August 9-12, 2017
Aug 09 01:45 Dispelling a misconception Aug 09 02:33 Is Minnesota turning red? Aug 09 05:55 Carol Lewis' pass-the-buck-shuffle Aug 09 08:43 Erin Murphy's doomed candidacy Aug 10 08:46 Rahm Emanuel vs. Jeff Sessions Aug 11 02:36 TakeAction Minnesota's manipulations Aug 11 10:26 Clueless Democrats and 2018 Aug 11 15:19 Progressive activists' tactics history Aug 12 15:52 Keith Ellison, Kim Jung Un's defender
Prior Months: Jan Feb ~ May Jun Jul
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Dispelling a misconception
Last night, St. Cloud City Councilmember George Hontos made a motion "for a study session on refugee resettlement." When St. Cloud City Council President Carol Lewis voted against the motion, she said that the subject was "a federal issue, it may have some state implications, but we really have nothing we can say."
A loyal reader of LFR contacted me to correct Ms. Lewis' information. According to this loyal reader of LFR, the federal statute that deals with the Refugee Act of 1980, which "created The Federal Refugee Resettlement Program", is quite specific. 8 U.S.C. § 1522(a)(2)(A) states that "The Director and the Federal agency administering subsection (b)(1), shall consult regularly (not less often than quarterly) with State and local governments and private nonprofit voluntary agencies concerning the sponsorship process and the intended distribution of refugees among the States and localities before their placement in those States and localities."
Further, the statute states that "The Director shall develop and implement, in consultation with representatives of voluntary agencies and State and local governments , policies and strategies for the placement and resettlement of refugees within the United States."
In summation, the State Department is required to regularly consult with local governments prior to the resettlement of refugees. Based on what the federal government and county and city governments have shared with the public, those consultations haven't happened.
Let's be clear, though. It's entirely possible that the State Department has consulted with the various NPOs about the program. That's possible because the various levels of government have been as transparent as a brick wall.
Later in the statute, it says "Such policies and strategies, to the extent practicable and except under such unusual circumstances as the Director may recognize, shall- provide for a mechanism whereby representatives of local affiliates of voluntary agencies regularly (not less often than quarterly) meet with representatives of State and local governments to plan and coordinate in advance of their arrival the appropriate placement of refugees among the various States and localities, and
(iii) take into account-
(I) the proportion of refugees and comparable entrants in the population in the area,
(II) the availability of employment opportunities, affordable housing, and public and private resources (including educational, health care, and mental health services) for refugees in the area,"
In other words, municipal and county governments and school boards must meet with the federal government and put together a plan that doesn't overtax "educational, health care, and mental health services." Additionally, this plan must be in place prior to the first refugee is resettled in a city.
The city of St. Cloud hasn't shared any information on these required plans. That's possibly because there isn't a plan. That's possibly because they're just being exceptionally secretive. At this point, we don't have proof that a plan was ever put in place. This video (from Tennessee) seems to indicate that the federal government isn't taking their obligations seriously:
Posted Wednesday, August 9, 2017 1:45 AM
No comments.
Is Minnesota turning red?
Ed Morrissey is the latest Minnesotan to ask the question about whether Minnesota is turning red . Prior to Ed asking that timeless question, Barry Casselman asked that question in his Weekly Standard article .
Ed and Barry both note that Tim Pawlenty is the last Republican to win statewide office in Minnesota, with Ed noting that Hillary's near-defeat shouldn't be attributed to Trump's strong performance as much as it should be attributed to Hillary's poor performance. Ed highlighted the fact that "Trump did manage to outscore Mitt Romney's 2012 results, but only by 2,000 votes. Clinton, on the other hand, dropped nearly 180,000 votes from Barack Obama's 2012 total. That lack of enthusiasm for Clinton, and the poor GOTV effort on the ground in the state, is what nearly cost her the election."
What neither gentleman wrote about was the strength of the Republicans' legislative victories in 2016. In my opinion, that's missing a key data point. Just look through the margins in the State Senate races . Republicans flipped SD-1 and SD-2 in northwestern Minnesota, SD-5 on the Iron Range, SD-17 near Willmar, SD-20 in south central Minnesota. Most of those seats were won by double-digit margins. Of the Republicans winning re-election, most won by high double-digit margins. On the House side, Republicans won by impressive margins .
