July 17-18, 2019
Jul 17 02:40 St. Louis Park votes: Pledge is inclusive again Jul 17 09:12 Tim Walz: "I don't do drama" Jul 17 10:18 Speaker Pelosi didn't dodge impeachment after all Jul 17 15:50 Rashida Tlaib's pity party Jul 17 17:56 House hands Trump a big win Jul 17 23:47 Yes, Mr. Friedman, Trump's gonna win again Jul 18 05:49 Was Trump's fight with the Squad purely impulsive? Jul 18 11:50 RNC Chair touts progress with women voters
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Prior Years:
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
St. Louis Park votes: Pledge is inclusive again
Last night, the Democrat politicians in St. Louis Park voted to restore the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance before City Council meetings. In so doing, the Council officially recognized that reciting the Pledge was patriotic and inclusive.
Actually, that isn't what they said. "At-Large Council Member Thom Miller, who introduced the amendment, said...the harassment from nonresidents was too much. "To be perfectly clear, I fully support the change we made in June to eliminate the Pledge of Allegiance from our standard meeting agenda." Nonetheless, he voted to restore the reciting of the Pledge. Did he just say that he's just another spineless politician? I think so.
What needs to be remembered is how this got started. This started with a terribly flawed process. No notice was given that this rule change was going to be voted on. In fact, citizens weren't allowed to testify on the issue. That being said, the process was intentional. The City Council intended for citizens to not be able to testify. The last thing they wanted was for a bunch of uppity peasants to raise a ruckus. Like Rep. Omar, the St. Louis Park City Council thinks that they're the citizens' betters.
They aren't the citizens' betters. They're just a bunch of arrogant politicians. Rep. Ryan Winkler, the House Majority Leader, is a total lightweight and a charlatan. He's from Golden Valley. In the summer of 2017, Rep. Winkler criticized the Supreme Court for its opinion on the Voting Rights Act, saying "VRA majority is four accomplices to race discrimination and one Uncle Thomas." When he was called on his usage of a nasty racist term, Winkler insisted that he didn't know that Uncle Thomas was a racist term. At the time, I did a little digging into Winkler's educational background. It turns out that Winkler graduated with a degree in History from Harvard. But I digress. Back to St. Louis Park.
The mayor, Jake Spano, missed the vote but issued a statement on the vote. He said that he wouldn't have supported the rule change. That's easy after the fact. Others were less diplomatic:
Ward 1 Council Member Margaret Rog echoed Miller's sentiments, stating the feedback she'd gotten from residents had been "thoughtful and respectful" but that the same could not be said for those not from the city. "We don't need to be at the epicenter of a manufactured standoff of what it means to be a good American," she said, directing her message to St. Louis Park residents. "This circus needs to end."
Stop making major decisions without asking for the citizens' input next time. Had the City Council invited testimony before they voted, it's likely they wouldn't have made this mistake. Anne Mavity spoke out, too:
Anne Mavity, the councilwoman who proposed the original measure, remained defiant -- even as she reversed her vote -- and addressed the council's critics. "I'm not sure that if you say the pledge three times a month instead of this two, you're more patriotic," Mavity said. "Or if you say it one time a month you're less patriotic. That makes no sense."
Defiant is exactly the right word. Mavity doesn't care about the uppity peasants. That's why she doesn't understand them.
This is a fight over retaining one of the richest institutions of the United States. What other pledge states as a national goal " liberty and justice for all "? In Somalia, Ilhan Omar's nation of origin, I'm betting that they'd be satisfied with liberty and justice once in awhile. By stating that each person is committed to liberty and justice for all, people are stating emphatically that our national goal soars high above our nation.
That's why people want to come here. Yes, they enjoy the economic mobility, too, but most people fleeing their nations are fleeing nations where the laws are determined by dictators on a minute-by-minute basis.
That's why it's beyond odd that people want to eliminate the Pledge.
Posted Wednesday, July 17, 2019 2:40 AM
No comments.
Tim Walz: "I don't do drama"
In his attempt to downplay the full-fledged crisis within the Minnesota Department of Health and Human
When the top 3 people in the biggest department in the state resign within a week, there's drama. When those people resign without warning and without giving anyone a heads-up, that's major drama. It's time for Gov. Walz to act like he gave a damn. Thus far, it's looked like he's been totally disinterested. That's certainly the picture that he's given towards DHS Inspector General Carolyn Ham. Saying that House Minority Leader Kurt Daudt was upset is understatement. Here's what he said about Ham:
Four months went by when she drew a paycheck where no investigation happened. That's the problem. No one was investigating. Nobody cared. And she just kept drawing a paycheck.
