Tag Archives: politics

Insufficient

Posted on by
Reply

People’s Republic of China government securities regulators are offering a change to PRC securities laws that would remove a requirement that

audit inspections of overseas-listed Chinese companies be done mainly by Chinese regulators.

Another part of the PRC regulators’ offer:

Under the draft rules, the burden of protecting state secrets now falls to private companies as well. They have to report to the financial watchdog and other authorities before cooperating with overseas regulators.

Far from being a serious offer, this is insulting.

PRC regulators of companies possessing PRC state secrets—or held to possess them by the PRC government—will have too easy a time using the secrets excuse to delay, obfuscate, or outright censor any effort at an audit.

Audits not being done “mainly” by PRC regulators are not the same as agreeing to let host nation auditors—American auditors in our case—have full, complete, open access to PRC company books immediately on request, including no-notice requests.

Anything less is too much interference with the audits of companies listed on our exchanges, whether foreign companies are PRC-domiciled or elsewhere.

The SEC must not take this move by the PRC seriously.

All Lives Don’t Matter

Posted on by
Reply

Certainly not in Colorado.

[Governor Jaried, (D)] Polis signed HB 22-1279, the “Reproductive Health Equity Act,” which the governor said “codifies a person’s fundamental right to make reproductive health-care decisions free from government interference.”

And this:

A fertilized egg, embryo, or fetus does not have independent or derivative rights under the laws of this state[.]

Baby’s lives don’t matter; the State and anyone residing in it are free to murder unborn babies, and those babies don’t even get a voice to speak for them in court. This pretty much says it all regarding Colorado’s Polis (D) and the State’s Progressive-Democratic Party-controlled legislature.

But not quite. There’s this, too, in this…law:

The law prohibits state and local public entities from denying, restricting, interfering with, or discriminating against a person’s right to…have an abortion. It also bars public entities from restricting abortion due to the individual’s “potential, actual, or perceived impact on the pregnancy, the pregnancy’s outcomes, or the pregnant individual’s health.”

The persons being called upon to execute the abortion, whether private or public, are barred from refusing to do so due to that person’s religious beliefs. This Progressive-Democrat move also is a naked assault on religion and on simple conscience.

Revisionist History

Posted on by
Reply

Recall that President Joe Biden (D) recently identified his wife as a prior Vice President of the United States in another of his…misspeaks.

Now his White House staff is rewriting history by altering the transcript of the speech in which said the thing.

And I’m deeply proud of the work she is doing as First Lady with Joining Forces initiative she started with Michelle Obama when she [I] was Vice President and now carries on

This is especially invidious dishonesty. The Progressive-Democrats are trying to rewrite history to erase events that occurred. Pretending to correct a transcription error—leaving the line-through of the putative error and supplying the not-actually-said insertion is naked revisionism, not a simple correction.

A proper move, an honest move, would have been to create an addendum saying “What the President meant to say….”

History is how we know what happened and how we got to where we are. Falsifying history is an attack on all of us.

It cannot be tolerated by us American citizens.

Will It Be The End?

Posted on by
Reply

Major portions of the press are convinced that a Republican sweep in the coming mid-term elections would spell the end for our nation. A recent Fox News headline reads,

CNN, MSNBC, NBC, and more worry about bloodbath for the Democrats in midterms: “The end of our country”

To which I say, if by “our” they mean CNN‘s, MSNBC‘s, NBC‘s, et al.‘s version of the country, I certainly hope so.

Those…outlets…support in the most vociferous way the racism and sexism of identity politics and Big Government’s utter contempt for us average Americans. They do not share even their Progressive movement founder Theodore Roosevelt’s insistence on an economic system under which each man shall be guaranteed the opportunity to show the best that there is in him. They do not support a nation in which equal opportunity exists, where all of us—each of us—are equal under law and before God. They demand equality of outcome, which cancels (to coin a term) any ability each man to show [his] best.

They demand that only (Progressive-)Democrats must be elected.

Progressive-Democrats’ Continued Assault on our 2nd Amendment

Posted on by
Reply

Especially cynically, President Joe Biden (D) is using the tragedy of the Sacramento, CA, shooting—other people’s blood—to press his assault on our 2nd Amendment.

Ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Repeal gun manufacturers’ immunity from liability.

Ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Where in our Constitution is the Federal government given the authority to limit the weapons us American citizens are allowed to have and to carry? Here, for Biden’s edification, is the 2nd Amendment:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

In order to have a population that is armed and that understands its arms and so can muster at need to defend our nation, every American has the right to keep and bear Arms, entirely unfettered by Government. Nowhere in that Amendment is there any authority of Government to dictate to us citizens the kind of Arms each of us can keep and carry.

Beyond that, the Supreme Court has already ruled, in District of Columbia v Heller and in McDonald v City of Chicago that the Amendment means precisely what it says: the right to have and to carry firearms is an individual right, with the addition (incorporation) that State governments also cannot (not may not) infringe on this right.

Repeal gun manufacturers’ immunity from liability? Based on what actual theory of law, gun rights, or other? Biden continues to offer no rationale other than his desired gun grab for his abuse. Gun manufacturers have no more control over the uses to which purchasers put their product than have car manufacturers, knife manufacturers, baseball bat manufacturers, hammer manufacturers, or pillows.

That last isn’t me being facetious or sarcastic. Suffocation is the third most common technique for murder.

Biden doesn’t care about any of that. He just wants our firearms; he just wants us disarmed.