Seven more arguments in favor of making the appointment to the Supreme Court now

Featured

  1. Of course, we could start with the examples of Democrat misdoings hashed in my last post on this

Barack_MerrickWe could point toward the establishment of the nuclear option by Harry Reid. We could continue with the Democrats’ nomination of Merrick Garland in February 2016 and then point out that replacing a Supreme Court justice by a lame duck president in February is not the same as this September appointment by a President who can be re-elected.

Moreover, we could point again to the hell-on-earth, circus-like spectacles organized by Democrats against conservative judges like Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas, and Brett Kavanaugh. Again, we could point to the complete lack of evidence of wrong-doing on part of the judges as the Democrats made a mockery of the judicial approval process in order that they might protect their leftist ideals.

  1. In 2016, Democrats argued for election-year appointments

The Daily Caller points to the words of eight Democrats on making election-year appointments to the Supreme Court. Here are the first six:

Although Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden favored putting off a confirmation hearing during an election year in 1992 as a senator, Biden supported Garland’s confirmation in 2016 as vice president, according to ABC News. He said there was no supposed “Biden Rule” concerning Supreme Court nominations in an election year.

“Deciding in advance simply to turn your back before the president even names a nominee is not an option the Constitution leaves open,” Biden said, according to Business Insider. “It’s a plain abdication from the Senate’s duty. … [It’s] never occurred before in our history.”

“Elections have consequences,” then-Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton said, according to Politico. “The president has a responsibility to nominate a new justice and the Senate has a responsibility to vote.”

She called McConnell’s decision “outrageous.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer tweeted: “Garland has integrity, a brilliant legal mind & is a perfect fit for [the Supreme Court]. GOP inaction does our country a great disservice.”E

And then-House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi tweeted: “Judge Merrick Garland, is a respected jurist who must be given a fair hearing & timely vote.”

Sen. Bernie Sanders, an Independent who caucuses with Democrats, tweeted, “Judge Garland is a strong nominee with decades of experience on the bench. [Obama] has done his job. It’s time for Republicans to do theirs.”

Meanwhile, Sen. Elizabeth Warren tweeted that Republicans must “ditch their extremism” and schedule a vote for Garland.

(Read more at the Daily Caller)

I will have to agree with these Democrats — election-year appointments can be made if the ruling party can handle the dissent from the other party

If Democrats have the numbers in the Senate and the presidency (as they did in 2016), they can try.

If they could not set aside enough time to complete their plans — well, that just shows poor political gamesmanship. If their plans required cooperation, they should have compromised and gotten cooperation.

  1. In 2016, even Ginsburg made an argument against the position she purportedly made on her death bed

In 2016, Ginsbug said “Nothing in the Constitution” prevents final year Supreme Court picks (as reported by the Daily Caller in a 19 September 2020 article).

GinsburgThe late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 2016 said “nothing in the Constitution” prevents a president from nominating to fill a court seat.

Ginsburg was reacting to the upcoming fight over a replacement for her friend and colleague Justice Antonin Scalia, who passed away. Then-President Barack Obama had nominated Judge Merrick Garland to fill Scalia’s seat only to be denied a Senate hearing by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

“I think he is about as well qualified as any nominee to this court,” Ginsburg said of Garland, according to a July 2016 report from The New York Times. “Super bright and very nice, very easy to deal with. And super prepared. He would be a great colleague.”

The Times called her answer “immediate” when asked if the “Senate had an obligation to assess Judge Garland’s qualifications.”

“That’s their job,” Ginsburg told the outlet then. “There’s nothing in the Constitution that says the president stops being president in his last year.”

Ginsburg, who passed away Friday after battling metastatic pancreatic cancer for years, reportedly expressed the wish that her replacement wouldn’t be confirmed until a new president is installed.

(Read more at the Daily Caller)

Odd how this former ACLU pro-abortion lawyer was in favor of this move, just over four years ago

When she thought that she might gain an additional ally, she was all for having President Obama implement these plans. But now that it does not work to her needs (and now that she has gambled her time away), she has another idea.

  1. No matter what we do, there will be no civility

Barring Divine intervention, it seems that the Left will not dialog with anyone on differing sides. This comes forward through an 18 September 2020 article in The Hill where an associate professor at Marshall University proffers a prejudicial opinion of Trump supporters.

“I’ve become the type of person where I hope they all get it and die,” Professor Jennifer Mosher said. “I’m sorry, but that’s so frustrating — just — I don’t know what else to do. You can’t argue with them, you can’t talk sense with them, um, I said to somebody yesterday I hope they all die before the election.”

MosherMosher, who teaches in the school’s biology department, was making a reference to recent indoor rallies held by the president, events that have garnered hundreds of attendees with sporadic mask usage.

Many have criticized the Trump campaign for holding the indoor rallies, noting the events violate the administration’s coronavirus guidelines which call for social distancing and mask wearing.

Mosher’s comments were recorded by a student and posted on social media, sparking backlash online and triggering a statement from the university on Friday.

“Marshall University this morning announced it is aware of an overtly political statement made by a faculty member in a recent virtual classroom session and widely circulated on social media,” the statement read. “The University does not support or condone the use of any of its educational platforms to [b]elittle people or wish harm on those who hold differing political views. The professor was removed from the classroom yesterday and is on administrative leave, pending an investigation. [T]here will be no further comment on this personnel matter at this time.”

(Read the whole article at The Hill)

While it is true that this professor has been “punished” by putting her on “administrative leave”

Do you think for a minute that a conservative professor would not have been fired for doing the same to the former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton? Do you think there is any chance that this professor will be reinstated?

  1. The Democrats have promised that there will be no civility

National Review reports on threats communicated through The Atlantic concerning a possible Biden loss

Writing in The Atlantic recently, the sober-minded commentator Shadi Hamid says, “I struggle to imagine how, beyond utter shock, millions of Democrats will process a Trump victory.” For Democrats, having failed to cope with the 2016 election, and believing the polls that show a solid Joe Biden lead, another shock Trump win would “provoke mass disillusion with electoral politics as a means of change — at a time when disillusion is already dangerously high.” And it would lead decent folks astray. They would seek remedies “outside the political process, including through nonpeaceful means,” though, “not necessarily out of hope but …

I presented the summary from National Review out of sympathy

If you want to review the twisted logic of the left, please feel free to look at The Atlantic article by Shadi Hamid where he postulates that the Democrats’ illegal rioting in Minneapolis, Seattle, and Portland will be rewarded by Republicans who have been cowed into submission and will vote for Biden.

  1. Progressives, who demand that we show compassion for their shortcomings, show themselves to be myopic

In the following video (warning: there is a lot of vulgar language), the woman shows no compassion for the suffering of Ruth Ginsburg or her family. She only curses at others for what the death of RGB does to the progressive cause.

  1. Tucker Carlson hits many of these points and more

Liberal expectations and reality do not match on the Coronavirus panic


As I observe the coronavirus panic, the disparity between liberal expectations and the reality they create becomes more evident

During the past few weeks, I have been watching the coverage of this coronavirus crisis (often observing how the newscasters seem to be treating the audience as imbeciles). Therefore, I have laid out the following observations that fall across this coronavirus crisis from various liberal slants and do not in the least make sense for the reasons that I also note.

The Expectations of Liberals: My Observation
Liberals say that we must trust certain portions of our main stream media.

They claim that “fake news” is a construct of conservatives.

The following paragraphs document five instances of fake news committed (by over 23 “news” organizations) that occurred during the first two weeks of March 2020.

CNN, the Washington Post, and other members of the main stream media first accused President Trump of lying about a Google-developed app to help those who have potentially contracted Covid-19 get tested. Then they had to correct their misinformation.

According to Breitbart, at least eight New York Times authors shared a deceptively edited quote Monday from President Donald Trump’s recent call with state governors, creating the false impression that the president is denying federal support for ventilators that are needed in hospitals treating coronavirus patients.

The Daily Caller went further to report that not only nine New York Times authors, but also the Business Insider, Political Wire, Daily Kos, and Daily Beast repeated the same lie by omission.

Additionally, Breitbart notes that Reuters has been caught stealth-editing a debunked story where they initially claimed Trump wanted to obtain exclusive American access to a coronavirus vaccine.

Add to that, a story claiming that President Trump fired the entire White House pandemic team came out through main stream media sources, but was disproven by Breitbart.

As the contents of the right column of the row above demonstrate, the press would love to catch the President in a lie (even if they have to manufacture and spread it themselves). Why doesn’t the press hold the Chinese government to even a normal level of accountability? Now we know that the Chinese government covered up the origins of the Wuhan virus, suppressed doctors who tried to get news out, and destroyed records, but that news has hardly been shared widely.
Liberals say that conservatives need to tone down the hate during this time of crisis. The Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin appeared on MSNBC‘s Morning Joy where she suggested that there would be fewer Democrat deaths because they would follow the suggestions of experts offered through the media.(as reported by Breitbart). Elsewhere, similar assertions might be considered hate speech. (However, in related news, a Democrat lawyer who worked to prosecute the impeachment has tested positive for coronavirus.)

Democrat Representative Rashida Tlaib shared a tweet telling her followers “F**k the National Day of Prayer,” according to Breitbart.

Instead of conservatives, we saw Bernie supporters cornering a Democrat woman in her car and berating her.

With a hat tip to sfcmac, we see in the Washington Times that immigrants were targeted by leftists for attending a Trump rally.

Following the lines of logic provided by Jennifer Rubin on MSNBC‘s Morning Joy, liberals expect people to submit to the purportedly more accurate and responsible ideas concerning “the truth.” A recent article by Daily Caller, we are reminded that the WHO told us to not worry because China told us the coronavirus was not contagious. Now those same “experts” are credibly being cited by both the press and Joe Biden.
Even without the creative work of the main stream media, President Trump does produce gaffes that the press loves to accentuate. With that said, why doesn’t the press report on the many, many Biden gaffes that not even the most diligent can track? Why not question him about his lie that the WHO offered the U.S. coronavirus tests?

Why don’t they point out how a point out how one doddering old socialist repeatedly confused “ebola” with “coronavirus?”

Numerous liberals (including Bernie, Biden, and other leading Democrats) advocate for open borders even during this crisis.

Nancy Pelosi called the closing of travel from China “over-reacting.”

Joe Biden called Trump xenophobic and racist for shutting off travel from China.

Open borders countries like Italy and Spain have experienced some of the highest infection rates of Covid-19.

European nations with strong borders (like Poland and Hungary) have experienced fewer cases of Covid-19.

Liberal politicians (such as Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau) have adopted a closed-border stance.

The closure of our borders to travelers from China has been credited with preventing cases of coronavirus.

Likewise, numerous liberals (such as Bernie, Biden, and others) continually call for the U.S. to have government-provided health care in various forms.

During the first Democrat debate, all participants supported taxpayer-supported health care for illegal aliens.

As Joe Biden pointed out when making points against Bernie, the single-payer health care system in Italy has begun to flounder under the weight of coronavirus.

Likewise, Spain struggles with the Covid-19 outbreak.

Bernie continually praises communist regimes (China, Cuba, Russia, … ) and suggests the U.S. take on socialistic programs. As pointed out above, the Chinese government (a communist government, for those of you in Rio Linda) covered up the origins of the Wuhan virus, suppressed doctors who tried to get news out, and destroyed records. America does not need communism, no matter what Bernie says.
Along the line of liberals expecting us to take the word of experts, the main stream press seems to want us to accept the word of liberal politicians without question. However, Bernie was not questioned when he claimed we had 87 million uninsured (when Obama claimed 9 million).

Other questions/responses posed on social media

The following are some tweets and responses from conservative people on Twitter. Because the tweets of such people tend to be either shadow banned or deleted, I included both links to the original  tweets and screen captures of the tweets.

SchowTweet

TalonsTweet


Since tweets, articles, and photos disappear, the following are screen captures of the previously-mentioned tweets

From the New York Times

The following is a screen capture from Julie Bosman’s Twitter feed.

BosmanTweet

As if embarrassing herself with the comment about Bloomberg was not enough, Maya Gay also tweeted this tweet.

GayTweet

The screen capture below shows a tweet by Zach Parkinson that demonstrates that no less than nine New York Times authors participated in the deception.

ParkinsonTweet9

Do you have observations?

I would like to read your observations on the gap between liberal expectations and the reality they create for the rest of us.

Three stories of good news concerning coronavirus


  1. One hundred and fifty thousand immigrants from seventy-two nations with coronavirus stopped at border

The Washington Examiner reported in a 11 March 2020 article that 150,000 immigrants from 72 nations with coronavirus have been stopped at border.

Some 150,000 illegal immigrants from 72 nations with cases of the coronavirus have been apprehended or deemed inadmissible from entering the United States since November, raising the ongoing border crisis to a potential public health threat, according to officials.

ReturnToMexicoPolicyFruitsNew figures provided to Secrets show that over half of the nearly 300,000 illegal immigrants apprehended or deemed “inadmissible” this fiscal year came from nations with cases of the coronavirus, including China, Italy, Iran, and South Korea.

The administration has been bracing for a federal court decision that would junk its “remain in Mexico” policy and open the doors on the southwest border. But the U.S. Supreme Court Wednesday put that on hold as legal arguments on both sides continue in the liberal 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which oversees Arizona and California.

“The border/immigration situation has taken on a whole new dynamic; it’s a public health threat,” said an official.

Secrets recently reported that 328 Chinese immigrants had been seized illegally crossing the border since the virus outbreak began in China.

So far, 150,958 immigrants from 72 nations with the virus have been stopped at the border. DHS has sought to return, repatriate, and remove as many as possible.

What’s more, another 43,000 from Latin nations including Venezuela, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti and Nicaragua — nations that haven’t reported the virus — have been turned away to wait.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials said last week none of the immigrants stopped by agents showed signs of the virus.

