Hope For New York State

The Western Journal posted an article today describing what is happening in New York State as a result of the mismanagement and scandals surrounding Governor Cuomo.

The article reports:

Andrew Cuomo’s despicable rule in New York has never been seriously challenged. He won re-election to a third term by 23 points in 2018 — an election in which he arguably didn’t even try.

But, for the first time in his tenure at the helm of the Empire State, Cuomo appears to be facing a serious opponent — one that was, at least in part, of Cuomo’s own making.

After more than a half-dozen allegations of sexual misconduct, as well as accusations that his use (and subsequent cover-up) of nursing homes to house infectious COVID-19 patients last spring caused thousands of additional deaths, Cuomo is unusually vulnerable.

And Rep. Lee Zeldin, a Republican who represents New York’s 1st congressional district in the U.S. House of Representatives, smells blood in the water.

As Fox News reported last week, Zeldin is running for governor of New York in next year’s election, when Cuomo could be running for a fourth term.

There is an indication that New York State may be ready for a change in leadership. There is also an indication based on actual facts vs. trends on Twitter that Twitter may again represent opinions that are not universally shared.

The article notes:

But, one of the most important political lessons of 2020 was that Twitter is in no way representative of reality. Fox News reported that on his very first day of campaigning, Zeldin raised over $1 million. Clearly, reality is once again diverging from Twitter.

This is something to keep an eye on. The media will do everything it can to discredit Lee Zeldin and his campaign. It will be interesting to see if the voters of New York will believe the media or ask for change.

 

Does A Country Have The Right To Protect Itself From Annihilation?

Yesterday One America News posted an article about a recent action by Israel regarding Iran’s nuclear program. There is little doubt that as soon as Iran has a reliable nuclear weapon with a reliable delivery system it will strike Israel. That would fit in perfectly with the religious leaders’ idea that they need to create chaos in order to hasten the return of ‘the mshdi,’ their Messianic figure.

The article reports:

Commemorating Israel’s independence day on Sunday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu highlighted the fight against Iran’s nuclearization. This came after reports suggested Israeli hackers caused a blackout on Iran’s main nuclear enrichment facility.

Iranian officials called the blackout an act of “nuclear terror.”

However, Netanyahu called Israel’s nuclear disarmament efforts a matter of national security and regional stability.

“The fight against Iran’s nuclearization and its proxies is a massive task. The situation that exists today doesn’t mean it will be the same situation tomorrow,” Netanyahu stated. “It is very difficult to explain what we have done here, in this transition from nothingness to being the world power, yes, world power which we’ve built here.”

Creating obstacles to Iran’s nuclear program is probably the only way Israel can hope to survive as a nation. They understand that they will be the first target. A successful strike on Israel will then become Iran’s ticket to blackmailing the rest of the world with the threat of another nuclear strike.

Unfortunately, This Is Not Surprising

On Saturday, The New York Post posted an article about recent developments in the talks between America and Iran. Unfortunately the news is not good.

The article reports:

Even before the “indirect” US-Iran talks in Vienna had finished up, Team Biden caved, with the State Department saying it’s ready to lift sanctions on the rogue regime to rejoin the nuclear deal — giving away all leverage without getting a thing in return.

Spokesman Ned Price said Washington is “prepared” to lift all sanctions “that are inconsistent with” the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. He wouldn’t offer details: “I am not in a position here to give you chapter and verse on what those might be.”

And Price refused in repeated questioning to rule out even dropping separate sanctions put on Tehran for its terrorism, human-rights violations and ballistic-missile program.

That cave came after just two days of indirect talks — with reps from China, Russia, Germany, France and Britain as intermediaries — that Iranian President Hassan Rouhani crowed were already a “success.”

The Europeans tried to get Team Biden to lift some sanctions his first days in office, but the president said Tehran would have to move first, coming back into compliance with the deal by ending its enrichment of uranium at 20 percent and stopping its production of uranium metal — which even the Europeans have condemned, as it has no civilian use.

In order to put this in context, you need to understand that trade with Iran is very lucrative for Europe. The sanctions interfere with that trade. Aside from the fact that the Biden administration’s foreign policy at first glance seems to be anti-Israel and pro-Iran, there is a lot of money that can be made by lifting sanctions.

The article concludes:

The Europeans, in consultation with Team Biden, offered to release $1 billion in frozen oil revenue in exchange for Iran freezing its production of 20 percent enriched uranium. Tehran rejected that — and asked that America release all of its frozen export revenue, estimated at over $30 billion, in exchange for a one-month pause in production. Washington rejected that laughable idea and counter-proposed a release of some frozen funds and some oil-export waivers in return for Iran stopping 20 percent production and its work on advanced centrifuges. Again, Iran rejected the idea.

Why on earth would Team Biden respond by giving away the farm? There’s no reason to rush: The nuclear deal’s sunset provisions let Iran start going nuclear within a decade anyway. It’s Tehran that needs to hurry, as it can only do business with tyrannies such as China and Venezuela until America lifts its sanctions.

And the regime’s evildoing isn’t restricted to its pursuit of nuclear weapons or even its terrorism in the Middle East. In February, a Belgian court convicted an Iranian diplomat of plotting to bomb a dissident rally near Paris in 2018 — and Tehran planned and approved the scheme.

Now Biden is set to give Iran’s rulers more billions to play with — all for the sake of preserving his old boss’ “legacy.” But the only legacy of legitimizing these monsters will be more murder.

Iran understands that they are dealing with a weak American President, and they may have a better understanding than Americans as to who is pulling President Biden’s strings.

Important Information, Despite The Spin

Yesterday Bloomberg posted an article citing how some major corporations are dealing with the issue of whether or not to require the coronavirus vaccine.

The article reports:

Covid-19 vaccination requirements are fast becoming facts of life in the U.S., spreading business by business even as politicians and privacy advocates rail against them.

Brown, Notre Dame and Rutgers are among universities warning students and staff they’ll need shots in order to return to campus this fall. Some sports teams are demanding proof of vaccination or a negative test from fans as arenas reopen. Want to see your favorite band play indoors in California? At bigger venues, the same rules apply. A Houston hospital chain recently ordered its 26,000 employees to get vaccinated.

Yet it’s another matter how people prove they’ve had their shots or are Covid-free. Republican politicians and privacy advocates are bristling over so-called vaccination passports, with some states moving to restrict their use.

At this point you have to wonder why the article cites only Republicans and privacy advocates as being against vaccination passports. If you read this carefully, you realize that we are being set up to believe that anyone who opposes a vaccine passport is somehow out of the mainstream of American politics.

The article reports:

Public-health measures became a partisan issue as soon as former President Donald Trump began downplaying the pandemic, and fierce debate arose over its severity, the wearing of masks and government-enforced lockdowns. Vaccine requirements and passports have become the latest flash points.

“Idahoans should be given the choice to receive the vaccine. We should not violate Idahoans’ personal freedoms by requiring them to receive it,” said Idaho’s Republican Governor Brad Little on Wednesday, after signing an executive order banning the vaccination requirement for people seeking public services. The governors of Florida and Texas have issued similar orders.

“Vaccine passports create different classes of citizens,” Little said.

And yet, New York state has unveiled its “Excelsior Pass” smartphone app to quickly prove vaccination or a clean test. The widely used Clear airport check-in system will soon offer its own version.

Again, watch the spin. Remember the outcry when President Trump stopped airline flights from China from coming to America? To me, that seemed to be an example of someone taking the virus seriously. Someone who did not take the virus seriously would not have mobilized the medical research community to find a vaccine in record time.  Actually, I don’t think it was President Trump who politicized the vaccine.

The article concludes:

For some, their approach is dictated by the states in which they operate. The Mets and the Yankees, for example, didn’t decide that their fans would need proof of vaccination or a negative test to attend a Major League Baseball game -– New York state did. It’s the same with California concert venues that are finally being allowed to reopen.

On Friday, the San Francisco Giants played their home opener under similar restrictions, requiring proof of vaccination or a negative Covid test within 72 hours of the game. The team’s chief executive officer, Larry Baer, told local television station KTVU that the restrictions would help fans feel comfortable as they return to Oracle Park. “We will have the safest spot on Planet Earth,” he said. “When you’re coming to a game, you know you’re going to be safe — you’ll feel good.”

As I have previously stated, my husband and I have had the coronavirus. We do not necessarily see the need to take the vaccine. Yesterday we had our antibodies tested and discovered that we have the coronavirus antibodies. I wonder where proof of antibodies fits in with the scenario of proof of vaccine.

Acceptable Return On Investment?

Yesterday Just the News reported that the jobs plan that is proposed by President Biden could cost taxpayers more than $666,666 per job created. The cost of the proposal is $2 trillion. Seems like a lot of money to pay for the creation of one job. The obvious question here is ‘how much does each job pay and where is the rest of the money going?’.

The article reports:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said that House Democrats hope to draft the formal legislation for the American Jobs Plan by May and finalize it by July 4. The White House fact sheet about the plan includes a description of key parts of the proposal but does not list the specific infrastructure projects the bill would fund. 

Democrats are considering using budget reconciliation to move the bill through Congress to avoid the filibuster in the Senate. Democrats used that strategy for the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan that Biden signed last month.

If you are not yet familiar with the Cloward-Piven strategy, now would be a really good time to look it up.

The article concludes by reminding us of some past history:

Biden oversaw the implementation of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009. The Obama administration estimated that the bill would “create or save” 3.5 million jobs by the end of 2009. Politifact rated former President Obama’s claim in May 2009 that the bill “saved or created” 150,000 jobs as “mostly false.”

At the time, Republicans as well as some political and economic analysts argued that it was difficult to measure how many jobs a piece of legislation could “save.” In the end, the Congressional Budget Office estimated in November 2010 that the number of saved or created jobs fell somewhere between 1.4 million and 3.6 million.

Déjà vu all over again.

Is This Part Of Our Future?

Reparations has been discussed in political circles for a while now. So far no one has explained how to make reparations to families of slaves, but not to the families whose loved ones died freeing the slaves. Do people who weren’t here before 1860 have to pay reparations? Do people whose ancestors were indentured servants get reparations too? There are an awful lot of unanswered questions.

On April 5th, The New York Sun posted a very interesting article on reparations.

The article poses an interesting question:

Could a racial priority for getting a Covid-19 vaccine turn out to be just the first stop on the way to race-based tax rates?

A tax bill that varies depending on the taxpayer’s race might strike readers as some law professor’s remote fantasy, far from anything that might become reality.

Things are developing more quickly on this front, though, than is widely recognized.

Just this month, the governor of Vermont, Phil Scott, a Republican, attracted attention when he announced, “If you or anyone in your household identifies as Black, Indigenous, or a person of color (BIPOC), including anyone with Abenaki or other First Nations heritage, all household members who are 16 years or older can sign up to get a vaccine!”

A Reason article notes that in December 2020, while Republican Donald Trump was still president, the federal Department of Veterans Affairs announced that it would prioritize Black, Hispanic, Native American, and Asian veterans in vaccine distribution. Reason cites the Cato Institute’s Walter Olson as describing these schemes as unconstitutional, a violation of the “equal protection” clause of the 14th Amendment.

The article reports:

“Prediction: By tax year 2024, Americans will be asked to indicate their race on the Form 1040,” tweeted Scott Greenberg, a former analyst at the Tax Foundation who now writes about tax policy in a Substack newsletter called “No Withholding.”

Greenberg was reacting to a tax-policy reporter for the Wall Street Journal, Richard Rubin, who had flagged the news that the Biden administration had put the Treasury department’s top tax-policy official on an “equitable data working group.”

