Further, I have a bet for Ms. Warren: If there is another credit crisis she will immediately call for the abolition of her agency.
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
A letter to the LA Times from me.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
President Obama inhabits Arnold Rimmer's body
Here. Just to be clear, Rimmer is the white guy with the t shirt that says "Give Quiche A Chance".
I'm waiting for Obama's Committee Against Salivating Monsters....
I'm waiting for Obama's Committee Against Salivating Monsters....
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Death in the Andes-by Vargas Llosa
I am reading the novel Death in the Andes. Unlike the last one of his I read, Conversation in the Cathedral, it is an easy read. It is about the Shining Path terrorists--terrucos as they are known in Peru. I recommend it highly--both books actually. I have no way of knowing this with certainty but it seems that if you want to really know about Peru--you have to read his books. He conveys an incredibly vivid image of the culture and the politics.
Someday I will go to Peru.
Anyway, I always knew Vargas Llosa ran for president of Peru but I always thought he ran sort of how Ron Paul ran here---as a passionate longshot. Apparently, though, he was the favorite but he failed to win a majority in the first round and was forced into a runoff with Fujimori. For various reasons, he lost his lead and Fujimori won the runoff. I think Peru wishes it could have that vote back, despite some of the good things Fujimori did: e.g. crushing the Senderistas (shining path) and implementing some free market reforms. But maybe Vargas Llosa wouldn't have made a good president--who knows?
UPDATE: I guess Peruvians don't want that vote back: 66% agree that Fujimori was the greatest Peruvian president ever.
Someday I will go to Peru.
Anyway, I always knew Vargas Llosa ran for president of Peru but I always thought he ran sort of how Ron Paul ran here---as a passionate longshot. Apparently, though, he was the favorite but he failed to win a majority in the first round and was forced into a runoff with Fujimori. For various reasons, he lost his lead and Fujimori won the runoff. I think Peru wishes it could have that vote back, despite some of the good things Fujimori did: e.g. crushing the Senderistas (shining path) and implementing some free market reforms. But maybe Vargas Llosa wouldn't have made a good president--who knows?
UPDATE: I guess Peruvians don't want that vote back: 66% agree that Fujimori was the greatest Peruvian president ever.
Obama and the law and marijuana
So Obama and Holder are making a low priority of busting marijuana stores in California. So low that they won't be busting them. That's fine. I think the federal law is unconstitutional anyway and I'm Ok with legal pot.
BUT, say a DEA agent is cruising around and observes the illegal behavior? Or even, what if the DEA knows about where and when the illegal activity is taking place (which is the case)? Is he/they supposed to ignore it? That hardly seems ethical or legal. It seems to me that Obama should work to repeal marijuana's status as a schedule 1 drug, if he wants to be legal and ethical. The Supreme Court has already upheld the federal law, so the judicial approach is out--at least for now.
Same thing with immigration laws: how can Obama legally ignore lawbreaking aliens? I understand that this is a semantic issue of what law enforcement issues are a priority, but, as a practical matter, these laws are being ignored based on Obama's political preferences. Again, this seems unethical. I believe, of course, that there is no legal remedy to make the executive branch enforce the law--the judicial branch allows a lot of leeway here. And, I know Republicans do the same thing but I can't think of anything specific that George W Bush did along these lines.
So here's a hypothetical: what if Bush said: I am going to make a low priority of prosecuting Border Patrol agents for misconduct (even of the felonious variety) because well, it's a tough job and sometimes mistakes are made in the heat of the moment. I think we can all agree that this would be a terrible idea. So why is it OK for Obama to effectively abrogate federal law?
The outcome of Obama's "policies" will be increased marijuana use, the practical legalization of marijuana, increased illegal immigration and the costs thereof. Whether or not one opposes these ends or not, our democracy has spoken against them. The executive should be required to seek Congress' input if they want to implement such policies as, dare I say, the Bush administration did when dealing with detainees and Gitmo. Why didn't Bush just ignore the Supreme Court? Prior to 2006 (and democrat pickup of the HOuse) he surely could have...but he didn't. He worked with the court's rulings and Congress in good faith. Bush had more respect for the rule of law and democracy than Obama has.
