Patterico's Pontifications

5/5/2017

California Officials Want To Punish Contractors And Companies Helping to Build Trump’s Wall

Filed under: General — Dana @ 3:04 pm

[guest post by Dana]

With the introduction of the amended SB 30, a California senator, with political aspirations, and representing a predominantly Hispanic community, came out swinging against any companies or contractors who work on building President Trump’s “big beautiful wall”. In lockstep, Democratic state legislators gave a thumbs up this week to meting out punishment:

California legislators took the first step Tuesday to ban state government contracts for any company that helps build President Trump’s promised wall along the Mexico border, with the author of the plan urging colleagues “to be on the right side of history.”

The bill by state Sen. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens) would prohibit any company from receiving a new or extended contract with the state of California if it participates in a future effort to build a new wall along the 2,000-mile international border.

Senate Bill 30 won committee passage on a party-line vote, with Republicans expressing concern about the need for additional border security. Representatives of the construction industry also voiced opposition, arguing Lara’s bill forces contractors into the middle of a divisive political fight.

“This is precedent-setting,” said Todd Bloomstine, a lobbyist representing the Southern California Contractors Assn. “What next unpopular project would be [on the] blacklist?”

There is every possibility that the elected officials who voted “yes” on this, may have done so with something more than just a principled belief in the cause:

[E]eight Democrats on the Senate Governmental Organization Committee voted for it. Sens. Bill Dodd, who represents Davis, and Cathleen Galgiani, who represents Stockton and Modesto, were among the aye votes. Only one Democrat, Steve Glazer of Orinda, had the good sense to not vote. Republicans opposed it or didn’t vote.

Perhaps the legislators voted for it out of principle. Or maybe they were being craven. Lawmakers know that as chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Lara has life or death power over every piece of legislation and they cross him at risk of losing bills important to them.

These legislators demonstrated that California’s Democrats care more about bullying and intimidating workers, rather than supporting the gainful employment of untold men and women and lending to the success of privately owned businesses and concerns:

Lara’s Senate Bill 30, similar to measures in the New York Legislature and other jurisdictions, takes aim at the general contractor that might win the main federal contract. But it would extend far beyond that company and sweep up any “individual, partnership, joint venture, or association or any other organization or any combination thereof” that is “providing or has provided goods or services to the federal government for the construction of a federally funded wall, fence, or other barrier.”

Heavy equipment would be used to build a wall. So the boycott would extend to makers of bulldozers and cranes, which also are used on state projects. Since bulldozers and cranes need fuel, the boycott presumably would include oil companies, which fuel state vehicles.

And although Lara is obviously a union-friendly Democrat (What other kind is there?), the bill’s language suggests that even union trades could face the brunt of punishment.

Last month, Lara defended SB 30 by, ironically, bringing up concerns about the economy:

“It’s clear that President Trump intends to stick taxpayers with the cost of a border wall that will hurt California’s economy, environment and people,” Lara said in a statement. “I introduced Senate Bill 30 to give our state a louder voice to say that building a wasteful and unnecessary wall would be a huge mistake.”

He further expressed concern about losing valuable jobs:

[H]e argued that movement between the nations benefits California because of the money Mexican shoppers spend in the state, and Mexico is California’s largest export market.

“Another wall will delay cargo delivery, slow down business and take away valuable jobs,” he wrote.

This past Tuesday, however, while testifying before the Senate Governmental Organization Committee, Lara got to the real nub of the matter for him:

The wall is another attempt to separate and divide us. It sends a message that we are better off in a homogenous society.

An editorial in the not Trump-friendly Sacramento Bee, smartly observed:

Lara has every right to use his political skills to work to unseat Trump and members of Congress who support the wall. Like any consumer, he can choose not to patronize Trump resorts and shun Trump family products. He could sue to block construction, as could the state itself.

But with his SB 30, Lara would use the state as a partisan battering ram against private companies, transforming the state into a bully. That’s familiar, a little like the occupant of the Oval Office who threatens companies and citizens who dare to cross him.

Lara sadly reminds us, that whether one is for or against the wall, state government penalizing individuals and companies for securing contracts which will put people to work and put bread on the table is the Democratic way.

(Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.)

–Dana

130 Responses to “California Officials Want To Punish Contractors And Companies Helping to Build Trump’s Wall”

  1. I just want Democrats to stop pretending they care about the success of privates business, small business, and the working class.

    Dana (023079)

  2. Lara is one toke over the line.

    mg (31009b)

  3. This has to be illegal even under California law. And Trump can knock it flat it back on its back with a one-sentence executive order: “No state, county, municipality or other local unit of government which punishes, or discriminates against, contractors for doing business with the United States shall receive any federal funds whatsoever.”

    nk (dbc370)

  4. Democrats: Enemies of the American people.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  5. How about that “Freedom of Association” thingy you Yanks used to think you had?

    Fred Z (05d938)

  6. Then he declares California to be engaged in rebellion and insurrection; occupies it with federal troops; imposes martial law; takes away its representation in Congress pursuant to the 14th Amendment; dissolves its legislature; and appoints a military governor.

    nk (dbc370)

  7. Freedom of association nothing. No state can punish a person or company for doing business with the federal government. It is close, if not outright, sedition and treason in the “levying war against the United States” sense.

    nk (dbc370)

  8. “No state, county, municipality or other local unit of government which punishes, or discriminates against, contractors for doing business with the United States shall be placed under marshal law”. FIFY.

