July 5-7, 2019

Jul 05 02:48 Whiny Democrats look petty
Jul 05 04:03 Dems' early victory, late loss?
Jul 05 07:45 Immigration thought experiment

Jul 06 02:20 Trump's Salute to America
Jul 06 08:52 The Dems' prosperity problem

Jul 07 00:41 No more Dem euphemisms
Jul 07 03:51 Questioning untested theories
Jul 07 04:53 Biden's cringeworthy campaign
Jul 07 10:43 The firing squad starts forming

Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

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

Whiny Democrats look petty

Prior to President Trump's "Salute to America" event on the National Mall, Democrats insisted that President Trump was using the event for partisan gain. In looking past the speech, Democrats looked petty. This Washington Post article did its best to sound whiny but it grudgingly finally admitted that the speech was simply a patriotic speech.

What can't be denied is the fact that all incumbent presidents have a huge advantage going into their re-election campaigns. It's often called the power of incumbents and it's there whether the person running for re-election is running for City Council, the State Legislature, Congress or the White House. Whining about the inherent structural benefits of being the incumbent is nothing more than sour grapes.

The best part of the speech was that President Trump's speechwriter wove in a history lesson of what makes America great without drawing on a single partisan issue. It truly was pitch-perfect. There's little doubt that President Trump's critics want to criticize him. It's just that they don't have anything to criticize him about. The Media Wing of the Democratic Party wanted to criticize President Trump but couldn't:

The Fourth of July extravaganza was created at Trump's request and designed to suit his whims, but the president largely refrained from using it to praise himself - abandoning his typical self-promotional style to applaud the military and ordinary Americans who have contributed to the nation's advancement.

"As we gather this evening in the joy of freedom, we remember that all share a truly extraordinary heritage," Trump said in a 47-minute speech that was dampened and delayed by a downpour on the Mall. "Together, we are part of one of the greatest stories ever told, the story of America. It is the epic tale of a great nation whose people have risked everything for what they know is right and what they know is true."

Democrats wanted badly to find something to criticize President Trump about -- but couldn't. This is an example of how much the MSM wanted to accuse President Trump of politicizing the event, then stopped short:
[Video no longer available]
OMIGOD! The crowd started chanting USA -- USA -- at an Independence Day event no less. What type of partisans would do such a thing? Wow! What's the big deal?

This is the Mueller Report, Part II. Prior to the Mueller Report getting published, Democrats thought for certain that this would be the time that they got President Trump by the short hairs. When the report was published, they couldn't admit that they didn't get the results they wanted. That was difficult because Democrats were so certain they had President Trump in their crosshairs and that he wouldn't escape this time. They were positively crestfallen when the Mueller Report disappointed Democrats.

Prior to Thursday night on the National Mall, Democrats kept raising a stink about President Trump politicizing the event. Democrats were certain that they'd finally trapped President Trump. Instead of watching President Trump politicize the Salute to the Nation, Democrats watched something horrific. Democrats watched President Trump deliver a history lesson on American exceptionalism and patriotism.

President Trump talked about American ingenuity, American innovation and American sacrifice to liberate America's allies. President Trump didn't need to draw political comparisons with Democrats with red meat. He just had to talk about the US at its aspirational best vs. the Democrats' pessimism. The American people are smart enough to notice the difference.

Here's hoping that your Independence Day was exceptional. Here's hoping that the United States' best days are still to come. God bless America.

Posted Friday, July 5, 2019 2:48 AM

No comments.

Dems' early victory, late loss?

Is immigration another issue where Democrats think they have a winning issue but they really have a losing issue? Apparently, Democrats are certain it's a winning issue. If I had a $100 bill for each time Democrats thought they had a winning issue, I'd be a 1-percenter. If I had to pay Democrats $250 each time they were certain they had a winning issue and they were right , I'd still be a 1-percenter.