According to the Biden executive order, “Many Federal datasets are not disaggregated by race, ethnicity, gender, disability, income, veteran status, or other key demographic variables. This lack of data has cascading effects and impedes efforts to measure and advance equity. A first step to promoting equity in Government action is to gather the data necessary to inform that effort.”

The Census provides plenty of race-based income and poverty data, but the IRS has not done so. That surprises even some savvy observers. Kai Ryssdal, of the public radio show “Marketplace,” devoted a recent segment to an interview with Dorothy Brown. A law professor at Emory, Ms. Brown is the author of “The Whiteness of Wealth: How the Tax System Impoverishes Black Americans — And How We Can Fix It.”

Isn’t it interesting that the same Democrat party that fought so hard against civil rights legislation is still working hard to divide Americans by race. \

The article concludes:

The tax code already rewards or punishes all sorts of behaviors — home-ownership, say, or marriage and child-rearing, retirement saving, even electric-vehicle purchasing. In that context, a reparations credit seems less exceptional than it otherwise might.

There are plenty of potential downsides other than the constitutional obstacles. Yet those taxpayers who think Form 1040 is already complex enough, thank you, without adding race to the mix might want to get their arguments in order lest they find themselves, in some future tax season, in the IRS equivalent of the back of the vaccine line.

Let’s hope that if reparations through the IRS ever takes place, the Supreme Court shoots it down immediately.

Something To Watch Closely

Yesterday Politico posted an article about President Biden’s executive order forming a commission to look into reforming the federal court system.

Please read the following excerpt from the article carefully and note the wording:

President Joe Biden signed an executive order on Friday empaneling a commission to examine possible reforms to the Supreme Court and federal judiciary, making good on a campaign trail promise sparked by his predecessor’s tilting of the federal bench.

Biden first floated the idea of such a commission last fall on the campaign trail following the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg — whose seat on the high court was quickly filled by Amy Coney Barrett, installing a 6-3 majority of justices nominated by Republican presidents.

Note the expression ’tilting of the federal branch.’ That statement is an example of media bias. Note that President Obama was never accused of tilting the federal bench despite the fact that his appointed justices were well outside the mainstream of the views of most Americans.

The article concludes:

The commission is likely to raise hackles among conservatives as a veiled attempt to reshape the court after Trump and Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell prioritized installing federal judges over the past four years.

Its formation comes as Stephen Breyer, the Supreme Court’s eldest justice, faces pressure from liberal legal activists to step down during Biden’s term so that his successor would be appointed and confirmed while Democrats hold the White House and Senate.

Earlier this week, Breyer issued a warning to advocates of overhauling the Supreme Court that doing so risks eroding the trust in the institution and that they should think “long and hard” about the ramifications in a speech given virtually to Harvard Law School students.

The White House said the commission will complete its work within 180 days of its first public meeting, which it is required to do under federal law.

It will be interesting to see where this goes. Most Americans do not want to see more justices added to the Supreme Court–particularly to make it politically biased. Franklin Roosevelt attempted to do this during his term as President and was rebuffed by his own party. However, the current Democrat party does not necessarily have the scruples that the Democrat party of Roosevelt had.

Remember The Taylor Force Act?

In 2018, President Donald Trump signed the Taylor Force Act into law. The law prevents the United States from sending support to the Palestinian Authority (PA) as long as the PA continues to give subsidies to the families of terrorists or the families of those in prison in Israel for committing terrorism. Evidently the Biden administration has chosen to overlook that rule.

On Thursday, Breitbart reported the following:

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and seventeen other Republican Senators wrote to Secretary of State Tony Blinken on Thursday, objecting to the Biden administration’s plan to spend $250 million on the Palestinians, arguing that the proposal violates anti-terror law.

…In 2018, President Donald Trump signed the Taylor Force Act into law, which prevents the U.S. from providing economic support and other funding to the Palestinian Authority while it continues to pay the families of deceased terrorists, or to pay terrorists in Israeli prisons — a policy referred to by critics as “pay-for-slay.” The Palestinian leadership, having refused to end the payments, lost U.S. funding. Trump also cut funding to the UNRWA because of concerns that it has supported terror. The Taylor Force Act allows for a limited set of humanitarian exemptions, such as funding for vaccination programs.

Blinken claimed that “All assistance will be provided consistent with U.S. law,” but did not explain how the funding would comply with the Taylor Force Act. He also did not provide any evidence of reforms within the Palestinian Authority or UNRWA, nor did he mention any Palestinian effort to discourage terror or to stop incitement against Israel or Jews.

The article concludes:

The State Department’s announcement of funding to the Palestinians on Wednesday came after weeks of speculation that the Biden administration was spending the money in secret to avoid public scrutiny or potential legal challenges to the policy.

It is becoming very obvious that the Biden administration is President Obama’s third term. The Biden administration will continue the failed Middle East policies of the Obama administration. It is irrelevant whether or not President Obama is actually pulling the strings–the policies are the same.

This Is An Alarming Statement

Yesterday Breitbart posted an article about a statement made by President Biden while introducing his executive action on gun control.

The article reports:

President Joe Biden declared Thursday that “no amendment is absolute” while unveiling a series of executive actions targeting American citizens’ Second Amendment rights.

“Today, we’re taking steps to confront not just the gun crisis, but what is actually a public health crisis,” Biden announced in a speech at the White House’s Rose Garden, claiming: “Nothing, nothing I am about to recommend in any way impinges on the Second Amendment.”

The President contimued:

“No amendment, no amendment to the Constitution is absolute,” the president continued. “You can’t yell ‘fire’ in a crowded movie theater — recall a freedom of speech. From the very beginning, you couldn’t own any weapon you wanted to own. From the very beginning that the Second Amendment existed, certain people weren’t allowed to have weapons.”

Let’s review this a minute. If no amendment to the Constitution is absolute, then what good is the Constitution? The Second Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights. The intention of the Bill of Rights is to limit the power of the government. The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution so that states who feared an all-powerful central government would vote in favor of adopting the Constitution. The Second Amendment was intended to keep the government in check–not to keep the citizens in check. The Bill of Rights was in no way intended to limit the rights of Americans.

