► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Archive for the ‘Democratic Party’ Category

If You Think The Democrats Are Running From Obamacare Now, Just Wait Till October

by Flyovercountry ( 264 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Progressives at July 9th, 2014 - 7:00 am

In the never ending game of, “is the conservative, evil, stupid, senile, or crazy,” Sarah Palin drew the stupid card, and they even made a movie about her to prove it. Game Change showed us a Palin so vapid, and simultaneously vacuous, that I honestly believed that Ed Harris, the guy playing John McCain, would at one point knock her over and begin using her as a kettle drum. The great quote from the movie was Sarah saying, “we have to win this race so I won’t have to go back to Alaska,” nice. Something happened on the way to labeling Sarah stupid though. Each of the, “dumb things,” Sarah said during that campaign, have either come true or been proven correct.

So while we all have a laugh at the Woman not properly vetted to take the Oath of Office, and worse yet, not fit to lead, let’s grab a quick glimpse of the guy who actually was elected as our nation’s number two, before we continue.

After the election, Sarah Palin penned in early 2009, an op-ed in which she passionately argued against the passage of Obamacare. During that impassioned plea, she described the cold realities which would await Americans when facing, “Death Panels.” The usage of that term of course threw the political left into a tizzy. “Sarah is just plain stupid, that she would try to scare Americans into believing such a crazy thing.” Of course, those panels are called, “Independent Payment Advisory Boards,” and the phrase, “Death Panels,” itself comes from the British Citizens, who dubbed their counterpart of that particular piece of our legislation as such. It is a derogatory term for a body of bureaucrats making life and death decisions for all of us, not based upon medical considerations, but upon bureaucratic ones instead. What brings it all home is the fact that when ever pressed about the moronic economics of Obamacare, the left always pointed to Britain as one of their shining examples of how well the law would work, and indeed was already working in other industrialized nations.

The first glimpse of the Death Panel reality can be seen by clicking the link.

Rolain was diagnosed with the tumor in early 2014 and was unable to receive treatment for months because of enrollment problems with the state’s Obamacare exchange, Nevada Health Link, Rolain’s husband Robert said in a June press conference.

Robert Rolain said his wife’s tumor went from treatable to fatal as they awaited coverage. Following multiple enrollment issues, the couple bought insurance through Xerox. The plan was supposed to begin in March, but Xerox miscommunicated its start date so the couple didn’t know they had coverage until May, according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

Las Vegas insurance broker Pat Casale, who helped Rolain with the enrollment issues, told the Review-Journal that he knows multiple people who are “in serious need of care” but aren’t receiving it despite the fact that they’ve paid premiums.

We have now had our first death-by-government-bureaucracy casualty of Obamacare. But, like every good leftist knows, one death is a tragedy, and a million deaths are a statistic. Right now, Linda Rolain’s death is a tragedy, and one that could have been avoided, death by Obamacare. Fear not my fellow comrades of the land formerly reserved for the free and brave, by this time next year, she’ll have been joined by many others, thus completing that short walk from tragedy to statistic. Sorry Linda, you’re only the first in an eerily long and depressing line.

Milton Friedman once quipped that if you wanted to rid the desert of sand, all you’d need to do would be to appoint some government bureaucrat the task of keeping sand in the desert. Welcome to that desert my fellow good subjects, the sand I speak of is what’s left of the world’s greatest health care system. And as hard as this news may be to hear, you ain’t seen nothing yet.

As unpopular as this law is, the really scary stuff hasn’t even hit yet. That loud and palpable convulsion America experienced in November of last year, when about 8 Million or so people nation wide were unceremoniously informed that they couldn’t keep their plans, doctors, or facilities, that they liked, will seem like the happy days when almost a third of Americans felt Barack Obama was really good at his job.

Insurers have already started to dribble out the really good news that premiums will be skyrocketing due to out of control costs inflicted by adding a massive money sucking infrastructure with out benefit to a system that was operating well enough to actually make 85% of Americans happy with its function. Come to think of it, what institution in our nation’s history besides health care could ever have made that claim?

The problem of course is that those cost curves aren’t coming down, at least not in the land known as reality.

Insurers got a close look at the profiles of the enrollees in the individual health-insurance market this spring, and they turned out to be sicker than projected, as the “young invincibles” took a pass on ObamaCare in 2014. That means that premiums will go up in the fall in order to cover the added expense of the higher-risk enrollments — and that has the Obama administration spin team working extra hard this summer to cover their rear ends just before the midterms:

Even the upcoming rate hikes that almost everyone in the nation will face this year however is only a side show annoyance in this colossally bad idea made national law. the true devastation will occur when and if the employer mandate ever kicks in. It’s been pushed back once already, and something tells me that the Democrats holding office in Washington will try to delay it through at least the 2016 Presidential Election. Those 8 Million dropped subjects will seem like small potatoes indeed when the vehicle by which a vast majority of our number becomes too encumbering to keep in place.

Buy stock in companies that produce pitch forks and torches. When 200 Million Americans lose their health care coverage, because compliant plans that won’t be designed to actually pay benefits make the fines cheaper than the, “coverage,” something tells me that they’ll be plenty upset.

Just as a side note: Maybe instead of debating about what to do with the new crisis caused by our petulant man child President along our Southern border, we should be worried about the adoption of the very economic system that made their original nations such hell holes as our own economic system. Change it back please!

Cross Posted from Musings of a Mad Conservative.

The Wealth Gap Versus The Consequence Gap

by Flyovercountry ( 57 Comments › )
Filed under Communism, Progressives at July 7th, 2014 - 7:00 pm

Embedded image permalink

Any Government big enough to give you everything you need, will also be big enough to take from you, everything you have – Thomas Jefferson.

Elections have consequences. Laws passed have consequences. Laws passed also have unintended consequences. One of my favorite personal epiphanies has always been that America’s big problem is not a wealth gap, but rather a consequence gap. I’ll explain this, in case you’ve missed my post from a couple of years ago entitled, “The Consequence Gap.”

We have passed many laws over the last five years designed to provide a fairness for our society in areas of our daily lives where the political left has professed a perception that fairness was somehow lacking. Their chief piece of evidence for said lack of fairness has been the supposed wealth gap, that variance between those with means and those without, irrespective of what each group may or may not have done to create said wealth. Always, without fail, those laws have led to unintended consequences, which have had devastating consequences for society as a whole, most keenly felt among the very population that was supposedly being served, or targeted for help.

