text:
Category: republicans
The Traitorous "Gang of 18" Republican Senators!
Yes, traitorous!
Traitorous in the sense that we were implored to support republicans in the 2022 elections to prevent exactly what they ended up voting for.
I guess the results of the 2022 midterms reflected the support the republican senate candidates deserved.
At least with the democrats, we know where they stand.
The "Gang of 18" republican senators can all be rightfully described as "snakes in the grass" sell-outs!
All republican politicians will end up paying the price for The Gang of 18. Mark my words. The republicans' contribution revenue stream has now officially dried up.
According to Anna Skinner, reporting for Newsweek, "The Senate voted to pass a $1.66 trillion omnibus spending bill Thursday afternoon with only a day remaining before a deadline that could partially shut down the government."
The shutting down of our government, even a partial shutdown, would be the best thing that could happen for our country.
"Eighteen Republicans joined all 48 Democrats and two independents ["Independents in name only!] in passing the bill, which must still pass through the House before it arrives on President Joe Biden's desk to be signed into law. The final vote was 68-29."
"If approved [by The House of Representatives], [and it was] the bill will extend government funding through September 30, 2023. It had been delayed for weeks as lawmakers argued over its proposals, which included funding around immigration, emergency disaster assistance and military aid to Ukraine."
Now, even after this bill's passage, they are still writing-in portions of the bill. It's the democrats' version of a late night voting dump.
"Before the Senate voted, former President Donald Trump slammed members of the Republican party for their potential help in passing the bill in a video message posted to Truth Social. Trump specifically targeted Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell [and rightfully so], who voted in favor of the bill."
"Trump had urged all members of his party to vote against the bill and called the bill a 'disaster' for the Republican Party since Republican senators could have stopped it. Trump also criticized Democrats for pushing the bill through Congress before Republicans take control of the House in the New Year."
"However, McConnell thought the bill was a win for Republicans because it increased the nation's defense budget by nearly 10 percent, according to an article by The Hill. Nondefense and nonveteran spending received a more than 5 percent bump, totaling $772 billion."
'"The world's greatest military will get the funding increase that it needs, outpacing inflation. Meanwhile, nondefense, nonveterans spending will come in below the rate of inflation, for a real-dollar cut,' McConnell said on the Senate floor, according to The Hill."
"If it is signed into law [and it will be], the bill will direct $19.8 billion toward Ukraine and NATO military aid and an additional $12.9 billion to help the Ukrainian economy as it battles through the Russia-Ukraine war, The Hill added."
"The House is expected to vote on the bill Thursday night or Friday morning. Punchbowl News founder Jake Sherman tweeted that since the Senate added several items to the bill, it could 'take a while to process and get to the House.'"
They did vote on the bill, and they passed it, and it didn't take very long at all. It's called "take the money and run."
Here is a full list of Republican senators [traitors] who voted in favor of the bill (in alphabetical order):
Roy Blunt (Missouri)
John Boozman (Arkansas)
Shelley Capito (West Virginia)
Susan Collins (Maine)
John Cornyn (Texas)
Tom Cotton (Arkansas)
Lindsey Graham (South Carolina)
Jim Inhofe (Oklahoma)
Mitch McConnell (Kentucky)
Jerry Moran (Kansas)
Lisa Murkowski (Alaska)
Rob Portman (Ohio)
Mitt Romney (Utah)
Mike Rounds (South Dakota)
Richard Shelby (Alabama)
John Thune (South Dakota)
Roger Wicker (Mississippi)
Todd Young (Indiana)
This "Gang of 18" should go down in infamy, regarding their unnecessary capitulation to the democrats, and their disregard of their constituents and conservative Americans everywhere.
From the mouth of liberal propaganda news headquarters itself, CNN, we hear some of the lowlights of the omnibus bill.
Tami Luhby and Katie Lobosco report for CNN, "What's in the massive government funding bill? Some [most, if not all] Congress members may not even know."
And that's another thing. Who actually wrote-up this 4,000 plus page behemoth of a bill?
And shouldn't the actual author(s) be published on the bill?
"The House passed a $1.7 trillion yearlong federal government spending bill on Friday, paving the way for it to be signed into law by President Joe Biden."
"The legislation includes $772.5 billion for nondefense discretionary programs and $858 billion in defense funding, according to a bill summary from Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy, chair of the Senate Committee on Appropriations. That would represent an increase in spending in both areas for fiscal year 2023."
A few hundred billion dollars here, and a few hundred billion dollars there, and pretty soon we're talking about some real money!
"The sweeping package includes roughly $45 billion in emergency assistance to Ukraine and NATO allies, and an overhaul of the electoral vote-counting law…"
"It also would provide a boost in spending for disaster aid [But not for Florida hurricane relief, however. Hmmm, I wonder why?]…, and additional funds for the US Capitol Police, according to Leahy's summary and one from Sen. Richard 'Benedict Arnold' Shelby of Alabama, the top Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee."
So, democrat politicians (and The Gang of 18) want the police defunded for us, but additionally funded for them. Isn't that special?
"And the legislation contains several major Medicaid provisions, particularly one that could disenroll up to 19 million people from the nation's health insurance program for low-income Americans."
Well, isn't that wonderful as well?
"However, the bill, which runs more than 4,000 pages [more than three times the size of The Bible], left out several measures that some lawmakers had fought to include. An expansion of the child tax credit, as well as multiple other corporate and individual tax breaks, did not make it into the final bill."
That's odd.
"The spending bill, which would keep the government operating through September, the end of the fiscal year, is the product of lengthy negotiations between top congressional Democrats and Republicans."
Ahh, yes…, we love those "top congressional democrats and republicans!" Especially our top "bend over" republican snakes in the grass!
"Here's what's in the bill [some of the lowlights]:"
"More aid for Ukraine: The spending bill would provide roughly $45 billion to help support Ukraine's efforts to defend itself against Russia's attack."
We surely can't leave Ukraine off of the gravy train.
"Also, it would provide $13 billion for economic support to the Ukrainian government. Other funds would address humanitarian and infrastructure needs…"
Our own economy and humanitarian, and infrastructure needs are all good here, so…
"Emergency disaster assistance: The bill would appropriate more than $38 billion in emergency funding to help Americans in the west and southeast affected by recent natural disasters, including tornadoes, hurricanes, flooding and wildfires."
Like I mentioned earlier, Florida hurricane relief is not included here for some reason. I wonder why that would be?
"Overhaul of the electoral vote-counting law: A provision in the legislation aims at making it harder to overturn a certified presidential election, the first legislative response to the US Capitol insurrection and then-President Donald Trump's campaign to stay in power despite his loss in 2020. The legislation would clarify the vice president's role while overseeing the certification of the electoral result to be completely ceremonial."
This is the "how dare you attempt to question our illegitimate election results" portion of the program.
"Funding for January 6 attack prosecutions: The bill would provide $2.6 billion for US Attorneys, which would include funding efforts "to further support prosecutions related to the January 6 attack on the Capitol and domestic terrorism cases," according to a fact sheet from the House Appropriations Committee."
"Domestic terrorists" as in concerned parents at school board meetings?
And would that "further support of prosecutions related to January 6" include Nancy Pelosi and all of her FBI co-conspirators?
"The package also gives $11.3 billion to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, including for efforts to investigate extremist violence and domestic terrorism. The funding measures are part of nearly $39 billion that would be for the Justice Department."
We can't neglect the support for our politically weaponized versions of our own Gestapo and KGB, can we?
"Changes to Medicaid and other health care programs: The spending bill would phase out the requirement that prevented states from disenrolling Medicaid recipients…"
Hmmm, seems legit.
"Under the spending bill, states would be able to start evaluating Medicaid enrollees' eligibility and terminating their coverage as of April 1."
Those damn Medicaid enrollees, wanting to be all heathy and stuff!
"Up to 19 million people could lose their Medicaid benefits, according to estimates, though many would be eligible for other coverage."
Exactly what "other coverage" would that be?
Maybe we'll get the special kind of coverage that Congress enjoys instead! Ya, that must be it!
"Plus, the package would provide more money for the National Institutes of Health [NIH] and the Centers for Disease Control…"
Oh, goodie! More money for the political, fake science, "doctors" to promote liberal control policies, propaganda, and out and out lies.
"It would include nearly $53 billion to address higher inflation [by actually increasing inflation] and $2.7 billion, a 25% increase, to support critical services and housing assistance for veterans and their families."
I would really like to know exactly how this money will "support critical services" and "housing assistance."
Why do I think we would be way, way better served by just turning this money over directly to an organization like Tunnels to Towers or Wounded Warrior Project?
"The bill would also help families who have had their food stamp benefits stolen since October 1 through what's known as 'SNAP skimming. It would provide them with retroactive federal reimbursement of the funds, which criminals steal by attaching devices to point-of-sale machines or PIN pads to get card numbers and other information from electronic benefits transfer cards."
Say what? Is this really that big of a thing? I'm sure it would be hilarious to see exactly how this would be processed and administered. Why do I think the criminal will find a way to double dip on the skimming and the reimbursement? Just a wild, but educated, guess.
"Help to pay utility bills: The bill would provide $5 billion for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program. Combined with the $1 billion contained in the earlier continuing resolution, this would be the largest regular appropriation for the program, according to the National Energy Assistance Directors Association. Home heating and cooling costs, and the applications for federal aid in paying the bills have soared this year."
Here's an idea! Why not just reverse some of the idiotic democrat anti-energy policy, and nip this in the bud, so people won't need assistance to begin with? Of course, with that scenario, people would be less dependent on government, and we can't have that!
