchs and Joe Biden ?
Or who thought the Russian bounty story was real ?
“Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last?”
Inarguably this was the least secure election in a century – mailin voting CAN NOT BE SECURE.
When a person makes one domonstrably stupid claim – it undermines everything else they say.
Seven million popular votes, baby.
Trump lose decisively, and fair and square.
Election Fraud now gives the proles something to do beyond going to Target and standing outside looking into the sky counting Chem Trails.
BM: “Trump lose decisively, and fair and square.”
That’s funny! That you who just lectured us on proper spelling and grammar, something about being different from Mongols I think, should make such a juvenile error.
You apparently don’t know that the ‘lose’ in your sentence should be ‘lost’.
Perhaps you should leave off nitpicking the grammar and spelling of other commenters or the word ‘loser’ will come to mind when you post.
I was using Ebonics for our black brothers reading all this.
“Trump lose decisively” should of course be “Trump lost decisively”
Regardless of spelling, he lost decisively and that’s a good thing.
He is out of office, stifled from social media and hopefully going to prison.
Hopefully Trump will have the same effect on the Republican party that Hitler had on the Nazi party.
“I was using Ebonics for our black brothers reading all this.”
So just another liberal racist who believes black people are incapable of speaking grammatically and so you must talk down to them, like baby talk with children.
I ain’t racist. I’m “intelligentist.” I judge not on race, creed or religion but intelligence. Rationality. Common sense. Manners. Class.
There are smart black people (See: Obama) and there are dumb white people (See: Trumpers)
I have coffee with AC every morning and my roommate was Charmaine Sylvers and my brother was with Ray Charles for many years.
It’s not race, it’s brains.
And if the liberals are so racist, why did they elect a half-black president and a half-black vice president?
“I ain’t racist.”
Of course you are.
” I judge not on race, creed or religion but intelligence.”
That is obviously false.
“Rationality. Common sense. Manners. Class.”
You have not demonstrated knowledge of anything of these – or spelling or grammar.
You are just another left wing nut racist.
“There are smart black people”
Absolutely – Ben Carson, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams. Janice Brown.
“there are dumb white people ”
Certainly – anyone who buys any of the coolaid being sold by the left.
“I have coffee with AC every morning”
While surfing at Malibu ?
And you expect us to beleive you are smart ?
“and my roommate was Charmaine Sylvers and my brother was with Ray Charles for many years.”
“It’s not race, it’s brains.”
Agreed – and you do not have brains.
They do not rub off by surrounding yourself with celebrities.
“And if the liberals are so racist”
Please do not abuse the word liberal.
A liberal is one who values individual liberty.
“And if the liberals are so racist, why did they elect a half-black president and a half-black vice president?”
Because you are racist. The very fact that you must emphasize that you voted for a “half-black” – is proof that you thin that is what mattered.
More likely he is making excuses for his errors.
Regardless, he damns himself – ebonics or or poor grammer – he is hoist by his own petard.
Res ipas liquitor.
Et illuminabit te incendi depone desilire aliqua rupe.
Geez. Trying to type on a phone keyboard sure leads to typos…
If Biden and Kamala did not have the sycophantic media circling its wagons of protection around them, they would:
1. Not have been elected.
2. Be exposed as the corrupt and incompetent failures they have thus far been in their respective roles.
BM– Disappointing. I thought you were going to say you had lunch with the Obamas in Malibu every day and couldn’t be racist. Maybe next time.
As to history, it doesn’t appear you know much about Hitler and the Nazi party not that I expected you would. Hitler was black, wasn’t he?
I did make a crossword puzzle for Nancy Pelosi’s 80th birthday that was all about her – illustrated and everything.
I asked my most famous acquaintance C____ C____ if he knew Pelosi but he said he didn’t.
I mailed it to her office in March and didn’t hear anything.
Figured she didn’t get it because she gets a lot of mail and they probably scan everything because Pelosi is rad and people don’t like her.
Three days ago C___ C____ emailed me and said he had lunch with Pelosi’s daughter and brought up the crossword puzzle.
I emailed it straight to C___ C___ with a cover letter and he passed it along.
So that’s rad.
Pelosi is rad.
She tore up the State of the Union speech in front of God and everyone.