The administration has been making the case that continuing the so-called Migrant Protection Protocols that keep immigrants in Mexico pending approval to come into the U.S. to seek asylum is both an important national security and health security issue.

“MPP is all the more critical to keep Americans safe and healthy, which can only be accomplished through lawful and orderly migration,” said an official.

Another said, “We have a unique public health threat posed by individuals arriving unlawfully at the border, where migrants, law enforcement officials, frontline personnel, and the American public are put at risk. All it would take is a single infected individual to impact the detained migrant community within DHS facilities. Without proper precautions, which can only happen through orderly, lawful migration, the virus threatens to spread rapidly. Any halting of MPP would exacerbate this threat.”

Should the policy be lifted, holding stations run by the Department of Homeland Security would immediately fill up, and, there is the potential that the spillover would have to be shipped to facilities around the country.

(Read more at the Washington Examiner)

Luckily, the Supreme Court has decided to uphold President Trump’s right to keep this policy

Even the liberal-left, Trump bashing CNN reported that the Supreme court upheld Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” policy.

In this age of Coronavirus panic, at least the Supreme court seems more reasonable than Bernie and Biden, both of whom pledged to open the border.

  1. Mullah who said Coronavirus was Allah’s punishment
    catches …

This comes from the department of “if you are going to claim an illness constitutes divine punishment on a group, make sure you don’t also catch the illness.” According to a MEMRI article published on 28 February 2020, one Iraqi Shi’ite scholar claimed that the Coronavirus was Allah’s punishment of China for their mockery of Islam.

https://youtu.be/K7BENXxou60
Shi’ite Iraqi Islamic scholar Hadi Al-Modarresi, who is based in Qom, Iran, said in a video that was uploaded to the Internet on February 28, 2020 that the spread of coronavirus is undoubtedly an act of Allah that is divine punishment against the Chinese for their treatment, mockery, and disrespect towards Muslims and Islam. In early March, online sources reported that Al-Modarresi contracted coronavirus.

HadiAl-ModarresiHadi Al-Modarresi: “It is obvious that the spread of this virus is an act of Allah. How do we know this? The spread of the coronavirus began in China, an ancient and vast country, the population of which makes up one seventh of humanity. More than a billion people live in that country. The authorities in that country are tyrannical and they laid siege to more than a million Muslims and placed them under house arrest. The journalists in that country began to mock the niqab of Muslim women and they forced Muslim men to eat pork and drink wine. Allah sent a disease upon them and this disease laid siege to 40 million [Chinese people]. The same niqab that they mocked has been forced upon them, both men and women, by Allah, by means of the state authorities and officials.

[…]

“Islam forbade people from eating insects, but [the Chinese] mocked this matter. And there you have it, this disease spread from the world of animals – be it bats, ants, or snakes, the result is the same – to the human world and it has scared humanity in its entirety.”

Occasionally, you just have to laugh

While I don’t minimize the risk of suffering to this man, the eternal risk to his soul by following a twisting of the message of the gospel will cost him much more.

Still, in this case, you just have to step back and laugh when someone gets hoisted on his own petard.

petard

Of course, other pieces of good news float all around this story. First, the good news that (in spite of both our self-righteousness [Romans 10:3] and sin [Romans 3:23]), God loves us and even this man and wants both us and him in heaven, if he (or we) would only accept the gift [John 3:16]. Another piece of good news previously blogged here is that Iranians have been turning to Christ due to the heavy hand of the regime, one-on-one evangelism, and the calling of God through dreams. Maybe this man can be reached.

  1. Most coronavirus patients recover, still anxiety, fear loom

According to an Associated Press article published 11 March 2020, most coronavirus patients recover. Still, with all of the media-driven hype, everyone is anxious. Therefore, it is really surprising when a bit of truth leaks out through the main stream media (as highlighted by the bolding, which is mine).

Amid all the fears, quarantines and stockpiling of food, it has been easy to ignore the fact that more than 60,000 people have recovered from the coronavirus spreading around the globe.

recovered
A recovered patient

The disease can cause varying degrees of illness and is especially troublesome for older adults and people with existing health problems, who are at risk of severe effects, including pneumonia. But for most of those affected, coronavirus creates only mild or moderate symptoms, such as fever and cough, with the vast majority recovering from the virus.

According to the World Health Organization, people with mild illness recover in about two weeks, while those with more severe ailments may take three to six weeks to rebound. In mainland China, where the virus first exploded, more than 80,000 people have been diagnosed, but more than 60,000 already have recovered.

Because the difference in impact can be so great, global health authorities have the difficult task of alerting the public to the virus’ dangers without creating panic.

Already, the widespread consequences of the virus have been staggering, sending shock waves through the world’s financial markets. Global oil prices sustained their worst percentage losses since the the Gulf War in 1991, and new restrictions were imposed in Italy and in Israel as the Holy Week approached.

But even some of the most vulnerable patients can fight their way through the disease.

Charlie Campbell’s father, 89-year-old Eugene Campbell, has been diagnosed with the coronavirus and is hospitalized in Edmonds, Washington. Charlie Campbell said his father’s doctor is cautiously optimistic, adding, “Under normal circumstances, he would discharge my dad, but these aren’t normal circumstances.”

(Read more at the Associated Press)

Who would think that the truth might leak out of the main stream media

Among all of the coverage of the hype, who would think that the news that “most patients recover” would be reported? Additionally, who would think that a caption to a graphic within the same article might point out that many cases have recovered? The take-away from that may be a conclusion that a medical doctor brought out during a radio interview on AM 740 KTRH: many people have probably caught the coronavirus without noticing that they had it and have recovered (thence, the mortality rate of this disease may be multiple times lower than originally projected).

Six stories on how Bernie Sanders has and will hurt us


  1. Sanders tells rust belt workers he is ready to hurt them

Townhall comments on Sanders attempt to follow Hillary Clinton in her promise to shut down coal industry jobs. That is, Sanders pledged to shut down the Rust Belt.

The Nevada Caucus has come and gone, but the debate leading to it had some rather worrisome tidbits if you’re a worker in the Rust Belt. The Democrats just hate you. That’s all we can gather from their agenda, especially Sen. Bernie Sanders.

BernieKillsTheRustBeltIf he isn’t bellowing about health care, it’s climate change. We’re less than a decade away from all of us dying from global warming, according to the Vermont senator. So, that means we have to act now. Not tomorrow, not after breakfast—now! We’re all going to die…unless we do exactly what the Democrats want on this issue, which is typical. And in doing so, Sanders, like his former rival Hillary Clinton, may have had his own coal miner moment. You might remember from 2016 that the former first lady and two-time presidential loser promised to put a lot of coal miners out of business if elected president.

In 2020, MSNBC’s Chuck Todd asked Sanders what he would say to workers in the Rust Belt, specifically in the key state of Pennsylvania, who are in the natural gas industry. It supports hundreds of thousands of jobs. Banning it, which is what Sanders wants to do, will destroy this industry overnight. And Todd aptly noted The New York Times report that quoted top union leaders in the Keystone State stating that if Sanders or Liz Warren is the 2020 nominee, they will tell their people to either vote for Trump or stay home.

What I tell these workers is that the scientists are telling us that if we don’t act incredibly boldly within the next 6-7 years there will be irreparable damage done not just to Nevada, not just to Vermont, or Massachusetts, but to the entire world.

Translation: I’m going to screw you over. It’s not as blunt as Hillary, but the effects are the same. Will it derail his campaign like Hillary? That remains to be seen.

(Read more at Townhall)

Removing people’s ability to support themselves does not win votes, Bernie

You may candy-coat your plans to terminate whole industries by promising free training, but Bernie, if you come against an industry that currently enjoys robust growth (like the oil industry) or provides things that you claim to want (like zero emissions — as comes from the burning of natural gas) and you express a desire to eliminate these industries, then something will happen. If all the people who work for these industries have to do to eliminate the threat against their industry is to get out and vote, then the workers in these industries had better mobilize and eliminate your campaign through their vote.

Working America, the ball has been served to you from the politician who wants to eliminate numerous jobs in the energy sector (and, like Obama, end options within the medical field). You have the choice of whether to vote for someone who wants to eliminate your jobs and take over your medical options (in this day of coronavirus) or to vote for freedom.

  1. Sanders dumped Vermont & Maine nuclear waste in Texas. When Texas protested, Sanders: “Drop dead.”

Townhall pointed out that Sanders told those who protested nuclear waste to “drop dead.”

As someone who follows politics quite closely, I’m often fascinated when a potent piece of opposition research against a major candidate for office percolates below the radar for years, yet never quite breaks through.  Have you ever heard of ‘Sierra Blanca,’ as it relates to Bernie Sanders?  Neither had I.  Neither had hardly any voters, I’d wager.  Well, expect that to change, sooner or later.  Tim Miller, a hardcore anti-Trump conservative, is adamantly opposed to Democrats nominating Sanders.  He’s written a piece outlining a somewhat obscure episode that he anticipates would be used as a powerful cudgel to clobber Bernie in a general election.  Out of pure curiosity, I clicked the link in one of his tweets, and…wow:

(1) In 1998, then-Rep. Sanders cosponsored a bill that would allow Vermont and Maine to dump their nuclear waste in a poor and largely Latino town in Texas called Sierra Blanca.

(2) A Texas Observer article in 1998 covered protestors from Sierra Blanca confronting Rep. Sanders and being given the stiff arm. The story’s headline was “Sanders to Sierra Blanca: Drop Dead.” Sanders even rebuffed an offer to visit Sierra Blanca, telling its residents, “Absolutely not. I’m gonna be running for re-election in the state of Vermont.”

(3) Liberal hero Paul Wellstone—an actual progressive Democrat—gave a speech on the Senate floor calling this dump “environmental racism.” Former Texas Democratic Rep. Silvestre Reyes called Sanders actions “insanely callous.”

(4) After Congress approved the proposal, environmental regulators rejected the Sierra Blanca site. But a different site in Andrews County, Texas gained approval a few years later and Vermont/Texas maintain an interstate waste agreement.

(5) In 2016, Sanders’ tax returns revealed that as of 2014 Jane Sanders was still drawing a small salary as an alternate commissioner for the Texas Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Compact Commission as part of the agreement with Vermont that her husband pushed.

BernieKillsSierraBlancaThis story is, well, toxic. Bernie drew up an environmentally-controversial proposal to dump nuclear waste in a Latino community, then refused to meet with the people it impacted.  Oh, and he managed to secure a little sweetheart deal to enrich his wife in the process.  Funneling public and campaign money to his spouse (no stranger to financial scandal) has been something of a pastime for this socialist, who was a jobless deadbeat before becoming a career politician who is now a millionaire with three homes.  This episode is problematic for Bernie on the subjects ranging from environment, to race, to his “man of the people” persona, to graft.  And as Miller notes, it makes for a hell of an ad — and this 15-second spot barely hits the basics:

Miller also points out the a left-leaning ‘fact checking’ organization reviewed an attack from a conservative group on this front four years ago: “Turning Point USA meme’d Sierra Blanca back in 2016 and got enough traction on Facebook that Snopes fact-checked it. Their verdict? Mostly True. It goes without saying that Snopes isn’t really in the business of giving TPUSA their seal of approval.”

(Read more at Townhall)

Don’t let the Democrats fool you. They are not the pro-environment party.

Democrats are the party of “not in my backyard.” This is demonstrated by the fact that they will not have windmills in their immediate area. Likewise, liberals will not have the waste from the nuclear plants that create their “clean electric energy” disposed of anywhere near themselves.

So, when Hispanic Democrats came from Texas to complain about the nuclear waste that Bernie arranged to send into their backyards, Bernie had a message for them. “Drop dead.”

  1. Bernie Sanders’s Campaign Embraces Radical Group That Wants To ‘Abolish Prisons’ And Promoted Palestinian Terrorists

The Daily Caller reports how Bernie Sanders embraces a group that wants to abolish prisons and promote Palestinian terrorists.

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders’s presidential campaign has embraced a far-left group that seeks to abolish prisons and has promoted a group the U.S. State Department designated as a Palestinian terrorist organization, a Daily Caller News Foundation investigation found.

Sanders’s 2020 presidential campaign website touts an endorsement from the radical group, Dream Defenders, and the group’s co-director, Phillip Agnew, is a top Sanders surrogate.

The group’s political arm, Dream Defenders PAC, has been holding twice-weekly phone banking events in support of Sanders.

Dream Defenders aims to abolish the use of prisons, according to the group’s website and public statements.

“Police and prisons have no place in ‘justice.’ Police and prisons aren’t just racist but they work to enforce the separations of rich and poor,” Dream Defenders’s website states.
dd-abolish-prisons

Dream Defenders, which first launched in Florida in 2012, has declared its support for the anti-Israel boycott, divest and sanction (BDS) movement, which has its own ties to designated terrorist organizations. It has also has repeatedly promoted the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which has been a U.S.-designated terrorist organization since 1997.

(Read more at the Daily Caller)

For the past few months, I have blogged about the social justice judges and DA in Harris county

I have dedicated no less than three blog posts to murders committed by murderers released by the Harris county social justice judges and District Attorney (two blog posts even cover articles on 2-7 murderers). The elimination of prisons would do infinitely more damage to the United States.

  1. Even Bloomberg identified Sanders as a communist

In a 4 March 2020 Breitbart article centering on the face that Bernie did not know about Bloomberg dropping out until a reporter pointed it out, certain salient points come out at the end:

The two, Sanders and Bloomberg, had a bitter back and forth throughout the former mayor’s short-lived presidential bid. Sanders repeatedly slammed Bloomberg for attempting to “buy” the election, and Bloomberg accused the socialist senator of supporting communist policies.