"Additional funding for the US Capitol Police: The bill would provide an additional $132 million for the Capitol Police for a total of nearly $735 million. It would allow the department to hire up to 137 sworn officers and 123 support and civilian personnel, bringing the force to a projected level of 2,126 sworn officers and 567 civilians."
As I mentioned earlier, democrat politicians (and The Gang of 18) want the police defunded for us, but additionally funded for them. They require 2,700 people to protect 635 representatives? That's roughly four people for every representative. Boy, they must really be important! On our end of things, we're lucky to have one police officer for every 300 of us.
"It would also give $2 million to provide off-campus security for lawmakers in response to evolving and growing threats."
I'm not even sure what to say about this. If I did, it would be nothing good.
"More resources for children's mental health and for substance abuse: The bill would provide more funds to increase access to mental health services for children and schools. It also would invest more money to address the opioid epidemic and substance use disorder."
Again, not a bad thing. But while we are allowing tons of drugs to flow over our border every day, it seems like an attempt to additionally fund our missile defense system with fly swatters.
"Investments in homelessness prevention and affordable housing: The legislation would provide $3.6 billion for homeless assistance grants, a 13% increase. It would serve more than 1 million people experiencing homelessness."
Oh, yeah! Because these current homelessness prevention programs are working so well!
"The package also would funnel nearly $6.4 billion to the Community Development Block Grant formula program and related local economic and community development projects that benefit low and moderate income areas and people, an increase of almost $1.6 billion."
Another stupid and wasteful program that will just continue to line the pockets of people who are talking a good game, but actually doing nothing to help these low income areas.
For a good example of these wonderfully wasteful programs, please let me refer you to one of my prior blogs:
"Sleepless in Seattle?" No…, homeless in Seattle.
"More support for the environment: The package would provide an additional $576 million for the Environmental Protection Agency [EPA], bringing its funding up to $10.1 billion."
More increased funding for a government agency with way too much uncontrolled power as it is.
Let me just add that all of the alphabet of government agencies, with all of their unelected Nazi wannabes, are up to no good, and are all involved in only controlling us more. That would include, for starters, in no particular order, the IRS, NSA, NIH, CDC, DHS, DEA, FBI, CIA, EPA, DOE, FCC, FEC, NRC, and the DOJ. And like I said, this is a list just for starters.
In addition, we see funding for:
A Michelle Obama "trail" for $3.6 million,
An LGBTQ museum in New York City for $3 million,
$410 million to secure foreign borders, with nothing to secure our own borders,
$7.5 million to study the "domestic radicalization phenomenon," whatever that means. Since they feel it is a "radicalization," I can only assume it is a study to target and minimalize normal, everyday, patriotic citizens.
And, $200 million for something called the "Gender equity and Equality Action Fund." Here, again, I'd like to see an actual accounting of where this money is going, and how it is actually being used.
And there is more disgusting wasteful spending we will hear about as people continue to dissect this monstrosity of a bill.
Oh, and I forgot to mention they threw in a 16.5% raise for themselves. How's that for a cherry on top?!
Thank you "Gang of 18" for your irresponsible and unexplainable support of the democrats and their continued degradation of our great country. You have officially become heroes of "the swamp," and newly minted members of "the dark side."
Hershel Walker and Kim Klacic at the RNC: The whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Caleb Parke of Fox News reports, "Raised a Democrat and a longtime friend of President Trump, former Heisman Trophy winner Herschel Walker told 'The Ingraham Angle' [a nightly news and opinion-based talk show on the Fox News channel] Monday night he wanted to give people a picture of who the president really is on the first night of the 2020 Republican National Convention."
'"What this president has done for America needs to be known, and I think it's not being known,' the former Heisman Trophy winner told Laura Ingraham."
"Host Laura Ingraham praised Walker for one of the 'most powerful and memorable speeches of the night' in which the former NFL player shared advice Trump gave him many years ago and why he is such a strong supporter now."
'"I don't think people really know Donald Trump. I think they look at Donald Trump from a tweet or look at from what he says, and they're not looking at what he does,' Walker told Ingraham."
On top of that, many Americans get a distorted impression of President Trump from the fake news, liberal propaganda media. The media declines to give this president credit for doing anything positive, while at the same time focusing on negative witch hunts, hoaxes, and personal attacks.
'"Donald Trump has done more in three years than most presidents have done in eight, and what's so special about him is he cares about people and that's what I wanted people to know.'"
"The Trump-supporting football legend spoke about his friendship and how he prays the president gets more time in office."
'"I've had a personal friendship with Donald Trump for 37 years, and during all this time he has never, never, never asked Herschel Walker to speak for him, and after they've called him all types of names, and I know Donald Trump,' Walker said. 'I've been with him in very, very special moments and I've never seen that in him and that's why I wanted to speak for him.'"
Walker noted that he "grew up in the deep south" and that he "knows what racism looks like," and that "Donald Trump is no racist."
So, here's a respected, genuine, and sincere Black man, who has had a "personal friendship with Donald Trump" for 37 years, but the racist and disingenuous commentators and talking heads at CNN and MSNBC continue to attack The President without and basis for their attacks, and claim to know him better.
"He [Walker] added, 'What this president has done for America needs to be known, and I think it's not being known. People do not want to mention even the things he's done in three years … normally when you run for a political party, you don't know what you say. This president here has done almost everything he said that he was going to do and that counts.'"
"Responding to Democratic Georgia state Rep. Vernon Jones' comments about being attacked by his own party and given Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden's controversial comments about Black Americans voting for him, Walker said, 'I'm not going to call him what even his vice president called him during the debate, he had some racist tendencies.'"
"Walker, 58, said he's not calling Biden a racist but questions how Democratic vice-presidential nominee, Kamala Harris, can support him now after what she said about him in the primaries [regarding race and sexual assault claims]."
But remember, we're talking about politicians here, and more specifically, democrat politicians. They have NO shame and NO moral standards.
'"We have a Democratic Party, today, not telling anyone where they stand on anything,' he said. 'That is the honest truth, but they want you to go to a voting booth and make an emotional decision.'"
The democrats don't want to advertise where they stand on issues because they stand with Communist China, and socialist/communist/fascist regimes all around the world, and they know they can't get elected if this ugly truth is let out of the bag.
"Walker said he wants young African Americans to be free thinkers and educate themselves on the issues."
'"I was raised Democrat, and I didn't know any better, and what's strange is I'm not saying the Democrat Party is bad, I'm saying it doesn't fit what I believe,' he said."
That's okay Hershel, but I'll say it…, I'll say the democrat party is bad without any reservation.
'"First of all, I believe in God, I believe in family, I believe in the American flag, I believe in the national anthem. I believe in law and order. While the Democrat Party has not said that they believe in any of those things. That's what made America beautiful.'"
Walker also believes we can be patriotic and supportive of social justice at the same time. It doesn't have to be one or the other.
"The former running back for the [University of Georgia], Dallas Cowboys, Minnesota Vikings, Philadelphia Eagles and New York Giants says sports and politics should be separate."
"It seems like we have a political civil war right now where people are afraid to speak their mind and that's sad.'"
And in many cases, people aren't "afraid to speak their mind," but they're being attacked, shunned, boycotted, censored and cancelled.
It is an all-out attack on the first amendment rights of all Americans who won't bow down to the prescribed liberal narrative.
You can watch Hershel Walker's speech via the link below.
http://video.foxnews.com/v/6184232613001
Megan Henney of Fox News reports, "Baltimore [congressional] candidate Kim Klacik puts Dems on notice over Black support: 'You've Ignored us for too long.'"
"Kim Klacik says, "The days of Black voters blindly supporting Democrats are coming to an end!"
"Kim Klacik, a GOP congressional candidate who suggested that Democrats don't care about Black voters in a viral campaign ad, took aim at Joe Biden in a speech during the first night of the Republican National Convention, accusing the Democratic nominee of believing that Black Americans 'can't think for ourselves.'"
You can check out her campaign ad below.
https://twitter.com/kimKBaltimore/status/1295461903268040707?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1295930978582568963%7Ctwgr%5E&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.foxnews.com%2Fpolitics%2Fkim-klacik-republican-national-convention-speech
"Klacik, who is Black, is the Republican nominee running to represent Maryland's 7th Congressional district, a Democratic stronghold that was represented for years by the late Rep. Elijah Cummings."
You know…, Elijah Cummings the saint, Elijah Cummings the fearless fighter for civil rights and justice, Elijah Cummings the African American icon.
Now ponder his perception with the reality of the condition of his congressional district.
What we're really talking about here is Elijah Cummings the fraud.
I'll give Elijah Cummings one thing though…, he sure was good at pulling the wool over the eyes of all of his constituents' and keeping his flock of democrat sheep on the plantation!
'"Joe Biden believes we can't think for ourselves — that the color of someone's skin dictates their political views,' she said in her remarks. 'We're not buying the lies anymore — you and your party have ignored us for too long.'"
"Black voters as a whole helped Biden clinch the Democratic nomination after a decisive victory during the South Carolina primary. But that success hinges on his support among older Black voters."
"Klacik rose to national prominence last week when President Trump shared one of her campaign ads, which shows her marching by abandoned rowhouses in a red dress and matching stilettos, lambasting Democratic politicians for abandoning Black Americans."
'"Black people don't have to vote Democrat,' she says at the end of the 2.5-minute video. Baltimore's population is about 60% Black, according to the Census Bureau."
