The Market Ticker
Commentary on The Capital Markets - Category [Politics]
Logging in or registering will improve your experience here
Main Navigation
Sarah's Resources You Should See
Full-Text Search & Archives
Leverage, the book
Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions. For investment, legal or other professional advice specific to your situation contact a licensed professional in your jurisdiction.


Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility; author(s) may have positions in securities or firms mentioned and have no duty to disclose same.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.

Considering sending spam? Read this first.

2022-11-18 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Politics , 672 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

The GOP cannot win in its current incarnation, and none of the people running it and in leadership positions today -- none of them, including Trump, DeSantis, Noem and others -- will face this and change it.

Therefore it will die, and the question is what displaces it, since America has always been a two-party system.

The Whigs disappeared awfully fast when the point break came.

So it will be this time.

Thus let's get positioned for it -- if you're politically-inclined then here's the opportunity.

We'll name the party too: Federation, and those running under it Federationists.

That's what America is supposed to be, after all: A Federal Republic.

Yes, I know, I talked about this years ago.  It is more-pressing now than then.  Let's start the debate here with a platform upon which we will demand candidates adhere, no exceptions.  This in turn means we must be sparse with said platform because that is the only way to be "big tent" and at the same time protect everyone's rights.

Thus I propose a platform that is relatively simple and has no cheats.  In no particular order:

  • The Constitution sets the boundaries for both the Federal and State governments, without exception.  Any political group that asserts a desire to change things on a 50-state basis, where same either "stretches" or outright violates the Constitution must change it.  We shall not permit end-runs around this process and any attempt to do so, no matter what it is is comingled with, shall be turned away.

  • The people have the right to retain the fruits of improved productivity.  This, in turn, means that the government may not spend what it does not first tax, and no private party, including banks, may violate published credit to capital ratios nor may they be changed capriciously as they were in 2008.  The former 10% "reserve" ratio is to be restored immediately and enforced.  Violations are to be treated as counterfeiting because they are.  The sole exception under which deficit spending is permitted is during a time of declared war.

  • The Federal Government has no right to mandate the bodily invasion of a person who is a citizen and present in the United States.  There is no federal power granting this authority within the United States with respect to a person.  The regulation of interstate and international commerce, on the other hand, does rest with the Federal Government.  Your personal travel for non-commercial purpose is not commerce; this has long been decided by the USSC.  As such federal "mandates" within the US for any vaccine or medical prophylaxis, for any purpose, are unconstitutional.  Period.  This does not prohibit isolating a person who is actually infectious until said time that they no longer are.  We did this years ago with TB and it was both successful and constitutional.

  • The Constitution clearly delegates to Congress the right to declare war -- and nobody else has that power.  Exigent circumstances may well arise but unlike 200 years ago the capacity to call Congress into session and have it actually meet with a quorum is now, absent an event such as a nuclear strike, possible within 48 to 72 hours in essentially every case.  As such no executive action that is otherwise within the domain of Congress, including war assistance or other declared "emergencies", will be permitted to stand beyond the time required for Congress to be called into session and we demand a Constitutional Amendment that codifies that all declared "Executive" emergencies expire 72 hours after Congress can convene, whether or not the House and Senate choose to do so.  If an event demands authorization beyond that point Congress remains the only legitimate place in which it may rest and must originate from.

  • The First Amendment means what it says, part 1.  No branch of the Government may collude with or set policy of any element of the private sector as pertains to restrictions on speech.  Any such attempt is both void and renders the seat(s) held by the persons who do so within the Government vacant, and we shall enforce this irrespective of who is doing so or why they claim they should.  Further, we support a private right of action against all who collude in such a fashion, enforceable against said person in their personal capacity.

  • The First Amendment means what it says, part 2.  No law at the federal or state level may compel a person to violate their religious beliefs through forced association of any sort.  You may no more be forced to shoot photographs of a gay wedding if you are opposed to same than you may be compelled as a Baptist to have your sermon delivered by a Satanist -- or vice-versa.  It is all fine and well to provide that full faith and credit applies to marriage across state lines however such a power does not extend to compelling a private, religious agency to associate with those who openly and deliberately violate their religious tenets, and seek through said forced association to compel the commission of what said persons and institutions define as "sin."  You may no more compel a Church to marry two women or two men than you may compel a Southern Baptist or Mormon to serve alcohol at a church function, or forbid the Catholic Church from using wine in the context of the Eucharist.