(Read the rest at Breitbart)

Get out your pre-1970 history book. Look at the millions killed by communism

After you get your nose out of the history book, talk to someone with a connection with family in Venezuela or Cuba. Find out what real oppression can be.

  1. #RiggedPrimary And #RiggedDNC Trends On Twitter After Super Tuesday

A Daily Caller article of 4 March 2020 points out how quickly the Sanders-nistas resort to conspiracies once their message does not take hold with the Democrat masses.

Twitter was full of life Wednesday morning following Super Tuesday as the hashtag #RiggedPrimary trended nationwide.

#RiggedPrimary trended Wednesday morning after Independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders’ momentum was severely blunted after former Vice President Joe Biden won more states and took the lead in the projected delegate count on Super Tuesday.

Further complicating things for Sanders was the string of endorsements Biden recently won from the “moderate” lane of the Democratic Party, including former Texas Congressman Beto O’Rourke, Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, and former South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg.

Biden’s latest endorsement comes from billionaire Mike Bloomberg, who dropped out and announced his support for Biden on Wednesday morning.

(Read more at the Daily Caller)

While some of this comes from Trump supporters egging the Bern-istas on, much comes from the young communists

While it may be true that the Democrat primary system slants against Bernie, that is what happens when you join a group that makes telling people what to do a part of their way of operating.

  1. Bernie Sanders flipped on immigration

In a Breitbart article quoting Ann Coulter, the flip from a working-class defender to a open-borders Democrat will cost Sanders.

New York Times best-selling author and populist conservative columnist Ann Coulter says Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) hurt his campaign this election cycle when he dropped the anti-open borders position that he held for decades.

During an exclusive interview with SiriusXM Patriot’s Breitbart News Tonight, Coulter said Sanders once defended working-class Americans against the negative impacts of open borders and mass immigration but has since hurt his campaign by endorsing decriminalizing the U.S.-Mexico border, taxpayer-funded healthcare for illegal aliens, and an end to deportations of all illegal aliens.

(Read more at Breitbart)

Twelve stories that show the danger of Sanders


  1. Sanders says he was briefed on Russian effort to help campaign

The Hill reports that Bernie Sanders knows that Russians have schemed to help his campaign.

BernieScreamsSen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Friday acknowledged that he was briefed by U.S. intelligence officials about Russian attempts to interfere in the 2020 elections, with The Washington Post reporting that Russia has sought to help his presidential campaign.

The Post’s report was published the day after The New York Times reported that House lawmakers were told by U.S. officials last week that Russia was also attempting to interfere in the 2020 elections to help the campaign of President Trump.

Sanders told reporters on the campaign trail Friday that he was briefed on Russian interference efforts “about a month ago,” speculating that the news of potential Russian interference efforts came out now because it was on the eve of the Nevada caucuses.

“It was not clear what role they were going to play. We were told that Russia, maybe other countries, are gonna get involved in this campaign,” Sanders said.

“The ugly thing that they are doing, and I’ve seen some of their tweets and stuff, is they try to divide us up. That’s what they did in 2016,” he added.

Sanders described Russian President Vladimir Putin as a “thug” in a statement on Friday, emphasizing that he stands “firmly against” Russian interference efforts.

(Read more at The Hill)

Other reports have Sanders claiming no involvement by the Russians

Other sources suggest that Sanders either denies or deflects any suggestion that Russians might be influencing people to vote for him (as we have heard about President Trump by the main stream media for over four years). This, along with a lack of questions from the main stream media on how many of his policies will limit our rights and kill our economy, show how journalists are actively covering for Bernie Sanders.

However, if the “journalists” wanted to scare up the real sleeper Soviet agents, why don’t they look at the guy who recently praised Fidel, who honeymooned in Moscow, and who claimed Russian-style bread lines were a good thing?

  1. Washington Post reports Russian help for Bernie

Townhall points to the Washington Post as they report on Russian help for the Bernie campaign.

Bernie_SandersAre we seeing a pattern here yet, liberal media? Are we starting to get it when it comes to Russia? No. You people are still a bunch of insufferable morons on this stuff. For years, you thought the Trump campaign and the Kremlin colluded during the 2016 election, despite there being zero evidence to back up that allegation. It was a myth. It was a hoax. It was based on a shoddy piece of political opposition research funded by the Clinton campaign that was exposed as bunk not by one, but two reports. Ex-Special Counsel Robert Mueller trashed it as did the Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz. Still, the Left has been consumed by Russophobia. Collusion delusion is still a thing, but now the shots are being fired inside the ship. U.S. officials informed Sen. Bernie Sanders, the frontrunner for the 2020 Democratic nomination, that the Russians are trying to help his campaign (via WaPo):

U.S. officials have told Sen. Bernie Sanders that Russia is attempting to help his presidential campaign as part of an effort to interfere with the Democratic contest, according to people familiar with the matter.

President Trump and lawmakers on Capitol Hill have also been informed about the Russian assistance to the Vermont senator, according to people familiar with the matter, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence.

It is not clear what form that Russian assistance has taken. U.S. prosecutors found a Russian effort in 2016 to use social media to boost Sanders campaign against Hillary Clinton, part of a broader effort to hurt Clinton, sow dissension in the American electorate and ultimately help elect Donald Trump.

“I don’t care, frankly, who Putin wants to be president,” Sanders said in a statement to The Washington Post. “My message to Putin is clear: stay out of American elections, and as president I will make sure that you do.

That’s it. Based on the Left’s rules on this nonsense, Bernie is a Russian agent. His trips to the USSR in the past were really meetings with his KGB handlers.

(Read more at Townhall)

It seems only fair that chants of “Bernie, Bernie, Bernie” should be countered with “Russia, Russia, Russia”

sandershoneymooninMoscowPhotos of Bernie in his underwear at a Russian restaurant should be unfurled at every Bernie rally. Chants of “Russia, Russia, Russia” should meet Bernie as he enters the stage.

Just to be fair, the protesters should also include some of Bernie’s words of wisdom like “bread lines can be a good thing,” “wartime occasionally necessitated undemocratic measures,” and other choice bits of knowledge.

  1. Sanders, Ocasio-Cortez push bill to ‘ban fracking nationwide’ by 2025

Breitbart reported in a 3 February 2020 article that Sanders and AOC want to ban fracking by 2025.

oilfieldAn anti-fracking bill crafted by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) aims to end the practice altogether, making it illegal “on all onshore and offshore land in the United States” by Jan. 1, 2025.

Left-wing actor Mark Ruffalo teased the bill last week, allowing Sanders to jokingly knock him for “ruining the surprise” of the new fracking legislation.

“I don’t mind if @MarkRuffalo spoils his own movies. But please, don’t ruin the surprise of our new legislation with Rep. @AOC, @SenJeffMerkley and @RepDarrenSoto,” Sanders wrote with an accompanying clip of the Avengers actor evidently “spoiling” the upcoming legislation:

The bill, according to the Hillaims to end fracking altogether, revoking permits for “wells where fracking takes place and that are within 2,500 feet of a home, school or other ‘inhabited structure’” beginning February 1, 2021. It would also “immediately prevent federal agencies from issuing federal permits for expanded fracking, new fracking, new pipelines, new natural gas or oil export terminals and other gas and oil infrastructure.”

It would make the practice, which Ocasio-Cortez has identified as the “leading contributor to our climate emergency,” illegal by January 1, 2025.

“Fracking is a danger to our water supply. It’s a danger to the air we breathe, it has resulted in more earthquakes, and it’s highly explosive,” Sanders said in a statement, according to the Hill. To top it all off, it’s contributing to climate change.”

“If we are serious about clean air and drinking water, if we are serious about combating climate change, the only safe and sane way to move forward is to ban fracking nationwide,” he continued.

Critics of Sanders have defended the practice, warning that its elimination would “spike household energy costs and hurt farmers and manufacturers.”

American Petroleum Institute spokeswoman Bethany Aronhalt told the Hill:

Banning a safe, successful method of developing energy would erase a generation of American energy progress and in the process destroy millions of U.S. jobs, spike household energy costs and hurt farmers and manufacturers.

“Thanks to fracking, the United States is the global leader in reducing carbon emissions,” Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) tweeted in response to the announcement:

Sanders has long maintained the need for the elimination of fracking, promising to ban it during his presidential bid in 2016.

(Read more at Breitbart)

Rather than banning fracking, maybe start by forcing all socialists to register their party affiliation at their employers

Maybe even the union leadership might want to know who has decided to vote away their Cadillac-health care packages. Surely the owners of the bus company or trucking company might want to know who voted to exponentially increase their costs of operation (electric buses and semi-trucks don’t fall off of the lemon tree). What’s more, I am sure that the biggest employers in Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, and Louisiana would be interested in who voted to put them out of business.

  1. Bernie Sanders has already drafted ‘dozens of executive orders’ to bypass Congress if elected President

Lifezette pointed out in a 30 January 2020 article that Bernie had already drafted dozens of executive orders to bypass Congress.

BernieTweetDisturbing campaign documents have just come to light showing that 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders’ staffers have already begun preparing “dozens of executive orders” so that he can bypass Congress in the first days of his presidency, should he win the election in November.

The documents, which were obtained by the Washington Post, show that Sanders’ has executive orders prepared on a wide range of issues that include the environment, immigration, and the economy.

Sanders’ team has prepared over a dozen options for reversing President Donald Trump’s immigration policies, with one of them being the immediate halting of construction on the border wall. Another potential executive order would remove the limit for the number of refugees that could be admitted to the United States, while a third would reinstate Barack Obama’s DREAMER program, which granted legal status to undocumented immigrants who were brought to this country as children.

This is just the beginning of the executive orders that Sanders has planned. One order legalizes marijuana in the entirety of the United States, and another would allow the U.S. to import prescription drugs from Canada. Sanders would also declare climate change to be a national emergency as soon as he took office, and he would ban the export of crude oil.

This shows that Sanders is anticipating that Republicans will keep control of the Senate come November, and that he has no intention of letting this stop him from achieving his radical agenda.

Another document obtained by the post was written by Faiz Shakir, Sanders’s campaign manager; Warren Gunnels, a senior adviser; and Josh Orton, the campaign policy director, who all urge him to use the executive orders to undo the many “wrongs” of Trump’s presidency.

“We cannot accept delays from Congress on some of the most pressing issues, especially those like immigration where Trump has governed with racism and for his own corrupt benefit,” they said.

(Read more at Lifezette)

For all who claimed Trump to be a dictator, they had better speak up here

For all of the freedom-loving people who protested Obama’s and Trump’s use of executive order, I hope that you will stand up against this misuse of executive power.

However, I also have a number of issues against the things that it seems that Mr. Sanders would write his orders on. On these items, there are several contentions that I have with Mr. Sanders’ issue on the “Muslim ban.” First, Mr. Sanders knows that the restriction on travel to the United States only held back peoples from countries that acted as sources of terrorism (Iran, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, North Korea, and Venezuela). Second, for Mr. Sanders to call this a “Muslim ban” ignores the majority religions of the last two countries on the list.

Regarding the rest of your laundry list of executive orders, Mr. Sanders, you need to go to Congress to propose laws and have them work their way through Congress. Despite your adoration of socialism, this is not a dictatorship, yet.

  1. A problem in the Nevada caucuses

Townhall mentions through a 22 February 2020 article the problems in the Nevada caucuses.

The results during the Iowa Caucuses were nothing shy of a mess and a large part of that had to do with the math worksheets used to calculate how delegates were awarded. There appeared to be some rounding errors and confusion about what happens when the number of potential delegates a precinct had versus how many were actually awarded.

Fast forward a few weeks later and we’re seeing issues yet again. This time they’re somewhat math-based.

According to MSNBC’s Steve Kornacki, Democratic voters’ initial preferences were for Sen. Bernie Sanders (35 percent), former Vice President Joe Biden (17 percent) and former South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg (15 percent). Once votes had to be reallocated, Sanders’ preference spiked to 42 percent, Biden’s jumped to 19 percent and Buttigieg remained the same. Those numbers were based on 10 spotters throughout the state. As of now the Democratic Party has yet to call any precincts.

The National Election Pool, a consortium of various media outlets, have reporters stationed across the Silver State. According to Kornacki, six reporters have reported issues with the caucus process.

“They have reports from six of their reporters, six of their reporters out of 63 sites that they have these reporters at. Six out of 63 or about 10 percent, who have said that they have witnessed issues at precincts with incorporating the early vote with the same-day caucus activity,” the MSNBC reporter explained. “Remember, 75,000 early votes cast statewide. They’re trying to take those results from folks who voted days ago and merge it with what’s happening in real-time with the people who show up and break up with these groups. So at 10 percent of these locations where the National Election Pool has folks witnessing this activity, they say they have been seeing this issue.”

Kornacki said those issues could be part of the reason the Nevada Democratic Party has failed to call any precincts. The projects are based on spotters who watched the vote take place, recorded the results and called it into the National Election Pool.

(Read more at Townhall)

The article above more accurately points to a Democrat party where nobody got 50% of the votes from socialist Democrats

With Joe Biden in the headlines weeks ago due to his bragging about forcing the Ukraine government into firing the prosecutor who was investigating Burisma and Biden’s son, Hunter — one wonders how many moderates who would have voted for him have now decided to throw in the towel.

Considering that Buttigieg wrote an essay praising the socialist Bernie (or all of the similar answers that came from any of the Democrat contenders at the debates), maybe we should not expect a dime’s worth of difference between Bernie and Mayor Pete.

  1. Three of the five takeaways from the Nevada caucuses

The Hill points to five takeaways it thinks can be derived from the Nevada caucuses. Here are excerpts from the first three takeaways that The Hill supposes.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) won a resounding victory at the Nevada caucuses on Saturday, putting together a coalition of young people, Latinos and working-class voters to cement his status as front-runner in the race for the Democratic nomination.

