Monthly Archives: March 2022

Protecting Our Freedom

Posted on by

On Monday, The Conservative Review posted an article about a suggestion made by Senator Rand Paul. Senator Paul has a medical background and has not always been happy with the edicts of Dr. Fauci during the Covid-19 pandemic.

The article reports:

Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky has proposed an amendment that would nix the position of director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, a role Dr. Anthony Fauci has occupied for more than three decades.

Under Paul’s proposal, Fauci’s role would be eliminated and replaced with three directors tasked with leading three new institutes: A National Institute of Allergic Diseases, a National Institute of Infectious Diseases, and a National Institute of Immunologic Diseases.

“To ensure that ineffective, unscientific lockdowns and mandates are never foisted on the American people ever again, I’ve introduced this amendment to eliminate Dr. Anthony Fauci’s position as Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and divide his power into three separate new institutes,” Paul said, according to a press release. “This will create accountability and oversight into a taxpayer funded position that has largely abused its power, and has been responsible for many failures and misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic.”

The article concludes:

Paul noted that the amendment will receive a vote this week.

Fauci, who has been a prominent and controversial public health figure throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, began serving as the NIAID director in 1984. He is also currently serving as the chief medical advisor to President Joe Biden.

During the past two years we have seen an unelected bureaucrat tell business owners to shut down their businesses, tell Americans they did not have the right to go to church, put treatment of Covid on the back burner while searching for a (relatively ineffective and expensive) vaccine that generated millions for those invested in certain pharmaceutical companies, and generally disrupt the freedoms Americans fought for generations ago. It is time to divest Dr. Fauci of that non-existent power and get on with our lives.

 

Slowly We Are Learning

Posted on by

There are some serious risks in getting your children vaccinated for Covid. There is less risk in not vaccinating them (unless there is an underlying condition involved). One pediatrician put a sign on his office door that should give parents considering vaccinating their children pause.

The Gateway Pundit posted the article on Monday.

This is the sign on the door:

The article includes the following statement by the person who posted the picture:

“I know that sometimes we put things like sports physicals off until the last minute,” said the poster, who spoke to PJ Media anonymously. “Part of my intentions of sharing the picture that I took Monday at our pediatrician’s office was to let parents who had their children vaccinated for COVID know that they cannot wait until the last minute for sports physicals,” she said. “I have received backlash from friends and family for not having my children vaccinated for COVID,” she continued. “I believe that my husband and I made the right choice but now I have proof that someone educated far greater than I has evidence that the COVID vaccine can do damage to children’s health.”

The concerned mom thinks people deserve to have all the facts. “I don’t condemn anyone for choosing to vaccinate their children for COVID,” she said. “People need to make the decision that is best for their own situation.”

It might be time to consider the risk of the vaccine vs. the risk of the disease.

Our Insane Foreign Policy

Posted on by

On Sunday, The Washington Free Beacon reported that Iran has claimed responsibility for the ballistic missiles that struck the U.S. consulate and other targets in Erbil, Iraq’s northern Kurdish regional capital, early Sunday morning. We are currently negotiating a nuclear deal with Iran. Obviously they have very little respect for us or our foreign interests.

The article reports:

The missile attack comes as talks to revive the 2015 Iran nuclear deal face the prospect of collapse after a last-minute Russian demand forced world powers to pause negotiations for an undetermined time despite having a largely completed text.

The missiles, which targeted the U.S. consulate‘s new building and a neighbouring residential area, caused only material damage and one civilian was injured, the Kurdish interior ministry said. An Iraqi security official told Reuters that the missiles were manufactured in Iran.

Iran‘s Revolutionary Guards released a statement taking responsibility for the missile attack against Israeli “strategic centres” in Erbil, Iran‘s state media reported.

“Any repetition of attacks by Israel will be met with a harsh, decisive and destructive response,” the Revolutionary Guard said in the statement.

There are a lot of things going on here. First of all, Iran would like to be in control of Iraq. Kurdistan is an impediment to that control. Secondly, Iran needs to drag out the nuclear talks long enough to get an atomic bomb. They are almost there, and they probably have some sort of acceptable delivery system. When they have both, their bullying tactics may turn into action–not a good thing for anyone in the world.

The article concludes:

“Iran had carried out attacks against American targets and did not shy away from publicizing this,” said Hamidreza Azizi, Visiting Fellow at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs.

“I see this more as a warning sign to Israel and a show of force in the negotiations.”

A Kurdish spokesperson for the regional authorities said there were no flight interruptions at Erbil airport.

Residents of Erbil posted videos online showing several large explosions, and some said the blasts shook their homes. Reuters could not independently verify those videos.

Iraq has been rocked by chronic instability since the defeat of the Sunni Islamist group Islamic State in 2017 by a loose coalition of Iraqi, U.S.-led and Iran-backed forces.

Since then, Iran-aligned militias have regularly attacked U.S. military and diplomatic sites in Iraq, U.S. and many Iraqi officials say. Iran denies involvement in those attacks.

When America has a weak President, the world is less safe.

About That Transparency Thing…

Posted on by

John Kerry has been a figure in American politics since the 1970’s when he appeared before Congress to condemn America’s actions during the War in Vietnam. He has served in Congress, as Secretary of State, and run for President. He is currently the Climate Czar in the Biden administration. Inquiring minds want to know how much he is being paid to be the Climate Czar. Washington isn’t talking.

The Daily Wire posted an article on Sunday asking how much John Kerry is being paid. He is a government employee. Shouldn’t his salary be part of the public record?

The article reports:

John Kerry, President Joe Biden’s White House climate czar, flies around the globe in a gas-guzzling jet warning refugees that the worst is yet to come if the world does not stop emitting carbon dioxide into the air. It is unclear how much he is paid or who is on his office’s staff — which is odd, because the United States taxpayer is footing the bill for his travel and salary. After the Boston Herald was told by the government to submit a Freedom of Information Act request to find out that information, Alaska Republican Senator Dan Sullivan is demanding answers.

On Thursday, Boston radio legend Howie Carr interviewed Sullivan on his daily radio show. Carr informed the senator that Kerry’s office told the Herald — where Carr also writes a column — that they would have to submit a FOIA request and could expect to hear back by 2024 to find out how much money Kerry is taking in from government coffers.