The simple truth is that the Democrats' political instincts are pretty worthless. Right now, Democrats think they're riding a winning issue with immigration thanks to the drowning of the father and daughter, the DHS IG report and also the Facebook outrage. Once the truth about these issues comes out, they'll be losing issues for Democrats.

Last week, Democrats passed a supplemental appropriations bill to pay DHS workers back pay and restock the shelves at the detention centers at the border. The DHS IG report characterized conditions at these facilities as being harsh. That's a fair assessment. What that IG report didn't do, though, is affix blame for why the conditions are terrible.

Rep. Dan Crenshaw is doing a fantastic job explaining what's happening and what's happened with his videos. This video explains things beautifully:
[Video no longer available]
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, (D-NY), issued a 4-point plan to address the crisis . The plan starts with:

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Wednesday released a plan to address the increasing numbers of migrants crossing the southern border, calling among other things for decriminalizing illegal border crossings.

That's part of AOC's solution? Seriously? Right. Let's solve the problem by giving illegal aliens a greater incentive to cross the border illegally. Telling illegal aliens that they'll get to stay if they pay a light fine is putting up a big green light at the northern end of Guatemala and another green light at the US-Mexico border. In other words, that part of AOC's 'plan' will make things worse, not better.

Secondly, the progressive congresswoman tied in her signature issue, climate change, saying that the refugee crisis is partly due to natural disasters.

What's frightening is that this stupidity passes as serious policymaking with Democrats. The problem started this winter when Nancy Pelosi's solution to the government shutdown was to give illegal aliens the right to stay if they came with a child. It didn't have to be their child. It just had to be a child. Prior to that, most people caught illegally entering were from Mexico and male. Today, 60% of apprehensions are families from the Northern Triangle.

Here's the third point of AOC's 'plan':

Third, Ocasio-Cortez called for repealing the laws criminalizing crossing into the U.S. without proper documentation, saying the Trump administration is using the statutes to "mindlessly throw people in cages."

Why doesn't AOC understand that rewriting the law will cause more illegal aliens to come across the border, not less? Apparently, AOC thinks that letting illegal aliens pay minimal fines will slow illegal alien traffic. Jeh Johnson, President Obama's final secretary of DHS, thinks otherwise :

Jeh Johnson, former DHS secretary in Barack Obama's administration, called presidential candidate Julian Castro's proposal to decriminalize illegal border crossing essentially advocacy for "open borders."

"That is tantamount to declaring publicly that we have open borders," Johnson told the Washington Post. "That is unworkable, unwise and does not have the support of a majority of American people or the Congress, and if we had such a policy, instead of 100,000 apprehensions a month, it will be multiples of that."

Stupidity of that magnitude should earn her a termination notice, not a re-election certificate of re-election. Finally, there's this:

Finally, the congresswoman proposed "large-scale public investment to spur job creation for citizens & immigrants alike." She mentioned climate change again, expressing her hope that the "investment transitions us to a sustainable economy (climate & income-wise)."

We've seen before how AOC drives the debate amongst Democrats. There's little doubt in my mind that Democrats will adopt AOC's initiative. That sounds like a loser for Democrats.

Posted Friday, July 5, 2019 4:03 AM

No comments.

Immigration thought experiment

It's time to put a halt to AOC's intellectual dishonesty. I figure that the best way to do that is to engage LFR visitors in a little thought experiment on immigration. Specifically, the thought experiment applies mostly to illegal immigration.

History shows that there weren't any claims of guards telling women to drink from toilets prior to AOC's visit. That directs us to a binary decision. One option is that the illegal aliens held at one of these facilities felt so threatened that they never told anyone about their mistreatment. The other option is that illegal aliens weren't mistreated prior to AOC's visit.

It's difficult to imagine large numbers of people being held in these facilities saying nothing, especially after they've been processed. Also, it's difficult to imagine a person drinking from a toilet and not getting some sort of life-threatening illness. Let's remember that these illegal aliens often have travelled hundreds of miles through hot temperatures. Further, it's rare that many illegal aliens had the basics for making the trip.