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  9. I will vote for California secession and if successful, move to Arizona where I will proudly retain my US citizenship. California will go by way of Venezuela and the Dems will lose 55 electoral votes. Maybe I will get tired of winning after all.

    AZ Bob (f7a491)

  10. I’ve been saying these guys under Democrat tutelage have been engaging is low level sedition since the election. When does the lawfully elected government take back it’s Constitutional authority? Too many lawyers, not enough soldiers.

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  11. I do not support building the wall, AND this is not ok.

    It’s one thing for *me* to choose not to do business with such contractors. But the state should not be refusing to do business with contractors to ‘punish’ them for legal domestic activity.

    Just … no. We on the left would be outraged if Texas passed a similar policy refusing to do business with any company that provided health benefits to domestic partners; the principle is the same, and we should be outraged at this, as well.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  12. As I said in the post, whether one supports the wall construction or not, Democrats aren’t above such strong arm tactics. Government should not be in the business of bullying and should not be in the business of threatening the livelihood of any who are willing to work. Just because they may not like the project, does not mean that the citizenry objects. Let’s see them put this up for a vote.

    Dana (023079)

  13. “When wall-building is outlawed, only outlaws will be wall-builders.”

    – Pope John Paul II

    Leviticus Channeling Hoagie (e80149)

  14. Also, your comment #8 says the opposite of what you want it to say.

    Leviticus (e80149)

  15. Dana, I would bet that an initiative to do the same thing would pass in California — and doing it via initiative does not make it any better. It makes it more democratic, but no less illiberal.

    One of the major cleavages in the next decade or two, throughout the west, is going to be between those who stand behind liberal democracy and those who stand behind illiberal democracy. I’m a liberal democrat; this kind of thing is profoundly illiberal and abhorrent to me.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  16. aphrael,

    I think you’re right. But whether it would pass or not is secondary to me. Citizens should have the right to vote on what is in their best interest and not have the legislators decide for us. Further, if this project is offensive to them and they have opted to use their power to make it untenable for businesses to work on the wall, what might the next project of offense be, and do we want the same narrow-minded illiberal morons making that decision for us?

    Dana (023079)

  17. I will vote for California secession and if successful, move to Arizona

    I already moved.

    This reminds me of the LA City Council which voted to boycott all Arizona products after SB 2010 was signed.

    The staff had to quietly remind them that LA gets 25% of its electricity from Arizona. The boycott was quietly dropped.

    Mike K (f469ea)

  18. For a state government to sanction companies for doing work for the feds is not only unconstitutional (attempting to regulate interstate commerce), but is likely to be actionable as a denial of civil rights.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  19. nk,

    California is already in insurrection with its refusal to obey federal immigration laws, and in aiding and abetting federal fugitives.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  20. Az Bob, even if CA votes for secession, that does not mean you are no longer an American citizen even if you still live in CA. You would have to renounce that citizenship first. Of course, CA might say you were illegal and expel you, however ironically.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  21. > Citizens should have the right to vote on what is in their best interest and not have the legislators decide for us

    I somewhat agree and somewhat disagree. We’re a representative democracy, not a direct democracy, and I do not believe that most citizens have the time, skill, or inclination to thoroughly research and understand every piece of legislation which the legislature, or regulatory agencies, consider; so, while I support the initiative system as a check on abuse by the legislature and the regulatory bodies, I *do not* support abolishing them and putting everything to a vote.

    That ‘cure’ would be substantially worse than the disease.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  22. do we want the same narrow-minded illiberal morons making that decision for us?

    I have got to say that California voters are the least informed, most air-headed people you ever wanted to meet. At least until the dating habits of movie stars is an important election issue.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  23. > You would have to renounce that citizenship first.

    I don’t think that’s clear.

    In a world where California voted to secede and the Federal Government allowed it to happen peaceably – a world in whose existence I do not believe; this is entirely a hypothetical that I think has no chance of actually happening – in that world, the citizenship status of residents of California would be unclear. I’m fairly certain there is neither statute nor case law covering it.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  24. Aphrael is right. Direct Democracy is a system that assumes that knowledge of issues in less important that wide participation. For some things, basic things, this is possibly true. But for things that require significant specialize knowledge it’s a terrible method.

    The “People’s Choice” Award for best movie may be more insightful than the Oscar. But the People’s Choice Award for Best Set Direction would be less so.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  25. The worst initiative in California history was probably the one to put AIDs patients in camps quarantine, back in the 80’s. It lost 2-1, but it was allowed on the ballot.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  26. @ Kevin,

    I have got to say that California voters are the least informed, most air-headed people you ever wanted to meet. At least until the dating habits of movie stars is an important election issue.

    Yes. As evidenced by the Democrats’ supermajority in both houses and the state Assembly, as well as our exorbitant, and ever increasing debt.

    @ aphrael,

    We’re a representative democracy, not a direct democracy, and I do not believe that most citizens have the time, skill, or inclination to thoroughly research and understand every piece of legislation which the legislature, or regulatory agencies…

    I *do not* support abolishing them and putting everything to a vote.

    That ‘cure’ would be substantially worse than the disease.

    Ultimately, agreed. See above.

    Dana (023079)

  27. Kevin M, at 25: there’s also the initiative which would have prohibited gay people from being employed as teachers. It failed, but more than 40% of the voters voted for it.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  28. California right now is packing itself with illegals to increase their house seats and electoral votes after the census. Once that occurs, California alone will determine the future of America. Along with New York and a couple other states they will have America in an Iron Grip. They are moving steadily toward a fascist state while we argue gays in rest rooms.

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  29. You think this came from Lara, this is Eric holder’s stealth move.

    narciso (59be11)

  30. Voters want the wall because they don’t believe ANY politicians on the issue, even those politicians who say they want to stop illegal immigration. California will have to burn to the ground before a change for the better is made. California Democrats have made a concerted effort to flood the state with people looking to better their lot in life whatever the cost to wealthier residents or job creators, however ridiculously unsustainable this will quickly prove to be.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  31. Extending the boycott to equipment suppliers is idiotic. But the wall contractor could have a ball with it by making sure one of every make of automobile is used by the contractor. Or maybe leave the door open for just one and pick Fiat as the only conforming auto manufacturer. I can just see it. Every police vehicle, every EMS vehicle and every limo for the governor would have to be a Fiat 500.

    Bring it on baby!

    Corky Boyd (d7b434)

  32. it’s so easy to create ad hoc companies

    slimy corrupt hoochie dianne feinstein and her criminal pig husband richard blum do this all the time

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  33. Democrats trying to stuff non-citizens who they hold as illegal labor into a state for representation purposes to increase their own power federally.

    Now when have we seen that before?

    NJRob (1b3e18)

  34. As long as the illegals are counted for representation purposes, the Democrats could care less if they vote. In fact they probably prefer it that way. Less chance of an illegal slipping off the reservation by accident.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  35. #20 Az Bob, even if CA votes for secession, that does not mean you are no longer an American citizen even if you still live in CA. You would have to renounce that citizenship first. Of course, CA might say you were illegal and expel you, however ironically.
    Kevin M (25bbee) — 5/5/2017 @ 5:18 pm

    Isn’t it ironic? (Don’t you think.) California would deport me.

    AZ Bob (f7a491)

  36. Mister Trump is an Andrew Jackson fan. He’ll invade and hang Jerry Gavin Xavier Becerra and anyone else stoking the fires of disunion, sooner that see California become a Mexican province .

    papertiger (c8116c)

  37. All 14 congressman from Ca. voted for the new health plan.
    So Californians have that gift from republicans.

    mg (31009b)

  38. To think, I used to be proud to be a Californian. I miss those days.

    ThOR (c9324e)

  39. I’m fairly certain there is neither statute nor case law covering it.

    I do not see how I can lose my US citizenship by CA seceeding. The 14th Amendment says that if I was born in the USA then I’m a citizen and that event has happened. Neither Congress nor California can strip me of it, and since a plebiscite in CA is a delegation of the legislative power, it cannot either.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  40. All 14 congressman from Ca. voted for the new health plan.
    So Californians have that gift from republicans.

    41 from CA voted against.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  41. If CA seceded, then about 30 counties would secede from CA and form a few new states. Jefferson, San Joaquin, and whatever the non-LA part of Southern Cal called itself. Probably Southern Cal. They could send all the illegals to LA.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  42. In the end, the only counties that would secede would be Mendicino south to Monterrey and around the SF Bay. And Los Angeles, but maybe we could conquer them and send the traitors packing.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  43. 14 republicans from Ca. staying together is a start.

    mg (31009b)

  44. Democrats trying to stuff non-citizens who they hold as illegal labor into a state for representation purposes to increase their own power federally.

    Someone should sue, saying the state only gets 3/5ths of a vote credit.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  45. 14 republicans from Ca. staying together is a start.

    And they didn’t vote with the Democrats.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  46. Extending the boycott to equipment suppliers is idiotic. But the wall contractor could have a ball with it by making sure one of every make of automobile is used by the contractor. Or maybe leave the door open for just one and pick Fiat as the only conforming auto manufacturer. I can just see it. Every police vehicle, every EMS vehicle and every limo for the governor would have to be a Fiat 500.

    Bring it on baby!

    The idea is a cure one and it makes me smile. That is, until I remember just how incestuous the auto industry is. Remember that Fiat owns (for the time being, anyway) Chrysler. A Dodge Ram 3500 on the jobsite? No Fiat based 500 stretch limo for the Gov.

    Bill H (383c5d)

  47. Not that Brown would really need a 500 limo. He’ll have his train that nobody asked for stretching between two cities nobody gives a damn about.

    Bill H (383c5d)

  48. Fruits and nuts have feelings.

    mg (31009b)

  49. In the end, the only counties that would secede would be Mendicino south to Monterrey and around the SF Bay. And Los Angeles, but maybe we could conquer them and send the traitors packing.
    Kevin M (25bbee) — 5/5/2017 @ 11:07 pm

    Tell me again, why would we conquer them? Like, we want them back or something?

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  50. barack built a nice wall around his new house in dc
    he obviously hates hispanics

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  51. when president mr reagan told mr gorbachev to tear down this wall, the left wingers became very angry
    they said president mr reagan shouldn’t be talking like that

    now president mr donald wants to build a wall, and the left wingers are becoming very angry
    they say president mr donald shouldn’t be talking like that

    so, no matter what you do, the left wingers are going to get all pissy

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  52. To think, I used to be proud to be a Californian. I miss those days.

