+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Governor of California announced crime is down. Could it be that what once were labeled crimes have been deleted? Typical lie from a failed politician. But in California expect a slew of lame brained liberals will swallow whatever he says.
And:
Will the CDC relent and start insisting we go back to wearing masks? Appears Biden is either setting us up for such or is signaling the CDC to mend their ways. Stay tuned.
Finally:
Pelosi wants to find out what happened on Dec 6th at the Capitol and she has decided to have a commission look into the matter. She allowed the Republicans to select members from their side and the rest is history:
Pelosi wants to find out what happened on Dec 6th at the Capitol and she has decided to have a commission look into the matter. She allowed the Republicans to select members from their side and the rest is history:
Jim Jordan
Republican House Leadership selected me to be one of 5 Republicans on the “January 6 Select Committee.”
Days later, Speaker Pelosi BANNED me from participating... because she thinks it would compromise the “integrity” of her sham “investigation.”
You and I aren’t fooled so easily, Patriot:
Pelosi wants to use this “committee” as a partisan hit squad against conservatives and to make it a 3rd impeachment of President Trump.
The far left is out of good ideas that will help our country. All they are left with is their radical obsession with Donald Trump.
She knows if I’m on the committee, I’ll do what I do best: fight for the facts, hold the left accountable, and expose the truth to the American people.
Nancy Pelosi’s right to be scared of me. Because I do NOT back down and I do NOT quit
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Pompeo suggests how he and Trump might have handled Cuba:
Exclusive — Pompeo Explains How He and Trump Would Have Handled Cuba Better than Biden
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Biden Administration has been in office some seven months and have spent money like it was water, divided the nation even further because of a variety of mistakes which have potential voters upset like inflation, return to energy dependence and destruction of school curriculum for starts. In addition it is evident, even to the blind, Biden has deteriorated. He was never swift at his best.
Where this all leads is anyone's guess but, if the mid year elections go as polls suggest, Republicans may well take the House and Senate back and then we will have two years of even more contentious government.
Biden's appointments have been very radical and many are Obama holdovers. The public is increasingly dismayed, as they should be, and their discontent is beginning to percolate.
Stay tuned because discord is going to spread like a virus as Democrats try to strongarm themselves into what they will call a semblance of victorious legislation. They are so caught up being driven by the radicals within their ranks they are totally tone deaf to what voters want.
We know the effort to despoil the election process is a Democrat must and they might be able to pull it off because Republicans tend to be timid and many are incompetents when it comes to winning. They just are not capable of are knuckle fighting.
What is at stake is what is left of our pitiful nation.
A Pandemic of Misrule
Antigovernment protests in Cuba, South Africa, Haiti and elsewhere are not random chaos.
By Daniel Henninger
J
For all the elevation American progressivism has received recently— Joe Biden’s leftward flop, the descent of America’s institutional elites into facile wokeism—I am beginning to think the most alert minds on the political left know that what looked like their historical moment is losing momentum.
The Democrats’ determination, driven by party progressives, to cram a generation’s worth of entitlements, taxes and welfare spending into a single reconciliation bill they will pass with a vice-presidential vote is properly seen as an act of desperation. They know it’s this year or never for making central government authority the virtually irreversible locus of power in the U.S. system. How else to explain the constant, totalist appeal that all this must be done to “save our democracy”? The clock is ticking.
But elevate your gaze beyond the Beltway, with its dainty debates about “our democracy,” and it looks like the ideology of command-and-control rule over entire populations is losing public support all over the world.
Cuba, South Africa, Haiti, Belarus and Myanmar all have seen recent explosions of significant antigovernment protests. In a world overwhelmed by dramatic events, one’s instinct is to let them wash through. But maybe we should consider the possibility that something other than random chaos is reflected in so many antigovernment protests. Wildfires can also erupt among nations.
The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 wasn’t expected. Even less likely was the dissolution two years later of the entire Soviet Union and its bloc of satellite countries. Cuban communism is 60 years old. Like the Berlin Wall, Castro’s Cuba became a political monolith, a lump of seemingly immovable repression.
Apologists for both the Soviet Union and Cuba long argued for a kind of amoral patience, believing that someday the sacrifices and compromises would be validated with the arrival of what they now call “equity.”
On Cuba, they still do. Nikole Hannah-Jones, architect of the New York Times’ “1619 Project,” said this week, “The most equal multiracial country in our hemisphere, it would be Cuba.” She added, “That’s largely due to socialism, which I’m sure no one wants to hear.” Not anymore in Cuba, it appears.
South Africa has just seen its worst rioting since apartheid ended and the African National Congress came to power in a democratic election in 1994. The ANC has run South Africa ever since, never losing an election and largely immune to international criticism, with the past week’s riots occurring under “reform” President Cyril Ramaphosa.
What happened? In a recent article, Brian Pottinger, former editor of the South African Sunday Times, offers a searing and comprehensive indictment of the ANC’s nearly three decades of misrule. “To gain control of the state,” he writes, “the ANC followed a policy of ‘cadre deployment’ of party faithful to occupy every level of government. Unable to even manage its own party affairs, they had no hope of managing a modern state. Everywhere there was dysfunction, collapse and corruption, the burden again borne most heavily by the poor.” All this, he writes, “has not gone unnoticed by the people burning the malls today.”
Meanwhile, one finds academics writing admiringly that the African National Congress is a model for Black Lives Matter in the U.S., offering “lessons in white allyship from the South African anti-apartheid movement.” And maybe they’re right that South Africa’s ANC is in fact the political model for Black Lives Matter. BLM’s global network issued a statement this week praising Cuba’s government for its “solidarity with oppressed peoples of African descent.”