  • 15 USC Chapter 1 means what it says.  If you collude to fix prices or monopolize markets, irrespective of the means in any good or service that crosses a State or National boundary all persons in the United States who are so-involved will, in each and every case, go to prison.  Period.  If the DOJ will not bring said cases their budget will be zeroed until they do.  The entire medical system in this nation consumes 20% of our economy and three quarters of that, at least, is effectively stolen due to these acts.  They are not alone in this regard, "social media" firms and corporations monopolize on the basis of what opinions are deemed "acceptable" as well.  This ends now and forever; it was codified as a criminal felony over a hundred years ago and Congress was right to do so.

  • The Federal Government shall not use the power of federal funds to compel actions within a state or locale's jurisdiction.  This is flatly unconstitutional as it is a clear dodge around the separation of delegated powers.  This in turn means "national" speed limits, BAC or "national" drinking or smoking ages and similar, never mind paying for procedures during an epidemic of dubious effect rather than for outcomes shall no longer happen.  Period.  Close to a million people are dead as a direct result of CMS mandates in this regard since 2020 and every bit of that was and remains improper.

  • As regards abortion it is within the realm of the 50 States and their respective legislatures.  Period.  The Constitution clearly delineates the point at which Constitutional protections attach and that is at the moment of birth.  To change this you must amend the Constitution.  Until that occurs this is where the line is at a federal level.  This does not prohibit the 50 States from having disparate laws however all states must, under full faith and credit, respect the laws of all others and thus no person may be punished in any way, and the Federal Government shall protect all citizens from same, should they seek a procedure legal in one state but not another.  The good answers to this question will succeed and the poor ones will fail and be replaced; exactly where these lines wind up is not knowable at present and should have debated and figured out 50 years ago.  We get to do it now because we tried to short-circuit that process then; we were wrong and we admit it.

  • The border shall be secured.  Period. Those actions unconstitutional prior to now will be ended and, to the extent people must leave and then apply for entry and residency, that is what they must do.  Those who attempt to enter the United States unlawfully or remain without authorization are invaders and shall be treated as such.  America is a nation largely comprised of lawful immigrants and we shall never disrespect that heritage or the efforts made by persons desiring to come to this nation and become citizens, but we insist that all do so with respect for and adherence to our laws.  A person who, as their first act when coming here, violates the law has proved their depraved indifference to our citizens, our land and our legal system and shall not be permitted to stay.

That's it.  We can debate the rest as the party forms together.

There is no way to fix either the GOP or Democrat parties and both have hard-core crazies in control of the funds.

Therefore one or both must go, and the obvious target is the GOP.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2022-11-10 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Politics , 629 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

If there's one take-away from the results of 2022's war (politics, at least thus far) is this: Trump is a crappy General and if he's not ditched 2024 is doomed.

Of course anyone with a brain knew this after 2020; the man was a gutless bully which also was obvious to anyone who had one bit of common sense well back to 2016, but then again neither the media or anyone else in the political punditry wanted to either admit or discuss it.

January 6th was the culmination of man without a sack from top to bottom, and yet still a huge part of the population continued to buy kneepads, to the point that there was a severe shortage of them for those who wanted them for mundane reasons -- like work in their attic or replacing their roof.

Yet two years after that fiasco -- a man who maintained he was cheated yet lacked the sack to arm up and go prove it, yet claimed to be "the guy" who should sit in the left seat with his finger on the button of nuclear holocaust for the world, a good part of the GOP voter base still bought his obese, germophobic BS.

Tuesday, November 8th, 2022 has now come gone. We'll see if that fantasy has finally been broken.

The usual recriminations are out.  Kansas had an independent on the ticket who got about 2% of the vote.  Milton Wolf is blaming said candidate in Kansas for all the abortions and breast-chopping off girls that are likely in the state over the next four years.  Notice what's missing and what's present: Only "approved" parties have a right to run for office and those who run don't have the responsibility to put forward a winning platform on their own; if someone else runs and the "preferred" person by someone's view loses it's not the losing candidate's fault they lost.