From the HotAir article linked to above:

“I’m at the breaking point,” said Gretchen Gardner, an Austin artist who bought a 1930s bungalow in the Bouldin neighborhood just south of downtown in 1991 and has watched her property tax bill soar to $8,500 this year.

“It’s not because I don’t like paying taxes,” said Gardner, who attended both meetings. “I have voted for every park, every library, all the school improvements, for light rail, for anything that will make this city better. But now I can’t afford to live here anymore. I’ll protest my appraisal notice, but that’s not enough. Someone needs to step in and address the big picture.”

Gretchen Gardner voted for massive taxation upon her fellow citizens, because she felt that somebody else would be paying for her city’s improvements, or more to the point, what she felt was necessary for her city to be improved. The result of course was that anyone who is on the bottom rungs of Austin’s economic ladder have undoubtedly found the consequences to be far more destructive. If you think, no this will only affect property owners, what do you think land lords are going to do with their increased tax burdens? They will simply embed that increased expense into the prices they charge for the usage of their property. People who are on the bottom of that ladder in terms of wealth accumulation will now have an even harder time saving for a place of their own. They will have less money to spend on other things, such as groceries, heat, gasoline needed to drive to work, clothing, and Bush = Hitler bumper stickers. The consequences of bad government policy are always paid disproportionately by those for whom they were supposedly designed. The progenitors of those policies are invariably exempted from any material change in their own lives, meaning consequences, and once things go bad will immediately proclaim that they should be judged by their intentions and not their results.

Our elected leaders, tasked with management of our Executive Branch, are watching events around the globe and here at home unfold as if they were watching a made for television movie. I am tired of listening to the political left bleat on about how the Republicans or Mitt Romney would have done no better in dealing with the complete implosion of our foreign policy, domestic policy, economy, the situation at our Southern Border, what have you. The problem of course is that this implosion can not be separated from the massively idiotic policies that fomented them in the first place, otherwise known as the Obama agenda. These things didn’t just happen, they are the inevitable end to the path chosen by two elections in which America elected the single worst President in our history to be our country’s top executive. They are the only possible conclusion to policies enacted by our white House from January of 2009 onward.

Special Note: Before anyone suggests that the latest jobs report shows that finally, after only 6 short years, Obamanomics is showing signs of working, please learn to read past the top line of a BLS report. Once again, most of the jobs created are part time, and without those plus the jobs produced by the Fracing Boom, Oil and Gas, (not fracking as dubbed by the environazi crowd,) we would be in solidly negative territory. Those oil and gas jobs by the way, are jobs that our President has done everything he possibly could to prevent from being created, and then he took credit for creating them. The U6 number is still North of 12% and the Labor Force Participation Rate declined again, past what was already a 40 year low. Which means that once again, more people in America got discouraged and left the workforce than actually found jobs. Let’s not forget that our last GDP report showed a 2.9% hemorrhage of productivity.

The lens of history has been crystal clear on this point. There has been nothing yet devised by man that comes anywhere close to providing improvements in the lot of ordinary people as the productive and innovative forces that are unleashed when the free market system is allowed to flourish unfettered by over bearing government regulation. The only impediment to that vast improvement in wealth and circumstance of ordinary people so far has been the infliction of bad government policy. Winston Churchill once said that if people were not liberals at age 20 they possessed no heart, and if they were not conservatives by age 40, they had no brains.

I believe personally however that Churchill got it somewhat wrong. I believe that, while many liberals 40 years and over are lacking the ability to think critically, many more wish to see this parade from crisis to crisis continue, and seek to inflict bad government policy upon us knowing full well what the results will be. Rahm Emanuel famously said, way back in week one of Barack Obama’s Presidency, as his Chief of Staff by the way, “never let a good crisis go to waste.” People have shown many times in the past that they’ll only inflict Socialism upon themselves if a current crisis makes that self destructive economic system seem to be the lesser of evils. As with all forms of governance that depends upon coercion for its ultimate method of enforcing participation, violence inflicted by a government upon its citizens will eventually become the only possible reality. Eventually, you’ll have some joker who wishes to speak his mind freely, or wants to participate in an economic activity that is better for himself, rather than sacrificing his needs or those of his family, for the greater glory of political elites, who care nothing for him.

I am often struck by how eloquently the Keynesians are able to describe their economic theory, and how they are able to explain away the fact that it has never worked, despite its long history of having been tried. The same holds true for the Socialists. Great in theory, as long as no critical thought takes place, but the lens of history has been nothing but clear. The only possible result will be the above picture. When Josef Stalin took power in the Soviet Union, the very first people that he rounded up and had executed were those who had helped sweep him into power. His reasoning was that they would have been the most severely disillusioned when his policies had the exact opposite effect of what he’d promised. The useful idiots are always the first to go. So, at least we have that.

There seems to be some sort of disease where people complain about things our government is doing, and then seek to solve those problems by taking more of the poison that made us sick in the first place. Crony Capitalism seems to be an evil that people from both sides of the political aisle can agree on. I personally don’t see the logic in a solution that would make the government even more powerful to exert even greater degrees of influence, allowing it to pick our winners and losers for us. The answer to problems created by bad government policy is not more government. Putting different people in charge or just doing it bigger this time, while it may seem intuitive when stated eloquently, has never worked, and most certainly has never worked as planned. Limiting government has always worked however, and has only ever failed when people became convinced of the need to solve non-existent problems.

Cross Posted from Musings of a Mad Conservative.

There’s Blindingly Dishonest Analysis, And Then There’s Mother Jones

by Flyovercountry ( 168 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Progressives at July 3rd, 2014 - 7:00 am

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

I stayed away from the Hobby Lobby Supreme Court Kerfuffle purposefully, mostly because, and I can not stress this enough, there’s really nothing there. In the broader context in which every American citizen attempted to explain the pending and then rendered decision using some sweeping philosophical or Constitutional template, most missed the fact that it was simply a case in which lawyers of both sides argued about how to reconcile two previously enacted laws passed by Congress and signed by Presidents which conflicted with each other. Specifically, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, enacted in 1993 and the Affordable Care Act, enacted in 2009. Neither law found itself struck down or even hindered in any way, merely forced to coexist with one another.

