Needed Stimulus

or not. Mostly—nearly entirely—not.

real per capita disposable income in [Wuhan Virus situation-ridden] 2020 grew 5.5%

The Wall Street Journal noted that this is all before the December-passed $900 billion stimulus “took effect.” It’s also after that stimulus—which still hasn’t had much effect since much of that money hasn’t even been sent into the economy by Government.

What happened to the $2.6 trillion Government had already lobbed into the economy?

Preliminary data for 2020 show total savings for 2020 was $1.6 trillion higher than in 2019.  And that was before the $900 billion stimulus.

Bipartisanship the Biden Way

Then-Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate Joe Biden campaigned on—bragged about—his ability to work with Republicans, to get bipartisan deals done, because he claimed, bipartisanship was best for the nation.

Here’s an example of that bipartisanship in the true Biden way, centered on the nearly $2 trillion Wuhan Virus “relief” bill the Progressive-Democrats are pushing in Congress. It comes on the heels of Biden’s Monday meeting with 10 Republicans regarding their far cheaper relief proposal, a meeting in which Biden paid lip service to hearing what Republican had to say and to offer. Speaking through his White House Press Secretary, Jen Psaki, Biden said,

A Trump Legal Legacy

Brent Kendall had a piece in Sunday’s Wall Street Journal, Trump Appointees Poised to Influence Legal Outcomes for Decades to Come, that explored this item. It’s well worth the read.

One statement in particular caught my eye, though.

Republican and Democratic [judicial] appointees often embrace differing legal philosophies that lead to divergent results.

This is at the core of the problem. As our Constitution’s Article I, Section 1 makes clear, there is only one legitimate legal philosophy for judges and Justices. They’re sworn to uphold the Constitution, not some mythical document that better comports with what they want to uphold.

Not a Mixed Message

Amazon insists it’s only censoring violent speech, and claimed that when it tossed Parler off its AWS cloud hosting facility, thereby denying (as Jeff Bezos, Amazon’s MFWIC, knew full well at the time) Parler and all of its primarily conservative participants any voice on the Internet.

Just the News says that with the tossing of sites like Parler while hosting other sites like Twitter, Amazon is sending “mixed signals.”

Here are some tweets that still are up on Jack Dorsey’s Twitter, that’s now on Amazon’s AWS cloud hosting facility:

Taxing and Spending

Progressive-Democrats are shocked—shocked—that folks want to hang onto their money rather than send in to Government. Thus, when State profligate spending and confiscatory tax rates were exposed by the Federal income tax reform that capped SALT deductions at $10,000, and folks on whom the cap had material effect decided to relocate their incomes, their money, and their lives to other States, Progressive-Democrats squalled most loudly.

The lawmakers say the cap, created in the 2017 tax law, punishes their constituents unfairly and pushes residents to move to low-tax states such as Florida. They are pitching the break as crucial to their states’ economic recovery.

Alphabet Strikes Again

Alphabet, through its wholly-owned Google’s wholly-owned YouTube, has censored The Epoch Times, barring the news outlet from its YouTube channel and expelling it from YouTube’s Partner Program, through which The Epoch Times monetized much of its output.

Alphabet claims the news outlet violated its subsidiary’s subsidiary’s “Community Guidelines.” Its YouTube spokesman said,

All channels on YouTube need to comply with our Community Guidelines, and in order to monetize, channels must comply with the YouTube Partner Program policies, which include our Advertiser-Friendly Guidelines. Channels that repeatedly violate these policies are suspended from our partner program.


Jack Dorsey is expanding his censorship function, this time under the guise of something he’s euphemistically calling “Birdwatch.”

The project, which is called Birdwatch, will be available to users on a first-come, first-served basis. It will allow users to write notes that provide context to tweets they believe require additional information to be digested by the public responsibly.

First come, first served—so no pretense of an actual cross-section of the speaking or political spectrums. And birders’ definition of “public responsibility,” not posters’ or readers’ definition(s). Can’t have that.

Then there’s Keith Coleman, Twitter Vice President Product:


…can be fun. I’ve often said that in a variety of other venues. Here’s an example of the fun that can be afforded by discovery. Of course, what I’m talking about is the legal process that kicks off most any legal proceeding, a stage during which all parties to a litigation are required to show to all the other parties, voluntarily or under subpoena, everything they have that bears on the matter being litigated.

A Teachers Union Rebellion

The Chicago Pubic Schools district intends to reopen kindergarten through 8th grade for in-class schooling and in-person teaching on 1 February. To that end, the teachers were required to show up for work last Monday to prepare for the reopening.

The Chicago Teachers Union refused.

The union’s excuse was their holding of

the clear and present danger that [in-person classes and teaching] poses to the health of our families and school communities.


Here’s an empirical example of the contempt in which Progressive-Democrats hold us ordinary Americans, this one from California.

California leaders are now saying key data on the virus is not being made public because it would “mislead” the public.


With no end in sight, 98% of the state’s population was recently under stay-at-home orders, when the governor decided to lift restrictions on some areas, yet unable to explain why.

Department of Public Health spokeswoman Ali Bay:

At the moment the projections are not being shared publicly.
These fluid, on-the-ground conditions cannot be boiled down to a single data point—and to do so would mislead and create greater uncertainty for Californians[.]