BUT, say a DEA agent is cruising around and observes the illegal behavior? Or even, what if the DEA knows about where and when the illegal activity is taking place (which is the case)? Is he/they supposed to ignore it? That hardly seems ethical or legal. It seems to me that Obama should work to repeal marijuana's status as a schedule 1 drug, if he wants to be legal and ethical. The Supreme Court has already upheld the federal law, so the judicial approach is out--at least for now.
Same thing with immigration laws: how can Obama legally ignore lawbreaking aliens? I understand that this is a semantic issue of what law enforcement issues are a priority, but, as a practical matter, these laws are being ignored based on Obama's political preferences. Again, this seems unethical. I believe, of course, that there is no legal remedy to make the executive branch enforce the law--the judicial branch allows a lot of leeway here. And, I know Republicans do the same thing but I can't think of anything specific that George W Bush did along these lines.
So here's a hypothetical: what if Bush said: I am going to make a low priority of prosecuting Border Patrol agents for misconduct (even of the felonious variety) because well, it's a tough job and sometimes mistakes are made in the heat of the moment. I think we can all agree that this would be a terrible idea. So why is it OK for Obama to effectively abrogate federal law?
The outcome of Obama's "policies" will be increased marijuana use, the practical legalization of marijuana, increased illegal immigration and the costs thereof. Whether or not one opposes these ends or not, our democracy has spoken against them. The executive should be required to seek Congress' input if they want to implement such policies as, dare I say, the Bush administration did when dealing with detainees and Gitmo. Why didn't Bush just ignore the Supreme Court? Prior to 2006 (and democrat pickup of the HOuse) he surely could have...but he didn't. He worked with the court's rulings and Congress in good faith. Bush had more respect for the rule of law and democracy than Obama has.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
A former undersecretary-general of the United Nations lets us know how he really feels
From the New York Review of Books aka the Fuck America Monthly:
This gem is from Brian Urquhart, a former Undersecretary-General of the UN. Why anyone would give a fuck what a UN flunkey thinks is beyond me."A fog of know-nothing ideology, anti-intellectualism, cronyism, incompetence, and cynicism has, for eight years, enveloped the executive branch of the United States government. America's role in the world and the policies that should shape and maintain it have been distorted by misguided decisions and by willful misinterpretations both of history and of current events. That fog is now being dispersed, and the vast intellectual and managerial resources of the United States are once again being mobilized.
A blessing of this time of liberation and hope is that serious works of political analysis and philosophy may contribute to the new administration's approach to its daunting agenda of global and national problems."
Saturday, March 7, 2009
In Bruges with a racist dwarf..
Saw the movie In Bruges. Pretty enjoyable. But one thing struck me as funny. The two main characters are hit men. One, who is cultured and enjoys Bruges, and another, who isn't and doesn't. At one point, they are "partying" with two prostitutes and a "dwarf" who is playing a role in a movie being shot in Bruges. The "dwarf" holds forth on his theory that a race war is coming between the blacks and the whites. The cultured (white) hitman takes offense because he was married to a black woman who was killed by a white man. He gets up too leave with disparaging words for the prostitutes and the racist dwarf. A hitman! Takes offense! At racism! And skeeziness! What's the message here? Most certainly that a racist is worse than a hitman! A person who kills people for money is fit to pass judgement on a simple racist. Ridiculous.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
And you wonder why LA schools blow dead donkeys?
I'll never understand why voters elect union backed candidates to school boards. These candidates are interested in one thing--and guess what? It ain't the students.
Friday, February 27, 2009
While Investigating my local public schools....
...I came across this. You have to click on a student's name and then you will see their letter to President Obama. All of the students have written to Obama. I feel ambiguous about this. On the one hand, he is the newly elected President so why shouldn't they write letters to him? But I can't help but feel that this is just part of the larger liberal propaganda campaign aimed at students K-Graduate school that needs to be countered just a bit. I especially like this kid's letter.
Gotta stop my daughter from requesting emergency contraception
Noam Levey of the Chicago Tribune needs a refresher on the facts of life:
"The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology has reported cases such as that of a Virginia mother of two who became pregnant because she was denied emergency contraception." (emphasis mine)
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Union Station, Los Angeles
Union Station built in 1939.
From Wikipedia:


From Wikipedia:
The structure combines Dutch Colonial Revival Style architecture (the suggestion
of the Dutch born Jan van der Linden), Mission Revival, and Streamline Moderne
style, with architectural details such as eight-pointed stars.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Hilda Solis, the Labor nominee
Ms. Solis is the congressman from the 32nd district. Her district is also a gerrymandered disgrace but not quite as bad as the 31st or the 38th. Only 62% of her district is "Hispanic or Latino". After looking at her district I noticed that, just like the 31st and the 38th, the 32nd has a piece of East LA. Clearly, East LA, at about 100% (97.6% according to the census) "Hispanic or Latino" is the linchpin or keystone of many racially gerrymandered districts. It must be confusing as hell to live in East LA when you need to speak to your congressman.

When you look at these maps it is ridiculous how they manage to stretch back to take a slice of East LA (The very green area to the left in the image).

When you look at these maps it is ridiculous how they manage to stretch back to take a slice of East LA (The very green area to the left in the image).
Grace Napolitano, her own little CheckNGo operation
By now you must have heard about Congresswoman Napolitano and her brilliant money making operation, loaning money to herself at usurious rates and making a killing.
And here is her district. Quite an odd looking shape--I wonder why? The percentage of "Hispanic or Latino" is over 70%, just like Congressman Becerra's district and she runs unopposed as well. (Remember, the percentage of "Hispanic or Latino" for LA County is 44%) Isn't democracy grand?
And here is her district. Quite an odd looking shape--I wonder why? The percentage of "Hispanic or Latino" is over 70%, just like Congressman Becerra's district and she runs unopposed as well. (Remember, the percentage of "Hispanic or Latino" for LA County is 44%) Isn't democracy grand?
Xavier Becerra, affirmative action congressman, part 2
A quote from my esteemed congressman:
This is a big steaming pile of horseshit. The "stimulus" bill does nothing but increase spending for bullshit liberal social engineering projects. For added evil-they are meddling in markets in ways that are ensured to cause decreased income---for everyone---even sainted poor folk. What "they" really voted against was not a tax cut but a brand new entitlement program mislabeled as a tax cut. People who don't pay taxes in the first place can't get a "tax cut", congressman. The democRAT party is buying elections by ensuring that more than 1/2 the country does not pay any taxes.
"They just voted against the largest tax cut for middle class America in the history of this country," he said. "They voted against expanding the child tax credit for millions of Americans. … They voted against American families and small businesses who need some relief as the credit market froze up. And they voted against American families who are just trying to hold on to their homes."
He added, "Mr. President we stand here today to say we will deliver again. As the American public has said, it's time for a change."
If You Were Wondering....
...this is Socialism (you know, the political ideology responsible for 150 million deaths).
I know, I know: we (the govt) gave them billions so we have the "right" to limit compensation. Yes, as majority owners we do, but when the government owns, that is socialism. And beyond that, is it really a good idea? Or does it just feed our own greed and envy?--The "anti-capitalist mentality" as Ludwig von Mises put it.
I can't remember a government more hostile to capitalism. And we and future generations will pay with a lowered standard of living.
I know, I know: we (the govt) gave them billions so we have the "right" to limit compensation. Yes, as majority owners we do, but when the government owns, that is socialism. And beyond that, is it really a good idea? Or does it just feed our own greed and envy?--The "anti-capitalist mentality" as Ludwig von Mises put it.
I can't remember a government more hostile to capitalism. And we and future generations will pay with a lowered standard of living.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Xavier Becerra, affirmative action congressman
This past fall my congressman, Xavier Becerra, ran unopposed. As if that wasn't enough to make a mockery of democracy take a look at the "district" he "represents":

This is racial gerrymandering at its worst. This is NOT democracy but racist political fixing. The percentages below refer to Hispanic or Latino constituents. Do you think a non-Hispanic or Latino has a chance in hell of winning this district? Of course not....and that's the idea.


This is racial gerrymandering at its worst. This is NOT democracy but racist political fixing. The percentages below refer to Hispanic or Latino constituents. Do you think a non-Hispanic or Latino has a chance in hell of winning this district? Of course not....and that's the idea.

Congressman Becerra refers to his district as "multicultural". Hispanic or Latinos make up over 70% of this "district", but 44% of LA county, 32.4% of the state as a whole and 12.5% for the whole country.
By the way, these screenshots come from the US Census website.
By the way, these screenshots come from the US Census website.
Saturday, February 7, 2009
I Couldn't Agree More
I also am sick of the term "fair-trade".
Like many economists, I cringe whenever I hear the term “fair trade.” It is not that I am against fairness — who is? — but the word “fair” is so amorphous in this context as to defy definition. Most often, the slogan “fair trade” is little more than a rallying cry for protectionism.
Obama can do whatever the f*** he wants!
Doesn't this count as politicizing the DEA?
If you want to change federal law concerning marijuana then I'm right there with you Obama, but to simply say we won't enforce the law is ridiculous. How is this different from Bush prioritizing voter fraud prosecution? For one thing, Bush wasn't choosing to ignore federal law he was just setting priorities for the Justice dept. If law enforcement noticed Republican wrong-doing they hardly turned a blind eye.
For Obama and the democrats, certain laws like those concerning immigration and marijuana distribution simply will not be enforced despite their clear constitutional duty to do so.
So, will we drop the charges against Larry Craig. That hardly sounds like a priority to me!
If you want to change federal law concerning marijuana then I'm right there with you Obama, but to simply say we won't enforce the law is ridiculous. How is this different from Bush prioritizing voter fraud prosecution? For one thing, Bush wasn't choosing to ignore federal law he was just setting priorities for the Justice dept. If law enforcement noticed Republican wrong-doing they hardly turned a blind eye.
For Obama and the democrats, certain laws like those concerning immigration and marijuana distribution simply will not be enforced despite their clear constitutional duty to do so.
So, will we drop the charges against Larry Craig. That hardly sounds like a priority to me!
Obama
Between his moronic bungling cabinet appointments, his lack of leadership for the national government and all the things he actually meant to do Obama is working up to one of the all time worst presidencies in US history! It really is hard to keep up with this incompetent fool.
Great!
He's a tax cheat and a communist!
Mr. Geithner said he would consider “extending at least some of the TARP provisions and features of the $500,000 cap to U.S. companies generally.”Thanks, Senator Hatch!
Friday, February 6, 2009
My Other Stimulus Plan
We can all dig holes and hang with lizards. Same result as the "stimulus" bill but easier accounting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)