Category: Politics

When you don’t have enough people that will vote the way you want, will do what you want, will allow themselves to be controlled the way you want, well, replacing them is an option.

The Democrats Finally Did It on Immigration…And It’s the End of Us If They Succeed

Why wouldn’t Democrats do this? They need to address their base’s lust for left-wing activism. They want to get as much done as possible before the 2022 midterms likely wash them off the Hill. When it comes to illegal immigration, amnesty is a top item. For weeks, Democrats floated that they might incorporate some form of amnesty into this $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill that’s just a progressive goodie bag of wasteful spending. And, of course, you knew they were going to make the argument that legalizing these people impacts the budget in some fashion.

Now, with the $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill looking to pass the Senate, the reconciliation bill is next, though House Democrats want this package done first and will block the former until that’s done. It’s all talk, no action. It’s pure theater. It’s meant to press this up against the September 30 government funding deadline. Regardless, if Democrats succeed in this effort, we’re done.

The $3.5 trillion package that the left-wing of the Democratic Party wants has a framework that allocates some $107 billion to get this amnesty push going. And only through the reconciliation process can this be done (via Breitbart):

The cost of the amnesty to taxpayers is just slightly lower than Senate Budget Committee chairman Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) amnesty plan, which was projected to cost $150 billion.

Any amnesty plan crafted by Democrats is expected to give green cards, which lead to naturalized American citizenship, millions of illegal aliens eligible for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), those with Temporary Protected Status (TPS), those working on U.S. farms, and those considered “essential” workers.

Democrats’ amnesty via the reconciliation plan hit a serious roadblock last month when Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) announced she will oppose their $3.5 trillion budget. With Sinema’s opposition, Senate Democrats do not have the 50 votes necessary to pass the budget via reconciliation with Vice President Kamala Harris breaking a tie with Republican opposition.

Most recently, Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) told donors amnesty would only be possible if Senate Democrats shove it through the reconciliation process.

“If we don’t have reconciliation, I’m not sure that there’s a pathway forward,” Menendez said.

How many will be legalized? What’s the exact number? We don’t know. It doesn’t say. But given the fact that Democrats are hanging onto their majorities by a thread ahead of a key midterm election with Biden’s numbers rapidly sinking, you can bet the mortgage that the “millions” figure is correct. I’m not saying anything new—Democrats need to get as many on the fast track as possible. And they know there will be zero Republican support to do get this done.

This has all the makings of a doomsday situation. The House Democrats are purposefully delaying until all this nonsense is pressed against the deadline to keep the government open. Oh, and on top of trillions in new spending, an estimated $256 billion will be added to the deficit over the next eight years, and a soft amnesty push—the reconciliation package has no mechanism to increase the debt ceiling. The deadline for that was August 2. The Treasury is now in “extraordinary measures” mode. It only has enough reserves to fund government obligations for no more than three months.

Continue reading “”

Bill Aims To Add ALL Semi-Automatic Rifles With Detachable Magazines To NFA

Back when candidate Joe Biden was running for president, he had laid out several different things he wanted to do in the way of curbing so-called “gun violence”. Multiple times on episodes of Cam and Company, Cam stated we should be taking Biden at his word on what he wishes to do. From his wish list:

Regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act. Currently, the National Firearms Act requires individuals possessing machine-guns, silencers, and short-barreled rifles to undergo a background check and register those weapons with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Due to these requirements, such weapons are rarely used in crimes. As president, Biden will pursue legislation to regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act.

Let’s first note the laziness and candor in Biden’s plan by linking to a fact sheet on Giffords Law Center’s webpage. Biden is clearly in bed with this group, why else would his website link to them? I don’t think it would have been too hard for the team to come up with a similar document to link to or come up with their own ideas on the subject, but I digress.

Then there is the progressive golden boy, former ATF agent, David Chipman, who’s falling from grace, but still an entity to deal with, and his views. As reported on The Hill:

David Chipman, a retired Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) agent, on Monday said AR-15 rifles should be regulated like machine guns.

“What I support is treating them just like machine guns,” Chipman, who is now a senior policy adviser at Giffords: Courage to Fight Gun Violence, told Hill.TV’s Buck Sexton and Krystal Ball on “Rising.”

