RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://issuesinsights.com/2021/09/17/taxpayers-spend-more-to-prop-up-government-than-they-do-on-themselves/

One would think that in a nation founded on liberty that we’d be free to spend more on personal consumption than the government takes from us. But that’s not the case. Americans are paying more in taxes than they spend on themselves. Anyone who thinks this is healthy has a profoundly warped sense of right and wrong.

In 2020, according to Terence P. Jeffrey at CNS News, who did the arithmetic using Bureau of Labor Statistics data, American “consumer units” – a BLS term – “spent a net total of $17,211.12 on taxes” sent to Washington, state capitals, and local halls of government. Meanwhile, they spent “only $16,839.89 on food, clothing, health care and entertainment combined.”

Apparently the tribute paid to government isn’t enough. Americans just have to “give” more. The Biden administration is expecting to extract trillions more from us to pay for government programs it hopes will cement a permanent Democratic majority in Washington. We’re told that the agenda will be paid for by hiking taxes on the rich, but the reality is, “in the end, average Americans, not the rich,” will have to “pick up the tab.”

A few on the left who are more honest about the plans and the worldview that informs those schemes will make the claim that every penny earned belongs to government, and we’re allowed to keep some of it for ourselves because government is a kind and charitable institution. Americans are certainly free to hold that opinion. But not one of them has the moral right to put such a perverted idea into practice.

Yet it happens every day. Politicians, not all but enough to engage in large-scale racketeering, believe the dollars they rob without a conscience from Americans belong to them.

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/great-unraveling-biden-administration/

The smart money says that Donald Trump will not run in 2024. The smarter money says that he might, but that he shouldn’t because he’s too old and too divisive. I have no accounts at either of those depositories, so am not going to participate in that panel discussion. Instead, I propose to make a few obvious points. If they’re obvious, why make them? Because the obvious is not always so obvious.

René Descartes is widely detested by all the clever people, for whom ‘Cartesian’ is term of snobbish contempt. I think Descartes was a great genius but one who was wrong about a couple of important things. No, I do not mean what he says about ‘extended substance’, the ‘Cogito’ or any of his other epistemological and metaphysical flights.

I am thinking, rather, of his bold claim in Discours de la Méthode that ‘Le bon sens est la chose du monde la mieux partagée’: ‘Common sense is the most widely shared thing in the world.’ That, I submit, is almost Panglossian in its optimism. Indeed, experience tells us that something close to the opposite is the case. Really, common sense is the among the least common of virtues.

That is obvious point number one, and for confirmation I invite you to consider the phenomenon of the Biden administration. I am not one of the sensible, smart-money people who believes, or says he believes, that Joe Biden fairly won more electoral college votes than Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential. Contrary to The Narrative, I believe that the Big Lie is that the election was on the up-and-up. But — and this is obvious point number two — it doesn’t matter, by which I mean that there is nothing that can be done now to alter the outcome of the election.

Then why bring it up? Because (moving on to OP number three), the Biden administration is an unmitigated disaster unfolding in real time. It is a disaster fully owned and operated by the people that brought you the hysteria of NeverTrump and, as a part of that long-running entertainment, told us repeatedly (indeed, ad nauseam) that with the installation of Joe Biden the ‘adults’ were back, America was back and ‘normality’ was back.

That was about 15 minutes before the Great Unraveling commenced. It started on the domestic front as Biden’s economic policies stepped like a rhinoceros into the dinghy of the American economy, swamping it with eye-watering levels of debt, out-of-control inflation, an energy crisis and an unsustainable labor situation in which people are paid to stay home and not work.

Then there was the ongoing hysteria about COVID and the fraternity-house-like variants — that Big Pharma, the ‘experts’ and the media are exploiting for fun, limelight and profit. Trump confronted the novel virus, mobilized American ingenuity and scientific know-how and produced several effective vaccines in record time. His big mistake was engaging St Anthony Fauci and Lady Deborah of the Hermes Scarf as advisers. They muddied the waters and dispensed conflicting and contradictory advice. And they, at least he, would neither leave nor shut up.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/09/the-taliban-just-received-the-largest-weapons-transfer-in-50-years/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=right-rail&utm_content=capital-matters&utm_term=second

As a percentage of GDP, the arms left in Afghanistan represent the largest international weapons transfer in decades.

Economic statistics rarely deepen the sense of drama behind headlines. The Taliban’s new cache of American arms may be an exception. Each of the Taliban’s new American-made M4 assault rifles costs more than a year of per capita output in Afghanistan. The Taliban now cruise in some of the 4,700 Humvees transferred by the U.S. to Afghanistan between 2017 and 2019. Twenty thousand Humvees would cost the whole country’s annual GDP. The arms transfer that occurred as the U.S. withdrew and American-aligned Afghan forces surrendered in a haste really is as enormous as it seems. Relative to the size of the local economy, as the chart below shows, it’s the largest transfer of weapons the world has witnessed in decades.

The chart shows the world’s largest annual weapons transfers as a share of the receiving country’s GDP since 1960. The underlying data on weapons transfers come from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Their data document weapons transfers to governments as well as other armed groups. In the 1980s, for instance, the data for Afghanistan document weapons transfers to the Mujahadeen, the Taliban’s predecessor, as well as to the Northern Alliance (the anti-Taliban opposition the U.S. aligned with in 2001) along with the central Afghan government. For each country in a given year, the value all arms transferred to any group operating within its borders is added up, creating a single value for arms transferred to armed groups in that country. This value of all weapons received in a given year is then divided by the annual GDP of that country, available from the World Bank. For this metric of weapons received as a share of GDP, the chart displays the largest value registered by any one country for every year since 1960, the first year for which these data are available. World War II and its aftermath almost certainly would have registered higher values than anything observed since 1960. The inferences permitted by the chart, then, are only about history since 1960.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/09/ron-desantis-was-right-about-monoclonal-antibody-therapy/

Florida’s governor was blasted by progressives for promoting Regeneron’s COVID treatment. Now, demand is so great the Biden administration is rationing it.

T wo months ago, Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida was being roundly castigated for promoting the use of Regeneron’s monoclonal-antibody treatment as part of his state’s efforts to fight COVID-19. Desperate to find something sinister in the push, DeSantis’s critics threw out every charge they could dream up. At first, the line was that Regeneron’s treatment didn’t work. Then, it was that Regeneron’s treatment worked fine, but represented a dangerous distraction from the vaccine. And, finally, it was that Regeneron’s treatment was part of a corrupt plot to enrich DeSantis’s donors.

Today, we learn from the Washington Post that, actually, none of that was the problem. Instead, DeSantis’s sin is that he has been relying upon monoclonal-antibody treatment too much, and that this is unfair to other states that now need it.

What a difference eight weeks make.

The Post informs us that the Biden administration has been so impressed by the impact that Regeneron’s treatment has made that it is now seeking to “stave off shortages” of the drug by “purchasing 1.4 million additional doses” and tasking the Department of Health and Human Services with setting “the rules for distribution . . . instead of allowing states, medical facilities and doctors to order them directly.” In explaining this move, the Post submits that “soaring demand for the therapy represents a sharp turn from just two months ago, when monoclonal antibodies were widely available and awareness of them was low” — which . . . is certainly one way of admitting that the same people who relentlessly condemned DeSantis for trying to raise that “awareness” “just two months ago” are today coming around to his point of view.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/milley-checkered-history-china-afghan-withdrawal-crt

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley faces intense scrutiny for phone calls he made to his Chinese counterparts about then-President Donald Trump. But it’s far from the first time Milley’s actions have sparked accusations of politicizing his role.

The pair of phone calls between Milley and Chinese defense officials emerged from a forthcoming book about the end of the Trump presidency. According to the book, Milley called the Chinese once in October 2020 to assure them the United States would not attack them and again in January 2021 to offer the same assurances. He also promised to give them a secret heads-up if Trump planned to launch an attack.

A spokesperson for Milley said Wednesday the phone calls, which the Pentagon did not deny, were part of the chairman’s regular “duties and responsibilities conveying reassurance in order to maintain strategic stability.”

