The Atlantic  – so well known for its leftist point of view- published this!?!?


Consider the Possibility That Trump Is Right About China.
Critics are letting their disdain for the president blind them to geopolitical realities

When a new coronavirus emerged in China and began spreading around the world, including in the United States, President Donald Trump’s many critics in the American foreign-policy establishment were quick to identify him as part of the problem. Trump had campaigned on an “America first” foreign policy, which after his victory was enshrined in the official National Security Strategy that his administration published in 2017. At the time, I served in the administration and orchestrated the writing of that document. In the years since, Trump has been criticized for supposedly overturning the post–World War II order and rejecting the role the United States has long played in the world. Amid a global pandemic, he’s being accused—on this site and elsewhere—of alienating allies, undercutting multinational cooperation, and causing America to fight the coronavirus alone.

And yet even as the current emergency has proved him right in fundamental ways—about China specifically and foreign policy more generally—many respectable people in the United States are letting their disdain for the president blind them to what is really going on in the world.

Far from discrediting Trump’s point of view, the COVID-19 crisis reveals what his strategy asserted: that the world is a competitive arena in which great power rivals like China seek advantage, that the state remains the irreplaceable agent of international power and effective action, that international institutions have limited capacity to transform the behavior and preferences of states.

China, America’s most powerful rival, has played a particularly harmful role in the current crisis, which began on its soil. Initially, that country’s lack of transparency prevented prompt action that might have contained the virus. In Wuhan, the epicenter of the outbreak, Chinese officials initially punished citizens for “spreading rumors” about the disease. The lab in Shanghai that first published the genome of the virus on open platforms was shut down the next day for “rectification,” as the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post reported in February. Apparently at the behest of officials at the Wuhan health commission, news reports indicate, visiting teams of experts from elsewhere in China were prevented from speaking freely to doctors in the infectious-disease wards. Some experts had suspected human-to-human transmission, but their inquiries were rebuffed. “They didn’t tell us the truth,” one team member said of the local authorities, “and from what we now know of the real situation then, they were lying” to us.

Now China’s propagandists are competing to create a narrative that obscures the origins of the crisis and that blames the United States for the virus. This irresponsible behavior and lack of transparency revealed what Trump’s National Security Strategy had identified early on: that “contrary to our hopes, China expanded its power at the expense of others.” Instead of becoming a “responsible stakeholder”—a term George W. Bush’s administration used to describe the role it hoped Beijing would play following China’s entry into the World Trade Organization in 2001—the Chinese Communist Party used the advantages of WTO membership to advance a political and economic system at odds with America’s free and open society. Previous National Security Strategy documents had tiptoed around China’s adversarial conduct, as if calling out that country as a competitor—as the 2017 document unequivocally did—was somehow impolite.

‘Could’ ought to be SHOULD.


Why gun owners could be the decisive vote in 2020

Recently, Joe Biden visited a construction plant in Michigan. A worker confronted Biden and accused the former vice president of “actively trying to diminish our Second Amendment right and take away our guns.” Biden, in turn, responded, “You’re full of [it].”

The exchange continued, cameras rolling, Biden clearly sensed an opportunity, recognized the political value of the moment.  Biden’s staff stepped in to try and move him aside. He waved them off. After all, his successful legislative record on guns – including the 1994 passage of a 10-year ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines – and frequent boasts about taking on and beating the NRA were at stake. Dodging the worker’s accusations was not an option.

Biden’s assertive posture on guns recalls the 2000 election. And this worries Democrats.

In 2000, the Democrat Party Platform celebrated Al Gore’s record of standing up to the NRA, the legislative successes of the Clinton administration, namely the Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban, and called for mandatory gun locks and a host of federal programs regulating gun purchases.

Al Gore lost. Democrat leaders attributed the loss in part to gun owners support for George W. Bush, especially in states Gore was defeated including his home state of Tennessee. Public opinion surveys showed Bush won a historically large share of the gun owners vote – 66%, only Bush senior in 1988 attracted a greater proportion – 68%. To win elections, centrists Democratic strategists, concluded “Democrats need to reason with gun owners rather than insult them.”

Gun owners have long been a reliable GOP voting bloc. The General Social Surveys demonstrate that in 10 of the last 12 presidential elections, a majority of gun owners supported Republican candidates. Even when the nation supported a Democrat, gun owners typically remained loyal to Republicans. And in 2016, Donald Trump garnered over 60% of gun owners, which was the largest share since Bush in 2004. In the 2018 midterms, 61% of gun owners voted for Republican candidates compared to just 26% of non-owners, a 35-point gap.

