CongressCritters want a tax hike without voting for it

New twist to the tax bill.  A "snap back" clause that pops taxes back up if the deficit gets too large.  "Too large" is not defined, so it can happen anytime.  The effect is a tax hike but Congresscritters don't have to vote for it.  Constituents don't like tax hikes which accounts for Congresscritters reluctance to stand up and vote for them.  They like this trick better, where they can cancel the tax cuts, pretty much anytime they like, with out voting for it. 
  This should not be allowed.  When Congress raises taxes, each member must take a vote, in public (rollcall) so we taxpayers can know which Congresscritters are taking our hardearned money.
   Speaking of the tax bill, I have been noticing some TV ads denouncing the tax bill because it will raise the deficit.  The ads don't have sponsors, I don't know for sure who is running them, but I suspect Democrats.  Might be RINO's.  I'm thinking we voters ought to ignore political ads that don't declare their sponsors.  The deficit argument is kinda bogus too.  It really means that Congress wants to keep on spending, that shutting down the gravy train is just too painful to think about. 
   The deficit could be reduced by better economic growth, and shutting down worthless programs.  Start with shutting down the federal education department.  Education from preK thru college is funded and controlled by state and local government and parents.  The feds just draw their salaries, they don't actually educate anyone.  Then shut down the federal Housing and Urban Development department.  Let the state and local governments do the work. 
   Those few ideas will do good things for the deficit. 

Sexual Harassment bags three more newsies today

Wow.  NBC fired Matt Lauer, host of the Today show.  That hit my FM radio this morning at 7 AM.  Then Garrison Keillor, who used to do the Prairie Home Companion on PBS  announced the Minnesota Public Broadcasting had fired him.  David Sweeney, a senior news editor for NPR, was also canned today.
  Three down in just one day.  Does not look like the sexual harassment crusade is letting up at all.
In these three cases, the accusations, and the accusers are still secret.  Could be anything, or anybody.
   Talk about a target rich environment. 

Lawrence of Arabia uses Facebook in the Sinai desert

After the horrible attack on the Sinai Al Rawda  mosque, Bedouin leaders in the Sinai have issued a call to their people to assist the Egyptian army.  This was posted on Facebook by the Union of Sinai Tribes. 
   Our culture is spreading.

Just how did the US Navy collide with two different merchant freighters??

I have done a bit of yachting in my time, various places, from the Chesapeake Bay up thru Maine.  When at the wheel (or tiller, same-same) you have to stay situationally aware.  You need to keep track of wind direction, state of the tide, buoys, lighthouses, landmarks, other vessels.  You need to know where your vessel is on the chart.  You have to keep an eye on the radar.  You have to stay in the buoyed channels lest you hit a rock or get stuck in a mudbank.  As a 30-40 foot vessel you have to give right of way to the big steamers,  who draw much more water than you do, and don't dare steer outside the buoyed channel.  The big boys find it cheaper to just run down a yacht than pay for the tugboats needed to pull them off a sandbar if they were to leave the channel even for an instant. 
   So just how did those two Navy destroyers manage to collide with freighters?  At what distance did the destroyer's radar pick up the freighter?  Who was officer of the deck?  How much real sea time did he have? When was a plot of the freighter's course and the destroyer's course made, and did it indicate a collision was coming?  At what range did the lookouts see the freighter thru binoculars and report it to the bridge? What did standing orders say about avoiding merchant traffic?  Were the destroyer's navigation lights burning?  Had anyone on the bridge read Admiral Dan Gallery's book where he wrote "Steer well clear of any merchie, lest he decide to liven up your day by ramming you."  When was any change of the destroyer's course ordered? 
   I haven't seen any discussion of the seamanship leading up to collision[s].  Probably the newsies are all landlubbers and  don't know what to ask.  And the Navy is embarrassed to say what went wrong.

Why I do my Christmas Shopping on line

There is more cool stuff on line.  Cooler than anything Walmart carries.  Littleton NH, my local shopping emporium, has been loosing good shopping for years.  It is down to La Houte's Sporting Goods, some second hand and antique shops.  Years ago, I would go Christmas shopping in downtown Boston, Washington street.  There used to three good department stores, Jordan Marsh, Filene's, and Raymond's.  The original Radio Shack, Lafayette Radio, Eric Fuchs Hobby Shop, a flock of good camera stores on Bromley St, book stores, jewelry stores, FAO Schwatz toy store.   The department stores had Christmas decorations, shop windows, Santa Claus, huge operating electric train layouts, and the department stores carried a lot more than just ladies clothing.  Not only was there cool stuff to buy, they put on a show for use shoppers. 
   All that is gone.  About the most exciting store left down town is a CVS pharmacy.  Boring.  So I thumb thru my stack of catalogs, fire up Windows XP, and start placing orders.  Plus the internet stores wrap it and mail it for you. 

How can anyone talk politics over Thanksgiving??

What is there to say, other than I Like Trump, or I Hate Trump?  That won't led to much of a discussion.  I am a news junkie, and I just don't have anything worth discussing.  Trump's first year hasn't accomplished much that you can put your finger on, let alone support or condemn.  Stock market is up, GNP growth is up, unemployment is down, wages are up a little bit.  All good things, but they might have happened no matter who won the 2016 election.  I like Trump, but I cannot point to things Trump did that led to those good things happening.  I like to believe that Trump's attitude and activity had something to do with it, but that's just a belief, I cannot back it up with concrete examples. 
  So what political can I say to all the left and hard left family members coming for Thanksgiving?  Particularly now they all have smart phones, and will summon up facts and arguments to support their lefty beliefs at the drop of a hat.  And now that politics is a religion that sees compromise as sin.
  Best to stick to talk about grandchildren, home projects, cars, the model railroad, the great windstorm that put my power out last month, recipes, wildlife (I have bears, wild turkeys, weasels, moose, deer about the place).

Wall St Journal opposes suit over Verizon- Time Warner merger.

Verizon, ($211 billion) wants to take over Time Warner (($79 billion).  The Justice Department is objecting upon anti trust grounds and is threatening (or perhaps actually has) file an anti-trust suit to block it. 
   The Journal, in an OpEd and some coverage in the business section, is saying that the merger in not anti competitive because Verizon and Time Warner are not competitors.  They offer different products and services, and so merging them doesn't reduce competition. 
  Hogwash say I.  They are both in the cable TV and Internet business.  Just cause their services have different names, it's still providing TV and internet. 
   Verizon is too damn big already.  Letting them get even bigger is bad for me.  I'm getting ripped off on TV and internet cable by Time Warner right now.  It got so bad that Time Warner changed its name to "Spectrum" hoping that a lot of Time Warner bad feelings might go away if they changed their name.  When last month's storm took out my electric, telephone, and Time Warner Cable, guess who was the last one to restore service.  You guessed it, Time Warner took two days more than the electric and telephone companies did to restore my service.   Does anyone think that a much  bigger Verizon would be any better?
   We passed the Sherman Anti-Trust Act two centuries ago to limit the size and power of big companies. In the past, Sherman Anti Trust was strong enough to break up Rockefeller's Standard Oil.  They tried to break up IBM in the 1960's but wimped out in the end.  The last gasp of anti trust action was the suit against Microsoft over the browser wars.  Anti-Trust wimped out on that one too, which is why we still have Internet Exploder  letting viruses onto our PC's
   And all those "too big to fail banks" that Dodd Frank is so kind too.  If the damn banks are too big to fail, then they are plenty big enough for anti-trust action. And the humongous InBev merger that Justice OK'ed just this year.
   The Justice Dept should be encouraged to do some more anti trust work.