July 11-13, 2019

Jul 11 00:47 The Pledge of Divisiveness?
Jul 11 06:36 St. Louis Park part of a pattern
Jul 11 07:32 Tina Smith's partisanship

Jul 12 04:28 Immigration crisis is real
Jul 12 08:44 ICE raids are coming
Jul 12 11:18 2018 vs. 2020

Jul 13 09:25 Democrats heading off a cliff
Jul 13 15:48 The bloodbath officially starts

Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

The Pledge of Divisiveness?

This article highlights just how hair-brained the city of St. Louis Park, MN is. By now, the entire nation knows that St. Louis Park's soon-to-be-replaced City Council voted unanimously to stop reciting the Pledge of Allegiance at the start of their meetings. The confusion and uproar started when "Council member Anne Mavity, who sponsored the rules change, told KARE 11 that she didn't feel saying the pledge was necessary, especially for non-citizens."

Amidst the uproar, KARE11 reported that the citizens attending Monday's study session erupted in reciting the Pledge and chants of USA, USA!" Jon Lauritsen said the meeting "wasn't intended to accept public input." (Are you getting the impression that the City Council might be a bit out of touch? Don't fight that impression. The St. Louis Park City Council is attempting to bend over backwards in its attempt to be seen as a "welcoming community." These Democrats have started spinning as fact that the Pledge of Allegiance is polarizing. Read the Pledge for yourself, then determine whether it's divisive or whether the City Council is divisive:


That's the definition of divisiveness? Liberty and justice for all is divisive? Why would anyone think that the American flag is divisive? The Democrats on St. Louis Park's City Council are simply spinning things. No right-minded person thinks that anything about the Pledge is divisive. That doesn't mean that Ilhan Omar doesn't think it's divisive and probably racist, too. (St. Louis Park is part of Rep. Omar's district.)

Lawrence Jones and Rep. Dan Crenshaw, (R-TX), asked some great questions tonight:
[Video no longer available]
To the people of St. Louis Park, you have the opportunity to start cleaning out the sewer this November :

Contact
mayorjakespano@gmail.com
952.928.1448
Term ends: January 2020

Based on what we've seen thus far, this mayor and this city council is really out of touch with their constituents. When that happens, it's time to fire them. PERIOD.

Posted Thursday, July 11, 2019 12:47 AM

No comments.

St. Louis Park part of a pattern

By now, the entire industrialized world knows that the St. Louis Park City Council voted unanimously to discontinue to recite the Pledge of Allegiance before their meetings. That isn't news so I won't beat that horse. It's already dead. What hasn't been discussed is whether there's a bigger story that hasn't gotten the attention it deserves. In my opinion, there's another story that needs covering that's just as important.

Mayor Jake Spano got it right when he said "It feels to me like we may have missed a step there and if we had that conversation, we might have been able to hear from our community about how they felt about this action." First, let's dispense with the "may have." The City Council intentionally skipped that step. This was an ambush, pure and simple.

This isn't a new tactic. The DFL 'nonpartisans' in other cities have used the "inclusive and welcoming" argument before to push through unpopular resolutions and rule changes. When St. Cloud wanted to ambush Councilman Jeff Johnson with a resolution on refugee resettlement, the put the resolution on the agenda at the last minute, then arranged for special interests, including CAIR-MN, to speak when the microphones opened up. They made sure average citizens didn't have the chance for input.

When St. Louis Park voted to drop the Pledge, the public didn't have the opportunity to testify. Sounds familiar, doesn't it? When I led the Vote No campaign to sink the bonding referendum, I tirelessly told LFR readers that the ISD 742 School Board was trying to keep the referendum as low profile as possible. Stealth was its chief tactic. Sounds familiar, doesn't it? Are you sensing a pattern yet?

The DFL locally and Democrats nationally don't win arguments anymore. They don't bother trying, in fact. They call people who oppose them bigots or racists, instead. Once upon a time, Democrats consistently insisted on openness and fairness. Now, they insist on those things only when it helps them. There's nothing consistent about it anymore.

During this past Monday night's study session, the St. Louis Park City Council hoped to not to take public testimony :

According to WCCO news, the session was meant to re-address the council's unanimous decision to drop the Pledge of Allegiance from council meetings. The session was not meant to include public input , but that did not stop community members from interrupting.

