Free Gift Mentality of the Government

 I saw this three liner come up today.  The Joe Biden team is looking at this idea that they'd just send (didn't say how) Covid-19 masks direct to your house.  I should note, for a very brief time....some Trump dimwits picked up the idea....held it for about a day, and then dumped it.

So you'd naturally ask questions.

First, where are these masks made?  China, or Mexico?  

Second, who exactly is capable of mailing these out?  Well....Amazon is the only capable party in the US capable of doing this.  

Third, is the government about to hand the address business of every single American to Amazon to make this possible?  I don't see how they'd avoid it.

Would people even wear them, if they were free?

So if this worked, and you started to get a box of 30 cheapo masks each first of the month....would this eventually expand?

I mean like....well....couldn't you say that some folks were bad off and you (as the government guy) wanted to share 22 pounds of cheese every month with every household?

Then maybe you could put vitamin pills in the box?

Then maybe you could add two rolls of North Korean single-ply toilet paper to the box?

Then you'd add six cans of canned Bolivian ham to the box?

Then you'd add government-procured soap and shampoo to the box?

Then you'd add some cheapo Mexican salsa to the box?

Then you'd add some instant Nicaraguan coffee to the box?

After a while, you'd all gather on the front-porch....excited because the mailman came and left you a Biden box, and you'd sit there grinning ear to ear....because Joe sent you this month two packs of Brazilian cigarettes' and a miniature bottle of mayonnaise made in India.  

Not to condemn all of this, but this is the way that government programs get out of control and become a joke.  

This Texas 'Split' into Five State Discussion?

 So back in December of 1845, the paperwork for Texas to be accepted as a state has this stipulation written into it, as it was handed into Congress.  It says that Texas reserves the right to split from one state, into five.  No other state prior to this and no state since then....has ever included this wording.

As for the legality of this?  Some suggest that it's null and void because Texas used the wording that they were on 'equal footing' of all other states at the time.  Beyond that, it's been mostly laughed about legal talk.

The general problem here?  Congress in 1845 had three options to this submission:

1.  Refuse the application until they removed the five-state comment.

2.  Accept the application but give Texas a limited amount of time (say 10 to 20 years) to split.

3.  Do nothing and just accept it as it is.

Basically, since 1845, Congress has done nothing.

Slavery fitting into this one massive state entry?  Well....yeah, that is the big chunk of the discussion and why entry of this massive area needed to be one state only.  

Why any of this chatter matters?  Well....since the application of DC to become a state has gone in....some folks in Texas suggest that it's finally time to split and create four additional states.

Maps of this five-state creation?  There are literally hundreds of them.

Most end up showing Austin (a fairly blue city) with San Antonio (a 50-50 political situation) and Waco (mostly a red area).  That might be the only Democratic state created out of this.

The remaining four would be fairly Republican, with a strong twist of Hispanic votes.

The question is....if put to a Texas public vote....would they even go this way, and my humble guess is no. There'd be a max of 30-percent of voters who might agree to this path ahead.

Legally, the idea will just hang out there....forever discussed but never going anywhere.  

'Czar' for Reality?

 This came up yesterday and it's been on my mind.

The NY Times came out with a piece and suggested that President Biden needed to hire up some guy/gal....to be a 'Czar' (remember the term, they were highly paid folks in the Obama administration who were there to be experts)...for reality.

Yes....someone to emphasize 'reality' in branding the Biden message and theme.

In simple terms, they are supposed to prevent misinformation or fake news.

If you opened up the book, '1984' (Orwell's masterpiece), then you'd center on the 'Ministry of Truth', and this effort here (if Biden did this) would be the start of a ministry for the government.

If you'd gone to President Johnson or Eisenhower....they'd both be laughing on the floor at the mere suggestion of hiring up a guy to be an expert on reality.  But that's where we are today.  

Odds of this hiring occurring?  This year?  Probably less than 10-percent odds....but into 2022?  It's probably a 50-50 'bet'. 

Observations Over Psaki and the White House Press Conferences

 All total, I've watched six of these White House press conferences with Psaki (three from just this week).

First, they are simply marginal.  In basic terms....it's like she had a list of ten things she hoped you'd ask about, and instead....reporters throw questions that go beyond the ten.  She seems unprepared or just out of her league.

Second, the Space Command reaction?  It's kind of funny....she gives some poor reaction on one day....then 24 hours later....gives a fantastic support reaction that President Biden is absolutely behind Space Force.  

Third, if you go back to November when she was 'selected' for the job....she gave a pretty strong hint that she didn't want the job for long-term (meaning months).  In their search for the right character....she probably was the best person with in-depth knowledge of foreign policy, economics, and making a 'brand-name'.  But you get the impression her heart really isn't into this job.

So finally, I come to the fourth observation, and it hit me upon watching Wednesday's press conference.  If you simply sit back and listen 'only' (closing your eyes)....then about fifty-percent of her wording reminds you of Joe Biden, and his sometimes 'lost' nature on topics.  

Yes, I'm suggesting that maybe Psaki is giving marginal press conferences because Joe Biden in his morning pep-talk with Psaki is giving her marginal chatter to be used for the 'brand-name'.

The type of 'voice' that she is using....the reactions to certain topics....the flip-flop reactions....all typical Biden mechanisms.  

So what happens after Psaki leaves (probably by May)?  Someone will step in and do a six-month tour, and play the same wording and same reactions.  It's not their fault....it's the brand-name problem.