“What? … That should be public. My salary is online,” Sullivan responded. “The Secretary of State’s is online, and the president is, too.”

When presented with the FOIA request, the State Department replied that the Herald’s request did not meet the standards for an expedited response. An answer would be provided by 2024.

Please follow the link above for further details on the response from the State Department.

 

 

 

Have The People In Congress Ever Studied Economics?

Posted on by

On Sunday, BizPacReview posted an article about a recent statement by Massachusetts Congressman Ed Markey. I lived in Massachusetts for a long time, and I am sorry to say that what the Congressman said is not unusual for a Massachusetts Democrat.

The article reports:

Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey, a Democrat, has claimed that, despite an abundance of evidence showing that “clean” energy is currently neither as reliable nor as efficient as traditional energy, America should invest in it right now instead of the latter.

He made this bold but dubious assertion while delivering a speech this weekend at the Democrat National Committee’s winter meeting.

“Republicans and their oil-soaked cronies … want to feed the American people one of the biggest lies of all – that drilling for more oil and more gas is the path to energy independence,” he said during his speech.

“Republicans say that they have an all-of-the-above plan, but it’s really an oil-above-all plan. The GOP always has stood for the gas and oil party. And its argument of drilling equals energy independence is leakier than an old oil tanker.”

I beg to differ, but America achieved energy independence under President Trump. We were also in a position to send fuel to Europe to lessen their dependency upon Russia. Had we continued on that path, the combination of the lower cost of energy and Europe’s not feeding the Russian treasury, we would not be currently funding Russia’s attack on Ukraine.

The article concudes:

The evidence consists of data and polls showing that prices were on the rise long before Russia invaded Ukraine.

Republicans are not alone in their push for more oil/gas investment. Even Elon Musk, the billionaire entrepreneur renowned for his successful development and promotion of “clean”/”green” technology and solutions, has argued that oil and gas investments are mandatory at this juncture in time.

Everyone, it would appear, recognizes this point except for Democrats, who keep doubling down on “clean” energy, even as the American people double down on their complete disgust with what they say are controlling party’s skewed priorities.

If you actually believe that green energy will provide for our energy needs, please read this article at The Daily Caller. Until we have the technology for green energy (which is most likely to be brought about by a return to a free market economy), clean fossil fuel is possible and efficient.

I long for the return of $2 a gallon gas–I can easily ignore any mean tweets that appear.

What Security Does Europe Actually Have?

Posted on by

On Sunday, John Hinderaker posted an article at Power Line Blog wondering what protection against Russian invasion does Europe have from NATO or the European Union. It’s a very timely question.

The article notes:

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has caused a number of European countries–probably all of them–to reconsider their military defense postures. If Russia attacks them, will they be able to resist? And whom can they count on to come to their aid?

Responses vary. Germany is talking about abandoning its post-WWII de-militarization. France, in Gaullist tradition, wants the EU to take the lead on security. Others rely on a presumed airtight NATO guarantee of military assistance.

Sweden is an interesting case. Sweden is not a member of NATO, although it has collaborated closely with NATO’s central command. Instead, Sweden has allied itself with the U.S. and, to a lesser extent, the U.K.

This is a portion of the interview with Björn Fägersten, head of the Europe program at the Swedish Institute of International Affairs, included in the article:

Does the EU’s mutual defence clause have a similar effect to Nato’s Article 5?

Björn Fägersten: In a purely legal sense they are equivalent – in some ways the EU is a bit sharper. But on the other hand, the EU’s clause has a sub-clause that makes clear that it doesn’t affect member states’ individual choices on security policy, for instance for those countries that are neutral.

A key difference between the EU and Nato is that the EU has no real apparatus. Nato has a joint military headquarters, SHAPE, but the EU doesn’t have an equivalent.

Within the EU there are also expectations that Nato will be at the centre of European planning – most EU countries are members. In the EU’s Global Strategy from 2016 it is made clear that Nato is the cornerstone of the EU’s defence.

Looking to the future, many in the EU, not least Macron, have long spoken about the need for strategic autonomy, where Europe will take a more independent line in defence from the US. Last week Germany announced a huge increase in defence spending. How will that change the equation for Sweden?

BF: If in the long term Europe starts taking greater responsibility while the US takes the main responsibility for handling China, that would change Sweden’s calculation. Sweden would like there to be an American interest in its security, but if, for example, a new president was elected in the US in 2024 who had a more doubtful approach to European security, Sweden would be forced to rapidly reevaluate its defence strategy.

The article concludes:

Call me a cynical lawyer, but does “such action as it deems necessary” really obligate the U.S., or anyone else, to a full military response to Russian aggression in Europe? Might “such action” merely encompass economic sanctions in the event of a Russian invasion of, say, Lithuania?

I suppose it is best if Russia’s leaders assume that Article 5 represents an airtight mutual security pact, but it is easy to imagine a weaselly or mentally challenged president–or, perhaps, one who is uniquely focused on American self-interest–going back on 70 years of interpretation of Article 5 and more or less abandoning our European allies. No doubt that is something that they, too, are imagining.

Which I think is probably to the good. Donald Trump was right: it is long past time for powerful European countries, including Germany, to look to their own defense, even if in cooperation with us. And, of course, the more able they are to defend themselves against Russian aggression, the more likely they are to receive military help from their NATO allies, including us, should the time come.

There is value in working together and providing mutual aid, but there is also a lot of value in standing on your own two feet.

What An Amazing Coincidence

Posted on by

On Friday, The Washington Free Beacon reported the following:

Federal authorities are investigating three Democratic megadonors who made an enormous bet on shares of Activision Blizzard just days before Microsoft agreed in January to acquire the video game company for $69 billion.

The U.S. Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission are both looking into the suspiciously timed trading activity of Barry Diller, owner of the Daily Beast, his stepson Alex von Fürstenberg, and his friend David Geffen, a longtime Democratic donor who gave $500,000 to the scandal-plagued Lincoln Project in 2020.