This is not a small or insignificant political group. Opinion surveys estimate a third to 40% of households have a gun. That percentage increases notably among the all-important rural voting population. Moreover, in several key swing states gun owners comprise a substantial proportion of voters, including Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Florida, Michigan, and Wisconsin. As Democrats remember, in a tight election, gun owners’ vote can be decisive.

But the former vice president believes much has changed since Al Gore’s defeat.

“I have a shotgun,” Biden countered, “I have a 20-gauge, a 12-guage. My sons hunt, guess what?   You’re not allowed to own any weapon; I’m not taking your gun away at all.”

Will gun owners believe him? It may not matter.

Gun politics appears to be shifting.   Democrats are now better positioned to engage Republicans on guns. Mass shootings repeatedly remind voters of the dangers of gun availability and the unspeakable violence that can result. Gun safety groups are much stronger and better financed than in the past. They outspent the NRA by millions in the 2018 midterms and defeated many NRA backed candidates. Exit polling showed gun policy among Democrats ranked number two behind health care and ahead of immigration and the economy. It ranked fourth among all voters. In addition, gun violence prevention was the top issue among young people.

These facts strengthen Biden and calm fears of many Democrats.

Returning to Detroit, the factory worker repeated he had heard Biden make that claim, that he would take guns away. “It’s a viral video,” the worker declared. “I did not say that! I did not say that! Biden replied, his voice raising, temper flaring, finger pointing. “Don’t be such a horse’s ass,” he added.

Predictably, the NRA released the video of the confrontation on twitter with the headline “Joe:  Gun owners see through your lies.”

Biden’s campaign touted the video as well, using it to spotlight Biden’s authenticity and strong advocacy for gun control and his long-time commitment to an assault rifle ban.

Both sides are dug in, their collective heels firmly planted. Both are betting their position on guns will be the winner.

The 2020 contest will be close; it will be an epic battle.

Which party prevails may turn on whether swing state gunowners believe the factory worker or Joe Biden.

What Garbage: Clyburn Obviously Just Lied About the Focus of the House Coronavirus Crisis Committee

House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn (D-SC) joined CNN’s Jake Tapper on Sunday to explain the focus of the newly-formed House Select Committee on the Coronavirus Crisis, which Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) tapped him to chair. According to Clyburn, the goal of the committee is to “protect the American people.”

“I think that is one of the reasons Speaker Pelosi decided that this committee was necessary. We, in the United States Congress, have oversight and we must perform that oversight,” Clyburn explained. “And we will do that to make sure we save lives, that we save taxpayer money and she was very smart, I think, to pattern this committee after the Trump committee that was stood up in 1941.”

Clyburn went on to explain that then-Senator Harry Truman argued in favor of one committee to investigate what took place in World War I instead of the 116 committees that were established.

“He said, at the time, he thought it was much better to have one committee before the fact and that committee proved to be very, very wise,” Clyburn explained. “According to history, the committee spent less than $1 million dollars but saved $15 billion dollars and that’s what Speaker Pelosi is trying to do here, get out in front of this to protect the American people so that we can not only save lives, we can keep fraud and abuse, profiteering.”

The House majority whip cited an example of price gouging that has taken place in New York State. Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) was paying 70 cents for an N95 mask. That price has skyrocketed to $7 a mask.

“This is not about the President of the United States or even the independent counsel or the inspector general. This is about focusing on how the money is spent, whether or not the people who are getting the money are actually working on behalf of the American people or whether or not they’re profiteering,” he said.

According to Clyburn, his understanding is that the newly-formed committee will focus on how private businesses are handling the response, not whether or not the federal government could have responded the Wuhan coronavirus sooner.

“The crisis is with us. The American people are now out of work. There are millions of them out of work. The question is whether or not the money that’s appropriated will go to support them and their families or whether or not this money will end up in the pockets of a few profiteers,” Clyburn said.

Let’s get this straight. The Democrats are trying to do everything they can to take care of the American people? If that’s the case then why did Pelosi come in at the last minute and completely blow up the bipartisan, bicameral deal that was made without her? Oh. That’s right. It’s because she wanted to use this stimulus plan to fundamentally transform our country. Her wish list had ridiculous demands, like bailing out the USPS, upping the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour and offsetting airline emissions by 2025. Clyburn himself even said the Wuhan coronavirus relief package was the perfect opportunity to further their agenda.