The point isn't that President Trump didn't win. It's that legislative candidates outperformed President Trump by a significant margin throughout the state. Further, DFL incumbent Tim Walz almost got defeated in CD-1. The race was so close that Walz opted to run for governor rather than accept a rematch with Republican Jim Hagedorn.
Walz is considered the DFL frontrunner for governor. Speculation is that the DFL might not endorse a candidate this year. If there's a 3-, 4- or 5-way primary, which is a distinct possibility, the winner will limp out of the primary to face a hungry Republican Party and a well-rested, respected candidate.
Ed ends his post by saying "Before we get around to declaring the state ready to go red, perhaps the GOP can win one statewide office first. Casselman suggests that Pawlenty might be enticed to run again for his old office. That would be good news for the GOP, but we should wait to see whether any other Republican can crack that code - for the Senate, for secretary of state, auditor, etc. Until then : stay skeptical."
That's a fair point but I'm getting more confident that something historic is getting ready to happen with each passing election cycle. Don't forget that I was the only journalist that predicted Chip Cravaack's victory in 2010 and I'm the only journalist that predicted that Republicans would flip the Minnesota Senate.
In my opinion, Gov. Pawlenty's time has come and gone. There's little doubt that he'd do well in the suburbs but there's equally little doubt that he'd struggle in rural Minnesota. The traditional pick, if he runs, would be Kurt Daudt. The dark horse candidate I'd pick would be Amy Koch. They're both urban enough and well-known to win in the suburbs. They're both rural enough to win rural Minnesota by a big enough margin.
Posted Wednesday, August 9, 2017 3:05 AM
Comment 1 by Rex Newman at 09-Aug-17 08:12 PM
T-Paw runs like a Republican but governs like a Democrat.
Which suggests to me that he should run against A-Klo.
Carol Lewis' pass-the-buck-shuffle
Monday night, Councilman George Hontos made a motion to spend time during the City Council's study session talking about the economic impact refugee resettlement has had and will have on St. Cloud. Hontos, Jeff Johnson and Dave Masters voted in favor of the motion. Jeff Goerger, Steve Laraway, City Council President Carol Lewis and John Libert voted against Hontos' motion.
After the session, Lewis said "That's a federal issue, it may have some state implications, but we really have nothing we can say." Tuesday night, a loyal reader of LFR sent an email to the entire city council, including Ms. Lewis. This reader's email said (in part) "Local governments definitely have a role in the process. There is a process that seems to have been overlooked which was put in place to give local people rights/ a say, and it appears that our local governing body may be ignoring the process."
Ms. Lewis replied (emphasis added) "As I have told others who have sent me the same law, you are once again reading the law backwards . It is the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT that needs to establish a process for us to comment. You need to talk to Tom Emmer about this, not the City of Saint Cloud."
That's what I'd call the Carol Lewis pass-the-buck-shuffle. First, Lewis insists that the reader can't possibly know what the law means. Next, Lewis insists that the federal government has the ability to restrict comments on the program, essentially limiting public commentary. That's backwards thinking. Since when do citizens have to ask the federal government's permission to give their opinion on federal programs that hit local taxpayers' wallets?
Finally, Ms. Lewis implied that these uppity peasants shouldn't pester her but should bother our congressman instead. The statute clearly defines roles for the federal, state and local governments:
(2)(A) The Director and the Federal agency administering subsection (b)(1), shall consult regularly (not less often than quarterly) with State and local governments and private nonprofit voluntary agencies concerning the sponsorship process and the intended distribution of refugees among the States and localities before their placement in those States and localities.
(B) The Director shall develop and implement, in consultation with representatives of voluntary agencies and State and local governments, policies and strategies for the placement and resettlement of refugees within the United States.
(C) Such policies and strategies, to the extent practicable and except under such unusual circumstances as the Director may recognize, shall-
(i) insure that a refugee is not initially placed or resettled in an area highly impacted (as determined under regulations prescribed by the Director after consultation with such agencies and governments) by the presence of refugees or comparable populations unless the refugee has a spouse, parent, sibling, son, or daughter residing in that area,
(ii) provide for a mechanism whereby representatives of local affiliates of voluntary agencies regularly (not less often than quarterly) meet with representatives of State and local governments to plan and coordinate in advance of their arrival the appropriate placement of refugees among the various States and localities;
Notice that the first sentence highlighted here says that "the Federal agency administering subsection (b)(1), shall consult regularly (not less often than quarterly) with State and local governments and private nonprofit voluntary agencies concerning the sponsorship process and the intended distribution of refugees among the States and localities before their placement in those States and localities." According to Dictionary.com, the definition of consult is "to seek advice or information from; ask guidance from."
Notice that in (C)(ii), it says that the Director "shall provide for a mechanism whereby representatives of local affiliates" of NPOs "meet with representatives of state and local governments to plan and coordinate in advance of [the refugees'] arrival the appropriate placement of refugees among the various States and localities;" That sounds like local governments have a pretty substantial role to play in this process.
Finally, let's highlight that Ms. Lewis says people should contact Congressman Emmer on these issues whereas the statute says that the federal government should work with local governments in a collaborative effort.
It's clear that the city council hasn't lived up to its responsibilities. Let's hope voters remember that the next time the 4 no votes are up for re-election.
Posted Wednesday, August 9, 2017 5:55 AM
No comments.
Erin Murphy's doomed candidacy
Erin Murphy was one of the first declared DFL candidates. Based on this article , it appears as though she's all but officially dead in the water.
First, it's worth noting that "Murphy criticizes capitalist models of health care, saying that a for-profit model of any part of the health care system is bad for Americans." It isn't surprising to read that "Murphy also supports Sen. Bernie Sanders' (I-VT) plan for Medicare for all across the United States." From a DFL primary convention perspective, this isn't a foolish strategy. She's essentially just rolled out the red carpet for Bernie Sanders' voters. Let's remember that Sen. Sanders defeated Hillary Clinton by a 61%-38% margin in Minnesota's caucuses.
This tends to support the belief that DFL voters are further left than a decade ago and significantly further left than during the Perpich era. But I digress.
Later in the article, it quotes her as saying "Let's start by making MinnesotaCare an option available to everyone. Like Medicare, it's tested, trusted, and affordable coverage, available everywhere in Minnesota." The bad news for Murphy is that she'd be history if she made it to a general election. Here's why:
NPR reported in May 2016 that expanding Medicare coverage to cover everyone in the United States would add $18 trillion to the national debt in just the next ten years. The current national debt is just under $20 trillion.
Murphy's strategy appears to be to win the endorsement by winning over Sen. Sanders' supporters. It likely also means she's going hard left in the general election, too. Here's what she said on her campaign website :
But for too many that's not their reality. Too many of our neighbors are feeling forgotten, working harder than ever just to survive. Too many are at risk of falling further behind, and too many are not getting the opportunities they need to make progress.
That sounds like a repeat of Bernie Sanders' or Elizabeth Warren's stump speech.
Potentially, this sets up an interesting fight for the DFL endorsement for governor. Tim Walz appears to be running as a Blue Dog Democrat. That's probably wise because I don't think he can convince Sanders voters that he's one of them. Murphy, however, appears to be running as the Bernie Sanders candidate. Here's the question that we don't have the answer to: will this split the DFL? Here's another question: will the Iron Range finally reject a DFL gubernatorial candidate? At this point, that's a distinct possibility if Rep. Murphy is the DFL's candidate.
Posted Wednesday, August 9, 2017 8:43 AM
No comments.
Rahm Emanuel vs. Jeff Sessions
When the Trump administration announced that they'd start cracking down on sanctuary cities, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel openly stated that he'd challenge the Trump administration's law enforcement policies. Early in his op-ed, Newt Gingrich wrote "On July 25, Attorney General Jeff Sessions asked all cities, states, and territories applying for a very specific federal law enforcement grant to adhere to three new, very reasonable measures: & To openly communicate with the Department of Homeland Security; to allow DHS officers to meet with locally-held prisoners who live in the country illegally and have been arrested for non-immigration related crimes; and to give the Department 48 hours' notice before releasing such prisoners."
Newt's right. These requirements are reasonable and easy to measure in terms of effectiveness. Later in his op-ed, Gingrich wrote about why sanctuary cities pose such a danger, saying "The DEA reported that the foundation of these cartels is the network of people who run the drug trade infrastructure inside U.S. borders. Specifically, the DEA said, 'Actual members of Mexican TCOs are usually sent to important U.S. hub cities to manage stash houses containing drug shipments and bulk cash drug proceeds.'"
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out where these cartels will establish their headquarters:
Now, if you led an international drug cartel, would you set up shop in a city where your undocumented gang members would be deported upon arrest or one like Chicago, where local police looked the other way once you made bail? Mayor Emanuel would like us to believe that he is concerned about the safety of his citizens, but his lawsuit is nothing more than a political charade. He is literally welcoming more criminals to the streets of Chicago.
Appearing on Fox & Friends, Steve Cortes said that cities like Chicago shouldn't be called sanctuary cities:
Here's how Jeff Sessions replied to Mayor Emanuel:
"They have demonstrated an open hostility to enforcing laws designed to protect law enforcement, Federal, state, and local, and reduce crime, and instead have adopted an official policy of protecting criminal aliens who prey on their own residents: No amount of federal taxpayer dollars will help a city that refuses to help its own residents ," Sessions said.
When voter fraud first became a high profile issue, Democrats insisted that it didn't exist. I coined the phrase that "it's impossible to find what you refuse to look for." That phrase fits perfectly with sanctuary cities, which Mr. Cortes says should be called renegade cities. Cortes said "it's not sanctuary for the victims of these crimes, it's not sanctuary for the cops who have to deal with known criminals: I'd rather call them renegade cities."
Emanuel is likely to win the lawsuit that he filed because the money is from President Obama's budget. Next year, though, it will be a totally different story because the grants will be governed by the restrictions passed by Republicans. In the end, Rahm Emanuel will win Round 1. Jeff Sessions and the Trump administration will win the rest of the rounds.
Posted Thursday, August 10, 2017 8:46 AM
No comments.
TakeAction Minnesota's manipulations
Jason Lewis isn't your typical politician. First, he isn't afraid to highlight other people's bad behavior . When TakeAction Minnesota, aka TAM, sent protesters to his house, Lewis replied, saying "They don't want dialogue or to let other constituents speak, they want to turn them into a spectacle. I have responsibility to represent all my constituents. I don't have to hold a spectacle for my partisan political opponents."
TakeAction Minnesota wasn't established to bring civic-minded people together. It was put together by hyperpartisan progressives to shout down conservatives and criticize center-right policies. Listening isn't TAM's strong suit. Keeping an open mind isn't, either. People that insist that organizations like TAM and MoveOn.org are just interested in speaking to their congressman or senators are lying. More often than not, the goal is to produce videos that go viral.
Ask yourself this: would you attend a townhall meeting if you knew partisan activists wanted to use the meetings to create campaign ads? I definitely wouldn't participate in such a kangaroo court. CBS reported that lines extended out of the meeting hall and into the parking lot:
That doesn't sound like a grassroots event. That sounds like a partisan ambush. Before you think that's unprecedented, think again :
Dear Reps. Benson, Ruud, Winkler, Peterson and Simon and Sens. Bonoff, Rest and Pappas,
Thank you for participating in the Plymouth town hall meeting this Thursday. I anticipate there will be additional members participating but have so far not yet been notified. Meeting details are listed below and directions from the Capitol are attached.
Plymouth Town Hall Meeting
Thursday, Feb. 26 7:00 pm
Plymouth City Hall
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
I have also attached the list of people who have signed up to testify as of 9 a.m. this morning. Because we will be meeting for approximately 2 hrs., we will not be able to hear from everyone. (140 have submitted their names.) We will be limiting testimony to 2 minutes and encouraging individuals to submit their comments in writing or online. If there are any individuals listed who you think would provide particularly compelling testimony, please let me know . We will be working to hear from a variety of individuals covering a wide range of topics. Please contact me with any additional questions or suggestions.
Then there's this :
From: Gene Pelowski [mailto:Rep.Gene.Pelowski@house.mn]
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:13 AM
We would ask you to focus your comments on the impact of the Governor's budget including what is the harm to your area of government or program. Please be as precise as possible using facts such as number of lay offs, increases in property taxes, cuts in services, increases in tuition, elimination of programs.
In other words, the DFL is skilled at manipulating the media to achieve its political goals. If that means picking only the saddest stories to make it sound like there's a crisis, that's what they'll do. Throughout the years, the DFL have been firm believers in Rahm Emanuel's saying :
You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.
TakeAction Minnesota is an extremist organization. I applaud Jason Lewis for not participating in their manipulations.
Originally posted Friday, August 11, 2017, revised 11-Sep 2:25 AM
No comments.
Clueless Democrats and 2018
Since Hillary's defeat, Democrats have tried proving that they've closed the enthusiasm gap with Republicans. If I got $100 each time I saw or read an article that predicted Democratic victories in special elections that didn't happen, I'd have a fat retirement account. This article highlights how little Democrats understand about the people they'd like to represent.
The article starts by saying "Democrats have been given an enviable political landscape, with an opposition president at a historically low approval rating and scandal besetting his White House. But they risk potentially blowing it due to a lack of central leadership, diffuse organizational structures and disputes over tactics and issues." In the next paragraph, the writer writes that "That's the fear that some top officials harbor as they gear up for the 2018 elections: that the party has yet to learn its lessons from the 2016 cycle; that a horde of newly organized political groups are drawing money away from party infrastructure; and that a lack of a singular leader has complicated the need for a centralized message."
Actually, what's hurting Democrats the most is the lack of an appealing message. It isn't that Democrats didn't get their message out. It's that their message isn't appealing. I've argued that Democrats have gone too far pandering to the environmental activist wing of their party that they've alienated main street. Here's something that illustrates that point:
As if you didn't have your fill of liberal tomfoolery this week, check out what the Dayton administration is up to over at the Pollution Control Agency.
This summer, they are spending time and taxpayer resources shaming you, the taxpayer, into dumb and impractical ideas to reduce your carbon footprint this summer, such as these ideas for hosting:
BYOP (bring your own plate)
Provide reusable or compostable plates, cups, silverware and linens, or ask your guests to help contribute dishware! Using reusable and washable items is always the best choice whenever feasible.
Drink up
If you provide separate recycling containers for empty cans and bottles, you can go one step further by buying bulk-size containers and asking guests to bring reusable cups or mugs.
You've got mail
Elect to email invitations when possible to reduce paper waste. It's also a great idea to tell your guests in the invitation to bring their own food for the potluck or dishware, or at least to share how sustainability is a goal of your event!
Pass the ketchup
Buy condiments in bulk to avoid those pesky individual wrappers. Buying food in bulk is an easy way to create less packaging as well!
Bring a doggy bag
Remind guests to bring reusable containers so they can take leftovers home. Otherwise, you can gather the leftover food and take it to a compost drop-off site.
Normal people don't think like this. The more often that the DFL puts this stupidity out there, the more likely it is that they'll keep losing elections. The key driving factor in the Democrats' defeats isn't the enthusiasm gap. It's the 'These people are nuts' gap. Here's a perfect example of the Democrats' foolishness:
The Left has once again peed into the wind and declared it a refreshing rain shower.
This week, protesters from the infamous Take Action Minnesota showed up on the doorstep of Congressman Jason Lewis' private home to protest, taking full credit for their despicable actions by livestreaming the event and later taking victory laps on social media, much less refusing to apologize for trespassing on his private property (yes, a concept foreign to these people) and disturbing his and his neighbors right to the peaceful enjoyment of their property.
The paid professional leading the protest exhorted the assembled trespassers to disturb the congressman's family and neighbors. "We are here to make sure the Congressman Lewis' neighbors know exactly why we are here. So let me hear you cheer, let me hear you cheer so loud that the entire community here will hear us and know exactly why we are here," she yelled. The trespassers left the neighborhood chanting "We'll be back."
If you see TakeAction Minnesota's logo, run:
Let me rephrase that. If you see TakeAction Minnesota activists in your neighborhood, don't run. Run fast .
If Democrats don't start acting like normal people, they'll keep losing.
Posted Friday, August 11, 2017 10:26 AM
No comments.
Progressive activists' tactics history
TakeAction Minnesota is trying to spin this disaster as a good faith effort to talk about the issues. That's a lie. In fact, when TakeAction Minnesota trespassed onto Jason Lewis' private home , they used a tactic that Democrat fringe groups have used before.
Alpha News wrote "A group of about 15 protesters from a progressive advocacy group called TakeAction MN planted themselves on Lewis' front steps with a goal of making their presence known to the neighborhood at large. They were there accusing Lewis of stripping away Medicaid, and claiming that 'healthcare is a human right. We are here to make sure the Congressman Lewis' neighbors know exactly why we are here,' said a woman leading the demonstration. 'So let me hear you cheer, let me hear you cheer so loud that the entire community here will hear us and know exactly why we are here.'"
It isn't difficult to paint Democrats as extremists. Here's why it isn't:
One of Lewis' challengers, Rosemount high school teacher and football coach Jeff Erdmann, remains quite skeptical of all of these claims, and sent some mixed messages out regarding the incident.
'TakeAction MN had a peaceful protest outside of Jason Lewis's residence. Jason's campaign doctored TakeAction's video and put that doctored video on his YouTube page, then posted about the incident on Facebook,' Erdmann's campaign wrote in a press release according to Blois Olson's Morning Take. 'The Erdmann campaign would never condone people protesting on a person's private residence.'"
It isn't difficult to paint Erdmann as a conspiracy theory fanatic. What proof does Erdman have that Lewis' "campaign doctored TakeAction's video" before posting it? If he doesn't have proof, then he should be ridiculed mercilessly for making that type of accusation.
Nina Easton's article highlights how similar TakeAction Minnesota's militant actions are to other Democratic fringe groups' actions:
Last Sunday, on a peaceful, sun-crisp afternoon, our toddler finally napping upstairs, my front yard exploded with 500 screaming, placard-waving strangers on a mission to intimidate my neighbor, Greg Baer. Baer is deputy general counsel for corporate law at Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500), a senior executive based in Washington, D.C. And that, in the minds of the organizers at the politically influential Service Employees International Union and a Chicago outfit called National Political Action, makes his family fair game.
Waving signs denouncing bank "greed," hordes of invaders poured out of 14 school buses, up Baer's steps, and onto his front porch. As bullhorns rattled with stories of debtor calls and foreclosed homes, Baer's teenage son Jack, alone in the house, locked himself in the bathroom. "When are they going to leave?" Jack pleaded when I called to check on him.
Compare that with what happened at Lewis' home:
"Suffice it to say it is more than a bit disturbing to get a call from your neighbor saying his daughters were afraid and called him to contact the police."
These aren't frustrated people trying to contact a politician about an important issue. They're people who didn't think twice about intimidating young women in their own homes. That isn't acceptable. That's what playground bullies do.
Posted Friday, August 11, 2017 3:19 PM
Comment 1 by JerryE9 at 12-Aug-17 09:19 AM
Even more ridiculous is that they are violating individual rights (not to mention common decency and the law) in service of a LIE. There are NO Medicaid cuts in the bill for which Lewis voted, or even under consideration by the GOP. And the bill did not pass in any form, so why protest now? In a sane world, these people would be netted and caged.
Keith Ellison, Kim Jung Un's defender
Keith Ellison still hasn't learned how to discipline himself. Frequently, when he gets in front of what he considers a friendly audience, Rep. Ellison let's fly with a foolish statement. Friday afternoon, Ellison said that North Korean leader Kim Jung Un was " acting more responsibly " than President Trump. Friday night, Rep. Ellison tried digging out of his self-built hole, saying "That was one of those I wish I'd not said. It's tailor-made for somebody to misuse."
Gee. How could anyone misuse a statement like that? Notice, though, that he didn't say that it was wrong for him to make that statement. Ellison's statement said "You have this guy making bellicose threats against somebody else who has very little to lose over there. Kim Jong Un - the world always thought he was not a responsible leader. Well, he's acting more responsible than this guy. The time for cranking up the antiwar machine is right now. If you don't want to be a deer in the headlights, start calling for diplomacy immediately."
Apparently, Rep. Ellison isn't too bright. Without a credible military threat as an option, diplomacy fails. The other world leader won't take you seriously. President Obama drew an imaginary red line in Syria. After Bashar al-Assad violated that red line, President Obama didn't follow through with his threat. After that, Syria deteriorated quickly.
This isn't complicated. If there's nothing to stop evildoers from doing evil, they'll continue doing evil. The only times that President Obama used force, he created chaos in the region. He didn't make matters better. He made them worse.
Later in the interview, Ellison said "I'd say he's being incredibly irresponsible and he's putting us in a situation where you could have an accidental launch. I mean, his rhetoric might make Kim Jong Un think that he needs to strike first. What we need is someone bringing calm to the situation, not spiking it."
Actually, Rep. Ellison, what's needed is someone who puts an end to this situation. Anything short of that is just kicking the proverbial can down the road, something that the Obama administration was good at.
Posted Saturday, August 12, 2017 3:52 PM
No comments.
