Tuesday, December 6, 2016

Secessionist American States


For John, BLUFThis is all part of the five Kübler Ross stages of grief.  Then there was the guy who checked himself into a psych ward, per The Huffington Post.  Nothing to see here; just move along.




This is from NTK, the Need to Know Network.  Their view of themselves is here.  There is no author mentioned. At any rate, here is the lede plus one:
On Tuesday, disgruntled Democrats held a forum to discuss the possibility of replacing the Electoral College.

Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) conceded that Democrats could not get rid of the Electoral College due to the way the United States Constitution is written.

Well there is that.  They recognize how the Constitution is written, but apparently not why.  They have forgotten that the reason for the Electoral College, for two Senators per State, is to ensure the small stakes have a say and thus are willing to be members of the Union.  A Union run by Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Texas, California and Washington State would not be attractive to the other 42.

It ends thusly:

Rational people, not the fringe, are now talking about whether states could be separated from the U.S., whether we should have a Constitutional Convention.  And I think as time goes on that is apt to become more the case unless we here can figure an answer to preventing the majority from being ruled by the minority.
Cry me a River.  Are these folks ready to take on that anti-democratic institution, the US Senate.  There is, first of all, the filibuster.  Then there is the issue of one man one vote vs the allocation of two senators to each State.  Maybe we should just abolish the US Senate, or populate it solely with former Cabinet Officers, but with the ability to delay legislation, but not change it or block it. 

And what about the undemocratic way of picking a President if no one gets 270 votes in the Electoral College, it goes to the House of Representatives, where each state gets one (repeat, one) vote.

Then, there is the question of if, by switching to a popular vote we will then require a run-off, to ensure we don't elect a minority President.  I would suggest that to win a Candidate would need at least 50.5 percent of the vote, to ensure that small variances don't challenge the results.

Representative Zoe Lofgren of California needs to give this some serious thought, including an analysis of all the possible outcomes.

Hat tip to the Drudge Report.

Regards  —  Cliff

  This should not be confused with the now defunct NTK newsletter, gone about eight years.
  If the Democrats are disgruntled, can we assume the Republicans are gruntled?
  Aren't you ready to bet that the Democrats are regretting Senator Harry Reid's "nuclear option".
  Sort of like the British House of Lords.

Sunday, December 4, 2016

Suggestion Mr Trump Will Change Courtship


For John, BLUFLike women didn't enjoy sex before 1960?  Nothing to see here; just move along.




This is from Matthew Balan and Media Research Center's News Busters.

Here is the lede:

Jill Filipovic wildly claimed that "sex is about to get a lot less fun" in a Thursday op-ed on CNN.com. Filipovic pointed the finger at Donald Trump nominating ObamaCare opponent, Rep. Tom Price, to be HHS secretary, and claimed the move is "just one peek at what Trump's notorious misogyny will look like when it's translated into policy." The Cosmopolitan contributor zeroed in on ObamaCare's "provision that full covers contraception," and claimed that if the controversial law is repealed, many women would no longer be able to "enjoy recreational sex without suffering economically, professionally or medically from an unwanted pregnancy."
So, the concern Ms Filipovic has is that if birth control isn't available it will reduce freedom and enjoyment during sexual intercourse.

On the other hand, would this reduce the number of out-of-wedlock births?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Electoral College Returning to Favor


For John, BLUFI distrust a direct election, because of Federal involvement.  Nothing to see here; just move along.




From the Gallup Poll.  The Writer is Mr Art Swift.

Here are the story highlights:

  • 47% want to keep Electoral College, up from 35% in 2011
  • Republicans shift decisively in favor of Electoral College
  • Most Americans correctly answer that Hillary Clinton won popular vote
Hat tip to Memeorandum.

Regards  —  Cliff

Saturday, December 3, 2016

Meeting the National Security Advisor (Via the NYT)


For John, BLUFThe President gets to pick this one.  Nothing to see here; just move along.




The Old Gray Lady and Reporters Matthew Rosenberg, Mark Mazzetti and Eric schmitt go after Mr Trumps selection for National Security Advisor, Retired Lieutenant General Michael Flynn.

If you don't like Mr Trump, after this article you will like him even less and also not like Retired LTG Flynn.

The National Security Advisor is not a position reviewed by the US Senate.  It is a Presidential Direct Appointment.

Hat tip to the Memeorandum.

Regards  —  Cliff

New Boss, Not The Same as the Old Boss


For John, BLUFMr Trump is a practical man and probably likes to cut to the chase.  Nothing to see here; just move along.




Where have I heard that expression before?

Oh well; moving along, it is Foreign Policy Magazine and Reporter and Author Tom Ricks.

Here is the lede plus one:

Thinking last night about how Donald Trump is especially picking generals dissedby the Barack Obama White House, it occurred to me that what we might be seeing is a national security establishment built in precise reaction to Tom Donilon and Ben Rhodes.  I am sure they are nice guys, but they also strike me as a semi-competent hack (Donilon) and an arrogant youth (Rhodes).  And so we are seeing a bevy of ousted generals appointed to top positions as the Trumpist response.

I don’t really blame this on Donilon and Rhodes.  They were simply tools.  I blame this on Obama, and on his propensity to turn foreign policy over to Biden’s posse of ill-informed, narrow-minded, militarily ignorant hacks.  I’m all for civilian control, but I also want civilians who don’t fire generals for speaking their minds privately.  That’s what you want: dissent inside the meetings to explore differences and examine assumptions.  That is how good policy is made.

There are links embedded in the original.

This critique only gets better as it rolls along, so read the whole thing.  Speaking of rolling, a friend of mine commented that "Tom Ricks is on a roll."

Regards  —  Cliff

Election Aftermath


For John, BLUFIt is the Trump folks, or suspected Trump voters, who need to fear.  Nothing to see here; just move along.




No!

Next question.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Warren on Race


For John, BLUFAnderson Cooper just went way up in my estimation.  Nothing to see here; just move along.




From The Hill and Reporter Mark Hensch.

CNN host Anderson Cooper and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) clashed Wednesday over whether one of President-elect Donald Trump’s key appointments is a white supremacist.

Warren ignited the encounter by accusing Stephen Bannon, Trump’s incoming chief strategist and senior counselor, of practicing the racist ideology.

“[Trump’s] got as his strategic adviser someone who’s a white supremacist,” she said of Bannon, the former chairman of Breitbart News, on CNN’s “Anderson Cooper 360.”

“Wait a minute, there’s no evidence he’s a white supremacist,” Cooper said, interrupting Warren.  "Obviously, there are people who are white supremacists who support Donald Trump and support Breitbart or Steve Bannon.”

So, if you don't get your way throw a temper tantrum and call people names.  Real high class.

Hat tip to The Drudge Report.

Regards  —  Cliff