Has he looked at TSLA recently? Or is he too busy “dismantling government bureaucracy“?
Musk Undercuts Trump’s Promise Not to Cut Social Security
Read More »Has he looked at TSLA recently? Or is he too busy “dismantling government bureaucracy“?
Musk Undercuts Trump’s Promise Not to Cut Social Security
Read More »Lawmakers pressure Bondi to release Epstein ‘client list’
Donald Trump, Pam Bondi, and Ghislaine Maxwell have links to Scientology.
Related:
Scientology sitting pretty as Trump names Pam Bondi his pick for Attorney General
Read More »Watch: Tucker Carlson repeatedly attacks Medicare and Social Security
…unless right-wing populists now think that Grandpa & Grandma should live on the street, eating kitty food!
Related:
Right-wing populism in the Western world is generally associated with ideologies such as anti-environmentalism, anti-globalization, nativism, and protectionism. In Europe, the term is often used to describe groups, politicians, and political parties generally known for their opposition to immigration, especially from the Muslim world, and for Euroscepticism. Right-wing populists may support expanding the welfare state, but only for those they deem fit to receive it; this concept has been referred to as “welfare chauvinism”.
Right-wing populists and welfare chauvinism:
According to welfare chauvinists, the safety nets of the welfare state are for those whom they believe belong in the community. By the right-wing populist standard, affiliations with society are based in national, cultural and ethnic or racial aspects. Considered to be included in the category are those that are regarded as nourishing. The debilitating group (primarily immigrants) is considered to be outside of society and to be unjustly utilizing the welfare system. In essence, welfare chauvinists consider immigration to be a drain on societal scarce resources. They believe these resources should be used for the ethnically homogeneous native population, preferably children and the elderly.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) on Tuesday night withdrew his request to vote on the Yemen War Powers Resolution that would end US support for the Saudi-led war and blockade on Yemen, citing White House opposition to the bill.
Sanders Withdraws Yemen War Powers Resolution Vote Over Biden Opposition
Experts question former Sen. Norm Coleman’s role as both foreign agent for Riyadh and Republican fundraiser.
Saudi lobbyist oversees millions in dark money GOP campaign donations
Related:
Norm Coleman: Former U.S. Senator Now Lobbyist and Agent for the Saudi Government
Who are the 11 senators who voted against the burn pits bill for veterans?
Senators Mitt Romney, Thom Tillis, Rand Paul, Tommy Tuberville, Richard Shelby, Pat Toomey, Mike Crapo, James Lankford, Mike Lee, Cynthia Lummis, and James Risch ultimately voted against the bill.
…
Political commentators were less surprised to see Mr Paul oppose the bill, as the libertarian frequently opposes federal spending — unless it directly benefits him.
Mr Paul said the bill would put the economy “at risk” and attempted to include an amendment to the legislation that would cut spending on foreign aid in order to offset the cost. That amendment was ultimately voted down.
…
Mr Paul had no problem asking for federal aid when his home state of Kentucky saw severe damage caused by tornadoes in 2021. He has regularly opposed federal aid bills for other disasters, and has previously attempted to attach amendments that reduce foreign aid spending to offset the costs of disaster relief.
…
Mr Tillis, Mr Lee, and Mr Lankford said they opposed the bill over fears that it would allow more people to get treatment at the VA and increase wait times for veterans seeking healthcare. While wait times are never ideal, waiting weeks or even months for treatment is still a shorter wait than simply never being eligible for healthcare.
Cut all foreign aid!
I feel like I keep needing to write this, but once again, no matter who does it and no matter which company they’re targeting, it’s wrong for politicians to promise to punish companies for their speech. For some reason, many people’s position on this point changes based on whether or not they like or dislike the politician, and whether or not they like or dislike the company. But it’s wrong.
It’s wrong when Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee go after Major League Baseball for its speech. It’s wrong when Senator Elizabeth Warren threatens Amazon for its speech. It’s wrong when Senator Marsha Blackburn (and a ton of others) threaten Disney for its speech. It’s wrong when White House officials threaten Facebook for its speech. And it’s wrong when Rep. Ken Buck threatens Apple for its speech.
All of this is grandstanding nonsense, but it’s designed to suppress speech. It’s designed to punish companies for speech that these elected officials dislike. And that’s even if the companies have said something stupid or acted in a way that deserves a regulatory response. By positioning any response as retaliation for speech, these politicians are fundamentally going against the 1st Amendment.
It’s Wrong For Politicians To Announce Plans To Punish Companies For Speech, No Matter Who Does It
You must be logged in to post a comment.