Uh huh.

Here's what people don't want to face: The extremes of abortion on both sides are a political third rail; nobody except for the nutjobs is in either of those camps.  The GOP tried to spin the Roe-v-Wade decision as a mandate to ban abortion entirely under all circumstances and got their teeth kicked in -- justly so.  If they had left it alone as a state-specific issue and come out strongly for that, rather than trying to press the USSC win onto the national stage several races, including Pennsylvania's Senate race and Michigan's Governor, would have been walk-off victories.  Instead both were losses and in that regard the Republicans literally sucked-started a political shotgun.

If you run on "abortion is murder" -- or can credibly have that position pinned on your campaign you lose.  Note that murder is a very-specific word; murder is always and everywhere a criminal offense carrying long prison sentences or capital punishment.  It therefore leaves no woman who can find any reason to undergo such a procedure, ever and under any circumstance, any possible path to vote for you since you are by your clear statement threatening to throw her in prison.  Would you vote to voluntarily go to prison?

There are plenty of people who try to link this to things like an ectopic pregnancy, which is never viable and, unless removed, is almost-certain to kill the woman.  That's BS and everyone knows it; there is not one so-called "trigger law" that mandates that a woman die if such was to happen and no such law would be constitutional.  However there are myriad other corner cases that remain -- and attempting to label all of them murder is how you lose elections.

The Republicans continue to refuse to face this fact and boy did they amp it up this time -- with the entirely-expected results.  No more than a tiny single-digit percentage of child-bearing age women will agree that there are no circumstances under which she might want to terminate a pregnancy short of her being dead if she doesn't and will accept being convicted of murder and thrown in prison if any of those other circumstances  -- like being raped, for example, or if the fetus is discovered to be horribly defective and cannot possibly live a reasonable life by any rational definition, never mind bankrupting both her and her partner before dying horribly -- arise.

If you're one of the people pressing that position in public, no matter the venue but especially if you were doing it in a political context you are the reason that the election turned out the way it did.  You caused it; you cheered it on and stoked the crazy, now you get to live the curse.

The really ugly part of that stupidity is that it meant we had no political debate at all about what is arguably the fiscal issue on the table and one that threatens to blow up the Federal Government within the next few years.

Tell me, America:  How many candidates ran on a platform that had as its primary feature ending the medical monopolies and, as a result, adding 15% to your actual disposable personal income?

Oh yeah, there would be side effects: One in five, roughly, would lose their job and of course they would be vociferously opposed.  But the other 80% would have basically the entire Bidenflation economic impact removed from their personal finances and not just once -- permanently.  What percentage of those people do you think would have voted for said candidate, assuming he or she didn't blow their own head off by bringing abortion into it?


There was not one candidate who did so that I'm aware of.

Not one.

Not one Democrat (of course), Republican or Libertarian for that matter who ran on something like this.

Nor did anyone that I've seen actually run on enacting legislative hard-stops on ever pulling any of the 2020 crap again including against their own authority should they try to do it.  DeSantis claims he did but in fact he closed things just like everyone else and while now taking credit for "reopening faster" the fact is that he has not stated that he was wrong originally.  Of course there is also his refusal to enforce the fines in his pet legislation, including against entirely-intrastate entities such as The Straz in Tampa where there was no federal jurisdictional question.  Therefore it must be concluded that he doesn't think he was wrong, he not only supports he demonstrably abuses laws through selective enforcement and further, despite having the capacity to prohibit blockage of treatments by pharmacists and physicians that has not been taken care of either.

Where were the candidates, incumbent or otherwise, stating clearly that no more of that crap will happen, ever again, period?

Zero incumbents who actually did slaughter people -- including shoving Covid-positive patients into nursing homes when we knew damn well that was rather likely to kill the residents, lost their job.  It certainly doesn't help that the Republicans ran a caricature of Satan in several contests, including Michigan -- but the fact remains that in those states where that sort of insanity happened at their specific direction and said governor was on the ballot they were all reelected.  Ditto for those who cost kids two years of education (I remind you that they all cost the kids a full semester, basically.)  Never mind the "squad" folks who want to get rid of cops -- and we've been witness to entire areas of cities burned to ash over the last two years, along with skyrocketing crime.  Pritzker, who signed and in weeks will implement a ban on cash bail, was reelected despite Chicago's weekly "shot clock" standing as evidence for how bad it already is.

People are trying to spin DeSantis' win as some sort of referendum on "freedom."  It was no such thing; Crist was a and remains a washed-up nutjob who had no realistic chance in the first place.  The "bench" issue with crazies is not uniquely Republican and as such DeSantis' win is equivalent to what would have happened if he ran against Bozo The Clown so spare me the accolades.

I thought we'd probably wake up and find ourselves with a clear GOP majority in both the House and Senate, and as a result there would likely be a nice market rally (gridlock tends to produce one) with a deferment of the Trump question for another few months, albeit with him likely announcing intent within a week or so.

While the House appears to be definitely GOP even with undecided races, the Senate is, as I pen this, undecided although I don't see how the GOP loses all three of the remaining to-be-decided contests.  Nonetheless without at least two wins its still 50/50 with Kamala as a tiebreaker and it shouldn't have been close.

All of that happened because Trump was in the game and the GOP's bench was both garbage and spewed crap about throwing women in prison -- but for the Oz debacle in PA Fetterman would have been roadkill three months ago.  He wasn't, and the reason he wasn't is that a literal nutjob -- yet another celebrity cardboard cutout -- was on the ballot opposing him.

Further, and perhaps most-importantly: If you back anything of the current "GOP" power structure at this point, including most-particularly those who took in and spent hundreds of millions of dollars on the promise of a "red tsunami" and instead produced a bit of blood-tinged piss -- you're nuts.

We, like every other nation's citizens, get the government we deserve.  Unfortunately what we now deserve plausibly includes the black flag going up.  That's by no means certain yet, but the odds have risen dramatically -- and our actions, and inactions, are why.

It's always darkest just before it goes pitch black.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2022-11-09 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Politics , 938 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

It is done.

Now we find out whether politics is indeed the peaceful version of physical war or that barrier is, at least in the United States, gone.

If you think about it for 30 seconds or so (assuming you haven't ruined your ability to do that with Instragram and similar) you will recognize that politicians and indeed the formal political process has long declared, all the way back to the founding of America and likely far longer, that this is in fact true.  

Carl von Clausewitz once said "War is politics by other means" but in fact he had it backwards -- its the other way around.

Politics is war without the killing and physical destruction of the property held by your opponent.

You think not?

  • Let's campaign for this politician or that.

  • I'm going to fight for ($15 minimum wage | green energy | black lives | whatever-handout-du jour)

  • I'm going to defeat my opponent (in office, in political views, etc.)

  • My opponent is going to throw Granny down the stairs (including ads of stick-figures doing so)

  • My opponent will get you nuked, literally ("Daisy" anyone?)

  • My opponent is a {fascist | Nazi | Communist | Socialist | etc} - the implication is that if you vote for the opponent they will kill you, imprison you or destroy and/or confiscate your stuff.  All three are what happens in a war.

Why is it that we have entire nations (e.g. Brazil) where they can count all the ballots within hours of the polls closing but we can't?  There's nothing complicated about running a hard-to-cheat and entirely-fair election that produces irrefutable results within hours when you get down to it.  It simply requires:

  • Everyone votes during a single-day fixed window of time.

  • Everyone who votes dips their finger in indelible ink so you cannot vote twice.

  • Everyone showing up to vote must present reasonable proof of citizenship.  In a nation where close to ten percent of the persons in the nation on a given election day have no lawful right to vote due to being here illegally, a visitor or green-card holder, and ten percent is materially beyond the margin of victory for most races, no balloting is legitimate unless every voter is verified to be eligible to cast their ballot.  Since ballots are secret (they cannot be tied to an individual person by design, otherwise there is no privacy in how you vote) there is no way to cure a ballot cast by an ineligible person after the act.  It therefore it must be proved at the time of ballot issue.  Period.

  • Other than serialization of the ballots issued to a voter and tabulated (so "X" ballots were issued, "Y" were spoiled and retained and therefore "X - Y" must be in the tabulation for said precinct or other voting location and "Y" must be in the spoiled container) no means of tracing which voter got what provably-unique ballot is possible.  Therefore nobody can tie a specific vote to a specific person but it is absolutely proved that "X" people voted, each person who did so only did so once, and "X" ballots are present.

  • All votes are made onto a physical, tamper-evident thing (the easiest and cheapest is paper of a specific type, bond and with security features embedded in it, no matter how tabulated) which is retained and able to be inspected by anyone at any time to verify that the tabulation of votes was "as cast."

  • All votes are tabulated and counted only (1) after the polls close and (2) no results are permitted out of the counting room(s) by any means whatsoever until all counts are complete and the polls books verified as balanced.  This makes impossible determining how a race is going to turn out in advance and thus you can't "find" or change votes after the fact since nobody has any way to know what the count is or will be until the opportunity to add, subtract or modify the votes as cast has been foreclosed.

  • All tabulating, printing and related election software must be open-source including the operating system and all OS/device libraries and drivers, the configuration files that control its operation are signed with a maintained certification chain (as with TLS certificates) the issuing CA keys are under lock and key except when used to issue same, and said media containing same can only be withdrawn and used under direct physical observation of poll watchers by all parties on the ballot.  Any violation of the security of said signing certificates results in their immediate revocation without exception.  No election operations or tabulating machine may have connectivity outside of the physical room it is in by any means whatsoever, no such hardware capable of same (e.g. Wifi, bluetooth or other than physical wired links) may be present in the room, no such equipment may be visible from outside the room by any means (e.g. through windows) that allows its operation or the material fed into it to be observed beyond the four walls, once the polls are closed and tabulation begins nothing may enter or leave until it is complete and any person or entity that violates any section of this provision is subject to summary public execution without exception.  This means anyone can verify that (1) the software has no "back doors" in it, (2) the configuration files (e.g. ballots, where the "marks" have to be, etc.) are as-claimed, (3) the configuration file was in fact issued by who it allegedly was and is valid and (4) nobody has screwed with any of this from outside the place where polling or tabulation occurs and if someone tries it verification fails and said equipment will refuse to operate on said tampered-with file.

  • All election materials, including the code, configuration files and physical ballots cast, sans outer envelopes which may contain a signature or return address in the case of absentee ballots, are public domain post-election subject only to reasonable requirements to prevent tampering or destruction.  Any person or entity may examine same at any time and no election materials may be tampered with or destroyed for a period of at least ten years.  Physical ballots shall be made publicly available in high-resolution scanned image form, along with the evidentiary basis behind the poll books to prove they balance against said ballots on a precinct basis, no later than ten (10) days post-election and all configuration files, operating systems and other code on an "as-used" basis shall be publicly available as of the date of certification of results.

That's it.

If you want to argue that there needs to be some exception for people legitimately unable through no fault of their own, and not able to be mitigated by their planning and choice, to vote on the given day (which everyone knows a year or more in advance) then that's fine.  That can be accounted for under this system; all such "absentee" voting must have a verified reason for issue, once issued you are removed from the poll books for the next election used for in-person voting (so you can't show up and request a ballot on election day) and none of the absentee ballots can be inspected in any way including the outer envelope, opened, validated as acceptable (e.g. bearing signature, etc.) or otherwise have their security violated until the polls have closed.  Once the polls have closed then said ballots are treated as any other; they go into the counting facility, their poll book is validated (e.g. there cannot be more absentee ballots in envelopes than there were validated requests) post closure of the polls they are opened and from that point forward are subject to the same rules as an in-person ballot except that a spoiled ballot (is unsigned, not filled out, etc.) is discarded and recorded as such.  The risk of an absentee ballot being spoiled and not redeemable is on the person voting absentee; if you're going to use that path then you are the one with the responsibility to make sure you don't screw it up and spoil your ballot because once-issued to you there is no way to replace or cure it.  There can't be a cure process or its entirely too easy to cheat.