Califronia Uber Alles baby.
If she thanks me personal I am going to ask to be invited to one of her shindigs in Napa.
Would love to meet J Brown and B Obama and ask them a few things.
Obama inherited a 15T economy and in 8 years converted it to an 18T economy.
Trump took an 18T economy and in 4 years converted it to a 22T economy.
Another thing Trump did – brought the economy out of the Obama Doldrums – something we were told was impossible.
Do you know what 1% of 16T is ? – that is 160B of additional jobs and growth and benefits EVERY YEAR.
I would further note that growth COMPOUNDS
If the government loan to Tesla was actually consequential – it was not – it is dwarfed by the economic benfit of Trump’s growth.
P.S. I know a fair bit about Hitler and the Nazi Party.
My great uncle Emmanuel Schafer was the Butcher of Belgrade.
Murdered 7000+ Jews in a Sauer gas van in Belgrade.
Hitler was self-hating and did more permanent damage to Germany than Trump has done to America.
My great great grandfather was best friends with Karl Marx in Trier, circa 1835.
“Hitler was self-hating and did more permanent damage to Germany than Trump has done to America.”
We agree – Hitler destroyed Germany. Trump rebuilt the US.
Hitler started global wars.
Trump started no conflicts and brought about peace.
How is Biden doing so far? Oops.
Aproximately 600 generations ago – my great, great, … grandfather was Adam.
I also descended from Charlemaign.
SO WHAT ?
You play this name dropping game as if it is meaningful.
Being related to Nazi’s does not mean you understand nazi’s.
Your lineage includes the Butcher of Belgrade and great great grandpa who was best friends with Karl Marx. So…murder, immorality, evil, dictatorial tendencies, lying, exploiting…it’s all in your bloodline, your lineage. Fascinating.
Yep my pops was descended from Transylvanian gypsy Jews so some of them were probably slaughtered by the Nazis.
There are Nazis on my mom’s Schafer side who slaughtered Jews.
But on my mom’s side the Tuttles worked for Kodak in the 30s and 40s.
My great uncle Fordyce Tuttle was VP of the whole shebang and headed the Optical Physics branch of the NDRC during World War II.
He patented Gun Training by Tracer Fire Spotting” and a lot of other fiendish thingies: https://patents.google.com/patent/US2458448A/en
And my grandfather Clifton was a physicist who worked on the Manhattan Project and was at Alamogordo for the first nuclear test.
So yes, interesting, but the shameful Nazi side makes me wonder how the German people could have deliberately and bureaucratically slaughtered millions of people.
This was not that long ago.
There is a guy named Jimmie who comes to Malibu Kitchen every Sunday – he got shrapnel in his knee during the Invasion of Normandy.
So I wonder how the Germans could have done something like that, but then I listen to Trump supporters and I understand how people could support a corrupt buffoon out of ignorance, arrogance, fear, insecurity, greed, racism, self interest and sheer stupidity.
Hopefully Trump will have the same effect on the Republican party that Hitler had on the Nazi party.
Frankly I do not beleive much of what you say about yourself.
There is no way to test it, and you spew falsehoods on every other subject why would one expect you to be honest about yourself ?
But I also do not care.
If you had tea with the queen on thursday – it would not make what you say any more credible.
None of the personal history you provide gives us a reason to trust you.
Being distantly related to marx – does not mean you know marixism.
Being distantly related to nazi’s – does not mean you know nazism.
Banging elbows with the glitterati does not make you knowledgeable about anything.
Truth is cont communicated genetically.
As to your life – you surf and ghost write. Are these reasons to beleive you know anything about anything ?
We are not debating surfing here.
As to ghostwriting – one would expect better grammar and spelling – so that claim is not plausible.
But even it it was – it still not actual life experience.
What is disturbing is he is proud of this and thinks it means he knows something.
I guess he thinks that knowledge is passed genetically.
That is an ugly thing to say.
To self-reflect, though, it was impolite of me to respond thus.
Nevertheless, I do wish you would be kinder…
Ebonics is not english.
It is leftist nonsense to whitewash ignorance of english.
It is another leftist creation to keep blacks in their place.
It is left wing nuts telling blacks – you need not learn how to speak proper english – skills that will get you better jobs and prospects.
