The Final Show of the Greatest Country on Earth

On May 31, 1866, John C. Ringling was born in Iowa to German immigrants in what felt like an extremely bleak year.

The chaos and devastation from the Civil War that had ended in 1865 were still keenly felt, and the US economy was in the midst of a deep recession

The country was still shaken from the assassination of Abraham Lincoln.

And the new President, Andrew Johnson, was embroiled in a major political crisis with Congress that would soon lead to his impeachment.

(Johnson was also a noted buffoon, once giving a speech in early 1866 to honor George Washington in which he referred to himself over 200 times and accused Congress of plotting his assassination.)

No doubt those were some of the darkest days in US history. And it would have been hard for Mr. and Mrs. Ringling to imagine a bright future for their children.

But John and four of his brothers went on to build the most successful circus empire in modern history– the Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey Circus, known as the “Greatest Show on Earth.”

There were countless traveling circuses crisscrossing the United States in the 19th and early 20th centuries.

But what made the Ringling Brothers’ event so spectacular was sheer scale. They didn’t hold anything back– lions, tigers, elephants.

The Ringling brothers were also masters of efficient logistics.

Like Ray Kroc and Henry Ford, the brothers developed an assembly line approach to the construction, deconstruction, and transportation of their event so that they could swiftly move from town to town.

It was a spectacle itself simply to see their train of railway cars packed with exotic animals stretching on for more than a mile.

Their circus was considered the ultimate in entertainment back then, and John Ringling became one of the wealthiest men in America as a result of this success.

It seemed like the empire would last forever.

But it didn’t.

After peaking in the Roaring 20s, the circus took a major hit during the Great Depression that effectively bankrupted John Ringling, the sole surviving brother.

At the time of his death in 1936, in fact, Ringling only had about $5,500 in the bank (that’s after adjusting for inflation to 2017 dollars).

The circus limped along in the Depression and barely made it through World War II.

Towards the end of the War in 1944, right before they thought their luck would turn, the circus had a major accident in Hartford in which the tent caught fire, killing 167 people.

That nearly bankrupted the company a second time, and several executives went to jail for negligence.

In the decades that followed, American consumer tastes changed.

Television, movies, and music were far more interesting than circus performances, and Ringling Brothers went into terminal decline.

Fast forward to the age of Facebook and YouTube, and there simply wasn’t a whole lot left in the circus that was exotic or interesting anymore, not to mention the animal rights issues.

So yesterday, the Greatest Show on Earth held its final performance in Uniondale, New York, after 146-years in the business.

A century ago this would have seemed impossible.

The early 1900s were the absolute peak for Ringling Brothers, and no one imagined a future where consumers weren’t standing in line to buy tickets.

Candidly I find this story to be an interesting metaphor for the United States itself.

Rise from the ashes. Remarkable growth. Peak wealth and power. Bankruptcy. Gross negligence and incompetence. More bankruptcy. Terminal decline.

And just like how people viewed Ringling Brothers 100-years ago, it’s difficult for anyone to imagine a world in which the US isn’t the dominant superpower.

Instead of the Greatest Show on Earth, it’s the Greatest Country on Earth. And most of us have been programmed to believe that this primacy will last forever.

But nothing lasts. History is full of failed dominant superpowers, from the Roman Empire to the Ottoman Empire. Many no longer exist.

Their declines were almost invariably due to excessive spending, unsustainable debt, military overreach, and a society that abandoned the core values which made it wealthy and powerful to begin with.

Every successive superpower always believes that they will never suffer the same fate. And every time they’re wrong.

This time is not different.

Yes, it’s still a wonderful country with plenty of positive things going for it.

But at its core the United States still has $20 trillion in public debt (over 100% of GDP) and an additional $46.7 trillion in net, unfunded future social obligations (like Social Security and Medicare).

Plus, the government spends an appalling amount of money, far more than they collect in tax revenue.

(In 2016 their total net loss exceeded an incredible $1 TRILLION.)

Former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers summed it up when he quipped, “How long can the world’s biggest borrower remain the world’s biggest power?”

The answer is– no one knows. Maybe months. Maybe decades.

Either way, this trend is one of the biggest stories of our time. And though few people want to acknowledge it, it’s already happening.

We now regularly witness government shutdowns, debt ceiling crises, and gross government incompetence. But this is just the beginning.

The national debt is growing far faster than the economy as a whole. And, especially if interest rates continue to rise, the trend will accelerate.

It’s simple arithmetic.

So while it seems impossible now, the Greatest Country on Earth will some day have its final show as well.

That doesn’t mean the US simply disappears.

But it’s foolish to assume that the insolvency of the world’s largest superpower will forever be consequence-free.

What’s your Plan B?

Source

from Sovereign Man http://ift.tt/2qNsrpS
via IFTTT

Watch Live: President Trump And Israeli PM Netanyahu Joint Press Conference

Having confirmed earlier in his press conference with Israeli President Rivlin that 1) he did not say the word 'Israel' to the Russians, and 2) Iran are the bad guys (confirming the narrative from the Saudis the day before), President Trump is due to join Israeli PM Benjamin Netantahu shortly for a joint press conference…

Trump meets with President Rivlin at his residence for a bilat. Trump commended Rivlin's work, and the two discussed the "opportunity" for Israel and other countries in the Middle East to come together.

"This moment in history calls for us to strengthen our cooperation, as both Israel and America face common threats – from ISIS and other terrorist groups, to countries like Iran that sponsor terrorism and fund and foment terrible violence. Together, we can work to end the scourge of violence that has taken so many lives, here in Israel and around the world." — Donald Trump.

President Trump meets with Bibi in Jerusalem, where he criticizes the Iran deal as Netanyahu nods along. "We gave them wealth and prosperity… and an ability to continue with terror," said Trump. "Iran will never have a nuclear weapon. That I can tell you."

Trump also told Bibi that he "never mentioned the word or the name Israel" during his Oval Office meeting with top Russian officials. "They're all saying I did, so you have another story wrong."

 

Alternative Feed:

Official Live Feed:

via http://ift.tt/2qOWJXt Tyler Durden

Goldman Warns Of “Sharp Oil Price Drop”, Inventory Glut “If Backwardation Is Not Achieved”

Increasingly some of the more prominent sellside analysts appear to be picking and choosing ideas from their competitors. Earlier, it was JPM echoing Goldman’s reco when it cut its 10Y yield forecast. Now, in a note previewing the outcome of this week’s OPEC meeting and proposing a way forward for OPEC, Goldman’s Damien Couravlin adopted the “backwardation” idea presented last week by Morgan Stanley’s Francisco Blanch.

As a reminder, Blanch’s latest thesis on oil market dynamics, is that “OPEC’s goal for the oil market is not a specific price level, but reaching backwardation“, (which is also why he does not believe that OPEC will proceed with deeper cuts as this would likely mean ceding more market share to U.S. shale production).

Fast forward to Monday, when Goldman’s energy strategist Damien Couravlin effectively cribbed the whole note by writing that while “oil prices are rebounding with stock draws and greater certainty on an extension of the production cuts” and a “9 month extension would normalize OECD inventories by early 2018” he warns that he sees “risks for a renewed surplus later next year if OPEC and Russia’s production rises to their expanding capacity and shale grows at an unbridled rate.”

How can OPEC avoid this boom-bust cycle again and achieve both fiscal stability and rising revenue through oil market share gains? He argument is that “only sustained backwardation can restrain access to the large pools of private equity and HY credit capital.”

We believe that low deferred prices can achieve this by (1) increasing the opportunity cost of shale’s capital providers to hedge out their oil price exposure, (2) lowering expected equity valuation and (3) increasing expected leverage levels. Costs will also play a role in setting shale’s growth path but we do not forecast sufficient inflation at this point to achieve the required slowdown next year.