Here are five takeaways from the Nevada caucuses.

Sanders has a diverse coalition that could carry him to the nomination

In the 2016 primary, Sanders struggled mightily with voters of color, who broke in large numbers for Hillary Clinton and ultimately propelled her to the nomination.

Since then, Sanders has invested heavily in outreach to racial minorities and he’s accumulated a diverse team of dynamic surrogates.

Those efforts are paying off in 2020, as Sanders has built a diverse coalition of Latinos, young people, and union members, who drove him to a huge victory in Nevada, the most diverse state to vote so far.

With 60 percent of precincts reporting, Sanders stood at 46 percent support, followed by former Vice President Joe Biden at 19.6, former South Bend, Ind. Mayor Pete Buttigieg at 15.3, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren at 10.1.

And Sanders’s diverse base of support makes him even more imposing heading into Super Tuesday on March 3, when about one-third of the delegates will be allocated, with most of them coming from the racially diverse states of California and Texas.

Rivals have an uphill climb in stopping Sanders after decisive Nevada victory

There is not much positive news coming out of Nevada for the also-rans.

Former South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg has dramatically outperformed expectations so far, narrowly winning more delegates at the Iowa caucuses and barely falling short in New Hampshire.

But those predominantly white states are not reflective of the racial make-up of the states that have yet to vote. Buttigieg, along with Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), the third-place finisher in New Hampshire, have not shown an ability to make inroads with voters of color.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) raised an astonishing amount of money in the days since she took down former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg at the Las Vegas debate. But she’s poised to finish a distant fourth place in Nevada, and it’s unclear where she’ll be able to defeat Sanders, who will be looking to win in her home state of Massachusetts on Super Tuesday.

Biden’s support among black voters appears to be on the decline.

Bloomberg has unlimited money and is the only candidate on the airwaves in all 14 Super Tuesday states, but his disastrous debate performance raises real questions about whether he’ll be able to compete.

The Buttigieg and Bloomberg campaigns are already warning that Sanders might be headed for an “insurmountable” delegates lead by March 3.

Democrats are enthusiastic and turning out in record numbers

Democrats can breathe a sigh of relief — the lower than expected turnout for the Iowa caucuses was a mirage.

More than 176,000 people caucused in Iowa earlier this month, a slight increase from 2016, but nothing close to the blowout numbers from 2008, when the Hawkeye State sent former President Obama on his way to the nomination.

Democrats assumed that caucus and primary turnout would be gangbusters, driven by grassroots energy to defeat President Trump.

But New Hampshire painted a different picture, with a record 300,000 people turning out, blowing past the 288,000 who voted in the 2008 primary.

(Read more at The Hill)

In many ways, this paints too rosy a picture for Bernie

However, a too-rosy picture of Bernie might motivate Trump supporters to get off of dead center. That would be one of the better outcomes of this article.

  1. MSNBC contributor calls Bernie supporters racist liberals

One America News Network reports how Jason Johnson called Bernie supporters racist liberals.

An MSNBC contributor sparked backlash this week after he referred to some of Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (D-Vt.) campaign staffers as “an island of misfit black girls.”

During a recent interview, Jason Johnson spoke at great length about Sanders’ supporters and, more specifically, the demographics involved.

“I do find it fascinating that racist, liberal whites seem to love them some Bernie Sanders. (They) consistently and always have a problem with any person of color who doesn’t want to follow the orthodoxy of their lord and savior, Bernie Sanders. The man cares nothing for intersectionality. I don’t care how many people from the island of misfit black girls you throw out there to defend you on a regular basis, it doesn’t mean your campaign is serious.” – Jason Johnson, MSNBC contributor

(Read more at the One America News Network)

This assessment fits with the words of the Bernie staffer

If you refer back to the words of Kyle Jurek, Bernie staffer who was recorded by Project Veritas, this assessment somewhat fits.

  1. MSNBC’s Chris Matthews compares Sanders’ Nevada win to France’s fall to Nazis, draws calls for his firing

Fox News relays the words of MSNBC‘s Chris Matthews who suggested Sander’s Nevada win was like the Nazi win over France.

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews drew ire on social media Saturday after he compared the Nevada Democratic caucus victory of U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders to France’s fall to the Nazis during World War II.

“I’m reading last night about the fall of France in the summer of 1940,” Matthews said during the network’s caucus coverage. “And the general calls up Churchill and says, ‘It’s over,’ and Churchill says, ‘How can it be? You got the greatest army in Europe. How can it be over?’ He said, ‘It’s over.’”

The backlash on Twitter was swift and severe, with many commenters calling for Matthews to resign or be fired. Many pointed out that Sanders’ family includes survivors of the Holocaust.

(Read more at Fox News)

Here, however, Mr. Matthews could have made his point without using a Nazi reference

If he had just said “the race is over” or told a story about the ending of some central event, he could have made the same point. Reference to Nazis cannot be justified.

  1. Buttigieg takes aim at intractable socialist Sanders

Townhall comments on Mayor Pete’s suggestion that Bernie is an intractable socialist.

It did not take long for the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, Pete Buttigieg, to target the winner of Saturday’s Democratic caucuses in Nevada. Socialist Bernie Sanders is projected to win a decisive victory in the Silver State, sending the media into a frenzy over renewed concerns that nominating a socialist would all but guarantee a second term for President Trump. In a speech following his apparent loss in Nevada, Buttigieg told a crowd of supporters that nominating Bernie Sanders would not sit well with the American people.

Buttigieg said he believes the best way to defeat President Trump “is to broaden and galvanize the majority that supports [Democrats] on the critical issues.”

“Senator Sanders believes in an inflexible, ideological revolution that leaves out most Democrats, not to mention most Americans,” Buttigieg warned. “I believe we can defeat Trump and deliver for the American people by empowering the American people to make their own health care choices with medicare for all who want it. Senator Sanders believes in taking away that choice, removing people from having that option of a private plan and replacing it with a public plan whether you want it or not. … but that is different from Senator Sanders’ vision of capitalism as the root of all evil that would go beyond reform and reorder the economy in ways that most Democrats, not to mention most Americans, don’t support.”

It’s going to be harder for Pete Buttigieg to say most Democrats don’t support the Vermont socialist the longer Sanders remains the party’s front-runner. Buttigieg called for an end to the so-called “viscousness and bullying” of the Trump era, warning that a Sanders’ presidency would only continue the toxicity and polarization of our nation’s politics.

(Read more at Townhall)

Prior to the Bernie wins, Buttigieg and Sanders were singing from the same sheet

In the last few weeks, both Mayor Pete and Bernie suggested that Democrats must be exclusively pro-abortion. Both Mayor Pete and Bernie (and all of the Democrats on the debate stage) want to extend health benefits to illegal aliens.

  1. Bernie Sanders Says U.S. Is Worse than Communist China in Jailing People

Breitbart quotes Bernie Sanders in a 22 February 2020 article where Bernie says the USA is worse than the communist Chinese in jailing people.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) said during a rally in Texas on Saturday evening that the United States was worse than Communist China in regards to the number of people in jail — a figure that does not count Muslim Uyghurs and others detained in China’s detention camps.

“This is the United States of America. We should not be having more people in jail than any other country on earth including Communist China four times our size,” the self-proclaimed Democratic Socialist said.

According to the World Prison Brief’s website, the U.S. has more than two million people in jail, while China has 1,700,000 in jail.

However, China’s figure does not count pre-trial detainees and those in administrative detention. The website said that China had more than 650,000 people held in detention centers in China in 2009, and if still true, that would mean the total prison population would be at least 2,350,000 — surpassing the U.S.

NBC News reported in October that approximately a million Uyghur Muslims are detained in China, according to the U.S. government and human rights organizations.

Nonetheless, Sanders suggested the U.S. was worse than China, for its “racist and broken criminal justice system.”

“The people in jail, as everybody here knows, are disproportionately African American, Latino, and Native Americans,” he said.

He said he would invest in more education for kids instead of “more jail and incarceration,” and he would end the cash bail system in the U.S.

(Read more at Breitbart)

This is nothing but a lie

Considering that this lie about the level of jailing is so blatantly false, it is amazing that it comes from the guy who says “the president lies all the time.”

  1. Sarah Sanders warns Trump backers about Bernie’s momentum: ‘We can take nothing for granted’

Fox News quotes Sarah Sanders in a 23 February 2020 article where Sarah Sanders reminds us that we cannot take anything for granted (since we know of the Democrat penchant for election fraud, counting “hanging chads,” and other issues).

Former White House press secretary Sarah Sanders warned supporters of President Trump on Saturday night not to underestimate Sen. Bernie Sanders following his projected victory in the Nevada Democratic caucuses.

“I think [Bernie Sanders] is looking like the presumptive Democrat nominee at this point. He’s certainly moving in that direction,” Sanders said on “Justice with Judge Jeanine.” “And I think Republicans have to be extremely careful. We can take nothing for granted at this point. The stakes have literally never been higher.”

Bernie Sanders, who is no relation to Sarah Sanders, will win the Nevada caucuses, Fox News projected Saturday, furthering the democratic socialist’s lead over his Democratic rivals and raising the question of whether he can be stopped on his path to the Democratic nomination.

Sarah Sanders noted the importance of Republicans voting in November to combat Bernie Sanders.

“If crazy socialist Bernie Sanders is the Democrat nominee, as he is well on track to be, literally the way of life and our very freedom is at stake at the election in November and Republicans have to come out in full force and make sure that they get Donald Trump reelected,” Sanders said.

(Read more at Fox News)

As I said before, we must work to the end

We can never take anything for granted. We have to work to the moment that the polls close.

  1. New FEC Filings Show Financial Woes For Democratic Candidates

The Daily Caller reports in a 21 February 2020 article how the FEC filings show how Democrat presidential candidates have experienced financial woes.

Democratic presidential candidates spent more money than they raised in January, new Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings show.

Independent Vermont Bernie Sanders stood out as the leading fundraiser thanks to a high volume of small donations while billionaire Michael Bloomberg continued to spend away, The Washington Post reported. Democratic Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren struggled financially early on but is showing signs of recovering, while the more moderate candidates appear to be sinking financially, Politico added.

Here’s how each campaign did financially.

Bernie Sanders

Sanders, who is the current frontrunner in the race, had the most funds of any non-billionaire candidate going into February with nearly $17 million, according to The Washington Post.

Sanders spent $26 million and raised $25 million in January, with a majority of donations being less than $200, The Post reported. The only other candidate to raise more than $10 million was Warren.

Elizabeth Warren

Warren had a rollercoaster of a month, starting with the lowest amount of money headed into February with only $2.3 million, according to Politico. The shortage of funds led her to pull ads from Nevada and South Carolina while also taking out a $3 million line of credit.

Still, Warren spent the second-most excluding the two billionaire candidates. To help cover this, Warren turned to PACs. Persist PAC was formed Tuesday to help aid her campaign. This is a flip from her previous opposition to taking PAC money. She told reporters that she would support efforts to weaken PACs in the future, but that in the current state of the campaign, taking money from PACs is “how it has to be.”

(Read more at the Daily Caller)

This all sounds good, but we still need to work

If you look at all the numbers (especially Trump’s), this can be encouraging. Still, we don’t need to take anything for granted.

Eight stories that illustrate how politics have gone awry


Politicians milking the system for money

  1. Bernie Sanders rails about common good but public service has made him (and his family) rich

Fox News reported in a 28 January 2020 article how (from the beginning) Bernie Sanders has used public funds to enrich himself and his family.

berniefrombehindSen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., has been a loud and constant voice for socialist policies throughout his 30 years in Washington, D.C., a self-proclaimed champion of the collective good. But in researching my new book, “Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of Power by America’s Political Elite,” I discovered that while Sanders may talk about the common good, his public service has made him and his family quite wealthy.

Perhaps no one has benefited more from Sanders’s career in politics than his wife Jane.

When Bernie was first elected mayor of Burlington, Vermont, he appointed his then-girlfriend, Jane Driscoll, to head his administration’s Youth Office. Though the position was originally unpaid, Bernie eventually put Jane on the payroll over objections of the city council. The job was never advertised so that others could apply. A local paper noted that Sanders never bothered to provide evidence as to Jane’s “qualifications” for the position.

The appointment would remain a source of controversy for Sanders. After Bernie and Jane got married in 1988, his new wife received a big pay increase. As one local newspaper reported, “Political sparks flew at Burlington’s annual city meeting Monday night as Democratic aldermen raised a series of questions concerning a hefty pay raise for Mayor Bernie Sanders’ new wife and whether she should continue to hold her job as director of the Mayor’s Youth Office.”

After Bernie won election to Congress in 1990, Jane’s business ties to her husband rose to a new level.

In Washington, Jane became one of her husband’s top aides, serving at various times as his chief of staff, press secretary and political analyst. After a decade in Congress, Jane and family went about setting up a company that operated under three different names to provide income tied to Bernie’s political career.

On Sept. 27, 2000, the family formed Sanders & Driscoll LLC, a for-profit consulting company run by Jane, her daughter Carina, and son David. The business also operated under two trade names: Leadership Strategies and Progressive Media Strategies.

(Read more at Fox News)

Never forget that Bernie’s wife also ruined a small college that employed her and her daughter

By running that college on liberal principles, Mrs. Sanders ran the college into the ground. At the same time, that college paid both Mrs. Sanders and her daughter significant sums for their services.

Maybe we should treat this as a cautionary tale for Bernie Sander’s plan for free college (aka, worthless college).

  1. Bombshell? Joe and Hunter Biden were both paid by Burisma

Townhall commented in a 10 October 2020 article how both Joe and Hunter Biden were paid by Burisma.

