++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
(OUTRAGEOUS) Dennis Prager: Why the Left Calls Good People Racist
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Why Meg deserves to be re-elected. Spencer Lawton was Meg's mentor and voluntarily wrote the attached and gave me permission to post. Spencer is one of the most articulate people I have had the pleasure to know. He also is a fellow memo reader.
Dear Dick --
After 28 years and seven election cycles in public office, I wouldn’t be starting my twelfth year of retirement by throwing myself into yet another campaign unless I thought it was important.
Meg Heap is offering for re-election to her third term as DA, and she has opposition. It’s imperative that she succeed.
In a perfect world, this would be a contest in which we could assume of both candidates a roughly equal measure of competence, such that either outcome would be at least acceptable. We do not live in a perfect world. In the current electoral climate, competence is increasingly to be prized, as its occurrence is increasingly rare.
Meg is easily – and demonstrably -- as competent a trial lawyer as there is in Chatham County, and far better than most. If the job consisted only in the ability to convict bad guys, and to model the skill to younger lawyers who come into the profession, she would be the obvious first choice. But there is more to it, not all of which is so obvious. The DA is the face of criminal justice in any community, and is clothed with enormous power. This means she must embody other attributes as well, such as maturity, a high sense of purpose, and the restraint that professional ethics and personal honor demand, including the ability to keep the exercise of prosecutorial discretion free of political considerations. Meg Heap is this person.
I could go on in this vein, but I’ll exercise some of that restraint and instead offer a few concrete examples of the kind of leadership that is not found expressed in the official charter of the district attorney but is found, if at all, only in the character of the person occupying the office.
Meg began her career in my office as a victim advocate, and her interest in that facet of criminal justice has only grown since then, including a special focus on elder abuse. She has also taken a lead position in dealing with the problem of criminal gang activity.
Perhaps the most extraordinary example of the qualities I’m trying to illustrate is this: in her first term Meg, together with leaders in the African American community, led the response to two incidents either one of which might well have exploded into a conflagration of the kind we saw in Fergusson only about a month earlier. The number of people in Savannah who could have stepped in as Meg did is not great, and I don’t think one of them is running against her now.
Please consider doing what you can to help Meg in the ugly necessity of financing this campaign. Political campaigns have become outrageously expensive, too often inversely to the return of benefit; this, however, is a unique opportunity to lend support to demonstrated merit. Meg can’t do it all alone.
Checks -- even quite large ones – can be sent for 55 cents to: Committee to re-elect Meg Heap, Suite 143, 22 West Bryan Street, Savannah, GA 31401.
Thanks for your consideration and help.
-- Spencer
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
By Erick-Woods Erickson
You can rationalize it and say that four years of Bernie would be ineffective because of Congressional gridlock, but that can be said of Trump too. Trump, at least at the regulatory level, has rolled back government, not expanded it. Bernie would undermine the private sector, free-market, churches, and individual liberty without ever involving Congress.
Stop posing as a conservative if you are going with Sanders. It’d be far better to sit it out. To go for Sanders is really an admission against interest that your pride is suffering, not the country.
As for the rest of us, ironically millions are going to turn out to vote for a guy they hate to stop a guy they loathe. I know a lot of people who refused to vote for Trump in 2016 who will crawl over broken glass to support him in 2020 against Sanders. I know Democrats who despise Sanders but consider Trump a bigger threat because of judges, deregulation, etc.
No one will be happy.
The upside is perhaps that our politics is getting so broken that people will realize at the local level they have to do something different. Our politics is only going to get better if people actually turn away from Washington and start focusing on their local communities. People burning out on national politics and convinced the country is held hostage by the fringes of either side is actually good. It’ll get them to stop worrying about Washington and get them to worry about their local communities instead.
The Bernie Map
Mike Bloomberg is about to spend millions to destroy Bernie Sanders with ad campaigns and opposition research. There’s just a problem.
