Rolled over to allow European Conservative time to explain what Angela Merkel really said.
Rolled over a second day in response to Mrs. Davis’ request that the discussion be allowed to continue.
[Zero] No this wasn’t something Adolf Hitler said many decades ago, this is what German Chancellor Angela Merkel told attendants at an event by the Konrad Adenauer Foundation in Berlin. Merkel has announced she won’t seek re-election in 2021 and it is clear she is attempting to push the globalist agenda to its disturbing conclusion before she stands down.
“In an orderly fashion of course,” Merkel joked, attempting to lighten the mood. But Merkel has always had a tin ear for comedy and she soon launched into a dark speech condemning those in her own party who think Germany should have listened to the will of its citizens and refused to sign the controversial UN migration pact:
“There were [politicians] who believed that they could decide when these agreements are no longer valid because they are representing The People”.
“[But] the people are individuals who are living in a country, they are not a group who define themselves as the [German] people,” she stressed.
Merkel has previously accused critics of the UN Global Compact for Safe and Orderly Migration of not being patriotic, saying “That is not patriotism, because patriotism is when you include others in German interests and accept win-win situations”.
Her words echo recent comments by the deeply unpopular French President Emmanuel Macron who stated in a Remembrance Day speech that “patriotism is the exact opposite of nationalism [because] nationalism is treason.”
The French president’s words were deeply unpopular with the French population and his approval rating nosedived even further after the comments.
Macron, whose lack of leadership is proving unable to deal with growing protests in France, told the Bundestag that France and Germany should be at the center of the emerging New World Order.
Her cultural background from the East German back to Nazi timeline is showing.
#2
Hotel California Globalism: "You can never leave"
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/29/2018 4:14 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Ja, Atomkraft, danke! This nation,
For safety, must give up its station.
And as for the sheeple,
Not one tiny peep'll
Escape from their atomisation!
#15
Actually the Zerohedge article is quite a distortion of what she really said.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
12/29/2018 20:54 Comments ||
Top||
#16
What did she really say, European Conservative? We included a link to the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung report on which the Zero Hedge article is based.
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
12/30/2018 6:51 Comments ||
Top||
#21
I'll save EC some time:
You have to give up something to get something.
Give up self-determination via democratic elections.
You will get "something."
Give up local control of the civic organs that run your neighborhoods.
You will get "something."
Listen to gerbilists blowing smoke out their asses.
You will get "something."
Get it yet?
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
12/30/2018 6:54 Comments ||
Top||
#22
A better idea would be to reinstitute Colonialism. This time select nations, ones that didn't have colonies before, could hold African and middle eastern national as colonies under the UN. Give the nordic states, Ireland, and Canada a try. Clearly some nations simply can't run themselves and are borderline failures, lets give them a chance.
#25
Yeah. China will expect to be paid. What a nasty surprise...
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
12/30/2018 11:10 Comments ||
Top||
#26
Because we all want Xi Jinping telling us what to do, spying on us everywhere we go, taking us out of circulation for thought crimes and confiscating the fruit of our labor?
Go to hell, Merkel.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
12/30/2018 11:50 Comments ||
Top||
#27
OK. We know that most of our politicians are crooks. But at least they're our crooks and not China's or Germany's.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
12/30/2018 12:21 Comments ||
Top||
#28
EC decided not to waste her breath weigh in?
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
12/30/2018 13:17 Comments ||
Top||
#29
I’m sure European Conservative will weigh in late this afternoon or this evening, when he usually shows up.
#30
Eager to hear from EC as Zerohedge is not always the most reliable source.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/30/2018 14:26 Comments ||
Top||
#31
Ok, here's my comment.
First it's important to stress that Merkel doesn't even mention the so-called "New World Order" (whatever this term means that Macron, a true French elitist, uses). She's talking about voluntarily (no "must" there) giving up some national sovereignty to achieve common European goals.
Merkel explained that Germany had transferred part of its sovereignty rights to the European Union. "But the states are the masters of the treaties". This would always require the support and decision of the national parliament. The heart of democracy is the parliament.
Trust and a willingness to compromise were important keys in this national and international tension. Particularly in the discussions on the United Nations Migration Pact, it became clear that fundamental issues were being called into question. The democratic legitimacy of the institution and its conventions were questioned, even though they had long since been decided by the national parliaments. She criticised that "there are people who believe they can determine when these agreements lose their validity because they represent the people". She rejected this nationalism. "The people are the people who live permanently in a country and not a group that defines them as a people."
So Germany has transferred some of it's sovereignty rights to the EU (just like all the other EU states have, starting from the 1950s). That's nothing alarming. The EU couldn't work if nation states weren't willing to do so. She is stressing that the legitimacy of those institutions (EU, UN, WTO) has long been decided by German parliament (and Supreme Court), so a group of people which says it speaks for the German people can't put this legitimacy (and transfer of sovereignty) in question. Only Parliament can.
"National Sovereignty" is a term you hear very often these days in the U.S. For me this is quite surprising because I can't think of a country that has given up less sovereignty than the U.S. In the UN, nothing can really happen against the will of the U.S. (those non-binding resolutions of the General Assembly are meaningless).
It's different for Germany. Europe won't work without so many small nations giving up some of their sovereignty. And let's face it: Germany is in a unique position. It could probably go it alone, but would never do so. WW II ended more than 70 years ago but distrust of a sovereign Germany still exists. Europe wants a powerful Germany but reigned in by European institutions, and Germany has always understood that. Germany doesn't need the Euro but accepts it, mostly for political reasons.
I have a lot of problems with Merkel. She totally blew the migrant issue (and I think she realizes this now), but she may very well have saved Europe from financial collapse a decade ago.
The problem is that the EU wasn't meant to have 28 member states when it was founded. 6, 9 or 12 states can very well work together without giving up too much sovereignty. 28 can't.
But the UK, if it leaves the EU, will find out that it won't regain much of this coveted national sovereignty. Norway, Switzerland and Iceland know that. They are basically playing to the rules of the EU without having a say in it. The UK could choose a hard Brexit, but it will pay an enormous economical and financial price. This is starting to sink in only now.
The EU is the only way to negotiate at arm's length with the U.S. and rising powers like China, not to mention international giants like Amazon, Google etc. 28 "sovereign" nations would in fact be less sovereign, if they go it alone. Their negotiating power would be minimal.
It's a different world now. If smaller nations don't band together they become meaningless. And then sovereignty means little.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
12/30/2018 16:23 Comments ||
Top||
#32
Thank you, EC, for the Comment. There are several points that I find disquieting...
The democratic legitimacy of the institution and its conventions were questioned, even though they had long since been decided by the national parliaments. She criticised that "there are people who believe they can determine when these agreements lose their validity because they represent the people".
So, if Your Ancestors decided anything then you, their Descendant, have no right to want it amended? The Past is a Tyrant, it seems...
The problem is that the EU wasn't meant to have 28 member states when it was founded. 6, 9 or 12 states can very well work together without giving up too much sovereignty. 28 can't.
Or was the original European Economic Community a Good Thing, a voluntary thing, while the current European Union is the Neo-Carolingian Empire in disguise? The problem with giving up local freedoms is the difficulty in keeping Any freedoms at all.
#33
The worst thing that happened to Germany was reunification. It is now so large and dominant that the EU is the Fourth Reich in sheep's clothing. Think the United States without Texas. Caliphornia and New York would dominate.
And the EUropean parliament a democratic institution? With any power? As I understand it, the Brussels bureaucrats run the EU and they jump to their German masters.
Brexit is much like the American Revolution. We suffered for a while economically. But we got our act together and did much better than we would have had we remained under British tyranny. In a decade they won't regret it and there may not be an EU or an EURO. The Keystone state has been pulled out.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/30/2018 19:12 Comments ||
Top||
#34
Please carry over for comments from the early risers and rebuttal from the esteemed EC.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/30/2018 19:13 Comments ||
Top||
#35
"So, if Your Ancestors decided anything then you, their Descendant, have no right to want it amended? The Past is a Tyrant, it seems..."
Not at all, of course. Parliament gets elected every four year, and if Parliament decides to amend things, of course it can and will.
Note that Germany deplored Brexit but never questioned the democratic legitimacy of the UK to decide this way.
If Germany came to the conclusion that it would prefer to leave the EU, of course Parliament could decide to do so. What Merkel said was that she can't accept that a group of people question the legitimacy of European institutions that German Parliament has approved with an overwhelming majority.
"Or was the original European Economic Community a Good Thing, a voluntary thing, while the current European Union is the Neo-Carolingian Empire in disguise? The problem with giving up local freedoms is the difficulty in keeping Any freedoms at all."
The original EEC started as an economical union, but only because this seemed to be the most acceptable way of starting the long way to union. Remember that the EEC was founded years before the landmark Elysee Treaty between France and Germany. Eastern Europe wasn't on the horizon as nobody thought the Soviet Union would relinquishing control over it within 40 years.
Mrs Davis, Germany certainly carries weight in the EU, but it doesn't dominate it. France would never allow this, nor would the other nations agree to it.
Reunification didn't make Germany more dominant, the opening of the East did.
The national parliaments still have most of the say in Europe. The European Parliament is in a difficult position because it can't replace or overrule the national parliaments. So its ole is largely advisory.
The EU Commission might seen undemocratic by many, but it actually executes the will of the European nations. It's not an independent body that tells the European nations what to do (although you can be forgiven to get the impression it does).
It often rather serves as a scapegoat, when it decides things that the leaders of the European nations actually want but don't want to be responsible for. "Europe makes us do it" is usually a blatant lie.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
12/30/2018 19:47 Comments ||
Top||
#36
Please carry over for comments from the early risers and rebuttal from the esteemed EC.
Very good, Mrs. Davis, though I think this is the first time in Rantburg history that an article has been carried over for a second day. I agree that this is a very useful discussion.
European Conservative, herzlichen Dank for your translation and for the thoughtful presentation of your arguments.
Now to fix the title, which for reasons that passeth understanding has once again mislaid half its words. I have no idea why occasionally an article will repeatedly partially shed title verbiage.
The debate goes to the heart of the matter. "Sovereignty" has different meaning in the U.S. and Europe.
The EU certainly needs to be reformed, but in the end a few hard decisions will have to be made. I don't think we can go back to the EEC or the EC. Russia is already trying to regain influence in its own backyard. China is buying into Eastern and Southern Europe as well.
And yet the European nations aren't ready for the United States of Europe. So things will get quite complicated.
What I do know is that transatlantic friendship mustn't be jeopardized. We may be rivals, but we are friends, too, with common values that neither China, Russia nor the Islamic world share.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
12/30/2018 20:37 Comments ||
Top||
#38
Incidentally, Mrs. Davis, are you resuming an old nym or are you an entirely new user of it?
#39
#37 - The nation currently known as the USA was once an association under the articles of confederation. That didn't work so well!
One wonders if Europe is meeting a similar inflection point.
It refuses to reform and continues to lie. Hence the EUSSR "army" which will undoubtedly be used on to suppress nations which do not follow the EUSSR's rules.
I'm so glad my Nation the U.K. is leaving and I think the economy will have next to zero problems, although the MSM will make you think things are bad.
Just look at the Icelandic experience when they told the EUSSR to GFT.
#41
I'm the same old Mrs. Davis. Gray wouldn't have it any other way.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/30/2018 21:32 Comments ||
Top||
#42
What I do know is that transatlantic friendship mustn't be jeopardized. We may be rivals, but we are friends, too, with common values that neither China, Russia nor the Islamic world share.
Hear, hear.
I'm the same old Mrs. Davis.
How delightful to have you back under a nym I’m so fond of, my dear.
#43
I suggest to the world that you bow to reality and common sense. Surrender now to Texas and get favored status:) You don't want to wait until your like California. Join the Future. Join Texas:p
#44
Merkel already said Europe's future is with China. After Trump dumped the Paris agreement, that was it. China has tons of money to invest, Europe wants out from under the boot heel of the warmongering Americans. It's win-win.
As far as "common values", Europe and America are both being changed by massive immigration. The estrangement will proceed along natural lines. The new Europeans have different values, and along with old Europeans they don't like nor agree with the American values of racism and warmongering.
Posted by: Herb McCoy ||
12/31/2018 6:37 Comments ||
Top||
#45
Indeed, TW. I wondered the same thing about the nym, having met you and him at the same time and place. Rantapalooza!
Posted by: Bobby ||
12/31/2018 10:04 Comments ||
Top||
#46
She is stressing that the legitimacy of those institutions (EU, UN, WTO) has long been decided by German parliament (and Supreme Court), so a group of people which says it speaks for the German people can't put this legitimacy (and transfer of sovereignty) in question. Only Parliament can.
This runs counter to a concept many of us hold dear which is that the people are sovereign. Your parliament can only derive its legitimacy from the people. I think that's what the British people told their parliament when they held that referendum on the EU. British politicians would do well to heed what their people told them. Britain has a long history of resisting European dictators such as King Phillip II, Napoleon and Hitler regardless of the price.
In some ways I can understand a concept like the EU where all of the member countries are democracies and they share many common interests. It's difficult here in the United States where we have blue states like New York and California with their socialist tendencies pitted against red states like Texas and Wyoming whose people tend to despise government interference in their lives. I can see similar difficulties in the EU when Merkel insists they must all accept a massive influx of immigrants from places like Syria. No matter what the German parliament or any other parliament says, Europe's native population will rightfully reject this edict. It is quite likely that the civil strife will be overwhelming when elite EU politicians attempt to impose such odious policies upon the people.
As for the UN, it is dominated by countries whose governments are anything but democratic or legitimate. Therefore the UN cannot claim to be a legitimate governing body. The people of the United States will never surrender sovereignty to the likes of Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin or the ayatollahs in Iran without a fight.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
12/31/2018 13:39 Comments ||
Top||
#47
“patriotism is the exact opposite of nationalism [because] nationalism is treason.”
We fought a revolution over that. Looks like there is a low-grade conflict within going on over this now. DS versus the patriots.
#48
Abu Aluque hits the jackpot on the concept of sovereignty. EC says
Germany had transferred part of its sovereignty rights to the European Union. "But the states are the masters of the treaties". This would always require the support and decision of the national parliament. The heart of democracy is the parliament.
No American would ever say the U. S. had transferred its sovereignty because it doesn't belong to the U. S. it belongs to We the People. And no American would ever say the heart of democracy is the Congress.
This is a fundamental difference between us and the EUropeans. They see the state as the sovereign, going back to the days of the kings. They see their rights as coming from the state. We see them coming from the Creator.
Later on he says:
I can't think of a country that has given up less sovereignty than the U.S.
And I can't think of a country that has less sovereignty to give up than the U. S.
This distinction will prove to be of consequence for EUrope as unassimilated Muslims become a greater proportion of the electorate, as they must given differing fertility rates. Who will they recognize as Sovereign? Germany or the EU? Or Turkey?
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/31/2018 15:02 Comments ||
Top||
#49
This distinction will prove to be of consequence for EUrope as unassimilated Muslims become a greater proportion of the electorate, as they must given differing fertility rates. Who will they recognize as Sovereign? Germany or the EU? Or Turkey?
An unconstrained North Africa and ME will be the end of Europe. Vlad is counting on it.
"This runs counter to a concept many of us hold dear which is that the people are sovereign. Your parliament can only derive its legitimacy from the people."
The concept isn't any different in Germany. All power is derived from the people, including that vested in Parliament.
I don't think that people were told the truth about the consequences of Brexit, especially those of a hard Brexit. Should the people not vote on the outcome of the negotiations?
Is this the Brexit they voted for? (At least the slim majority of those who actually voted).
Here the New Year will start in one hour, so I wish you all a Happy New 2019 and many more fruitful discussions.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
12/31/2018 17:03 Comments ||
Top||
#52
Happy New Year EC, and everyone on Rantburg.
Posted by: Whiskey Mike ||
12/31/2018 17:14 Comments ||
Top||
#53
The Ottomans lost the battle in 1688 but may win the war...due to yellow-bellied surrender by drunken Junkers, et al..
Yes totally. We voted to exit the EU, exit the customs cartel and control the border.
It was made extremely clear, and I can find the videos If you like. Are you one of those who think the people need another go at getting the answer right? I feel once the lie that a bunch of far-left maoists are needed to run the British economy other countries will try and go. Whether the EUSSR army lets them is another thing.
The consequences of WTO only Brexit are hard for the EUSSR, but I believe the UK will be fine.
[The Hill] Retired Gen. David Petraeus said Monday that he doesn't "envision" returning to a government position, and said his views don't align with President Trump's on foreign affairs.
"I think there does have to be policy alignment [with Trump,] and I’m not sure that exists, I’m afraid," Petraeus said on BBC Radio 4 when asked if he'd be willing to replace James Mattis as Defense Secretary, as first reported by Time magazine.
Mattis resigned in December in a letter that said Trump deserved to have a Defense secretary with views that aligned with his own. The decision came as Trump announced the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Syria and a reduction in the U.S. presence in Afghanistan.
Petraeus, who previously served as former President Obama's CIA Director, added that he "cannot envision returning to government at this time."
"It’s not unreasonable to ask after 17 years of war, ’is this the best way to go about it,’ " Petraeus said. "It doesn’t mean that I agree, necessarily, with the recent decisions, but to be truthful we don’t know the details of the policy yet."
Continued on Page 47
[NY Post] Fauxcahontas make big run Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Monday announced her intention to run for president in 2020 as a champion of middle-class Americans and an adversary of big banks and Wall Street fat cats.
Warren, who said she was creating an exploratory committee that will allow her to raise funds and hire staffers, will be among a crowded field of Democrats taking a shot at the White House. raise funds from fatcats, banks, and Hollywood.
"America's middle class is under attack," Warren said in a four-minute, 30-second video posted to YouTube. "How did we get here? Billionaires and big corporations decided they wanted more of the pie. And they enlisted politicians to cut them a bigger slice."
In the video, the 69-year-old former law professor lays out her vision of the future, while setting herself up as a foil to President Trump and members of his administration.
"I've spent my career getting to the bottom of why America's promise works for some families, but others who work just as hard slip through the cracks into disaster," she says. "What I've found is terrifying. These aren't cracks that families are falling into, they're traps."
The president, who has announced that he will seek re-election in 2020, has trashed Warren in the past for her claims that she is partly Native American, referring to her as "Pocahontas."
Warren in October released DNA testing results that showed there was "strong evidence" that she has Native American blood. 1/1024th, less than the average American
The release was intended to quell questions about her heritage but prompted criticism from Native American leaders and left some supported puzzled why she would rekindle the controversy.
A number of Democrats are expected to announce presidential campaigns in the next few months, including former Vice President Joe Biden and Sens. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Kamala Harris of California, Cory Booker of New Jersey and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York.
Former Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Texas Rep. Beto O'Rourke, who lost a Senate bid in November to GOP Sen. Ted Cruz, are also weighing getting in the race.
Continued on Page 47
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/31/2018 10:35 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11135 views]
Top|| File under:
#5
We should start developing an Alisnky-esque list of questions to see which of these folks are the ideologically purest. Are men and women any different? Should white men be allowed to vote and hold office? Are you in favor of Reparations? "No Borders, No Wall, No USA At All"-- do you disagree with any part of that and if so which parts?
But in Liz's case I would start with easy ones: When you were practicing law how much in fees did you collect from Fortune 500 companies, and are you going to return that money?
Posted by: Matt ||
12/31/2018 14:43 Comments ||
Top||
#6
She has her work cut out for her. According to Polling Report, a few weeks ago the honourable senator ranked seventh at 3% among Democratic voters and Dem-leaning Independents:
CNN Poll conducted by SSRS. Dec. 6-9, 2018. N=463 Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents nationwide.
"I'm going to read a list of people who may be running in the Democratic primaries for president in 2020. After I read all the names, please tell me which of those candidates you would be most likely to support for the Democratic nomination for president in 2020, or if you would support someone else. Former vice president Joe Biden. Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders. Texas Congressman Beto O'Rourke. New Jersey Senator Cory Booker. California Senator Kamala Harris. Former secretary of state John Kerry. Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren. Former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg. Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar. Former attorney general Eric Holder. New York Senator Kirstin Gillibrand. Montana Governor Steve Bullock. Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown. Washington Governor Jay Inslee. Former Virginia governor Terry McAuliffe. Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti. Former Housing and Urban Development secretary Julian Castro. Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper. Maryland Congressman John Delaney. Businessman Tom Steyer. Attorney Michael Avenatti. Former Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick."
[PJ] WASHINGTON ‐ Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) told PJM that the federal government should conduct a study of reparations for descendants of slaves to be able to determine the best way to "repair some of the damage" that slavery has caused to the African-American community.
Jackson Lee became the lead sponsor of H.R. 40, the Commission to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African-Americans Act, after Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) resigned from Congress.
The legislation seeks to "address the fundamental injustice, cruelty, brutality, and inhumanity of slavery in the United States and the 13 American colonies between 1619 and 1865 and to establish a commission to study and consider a national apology and proposal for reparations for the institution of slavery, its subsequent de jure and de facto racial and economic discrimination against African-Americans, and the impact of these forces on living African-Americans, to make recommendations to the Congress on appropriate remedies, and for other purposes."
"It’s a commission to study the issue of what was the economic impact of the work of slaves and how does it translate in the 21st century. And what we want to do is to build a narrative, a story of the facts and out of that be able to access how we repair some of the damage," Jackson Lee said during a recent interview after her speech at the annual Legislative and Policy Conference organized by Rev. Al Sharpton’s National Action Network.
"When you look at urban blight, when you look at schools in inner cities and rural communities that are not at the level of excellence that they should be, when you look at support for [historically black colleges and universities], all of that will be part of understanding that whole journey and that whole economic journey," she added. "And it is interesting that these magnificent buildings were built by slaves, obviously with no compensation. That is not what we are asking for; this bill is to have a commission to hear from people all over the nation."
Continued on Page 47
#1
Stop committing crimes and go to school. Easy peasy.
Posted by: Herb McCoy ||
12/31/2018 6:30 Comments ||
Top||
#2
How about you pay reparations for the cost of housing your feral father-less youts in prisons, the crime they commit, and the social costs of your broken culture?
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/31/2018 7:07 Comments ||
Top||
#3
sheila lee A MORON in a suit of a OVER educated IDIOT, ALL BAD
#4
Fine, anyone taking a payment forfeits their US citizenship and if found in the country again is summarily executed. You take a payment, you go back to Africa. Having worked with many Africans, let me tell you, you will not impress them.
#5
The #1 cause of urban blight is the urban population.
Posted by: Rob Crawford ||
12/31/2018 7:44 Comments ||
Top||
#6
so sheila, 2000 years ago some of my ancestors were probably slaves. Waddaya gonna give me, Sweets? Better be more than you scarf for your own ugly self, 'cause, compound interest, you know?
#7
Only descendants of US slaves? Or also of Caribbean slaves (like Gen. Powell?) And how will decendancy be documented? Would 'one drop' rule apply or would people get fractional shares? I have a counterproposal: grant one billion dollars in reparation to each former legal US slave, payable from the assets of all former legal US slaveholders.
#9
Just adding fuel to the tinderbox that has become American’s political trasheap. America’s urban shi*holes are that way in a very large part because of the Democrat party rule and entitlement slavery mindset. They own much of their own condition and I have no intention of subsidizing it further. A sense of kindred citizenship stopped years ago when race merchants made everything about guilt and extortion.
#10
Deduct from the cost of reparations the value of the 280,000 or so Union soldiers who died in the Civil War. And the cost to the Union of the war. Adjusted for inflation of course.
And why should my wife, a descendant of immigrants from the UK in 1900 or so, have to pay reparations? They never owned slaves.
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia ||
12/31/2018 12:21 Comments ||
Top||
#11
The SCOTUS will bomb this.
It is essentially punish a group for committing a crime, that was legal when they committed it.
The Constitution is very clear on Ex Post Facto laws.
#16
My ancestor's fought for the Union; I'll send the bill for services rendered. ~
Posted by: Phonter Lover of the Welsh3256 ||
12/31/2018 16:48 Comments ||
Top||
#17
#2 How about you pay reparations for the cost of housing your feral father-less youts in prisons, the crime they commit, and the social costs of your broken culture?
#4 Fine, anyone taking a payment forfeits their US citizenship and if found in the country again is summarily executed. You take a payment, you go back to Africa. Having worked with many Africans, let me tell you, you will not impress them.
#10 Deduct from the cost of reparations the value of the 280,000 or so Union soldiers who died in the Civil War. And the cost to the Union of the war. Adjusted for inflation of course.
And why should my wife, a descendant of immigrants from the UK in 1900 or so, have to pay reparations? They never owned slaves.
#20
I have a counterproposal: grant one billion dollars in reparation to each living former legal US slave, payable from the assets of all living former legal US slaveholders.
[The Hill] Dozens of outgoing lawmakers are looking to make the jump to K Street after an election that saw a massive number of GOP retirements and a Democratic wave flip control of the House.
Lawmakers have long been coveted by lobby firms and business and trade groups for their connections and insider experience. But with a large turnover following the 115th Congress, the competition for prime spots could be fierce.
The jockeying has already begun with associations and firms sizing up retiring lawmakers for their accomplishments in Congress and their willingness to work hard and fit in on a new team.
Some prominent names being eyed include outgoing Democratic Caucus Chairman Joseph Crowley, who lost in his primary to progressive rising star Rep.-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in New York.
Pennsylvania Republican Bill Shuster, former chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, is also on that list.
"Bill Shuster is a name that sometimes comes up ... given his transportation background," a recruiter told The Hill, adding that there was speculation he could have taken over at the Association of American Railroads. CEO Edward Hamberger announced his retirement in May but the association tapped Ian Jefferies, senior vice president, as its next chief.
Continued on Page 47
Posted by: Mullah Richard ||
12/31/2018 10:38 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Mused a mullah, "A perch and a spike,
By Allah, are not much alike.
Ain't it strange that the fish
As arranged on this dish
Should so closely resemble a pike?"
[PRESSTV] Outgoing White House chief of staff John Kelly says he was surprised by US President Donald Trump’s so-called Muslim ban despite his full-throated defense in the early days of the administration.
“I had very little opportunity to look at them,” before the orders were announced, Kelly acknowledged in an interview with the Los Angeles Times.
Trump issued an executive order shortly after taking office in January 2017 to suspend the entire US refugee program for 120 days and bar travelers from seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States.
Continued on Page 47
Posted by: Fred ||
12/31/2018 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11132 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
from seven Muslim-majority countries
But not all, which are far more numerous than seven. Thus, other than pure propaganda, can't be anti-Muslim in its nature.
[PRESSTV] US President Donald Trump ...New York real estate developer, described by Dems as illiterate, racist, misogynistic, and what ever other unpleasant descriptions they can think of, elected by the rest of us as 45th President of the United States... is "immoral and dishonest," says retired four-star General Stanley McChrystal, criticizing the American leader's Middle East policy.
Speaking in an interview on Sunday, McChrystal, who once led the US military forces in Afghanistan, said Trump was not telling the truth most of the time.
"Do you think he’s a liar?" the former top general was asked on the set of "This Week with George Stephanopoulos."
"I don’t think he tells the truth," McChrystal responded.
"Is Trump immoral, in your view?" he was asked. "I think he is," he said.
McChrystal then praised outgoing US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis for speaking against Trump and said he would not accept any job offer from the president.
How very fortunate then, that you won’t be offered a job, General.
"It’s important for me to work with people who are basically honestly, who tell the truth as best they know," he said.
Mattis handed in his resignation letter earlier this month, shortly after Trump announced his decision to end the US military presence in Syria.
#3
Just remember general officers are political animals with some military training and experience. Somewhere between the second and third star, the politics shifts from inside the institution to outside pursuits.
#4
The are just the entry fees he's paying for consideration as SECDEF if the Democrats (The Party of Slavery, Treason, and Corruption (and so much more))(TM)win in 2020
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[Zero] No this wasn’t something Adolf Hitler said many decades ago, this is what 
Speaking engagement cancelled as stage collapses under retired Army general's massive ego. 
[NY Post] 
[PJ] WASHINGTON ‐ Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) told PJM that the federal government should conduct a study of reparations for descendants of slaves to be able to determine the best way to "repair some of the damage" that slavery has caused to the African-American community.
[The Hill] Dozens of outgoing lawmakers are looking to make the jump to K Street after an election that saw a massive number of GOP retirements and a Democratic wave flip control of the House.
[PRESSTV] US President 