The Second Amendment states:

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

President Biden’s executive order does infringe on the rights of Americans to bear arms, and therefore should be declared unconstitutional.

Let’s See If This Holds

On Wednesday, The New York Post posted an article about a recent pledge by West Virginia Democratic Senator Joe Manchin.

The article reports:

West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin has pledged that under “no circumstance” will he vote to eliminate the filibuster amid a push by his other members of his party to reform the rule.

“I have said it before and will say it again to remove any shred of doubt,” Manchin, a moderate, wrote in a op-ed published in The Washington Post on Wednesday.

“There is no circumstance in which I will vote to eliminate or weaken the filibuster,” he wrote.

“The time has come to end these political games, and to usher a new era of bipartisanship where we find common ground on the major policy debates facing our nation.”

Removing the filibuster allows the majority party to pass legislation without bothering to consult or compromise with the minority party.

The thing to remember here is that Senators come up for re-election every six years. If the Democrats in the Senate ram through policies that hurt the average American, they will be in danger of losing their majority. Another thing to remember is that almost two-thirds of the voters in West Virginia voted for President Trump. They may not react too favorably to a Senator who participates in the undoing of the Trump administration policies that were successful.

 

 

When You Find Yourself Moving In The Wrong Direction, Should You Turn Around?

The Biden administration began with a flurry of executive orders. Many of them were questionable at best, and some have resulted in lawsuits against the administration. One executive order shut down the Dakota Access Pipeline.  Is is possible that the decision will be revisited?

Yesterday The Hill reported the following:

The Biden administration could decide Friday whether or not it is up to them to shut down the Dakota Access Pipeline. 

In January, a federal appeals court determined that the government did not adequately evaluate the environmental impacts of a 2017 easement that enabled the pipeline’s construction, and ordered the government to do a more robust analysis. 

The closely watched question on whether to stop the pipeline’s operations during this process is politically fraught, as as progressives have called for a shut down, while conservatives want to keep its oil flowing.

It may be that the only way to deal with the overreach of the Biden administration is through the courts.

The article notes that any decision is going to make someone unhappy:

Biden is facing pressure from both the left and right on the issue.

The pipeline’s critics say that it violates tribal treaty rights, while supporters argue that it helps transport U.S. energy.

Thirty-three Democrats recently wrote to Biden saying he should stop the pipeline from carrying crude oil between North Dakota and Illinois.

“By shutting down this illegal pipeline, you can continue to show your administration values the environment and the rights of Indigenous communities more than the profits of outdated fossil fuel industries,” they wrote.

Indigenous activists and celebrities have also recently urged the administration to do the same.

Meanwhile, congressional Republicans are supportive of the pipeline, and would likely push back on any moves to disrupt it.

The article concludes:

“The Army Corps of Engineers should be allowed to proceed as they are without political interference from the Biden Administration,” Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) said in a statement in January. “This is not another opportunity to wage war on North Dakota’s energy producers.”

Republicans have staunchly criticized other recent moves made by the administration on energy, including the revocation of a border-crossing permit for the Keystone pipeline and temporary pause on new oil and gas leases on federal lands. 

The Biden administration might want to consider the consequences of giving up the energy independence America achieved during the Trump administration. Many Americans are old enough to remember the oil embargo of the 1970’s and are not interested in repeating the chaos that resulted from it.

What’s In The Infrastructure Bill?

Yesterday Breitbart shared the following Tweet by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand:

That is the current definition of infrastructure in the Biden administration.

Yesterday The Daily Signal posted an article listing some basic facts about the infrastructure bill. Below is a short list. Please follow the link to the article to read the details.

1. Dishonest advertising: Less than 5% of spending goes to roads and bridges.

2. $2.75 trillion tax hike would stunt post-pandemic economic recovery.

3. Big spending won’t deliver promised job creation.

4. Federal takeover of local responsibilities.

5. Undercuts businesses by micromanaging economic development.

6. $700 billion in corporate welfare and tax credits.

7. Over $400 billion in welfare and health spending.

8. Wasteful $165 billion handout for transit and Amtrak.

9. $174 billion in subsidies for electric vehicles.

The article concludes:

The bottom line: Central planning and federal micromanaging doesn’t work.

Biden’s latest spending proposal demonstrates that he has an unshakable faith in the federal government to manage the economy and tinker with how Americans live their lives. This is exactly the wrong direction for a nation as large and as diverse as ours.

Congress should take a hard pass on the plan.

I really don’t think this is what our Founding Fathers had in mind.

Preventing Dead People From Voting

It should be the goal of every American to have every legal voter be allowed to vote and every legal vote counted. However, it doesn’t always work that way, and unfortunately there are people who work to keep it from working that way.

The Epoch Times is reporting today that the Public Interest Legal Foundation has won its lawsuit in Pennsylvania, and because of their victory more than 20,000 deceased voters will be removed from the voter rolls in the state.

The article reports:

The lawsuit (pdf) was filed in November and alleged that some 21,000 dead people were still on the state’s voter rolls during the 2020 presidential election. Pennsylvania agreed to compare its voter-registration database with the Social Security Death Index before removing the names from the rolls.

“This marks an important victory for the integrity of elections in Pennsylvania,” Public Interest Legal Foundation President and General Counsel J. Christian Adams said in a statement in announcing the court’s decision. “The Commonwealth’s failure to remove deceased registrants created a vast opportunity for voter fraud and abuse. It is important to not have dead voters active on the rolls for 5, 10, or even 20 years. This settlement fixes that.”

The lawsuit was filed after the Nov. 3 election and when then-candidate Joe Biden took a lead over President Donald Trump in Pennsylvania. Ultimately, the Pennsylvania Secretary of Commonwealth’s office certified the election.