We are less than a week away from South Carolina. Bernie is going to do well enough to add more delegates. Three days later is Super Tuesday. That will see races in Alabama; Arkansas; California; Colorado; Maine; Massachusetts; Minnesota; North Carolina; Oklahoma; Tennessee; Texas; Utah, Vermont; and Virginia.
Bernie is going to win most of California’s 494 delegates and is surging in Texas. Texas has 262 delegates. Right now, Bernie is in second in Texas and will pick up a significant number of delegates. If he goes to first there, he will get more. The latest polling now has him leading.
Bloomberg can spend what he wants, but Bloomberg is not on the ballot until Super Tuesday and is losing to Sanders in Texas and California.
The next major haul will be Florida with 248 delegates and Sanders may be shut out there. But he is going up in the polls there too. It is not yet known if his 60 Minutes remarks will sabotage him there.
The problem is that Biden will keep picking up delegates too. That keeps Biden in the race fighting Bloomberg. Warren also has no reason to get out because she is doing well in several polls and will gain delegates on Super Tuesday. She is also a useful instrument to attack the establishment in a way that protects Bernie.
But, Events Change Things
If Bloomberg is resurgent in tonight’s debate or Biden does terrible in South Carolina, those events could finally shake up the race. The odds are the candidates will finally go after Bernie in desperation, but I would expect Elizabeth Warren to keep up the attacks on Bloomberg and Biden, drawing cover for Bernie.
On top of that, Warren is a media darling and they love to give her air time. That actually will help Bernie. Warren does not want to piss off Bernie supporters. She wants to be seen as a reasonable alternative to Bernie. She loves socialism, just not democratic socialism. She will defend free markets but embrace Bernie’s policies.
Warren has to take out Bloomberg and stunt Biden’s momentum.
The debate is going to be meaningful, but we keep forgetting early voting. In Nevada, early voters ignored Warren and same-day voters saw a groundswell for her. A second great debate performance for Warren might not help her in South Carolina (it won’t), but could really help her on Super Tuesday.
Again, all this keeps the race from consolidating and keeps Bernie in the lead. Bernie has a core base of support and the other Democrats continue to fight over the majority of the party. If Bloomberg has another debate, it will be game over for him even if his consultants decide to keep him in so they can keep their payday going.
Look For This
Watch the moderators of the debate tonight to go after Sanders. The media really is lining up against Sanders. The press hates Trump so much they want him gone and doubt Sanders can do it.
But watch Sanders turn the attacks around on the press and the Democrats. His supporters will be united with him against the establishment. The attacks on Bernie will make him stronger against his opponents. Bloomberg’s coming ad campaign risks hurting Sanders and helping Trump, not the rest of the Democratic field.
I expect Sanders’ supporters to soon start arguing Bloomberg is a Republican plant in the race looking to help the President. A large number of Democrats will believe it.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
There are may reasons why politics has become so divisive. In my humble opinion I believe, in addition to the general ones, it is because, for the first time, we have a Republican President who has proven conservatives can fight back and has dedicated his administration to taking away the power of the opposition, ie "draining the swamp."
Trump has been unwilling to allow Democrats to walk over him, to tag him with identity politics and other pejorative methods while remaining silent. Trump is a fighter and that is one of the reasons he was elected. "America First" is simple but says a great deal and touches the deep seated belief that we have allowed ourselves to become pigeons and those who voted for him believe progressive policies have been injurious and bad for America.
As for Trump's "draining the swamp," this has led Democrats to oppose virtually everything he does including impeachment , attacking his appointees, denying him, through the press and media, any positive news about his many accomplishments.
Yes, Trump is a bit crude, unorthodox but that is what his supporters are willing to accept because is a fighter, not a patsy and is willing to step on deserved toes.
America’s House Divided Cannot Stand
Voters tend to see their political opponents as enemies, which is dangerous for democracy.
By Charles Lipson
For constitutional democracies to thrive—or even muddle through—voters and candidates have to respect their political opponents. Parties must see the competition as legitimate even amid vigorous disagreement on ideas. This shared sense is a load-bearing wall for democracy.
Over the past decade, the U.S. has become much more divided, sawing holes in this wall and hoping to miss the support beams. Progressives and conservatives agree on one thing: It’s the other guys with the chain saws. A 2018 Axios poll summed up the sentiment: Some 61% of Democrats thought of Republicans as racist, bigoted or sexist. About half of Republicans described Democrats as ignorant or spiteful.
Why do so many Americans see their political opponents in such stark terms? One reason is that many on both sides think the future of American democracy hangs in the balance, that a victory for their opponents could ruin the republic. Conservatives fear the growth of the administrative state—powerful bureaucrats who rule by fiat and undermine elected leaders. For progressives, the perceived danger is Donald Trump. The left sees him as an aspiring dictator who is willing to shred constitutional norms.The two sides might seem diametrically opposed, but they aren’t. Both could be true and form a vicious circle. If “the swamp” and the “deep state” bureaucracy are out to sink President Trump, he can stay afloat only by fighting them ferociously. The harder he fights, the more progressives double down to defend the administrative state, which their policies have built.
This conflict is sharp, deep and toxic for democracy. It is grounded in the country’s profound ideological divide, now embodied in its two parties, and the shared belief that the stakes are very high, perhaps the highest since the Civil War.Progressives say Mr. Trump started the fight. He is confronting allies, unilaterally imposing tariffs, and rolling back regulations. He is attacking opponents on Twitter. Progressives—and some Republicans who dislike Mr. Trump—are especially troubled by his attacks on “fake news,” which they consider a dangerous assault on the First Amendment. The left is appalled when Mr. Trump criticizes federal judges, whose independence is central to the rule of law. The left also fears Mr. Trump’s entirely legitimate effort to reshape the courts.
Both sides believe in their mission—and their righteousness. The civil servants and lawmakers who oppose President Trump believe they are saving democracy. They consider it a civic obligation to speak out, leak highly privileged documents, launch endless investigations, and unleash the powerful tools of national intelligence on domestic political opponents. They are guided by what former Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James Comey calls “a higher loyalty” that pre-empts laws and procedures designed to prevent such abuses. In their minds, the ends justify the means.
Something similar happens on college campuses, where political activists and social-justice warriors shout down speakers they oppose. They are convinced their goals are noble. That self-assurance dwarfs any concerns about free speech or free assembly.
Mr. Trump and his supporters believe they are being persecuted by these opponents. They see their views being “canceled” in college classrooms and in the media. Mr. Trump’s supporters see elites treating them with open contempt. And they’re angry about it.
They are certain the Obama administration used the FBI and intelligence agencies to spy on Mr. Trump’s campaign and early presidency—and broke the law to do it. They know Mr. Comey leaked confidential memos to get Robert Mueller appointed special counsel. Mr. Mueller continued Mr. Comey’s unprecedented investigation of the president and his aides. Mr. Mueller assembled a partisan team and continued his probe for two painful years even though there was no Russian “collusion.”
When that story finally imploded, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Rep. Adam Schiff began their quest for impeachment. Democrats denied the president the most basic features of Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence: the right to call your own witnesses and cross-examine the other side’s. When the Senate voted to acquit, Mrs. Pelosi tried to deny reality. “There was no acquittal,” she told CNN. “You can’t have an acquittal unless you have a trial, and you can’t have a trial until you have witnesses and documents.”
It is hard to imagine a more damaging assault on settled constitutional procedures. Yet Mrs. Pelosi is merely reiterating Democrats’ central theme since 2016: Donald Trump is not a legitimate president.
Mr. Lipson is a professor emeritus of political science at the University of Chicago, where he founded the Program on International Politics, Economics, and Security
Richard Grenell: An American Hero Under Attack
By Daniel Greenfield
No figure in the Trump administration has been a greater champion of equality for gay people.President Trump’s new appointee to be the Acting Director of National Intelligence is under vicious attack from the left and from the LGBT Left in particular – a telling fact since no figure in the Trump administration has been a greater champion of equality for gay people.