Why would anyone think that there wouldn't be more deaths in custody considering the conditions? That points us to the second option. If deaths in custody are this rare, why wouldn't we think that the CBP agents act with professionalism and thoughtfulness?

Further, the thought of a self-aggrandizing politician lying about what she saw isn't exactly beyond the realm of possibilities. Additionally, what corroboration do we have of AOC's claims?

AOC's statements work against AOC's credibility. Check this out:
[Video no longer available]
Notice that she said "There's abuse. This is them on their best behavior and they put them in a room with no running water. And these women were being told by CBP officers to drink out of the toilet." I can't wait to hear a reporter ask AOC how women being held in a room with no running water could drink out of a toilet. This seems logical to ask since facilities need running water to operate a toilet.

The fact that reporters haven't asked her about that glaring contradiction suggests that AOC knows that she can lie through her teeth without the media questioning her honesty. Being a media-savvy person, why wouldn't AOC think she could lie and get away with it?

There's a daunting possibility that the problem isn't with CBP and ICE but with House Democrats. Once the word spread that Democrats weren't serious about enforcing the borders, the floodgates opened in Central America. When each of the Democrats' presidential candidates raised their hands in favor of decriminalizing illegal immigration. Put differently, everything points to Democrats being the problem, not CBP and ICE.

Jeh Johnson opposes decriminalization :

That is tantamount to declaring publicly that we have open borders," Johnson told the Washington Post. "That is unworkable, unwise and does not have the support of a majority of American people or the Congress, and if we had such a policy, instead of 100,000 apprehensions a month, it will be multiples of that."

It's clear that Democrats won't budge from this position. Further, it's clear that we have a legitimate crisis on our hands. Therefore, the only way to resolve this issue is to throw out 50-60 Democrats in the House, then strengthen Mitch McConnell's majority in the Senate and re-electing President Trump.

I'm not saying that Republicans are perfect about fixing the immigration problem. I'm saying that they're the only ones who seem serious about fixing that crisis.

Posted Friday, July 5, 2019 7:45 AM

No comments.

Trump's Salute to America

Now that it's over, let's review President Trump's Salute to America event. The Democrats' unpresidential presidential candidates took to the airwaves to predict that President Trump would politicize his "Salute to America" event on Independence Day. Predictably, these Democrat presidential candidates got it badly wrong. Tulsi Gabbard got it wrong , saying "The self-serving politician that he is, Trump has succeeded in making July 4th about himself, and in doing so, further divided our country. This on a day when our nation's president should be uniting us."

Joe Biden, aka Sleepy Joe, criticized President Trump , saying "Will he speak to the example America must set to inspire the world? Will he offer a robust defense of the democratic values that have always been our strength in times of crisis? We all know the answer to that. Donald Trump is incapable of celebrating what makes America great - because he doesn't get it."

Biden is a bull-shitter. He's always been a gaffe machine. He's a total idiot in this interview:
[Video no longer available]
Starting at around the 10:00 mark, Biden made these idiotic statements:

Look what's happening with Putin. While Putin is trying to undo our elections, he is undoing elections in Europe. Look what's happened in Hungary. Look what's happened in Poland. Look what's happened in Moldova. Do you think that would've happened under my watch? Or under Barack's watch? You can't answer that but I can. It wouldn't have. And it didn't.

That's a pile of BS. Apparently, Biden thinks we're stupid. The Mueller Report stated quite clearly that Russia interfered in the 2016 election. You can't blame the Trump administration for not doing anything to stop that attack because, at that point, there officially wasn't a Trump administration. The administration that let the Russians tamper with our election was the Obama administration. That's an indisputable fact.

President Trump's Salute to America featured a speech that was really more of a history lesson than anything else. He talked about inventor like Orville and Wilbur Wright, Thomas Edison, trailblazers like Amelia Earhart and Lewis and Clark, civil rights leaders like Harriet Tubman, Fredrick Douglass and Clarence Henderson. President Trump didn't shy away from telling the stories about the US military's acts of bravery. Here's one story that jumped out at me:

A generation later, the Army returned to Europe, and embarked upon a great crusade. With knives and rifles in hand, the Rangers scaled the cliffs of Normandy. The 101st Airborne leapt into the danger from above, illuminated only by enemy flares, explosions, and burning aircraft. They threw back the Nazi empire with lightning of their own, from the turrets of Sherman tanks and the barrels of the M1 rifle. In the darkness of the Battle of the Bulge, with Nazis on every side, one soldier is reported to have said: " They've got us surrounded again, the poor bastards ."

If that's the Democrats' definition of a self-serving speech, then they need a different dictionary because that one's worthless.

Let's be honest, though. It isn't that Democrats are stupid. It's that their hatred of President Trump is that intense. It isn't disputable that Democrats, time after time, let this hatred get the better of them. At times like these, it's virtually all-consuming.

Just once, I'd love to see Democrats put the US first for an extended period of time rather than put partisanship first. If that ever happened, the average person would be astonished at the great things that could get accomplished.

If Democrats don't adopt that mindset, they should prepare for an electoral landslide in November, 2020.

Posted Saturday, July 6, 2019 2:20 AM

No comments.

The Dems' prosperity problem

Each week, Democrats pitch multiple messages on Trumponomics. The first attempt is telling viewers that too many people aren't feeling the effects of the good numbers. They're insisting that voters don't notice the increasing wages and the tax cuts because health insurance costs have stolen the wage increases and the money from the tax cuts.

Another of the Democrats' attempts to discredit Trumponomics is by pretending that President Obama deserves the credit for the booming economy. They point to the fact that we've had steady job increases under Obama. They leave out the fact that economic growth and wages were virtually stagnant under President Obama's policies. President Obama's supporters never mention how small business and consumer confidence have skyrocketed under President Trump's policies.

The latest Democrat attempt is to ignore the economy altogether. This attempt will fail, too. According to Byron York's article , Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are basing their campaigns on virtue signaling:

That leaves Democrats with the task of convincing millions of Americans to vote against their economic interests, to choose a Democrat over the president, during a time of economic satisfaction.

How to do it? Some Democrats have chosen to argue that there is something so wrong with the president, that he's a racist, or he is an agent or Russia, or he is something equally terrible, that the traditional measures of a successful presidency do not apply.

Look at Democratic front-runner Joe Biden's entry into the race. Biden's announcement video focused entirely on the August 2017 white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, in which a counterdemonstrator was murdered.

"We are in the battle for the soul of this nation," Biden said. "If we give Donald Trump eight years in the White House, he will forever and fundamentally alter the character of this nation, who we are, and I cannot stand by and watch that happen."

Fast-rising Democratic contender Kamala Harris chose another approach. "I know predators," the former prosecutor said recently, "and we have a predator living in the White House."

President Trump isn't a predator. He isn't the bully that Biden accused him of being, either. They're just flailing in their attempt to pull him down to their levels. It won't work. President Trump is still the heavyweight in the ring. Biden's been a lightweight his entire career. That's why former Bush and Obama Defense Secretary Robert Gates said that Biden had gotten every major foreign policy issue for the past 30 years wrong.

As shown in this videotape, Biden talks tough but he's a lightweight:
[Video no longer available]
He doesn't lack for confidence. He's just lacking in talent. More than exposing him on an issue, Sen Harris exposed Biden on his lack of talent.

Posted Saturday, July 6, 2019 8:52 AM

Comment 1 by Terry Stone at 06-Jul-19 09:50 AM
It's important to remember that the stagnant wage growth and meager job growth under the Obama Administration was in spite of a trillion-dollar stimulus package. The democrats tried to stimulate the economy with the right hand and strangled it with the (far) left hand.

Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 06-Jul-19 03:09 PM
That's a great point, Terry. That point, in fact, will likely have an impact on this year's election. Biden's 'claim to fame' is that he's able to connect with working people. I'm skeptical of that because he was part of the administration that tried killing (not hurting) the coal industry. The odds of those coal miners forgetting that is between slim & none & slim just left town.

No more Dem euphemisms

It's pretty apparent that Democrats don't give a damn about border security. Any political party that unanimously approves of decriminalizing illegal aliens entering the United States officially is the Open Borders Party. The week before Independence Day, NBC and the DNC (Pardon the repetition) hosted a pair of Democrat presidential debates.

During those debates, each of the Democrat presidential candidates raised their hands in support of decriminalizing illegal aliens entering the US. They didn't stop there, though, unfortunately. All 20 of these Democrat presidential candidates raised their hands affirming that their national health care laws would provide taxpayer-funded health care to illegal aliens.

Jeh Johnson, President Obama's final Secretary of Homeland Security, passionately opposes the Democrats' open border policies :

That is tantamount to declaring publicly that we have open borders. That is unworkable, unwise and does not have the support of a majority of American people or the Congress, and if we had such a policy, instead of 100,000 apprehensions a month, it will be multiples of that .

I don't disagree often with Newt Gingrich but I must this time :

When word spreads that sick people can sneak into America and get free medical treatment from American doctors and nurses, the flood of sick immigrants will double and triple from the current numbers.

It isn't that I disagree with Newt's opinion. It's his choice of words. Right now, illegal aliens don't have to "sneak" across the border. They can waltz across the border, then apply for asylum. Thanks to Nancy 'Spark of Divinity' and Alexandria 'Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire' Ocasio-Cortez, illegal aliens are treated better than are our homeless veterans.

Anyone who thinks that this is patriotic is stupid beyond belief. Yes, I'm talking to you, Jessica Tarlov, Tom Perez and Ed Rendell. Predictably, Newt nailed it with this tweet:


Democrats are patriots in some weird, demented way but not in the traditional sense. It's time to re-establish Reaganite patriotism. It's been too long since we had that type of patriotism.

AOC's patriotism is faux patriotism. She wouldn't recognize Founding Fathers-style patriotism if it bit her backside. The men who signed the Declaration, the men who fought the Revolutionary War and the men who wrote this nation's Constitution were selfless men. The men who signed the Declaration of Independence knew that they were dead men walking if George Washington's army didn't defeat King George's military.

Can anyone picture AOC doing any of the things that those slaveholders did? Yes, I 'admitted' that many were slaveholders. I can't picture AOC doing anything even close to what those patriots did.

Democrats have been intentionally mangling the meaning of important words. Democrats deny advocating for open borders while providing incentives that would shout to the Northern Triangle nations to flood across the US-Mexico border. Democrats insist that detention facilities are concentration camps and that women are forced to drink from toilets.

It's impossible to believe that CBP is tormenting women and little girls in the ways that AOC is insisting. It isn't like AOC has a lengthy history of veracity. Rather, AOC has a history of frequently getting caught lying.

If Republicans want to get things done, they'll need to toss the gloves and put on brass knuckles. Resistance Democrats fight like Antifa. If we want to lose honorably, (think John McCain) then Republicans will lose often. No more! Tell AOC, Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff that their reign of stupidity and lies is coming to a close in a few months.

Finally, Republicans should adopt President Reagan's policy towards the USSR. When asked what his policy towards the Soviets was, President Reagan, replied "Simple. We win, they lose." It's time to sink the Democrats' battleship.

Posted Sunday, July 7, 2019 12:41 AM

No comments.

Questioning untested theories

This LTE sounds authoritative without being authoritative. It focuses on the subject of xenophobia as it relates to my friend Dr. John Palmer.

The LTE opens by saying "Xenophobia is the fear of anything this is "alien" to, or different from what's 'normal' for a person. What's normal for a white German Catholic from Stearns County is likely not normal for a Muslim from Somalia. That doesn't make one person's 'normal' better or worse, just different. In the case of John Palmer and his group, what they fear isn't brown Somali immigrants, as much as it is people who are DIFFERENT from white German Catholics."