In other words, Goldman observes that curtailing access to capital is required to slow shale grow, and is urging OPEC to eliminate the biggest loophole that has allowed shale to keep producing despite lower prices, namely the contango that has allowed US producers to not only hedge production at affordable prices but to continue expanding production even as OPEC nations have been forced to limit their own output, ceding market share to US producers. 

How can OPEC achieve this? Goldman’s answer is that the bank believes “that OPEC and Russia should (1) extend/increase the cuts until stocks have normalized, (2) express the goal of growing future production, and (3) gradually ramp up production to grow market share but keep stocks stable and backwardation in place.”

Goldman concedes that “achieving this will be difficult, but we see templates in both OPEC’s modus operandi of the 1990s of managed but flagged growth and the rationalization of shale growth in US gas, both with backwardation.”

The bank also highlights one major risk to its thesis: that cheap, mostly junk-rated credit will remain abundant, allowing shale to continue expanding production regardless of the fundamentals: “while oil hedge ratios are low for 2018, the main risk to this view is that funding markets remain resilient to lower deferred prices, with little HY debt maturing in the coming years.

What does all of the above mean for OPEC’s announcement on Thursday? Under such a proposed framework, “we believe that OPEC should announce a decisive cut on May 25, as normalizing stocks is a required first step (likely a 9 month extension).” Such an announcement would have a two-fold impact on oil prices: first, when it comes to Goldman’s near-term price target, the firm says that its year end Brent spot price forecast remains at $57/bbl. Things change when going beyond the 2017: here Goldman for the first time adds a significant caveat:

“we now forecast that deferred prices will need to decline with 1- to 2-yr WTI forwards of $45/bbl. This leaves us expecting high total returns for being long oil, delivered through backwardation, but recommending that producers increase their hedge coverage. If backwardation is not achieved, however, we see risks that prices fall sharply next year as OPEC reverts to growing market share through volumes.”

Just to recap, here is Goldman’s summary of what it dubs “OPEC’s dilemma”:

Herein lies the OPEC dilemma – a return to production capacity in 2018 to grow market share would lead to a sharp collapse in prices. This would extend the tug of war between OPEC and shale with the former ramping up production in 2015-2016 and 2018 but shale growing sharply in 2013-14 and 2017.

 

 

This dilemma is well illustrated with Saudi Arabia. While the Kingdom reduced its fiscal deficit in 1Q17, its roll back of austerity measures necessitates higher oil revenues in 2018 to prevent renewed large deficits. While further cuts in 2018 to support oil prices near $60/bbl would guarantee such higher fiscal revenues, this strategy would prove self-defeating longer term as high cost producers globally would ramp up activity at such prices, reducing Saudi’s long-term revenues. In turn, we do not believe that Saudi’s spare production capacity is large enough to be able to grow volumes sufficiently in 2018 to offset a sustainable decline in prices to $45/bbl and keep oil revenues at 2017 levels.

 

 

How can OPEC therefore achieve both fiscal stability and rising revenues through market share gains? We believe that the answer to this question is backwardation as low deferred prices can restrain access to capital for higher cost producers such as shale. Furthermore, backwardation maximizes low cost producers’ revenues relative to higher cost producers that hedge, as they instead sell all their production at spot prices.

Finally, we will note that the irony embedded of Goldman’s latest analysis is two-fold: on one hand the bank has to come up with a comprehensive strategy to bypass the liquidity gusher unleashed by the Fed and other global central banks. One issue with the Goldman analysis is that while it may be absolutely correct, and that backwardation will likely impair the fundamental profile of US shale producers, all that would result in is higher yields for corporate issuers which in turn would lead to an oversubscribed, bidding frenzy as the buyside rushes to allocate “other people’s money” in distressed names. As such, Goldman’s assumption of an efficient capital allocation process in a time when there is $18 trillion in excess liquidity is almost certainly wrong.

