The Few, The Proud, The Marines Forum
|Contact Your Representative|
Backup location for this board.
If you forget the URL for this board, or you
are at a different computer and don't
have the link just go to usmcforum.net for a clickable link to either board.
A Potpourri of a few things. . .
Posted By: MillRatUSMC aka Ricardo
Date: Tuesday - February 5,2019 12:16
Today, The "People" of the United States of America find themselves ruled by the Tyranny Elite.
~ The Patriot Chronicles
Confronted with a member of the middle class, "I didn't have the slightest idea what to say to someone like him," Deresiewicz writes.
Deresiewicz blames his education.
"My education taught me to believe that people who didn't go to an Ivy League or equivalent school weren't worth talking to, regardless of their class."
He continues, explaining that at elite institutions, rules like "due dates and attendance requirements" are routinely disregarded.
Students there "get an endless string of second chances."
He contrasts this with other (lesser) schools, where rules are enforced, and their graduates.
Are "being conditioned for ... lives of subordination, supervision and control."
Deresiewicz describes then-President George W. Bush as "the apotheosis of mediocrity."
One can only imagine what he would say about DON THE CON-MAN.
Or the 63 million people who voted for him.
The attitude he describes lays the foundation for what I am calling "The Tyranny of the Elites."
It explains why the Department of Justice and the FBI overlooked.
Hillary Clinton's clear violations of federal statutes.
Destroying evidence, exposing classified information, lying about it.
And why Clinton was given the investigative white glove treatment:
The decision not to prosecute her was made before the investigation was even concluded.
Internal memos were rewritten so that her "gross negligence".
Which would have been a violation of federal law — became "extreme carelessness".
Clinton's questioning was neither recorded nor done under oath.
Her staff member Cheryl Mills was permitted to claim attorney-client privilege.
It also explains why Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his team of Democratic donors.
Have spent a year and a half ignoring the misconduct in the Democratic Party.
And the Clinton campaign, searching instead for evidence of collusion.
Between the DON THE CON-MAN campaign and Russia.
Lacking that, Mueller's team has been frantically trying to find a violation of law.
Any law — by DON THE CON-MAN & Co., has indicted members of Trump's campaign staff.
For conduct unrelated to the 2016 presidential campaign.
And has ransacked one of DON THE CON-MAN's attorney's offices.
Claiming that the "crime-fraud" exception to attorney-client privilege gives them license to do so.
The condescension and sense of entitlement that Deresiewicz describes has been recounted elsewhere.
The 2010 film "The Social Network" was about the ugly disputes between Mark Zuckerberg.
And the other Facebook founders.
But the film depicts Harvard in an equally unfavorable light.
As a playground for indulged brats.
Who spend their free time snorting cocaine and sleeping around.
In 2012, Rolling Stone published "Confessions of an Ivy League Frat Boy.
An interview with former Dartmouth student Andrew Lohse.
Who went public about his fraternity's horrific hazing.
As Lohse tells it, "I was a member of a fraternity that asked pledges.
To swim in a kiddie pool of vomit, urine, fecal matter, semen.
And rotten food products; to eat omelets made of vomit (and) chug cups of vinegar."
Much of the article describes the tolerance of this culture.
As part of Dartmouth's role as a "conduit to the top."
Like the other Ivies, Dartmouth tells its students.
You're going to run the world really soon." And they believe it.
Deresiewicz warns that the "next generation of leaders" our elite educational system.
Is producing consists of kids who "don't have a minute to breathe, let alone think.
And who "will have many achievements but little experience, great success but no vision."
Yes, that's troubling.
But worse, this system is creating a class.
Of condescending snobs.
Who not only loathe those not like them.
They believe that their "specialness".
Entitles them to play by a different set of rules.
Those who doubt the seriousness of that attitude.
Need only look to the 2016 presidential election.
Our betters in media, academia, the entertainment industry.
And the ruling political class assumed.
That their desired outcome was a fait accompli.