"The ad, titled "Black Lives Don't Matter to Democrats," has been viewed more than 11.4 million times."
"Klacik hit that same theme again on Monday during her address, accusing Democrats of running Baltimore — and other major cities across the country – 'into the ground,' despite high taxes."
And who can dispute that claim?
'"And yet, the Democrats still assume that Black people will vote for them, no matter how much they let us down and take us for granted,' she continued. 'Nope. We're sick of it and we're not going to take it anymore. The days of blindly supporting the Democrats are coming to an end!'"
Amen, Kim…, and let's hope you're right!
If you're not already "following" me and you liked my blog(s) today, please "click" on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article. From there you can let me know if you "like" my blog, leave a comment or click the white "FOLLOW" button at the bottom of that page, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.
We're all entitled to our opinions. I value yours and your feedback as well.
I'd love to hear from you!
Our national debt is a national disgrace!
You'll hear people complaining that the more than $22,000,000,000,000 ($22 trillion) national debt we have can be blamed on democrats and republicans, and they would be correct, but on the other hand I don't see liberals attempting to really do anything about it or bring it to anyone's attention.
There is at least a group of conservative congress people who attempt to act like responsible adults.
In this instance, a number of republican lawmakers are seeking to declare our $22 trillion debt a national security threat, and there is no doubt that our debt IS a national security threat.
According to Doug McKelway, a Washington correspondent for Fox News, "Few politicians appear willing to address the hard choices that debt reduction would entail: higher taxes and less spending."
Wow…, now that is breaking news…, NOT!
Not only do most politicians not want to talk about debt reduction, quite a few of our liberal friends are actually promoting a seemingly unlimited expansion of the national debt.
"We introduced this resolution because the United States is racing towards a fiscal cliff," Representative Andy Biggs, a Republican from Arizona, who is sponsoring the legislation, said. "Congress is taking few measures to solve this problem, and it is beyond time for our colleagues in both chambers to become serious about balancing the nation's budget and recognize this issue as a threat to our national security."
According to Sally Persons of Fox News, "A similar resolution was introduced last year on the House side, but this time sponsors were able to get some support from Senate colleagues. Biggs has been working with Senator David Perdue, a republican from Georgia, and a vocal advocate for addressing the debt, who even has a debt clock in his office, on a similar resolution in the upper chamber."
"The single greatest threat to our national security is our national debt, and it's time Washington comes to grips with that reality," Perdue told Fox News. "This month, our national debt topped $22 trillion. This news should have sounded alarms throughout Washington, but bureaucrats and career politicians didn't even blink an eye."
Senator Rand Paul, a republican from Kentucky, admonished his fellow members last year over the budget and spending increases. His opposition actually led to a short government shutdown.
"If you were against President Obama's deficits and now you're for the Republican deficits isn't that the very definition of hypocrisy?" Paul said on the Senate floor last year. "Don't you remember when Republicans howled to high heaven that President Obama was spending us into the gutter, spending us into oblivion?"
Leaders in the national security community have also made their concerns known about the massive debt. Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats listed the debt as a national security concern last year in a hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee.
"This situation is unsustainable as I think we all know and represents a dire threat to our economic and national security," Coats said.
"Ultimately, the debt impacts our ability to fund priorities, like providing our men and women in uniform with the resources they need to protect Americans," Perdue said. "This debt crisis will only get worse, and if we don't act now, our country will lose the ability to do the right thing."
Let's take a closer look about what we're actually talking about here when we talk about a national debt of over $22,000,000,000,000 ($22 trillion).
Every citizen, meaning every man, woman, child or whatever you are, would have to come up with about $68,000 to pay off the national debt.
According to Chris Pandolfo of the Conservative Review:
Not every citizen pays taxes, however. Every taxpaying citizen owes approximately $166,000 towards the national debt.
The national debt is bigger than the value of everything produced in America over one year (U.S. GDP, Gross Domestic Product, = $19.3 trillion).
That means every dollar you worked for this year and everything of value produced in this country right now is not enough to meet our debt obligations.
Government estimates currently project this year's budget deficit alone will be $693 billion, which in turn gets added to the running national debt.
To avoid default, the government needs to make interest payments on our debt. As the debt increases, the interest payments go up, too.
A complete collapse is the threat of such uncontrollable debt. And an economic collapse would mean massive cuts to government programs like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid in a very short amount of time.
When taxes go up, social services stop, paychecks get smaller, and jobs are lost. There, you have the perfect recipe for civil unrest. This is what happened in Greece.
Our national debt increases at an average rate of $27,762.94 per second.
If it took you five minutes to read this, the debt grew by at least another $8 million in that time.
This obviously cannot last.
Eventually we will be unable to make the payments we need to make. When that happens, this country could see economic devastation that looks like Venezuela.
In his farewell address, George Washington urged the nation to "avoid … the accumulation of debt not only by shunning occasions of expense but by vigorous exertions to discharge the debts, no throwing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought to bear."
It's time to take President Washington's advice seriously, or we all will end up suffering.
Additionally, Simon Black from the website Sovereignman.com added:
A "trillion" almost seems like a fantasy… a made-up number like "a bajillion" or "a gazillion."
It's a number so large that our minds don't even have the ability to grasp the real meaning of it, because there is so little within our physical human experience that we can relate to it.
To put the number into perspective, consider that in the entire history of humanity no other nation has ever had as much debt as the United States. And yes, that fact is adjusted for inflation.
Let's say you start spending money when Jesus was born, on the first Christmas.
You start spending $1,000,000 (1 million) every hour. Over two thousand years pass, and by a miracle, you're still alive…, and you're still spending $1,000,000 every hour since Jesus' birth.
So, spending $1,000,000 X 24 hours per day X 365 days per year X 2018 years…, you'd spend $18 trillion. You'd still have spent less that the current US national debt.
Worse yet, the Treasury Department has already estimated that it will borrow another $1 trillion this fiscal year, an additional $1 trillion next year, and another trillion dollars the year after that.
Can you see the insanity?
But the scariest factor is how quickly the US national debt is growing.
On October 22, 1981, the national debt in the United States crossed the $1 trillion threshold for the first time in history.
People were rightly dismayed. It had taken nearly two centuries to reach that unfortunate milestone.
And over that time the country had been through a revolution, civil war, two world wars, the Great Depression, the nuclear arms race…, plus dozens of other conflicts, financial panics, and economic crises.
So who owns the $22 trillion of our national debt?
If you are like most people, you probably have the most concerns about the Chinese and other foreign holders of the national debt. But in reality you should be most worried about the national debt owned by the American people.
It's a bigger number than all the foreign holders combined.
This may seem unbelievable at first, but let's take it step-by-step and in a moment it will all make sense. We'll start with the biggest holders of the national debt:
Federal Agencies:
The second biggest holder are other branches of the US government. You may feel relieved reading this…, after all, it looks like the US government owes a huge portion of its debt to itself and could simply "erase" it if it wanted to.
But it's important to look closer, because this is the first way of how you own a big portion of the government debt.
The vast majority of this debt is actually held by various government funds such as Social Security and retirement funds.
So…, the entitlements causing our debt own a lot of our debt? How does that work?
This is getting scary.
The US government has made the promise to take care of its citizens. To achieve this goal they put a portion of the collected tax revenue into various funds.
These funds don't just keep the money in the bank and instead invest a portion of it into various financial instruments to grow it. One of these financial instruments is the national debt in the form of government bonds.
But the important thing to realize here is that this money belongs to the American citizens and not to the government.
And the government has the obligation to pay back that debt in order to allow the Social Security Trust Fund and other funds to fulfill their obligations to the people.
If they don't pay it back, then it is you, the American citizen, who is on the hook for that debt.
This seems to be a "circular" nightmare that just cannot end well.
The Financial Industry:
The third biggest holder is the financial industry. These are mutual funds, banks, private pensions, insurance companies, savings bonds and so on.
This is another way of you how are exposed to and own the government debt. Even if you personally don't own the debt, you certainly have a bank account, a 401(k) or an IRA.
And these financial institutions own government bonds purchased with your money.
Here again, we are somehow profiting from our own debt…, our own demise?
The Federal Reserve (America's central bank):
The Federal Reserve is the fourth biggest holder. It's the central bank of the United States and also known as "The Fed." And although it sounds like a government entity, there is nothing "federal" about the Federal Reserve, it's a private institution.
This private institution has control over the money supply of the United States. It establishes interest rates and has the power to conjure up money out of thin air.
This is an extraordinary power. And it has been awarded to an unelected committee of power brokers, many whom come from the investment banks.
I don't like the sound of this already.
It works like this:
"The Fed" literally creates money out of thin air and buys government debt with it. The government uses that money to fund government operations, but in return it has to pay interest to The Fed.
Then The Fed pays out a portion of the earned interest and other profits as dividends to its shareholders, who happen to be other private banks such as JPMorgan.
Much of your income taxes are not used for roads, schools or other public services, but are spent on interest paid to The Fed…, on money it created out of nothing.
It's a perverse system designed to transfer wealth from the American people directly to the banking elite. By continuing its unsustainable spending and debt habits, the US government is stealing from the future, your future and your children's future.
So it is basically what we have come to expect from "the swamp."
Other holders:
Other debt holders include individuals, bank trusts and estates, businesses and other investors… to the tune of over $1.6 trillion.
Included among these "other holders" of US debt is legendary investor and CEO/chairman of Berkshire Hathaway, Warren Buffett. Berkshire has over $100 billion parked in short-term Treasury bills.