Amid the demands for Milley’s termination, President Joe Biden said Wednesday he has “great confidence” in his top military adviser.

Republicans have demanded answers whether Milley circumvented the chain of command by communicating Pentagon plans to the Chinese without the president’s knowledge.

Critical race theory defense

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2021/09/15/the_deep_politics_of_vaccine_mandates_146408.html

The debate over President Biden’s vaccine mandates has focused, understandably, on the tradeoff between individual rights to make medical choices and the potential harm the unvaccinated pose to others. That tradeoff is unavoidable. It is simply wrong for Biden to say, “It’s not about freedom.” It is. It is equally wrong for some Republican governors to say it is all about freedom. It’s also about the external effects of each person’s choice. To pretend that tradeoff doesn’t exist is demagoguery. But then, so is most American politics these days.

What’s missing or underappreciated in this debate?

The most important thing is that the Biden administration’s “mandate approach” is standard-issue progressivism. The pushback is equally standard. The mandates exemplify a dispute that has been at the heart of American politics for over a century, ever since Woodrow Wilson formulated it as a professor and then president. That agenda emphasizes deference to

Experts, not elected politicians,
Rational bureaucratic procedures,
Centralized power in the nation’s capital, not in the federal states, and
A modern, “living constitution,” which replaces the “old” Constitution of 1787 and severs the restraints it imposed on government power.

Implemented over several decades, this progressive agenda has gradually become a fait accompli, without ever formally amending the Constitution. The bureaucracies began their massive growth after World War II and especially after Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society initiatives of the mid-1960s (continued, with equal vigor, by Richard Nixon).

https://amgreatness.com/2021/09/15/science-they-said/

The scientific method used to govern much of popular American thinking. 

In empirical fashion scientists advised us to examine evidence and data, and then by induction come to rational hypotheses. The enemies of “science” were politics, superstition, bias, and deduction. 

Yet we are now returning to our version of medieval alchemy and astrology in rejecting a millennium of the scientific method.  

Take the superstitions that now surround COVID-19. 

We now know from data that a prior case of COVID offers immunity as robust as vaccination—if not better. 

Why then are Joe Biden’s various proposed vaccination mandates ignoring that scientific fact? Dr. Anthony Fauci, when asked, seemed at a loss for words. 

Is this yet another of the scientific community’s Platonic “noble lies,” as when last year Fauci assured the public there was no need for masks? He later claimed he had lied so that medical professionals would not run out of needed supplies. 

Fauci also seemed to throw out all sorts of mythical percentages needed for herd immunity, apparently in an attempt to convince the public that it will never be safe until every American is protected from COVID by vaccination only.

And why was it that hard for the scientific community to postulate a likely origin of COVID-19? 

Instead, some of the very scientists engaged in gain of function research oversaw an investigation with Chinese authorities. They all confirmed the predetermined conclusion that the virus likely had little to do with gain of function engineering. And they saw little proof it was birthed in the Wuhan virology lab. 

Yet the preponderance of scientific opinion, emerging data and evidence, and basic logic have suggested just the opposite.  

How can the government hector citizens that they have a moral duty and soon a legal obligation to be vaccinated, when it does not ask vaccinations of unvetted refugees flying in from Afghanistan? 

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/09/the_unsung_death_of_my_body_my_choice.html

Just 79 minutes after Harris breathed new life into it, President Joe Biden put the mantra out of its misery

As late as 3:43 p.m. on Thursday, September 9, the long-lived mantra of the pro-abortion movement, “My Body, My Choice,” was still showing signs of life. It was at that time, that the White House published the remarks made by Vice-President Kamala Harris at a “Reproductive Rights” roundtable.

“The President and I are unequivocal in our support of Roe v. Wade and the constitutionality of Roe v. Wade, and the right of women to make decisions for themselves with whomever they choose — about their own bodies,” said Ms. Harris.

“And, needless to say,” Harris continued much too quotably, “the right of women to make decisions about their own bodies is not negotiable. The right of women to make decisions about their own bodies is their decision; it is their body.”

So far is Harris out of the White House power loop that she may not have known the mantra had less than two hours to live.