Instead we can pretend that your poor english is really its own legitimate language and the rest of the world should accomidate your poor communications skills.
I beleive that blacks are capable of math, or english, of actual historical truth.
That they do not need to be lied to and coddled.
That they are capable of succeeding in the world as it is.
And the real world evidence supports my beleifs.
You are the one who is racist.
You constantly assert that blacks are inferior – that they are incapable for getting voter ID – or that some election law is dsicriminatory because blacks are inferior and therefore can not manage what others can.
If you want to stop racism – stop being racist.
BM forgot to say he is a direct descendant of Judas and is still upset that he didn’t get leftovers after The Last Supper.
Unfortunately, BM also neglected to explain how he is a blood relative of Scrooge McDuck.
“Unfortunately, BM also neglected to explain how he is a blood relative of Scrooge McDuck.”
Scrooge McDuck … Young, maybe with his leftist and CCP sympathies he is Peking Duck
No leftovers but one of the family heirlooms is a napkin signed by most of them.
Thought about selling it at Christies but can’t get the whole family to decide.
Lol @ Ben’s family dilemma brought to light by 2 right wing b holes.
His own argument is that if you can not get grammar and spelling correct – how can you be trusted on other things ?
So why should we trust Ben by his own standards ?
Seven million paper ballots.
Not the same thing.
And the fact that you refuse to allow those ballots to be scritinized and have engaged in lawfare to prevent that alone makes your claims dubious.
The ratings for the left media – have all tanked. Neither before nore after the election – could Biden ever get anyone to his events of speeches.
And you honestly expect anyone to beleive that people were highly motivated to vote for Biden ?
I have no idea what the actual vote was – nor do you.
But I have lost of reasons to distrust the claimed results.
“Trump lose decisively, and fair and square.”
Trump lost by approximately 45,000 votes spread accross 3 states.
In GA alone 200,000 votes were illegally counted – not fraudulently – but illegally.
They did not meet the GA laws voted ID rquirements.
12-24,000 votes in GA were likely fraudulent.
That is based on the few audits that GA actually performed.
Absolutely we should have a full signature audit – looking for both violations of the law and fraud throughout the state.
But the random sample that was done provides damning results.
“Election Fraud now gives the proles something to do beyond going to Target”
Then quit fighting tooth and nail – lets audit the ballots and lets get real discovery and lets find out the actual truth.
Instead you hide from it.
Despite the fact that the SC investigation was completely illegal – we still did it. In the end Mueller grumbled and ranted and talked about what he might have been able to find in some other magical world. But he still found NOTHING.
And the collusion delusion claims were THOUROUGHLY investigated – whether they deserved it or not..
Every single stupid nonsenseical claim of collusion was thoroughly investigated – by the FBI, by Mueller, By a biased press, by the house, by the senate. And no one found anything.
Lets do the same with the election and see what the results are.
Further lets do much the same EVERY election.
How could I say the election was conducted lawlessly – because inarguably it was.
Every state in the country has election laws.
each like the federal government has election provisions in their constitutions.
In myriads of instances these were not followed.
That is the very defintion of lawless.
Regardless, we have been over this dozens of times – no one has raised a credible counter argument – because there isn’t one.
28 of 50 states – including 6 of the “swing states” have constitutions that require “secret ballots”.
Mail in voting is NOT a secret ballot. Each of the states with a constitutional secret ballot requirement that allowed voting by mail – or any form of voting where the voter possessed a blank ballot outside of a polling place or county office, any state that allowed ballots to be filled in with even the possibility of others being able to identify how any person voted – violate that states constitution.
Any such election is LAWLESS – PERIOD.
I would prefer NO state conducted mailin voting. I would prefer if the US constitution required it.
We have plenty of experience – in the past in the US and elsewhere in the world regarding how easy it is to commit fraud where ballots are not secret.
But just because something is a good idea does not make it the law 22 states do not require secret ballots unfortunately.
Those states did not conduct lawless elections – atleast not by allowing mailin voting.
I would note that lawless and fraudulent are NOT the same,
Fraud can occur in lawful elections. We do not know the extent of voting fraud in states that have lawfully voted by mail.
Lawless elections are not automatically fraudulent. Though the odds heavily favor lawlessness leading to fraud.
Further – lawlessness is WORSE that fraud – Lawlessness undermines trust in government. Lawlessness in government is not mere incompetence – it is a deliberate choice. Large scale fraud can occur as a consequence of govenrment incompetence.
But lawlessness can only occur when government CHOOSES to violate the social contract.
Lawlessness in govenrment is not remediable.
Nor is this the only example of lawlessness by government.
Worse still not only are the executives part of this – but often the courts were complicit.
You celebrate the decisions of courts NOT to scrutinize the elections.
That is not something to celebrate – it is a breach of a fundimental duty.
I would suggest following the cases that still continue – the results there are so far mostly damning.
While none have reached the point of proving massive fraud – there are innumerable instances of violating election laws by those in government.
Atleast 6 courts have found that state executives violated the election laws of their states.
And many more instances are pending.
In fact there has been a great deal of serious malfeasance since the election, since the innauguration.
There are numerous instances of destroying election records – federal laws requires these to be preserved for 2 years.
There are numerous instances of chain of custody violations – that means that in many places it is impossible to know that a ballot in the possession of the state represents an actual vote by a person – or it is merely a peice of paper with marks on it that is currently in the custody of the state.
Seals on ballot batches have been broken. The number of Ballots in those batches do match the number of ballots from that batch counted on election day – and there is absolutely no explanation for the discrepancies
State election officials have repeatedly violated court orders. The GA department of state as an example has been conducting a secret recount of their own – that is not authorized by the law and that requires violating court orders and that interferes with the recount that has been ordered by the court.
In PA numerous provisions of ACT 77 – the 2019 election laws (itself arguably unconstitutional) were violated.
In GA Raffensberger revised the rules for verifying ID for mailin ballots – pretty much elminating them in violation of GA law.
You can fume as you wish – the state constitutions were not followed.
The State laws were not followed.
The election was conducted lawlessly.
I have no idea what argument you are trying to make. It appears you seem to think that the ballot count is correct.
I do not know whether that follows from the rot you are offering – nor do I care.
Though I would note there are myriads of statistics that can be cited in this (and most any election) that appear to prove the results were fraudulent – or appear to prove they were not. Most statistics give us reasons to be suspicious, sometimes strong reason to believe something one way or another – they are rarely proof, and as with this election – and most every political conflict – there are statistics that appear to contradict each other. There are dozens, possibly hundreds of statistics that support the premise that the election results are fraud. But I would not be surprised that you have some that lean otherwise.
Though honestly, you have no track record for honesty.
You do not seem to take lawless actions by government very seriously.
What if in 2022 an assortment of states with republican governors decide to make up the elections processes on their own – and those states courts allow that ?
What if governors of states without voter ID laws – decide to require voter ID – and the courts go along with that ?
You are quick to ignore lawlessness when you do not think it harmed you – IT ALWAYS HARMS YOU.
But raise holy he!! when it is your ox that is gored.
Another example of lawlessness – The PA constitution allows Absentee ballots only for a few specific causes, as well as for additional causes designated by the legislature. Nor is PA alone in this requirement – atleast one state has found that states mailin (absentee) ballot issuance violated the states constitution.
You do not like these laws – fine, change them. But you are not permitted to wish them away.
Every member of the exectutive of every state swore an oath to uphold the constitution and laws of that state.
Whether they agree with those laws or constitutional provisions or not.
You are free to not like the law as it is. You are free to fight to change it.
But NO ONE is free to ignore it until it is changed.
Get over it EB – the 2020 election was lawless.
Saying otherwise is “the great lie”.
Why should we beleive you or the media or democrats or the left – when you have already been caught lying about so much ?
Because a) we haven’t gotten “caught lying so much”, and b) I trust Krebbs over you (while noticing you completely ditched my question to you about the ballot backup in the ’20 election).
“Because a) we haven’t gotten “caught lying so much”,”
But you have – that is indisputable.
The collusion delusion is probably the biggest whopper of all time.
And it is not close to the only one.
The Zoonotic origens of Covid might well displace it though.
“and b) I trust Krebbs over you”
You are free to trust whoever you want for whatever reasons you wish.
Wise people do not trust those who speak anonymously.
Nor those with a track record of error.
what are the factual errors I have made ? I even have a track record on predictions that has done better than most pundits.