The Democrats aren’t looking to protect the American people. They’re looking at protecting their party status and their position in government. They’re doing everything in their power to push their radical agenda and move our country further left. The fact that they have to use a crisis to attempt to get it done shows just how unpopular their socialist ways really are.

Okay. Here’s how I read this.

That was read right off a Teleprompter. So, it was set up, approved by the campaign and rehearsed, no telling how many times, to the point that Biden could reel it off with barely a slip.
Now, no one –NO ONE– in their right mind would let that kind of stupid opening remark out in the pubic domain except on purpose.
So, the campaign, and the media, in this case The Hill, let it out on purpose.
Why?
All of them have conceded the fact that SloJoe is senile.
Too senile to ever be considered as a real candidate, for who wouldn’t question such an idiotic statement while rehearsing it, and demand to delete it.

So, that being taken into consideration, I think the campaign and his family  want this continually exposed so that any who might still believe Biden is a viable candidate will have no excuse but to ask the partai to work on a replacement before or during the convention, and to keep Sanders from walking away with the nomination.


Biden Earned 11 Pinocchios From Fact-Checkers Over Virus Claims and His Latest Gaffe is Truly Bizarre

Someone really needs to let Joe Biden give this whole thing up already. He’s struggling so hard to be relevant from his basement and it’s just not working. Every time the media covers him there, he offers up another gaffe and more evidence that he’s not the right person for the job.

Today’s entry was more than a bit bizarre. For some reason he seemed to believe that virus relief checks going out to help people whether the crisis were being held up because the president wanted to put his signature on physical checks. That is straight-up nuts.

What’s even more bizarre was he was actually reading it.

Most checks would be direct deposited. But no, Trump isn’t physically signing any of them. If he really believes that, there’s a big problem.

Comment O’ The Day


The best description of democrat politicians that I have ever come across:

These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:

1: A proud look,
2: a lying tongue,
3: and hands that shed innocent blood,
4: An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations,
5: feet that be swift in running to mischief,
6: A false witness that speaketh lies, and
7: he that soweth discord among brethren.

(Proverbs 6:16-19)

When you think about it, there is nothing on that list that does not describe the democrat party leadership

So, anyone tell me when the demoncraps haven’t been a bunch of clowns running amok?


Democrat Clownshow: Sisolak, Whitmer Reverse Course on Hydroxychloroquine

Send in the clowns. There ought to be clowns. – Last week, two craven political hack governors – Steve Sisolak in Nevada and the detestable Gretchen Whitmer in Michigan – made the indefensible decision to deny their citizens the right to be treated with hydroxychloroquine for the Wuhan Virus. On Sunday, the FDA issued an emergency authorization to doctors to use that cheap, highly-effective drug across the United States.

Today, the two circus clown Governors reversed their stupid edicts, now allowing those who contract the Virus in their states to be treated with the drugs. Better late than never.

From a report on Sisolak from JustTheNews.com:

Nevada Democratic Gov. Steve Sisolak has now decided to allow malaria drugs hydroxychloroquine and chloroquin to be prescribed for the impatient treatment coronavirus patients, a spokesperson on Tuesday.

Sisolak previously endorsed restrictions on the use of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquin as the Trump administration touted its potential effectiveness in treating coronavirus.

Influential Republicans such as Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) have criticized Sisolak for his state’s handling of the drugs, which on Monday received emergency Food and Drug Administration approval for treating coronavirus patients.

From a report on Whitmer by the Detroit Metro Times:

Gov. Gretchen Whitmer drew fire from some on the right after the Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (LARA) sent a letter last week threatening “administrative action” against doctors who prescribed two experimental drugs that could potentially help coronavirus patients.

The Whitmer administration has since removed the language threatening doctors from the letter and is now asking the federal government to send shipments of the drugs, Bridge magazine reports. The Food and Drug Administration issued an emergency authorization for the antimalarial drugs hydroxychloroquine sulfate and chloroquine phosphate on Saturday.

Conservatives including Charlie Kirk and Rudy Guiliani accused Whitmer of risking lives to oppose President Donald Trump. In recent weeks, Whitmer and Trump have been sparring on national television over federal aid for Michigan, while Trump has touted the drugs’ potential in treating COVID-19.

Note that the despicable Whitmer is not only reversing her ban, but now begging the federal government to ship her quantities of the drug. Hey, maybe she tested positive herself – that would par for the course for this insufferable clown.

These people make me sick. They are among the worst people in our entire society.

That is all.

A stupid little political stunt to Get Trump goes awry in Nevada

Steve Sisolak, the leftist governor of Nevada, decided to play doctor by banning the use of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, two drugs that are being used elsewhere to treat COVID-19.

“While these drugs serve necessary medical purposes, this regulation protects the Nevadans who need them and prevents unnecessary hoarding,” Sisolak wrote on Twitter.

Unneccessary hoarding? The hoarding thing is a smokescreen, his real reason was to slap at President Trump who touted these medications as showing promise, and even mistakenly said they had been approved for use by the FDA. That’s his real reason for the limit on the unproven drug, which goes against the ‘right to try’ and the current national mobilization effort to get everyone well by suspending burdensome regulations in the medical community to encourage experimentation and swift solutions. What Nevada needs, see, is more administrative-state regulation, which is is showing all signs of going badly for him.

According to the Reno Gazette-Journal, here was Sisolak’s originally stated reason, which has a clear reference to President Trump:

Sisolak announced an emergency regulation prohibiting the drugs’ use in a statement that said there was “no consensus among COVID-19 experts or Nevada’s own medical health advisory team” that the medications  were an effective treatment for the virus.

Tellingly, this semi-prohibition comes right on the heels of the death of an Arizona man who tried to self-medicate, fatally taking a fish tank cleaning additive with a similar name, and killing himself as well as sickening his wife. She has since blamed President Trump.

Sen. Ted Cruz could tell what Sisolak’s ban was really about — Getting Trump — and he said something. According to the Reno Gazette-Journal:

On Wednesday, Cruz wrote on Twitter: “During this crisis, we should listen to the science & the medical professionals,” Cruz tweeted on Wednesday. “The opposite approach: the Governor of Nevada, practicing medicine w/o a license—trying to score political points against Trump—& prohibiting NV doctors from prescribing medicines to treat COVID19.”

Sisolak hollers about ‘no consensus’ as reason for his move, but now looks like Sisolak has decided the consensus, limiting the availability of the drug on the market as bad stuff, and never mind that portion of the medical community that thinks it does work.

Sisolak has since clarified that he hasn’t totally banned the use of the drug – he’s allowing it for hospital use, which is for COVID-19 patients at death’s door. It’s sad stuff because the drug reportedly shows the most promise in early-stage COVID-19 patients. But Sisolak’s the doctor now, so late-stage can have his exception.

Where he really gets into the playing-doctor thing, though, is by permitting it for prescription by doctors for outpatient use, but only with only a 30-day supply.

What happens to the guy who needs a 40-day supply to get well? People are different, and one-size-fits-all works very badly in medicine.

With the drug banned for the forty-day guy, he’s going to be looking into the black market, or in a worse-case scenario, under the kitchen sink, for what he needs. So is the uncertain guy who forgot to pay his big Obamacare insurance premium. So is the slightly sick guy who can’t get an appointment because the doctors are too busy with more urgent cases. The whole thing interferes with doctors’ ability to practice medicine, and patients’ “right to try.” Too bad if you’re sick, no hydroxychloroquine for you!

All of them — and anyone else who thinks he might get sick — have in fact just been incentivized by the Nevada governor’s stupid micromanaging move to … hoard up.

It’s ironic, because Sisolak couldn’t do anything better to incentivize hoarding than to initiate bans and conditions and prohibitions. In his current “hoarding” justification, he now admits it has some promising medical applications for COVID-19, just as Trump says, as well as for treatment of lupus and malaria so now he’s limiting availability to help non-COVID-19 patients, he says. A normal person in normal market would ramp up production to accommodate everyone who wants it. This guy likes the ‘divide it up and ration it out’ model instead, a feature, not a bug, of socialized medicine.

If you wanted to encourage hoarding, there probably isn’t a better way to do it than to cut off access. Just ask any surge of travellers after an entry ban is introduced, or pot stash house owner in the face of some new prohibition, gun and ammo buyer after gun- and ammo-buying limits are introduced, or stock market participant after the switch breakers are introduced. Prohibitions are precisely what encourage hoarding. Ramp up production to accompany higher demand is what ends the impulse for hoarding.

It’s nothing but Democrat administrative-state mentality at work here – first, the slap at Trump, and second, the move to crush the wreckers and hoarders – all coming at a time when the private sector is stepping up production of necessary things in a pandemic, the innovators are going gangbusters  with new solutions, doctors are experimenting in uncertainty as never before and the regulators in Washington are getting out of the way in a bid to hasten solutions.

What Nevada needs, he seems to be saying, is more bureaucrats, more enforcers, and more regulations, because there’s just too much freedom and in a pandemic, people are escaping “all proper control.”  He’s moving against the Zeitgeist, led by President Trump. Expect a lot more self-justification and backtracking from him, he’s not making himself popular.

 

Politifact Determined To Get It Wrong On Joe Biden And Gun Confiscation

Another week, another dubious “fact-check” from the professional propagandists at Politifact. This time the Poynter Institute project labeled a claim that Joe Biden has admitted to supporting gun confiscation as “Pants on Fire,” their most extreme rating for a supposed falsehood. In their herculean effort to obscure Biden’s support for gun confiscation, the media outlet went out of its way to avoid discussion of the overwhelming evidence of the presidential candidate’s intent to take guns.

Politifact took issue with an article from Conservative-Daily titled, “Watch: Biden Looks Into The Camera And Promises To Take Away Americans’ Guns​.” As evidence, the Conservative-Daily article cited a viral video of Joe Biden and Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke, eating at Texas hamburger chain Whataburger. During the video, Biden states “This guy changed the face of what we’re dealing with regarding guns, assault weapons… and I just want to warn [Beto’s wife] that if I win I’m coming for him.”

By narrowly focusing on only Biden’s statement at the Whataburger, while avoiding all context, Politifact came to the conclusion that Biden was only expressing his intent to have O’Rourke be part of his administration and that the video did not show evidence of the former vice president’s desire to ban guns.

When looking at the totality of Biden’s comments on confiscation, this view is untenable.

Just prior to the Whataburger outing, Biden shared the stage with Beto at a campaign rally where the failed U.S. senate and presidential candidate endorsed him for president. Biden told those gathered, “I want to make something clear. I’m going to guarantee you this is not the last you’ll see of this guy.” Biden went on say, “You’re going to take care of the gun problem with me. You’re going to be the one who leads this effort. I’m counting on ya.”

By offering Beto a role on guns in a potential future administration, Biden made clear that he supports Beto’s gun control position. That position is gun confiscation.

During the September 12, 2019 Democratic debate, Beto was asked about his proposal to confiscate commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms. Beto responded in part by saying, “hell yes, we’re going to take your AR-15.” The Beto campaign would go on to sell t-shirts with the anti-gun slogan.​

Less than a week later, Beto reiterated his call for gun confiscation on CNN’s Cuomo Prime Time. During an interview, Chris Cuomo asked Beto, “All right, so let’s state the proposition. Are you, in fact, in favor of gun confiscation?” Beto responded with “Yes.”

There can be no doubt that Biden understands Beto would confiscate firearms, as he shared the debate stage with him on September 12.

However, it is not necessary to deduce that Biden supports gun confiscation from his support for Beto’s attacks on firearms rights. Biden has stated that he intends to take firearms.

Biden had the following exchange with CNN’s Anderson Cooper when asked about firearm confiscation during an August 5, 2019 interview.

Cooper: So, to gun owners out there who say well a Biden administration means they are going to come for my guns.

Biden: Bingo! You’re right if you have an assault weapon. 

It is revealing that the purported “factcheckers” at Politifact did not make a full accounting of the facts concerning Biden and gun confiscation. Biden and Beto’s statements on gun confiscation are public and have been made widely available by those who support the Second Amendment. Such actions by Politifact suggest a determined ignorance calculated to protect a favored political candidate.

 

Why do you think the talking heads of leftist press was yammering that he should stop the briefings, or none of the news channels should cover them? President Trump was harshing their narrative and they couldn’t stop it.


pelousy pays homage and channels Kenny Rogers’ The Gambler:
“Know when to fold ’em”


Pelosi delays her coronavirus bill, says will try to pass Senate’s without most members present

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Tuesday that she will attempt to pass the Senate’s coronavirus economic stimulus package – putting aside the alternative, projected $2.5 trillion measure that she proposed.

The California Democrat said she’ll try to pass the Senate’s projected $1.8 trillion measure by unanimous consent, meaning House members can say yes without having to come to Capitol Hill to vote.

“The easiest way to do it is for us to put aside some of our concerns for another day, and get this done,” Pelosi told CNBC. “If it has poison pills in it, and they know certain things are poison pills, then they don’t want unanimous consent – they just want an ideological statement.”

 

Pelosi ‘Stimulus’ Bill Imposes Nationwide ‘Ballot Harvesting’ Without ‘Any Limit’

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s new stimulus bill would mandate nationwide “ballot harvesting,” allowing party operatives to return other people’s ballots to polling places without “any limit” on the number of ballots.

“Ballot harvesting” was legalized in California in 2016, and first used in the 2018 midterm elections. It allows anyone to drop off someone else’s mail-in ballot at a polling station. There is no process for vetting or verifying those delivering the ballots — no background checks or identification requirements. Democrats dropped hundreds of thousands of ballots off at polling stations in 2018, helping Democrats as they flipped seven Republican seats.

The practice is illegal in most other states, largely because it is susceptible to fraud and intimidation. Republicans were caught flat-footed in 2018; they experimented with the tactic in recent special elections, only to find that their voters adamantly refuse to give their ballots to strangers. Democrats are more open to the practice — often because the “harvester” previously registered the voter, according to Republican National Committeeman Shawn Steel.

California’s “ballot harvesting” law has yet to be challenged in court. It is one reason that California remains a one-party state, with little prospect for change in the foreseeable future.

Pelosi wants to take that system nationwide.

Her bill, released Monday afternoon, provides that every state:

A) shall permit a voter to designate any person to return a voted and sealed absentee ballot to the post office, a ballot drop-off location, tribally designated building, or election office so long as the person designated to return the ballot does not receive any form of compensation based on the number of ballots that the person has returned and no individual, group, or organization provides compensation on this basis; and (B) may not put any limit on how many voted and sealed absentee ballots any designated person can return to the post office, a ballot drop off location, tribally designated building, or election office.

In other words, paid party operatives can literally truck thousands and thousands of ballots to the polls, provided they earn a salary or fee, and are not paid by the ballot.

It is a practice that is known in Third World countries as “ballot stuffing,” and is outlawed in every democracy, no matter how poor — even in countries where the physical and administrative obstacles to voting are far greater than in the world’s most developed economy.

And it is Pelosi’s condition for saving the U.S. economy from coronavirus.

Again;  Any questions why I call them demoncraps?
It reminds me of Maureen O’Hara’s line in ‘Big Jake‘ after Wayne opens the strongbox:
I don’t think we’ve got any other choice than to give them what they’ve asked for


Pelosi’s extortion is a spark that may start a national fire

Nancy Pelosi, with a major assist from Elizabeth Warren and the capitulation of Chuck Schumer, scuttled Senate negotiations Sunday over a rescue bill to help people left unemployed and businesses at risk of collapse from a government-ordered economic shutdown in response to the Wuhan coronavirus pandemic.

Pelosi’s move, at so many levels, is so outrageous, it could become a spark that sets a national fire.

It wasn’t just the disruption of negotiations which were close to conclusion. The bill Pelosi put forward is a liberal laundry and wish list of things they know they could not get enacted unless the nation were in a vulnerable position. It’s the extortionist’s price for the release of your loved ones.

I don’t think Pelosi and many other Democrats are aware of the fury they are about to unleash in the nation.

I think Chuck Schumer, for all my criticisms of him, understands this, which is why there still is a chance of a Senate deal being reached despite and without rewarding Pelosi’s extortion.

It’s getting hard not to hate.

Senate Fails To Pass Cloture Vote On Coronavirus Stimulus Bill

The Senate on Sunday night failed to pass a procedural cloture vote on a phase-three coronavirus stimulus bill as there has been continued internal dispute between both parties.

The vote was 47-47. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Sunday that the bill would include $75 billion for hospitals and that two-thirds of all new money in the bill would go to states, however, this vote will likely end consideration of this bill. McConnell also said, “it’s just about time to take yes for an answer.” Democrats have said the coronavirus bill lacks new SNAP funds and were reportedly pushing for expanded emergency leave provisions and more than three months of unemployment insurance.

Treasury Sec. Steve Mnuchin, who has been negotiating with members of Congress on behalf of the White House, was spotted entering Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s office, 20 minutes away from the cloture vote.

McConnell voted no, which was not planned. He voted with the Democrats so he would have the option of recalling the vote, as Senate rules state.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Sunday said she will halt negotiations with the Senate and move to pass her own coronavirus package in the House, which could drag things out longer than many expected. Pelosi’s legislation will be a $1.6 trillion emergency package, according to Politico.

The text for a phase-three Senate bill announced Friday would give $1,200 checks to every person, while couples would receive $2,400. That $1,200 check will go to Americans making less than $75,000 annually. Each child will receive $500. The amount is reduced by $5 for every $100 a person earns over $75,000. Those making above $99,000 would not get any money.

The GOP’s bill also includes specific provisions for disabled veterans, low-income seniors, and individuals with no income tax liability with at least $2,500 in qualifying income, according to The Senate Finance Committee. There will also be a much smaller benefit of $600 for millions without federal tax liability……….

First, they tried to repeal the Hyde amendment that restricts federal funding for abortion, now this gambit is trotted out.


Democrats Play Politics, Try to Shoehorn Climate Change Provisions Into Wuhan Virus Relief Bill

Never letting a crisis go to waste seems to be the motto Democrats live by.

The latest example comes in regards to the current negotiations over the next phase of relief in dealing with the Wuhan virus. With the initial round of spending passed, the next phase is too include checks to Americans and loans to businesses in order to get them through this hard time. For the most part, there’s been bi-partisan buy-in that this must be done.

But some Democrats are looking to push their unrelated policy goals into the process.

Democrats want climate action included in coronavirus aid

Democrats on both sides of Capitol Hill are pushing to add climate change provisions to the third aid package for people and industries affected by the novel coronavirus pandemic.

But it’s unclear whether they have the political leverage to make those ideas stick — at least not yet.

The Democratic proposals touch on two main areas.

Several Senate Democrats want airlines to reduce their carbon emissions in exchange for federal aid that could hit $50 billion or more.

House Democrats, meanwhile, are looking at clean-tech tax credits. Those include incentives for electric vehicles, battery storage, offshore wind and solar energy that were left out of a December tax extenders package…………

In a vacuum, these might not be that big of a deal. But when you understand the dynamics at play, they become much more consequential. For example, you can’t just impose arbitrary carbon emission reductions on an airline industry that’s already floundering. Further, development of aircraft that burn less fuel is already well underway, with some being delivered already (the Boeing 787 is much more efficient than a 767, for example). Airlines and aircraft manufacturers have every incentive to fly planes that burn the least amount of fuel as possible, while still getting the job done of course. Government mandates on emissions could squash a vital sector of our economy.

Businesses are hurting right now. Putting any additional pressure on the economy is absolutely nuts. We need less regulation and more freedom of movement within our economic environment right now, not more crushing government intervention.

The latter push for “clean-tech” tax credits is perhaps even worse. We are already cash strapped as a nation. Any taxpayer money spent needs to go to businesses that have actually proven to be sustainable, from the mom and pop deli to the major suppliers that keep our country going. The last thing the U.S. needs to be spending on is more Solyndra-type boondoggles, where “green” start-ups take taxpayer money and promptly blow it.

The good news is that it does not appear the Democrats pushing this stuff have much support. I expect Nancy Pelosi to push them aside, as even she recognizing the urgency of getting the next relief bill passed.

Biden Virtual Town Hall: The Confused Ramblings of a Perpetually Confused Candidate.
Biden on what he’ll do about coronavirus if he wins: “But even I can’t do that for another two year, another year, between now and November. Or actually January.”

Joe Biden held a virtual town hall on the coronavirus, presumably to show that he is better equipped than President Trump to address a pandemic crisis. It didn’t go well.

In fact, it was an unmitigated disaster. A real one, not the TDS-fueled media rendition of doomsday fear-mongering that passes for coverage of the Trump administration’s coronavirus response.

Image

Bernie Bros Warn of ‘Massive Exodus’ If Democrats Nominate Joe Biden

The circular firing squad never fails to amuse.

The Bernie Bros are vowing revenge.

As the presidential campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders continues to crash and burn, the socialist’s most hard-core supporters are vowing they will never vote for Joe Biden at the ballot box — even if that means handing Trump a second term.

“We will never — NEVER boost or support Joe Biden or defend his abysmal record and terrible policy positions,” Henry Williams, executive director of The Gravel Institute, told The Post. “We will tell people, as we always have, to vote their conscience and to make decisions based on the interests of all the world’s oppressed people… I do expect a massive exodus from the Democratic Party.”

Democrats Bash Trump for Not Declaring Himself a Dictator

This idjit is in the same crap-for-brains party that for the past 3 years has been running around with their hair on fire, screaming ‘Trump is going to declare hisself God Emperor and Dictator for Life’, right?
This hypocrisy and lack of self awareness again indicates these are adult bodies containing the minds of 12 year old juveniles.