It's worth noting that the man who wrote the LTE has never met Dr. Palmer, which renders the entire LTE worthless. It's worthless because it's based on suppositions rather than anything verifiable. The 'foundation' for the premise is that xenophobia is a real word that's been around centuries. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary , that isn't true:

Xenophobia - "fear or hatred of strangers or foreigners" - has the look and feel of a word that has been in the English language for hundreds of years, borne of the tumultuous political climates of the Renaissance and the penchant that many writers back then had for fashioning fancy new words from Latin and Greek. It is not that old.

Let's entertain another possibility. Let's entertain the possibility that the people getting called xenophobic are simply people who disagree with a philosophy or religion. For instance, isn't it possible that Roman Catholics (or Baptists or evangelical Christians) aren't afraid of people who are different but rather, are highly principled people who simply disagree with people of other religious or governing beliefs?


Let's also dig into the word phobia a little. Dictionary.com's definition of phobia is:

a persistent, irrational fear of a specific object, activity, or situation that leads to a compelling desire to avoid it.

What proof does the person who wrote this LTE have that Dr. Palmer or others in C-Cubed have an irrational fear of anything? Just from a technical standpoint, how would this person determine what Dr. Palmer or others in his group think of anyone? Frankly, from a technical standpoint, this LTE sounds like a big pile of opinionizing.

That's fine but it shouldn't be treated like an authoritative writing. Rather, it should be seen, I'd argue, as the opinions of a mediocre (at best) researcher.

Finally, let's ponder the possibility that Dr. Palmer's religious beliefs are right. The presumption of the LTE appears to be that Dr. Palmer's religious beliefs aren't legitimate or, at minimum, the product of an irrational way of thinking. Again, where's the proof that Dr. Palmer's thinking is irrational or illegitimate?

Posted Sunday, July 7, 2019 3:51 AM

Comment 1 by John Palmer at 07-Jul-19 01:16 PM
For the record, I'm not German but I am Christian worshipping under the Roman tradition. A few minutes ago during Mass I recited the Nicene Creed and that commits me to a non negotiable set of beliefs. In fact those beliefs are irreconcilable with Islam. As a follower of the one true Lord and Savior, my fears are not related to this earthly life and my Savior desires that I love the sinner and hate the sin. Therefore it is not possible for me to be xenophobic. I neither fear or hate, but I am called to evangelize as a follower of Jesus Christ. It is my obligation as a Christian to bring people to Christ, the one true gate to heaven. By the way, I am English/Irish and an outsider to Stearns, Co.

Comment 2 by Gretchen L Leisen at 07-Jul-19 10:44 PM
Thank you, Gary, for your oped on this subject which refers back to the New York Times article which in turn was publicized by our city council and the St. Cloud Times. The conclusions of the author of the article were not well based, and resulted in a dishonest conclusion that a group of local Catholics were 'haters'. My observation was that the group was merely asking questions and not getting answers to the potential numbers of more immigrants and the cost to our local society. I always thought that opinions expressed and questions asked were a basic right of citizens in our great republic, but apparently according to some folks, that is not so. In the meantime, John Palmer and his group have nothing to be ashamed of.

Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 08-Jul-19 01:14 AM
Gretchen, I'm glad you published that comment because it touches on an important point that can't be overemphasized. When you said "I always thought that opinions expressed and questions asked were a basic right of citizens in our great republic, but apparently according to some folks, that is not so", it highlighted a strategy that Democrats frequently employ. This authoritative-sounding pile of leftist gobbledygook is intended to stifle debate. The proper reaction to that type of BS is to speak up while making a fact-filled compelling argument.

I've long said that 'when spin collides with reality, reality wins consistently.' That's what I'd recommend in this situation.

Biden's cringeworthy campaign

Anyone that saw the videotape of Kamala Harris dismantling former Vice President Biden likely cringed when they saw it. Biden looked that discombobulated. It stripped away the veneer that Biden was the most electable candidate the Democrats could nominate in their attempt to retake the White House.