JoeBidenYellingSo, the plot thickens with Joe Biden and his Ukraine ties. House Democrats have pulled the trigger on their grand plan to impeach President Trump for simply winning the 2016 election. They couldn’t get him on impeachment for “Russian collusion,” but they’re now using some inaccurate whistleblower report that alleged that President Trump tried to shakedown Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, threatening to withhold military aid unless he opened a corruption investigation into Hunter Biden. Hunter was being paid $50,000/month at his position at Burisma Group, an energy company and a sector of the economy that Biden has zero experience.

As the son of then-Vice President Joe Biden, it seems pretty clear that he was there selling access. That’s the allegation. It’s a question that hasn’t gone away, and one that has irritated Joe Biden to no end. And now we’re hearing that Joe Biden was also paid $900,000 which was part of his lobbying fee on behalf of Burisma. The former vice president has repeatedly said that he and his son never discussed overseas business, despite being pictured in a photograph golfing with two Ukrainian energy executives. They didn’t talk business. Who are you kidding? Our friends at RedState wrote about this earlier today. Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s attorney, also repeated the claim on Fox News’ Sean Hannity Wednesday night (via NY Post):

Rudy Giuliani, the personal lawyer for President Trump, alleged that a Ukrainian natural gas company that employed Joe Biden’s son Hunter also paid the former vice president $900,000 in lobbying fees.

Giuliani, appearing Wednesday night on Fox News’ “The Sean Hannity Show,” cited as evidence documents released by Andriy Derkach, a member of Ukraine’s parliament.

“Biden, his son and his brother had a 30-year-long scam to make money, millions, selling his public office,” Giuliani told Hannity.

Derkach held a press conference earlier Wednesday in Kiev where he claimed he had documents showing how Burisma Holdings paid Biden the lobbying fees.

(Read more at Townhall)

So, with information from RedState, the New York Post, Sean Hannity, and Townhall, we cannot claim we did not know

Still, this information did not appear on any over-the-fold, main-stream media outlets. During the time that this article came out, all of the over-the-fold space in major publications was taken up by various iterations of the impeachment story. I guess that they didn’t really hide this information. They just made it less visible.

This is partially how Democrats still get elected. Nobody hears about their wrong-doing.

Politicians treated differently by the press

  1. Joe Biden, grilled on Obama-era record of putting children in ‘cages,’ argues ‘we kept them safe’

Fox News reported on how Biden replied to Jorge Ramos. Oddly, this met a different response than when pictures of Obama’s cages were blamed on Trump.

Former Vice President Joe Biden was grilled Friday about the Obama administration’s record of detaining migrant children in what some lawmakers and activists have described as “cages” — with the 2020 hopeful claiming the government did it to keep them “safe.”

Biden, who served as VP for both of then-President Barack Obama’s terms, has cited his experience as a reason he should be the Democratic nominee. But with the Democratic Party shifting to the left on matters related to immigration in recent years, he has faced increased scrutiny about the administration’s policies from those claiming they were cruel.

In an interview Friday posted on Facebook, Univision journalist Jorge Ramos took issue with a claim that Biden made in September in a debate in Houston that the Obama administration never put migrant children in cages — in contrast to the Trump administration.

“What Latinos should look at is comparing this president to the president we have is outrageous,” Biden said in September. “We didn’t lock people in cages. We didn’t separate families. We didn’t do all of those things.”

“You actually did,” Ramos said Friday, showing him a picture of an 8-year-old boy in McAllen, Texas, in 2014.

“What happened was all the unaccompanied children were coming across the border,” Biden said. “We tried to get them out, we kept them safe, and get them out of the detention center… run by Homeland Security and get them into communities as quickly as we can.”

The “cages” are detention centers in which there were also chain-link enclosures. The practice was carried out by both the Obama and Trump administrations, and Biden is correct that in both instances minors were held, in part, for their own safety. An Associated Press fact check last year noted that migrants were housed in the facilities and separated by both age and sex. Those facilities were built and used by the Obama administration, and the Trump administration used the same facilities.

(Read more at Fox News)

The Congress seems unwilling or unable to punish its own lawbreakers

  1. Ilhan Omar breaks campaign finance law by paying her ex $250K

The Daily Mail reported on the sordid details of Ilhan Omar’s affair.

IlhanOmarYellingIlhan Omar’s husband discovered the truth about her torrid affair with her chief fundraiser when he went to her Washington D.C. apartment last spring and found the lovers lounging around in pajamas, DailyMail.com has learned exclusively.

Ahmed Hirsi had long suspected that Omar, 39, was cheating on him with married Tim Mynett  but the proof came when he caught the hijab-wearing congresswoman in a state that no Muslim woman would expect to be with a man who is not her husband.

Two separate sources confirmed the account to DailyMail.com, saying that Hirsi was left ‘angry and humiliated’ by the encounter.

‘He suspected she was cheating but she kept telling him he was paranoid,’ one source said.

‘He told her he wanted to move down to D.C. to be with her but she insisted he should stay in Minneapolis with the children. Eventually he surprised her down there and his worst fears were confirmed.

‘It wasn’t that he actually caught them in bed but they were clearly in a romantic situation.’

(Read more at the Daily Mail)

While the Daily Mail touches on the salacious nature of the issue, it does not address the illegality

They may have spoken reams on how Ilhan seems to have almost been caught in the act and how her lover has been seen carrying bags of beer, but they ignore the illegality of using campaign funds to pay $250K to one’s husband and another $250K to one’s lover.

  1. Ilhan Omar got hit with state campaign finance violations in July 2018

On the other hand, Breitbart reported in a 6 June 2019 article that Ilhan Omar had been brought up on state charges of campaign finance violations.

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) was found by the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board on Thursday to have committed several campaign finance violations — and its findings have revived old questions about the legality of her marriage.

In July 2018, Minnesota State Rep. Steve Drazkowski (R-Mazeppa) filed a complaint with the board against the Neighbors for Ilhan (Omar) campaign committee, which had supported her campaign for state representative. He claimed that she had improperly spent campaign funds on legal work related to her divorce. He later filed additional complaints that she had improperly spent campaign funds on out-of-state travel.

The board’s investigation into Omar found several violations. It noted that while none of Omar’s legal expenses had been for her divorce, she had spent $1,500 on legal expenses related to her personal taxes that were not sufficiently related to the campaign. Furthermore, the board found that some of her out-of-state travel expenses were not related to her legislative duties. She has been ordered to pay reimbursements to her campaign, to file amended campaign finance statements, and to pay a civil fine of $500 to the state.

The board’s report also noted that Omar and Ahmed Hirsi, her current husband, “filed joint tax returns for 2014 and 2015.” That could add fuel to persistent allegations that Omar had been married to two men at the same time — one of whom, Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, City Journal noted in 2016, was rumored (though never proven) to be her brother.

(Read more at Breitbart)

However, it seems the gears of justice turn slowly (if at all) for Democrats

Furthermore, there seems to be a stranglehold on negative information regarding Democrats. Has anyone heard complaints by leadership on either side of the aisle regarding Ilhan Omar and her misuse of campaign funds? Maybe someone has complained, but it does not seem to have reached the pages of the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, or other main stream media outlets. Therefore, unless we can find it among the alternative media outlets that Google regularly shadow bans, we will never know.

  1. Rashida Tlaib Detained During Airport Protest

The Daily Caller reported in a 15 February 2020 article that Representative Tlaib was detained and released at a protest.

Democratic Michigan Rep. Rashida Tlaib was taken into custody, then immediately released Friday during a protest at Detroit Metro Airport.

The Michigan lawmaker was part of a protest involving picketing Delta catering workers at the airport’s McNamara Terminal, according to WXYZ Detroit.

Diana Hussein of the union group Unite Here posted pictures of the protest, which reportedly blocked traffic:

However, she later corrected her earlier contention that Tlaib had been “arrested” with the group, instead stating she “did participate in solidarity in the civil disobedience.”

After her release, Tlaib took to Twitter to express her views and post a picture of herself with some of the other protesters who were detained.

“We won’t stop until we get #fairwages & #healthcare,” Tlaib tweeted. “These courageous people got arrested tonight at DTW b/c they believe workers deserve human dignity. Shame on you @Delta for leaving workers behind and letting them live in poverty.”

(Read more at the Daily Caller)

Regular plebes who violate this type of law at airport are jailed

However, since Hillary, we have known that “equal under the law” is nowhere near the standard.

Additionally, if you want a case study in unequal under the law, look at Roger Stone. While the law allows up to 9 years for the crime, first-time offenders with no record normally get 3 months (heard during the 5-6 am drive on 21 February 2020 on KTRH AM 740 — which sort-of matches what NBC reported on similar cases). But when the 9-year recommendation gets pulled back by Barr, four prosecutors quit, a multitude of former (Democrat) prosecutors call for Barr to resign, and the world is about to end (according to the press). So, still, nothing is really equal.

The “party of the people” disdains the people

  1. Omar claim of PTSD ‘offensive’ to US veterans, Indiana congressman says; Squad member responds

Fox news reported in a 9 January 2020 article how soldiers have found offense to Ilhan Omar’s claims of PTSD.

An Indiana congressman who served in Afghanistan as a member of the Navy Reserve spoke out on behalf of America’s military veterans Wednesday after U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., claimed she suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder.

U.S. Rep. Jim Banks, a Republican, said Omar’s comments were a “disgrace,” calling the remarks “offensive to our nation’s veterans who really do have PTSD after putting their life on the line to keep America safe.”

Omar had made her remarks during a news conference with other Democrats on Wednesday, at which she said she “felt ill” because of “everything that is taking place” in the Middle East — a reference to the recent U.S. tensions between the U.S. and Iran, including last week’s U.S. airstrike in Baghdad and Iran’s missile attacks early Wednesday against airbases in Iraq where U.S. service members are stationed.

“And I think every time I hear about … I hear of conversations around war, I find myself being stricken with PTSD,” she said. “And I find peace knowing that I serve with great advocates for peace and people who have shown courage against war.”

After Banks took issue with her comments, Omar posted a reply on Twitter, making reference to her youth in war-torn Somalia. Omar left her homeland with her family near the start of the Somali Civil War in 1991 and spent four years at a Kenyan refugee camp before immigrating to the U.S. in 1995.

“Hi Jim, I survived war as a child and deal with post-traumatic stress disorder—much like many who have served or lived through war,” she wrote in the tweet, which was addressed to Banks but not tagged. “It’s shameful that you as a member of Congress would erase the PTSD of survivors.”

But Banks doubled down on his comments later Wednesday evening, posting a video that showed Omar and other Democrats giggling in the background as their colleague, U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, spoke to reporters about the more than 4,000 U.S. service members killed in Iraq over the years.

“Your words and actions at today’s press conference reveal your feelings toward our soldiers serving abroad and the video speaks for itself,” Banks wrote, including a video of the news conference shared by Rep. Jody Hice, R-Ga.

Omar posted another message about a half-hour later, elaborating that she had “lived in a war zone” and had “seen what conflict does to families and communities.”

(Read more at Fox news)

This seems to reflect the sentiments of Democrats

Think back. Do you remember how Bloomberg suggested farmers to be idiots? Do you remember Biden calling Trump supporters the “dregs of society?” Do you remember Hillary infamously calling the political camp arrayed against her a “basket of deplorables?” Do you remember how the California legislature reprimanded those who voted for Trump, calling them “bigots?” Do you remember a similar reprimand directed toward Black Lives Matter when they rioted on false pretenses?

It seems that the Democrat party has selected certain groups to be our elites. All other groups need to kowtow to those groups. That, according to them, is just how it is.

  1. Omar laughs at American deaths

Townhall comments in a 9 January 2020 article on how Ilhan Omar laughed at American soldier deaths.

During a press conference on Wednesday, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) is seen giggling and talking to her colleagues while she is standing behind Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), who was discussing U.S. troops killed in war.

“I’m very glad to say that I was part of the 132 and also the vote for Barbara Lee’s amendment, but I think that the point of that is that that is the same war that we’re dealing with today,” Lee said. “We never solved any problems with AUMF, we left 4,000-plus, maybe even 4400 dead, and over 60,000 who came back injured in some form and the war never ended.”

Rather than stand silently behind her colleague as she spoke, Omar became a distraction when she starting laughing and turning around to talk to her Democratic colleagues.

“I recall the language in AUMF, it deals with hostilities in Iraq,” Lee continued. “It doesn’t deal with an incident or a dislike or someone in a car coming in from the airport. That is the danger of not acting and I do think with our leadership, meaning the leadership CPC, that will come together around specific answers.”

As Matt covered, Omar said during the press conference that tensions with Iran have left her feeling “a little bit” ill.

(Read more at Townhall)

Thirteen stories on Bloomberg’s failures, problems, insults, and attempts at redemption


Bloomberg’s failures

  1. Bloomberg’s gun ban rejected in Virginia with Democratic help

The Washington Examiner reported in a 17 February 2020 article that the gun grab in Virginia funded by Michael Bloomberg went down in flames.

Despite spending millions to turn Virginia’s legislature blue and a last-minute visit to Richmond, Democrats in the Senate turned back presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg’s top goal in the state of banning “assault weapons.”

In a lopsided 10-5 vote, the state Senate Judiciary Committee killed any advancement this year, pushing the legislation off for a year.

VCDLtweet

(Read more at the Washington Examiner)

Thank God and some sensible Democrats for rejecting this idiocy

While I have a hard time calling some Democrats sensible, I can reasonably affix that label to a few. Thank heavens that those Democrats stopped this incursion into our Second Amendment rights.

  1. Bloomberg’s ban on super-sized colas was both unpopular and unconstitutional

A 30 July 2013 article at Reuters explained first why the measure had been found unconstitutional.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s controversial plan to keep large sugary drinks out of restaurants and other eateries was rejected by a state appeals court on Tuesday, which said he had overstepped his authority in trying to impose the ban.