Not that reading ouiji boards is a skill to be respected.
“while noticing you completely ditched my question to you about the ballot backup in the ’20 election”
Because you did not raise it in any post I responded to.
What are you even talking about ?
If you are going to make and argument – actually make it.
With specific respect to elections – my arguments have focused om the lawlessness of the elctions and the necescity for audits and other security are trust measures ALWAYS.
I have been fighting for these since the stupid Bushie HAV nonsense foist on us in 2001.
My stance on voting integrity and voter fraud is not new, and not partisan.
It is well known how to manage elections with integrity. It is not secret.
And I have opposed measures that have undermined election integrity from both parties.
Mailin voting is not practiced anywhere else in the developed world – it is highly prone to fraud and it can not be secured.
The gold standard for elections is secret balloting – the entirety of the developed world uses secret ballots – including most of the US until recently.
A secret ballot requires that a voter never have a ballot outside of a voting booth.
That a voter must be given a blank ballot by election officials. That he must fill it out without anyone else present and that he must turn it in to be counted without any record other than the ballot itself of his vote.
That there is no possible means for any third party to ever be certain of how a voter cast their votes.
Mailin voting can not do that – and the rest of the developed world rejected it.
In the US in 28 states it is a violation of the state constitution.
Often it violates several provisions – aside from secret ballot provisions.
The left constantly argues that voting needs to be made easier. That is both wrong as a matter of principle, and wrong as a matter of security.
The easier voting is the easier fraud is.
But equally important – people make incredibly poor decisions when those decisions have no personal cost.
If you wish people to vote well, to seriously consider their vote – then voting must be difficult – not easy.
Do we really want couch potatoes who can not walk down the block to vote to decide the fate of the country ?
If I could I would have every polling place in the country experience a hurricane on election day. To assure that only those who were really serious voted.
Couldn’t read past the point where you did exactly what I predicted you would in my post. You’re a clown that has been wrong on virtually everything I’ve seen you prognosticate on this blog..
It’s quite entertaining.
Wow! – the amazing Kreskin!
You are able to predict that others will shred stupid arguments you make!
I’ll bet you can bend spoons with your fingers too.
Predicting that your poor arguments are going to be torn apart is no skill.
I predict the sun will rise tomorrow.
I also predict that you will post something stupid.
It is trivial to get a 100% accurate predication rate.
Can you make an actual argument – ever.
“You’re a clown that has been wrong on virtually everything I’ve seen you prognosticate on this blog..”
Lets address those – pick one. Whatever one you want.
If I have been so constantly and obviously wrong – that would be trivial to demonstrate.
Ah Krebbs – took me a second.
No there is no reason to trust Krebbs. The claim that the election was the most secure ever is complete nonsense.
The election was inarguably lawless – hence insecure
It was inarguably conducted int he least secure means possible.
When you tell whoppers – you should not expect to be beleived.
That you trust people who tell whoppers reflects on you.
Krebbs is not trustworthy.
“Unfortunately we now have a political class that appears to be a mix of stupidity, cowardice, radicals, and hustlers who are unlikely to see where we are drifting.”
Away from self-governance and towards an entrenched statist corporatism.
The populace needs to pay closer attention, too.
The horrific video explains itself and it is not an isolated incident by any means.
Meanwhile the enthusiasts in the DOJ are looking for, or are faking, white supremacists.
“In typical lefty fashion you break your word in record time. Don’t have a time stamp but my guess is minutes.”
What gives? How did I break my word? I said I would retire if and only if Turley agreed with Alex Jones. That’ll be the day.
I have said it before, but it bears repeating, Turley’s views and mine are far more in simpatico than any Trumpist. My only complaint is his decision to sell out to Fox News and his hypocritical ignoring the hateful false narratives of its prime time hosts. Forcing him to watch Carlson, Pirro, Hannity or Ingraham on any given night would be all that it would take to shame him into silence.
Unlike Barr, Turley never mentions much less defends the Fox prime time hosts *by name* because he no more wishes to legitimate their rage than he would Alex Jones. Turley has to maintain his academic credentials. He will take Fox’s dirty money so long as he can keep his professional reputation clean (or so he hopes).
Comments are closed.