    Me, too.

    When I came to the state in 1956, it was beautiful, even LA, and had the best infrastructure in the nation.

    Mike K (f469ea)

  53. It seems that the causes of mass emigration and the needs of mass immigration are of paramount concern to minority leaders.

    n.n (37e3bd)

  54. california started the food truck craze thank you california

    now the next thing i guess is the shabu shabu

    there’s a few places you can do this here in chicago

    but… i did googles

    and i don’t think the go to place has emerged for this yet here

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  55. Once the meat and vegetables have been eaten, leftover broth from the pot is customarily combined with the remaining rice, and the resulting soup is usually eaten last.

    yum?

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  56. “If Democrats thought for one minute that illegals were voting Republican, you’d see the border wall from space!”

    – Albert Einstein

    Leviticus Channeling Hoagie (e80149)

  57. “when president mr reagan told mr gorbachev to tear down this wall, the left wingers became very angry
    they said president mr reagan shouldn’t be talking like that”

    – Trump Supporter

    Really? “The left wingers” were angry about the fall of the Berlin Wall? Which ones?

    Leviticus (e80149)

  58. @60, the ones who nicknamed the President “Ronnie Ray-Gun.” They loved the Berlin wall. Leftists like Sean Penn, who later went on to say that anybody who called Hugo Chavez a dictator should go to prison.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/mar/11/sean-penn-hugo-chavez-venezuela

    Sean Penn has defended Hugo Chávez as a model democrat and said those who call him a dictator should be jailed.

    The Oscar-winning actor and political activist accused the US media of smearing Venezuela’s socialist president and called for journalists to be punished.

    “Every day, this elected leader is called a dictator here, and we just accept it, and accept it. And this is mainstream media. There should be a bar by which one goes to prison for these kinds of lies.”

    …Penn, speaking on Bill Maher’s HBO chatshow, is part of a small but vocal pro-Chávez Hollywood group which includes Oliver Stone and Danny Glover.

    The leftists who fetishize, as The Nation puts it, Cuba as a Cold War Museum.

    https://www.thenation.com/article/hipster-colonialism-and-the-ruin-of-cuba/

    The people who are now worrying about American capitalism “ruining” Cuba are the same leftists who hated seeing the Berlin wall come down.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  59. Really? “The left wingers” were angry about the fall of the Berlin Wall? Which ones?

    He didn’t say they were “angry about the fall of the Berlin Wall” now did he? He said some left wingers were got angry because Reagan called for it to be torn down. As I recall in 1987 when Reagan said that noted line many left wingers at the time thought Reagan was unnecessarily provoking the Soviets. By November 9, 1989 they were learning Reagan was right.

    I know it’s tough but being on the right side means being on the side that doesn’t burn the American flag. Crazy, huh?

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  60. Yes nearly 60 years later, there are novels that follow the Graham greene template re batista.

    narciso (916136)

  61. http://www.history.com/topics/cold-war/berlin-wall

    The Berlin wall fell in 1989. What wasn’t with us was the intertubes. So it’s a bit hard for me to come up with the material that proves that there were idiots who loved the Berlin wall.

    Especially because they’ve had nearly 30 years to shred the evidence.

    I can only point to more recent examples.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2014/12/17/shep-smith-wonders-is-america-about-to-ruin-cuba/

    …Two ways to read that, I guess. One is that he’s objecting to having the wrong priorities, not to American businesses invading the island. Cubans need basic necessities, not fast food. Get a couple of Charmin factories in there churning out TP and that’d be a corporate move worth applauding. But wait — if that’s his point, why’s he reminiscing at the start of the segment about the sweet-[$@@] four-dollar Cuban rum he likes to bring back whenever he travels there? That’s not a necessity. Which brings us to theory two: This is exactly what it sounds like, a guy seemingly willing to trade away greater prosperity for Cubans if it means Americanizing the island in return for preserving the quaint, simple culture that decades of authoritarianism and economic retardation have produced. It’s basically the “noble savage” view of economics. What doth it profit a Cuban to gain a middle-American depot for cheap building materials if he lose his cheap-rum-making soul? Where are we going to go to watch people riding around in 60-year-old Studebakers now?

    Lot of that going around on the left today, as it turns out…

    Fools like this are with us always. Like bad weather. I wish I could go back and find the garbage they were writing about the USSR back in 1989. Sorry. You’re just going to not have to trust me, Leviticus.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  62. @Rev @62, I wholeheartedly agree with you that the lefties were mostly angry with “Ronnie Ray-Gun” for what that claimed was unnecessary provocation of the Soviet Union.

    But I couldn’t avoid the whiff of nostalgia for the wall.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  63. Yep, Cruz Supporter and Hoagie, leftwingers, I n general, were upset about the fair shake not given to the Soviet Union and communism…

    “If suddenly a true, two-party or multi-party system were to be formed in the Soviet Union, the Communist Party would still win in a real free election. Except for certain small pockets of resistance to the Communist regime, the people have been truly converted in the last 68 years.”
    — CNN Moscow bureau chief Stuart Loory in a letter to the Wall Street Journal, Feb. 3, 1986.

    “Despite what many Americans think, most Soviets do not yearn for capitalism or Western-style democracy.”
    — Anchor Dan Rather on the CBS Evening News, June 17, 1987.