State and Local Governments:
Large financial institutions, hedge funds and other investors are not alone in their holdings of US government debt.
Your state government has money invested in US government debt. And it's likely that your local government also holds federal debt.
So, with your state and even local government holding a portion of the US national debt, you're a creditor exposed in multiple ways to a federal government default.
The Social Security "Trust Fund" owns $2.8 trillion of our debt, roughly the same as the top 5 foreign holders of US debt.
Medicare owns another $294 billion.
Financial institutions own $3.4 trillion.
That's a total of about $6.5 trillion and about one-sixth of the national debt. This is an even larger amount than all the foreign holders combined and makes YOU AND I the largest holders of US national debt.
Whether you like it or not, your money is exposed to the national debt and you are a holder of the US national debt in one form or another.
Nobody knows exactly when, but at some point, this whole debt bubble is going to burst.
This economic disaster will be a government default on its debt, and based on other government defaults throughout history, the situation won't be pretty.
So, congratulations, you're on the hook for this massive, unsustainable debt. You're left holding the bag. You and your family are the ones who will fight for a chair when the music stops.
Do we realistically have a chance at ever paying off our national debt?
The unfortunate and short answer is…, No.
In fact, it's MATHEMATICALLY impossible for the US to pay off its national debt.
In other words, the government could COMPLETELY CUT FUNDING for these 14 departments:
… And the government's annual budget would still be in the red.
It's all about the entitlement programs (programs where we get money back from our government), which account for about 60% of our annual budget.
Entitlement programs are used by politicians to "buy" votes by convincing us how compassionate they are as they dole out our own money (and our own future debt) back to us, as if they were digging into their own wallet or purse.
And now we have liberal politicians promoting the "Green New Deal," which would make our current debt look like pocket change!
I really don't want to scare you…, but you should be scared.
You should be very scared.
You should be scared enough to make sure you vote next time for a congressional representative, a senator or a president who is courageous enough to do what is right for our country as opposed to selling us all down the river for their own political gain.
NOTE: If you're not already "following" me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the very bottom of this page and click the "Follow" button. That'll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.
The hypocrisy of "the left" knows no bounds!
According to Paul Farhi of The Washington Post, "The Democrat National Committee (DNC) has decided to exclude Fox News Channel from televising any of its candidate debates during the 2019-2020 cycle …"
Is this even legal? Isn't this a violation of the freedom of the press? It surely is at least un-American.
You can't say the democrats aren't consistent.
Consistently hypocritical.
Consistently unconstitutional.
"In a statement Wednesday, DNC Chairman Tom Perez cited a story in the New Yorker magazine this week that detailed how Fox has promoted President Trump's agenda. The article, titled 'The Making of the Fox News White House,' suggested that the news network had become a 'propaganda' vehicle for Trump."
(Please see my other blog today on this very topic.)
"I believe that a key pathway to victory is to continue to expand our electorate and reach all voters," said Perez in his statement to The Washington Post.
Soooo you "expand" your electorate "and reach all voters" by excluding certain news coverage? You "expand" the reach of your party by excluding the most watched cable news channel on TV? Is this what they call liberal common sense? It sounds like you're talking out of both sides of your mouth. You're a democrat alright!
'"That is why I have made it a priority to talk to a broad array of potential media partners, including Fox News. Recent reporting in the New Yorker on the inappropriate relationship between President Trump, his administration and Fox News has led me to conclude that the network is not in a position to host a fair and neutral debate for our candidates. Therefore, Fox News will not serve as a media partner for the 2020 Democratic primary debates,' Perez added."
Oh, you mean they won't be fair and neutral and allow the DNC to provide debate questions to your candidate of choice before the debate, like what happened last time at a CNN debate?
We are all also painfully aware of how "fair and neutral" the "biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media" is towards President Trump and the virtually 100% negative reporting around the clock.
But that's okay?
It sure is okay…, in the whacky world of irrational and hypocritical democrats.
"Hours later, Trump responded to the decision by suggesting he might seek to retaliate."
"Democrats just blocked @FoxNews from holding a debate," he said in a tweet Wednesday night. "Good, then I think I'll do the same thing with the Fake News Networks and the Radical Left Democrats in the General Election debates!"
Nice retaliatory strike Mr. President! The DNC obviously didn't consider what the repercussions of their "stupidness" would be. That's what happens when all of these idiots get together in a room and bounce dumb ideas off of each other.
"Numerous networks, including Fox, have submitted proposals to the DNC to televise one of the 12 scheduled debates, which will start in June."
12 debates?! And that's only amongst the democrats! By the time we get to the twelfth debate there won't be anything left that the democrats and their socialist government can give away "free" that the democrat candidates will be able to promote.
"So far, the organization has only awarded rights to the first two, to NBC (along with sister networks MSNBC and Telemundo) and to CNN."
Telemundo?! Really?
Well, I suppose the DNC does have to be careful to consider the tens of millions of illegal immigrant voters who can't speak English.
I'm sorry…, I'm bad…, I know it…, but I just couldn't help myself.
"In a statement, Fox News Senior Vice President Bill Sammon said: 'We hope the DNC will reconsider its decision to bar Chris Wallace, Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum, all of whom embody the ultimate journalistic integrity and professionalism, from moderating a Democrat presidential debate. They're the best debate team in the business and they offer candidates an important opportunity to make their case to the largest TV news audience in America, which includes many persuadable voters.'"
We shouldn't be surprised by these turn of events. The DNC is just the logical extension of the liberal fascists we see all of the time attempting to silence conservative voices on college campuses around our country and at other public events and public protests.
We are well aware of their "playbook" by now.
In the Socialist democrat world, the freedom of speech only applies to those who believe like they do. Everyone else must be shouted down, silenced and labeled as racists, misogynists, homophobes and Nazis.
Former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe is a treasonous weasel among treasonous weasels!
Yes…, former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe is a treasonous weasel, and so are all of the rest of his partners in crime from Obama's DOJ and Obama's FBI.
All of these vermin in this "swampy" nest of rats should be in jail in my opinion, and they still may end up there.
Catherine Herridge, Chief Intelligence Correspondent for Fox News, reported that, "Former FBI acting Director McCabe says the DOJ discussed removing President Trump under the 25th Amendment."
Wait…, say what?!
"THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DISCUSSED REMOVING NEWLY ELECTED PRESIDENT TRUMP FROM OFFICE!"
And no one in the "biased, liberal, fake news media" feels this is worth reporting at all.
If you regularly watch NBC, ABC, MSNBC or CNN you would not be aware of any of this because they all have chosen to ignore it. Propaganda by omission.
Now take a minute to think about the reporting that would have resulted if the same type of efforts had been directed at former President Obama after he was duly elected.
That is what we call the "biased, liberal, fake news media."
Michael Goodwin, of the New York Post, added, "McCabe, you see, has reminded us once again that there really is a powerful deep state, and that there has not been a full accounting of rampant FBI misconduct during the presidential campaign of 2016."
"There is also still too much we don't know about the role top aides to then-President Barack Obama and higher-ups in the Justice Department played in spying on the Trump campaign and leaks of classified information for partisan purposes."
"In short, what is arguably the greatest scandal in the history of America remains mostly hidden from the public. That shroud of secrecy piles one scandal on top of another."
This was undoubtedly an unprecedented plot to swing an election and later to remove the duly-elected president.
Andy "poor little angel" McCabe is talking because he's peddling a book and, just like "Leakin' and Lyin'" James Comey before him.
McCabe then used an interview with CBS' "Sixty Minutes" to offer up more details of a discussion within the FBI and the DOJ to use the 25th Amendment to remove Trump from office.
According to Michael Goodwin, "McCabe said that the effort took shape immediately after Trump fired Comey in May 2017 and that numerous people were involved, including Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. Rosenstein, through an aide, denied the account."
So now we one lying "swamp rat" calling another lying "swamp rat" a liar.
All of these treasonous rats try to convince us that they were acting in the best interests of our country. Ya…, that's what all traitors say. In actuality, they were acting in their own best interests.
Goodwin continues by saying, "Meanwhile, we do know that Comey and his dirty crew used the unverified Christopher Steele dossier, which was funded by Hillary Clinton's campaign, to get a secret court warrant to spy on the Trump campaign. And FBI text messages, along with congressional testimony, confirm that the same agents probing Trump were simultaneously involved in the Clinton e-mail investigation and decided to go easy on her because they thought she would be their next boss. Recall that Peter Strzok, the top agent in both cases, called the Trump probe an "insurance policy" in the event he won."
Please tell me…, how are any of these slimy, treasonous, conspirators not in jail, still walking around, and selling books on top of it all?
Alan Dershowitz is an accredited and well-respected American lawyer and academic. He is a scholar of United States Constitutional law and criminal law, and a noted civil libertarian. Most of his career has been at Harvard Law School where, in 1967, at the age of 28, he became the youngest full professor of law in its history. He retired from Harvard in 2013, and subsequently became a regular CNN and Fox News contributor and political and legal analyst.
Dershowitz, giving his take on McCabe's descriptions of Justice Department meetings where he said officials discussed ousting the president, said, "If [McCabe's comments are] true, it is clearly an attempt at a coup d'état," Dershowitz said.
"Evoking the 25th Amendment," Dershowitz added, "would be a fundamental misuse of its original purpose. It was originally about Woodrow Wilson having a stroke. It's about a president being shot and not being able to perform his office."
So what exactly is in the 25th Amendment that is being referred to?
