#1
We're not talking about '62 split window Vettes here.
Posted by: ed in texas ||
08/31/2025 9:12 Comments ||
Top||
#2
In his final days, Mr Dillard was visited at the hospice by a company called Bio Care. They asked if he might like to donate his body to medical science, where it could be used by doctors to practise knee replacement surgery. The company would cremate the parts of his body that weren't used and return his ashes free of charge.
#3
I give blood. The Red Cross makes money off my blood. Their highest level salaries are an abomination. I could stop giving blood, but people need the blood.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
08/31/2025 14:05 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Last that I checked the ARC had 10 people compensated at the $500,000 + level. There has to be a better way to donate blood.
Posted by: Difar Dave ||
08/31/2025 18:47 Comments ||
Top||
By now, we are getting used to lower courts misappropriating their roles, acting as if they occupied that of the chief executive. As these cases reach the Supreme Court, they are being overturned, but not without a cost to the president’s agenda or to the respect to which we’d normally accord the judiciary. The notion of a judicial coup is not far off, and people like Elon Musk suggest it’s time for Congress to initiate impeachment proceedings against the worst offenders.
This week, there are several examples of cases where the courts have been asked by plaintiffs to assume presidential powers, and except for one case still pending (the firing of Lisa Cook from the Federal Reserve Board), they did so.
Lisa Cook is a governor of the Federal Reserve Board. There is substantial documentary evidence that she lied on several mortgage applications. Even the left-wing Washington Post conceded this.
[American Spectator] China is America’s greatest adversary. Not merely an economic rival or a diplomatic competitor, but an existential threat to everything the United States claims to stand for. Beijing dreams of an America in retreat, a world where democratic values collapse and the Middle Kingdom reclaims the throne of global dominance. Their strategy isn’t nuclear war. It’s far more insidious: buying America one acre at a time.
The land acquisition pattern is unmistakable and deliberate. In New Hampshire alone, Chinese companies have made several major purchases in the last decade. Nongfu Spring, owned by China’s richest man, bought a warehouse and land near Nashua’s water system for $67 million — four times its assessed value. Chinese investor Sui Liu purchased the former Daniel Webster College campus that sits just 6 miles from BAE Systems Electronic Systems, a defense contractor supporting Air Force and Space Force programs. These aren’t random real estate investments — they’re strategic positioning near military installations and defense contractors.
The mathematics are revealing. When foreign companies systematically overpay by 300-400 percent for properties adjacent to sensitive military sites, that’s not market dynamics. That’s reconnaissance disguised as commerce. The New Boston Space Force Station sits within striking distance of multiple Chinese-owned properties. The pattern repeats across critical infrastructure: airports, water systems, defense facilities.
[TAC] "...do we live under a limited or an unlimited government?"
To you, that question probably sounds naive because the answer feels obvious. But in 1792, Thomas Jefferson saw it as the moment of truth.
Alexander Hamilton had just laid out his vision for the "general welfare" clause. His answer was simple. "The power... is ...indefinite."
To Jefferson and his allies, this was a scam. A complete betrayal of the constitutional system that was adopted.
The clash over the meaning of these two words — general Welfare — set the stage for what became the largest government in history.
HAMILTON: WITHOUT LIMITS
To begin this story, we first need to go back to December 5, 1791.
Alexander Hamilton just published his now-famous Report on the Subject of Manufactures. His goal was to stretch the "general Welfare" clause so far that it would authorize virtually unlimited power.
"the power to raise money is plenary, and indefinite; and the objects to which it may be appropriated are no less comprehensive, than the payment of the public debts and the providing for the common defence and ’general Welfare.’"
Hamilton admitted to only three exceptions. Taxes must be uniform across the Union. Direct taxes must be apportioned by census. And no export taxes from any state. Beyond that? Nothing.
"The phrase is as comprehensive as any that could have been used; because it was not fit that the constitutional authority of the Union, to appropriate its revenues shou’d have been restricted within narrower limits than the ’General Welfare.’"
Hamilton pushed the point even further, insisting that "general welfare" was so broad is couldn’t be defined.
"...and because this necessarily embraces a vast variety of particulars, which are susceptible neither of specification nor of definition."
That takes us directly to the text of the Constitution, and Article I, Section 8, Clause 1:
"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"
FROM THE REVOLUTION TO THE ARTICLES
To understand the full context of this debate, we need to go back to July 1775, at the height of the American Revolution.
A year before the Declaration of Independence, Benjamin Franklin submitted his proposed plan for Articles of Confederation to the Continental Congress. It never came to a formal vote, but Franklin circulated copies among delegates to spark discussion on how to structure a union — something he had been pushing since his Albany Plan of 1754.
One of those copies survives today with Thomas Jefferson’s handwritten notes in the margins. On the last page, Jefferson zeroed in on a phrase that would haunt debates for decades.
"qu. what ’their mutual and general welfare’ means. There should be no vague terms in an instrument of this kind. It’s objects should be precisely and determinately fixed."
Jefferson’s concern was simple but profound. A constitutional charter could not leave room for elastic words that politicians might twist to justify limitless power.
When the Articles of Confederation were finally adopted a few years later, the phrase "general welfare" appeared twice — including this provision in Article VIII:
"All charges of war, and all other expenses that shall be incurred for the common defence or general welfare, and allowed by the united states in congress assembled, shall be defrayed out of a common treasury, which shall be supplied by the several states."
#3
The issue was addressed from the beginning with the 10th Amendment -
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people
If it isn't written as a specific power, the federal government has no authority other than by fiat in direct contradiction to the Constitution.
America first doesn't mean America only. The best way to make America great again is a strong alliance with our best ally, the one who doesn't sneer at us like Europe does.
[YouTube] Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, “You can’t be MAGA if you’re anti-Israel,” during an interview with Breitbart. John Iadarola, Senator Nina Turner and u discuss on The Young Turks.
Instead of taking the vile Cenk Uygur’s opinion for it, read the Breitbart interview for yourself here. It’s interesting that the entire left side of the mediasphere is having hysterics about the subject using the same phrasing as Mr. Uyger, and also some on the right who clearly did not read the actual interview. Key bits therefrom:
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Breitbart News on Wednesday in an exclusive interview that the antisemitism that has grown on the political right is not only anti-Israel, but anti-American and anti-Trump.
Netanyahu addressed the problem he referred to as the “woke right,” which arose as some conservative pundits — including a few who had once been supportive of Israel — opposed Israel in the “12-Day War” against Iran, as well as any American involvement on Israel’s side.
The issue arose in a discussion of antisemitism, which has become familiar on the left in recent years, and is resurgent on the right:
And let me say one more thing — you talked about the “woke right”? Some of these people call themselves MAGA [Make America Great Again]. They’re not MAGA. If you support Iran, Iran tried to kill President Trump twice, not once, but twice. Iran has put a price on his head. … That’s Iran. Iran has murdered, has killed and wounded more Americans, thousands of them, in Iraq and in Afghanistan with their explosive devices. They killed 251 American Marines in Beirut. They bombed American embassies. They burn American flags. They chant, “Death to America.” The first thing they did when this regime took power was to take over 50 hostages in the American embassy.
Iran wants to annihilate the United States. Israel is the best ally of the United States.
Israel is fighting Iran, and you can’t be MAGA if you’re pro Iran, you can’t be MAGA if you’re anti-Israel. President Trump understands this, and he stands very strongly with us. And I, you know, I really appreciate the straightforward and courageous way that he he faces people, sometimes in his own constituency, because that’s what leaders, from time to time, have to do.
Since taking office, Trump has launched the most aggressive campaign against antisemitism in American history, focusing on university campuses but also fighting anti-Jewish hatred in the media and in politics.
Related: For perspective on Mr. Uygur, a Facebook Reel addressing one of his recent tweets on Israel can be seen here.
Posted by: Jairong+Scourge+of+the+Gepids2435 ||
08/31/2025 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1762 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