When you combine "pervasive fraud" with these resignations, it's safe to say that major changes need to get made. At their press availability yesterday, Daudt, Rep. Mary Franson and Sen. Michelle Benson said that someone from the private sector should be brought in to provide a new direction for the Department.
In his resignation letter, Commissioner Lourey said that there was a need for "new leadership". That's understatement. During their press availability, Sen. Benson criticized the Department:
[Video no longer available]
Sen. Benson said "It has failed over and over and over again. Taxpayer money is wasted and people are hurt and it's time for the Governor to grab the leadership and move this to a better place. And that's all I want."
It's apparent from Sen. Benson and others that Human Services wasn't well-run. Based on Sen. Benson's statements at Monday's press availability, it isn't difficult to think that too many of the people there were arrogant and/or distant. That attitude must immediately change. Period.
Gov. Walz better start doing drama because he's got a major crisis on his hands, despite the Twin Cities media's attempts to spin it otherwise. When Jim Nobles' investigation says that they found widespread fraud, especially in the child care programs, rest assured that he's got plenty of proof to support that statement. A politician's instinct is to downplay this. That instinct is wrong. The best way to deal with this is to admit that there's a full-fledged crisis, then state emphatically that you'll get to the bottom of things ASAP.
Doing something like that would increase Gov. Walz's credibility. Instead of actually dealing with this crisis honestly and openly, Gov. Walz is being secretive. What a stupid decision.
Posted Wednesday, July 17, 2019 9:12 AM
Comment 1 by Rex Newman at 17-Jul-19 07:52 PM
Translation: I don't do my job, either.
Comment 2 by Rex Newman at 17-Jul-19 08:23 PM
The Presidency switches parties regularly. When a President under-performs (Carter, Obama, e.g.) or even appears to have under-performed (Bush 41, Clinton), we switch.
But clearly that doesn't work for Governor here in Minnesota. Even at my age, I can't remember a Governor worse than Mark Dayton. And yet we re-elected him in 2014. And now we have his ideological tag-team partner, Tim Walz in charge. In charge of what, you say? Not DHS - he doesn't do drama. Not MnLars - the guilty still have their jobs. Not MnSure - it's all better now, right? He did find some time for massive, completely unnecessary tax hikes like on gasoline. But even here, when the going got tough, he abruptly walked away, surprising even his own party leadership.
He's said to be affable and likeable in person. He certainly enjoys the pomp and ceremony of being Governor, just not all those droll day to day duties and responsibilities he was elected to perform.
Remember Maynard G. Krebs, anyone?
Speaker Pelosi didn't dodge impeachment after all
Al Green, (D-TX), has had enough. He's been threatening to file a privileged resolution on articles of impeachment. Now, he's filed that resolution . That starts the clock ticking on a decision that Speaker Pelosi didn't want started.
Pelosi knows that her options are terrible, worse yet or full-fledged disaster. House rules require that privileged resolutions be dispensed with within 48 hours. As Ed mentions in this post , Pelosi's options are "Under House rules, Democratic leadership can decide to try to table the impeachment articles, effectively killing them for now and risk criticism from the party's liberal base; refer them to the House Judiciary Committee for possible consideration; or allow the vote to proceed."
At this point, Pelosi must know that her days as speaker are finished. This is her last term as speaker. If she wants her legacy to be that she saved House Democrats from themselves, she should schedule a vote on the House floor, otherwise known as the Committee of the Whole. Democrats representing swing districts will vote against Green's resolution, effectively killing impeachment against President Trump.
That would hand President Trump a huge victory. He'd be able to wave that defeat in the Democrats' face and claim vindication. He'd be able to say that Democrats tried to impeach him but couldn't get the votes to impeach from their 240 members.
That might trigger a series of moderates getting primaried by AOC's Justice Democrats. Imagine the mess that might create for Democrats. Like I said earlier, at this point, Pelosi's options are "terrible, worse yet or full-fledged disaster." After Monday's press conference by the Squad, Pelosi didn't have many options left:
[Video no longer available]
At this point, Pelosi can kiss the Democrats' majority goodbye. That isn't just my opinion. Mild-mannered Dana Perino predicted that yesterday, too. In 2018, Democrats ran on a appealing-sounding agenda. In 2020, they can't just regurgitate that agenda because they didn't get anything done. That isn't my opinion. That's what AOC's chief of staff said :
Pelosi claims we can't focus on impeachment because it's a distraction from kitchen table issues. But I'd challenge you to find voters that can name a single thing House Democrats have done for their kitchen table this year .
What is this legislative mastermind doing?
- Saikat Chakrabarti (@saikatc) July 7, 2019
Republicans are highly motivated to get out and vote this time. If things keep going against the Democrats, this might turn into a bloodbath.
Posted Wednesday, July 17, 2019 10:18 AM
No comments.
Rashida Tlaib's pity party
According to Democrat Rep. Rashida Tlaib, it's Nancy Pelosi's fault that she's getting death threats .
This morning, the Squad did an interview with CBS's morning show. During the interview, Rep. Tlaib said "The fact of the knowledge is, and I've done racial justice work in our country for a long time, acknowledge the fact that we are women of color, so when you do single us out, be aware of that, and what you're doing. Especially because some of us are getting death threats. Because some of us are being singled out in many ways because of our backgrounds, because of our experiences and so forth."
This isn't about race. That's insulting. Most likely, it has to do with people living in the best nation in history being upset by a squad of 4 ingrates and liars. AOC insisted that border patrol guards ordered illegal aliens to drink from toilets. That's after AOC insisted that detention facilities were worse than Nazi concentration camps.
Rep. Ilhan Omar has criticized Israel for buying off politicians (without proof). Rep. Omar also asked for leniency with ISIS terrorists. On top of all that, she's famous for saying of the 9/11 terrorists that "some people did something." Hearing a congresscritter talk that way about the 9/11 terrorists is beyond disrespectful.
Well before Mueller's report was published, Rep. Tlaib said that they had to impeach the m-----f----- in the White House.
With all due respect, did these Democrat women think that they'd get bouquets of roses for their anti-American remarks? The American people are feeling a resurgence of patriotism. At the same time, The Squad is feeling ungrateful. Further, they aren't feeling the need to condemn terrorist attacks from Democrat-related organizations like Antifa:
[Video no longer available]
An Antifa terrorist tried attacking an ICE detention center in Tacoma, Washington. The terrorist was killed while attacking the building. AOC and Ilhan Omar were asked about the attack but didn't reply. Then they're surprised when people hate them?
UPDATE: Matt Vespa's latest article highlights why parasites like Omar, AOC and Rashida Tlaib need to be ignored.
Posted Wednesday, July 17, 2019 3:50 PM
No comments.
House hands Trump a big win
If this article is right, then House Democrats will hand President Trump a huge victory later this afternoon. According to the article, "Texas Rep. Al Green's resolution faces long odds, as the House is expected to easily block his impeachment effort. But the move nevertheless presents a dilemma for impeachment supporters and moderate Democrats alike, as it will put them on the record in what's likely to be a vote to either kill the resolution or refer it to the Judiciary Committee."
If Democrats vote to table Green's resolution, President Trump will be able to say that he's been exonerated by the House. He'll have the vote to prove it, too. If the House refers it to Chairman Nadler's committee, he'll have to deal with it. At that point, Chairman Nadler will be caught in between the impeachment fanatics and Speaker Pelosi. At that point, there's just one thing to say for a conservative. That thing is 'Pass the popcorn.'
Once this gets tabled, many questions will need to be answered. How will this fracture House Democrats? Will this dampen House Democrats' enthusiasm? Will Democrats be seen as too far left to be kept in charge of the House?
Speaker Pelosi didn't do Rep. Green any favors in her weekly press conference:
"With all the respect in the world for him, we have six committees that are working on following the facts in terms of any abuse of power, obstruction of justice and the rest that the President may have engaged in," Pelosi said. "That is the serious path that we are on, not that Mr. Green is not serious, but we'll deal with that on the floor."
UPDATE: They killed the resolution:
The House on Wednesday easily defeated an effort from a Texas Democrat to impeach President Donald Trump in the first vote that Congress has taken related to impeachment since Democrats took control of the chamber.
Rep. Al Green was able to force the vote under House rules, in what amounted to the most direct challenge yet to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's handling of impeachment. The 332-95 vote showcased the stark divide among Democrats, who split over the vote to kill the impeachment measure. Ninety-five Democrats, a little more than 40% of the Democratic caucus, voted against tabling it, or to keep it alive. That's more Democrats who voted against tabling than similar resolutions in 2017 (58) and 2018 (66). No Republicans voted to keep it alive.
Posted Wednesday, July 17, 2019 5:56 PM
No comments.
Yes, Mr. Friedman, Trump's gonna win again
Thomas Friedman's latest column must've been a difficult column to write for him. It's one of the few columns that he's written that I've actually agreed with.
For instance, Mr. Friedman was exceptionally coherent when he wrote "I was shocked that so many were ready to decriminalize illegal entry into our country. I think people should have to ring the doorbell before they enter my house or my country." I totally agree, Mr. Friedman. I think that's just common sense. I think it's also just common courtesy. I wish more of your media cohorts would starting simple truths like that on a frequent basis.
Mr. Friedman's coherent statements continued in the next paragraph when he wrote "I was shocked at all those hands raised in support of providing comprehensive health coverage to undocumented immigrants. I think promises we've made to our fellow Americans should take priority, like to veterans in need of better health care." Again, this isn't complicated. It's common sense.