Some how, that very boring and mundane process was blown out of any proportion that could be possibly construed as sane, and into the ill informed’s proxy for the First Amendment. Granted, most if not all of the hysteria has come from the tyrannical tolerati found within the rank and file of the political left. Some of the more egregiously false remarks I’ve heard have included cries of, “They’re taking our reproductive rights away from us.” “They’re allowed to refuse us contraceptive care now,” or, “they’re waging a war on women and trying to make birth control and abortion illegal.”

None of this is true of course, but it will help the left raise gobs and gobs of cash off of the whole thing, and that’s what’s really important here. A quick test to prove that last point might be in order. Justices Kennedy and Alito both included within their opinions, step by step instructions for HHS on how to get the offending 4 types of pills covered for those on the Hobby Lobby health plan, without violating either RFRA of the ACA. If in 90 days time we’re still talking about this, then we’ll know whether this was outrage or fauxrage.

So what was that analysis from that respected magazine bird cage liner of impeccable integrity, Mother Jones? I’m glad you’ve asked, here it is. Apparently, one of the geniuses at Mother Jones did some research, probably on Freeerisa.benefitspro.com, and found the 5500 paper work for Hobby Lobby, which is a matter of public record. It’s hardly the stuff anyone outside of the securities industry is usually interested in, but it does include the various mutual funds found in ERISA compliant retirement plans.

This according to Mother Jones’ Molly Redden:

Documents filed with the Department of Labor and dated December 2012 (see above)—three months after the company’s owners filed their lawsuit—show that the Hobby Lobby 401(k) employee retirement plan held more than $73 million in mutual funds with investments in companies that produce emergency contraceptive pills, intrauterine devices, and drugs commonly used in abortions. Hobby Lobby makes large matching contributions to this company-sponsored 401(k).

There are over 40,000 mutual funds offered on various exchanges in the United States. Of those 40,000, anyone in the biz so to speak, might have a trading platform that includes up to as much as 5,000 at any one time. Some firms will allow multiple trading platforms to be used on a temporary basis, but this gets really expensive, and eventually all will settle on one platform. Ask anyone to name all of the options on their platform, and I’d be willing to bet a good bit that they couldn’t do it. Add to that, that within each mutual fund, just by the nature of how that investment vehicle works, there could be up to a few hundred different securities owned. It would be difficult, even for someone with knowledge of how to research it, to actually tell you what all of the individual securities that you owned actually were, at least without spending a great deal of effort in a process that fruitless. (Most research firm reports will list off the top holdings of any particular fund, somewhere between 5 and 20, but digging to find the entirety of a fund’s holdings can prove a lot more difficult.)

Let’s pretend for a moment that you owned 100 shares of Columbia’s Marsico 21st Century focused growth fund, A shares. Could you right now tell me how many shares and of what companies would fill out your portfolio? What about RiverSource’s Diversified Equity Income Fund. What stocks make up that portfolio, and how would each share of that fund translate into your individual ownership stake of the underlying companies? Holding the Hobby Lobby ownership, on the face of this argument is silly at best, but it does manage to get worse.

Hobby Lobby doesn’t control what’s in its 401k platform. Hobby Lobby, while they may have the ultimate decision on things, most probably leaves much of the decision making process up to the third party administrative team, (the registered representative who sold them the package,) and only ever sees the names of the mutual funds, and only if they’re truly micro managing the process. Hobby Lobby has no say in how those funds are invested, and only has control in that they can nix one fund in favor of another, and that even fails to consider that a fund can make trades after Hobby Lobby’s purchase.

More to the point, Molly Redden herself probably owns a fraction of a share in some company that produces cigarettes, beer, guns, Bush for President signs, what have you. This kind of a microscope and analysis can only be described as dishonesty put on steroids. When I see a source quoted as Mother Jones, that’s usually an indication to simply reject it out of hand, but for some reason I kept going in this case. They did not disappoint.

Here’s the headline attached to this bit of non evidence:

Hobby Lobby Invested In Numerous Abortion And Contraception Products While Claiming Religious Objection

Just on a side note, once per year, on my birthday, I fire a client. It is the client who has caused me the most grief during the previous year. Those people who’ve come to my office and stated that their wish was to only invest in, “Socially Responsible Companies,” received an immediate and courteous request to seek out a different professional. If they inquired as to why, I’d simply tell them that I was only interested in working with people who were as committed to successful investing as I would be on their behalf. I have learned that while someone may profess to be willing to take a hit in performance due to limiting their options, such promises usually disappear with the first statement or two. I’ve had similar discussions with people who’ve wanted to play the losing green technology game.

So, for Hobby Lobby’s effort to do something nice, and by the way massively helpful for the working employees that make up their rank and file, they get to play this gotcha game with some lazy turd who knows not one thing about the workings of a retirement plan, but feels compelled to use one as a reason to condemn Hobby Lobby anyhow. The Supreme Court, nor Hobby Lobby seeks to keep these women, who by the way have not themselves complained, from seeking contraceptive coverage. Hobby Lobby covers 16 varying forms of contraception, more than almost any company did prior to Obamacare. No one said that those women would be prevented from paying out of pocket, if those choices were deemed to be something they didn’t want. There is a vehicle available to have those four pills included in the plan without Hobby Lobby’s involvement in the process. Those women are perfectly within their rights as citizens to push for a repeal of the 1993 RFRA Law that until last week, Bill Clinton touted as one of his signature achievements.

Keep in mind, this all comes from the crowd that has made incandescent light bulbs illegal, restricted what kind of toilets we can purchase, restricted the washing machines we can purchase, what kind of foods we are allowed to eat, and what terms are allowed to be utilized in purchasing or selling real estate. All endeavors in which they have intruded themselves into a transaction that they were being asked for zero help in financing. With that in mind, Hobby Lobby not wanting to foot the bill for Abortive pills is somehow considered to be impinging upon the choices of another. This truly is a bizarre world. Rod Serling must be around here somewhere.

Cross Posted from Musings of a Mad Conservative.

What Do You Call Scientific Theory Based On Faked Data?

by Flyovercountry ( 286 Comments › )
Filed under Communism, Fascism, Progressives at July 2nd, 2014 - 12:00 pm

Busted, you call it busted. Any statement past that is simply asinine. But, don’t worry my fellow inhabitants of the worker’s paradise formerly reserved for the free and brave, I’m sure that the whole climate change grievance theater will continue on, as if nothing has changed. We’ll still be bombarded with shouts of, “we have to self inflict economic hardship and damage now in order to save the Earth,” or, “anyone who denies that climate change isn’t real is just like someone who used to believe that the Earth was flat.” Let’s not forget my personal favorite, “anyone who denies climate science should be imprisoned for their heresy.”