…The Journal (The Wall Street Journal) notes that Activision stock options similar to those purchased by Diller, Geffen, and von Fürstenberg were “sparsely traded” in the days before the Microsoft acquisition was announced, but “exploded” in response to the news. The wealthy Democrats’ stock options instantly surged in value by more than 60 percent—an amazing coincidence, indeed.

The men have yet to exercise their options, which don’t expire until 2023. They could realize a profit of about $60 million if they sold today, based on Activision’s current share price of $80. They stand to make more than $100 million if the Microsoft acquisition, expected to close this summer, goes forward at the agreed-upon price of $95 per share.

What better way to ensure generous donations than to help those donors make money in the stock market? Is this an incredible coincidence as those involved claim?

Stranded?

Posted on by

International relations are not always stable, and sometimes friendships and joint efforts can be difficult when circumstances change. The U.K Daily Mail posted an article today about what could become a very serious side effect of the current war in Ukraine.

The headline of the article reports:

Head of Russia’s space program posts sinister video threatening to LEAVE BEHIND US astronaut, 55, aboard International Space Station and only fly home his cosmonauts on March 30 because of Biden’s sanctions over Ukraine invasion

Yikes.

The article reports:

Russia’s space program has apparently threatened to leave an American astronaut aboard the International Space Station as it comes crashing down to Earth in a video shared by Russian state media outlet RIA Novosti.

Mark Vande Hei, a married 55-year-old father of two from Texas, is scheduled to return to Kazakhstan from the International Space Station (ISS) with two Russian cosmonauts aboard a Russian Soyuz spacecraft on March 30 after spending nearly a year on board.

But amid United States’ sanctions against Russia for the human rights violations it is committing in its siege of Ukraine, Dmitry Rogozin, head of the Russian space agency Roscosmos, has threatened to leave him in space.

The article concludes:

Then, after trading barbs with retired astronaut Scott Kelly over a separate video in which workers covered depictions of American and Japanese flags, Rogozin wrote in a now-deleted tweet: ‘Get off, you moron! Otherwise the death of the ISS will be on your conscience!’

But Kelly said the video leaving Vande Hei on the International Space Station went too far. 

‘It kind of enraged me that the country that we had been in this international partnership for 20 years would take the time to make a video to threaten to leave behind one of the crew members they are responsible for,’ he told the Wall Street Journal.

‘They agreed to be responsible for his safety, getting him to the space station and getting him home,’ Kelly explained. ‘For me, that kind of just crossed the line.’

Still, Rogozin has doubled down on his threats, claiming over the weekend that ‘illegal’ sanctions could cause the 500-ton ISS to crash down over Western countries.

He said: ‘The populations of other countries, especially those led by the “dogs of war,”  should think about the price of the sanctions against Roscosmos.’

Elon Musk has now offered to send his SpaceX rocket to rescue the US astronaut if the Russians abandon him, but NASA officials say they are confident Vande Hei will return as planned.

‘NASA continues working with Roscomos and our other international partners in Canada, Europe and Japan to maintain safe and continuous International Space Station operations.

‘On March 30, a Soyuz spacecraft will return as scheduled carrying NASA astronaut Mark Vande Hei and cosmonauts Pyotr Dubrov and Anton Shkaplerov back to Earth,’ it vowed.

‘Upon their return, Vande Hei will hold the American record for the longest single human spaceflight mission of 355 days.’

Hopefully, actions by Elon Musk will not be necessary, but this illustrates the folly of giving up the American space program and also illustrates the value of the free market and free enterprise.

When It’s Not Your Money, You Don’t Always Spend It Wisely

Posted on by

One of the problems with the establishment in Washington, D.C., is that they do not treat the taxpayers’ money as if it were their own. Actually, the problem is not limited to Washington–how many politicians offices have spend thousands of dollars simply on drapery? Just as an example, in November 2013, The Boston Globe reported that Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, who spent $27,000 on new drapes and furniture for his office early in his first term, has authorized a $9 million project to dramatically upgrade the office before he leaves in 2014. The Biden White House has made a recent purchase that illustrates the problem of not shopping carefully.

On March 11, The Washington Free Beacon reported the following:

The Office of Management and Budget spent $2,735 in October for the order and delivery of the 12′ by 9′ rug, the government documents show. The custom Bora Bora rug in the chosen color of “Starfish” was sold to the agency for $1,972, with additional costs attributed to freight, delivery, and padding.

A Washington Free Beacon investigation found that the White House budget office likely got ripped off, and could have purchased an identical rug for far less than what it paid. The Bora Bora rug is manufactured by Fabrica and cut into custom sizes by retailers. New York-based carpet retailer Kanter’s Carpet & Design Center told the Free Beacon it charges just $1,600 to custom-build a 12′ by 9′ Bora Bora rug, a price the company said includes binding, pads, and local delivery.

That may seem like a small thing, but it illustrates how careless the government and its minions are with taxpayers’ money. That’s $1100 that could have been used toward the deficit. It would only be a drop in the bucket, but how many other ‘drops in the bucket’ are out there?

At a time when Americans are being severely hurt by inflation, it would be nice if the White House would curtail its spending a little. 

 

The Latest Executive Order

Posted on by

On Thursday, The Epoch Times posted an article about a recent Executive Order issued by President Biden.

The article reports:

President Joe Biden’s Wednesday executive order on cryptocurrency outlines a range of new policy objectives and measures, including language on the climate-related effects of cryptocurrencies and on the potential for a U.S. central bank digital currency (CBDC).

“We must take strong steps to reduce the risks that digital assets could pose to … climate change and pollution,” the executive order states; “climate change and pollution” come at the end of a long list of prospective dangers.

Section 5 of the EO, “Measures to Protect Consumers, Investors, and Businesses,” includes a subsection, (b) vii, telling the Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) to lead work on an interagency report examining climate and energy concerns around cryptocurrency.

The OSTP is currently led by Alondra Nelson, a social science professor at the Institute of Advanced Study with a doctorate in American studies, who has been a member of the World Economic Forum’s Network on AI, IoT, and The Future of Trust.

The article also reports:

Peter St Onge, a research fellow in economic policy at the Heritage Foundation who studies cryptocurrency, told The Epoch Times that the EO’s language on climate and energy use was less aggressive than many in the cryptocurrency community had feared.

“It looked almost like a throwaway line, given how many activists have been attacking on those vectors,” he said. “Overall, they’ve demoted that in their rank of concerns.”

He agreed that the Biden administration could be shifting its rhetoric or policy focus from climate in light of surging energy prices.

St Onge said he is both surprised and concerned by the EO’s discussion of a future digital dollar, subject of EO Section 4.

It states: “The Administration places the highest urgency on research and development efforts into the potential design and deployment options of a United States CBDC.”

There are a few things that concern me about this. The World Economic Forum (WEF) is not America’s friend. These are the one-world government people who want to take away America’s sovereignty. The fact that the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) is currently led by someone with ties to the  WEF is not comforting to me. At the present time, digital currency has enough anonymity to protect the holders of the currency. However, there is also the potential that a digital currency could be used to set up a social credits system similar to the one currently used in China. To sum it up, I really don’t like the direction in which this is going.

Good News For America–Bad News For Russia

Posted on by

On March 10th, Newsmax reported that the Iran nuclear talks have stalled. The sticking point is that Russia is demanding protection from sanctions in response to its invasion of Iran.

The article reports:

Just days after reports a deal was close, diplomats are now signaling talks for a rewritten Iran nuclear deal have stalled due to Russia’s demand for sanctions protections amid the world response to Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, Politico reported Thursday night.

“The talks seem to have stalled, primarily because of Russian demands,” International Crisis Group analyst Ali Vaez told Politico.

The article also notes:

Russia is leading talks with Iran, along with diplomats from China, France, Germany, the U.K., and the U.S., but those other parties are balking at the demand for sanctions relief, according to Politico.

An official from the West parties told Politico the accommodation cannot be made in talks that were designed to pull the U.S. and Iran back into the deal — not to give Russia more trade leverage.

“We’ve made it very clear,” U.S. State Department spokesman Ned Price told reporters Thursday, “that the new Russia-related sanctions are wholly unrelated to the JCPOA [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action].” 

“We also have no intention of offering Russia anything new or specific as it relates to the sanctions.”

The old Iran nuclear deal was called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action under former President Barack Obama’s administration when current President Joe Biden was vice president. Many of the Obama administration officials are now working in the Biden administration.

Just for the record, it is not a good idea to make a deal with the world’s largest source of terrorist funding. We have seen that Iran did not follow previous agreements, and there are no indications that Iran would follow any new agreement no matter how generous it is. Short of sanctions on Iran (which the Biden administration would never do), at this point there is probably no way to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and their delivery systems. If you understand the apocalyptic beliefs regarding the return of the Mahdi, that is a problem. There is a belief among some Muslims that if they create chaos, the Mahdi (their messiah) will return more quickly. Unfortunately, our State Department is obviously ignoring much of the history and beliefs of the militant Islamists who are currently ruling Iran.

Important–A Little Late, But Important

Posted on by

On Thursday, Just the News posted a list of twenty significant problems with the 2020 election. I realize that this does not seem current, but in view of the fact that we have an election coming up in November, we need to correct these problems. I am posting half of that list. Please follow the link to the entire article to read the rest of the list and the details.

The article lists the problems:

1. A Foreign Intrusion. Federal authorities have confirmed that two Iranian nationals successfully hacked into a state computer election system, stole 100,000 voter registrations and used the data to carry out a cyber-intimidation campaign that targeted GOP members of Congress, Trump campaign officials and Democratic voters in the November 2020 election in one of the largest foreign intrusions in U.S. election history.

2. Alleged Bribery. The former state Supreme Court justice appointed by the Wisconsin Legislature to investigate the 2020 election concluded that millions of dollars in donations to election administrators in five Democrat-heavy municipalities from the Mark Zuckerberg-funded Center for Tech and Civic Life violated state anti-bribery laws and corrupted election practices by turning public election authorities into liberal get-out-the-vote activists.

3. Illegal ballot harvesting in Wisconsin. Gableman also exposed an extensive vote collection operation, known as ballot harvesting, in nursing homes in which third-party activists illegally collected the ballots of vulnerable residents, some of whom lacked the mental or physical capacity to vote or were forbidden from voting by guardianship agreements.

4. Ballot harvesting probe in the Peach State. Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger has announced he has opened a criminal investigation into allegations that liberal activists engaged in illegal ballot harvesting, collecting ballots from voters and delivering them in violation of state law. Raffensperger said he is planning to issue subpoenas to identify a whistleblower who admitted he engaged in the operation, and there could be prosecutions.

5. Bad voter signatures? A review of Maricopa County’s mail-in ballots in Arizona’s 2020 presidential election estimated that more than 200,000 ballots with signatures that did not match voter files were counted without being reviewed, more than eight times the number the county acknowledged.

6. 50,000 Arizona ballots called into question. An extensive audit by Arizona’s Senate officially called into question more than 50,000 ballots cast in the 2020 election, including voters who cast ballots from residences they had left.

7. Illegal ballot drop boxes. A Wisconsin judge has ruled the widespread use of ballot drop boxes in 2020 was unlawful, and the state Supreme Court let that ruling stand. 

8. Foreign voters found on Texas rolls. An audit of Texas voter rolls identified nearly 12,000 noncitizens suspected of illegally registering to vote and nearly 600 cases in which ballots may have been cast in the name of a dead resident or by a voter who may also have voted in another state.

9. Foreign voters found on Georgia  rolls. An audit by Georgia’s Secretary of State has identified more than 2,000 suspected foreigners who tried to register to vote in the state, though none reached the point of casting ballots. 

10. Unconstitutional mail-in voting. The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court has concluded the state law that opened the door to no-excuse mail-in voting in 2020 was unconstitutional and that mail-in voting can only be enacted by a constitutional amendment.

The article also includes links to further information on the subject including  indictments and court decisions.

While We Were Looking Elsewhere?

Posted on by

Politicians are shifty creatures. Some are more shifty than others. The Friday night news dump occurs when an administration wants to reveal news they are hoping won’t get a lot of attention. Other information is lost behind the screen of a major story.

On Wednesday, Red State reported the following:

Biden Quietly Forgives Student Loans for Thousands of Government Workers While Millions of Others Remain Crushed by Debt

Seems a little unfair. Where does the money come from to forgive these loans?