Sections 3 and 4 from the 25th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America says:
3: Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.
4: Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.
The 25th Amendment was added to the Constitution in February of 1967.
Dershowitz added that, "Any justice official who discussed the 25th Amendment in the context of ousting the president has committed a grievous offense against the Constitution," and that "using the 25th Amendment to circumvent the impeachment process or an election, is a despicable act of unconstitutional power grabbing."
Mr. Dershowitz is definitely not mincing words here.
Getting back to the "Sixty Minutes" interview, "These were the eight days from Comey's firing to the point that Robert Mueller was appointed special counsel," Scott Pelley, the '60 Minutes' host said. "And the highest levels of American law enforcement were trying to figure out what to do with the president." He [McCabe] said people involved were 'counting noses' and considering who might agree to the idea [of trying to remove The President].
"I was speaking to the man who had just run for the presidency and won the election for the presidency and who might have done so with the aid of the government of Russia, our most formidable adversary on the world stage. And that was something that troubled me greatly," McCabe said in one excerpt.
Excuse me Mr. McCabe, but that is just an out and out lie.
You were entirely aware that the "Russian collusion" angle had been completely fabricated, and that was not what "troubled you greatly."
What "troubled you greatly," Mr. McCabe, was that President Trump and his administration might actually shine some light on all of the unethical, illegal, and treasonous activities that you and your "swampy" friends had performed and had become accustomed to getting away with.
Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive! – Sir Walter Scott
NOTE: If you're not already "following" me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of this site and click the "Follow" button. That'll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.
"There was NO Russian collusion by President Trump," per the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee.
The conclusion of the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee is there is no evidence, whatsoever, that the Trump campaign conspired in any way with the government of Vladimir Putin during the last presidential election.
Let's repeat that for some of our slower liberal leaning friends.
Is that clear enough for all of you democrat sheep who think wishful thinking is a valid reason to impeach a president?
To many of us this finding is no surprise at all.
To others it is a complete surprise, based on how they were led along by the "biased, liberal, fake news media" and "the swamp" in general.
The bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee spent two years investigating the question of Russian collusion and our President. Of course, hundreds of interviews, reams of classified documents, untold millions in taxpayer dollars. "No collusion at all." That is what we are hearing that they have found.
Wait, I don't get it. Why were these senators wasting time on this while a special investigator (Robert Mueller) and his team were already tasked with investigating the same thing?
I think I would almost have to call the whole situation investigative harassment of a sitting president.
Let's keep in mind that the whole investigation of Russian collusion was launched based on false pretenses provided by the discredited Steele dossier.
It's easy to get sucked into this whole incestuous mess, trying to assess it logically, when in truth we have to understand that the forces pushing for the investigation knew full well that there wasn't any Russian collusion by President Trump from the very beginning. It was all just a distraction from the real collusion conducted by the democrats, the Obama administration, President Obama and Hillary Clinton. It was also an attempt side track President Trump and discredit his election.
Tucker Carlson of Fox News agrees and points to some of our liberal democrat friends who have tried desperately to keep this hoax alive.
ADAM SCHIFF: U.S. REPRESENTATIVE, CALIFORNIA: "I think there is plenty of evidence of collusion or conspiracy in plain sight."
MAXINE WATERS, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE, CALIFORNIA: "Trump has the Kremlin clan surrounding him. There is more to be learned about it. I believe there has been collusion."
JOHN PODESTA, FORMER WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF AND CLINTON APOLOGIST: "It is starting to smell more and more like collusion."
NANCY PELOSI, SPEAKER, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, CALIFORNIA: "We saw cold, hard evidence of the Trump campaign and, indeed, the Trump family eagerly intending to collude, possibly with Russia." "Smells like collusion."…"Plenty of evidence of collusion." "Hard evidence of collusion."
Can you see any kind of pattern forming here regarding The People's Republic of California?
Carlson added, "In the end, it was all fake. And they knew that, they knew it wasn't real. They were lying from the very first day. Only their remarkable aggression, their willingness to say literally anything no matter how outrageous or slanderous or vile, kept the rest of us from catching on to what they were doing."
"If the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee is willing to call someone [The President] a traitor to this country, there's gotta be some truth to it, right? Actually, no, there wasn't. It was always a hoax. [Congressman] Adam Schiff is an unscrupulous charlatan; that is the real lesson here. Don't expect people like Schiff to apologize though or correct the record, much less repair the lives of the people they have destroyed."
Here is Malcolm Nance of MSNBC explaining why the results of a two-year Senate investigation mean nothing. People are guilty because we say they are guilty, and we must punish them regardless.
"Let me just say one thing. When Benedict Arnold gave the plans to West Point to Major Andre and they captured Major Andre, they do not have any real information linking those plans to Benedict Arnold, other than the fact that it was in his presence at one point during that day. But everyone knew it was treason when they caught the man, and they hung him. So at some point, there is going to be a bridge of data here that is going to be unassailable."
"No one had any evidence, but everyone knew it was treason when they caught the man and they hung him."
Tucker comments about this by saying, "That says it all. Let's repeat that, once again, slowly so you can write down those words and put them on your fridge as a memento of the terrifying mass hysteria we have all just lived through: 'Everyone knew it was treason when they caught the man, and they hung him.' That is our country now. That is what the Russia insanity has done to us. The country's core problems don't even rate as interesting anymore, either to legislators or to TV pundits who comment on legislators. The suicide rate just hit a 50-year high, did you know that? We are in the middle of the worst drug epidemic in the history of America, including the one after the Civil War and the heroin epidemic of the '70s and the crack epidemic of the '80s, this is way worse, and it's one of the reasons the life expectancy, in many parts of the country, is dropping."
"This is starting to look like Boris Yeltsin's Russia, and yet nobody in Washington even notices. All Adam Schiff and the rest of the wild-eyed morons can think about is "Vladimir Putin," "collusion," "our hacked democracy" and all the other mindless slogans they have repeated long enough to half believe."
"We've spent two years perpetuating a fraud, and they are still doing it. What is this? It is negligence on a stunning scale. It has nothing to do with Trump, it has everything to do with running this country, and they are not."
"Historians will look back on this moment in amazement and in sadness…, [and wonder] why didn't any responsible person in the media say anything about it? Why did they collude in the charade? What the hell happened to America?"
The answer, Tucker, is nothing "new" has really happened to "America," regarding the "biased, liberal, fake news media," "the swamp," or our politicians.
What has happened, that is new, is that many of us are now paying attention and we're refusing to let these slime balls get away this crap like they were used to in the past.
Climate Change! Global Warming! It's the end of the world as we know it…, and I feel fine.
There are a lot of misconceptions and misnomers being thrown around by "Climate Change Alarmists."
Climate Change Alarmists are individuals who look at you as if you have three heads if you dare to question any of their Climate Change claims or appeals.
Climate Change Alarmists call people other people who don't swallow their story hook, line and sinker, "Climate Change Deniers."
Ok…, let's be clear…, NOBODY believes the climate doesn't change or isn't changing.
Some people just believe the Earth's climate changes naturally, and on its own, just like it is scientifically documented to have done throughout the world's history, whether people were around or not.
"Climate Change Deniers" are also typically skeptical of policies directed at combating Climate Change because they don't believe there is anything people can really do to effect the climate one way or the other.
My question to the Climate Change Alarmists would be, "Did you actually expect the Earth's climate to NOT change from time to time? Did you really expect the Earth's climate to remain exactly the same forever?
That seems to be where these Climate Change Alarmists are coming from.
The Earth has had periods of "Global Warming," "Global Cooling," and even "Ice Ages" in the past when people either weren't even around, or people did not burn fossil fuels. How does the Climate Change community explain this? How did the climate change back then without the help of the "evil" human polluters?
Let's look at a recent article by Harry Pettit, of News.com, as a typical example of a Climate Change Alarmist spinning another fantasy climate change story and scenario that just doesn't make any sense.
According to Mr. Pettit, "An Antarctic 'time bomb' is waiting to go off."
He says that, "Earth's sea levels should be nine meters higher than they are," and that "dramatic melting in Antarctica may soon plug the gap."
That's over 29 feet higher for us unscientific and/or American Neanderthals.
So…, the oceans should be 29 feet higher than they are?
That's like a three story building you know?
Do you understand how stupid that sounds?
"They say global temperatures today are the same as they were 115,000 years ago, a time when modern humans were only just beginning to leave Africa, he continues."
Oh really? How could that be? What types of cars were people driving back then? They must have had a lot of factories pumping out plenty of emissions in old Sub-Saharan Africa, huh?
Again, do you understand how stupid that sounds?
"Research shows during this time period, 'scorching' ocean temperatures caused a catastrophic global ice melt. As a result, sea levels were six to nine meters higher than they are today. But if modern ocean temperatures are the same as they were during that period, it means our planet is missing a devastating sea rise."
I feel like I'm dumber for just having read that. Please take a moment to reread the previous paragraph in order to properly appreciate all of the contradictions and false assumptions made here.
And again, do you understand how stupid that sounds?
"If oceans were to rise by just 1.8 meters (about 6 feet), large swathes of coastal cities would find themselves underwater, turning streets into canals and completely submerging some buildings," and that, "There's no way to get tens of meters of sea level rise without getting tens of meters of sea level rise from Antarctica," said Dr. Rob DeConto, an Antarctic expert at the University of Massachusetts in the U.S.
"In the next century, ice loss would get even worse," he added.
Even if you throw all common sense out the window and take all of these doomsday predictions at face value, do these people really think that having America return to the Middle Ages would make any difference?