Their collective temper tantrum when the American electorate decided to think for themselves.
And their leviathan efforts to undo the election results.
Are examples of what happens when the disaffected elites don't get their way.
~ Laura Hirschfeld Hollis is a native of Champaign, Illinois.
She received her undergraduate degree in English and her law degree from the University of Notre Dame.
She is presently on the faculty at the University of Notre Dame.
Where she teaches courses in business law and entrepreneurship.
She wrong on several things, Robert Swan Mueller III, has voted as a Republican.
The University of Notre Dame, isn't an 'elite school'?
I found what's below, while searching for; Can we skip the State of the union response? by Jennifer Rubin
The shutdown might have accomplished at least one thing
If you took a secret poll in the U.S. Senate as to whether the shutdown.
Was a mistake, you’d likely get 100 yes votes.
Now at least two senators, senior ones at that, are suggesting we never make that mistake again.
They may have gotten a boost from the Congressional Budget Office.
Which released a report showing $11 billion was lost in the shutdown.
As a result of reduced economic activity, CBO estimates, real . . .
Gross domestic product (GDP) in the fourth quarter of 2018 was reduced by $3 billion (in 2019 dollars).
In relation to what it would have been otherwise, the CBO reported.
In the first quarter of 2019, the level of real GDP.
Is estimated to be $8 billion lower than it would have been.
An effect reflecting both the five-week partial shutdown.
And the resumption in economic activity once funding resumed.
The CBO also determined, as a share of quarterly real GDP.
The level of real GDP in the fourth quarter of 2018.
Was reduced by 0.1 percent, CBO estimates.
And the level of real GDP in the first quarter of 2019.
Is expected to be reduced by 0.2 percent.1
The effect on the annualized quarterly growth rate in those quarters will be larger.
Fed up with self-inflicted political and economic wounds.
Sens. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, and Mark Warner, D-Va., came up with separate but similar bills.
Under [Portman’s] plan, which has 18 co-sponsors and rising, funding.
At existing levels would continue for agencies.
Covered by an appropriations measure that was not signed into law.
By the beginning of the fiscal year on Oct. 1.
Preventing any lapse that incites a shutdown, the New York Times reports.
To spur a resolution, funding would be reduced by 1 percent.
After 120 days if no agreement is reached.
And by 1 percent more every 90 days.”
In a statement last week, Warner explained his cleverly titled bill:
The Stop STUPIDITY
(Shutdowns Transferring Unnecessary Pain and Inflicting Damage In The Coming Years) Act.
Would fund all aspects of the government except for the legislative branch.
And the Executive Office of the President - effectively forcing Congress.
And the White House to come to the negotiating table.
Without putting at risk the economy or hurting the American public.
Other powerful members, including Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa.
Chairman of the Finance Committee, put out his own statement last Friday.
Just common sense tells me we need to reopen government, said Grassley.
In fact, I’ll tell you that I’m embarrassed to even talk about it.
It costs money to shut down government and it costs money to open up government.
We ought to be functioning.
He also called for an end to shutdowns “once and for all.”
These lawmakers are all on the right track.
While they are at it, they should pass legislation.
Clarifying that an “emergency” under the National Emergencies Act.
Cannot be “I negotiated with Congress for months but didn’t get my way.”
If DON THE CON-MAN vetoes it, the first override of his tenure.
Could appropriately be a defense of Congress as an equal branch.
The one solely charged with passing legislation and funding the government.
Jennifer Rubin writes reported opinion for The Washington Post.
How to think like a scientist about the border wall
I was born and raised in South Texas, but now I’m a scientist living in Washington D.C.
Where, because of the recent government shutdown, I missed more than 60 days of pay.
During that time, I thought it would be worthwhile to use my Ph.D. skills.
To analyze the evidence for the president's claims about a national security crisis.
At the U.S.-Mexico border and whether a wall was an adequate justification for the shutdown.
Evidence in support of the wall would have to back up three key claims:
First, there has been a dramatic increase in people crossing our border over time;
Second, an increase in immigration causes an increase in crime.
