Of Mr. Hinderaker’s Inability To Read The Congressional Record…

UNTITLEDI’ve long held that reading… is a skill. And I’ve long hoped that as a trained lawyer, Mr. Hinderaker would read the Congressional Record, before opening his yawning yap. That hope has mostly been in vain, ‘lo these last 15 plus years — and today is more of the same.

Mr. Hinderaker is right, insofar as he mentions that TrumpCare 2.0 contains a stealthy provision to cut taxes for the wealthiest two per centers in the nation. It is a repeal of the taxes on investment income — a Christmas tree ornament amendment dropped in to push the last couple of holdouts to support the bill in the House.

Of course, none of this will ultimately matter — because the ill-starred bill will now founder in the Senate.

Thus it is all Kabuki theatre of the most prosaic sort — as I’ve written at my other properties this week. So, yesterday when Mr. Hinderaker declared that its passage by two votes in the House means Democrats “lose big” and spin wildly — I simply chuckled, and kept my own counsel. [Do see below — for how 45 will be the ultimate loser, here.]

untitled10Today, though — instead of admitting that the bill contained pork for the richest people in the nation, he goes on a rant about all the old “taxes” previously embedded in the original ACA of 2010. Many of them have been amended or have expired, outright — but John quite tellingly fails to mention — as Minority leader Pelosi just did — the sop for the ultra-wealthy in the bill.

So I write this evening solely to record that either (i) Mr. Hinderaker hasn’t read the bill — but is opining on its illusory virtues (as he is often wont to do — i.e., clue-free), or (ii) more darkly — he is simply… a liar. Again.

As he’s been — pretty uniformly — for 15 plus years.

Now you know. And as I’ve long said, this goofy bill is D.O.A. in the Senate, after the non-partisan CBO scores it — that will appear next week. And OrangeCare 2.0 will be more deficit inflating, and more cruel, upon the neediest five per cent of the nation than TrumpCare 1.0 was. It is a… dead letter.

Try to read, John — that sh!t is… “fundamental, and sh!t” — ref. “Out of Sight… and the great Don Cheadle Maurice “Snoop” Miller character, all while in a Lompoc library.

 

Force Need Not Be Lethal To Be Discriminatory — And Wrong.

whopper-alt-nyt-harvard-hinderaker-debunked-2016Over the weekend, Mr. Hinderaker wrote that “Black Lives Matters” is a movement founded on “a lie“.

With an all too typical paucity of evidence, he makes this claim based on his own analysis of police shootings of black and white citizens, from one year of data from The Washington Post — he claims, anyway.

But he only considers lethal encounters — where the citizen is killed. So he engages in a “straw man” fallacy. His straw man falls, but so too does his claim — when more of the data is considered, and sensibly so.

As the New York Times made clear this very morning, and as my graphic at right (derived from Professor Fryer’s Harvard study — referenced in the article) reiterates — the vast bulk of the ten year longitudinal evidence confirms that significant “use of force” by at least New York City police officers is meted out in a significantly disparate (i.e., racially discriminatory) manner — even after controlling for types of escalated, and non-escalated encounters.

So — again, Mr. Hinderaker tells… a lie. A whopper, in fact. Now you know.

Nothing new there, though — and after the servers at blog.com website are resurrected, I’ll move all the four years’ of those historical posts over here — as a solid back-up.