09-20-2018 10:29:38 AM -0700
09-20-2018 08:44:42 AM -0700
09-19-2018 04:17:25 PM -0700
09-19-2018 01:49:53 PM -0700
09-19-2018 06:50:04 AM -0700
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.
PJ Media encourages you to read our updated PRIVACY POLICY and COOKIE POLICY.
X


Live Blog

Here is your live blog for the day.

Breaking:

It's a start.

For all you fans of massive government spending — that means you, Mr. Trump — I'm sure you'll be pleased to hear that the federal deficit grew at an astonishing 32% through the first 11 months of the year to $895 billion -- an increase of $222 billion over 2017.

The Hill:

The nonpartisan CBO reported that the central drivers of the increasing deficit were the Republican tax law and the bipartisan agreement to increase spending. As a result, revenue only rose 1 percent, failing to keep up with a 7 percent surge in spending, it added.

Do you mean to tell me that if you spend more than you take in, you run a deficit? What an exciting idea!

Revenue from individual and payroll taxes was up some $105 billion, or 4 percent, while corporate taxes fell $71 billion, or 30 percent.

But... but... but... what about the theory that we'll "grow" our way out of the deficit? "Nevermind," as Emily Litella would say.

Republicans won't say anything about trillion-dollar deficits because they're in charge. Democrats can't say anything about trillion-dollar deficits because they didn't care about them when they were in charge.

And if the politicians aren't saying anything about trillion-dollar deficits, the media has nothing to report and won't talk about it either.

As Chester A. Riley used to say: "What a revoltin' development this is."

#NeverForget the heroes of 9/11:

Between this and the Community Reinvestment Act which led directly to the 2007-08 meltdown, the Clintons screwed this country but good.

And they'd be doing even worse right now if it weren't for some tens of thousands of Obama-to-Trump voters in the Northeast and Midwest.

Army Seeks 1,000-Mile Missiles Vs. Russia, China.

I'm like a kid in a candy store with these stories -- a kid in a candy store who just found James Bond's American Express Black Card on the floor.

Details:

For the first time since the Soviet Union fell, the Army is developing weapons with a thousand-mile range. That’s roughly five times the range of anything the Army fields today and three times the range of previously announced programs. The payoff in a future war with Russia or China could be dramatic – but the technological, financial and even legal problems are daunting.

The ambition? Develop not one but two types of ultra-long-range missiles to help blow holes in advanced air defenses:

One Army weapon, not yet officially named, would be a high-performance hypersonic missile, tearing through missile defenses at Mach 5-plus to kill critical hardened targets such as command bunkers.

The other, the Strategic Long-Range Cannon (SLRC), would use a gun barrel to launch cheaper, slower missiles at larger numbers of softer targets like radars, missile launchers and mobile command posts.

Together with comparable weapons launched from jets, ships, and submarines, these ground-launched “strategic fires” would blast a path for attacking aircraft, from Army helicopters to Air Force bombers. That kind of mutual support – formally known as Multi-Domain Operations – would transform the Army’s role from a consumer of the other services’ support to a full partner in providing long-range firepower.

Because the only thing wrong with overkill in the Army is that there's never enough of it.