[American Thinker] In Mexico, it is often impolite to tell someone ’No.’ If you want to spare someone’s feelings, many people say ’Maybe.’
Everyone knows that means ’No.’
Mexico stopped worrying about American feelings long ago. Among the fashionable public officials and academics, scorn has been the ruling emotion for decades. And we see that more recently in the last week’s elections.
Pretending otherwise is just too much work in Mexico today. The new President declares he is a socialist, but he will be hard pressed to show how his new socialist policies are any different than the old socialist policies that govern so many parts of Mexican life. That’s what we said about Venezuela, come to think of it.
And those who predict their ’Fill in Blank’ Latin American country has finally bottomed out and is now turning around are often, even invariably, wrong.
But at least admitting they are socialists has the added benefit of sticking a finger in the eye of their terrible neighbors to the North -- whom everyone knows ruined Mexico by stealing a good chunk of the country in 1848.
Anyone who reads the daily papers in Mexico is reminded of that 157-year old treaty every day: for most of the country, the national slogan/curse remains "Mexico, so far from God, so close to the United States." We can even hear it today from Mexican nationals and their descendants in the U.S. who glorify La Raza at the expense of their adopted country.
Oh, and by the way, Americans are still waiting for any kind of public display of support for those who died on 9/11. Mexicans largely ignored it, when they were not supporting it behind closed doors at their local universities.
#1
Because at last count illegals send over $35 Billion in hard cash south every year, the Mexican government (?) needs the hard US dollars to prop up their Peso and keep the country afloat.
Much of the cartel money goes to US banks, those thugs may be brutal but they are not stupid enough to trust Mexican banks. So the US currency that keeps Mexico alive comes from moneygrams and mailgrams from the US.
[American Thinker] President Trump is unraveling eight years of Obama tyranny. Here is a little reminder why so many people now stand shoulder to shoulder with President Trump.
President Trump has chosen to unravel the last eight years of Obama's tyranny one day at a time. Trump is now reversing the negative Obama tide by simply implementing basic commonsense economic policies. The combination of this commonsense approach with tax cuts and the reversal of countless Obama executive order EPA regulations has resulted in a booming economy. Do you really think Obama cared about the middle class economically, or did he just take all of us for fools with his love of job-killing EPA regulations? These regulations did nothing but destroy American jobs and add costs to American-made products and U.S. private businesses. They had absolutely no real effect on the environment. Trump's reversal of these Obama regulations has brought back many U.S. jobs, and this has become the main contributing factor in revitalizing numerous U.S. industries.
Why would a president who cared about peace and security in the Middle East and the world recklessly remove U.S. troops from Iraq? Was Obama the Manchurian candidate? The devastating negative repercussions of Obama's removal of U.S. troops from Iraq will surely be felt for many decades. ISIS in filling up the power vacuum within the Middle East has caused hundreds of thousands of deaths. Trump has since cleaned up the ISIS mess, and it took him less than a year to do it.
Was Obama's compliance in enabling the terror state of Iran to receive 150 million dollars to basically self-regulate its nuclear program something that made the world a safer place? Thank God Trump has removed the U.S. from such a diabolical, one-sided "deal." The current uprisings in Iran might just take care of this problem. There will be no reprieve for the Iranian mullahs this time, not from President Trump.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
07/04/2018 11:44 Comments ||
Top||
#3
...and in the end only hurts consumers.
Really, better to have nearly everyone unemployed with a few money makers and dealers at the top of the heap. That's not going to make a nation. Everyone protects their interests. There is no Free Trade nor Workers Paradise. All theory, no practical application with humans. Let's have Fair Trade without sell out the house.
#5
Trump's mercantilist/protectionist policies are not good and in the end only hurts consumers.
Generally, tariffs are inlationary. Tariff costs get passed on to the consumer and result in increased prices. However, I wonder if tariffs can't provide an incentive to manufacture the products in the U.S. and thus create jobs. Suppose we buy steel from China. Further, suppose, we put a tariff on Chinese steel thus raising the costs and increasing the price of imported steel. If the price gets too high, there is an incentive, at some point, to consider manufacturing the steel in the U.S. When you add in transporation costs, it might become cheaper to manufacture more steel here.
[Fortune] Walmart is once again under fire for a shirt available on its Website.
The retailer (WMT, +0.52%) is facing calls for a boycott after supporters of President Donald Trump discovered a shirt for sale readying "Impeach 45".
The shirts, seemingly discovered by the chairman of the group Students for Trump, are one of a number of "Impeach 45" offerings, which range from sweatshirts to baby clothes from a wide variety of manufacturers. The company also sells a wide range of pro-Trump merchandise, including a substantial number of "Make America Great Again" hats.
News of the shirt prompted a #BoycottWalmart movement on Twitter and social media, with a large number of supporters jumping in.