That picture above? Oh, that’s just what happens when you try to reconcile the actual temperature data with the new and improved faked temperature data the NOAA and NASA peddled to American Citizens in order to make it appear as though the Earth’s mean temperatures were indeed rising. O.K., we’ll let that last bit sink in for just one moment.

Right after the year 2000, NASA and NOAA dramatically altered US climate history, making the past much colder and the present much warmer. The animation below shows how NASA cooled 1934 and warmed 1998, to make 1998 the hottest year in US history instead of 1934. This alteration turned a long term cooling trend since 1930 into a warming trend.

So, let’s take a rather brief walk down Chicken Little’s memory lane. The whole theory has morphed into this catch 22 style game, where computer models have predicted global catastrophe due to rising temperatures. Since Scientists have ruled out all natural causes for the rapidly increasing temperatures, man’s burning of fossil fuels, dumping Carbon Dioxide, and Methane now I guess, must be what’s to blame. This means that all economic development created by free market economics must be bad, while Socialism on the other hand, has been nothing short of a miraculous boon for Gaya.

So now, what we’ve seen is that the rising temperatures used to convince us all that this thing is real, turns out to have been falsely reported as such. When the temperatures in the past and present failed to live up to the predictions, the data was simply changed to show that the Earth was cooler in the past, and is getting warmer in the present. So, in order to prove that only man kind could possibly be responsible for the current warming trend, a warming trend was faked, and any other possibility for the warming trend was declared to be impossible, like say, its having been faked.

Don’t worry though, I’m sure we’ll get a flurry of dire predictions and warnings, as if this latest bombshell hadn’t been dropped on top of our heads, instead of the sky.

Well, maybe I’m not an engineer, nor a peer reviewed author of any scientific theory worthy of note, but I do know that needing to fake data in order to bolster a theory’s validity is considered deceptive, even in the world of academia. First we had the leaked email dump from East Anglia and Penn State, in which, “Climatologists,” were caught sending each other notes describing how they could continue perpetrating a fraud upon the entire world, and that was ignored. Now we have the faking of actual data used to convince us that this problem is very real, and an imminent threat. At some point, accountability must be introduced, even in the world of academia.

How silly of me, falling temperatures proves this theory too. Time for damage control now, see you in a few days, after all of the pieces designed to make us all forget that we saw the man behind the curtain. In the mean time, let’s get to work on that next Chicken Little scenario which will necessitate the self infliction of economic damage.

What were those possibilities again?

A) We need to prepare Earth for a possible invasion of Space Aliens.

B) All of the Honey Bees are suddenly dying off and no more plant will ever be pollinated, ever again.

C) The Ozone is disappearing.

D) Global Cooling, which we would’ve seen had we not faked the data to show a warming trend.

E) Hydraulic Fracturing causes Earth Quakes.

F) Nuclear Power Plants are causing fish to be born with three eyes, which will cause a planetary wide catastrophic loss of appetite, and subsequently world wide famine.

Cross Posted from Musings of a Mad Conservative.

Thad Cochran And John McCain Save Team Palooka!

by Flyovercountry ( 215 Comments › )
Filed under Progressives, Republican Party at June 30th, 2014 - 12:00 pm

150218 600 Miss Sen Thad Cochran cartoons

Palooka – A prize fighter who purposefully throws a fight in which he is favored, in exchange for a payoff.

When I was a 5 or 6 year old wannabe alpha male in my home town, feeling those first oats provided by the Y Chromosome, I threatened another 5 or 6 year old kid to that ultimate deciding contest little boys of that time period used to settle disputes. I threw the first punch, and subsequently got my little fanny beat. He won and I lost, dispute settled. I lost as much due to the surprise of what followed my act of aggression, which was his counter aggression. In the disputes of six year old boys, as in life you see, the other guy is allowed to hit back. I was surprised when he did, since I felt justified in my cause in the first place, and that surprise at being hit back froze me just a little bit. That lesson is one I remember to this day. Take a shot, expect one, or hundreds to be returned in your direction. Return a volley in response, don’t expect that to end it either. Everyone feels justified in their position, and if they don’t, they’re not the sort to take loss easily either.

Notice that the lesson learned here is not about who was right or wrong, I can’t even remember what the reason for fighting was anymore. The lesson is entirely about being prepared to finish what you’ve started, and being prepared to face the consequences of your actions. The Republican Party has been involved in a civil war going back to the 1964 primary. The Goldwater Wing/Conservative base of the Party has been trading blows in a decades long battle with the Rockefeller Wing/Establishment apparatchiks who run the party. Both sides have taken shots at the other, and then whined like little girls when absorbing the shots thrown back their way.

John McCain has labeled all members of the Tea Party wacko birds and along with Mitch McConnel vowed to defeat every Tea Party Candidate in every election in which anyone was identified as being sympathetic to the group. At the same time, both men have whined of the need for unity in order to solidify and strengthen the Republican Party. Tea Party groups have for years threatened to, “primary rinos,” and brayed when those rinos fought back hard in their respective primaries, vowed to destroy the Tea party, and rallied the establishment money spigot so overwhelmingly at their disposal.

Slow down you pretentious distributors of righteous indignation, I’m not saying that the fight is wrong. I’ve been calling for this fight to happen for a long time. We need to hash this out, but just remember to keep your eyes on one reality. We do have common cause here, and that is to use the 2014 elections as a restraining order against the Obama agenda, and to prevent a President Hillary from being sworn into office on January 20, 2017.

With all of that being said, I was never ashamed of being identified with the Republican Party until Tuesday, and the days leading up to Tuesday of this past week. Thad Cochran pulled off what was undoubtedly the dirtiest campaign ever run by any member of the GOP, all in an effort to win a primary that he actually lost by 25,000 votes. He did it by having a Democrat Party staffer named Mitzi Bickers promise every piece of populist tripe offered at any time in that party’s sordid history. Robo calls went out to every Democrat in the state promising that Thad Cochran would help them keep the welfare state in tact, help them keep their wealth redistribution schemes in tact, help them inflict minimum wage increases, help them eliminate voter ID laws, and help them pass Barack Obama’s agenda, as envisioned totally by Barack Obama.

Folks, I have just a couple of thoughts here. First of all, if Republicans are going to win elections by campaigning as if they were not only Democrat Lite, but the furthest to the left Democrats available, what exactly is the point of being in an opposition party? Thad Cochran lost among Republican Voters by a huge margin, and only won by convincing Democrats to come out and choose the Republican nominee against the express wishes of the Republican voters of Mississippi.

He didn’t do this on his own, he had help, and that help came from the GOP establishment. Why have ideals and values at all, if that’s all they mean to people? I’ve sent the GOP solicitation crowd multiple return messages in lieu of a check. All of them have stated that until such a time as they prove some spunk in actually fighting for the principles that they have repeatedly promised they support, they’ll not get my hard earned dime. Next time, I’m filling the envelope with lead weights, a wooden shim, several dozen sheets of blank paper, and a letter that uses this incident to describe my displeasure. It is clear that the establishment Republicans consider their own voting base to be a problem needing eradication.

We who make up this disorganized grass roots movement should never again be surprised. They took our punches and fought back. People with power are willing, as we’ve just learned, to do anything in their effort to keep power. Thad Cochran has just taught us a valuable lesson, and one we should remember for the rest of our lives. They will scratch, kick, bite, claw, and do what ever it takes to win. The next time we get into one of these civil wars, or the next battle of this one, we should expect them to fight dirty, the dirtiest, all while speaking of a need to unite and help them fight our common enemies. If we do not expect the worst the next time out, that’ll be our fault, and nobody else’s. Thad Cochran ran on being a Democrat, and he cheated like one of them as well. We must expect this in the future.

To the GOP establishment types out there, especially those who wish for a united front in order to win elections in the future, how far do you think you’ll get without your voting base? The only reason Republicans hold the House, and the only reason John Boehner is the Speaker right now is due to the energy supplied by the Tea Party. Without that, you’d have nothing, which is right where you’re headed again, if you continue along this path. Even if you win this fall, it’ll only be due to the energy and anger of the Tea Party that has buoyed you up against your very own efforts.

To my fellow Tea Partiers, don’t abandon the GOP completely, let’s continue to work towards taking it back instead. There are many rinos out there to be sure, but there are also many decent people representing the GOP brand. Ted Cruz, Scott Walker, Bobby Jindal, Mike Lee, etc. I share your anger yes, but I am not suicidal, and America is worth fighting for.

To everyone, when any Republican victory seems to be in hand, for what ever battle presents itself as being crucial, look for Thad Cochran to be that next guy who purposefully kisses the canvas. John McCain’s done it so many times now that the canvas doesn’t even expect dinner afterwards. Cochran on the other hand owes a dive to the political left, and believe it, he’ll take that dive when it really counts.

Cross Posted from Musings of a Mad Conservative.

Ex-Soviet Vladimir Jaffe Debates Socialism With Socialists

by Bunk X ( 162 Comments › )
Filed under Communism, Politics, Progressives, Socialism at June 30th, 2014 - 12:01 am

During the “Occupy Wall Street” assholery, one video caught my attention. An “occupier” was handing out propaganda to people sitting along the NYC protest route when he met Vladimir Jaffe.

Jaffe grew up in the Soviet Union, and at 29 years left Moscow in 1988. He understands first-hand what life under communism is like because he lived it – he understands the grotesque economic policies imposed by socialism and the results of those policies. The discussion that followed between the kid and Jaffe was excellent. Jaffe was polite, his arguments were coherent and based upon easily identifiable facts, and whether or not any of Jaffe’s facts sunk in to Occupy Boy’s brain is up for conjecture.

Vladimir Jaffe isn’t a one-hit Utoobage wonder – he’s got 187 videos posted on YouTube to date, and he plays the logic card on every one of them. Check this one out. Note that Jaffe is polite every step of the way, even while debating a young self-identified lawyer for #Occupy.

Then there’s this guy who gets humpy when he finds he has no answers to Jaffe’s questions:

We need more people with balls like Jaffe, willing to stand up and tell the truth about socialism.

[What am I doing about it you ask? Am I doing as much as I could? Nay, I'm posting here in my free time, posting elsewhere in my free time, and voting in my free time, because my time is limited and I only have a few years left to tell Charles Johnson and other leftists to go fuck themselves.]

[Update: "How would you deal with Vladimir Jaffe?" Libtards discuss what they can't comprehend.]

Quit Telling Lies About Common Core, It’s Just A Raising Of Our National Standards

by Flyovercountry ( 171 Comments › )
Filed under Democratic Party, Progressives at June 27th, 2014 - 8:28 am

Every so often, there comes an issue that really and truly unites Americans in a way not seen often. We are a divided country, separated by factions left and right in a manner not seen since the last time we were divided by factions of left versus right. Even with this bitter division, there exists one issue that finds both left and right united in fevered battle with political leaders, both left and right. That issue is Common Core, and the fevered battle against all politicians is being led by the ultimate weaponry of grass roots movements, anyone with a kid or grand kid.

Don’t blame this crap on Barack Obama, at least not exclusively. He’s just the last guy holding the bad filled with this turd. While it’s true that he’s jumped on this bandwagon, it’s also true that this one started rolling during the day’s of Jimmy Carter, and not one single President since has failed to heap himself upon it. If ever there were an issue to make one a Libertarian, this is it. We can go back to the roots of the Department of Education, the absolute folly that led us to that creation, and call that our starting place. Carter proposed and pushed through Congress this new Cabinet level Department within the Federal behemoth as a vehicle to funnel massive amounts of tax payer money from households to Washington D.C., ostensibly in an effort to raise the standardized test scores of American Students as compared with foreign kids. It has been nothing short of an abject failure in its original mission. But like all good baby gorillas, it has grown into the 800 lb. variety. That original intention of course was eschewed for others, including a lucrative money laundering scheme that has enriched public sector unions and shifted considerable political clout to that fine group of thugs. Indeed, the 10 worst performing school districts in America are coincidentally at or near the top in terms of money spent per student. Coincidentally, those same school districts are still crying out for more and more funding, since there is no evidence that any money being spent per student has actually made into those class rooms. (We keep getting promised that our good friends, fraud, theft, and waste, will be eliminated as a means to save the taxpayers money.)

Ronald Reagan campaigned on eliminating both the Department of Energy and the Department of Education. In an 8 year Presidency, he attempted neither. I realize that Reagan never had a Republican Congress to help him get things passed, but he also had a knack for taking his case straight to the American People and having individual communities pressure Congress Critters to pass his agenda. Reagan’s economic boom was a tremendous testament to his policy achievement, but let’s not forget that much of that success should also be attributed to Paul Volcker and his refusal to bow to political pressure designed to force him into loosening the money supply.

George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton both expanded the roles of these Departments, and by the time those 12 years had passed, the Department of Energy and the Department of Education had become permanent entities that Americans believed we could not live without. Many may have actually contemplated how could we have survived past our Bicentennial without them. Never mind that like many of the pitched boondoggles, neither agency came close to accomplishing the original mission which was sold as being the vital reason for its creation, they are still what’s best for we mere subjects of the worker’s paradise formerly reserved for the free and and brave.

Enter George W. Bush and that perfect lesson of how dangerous vague legislation can be. With the framework that No Child Left Behind created, the apparatus to make Common Core a reality for every lucky girl and boy in the land was created. Now, it is true that this program is, “voluntary,” and left up to each individual state as to whether or not they’ll play along, but that belies the point that Federal Dollars to the States for education are being held hostage to insure compliance. Federal Matching funds are why a lot of states decide to voluntarily go along with federal suggestions on a variety of issues.

Now in the public debate over Common Core, many things are said, and a lot of them, while not technically true, or technically true, (picking the pepper from fly shit so to speak,) I’ll hear that Common Core is nothing more than a raising of our national bar in regards to education, and that minimum standards need to be set in order to keep us competitive. Technically, this is true, Common core is only the set of standards, and not the individual lesson plans that have us all shaking our heads.

The lie to all of that of course is found in the picture above. We didn’t see that kind of crap coming home with our kids prior to Common Core, nor can that wonderful example be found anywhere within the very vague text of the law. So, when you read Common Core, all it actually says is that we’ll establish some national standards, and that the Secretary of Education will be responsible for what is considered adequate to satisfy those standards, disburse the money necessary, establish a methodology of tracking progress, and hold states and school districts accountable.

Politicians from both major political parties have pimped this mess to us. The difference this time around is that parents, almost all of them, are not willing to just take it. The common core lesson plans, not found in the law itself, but within the rules drawn up by the Secretary of Education, something most people never think to bother with, include this new methodology of doing math, Socialist dogma, a revised version of American and World history, and many other surprises that American Parents find troubling.

Common Core had been originally signed onto by 45 States, and of those 45, 5 have reversed course. The political pressure from angry parents will continue to build, as more and more children pass from grade to grade, believing that these bizarre number lines are the best way to solve simple math problems, where getting the right answer is no where near so important as how pretty you draw the picture corresponding to description of the problem introduced.

I know many teachers, and shockingly almost all of them are solidly left of center. Most of them have bitched about Common Core. They tell me, a solid member of the anti-Common Core choir, that this new method of teaching is tying their hands and preventing them from doing the right thing by their students. I have found in my life time that teachers actually do care a great deal for doing a good job, and actually imparting knowledge to those young skulls full of mush that pass through their class rooms. They agree with the goals of Common Core, establishing standards by which kiddies actually learn something, and truthfully, it’s hard to argue with that. Then they’ll give that tried and true Leftist argument, “we just didn’t have the right people running things.”

Such is the danger of all vague government programs, they depend upon the right people running things, a mythical beast I’ve yet to meet. Local control of our schools complete with parents of children running the school boards in those communities had worked well for 200 years prior to the Department of Education. Our standards then were much higher, and our kids were graduating with far greater knowledge and skill.

I will predict that this government intrusion into perpetrating damage upon the fabric of our society will fail. Anyone with skin in the game is really pissed off, both teachers and parents alike. That upset is national and unifying across ideological lines. The proponents of this pig can place as much lipstick on their beauty queen as they wish, call us liars for balking, and even spend millions to air slickly produced adverts telling us all how important it is to raise educational standards, but as long at the above homework assignment keeps coming home, the truth will be seen. Messing with someone’s kids is that tipping point to stir up real grass roots anger.

Cross Posted from Musings of a Mad Conservative.

Mars Attacks: Ten Most Harmful Books of the 19th and 20th Centuries

by Mars ( 376 Comments › )
Filed under Abortion, Academia, Bigotry, Blogmocracy, Censorship, Communism, Corruption, Democratic Party, Education, Environmentalism, Fascism, Free Speech, Global Warming Hoax, government, Guest Post, Hate Speech, Hipsters, History, Leftist-Islamic Alliance, Liberal Fascism, Marxism, Multiculturalism, Nazism, Patriotism, Political Correctness, Politics, Progressives, Racism, Socialism, Tranzis at June 26th, 2014 - 12:00 pm

Ten Most Harmful Books of the 19th and 20th Centuries

By: Human Events
5/31/2005 03:00 AM

HUMAN EVENTS asked a panel of 15 conservative scholars and public policy leaders to help us compile a list of the Ten Most Harmful Books of the 19th and 20th Centuries. Each panelist nominated a number of titles and then voted on a ballot including all books nominated. A title received a score of 10 points for being listed No. 1 by one of our panelists, 9 points for being listed No. 2, etc. Appropriately, The Communist Manifesto, by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, earned the highest aggregate score and the No. 1 listing.

1. The Communist Manifesto

Authors: Karl Marx and Freidrich Engels
Publication date: 1848
Score: 74
Summary: Marx and Engels, born in Germany in 1818 and 1820, respectively, were the intellectual godfathers of communism. Engels was the original limousine leftist: A wealthy textile heir, he financed Marx for much of his life. In 1848, the two co-authored The Communist Manifesto as a platform for a group they belonged to called the Communist League. The Manifesto envisions history as a class struggle between oppressed workers and oppressive owners, calling for a workers’ revolution so property, family and nation-states can be abolished and a proletarian Utopia established. The Evil Empire of the Soviet Union put the Manifesto into practice.

2. Mein Kampf

Author: Adolf Hitler
Publication date: 1925-26
Score: 41
Summary: Mein Kampf (My Struggle) was initially published in two parts in 1925 and 1926 after Hitler was imprisoned for leading Nazi Brown Shirts in the so-called “Beer Hall Putsch” that tried to overthrow the Bavarian government. Here Hitler explained his racist, anti-Semitic vision for Germany, laying out a Nazi program pointing directly to World War II and the Holocaust. He envisioned the mass murder of Jews, and a war against France to precede a war against Russia to carve out “lebensraum” (“living room”) for Germans in Eastern Europe. The book was originally ignored. But not after Hitler rose to power. According to the Simon Wiesenthal Center, there were 10 million copies in circulation by 1945.

3. Quotations from Chairman Mao

Author: Mao Zedong
Publication date: 1966
Score: 38
Summary: Mao, who died in 1976, was the leader of the Red Army in the fight for control of China against the anti-Communist forces of Chiang Kai-shek before, during and after World War II. Victorious, in 1949, he founded the People’s Republic of China, enslaving the world’s most populous nation in communism. In 1966, he published Quotations from Chairman Mao Zedong, otherwise known as The Little Red Book, as a tool in the “Cultural Revolution” he launched to push the Chinese Communist Party and Chinese society back in his ideological direction. Aided by compulsory distribution in China, billions were printed. Western leftists were enamored with its Marxist anti-Americanism. “It is the task of the people of the whole world to put an end to the aggression and oppression perpetrated by imperialism, and chiefly by U.S. imperialism,” wrote Mao.

4. The Kinsey Report

Author: Alfred Kinsey
Publication date: 1948
Score: 37
Summary: Alfred Kinsey was a zoologist at Indiana University who, in 1948, published a study called Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, commonly known as The Kinsey Report. Five years later, he published Sexual Behavior in the Human Female. The reports were designed to give a scientific gloss to the normalization of promiscuity and deviancy. “Kinsey’s initial report, released in 1948 . . . stunned the nation by saying that American men were so sexually wild that 95% of them could be accused of some kind of sexual offense under 1940s laws,” the Washington Times reported last year when a movie on Kinsey was released. “The report included reports of sexual activity by boys–even babies–and said that 37% of adult males had had at least one homosexual experience. . . . The 1953 book also included reports of sexual activity involving girls younger than age 4, and suggested that sex between adults and children could be beneficial.”

5. Democracy and Education

Author: John Dewey
Publication date: 1916
Score: 36
Summary: John Dewey, who lived from 1859 until 1952, was a “progressive” philosopher and leading advocate for secular humanism in American life, who taught at the University of Chicago and at Columbia. He signed the Humanist Manifesto and rejected traditional religion and moral absolutes. In Democracy and Education, in pompous and opaque prose, he disparaged schooling that focused on traditional character development and endowing children with hard knowledge, and encouraged the teaching of thinking “skills” instead. His views had great influence on the direction of American education–particularly in public schools–and helped nurture the Clinton generation.

6. Das Kapital

Author: Karl Marx
Publication date: 1867-1894
Score: 31
Summary: Marx died after publishing a first volume of this massive book, after which his benefactor Engels edited and published two additional volumes that Marx had drafted. Das Kapital forces the round peg of capitalism into the square hole of Marx’s materialistic theory of history, portraying capitalism as an ugly phase in the development of human society in which capitalists inevitably and amorally exploit labor by paying the cheapest possible wages to earn the greatest possible profits. Marx theorized that the inevitable eventual outcome would be global proletarian revolution. He could not have predicted 21st Century America: a free, affluent society based on capitalism and representative government that people the world over envy and seek to emulate.

7. The Feminine Mystique

Author: Betty Friedan
Publication date: 1963
Score: 30
Summary: In The Feminine Mystique, Betty Friedan, born in 1921, disparaged traditional stay-at-home motherhood as life in “a comfortable concentration camp”–a role that degraded women and denied them true fulfillment in life. She later became founding president of the National Organization for Women. Her original vocation, tellingly, was not stay-at-home motherhood but left-wing journalism. As David Horowitz wrote in a review for Salon.com of Betty Friedan and the Making of the Feminine Mystique by Daniel Horowitz (no relation to David): The author documents that “Friedan was from her college days, and until her mid-30s, a Stalinist Marxist, the political intimate of the leaders of America’s Cold War fifth column and for a time even the lover of a young Communist physicist working on atomic bomb projects in Berkeley’s radiation lab with J. Robert Oppenheimer.”

8. The Course of Positive Philosophy

Author: Auguste Comte
Publication date: 1830-1842
Score: 28
Summary: Comte, the product of a royalist Catholic family that survived the French Revolution, turned his back on his political and cultural heritage, announcing as a teenager, “I have naturally ceased to believe in God.” Later, in the six volumes of The Course of Positive Philosophy, he coined the term “sociology.” He did so while theorizing that the human mind had developed beyond “theology” (a belief that there is a God who governs the universe), through “metaphysics” (in this case defined as the French revolutionaries’ reliance on abstract assertions of “rights” without a God), to “positivism,” in which man alone, through scientific observation, could determine the way things ought to be.

9. Beyond Good and Evil

Author: Freidrich Nietzsche
Publication date: 1886
Score: 28
Summary: An oft-scribbled bit of college-campus graffiti says: “‘God is dead’–Nietzsche” followed by “‘Nietzsche is dead’–God.” Nietzsche’s profession that “God is dead” appeared in his 1882 book, The Gay Science, but under-girded the basic theme of Beyond Good and Evil, which was published four years later. Here Nietzsche argued that men are driven by an amoral “Will to Power,” and that superior men will sweep aside religiously inspired moral rules, which he deemed as artificial as any other moral rules, to craft whatever rules would help them dominate the world around them. “Life itself is essentially appropriation, injury, overpowering of the strange and weaker, suppression, severity, imposition of one’s own forms, incorporation and, at the least and mildest, exploitation,” he wrote. The Nazis loved Nietzsche.

10. General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money

Author: John Maynard Keynes
Publication date: 1936
Score: 23
Summary: Keynes was a member of the British elite–educated at Eton and Cambridge–who as a liberal Cambridge economics professor wrote General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money in the midst of the Great Depression. The book is a recipe for ever-expanding government. When the business cycle threatens a contraction of industry, and thus of jobs, he argued, the government should run up deficits, borrowing and spending money to spur economic activity. FDR adopted the idea as U.S. policy, and the U.S. government now has a $2.6-trillion annual budget and an $8-trillion dollar debt.

Honorable Mention

These books won votes from two or more judges:

The Population Bomb
by Paul Ehrlich
Score: 22

What Is To Be Done
by V.I. Lenin
Score: 20

Authoritarian Personality
by Theodor Adorno
Score: 19

On Liberty
by John Stuart Mill
Score: 18

Beyond Freedom and Dignity
by B.F. Skinner
Score: 18

Reflections on Violence
by Georges Sorel
Score: 18

The Promise of American Life
by Herbert Croly
Score: 17

The Origin of Species
by Charles Darwin
Score: 17

Madness and Civilization
by Michel Foucault
Score: 12

Soviet Communism: A New Civilization
by Sidney and Beatrice Webb
Score: 12

Coming of Age in Samoa
by Margaret Mead
Score: 11

Unsafe at Any Speed
by Ralph Nader
Score: 11

Second Sex
by Simone de Beauvoir
Score: 10

Prison Notebooks
by Antonio Gramsci
Score: 10

Silent Spring
by Rachel Carson
Score: 9

Wretched of the Earth
by Frantz Fanon
Score: 9

Introduction to Psychoanalysis
by Sigmund Freud
Score: 9

The Greening of America
by Charles Reich
Score: 9

The Limits to Growth
by Club of Rome
Score: 4

Descent of Man
by Charles Darwin
Score: 2

The Judges

These 15 scholars and public policy leaders served as judges in selecting the Ten Most Harmful Books.

Arnold Beichman
Research Fellow
Hoover Institution

Prof. Brad Birzer
Hillsdale College

Harry Crocker
Vice President & Executive Editor
Regnery Publishing, Inc.

Prof. Marshall DeRosa
Florida Atlantic University

Dr. Don Devine
Second Vice Chairman
American Conservative Union

Prof. Robert George
Princeton University

Prof. Paul Gottfried
Elizabethtown College

Prof. William Anthony Hay
Mississippi State University

Herb London
President
Hudson Institute

Prof. Mark Malvasi
Randolph-Macon College

Douglas Minson
Associate Rector
The Witherspoon Fellowships

Prof. Mark Molesky
Seton Hall University

Prof. Stephen Presser
Northwestern University

Phyllis Schlafly
President
Eagle Forum

Fred Smith
President
Competitive Enterprise Institute

http://www.humanevents.com/2005/05/31/ten-most-harmful-books-of-the-19th-and-20th-centuries/

Hipster Russell Brand calls Fox News terrorists and defends ISIS

by Rodan ( 174 Comments › )
Filed under Al Qaeda, Entertainment, Fascism, Hipsters, Iran, Iraq, Islamists, Leftist-Islamic Alliance, Progressives, Syria at June 26th, 2014 - 7:00 am

The Islamic State of Iraq and ash-Sham has become a revolutionary symbol to many in the Hipster movement. This Islamic Imperialist organization is viewed by some Hipsters as a revolutionary organization fighting against “Global Capitalist Oppression.” A manifestation of the mainstreaming of ISIS with the Avant-garde crowd is Hipster comedian Russell Brand.

The British comedian who is popular with the Hipster set defends ISIS and blames their rise on the US. Russell Brand then calls Fox News a terrorist organization. He launches a very vile attack on Justice Jeanine Pirro with sexual taunts.

Do not laugh at Russell Brand’s defense of ISIS and anti-Fox rant. He is a player in the popular culture and his opinion helps form the opinions of many especially in the Hipster set. Brand is a dangerous man who is participating in the softening of the image of ISIS.

Here is Russel Brand’s tour poster.

Brand

Brand views himself as a leader of some cultural movement. I would not be shock to see Brand in a few months wear ISIS t-shirts to promote them as a cool and hip organization. Russell Brand is the face of evil and not someone to take likely.

Kim Jong-un Directs Farmers To Stop Growing Tall Corn

by Bunk X ( 135 Comments › )
Filed under Communism, Food and Drink, North Korea, Politics, World at June 25th, 2014 - 1:00 am

Kim Jong Un Corn Mandate

Even well-off families Can Only Add a Handful of Rice to Their Corn Meal Porridge
Corn (maize) long ago replaced rice as North Korea’s staple food. North Koreans call corn meal “corn rice”. The well-to-do eat steamed rice; for others, corn is their staple food. Depending on a family’s economic status, the rice-to-corn ratio varies. Well-off families don’t use more than 50% corn; as the household budget becomes more strained, corn’s share grows.

Mrs. Kang Un-hui (alias) of Pyongsung city in South Pyongan Province has not so far had to worry about food thanks to her husband, who is a police officer. However, now only her husband gets a food ration. It has been several months since the food ration ended for the three other family members. Even so, they are not starving, but the quality of their meals has fallen sharply. Long ago, they only ate steamed rice. Last year, their meals were half corn and half rice. This year they struggle to be able to mix a handful of rice into the corn meal.

Says Mrs. Kang: “These days, if you’re not pretty rich, the quality of your meals worsens. Now, a family that can afford corn meal is doing well. It’s gotten to the point that it’s hard to have corn meal with even one handful of rice. If our family is like this, other families will be even worse-off. Apart from North Koreans of Chinese origins, everybody is like this. Even so, that does not mean we should complain. My husband has steady work, and I’m just grateful that he can keep his position. I hope that the country’s food situation will improve quickly and we can receive our food rations in the usual way.”
[Source: http://goodfriendsusa.blogspot.com/2012/07/north-korea-today-no-462-july-4-2012.html ]

Okay, the image (Kimmy Crack Corn?) is an obvious photoshop intended for political snark, and I’m not going to post the source in order to protect their anonymity. The story dated 4 July 2012, quoted verbatim, is unaltered.

But there is something odd in that report, and it has to do with rice and corn.
Lookee here:

Grains Comparison[Source]

So why is corn (maize) disparaged as a staple in North Korea when it has three times as many calories and more nutrients? Is it because it’s a crop cultivated in the Americas? I dunno, Babs, but I do know this.
The U.S. don’t raise no rice-fed cattle.

North Korea’s sparse agricultural resources limit agricultural production. Climate, terrain, and soil conditions are not particularly favorable for farming, with a relatively short cropping season. Only about 17% of the total landmass, or approximately 20,000 km2, is arable, of which 14,000 km2 is well suited for cereal cultivation; the major portion of the country is rugged mountain terrain.[1] [Wiki]

That means North Korea has approximately 12% of its landmass good for growing grains, and it grows mostly rice. The government takes most of the rice away from the private subsistence farms.

So much for the Workers’ Paradise. Eat dirt, peons.