“To me, if you want to have a weapon of war, the same gun that was issued to me as a member of [the] ATF SWAT team, it makes sense that you would have to pass a background check, the gun would have to be in your name, and there would be a picture and fingerprints on file,” he continued.

Anyone paying attention? Just to connect the dots, we all know about Chipman’s involvement with Giffords. Biden linking to Giffords? Chipman working for Giffords? Swampy.

Continue reading “”

Gun Control Activists Blame Biden As Chipman Nomination Nears Collapse

On Wednesday, advocates for David Chipman told POLITICO that they were pushing for a full vote to confirm the gun control activist as ATF director before the Senate starts its August recess. By Thursday afternoon, however, Chipman’s biggest supporters appeared resigned to the idea that senators will most likely skip town without holding a vote and had started pointing their fingers at the White House and Joe Biden himself over the crumbling prospects of installing one of their own as the head of the agency overseeing the nation’s gun laws, regulations, and the firearms industry.

Frustrations became evident during a Zoom call on Thursday afternoon with Cedric Richmond, senior adviser to the president and director of the White House Office of Public Engagement — the latest in months of meetings in which advocates have brought up Chipman’s nomination.

According to two people familiar with the call, a small group of survivors and those pushing firearms restrictions urged the White House to be more aggressive on the nomination. They also encouraged the administration to support ending the filibuster to allow firearms legislation to more easily pass the evenly-divided Senate, the people said.

If Biden can’t move senators like Joe Manchin to publicly support Chipman’s nomination, how exactly is Sleepy Joe supposed to convince red state Democrats to nuke the filibuster? The White House isn’t the hang up here, it’s a number of Senate Democrats themselves who are the biggest roadblock in that regard. But with Chipman’s nomination in serious trouble, gun control activists have to place blame somewhere, and they’re certainly not going to blame themselves for pushing Chipman as a candidate in the first place.

Continue reading “”

Well, maybe they ought to careful about that. And ‘hoping’ for a backlash? What does the author think would happen? Any major form of crackdown and there’s quite a few that have made it plain that things can go kinetic.

BLUF:
Paul’s letter to the Ephesians was written at a time when fathers were kings of their homes and wielded total, unquestionable authority. It’s Paul’s biblical warning to fathers not to behave as tyrants lest they produce restless or rebellious children who ultimately resent them.

That same warning should be heeded by public officials who forget we’re a republic and “consent of the governed” is still the order of things.  Ignoring that fact will produce a “restless and rebellious” electorate, too.

And that’s just what the provocateurs in charge are hoping. 

They’re Provoking Us, You Know

If you grew up with siblings, you know what it’s like to feel provoked.  If you watch sports you’ll often see visiting players show-boat to provoke the home team and their fans after they make a great play.  Provocation is such a powerful psychological tool the Bible expressly forbids it when bringing up children. Ephesians 6:4 says “Fathers do not provoke your children to anger…”

We’re living in a time of great provocation directed at the American people from those in elected office.  Virtually all levels of government are barely hiding the disdain and contempt they have for the people they’re supposed to serve.

The pandemic has given county commissioners, school boards, health directors, mayors, governors and federal officials an emperor complex, lording over our daily lives deciding which privilege they will or won’t allow based on their whims.

They justify it by calling it science.  It’s not.  It’s provocation and it’s working for the left on many fronts in very effective ways.

Take for example the foiled plot to kidnap Michigan Governor Whitmer last year.  Originally reported as a group of pro-Trump insurrectionists bent on punishing Whitmer for her aggressive lockdowns of 2020, only a year later do we learn the truth.  The men involved may well have agreed with the plot, but were set up and goaded into it by embedded federal informants.

Left-leaning BuzzFeed reported, “Working in secret, they (FBI informants) did more than just passively observe and report on the actions of the suspects. Instead, they had a hand in nearly every aspect of the alleged plot, starting with its inception. The extent of their involvement raises questions as to whether there would have even been a conspiracy without them.”

Similarly, the events at the US Capitol on January 6th have led many eyewitnesses, journalists, and at least one United States senator to ask who was involved in that day and what planning went into it.  Given what BuzzFeed reported on the Whitmer plot, is it difficult to imagine the same for January 6th?

As Revolver News summarized, “If it turns out the federal government did in fact have undercover agents or confidential informants embedded within the so-called militia groups indicted for conspiring to obstruct the Senate certification on 1/6, the implications would be nothing short of seismic. Especially if such agents or informants enjoyed extremely senior-level positions within such groups.”

These events are still sold by media and Democrats as organic uprisings of unhinged opposition posing a constant, present danger to our very republic.  They have been used throughout the last eight months of Biden’s presidency to paint any opposition to any authority, order, or edict as potential “insurrection” and wing-nuttery.

Any questions raised about the election, the virus, the lockdowns, the vaccine, the border and the insinuation is, “What are you, one of THOSE people?”

They’re provoking you.

Continue reading “”

BLUF:
The odd election of 2020 does not sit well with a great many Americans. They are not in the mood to engage in the equivalent theatrics of Ben Cohen’s mockery of Bush or the pussyhat feminists’ sneers against Trump.

President Biden is, in their view, a hollow figure not even worth mention. Their complaint lies far deeper as they see the purposeful destruction of American values by an elite that bullies and derides them.

What will come of this? How might revolt manifest itself? I hope it will be a successful recapture of key institutions, perhaps beginning with the schools. But the political elite that prefers to scorn the common people for wanting a say in their government is playing an awfully risky game. Despair breeds wrath and that fire, once ignited, will engulf us all.

OLD GLORY, NEW ANGER

America is no longer just angry. We have become a nation of wrath. It is a risky emotional condition, recognizable by our desire to obliterate our opponents. Wrath doesn’t seek reconciliation. It wants revenge. Nor does wrath want to accommodate what it can’t control. It wants to rub the slate clean.

There is a wrathfulness of the political left, stemming from visceral hatred of Trump and his supporters. But as the left is ascendant in the seats of power, it can pursue its effort to extinguish its opposition via the instruments of state. The wrathfulness on the political right is another story. Wrath reaches its zenith when people feel not just abused but hopeless in the pursuit of any redress. American wrath right now is the white-hot anger of the millions of people who have concluded the country is being destroyed and they have no legal redress.

I have been writing about anger in America for close to 20 years. That is a period that encompasses the ‘I hate George W. Bush’ manifestos; Revd Wright’s ‘God damn America’ sermons; Obama’s ‘They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them’; Hillary’s ‘basket of deplorables’ characterized by ‘racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic’ views; Trump Derangement Syndrome; the 2020 George Floyd ‘peaceful protests’; and the QAnon Shaman at the January 6 Capitol riot.

All of these are instances of American rage, specifically from its political branch. But the quality of the anger differs from one instance to another. Anger against George W. Bush, first ignited by his disputed 2000 victory over Al Gore, was vehement but theatrical. Ben Cohen of Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream, for example, mounted a national ‘Pants on Fire’ tour in 2004, exhibiting a 12-foot effigy of Bush with fake flames shooting out of his trousers.

The pussyhatted protesters at Trump’s inaugural in 2017 had some similar goal of deflating a man they saw as pompous and overbearing, but the tone of the protest shifted from exaggerated disrespect to something approaching bitter enmity.

Both are instances of what I call ‘new anger’, a self-congratulatory, look-at-me styling of the old emotion. New anger is a post-World War Two phenomenon that followed from the breakdown of an older ethic. For centuries American culture had upheld an ideal of self-control, in which easy resort to anger was stigmatized as a weakness and a personal fault. The arrival on these shores of Freudian analysis, emphasizing that repressed anger causes neurosis, and the simultaneous importation of the existentialist idea that unleashing anger is the path toward finding your authentic self, opened the door to this emotional rewiring of the American temperament.

Continue reading “”

The Mythological White Supremacist

Washington — We at The American Spectator call it “Kultursmog,” and it is the only kind of smog of which our friends on the left approve. Actually, they not only approve of Kultursmog, but they contribute to it. Kultursmog is that aspect of American culture that is utterly politicized, and it is politicized by the politics of the left. Its leading centers of pollution are Hollywood, California; New York City; Washington, D.C., and, increasingly, Silicon Valley. I had hoped that Silicon Valley, with its brave claims to libertarianism, might have escaped the pollutants of Kultursmog, but I was wrong. The lure of virtue flaunting proved too strong for the tycoons of Silicon Valley. Now they are taking it to outer space. Did you see that Jeff Bezos had hardly gotten his feet back on terra firma when he donated $100 million not to the Red Cross, not to the Little Sisters of the Poor, but to Van Jones, who is himself a leading smokestack of Kultursmog over at CNN.