And immigrants commit more crimes than those within our borders;
Third, current strategies for border security are ineffective.
So, what do the data show?
There is absolutely no evidence for the first claim.
In fact, the opposite is supported:
Unauthorized immigration rates actually slowed down between 2010 and 2016.
When it fell to its lowest level in decades.
Overall, the population of unauthorized immigrants.
Shrank by 13 percent between 2007 and 2016 in the U.S.
As of January 2015, there were an estimated 10.7 to 12.0 million undocumented immigrants.
Living in the United States - 3.34 percent to 3.75 percent of the total U.S. population.
At that point in time.
Because I’m a scientist and love data, I analyzed the available raw data.
For total apprehensions of illegal immigrants across multiple years by our border patrol.
This number of apprehensions has also declined over time.
And I found this decline to be highly statistically significant.
So, to conclude, there is no evidence for the first claim.
What about the second?
Studies on the subject have found no link between immigration and crime.
This revelation comes from a 2018 study published in the journal “Criminology”
That attempted to correlate undocumented immigration and violent crime.
In all 50 states and Washington, D.C., using multiple data sources.
At the state level from 1990-2014.
The robust analyses from this study reveal the opposite relationship.
Increases in the undocumented immigrant population are generally associated.
With significantly lower rates of violence.
Other studies reveal that illegal immigrants have lower conviction.
And arrest rates relative to native-born Americans in the United States.
In Texas alone, a study of 2015 data by the Cato Institute.
Found that the homicide rate for illegal immigrants.
Was 16 percent below that of native-born Americans.
For all criminal convictions, illegal and legal immigrants.
Had criminal conviction rates 50 percent.
And 66 percent below that of native-born Americans, respectively.
Together these findings undermine statements that undocumented immigrants are criminals.
Or are bringing crime into the United States.
In looking at statistics from U.S. Border and Customs Protection.
Two things are clear from my analyses:
An increase in funding and an increase in staffing agents over time.
Is significantly correlated with reduced rates of apprehension of illegal immigrants.
So, if you are concerned about keeping these numbers low.
My observations suggest that continuing to fund this agency.
And maintaining a steady number of agents on the ground may be an effective way to do so.
An alternative explanation is that there are fewer people crossing our border over time.
Which is supported by the studies.
Regardless, these results do not support the third claim.
And instead suggest that the border security strategies currently in place are effective.
In sum, there is no evidence that there is a border crisis that requires building a wall.
The number of immigrants coming into the U.S. is decreasing.
And they are not causing any upticks in crime.
A wall is an unnecessary feature and would be a waste of taxpayer money.
In a few short weeks, we may be dealing with yet another shutdown.
And engaging in heated national discourse about a wall.
That the president has not justified based on facts.
Legitimate sources or an itemized budget for its costs.
When debating important national issues.
The onus should be on the president and our representatives in Congress.
To support their claims with verifiable evidence.
It is also on us as informed citizens to require evidence.
For claims and question unsubstantiated stories and hearsay.
The stakes are high.
Our standards should be, too.
Kristin Hook writes reported opinion
She obtained her B.A. and B.S. from the University of Texas at Austin.
And her Ph.D. from Cornell University.
She is currently a postdoctoral fellow living in Washington, DC.
Must relate some dudes thinking might do a thing or two for that host of 'Fraux News'.
And its not the way to carry a pistol.
ICYMI; he sports my rank 'Staff Sergeant'.
UTI's - Useful Trump Idiots.
Tell me who you walk with, and I'll tell you who you are.
Roses are red.
Violets are blue.
Diabetes II or Diabetes 2
Affect a few.
What's a body to do?
Walk a few.
Blocks or in a local mall.
Looking more like the puppet Walter!
Ricardo in virtual reality.
Is the term used to describe a three-dimensional.
Computer generated environment.
Messages In This Thread
The Few, The Proud, The Marines Forum is maintained by Rick with WebBBS 5.01.