Always believe staffers.
Amy “The Slugger” Klobuchar announced her candidacy for President during a snowstorm yesterday.
A friend of the blog writes:
Saw no African Americans. Other then on the podium. __ One,only one Rainbow flag. Very ELCA crowd. Throw in a sprinkling of UCC.
Tne DFL’s props department was apparently stuck in a snowdrift.
The thing about “progressivism” is that while it flaps its jaws about “helping” the vulnerable, it inevitably ends up harming them.
Give them a $15 minimum wage and mandatory sick time? Get them laid off!
Attack landlords for the “quality” of housing they provide? Make housing unaffordable!
Kamala Harris, in her celebrated (by the media) record as a prosecutor, did more than her fair share of being unfair.
. Her crusade against the scourge of parents whose kids skip school, for example:
The good news is that post-CNN town hall, although much of the media lauded Harris and posted adoring articles about her acumen and likability, several took it upon themselves to resurface videos of Harris’s recent support for cracking down on truancy violations.
In 2010, for example, video shows Harris saying, “I believe a child going without an education is tantamount to a crime. So I decided I was gonna start prosecuting parents for truancy.”
“Well, this was a little controversial in San Francisco,” Harris noted, with a folksy giggle.
Another video showed Harris bragging about her power: “As a prosecutor in law enforcement, I have huge stick. The school district as a carrot. Let’s work together in tandem…to get those kids in school.”
Have I ever mentioned how much I love prosecutors who are drunk with their own power?
Her policies involved $2,000 fines, and even jail time, for parents whose kids missed “too much” school.
Which, people who actually pay attention to this issue will tell you, is a stupid, stupid plan, unless your goal is to paint yourself as “tough”:
…the people hurt by this carceral approach are the very people who are most likely to be financially crippled by a few fines. We’re not talking about wealthy people here, and generally speaking, criminal justice reform advocates fear using punitive means to “help” poor people because it can be so easy for them to get trapped in a cycle of unpaid fines that leads to jail time, which leads to time forcibly taken off of work, which leads to even less money and even less ability to pay outstanding debts.
None of this, you can imagine, helps children get a more stable home life with more attention from parents.
With junior high and high school kids, truancy often isn’t something parents can control (while still holding down jobs, anyway).
With younger kids? If they’re missing school regularly, it’s usually not a matter of “truancy”; it’s problems at home, more often than not problems stemming from one personal or social pathology or another.
In what other area of society do we try to address this sort of thing with fines and jail time?
Kamala Harris is a public cancer.
Beto O’Rouke – flirting with the idea of running for president with all the grace of an elementary school choir singing a medley from Les Miserables – discusses his take on the Constitution.
Caveat: I did not make this up. Emphasis added by me.
“I’m hesitant to answer it because I really feel like it deserves its due, and I don’t want to give you a — actually, just selfishly, I don’t want a sound bite of it reported, but, yeah, I think that’s the question of the moment: Does this still work?” O’Rourke said. “Can an empire like ours with military presence in over 170 countries around the globe, with trading relationships . . . and security agreements in every continent, can it still be managed by the same principles that were set down 230-plus years ago?”
More and more, I’m starting to believe those who do believe we can, and must, govern ourselves by those principles should seek an amicable divorce from those who can’t.
Former Rep. Robert “Beto” O’Rourke (D-TX) has been meeting with former President Barack Obama. A meeting of these two minds makes a great deal of sense. In Obama, the Democrats found a blank slate candidate on whom voters could project their wishes and dreams and he won two terms. In O’Rourke, the Democrats may have found the answer to their struggles in Texas. And if they can even become competitive in Texas, national politics will shift in the Democrats’ favor. Democrats see 2020 as an opportunity to topple President Trump.
Two years is a long time in politics, but at the same time it’s no time at all. The 2020 primaries are just over a year away. Any serious candidate for president in 2020 must be laying the groundwork now if they have not already started. They must be looking at building campaign staff, and they must have money in the bank or proven access to money.
Read the whole thing
Barack Obama was on the campaign trail in the weeks leading up to mid-terms…
…and it’d seem he had the same results at mid-terms that he did as president:
Over the past 5 days, President Obama flew into the states of Georgia, Florida & Indiana to personally campaign for big-name Democrat candidates in those states.
Here's how they did:
Joe Donnelly: Lost
Andrew Gillum: Lost
Bill Nelson: Lost
Stacey Abrams: Lost
— Benny (@bennyjohnson) November 7, 2018
Now – if only we can get the Dems to endorse Elizabeth Warren, and get Obama to stump for her…
Senator Warren just held a press conference saying that genetics tests prove that she is of between 1/64 and 1/512 Native American ancestry – and therefore “Native American”
Those same tests say that I – one of the most northern European people I know, and proud of it – am between 1/64 and 1/256 African-American.
If I were to use my “African-American heritage” to get preferential treatment, including prestigious academic appointments, based on a genetic sample like that, not only would people mock and taunt me, I would mock and taunt myself. And I would deserve it.
Please, my Democrat friends – nominate this woman for president in 2020.
Is Michael Bloomberg going to become the Harold Stassen of the 21st century?
Pro: So it seems.
Con: At least Stassen didn’t have tens of billions of dollars to blow on mindless freedom-sucking political action.
…I’m reminded that Donald Trump’s greatest political asset…
…is his opposition.
(With friends like the beltway GOP, who needs Democrats for enemies?)
Salon Magazine is the revealed voice is your hierarchical overlords.
That is all.
A longtime friend of this blog writes:
With all the talk of Trump being too impulsive to have his proverbial finger on nuclear weapons, Trump hasn’t really done anything rash. He says some annoying things, getting the goat of many people in this country. But, despite all the uproar, he has pretty much stuck to not doing anything to us.
However, the constant focus on his brash style of speaking has me most concerned about what the Democrats are going to produce next Presidential election to counter this. It has been speculated that Franken may run. He has already written a book, which usually signals interest. Last night, I had a nightmare that he announced. His pen will likely be a little more impulsive in doing to us.
Yeah, that thought’s crossed my mind. I can just see the meeting at the DNC: “So the people want loudmouthed, brash and incorrigible? Let’s give ’em really loudmouthed, brash and incorrigible!”
If Franken doesn’t run, they might go with Dennis Rodman.
Warren Henry, in writing about the “Womens March”
for women against Donald Trump, notes sort of clubby fragmentalism that accompanies so much of the far left these days:
Black feminists have turned off white women with calls to check their privilege. The march’s inclusion of a pro-life group as a partner in a march that cites abortion rights as one of its “unity principles” was proven controversial and “horrified” the usual suspects. The march has now disowned the pro-life group. Given the march’s problems with alienating women, it is not surprising that the enterprise has had some difficulty attracting men.
The New York Times helpfully explains that “[t]his brand of feminism — frequently referred to as ‘intersectionality’ — asks white women [and presumably everyone else] to acknowledge that they have had it easier.” Moreover: “[T]hese debates over race also reflect deeper questions about the future of progressivism in the age of Trump. Should the march highlight what divides women, or what unites them? Is there room for women who have never heard of ‘white privilege’?”
Under Urbal Liberal Privilege, there are no contradictions.
I cite this partly to diagnose some of the problems with the American left today – and partly to give me an excuse to run this video which is the ultimate illustration of the phenomenon:
But let’s not get too smug, conservatives. We’ve got problems of our own too – starting with the fact that while we started this cycle with over a dozen great conservatives, none got to the White House. Remember how the Cruz faction hated the Rubio faction?
We’ve got our own homework to do.