Rebane's Ruminations
November 2026
S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930  

ARCHIVES


OUR LINKS


YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

  • [Apologies for my recent silence.  We were doing a little trailering with friends in the future State of Jefferson during the past week ;-)  When SoJ comes to pass, one of the first orders of business is to spread broadband far and wide.  And we can, of course, start that right here in Nevada County.  Did everyone see D'Souza's film 'America'?  Apparently every leftie in town went to see it, and then packed the movie's review page with horrible posts.  But, hey, at least it's good to see them put their money where their mouth isn't.]

    Posted at

    in

  • George Rebane

    In genereal liberals are not stupid; many of them just have bad luck when they think.  (However, this cannot be said of California liberals).

    As we await details of the House suit against this Executive, it might be good to remind ourselves what kind of thinking has put the country into a tailspin.

    1. When you are against government providing a service or subsidizing a class of people, you are immediately pilloried as wanting to deny everyone the benefits of such service, or ‘waging war’ and/or ‘hating’ members of the subsidized class.  You stand loudly accused of this no matter that the service can be freely and widely obtained elsewhere without government funding.  And you are a hating warmonger no matter that you can demonstrate most government funding programs at worst exacerbate the stated problem, and at best are totally ineffective.

    2. Given a uniform history of failures, the same government funded/imposed solution should be applied again because this time it really will work – besides, the data on past failures can simply be denied as partisan.

    3. Messages from the wrong messengers need never be evaluated on their merits.

    4. Government funded science should serve a prescribed social agenda and tailor its results accordingly.  Science not funded by government is prima facie suspect.

    5. Imposing calcifying regulations on an area of rapidly evolving enterprise is always good, especially when done without any understanding of the enterprise or examination of the effect of the new regulations.

    6. Tax rates have no impact on the practice of taxed activities, or how much of the taxed products/services will be available to and/or demanded by the markets.

    7. Unmediated democracy based on universal suffrage and franchise is the best form of government.  Fair and just government results from allowing everyone to vote on everything.  In the aggregate, all people are informed, wise, and rational.  (Victor Davis Hanson gives us an overview here of what such people abet and abide.)

    8. The government and the country are one.  If you criticize and oppose government, then you are not a loyal American and subject to sanction.

    9. There should be no limit on what fraction of GDP is made up of government spending.

    10. Jobs are created by judicious government spending, and destroyed by corporate greed.

    11. Taxing corporations impacts only overcompensated management and speculators in the corporation’s shares.

    12. Above a certain TBD level government owns essentially all of your earnings.

    13. Above a certain TBD level government owns ALL of your property and can charge you rent for its use.

    14. All debts public and private can be forgiven at the pleasure of the government.  All savings may be confiscated at any time for the public good.

    15. The Founders erred when they provided Americans the means to vote with their boots, bullets, and ballots.  Voting should only be possible with ballots.

    16. Equality can always be increased without diminishing liberty.

    This is a partial list.  And recent examples of such thinking in action are readily available from the daily press.  Two come to mind today.

    American corporations pay the world’s highest taxes, averaging about 40% when all federal, state, and local taxes are included.  This adds pressure to other reasons to relocate overseas – lower labor costs, taxes, proximity to world markets, less onerous regulations, declining access to investment capital, … .  The promised tax reform is not coming, so corporations have increased the pace of ‘inversions’ – merging with overseas companies so as to relocate their headquarters offshore and essentially become foreign companies.  This year we have already seen 14 inversions and more are cooking.

    So what do the brainiacs in Obama’s administration propose, lower corporate taxes?  Nooo, SecTreas Lew wants Congress to pass more onerous restrictions that prevent such moves.  The collateral damage from such butt stupid solutions are manifold (more here and here).

    Think tanks on the left are proposing that the top income tax rate be raised to 80% with an added 10% “wealth tax”.  This would be the latest in government’s trashing the Constitution’s takings clause and exercise of eminent domain for public use (SCOTUS essentially trashed the latter in Kelso v New London which allows government to transfer property from one private owner to a more favored private owner).  But the wealth tax is a dooser, any such tax is a constructive rent on the use of your former property which now tacitly belongs to the government (more here).

  • George Rebane

    We’re told that the Army has put Sgt Bowe Bergdahl back on normal duty.  He is done decompressing from his five years with the Taliban, and there are no extraordinary restrictions on his movements or activities while the Army continues to investigate the conditions of his departure and stay with the Afghan ragheads.

    As a veteran I have strong feelings about what went down on 30 June 2009 when Bergdahl up and walked away from his unit.  And I must confess, I weigh heavily the statements made by the six GIs from his unit who were with him on that day.  In their judgment, he simply deserted his post as a member of a deployed combat unit.  We are also told that the Army has yet to interview the men who served with him, and were witness to his departure and the conduct that preceded it.

    We do know that lives were lost and troops were wounded in the course of conducting searches for Bergdahl.  We do know that his relationship with his captors changed markedly during the time he spent with them.  The Army also has intelligence reports that tell of his conversion to Islam and declaring himself to be a “mujahid”. (more here)

    We and the world know that Obama traded five senior Taliban leaders from Gitmo for the release of Bergdahl.  The price for freeing those experienced and sworn enemies of America and western civilization has yet to be paid.

    From everything I have seen and read, our Army is now conducting a politicized investigation whose conclusions are again being molded in the White House.  In this regard I’m reminded of how the Army concluded that its Muslim Major Hasan’s 2009 massacre of 13 fellow soldiers while wounding 30 others at Ft Hood was termed “workplace violence” as he pumped bullets into helpless comrades while shouting ‘Allahu Akbar!’  The record and evidence of his jihadist behavior was totally discounted in his long-planned act of terror.  With this administration our insane policy toward Islam ruled the day, and the new Army toed the line.

    (Readers who have paid attention know that this administration has replaced entire cadres of flag officers who could no longer stomach the course our country is taking.  The current cohort of compliant senior officers have much stronger stomachs.)

    But coming back to Bergdahl, some questions remain.  After all these years away, why does he still refuse to talk to his anxious parents, the very same people who tirelessly worked for his release and were paraded by Obama in that now infamous Rose Garden announcement?  What is the evidence that he is not a taqiyya practicing Muslim like Hasan was?  Why is Sgt Bergdahl allowed to walk free within the company and respect of other soldiers; what evidence does the Army have that permits them to grant such latitude not afforded to other military personnel who deserted their post and were confined while waiting for their court martial?  And there’s much more that the man has to answer before we can put Sgt Bergdahl behind us.

    In the end I come back to his comrades-in-arms and the institution of the ‘buddy rating’ that is time honored in the military.   In the various intense training courses that military people are put through, teamwork is the main idea that is drilled into each of us.  There we are put into situations where the mission cannot be accomplished save through competence, ingenuity under stress, and selfless dedication by each member of the team.  The bonds developed during such training and hardship deployments are hard to convey to those who have not had the privilege.  And as the history of heroism attests, members of such units have routinely gone above and beyond the call for each other.

    The other side of such bondedness is each team member’s intimate knowledge of how his comrades perform.  A shirker or incompetent member may be able to hide his deficit from his commander, but never from his ‘buddies’.  That is why one of the main factors in evaluating the capability, performance, and character of a combat unit member is the ‘buddy rating’ in which each team member confidentially rates (actually ranks) every other team member in the several categories important to the unit’s mission.

    In combat, I am sure that Bergdahl’s mates would most certainly have risked and perhaps even given their lives for each other.  But they also knew what each was ‘made of’, and would never expect or accept a team member’s defection.  From the public testimony of his teammates, we know that Bowe Bergdahl failed his buddy rating.

  • [No doubt some comment threads will continue from Sandbox – 7jul14.  Onward!]

    Posted at

    in

  • George Rebane

    RL ‘Bob’ Crabb is having a big bash at McGee’s on 27 July to celebrate the ‘release’ of his new book (graphic autobiography?).  Would love to be there, but travel plans will cause us to miss this significant event.  All the rest of you should go and buy a couple of books – one for each hand.  I am hereby placing my order for later pick-up.  (more here)

    Recently noted sociologist Charles Murray wrote a workmanlike essay – ‘The Trouble Isn’t Liberals; it’s Progressives’ – to hone our socio-political semantics and taxonomy.  His case was understandable, but now he’s getting a little pushback from readers who point out that he really made a distinction without the benefit of a real difference.  The examples are many, but the ones that resonate with me are free speech and inequality.  People of both stripes on the Left are overwhelmingly against free speech as witnessed by their impact on the institutions of the academe, entertainment, and governments at all levels.  They proscribe ideas that counter their religion whenever and wherever they are found in the public realm.

    More and more readers are beginning to recognize the regressive nature of the Progressive policies of governance (here).  They really do want to return to the days of feudalism in which a governing elite of monarch and nobles enjoyed all the prerogatives while centrally planning for the realm in which the serfs were equally poor, rigidly localized, and tightly controlled in what they could say and do.  The land will again be ruled by outcome governance – no freedom, no enterprises for unequal wealth creation (or wealth creation of any kind), all will be back to a local sustainability like it was in days of yore.  For the masses, uniformity über alles.  Both Liberals and Progressives want to walk us in lockstep into such a future.

    A couple of recent examples of leftwing madness and corruption in the land.  Did you read about the father who was peremptorily arrested in his Blanchester, Ohio home on a recent Sunday while his family watched. (more here)  The charge was “child endangerment” because his son skipped Sunday school and went to play with his pals instead.  The father has lost his job, and faces up to six months in jail.  These stories of a burgeoning Stasi police state are becoming more common daily as our militarized police departments insert themselves into the private affairs of citizens while preparing to counter a massive onslaught of terror that will supposedly arise from the ranks of veterans returning from the Mideast wars according to DHS communications.  Meanwhile, the loyal leftwing lackeys rejoice as their sought after world order materializes.

    And then there’s Sacramento’s lying legions led by our own Governor Moonbeam who is now celebrated in the lamestream for California’s economic recovery and creating a 'budget surplus'.  No one with a functioning three-digit IQ believed him, but that apparently does not a plurality form among the nation’s or the state’s electorate.  But a brave and dedicated patriot, Dean (‘Dino’) Cortopassi, spent his own savings to take out a full page ad in the 10jul14 SacBee (page A8) calling Brown an unmitigated liar as he pointed out that the only reason the state’s budget can be called “balanced” is that the scumbags in Sacramento decided not to pay about $6,000,000,000 worth of mandated CalPERS and CalSTRS retirement plan obligations.  Instead they added that amount to the state's massive unfunded liabilities that now total in the neighborhood of half a trillion dollars.  As befits the Left’s lamestream, not one of the outlets has reported on this fiscal legerdemain.

    If private corporations filed their tax returns on the same accounting principles, there would be people serving jail time.  Only the government can do that simply because the voters are unimaginably dumb.  Using their methods I can create any desired level of a budget surplus by just not paying bills that are due.  Cortopassi is not yet done spending his own shekels to continue his full page ‘Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire!’ ads.   My hat is off to the gentleman.

  • George Rebane

    [This is the addended transcript of my regular KVMR commentary broadcast today 9jul14, two days early because this weekend the station is covering the World Music Festival from the county fairground.]

    The Wall Street Journal is one of the remaining success stories in print publishing, this week celebrating its 125th anniversary since it was launched in 1889.  Today it is a global multi-media giant with over 2.2 million paid subscribers to its print edition alone.  They ran a huge section about what the future holds in their 8jul14 edition, having experts tell us what to expect over the next quarter century in everything from medicine, through personal technologies, to, of course the economy.

    UnemploymentPuzzleHidden away in the middle of the big section was a little piece by Dr Larry Summers on the economic challenge of creating future jobs.  You remember economics professor Summers, former president of Harvard, and former Obama Treasury Secretary?  Well, the good professor has peeked into the crystal ball and seen that we have employment problems – trouble right here in River City.  It’s not just a temporary unemployment rate or workforce participation rate problem that our so-called ‘recovery’ will hopefully fix.  Nope, it’s the real thing – growing systemic unemployment across the land and into the future as far as the eye can see.  Actually, Summers was a bit more circumspect in his description, after all the article did appear in the WSJ, which seems to shy away from un-rosy views of our long term financial futures.

    Listeners to these commentaries and readers of Rebane’s Ruminations have been apprised for years about the inevitable growth of systemic unemployment as advancing technology lets employers substitute intelligent robots and software for human labor.  But before going on, let’s understand what is meant by systemic unemployment, or as put more gently by the good professor, “Job availability is already a chronic problem in the U.S.” (more here)

    (more…)

  • George Rebane

    A couple of sad additions to the Liberal Mind department.  People who follow news and public affairs hear at least ten times a day another liberal or lamestream statement declaring with complete assurance that anyone who, at their cost, is unwilling to deliver abortion inducing prophylactics to a woman is in fact 1) imposing their religion on the woman and/or 2) interfering with the woman’s control of her own body.  While the stark reality is that the same agent makes no effort to deny the woman her opportunity to get identical prophylactics from any of a number of alternative and readily available sources.  (Revival of the Sandra Fluke war on women?)

    And then in a similar vein we hear liberals and the lamestream continue accusing Bush2 of being responsible for hurricane Katrina and its aftermath, while Obama had/has nothing to do with the massive influx of illegal alien children crossing our southern border.  One was a horrific act of God/nature that struck a decades long Democrat mismanaged metropolis (more here), the other the result of an ongoing and purposive administration policy.

    And then consider this email from VA’s Janet Murphy that recently went across the desks of VA managers nationwide.  It reads in part –

    Please immediately stand down on any further communications with stakeholders, delegation members, and others regarding the access audit, wait lists, and accelerating care initiatives.  There will be a network director call this afternoon to discuss the way forward with communication regarding these topics and medical center/health care system directors will be briefed from/by their respective VISNS (various regional districts of the VA).

    Upon this email’s disclosure, the newly appointed VA acting secretary, Sloan Gibson, immediately went on the air to tell the country that this “stand down” message was not really a directive to co-ordinate the continuing decades long cover up of how the VA published its fraudulent healthcare performance statistics, but simply a desire to give some clarifying guidance to the directors of the various VA districts, who obviously have no idea what has been going on under their management.

    What is it with these people??  Are they evil, are they stupid, do they consider that the rest of the country is stupid?  How in hell is anyone of goodwill with an intact system of logic supposed to reach common ground with people who think and reason like that?  It is simply mindboggling to even contemplate finding a starting point.  The only redemptive part of such accusations and reports is that they sure make clear why we are a terminally polarized nation.

    Ending on a happier note, this evening watching the news of the illegal influx of ‘Central American’ children (the Border Patrol believes a huge fraction are actually Mexican with no ability to resolve the matter), we heard that President Obama’s solution to the problem is to do nothing more with or at the border, but ask Congress for almost $3B for housing and processing the kids so that they can properly disappear into our countryside more quickly.  We were told that this amount comes to about $80,000 a kid.

    Upon hearing this, my sweetie and no slouch of a woman, immediately announced she had the better solution to this national crisis – send each kid back to his declared country of origin with $5,000 cash in his pocket.  This would not only give rise to untold joyous reunions, but also bring the cost down to about $6K per head with the additional money going for short term housing/feeding, name tags, and airfare home.  The policy would be implemented with the concurrent directive that the Border Patrol (and National Guard if necessary) would again close the affected borders as required by federal law, else the kids will quickly be sent back for another $5K.  This response will immediately drive the price charged by the scumbag smugglers for future transport through the roof, and save over 90% of the currently requested amount.

    [update]  In this morning’s (9jul14) WSJ is a short column ‘Confessions of a Computer Modeler’ by Robert Caprara.  Mr Caprara holds a masters in environmental engineering and has developed large scale models for the EPA and other government agencies and corporations.  RR readers will be familiar with his message on such modeling, especially as he describes their use in the ‘science’ and politics of climate change.  He hits all the high points and cites examples of how such models are constantly used to produce results desired by the ‘customers’ who pay for their creation and exercise.

    What should impress some of the DIO religionists is the ease with which a large scale model can produce a smorgasbord of results from which the tastiest ones can be selected and then paraded as objective science to the ideological scoundrels and, of course, the sheeple – it’s a 24/7 global enterprise.  This is not the place to review the details of what has been presented in these pages, Caprara’s piece gives a good thumbnail summary.  However, I will point out that even the models he discusses are much simpler than those ‘general circulation models’ used to predict catastrophic temperature and sea level rises (explicated in these pages).  Such GCMs contain many more opportunities for bamboozlement because they are cobbled together from tens of submodels by scattered ‘experts’ in such domains as atmospheric water vapor, high altitude ozone dispersal, spectral aborption by subtropical vegetation, thermodynamics of shallow water energy exchange, South Pacific circulation, …, you get the idea.

    What really causes laughter and tears is how the double dummies, from Obama to the local leftwing loonies, hold themselves in high esteem as caring people in the know, people who need to educate the rest of us and vacuum our wallets to pay for ‘green’ projects and policies that have no impact on their stated objectives while causing immeasurable damage to everything such diktats touch.  DIO??  Sorry about that, it’s the well-rehearsed 'Debate Is Over!'

  • [Among other topics, anybody want to talk about how Hillary is positioning herself for 2016 (here) by starting to cast off from the SS Team Obama?  Who will be the next to start hitting the silk? gjr]

    Posted at

    in

  • George Rebane

    Immigration has again become a national wedge issue in this midterm election year.  It doesn’t look like any new immigration laws will come out of Congress before this November, but that doesn’t mean that bamboozling voters over alternative immigration policies is not effective for garnering their votes.  Recent posts (here) and related comment streams have discussed topics that relate to immigration, and interest in the topic and its related factors – e.g. governance, national security, economics – remains high.  To continue the conversations, I offer a series of loosely related points that represent my take on the matter.  In this view, the national debate on immigration has been badly and purposefully misguided, taking full advantage of our national dumbth.  There is no indication that clarity will strike any time soon to provide a basis for the much sought after ‘immigration reform’.

    USinhabitants

    1. The public understands and appreciates surprisingly little about emigration and immigration as terms that define the movement of people.  Emigration denotes the departure from or exiting a jurisdiction (e.g. a country).  Immigration denotes the intent to become a permanent legal resident of a welcoming jurisdiction.  (This longstanding ignorance is evident in the names of trails and landmarks in America’s west.  Trails and roads coming into California historically were used overwhelmingly by immigrants.  And routes from St Louis and St Joseph were overwhelmingly established for and used by emigrants departing the eastern part of the country.)

    2. Emigration may or not be a two-way bargain between a jurisdiction and the departing émigré – i.e. the émigré may escape a jurisdiction instead of applying for an exit visa.  But immigration requires a mutual agreement between the immigrant and the conditionally welcoming jurisdiction.  Depending on the jurisdiction, the contract is usually explicit, but may even be implicit (see below).  The minimal part of every immigration ‘contract’ is that the immigrant comes to the welcoming country to make a life within its established culture while adopting its existing ways.  Were the new arrivals from another culture intent on changing the nature of their new home, they would be called colonists rather than immigrants.

    (more…)