If we all stopped driving cars, stopped transporting things with trucks, stopped flying in commercial jets and stopped using fossil fuels for electric power tomorrow, would that avert all of this supposed ice melting?
If you really think so, I've got this bridge I'm looking to sell…, cheap.
"The Sun" newspaper, in the United Kingdom, actually has a "sea level doomsday simulator" on its website if you'd like to know whether your home would be wiped out by rising oceans!
Well isn't that special.
So, what the heck is this "Green New Deal" anyway?
Well, first of all it's NOT a law. It's more like a "game plan" or a "road map" to follow.
It's a liberal/socialist/environmentalist manifesto in the same vein as the Communist Manifesto.
Yes…, that's exactly what it is.
Let me be your guide about something you will be hearing about non-stop for a long time. The "biased, liberal, fake news media" will be getting their propaganda machine cranked up into overdrive for this one.
The people that put this "Green New Deal" resolution together were either high on drugs, extremely naive, extremely confused, stupid, or some combination of all of the above, in my opinion.
So…, let's see exactly what we have here.
This resolution validates all of its proposed actions based on the October 2018 report entitled "Special Report on Global Warming [of 1.5 degrees centigrade]" by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the November 2018 Fourth National Climate Assessment report.
If the report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is to be believed, humanity has just over a decade to get carbon emissions under control before catastrophic climate change impacts become unavoidable.
At the rate our government works, I guess we should all start planning our funerals, or preparing to live underground, and stockpiling food and water, because nothing is going to happen over the next ten years to fix our environment, if in fact it is broken, and if in fact it is our fault.
The United States is already the most environmentally friendly country, among major industrialized nations in the world by the way. You sure wouldn't know this by the way the "biased, liberal, fake news media" demonizes the USA on a daily basis. Is China, Russia, India, Germany, The United Kingdom or Japan on board with any of this? Because we surely cannot effect global climate change without global participation.
If the Paris Climate Agreement is any indication of the level of global participation we could expect, we're in trouble!
In the Paris Climate Agreement, which President Trump wisely backed the U.S. out of, all of these other countries pledged their support with flowery environmental words and swore to meet the new pollution regulations AFTER the U.S. had piloted the proposed pollution levels for the first 10-20 years of the agreement!
Such determination!
Such support!
Such disingenuousness!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The resolution consists of a preamble, five goals, 14 projects, and 15 requirements. The preamble establishes that there are two crises, a climate crisis and an economic crisis of wage stagnation and growing inequality.
The goals are: achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions, creating jobs, providing for a just transition, and securing clean air and water.
The projects are things like: decarbonizing electricity, transportation, and industry, restoring ecosystems, and upgrading buildings and electricity grids.
Our liberal/socialist/environmentalist friends have managed to incorporate virtually all aspects of our society, economy, employment, racial issues, gender issues and government into their "end all, be all" "primary directive."
The document itself is not even 14 pages long, so please, read it for yourself if you get the chance.
In the meantime, let's take a look at some excerpts taken directly from the resolution:
"Whereas climate change, pollution, and environmental destruction have exacerbated systemic racial, regional, social, environmental, and economic injustices (referred to in this preamble as "systemic injustices") by disproportionately affecting indigenous communities, communities of color, migrant communities, deindustrialized communities, depopulated rural communities, the poor, low-income workers, women, the elderly, the unhoused, people with disabilities, and youth (referred to in this preamble as ''frontline and vulnerable communities''); Whereas, climate change constitutes a direct threat to the national security of the United States…"
Are you starting to get the point?
This new Raw Deal…, I mean Green Deal, is your typical "bleeding heart" bunch of politically correct mumbo jumbo.
Here are some of the more detailed goals taken directly from the resolution:
"Upgrade all existing buildings in the United States and building new buildings to achieve maximal energy efficiency, water efficiency, safety, affordability, comfort, and durability, including through electrification."
Well gee…, that doesn't sound expensive at all.
"Spurring massive growth in clean manufacturing in the United States and removing pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from manufacturing and industry as much as is technologically feasible, including by expanding renewable energy manufacturing and investing in existing manufacturing and industry."
What exactly is meant by "spurring?" I'm guessing it means spending more money.
"Working collaboratively with farmers and ranchers in the United States to eliminate pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector as much as is technologically feasible…"
"Working collaboratively" mean dictating unmanageable pollution standards.
"Overhauling transportation systems in the United States to eliminate pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector as much as is technologically feasible, including through investment in zero-emission vehicle infrastructure and manufacturing; clean, affordable, and accessible public transportation; and high-speed rail."
"Overhauling transportation systems" sounds like a lot of money…, again.
"A Green New Deal must be developed through transparent and inclusive consultation, collaboration, and partnership with frontline and vulnerable communities, labor unions, worker cooperatives, civil society groups, academia, and businesses…"
This last part is just a bunch concepts that sound good, but will never actually happen. Just like with The Affordable Care Act legislation, there will be nothing inclusive or transparent about it.
"To achieve the Green New Deal goals and mobilization, a Green New Deal will require the following goals and projects:"
"Providing and leveraging, in a way that ensures that the public receives appropriate ownership stakes and returns on investment, adequate capital (including through community grants, public banks, and other public financing), technical expertise, supporting policies, and other forms of assistance to communities, organizations, Federal, State, and local government agencies, and businesses working on the Green New Deal mobilization."
"Making public investments in the research and development of new clean and renewable energy technologies and industries; directing investments to spur economic development, deepen and diversify industry in local and regional economies, and build wealth and community ownership, while prioritizing high-quality job creation and economic, social, and environmental benefits in frontline and vulnerable communities that may otherwise struggle with the transition away from greenhouse gas intensive industries."
Mo' money, mo' money, mo' money!!!
"Ensuring the use of democratic and participatory processes that are inclusive of and led by frontline and vulnerable communities and workers to plan, implement, and administer the Green New Deal mobilization at the local level; ensuring that the Green New Deal mobilization creates high-quality union jobs that pay prevailing wages, hires local workers, offers training and advancement opportunities, and guarantees wage and benefit parity for workers affected by the transition."
"Ensuring the use of democratic and participatory processes that are inclusive of and led by frontline and vulnerable communities and workers" means only selected "enlightened" liberal individuals and groups will dictate to all of the rest of us "knuckle-draggers" what to think.
"Guaranteeing a job with a family-sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations, and retirement security to all people of the United States."
In the government world "Guaranteeing" something means there will be no budgetary concerns.
"Strengthening and protecting the right of all workers to organize, unionize, and collectively bargain free of coercion, intimidation, and harassment; strengthening and enforcing labor, workplace health and safety, antidiscrimination, and wage and hour standards across all employers, industries, and sectors."
"Enacting and enforcing trade rules, procurement standards, and border adjustments with strong labor and environmental protections, to stop the transfer of jobs and pollution overseas; and to grow domestic manufacturing in the United States."
Hasn't President Trump already pretty much taken care of this one?
"Ensuring that public lands, waters, and oceans are protected and that eminent domain is not abused."
This means eminent domain will be abused.
"Obtaining the free, prior, and informed consent of indigenous people for all decisions that affect indigenous people and their traditional territories, honoring all treaties and agreements with indigenous people, and protecting and enforcing the sovereignty and land rights of indigenous people."
Here's your "bone" Native-Americans!
"Ensuring a commercial environment where every businessperson is free from unfair competition and domination by domestic or international monopolies; and providing all people of the United States with: high-quality health care; affordable, safe, and adequate housing; economic security; and access to clean water, clean air, healthy and affordable food, and nature."
This last section, and the last section of the resolution, is kind of a catch-all.
According to David Roberts for Vox.com, "The question of how to pay for the many public investments called for in the GND [Green New Deal] is still a bit of a political minefield. There are centrist Democrats who still believe in the old PAYGO rules, keeping a "balanced budget" within a 10-year window. There are Democrats who think deficit fears have been exaggerated and there's nothing wrong with running a deficit to drive an economic transition. And there are Democrats who have gone full Modern Monetary Theory, which is way too complicated to explain here but amounts to the notion that, short of inflation, the level of the deficit is effectively irrelevant, as long as we're getting the economy we want. That discussion is just getting underway, and the better part of valor is to do what the GND resolution does: say nothing about it. Leave it for later."
Just in case you're keeping score at home, the Green New Deal includes a "federal job guarantee," the right to unionize, liberal trade and monopoly policies, and universal housing and health care.
In other words, "Hello Socialism…, here we come!"
Some of this stuff is even too far left for Nancy Pelosi! She is actually coming under some attack for even having the slightest bit of skepticism about some of the goals in the Green New Deal!
Remember the name Rhiana Gunn-Wright. She has apparently been tabbed to be the architect of any official policy platforms developed from the Green New Deal resolution.
"Obviously, figuring out how to fundamentally transform the world's largest economy is a lot for one person to take on. When Gunn-Wright was asked if she knows what she's gotten into, she laughs. "It's really exciting!"
Do you mind if I ask if this person has ever really done anything regarding any of this stuff, or is she just working from a theoretical stand point? Has she ever had a non-political job? Does she really know anything about economics?
"If you have more money or access to power, you can either opt out or pay to make it simpler," she says. "The people who will have to go through all the mess are generally poorer people, with the least access to power."
So it'll be just like usual…, with the rich liberal entertainers, athletes, businessmen and politicians being exempt or being able to "buy" their way out of the policies the rest of us are forced to deal with. Again…, "do as I say not as I do."
