Displaying posts published in

October 2018

A Universally Bad Idea Silicon Valley titans push the Marxist-Leninist nonsense of a guaranteed income. By Andy Kessler

https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-universally-bad-idea-1540147422?cx_testId=16&cx_testVariant=cx&cx_artPos=0&cx_tag=pop&cx_navSource=newsReel#cxrecs_s

Bad ideas just won’t die. Ronald Reagan’s goal was to “leave Marxism and Leninism on the ash heap of history.” But they keep coming back, albeit in different forms. Of today’s bad ideas—from net neutrality to open curriculum and living wages—the most dangerous is the universal basic income.

For twisted reasons, Silicon Valley, the embodiment of meritocracy and incentives, thinks universal basic income will be the next great economic force. Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes is helping to fund a UBI pilot program in Stockton, Calif. He even wrote a book about the idea—something about 1%-ers paying money via tax credits—hardly original.

He’s not alone. Barack Obama has recently expressed interest in the idea. So have Bill Gates, Richard Branson, Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, Marc Benioff and others in Silicon Valley. Why? I figure it’s their misplaced guilt about patriarchal dominance over workers displaced by automation. That’s a triple crown of bad excuses.
Photo: iStock/Getty Images

The enthusiasm seems infectious. In July, Chicago Alderman Ameya Pawar told the Intercept, “We need to start having a conversation about automation and a regulatory framework so that if jobs simply go away, what are we going to do with the workforce?” It wasn’t a long chat. This summer, Mr. Pawar introduced legislation for a pilot program that would give $500 a month to 1,000 families. Think of it as a new version of walking-around money. Never mind that Chicago can’t even afford to fund its public-employee pensions. CONTINUE AT SITE

The Real Reason They Hate Trump He’s the average American in exaggerated form—blunt, simple, willing to fight, mistrustful of intellectuals. By David Gelernter

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-real-reason-they-hate-trump-1540148467

Every big U.S. election is interesting, but the coming midterms are fascinating for a reason most commentators forget to mention: The Democrats have no issues. The economy is booming and America’s international position is strong. In foreign affairs, the U.S. has remembered in the nick of time what Machiavelli advised princes five centuries ago: Don’t seek to be loved, seek to be feared.

The contrast with the Obama years must be painful for any honest leftist. For future generations, the Kavanaugh fight will stand as a marker of the Democratic Party’s intellectual bankruptcy, the flashing red light on the dashboard that says “Empty.” The left is beaten.

This has happened before, in the 1980s and ’90s and early 2000s, but then the financial crisis arrived to save liberalism from certain destruction. Today leftists pray that Robert Mueller will put on his Superman outfit and save them again.

For now, though, the left’s only issue is “We hate Trump.” This is an instructive hatred, because what the left hates about Donald Trump is precisely what it hates about America. The implications are important, and painful.

Not that every leftist hates America. But the leftists I know do hate Mr. Trump’s vulgarity, his unwillingness to walk away from a fight, his bluntness, his certainty that America is exceptional, his mistrust of intellectuals, his love of simple ideas that work, and his refusal to believe that men and women are interchangeable. Worst of all, he has no ideology except getting the job done. His goals are to do the task before him, not be pushed around, and otherwise to enjoy life. In short, he is a typical American—except exaggerated, because he has no constraints to cramp his style except the ones he himself invents.

No Debate in New York State Cuomo, Gillibrand and the arrogance of one-party rule.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/no-debate-in-new-york-state-1540159576

Why be a journalist if you can’t have fun? Our friends at the New York Post have been doing exactly that while publicizing the refusal of New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and Senator Kirsten Gillibrand to debate their opponents in what is allegedly an election year. There’s also a lesson here about what happens in states with one-party government.

The Post has the two Democrats dressed in yellow chicken suits with the headline, “Birds of a Feather” and “We’re gonna need a bigger coop!” Both politicians are planning presidential runs, but they’re so far ahead in the polls that they don’t want to give their opponents a chance to highlight any of their career lowlights.

Republican nominee Marc Molinaro would no doubt want to mention the corruption that has effloresced on Mr. Cuomo’s watch, the lousy upstate economy, and the decline of New York City’s subways. GOP candidate Chele Farley might ask Ms. Gillibrand to defend her past admiration for Bill Clinton and Harvey Weinstein even as she says she believes charges without evidence against Brett Kavanaugh.

Ms. Gillibrand announced Friday she was ducking out of a debate with Ms. Farley scheduled for Sunday. The Senator claimed she didn’t want to cross a “de facto picket line” by workers striking against Charter Communications even as she said “open public debate is essential to democracy.” Is she getting credibility counsel from the Saudis? Late Sunday she finally agreed to a debate on Thursday at 1:30 in the afternoon.