Kultursmog is everywhere. It is in the books we read, the movies we attend, the songs we sing. It does not permeate our history, which is why the woke folk are so intent on tearing down our history, including statues of Abraham Lincoln, George Washington and even Frederick Douglass. Can Martin Luther King Jr. be next?

I have made a career of sounding the alarm against the propaganda of the left, and just the other day, I caught the left extruding their propaganda into the public arena. They were using the obituary pages of The New York Times to spread their malign message. Is there no place they will not defile with politics?

One of the left’s favorite myths is that America is abundant with white supremacists and practitioners of something called the alt-right. I know. I, too, once thought the alt-right was a roadside direction or an indication a detour was ahead, but apparently it has something to do with the politics of a distinctly extremist variety. Advocates of the alt-right apparently tend to congregate at rural gas stations, usually in the dark of night. That is about all I know about it, but the writers at The New York Times claim to be highly agitated over it.

A couple of weeks back, William Regnery II, a man who supposedly “bankrolled” what the Times called “some of the leading organizations and figures behind the rise of the alt-right and championed efforts to win adherents to a modernized notion of white supremacy,” bit the dust. And do you know how the hysterics at the Times handled his passing? They devoted an entire half-page to him, complete with a picture of him standing with some young adjunct who looked understandably uneasy. The young man was wearing an ill-fitting suit, and he might have been more comfortable was he armed, but he was not. The recently deceased Regnery and I might have met years ago at some Republican function, for he was active in the Barry Goldwater campaign of 1964. Or possibly, it was at a stamp collectors’ conference. I used to be an avid collector. At any rate, he is dead, and from the Times’s own information gathered for Regnery’s obit, it is clear that he never succeeded in any political endeavor, from his earliest Republican days to his days of aimless wanderings with fanatics.

Senator Sinema Just Nuked Dems’ $3.5 Trillion Budget Reconciliation Plan

Senator Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) delivered a blow to Senate Democrats’ proposed $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill that the caucus hoped to pass after the bipartisan infrastructure package is advanced. Sinema made it clear that she will not support a bill with a $3.5 trillion price tag, but is open to “beginning the process.”

“I have also made clear that while I will support beginning this process, I do not support a bill that costs $3.5 trillion — and in the coming months, I will work in good faith to develop this legislation with my colleagues and the administration to strengthen Arizona’s economy and help Arizona’s everyday families get ahead,” Sinema told The Arizona Republic.

Democrats would need all 50 members of the caucus and Vice President Kamala Harris’ tie-breaking vote to pass the budget via reconciliation. Meanwhile, the Senate may advance the bipartisan infrastructure package, with a $1.2 trillion price tag, on Wednesday night.

Democrats condemn Trump’s ‘Big Lie’ but keep telling ones even worse ones themselves

Did you know that black people are not going to be allowed to vote in America anymore? At least in states controlled by Republicans? Sounds a bit unlikely, but that’s a conclusion you might have come to if you took seriously what President Joe Biden said in Philadelphia Tuesday.

Biden decried Republicans’ proposed changes to election laws as “the 21st-century Jim Crow assault” that tries “to suppress and subvert the right to vote in fair and free elections, an assault on democracy.”

This is, to be polite, unhinged nonsense.

Biden is old enough to remember what real Jim Crow voter suppression was like. It meant zero black people voting in places like Mississippi. It meant threats and violence against black people who tried to register to vote. It meant unfair application of literacy tests and poll taxes.

Requiring voters to present photo ID is nothing like this: Large majorities think it’s reasonable.

Continue reading “”

McCarthy Pulls His Five Republicans From Riot Commission After Pelosi Rejects Conservative Reps

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi rejected two of Republican Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s five choices to sit on the select committee that will investigate the riot at the Capitol on January 6.