David Roberts for Vox.com Thinks, "Gunn-Wright's command of the issues, coupled with her unapologetic belief in the public sector to "shape markets and direct innovation," coupled with her evident concern for the low-income and working classes, make me excited to see what New Consensus produces."
So…, apparently Mr. Roberts is just as clueless as the authors of the resolution, Ms. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ms. Gunn-Wright and all of their partners in crime.
Ocasio-Cortez calls for 100 percent renewable electricity within 10 years, but very few policy experts believe that is possible.
By their own admission, the top three challenges facing the GND are paying for it, convincing the public, and winning over Democrats.
Roberts adds, "In the real world, if the GND looks like it has any chance of becoming a reality, it will face a giant right-wing smear campaign, coordinated across conservative media, think tanks, and politicians, funded by effectively unlimited fossil fuel wealth. The right will rush to define the GND as a silly, ridiculous, naive, unaffordable government boondoggle meant to destroy your way of life and funnel your taxpayer money to Democratic constituencies like illegal immigrants."
That's because, Mr. Roberts, the Green New Deal IS "a silly, ridiculous, naive, unaffordable government boondoggle meant to destroy your way of life and funnel your taxpayer money to Democratic constituencies like illegal immigrants."
Trumpeting the truth about this foolishness is not a "right-wing smear campaign," it's just a matter of combating the propaganda of the "biased, liberal, fake news media" and the rest of "the swamp."
Well, there you have it. I hope this helped.
Like I said…, we're not going to stop hearing about the Green New Deal anytime soon.
The President appealed to lawmakers in both parties to, "Rise above partisan politics and define victory as not winning for one party but winning for our country." My State of the Union address analysis: Part 2.
Liz Peek for Fox News reported that, "In a speech that was interrupted 102 times by applause, President Trump rocked the House, delivering remarks that were at times moving, funny, inspiring, feisty and visionary."
I would have to totally agree with Ms. Peek here. I was very impressed by The President's tone, his overall presence, and his words.
"He appealed to lawmakers in both parties to rise above partisan politics and define victory as "not winning for one party but winning for our country."
The President "Framed his speech as a celebration of two great occasions: the 75th anniversary of D-Day that liberated Europe [and saved the world's civilization] from the Nazis and the 50th anniversary of America's [Apollo 11] moon landing. Heroes from both those historic undertakings were in the gallery, personifying the daring and selflessness that has characterized the United States throughout our history."
He asked Democrats to partner with him in "choosing greatness" and to "keep freedom alive in our souls."
"He exhorted Congress to 'think of this very chamber, where lawmakers before you voted to end slavery, to build the railroads and the highways, to defeat fascism, to secure civil rights, to face down an evil empire.'"
The democrat side of the aisle honestly seemed petty and a bit foolish in comparison.
There was even a large group of democrat female representatives who wore white to represent something, or show some kind of unity. They all characteristically chose to "thumb their noses" at President Trump's accomplishments, and the country's historic economic numbers.
Liz Peek added, "The Democrats also pouted as the president listed the economic gains made during his administration. They did not cheer when he said 5.3 million new jobs have been added, including 600,000 manufacturing jobs."
"Nor did the Democrats cheer when the president cited the all-time low in African-American, Asian-American and Hispanic unemployment and the uptick in the incomes of blue-collar workers."
"Do Democrats not approve of putting people to work?"
Do they not approve of 5 million people being lifted off of food stamps?
Do they not approve of hundreds of thousands of manufacturing jobs being brought back to our country?
Do they not approve of us being self-sufficient, energy-wise, in the world?
Do they not approve of our NATO allies finally kicking in their fair share for their own defense spending?
It sure appeared that way, as democrats declined to applaud, and even smirked at the country's good fortune.
President Trump did manage to break through their grumpiness, however, by pointing to the record number of women working in the United States today and the all-time high number of women in Congress. Even the "women in white" couldn't help but celebrate themselves.
One of The President's guests in the gallery was a survivor of Nazi concentration camps who was enjoying his 81st birthday. It was enjoyable to see the entire House join in singing "Happy Birthday" to him. That was certainly a first at a State of the Union address.
"In fairness, even while calling for a 'new era of cooperation,' [President] Trump threw some partisan zingers into the mix. He singled out bills recently introduced in Virginia and passed in New York that allow for late-term abortions, and said he would ask Congress to pass legislation banning such procedures."
"In addition, The President hammered home his determination to secure our 'dangerous' border, and the need for a wall. To make the point, he introduced some family members of an elderly couple killed by an illegal immigrant. Democrats were not pleased."
How can you not be concerned with illegal drugs pouting over our southern border?
How can you not be concerned with thousands of young girls and children being taken advantage of by human trafficers at our southern border?
How can you not be concerned with gang members and other dangerous individuals coming across our southern border and committing crimes against and taking the lives of our citizens?
Just who do these democrat representatives represent exactly?
They didn't account for themselves very well during the State of the Union address in my opinion.
The President added that "Great nations do not fight endless wars," which is a statement no one can really argue with, as he is winding down our engagements in Afghanistan and Syria.
Liz Peek commented, "But for sure, the most contentious issue, and the one that continues to hang over the country, is immigration. Trump said no other issue better illustrates the divide between the working class and members of the wealthy [elite] political class, who hide behind walls [and gates and armed guards] while blue-collar workers suffer the lower wages, overburdened schools, [crime] and depleted safety nets that illegal immigration causes."
"It will be interesting to see how Democrats answer that charge."
"President Trump asked us all to 'rekindle the bonds of love and loyalty and memory that link us together as citizens, as neighbors, as patriots.'"
"He vowed, as he has before, to put America's interests first and, notably, promised that America will never be a socialist country."
"Even Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer applauded that one."
A CBS poll, conducted during and directly after The President's speech, showed that 76% of viewers liked what they heard.
Since polling numbers regarding The President typically seem to skew low; that would translate into an 85%-90% positive approval rating of The President's speech.
I would tend to agree with them.
In retrospect, I'm glad The President didn't take my advice and hold his own State of the Union address away from The Capitol. He definitely came away here as being the bigger person, the more reasonable person and the more responsible person.
Congratulations Mr. President.
President Trump asks The Congress to choose greatness. My State of the Union address analysis: Part 1.
There were quite a few memorable moments from President Trump's State of the Union address last night. But it was at the end of his speech, when he was appealing directly to The Congress, that The President's message especially resonated.
As the cameras panned the audience of elected Congress people and Senators, you could see that they were actually paying attention, intently listening to The President, as he pulled them in and attempted to enlist them all in his cause:
"Here tonight, we have legislators from across this magnificent republic. You have come from the rocky shores of Maine and the volcanic peaks of Hawaii; from the snowy woods of Wisconsin and the red deserts of Arizona; from the green farms of Kentucky and the golden beaches of California. Together, we represent the most extraordinary Nation in all of history."
"What will we do with this moment? How will we be remembered?"
"I ask the men and women of this Congress: Look at the opportunities before us! Our most thrilling achievements are still ahead. Our most exciting journeys still await. Our biggest victories are still to come. We have not yet begun to dream."
"We must choose whether we are defined by our differences, or whether we dare to transcend them."
"We must choose whether we will squander our inheritance, or whether we will proudly declare that we are Americans. We do the incredible. We defy the impossible. We conquer the unknown."
"This is the time to re-ignite the American imagination. This is the time to search for the tallest summit, and set our sights on the brightest star. This is the time to rekindle the bonds of love and loyalty and memory that link us together as citizens, as neighbors, as patriots."
"This is our future, our fate, and our choice to make. I am asking you to choose greatness."
"No matter the trials we face, no matter the challenges to come, we must go forward together."
"We must keep America first in our hearts. We must keep freedom alive in our souls. And we must always keep faith in America's destiny, that one Nation, under God, must be the hope and the promise and the light and the glory among all the nations of the world!"
"Thank you. God Bless You, God Bless America, and good night!"
By the time he hit "thank you,' it seemed like he had the audience mesmerized.
It seemed like for those last two minutes they all had dropped their partisan political guards just a bit, and we were all able to glimpse some of the potential that exists when our representatives choose to do their jobs like they were intended to do in the spirit of constructive compromise, with the best interests of our country and its people in mind.
Stay tuned for my more detailed analysis of The State of the Union address: Part 2 tomorrow.


Marketers are adventurous. Marketers are early adopters. Marketers are trailblazers of the software world.
That's why marketing automation software appeals to marketers everywhere, in almost every industry: to get to the highest efficiency, many marketers choose to automate as many processes as possible. This can include lots of different kinds of comms, depending on the company: emailing new leads with a nurture campaign, replying to a contact form submission, an onboarding video and a lot more. When repetitive actions are done automatically, a marketer can focus his/her energy on more creative work. The work becomes more interesting and more efficient.
One time-consuming task that can benefit from automation in a very big way is transcription, the process of converting speech to text. But if hearing the word "transcription" doesn't make your heart beat faster, that's okay - most people wouldn't consider it a riveting topic. And that's exactly the reason why marketers should be interested in automating transcription as part of their marketing efforts: this boring, mundane task is just not a good use of a marketer's time.
AI transcription can lend a hand in a lot of different ways. Here are just two of the ways transcription is changing how the marketing world works.
Marketers who know their customers are better positioned to market to them. That's why a lot of marketers interview their users - they can learn what they're frustrated with, how they're using a product and the changes they'd like to see in the future.