    “The reality is that even if the communist state were to protect individual rights aggressively, many of its people are not prepared to tolerate diversity.”
    — Dan Rather on the May 27, 1988 CBS Evening News.

    “Communism got to be a terrible word here in the United States, but our attitude toward it may have been unfair. Communism got in with a bad crowd when it was young and never had a fair chance….The Communist ideas of creating a society in which everyone does his best for the good of everyone is appealing and fundamentally a more uplifting idea than capitalism. Communism’s only real weakness seems to be that it doesn’t work.”
    — 60 Minutes commentator Andy Rooney in the New York Times, June 26, 1989.

    “Marx and Lenin are still revered heroes. Never mind that communism as they conceived it didn’t work. Most Soviets don’t want to dump it, just improve on it.”
    — USA Today founder Al Neuharth, February 9, 1990 column.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  64. Don’t worry Haiku. Those quotes will be scrubbed by the left soon enough. Just like they did will Bill Nye’s facts about chromosomes.

    NJRob (68f3b2)

  65. Oh, was that really you Colonel? I thought it may have been some smart-ass channeling you in an attempt at Alinsky style ridicule. Good show, old chap.

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  66. 55… Yes, Mike K, the memories I have of Orange County are fond: Our family moved to East Anaheim in 1962 – a time when orange groves thrived throughout the city and county and many of what are now busy thoroughfares were just narrow two lane roads winding through the groves. Mom and Dad purchased a new house in a tract near the intersection of Lincoln and Rio Vista that bordered on the Santa Ana River. Our family was blessed to have an aunt, uncle and 7 cousins living just a few houses down on the same street as us. We grew up with them, and we looked up to those older than us. This was a time when a kid could ride his bike on roads through the orange groves over to Angel Stadium and watch a baseball game in the cheap seats for a $1.60. A time before big-money major league baseball, where we had some Angels and their families live in our neighborhood and had a chance to make new friends – albeit short term – of their sons and daughters.

    So many good memories…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  67. I’m curious, Leviticus. If you doubt me, what are your reasons? And I freely admit it’s hard, after 30 years, to come up with exact quotes. The internet by and large didn’t exist when all this was happening. And they’ve had all that time to shred the evidence.

    The best I can do is to quote more recent examples and hope you can understand they were saying the same things in late ’80s.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  68. The fact they exist yet rarely are referred is like the ark in the warehouse.

    narciso (4602a7)

  69. Just like they refer to gitmo, the garden spot compared to villa marista (regime g2) mazorra (psychiatric facility) ranch boyeros, et al

    narciso (4602a7)

  70. If you can find more recent examples of left wingers being angry about the demolition of the Berlin Wall, Steve, I’d love to see those too.

    Leviticus (e80149)

  71. They’re b*st*rds, narciso.

    Hate is expensive. Like Horses and the Kardashian sisters, as much as I might want any of it, I can’t afford it.

    And they’re still b*st*rds.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  72. Tell me again, why would we conquer them? Like, we want them back or something?

    We want the infrastructure and the nice beaches. But anyone who thinks we’re, I dunno, fascists for invading can go to Mexico or the People’s Republic of San Francisco.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  73. Leviticus,

    You won’t find modern socialists upset about the fall of the Berlin Wall anymore.

    Instead of just having East Germany under socialist rule, now they have all of Germany being led by an East German socialist.

    Still doesn’t change the facts of history.

    NJRob (1b3e18)

  74. Really? “The left wingers” were angry about the fall of the Berlin Wall? Which ones?

    I heard lefties DEFEND the wall in the 80’s. The argument was basically that they had been trained by the state and were stealing their knowledge from the People.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  75. On Tue night, the Verizon-owned company held an intimate, invite-only event for clients and potential clients inside of a 3-story townhouse in Manhattan to showcase what brands might want to buy into for the coming year. The goal: to explain in a closed-door setting why brands should sponsor content created by the likes of TechCrunch, The Huffington Post and Makers Studio.

    The atmosphere was entirely different than the event AOL held last year during the first week of May – a formal, IAB-sanctioned NewFronts event – at the South Street Seaport in lower Manhattan, when the company took over several blocks to throw a massive concert for thousands featuring Snoop Dogg, Wiz Khalifa and Demi Lovato. This year, there were only 50 people in attendance instead of 5,000. There were cocktails on the roof rather than long lines at drink carts. And instead of Snoop and Wiz, there was a dinner presentation from CEO Tim Armstrong that was followed by a conversation with President Obama’s former senior adviser, Valerie Jarrett.

    what in god’s green would this nasty jew-hating hooch know about internet marketing

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  76. they have all of Germany being led by an East German socialist.

    And most of Europe as well. I guess that’s better than a Bavarian socialist.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  77. Baseball cards in your spokes, Col.?

    mg (31009b)

  78. Leviticus, if you are a fair minded person, I would hope you could agree that because this is an event that happened in 1989, there might form a barrier to internet research.

    In that, the documentation might not be available, or readily accessed. Or it’s been destroyed. It’s been 30 years. I can more readily present evidence of stupid things leftists had said since then. Not that I’m not saying the stupid things they said were representative of even the majority of leftists. Just that they were said, and pretty high profile.

    Just be straight up about it. Do you think I’m lying to you?

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  79. 80… damn straight, mg! Schwinn Stingray, banana seat… schwing!