People were already pissed with the Council's decision. They held this study session to plot a path forward. Their intention was to restrict or eliminate input from their constituents. What part of that sounds like a plan to resolve this outcry?

Passing this rules change without public input is what got the Council in trouble. Did they think that plotting political strategy without public input would help fix this problem? Only people who are totally out of touch would think that would fix things.

This looks like white gas getting poured on a raging fire:
[Video no longer available]
The pattern that's emerged is for Democrats to restrict public testimony and/or to accuse people who oppose them of being racists. Fortunately, the DFL hasn't called these patriots racists -- yet.

Posted Thursday, July 11, 2019 6:36 AM

No comments.

Tina Smith's partisanship

Saying that Sen. Tina Smith's intellectual heft isn't impressive is understatement. Sen. Snith's op-ed is filled with Schumer-styled partisanship. What isn't said is that Senate Democrats went all-in with the Resist Movement in slowing down the confirmation of President Trump's appointees. What isn't said is that Democrats did this to keep Obama appointees in key positions as long as possible.

Now, Sen. Smith has written this op-ed to complain that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said that the Senate is in the personnel business. Sen. Smith has a problem with that, saying "...McConnell has transformed the Senate into little more than the Trump administration's personnel office, the place where good ideas go to die."

Had Sen. Schumer, (D-NY), not tied the Senate up in nots with procedural gimmicks, President Trump's appointees might've gotten finished by now. That's why Senate Republicans changed the rules to limit debate on nominees. Sen. Smith doesn't mention that fact, though. Then, to pour white gas on the fire she just started, she wrote this:

What that means is that day in and day out, the work of the Senate has been reduced to voting to pack the courts with Trump-appointed, lifetime federal judges, as fast as we can. And because McConnell and the Republicans have dramatically reduced the time for debate on most of these judges -- from 30 hours to two -- they can pack the courts faster than ever before.

Democrats created this problem. Had Pelosi and Schumer not pledged to empty the rules toolbox to slow down President Trump's entire agenda, perhaps Sen. McConnell might be more willing to debate bills. Why should he take up far-left bills from the Democrat House knowing that they won't fix America's problems?

Then there's this howler:

Voting on these nominees is part of my job as a senator, and I take this responsibility seriously. I make time to research the background of each nominee, but the truth is, there's never any real debate.

That's BS. She was part of a press conference prior to President Trump nominating Justice Kavanaugh to fill the opening caused by Justice Kennedy's retirement. At that press conference, held hours before the nominee was known, a bunch of Democrats announced that they'd oppose whoever President Trump nominated. What part of that sounds like Sen. Smith and those other Democrats took "time to research" that nominee?

It's well-known that Smith was the vice president of external affairs for Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, South Dakota and North Dakota. Sen. Smith's decision to announce how she'd vote on the nominee wasn't the result of painstaking, exhaustive research. It was the result of Sen. Smith's far-left ideology on abortion on demand. Sen. Smith tries to keep that part of her history secret. Imagine that.

Sen. Smith is a waste of a Senate seat. She does whatever the Democrats tell her to do. That isn't just on major issues. Sen. Smith follows the Democrats' instructions to the letter on virtually every issue. In this video, Sen. Smith looks like the robot she's been since becoming part of the Democrats' minority:
[Video no longer available]
Like Al Franken before her, Sen. Smith has been a partisan hack. The thought of her working across the aisle on important issues is laughable. It's that simple.

Posted Thursday, July 11, 2019 7:32 AM

No comments.

Immigration crisis is real

This article is good news in the sense that things are improving. It's also proof that we shouldn't get too giddy just yet because, while there's been significant improvement, there's still plenty of need for improvement in the coming months.

According to CBS's reporting, "U.S. authorities apprehended more than 94,000 migrants in between ports of entry along the southern border, a precipitous drop from May, when more than 132,000 people, including about 84,000 families and over 11,000 unaccompanied minors, were apprehended. The total number of apprehensions that month was a 13-year high."

