10

Lefties Eat Their Own

 

 

The fact that some of the far left is completely deranged is beginning to penetrate through to those on the left not quite as barking mad.  A case in point is a letter sent out by the Democrats in the California State Assembly.  Democrats in the California State Senate bill passed a bill calling for a state single payer health care system.  However, the bill did not provide any mechanism to fund it.  Estimates are that it would cost at least 200 billion a year, assuming that other state and federal health care funding in California could be tapped for the new system.  This would require doubling California’s state taxes.  Unsurprisingly the powers that be among the Democrats in the Assembly quietly tabled this lunatic proposal.  However, this did not well with the denizens of the fever swamp left, who started to make threats, usually reserved for Republican targets, including death threats.  This so unnerved the Democrats in the Assembly that they jointly sent out the following letter:

 

In recent days, we have become alarmed and disheartened by bullying tactics, threats of violence, and death threats by a few who disagree with the decision of Speaker Anthony Rendon to postpone the advancement of SB 562. While it is appropriate for persons of varying views to express concern, disapproval or disfavor about the delay, it is never acceptable to engage in those tactics. That is not how we make decisions in the Assembly. In a civil society, this behavior can neither be condoned nor tolerated.

We have seen the impact of bullying in schools and now in the political arena. We have written numerous bills to prevent persons in school and the workplace from being harassed and bullied. That is not the type of culture we believe allows for open discourse and good decision making. The political campaign of 2016 was filled with verbal attacks and even calls for violence. These are tactics that we all abhor. Let us not become the persons that we detest.

For the past few years, California has embraced the Affordable Care Act with the intent of providing healthcare for all Californians. While we have not reached our goal, we are moving in that direction. There are many ways of achieving the goal of healthcare for all. Included in that list is a single-payer option, an idea that is embraced by many in the Assembly.

As we move forward and continue our commitment to work toward improved healthcare for all Californians, we welcome ideas and discussion from those who want to find a solution. Continue Reading

4

Mirror, Mirror

 

The left in a nutshell:

 

Based on a brainchild of one its students, Laguna Hills High School officials had the mirrors taken out of the school’s girls’ bathrooms … and replaced with notes of “affirmation.”

The notes include little sayings such as “You are important” and “You are loved.”

Sabrina Astle, a member of the school “Kindness Club,” said she came up with the idea because she wanted to “make a difference.”

“[W]e had What if … Week,” Astle told ABC News. “Each day has a specific message. The message for Thursday, March 23, 2017, was ‘What if we showed more love?’

“The signs have helped people remember that everyone is beautiful, everyone is important, everyone is good enough and everyone should be treated equally. I did this because I am passionate about the fact that everyone is important and everyone needs to be cared for.” Continue Reading

11

Potty War

 

The Obama administration has declared war on all Americans who believe that public rest rooms should be divided by sex. Ostensibly to accommodate the estimated, likely an over estimate, 0.3% of Americans who are mentally ill and who desperately wish to pretend that they are the opposite sex, the increasingly Orwellian Department of Justice and Department of Education sent out a letter to all public school districts requiring them, with the implicit threat of taking away public funding, to allow such individuals to use the bathrooms they wish to use.  Thus a boy who wishes to be a girl must be allowed to use the girls’ restroom.  Schools may not require any proof that the individual wishing to use an opposite sex restroom has any medical history indicating that they are “transgender”.

You will frequently hear from the Left that no crimes have been committed as a result of allowing biological men access to female restrooms.  Go here to read proof that they are lying.

Is all this upheaval really about making allowance for such a small percentage of the population?  Of course not.  This is part of the ongoing war of the Left against the reality that God made us male and female, and that the vast majority of men and women are quite happy with that Divine arrangement.  Any stick that can be wielded against the reality of sex differences is eagerly seized upon by an increasingly deranged Left to reshape reality to match their ideology.  If women and girls are raped in the process, well that is just too bad.

 

50

How the Left Still Hates Maggie Thatcher

His Holiness Pope Francis was saddened to learn of the death of Baroness Margaret Thatcher.  He recalls with appreciation the Christian values which underpinned her commitment to public service and to the promotion of freedom among the family of nations.  Entrusting her soul to the mercy of God, and assuring her family and the British people of a remembrance in his prayers, the Holy Father invokes upon all whose lives she touched God’s abundant blessings.
Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone
Secretary of State

The gracelessness and blind hatred that governs much of the Left was put on full display with the death of Margaret Thatcher, the greatest prime minister Britain has had since World War 2, with organized street demonstrations “celebrating” her passing.

Thatcher, who personified the phrase “true grit”, I think would have welcomed their hate as the finest tribute to her work.  She opposed the Left and its goal of an ever expanding state with all the wit, courage and eloquence she could muster, and she had a considerable store of all three qualities.  This accolade from Milton Friedman in 1979 explains just what an extraordinary politician Thatcher was:

We have become so accustomed to politicians making extravagant campaign promises and then  forgetting about them once elected that the first major act of Margaret Thatcher’s government— the budget unveiled on June 12—was a surprise. It did precisely what she had promised to do.

Margaret Thatcher campaigned on a platform of reversing the trend toward an ever more  intrusive government—a trend that had carried government spending in Great Britain to  somewhere between 50 per cent and 60 per cent of the nation’s income. Ever since the end of  World War II, both Labor and Tory governments have added to government-provided social  services as well as to government-owned and -operated industry. Foreign-exchange transactions  have been rigidly controlled. Taxes have been punitive, yet have not yielded enough to meet  costs. Excessive money created to finance deficits sparked an inflation that hit a rate of over 30  per cent a year in mid-1975. Only recently was inflation brought down to the neighborhood of 10  per cent, and it is once again on the rise.

Most important of all, the persistent move to a centralized and collectivist economy produced  economic stagnation. Before World War II, the British citizen enjoyed a real income that  averaged close to twice that of the Frenchman or German. Today, the ratio is nearly reversed.  The Frenchman or German enjoys a real income close to twice that of the ordinary Briton.

Margaret Thatcher declared in no uncertain terms that the long British experiment was a failure.  She urged greater reliance on private enterprise and on market incentives. She promised to  reduce the fraction of the people’s income that government spends on their behalf, and to cut  sharply government control over the lives of British citizens. Her government’s budget is a major first step. It reduces the top marginal tax rate on so-called  “earned” income from 83 per cent to 60 per cent, on “unearned” income from a confiscatory 98  per cent to 75 per cent. At the same time, it raises the level of income exempt from income tax  and cuts the bottom rate from 33 per cent to 30 per cent. It proposes to cut government spending  significantly, to sell some of the government’s industrial holdings and to promote the sale of  government-owned housing units to their occupants. It loosens foreign-exchange controls  substantially as a first step toward their elimination.

One retrograde step, in my opinion, is an increase in indirect taxes—the British general sales  taxes, or VAT. This increase, which partly offsets the decrease in direct taxes, combined with  lower spending will reduce government borrowing, facilitating a restrained monetary policy and  releasing funds for private investment. The purpose is admirable. However, once taxes are  imposed, it is hard to cut them. From the long-run point of view, it seems to me preferable to  resort to a temporarily higher level of borrowing rather than to a possibly permanently higher level of indirect taxes.

I would also have preferred to see exchange controls eliminated completely rather than by  degrees. The controls serve no constructive purpose. Eliminating them gradually only prolongs  the harm and preserves a mischievous bureaucracy.

But these are quibbles. I salute Margaret Thatcher and her government for their courage and  wisdom in moving firmly and promptly to cut Britain’s bureaucratic straitjacket. Britain has  enormous latent strength—in human capacities, industrial traditions, financial institutions, social  stability. If these can be released from bondage, if incentive can be restored, Britain could once  again become a vibrant, dynamic, increasingly productive economy. Continue Reading