The EU

Google says the EU requires a notice of cookie use (by Google) and says they have posted a notice. I don't see it. If cookies bother you, go elsewhere. If the EU bothers you, emigrate. If you live outside the EU, don't go there.

Saturday, March 26, 2011

More Experimentation

Here I try to embed a video from the MSNBC show Hardball, with not Chris Matthews, but "The Chuck", talking about new census figures regarding Hispanics in the United States.  Fifty point five million Hispanics, or 16.3% of the total population.

I am hoping that the transcript is here.

Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The gist of it is that the Republicans are now in big trouble, due to the demographics of the Hispanic population.  But, you knew that when I said MSNBC at the lede.

Frankly, I am not very concerned.  If the economy turns around, and I hope it does, then this large number of Hispanics will be able to partake in the success, assuming the Obama Administration and the Reid/Pelosi Health Insurance Reform have not combined to create an even greater Underground Economy.

The Republican Party is about John Locke, the Founding Fathers, Middle Class values and Upper Middle Class aspirations.  As the economy improves, that 16.3% of the population will benefit and move upward.  On the other hand, as Hispanics grow as a percentage of the US population they might bring with them habits of thought and action from the old country and we could see the US go the way of the ABC nations.  Once strong and surging economics, those three nations have since slid backward compared to the rest of the world.  Only now is Brazil emerging from many years in the doldrums.  Argentina is still on the ragged edge, economically.

Our future is in our hands.

Regards  —  Cliff


Anonymous said...

I have become completely convinced that the fortunes of empire rise and fall on the decisions of a small number of men, and occasionally, traceable to ONE man. This was posited in this way by Dr. Rufus Fears, Oklahoma State University in his excellent course, The Lessons of History.

That the hispanics, or the blacks, or the yellows continue to become more plentiful in the demographic game probably has much less to do with causing or determining outcomes than with the way the outcomes look.

In American history, one can easily identify men, or small groups of men, who have had benchmark effect of the course of American socioeconomic progression through time.

The decisions made by the current idiot in chief, along with those of his minions, are setting the stage and may very well have already irreversibly propelled us from a free market republic to a socialist dictatorship.

The basis for my theory is that in order for the Republican dream to evolve, the free market must be not only operable, but vital. Currently, it is in decline as a result of the sharp loss of our means of production. This is exacerbated by policy decisions delivered and enforced by a Congress, and now joined by a sympathetic Administration, whose fundamental philosophies are collectivist in nature and deed.

The American society, given more and more to hedonistic orientations and academic discourse about what has been done and/or should be done, is, at the end of the day, not given to decision or palpable resistance to the current political decisions. The boiled frog comes to mind once again....and may in fact be emblematic of the situation in which the American society finds itself.

Craig H said...

??? The current form of imperial presidency was invented by Republicans--and making an argument that it has somehow become a tool for socialism and it wasn't before (tell me again how a bailout is not socialism, and then tell me how Wall Street didn't get one during the last administration) is full denial of recent history.

C R Krieger said...

I think that Kad is right about the "Imperial Presidency" being an invention of Republicans, if you go back to Abraham Lincoln, otherwise you only need to go back to FDR or Wilson.

I am becoming more careful of the "Socialism" argument.  It is a loaded and misunderstood term and probably needs some unpacking.  To me socialism is about a central authority setting the prices, from six-penny nails to heart transplants.  The idea is that with our broad knowledge and data processing capabilities we are smarter than the markets.

At the same time there is the idea that goes along with some ideas of socialism that the vast majority of people are not smart enough to know what is good for them—for evidence, look at all the folks who vote Republican—and thus need an elite to guide them.  This is an idea as old as the hills and has been demonstrated to be bad several times in the last few centuries, including Germany in the "National Socialist" era and France in the Revolution (not to mention the Soviet Union).

This goes to Nealcroz' point early in his comments and why I think the idea of keeping power out of the hands of small groups of people is a good idea.

Regards  —  Cliff

Anonymous said...