The law, which would have prohibited those businesses from selling sodas and other sugary beverages larger than 16 ounces (473 ml), “violated the state principle of separation of powers,” the First Department of the state Supreme Court’s Appellate Division said.

The decision, upholding a lower court ruling in March that struck down the law, dealt a blow to Bloomberg’s attempt to advance the pioneering regulation as a way to combat obesity. Beverage makers and business groups, however, challenged it in court, arguing that the mayoral-appointed health board had gone too far when it approved the law.

A unanimous four-judge panel at the appeals court agreed, finding that the board had stepped beyond its power to regulate public health and usurped the policy-making role of the legislature.

In particular, the court focused on the law’s loopholes, which exempted businesses not under the auspices of the city’s health department and left certain drinks, such as milk-based beverages, unaffected.

As a result, grocery and convenience stores – such as 7 Eleven and its 64-ounce Big Gulp – were protected from the ban’s reach, even as restaurants, sandwich shops and movie theaters were not. Meanwhile, milkshakes and high-calorie coffee drinks like Starbucks’ Frappucinos would have remained unfettered.

(Read more at Reuters)

My opposition to Bloomberg’s soda ban stands on the same reasons that I oppose other Bloomberg initiatives

We do not need a nanny state. It cannot be there to protect us when we need it (for, as you know, “when seconds count, the police are minutes away.”)

  1. A full list of the things banned by Bloomberg

With a hat tip to ChrisX at KSEV, we can find a full listing of everything banned by big-government Michael Bloomberg at Gizmodo. These bans were:

  1. Smoking in commercial establishments like bars and restaurants (2003)
  2. Smoking in public spaces (2011)
  3. Cigarette sales to those under 21 (2013)
  4. Sales of “flavored” tobacco products (2009)
  5. Smoking e-cigarettes in public spaces (2013) ***
  6. Cigarette in-store displays (2013)
  7. Cars in Times Square (2009)
  8. Cars from driving in newly created bike lanes (2007-2013)
  9. Cars causing congestion below 60th Street in Manhattan (2007) *
  10. Speeding on residential “slow zones” (2013)
  11. Illegal guns (2006-2013) **
  12. Sodium levels in processed foods (2010) **
  13. Trans-fats in restaurants (2006)
  14. Loud headphones (2013) **
  15. Styrofoam packaging in single-service food items (2013)
  16. Sodas larger than 16 ounces (2012) *
  17. Collection of yard waste and grass clippings during certain times of year (2003-2013)
  18. Organic food waste from landfills (2013) **
  19. Commercial music over 45 decibels (2013)
  20. Chain restaurant menus without calorie counts (2008)
  21. The posting of signs in “city-owned grassy areas” (2013)
  22. Non-fuel-efficient cabs (2007)
  23. New cabs that aren’t Nissan NV200s (2013) *
  24. Greenhouse gas emissions (2007)
  25. Government buildings that aren’t LEED-certified (2005)
  26. Non-hurricane-proof buildings in coastal areas (2013)
  27. Black roofs (2009) **
  28. Construction cranes over 25 years old (2013)
  29. No. 6 and No. 4 “heavy” heating oils (2011)
  30. Less than a 2-1 ratio of female and male restrooms in new public buildings (2005)
  31. Cell phones in schools (2006)
  32. Two-term limits for city elected officials (2008) *

* Overruled/appealed ban
** Suggested/voluntary ban
*** Proposed/pending ban

Bloomberg’s problems

  1. Bloomberg’s billions a big problem

OneNewsNow reports in a 17 February 2020 article that one of Bloomberg’s biggest problems is wealth that he has amassed.

A conservative activist says New York’s former mayor will have to overcome several obstacles if he hopes to “buy” the U.S. presidency.

Much has been made about Michael Bloomberg’s obscenely deep pockets and the fact that he could spend a billion dollars of his own money to blanket the country with campaign ads, posing a serious challenge to President Trump’s re-election. But Bloomberg could also face a serious blowback from black voters following the release of a 2015 speech in which he said 95 percent of all crime is committed in minority neighborhoods.

“The tapes that came out recently showing certainly what appeared to be his disdain for the people that live in minority communities is the kind of thing that will hurt him deeply with perhaps the most important voting bloc in Democrat Party primaries,” comments Gary Bauer of the Campaign for Working Families.

And Bauer says Bloomberg has something else to deal with.

“He is the ultimate capitalist success story — a self-made billionaire running in a political party that is increasingly socialist in its orientation,” the conservative activist notes.

And as Bauer points out, some polling data shows nearly 60 percent of Democrats could never vote for a billionaire to be their party’s nominee.

(Read the original at OneNewsNow)

For a party like Democrats, having billions is a liability.

For both parties, having earned multiple millions while in office should be a liability for Bernie, Warren, and others.

  1. Bloomberg voices his views on health care for older Americans

Forbes repeats Bloomberg’s words regarding health care for older Americans.

If Democratic presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg was 95 years old and had prostate cancer, he could afford advanced and extreme medical care to improve and extend his life.

But what about a 95-year-old non-billionaire with prostate cancer who requires medical treatment using taxpayer dollars? In 2011, Bloomberg made the following statement: “If you show up with prostate cancer and you’re 95, we should say ‘go and enjoy, have a nice day, live a long life.’ There’s no cure and we can’t do anything. If you’re a young person, we should do something about it,” said Bloomberg, a former New York City mayor.

Bloomberg warned that society was not yet willing to make hard choices with respect to treating older Americans and this is “going to bankrupt us.”

The video reportedly was released by Daily Caller, a hyper partisan conservative website.

Bloomberg’s 2011 statement surfaced as he released a proposed health care plan to improve retirees’ lives, from giving low-income workers access to government-provided retirement savings plans to bolstering Social Security. Bloomberg said he would limit out-of-pocket drug costs and provide federal coverage for long-term care costs.
Do Bloomberg’s statements constitute age discrimination? Yes. Without a doubt.
Dr. Robert N. Butler, M.D., (1927-2010), who coined the term “ageism” in 1968, said generations throughout history have justified the futility of granting the aged access to health care due to unfounded ageist beliefs. Butler defined ageism is ‘a process of systematic stereotyping, prejudicial attitudes and direct or indirect discrimination against people because they are old.”

In his book, Age-ism: Another Form of Bigotry, Butler writes: “Age-ism reflects a deep seated uneasiness on the part of the young and middle-aged – a personal revulsion to and distaste for growing old, disease, disability; and fear of powerlessness, ‘uselessness,’ and death.”
Scapegoating Older Americans
Moreover, Bloomberg’s 2011 ramblings while sitting Shiva with a Jewish family also seem profoundly misguided. There are many other criteria that seem just as likely to bankrupt the United States.

The U.S. health care system is notoriously inefficient and outrageously expensive. It costs four times more to run the U.S. health care system than Canada’s single-payer system. Why is America saddled with a failed system? The U.S. Congress has failed to act in the face of intense lobbying by insurers and pharmaceutical companies.

And why is aging singled out as opposed to other conditions, such as obesity? Some 40 percent of American adults aged 20 and over are obese, a condition that can lead to coronary heart disease and stroke.

The Centers for Disease Control states that coronary heart disease and stroke cost the U.S. health care system $199 billion per year and cause $131 billion in lost productivity on the job.

Why doesn’t Congress address America’s “new national epidemic” and enact sound policy changes, such as limiting unhealthy foods at schools and restoring “gym ” for all students. Congress could tax products that contribute to obesity or require informative labeling of food products  Many blame lobbying by the mammoth food production and retail industries for Congressional inaction.

(Read more at Forbes)

Democrats need to stop fixing what works

Consider this: when Bernie had a heart attack, he did not go to Canada, Great Britain, or Venezuela for treatment. Although he has been hypocritically hopping in his personal jet while lecturing us on “climate change,” he did not hop down to his much-praised comrades in Cuba for treatment. Instead, he went to an American hospital.

So, if the Democrats want to fix anything, they need to open up markets and reward those of us who come together in medical collectives.

  1. Bloomberg insults Christians and Jews

A 15 February 2020 article in Vanity Fair, we find a new set of insults. Among these insults is one that should offend both Jews and Christians (refer to the bold, italicized sentence below).

Friday was Michael Bloomberg’s 78th birthday and the Washington Post gave a belated gift Saturday morning, a blast from the former New York City mayor’s past. “Aw, you shouldn’t have,” he must have said, seeing the news.

The paper has reprinted, in full, The Portable Bloomberg: The Wit and Wisdom of Michael Bloomberg, a gag birthday gift published by former Bloomberg L.P. chief marketing officer Elisabeth DeMarse 30 years ago. “Yes, these are all actual quotes,” it says in the introduction, adding “no, nothing has been embellished or exaggerated. And yes, some things were too outrageous to include.”

The Wit and Wisdom, an ersatz monograph on corporate culture, may plunge the 2020 political discourse into a new period. One can easily foresee people arguing if describing the Bloomberg Terminal device as something that “[can] do everything, include give you a blowjob. I guess that puts a lot of you girls out of business,” is as bad as “grab ‘em by the pussy.”

The pocket-sized collection has long been the stuff of lore. ABC News had a piece on it in December and Bloomberg himself distanced himself from the collection in 2001 during his first mayoral campaign. But today’s reproduction, as Bloomberg readies himself, at long last, to compete in Democratic primaries, is the first time citizens considering him for national office can scroll through his alleged recorded office musings.

Bloomberg’s campaign spokesman Stu Loeser, upon learning of the book’s imminent reproduction, said that the candidate “simply did not say the things somebody wrote in this gag gift, which has been circulating for 30 years and has been quoted in every previous election Mike has been in.” He did add that “Mike openly admits that his words have not always aligned with his values and the way he has led his life and some of what he has said is disrespectful and wrong.”

Not all of the 121 quotes, divided into sections like “On Computers” or “On Customer Service” will raise eyebrows. Some quotes are simply business-speak, the type of thing you half-hear while zoning out during a meeting. For example:

Everyone I know who is successful loves what they do. The question is: are they successful because they love what they do, or do they love what they do because they are successful? I don’t know. I suspect it’s a combination of both.

Other quotes, while admittedly coarse, are simply benign jokes, like this listed in the “On Profanity” section:

When the Wall Street Journal article came out saying I was profane, my dear old mother called me to ask me if it was true. ‘Ma,’ I said, ‘Fuck ‘em!’

Then there’s typical Manhattanite braggadocio, which might get a laugh at work, but probably isn’t something you want spreading around if you are, you know, running for President of the United States of America. Such as:

You know, there’s a Federal Law that prohibits the serving of good food west of 12th Avenue — look it up.

Or:

I make it a rule never to go to Queens — and since that eliminates both airports I don’t travel a great deal.

And then there’s the sexism and casual bigotry:

If women wanted to be appreciated for their brains, they’d go to the library instead of Bloomingdale’s.

The Royal Family — what a bunch of misfits — a gay, an architect, that horsey faced lesbian, and a kid who gave up Koo Stark for some fat broad.

The three biggest lies are: the check’s in the mail, I’ll respect you in the morning, and I’m glad I’m Jewish.

If Jesus was a Jew, why does he have a Puerto Rican first name?

Whenever my wife catches me eyeing some broad, she’s very careful to turn to me and say “That’s the most expensive piece of ass in the world!”

The scanned PDF also includes some cartoons.

In the middle of all this, however, one can find seeds of progressivism if you look really, really hard. One quote shows a surprising lack of fiery hatred concerning the topic of taxes, at least coming from a business tycoon whose fortune stemmed from letting Wall Street killers know about deals a fraction of a second ahead of the poor schmucks who couldn’t afford his proprietary information system.

(Read more at Vanity Fair)

I encourage you to download the PDF and view it for yourself

Inform yourself by downloading and reading the PDF linked above. This guy said many more offensive things than Trump has been accused of saying. So, when the Democrats support any of these clowns, you know that it is not on principle.

  1. A former Clinton staffer questions Bloomberg’s racist comments (including “stop and frisk”)

Townhall reports that one Clinton staffer suggests that Bloomberg’s “stop and frisk” comments will need to be explained.

Rumors are swirling that former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is contemplating adding former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to his ticket. According to one of Clinton’s ex-staffers, Zerlina Maxwell, the move is highly unlikely. But, regardless of whether or not Clinton is on Bloomberg’s ticket, the MSNBC analyst believes people need to dig deep into the billionaire’s past.

“One of the things that’s been annoying me about this particular election cycle is when the men who are running for president speculate about women or women of color they’re going to put on the bottom of their ticket as their number two in order to help their chances. Why can’t we just talk about the women themselves?” Maxwell asked.

She reminded people that the former secretary of state has repeatedly said she would not run for president again.

“I’m highly skeptical of this particular report and I think, in some ways, it’s to send a signal to the folks who still love Hillary Clinton, that they should look at Michael Bloomberg,” the former staffer explained. “But they should look at Bloomberg on his own record. He has plenty of issues that he needs to address. He has not been in a debate. He has not done a national interview on television, so, right now, he’s blanketing the airwaves with glossy advertisements. And if millions of dollars in advertisements didn’t work to sell products, even defective ones, they wouldn’t spend so much on advertising.”

Bloomberg has taken hits over redlining and stop and frisk, MSNBC’s Alex Witt said. Despite that, three members of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) have endorsed the former New York City major.

Maxwell said voters shouldn’t overlook Bloomberg’s past policy positions simply because they want to beat President Donald Trump come November.

“I don’t think that by accepting a deeply-flawed candidate, particularly one who hasn’t debated any of the other candidates. I think black and brown people are jumping ahead before we’ve even had an opportunity to weigh in at the ballot box,” she said. “It’s very important to get endorsements from the [CBC members].”