#1
...Okay - FWIW, I just went to the Walmart website and searched for anything with 'Impeach 45' on it. Nothing, zip, nada, bupkis.
However....
At the bottom of the t-shirt page is a link that says, "Impeach 45 sale - Lowest Possible Price', and that goes to something called bestdeals.today. Buncha 'Impeach 45' shirts, you betcha...from Amazon.
And inbetween the links to the actual shirts are links to purchase:
*B&T USA - APC45 PISTOL,45ACP,1-25RD MAG
*FN - FNX-45 4IN 45 ACP STAINLESS BLACK POLYMER FIXED 3-DOT 10+1RD
*HECKLER & KOCH - HK45 COMPACT (V1) 3.9IN 45 ACP BLUE 8+1RD
All three of those links, by the by, go to the nice people at brownells.com. Wonder what they'd think of knowing that their products are being sold next to shirts for people who want said products banned...?
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
07/04/2018 8:26 Comments ||
Top||
#4
As I understand Walmers also had Hillary For Prison tees. I don't know whether it is my inner Rabid Free Market Capitalist or whether I'm just tired of this boycott bullshit, but I'm kinda sorta OK with this.
This is America. If you want to wear a tee-shirt branding you as a certain class of moron, it's your God-given right. Says so in the Constitution. Somewhere.
When the Oslo deal that would create two Islamic terror states inside Israel came up for a vote in the Knesset, the legislator whose vote helped it pass is the same man now accused of spying for Iran.
The strange story of Gonen Segev, doctor, Minister of Energy, drug smuggler, Nigerian exile and now accused Iranian spy, is also that of the dirty politics behind the peace process. It wasn’t idealism that made the deal with the PLO. It was dirty backroom deals with dangerously unprincipled politicians.
Segev's cousin had testified in court that he was "a pathological liar who makes excuses and evades responsibilities for his actions." But the same is true of the Israeli left which brought Segev on board.
h/t Instapundit
First things first: I'm not going to pretend to know what it's like to be a black woman. Hell, unlike Bruce Jenner, Bradley Manning, and many other dudes in 2018, I don't pretend to know what it's like to be any woman. But I do know that in America, black women have to put up with a lot more crap than most other people. They have to deal with both racism and sexism, which apparently is a phenomenon called "intersectionality." (I've tried and tried to figure out what that word actually means, but I guess I'm not smart enough to figure out modern feminism.) Black women have to work even harder and smarter than white women and black men do, just to make the same societal gains. For that reason, among others, I hope the Democrats nominate Kamala Harris for president in 2020.*
But as tough as it is to be a black woman, it must be even tougher when you know in your heart that you really are one, but your DNA disagrees. Imagine waking up and knowing exactly who you are inside, but then being confronted with the wrong face in the mirror. What a nightmare.
That's why I sympathize with Rachel Dolezal. I think she's been unfairly maligned by #woke America. But I'm not going to make excuses for her when she runs afoul of both social justice and actual justice.
...I don't know what's next for Rachel, or Nkechi, or whatever she wants to call herself. It's just too bad that while every other trans identity group is being celebrated these days -- transgender, transsexual, even transspecies -- Dolezal's transracial identity is mocked and excoriated. The same liberal scolds who are still yelling at me for typing "Bruce Jenner" in the first paragraph can't handle Dolezal's transition.
People only hate her because they think she's invading their territory. Racial identity is so precious to them that they can't think of anything else. In 2018 America, you can be anything you want to be, unless you want to be a black woman.
...The judicial branch was never meant to act as a superlegislature, using the verbiage of the Constitution in order to implement preferred policy prescriptions. In Federalist No. 78, Alexander Hamilton expressed the idea well: "The courts must declare the sense of the law; and if they should be disposed to exercise WILL instead of JUDGMENT, the consequence would equally be the substitution of their pleasure to that of the legislative body." Substituting will for judgment would make the case for utterly dissolving the judicial branch.
...In the end, the Democrats' obsession with the Supreme Court says more about them than about the role of the court. It says that they don't believe their policies are popular enough to win the country over at the electoral level. If the judiciary should be returned to its role of ruling by judgment rather than will, the will of the people might be heard once again -- and it wouldn't be friendly to Democrats. Democrats know it. Hence the panic.
#1
While they have fixated on the SCOTUS, Donald is jamming the lower courts full of constitutional scholars.
The dems don't quite realize how unpopular Roe v. Wade is and are making it a hill to die on for the next SCOTUS appointment. Making every issue a scorched earth battle is wearing thin with Joe Six Pack if it hasn't already and thousands more of the yellow dog democrats will leave.
#3
the purpose of Courts is to provide a method of resolving disputes without unsanctioned violence
I thought that was the purpose of politics & governments in general.
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.