Apparently, Mexico's help has dropped illegal crossings. That's proof that President Trump's threatened tariffs helped break the logjam with Mexico. Without that tactic, it's doubtful that Mexico would've agreed to helping us as much as they've helped thus far. Still, monitoring the situation is imperative. Despite these attempts to shut the border off, Democrats don't want the laws enforced:


Beyond that, Pelosi is giving illegal immigrants advice on how to avoid ICE :

Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday offered advice to illegal immigrants seeking to avoid arrest and deportation by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers. 'An ICE deportation warrant is not the same as a search warrant. If that is the only document ICE brings to a home raid, agents do not have the legal right to enter a home. If ICE agents don't have a warrant signed by a judge, a person may refuse to open the door and let them in,' said Pelosi, reading from prepared remarks at her weekly press conference.

These raids will be on people who've sought asylum, have had their day in court and had their applications rejected. These won't be random raids in neighborhoods where illegal aliens congregate. These are people who applied for asylum and were rejected through impartial courts.

Matt Gaetz took Democrats to the woodshed on the Democrats' denial that there was a border crisis:
[Video no longer available]

Posted Friday, July 12, 2019 4:28 AM

No comments.

ICE raids are coming

Ken Cuccinelli didn't mince words when he was interviewed for CBS's Face the Nation about upcoming ICE raids. According to the report, Cuccinelli said "ICE agents are ready to just perform their mission which is to go and find and detain and then deport the approximately one million people who have final removal orders."

It's worth noting that families aren't separated. Instead, the entire family is subject to deportation. Also, Cuccinelli is the head of US Citizenship and Immigration Services, aka USCIS. Cuccinelli continued, saying:

"I'm just pointing out that the pool of those with final removal orders is enormous," Cuccinelli said. "It's important to note, here we are talking about ICE doing its job as if it's special. And really this should be going on on a rolling basis for ICE and they've been interfered with, effectively, and held up by the politics of Washington to a certain extent."

Nancy Pelosi, the chief lawmaker in the House, is doing her best to stop the laws she's written from getting enforced:

Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday offered advice to illegal immigrants seeking to avoid arrest and deportation by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers. 'An ICE deportation warrant is not the same as a search warrant. If that is the only document ICE brings to a home raid, agents do not have the legal right to enter a home. If ICE agents don't have a warrant signed by a judge, a person may refuse to open the door and let them in,' said Pelosi, reading from prepared remarks at her weekly press conference.

Last night, I spoke with Agnes Gibboney. Agnes is an Angel Mom living in California. Last night, she told me this about Pelosi:


Gee. Now that's a shocker. A weasel weaseling out of a meeting with a hurting mom. How affectionate, especially from someone who criticized President Trump for ripping families apart. Pelosi's sanctuary city laws have gotten people killed, aka eternal family separation. The next time I hear Pelosi complaining on that subject, I hope someone shoves Kate Steinle's death in Pelosi's mouth.

The other thing that the MSM should, but won't, do is ask her why she's criticizing law enforcement for enforcing the laws she's played a major part in passing. Does she think laws are meant to be written, not enforced?

Posted Friday, July 12, 2019 8:44 AM

No comments.

2018 vs. 2020

In 2018, Democrats were more energized than Republicans. Democrats might still be energized but I'm fairly certain that isn't translating into positive result. Before going farther, I'll stipulate that it's always wise to be skeptical when viewing private polling. The party sharing private polling always wants to send a message. That being said, that doesn't mean private polling is wrong. It simply means 'proceed with caution'.

With that out of the way, however, it appears as though 2020 is shaping up to be a quite different year than 2018. Cindy Axne is part of the 2018 freshman class. She represents Iowa's third district. According to the memo released with the polling, "Axne is surprisingly weak with her base; the named Republican challenger is earning 21% of registered Democrats."

If that's accurate, the DCCC should start with a strategy of ignoring this race because it's essentially over. When a Democrat's Republican opponent is drawing 1 in 5 Democrats away, that's the Democrat's doomsday. She won't come back from that. This is the other statistic that's ominous for Axne:

Axne's image among undecided voters is 9% fav - 40% unfavorable

Having a net -31 favorable/unfavorable rating as an incumbent is death waiting to happen. Finally, there's this:

Cindy Axne trails a named Republican candidate by six points, 48%-42% with 11% undecided.

Sayonara. Get out the jelly because Axne is toast.

Posted Friday, July 12, 2019 11:18 AM

No comments.