Which brings us to Mr. Friedman's lede. Friedman opens the column by saying "I'm struck at how many people have come up to me recently and said, 'Trump's going to get re-elected, isn't he?'" Yes, Thomas, President Trump's path to re-election is smoother than a baby's bottom. On the Democrats' stage are wannabes without any political gifting. Compared with this clown show, John Kerry might look entirely plausible.
And I was shocked by how feeble was front-runner Joe Biden's response to the attack from Kamala Harris - and to the more extreme ideas promoted by those to his left. So, I wasn't surprised to hear so many people expressing fear that the racist, divisive, climate-change-denying, woman-abusing jerk who is our president was going to get re-elected, and was even seeing his poll numbers rise.
That's a polite way of saying that these Democrat candidates stink to high heaven. They're more qualified to do burlesque than run for president. This paragraph speaks volumes:
But I'm disturbed that so few of the Democratic candidates don't also talk about growing the pie, let alone celebrating American entrepreneurs and risk-takers. Where do they think jobs come from?
Tom, from what I've seen, these Democrats don't think about jobs. They're mostly about hating employers. You've criticized President Trump and that's fair. What you haven't done the last 5-10 years is hold Democrats accountable. You let the beast grow. Now that the Democratic Party has essentially disappeared, at least the Democratic Party you grew up in, you're shocked to find a hideous creature ruled by The Squad.
Lest you think that Mr. Friedman is smart, I'll disabuse you of that notion with this video:
[Video no longer available]
It reminds me of Joe Biden saying that President Trump "doesn't get it." It's Biden that doesn't get it. That's why President Trump will win re-election.
Posted Wednesday, July 17, 2019 11:47 PM
No comments.
Was Trump's fight with the Squad purely impulsive?
Axios insists that President Trump's fight with the Squad was purely impulsive. I'm not nearly as certain of that. In fact, there's some pretty solid thinking that this was intentional and well-executed. In an interview with Bill Hemmer, Newt Gingrich explained that President Trump plays chess while his opponents play tic-tac-toe. I tend to believe Gingrich because he's bested too many people for this to be accidental.
Katie Pavlich seems to think there's a method to President Trump's madness , too:
"I think that President Trump making these women the face of the Democratic Party as they want to be. They want to burn it down. They want their socialist policies to reign," Pavlich said on 'The Five.' "Democrats are going to find out a whole lot more about who they are because they're going to primary them as we just saw."
Nothing about the Squad's behavior says that they're respectful. If anything, their actions signal that they're extremely disrespectful. These women have made it pretty clear that they aren't interested in being key parts of the Democratic Party. They want to be the Democratic Party.
[Video no longer available]
Newt's right. Democrats will likely be united. That isn't automatically a positive thing, especially in the time of AOC + 3. Uniting around insane things still creates a landslide. Further, Pelosi, the leftist pundits and the propaganda wing of the Democratic Party, aka the media, can whine all they want about moderates. Now that the moderates have voted to protect AOC + 3, who will believe that there are still moderate Democrats?
It's obvious that President Trump doesn't just want to win re-election. He certainly wants that but he wants to recapture the majority in the House and grow the Republicans' majority in the Senate. To do that, he'll need a supercharged GOP coming out of the convention. Based on the fundraising numbers and the numbers of people volunteering at the rallies, I'm betting that President Trump will get his wish.
Posted Thursday, July 18, 2019 5:49 AM
No comments.
RNC Chair touts progress with women voters
Ronna McDaniel told FNC's Sandra Smith something that must've startled Democrats and excited Republicans. During the interview, McDaniel told Smith that "Listen, women right now can't vote, but they can vote with their pocketbook. Over 50 percent of the smaller donations coming to the Trump campaign are from women. That's more than any other Democrat."
What makes that so significant is that the Trump campaign is getting tons of small-dollar contributions. Also, the Trump campaign is on target to raise the most money in the history of presidential campaigns. McDaniel made a bold prediction that's worth noting when she predicted that "When the president goes to them in November of 2020 and he says, 'Are you better off than you were four years ago?' women are going to look at their lives and they're going to say yes I am and they're going to vote for him.'"
The Democrat nominee will be well-funded but they'll be at a disadvantage, thanks in large part to the volunteer army that the campaign is recruiting, but also because they've already staffed their offices in DC and New York but also in each state across the nation. The Trump/RNC data operation is top notch, too.
On Tuesday Lara Trump told the crowd, "You don't have to agree with everything that Donald Trump tweets. You don't have to agree with the way that he delivers every single message. But you sure as heck are going to like the fact that you have a bit of a better life now thanks to this president."
That's one hell of a closing argument in 2020.
[Video no longer available]
Posted Thursday, July 18, 2019 11:50 AM
No comments.