Funding aside, what is also ironic is that a US investment bank, one which effectively controls the White House, is tasked with conceptualizing a scenario which leads to a Saudi “victory” in the war with shale, an outcome which would result in thousands of lost US jobs, even as Saudi state revenues recover, and save the kingdom from its recent near budgetary death experience. It begs the question: if push comes to shove, will the Goldman Trump White House pick the side of the US shale industry, or that of Saudi Arabia, which this weekend announced intentions to purchase $350 billion in US arms over the next decade. Unfortunately, the answer is not self-evident.

via http://ift.tt/2qP1Jv8 Tyler Durden

Trump Saves Obamacare Again… For Now

The Trump administration and the House have officially asked for another 90 days to work out a lawsuit over subsidies that help poorer people afford to use their Obamacare insurance plans, further delaying a long-running legal fight that’s already destabilizing the health law.

As Axio snotes, the key point is – "The parties continue to discuss measures that would obviate the need for judicial determination of this appeal, including potential legislative action."

Full motion below…

Bloomberg continues…

Without the payments, insurers have threatened to drop out of Obamacare or substantially raise premiums, and customers could face thousands of dollars in unexpected costs. The Trump administration could still choose to drop the appeal, though other parties are attempting to take up defense of the payments.

State officials, the health industry and Democrats in Congress have pushed for the payments to continue, saying that ending them would upend the insurance market and cost millions of people their health insurance.

“We need swift action and long-term certainty on this critical program,” Cathryn Donaldson, a spokeswoman for America’s Health Insurance Plans, said in an email.

 

“It is the single most destabilizing factor in the individual market, and millions of Americans could soon feel the impact of fewer choices, higher costs, and reduced access to care.”

The group is one of the main lobbying associations for health insurers.

However, as Bloomberg reports, while the latest delay is a reprieve for Obamacare, it does little to resolve the underlying uncertainty created by the case and by Republican efforts in Congress to repeal and replace large parts of the law. Health insurers are in the midst of deciding whether to participate in the Affordable Care Act next year, and what to charge customers. Some have already said they’ll raise premiums in 2018 because of uncertainty around the subsidies.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said the decision to continue the funding showed the administration knows that continuing the payments is the right thing to do. He criticized the uncertainty from Trump on their future.

"Unfortunately, by kicking the can down the road once again, the administration is continuing to sow uncertainty in the markets that will hurt millions of Americans," Schumer said in a statement. "Instead of hemming and hawing, they ought to step up to the plate and say once and for all that they will make these payments permanently, which help millions of Americans pay less for their health care."

While the delay will move the next update for the case to mid-August, the deadline for insurers to submit their 2018 plans for Obamacare' exchanges in most states is June 21.

via http://ift.tt/2qHMvtz Tyler Durden

Meanwhile, In Baltimore…

Via StockBoardAsset.com,

What I Saw Today In Maryland… The Militarization Of Police.

The intensive militarization of America’s police forces is a serious topic of which the mainstream media somewhat ignores. On my travels to Hunt Valley, Maryland, I stumbled upon a family oriented charity event for law enforcement at the University of Maryland Extension. I was shocked to find unattended assault rifles and military  gear loosely displayed. (Weapons had safety features in place) 

Armored military vehicle with turret

Baltimore County, Maryland police helicopter

Military grade optics on the helicopter. By the way, FLIR systems is head quartered right here in Hunt Valley, Maryland

Conclusion: Baltimore County law enforcement looks like a small private army that should be somewhere in the Middle East. Nevertheless, this is a first hand account of the militarism in US police forces.

Bonus: Like it or not, the march towards a police state is here

via http://ift.tt/2qHH2Ty Tyler Durden

Bitcoin Blasts Through $2200, Here’s Why

Bitcoin is up almost 15% today, breaking through $2000, $2100, and now $2200.

As CryptoCompare's founder Charles Hayter notes, there are numerous drivers for this sudden surge in the virtual currency…

  • Bitcoin is trading at a $400, or 19%, premium on Japanese Markets as Bitcoin fever takes hold.

  • The USD-BTC markets are trading at $2150 whilst the JPY-BTC pair is trading at the equivalent of $2550.

  • Japanese volumes are 42-50% of trading with 132k BTC volume or c.$300 million per day.

  • The Japanese have caught the Bitcoin bug and inefficiencies across markets are being exposed. Irrational exuberance is taking hold as the Japanese stumble over each other to enter the Bitcoin market and drag up international prices.

  • Ethereum has seen a strong price rise on the back of the Ethereum Enterprise announcement and strong buying from Korea where the price is again at a large premium trading at $230 compared to the USD market at $180 – or 27%. The Korean market share of ethereum trading has been steadily increasing and has now reached 15%.

Summary

Bitcoin has hit the $2200 mark after a strong bull run with a fleshing out of the crypto ecosystem where positive regulatory moves, specifically in Japan have prompted a large inflow of fiat in the last couple of months.

The Japanese have given bitcoin the greenlight as a currency and are looking to increase the rigour that their exchanges are subject too – all in all positive for the industry as it moves more mainstream. Alongside you are seeing Chinese exchanges switching bank online after the PBoC halted withdrawals due to AML and KYC concerns in January this year. These exchanges have been trading at a steep discount for the past couple of months as money has essentially been trapped by the PBoC's diktats.

Interest in other crypto currencies has also brought money to the table that ebbs and flows via bitcoin – although you are starting to see direct ethereum pairs offering immediate exposure. The money is washing in and out of Bitcoin to search for extraordinary returns in the other crypto currencies. Ethereum and Ripple have seen some extraordinary returns this year – and momentum begets momentum with greed taking the lead.

Premia & Discounts

Bitcoin trades across multiple fiat pairs in a range of local and global exchanges. These pairs often trade at different prices due to fees, entrance and exit routes, and various perceptions of the safety of the exchange.

For example on the USD market exchanges have traded at up to a 5% or more difference. This can be exacerbated by various factors.

When these inefficiencies occur there are opportunities to arbitrage the difference. So large discrepancies or rises on one particular pair – for example the JPY BTC pair – can drag up the USD BTC pair as demand on one markets prompts opportunities on another.

Charts below showing the JPY Premium over time and price differential to the USD markets.

The Korean Won is also trading at a premium on the USD exchange of $2750 or a 27% premium. The Korean Won has 5% of Bitcoin trading.

Ethereum

is also seeing its markets dislocate as the Korean won takes a large premium. New fiat on ramps into the crypto currency are distorting market prices  but the fundamental levels of adoption and use by industry have been key in igniting price momentum.

The Enterprise Ethereum Alliance has more than tripled in size, with the group announcing 86 new members, including South Korean telecom Samsung, pharmaceuticals giant Merck, automaker Toyota, investor communications platform Broadridge, financial markets firm DTCC, and the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, which oversees licensed businesses in the state.

Additional factors include:

Global Uncertainty – Bitcoin has reacted as a form of digital gold at times of international crisis and this is often touted as first major price factor. Bitcoin traditionally moves with a higher beta than gold so spikes higher to the upside – periods of high correlation for bitcoin and gold occur when global uncertainty takes the ascendancy – which at present doesn't seem to be the case. Bitcoin is defying its gold relationship and subject to its own internal machinations. Gold has traded between 1240-1280 USD /oz whilst bitcoin has doubled in the last 3 months. On a macro level Macron's success, despite the storm clouds of brexit and Trump's bellicose attitude mean doom and gloom scenarios of political polarisation are improbable but still nonetheless a risk.