The article reports:

While tens of millions of other Americans remain burdened with massive student loan debts, government and other nonprofit workers have enjoyed substantial amounts of student debt forgiveness, and at a rate we’ve never seen before, thanks to a combination of policies most voters know very little about.

Under the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program, which was created by the College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007, federal student loan borrowers who work full-time for a nonprofit organization, including a government, can have their entire student debt balance discharged after making 120 qualifying monthly payments, a requirement that takes at least 10 years to complete, but could take longer.

Prior to receiving forgiveness, many of these borrowers enroll in a federal income-based repayment plan, which ties student loan payment amounts to income, allowing borrowers to “pay” as little as $0 per month without penalties, and as much as 15% of a borrower’s monthly discretionary income.

The article concludes:

The average loan amount forgiven for borrowers under the PSLF program in the 2020-2021 period was $94,907, while those enrolled in Biden’s smaller Temporary Expanded Public Service Loan Forgiveness program received an average of $44,324 in loan forgiveness.

When President Biden promised to help solve the student debt crisis and reduce the cost of attending college, I wonder how many voters knew only a relatively small group of borrowers, most of whom work for the government, would benefit from his pledge.

Come this November, we may find out.

This is government interference in contract law. When the students took out those loans, they signed a contract to pay them back.

Milton Friedman famously said, “If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there’d be a shortage of sand.”

Lendedu.com, reminds us of the history of government involvement in the student loan process:

1993: The Student Loan Reform Act officially implements the Direct Lending program. Under this program, the government can now directly lend to student loan borrowers, instead of through a private institution, which had been the only system since 1965 (FFELP).

Below is a chart that illustrates the impact of that program on college tuition:

As you can see, the cost curve increased when the government got involved in the student loan program. At that point the colleges had no incentive to keep costs down because students were taking out loans to pay for school. This began a vicious inflation cycle in higher education that we are still seeing today. For the 2019-2020 academic year at Harvard, the cost of tuition and living expenses was $73,800. The cost of sending a child to the University of Massachusetts – Dartmouth as a resident of Massachusetts is about $30,000. That is ridiculous.

Priorities?

Posted on by

On Thursday, The Daily Caller posted an article by Victor Davis Hanson that provides some perspective on the current war in Ukraine.

The article notes:

Thousands are dying from Russian missiles and bombs in the suburbs of Ukraine.

In response, the Biden administration’s climate change envoy, multimillionaire and private-jet-owning John Kerry, laments that Russian President Vladimir Putin might no longer remain his partner in reducing global warming.

“You’re going to lose people’s focus,” Kerry frets. “You’re going to lose big-country attention because they will be diverted, and I think it could have a damaging impact.”

“Impact”?

Did the global moralist Kerry mean by “impact” the over 650 Russian missiles that impacted Ukrainian buildings and tore apart children?

The article also asks the obvious question:

But how will the Biden administration square the circle of its own ideological war against oil and natural gas versus handing the advantage to our oil- and gas-producing enemies, as Russia invades Ukraine?

Or put another way, when selfish theory hits deadly reality, who loses? Answer: the American people.

President Joe Biden lifted U.S. sanctions on the Russian-German Nord Stream 2 pipeline designed to provide green Germany with loathsome, but life-saving, natural gas.

But first Biden canceled the Keystone XL pipeline in the United States. He has no problem with pipelines per se, just American ones.

While Biden doesn’t like the idea of Germany burning carbon fuel, or Putin reaping enormous profits from Berlin’s self-created dependency, or Germans importing liquified natural gas from America, Biden also does not like the idea of forcing German families to turn off their thermostats in mid-winter when there is Russian-fed war not far from Germany’s borders.

Here at home, Biden gets even crazier. As our enemies around the world reap huge profits from record high oil and gas prices, did Biden ask Alaska, North Dakota or Texas to ramp up production?

In other words, did he ask Americans to save fellow cash-strapped Americans from a self-created energy crisis, in the way he assured the Germans that during war reality trumps theory?

The article concludes:

Biden also has beseeched the once sanctioned, terrorist Iranian government. He wants Tehran to help us out by upping the very oil and gas production that America has tried to curtail for years. In return, Iran is demanding a new “Iran Deal” that will soon ensure the now petro-rich theocracy the acquisition of nuclear weapons.

On the eve of the Russian invasion, Biden begged Putin to pump even more oil to supplement its current Russian imports to the United States.

Did Putin see that surreal request as yet another sign of American appeasement that might greenlight his upcoming planned invasion? In Russian eyes, was it more proof of American weakness and craziness after the humiliating flight from Afghanistan?

Biden has blasted the human rights record of Saudi Arabia’s royal family. Now he is begging the monarchy to pump more of its despised carbon-spewing oil to make up for what his administration shut down at home. Is that why the Saudi royals refused to take his call?

The moral of Biden’s oil madness?

Elite ideology divorced from reality impoverishes people and can get them killed.

Because we have given up American energy independence (and the ability to supply Europe with energy), we are funding Russia’s war on Ukraine. Until our leaders are willing to acknowledge that fact, I don’t see the war in Ukraine ending or the war on American energy ending.

America On The World Stage

Posted on by

Remember when the Trump administration managed to negotiate peace deals between Israel and many of her Arab neighbors? During the Trump administration, we were on the road to peace. Now, not so much.

On Wednesday, The Wall Street Journal posted an article about President Biden’s recent outreach to leaders of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in an attempt to build support for Ukraine and tamp down oil prices.

The article reports:

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and the U.A.E.’s Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al Nahyan both declined U.S. requests to speak to Mr. Biden in recent weeks, the officials said, as Saudi and Emirati officials have become more vocal in recent weeks in their criticism of American policy in the Gulf.

…The Saudis have signaled that their relationship with Washington has deteriorated under the Biden administration, and they want more support for their intervention in Yemen’s civil war, help with their own civilian nuclear program as Iran’s moves ahead, and legal immunity for Prince Mohammed in the U.S., Saudi officials said. The crown prince faces multiple lawsuits in the U.S., including over the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018.

It should be noted that in addition to being a journalist, Jamal Khashoggi was quite probably an active member of the Muslim Brotherhood (article here). I don’t support the brutal murder of Khashoggi, but I do think that facts have been omitted and slanted by the media in reporting the event.

The article in The Wall Street Journal concludes:

But the Saudis and Emiratis have declined to pump more oil, saying they are sticking to a production plan approved between their group, the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, and a group of other producers led by Russia. The energy alliance with Russia, one of the world’s top oil producers, has enhanced OPEC’s power while also bringing the Saudis and Emiratis closer to Moscow.

Both Prince Mohammed and Sheikh Mohammed took phone calls from Russian President Vladimir Putin last week, after declining to speak with Mr. Biden. They both later spoke with Ukraine’s president, and a Saudi official said the U.S. had requested that Prince Mohammed mediate in the conflict, which he said the kingdom is embarking on.

Despite his claims to the contrary, President Biden has cut American energy production drastically. Until the restrictions that the Biden administration has put on energy companies and their drilling are lifted, the price of gasoline will not go down. The solution to the current high prices at the gas pump is for America to become energy independent again. Nothing short of that will solve the problem.

 

The Real Numbers On Electric Cars

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Western Journal posted an article about the actual cost of purchasing, driving, and maintaining an electric car.

The article notes:

As the average cost per gallon of gas has soared past $4.20, and with no end in sight, many of our leaders — including Joe Biden — are pushing EVs as a cost-effective replacement for gas-powered cars.

As Fox Business recently noted, a one-to-one comparison of the cost of charging an EV versus filling a regular auto with gas showed that EV charging appeared cheaper. But many other factors need to be included in the math to make a true analysis — factors that many EV advocates are desperate to ignore.

“According to the EPA, the national average for a kilowatt-hour of electricity is 13 cents, including at homes where most electric car owners charge their vehicles with 240-volt Level 2 chargers that typically take eight hours or more to fill them up,” Fox reported on Wednesday. “Many of these are also available in public settings like office and shopping center parking lots, where they are known as destination chargers.”

The article also points out:

But charging your EV comes with its own set of pricey problems. As noted above, costs are rising per kilowatt-hour when using public stations, and using a home charger offers the biggest savings. However, owners also have to shell out between $700 and $2,000 to install a Level 2 home charging unit, Carvana reported. This might tend to make the first year’s savings for not buying gasoline a wash.

Worse, if you want to install a Level 3 charger in your home, you’ll be hit with costs of up to $50,000 or more — including upgrading the electrical system in your house to power the thing.

The article also notes:

Also, a major source of expense for EVs is battery pack replacement. Depending on the car, battery packs can last between 5 and 20 years, but the replacement costs might make keeping the car prohibitive. Some experts say that the average battery life is eight years or 100,000 miles, and depending on the model, battery packs cost between $5,000 and $20,000 to replace — not including labor.

This high cost is also a warning to anyone buying a used EV. After all, if you buy a 10-year-old EV that still has its original battery, you might be forced to fork out another $10,000 to replace a dead battery pack shortly after putting as much as $25,000 to purchase the used vehicle. This is a cost that few average Americans can afford.

Another issue is a geopolitical concern.

Many of the rare earth minerals — such as lithium — and the manufactured batteries and parts are made in China, and the costs for these materials are also skyrocketing.

Indeed, in December it was found that the cost of lithium had surged more than 250 percent over the year. Not only are these materials rising in expense, but we are enriching China in the process.

Meanwhile, where is the electricity to power these electric vehicles coming from? If 20 percent of Americans owned electric cars, could the power grid handle the load?

Please follow the link above to read the entire article. It provides much food for thought.

The Omnibus Spending Bill

Posted on by

Kevin Roberts, The Heritage Foundation President released the following statement on Wednesday regarding the Omnibus Spending Bill:

“Americans are tired of the elites in Washington playing political games and using cheap tricks to pass massive spending bills that will only increase our debt and further drive inflation. Both parties in the House and Senate are working together this week to pass a $1.5 trillion omnibus bill that spends more money that we simply do not have, and they are playing games with our national security to do so. 

“Instead of following a transparent appropriations process, the House is using a procedural stunt to separate the 2,700-page omnibus bill into two divisions. This move is designed purely to secure enough votes to pass the bill in the House and send it to the Senate as one package, allowing House and Senate leadership to have full control over the outcome. 

“The national security spending in this bill is necessary, but it shouldn’t be used as leverage for a laundry list of far-left domestic priorities. The American people need relief from soaring inflation, higher prices, and a national debt that increasingly threatens their financial futures. Congress is showing that they still don’t understand this basic reality and are intent on causing more hardship for working Americans across this country.  

“It’s time for Congress to end the political games and govern responsibly. If Republicans are serious about governing like conservatives next year, they should start by rejecting this irresponsible approach to the people’s money.” 

It’s time to go back to the real budget process where every government department submits a budget to Congress for Congressional approval.

Someone asked the website Quora when the last federal budget was passed using the conventional budget process.

The website posted the following answer:

Usually a President’s first year in Office is under the previous President’s budget. However knowing that Barack Obama was winning, the Congressional Democrats used Continuing Resolution to push the budget forward. With Obama in Office, they passed the full budget in April 2009. I think since then we have only operated in a world of continuing resolutions and an omnibus budget. After gaining the control of the congress in 2014, Republican promised to return to regular order and it hasn’t happened yet.

To answer your question, the 2007–08 budget was probably the last regular budget passed.

We need to elect people who will return to the normal budget process.

Pay Attention To The Pattern

Posted on by

On Tuesday, The Federalist posted an article about the actions of private corporations regarding the war in Ukraine. Private corporations are denying services or products to Russia or to entitles connected to Russia. They are conducting their own private boycotts. Some of these companies are major corporation such as American Express, Apple, and Microsoft. That may seem like a good thing, but the pattern is troubling.

The article reports:

It could be tempting to cheer the move for targeting Russia’s authoritarian regime and condemning Russian President Vladimir Putin’s unprovoked attacks on the people of Ukraine. But the actions by private companies against Russians are part of a larger swing by U.S. corporations to deny services to those whose opinions they deem unacceptable — and that’s exactly the kind of social credit system Russia is building to impose on its own people.

That’s what we saw in Canada when bank accounts and other assets of protesting truckers were frozen.