The foundation said it found that 9,212 of the 21,000 voters had been dead for more than five years, and nearly 2,000 voters had been dead for more than 10 years.

We can’t change the results of the last election, but we can close some of the loopholes that allowed cheating so that we can lessen fraud in the next election.

Knowing The Players

As I am sure you are aware, the Arizona Senate is currently auditing the 2020 votes from Maricopa County. Yesterday The Gateway Pundit posted an article about some of what is going on with that audit.

The article reports:

The corruption from the Obama years is not over.  It’s just beginning.  The so-called “Non-For-Profit” group, the Protect Democracy Project, is now involving itself in the Arizona Senate’s audit of Maricopa County.  They are connected to Obama, Soros, China, and Biden’s DOJ, and are fighting to prevent an accurate count of the valid votes in the county.

Yesterday we reported that some legal firms joined the Not-For-Profit Protect Democracy Project in threatening the auditors selected in Arizona by the Senate to audit the 2020 Election results of Maricopa County.

The article quotes an article from the National Pulse:

…President Obama’s former associate White House Counsel, Ian Bassin, who heads the anti-Trump litigation efforts Protect Democracy Project and United to Protect Democracy.

Bassin previously headed the far-left Avaaz network, founded in turn by the leftist MoveOn.org group, as well as the Truman National Security Project, which has featured lead Joe Biden policy advisor Jake Sullivan and Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden on its board.

Despite claims of being non- or bi-partisan, The National Pulse exposed the group as a host of NeverTrump activists, partnered with [George Soros] Open Society Foundation staffers, and partnered in turn with Chinese Communist Party officials.

If you believe that President Joe Biden is actually making the decisions that are being made in the Biden administration, I admire your trust. It is much more likely that the terrible threesome of Barack Obama, Valerie Jarrett, and Susan Rice are calling the shots. Kamala Harris may or may not be involved. Barack Obama has long been a friend of George Soros–they are working toward the same end–the destruction of America as a world power in order to usher in one world government (in which they will be in charge). In order to achieve that goal they need to destroy the American economy (through high taxation and corporate cronyism) and to create so much internal strife in the country that Americans will not be paying attention to what Washington is doing or what is happening to their country. We are well on our way.

 

The Proposal To End Single-Family Housing In America

One of the great things about America is that many Americans are homeowners. As homeowners, they create individual homes that reflect their personalities. That is the reason driving through many of our cities can be a fascinating study of architecture and how it changed through our history. Well, if the Biden administration gets its way, single-family housing will be a thing of the past.

The National Review posted an article today detailing how the Biden administration is planning to eliminate single-family housing:

The article reports:

How, exactly, does Biden plan to end single-family zoning? According to the fact sheet released by the White House, “Biden is calling on Congress to enact an innovative new competitive grant program that awards flexible and attractive funding to jurisdictions that take concrete steps to eliminate [‘exclusionary zoning’].” In other words, Biden wants to use a big pot of federal grant money as bait. If a county or municipality agrees to weaken or eliminate its single-family zoning, it gets the federal bucks.

The wildly overreaching Obama-Biden era Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) regulation — which Biden has pledged to revive — works in a similar fashion. The difference is that by adding another gigantic pot of federal money to the Community Development Block Grants that are the lure of AFFH, Biden makes it that much harder for suburbs to resist applying — and that much more punishing to jurisdictions that forgo a share of the federal taxes they’ve already paid so as to protect their right to self-rule.

Are federal carrots enough, however? Prosperous suburbs may forgo the grants in an effort to secure their independence. The success of Biden’s initiative depends in part on exactly how much money gets allocated to grants tied to zoning reform. The details of that ask haven’t yet been released, but the $213 billion allocated to Biden’s total affordable housing initiative leave room for an awfully big pot for the anti-zoning portion.

I don’t think our Founding Fathers envisioned a country where the government could tell you what kind of a house you could live in.

The article concludes:

Last summer, when California floated a measure to kill single-family zoning, there was powerful opposition from residents who objected to a law that would make their neighborhoods denser, noisier, and more filled with traffic. Predominantly minority residents in South Los Angeles saw the bill as an “affront to how hard Black Americans fought to join single-family neighborhoods, battling redlining, racist covenants and even targeted violence. And they worried that suddenly relaxing zoning rules would not only ruin the low density they enjoyed, but also unleash an investment flood that would accelerate displacement of the Black community as developers scooped up old homes and built new ones unaffordable to most in the community.”

The zoning issue is tough and complex. It balances principled libertarian objections to zoning and the interests of developers, on the one hand, against core principles of federalism and local control, on the other. Massive spending and taxation are fundamental to the federal effort to override local zoning laws. Neighborhood preservation vies with “creative destruction.” There are plenty of complex, conflicting, and legitimate considerations in the balance. But reducing the zoning issue to bogus charges of “racism” is the way Democrats play the game nowadays.

If Republicans find the courage to stand up to the usual nonsense and oppose this big-government attempt to kill off the federalist system itself, they will find not only the vast majority of Republicans, but a great many independents and Democrats in their corner.

This is something to watch. If the infrastructure bill passes the Senate, it will not only kill our wallets, it will also end a lot of our freedom to choose where and how we live.

That’s A Big Change In The Numbers

Yesterday The Washington Times posted an article about the Biden administration’s revised estimate of how many jobs the infrastructure bill would create. The numbers have changed dramatically.

The article reports:

The White House clarified Tuesday that one study projects that President Biden’s $2.25 trillion infrastructure package will create roughly 2.7 million jobs — not the 19 million jobs administration officials had touted over the weekend.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki cited a study from Moody’s that projects the U.S. economy will add 19 million jobs over the next decade if Congress passes Mr. Biden’s plan and about 16.3 million jobs if Congress doesn’t pass it.

“So that is what the impact would be of the American Jobs Plan — 2.7 million, to be totally clear,” Ms. Psaki said. “It is important to be clear and to be specific about jobs numbers — to provide clarity to the American people.”