As the former Clinton staffer said, a candidate can receive CBC endorsements but that doesn’t necessarily translate to black voters. In 2016, Clinton received substantial CBC endorsements but black voter turnout was low.

“His record is one that should be examined by black and brown communities because it’s nice to put money behind good causes and philanthropy, but if you’re doing that at the same time that you’re throwing black children up against the wall and defending it up until weeks before announcing your run, then people have a right to be skeptical of whether or not you really care about these communities,” Maxwell explained.

(Read more at Townhall)

  1. Bloomberg’s sexist remarks

We have to go across the pond to The Guardian‘s 15 February 2020 article to read about Michael Bloomberg’s sexist remarks.

The presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg has insisted he is a “champion for women in the workplace”, after the republication of a 30-year-old booklet purporting to contain his “Wit and Wisdom” cast an uncomfortable spotlight on the billionaire former New York mayor.

The Washington Post made the 1990 booklet available online as it published an investigation of how Bloomberg has “for years battled women’s allegations of profane, sexist comments”. The booklet was presented as a gift to Bloomberg on his 48th birthday party and contains a catalogue of sexist remarks attributed to the billionaire during his time at the company he founded.

The renewed attention on Bloomberg – who has for years been the subject of allegations that his company fostered a hostile and sexist environment towards women – comes as he has surged in the race for the Democratic nomination to face Donald Trump in November.

With the leftwinger Bernie Sanders climbing in national polls and former vice-president Joe Biden falling away, Bloomberg’s self-financed candidacy has begun to attract support from moderates seeking what they believe will be an electable alternative to Donald Trump.

On Saturday the rightwing Drudge Report website caused a stir when it said “sources close to the Bloomberg campaign” said he was considering Hillary Clinton, the Democratic candidate beaten by Trump in 2016, as his running mate this year.

But with such increasing prominence, fuelled in part by a massive TV and Facebook advertising effort, has come increasing scrutiny of the former Republican’s record in office and his comments and views.

In one comment printed in the 1990 booklet, the businessman turned politician is said to have said of Britain’s royal family: “What a bunch of misfits – a gay, an architect, that horsey faced lesbian, and a kid who gave up Koo Stark for some fat broad.”

Of the Bloomberg Terminal, the computer system on which a fortune estimated at $60bn was built, Bloomberg is quoted as saying: “It will do everything, including give you a blowjob. I guess that puts a lot of you girls out of business.”

He is also quoted as comparing “a good salesperson” to “the guy who goes into a bar, and walks up to every gorgeous girl there, and says, ‘Do you want to fuck?’ He gets turned down a lot – but he gets fucked a lot, too!”

(Read more at The Guardian)

  1. Bloomberg implied farming doesn’t take intelligence in 2016 comments

Fox News reports in a 17 February 2020 article how Michael Bloomberg denegrated farmers in 2016.

Presidential candidate and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg appeared to belittle both farmers and factory workers in 2016 comments made at a university forum, continuing a trend of old remarks resurfacing to plague the billionaire’s bid for the Democratic nomination.

Joining the Distinguished Speakers Series at the University of Oxford Saïd Business School, Bloomberg was responding to a question about whether it is possible to unite people in middle America and the coasts. One of the issues standing in the way of that, Bloomberg said, was the inability of blue-collar workers to adapt to the information economy even if they have their education subsidized.

“The agrarian society lasted 3,000 years and we could teach processes. I could teach anybody, even people in this room, no offense intended, to be a farmer,” Bloomberg said. “It’s a process. You dig a hole, you put a seed in, you put dirt on top, add water, up comes the corn. You could learn that. Then we had 300 years of the industrial society. You put the piece of metal on the lathe, you turn the crank in the direction of the arrow and you can have a job. And we created a lot of jobs. At one point, 98 percent of the world worked in agriculture, now it’s 2 percent in the United States.”

Bloomberg continued: “Now comes the information economy and the information economy is fundamentally different because it’s built around replacing people with technology and the skill sets that you have to learn are how to think and analyze, and that is a whole degree level different. You have to have a different skill set, you have to have a lot more gray matter. It’s not clear the teachers can teach or the students can learn, and so the challenge of society of finding jobs for these people, who we can take care of giving them a roof over their head and a meal in their stomach and a cell phone and a car and that sort of thing. But the thing that is the most important, that will stop them from setting up a guillotine someday, is the dignity of a job”

(Read more at Fox News)

During my stint while earning a Bachelor of Arts at Texas A&M, I was introduced to many agricultural scientists

BloombergFarmerI concentrated on technical subjects during that time and took a number of classes in programming. However, that did not dim my respect for the work that students in the agricultural sciences went through. Obviously, Mr. Bloomberg has a bit of a vaunted view of himself regarding a field he seems to have invested little time in learning.

Bloomberg’s attempts at trying to redeem himself

  1. Bloomberg delivers his best attack line against Bernie Sanders … and it was pretty brutal

Townhall comments on the Bloomberg attacks against Bernie during the Nevada debates.

Former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg jumped into the 2020 ring. Or was it a shark tank? He secured a spot on the debate stage for the Nevada debate—and everyone was gunning for him. Mike clogs the spot. He threatens Amy Klobuchar and former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg. He has to be destroyed. He pulls from bases of support that makes everyone’s path to the nomination no matter how small, even smaller. They had to deliver a thousand blows to him. And he was beaten pretty badly by everyone. From stop-and-frisk to allegations of sexually suggestive remarks, Bloomberg came off as cold, calculating, and just unlikeable. He was horrific on the non-disclosure agreement issues that were brought up. It was not good. CNN’s Van Jones called his performance a disaster, but he did have one good attack line against Sanders—and it was a brutal one.

BernieScreamsThe Vermont democratic socialist went on his usual line about how socialism is awesome. He railed against what he sees as socialism for the rich, calling out Donald Trump for getting hundreds of millions of dollars in tax breaks for his business ventures. Sanders also railed against the welfare state expenditures for Walmart’s workers because the Walton family pays what the Left sees as “starvation wages.”

“I believe in a democratic socialism for working people, not billionaires. Health care for all, educational opportunity for all,” said Sanders as he finally ended his stump speech by declaring he will create a government that works for everyone.

And then Bloomberg torpedoed it in a couple of sentences.

“What a wonderful country we have. The best-known socialist in the country happens to be a millionaire with three houses. What did I miss here?” he replied.

(Read the rest at Townhall)

  1. Michael Bloomberg considering Hillary Clinton as running mate

Breitbart reports that Michael Bloomberg has suggested Hillary Clinton as a running mate.

Former Mayor Michael Bloomberg is considering choosing failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton as a running mate, according to the Drudge Report on Saturday.

Matt Drudge launched a siren banner on the front page of the Drudge Report to highlight the news, citing sources close to the Bloomberg campaign.

According to those sources, internal campaign polling found that the Bloomberg/Clinton ticket would be a formidable force to tackle Trump in the general election.

(Read more at Breitbart)

While Bloomberg may be strategizing, this may be a wrong move

If Bloomberg were to win the presidency with her at his side, it might be the shortest presidency on record.

  1. Candidate Bloomberg Adds Memes to Campaign Arsenal

Breitbart also reports that Bloomberg has been buying memes to build his brand on social media.

Michael Bloomberg’s campaign said Thursday it has invested in sponsored Instagram meme content in a new illustration of his record spending aimed at securing the Democratic presidential nomination.

As he vies to be the candidate to take on President Donald Trump, the former New York mayor is also challenging the president on one of his preferred battlefields — the world of social media, where the comic images known as memes flourish.

“Mike Bloomberg 2020 has teamed up with social creators to collaborate with the campaign, including the meme world,” campaign spokeswoman Sabrina Singh said in an email to AFP.

“While a meme strategy may be new to presidential politics, we’re betting it will be an effective component to reach people where they are and compete with President Trump’s powerful digital operation,” Singh added.

Trump’s surprise election win in 2016 was attributed in part to his use of social media, which was much more aggressive than his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton.

Among the Instagram content creators recruited by Bloomberg are fuckjerry, grapejuiceboys and tank.sinatra, each of which has millions of followers.

On Wednesday they published screen shots of humorous (but fake) private messages with Bloomberg on Instagram — and which they said were sponsored by him.

In one of them, the 77-year-old candidate says that his granddaughter showed him the account.

In one post, Bloomberg appears to ask the account to post a meme to let everyone know he is “the cool candidate” — along with a picture of him in oversized shorts, a Polo-style shirt and a rust-colored vest.

In the meme, the candidate agrees to pay “a billion dollars” for the post.

(Read more at Breitbart)

This is another sad instance of buying the presidency

Original articles said that Bloomberg was offering $150 per endorsement. Later scuttlebutt says that people have been earning thousands.

  1. Bloomberg Hits Sanders: ‘Outrageous’ to Call Soleimani’s Death an ‘Assassination’

If I am going to blog on all the things I disapprove of among Bloomberg’s acts, I should also refer to Breitbart‘s 6 January 2020 article where Bloomberg pointed out the outrageousness of Bernie’s statement on the killing of Soleimani.

Presidential hopeful Michael Bloomberg (D) said it is “outrageous” to describe the death of Iran’s top terror chief as an “assassination” — a description used by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT).

Bloomberg last week took issue with Sanders describing the elimination of Iran’s top general, Qasem Soleimani, an “assassination,” telling reporters that it is an “outrageous thing to say.”

“Nobody that I know of would think that we did something wrong in getting the general,” the billionaire said:

His remarks followed the Sanders campaign’s statement, describing the terrorist’s death as an “assassination”:

Sanders said in a video statement that he would “do everything that [he] can to prevent a war with Iran” and added that he apologizes to “no one” for his position:

Bloomberg, however, took a more measured approach, stating that Soleimani had the “blood of Americans on his hands.” While he took shots at Trump in his statement and questioned his judgment, he did not outright condemn the action:

(Read more at Breitbart)

Four stories on the problems of Mayor Pete Buttigieg


  1. Buttigieg Says He Won’t Be ‘Lectured On Family Values’ By Rush Limbaugh Or Trump Supporters

The Daily Caller points out that Mayor Pete has rejected the criticism of various people.

MayorPete2020 Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg said Sunday that he will not be “lectured on family values” by the likes of radio host Rush Limbaugh or Trump supporters.

The former South Bend, Indiana, mayor spoke on “Fox News Sunday” with anchor Chris Wallace, who brought up separate comments Limbaugh and “America First” host Sebastian Gorka made on Feb. 12 about Buttigieg’s stances on abortion and electability.

“A gay guy, 37 years old, loves kissing his husband on debate stages. Can you see [President Donald] Trump have fun with that?” Limbaugh asked, while Gorka questioned, “Why is a homosexual man lecturing us about the sanctity of life in the womb? Just a little curious there, strange.”

“What is your reaction to those comments?” Wallace asked Buttigieg.

The gay presidential candidate responded: “I am in a faithful, loving, committed marriage. I’m proud of my marriage, and I’m proud of my husband.”

He added:

And I’m not going to be lectured on family values from the likes of Rush Limbaugh or anybody who supports Donald J. Trump as the moral as well as political leader of the United States. America has moved on, and we should have politics of belonging that welcomes everybody. That’s what the American people are for. And I am saddened for what the Republican Party has become if they embrace that kind of homophobic rhetoric.

(Read more at the Daily Caller)

This seems like a return to the times before the Israelite kings and the times of the Proverbs

This does seem like a return to the times of the Septuagint. You see, in the days before the kings, “every man did what was right in his own eyes” (Judges 17:6 NASB). Likewise, Solomon observed this binary nature of the paths we can take:

Every man’s way is right in his own eyes, but the Lord weighs the hearts. (Proverbs 21:2 NASB).

Like the men of those earlier times, Mayor Pete only wants to do things his way. He would rather ignore the counsel of both the Old and New Testaments concerning homosexuality (Leviticus 18:22; Leviticus 20:13; Mark 10:6-9; Romans 1:26-28; 1 Corinthians 6:9-11; 1 Corinthians 7:2; 1 Timothy 3:2-3; 1 Timothy 1:8-11; and Jude 1:5-8). Likewise it seems that he would ignore the verses limiting marriage to one man and one woman (such as Matthew 19:4-6). Like many others, Buttigieg would like to focus on a a message that offers the love and forgiveness of God without requiring repentance. Sorry to say, but that adulterates the entire message of the Bible. Therefore, this has become one step too far.

You might ask why anyone would bother pointing out this discrepancy. Normally, politicians build coalitions based on shared goals of various groups they may claim allegiance. In this case, Buttigieg claims to be a Christian. Mind you, this type of Christianity falls outside of most Christian orthodoxy. Nonetheless, it would seem that an aspiring politician would do everything to build commonalities between himself and the large groups. Not so in this case, which does not seem so wise — which brings up back to Solomon.

Solomon also reminded us:

Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid. (Proverbs 12:1 NASB).

It seems to me that Mayor Pete might want to listen to someone who does not exactly mirror his own views.

  1. Buttigieg Scorns Pro-Life Votes

Lifezette reports that Mayor Pete calls for Democrat purity on the pro-abortion topic.

ButtigiegScornsProLifeVotesAt a Fox News town hall appearance on Sunday Democrat presidential candidate Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, IN, read out of his party anyone who supports the rights of the unborn and who disdains infanticide.

He instead hoped they could work together on other issues, he responded to a pro-life Democrat who queried him on the matter.

Democrats for Life of America leader Kristen Day said on Fox & Friends on Tuesday, “But I would first of all say that when I asked him the question, I didn’t ask him where he stood on abortion. And the fact that he took that opportunity to double down and sort of alienate pro-life Democrats even further just showed me that he did not — he does not want our vote. And, you know, I’m willing to discuss platform language with, but…he could say that and reinforce that he is pro-choice and…let’s find ways that we can work together,” Day also said.