Pelosi said that Ranking Judiciary Committee Member Jim Jordan — a close ally of Donald Trump — and Republican Study Committee Chairman Jim Banks cannot be on the committee because they might jeopardize “the integrity of the investigation.”

She said it with a straight face so I guess she thinks it’s true.

For his part, McCarthy threatened to pull all the GOP members from the Committee unless Pelosi changed her mind.

“With respect for the integrity of the investigation, with an insistence on the truth and with concern about statements made and actions taken by these Members, I must reject the recommendations of Representatives Banks and Jordan to the Select Committee,” Pelosi said in a statement. “The unprecedented nature of January 6th demands this unprecedented decision.”

The appointment of Trump supporters would ruin everything. No one is supposed to defend Trump or the Republicans. The GOP members will be present in order to give a patina of “bipartisanship” to the proceedings.

As CNN points out, because there is one Republican who has agreed to be on the committee — Liz Cheney — it will still be “bipartisan.” McCarthy won’t be able to pull her off the committee.

The committee will still have Republican representation from one member: Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, an outspoken critic of former President Donald Trump who was one of Pelosi’s eight choices to serve on the committee. Cheney’s participation keeps the committee bipartisan even without anyone appointed by McCarthy.

It’s still bipartisan even though no real Republicans will be there because CNN says so.

So there.

McCarthy issued his own statement, taking the high ground and saying, “We will not participate.”

“Denying the voices of members who have served in the military and law enforcement, as well as leaders of standing committees, has made it undeniable that this panel has lost all legitimacy and credibility,” he said. “Unless Speaker Pelosi reverses course and seats all five Republican nominees, Republicans will not be party to their sham process and will instead pursue our own investigation of the facts.”

Washington Post:

A senior Democratic aide familiar with caucus deliberations said many Democratic members were concerned about Banks and Jordan sitting on the committee, based on their past actions and statements. Particularly, members expressed outrage with Banks’s statement in which he blamed “the Left’s authoritarian agenda” for politicizing the committee’s scope. Reports that Jordan had aided then-President Donald Trump in strategizing about how to overturn the election, and the possibility of him testifying before the committee because he spoke to Trump on Jan. 6, made him an unreliable panelist, according to the aide.

Like CNN, the media will claim the proceedings are still “bipartisan” because Cheney — who was appointed to the committee by Pelosi, not McCarthy — will continue to serve. It’s one thing to stand up for your beliefs but quite another to actively seek to undermine your own political party.

This is not about impeachment. It’s about the integrity of Congress, which is threatened by this partisan attempt to destroy Trump and the Republican Party. That Cheney can’t or won’t see that should result in her being kicked out of the Republican caucus.

Below The Radar: The PISTOL Act

A while back, we discussed the difference between the ideal and the achievable. It is a conundrum that many Second Amendment supporters have, whether it is legislation or candidates. Our enemies often have the same problem, so we can take some small comfort.

Just as Dianne Feinstein has introduced a fallback measure to the semiauto ban she really wants, the same approach is being taken with regards to the Biden-Harris regime’s attack on AR-15-type pistols (among others). We have discussed the Home Defense and Competitive Shooting Act on multiple occasions, and it is the ideal solution to address that attack.

However, as Second Amendment supporters have often learned, the ideal solution isn’t always possible.

In this case, removing short-barreled rifles from the purview of the National Firearms Act may not be possible at the present time. In fact, to be very blunt, seeing the Home Defense and Competitive Shooting Act become law in this Congress is a pipe dream, given who controls the committees and subcommittees.

This is not to say it’s a bad idea – introducing legislation and tracking the cosponsors is a good way to gauge what sort of support there is for efforts to restore our rights. That makes having a fall-back option a good idea. Enter HR 3823, the PISTOL Act.

What this bill, introduced by Representative Bob Good (R-VA), does is to maintain the status quo by stating that firearms like the AR-15 pistols with a stabilizing brace may not be placed under the National Firearms Act. This would end the present threat for the short term – provided that anti-Second Amendment extremists don’t increase their numbers in Congress.

This doesn’t come without trade-offs.

On the one hand, if the PISTOL Act were to be passed into law (say as an amendment to the appropriate appropriations bill), it may make it more difficult to pass the Home Defense and Competitive Shooting Act in the future. But given the realities that surround passing legislation, even taking a majority in the future won’t make passing the Home Defense and Competitive Shooting Act a given.

For one thing, the same filibuster that currently is preventing anti-Second Amendment extremists from packing the court and ramming through extreme legislation will be wielded by the likes of Chuck Schumer, Chris Murphy, Dianne Feinstein, and other anti-Second Amendment extremists to block pro-Second Amendment legislation. It cuts both ways, and before Second Amendment supporters contemplate nuking the filibuster to pass such improvements, remember that Harry Reid’s use of the “nuclear option” for nominations backfired to the tune of Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett on SCOTUS.

The fact is, the PISTOL Act may be a suitable incremental measure in lieu of passing the Home Defense and Competitive Shooting Act, and Second Amendment supporters should contact their Senators and Representative and polite urge them to support this legislation. However, it is no substitute for defeating anti-Second Amendment extremists at the ballot box at the federal, state, and local levels.

Curtis Sliwa Blasts Biden Anti-Gun Gathering

The New York mayor’s race is heating up. Former police officer Eric Adams is already projected to win, and in New York City, that’s not overly surprising. However, his Republican opponent, Guardian Angels founder Curtis Sliwa isn’t exactly rolling over and handing him the keys to the mayor’s office.

Instead, he’s fighting back. In doing so, he’s not afraid to aim at the White House and a recent gathering that included Adams.

As crime in New York City regresses toward the crisis level seen in the 1970s, Republican mayoral candidate Curtis Sliwa argues his decades of experience leading the unarmed patrol group the Guardian Angels has prepared him far better than Democratic opponent Eric Adams to tackle worsening violence across the Big Apple a year after the onset of the “defund police” movement.

President Biden included Adams, a retired NYPD captain and current Brooklyn borough president, in a roundtable discussion on gun violence at the White House this week – even though Adams barely won his Democratic primary and there is still a general election in November, Sliwa told Fox News.

“To me, his invitation was purely political,” Sliwa said. “It’s almost as if they decided we don’t want to hear from the Republican, even though in this arena Curtis Sliwa has more credentials than anyone who attended that White House conference, especially Eric Adams.”

Sliwa, unlike other attendees at the roundtable, has a unique perspective as he is personally a victim of gun violence. He was shot five times in June 1992 on the orders of John Gotti Sr. to John Gotti Jr. and the Gambino crime family, and therefore went through four federal trials.

“I understand the problems of gun violence having experienced it,” Sliwa, who was once shot with a .38 Special handgun, said. “You say ‘gun control, gun control’ because that’s always what comes out of these sessions. That would have done nothing to have stopped the gunman.”

Sliwa has always taken a more proactive role in combating violent crime in New York City than most so-called gun violence activists. Rather than blaming the weapon, he’s always recognized the problem isn’t the tool, it’s the tool using it.

While many decried the Guardian Angels’ existence, let’s be honest, at least they were doing something tangible rather than holding rallies and hoping that would somehow stop the violence. They weren’t armed and weren’t trying to be polite, but they weren’t playing around, either.

Whether it worked or not is a topic for another time.

Continue reading “”

Shocking Poll Finds Many American Now Want to Secede From the United States

Support for secession is growing among every partisan group in the months following the Jan. 6 riots at the Capitol but particularly among southern Republicans, a new poll found.

Bright Line Watch, in conjunction with YouGov, found that citizen support for their state or region to secede from the U.S. is greatest in the South “where support was already highest (and has the greatest historical precedent).” Overall, 37 percent of respondents indicated a “willingness to secede.”

Support among southern Republicans grew from polling conducted in January, which showed 50 percent were in favor of secession. But the number leapt to 66 percent in June.

“By this summer, we anticipated, political tempers may have cooled — not necessarily as a result of any great reconciliation but perhaps from sheer exhaustion after the relentless drama of Trump,” the group wrote in an analysis of the survey’s findings.

Respondents were asked: “Would you support or oppose [your state] seceding from the United States to join a new union with [list of states in new union]?”

Bright Line Watch constructed five distinct regions that a particular respondent’s state would join and added the relevant states to the question.

Brightline Watch warns that the numbers might be skewed given the complexities of the matter and because the group believes it is an issue that respondents were “very unlikely to have considered carefully.”

The group reiterated that the respondents on either side of the political aisle indicated some support for the idea and that it rose within both partisan groups.

“Republicans are most secessionist in the South and Mountain regions whereas it is Democrats on the West Coast and in the Northeast,” the group writes. “In the narrowly divided Heartland region, it is partisan independents who find the idea most attractive.”

YouGov collected the responses of 2,750 Americans in a public survey from June 16–26, 2021.

BLUF:
While anti-gun Democrats like Carolyn Maloney will use this GAO report to push for more gun control laws, what the study tells me is that a) we’ve got much bigger issues that are driving up healthcare costs and b) banning or tightly regulating items doesn’t solve the problem. Even if the right to keep and bear arms wasn’t protected by the Constitution, gun control wouldn’t be the best answer to bring down the rate of violent crime and firearm-related injuries, but the Second Amendment makes the idea a non-starter. Want to reduce gun-related injuries? Reduce the number of violent criminals, and leave the 100-million responsible gun owners alone.

The Fuzzy Math Behind The GAO’s New Report On The Cost Of “Gun Violence”

Democrats have a new talking point in their continued push for new federal gun control laws – restricting the rights of Americans doesn’t just save lives, but money too. A new report from the Government Accountability Office claims that that the United States spends $1-billion per year on hospital costs related to “gun violence,” and anti-gun politicians are already pointing to the new report as a reason to pass more anti-gun legislation.

The nonpartisan GAO found gun violence accounts for about 30,000 hospital stays and about 50,000 emergency room visits annually. More than 15 percent of firearm injury survivors are also readmitted at least once after initial treatment, costing an additional $8,000 to $11,000 per patient. Because the majority of victims are poor, the burden largely falls on safety-net programs like Medicaid, including covering some of the care for the uninsured.

The report, the first of its kind from the watchdog agency, is based available data on caring for people who suffer non-fatal gun injuries each year. It’s expected to fuel Democrats’ calls for expanded background checks amid a stalemate on gun control legislation.

“Congress must do whatever it takes — including abolishing the filibuster if necessary—to address this public health crisis,” said New York Rep. Carolyn Maloney, chair of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, who led the coalition requesting the GAO study.

Do you get the feeling that Maloney was going to use this report to call for an end to the filibuster no matter what it said? This report is a means to an end, and the end result that Maloney and her fellow Democrats are aiming for is the end of the filibuster and the establishment of one-party rule; from enacting sweeping gun bans with 51 votes to packing the Supreme Court full of anti-gun justices that will uphold every new infringement on the Second Amendment approved by Congress.

Continue reading “”

“…outrage over the hypocrisy of allowing border crossers by land but not those who are seeking asylum for real reasons by sea.” ?

This is easy to understand. Mexicans in California tend to vote Demoncrap while Cubans in south Florida tend to vote Republican.

‘Outrageous:’ Mayorkas Blasted for Vowing to Reject Asylum-seeking Haitians, Cubans.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas vowed the United States will reject any Haitian or Cuban attempting to enter the country by boat, even if they have demonstrated a credible fear of being persecuted in their home countries.

“Allow me to be clear: if you take to the sea, you will not come to the United States,” Mayorkas said.

The warning comes as Cuban authorities are cracking down on demonstrators after massive protests erupted in the country over the weekend. At least 100 people are missing or have been arrested so far. In Haiti, the nation has been rocked by turmoil after President Jovenel Moise was assassinated last week.

Mayorkas fled Cuba with his parents in 1960 after Fidel Castro’s communist takeover of the country, a point he spoke about when President Biden nominated him to lead DHS.

“When I was very young, the United States provided my family and me a place of refuge,” Mayorkas tweeted. “Now, I have been nominated to be the DHS Secretary and oversee the protection of all Americans and those who flee persecution in search of a better life for themselves and their loved ones.”

But on Tuesday, Mayorkas said those attempting to make it to the U.S. by sea will be stopped by the Coast Guard and returned to their countries.