Frankly, considering the cost of the proposed infrastructure bill, I’d prefer the 16.3 million jobs.

The article concludes:

Brian Deese, director of the National Economic Council, and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg had both cited the study over the weekend to say the plan would create 19 million jobs.

The White House later indicated that Mr. Deese misspoke.

Mr. Buttigieg clarified on CNN Monday that the Moody’s study projects an additional 2.7 million jobs in its forecast if the plan is passed.  

I wonder how many Americans missed the ‘clarification’ and are still believing the original number given.

But There Is No Crisis

It’s pretty obvious to anyone paying attention that our southern border is being flooded with people entering American illegally. Many of those people are young children who have made the perilous journey and are now coming into the country looking for relatives who are already here. At some point, through chain migration policies, families will be reunited. At some future date, Democrats will magically make all of the illegals legal citizens. However, the current situation at the border is horrendous.

Yesterday Red State reported the following:

Biden spokesperson Jen Psaki has repeatedly told reporters that there is no crisis at the border. 

There is no surge at the border, people are merely “presenting” at the border.

They aren’t keeping kids in cages at the border, they are keeping them in “soft-sided structures” that they can’t leave.

While the people currently running this country have become the living embodiment of a CNN “mostly peaceful protests” meme, the crisis has continued to grow exponentially with no end in site. The Biden Administration is rumored to be in a bit of chaos behind the scenes as they struggle to message the deluge of illegal aliens currently streaming over the border on a daily basis.

The article continues with the following tweet:

Basically, the message in the tweet is:

Health and Human Services (HHS) is seeking interested candidates to serve up to a 120-day voluntary deployment detail as part of the HHS, Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), Unaccompanied Children (UC) Program, Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and HHS are calling upon our Federal Agency family of exception public servants to lend support to this humanitarian effort through this detail opportunity. This opportunity provides a continuum of care for children, including placements in foster care, shelter and residential care providers that provide temporary housing and to assist with caring for and placing children without legal immigration status…

…Details will involve contact with migrant children and a variety of other federal and non-federal entities, possibly including U.S. Customs and Border Protection, American Red Cross, Federal Emergency Management Agency, and other HHS employees. This is a reimbursement detail. Travel, lodging and per diem will be provided.

Just finish the wall and the problem will drastically decrease.

 

Rules For Thee, But Not For Me

Yesterday Just the News posted an article about the double standard that seems to be rampant in the ‘woke’ culture. Obviously voting is one of the most important things we do as American citizens. We all want every legal vote to count. We also are aware that every illegal vote cancels out a legal vote. Therefore it makes sense to protect the voting process. Well, the woke culture got very upset recently when Georgia passed a law to do just that. However, there is a bit of inconsistency in the actions of those protesting the law.

The article notes:

Leaders of major corporations have come out swinging against a Georgia election reform law with an ID requirement for absentee ballots — even though those same companies require valid photo ID to access the services their companies provide.

After Georgia Republican Governor Brian Kemp on March 25 signed into law the bill passed by the state’s Republican legislature, heads of corporations headquartered in the Peach State – including the leaders of Delta Airlines and Coca-Cola — came out against the law, which is fervently opposed by national and state Democratic leaders.

Democratic messaging against the law centers around the allegedly racially discriminatory implications of requiring valid voter ID in order to vote by mail. President Joe Biden blasted the law as an “atrocity,” likening it to “Jim Crow in the 21st century.” Seventy-two black executives, meanwhile, signed an open letter calling on their corporate brethren to stand up to the Georgia voting law’s “un-American” “assault” on the “fundamental tenets of our democracy.”

The article notes:

But if you want to hop a Delta flight to Atlanta — or anywhere else — you will need to show unexpired, government-issued ID to board any of the carrier’s flights.

Coca-Cola CEO James Quincey told CNBC last week that Georgia’s new law is “unacceptable” and “a step backwards.”

However, Coca-Cola required a valid photo ID for admission to its annual shareholders meeting last year. “We will verify your registration and request to see your admission ticket and a valid form of photo identification, such as a driver’s license or passport,” said the company in reference to its early 2020 annual meeting of the shareholders.

…But if you want to take in a Major League Baseball game now that many ballparks are once again readmitting fans on a limited basis, you will need a picture ID to pick up tickets from an MLB will call office.

Even Arlington National Cemetery requires valid photo ID for those aged 16 and older who wish to visit the graves of the war heroes buried there. 

UPS, another company headquartered in Georgia that is currently facing tremendous pressure to condemn the bill, requires valid photo ID when entering a UPS Access Point.

It’s interesting to me that Coca-Cola is interesting in validating the votes at its annual shareholders meeting, but not in a national election. Wow.

Actions Have Consequences

Yesterday The Washington Examiner posted an article warning of the consequences of passing the Biden administration’s infrastructure bill.

The article reports:

We are often told to “follow the science.” This is true of wearing masks, how we teach children to read, and addressing the perils of climate change. So we should probably better do the same with the economy, no?

Consider the new Congressional Budget Office report on that very thing, the budget, the economy, and how we tax it. Let’s assume that we want the Federal government to spend lots more money on infrastructure. I don’t, because I’m certain that the money will be sprayed up the wall like the last few trillions were.

Still, the CBO report is useful in laying down the basic science of taxation. Whatever we tax, we’ll get less of. Tax corporations and there will be less corporate activity. Tax the income from capital investment and there will be less investment. Tax labor incomes and fewer will work so hard to make that money. Put simply, if people get less from doing something, they’ll do less of it. Toddlers grasp this: they will do more for two pieces of candy and less for one. In the jargon these are known as “deadweights.” That is to say, things that do not happen, economic activity that is wiped out by taxation.

Yes, it’s true that we can buy lovely things with the money that has been taxed, or at least we might. But it is still true that the act of taxing itself reduces economic activity. Worthwhile tax and spend is defined as that which is even more lovely in its results than what we’ve lost by financing it.