“The people will have to go to the polls and decide, but I know for sure a lot of Democrats did not go out and vote for Hillary Clinton because of her extreme stance on abortion,” Day concluded.

(Read more at Lifezette)

If Buttigieg and Bernie want to turn their backs on pro-life votes, there is room elsewhere

If Mayor Pete and Senator Sanders would like to make commitment to abortion a Democrat litmus test, then I wish them all the power they need. There is room in the conservative ranks for debate on various issues and we can welcome any degree of pro-life supporters that want to join.

  1. Media Ignores Buttigieg Refusing To Say He Does Not Support Infanticide

The Daily Caller points out how other outlets have ignored Mayor Pete’s refusal to say he does not support infanticide.

Establishment and liberal media failed to cover a presidential candidate refusing to say he does not support infanticide.

2020 presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg refused to come out against late-term abortion or infanticide Thursday, speaking to The View’s Meghan McCain. Yet establishment and liberal media, including CNN, The Washington Post, The New York Times, HuffPost and Vox, did not cover Buttigieg’s remarks. None of these publications responded to requests for comment from the Daily Caller News Foundation.

McCain reminded Buttigieg that he once suggested unborn babies can be aborted up until they draw their first breath, and offered Buttigieg a chance to walk back the statement.

Buttigieg said “it shouldn’t be up to a government official to draw the line. It should be up to the woman.” When McCain pressed him on this, specifically asking if he would be comfortable with a situation where a “woman wanted to invoke infanticide after a baby was born,” Buttigieg still didn’t distance himself from infanticide.

(Read more at the Daily Caller)

Does anyone expect the media to come out against a Democrat?

I cannot express any surprise that the media that carried San Fran Nan’s message of “it’s for the children” now kow-tows to the abortion until birth mantra.

  1. Queer community isn’t happy with Mayor Pete

Townhall points out that Buttigieg doesn’t hold universal support among the gay community.

The LGBTQ community in San Francisco isn’t happy with former South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg. They feel as though he fails to represent their community. On Friday, two protestors were booted from a fundraiser at the National LGBTQ Center for the Arts for attempting to ask him a question. When it became obvious that they were protestors, supporters began chanting “Boot-Edge-Edge! Boot-Edge-Edge!”

“I’m definitely proud of the fact that a gay candidate has made it thus far, but it’s hard to enjoy or appreciate when his stances are so middle of the road and speak to a predominantly white, upper class audience,” Celi Tamayo-Lee, one of the women who was kicked out of the event, told The Guardian.

Those who feel he’s too moderate take issue with Buttigieg not supporting Medicare for All, free college tuition, his issues with the black community and his ties to billionaire donors. There are issues that don’t impact the LGBTQ community as a whole but impact individuals who are also queer.

(Read more at Townhall)

While I have seen the purity test play out in the Tea Party, I have seen it even more in liberal groups

Over the past few years, it seems that many liberal groups have called for ideological purity (refer to Bernie’s call and Buttigieg’s call for abortion purity). Hence, I expect this to continue and certain groups to tear themselves apart.

To those who find themselves victims, please hear this: every person was made in the image of God. All of us have messed something up, but each of us can be forgiven when we ask for that forgiveness.

Four stories on the Democrat side of the election


  1. Bernie Sanders wins New Hampshire, falls short of 2016 performance

Breitbart reports in a 11 February 2020 article on Bernie’s win (and how it does not stack up to his 2016 performance).

Bernie Sanders

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) won the New Hampshire primary on Tuesday, but he fell far short of his 2016 performance.

Sanders, who had been leading in the polls ahead of the first in the nation primary, only bested former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg by less than two percentage points when the race was called with 80 percent of precincts reporting. Sanders beat Buttigieg, garnering more than 64,000 to the former mayor’s less than 62,000.

The numbers stand in stark contrast to 2016 when the Vermont septuagenarian bested former Secretary of State Hillary by double digits in New Hampshire. In that contest, Sanders garnered more than 152,000 votes, compared to just a little over 95,000 for Clinton. Overall, Sanders carried New Hampshire by more than 22 percentage points during that cycle.

The 2016 victory was made possible by high turnout and little competition—two luxuries Sanders did not have this time around. According to exit polls conducted by NBC News, turnout appeared to be lower across New Hampshire than in prior presidential primary cycles. The biggest dropoff seems to have come from new and young voters. In particular, according to one exit poll, only 11 percent of New Hampshire voters were younger than 29 on Tuesday, down from 19 percent in 2016.

Complicating matters for Sanders is that the same exit polls showed that half of New Hampshire primary voters found his position too liberal, while only 40 percent thought they were a good fit.

(Read this at Breitbart)

As many reports have been made on Bernie’s NH win, no other addressed the smaller support he received since 2016

The way Bernie proclaimed that he would beat President Trump, I wonder whether he knows that his own support has decreased since 2016. Maybe nobody had enough courage to mention the falling numbers to the angry old socialist.

  1. Sanders: ‘Being pro-choice is an essential part’ of being a Democrat

The Daily Caller points out how candidate Bernie Sanders sees no room in the Democrat tent for pro-life Democrats.

bernie-sanders

2020 Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders said Saturday that “being pro-choice is an essential part” of being a Democrat.

The Vermont senator spoke Saturday morning at the “Our Rights, Our Courts” presidential forum in New Hampshire. Demand Justice Initiative, Center for Reproductive Rights, NARAL Pro-Choice America and MSNBC cosponsored the event.

Sanders discussed whether Democrats must be pro-choice. “I think in the Senate’s, probably 95% of the Democrats are pro-choice, the other few are not — in the House, maybe even a higher percentage,” he said.

“So that’s kind of what my view is. I think by this time in history, I think when we talk about what a Democrat is, I think being pro-choice is an essential part of that,” he added.

Sanders’s words come after pro-life Democrat Kristin Day questioned former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg on Democratic inclusion of pro-life Democrats during a Jan. 26 town hall with Fox’s Chris Wallace.

“I’m a proud pro-life Democrat,” she said. “Do you want the support of pro-life Democratic voters?”

“There are 21 million of us. And if so, would you support more moderate platform language to ensure the party of diversity and inclusion does include everybody?” she continued.

Buttigieg said that though he respects her views, he is not going to try to earn her vote “by tricking” her.

(Read more at the Daily Caller)

This comes from the party of “inclusion” and “diversity”

So, to be a Democrat according to Comrade Sanders, you need to goose-step to his tune. Of course, this comes from the party where all of the front runners are white. At least they got away from the requirement that they all be white and 70+.

  1. Bernie Sanders goes full tilt abortion

Townhall comments on the diatribe of Bernie Sanders on taxpayer-funded abortion and pro-life Democrats.

A conglomerate of pro-abortion groups, including NARAL Pro-Choice, the Center for Reproductive Rights and Demand Justice, held a forum in New Hampshire on Saturday focusing on abortion.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) made it very clear he believes that in order to be a Democrat a person must be pro-choice, a clear jab at pro-life Democratic voter Kristen Day. She was the one who asked former South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg if he supported the Democratic Party changing its platform to be more inclusive of pro-life Democrats.

“Is there such a thing as a pro-life Democrat in your vision of the party?” NBC News’ Stephanie Ruhle asked.

“I think being pro-choice is an absolutely essential part of being a Democrat,” he replied to audience cheers. “If you’re asking me – and I think I may be wrong on this – I think in the Senate, probably 95 percent of the Democrats are pro-choice, the other few are not. In the House, maybe even a higher percentage. So that’s kind of what my view is.”

“I think, by this time in history, I think when we talk about what a Democrat is, I think being pro-choice is essentially an essential part of that,” Sanders concluded.

Later in the forum, he discussed Medicare for All and how, under his version of the plan, abortions would be funded by the taxpayers.

(Read more at Townhall)

Once we knew that Sanders would limit Democrats to the pro-abortion view, we should expect that the socialist would require us to participate in abortion

Never mind the Supreme Court decisions on freedom of religion. This angry old socialist will shout down any opposition to abortion. If he can, he will likely be the one to require Christians stand before firing squads (considering his past views on Christians in office).

  1. Poll says Americans do not accept Bernie’s socialism

Townhall comments in a 15 February 2020 article on a poll that suggests that America has not developed a taste for Bernie’s brand of socialism.

Well, this should make for some good talking points against Sen. Bernie Sanders’ agenda to transform America into a socialist utopia. The Vermont senator is running on one of the most radical agendas in recent memory. It’s decidedly left-wing. Its supporters are decidedly left-wing. The energy that is has channeled has forced the Democratic Party to lurch to the left, much to the annoyance of the establishment. You see that with the Democratic National Committee pretty much changing the rules so that former New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg can be on stage. Sanders supporters will only see this as yet another time the Democratic National Committee interfered in a primary contest to screw over Sanders. Still, there is this poll to deal with that shows a majority of Americans would not vote for a socialist for president (via Fox News):

The results of a new Gallup poll suggest that Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., may face a big challenge winning the White House if he succeeds in capturing the Democratic Party’s nomination for president.

The survey, conducted from Jan. 16-29 among 1,033 adults, found 53 percent said that they would not vote for their party nominee if they were a, “generally well-qualified person for president who happened to be socialist.”

Sanders, a self-described democratic socialist, went into the New Hampshire Democratic primary on strong footing Tuesday night, after he nearly tied former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg in the Iowa Caucuses.

[…]

The Gallup poll showed Democrats are most willing to support a socialist, with 76 percent saying they would vote for a candidate with that political ideology. Only 45 percent of Independents and 17 percent of Republicans said they would do the same.

This is by no means a silver bullet that could end Sanders’ agenda. Or could it? Seventy-six percent of your party’s voters is not a strong showing from the base. Yet, let’s not take Sanders out of the realm of the possible, which is one of the reasons why Trump won; Democrats simply couldn’t fathom him winning. Keep this trend in your back pocket. Yet, what is does show is that all-in-all Americans know what far-left policies yield: equal suffering.

(Read more at Townhall)

One wonders whether the 76% of Democrats supporting socialism have looked at Venezuela

It seems that the line that gets toed is whatever the Democrat leadership says calls it. If the Democrat leadership says abortion-to-birth constitutes the Democrat line, then almost 80% of the Democrat faithful sidle up to that line. If San Fran Nan and Bernie say that capitalism sucks (even though just about every Democrat in Congress for more than a term has amassed a fortune), then the Democrat faithful fall in line with socialism.

Ten stories on moments of liberal epiphany


  1. ‘In my day, if you went up to a guy’s hotel room, you knew exactly why you were going’: Kathy Bates on #MeToo

The Daily Caller quotes Kathy Bates as she points out several obvious points about the #MeToo Movement.

Kathy Bates

Kathy Bates weighed in on the #MeToo era and said back in her day if a woman “went up to a guy’s hotel room, you knew exactly why you were going” there.

“About people like [Harvey] Weinstein and the casting couch and all of that,” the 71-year-old actress shared with the Guardian in a piece published Friday.

“I have a confession,” she added. “In my day, if you went up to a guy’s hotel room, you knew exactly why you were going and in those days it was consensual.”

Bates continued, “Times were different, but I really support the women who are coming forward now and I’m not happy about the men who are being accused falsely – but the ones who deserve all they’re getting, my feeling is hey, go for it.”

“The Waterboy” star went on to explain that though she was never seen as the classic starlet, she still experienced misogyny’s pigeonholing.

(Read more at the Daily Caller)

As long as there are humans, there will be sinners

While this is not quite a Joseph moment where the young man in the story escaped temptation by running away from its presence, it does show that we need to be self-aware of the real situation.

Do not desire her beauty in your heart

Do not desire her beauty in your heart, Nor let her capture you with her eyelids. For on account of a harlot one is reduced to a loaf of bread, And an adulteress hunts for the precious life. (Proverbs 6:25‭-‬26 NASB)

She caught him by his garment, saying, “Lie with me!” And he left his garment in her hand and fled, and went outside. (Genesis 39:12 NASB)

Now flee from youthful lusts and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, with those who call on the Lord from a pure heart. (2 Timothy 2:22 NASB)

Maybe this is Bloomberg’s version of a truth-in-advertising admission

  1. Mike Bloomberg ad uses Obama-era footage of caged migrants to criticize Trump

As we see in the Daily Caller article of 3 February 2020, “Mike” Bloomberg showed his stripes by deceptively using footage that has incorrectly been attributed to President Trump.

Bloomberg_aliens

Mike Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York City and contender for the Democratic presidential nomination, released an anti-Trump campaign advertisement that included footage of caged migrants in 2014 — during the Obama era.

The Bloomberg campaign released an ad that was meant to highlight unflattering events that have occurred during the Trump administration, such as the white nationalist march in Charlottesville, Virginia, the aftermath of a Florida school shooting, the Brett Kavanaugh hearings, and immigration enforcement at the U.S.-Mexico border.

“America demanded change and change is what we got,” a narrator said in the ad, which then led to a montage of footage, supposedly all taken during the Trump presidency.

The campaign took direct aim at the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement measures, clipping images of Border Patrol agents doing their job and featuring footage of detained migrants. However, a review by the Daily Caller News Foundation found that one still image used in the ad was taken in 2014 — during the Obama administration.

Bloomberg-Campaign-Ad

(Read more at the Daily Caller)

By using this footage, Bloomberg may be admitting that the US will return to the Obama economic malaise and other Obama policies

Or maybe he wants to point back to the lackluster energy economy that was only bolstered by the beginnings of the fracking boom. Otherwise, the nation would have seen the gasoline prices of the late G. W. Bush years.


Continue reading “Ten stories on moments of liberal epiphany”