Can't say I see any logic in the assignment of the Imperial Presidency being an invention of the Republicans. If one scans Presidential history, one cannot escape the fact that some of the most notorious Imperialists have not been Republican, in recent history, FDR (the penultimate imperialist), JFK, LBJ, and of course, how could we forget Bill Clinton?

What HAS occurred within the context of the Presidency as a process is that the OFFICE has been transformed (arguably, "allowed to become") imperial, if not in fact certainly by the implication derived from all of the trappings associated with the role.

Imperialism vested in a single leader leads inevitably to fascism, and historically, fascism is inextricably linked to socialism (which by definition is a totalitarian form of economic operation). One simply can't exist without the other.

The final solution in a fascist society is the introduction of communism, which is an outcome of the socialist period of sociopolitical progression.

This is precisely why empires have risen and then died and one need only consult history to validate that posit. Societies rise from capitalist roots and thrive, but ultimately, an exalted leader comes forth, and the imperialist nature of "anointed man" takes over, and then the society slips into fascism, socialism and ultimately communism.

It is not a party affiliated phenomenon, is is imposed by a self absorbed society on itself. The Fearless Leader gets there because he exists above the mere political processes and parochialism of party politics. This is what we are seeing unfolding with Obama.

As Khrushchev wryly observed in the late 50's, "The red flag of communism will eventually fly over the United States, and the American people will raise it."

Our astronomical debt is in its simplest form, nothing more than a total transfer of wealth from the people to the government, and the time will come soon when the people will cede their power to that of the government as the only salvation available.

Craig H said...

I said "current form", and I meant via the generation of legal opinions granting the President specific immunity from Congressional and Constitutional oversight.

Our present "socialism" is generated via the collusion of the major political parties, to trade the further socialization of pensions (Social Security) and healthcare (Medicare and Medicaid were here long before Obama pushed through his "reform") and unemployment insurance (99 weeks and counting) and home ownership (via Barney's Fannie and Freddie frauds) for the effective socialization of our financial services infrastructure (the bailouts are de facto criminal fraud on the part of the bankers, and I'm disgusted no one can see it so) and the complete looting of our Federal Treasury to their benefit. It's not a "D" or an "R" thing, it's a "D" AND an "R" thing, and Obama is neither the cause nor its last incarnation.

I object to the characterization that immigrants come here to sponge off our welfare state. The truth is, the lazy scions of past immigrants are far less productive, and far more prone to exploiting SSI and Medicare/Medicaid entitlements, since non-citizen immigrants can't even qualify for those programs in the first place, even though their pay is garnished to contribute to them. Do you deny that those programs are the ones busting our Federal budget? Do you for a moment think that non-citizens are behind the deficits there??? Think about it.

We have met the enemy, and he is us. Our one hope is that immigrants not feeling entitled to lifetime government coddling are arriving in increasing numbers to perhaps finally wrest the balance of electoral power back into the hands of free men and women.

Anonymous said...

I'm with you 100% on your last post Kad. The fraud that is the Federal government is unparalleled in modern times...and there is more than enough responsibility for it to go around to all the political porkers at the trough.

I have long felt that "representation" at the Federal level (and a good argument to be made for state level as well) should be on a non-reimbursable basis. You buy your own ticket to the your own salary....find and fund your own medical care....and the administration operate on a commercial cash and carry basis. If the President needs to fly somewhere, lets get him a First Class ticket...or go to NetJets and get a fractional would be at a fraction of the cost of operating AF One. free rides for Congress or Czars. You wanna go? Fine...go buy a ticket. It would be amazing to see how many would suddenly find Skype conferences very effective.

We don't need this gigantic Federal law enforcement bureaucracy either. The cost of maintaining it is staggering...and much of the crime that they deal with is caused by or inspired by the morass of Federal bureaucracy itself.

If all politics is local...then the outcome of local politics......rule making for the conduct of society.... should be enforced locally as well.

Oh it will never work. BS. When has anyone even tried it. The Republic wasn't supposed to work in the beginning either.

My only advocacy is for the sanctity of the individual...and the individual right to determine one's own destiny while respecting the same for others. That can't possibly be that hard. And...its a damned sight cheaper than what we have now