Scaling Debate – Litecoin has taken the lead and become the frontline in testing various augmentations for bitcoin with its segwit upgrade and early moves towards adding a lightening network for faster transactions. This has highlighted the fundamental issue of stalemate and hegemony in Bitcoin's corporate governance DNA. Although there is a proposal being put forward by Barry Silbert that cherry picks various elements to attempt to assuage both side of the political debate – there are no clear indications of a solution as of yet. The issue regularly raises its head as a bugbear for the price and takes centre stage for time with resultant downward pressure.

Bitcoin ETF – BATS exchange have requested the SEC review its refusal to allow the Winklevoss twins exchange to be approved. The reasons for the refusal have not changed substantially so this is not expected to dramatically alter the outlook for bitcoin.

via http://ift.tt/2qHKQUB Tyler Durden

JPM Cuts 10Y Yield Forecasts “Significantly Lower” Due To Weaker Inflation Outlook

Just one day after Goldman reluctantly cut its 2017 year end forecast on the 10Y yield last Friday from 3.00% to 2.75%, “reflecting some added uncertainty on the US macro outlook” while conceded that “bond bears”, i.e., those clients who have listened to it, “have had a difficult 2017″ it was JPMorgan’s turn, and over the weekend JPM announced it was adjusting its US rate forecast “significantly lower”, slashing its year end 10Y yield target to 2.75% from 3%, reflecting “a weaker outlook on core inflation and reduced expectations around tax reform and infrastructure spending.”

In the note by JPM’s Jay Barry, the bank also trimmed most other tenor forecasts by 15bp-35bp lower, saying that the inflation outlook “has changed markedly” over past month based on weakness in core CPI in March and April. JPM also said that  as for fiscal stimulus, odds are rising that it “gets pushed into FY18.”

And also just like Goldman, JPM tried to hedge adding that “even so, UST yields should rise in coming weeks,” because markets “continue to underprice the risk of further Fed tightening,” and yields “have consistently risen” ahead of FOMC meetings that include SEP and press conference; also, Treasuries “appear locally rich to other DM government bond markets.”

Finally, JPM maintains its recommendation to hold shorts in the 3-year sector and urges 10s30s flatteners, as the curve is ~3bp too steep adjusted for market’s medium-term Fed and inflation expectations.

Meanwhile, the fed funds market continues to be blissfully disconnected from the recent sharp slowdown in US economic data surprises, which as noted previously has posted one of the biggest drops on record, and if the disappointment persists, it is not impossible that the Fed will punts its June rate hike which the market now assumes is virtually assured.

 

via http://ift.tt/2q9KO5e Tyler Durden

Who’s Telling the Truth in Washington? Anyone?: New at Reason

For politicians, lying is an art form.

A. Barton Hinkle writes:

Even if you set political slant aside, the media sometimes get stories badly wrong. Think of Dan Rather’s “fake but accurate” memos about George W. Bush’s service in the National Guard. Or Rolling Stone‘s retracted cover story about a rape at U.Va. Or CNN’s retracted story about how the U.S. military used sarin gas against defectors. Or The New York Times‘ reporting on Saddam Hussein’s purported weapons of mass destruction—reporting The Times eventually recanted. Partly. Sort of. With qualifications and so on.

That combination of ideological slant and human fallibility gives Republicans reason to be skeptical of the press. So doubt is a natural reaction when a long train of allegations against Donald Trump, based largely on unnamed sources and unseen memos, dominates the headlines.

Say this much for the establishment press, though: For all its shortcomings, it doesn’t lie to your face. Newspapers and news shows are not going to run with a claim they know is a steaming pile of bogus.

Politicians and their henchmen do. All the time.

View this article.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2qN5za9
via IFTTT

Biden 2020: Former VP Continues To Fuel Speculation Of Presidential Ambitions

Last week at the SALT conference in Las Vegas, Joe Biden sent some mixed messages about a potential 2020 presidential run.  First, he took a shot at Hillary saying she “was never a great candidate” though he followed that up by adding that she “would have been a really good president”…which makes perfectly good sense.  Then Biden went on to talk about how he has no intentions of running in 2020 just before confirming that he “may very well do it.”