“If individuals make, establish a well-founded fear of persecution or torture, they are referred to third countries for resettlement,” Mayorkas said, reports CBS News. “They will not enter the United States.”

Continue reading “”

OK, Terry, You’re Crazy

One of the more common tactics of anti-gun extremists is to make some dramatic statement comparing our nation’s gun laws with some other aspect of everyday life. Every time—not usually or often, but every time—the comparison is wildly inaccurate. One of the more outrageous claims was made in 2016 by then-president Barack Obama (D), who claimed, “We flood communities with so many guns that it is easier for a teenager to buy a Glock than get his hands on a computer or even a book.”

Obama’s statement ignored many obvious facts, including that it would be illegal for any teenager to purchase a Glock, such firearms are far more expensive than books (even when purchased through illegal channels), and books are available through innumerable legal outlets—including for free at the more than 100,000 public libraries in America. Even PolitiFact, the “fact-checking” website many consider to favor liberals and Democrats, gave Obama’s statement a “Mostly False” rating.

Last week, Virginia Democrat gubernatorial nominee, Terry McAuliffe, got in on the game of comparing guns to other activities by making a ridiculous, and false comment that puts him in the company of Obama.

“Call me crazy, but I think it should be easier to vote than to buy a gun,” McAuliffe tweeted.

For a response to candidate McAuliffe, please refer to the title of this article. And based on the response to his ill-informed message, we are not alone.

So, where to begin with this latest entry in the competition for stupidest comments about guns?

First, when comparing two constitutionally-protected rights, neither should really be considered “easier” to exercise than the other.

But what of McAuliffe’s implication that it is currently easier to buy a gun than it is to vote? If he truly believes this, then maybe he is crazy.

Continue reading “”

Socialists Communists in Congress Silent as Cubans Rise Up Against Communist Dictatorship

Protests erupted yesterday in all of Cuba’s major cities against the nation’s ruling Communist dictatorship following over six decades of oppression. Protesters chanted “freedom,” “enough” and “unite,” and demanded the dissolution of their nation’s communist dictatorship.

Protesters had specific complaints about the nation’s food shortages, high prices, and handling of the coronavirus outbreak, which were correctly attributed to their government.

The Biden administration was initially silent on the protests, and only commented that they’d vow to condemn any violence in Cuba. Biden himself waited until this morning to say that the U.S. stands with the Cuban people.

Meanwhile the socialists in our Congress – Bernie Sanders in the Senate and all members of “The Squad” in the House – have remained completely silent. The Squad includes Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley, Rashida Tlaib, Jamaal Bowman, and Cori Bush.

According to Fox News:

Critics will likely say that these Democratic socialists are remaining quiet in the early stages of the protests because there are so many unknowns. Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel, who heads the Communist Party, has already called on the country’s revolutionaries to counter the demonstrators. “We are prepared to do anything,” he said during a national address. “We will be battling in the streets.”

The National Review reported that these legislators have never even denounced Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro. Sanders, I-Vt., once defended some of the policies of Cuba’s previous communist dictator Fidel Castro.

Following his win during Nevada’s caucus in the 2020 Democratic primaries, Sanders was asked by Anderson Cooper during an interview on CBS’ “60 Minutes” why the Cuban people didn’t rise up and help the U.S. overthrow the Castro regime. Sanders replied that the dictator “educated their kids, gave their kids health care, totally transformed the society.”

If or when our socialists in Congress do address the protests in Cuba, it’s more likely they’ll end up siding with the regime.

Democrats Demoncraps Try to Blame Guns for the Crime Surge Caused by Liberal Demoncrap Policies (FIFY)

As the Left tries to avoid responsibility for its own mistakes, many Americans see the progressive narrative about guns and crime for the charade that it is.

Acrime wave is gripping American cities, and the Left, in the wake of a ruinous series of radical criminal-justice “reforms,” needs scapegoats.

As Kevin Williamson has explained, much of this can be traced back to ridiculous city ordinances, such as the abolition of cash bail in some major cities. But, glossing over such decisions, major news outlets and politicians have instead taken to describing the problem as an issue of gun violence. There’s a reason for this: So long as they maintain this account, the Left can avoid responsibility — even with their policy fingerprints all over the crime scenes.

Continue reading “”