Kevin Williamson’s conclusion on the Democrats’ seeming compulsion to inflict more Clintons on us, and themsellves, via Chelsea:

…for Pete’s sake, stop it. Have a little self-respect, Democrats. Build Bill Clinton a statue or . . . whatever. Send him your daughters like a bunch of bone-in-the-nose primitives paying tribute to the tribal chieftain. But stop trying to inflict this empty-headed, grasping, sanctimonious, risible, simpering, saccharine little twerp on American public life. It’s stupid enough out there.

What led to the conclusion?

Oh, just read the whole thing.

39 thoughts on “Verdict

  1. Mr. Tedious here.

    “…he just surfed the long wave of prosperity that had kicked off in the early 1980s…”

    Greenspan was goosing the crap out of everything i.e. the NASDAQ bubble, balanced budget, retiring the 30 year bond etc.

    Then Clinton repealed Glass–Steagall with the blessings of notorious RINOs and Democrats. Finance parasites.

    Now we are paying for it, big time. Bubble after bubble and no GDP.

    Jason Lewis is the only public person that ever explained this to anyone.

  2. Amen. What strikes me here is that being President should not take that much cunning, but it takes a fair amount of wisdom (we have been so screwed for so long). Knowing what ought not to be done, so you don’t stretch your brains trying.

  3. Foreign policy is extremely hard to get your head around, and very, very easy to screw up. The thing about Rubio is he knows this stuff so he has free bandwidth for everything else.

  4. The angst over the Clintons is amusing.

    TFS: One thing missed by most of the media is that consumer confidence has surged only among Republicans but not among Democrats and independents. That goes a long way to explaining the disconnect between the soft data and the hard data such as GDP growth. If consumers were basing their confidence on their own personal experiences then there should not be any polarization in those surveys. But they are very polarized which can only mean that the consumer confidence readings are currently being distorted by the Trump supporters who are basing their newly found confidence on faith in Trump and not reality. And the same goes for the markets and it’s already becoming apparent with his failure to repeal Obamacare which was supposed to be a slam dunk. And who would think that 4% GDP growth is possible given the aging the US population. It was not long ago that Wall Street was sure that the Fed had to start hiking rates two years ago to head off inflation since the baby boomers had all retired and therefore labor market tightness would soon result in too much inflation. Yet, when it comes to Trump these same people think 4% growth is realistic without too much inflation? It’s obvious those two positions can’t both be correct.

    And those promised tax cuts can’t get passed in the Senate unless they are revenue neutral. And to make them revenue neutral requires that many loopholes, deductions and tax credits will be repealed and the industry that has the most to loose is, of course, real estate. Trump will never agree to cut his own cherished tax deductions and giveaways. When Obama was in office everyone was worried about the national debt but now “huge” tax cuts are thought to be in the pipeline even though the Obamacare taxes which were supposed to be the first step failed miserably and the deficit will explode without large reductions in spending. Wall Street is just as delusional as those Trump supporters.

  5. “Jason Lewis is the only public person that ever explained this to anyone.”

    Big fan of his. Pretty disappointed with him so far. If even he can be seduced by DC there really is no hope.

  6. Emery: I’m not enthused about Trump. He’ll save the courts and mess the identity politics and the media. Everything else is on a train to doom.

    My peeps say consumer confidence is BS.

    ***The markets are a creature of Fed easy money and not much else, really. Trump is an inflationist and that is what Big Finance wants. This is how they get thier cut. *** The PE and the CAPE is sky high for no good reason. The market will go down 20% at some point and then we will get QE4 for the only reason that it freaks out the masses. None of this crap will work. The whole planet will figure out that Janet Yellen et. al. have no idea what they are doing.

    The We can still get worse inflation, but the main thing is low interest rates ***misallocate capital***. BUT, emerging markets will get destroyed if they raise rates —> global depression.

    Tax cuts mean ***nothing***. The issue is there is too much ineluctable spending.

    Obamacare was the greatest Cloward and Piven strategy of all time and Trump and the GOP dealt very poorly with this fact.

    re: 4% We need a big depression to rest the economy for that. There is too much misallocated capital.

    Politicized central planning is dying right before our eyes. Too much government is getting it’s ass kicked by technology and globalized labor, otherwise known as freedom.

    Google “Inflation Where’s the Beef” & Rob Arnot for the truth about inflation. It’s much higher than they say.

  7. DMA: Jason isn’t going to have much power or be in his element until the markets go haywire. ***The system*** can’t cooperate with his correct knowledge and good principles just yet.

  8. Keynesianism. Central planning. Centralized government. Government actuarial science. Big Finance. K Street. Demand economics. The Military Industrial Complex. Voting.

    Put them into a blender, and what do you get?

    The Mises Institute is right about everything. Sad but true.

  9. So, we’ll “supply side” up the revenue forecasts and “trickle down” the tax cuts, and, presto, we’re at “unbelievably big” tax cuts.

    Wonder what the working class people are doing today?

  10. Supply side economics is impossible when the government is this big. Jason Lewis was very good at explaining that.

    Our system is based on lies. That is what the voters want. Kevin Williamson is always pointing out that we already vote for national socialism. That is what we want, decade after decade.

  11. CNBC says the market is up today due unexpectedly positive earnings reports by some big companies.
    My 401k is up 5% since last November’s election.

  12. Who knows everything? ***ME*** LOL

    Did Greece do it to themselves? Are we doing it to ourselves? Discuss.

    Centralized government, political superstructures, central banks that do ANYTHING except back up banks in a punitive way, non-public goods, government actuarial science, It’s all worthless.

  13. How in the hell does it let you post after it “moderates” two posts in a row( including no links, too)?

  14. My 401k is mostly in index funds, so It did well under Obama. You would have to be a fool to say that whatever Obama did was bad for the market.
    Look at the data:
    The market had been flat, with a pair of reversals, since January 2015, and then a “great leap forward” starting the day after the election. I’m not saying Trump is a miracle worker, I’m just saying that the market likes Trump.
    This graph is great:
    So much for “peak oil,” which all the smartest of people have been betting on since 1970.

  15. “Woolly: What were your returns during Obama regime ?”

    Mother of God you guys need training. Stocks are TRADING SARDINES not investments when the central banks are doing what they are doing.

    Trump is a rentier inflationist. Obama is a socialist-inflationist. The government is broke if the Fed does the right thing.

    Stop believing in “The System”. It is meritless.

  16. Woolly: I have been very pleased with Vanguard Index Funds.

    TFS: Of course there’s a difference in deficit projections based on growth “projections” but there are “projections” that eventually become reality as all the supply-sliders in the Reagan administration found-out, conveniently, after they turned the mess over to George Bush.

  17. Emery: I have no idea why you are invoking “deficit projections.”

    What you guys don’t get is, the increasing central bank activity ***since 1997*** AT LEAST makes this more and more a “Truman show.” Give it up.

  18. Emery: Supply side economics works, but the government is too big and most of the GOP is a bunch of whores per what their constituents want. See David Stockman.

  19. If ***multiple*** of you guys want to get a Real Vision pass, I will come up with a list of videos that are easy to understand. The whole planet is a g d Truman Show and I’m dead serious.

  20. “TFS: Of course there’s a difference in deficit projections based on growth “projections” but there are “projections” that eventually become reality as all the supply-sliders in the Reagan administration found-out, conveniently, after they turned the mess over to George Bush.”

    I had a chance to think about this.

    Reagan was, in effect, a Keynesian that had room to run up the debt to defeat the Soviets. It means nothing. Both parties are worthless except for Judges and gay marriage and stuff like that. No one is going to “fix” the system.

  21. If people need to believe in politics and government and that stocks are anything but trading sardines based on central bank activity I will try to stay out of the way.

  22. do people feel similar about hodges bleats about being sexually assaulted as a child now or has my stoke ( the reason for my absence, I’m fine btw, still a Trump supporters though) taken away my last shred of humanity?

  23. Hey, POD, hope you are okay!
    Say, you would know this. Isn’t despair a mortal sin? Something to do with overweening dread being a willing act?

  24. possible? Ask a Catholic, I’m a former, they are too corrupt and crazy for even me also still alive and kicking mysel. hope to see you all at a MOB party in the near future.

  25. I wonder, rhetorically, what the immediate response of Republicans would have been if Obama had proposed this sort of deficit spending.

  26. POD–you’re still pretty young to be having a stroke, aren’t you? Take care of yourself, friend, and heal quickly!

    Looked up “sin of despair”, and evidently, in the Magisterium, it’s the one sin that cannot be forgiven. I would presume this is why funerals for suicide victims are so sad in Catholicism. That said, I don’t believe that being pessimistic about politics qualifies. Here’s a link.

  27. So much for “peak oil,” which all the smartest of people have been betting on since 1970.

    People keep forgetting that “known reserves” are just that: known and economically viable recoverable assets. They’re not all possible reserves. You keep looking until you find enough oil, then stop. If you’ve got enough to hold you over for a 30 year time span, why would you waste your time and money looking for more?

    Then there’s human ingenuity. You make it worth their time to do something differently they’ll do it, like fracking.

  28. BB, that NYT article was pretty obviously a boomer leftist mangling traditional religious thought, but the core was almost right.

    Basically, the sin of despair is to reject God and His forgiveness. In doing so, you’re rejecting God and putting your own judgement and wisdom above His. This is what makes atheists damned, which agnostics may not be.

    PoD, sorry to hear about the stroke. Get better!

  29. Nerdbert – I finally understood “proven oil reserves” when I read this article by John Hinderocker explaining that the phrase is a securities law term, not a geological or scientific term.

    If I want you to invest a bazillion dollars in my oil well scheme, I must disclose how much oil is in the ground that you can recover with current technology, under a current government permit allowing you to pump it.

    No permit? No pumping. Not part of the “proven reserve.” It’s there and it would be easy to remove – but if you can’t get a permit, it’s worthless to you so you shouldn’t rely on it when making the investment in the oil well.

    Obama was right – America couldn’t drill its way out of an oil crisis because Obama wouldn’t let us, he held up the permits. If Trump decides to issue new pumping permits . . . .

  30. Oil-shale deposits are in many parts of the world. They
    range in age from Cambrian to Tertiary and were formed in
    a variety of marine, continental, and lacustrine depositional
    environments. The largest known deposit is in the Green River
    Formation in the western United States; it contains an estimated
    213 billion tons of in-situ shale oil (about 1.5 trillion
    U.S. barrels).
    At $50/bbl, that’s $75 trillion dollars.
    Saudi Arabia has 0.3 trillion barrels of oil reserves.

  31. Alas, not all oils are created equal and what you get out of a barrel is quite different weather it is shale or conventional well. As such, prices for different oils are quite different. WTI is a spec of a blended oils, not an actual oil. So valuation, while fine as a rule of thumb, is a bit more complicated.

    Also, not all shale deposits are created equal. Some just cannot be extracted at competitive costs since there is either no infrastructure, deposits are too deep, or there is no nearby water. Hence china will likely not become a shale developer any time soon.

    PoD, get well!

  32. Yeah, JPA, I should have put a “for entertainment purposes only” tag on my ciphering.
    But the environmental left likes to deal in absolutes. You can’t start a conversation about how we should manage oil extraction when enviro-weenies begin by saying that we are almost out of oil, so we have to either conserve existing supplies or replace them with something else. If there is no more oil, there can be no economic or environmental trade-off to maximize value to the oil consumer.

  33. JD, he got the rule on proven reserves right. We’ve had 30 years of reserves for all of my life, which is conveniently forgotten by those pushing “peak oil” and a massive (and unwise) rush into alternative energy systems.

    Please note that I’m not saying that we shouldn’t invest in things like wind and solar, but that we should do so in a way that keeps the grid stable and able to deliver power at a reasonable economic cost. Right now I’m not seeing much attention being paid to the economic or stability costs from those subscribing to the Green religion, and that’s frankly dangerous.

  34. If you take the time to go to the DOE site and actually do a bit of studying, it becomes clear that wind & solar are bad alternatives to coal/petroleum/LNG fired plants. This is because the grid was built to handle high density energy suppliers near population centers. Pull out a coal/petroleum/LNG plant, drop in a nuke plant, and you are okay.
    Try to make lots of power suppliers away from the old fossil fuel fired plants and you start to have problems.
    I know people with degrees in the sciences who suddenly get stupid about math when it comes to energy. I once had a physics guy tell me that nuke plants couldn’t replace fossil fuel plants because you would have to commission a new nuke plant every few weeks for decades to replace the fossil fuel power plants.
    In that case, what was the answer?
    Solar and wind!
    I have zero emotional reaction to the words “oil company.” A lot of people get stupid fast when they hear that “big oil” is involved in anything. I am old enough — barely — to remember the anti Vietnam War people saying that it was all a plot of Exxon. They were after the oilfields in the South China Sea.
    I don’t think anyone who believed that could have pointed to the South China Sea on a world map.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.