The two Democrats can get away with this disdain for democracy because New York is increasingly a one-party state in which Republicans can’t win statewide. This is partly a result of a GOP majority in the state Senate that has failed to offer much of an alternative to liberal governance. But even that restraint in Albany is likely to vanish this year as Democrats expect to control every branch of government. Politicians aren’t more accountable when they face no significant opposition.

America and the Saudis Saving the alliance will require telling the truth about Khoshoggi.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/america-and-the-saudis-1540159637

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has hurt itself badly with the killing of journalist Jamal Khoshoggi, and its serial explanations are compounding the damage. President Trump will lose control of the Saudi-U.S. relationship if he doesn’t speak truth to these Saudi abuses and to Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the 33-year-old power in front of the throne.

The most complete Saudi statement, issued late Friday night, at least admits that Khoshoggi was killed in its Istanbul consulate at the hands of Saudi agents. But the story that Khoshoggi was killed in a “fight and a quarrel” isn’t credible on its face. “The brawl aggravated to lead to his death and their attempt to conceal and cover what happened,” said the Saudi statement. That must have been some lopsided “brawl” with a 59-year-old journalist confronting multiple security agents, as if he were Liam Neeson in “Taken.”

The story is contradicted by information leaked by Turkish officials who say Khoshoggi was killed quickly and dismembered on the scene. The Saudis still haven’t produced Khoshoggi’s body, or provided more details of precisely how or when he died.

The “fight” story also conveniently lays blame on lower-ranking officials while effectively absolving members of the royal family, especially the Crown Prince known as MBS. The Saudis say they’ve arrested 18 officials and sacked five others. Several are part of MBS’s inner circle, and it’s unlikely they would have acted without at least the tacit assent of the Crown Prince. Khoshoggi, who had a wide following in the Middle East, had criticized the Crown Prince for his authoritarian tactics in trying to reform the Kingdom.

Why Is the ‘Blue Wave’ Looking More Like a Splash Than a Tsunami? By John Fund

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/10/midterm-elections-democrat-blue-wave-predictions/

Good news on the economy and bad behavior by Democrats may be energizing Republicans.

Every election people talk about an “October surprise” that upends the conventional wisdom about the outcome. Well, it appears we can see the contours of at least one October surprise. The Democrats have managed to shoot themselves in the foot with their handling of the Brett Kavanaugh nomination and the antics of their most extreme supporters. The “Blue Wave” that liberals have been waiting for may still come, but it’s more likely to splash the knees of most GOP incumbents than to submerge them.

Veteran political handicapper Charlie Cook puts it bluntly in his latest column at the Cook Political Report, in which he asks whether “those who led the out-of-control demonstrations on Capitol Hill against the Kavanaugh nomination have any understanding of how much damage they did to Democrats and the party’s chances of winning a majority in the Senate. His answer: “My guess is they don’t. But Senate Democrats probably do.”

Cook now says the odds of Democrats winning a Senate a majority are “long, no better than 1 in 5.” As of today, “a Republican net gain of a seat or two seems most likely, moving the GOP up to either 52 or 53 seats, though a gain of three seats or no net change [is] entirely possible.”

As for the House, political analysts still make the Democrats the odds-on favorites to retake control there for the first time since 2010. But while the new Wall Street Journal/NBC poll out today gives Democrats a nine-point advantage nationwide in voting for the House, it tells a different story in the battleground seats that will determine control:

The Democratic advantage has vanished in House districts that matter most. In districts rated as most competitive, the parties are dead even on which one should control Congress. In last month’s poll, Dems led by 13 points among registered voters and 6 points among likely voters.

In other words, Republicans have a real chance to beat the odds and hold their losses below the 23 seats that would transfer House control.

The reasons for this turnaround are various and go beyond the shrinking of the enthusiasm gap between the parties (before the Kavanaugh nomination, Democratic voters were more enthusiastic). The WSJ/NB poll shows President Trump with a 47 percent job approval, his highest rating yet as president. At the same time, 43 percent of registered voters say Republicans handle the economy better versus only 28 percent who pick Democrats. That’s the largest lead on that question the GOP has ever had in the WSJ/NBC poll.

Don’t Believe the Saudi Lies By The Editors

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/10/jamal-khashoggi-killing-saudi-arabia-lies/

Nineteen days after Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi disappeared in the Saudi Arabian consulate in Istanbul, the Saudi regime has at last acknowledged the obvious, that Khashoggi is dead. After first insisting that he had left the consulate of his own accord despite video evidence to the contrary, and then slamming the allegations of his murder as “baseless” and threatening oil sanctions against those claiming otherwise, the kingdom has finally settled on its official story: Khashoggi was inadvertently killed inside the consulate during a fistfight that just happened to break out in the midst of an otherwise standard meeting with Saudi intelligence officials. The regime has made a show of dismissing and arresting several officials it says were rogues, and attributes responsibility for the killing to them only.