Democrats heading off a cliff

When it comes to analyzing election cycles, Newt Gingrich has excelled for more than a generation. When he writes an article that talks about a looming Trump landslide, I listen. Speaker Gingrich's article cites 5 things that point to a Trump re-election landslide: "economy, stature, patriotism, issue insanity, and progress on health issues." Speaker Gingrich starts with the booming economy.

Gingrich notes that the "lowest African American and Latino unemployment rates recorded in history are beginning to create approval for Trump in those communities that no Republican in modern times has been able to do. The rise in manufacturing jobs and salaries are becoming advantages for President Trump. Meanwhile, the Democrats are campaigning on the economy as though they were in another country. Faced with continuous job and wage growth, it is hard to make a compelling case against the Trump economy."

Meanwhile, the Democrats' presidential candidates campaign like we're living in a country titled Soupline America. They don't believe their own words. It's just that they know that admitting that things are going pretty well pretty much dooms their campaigns while the leaders of the Resist Movement simmer as the Trump administration wins another fight. Gingrich notes that President Trump's economy is the underpinning for everything else.

Issue insanity is beginning to erode the Democrats.

In 1972, McGovern was an outlier. He clearly represented the radical wing of the Democratic Party. It was relatively easy for most Democrats to say, 'I am not him.' At the same time, President Nixon, scarred by losing in 1960 and 1962 and having won a very narrow election in 1968, kept Republican resources focused on his re-election and failed to help congressional Republicans. The result was the largest presidential popular vote percentage in modern history (60.7 percent) for the Republican president, while Republicans lost two Senate seats and only gained 12 house seats.

Today is dramatically worse for Democrats than in 1972. Instead of having one likable but wacky left-wing radical, every single candidate in the second debate raised his or her hand for positions that are simply unacceptable to most Americans. If McGovern could be separated out as "the radical" almost 50 years ago, look where we are today. Every plausible nominee has radical positions - and the House and Senate Democrats are voting for radical positions on issue after issue. Furthermore, President Trump has learned the cost of a left-wing Democratic Speaker and will be spending resources to help Kevin McCarthy of California become speaker.

AOC is everything except an official part of the Trump campaign. While she talks about concentration camps, Americans roll their eyes in disbelief. It isn't that they think that everything is fine at these detention centers. It's that they don't believe Democrats' claims of forcing women to drink from a toilet.

Further, the American people are looking at that situation while wondering why Democrats haven't worked with President Trump to fix a truly broken immigration system. If there is divided government, the people expect the different parties to work together and fix things. While President Trump offers reasonable proposals, AOC proposes to get rid of ICE, then the Department of Homeland Security and Rashida Tlaib accuses CBP of major human rights violations.
[Video no longer available]
I've said for several months that the biggest thing that Republicans have going for them is the Democrats' nuttiness. It isn't just that Democrats are wrong on the issues. It's that they're crazier than a shithouse rat. We know that Democrats are nuts when AOC accuses Nancy Pelosi of being a racist, then denies that she called the Democrat leader a racist several hours later.

Meanwhile, Democrats criticize the Trump administration for enforcing the laws:
[Video no longer available]
Democrats have become the party that doesn't believe in enforcing existing laws. To hear AOC talk about it, you'd swear that the people of law enforcement are Nazis. That's pretty nuts. That's why Democrats, if they don't grow a spine and stand up to AOC's Squad, will get their butts handed to them in November, 2020.

Posted Saturday, July 13, 2019 9:25 AM

No comments.

The bloodbath officially starts

Speaker Pelosi has done her best to keep the turmoil within her conference a private matter. After reading this article , I'd say that train has officially left the station. This started when Pelosi tried putting AOC in her place. That didn't sit well with the uppity socialist, who insinuated that Pelosi is a racist.

Once that happened, it was just a matter of time before this went nuclear. When Justice Democrats announced that they were primarying members of the Congressional Black Caucus , aka CBC, it was just a matter of time before the retaliation started. There's no pretending that there's much goodwill left between the 2 warring factions. This isn't just politics anymore. It's personal now. Here's why it's personal:

Justice Democrats is backing primary challengers to eight-term Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas), a Hispanic Caucus member, and 10-term Rep. Wm. Lacy Clay (D-Mo.), a member of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC). The insurgent group also made noise this year about challenging Democratic Caucus Chairman Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), a CBC member seen as the heir apparent to Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

And CBC leaders are fretting that Justice Democrats may target other black lawmakers in the coming weeks and months, including Reps. Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.), Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio), Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) and Anthony Brown (D-Md.). Brown said the group has been making calls in his district, actively trying to recruit a challenger to run against him - something that Justice Democrats denies.