    Colonel Haiku (9298f8)

  80. Shortened 73… if every conceivable attempt at justifying communism, excuses for “excesses” e.g., gulags, mass murder, etc., hatred shown for truth-tellers like Solzhenitsyn made by the Useful Idiots can’t be displayed, Leviticus just won’t believe you…

    Colonel Haiku (9298f8)

  81. Just be straight up about it. Do you think I’m lying to you?

    Of course he does not think you’re lying, Steve57. He’s just being disingenuous like the left is prone to do. He knows full well leftists were angry at the fall if the Berlin Wall. Leftists constitute communists so of course they were angry when the Wall fell. Just like they were angry when the Soviet Union fell. Just like they were sad when Castro croaked. Does any reasonable non-communist sympathizer need you to enumerate the names, dates and places of these angry, sad lefties? I think not. We all know who they were and you can start with the CPUSA and move on from there.

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  82. Netflix neuters chromosomes segment from old Bill Nye video

    Remembers Stalin’s purges as if they happened yesterday. With fondness.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  83. Coronello, Rev, and especially for Leviticus. I would walk up to you on the street and demand to know if you think I’m lying to to you. Because I am not.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  84. Never bet against the Sailor in the bar fight, Rev.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  85. you not supposed to fight in bars people get hurt

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  86. Same here, Col. Monkey handle-bars with all Yankee cards in the front wheel Tigers in the rear!!
    And Happy 86th Birthday to Willie Mays. The best I’ve ever seen.

    mg (31009b)

  87. Holy f*** you don’t need to tell me Mr. Feets. I used to get into bar fights and the next thing I knew was someone is slamming a chair on the the back of my head. It turned out everyone I got into bar fights with had friends.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  88. ugh i’m sorry you had to learn the hard way but you’re the wiser for it now mister

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  89. I’m still picking out staples from the back of my head.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  90. And I’d like to return to Israel.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  91. 87.Coronello, Rev, and especially for Leviticus. I would walk up to you on the street and demand to know if you think I’m lying to to you. Because I am not.

    I’m sure you’re not and I’m sure you wouldn’t, Steve57.

    88.Never bet against the Sailor in the bar fight, Rev.

    It is strange how often bar fights are centered around sailors, isn’t it?

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  92. I heard somewhere for a barfight you want the sheep herder on your side. The logic being handling sheep shears is an intense exercise, making them freakishly Popeye strong.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  93. You ever been to Pohang, Rev?

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  94. “Despite what many Americans think, most Soviets do not yearn for capitalism or Western-style democracy.”
    — Anchor Dan Rather on the CBS Evening News, June 17, 1987.

    “The reality is that even if the communist state were to protect individual rights aggressively, many of its people are not prepared to tolerate diversity.”
    — Dan Rather on the May 27, 1988 CBS Evening News.

    Given the current state of Russia, those two statements are not too far off the mark (especially if you compare the Eastern Europe/Baltic States to Russia, Belarus, and the Central Asian assortment of ex Soviet republics.

    kishnevi (d22255)

  95. I was a member of the Berlin Brigade when the Wall went up. I remember hearing an American leftist, with a group of African tourists standing at a viewing station in West Berlin, explaining how the Allies had built the Wall to keep West Berliners from escaping to the People’s Paradises of East Germany. Of course, anyone with even a basic knowledge of security would know that the Wall was built to prevent people from entering West Berlin not from entering Eastern Europe.

    Michael Keohane (947544)

  96. A shepherd with a shepherd’s crook would certainly be helpful.

    kishnevi (d22255)

  97. #60 leviticus, in the future, please don’t misrepresent what i write. thank you!

    i didn’t actually say left wingers were upset about the fall of the berlin wall
    what i said is that the left wingers said president reagan shouldn’t talk like that to gorbachev when he told him to tear down this wall

    at the time, the lefties complained the speech was too provocative and that it risked hurting relations with the soviets

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  98. Same question, Trump Supporter: which “lefties”?

    Leviticus (e80149)

  99. 97.You ever been to Pohang, Rev?

    I have not, Steve57. Closest I got was Busan. Did you get in soju inspired trouble there?

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  100. we’re all old enough to remember how the left wing media spoke of fidel castro when he died

    in fact, just for kicks, let’s compare the competing statements made by then-president barack and then-candidate mr donald
    https://www.hermancain.com/obama-issues-a-statement-on-castros-death-so

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  101. #102 leviticus, you have to keep in mind that the tear down this wall speech was given in june 1987
    the internet wasn’t around to document it in real time

    it requires having to get past a pay wall (pun!) to access major newspaper archives going back 30 years
    no offense, but i haven’t the time or motivation to do that for you

    however, i did quickly find this from cbs news in 2012
    left wing historian douglas brinkley said, “It was not well-received within the foreign policy community or the pundit class,” Brinkley said, in an interview with CBS. “Many people called foul.”

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/remembering-reagans-tear-down-this-wall-speech-25-years-later/

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  102. @101. what i said is that the left wingers said president reagan shouldn’t talk like that to gorbachev when he told him to tear down this wall

    =yawn= “Lefties” like Reagan Chief of Staff Howard Baker and Deputy NSA Colin Powell, among many other senior Reagan WH staff, eh.

    Reagan’s own people opposed the use of the phrase, chiefly because they felt it would sour the blossoming relationship w/Gorby. It’s been well documented in various memoirs as well as mentioned in the American Experience bio on Reagan.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  103. If you want to see political incorrectness by Reagan, watch his masterful speech to the evangelicals.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7bUye1CpfE

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  104. The guys who made “Charlie Wilson’s War” – every corksoakers involved in that project from start to finish.

    Mika (I’d like to buy a vowel) Brzezinski’s daddy.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  105. Off topic. Derby Day.

    Best memory of our 4th turn, infield encampment for the 100th Run for the Roses— a city native shouting to us as we swilled 9 AM mint julips as Sterling beer chilled in the cooler, “This here’s Louisville, y’all gotta party!”

    Toasting the 143rd w/my souvenir 100th Derby glass in hand. They’re off…

    “New Ajax, Laundry Detergent is whiter than white!” – Ajax Detergent TV ad jingle, 1970s.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  106. Reagan’s own people opposed the use of the phrase

    =yawn=cough=spit= Cruz Supporter was not talking about Reagans staff, nor was he referring to people opposing the use of the phrase. He was referring to =yawn= lefties like you =spit=yawn= being angry about the fall of the Wall. Not normal level headed conservatives but rather leftists angry, pissed off crazed. You know, their usual state when things don’t go their way.

    =yawn=spit=fart Do try and keep up.

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  107. He literally said he wasn’t t talking about the fall of the wall, but the rhetoric preceding it. Try actually reading the comments.

    Leviticus (e80149)

  108. 110- =yawn= as usual, you’re desperate to overlook his own people opposed it.

    Nice try.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  109. @111- the rhetoric opposed it– from within his own administration. Which conservatives fail to accept is in fact, a compliment to Reagan overriding their advice.

    Such an angry sour and bitter bunch. And fortunately, as even George Will has acknowledged, is now a waning, dying mind set. Which is Trump’s greatest triumph so far.

    Well done, Mister President!

    “… keep it up!” – Arthur Jensen [Ned Beatty] ‘Network’ 1976

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  110. I’m sour that we’re discussing the Berlin wall in this thread. Yup.

    Here’s the only guidance to be gleaned . https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6d/Structure_of_Berlin_Wall.svg

    Interesting interdiction features include raked sand or gravel median, rendering footprints easy to notice, easing the detection of trespassers and also enabling officers to see which guards had neglected their task.
    Rolling pipe along the top of the wall, so you get a finger on the lip to pull yourself up the pipe rolls you right back down.
    The evolution of the antifa wall (that’s what the commies called it) is interesting.

    Wire fence and concrete block wall (1961)
    Improved wire fence (1962–1965)
    Improved concrete wall (1965–1975)
    Grenzmauer 75 (Border Wall 75) (1975–1989)

    We can reverse engineer some Soviet crap for a change.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  111. some of reagan’s moderate staff such as howard baker and colin powell did oppose the insertion of the tear down this wall clause into the speech because they feared it might impede diplomatic efforts

    good think that the gipper followed his own instincts rather than those of howard baker, colin “i voted for barack twice!” powell, and the left wingers, huh?!

    there’s no denying the historical record that left wingers had been demonstrating a soft soft for the soviets for decades
    in fact, president jimmy carter had even scolded america for having an inordinate fear of communism

    on the other hand, some of us feel that carter had an inordinate fear of giant killer bunny rabbits

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  112. howard baker and colin powell did oppose the insertion of the tear down this wall clause into the speech because they feared it might impede diplomatic efforts

    Has anyone watched the DVD of the miniseries “The Path to 9/11″ since Disney lifted the embargo on it ?

    There is a great scene (and these scenes are why it has been hidden 15 years) of the ambassador to Yemen ordering the FBI out of the country as they try to investigate the Cole bombing because it will interfere with her outreach to the Muslims.

    There are also scenes with Madeline Albright complaining that Clinton’s “Peace Process” was much more important than finding out who bombed the embassies in Africa. Or killing bin Laden when they had him in their sights and knew he had been the leader.

    I can see why it has been hidden until Hillary was done as a candidate.

    Mike K (f469ea)

  113. @114. You forgot 1991- Berlin Wall fragments boxed up and on sale at Macy’s for Christmas.

    Great stocking stuffers at $12.95.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  114. Yes Barbara Bodine who has served in Iraq during the anfal campaign was the one. There were actually attempts by the ctc to go after bin Laden (trodpoint and kawbreaker) but they were vetoed by higher ups

    narciso (89c110)

  115. Rev @103, I managed to avoid the ye olde compleate soju experience despite spending a lot of time in Korea planning for, conducting, and participating in a lot of exercises like Ulchi/Focus Lens or RSO&I. I don’t remember what, exactly, was the exercise that took me to Pohang a couple of times. I noticed that the Korean officers weren’t trying to match the Americans shot for shot. They were faking it, dumping the soju into a tumbler they had clutched between their legs, under the table.

    I did likewise.

    What was memorable about Pohang, if I may be so bold to say, were the prostitutes. Because during my time there, riding the Belleau Wood and Dubuque out of Sasebo (and I still have the coffee cup from the ship’s store) we spent most days in port because the Koreans kept cancelling. Saying the seas were too rough. The weather was overcast, but it was only like a three foot chop. It was nothing for us but our compadres called the days events off. So we’d hit the beach, and the prostitutes were there, waiting for us, and time is money, so it was sort of amazing.

    And at the time we were like, “You prostitutes must have a sixth sense or something.”