But conducting the interview is the easy part. When it comes to analyzing the responses, things quickly hit nightmare status: hours of valuable recorded audio and video files with the information locked inside because those files can't be easily or quickly searched. Marketers have to play each file to find the best parts, or take hours to manually type each file into a text document so that it can be searched to find the valuable information.
If AI transcription ever had a chance to reach superhero status, it's right now: imagine the Caped Transcriber bursting into the room to save the day! Automated transcription lets marketers drop their files into online software and within minutes have full transcripts. And although these transcripts aren't 100% accurate, they will be around 95% accurate with good audio (no background noise, clear speakers, etc.). And transcription services with really good editors, like the Trint Editor, will make correcting transcripts easy and fast.
Once the file is transcribed and analyzed, it's easy to export the most important parts into marketing assets: slide decks, competitor research, social media posts, newsletters and lots more. Automated transcription gives marketers a huge amount of information in a very short span of time.
That's hours of time saved. And as any marketer will tell you, time is one of the most valuable things in a marketer's world.
Time for the Caped Transcriber to come bursting through a brick wall! By automating the transcription of marketing video clips, video content can easily be searched for the best clips. Timecoded transcripts make it even easier to locate the best parts of marketing video content and add them to the final asset.
Human transcribers are one option, but they're expensive and slow. Using a human to manually transcribe files also means your files aren't secure, which puts your content and interview subjects at risk.
Automated AI transcription produces first-draft transcripts in minutes at very low cost. After some light editing to make sure your transcripts are accurate, those transcripts can be used to piece together the marketing message. By using transcripts from online transcription services like Trint, marketers can use Multicolor Highlights to select the best parts of their materials, export the Highlights only (which will also tell the length of each clip, making it easy to keep an eye on the time) and edit these parts together to create the perfect marketing video content.
Bring on the Caped Transcriber!
Whatever your automated transcription needs, Trint makes it a fast and easy process. Trint is also scalable, meaning marketing teams of any size can benefit from adding AI transcription to their marketing automation arsenal. For more information on how Trint can be integrated into your marketing workflow, email hello@trint.com.


text:
Variety Plus Icon Read Next: Meghan and Harry Bolster Archewell With New Hires, Promotions (EXCLUSIVE)
Jun 23, 2017 9:00am PT
Remote Controlled: 'Westworld' Creators and Star Evan Rachel Wood Tease 'Ambitious' Season 2
By Debra Birnbaum
Debra Birnbaum
Executive Editor, TV
@debrabirnbaum
How Pushing Small-Screen Boundaries Led Ryan Murphy to Walk of Fame Stardom 4 years ago
How Nicole Kidman and Her 'Work Husband' Lined Up Blossom Films' High-Powered Slate 4 years ago
'House of Cards': Diane Lane on Playing Claire's New Nemesis 4 years ago
Wood: Variety; Nolan/Joy: Courtesy Chris Frawley/Warner Bros
Welcome to "Remote Controlled," a podcast from Variety featuring the best and brightest in television, both in front of and behind the camera.
In today's episode, Variety's executive editor of TV Debra Birnbaum talks with "Westworld" co-creators and executive producers Jonah Nolan and Lisa Joy about what they learned from the first season, the one question fans should be asking, and what's ahead for Season 2. Plus, star Evan Rachel Wood (who plays Dolores) reveals what mysteries she figured out — and what she still wants answers to.
"When you're working on a show like this where there are layers and there are details and you try to make every piece count, you're hoping that people will engage on that level," says Nolan. "In our wildest dreams, we didn't expect the level of fan engagement and dialogue, which is why you do it." He singles out with a laugh "that moment when they figured out the plot twist for episode 10 42 minutes into episode two."
Evan Rachel Wood photographed exclusively for the Variety Remote Controlled podcast
Dan Doperalski for Variety
Explains Joy, "It wasn't like there were surprises that we're trying to keep from the audience consciously; we were trying to lead a path of breadcrumbs. We anticipated that a small group of the audience might discover it, that that will be part of the game that we were playing with these die-hard fans. What we didn't anticipate was that they would go to social media and talk about it and they would get circulated so that it hit a wider base of people who have an online presence and pick that up. There were also people who were still in for the surprise like my parents — I managed to surprise them."
Heading into the second season, they've learned from the experience, but say it's ultimately up to the fans how much they want to engage with online chatter. "For us, even though we're creating it as we go along, we feel like we owe it to the fans to be bold and also to play this game with them where we're like, 'Do you want to figure it out? Do you want to play with us here?'," says Joy. "Hopefully now, because of the first season, the people who want to have this purist interpretation of the series, they'll just develop their own theories in a vacuum — and maybe don't log on to Reddit."
But they're careful to not give too much away about Season 2, which starts shooting in July. "It's an ambitious season," says Nolan. "We always knew that we wanted the stakes and the scope to increase dramatically and that means the scale of production increases as well. We have an amazingly talented group of writers, directors, and crew coming back and gearing up for what I think and what I hope will prove to be a season twice as ambitious as the first one."
The one question fans should be asking? "What's really happening in this place," says Nolan. "We've hinted at that a little bit in the first season and we're going to go a little deeper with that in the second season."
They did confirm that Ford (Anthony Hopkins) is dead: "I think the sacrifice he makes at the end of the first season is very real," says Nolan, but he adds, "I think there will be an opportunity to explore a little bit more of the backstory of how this park came to be, a little more of that story. We'll see the character's presence will be felt in that sense in terms of filling in a few more of the gaps about the early history of this place."
In the second half of the podcast, series star Evan Rachel Wood weighs in with her take on the hit series. She says the actors were kept in the dark as much as the fans were. "We were kind of the pioneers in the theories on the set," she says. "It was thrilling to know that it was resonating with people in the same way."
She did figure out some of the twists along the way — that William was the Man in Black, for example — but the finale she didn't see coming. "I was still pretty floored and shocked when I got episode 10. When I read the final page, I just threw the script down and kind of walked away, couldn't handle it," she says.
"Killing Ford, I did not see coming, not in the way that they did it. I didn't know it was going to be me, I didn't know that's how this show was going to end, I was just in absolute shock and I couldn't believe that it was me. I couldn't believe that I had to actually hold a real gun to Anthony Hopkins' head and pull the trigger. That was one of the most nerve-wracking experiences of my life."
You can listen to today's episode here:
New episodes of Remote Controlled are available every Friday, and you can find past episodes of Remote Controlled here.
Evan Rachel Wood,
Jonathan Nolan,
Lisa Joy,
Remote Controlled,

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Equity analysts on Wednesday seemed divided on whether the Supreme Court striking down RBI bad assets resolution circular will be detrimental to the banking industry or not.
Voices of concern drew parallels with a recent Indian Air Force action in Pakistan, wondering if it is a "Balakot on RBI", while those on the other side of the divide said this will "rationalise" the bankruptcy code.
Foreign brokerage Jefferies, which used the air strike metaphor, said the Supreme Court order Tuesday is a big setback as RBI will not be able to direct "generic insolvency" proceedings.
It said the central bank will do both, seek a review in the Supreme Court and also work on a new circular to take care of the problem of non-performing assets (NPA) resolution.
Stressed players in the realty sector are expected to benefit from the ruling as the automatic insolvency proceedings under the now quashed February 12, 2018 circular will not happen, it said.
Japanese brokerage Nomura said while the banks will now have increased flexibility in finding a resolution, the order "does provide the borrowers with some leeway again to delay the resolution process".
Domestic brokerage said power and sugar companies, among the petitioners who had approached the SC, where the owners are fighting for their ownership of the companies, will be the major beneficiaries.
The order, a "negative" overall, will be a short term positive for corporate focused state-run and private lenders because of the possibility of delaying incremental stressed asset recognition, Centrum analysts added.
Nomura said it does not see a surge in dud assets because of the apex court decision, but seemed to agree with its counterpart, saying resolutions will be impacted.
It said the February 12 circular, as it was popularly called, set strict timelines "instilled concern in borrowers to find a time-bound resolution".
However, analysts at Bank of America Merill Lynch were sanguine on the changes.
"We have a favourable view of the Supreme Court's decision to strike down the RBI's February 12, 2018 circular as ultra vires as it allows rationalisation of the (Insolvency and) Bankruptcy Code," they said.
It said over $50 billion of assets had to be referred to the National Company Law Tribunal for auction because of the circular.
They said this will lead to the creation of the public sector asset reconstruction/management company to manage banks' NPAs either directly or by bidding at NCLT auctions, which will cost the government up to $10 billion.
It explained banks' stressed power assets are at $36 billion, while banks have provided about 50 per cent. Auctioning the power NPAs will need a haircut of 75 per cent which is $9 billion more.
"Banks can then transfer the $9 billion of cleaned-up power NPAs to the ARC/AMC," it said.
There will likely be a greater push to pre-NCLT resolution structures, such as inter-creditor agreements (ICAs), it said, adding rate cuts by RBI will also help the situation.
The Supreme Court Tuesday quashed the stringent RBI circular which mandated banks to recognise even one-day defaults and finding a resolution within 180 days failing which the account in question has to be sent to bankruptcy courts if it is Rs 2,000 crore and above.


This entry was posted in Blog post, colors, Daily Post, Fall, Photography, Weekly photo challenge and tagged blue heron, bluffs, Missosuri, Montelle Winery, postaday, river, Seasons. Bookmark the permalink.
Absolutely beautiful svetlana. One of the few things I miss living in the south is the glory of fall colors. But then I remember what follows it and I feel better 😄. Your photographic skills are looking great!