Peoples of African descent have suffered for decades under Haiti’s misrule by a succession of dictators. The assassination of President Jovenel Moïse on July 7 pitched the country back into the only political model most of its citizens have ever known—a zero-sum power struggle.
In Russia, Vladimir Putin has spent years suppressing protests, led most recently by Alexei Navalny. Those protests spread last year to nearby Belarus and President Alexander Lukashenko’s fake democracy. Protests against Iran’s mullahs have become routine, especially outside Tehran.
Arguably the event that led in time to the unraveling of Soviet communism’s control over the Iron Curtain countries was the creation in 1980 of the Polish labor union Solidarity after a strike at the Lenin Shipyard in Gdansk. Our era’s Solidarity may prove to be Hong Kong’s heroic protests against Chinese communist rule.
The Hong Kong autonomy protests became a global phenomenon, running almost nonstop after March 2019. They were about one clear thing—freedom. The dramatic images of those long, hopelessly overmatched protests penetrated everywhere via social media, and that includes Cuba. It looks now as if Hong Kong’s people lost, but we shall see.
In the U.S. we have been having a debate about democratic capitalism and whether it can provide what its critics on the left call distributive justice, or equity. Their alternative, on offer now in Congress, is a softened version of centralized government direction for a country of 328 million people. The result surely would be permanent misrule. Who already in possession of freedom would want to go there?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The story of Throwing The Justice into the " Briar Patch."
The Stephen Breyer Backfire
Efforts to bully him into retirement may end up having the opposite effect.
By Kimberley A. Strassel
A defining feature of today’s left is its willingness to shoot itself in the foot. See the campaign to bully Justice Stephen Breyer into retirement.
The intimidation hit new levels this week, following a CNN interview in which Justice Breyer dared suggest he might make use of his lifetime tenure a bit longer—being, as he is, of good health and sound mind. That declaration, combined with his decision to hire four clerks for the next term (suggesting an intention to stay) sent liberals into spasmodic finger-wagging.
“What is it with these justices?” fumed CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, accusing the 82-year-old justice of “gambling” with the future of the court. “This is about ego,” ranted Brian Fallon of the progressive Demand Justice group, scoring Justice Breyer for “acting recklessly.” Even elected Democrats are going there, with Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal chiding Justice Breyer over the “political dangers of waiting.” All this follows a monthslong campaign featuring online petitions, public letters, advertisements and a mobile billboard truck that circled the Supreme Court, reading “Breyer, retire.”
The push is as patronizing as it is political. Some progressives are insisting the old white guy has a moral obligation to make room for what President Biden has promised will be the court’s first black woman. The more honest pit bulls admit they are concerned about health—though not Justice Breyer’s. If he died tomorrow, they’d cheer Mr. Biden’s ability to nominate a replacement. Their real worry is that a Democrat in the 50-50 Senate will meet an end, handing the ability to block a nomination back to Mitch McConnell.
But the outrage misses key realities—for both the man in the robe and for the left. The left’s calls are coming at the moment that Justice Breyer is having the time of his judicial life. Confirmed in 1994, he spent more than 11 years as the court’s most junior member and another 15 in the seniority shadow of John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Now he is the most senior liberal justice, able to speak earlier and exert more influence in the justices’ private conferences and to assign the liberal wing’s dissents. He made clear in the CNN interview how much this new role means to him; why give it up?
Especially given his dedication to the court. If Justice Breyer does stay on, liberals may be able to thank themselves. For years he’s broadcast how likely a bullying campaign against him might be to backfire. An institutionalist, Justice Breyer has only grown more vocal in recent years about his distaste for the politicization of the court by senators, the media and activists. In April he spoke out against Democrats’ court-packing proposals, warning they would damage the court’s reputation. The louder the calls for retirement, the more he may resist—since retiring amid a Democratic pressure campaign would look like just the sort of partisan move he decries.
Liberals also seem blind to the practical, legal outcome of a retirement. When not whining about Justice Breyer, the left is usually hyperventilating over the need to save the country from the supposed extremism of the court’s 6-3 conservative majority. How would it help their cause to replace the influential, moderating Justice Breyer with an uncompromising junior ideologist in the mold of Justice Sonia Sotomayor ?
Justice Breyer knows as well as anyone that Chief Justice John Roberts constantly frets over Democratic efforts to undermine the court’s legitimacy and is therefore always in search of unanimous or near-unanimous opinions. The senior liberal jurist knows this affords him a real opportunity to narrow or water down conservative opinions in return for his support. He’s also aware that the six conservatives are hardly in lockstep, providing more avenues to exert his influence. Replacing him with a progressive jurist only increases the likelihood of a rigid liberal bloc that gets a lot of practice writing outraged dissents.
Justice Breyer has also been around long enough to understand that strategic retirements can go wrong—personally and politically. Sandra Day O’Connor retired in 2006, to spend time with an ailing husband and to afford George W. Bush the appointment. She later told her biographer it was the “biggest mistake, the dumbest thing I ever did.” Her husband’s Alzheimer’s deteriorated rapidly, and she felt she could have mattered longer on the court. Ginsburg muscled through health issues during the Obama years, determined to give the first female president the opportunity to name her successor. Donald Trump had the honor instead.
No one knows who will control the Senate tomorrow, next month, next year or in January 2025. Or who will hold the Oval Office at that point. Or in what direction the court’s current members will go on any given issue. All that is clear is that Justice Breyer knows himself, and those who want him gone would be wise to remember that.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment