I love Christmas lights!
They remind me of the people who voted for Obama!
They all hang together, half of them don”t work,
and the ones that do …
aren’t all that BRIGHT!
And the low voltage (aka low information) burn outs in the middle ruin it for the rest of us! 🙂
U.S. President Barack Obama is apparently a fan of the Emmy-winning Netflix series House of Cards.
Before a meeting with tech magnates Tuesday morning, Obama shared a lighthearted exchange about the series with Netflix CEO Reed Hastings. Obama said he wished Washington politics were as “ruthlessly efficient” as the show’s portrayal. (mashable)
But I think the Washington Post has a closer explanation for his love of it:
The ways in which Kevin Spacey — as Rep. Frank Underwood — manipulates his colleagues suggests that he is a man among boys, that they are the sheep and he the shepherd. If Spacey was so very good about bending his colleagues to his will, why isn’t he the president? Or at least the Speaker of the House? (Frank is the House Majority Whip, the third ranking position in leadership.) There’s no question that in the actual Congress there are certain members who have savvier policy and political minds than others. But the black and white distinctions created by the show badly oversimplifies how most legislators interact.
It’s good to be the King. And oversimplification is a great Liberal trait.
‘Vote for Me, the Other Guy’s an Asshole!’ springs to mind…. 🙂
“I cannot imagine a more ‘indiscriminate’ and ‘arbitrary invasion’ than this systematic and high-tech collection and retention of personal data on virtually every single citizen for purposes of querying it and analyzing it without judicial approval,” wrote US District Judge Richard Leon. (of the The NSA spying).
The (IN-)Justice Department has continued to argue that plaintiffs in lawsuits against the spying program lack standing because they cannot prove their records were examined. But Judge Leon suggested that the old calculus that afforded police agencies great leeway when it came to monitoring communications has clearly changed.
Suggesting that the NSA has relied on “almost-Orwellian technology,” wrote Judge Leon, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia bench. “The relationship between the police and the phone company (as imagined by the courts decades ago)…is nothing compared to the relationship that has apparently evolved over the last seven years between the government and telecom companies.”
The judge concluded, “It’s one thing to say that people expect phone companies to occasionally provide information to law enforcement; it is quite another to suggest that our citizens expect all phone companies to operate what is effectively a joint intelligence-gathering operation with the government.”
This case will continue in the courts, as will others.
Remember when Liberals were apoplectic about “warrantless wiretapping”?? 🙂
John Stossel: This wasn’t a great year for liberty. A few disasters that government caused:
–Obamacare. It was supposed to “bend the cost curve” downward. The central planners had lots of time to perfect their scheme. For a generation, the brightest left-wing wonks focused on health care policy. The result? Soviet-style consumer service comes to America.
–Government shutdown. The real disaster was the unnecessary panic over it. Zoos would shut down, and baby pandas would starve. The media made it sound like America might not survive even slightly limited government. They were happy to echo the politicians’ claim that there’s no wasteful or stupid spending to cut.
“The cupboard is bare,” said Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. “There’s no more cuts to make.”
Nothing to cut? Government spends $3.8 trillion a year!
Many Republicans are almost as eager to spend as Democrats, despite the difference in rhetoric between the two parties. About the only spending reduction Republicans accomplished in the past few years was the so-called sequester — which really happened by legal default because the two parties couldn’t reach an agreement. The sequester instituted cuts of about $85 billion a year, a mere sliver of that $3.8 trillion budget and a still smaller sliver of our $17 trillion debt.
Yet even those modest cuts will not happen now under the new congressional agreement. Because some Republicans were upset the sequester made small cuts to the military’s budget and were fearful another partial government shutdown might hurt their chances in upcoming elections, they gave up the modest spending discipline the sequester imposed. Speaker of the House John Boehner, R-Ohio, said conservatives who want to keep the sequester are “ridiculous.”
The Republican behind the new agreement, Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., was once called a fanatical budget-slasher who wanted to push Granny off a cliff. People talked about him reading Ayn Rand and being a cutthroat capitalist. But now, even he abandons the meager budget cuts that were already scheduled.
I suppose Republicans feel they have no choice. They face Democrats who will cut nothing . They hope to win the Senate next election and realize that spending cuts are not particularly popular with the general public.
Americans say they want less spending. But then they fight for farm subsidies, flood insurance and “economic development” schemes. Most federal spending funds Social Security, Medicare and the military. Even citizens who sound fiscally conservative, especially elderly ones, don’t want these things cut.
–This was also the year we found out just how much the federal government spies on its own citizens. I annoyed my fellow libertarians by saying the privacy I lose to data mining seems a small price to pay for surveillance against terrorism. I posted a list of a hundred other things government does that upset me more. Some people responded by calling me a “traitor” and “LINO” (libertarian in name only).
Look, libertarians, I’m constantly angry at my government for lots of things, but I just can’t get worked up about data mining. My emails fly through the air. For all I know, my political enemies already read them.
It is upsetting, though, that the National Security Agency snooping goes far beyond what the government first claimed. President Barack Obama assured us the NSA does not read our emails or listen to our phone calls. But it turns out they sometimes do.
They say they only look for terrorists, and they won’t use the records to harass and punish their critics. But why would we trust that the same big government that spends $3.8 trillion a year, raids our homes looking for drugs and regulates almost every part of our lives won’t use its snooping powers to look into things other than terrorism?
Given the truth of Thomas Jefferson’s warning — “The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground” — I fear next year will be still worse for liberty.
To make it a better year, we can’t trust such a powerful government to restrain itself. We should cut back its duties to reduce its power.
But that means you have to get the drug addicts to voluntarily cut back on their drugs…:)