The Democrats seem to be unaware of the Laffer Curve. That is the principle that says that after people who produce wealth are taxed to a certain point, they will stop producing wealth. We will reach a point where the only way to pay for our bloated government is to devalue our currency. That is happening to some extent right now. The result of that will be hyper-inflation and a total collapse of our economy. That is the end result of unbridled tax and spend programs.

Where Is The Infrastructure Spending?

Yesterday The Epoch Times posted an article about the infrastructure bill that is currently working its way through Congress.

Here are some highlights from their overview:

$621 billion in transportation infrastructure and resilience. 

    • $115 billion to modernize bridges, highways, roads, and main streets most in need of repair. This includes funding to improve air quality, limit greenhouse gas emissions, and reduce congestion. 
    • $20 billion to improve road safety. 
    • $85 billion to modernize existing transit systems. 
    • $80 billion to address Amtrak’s repair backlog.
    • $174 billion investment in the electric vehicle market.
    • $25 billion for airports. 
    • $17 billion in inland waterways, coastal ports, land ports of entry, and ferries. 
    • $20 billion for a new program that will reconnect neighborhoods cut off by historic investments and ensure new projects “increase opportunity, advance racial equity and environmental justice, and promote affordable access.” 
    • $25 billion for a dedicated fund to support ambitious projects that have tangible benefits to the regional or national economy but are too large or complex for existing funding programs.
    • $50 billion in dedicated investments to improve infrastructure resilience.
    • Building a national network of 500,000 electric vehicle chargers by 2030.
    • Electrify at least 20 percent of the yellow school bus fleet through a new Clean Buses for Kids program.

$180 billion investment in R&D and the technologies of the future:

    • Includes $35 billion in the full range of solutions needed to achieve technology breakthroughs that address the climate crisis and position America as the global leader in clean energy technology and clean energy jobs. This includes launching ARPA-C to develop new methods for reducing emissions and building climate resilience, as well as expanding across-the-board funding for climate research.
    • $15 billion in demonstration projects for climate R&D priorities, including utility-scale energy storage, carbon capture and storage, hydrogen, advanced nuclear, rare earth element separations, floating offshore wind, biofuel/bioproducts, quantum computing, and electric vehicles.
    • 15 billion in creating up to 200 centers of excellence that serve as research incubators at Historically black colleges and universities and other minority serving institutions to provide graduate fellowships and other opportunities for underserved populations, including through pre-college programs.

$300 billion to strengthen manufacturing supply chains for critical goods

    • $50 billion to create a new office at the Department of Commerce dedicated to monitoring domestic industrial capacity and funding investments to support production of critical goods.
    • $50 billion in semiconductor manufacturing and research, as called for in the bipartisan CHIPS Act.
    • $30 billion over 4 years to create U.S. jobs and prevent the severe job losses caused by pandemics through major new investments in medical countermeasures manufacturing; research and development; and related biopreparedness and biosecurity.
    •  $46 billion investment to jumpstart clean energy manufacturing through federal procurement.
    • $52 billion in domestic manufacturers.

…$100 billion in proven workforce development programs targeted at underserved groups and getting students on paths to careers before they graduate from high school.

    • $5 billion over eight years in support of evidence-based community violence prevention programs. Biden is calling on Congress to invest in job training for formerly incarcerated individuals and justice-involved youth and in improving public safety.
    • $48 billion in American workforce development infrastructure and worker protection. This includes registered apprenticeships and pre-apprenticeships, creating one to two million new registered apprenticeships slots, and strengthening the pipeline for more women and people of color to access these opportunities through successful pre-apprenticeship programs such as the Women in Apprenticeships in Non-Traditional Occupations.

Please follow the link above for more liberal dreams. Just a note–the bill would not have to ‘invest’ $52 billion in domestic manufacturers if it didn’t plan to increase the corporate tax rate.

When The Media Totally Distorts The Truth

The American Thinker posted an article today about one network’s recent attempts to smear Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. Governor DeSantis is a current target because of his state’s relatively successful handing of the coronavirus. He is also viewed as a future candidate for higher office and thus must be destroyed before that happens. The article explains the smear attempt and then explains what actually happened.

First the smear attempt:

…In addition to repeatedly and falsely implying that Florida handled COVID badly and is a hotbed of disease, the media are now attacking DeSantis directly.

Most recently, CBS’s 60 Minutes, openly accused DeSantis of a pay-to-play scheme with Publix, giving the latter the right to distribute vaccinations in exchange for a $100,000 campaign donation. You can see the set-up in the string of three tweets, below, which culminate in ostensible footage of an angry DeSantis baselessly swatting aside Sharyn Alfonsi’s challenging questions:

This is one of the tweets:

If that were the entire story, it would not be a good look. However, there is more to the story.

The article notes:

Well, it turns out that CBS forgot to include a few things when it put together that footage of a contentious exchange between the “brave” Alfonsi and the “evil” Republican governor. In fact, DeSantis carefully explained to the assembled media the decision-making behind choosing Publix to disburse vaccinations:

So, first of all, when we did, the first pharmacies that had it were CVS and Walgreens. And they had a long-term care mission. So they were going to the long term care facilities. They got vaccine in the middle of December, they started going to the long-term care facilities the third week of December to do LTCs. So that was their mission. That was very important. And we trusted them to do that. As we got into January, we wanted to expand the distribution points. So yes, you had the counties, you had some drive through sites, you had hospitals that were doing a lot, but we wanted to get it into communities more. So, we reached out to other retail pharmacies — Publix, Walmart — obviously CVS and Walgreens had to finish that mission. And we said, we’re going to use you as soon as you’re done with that. For the Publix, they were the first one to raise their hand, say they were ready to go. And you know what, we did it on a trial basis. I had three counties. I actually showed up that weekend and talked to seniors across four different Publix. How was the experience? Is this good? Should you think this is a way to go? And it was 100% positive. So, we expanded it, and then folks liked it. And I can tell you, if you look at a place like Palm Beach County, they were kind of struggling at first in terms of the senior numbers.