If you had “Democrats trash Trump for not being a dictator” on your 2020 bingo card, mark it now.

As the Wuhan virus pandemic continues, state and local government are taking actions within their communities. We are seeing school closures, large gatherings being banned, and even some full-scale quarantine zones. All of this is happening to try to slow the spread of the disease, which is still largely a mystery in regards to just how deadly it is in a country like the United States.

You’d think all of that happening would be praise worthy, as elected officials are use the proper channels to serve their citizens, but nah. Democrats are now bashing Trump for not declaring himself a dictator.

…..Man, we went from “Trump is a fascist dictator” to “Trump is bad for not being a dictator” in record time.

The fact is, the President doesn’t have the authority to tell local cities they have to ban gatherings. To even attempt to do so would set an incredibly dangerous precedent, with the executive essentially having the power to ban public congregation, one of the fundamental rights protected by the Constitution. Federalism does not cease to exist because a bunch of people want to panic over a virus. In fact, federalism continues to be the best way to manage all this. Local officials making decisions tailored to their constituents is far more efficient than some top down decree from the federal bureaucracy

‘Death Threats For Me And My Family’: Missouri Lawmaker Trying To Ban Drag Queens From Reading To Kids Says He’s Faced ‘Vitriol’ And ‘Hate’

Tar and Feathers‘™ are too good for whoever came up with the idea of letting children be exposed to this perversion, the perverts and their agenda behind it. Flogging might be where to start from.

A Missouri lawmaker said he has never experienced so much”vitriol” and “hate” as he has faced after introducing a bill against drag queens reading to children in public libraries.

Republican Missouri state Rep. Ben Baker’s bill, which seeks to ban Drag Queen Story Hour in public libraries, has been met with opposition from local librarians, the American Library Association, Drag Queen Story Hour defenders and LGBTQ proponents. More than 100 people gathered Saturday at a rally organized by drag queens to protest the bill at the Missouri Capitol in Jefferson City.

The lawmaker told the Daily Caller News Foundation that he has received thousands of emails from people roused by the American Library Association’s political action committee “Every Library” and received death threats over social media.

The Bill: Parental Oversight Of Public Libraries Act

Baker’s January “Parental Oversight of Public Libraries Act” would strip government aid from libraries that allow minors to access “age-inappropriate sexual materials.” These materials include any description or representation of nudity, sexuality, sexual conduct or sadomasochistic abuse.

The bill also would require libraries to institute parental review boards elected by the community — none of whom would also be members of the public library. These parental review boards would determine whether any sexual material offered by the library is “age-inappropriate sexual material” and convene public hearings to help the community determine whether this material is suitable.

Library personnel who “willfully neglect,” willfully violate or refuse to follow these rules could be punished by a fine of up to $500 or imprisoned in the county jail for no more than a year.

What Is Drag Queen Story Hour?

Drag Queen Story Hours are “just what they sound like,” according to the Drag Queen Story Hour official website: drag queens reading to children.

The events are designed to be about 45 minutes long for children aged 3 to 8 years and intended to capture children’s imagination and help them explore gender fluidity through “glamorous, positive, and unabashedly queer role models.”

The official Drag Queen Story Hour website boasts more than 45 independently operated chapters across the U.S., including in New York City, D.C. and Chicago, as well as two international chapters in Tokyo and in Berlin.

The American Library Association has also backed the movement and offers a plethora of resources on its website “to support libraries facing challenges.” A spokeswoman told the DCNF in a January statement that the ALA “strongly supports the rights of libraries to host whatever programming they decide fits the needs and interests of their communities.”

Backlash: ‘The Vitriol And The Hate’

Baker called the backlash that has stemmed from his bill “unprecedented,” and pointed out that media coverage of his bill has been mostly negative. Media outlets initially portrayed the legislation as a bill that seeks to ban “inappropriate books” rather than banning Drag Queen Story Hours from public libraries.

“We are deeply concerned by Missouri House Bill 2044, ‘Parental Oversight of Public Libraries Act,’” Every Library wrote in a statement after Baker introduced the bill. “It sets up quasi-governmental tribunals that circumvent the normal way libraries review materials challenges and imposes fines or jail time on librarians who violate the act. It’s a bad bill and needs to be stopped.”

“When you take on some of these issues that are controversial, the push back from media and from even the American Library Association, you know, was astounding,” Baker told the DCNF. “I got thousands of emails, I’ve had death threats for me and my family.”……….