That's caused the CBC to retaliate:

In an interview with the Daily News, Meeks fumed over Ocasio-Cortez's recent racial beef with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and pushed back against her left-wing allies at Justice Democrats for openly backing insurgent candidates trying to unseat members of the Congressional Black Caucus. He also said the CBC can play the same game.

'Primaries go two ways," Meeks said when asked whether his wing of the party would consider challenging progressive members next year, including Ocasio-Cortez. 'If someone picks a fight with somebody else, you fight back. That's what my parents told me.'

It's going to get nastier than this. Check this out:

'They are going after the wrong target. Instead of fighting Republicans and defeating Trump and holding on to our majority, they find it convenient to go after their own, which is to me a bunch of B.S.,' Clay told The Hill.

I love this. I'm not alone:
[Video no longer available]
I'll sell the tickets, Ben. Who pops the popcorn? This is gonna get good.

Posted Saturday, July 13, 2019 3:48 PM

No comments.

Popular posts from this blog

January 19-20, 2012

Image
Jan 19 02:57 Minnesota Majority report an indictment against Minnesota's election integrity Jan 19 03:41 Ron Paul's Logic Jan 19 08:08 Newt thrives despite Mitt's hatchet job efforts Jan 19 09:19 Potential Game-Changer: Perry dropping out this am Jan 20 05:12 Newt takes Sen. Santorum to proverbial woodshed Jan 20 00:56 ABC, CNN, crawl into bed with National Enquirer Jan 20 04:00 Child Care small businesses file federal lawsuit Jan 20 04:41 Mitt's biggest policy blunder Jan 20 18:58 Gingrich, Reagan re-united Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Newt takes Sen. Santorum to proverbial woodshed Rick Santorum was really feeling it Thursday night. Then he said something that's certain to cause him pain this morning. Here's what he said that got him in trouble: SANTORUM: But you also have to admit that this freshman congressman who wasn't supposed to win a race came and did something you never did, which is blew the li...
Read more

March 21-24, 2016

Image
Mar 21 01:28 SCSU's budget cuts? Mar 21 02:29 When will the Range change? Mar 21 08:54 DFL's Marty in charge of environment Mar 21 11:45 OLA report, DFL & Meyer Associates Mar 23 12:48 Liberals' definition of moderate Mar 23 14:37 DFL activists: Government is racist Mar 24 08:59 IRRRB: Revamping vs. scrapping Prior Months: Jan Feb Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 SCSU's budget cuts? Cuts in Athletics at SCSU - Will it Really Save Money? by Silence Dogood With a $6,000,000 "structural deficit" and the need to "rebuild reserves by at least $3 million," SCSU has a $9,000,000 hole in its' FY17 budget. It doesn't take a Noble Prize in economics to figure out that reductions in expenditures (i.e., cuts) are going to be made at SCSU. On the Wednesday before Spring Break, SCSU President Dr. Earl H. Potter sent an email to the campus community announcing cuts to the athlet...
Read more

October 31, 2007

Oct 31 01:01 Media Matter's Alter Ego? Oct 31 03:32 Iraqi Civilian Casualties Dropping Oct 31 10:52 Hillary's Panderfest Blows Up in Her Face Oct 31 13:15 Brod, Emmer Call For Investigation of Mark Ritchie Oct 31 19:43 Ritchie's 'Episode' a Tempest in a Teapot? Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Prior Years: 2006 Media Matter's Alter Ego? One Media Matters-like organization is already too many. It appears as though there's another liberal apologist blog out there. Their name is News Hounds . The post that caught my attention dealt with last weekend's interview of Justin and Darryl Sharraltt on Hannity's America. To say that their post didn't attempt to refute Justin's story is understatement. In fact, they jump right into criticizing Mr. Hannity: Last night's (October 27th) Hannity's America was a strange magazine format which combined stories about mediums and haunted houses...
Read more