April 17-18, 2018
Apr 17 00:48 Liberal illogic personified Apr 17 06:57 Another immigration chanting point shattered? Apr 17 09:46 California's immigration backlash Apr 18 05:24 California's immigration revolt Apr 18 13:13 Polls trending in GOP's direction Apr 18 13:57 Otto lawsuit fails in Minnesota Supreme Court, too Apr 18 15:21 A closer look at 2018: What wave?
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Liberal illogic personified
Anyone that thinks liberalism is intellectually significant is kidding themselves. Think of this: liberals think that 18-year-olds are old enough to serve in the military but too stupid to make an informed decision about smoking and buying firearms. Further, Democrats think that that 16-year-olds can cast well-informed votes. If those facts don't give you intellectual whiplash, then you're a liberal.
This article almost gave me intellectual whiplash. Fortunately, I could tell from the title of the article that this was typical Democrat propaganda.
The article opens by saying "Akron City Council is expected to vote tonight on whether to prohibit the sale of tobacco products to those under 21. Proponents hope the rest of the Summit County will follow Akron's lead."
That sounds eerily similar to the arguments made by proponents of a similar measure put before the St. Cloud City Council. In that instance, the Council passed the proposed ordinance 4-3 . After the motion was made and seconded in St. Cloud, Mark Fritz, the owner of E-Cig Emporium in St. Cloud, testified, saying "Your ordinance will not stop them. You need to recognize all you're doing is hurting your local businesses."
What Fritz referred to is the fact that St. Cloud's neighboring cities haven't adopted this ill-fated measure. It's ill-fated because the 26th Amendment states :
Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
The minute these laws get challenged, they'll be flushed into the dustbin of history by the Supreme Court. One of the organizations pushing the 21 age limit for smoking in Minnesota is Clearway Minnesota / Minnesotans For A Smoke Free Generation . They present as fact this opinion:
Raising the purchase age to 21 will prevent youth tobacco use and save lives.
It's impossible to verify this. Something else worth considering is whether the laws will be enforced. This video hints that they aren't enforced:
[Video no longer available]
That's before talking about how high a priority preventing 'under-age' smoking is to police departments. I can't picture a PD for a city the size of Akron will put a high priority on stopping underage smoking when there's an opioid epidemic underway. There's only so many hours in a day. Police departments don't have unlimited resources.
That's why passing these laws is a waste of time. If you want to decrease teenage smoking, education programs are much more efficient than banning products.
Posted Tuesday, April 17, 2018 12:48 AM
Comment 1 by JerryE9 at 17-Apr-18 08:12 AM
It is the bedrock liberal conceit that society can be perfected by law. They are utopians and dreamers that believe THEY could run our lives better than we can, when they cannot even run their own.
Another immigration chanting point shattered?
Almost reflexively, Democrats insist that Central Americans flee their country of origin to avoid the gang violence. This article is a good example of that reaction. This recent survey hints that NBC is buying someone's spin.
First, the NBC article states "At its largest, the caravan included more than 1,500 members. Although many have chosen to stay in Mexico to pursue asylum, just over 600 of them will continue traveling to the United States. Its members are fleeing violence and political conflict in Honduras and other Central American nations. One Salvadoran caravan member said she fears for her life in El Salvador and feels she must continue to the United States in order to be safe from gang violence."
That won't be an easy sell. According to the survey, "Hondurans emigrate primarily for economic reasons, not violence, according to a new survey by a Jesuit-run research and social action center in that country. The report by the Reflection, Research, and Communication Team (ERIC-SJ as it is known in Spanish) is based on a survey of public perceptions of Honduras' social, political, and economic situation in 2017. ERIC-SJ conducted the survey February 12-22, 2018, with a national sample of 1,584 valid questionnaires, which is representative of all persons over 18 who live in the country."
These are some of the questions survey respondents were asked:
- Under the current situation in the country, have you thought or wished to emigrate?
- Has a member of the family emigrated in the last 4 years?
- Could you tell me the reasons why your family member emigrated from the country? (Answered by those who answered the previous question in the affirmative)
- Do you know if an acquaintance, relative, or neighbor has emigrated due to violence?
According to the article, respondents said:
The report confirmed the economic crisis in Honduras as the main cause for migration. Of the respondents that had a family member who had emigrated in the last four years, 82.9 percent did so due to lack of employment and opportunities to generate an income. Meanwhile, 11.3 percent migrated due to violence and insecurity. In comparison, the 2015 ERIC-SJ survey showed that 77.6 percent migrated for economic reasons and 16.9 percent migrated due to violence.
This video follows the script:
[Video no longer available]
I won't say that Honduras is a tropical paradise. I'm simply skeptical of the frequent articles that portray Honduras 'migrants' as fleeing violence.
Posted Tuesday, April 17, 2018 6:57 AM
No comments.
California's immigration backlash
A week ago, Jerry Brown and Xavier Becerra, California's governor and state attorney general respectively, were riding high while touting California's sanctuary state law. Since then, Brown and Becerra have done nothing but backtrack on immigration. Don't expect their losing streak to end anytime soon. Los Alamitos was the first openly defiant city to challenge SB 54. It wasn't the last.
Last night, Los Alamitos voted for a second time to opt out of SB 54 . By a vote of 4-1, "Los Alamitos Council members voted ... to opt out of a state law that prohibited state and local police agencies from informing federal authorities in cases when illegal immigrants facing deportation are released from detention."
Councilman Mark Chirco was the lone dissenting vote. Afterwards, Chirco said "the council has no legal authority to approve the ordinance and criticized the council members for what he called being irresponsible, stating that the measure will open the city to lawsuits."
That started the Democrats' criticism:
Shortly after the vote, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) tweeted that the ordinance is "a blatant violation of the city's obligation to follow a state law that puts our local resources to use for the safety of our communities rather than toward federal immigration agencies." The civil rights group previously threatened the city with a lawsuit if it passes the ordinance.
It isn't surprising that the ACLU has it bassackwards. California doesn't have the authority to ignore federal immigration policies. Let's be blunt. That's what California is doing by not notifying ICE of when illegal immigrants are getting out of jail.
The Democrats' arguments are worthless as trash:
Omar Siddiqui, a U.S. Congressional candidate in California running to unseat Republican Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, also spoke at the meeting, urging the council to oppose the motion as "our communities are safer when we work with each other and trust each other, not when we operate under a police state."
Tell that to the Steinle family. This is an outright lie that's told by Democrats. There's no proof that verifies that as anything more than spin or theory.
Don't be surprised if people reject Siddiqui. There's an anti-sanctuary state backlash building in California. More people are getting tired of California's failed liberal policies, especially with regards to illegal immigration. They're tired of hearing how safe their communities are when they aren't.
It doesn't require a rocket scientist to figure out that this controversy is increasing voter intensity on the right. People are rejecting the Democrats' anything goes immigration policies.
Posted Tuesday, April 17, 2018 9:46 AM
No comments.
California's immigration revolt
Tuesday night, Beaumont and San Diego became the latest cities to officially reject California's SB 54 California Values Act, aka California's Sanctuary State law. In Beaumont, the Beaumont City Council voted 3-2 tonight to approve a resolution asserting that California's so-called 'sanctuary state' law is incompatible with federal law and, therefore, illegitimate. Beaumont is the first Inland Empire municipality to oppose Senate Bill 54, the 'California Values Act,' joining Orange County and a number of its cities in challenging the statute's validity."
Also on Tuesday night, the "San Diego County Board of Supervisors voted 3-1 Tuesday to support the Trump administration's lawsuit against California over so-called sanctuary laws that the state passed last year to limit its role in immigration enforcement. The county will file an amicus brief at the first available opportunity, likely if and when the case moves to a higher court on appeal, said Supervisor Kristin Gaspar, chairwoman of the board."
I'd like to thank Agnes Gibboney, one of the Angel Moms I've had the privilege of interviewing , for tipping me off about the Beaumont vote.
It's unmistakable that the tide is turning against the Sanctuary advocates. A month ago, Gov. Jerry Brown and California State Attorney General Xavier Becerra were lipping off to President Trump. Now, they're in full retreat. According to Agnes and others, Californians are speaking up against the Democrats' anti-safety policies. One of the 'others' is Kristin Gaspar, the chairwoman of the San Diego County Board of Supervisors. Ms. Gaspar is also running to replace Rep. Darrell Issa in the US Congress. After Tuesday night's vote, Fox News' Ed Henry interviewed Ms. Gaspar about their vote. Here's that interview:
I found this snippet disturbing:
SB 54 also mandates that schools, health facilities, libraries an courthouses serve as 'safe zones,' where undocumented immigrants can come and go without risk of detention.
I don't see how that's enforceable since the sidewalks and city streets are public property. It's possible that SB 54 could suggest those areas as safe zones. I don't see how California could mandate that those areas be safe zones.
In the end, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors listened to their constituents:
During the announcement of the vote, Gaspar showed printouts of emails she received from each side of the debate. The stack of emails criticizing her for considering support for the lawsuit was not much thicker than a legal pad. The stack of emails asking her to support the Trump administration's legal challenge was more than a foot tall.
On a political note, Democrats had to think that they'd flip Darrell Issa's seat after he narrowly defeated Doug Applegate, his Democratic opponent, by 1,600+ votes. With an increase in Republican voter intensity in San Diego, a pretty red district, coupled with Ms. Gaspar's popularity, I'd say another Republican seat is a bigger challenge for the Democrats than it was a month ago.
Based on the reports I'm getting from southern California, I'm getting skeptical that Democrats will get enough seats from California to flip the House.
Margaret Baker, who lives near the border, told the board that backing the lawsuit will discourage immigrants from reporting crime. "We see this lawsuit as an attack on our safety and the well-being of our community," she said.
The reports I'm getting from southern California is that significant numbers of illegal immigrants are injuring pedestrians in hit-and-run accidents, with many legal residents getting severely injured. It's impossible to make the case that shielding these illegal immigrants from prosecution is making San Diego safe.
Facts on the ground are changing the debate more than Jerry Brown can spin things. That truth should frighten Democrats.
Posted Wednesday, April 18, 2018 5:24 AM
No comments.
Polls trending in GOP's direction
The political tide is turning. It's unmistakable. It isn't that Democrats can't get their message out, which is their cop-out explanation for why they fell short of their goals. It's that they've become the lecturing party or the ideological party rather than being the listening party or the solutions party.
Tammy Bruce's op-ed highlights the Democrats' tactics. In her op-ed, Ms. Bruce said "For a long time, the Democrats have been successful by scaring people into voting for them. It's a tactic used when you can't persuade people on policy. Americans were recently reminded of the Democrats' usual refrain when House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi declared President Trump's tax cuts as 'Armageddon.' Mrs. Pelosi went there, relying on contrived drama, comparing a tax cut to a fight between biblical armies during the end times. When the Senate GOP was discussing Mr. Trump's health care bill, the Democrats' response? 'Hundreds of thousands of people will die,' delivered again by Nancy 'We're all gonna die' Pelosi."
In late October, 2017, Democrats thought that they were looking at a blue wave. That's before Republicans passed the Trump/GOP tax cuts and President Trump signed them into law right before Christmas. Since then, the trend has been unmistakable. While there've been a few bumps in the road for Republicans, the RCP average of polling of the generic ballot question has headed in the Republicans' favor:
Speaking of messaging, the Republicans' message has consisted of telling people about the strengthening economy, fatter paychecks and greater financial security. The Democrats' message, compliments of Ms. Pelosi, has sounded like fingernails across a chalkboard.
The Democrats aren't ready for primetime. They've pandered to Moms Demand Action rather than putting forward plans to make schools safer. They've pandered to La Raza rather than getting criminal illegal aliens off the street. Meanwhile, Nancy Pelosi has talked in apocalyptic terms to frighten people to vote for Democrats:
Keith Ellison, the deputy chairman of the Democratic National Committee, was handed the Grim Reaper baton when he said this to the Progressive National Candidate Training gathering last week: "Women are dying because we are losing elections," Mr. Ellison said, Fox News Insider reported. "We don't have the right to lose a damn election. We have to win." Mr. Ellison was referring to a reported rise in maternal mortality rates in Missouri and Texas. The good news is, for Texas, that report has already been disproven, and explained by a computer reporting error.
And what is their argument really based on? The infantilizing of women. Underscoring Mr. Ellison's remarks is an argument that women are so fragile, so vulnerable, that if Democrats don't win and government doesn't control more of your life, you'll die. That is an inherently sexist argument, promoting the fraud that women can't control their own lives and need a Big Brother to help them along.
Back in January, I wrote this post , which I titled "2018: No wave, barely a ripple?" At the time, I wasn't sure if the trend towards Republicans would continue. If I wrote that article today, I'd omit the question mark from the title. The blue wave propaganda is coming from people like Chris Cillizza and other mindless lefties. The polling is clear. Nobody thinks that the improving economy and fat bonuses isn't changing the mindset of the American people.
The DC/NY worrywarts should take a valium. The Trump/GOP tax cuts virtually sell themselves. Republicans still have to get out the vote but the policy sells itself. There's a lesson I learned from a small business near my house. It's legendary, actually. It's called Val's Rapidserv. They've been in business for 50+ years. I might be wrong on this but I don't remember ever hearing a radio ad for them, most likely because their word-of-mouth advertising is exceptional.
This morning, I spoke with a person who owned a business right by Val's. This entrepreneur told me that they "piggyback off of Val's", telling callers that they're right next to Val's.
The point is this: Val's has 100% name recognition and the best fries in Minnesota. This translates to politics. If you've got a great reputation and a fantastic product to sell, you'll win if you work hard. That's where Republicans are at right now.
Posted Wednesday, April 18, 2018 1:13 PM
No comments.
Otto lawsuit fails in Minnesota Supreme Court, too
Becky Otto's "capricious" lawsuit suffered a final defeat today when the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled against her . In their ruling, the Court wrote that "The Constitution ... 'does not expressly detail the duties of the constitutional executive officers' of state government and are instead 'prescribed by law.'"
If that sounds familiar, you've been reading what I've written on the subject. In February, 2016, I wrote " Article V of Minnesota's Constitution talks about the executive branch of state government. Specifically, it says 'The executive department consists of a governor, lieutenant governor, secretary of state, auditor, and attorney general, who shall be chosen by the electors of the state. The governor and lieutenant governor shall be chosen jointly by a single vote applying to both offices in a manner prescribed by law.' Nowhere in Article V, Section 1 does it outline the duties of the State Auditor. That's properly left up to the legislature and governor to determine through state statutes. "
Had Ms. Otto listened to me then, she would've saved Minnesota taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees. Sarah Anderson, the chairwoman of the State Government Finance Committee, said she was not surprised by the court's unanimous ruling .
Rather than conceding defeat, Otto issued a non sequitur statement, saying "The Supreme Court has now made clear that the State Auditor has authority and responsibility over county finances, including the authority to conduct additional examinations of a county following a private CPA firm audit, and that the counties are responsible for the costs." It's an odd statement considering the fact that nobody questioned whether the OSA had the authority to audit counties.
The fact that it was a unanimous ruling against Mrs. Otto says that it's quite the public spanking for her. This should get every taxpayer upset :
Republican lawmakers have criticized Otto's use of taxpayer money to fight the law. A tally last year showed her legal bills at over $250,000 .
Posted Wednesday, April 18, 2018 1:57 PM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 18-Apr-18 03:44 PM
$250k + of taxpayer money was used to fight a lawsuit she knew she was going to lose and lost it in the most friendliest of courts (well to liberals that is) and the dimwit still won't admit defeat? I still scratch my head wondering how someone who isn't qualified to even hold the position keeps getting elected to the position especially when she has done such a terrible job.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 18-Apr-18 05:15 PM
I'm voting for Pam Myhra for auditor. I've met her when she was in the House. She's an exceptionally smart lady & she isn't stupid enough to file a lawsuit that she'll lose unanimously in what you rightly called the friendliest court to the DFL east of the 9th Circuit.
A closer look at 2018: What wave?
Julie Kelly's article for the Federalist demolishes the Democrats' chanting point that it's a matter of when, not if, Democrats retake the US House of Representatives.
Digging into recent polling reveals some glaring weaknesses for Democrats. These aren't insignificant weaknesses. They're game-changing weaknesses. For instance, Kelly reports that "there is no 'enthusiasm gap' for Democrats. In fact, Republicans now seem more motivated to vote in November: 86 percent of Republicans say they are absolutely or certain to vote this fall, compared to 81 percent of Democrats."
That's the first time I've read that this cycle. If that holds, Democrats won't retake the House. On the Senate side, that might indicate a red wave of historic proportions. Prior to this, I've been predicting Republicans gaining 4-5 seats net in the Senate. If the enthusiasm gap disappears, Republicans might have a big red wave staring at them. Instead of just flipping seats in West Virginia, Missouri, North Dakota, Indiana and Montana, the GOP might flip Florida, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, too.
The bad news for Democrats continues:
While white college graduates favor Democrats by nine points, non-college whites prefer a Republican congressional candidate by nearly 30 points , devastating news about a core constituency of the Democratic Party going forward.
This sums my thoughts up precisely:
[Video no longer available]
A slim majority also said gun violence has no effect on whether they will vote Republican or Democrat. So it looks like the nonstop media exploitation of the Parkland school shooting did not work for the Left.
I don't see a wave, be it blue or red. There just isn't an appetite for a major change. The economy is getting stronger, which usually leads to not rocking the boat at the voting booth.
Posted Wednesday, April 18, 2018 3:21 PM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 18-Apr-18 03:47 PM
No one wants what the progressives are selling except for the 1/4 of the population that are hardcore progressives/socialists/communists and for them, nothing will be good enough until the rich are knocked down to the common man.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 18-Apr-18 05:06 PM
The underlying dynamics of this election cycle is that people are generally satisfied with the economy, they're giving Republicans credit for improving the economy (especially Trump) & they think Democrats are crazier than a shit-house rat on immigration.
The chances that Democrats winning back those voters is virtually nonexistent because they're in full resist mode.
