Category Archives: culture

Zeroing In

Posted on by
Reply

That’s what the Biden-Harris administration claims is all it wants to do with its “new and improved” personal bank account monitoring scheme.

…banks, credit unions, and other financial institutions would be required to report annually on accounts with deposits and withdrawals worth more than $10,000….

Here’s Biden-Harris’ Treasury Secretary, Janet Yellen:

Today’s new proposal reflects the administration’s strong belief that we should zero in on those at the top of the income scale who don’t pay the taxes they owe, while protecting American workers by setting the bank account threshold at $10,000 and providing an exemption for wage earners like teachers and firefighters

Because some American workers are more equal than others of us, and so more deserving of protection from this government spying.

On top of that is the Biden-Harris/Yellen disingenuousness and that of their Progressive-Democratic Party syndicate that this is solely about tracking down those Evil Rich Tax Dodgers. Even at $10,000, though, those Evil Ones would need hundreds, if not thousands, of bank accounts to get down to sizes even approaching that $10k threshold. No, this move remains centered on the prurient interest those peopling our government have in the private doings of us common citizens.

After all, rather than spying on those of us average Americans of whom this administration disapproves (remember how narrow the “exemption” really is), the government could simply audit those Evil Rich individuals. No peeking in windows necessary that way.

Besides, I have it on good authority that the men and women in our government already know what income has gone unreported and how much tax is owed. From that, those worthies also already know where that missing income is and who owes it. If anyone.

An EU Attack on National Sovereignty

Posted on by
Reply

Poland’s Prime Minister, Mateusz Morawiecki, is objecting to the European Union’s claims to overriding authority over its independent constituent nations, Poland in particular. In an open letter to the EU’s parliament, then in debate during the next parliament session, he said

…EU mission creep…would lead to a “centrally managed organism, governed by institutions deprived of democratic control.”

And then,

EU competencies have clear boundaries, we must not remain silent when those boundaries are breached. So we are saying yes to European universalism, but we say no to European centralism.”

Which argument for the sovereignty of the Union’s constituent nations was answered dismissively by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen:

Your arguments are not getting better. You’re just escaping the debate[.]

She then laid out three options by which the EU would seek to compel Poland’s acceptance of EU suzerainty:

  • first: a so-called infringement, where the European Commission legally challenges the Polish court’s judgment, which could lead to fines
  • second: a conditionality mechanism and other financial tools whereby EU funds would be withheld from Poland
  • third: application of Article 7 of the EU’s treaties. Under this, rights of member states—including the right to vote on EU decisions—can be suspended because they have breached core values of the bloc

Despite this,

Poland’s ruling nationalist Law and Justice party says it has no plans for a “Polexit[.]”

Maybe the party and the citizens should begin thinking about it.

Stall

Posted on by
Reply

And outright disregard for court rulings and the law. That’s the Biden-Harris administration’s position regarding the prior administration’s Remain in Mexico policy—the Migrant Protection Protocols—implemented to stem the flow of illegal aliens into our nation, and by extension, the flow of illegal aliens into and through Mexico.

The Supreme Court, ‘way last August, ruled that the Remain in Mexico policy must remain in force, but Biden-Harris and their DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas say they’ll get around to it in another month—mid-November. -Ish.

Stall. And disobey.

Mayorkas, in an unsigned DHS statement:

Mexico is a sovereign nation that must make an independent decision to accept the return of individuals without status in Mexico as part of any reimplementation of MPP.  Discussions with the Government of Mexico concerning when and how MPP will be reimplemented are ongoing.

Stall. And disobey.

The protocols are in place. Mexico had already agreed. The only reason it’s taken eight weeks already is the Biden-Harris stall. And disobey.

The only reason it’ll take another four weeks, at least, is…stall. And disobey.

Domestic Spy

Posted on by
Reply

That’s what Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas seems to see as his primary job: spying on his employees, prying into their personal medical status.

The US Department of Homeland Security is seeking proposals for a new system that will allow it to track the biometric data of its workers in order to monitor their physical and mental well-being.

Government tracking of Americans’ biometric data. This is the Biden-Harris Surveillance State—rest assured that if this is allowed to go forward, it will spread rapidly to all the rest of Government—complementing the administration’s already radically expanded and expanding (see their reconciliation bill and it’s a priori amendment, their “infrastructure” bill) Administrative State.

Here’s a thought, admittedly inconceivable to Progressive-Democrats, but plainly obvious to us average Americans: improve the physical and mental well-being of those workers—and the rest of the folks involved in law enforcement in any milieu—by giving those workers the tools and support they need actually to enforce our laws. Stop denigrating them, stop defunding them, stop telling them to enforce only some laws, and those only partially.

The cognitive dissonance that results from being told to do a job, but don’t do it, from doing a job and then being castigated for doing it, can be devastating. And no biometric data collection, no snooping into personal medical situations, is needed for that.

Scapegoat

Posted on by
Reply

Holman Jenkins had a Wall Street Journal op-ed in which he described the indictment of Boeing’s 737 MAX Chief Technical Pilot, Mark Forkner, as not necessarily the end of the investigation into Boeing’s MAX failures that led to two fatal MAX crashes.

Jenkins didn’t come right out and say it, so I will. I will also add a couple of questions that Jenkins didn’t ask in his piece.

Straight out: Forkner looks more like Boeing’s scapegoat than he does a major contributor to Boeing’s MAX failures, for all of Forkner’s serious involvement in those failures.

Additional questions: as a test director for a major Defense contractor in my former life, I ask who tested this stuff? Where are they in the investigative/indictment phase of this charade?

Where is Boeing management, who permitted—created—the corporate culture where such shoddiness, if not outright lazy negligence, could exist?