As inept as Biden looked in that exchange, he looked worse in his interview with CNN. In that interview, Biden said "While Putin is trying to undo our elections, he is undoing elections in Europe. Look at what's happening in Hungary [: ] look what's happening. You think that would happen on my watch, on Barack's watch? You can't answer that, but I promise you it wouldn't have, and it didn't."

It's breathtakingly astonishing to hear that. Can you imagine what would happen if that idiot had to negotiate a trade deal with China? Can you imagine that idiot negotiating a nuclear disarmament treaty with Kim Jung-Un? The term 'raked across the coals' keeps running through my mind for some reason.

This crop of Democrat presidential candidates is lacking in political talent to begin with. With nonentities like Eric Swalwell, Robert Francis O'Rourke, Marianne Williamson and John Hickenlooper on the debate stage, it's difficult to take Democrats seriously. Throw in Bill de Blasio and Joe Biden and it's virtually impossible to take them seriously.

It almost makes me yearn for the competence of John Kerry or the charisma of Al Gore. Remember Sen. Kerry's global test moment:
[Video no longer available]
It's frightening to think that Biden and Kerry composed part of President Obama's national security team. But I digress.

The Biden administration would be a disaster. The Obama administration knew that Putin planned on hacking into the 2016 election way back in 2014. That's what's in the Mueller Report so it isn't opinion. The Obama administration didn't do anything. In fact, it's possible that they looked away while Russians tampered with our election system.

While it's uncertain what type of effect the latest Biden gaffe will have in the short term, it's certain that it would have a negative impact on his competitiveness against President Trump, if he gets that far.

Posted Sunday, July 7, 2019 4:53 AM

No comments.

The firing squad starts forming

Make no mistake about it. Ryan Grim's article officially marks the start of the Democrats' circular firing squad. In Grim's mind, older Democrats are still intimidated by President Reagan's legislative successes. What he doesn't state is something President Reagan stated in his final speech from the Oval Office. In that speech, President Reagan stated that he "never won a victory" that his supporters didn't win for him first.

Grim highlights the frustration felt by AOC, Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib. Each expressed their frustration after the House and Senate passed a supplemental spending bill to supply border protection with the things they need to deal with detention facilities. For instance, the forever foolish AOC stated "Hell no. That's an abdication of power." Rep. Omar said "A vote for Mitch McConnell's border bill is a vote to keep kids in cages and terrorize immigrant communities."

The best thing that could happen for Republicans is to have AOC's spokesman become spokesman for all Democrats. Here's why:

For newer members of the party's caucus, the older generation's fear of a backlash is befuddling. "Leadership is driven by fear. They seem to be unable to lead," said Corbin Trent, a spokesman for Ocasio-Cortez and a co-founder of Justice Democrats, the insurgent political organization that powered her rise, while also backing Omar and Tlaib. "I'm not sure what caused it."

It sounds like Speaker (in name only) Pelosi is getting frustrated :

"If the left doesn't think I'm left enough, so be it," [Pelosi] told me.

It's interesting that Maureen Dowd wrote about Pelosi's frustrations, which spilled over in this article :

I asked Pelosi whether, after being the subject of so many you-go-girl memes for literally clapping back at Trump, it was jarring to get a bad headline like the one in HuffPost that day - "What The Hell Is Nancy Pelosi Doing?" The article described the outrage of the Squad, as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts are known.

Pelosi feels that the four made themselves irrelevant to the process by voting against "our bill," as she put it, which she felt was the strongest one she could get. "All these people have their public whatever and their Twitter world," she said. "But they didn't have any following. They're four people and that's how many votes they got."

That sounds like open warfare between the Speaker-in-name-only and the real Speaker, aka AOC. Tensions are pretty high:
[Video no longer available]
All that's left to turn this into a full-fledged blood-bath is to primary a bunch of the freshmen moderates. Let the fun begin. And pass the popcorn.

UPDATE: This is about to get nasty:


Posted Sunday, July 7, 2019 10:50 AM

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