Of course, with politicians you can generally learn more about their intentions through their actions rather than their rhetoric.  And Biden’s intense speaking schedule seems to reflect that of a candidate that has presidential ambitions.  Per The Hill:

Still, Biden’s busy recent schedule of events and appearances suggests he hasn’t entirely ruled out another bid.

 

Biden has attended a hedge fund conference in Las Vegas and a fundraiser for New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D). His jam-packed calendar also includes upcoming speeches at the Florida Democratic Party and at a few college commencements. Biden will also receive an award at the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) LGBT Gala next month.

 

But the appearance that drew the loudest buzz was Biden’s speech last month at a state party dinner in New Hampshire — a critical early state in the presidential primary circuit. During his speech, Biden sought to tamp down the 2020 rumors.

 

“When I got asked to speak, I knew it was going to cause speculation,” Biden said to applause, only to add, “Guys, I’m not running.”

Biden

 

If successful, Biden would be 78 by the time he took office making him, by far, the oldest president in history. 

A recent poll from Public Policy Polling found Biden as the leading Democratic contender in a hypothetical matchup against Trump with a head-to-head lead of 14 points, 54% to 40%.  Of course, we’ve seen this story playout before with pollsters persistently underestimating Trump’s support through 2016.

And while those numbers may seem comforting, even close Democratic strategists don’t think Biden will run in 2020.

“I don’t have any idea what he’s going to do other than what he says publicly, which is he’s not inclined to do it at this point. I don’t think he knows what he’s going to do honestly,” said Steve Schale, a former Obama campaign aide in Florida who worked on the Draft Biden movement in 2016. He noted that he hasn’t spoken to Biden since Christmas.

 

“The idea that Joe Biden would continue to do what he’s done for 40 years … shouldn’t come to anybody’s surprise, nor do I think anybody should read into it that he’s definitely made a decision. He’s keeping his word that he was going to remain active in the public space and work on the issues he cares about.”

 

“This is who he is, this is what he’s done his whole life,” Schale said. “I think you’re going to see Joe Biden remain a pretty prominent fixture in American politics.”

 

“He has a very valuable role to play, but I don’t think he’s in the same league with the Sanders and Warrens of the world,” said Democratic strategist Brad Bannon. “They have bigger microphones and platforms to speak from.”

That said, one Democratic strategist had the guts to point out the real reason that Biden will likely never be the Democratic candidate for president: “I think Democrats are going to want a new face, somebody fresh”….which can be loosely translated as ‘he’s too white and too old.”

via http://ift.tt/2rLgjDj Tyler Durden

Notre Dame Students Who Protested Mike Pence Did Not Violate His Free Speech Rights

PenceNDVice President Mike Pence gave the commencement address at Notre Dame University on Sunday, and about 100 students walked out of the stadium as soon as he started talking.

These individuals had every right to protest Pence. They did not violate his free speech rights, or anyone else’s. They did not prove that they are delicate snowflakes who refuse to listen to other people’s ideas.

Students who left told The New York Times that they were expressing opposition to the Trump administration’s policies and also registering their disagreement with Pence’s stances toward gay people and Syrian refugees. (As governor of Indiana, Pence said he would not let Syrian refugees enter the state and was one of the most anti-LGBT Republican leaders.) It’s hard to fault them for wanting to make a statement against Pence. The policies they cited are in fact bad. The students, to their credit, didn’t heckle the vice president or prevent him from speaking. They simply declined to play the part of a captive audience.

Pence used the opportunity to decry the fact that some campuses are besieged by the forces of “safe zones, tone policing, and administration-sanctioned political correctness,” which chill free expression. And he’s right: Student-inspired censorship has become a big problem lately. But the Notre Dame graduates’ small act of polite defiance isn’t an example of this. Protest doesn’t become censorship unless the protesters prevent their target from speaking.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2rL4YTF
via IFTTT