You can't do "early voting" and have all of this work because someone's voter registration and thus their registered party is public.  The SOS will sell lists of same to anyone who asks (and political candidates do ask all the time); this is ordinary election and political work and there's nothing wrong with it.  If I am a candidate where in the district I want to expend my funds is something I can learn from the registration of voters and that's a perfectly-legitimate thing for me to do, and thus all candidates, even third-party candidates, do so.  You can't both allow such records out (and there's no way to maintain them as "secret" if you have "registered" party affiliation) and have early voting without information about likely margins being available, imperfect though it may be, days, weeks or months ahead of the contest date.  For this reason it must be banned.  Convenience does not trump integrity in a free and fair system.

Why am I posting this now?

Because there was no point in doing it ahead of time; nobody was going to change anything in time for it to matter but that this be addressed is utterly critical as the above, at the top of this entry, makes clear.

If trust in said process is lost then Carl von Clausewitz' words threaten to become real.

If I cannot prosecute my "war" when it comes to ideas by political means without bloodshed or breaking people's stuff you leave people with a serious beef against one another in terms of how a city, county, state or nation should be run only one other option to resolve their differences -- physical war.

If you ever destroy the trust of even a few percent of the population in the integrity of the voting process you wildly raise the odds of such a violent outcome.  There will always be a few nuts who claim their election was "stolen" and perhaps it was (Hillary, Abrams, Trump but whether they really believe that or simply are sore losers is easily determined by whether they pick up arms and go seek to prove it.  Funny how none of them have done that here in this country eh, and no, January 6th wasn't that.  Not even those arrested, prosecuted and sitting in prison, except perhaps one or two crazies, truly believed their actions were going to lead to a second Trump term and everyone knows it.

We've all seen plenty of sore losers in our lives and politicians are no exception.  Giving one a second bite at the apple is nuts, but then again a good part of our population is indeed crazy, especially today where you can reach for a pill bottle -- or a phone -- and immerse yourself in whatever brand of crazy you prefer.  But the entire point of an election is that if crazy wins then you deserve crazy, so there you have it.

Those who seek to destroy the integrity of this process must be denied the capacity to do so, and if they will not voluntarily desist then they have chosen the path by which the dispute is resolved.

Make sure they all understand that.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2022-11-08 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Politics , 1389 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

.... when you have nothing to run on?

Let's just be straight here, ok -- neither party, when you get down to it, has anything to run on.

But: When you're in the left seat, and the plane crashes, its your fault.

That's just how the cookie crumbles.

Just as an example the "authorities" won't release the surveillance or body camera tapes from the Paul Pelosi assault.  Why not?  The only reason not to is that what's there renders irrevocably false the story told thus far.

In what way?  I don't know, but it doesn't matter.  If the footage documents the affidavit "as told" then there's no reason not to release it as it will cement the case not only in court but in public opinion as well.  Therefore it clearly doesn't.

Biden claims inflation is not his fault and he's bringing it down by spending more deficit money.  This is mathematically impossible, incidentally.  He either doesn't know this or he's lying.  It matters not which it is; he ran on and promoted blowing more money around so he has no place to hide.

Biden told us all that if you took the Covid shots you would not get covid.  He said that conclusively.  He lied; his top advisor, Birx, has stated in public she knew this was not true before he took office.  Therefore either he hired her and is responsible or she told him and he deliberately lied.  Either way: He's in the left seat, he had opportunity to not lie, thus he owns it.

On Biden's watch Ukraine and Russia went to war.  Biden has poured tens of billions of dollars and weapons not only in munitions into Ukraine he's paying the salaries of their people with our money.  The total at this point is well over $100 billion, which is a quite-material part of the fiscal deficit.  By what authority?  Well, Congress appears to be ok with it, aren't they?  Indeed.  Who controls Congress?  Uh huh.  Oh, spending more money than you take in causes inflation?  Well, prosecuting this war over there is part of it then, on purpose.  Again, sit in the left seat, you're responsible when there's a smoking hole in the ground and nothing larger than a quarter can be identified.

There have been a couple of million people streaming into our nation illegally over the last two years.  Inflationary?  You bet.  What's worse?  The guy who is accused of attacking Pelosi is here illegally and has been for years.  How many others have been victimized by criminals who were here illegally?  Remember "A Girl in Iowa" anyone?  Sit in the left seat, it's your problem, especially when you sue, as Biden has done, to block Arizona and others from sealing said border.

Biden has declared war on carbon-based fuels.  Refiners are closing and have on his watch and will not restart because he has made clear that any investment in them is a zero.  It is his expressed intent to destroy said investment so nobody will make it.  Do you light $100 bills on fire for fun?  Neither does anyone else, so if you think gas or diesel prices are coming down on a durable basis exactly how when there is no increase in refining capacity coming online to meet demand?  You can't build an electric car without carbon-based fuels and in fact to build and operate one requires more carbon-based fuel than just refining and burning the gasoline.  This is fact and yet Biden does not care if you get screwed.

High food prices?  He doesn't care.  You might care that eggs have doubled in the last couple of years, along with a whole host of other common food items, but he certainly does not.

A woman was raped in one of NYC's best neighborhoods the other day while out for a jog.  Reports are a suspect was arrested after using the victim's stolen credit cards -- and he is homeless.  Further updates have shown that the accused has twenty five prior arrests and is accused of being a serial rapist.  NY State and NYC obviously deemed him fit to be free and available to rape again rather than keeping him behind bars where the only available victims are other inmates.  Given 25 priors this cannot be considered an "isolated incident" or "mistake", therefore its not; it was a deliberate decision to place women at risk of sexual assault and the voters in NY not only allowed it then they still are.

Heyjackass chronicles the wonders of Chicago's "shoot-a-palooza" on a daily and weekly basis and don't look at the race of the offenders -- or victims.  Hint: They're both the same race, in the majority, as that of the Mayor.  Oh yeah, and assault rifles?  Uh, no, that's not what is being used.  Common pistols are the weapon for most.  Surprised?  Funny how Biden doesn't want to talk about that, but he does want to talk about scary black rifles.  Crime has skyrocketed in the blue-run cities; Minneapolis, Chicago, Boston, New York and more are  turning into war zones, and they all have one thing in common -- Biden's party controls the city government and refuses to throw offenders in prison.  In San Francisco you're likely to find piles of human excrement and used needles on city sidewalks.  Illinois has passed and is set to ban cash bail entirely within weeks on a state-wide basis.

On issue after issue the story is the same; Biden has nothing to stump for and no agenda to run on; everything he's touched and all his party have participated in since he took office has turned to crap and the people have been relentlessly screwed -- in some cases literally and forcibly screwed while just trying to enjoy a peaceful morning jog.

So what's left?

As Biden has now told us, if you don't vote for Democrats our way of life is over, Democracy is over.  Vote for us or you're a {racist | fascist | homophobe | misogynist | insert-some-other-slur }

That's all he has left.

Notice what's missing: Anything -- even one thing -- that if you vote for them will improve.  They've had two years and they can't point to a single metric of modern life they have improved for anyone -- except themselves.

I wonder if the woman who was raped in NYC will vote Democrat today?

View this entry with comments (opens new window)

2022-11-07 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Politics , 736 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

How many times have you heard save our Democracy or some simile of it over your lifetime?

Let me guess -- you think we have one, we had one, we live in one or you'd like to live in one?

If so....

You're fine with the majority deciding that everyone must take an experimental drug -- or even a non-experimental one, yes?

You're fine with the majority insisting on forced business closures on the mere claim that something horrible might happen if not?  I remind you that every governor did this, even DeSantis.  Personal friends of mine had their bars forcibly closed by the cops during the pandemic -- in Florida -- and when my home sale closed at the very end of April it was not possible to go have a beer and some food with friends the night before as by state-wide decree all such places were shut down.  Spare me your sanctimonious lies as it is a fact that I and close friends sat in a hotel room and had to order our food for delivery.

You're fine with the majority deciding that every dollar you earn beyond some level (which they choose) is to be distributed out to everyone who has a need, yes?

You're fine with the majority deciding that if you have a spare bedroom in your home (say, for guests who might come) then if there is no guest in there right now a homeless person of someone else's choosing can occupy it at your expense whether you like it or not, yes?

You're fine with the majority deciding that your daughter must bear zero, one, two or four children and, if she doesn't want to or can't find someone she wants to do so with she must be held down and forced, yes?

You're fine with what China in fact did in furtherance of that sort of policy including forced abortions and sterilization as long as the majority votes for it, yes?

You're fine with the majority telling your daughter or son that he or she must change and/or shower with people of the opposite sex at a government-funded school in the locker room?  Your daughter has no right to keep boys from leering at her bare genitals if the majority says that physical boys have the right to leer at her naked body while at a government-funded institution which, incidentally, you are  also forced to pay for via taxes on your residence?

You're fine with the majority deciding that your son must take in one, two or more orphans or those who have "unsuitable" parents and raise said kids, and if this means he must go get another job to pay for the food, clothing and similar, that's his problem, yes?

Speaking of which, you're ok with the majority making the same demand of you too, right?  After all, your kids are grown and gone so here's two more to take care of on your dime because the majority says so.  At your expense, of course.

You're fine with the majority deciding that any travel in a vehicle anywhere beyond your place of work must be pre-approved and is subject to regulation, taxation or outright prohibition because every mile you travel by such conveyance may harm the environment, yes?

You're fine with the majority extending the same decision-making to your ability to get to your job by personal conveyance if said majority, in their opinion, thinks your current commute and job is more damaging to the environment than one they choose for you then you must change jobs  -- irrespective of your preference and either job's salary?

You're fine with the majority deciding that there are too many people in this nation and thus when you reach some arbitrary age, become disabled and no longer able to pull your own weight or even that you just contribute less than your neighbor today you must accept your life being terminated, yes?

You're fine with the majority deciding that as of the moment of your death every asset you may have accumulated is to be distributed to each according to their needs, such as, for example, by making it all forfeit to the government at that instant in time, yes?

Indeed you're fine with being the victim of gang rape, yes?  Oh, that's crazy?  Well, no, actually gang rape is the embodiment of Democracy: A bunch of dudes vote on who to have sex with and then do so despite the minority's objection.

Any or all of those is unacceptable, you say?

Well then you don't actually believe in Democracy, do you?

Obviously not.

Words have meaning.

Democracy is the governing principle that says that 50.0001% of the population gets to decide what happens with no limitations and can enforce that decision via whatever means are necessary to do so.  If you are in some way in the minority, no matter what the issue might be or how close the question provided you're out of the majority by just one vote, your opinion has no value and you have no choice whatsoever even if the majority opinion is that you must be reduced to penury or even die.

Democracy is two wolves and a sheep taking a vote on what's for dinner, in short.

Republic, on the other hand, is a form of government where explicit limits are placed on what the population can do through said government and collective action.  It is a form of government where the people have inalienable rights that are recognized, but not granted by said government.

As the government cannot grant that which it never possessed, nor can anyone else, the people cannot have those boundaries invaded no matter how many votes are taken or what percentage majority may hold said opinion and, if said boundaries are disrespected anyway each individual has the right through either personal or collective (with others) action to stop it by whatever means may necessary to do so.

Republic exists in the above example when the wolves attempt to hold the vote on what to have for dinner, the sheep pulls a gun and if the wolves do not immediately desist he shoots one of them in the head and if necessary he will shoot the other one too.  

In a Republic anyone in the minority has the legal right to put an immediate and if necessary final stop to any infringement on their unalienable rights despite being in the minority, even if a minority of one opposing all; said legal right is subject only to the determination that the infringement was in fact occurring or, as viewed by a reasonable person, about to occur.

Note that once you lose the essence of a Republic getting it back is likely to be an extraordinarily bloody affair and the odds that you do not become a victim in the process are not very good.  After all wolves really do prefer dining on sheep who either won't, because they're bereft of a sack or can't, because they've been disarmed, shoot them.

History bears this out with repeated examples.

Think back over the last couple of years and the problem with claiming "democracy" should be rather evident.

America has never been a Democracy; the very foundation of its government is that of a Republic.

Well, that's the theory anyway.

But unless you'd like your life and decision-making, never mind that of your children, to be voided in its entirety at the whim of others you'd better make damn sure we have less theory and more fact.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)