    “Oh, we knew you weren’t going anywhere.”

    But looking back on it, of course they knew. There was no way those hung over Korean navy types were going to take their boats out in that weather.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  116. There are also scenes with Madeline Albright complaining that Clinton’s “Peace Process” was much more important than finding out who bombed the embassies in Africa. Or killing bin Laden when they had him in their sights and knew he had been the leader.

    I can see why it has been hidden until Hillary was done as a candidate.

    Mike K (f469ea) — 5/6/2017 @ 5:16 pm

    Still waiting for that Obama speech the LA Times sat on before the 2008 election to those radical muslims

    NJRob (1b3e18)

  117. Yes Barbara Bodine who has served in Iraq during the anfal campaign was the one. There were actually attempts by the ctc to go after bin Laden (trodpoint and kawbreaker) but they were vetoed by higher ups

    Even Wikipedia gets it.

    Bodine’s career was marked by controversy surrounding her relationship with the FBI during its investigation of the USS Cole bombing: The PBS Frontline documentary The Man Who Knew included interviews with officials such as Richard A. Clarke (the Clinton administration’s counterterrorism chief) and Barry Mawn (a former head of the New York FBI office) who stated that John P. O’Neill (an FBI agent and al-Qaeda expert) came into a personal conflict with Bodine over different perspectives on Yemen. When O’Neill briefly traveled back to New York for Thanksgiving, Bodine denied his re-entry visa, blocking O’Neill from returning to Yemen to continue the investigation on the USS Cole bombing. Frontline cited sources as saying that “O’Neill’s removal from the scene in Yemen may have seriously limited the Cole investigation.”[3]

    The chilly relationship between Bodine and O’Neill is detailed in Lawrence Wright’s The Looming Tower. While O’Neill viewed Yemen as a serious threat, unstable from the Yemeni Civil War, with a large number of weapons, large cells of Ayman al-Zawahiri’s al-Jihad, and many Mujahideen veterans from the war in Afghanistan, Bodine, in contrast, viewed Yemen as an infant democracy, a “promising American ally in an unsettled but strategically important part of the world.”

    That worked out well/

    Mike K (f469ea)

  118. I just finished watching “The Path to 9/11.” \\It;s easy to see why it has been suppressed for 15 years.

    Mike K (f469ea)

  119. She was slated to be part of the provisional authority in Iraq but some wisely thought it would signal “business as uzual’

    narciso (0d2984)

  120. failifornia can say bye bye to 750 more jobs as State Farm quits Bakersfield for states with way friendlier business climates

    The work from the 11 affected offices will move to State Farm’s headquarters in Bloomington, IL, its offices in Atlanta, Dallas and Phoenix, plus other existing locations across the country, the company said.

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  121. Somebody shoul tell Lara to pass a law that anyone who has State Farm cannot do business with the state.

    nk (9651fb)

  122. I guess you can’t stream Path to 9/11?

    Very sorry to see the latest leftist bullying by the late great state of California. I keep thinking people will wake up and vote them out, or at least bring back a two-party system, but they didn’t do it in Detroit or Baltimore or Venezuela, until they were starving to death.

    Patricia (5fc097)

  123. 36. papertiger (c8116c) — 5/5/2017 @ 7:15 pm

    As long as the illegals are counted for representation purposes, the Democrats could care less if they vote.

    Maybe somebody could tell that to some Republicans.

    Sammy Finkelman (845007)

  124. Bill Clinton did not want to kill bin laden, but he created a paper trail that made it look like he did.

    It’s in the 9/11 commission report, although they don’t accuse anyone of lying, but that’s what it adds up to. (They say different people told different stories)

    http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch4.pdf

    From pages 132 and 133

    They finally agreed, as Berger reported to President Clinton, that an extraordinary step was necessary. The new memorandum would allow the killing of Bin Ladin if the CIA and the tribals judged that capture was not feasible (a judgment it already seemed clear they had reached). The Justice Department lawyer who worked on the draft told us that what was envisioned was a group of tribals assaulting a location, leading to a shoot-out. Bin Ladin
    and others would be captured if possible, but probably would be killed. The administration’s position was that under the law of armed conflict, killing a person who posed an imminent threat to the United States would be an act of self-defense, not an assassination.On Christmas Eve 1998, Berger sent a final draft to President Clinton, with an explanatory memo. The President
    approved the document.123

    ….

    Policymakers in the Clinton administration, including the President and his national security advisor, told us that the President’s intent regarding covert action against Bin Ladin was clear: he wanted him dead. This intent was never well communicated or understood within the CIA.Tenet told the Commission that except in one specific case (discussed later), the CIA was authorized to kill Bin Ladin only in the context of a capture operation. CIA senior managers, operators, and lawyers confirmed this understanding.“We always talked about how much easier it would have been to kill him,” a former chief of the Bin Ladin unit said.128

    In February 1999, another draft Memorandum of Notification went to President Clinton. It asked him to allow the CIA to give exactly the same guidance to the Northern Alliance as had just been given to the tribals: they could kill Bin Ladin if a successful capture operation was not feasible. On this occasion, however, President Clinton crossed out key language he had approved in December and inserted more ambiguous language. No one we interviewed could shed light on why the President did this. President Clinton told the Commission that he had no recollection of why he rewrote the language. 128

    Sammy Finkelman (3fda43)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3671 secs.