The article notes:

Punishment might include anything from slower internet speeds to being barred from flying or staying in certain hotels. There have also been reports of people being denied higher education and having their pets confiscated.

If you think comparisons between Russia and China’s authoritarian credit systems and the increasing dragnet in the United States are outlandish, just think about how Mastercard and American Express blocked donations to Americans whose beliefs about the 2020 election were found unacceptable, while Visa’s political action committee used the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021 to “temporarily suspend[] all political donations.” Paypal, Venmo, and Shopify all went after people who were supposedly involved in the riot.

A friend of mine had her Paypal account terminated because she used a credit card to buy a hamburger in Washington on the weekend of January 6th. She did not go near the Capitol–she went back to her hotel room after the rally, but her Paypal account was still canceled because her credit card company reported that she had made a transaction in Washington that weekend. This is not the America I grew up in.

The article concludes:

We shouldn’t cheer U.S. firms for appointing themselves the arbiters of who deserves to participate in our economy (and by extension, our society). If they can do it to Russia, they can do it to you.

But we also shouldn’t cheer such actions because they move us one step closer to blurring the line between ourselves and the authoritarian tyrants we purport to denounce. If we defeat Russia or China by making our differences unrecognizable, we’ve already lost.

Some Perspective On Gasoline Prices

Posted on by

Issues & Insights recently posted an article about some of the behind the scenes aspects of the rapidly rising gas prices.

The article notes:

That gasoline prices are becoming unaffordable to many Americans is becoming old news. What got us here, though, is a story unheard by much of the public. It starts and ends with green politics.

As gasoline reaches prices that made it a luxury good during President Joe Biden’s year in office, the White House is considering asking the Saudis to produce more oil. At the same time, the administration apparently wants more oil from Venezuela, which is languishing under a dictatorship that’s squarely aligned with Russian President Vladimir Putin, and Iran, a member in good standing with the axis of evil.

“Joe Biden is frantically searching the globe to see if anyone but Texas might have some spare oil,” says a tweet from Bryan Dean Wright, a former CIA officer and Oregon Democrat, that sums up well the comical blundering as well as the corrupt decision-making of the current White House.

The article concludes:

But green politics won’t allow the U.S. to take advantage of its bounty of crude and natural gas. Oddly, though, the environmentalists who hold energy policy hostage when Democrats are in power have no problem with this country importing oil from nations where the drilling and transportation processes are dirtier than they are in the U.S., and the regimes are not democratically elected.

This is the California model. Officials and activists’ rush to create an all-renewables electricity grid has forced the state to import energy from producers in Arizona, Baja California, Colorado, Mexico, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, and Utah that rely on natural gas, nuclear energy, and coal, three sources that California wants to eliminate from its portfolio. But this is acceptable, because it’s happening somewhere else, outside the view sheds of the wealthy enclaves on the coast.

It’s the same with the mining of the natural resources that are needed to build batteries for electric cars, cell phones, and other modern conveniences. The political left is happy to use these items as long as the extraction for material used in their manufacture is done away from their myopic gazes in countries where environmental protections hardly exist.

Yes, this not-in-my-back yard attitude is hypocritical, but worse than that, it produces poor public policy. We hope some day a majority of voters consistently figures this out in election after election.

Green energy destroyed the Spanish economy and did not lower carbon emissions (article here). Let’s not do that in America.

Following The Money

Posted on by

On Monday, Breitbart reported that Senator Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) took thousands of dollars in campaign donations from lobbyists for the Russian Nordstream 2 pipeline. At the same time, Senator Masto consistently opposed legislation that would allow America to continue being energy independence.

The article notes:

Cortez Masto is directly financially connected to the whole thing through campaign donations. According to FEC filings and disclosures, Vincent Roberti donated the legal maximum of $5,800 to Cortez Masto in March of 2021. Roberti represents many global companies, such as Valero Energy. Roberti Global has disclosed $8.5 million in fees lobbying for the Nordstream 2 pipeline.

Cortez Masto is among some of the Democrat Senators who have proposed a federal gas tax holiday instead of reducing dependence on foreign energy. Some believe a federal tax holiday will have little impact in Nevada.

Former Nevada attorney general Adam Laxalt is running against Senator Cortez Masto.

Attorney General Laxalt recently stated the following in a press release:

Prices were already going up before the Ukraine crisis and are likely to rise even further, but Cortez Masto has put green politics before the people. Independence from Russian oil and gas through American energy independence is an economic and national security imperative and Cortez Masto’s decision to handicap our production at home empowers Russia and hurts families across our state. I call on Catherine Cortez Masto to immediately reverse her opposition to the Keystone XL Pipeline, support drilling and hydraulic fracturing on federal lands, and end her senseless opposition to exploring energy resources in ANWR.

If gasoline prices continue to climb (which I believe they will), this Senate seat could easily flip.

 

A Reasonable Perspective On Ukraine

Posted on by

I haven’t written a lot about Ukraine because I think there is a lot of false news floating around about Ukraine and I don’t want to be misled by something that looks real but isn’t. However, I trust the Center for Security Policy, so I am posted excerpts from their article on Ukraine. The article was posted on March 3rd.

The article reports:

The courageous leader of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky, faces some harsh choices. But so does Vladimir Putin, President of Russia. Russia has taken many casualties, with more than 5,000 soldiers killed already. The Russian currency has all but collapsed and there is deep-seated anger in Russia against Putin and his war. Putin needs to wrap this war up fast, or he could be replaced by his adversaries in Russia.

Both Russia and Ukraine have asked for security guarantees –from NATO. Sorting out the NATO relationship is all important.

…A solution covers four main issues. The first is the future of the Donbass area; the second is NATO membership for Ukraine; the third is the Crimea; and the fourth involves nuclear weapons.

Perhaps the easiest solution is Donbass, which the Minsk Accords saw as becoming autonomous regions of Ukraine. Since Russia has now recognized the two breakaway areas (Donetsk and Luhansk) as independent states, it is more difficult now to find a way to a solution. Nevertheless, it is possible. One formula would be for the two breakaways to remain independent only while their status as autonomous Ukrainian areas is worked out, at which point it would be politically and economically expedient for them to become autonomous parts of Ukraine.