DeSantis explained too, that at a meeting with the Palm Beach County mayor, administration, and other “folks,” one of the things they calculated was “that 90% of their seniors live within a mile and a half a Publix.” The ultimate calculation, therefore, was what would be easiest for residents:

Please follow the link above to the article to read the rest of the story. As the mid-term elections approach, we can expect to see more character assassination directed at conservative candidates. Many Republican candidates will avoid this because they are part of the uni-party, but look for attacks (mostly baseless) on conservatives during the next year–particularly those who might run for President.

 

When Americans Won’t Vote For You, Simply Import New Americans

Yesterday Trending Politics posted an article about how the Biden administration is handling to flood of illegal immigrants currently pouring into America. The crisis at the border is rapidly spreading to all areas of the country. There is no way the number of people crossing into our country illegally are going to remain in one small area.

The article reports:

Biden’s border crisis is spreading nationwide, according to a new report from the Center for Immigration Studies. The new administration is pursuing an immigration policy dubbed “catch-and-bus” with the aim of establishing undocumented immigrants in states in the interior of the United States.

The Biden “smuggling routes” have gone largely unreported by media outlets that are fixated on the disastrous border crisis, where children are being kept in unsanitary conditions within detention facilities that violate COVID protocols.

According to an original investigation by CIS, a veritable “conveyor belt” of busesfrom Texas, Arizona and California are transporting “thousands” of undocumented immigrants into America’s heartland.

…“As best as the Center for Immigration Studies can determine from interviews and scattered media reporting, the buses are leaving regularly from Del Rio, the Texas Rio Grande Valley communities, and Laredo, but the busing also appears to be going on in Arizona, as well as in California,” the report continued.

“Where are the buses going?” the CIS rhetorically asked. “They often drop their Haitian, Venezuelan, and Cuban passengers in Florida and New Jersey. Those from Nicaragua and other Central American nations have been delivered to Tennessee, Massachusetts, Indiana, Michigan, North Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, and to large cities in Texas such as Dallas and Houston.”

The estimates square with other Border Patrol estimates, The Blaze corroborates.

The article concludes:

“One Nicaraguan migrant showed CIS a DHS document titled ‘Interim Notice Authorizing Parole’, which grants him a renewable one-year term to live legally inside the country,” the report went on, adding, “Most will likely use their time to apply for asylum, a lengthy, back-logged process that allows for work authorization and Social Security cards during an adjudication process that can drag on for years.”

The Biden “catch-and-bus” policy is an escalation of the Democratic Party’s open borders policy. Even if a state is not on the southern border, an illegal migrant can walk across it and get a free bus ride from the Biden administration to any place it chooses.

Has anyone given any thought to the people who have been waiting in line to come to America legally? Admittedly our immigration policies need to change to eliminate a lot of the expense and red tape, but open borders are not the answer!

Let’s project this a year or two down the road. The people who came here illegally are given a renewable one-year term to live in America. Some of the immigrants will renew; others will simply vanish somewhere inside the country. Eventually a Democrat congressman will say that like the dreamers, they have been here long enough so that they should automatically be given citizenship. At that point they should be allowed to vote. Voila! You have changed to voting demographic of America. Do you think the Democrats would close the borders if they thought the people coming across would eventually become Republican voters?

Fighting With Facts

I will admit that in doing research for this blog, I read a lot of news. However, I don’t think I am any smarter than the average America. I may be better informed, but that is a choice I made. Anyone can make that choice. I believe that one of the major problems in America right now is that people are believing what they are told and not doing their own research. That was recently illustrated in a post at Townhall by Larry Elder.

The article reports:

A couple of years ago, I gave a speech before a conservative, predominantly white audience. I couldn’t help but notice a tall, heavyset Black man, arms folded, standing in the back. From time to time, I would look at him, only to see him frown and shake his head, I assumed disapprovingly, when I made what I considered important points.

After the speech, he came up to me. “I am angry,” he said. “Not at you — at myself. I thought I was well informed. I read the news. I watch the news. I now see I’ve been manipulated by the party that I voted for all my life.”

The article lists the things that the man learned from Larry Elder’s speech:

He said he had no idea that (according to a 2004 Thomas B. Fordham Institute study) 44% of Philadelphia public school teachers send their own school-age kids to private school. Yet the Democratic Party adamantly opposes school vouchers, which would give K-12 children of urban parents a chance at a better school.

He did not know that Democrats, including President Barack Obama, tried to end the Washington, D.C., Opportunity Scholarship Program. It is a lottery that allows fortunate parents to opt out of their local public school for a better private school. The program is so popular that there are far more parents who want to participate than there are seats. “What’s more important, ” he asked me, “than making sure are kids are well educated?”

He did not know that, in 1965, 25% of Black kids were born outside of wedlock, versus 70% today, a phenomenon that cannot be attributed to slavery and Jim Crow. He did not know that Barack Obama once said, “Children who grow up without a father are five times more likely to live in poverty and commit crime; nine times more likely to drop out of schools and 20 times more likely to end up in prison.”

…He did not know that, according to Harvard economist George Borjas, illegal immigration creates winners and losers. But the big losers are low- and unskilled American workers of color who compete against low- and unskilled illegal immigrant workers — who place downward pressure on the wages of the native-born.

The man did not know that, according to The Washington Post, in recent years, more unarmed whites have been killed by the police than unarmed Blacks. He was unaware of studies, including one by a Black Harvard economist, that found the police more hesitant, more reluctant, to pull the trigger on a Black suspect than on a white suspect. He did not know that, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, police killings of Blacks declined almost 80% from the late ’60s through the 2010s, while police killings of whites have flatlined.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article. We need to remember that bias in reporting is not only reflected in the way things are reported, it is also reflected by the things relevant to a story that are not mentioned.