As alibis go, this barely qualifies. It is a wildly implausible story clearly designed to absolve Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman of responsibility of the murder and therefore leave open the way for continued close relations with the United States. President Trump and Secretary of State Pompeo seem inclined to suspend disbelief, which would be a serious mistake. The situation demands a tougher, less credulous approach.

The Saudi explanation has changed enough times to give the impression that the kingdom was trying on different hats to see which might fit. There is convincing evidence that Khashoggi’s killing was the result of a premeditated operation carried out with bin Salman’s support. Turkish intelligence has alluded to a recording of the killing not released to the public, but thanks to video surveillance, the world knows for certain that a group of Saudi musclemen flew into Istanbul and entered the consulate hours before Khashoggi arrived. Several of these men are members of bin Salman’s inner circle; one, since dismissed from his post, is among the crown prince’s closest advisers. Very little happens in Saudi Arabia without bin Salman’s foreknowledge and approval, so the notion that he would be so unaware of his inner circle’s activities regarding one of the regime’s highest-profile international critics is laughable.

Mob Rule and the Resistance By Carl M. Cannon

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/10/21/mob_rule_and_the_resistance.html

My friends and colleagues in the media, particularly at CNN, have taken offense to the idea that the self-styled “Resistance” to Donald Trump can ever be characterized as “a mob.”

It’s an unflattering description, but is it unfair? Are violence and physical intimidation now part of the Democrats’ playbook? To weigh that question, let’s do a thought experiment. The following actions all have taken place in the past two years. As you read about them, substitute the words “left” for “right,” “liberal” for “conservative,” and “Democrat” for “Republican.” As you do, consider how CNN, the New York Times, and the rest of the mainstream media would cover these events if the labels were reversed:

January 21, 2017: Addressing the crowd at the Women’s March, featured speaker Madonna says she’s thought “an awful lot about blowing up the White House.” Actress Ashley Judd compares Trump to Hitler and those who attended his inauguration the day before to Nazis.

June 14, 2017: James T. Hodgkinson, a 66-year-old Democratic activist from Illinois shoots up a baseball diamond where Republican members of Congress are practicing for the annual Congressional Baseball Game. Apparently intending to kill several GOP House members, including Louisiana Rep. Steve Scalise, who was grievously wounded, Hodgkinson had volunteered for Bernie Sanders’ 2016 presidential campaign, and belonged to a Facebook group called “Terminate the Republican Party.”

October 28, 2017: At a parade in Annandale, Va., Wilfred Michael Stark III, 49, is arrested after trying to block the van carrying Republican gubernatorial candidate Ed Gillespie. Although Stark identifies himself as a journalist, he was there on behalf of a website run by Democratic Party activist David Brock, which Brock purchased for the stated goal of electing Hillary Clinton president.

November 3, 2017: Kentucky Republican Rand Paul is tackled from behind without warning by next-door neighbor Rene Boucher, breaking six of the senator’s ribs. The assailant claims he lost his temper because of an ongoing dispute the two men had about yard trimmings, but he was known by other neighbors as a partisan Democrat who attacked Republicans on social media. “May Robert Mueller fry Trump’s gonads,” he once posted.

DHS Warns of Cartel Role in Illegal Alien Caravan By Rick Moran

https://pjmedia.com/trending/dhs-warns-of-cartel-role-in-illegal-alien-caravan/

Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen warned on Sunday that cartels would try to exploit the illegal alien caravan moving toward the United States border with Mexico to infiltrate members.

Cartels are already heavily involved in moving illegal aliens and drugs into the U.S. and, given the confusion and chaos associated with the caravan, would surely see a golden opportunity to sneak cartel members into the country.

“While we closely monitor the caravan crisis, we must remain mindful of the transnational criminal organizations and other criminals that prey on the vulnerabilities of those undertaking the irregular migration journey,” Mr. Nielsen said in a statement Sunday.

“We fully support the efforts of Guatemala, Honduras and Mexico, as they seek to address this critical situation and ensure a safer and more secure region,” the secretary said.

Those efforts have failed in Mexico, where approximately 2,000 illegals are still moving toward the U.S. border after barging into the country on Friday. Mexican police tried to stop the human wave but after scuffling at a border crossing with Guatemala, Mexican police basically gave up.

Thousands of migrants reached the Guatemala-Mexico border on Friday, breaking through a fence on the Guatemala side of a bridge separating the two countries. On the Mexican side of the bridge, they were met by Mexican police in riot gear. Others, meanwhile, waded into the Suchiate River or took rafts to get to Mexico.

Many of the migrants are seeking refugee status in either Mexico or the United States.

The Mexican Interior Ministry said on Saturday that 640 Honduran migrants have requested refuge in Mexico. It also said that priority attention would be given “164 women, some of them in advanced stage of pregnancy; 104 girls, boys and teenagers, who are from 3 months old to 17 years old; as well as older adults who have varying degrees of disability. This group includes a minor who traveled alone.” CONTINUE AT SITE

Senator Cory Booker Accused of Sexual Assault by Gay Man By Rick Moran

A gay man who describes himself as a liberal Democrat is accusing New Jersey Senator Cory Booker of sexually assaulting him in 2014. Booker is considered a leading contender for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020.

The man, who wishes to remain anonymous for now, penned a lengthy open letter which was posted on Twitter, describing the assault which occurred in a bathroom following a meeting at his workplace where the two met.

The letter goes into excruciating detail.

I stopped to use one of the building’s single-occupancy restrooms. Upon washing my hands prior to leaving, I hear knocking on the door. When it comes to these restrooms, it is customary to knock first in case someone is using it, even though there is an inner lock. When I opened the door, Mr. Booker was there. He smiled and very gregariously said, “Hey!” We engaged in some brief idle chitchat in the entryway and then he asked me to speak in private. What happened next, happened so fast that it was hard for me to comprehend what was going on. It was one of those surreal moments where what was happening was such a deviation and such a perversion of one’s natural daily routine that I hardly knew how to react. He pulled me into the bathroom, albeit not too forcefully, and slowly pushed me against the restroom wall. He said that “Being a hero was a serious turn-on.” He continued, “The Senate appreciates fine citizens like you. Especially this senator.” He then put his left hand on my groin, over my jeans, and began to rub. I seem to remember saying something like “What is happening?” It was a bit like having vertigo. He then used his other hand to grab my left hand with his right and pulled it over to touch him. At the same time, he disengaged from rubbing me and used his left hand to push me to my knees from my shoulder for what was clearly a move to have me perform oral sex on him. At that point, I pulled away quite violently and told him I had to go. I did not see him again before he left.

The victim says he contacted journalist Ronan Farrow, the “father of the #MeToo movement,” who requested a phone conversation but never got back to him after the victim gave Farrow his number.

He also contacted a lawyer. Grabien reached out to the attorney who is mentioned in the letter:

Grabien News has reached out to the accuser’s attorney, Harmeet Dhillon, to verify he has consulted with her, as he described in the letter.

“All I can say at this time is that the man is considering his next steps and has no further comment at this time,” Dhillon told Grabien.

Our Orwellian tax code by Andrew C. McCarthy

https://www.newcriterion.com/issues/2018/10/our-orwellian-tax-code
A review of Liberal Suppression: Section 501(c)(3) and the Taxation of Speech by Philip Hamburger

Anyone who has ever been audited by the IRS—no, let’s check that. Anyone who has ever lived in fear of being audited (now I’ve got everyone’s attention) knows well that there is more to the tax code than even its voluminous girth suggests. Still, would even the most cynical among us suppose that the code, in just one of its most promiscuous provisions, reflects the uniquely American history of left-wing hostility to free speech?

Philip Hamburger would.

To be sure, the Columbia Law School scholar is better described as erudite than cynical. Professor Hamburger is best known in recent times for his deep dive into modern government’s sprawling, unaccountable fourth branch, Is Administrative Law Unlawful? (Spoiler: Yes!). But his oeuvre has long focused on another topic, similarly consequential to popular sovereignty in our constitutional republic: liberalism. Liberalism not just in the classical sense of being liberty-minded, but liberalism in the political connotation: the nigh-antithesis of liberty-mindedness, most familiar to contemporary Americans as progressivism (and, if I may interject, about as progressive as it is liberal).

In his latest offering, Liberal Suppression: Section 501(c)(3) and the Taxation of Speech, Hamburger builds on the scholarship of his 2000 law review article, “Liberality,” which unfolds the phenomenon of liberalism as more attitude than ideology….

The unexpected but entirely apt framework for the story is a dryly worded, decades-old statute which, as is the Orwellian wont of the tax code, taketh away in the same breath as it giveth. Section 501(c)(3) permits an exemption from taxation to nonprofit business entities, referred to throughout the book as “idealistic” organizations to encapsulate their broad-ranging religious, cultural, educational, and social missions—organizations such as the one that publishes this magazine, for instance.