NATO, however, is a bigger issue for the Russians and for Ukraine. Ukraine believes, rightly or wrongly, that NATO guarantees their security (even though the support they have received from NATO has not achieved that goal at all). Russia believes NATO in Ukraine is a major threat to Russian security. How to solve this problem?

The article notes that the easiest solution to end the war would be for Ukraine to give up on the idea of joining NATO. That would solve at least part of the problem. Is that the problem or is the quest to reunite the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics the real goal? I don’t know.

The article continues:

A straightforward solution is for NATO to give Ukraine a special type of membership whereby NATO would come to Ukraine’s help if it is attacked. But to assuage Russia, NATO would not put any troops in Ukraine nor any NATO bases, and would not try to convert Ukraine’s military infrastructure into the NATO system. NATO, of course, is not directly part of the Russia-Ukraine negotiations, but some sort of formula can be agreed (no NATO bases, infrastructure etc) in Ukraine, leaving aside Ukraine asking for special status under Article 5 (collective security) in the NATO treaty.

If NATO membership for Ukraine is actually the issue, that would be a possible solution.

The article concludes:

European leaders, especially Emmanuel Macron of France, have tried to find a way forward, which is more than can be said of Joe Biden, who has tried to exploit the Ukraine mess for domestic political reasons. Instead of Macron visiting Putin, maybe he should stop off in Washington and see if he can turn around thinking in the White House.

Meanwhile, Americans need to be very careful about believing what they are hearing from the mainstream media.

 

We Might Want To Fix This Problem Quickly

Posted on by

On Sunday, Trib 24/7 posted an article about some of the results of the forensic audit of the Colorado election in 2020. The results of the audit are disconcerting to say the least.

The article reports:

A forensic analysis of Mesa County, Colorado’s use of the Dominion Voting Systems’ Democracy Suite Election Management System in the 2020 presidential election found the system was “illegally certified” and “illegally configured” in a way that “vote totals can be easily changed,” according to Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters.

“The public must know that its voting systems are fundamentally flawed, illegal, and inherently unreliable,” Peters wrote in a March 1 letter to the Board of County Commissioners.

In a forensic analysis of the images of the Dominion system drive, cybersecurity experts found the system was found to contain 36 wireless devices and was configured to “allow any computer in the world” to connect to Mesa County’s election system server.

The analysis also found uncertified software that had been illegally installed on the system’s server, Peters noted.

The article included the following:

I am not a computer geek, but this looks to me as if someone has some explaining to do.

Colorado has an interesting political history. The once red state turned blue in 2004. The background on that change can be found in a movie called “Rocky Mountain Heist” found on vimeo. Unfortunately political gamesmanship has been a part of American politics since the country began. It just seems as it has reached new heights in the past twenty years or so.

 

 

Is This Incompetence Or Something Else?

Posted on by

On Sunday, Breitbart posted an article about the Biden administration’s reaction to the rapidly rising fuel prices. They are definitely not moving in the right direction.

The article reports:

The White House on Sunday rejected the argument that increasing domestic oil production would help lower gas prices, as the cost of oil moves toward record highs.

Crude oil prices rose as high as $130.50 a barrel on Sunday evening.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki released a set of talking points on social media, arguing against a focus on boosting oil production in the United States.

“It’s a reminder that real energy security comes from reducing our dependence on fossil fuels,” Psaki wrote, noting that Russia’s continued invasion of Ukraine was causing a spike in oil prices.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration website includes the following chart:

As you can see from the chart, gasoline prices began climbing as soon as President Biden won the election. As a candidate, President Biden made clear his intentions to limit America’s fossil fuel production. When he was elected, the oil futures market reacted. Oil is a commodity. When there is less of it, the price goes up. When America went from being energy independent to energy dependent, the price of fossil fuels was going to skyrocket. The war in Ukraine has not helped the situation, but it is not the root cause of the situation. The war in Ukraine will end probably in a few months. Unfortunately the Biden administration’s war on American energy will probably last his entire presidential term.

The article at Breitbart reports:

President Joe Biden’s administration is exploring diplomatic shifts with oil producing countries including Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and Iran, as Russia’s latest Ukrainian offensive has disrupted oil markets.

But Psaki argued the only way to truly be free from high gas prices was to stop using oil.

“The only way to protect US over the long term is to become energy independent,” she wrote, pointing to Biden’s efforts on subsidizing wind and solar energy.

This is reckless, short-sighted, and dangerous to America.

How Free Are We?

Posted on by

Sometimes I am really glad that I drive an old car. Some of the technology in newer cars is getting scary. It is no comfort to me that an insurance company can put a device in your car to monitor whether or not you are a safe driver. There are also other electronics that can be added to your car with questionable capabilities. I am posting the following article not knowing if it is true or possible. However, it does provide some insight as to where we might be headed.

A website called “Freedom Headlines” recently posted the following:

As a result of this protest in Canada truckers in the United States have followed suit and have assembled a trucker’s convoy in Washington DC.

And it looks like some of the corporate heads are showing their true colors in the United States just like they did with Canada.

It’s being reported by at least one trucker that the Penske Corporation remotely shutdown a trucker’s vehicle because they do not support this sort of protest.

According to Yahoo,

A Burkburnett man taking part in a national truck convoy protest found himself without a ride Friday.

Jeff Sandberg has been vocal in his support of the convoy on social media and was driving a rig bearing a banner covered in slogans.

“We’re just trying to show what the people who back us believe — and our own beliefs — of what our country needs to go back to,” Sandberg told the New York Times Wednesday.

By Thursday night, Sandberg was sidelined because the company he rented his truck from, Penske, shut down his truck remotely.

“Penske does not support the people’s convoy movement,” Sandberg said on a Facebook stream. “So, I’m in a situation where I’m not going to be able to continue on.”

There are some questions surrounding this story, however:

Penske said that they didn’t cut the power to the truck, but instead they pulled him as one of their drivers because he had a “Let’s Go Brandon” banner on his truck.

According to one man, that’s not the truth because he has a good friend who is higher up in the company and relayed that information, but I guess we can’t truly know for sure.

I am neither mechanically inclined nor electrically inclined. Can a truck engine be shut down remotely?