After the attacks of September 11, the position of the Director of National Intelligence was created to coordinate all of our intelligence agencies against the external terror threat. As the Spygate scandal continues to undermine trust in the intelligence community, the position is more important than ever.
President Trump’s appointment of Richard Grenell as Acting Director has infuriated the Obama veterans and holdovers responsible for Spygate, as well as the LGBT Left.
As Trump’s ambassador to Germany, Grenell successfully led tariff negotiations with German automakers, helped gain subsidies for American energy shipments to Germany, convinced most major German companies to pull out of Iran, closed German airspace to an Iranian airline, stopped $300 million euros in gold and currency from going to Iran, and got Germany to ban Hezbollah.
Coming off this successful winning streak, Grenell is already under vicious attack because his track record shows that he can get things done, and get them done for America. And that’s the last thing that the anti-American Left wants.
The old allies of James Clapper and Susan Rice, Obama’s intelligence bosses, fear that Grenell’s appointment will finally allow Trump to clean house and expose their abuses of power, while the organized LGBT Left fears that Grenell will expose their hypocrisy and lack of concern for gay people.
Both of these big lies converge on Iran.
The Obama intel veterans have used every dirty trick, in and out of office, to help Iran. While the LGBT Left has been infuriated by Grenell’s insistence on exposing Iran’s executions of gay people.
And the truly infuriating thing for leftwing hypocrites is that Grenell is gay.
President Trump’s appointment of Grenell as acting director makes him the first openly gay cabinet member. But instead of welcoming the appointment, Grenell’s role has been met with hostility, contempt, and disdain by the very organizations who claim to be fighting for gay rights.
When Grenell led President Trump’s campaign to decriminalize homosexuality around the world, he took on Iran and other, mostly Islamic countries governed by Sharia law, where homosexuality is punishable with death.
"I want them to understand that you cannot put someone in jail or kill someone simply for being gay," he had told a UN session on the decriminalization of homosexuality. “I want these countries to be called out, I want them to feel the pressure. This list should be read out every day."
The countries began with Afghanistan and included Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia.
Instead of welcoming Grenell’s advocacy for gay rights, the Human Rights Campaign and GLAAD, funded by Harvey Weinstein, attacked or dismissed the move while attacking the Trump administration.
The Advocate complained that Grenell is “known for insulting powerful women, such as Hillary Clinton and Rachel Maddow”. GLAAD failed to note the appointment of the first openly gay cabinet member. The Human Rights Campaign spent its time touting assorted Democrats running for office, but utterly ignored Grenell’s appointment. As did the usual run of gay rights groups and publications.
“GLAAD,” Grenell later noted, “has this whole immigration thing, it’s a movement beyond anything that has to do with gays and lesbians.”
The LGBT Left did not want to talk about the execution of gay men in Iran. Instead it wanted to be part of the “resistance” to the Trump administration even if that meant letting gay people in Muslim countries die.
Out Magazine ran an op-ed claiming that decriminalizing homosexuality was an “old racist tactic”.
OutRight Action International’s executive director had attacked Grenell’s UN advocacy for the decriminalization of homosexuality by insisting that, "The drivers of violence and discrimination against LGBTQI people are stereotypical notions of who a woman or a man should be, so unless we tackle root causes, such as biological determinism, then we won't really be able to fully defend the rights of LGBTQI people.” Forget Islamic law and its death penalties. The real threat to gay people was biology.
OutRight understandably has other priorities. It’s currently protesting the lack of diversity at the Oscars.
Grenell not only called out the brutality of Islamic countries by name, tweeting about the violations of the UN's Declaration of Human Rights by members of the Human Rights Council, by Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Somalia, Nigeria, Qatar, Egypt, Mauritania, Sudan and Libya, but challenged Europeans, as ambassador to Germany, and the LGBT Left, as an openly gay diplomat, over their hypocrisy.
“Many of our European allies have Embassies in Tehran. This barbaric act must not go unanswered. Speak up,” he had urged European nations.
"People around the world who are fighting for equality are totally annoyed at the New York, Hollywood, West Hollywood gays who raise a lot of money for black tie events, but who aren't doing a thing to help our brothers and sisters in Lebanon who are getting arrested," Grenell later told Dave Rubin.
Gay rights groups accused him of a covert strategy to target Iran. European diplomats wanted to go on promoting sex ed globally, instead of confronting Sharia law.
While the UN Human Rights Council, Amnesty International, and the Europeans wanted to bash Israel, Grenell wanted to talk about gay people being hanged, murdered, and arrested in the Middle East.
And while the LGBT Left wanted to attack the Trump administration over immigration, Grenell challenged it to cross the intersectional red line and address the Sharia executions of gay men.
While the LGBT Left attacked or ignored the appointment of the first openly gay cabinet member, its constituent groups have thrown their support behind Pete Buttigieg even though he’s just the mayor of a failed city.
Why do GLAAD and HRC ignore Grenell’s real achievements while focusing on Buttigieg?
Beyond taking pictures of himself in a uniform to prep for a future run for higher office, what has Pete Buttigieg done to protect gay people?
When Grenell fought to stop countries like Iran from killing gay people, Buttigieg and the LGBT Left insisted that the real challenge was in the United States.
America, not Iran, was the real threat to gay people.
Pete Buttigieg, the first openly gay presidential candidate, has yet to condemn Iran’s execution of gay people. He has urged rejoining the agreement that allows Iran to develop its nuclear program without conditioning it on human rights. The closest he came to even mentioning the situation for gay people in Iran was when Meghan McCain asked him on The View about Rep. Omar's comparison of Israel to Iran.
"People like me get strung up in Iran," Buttigieg noted.
When the Washington Post asked Buttigieg whether he would use his foreign policy to advance gay rights, he replied that, “progress on LGBTQ rights is important, as are women's rights and racial justice and economic justice and political speech and all the things we care about”.
Then he argued that, “it only works if we actually have our own house in order. And so from human rights to democracy promotion to LGBT issues to climate, we had better be walking the walk before we go out on the world stage and push other countries to do the same.”
The real problem, Buttigieg was saying, isn’t in Iran or in Saudi Arabia. It’s in America. Until we achieve some impossible standard of human rights perfection, we have no right to tell Muslim countries that they shouldn’t hang gay people. Only, one day, when the Oscars are truly diverse, as HRC, GLAAD, and OutRight want them to be, maybe we can address the executions of gay people in Muslim countries.
And probably not then either.
That’s why in the argument between Grenell and Buttigieg, they chose Buttigieg over actually preventing the killing of gay people. It’s also why President Trump chose Grenell.
The gay rights groups that attacked Grenell have shown where their true priorities lie.
Just as he had in Germany and at the United Nations, Grenell exposed the hypocrisy of human rights activists who use gay rights as a weapon to enforce a larger politically correct consensus with no interest in actually protecting gay people from harm.
The Democrats are promising gay people a place in an intersectional coalition, in which Rep. Omar and Islamists rank ahead of them, but in which the campaign for Oscar representation will go on. Meanwhile, President Trump and Richard Grenell, his Acting Director of National Intelligence, will actually protect the lives of gay people against Islamic terror and violence. Like the Pulse massacre.
President Trump’s new appointee has actually fought to stop Iran from killing gay people while Buttigieg and his political friends will fight to see that Iran gets all the money it needs to keep on killing gay people and everyone else.
And:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Finally, a dear, astute friend and fellow memo reader invited us to dinner last night and we discussed Bloomberg's performance and the debate this evening. He acknowledges Bloomberg performed poorly in his debut performance but attributed it to the fact that Bloomberg could not believe he was on a stage with such idiots and was actually dumfounded into silence
I am not sure my friend's analysis is correct but I do believe "Mini MIke" will be more vociferous tonight.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment