This is a bizarre way to handle the issue of Immigration. These numbers are stunningly high. If we were a normal country with a functioning Congress, we would sit down and deliberate over how to handle immigration, determining the number of immigrants that could meaningfully assimilate in the U.S. And then we would enforce our laws.
This explanation gets right to the point. And addresses my reason for refusing to be called a called a cis-man.
The sound of two guilty people talking. I'll translate: "We had no idea that it might change a juror's vote on the Kyle Rittenhouse case if the entire world knows where they live."
I won't be posting for about a week. I'll be going on a mini-sabbatical, attending to some other things going on in my life. I'm looking forward to getting refocused and re-energized to do a lot more writing when I return.
See you again in about a week!
Perhaps the tide is turning. I hope so. This excerpt is from this article on Matt Stoller's Antitrust website: "The Most Boring Conspiracy is Big Law." Did you ever wonder where most of America's competition went?
As I’ve worked through politics, I’ve come to realize that giant conspiracies are far less interesting than they seemed to have been when I was younger. Don’t get me wrong. There are conspiracies, and they are far-reaching. It’s just that most of them, at least when it comes to corporate power and antitrust, are not run by titanic cackling geniuses, but by middle aged slightly overweight lawyers with bad posture who live in and around Washington, D.C., New York, and San Francisco and love talking about wine clubs.A few weeks ago, New York Times reporters Cecilia Kang and David McCabe published a useful article on the hot market for antitrust lawyers. “Antitrust work — once a relatively sleepy area of the legal world — is now providing a windfall for the big firms,” they wrote. “Top partners at a large firm often bill $1,000 to $2,000 an hour, and the scores of young associates who help them charge hundreds of dollars an hour.”
Restoring anti-monopoly policy will be a slog, because corporate lawyers are intimidating, and policymakers and judges tend to believe what they say. They have been trained for decades to look credible, and they do. But ultimately, what they are doing is helping their clients violate the law, and in doing so, make a mockery of democracy itself. And that should not stand.
. . .
Anti-Monopoly Midterm Election Candidates Begin to Emerge: I’m noticing a trend of candidates who are starting to talk about big business on the campaign trail. What’s interesting is that, like the anti-monopoly movement, it doesn’t break down by party. Here are the candidates I noticed.
Wisconsin Democratic Senate candidate Tom Nelson has talked about why it’s so “crucial to fight corporate power.”
In his first ad, Ohio Republican J.D. Vance in Ohio called Jeff Bezos and Google members of “the ruling class.”
South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem, who is running for reelection in 2022 to the Governor spot, wrote a long blog post attacking meatpacker consolidation.
Here’s Republican Blake Masters in Arizona, attacking “corporations that have gotten so big they think they are bigger than America."
Missouri Democratic Senate candidate Lucas Kunce, is pledging to “end monopoly domination of our economy.”
And here’s Iowa Democratic Senate candidate Dave Muhlbauer, going after meatpackers and “corporate farms.”
Both Odessa Kelly and her opponent Jim Cooper in a Tennessee Democratic primary race praised Biden’s executive order on competition.