What came first…poverty or democrat leadership?

Lots of people think the question of the ages is “What came first, the Chicken or the Egg?” However, as a conservative, I believe the more appropriate – and timely – question is “What came first… poverty or democrat leadership?”

A little research discloses that the 10 poorest cities in the union include Detroit, Cleveland, Hartford, Dayton, Rochester, Newark, Jackson, Birmingham, San Bernardino, and Syracuse.

The major distinguishing traits of these unfortunate metropolises are their poverty rates that range from 29% to 39% and unemployment rates ranging from 11% to 22%. (more…)

Heated Discussions…

Have you noticed that there’s a heck of a lot of discussion – argument even – about the difference between Republicans and Democrats?  Fact is, it gets pretty heated at times.

Seems that Republicans think democrats are just plain wrong on many issues…  that democrats propose unworkable solutions for non-existent problems and then complain that there isn’t enough money allocated to develop required remedies.  As if there ever could be…

Democrats, conversely, contend that Republicans refuse to consider these ill-advised “solutions” because Republicans are uncaring, greedy, and evil.

But, really, it’s more complex than simply “wrong” vs “evil”.

Truth is, most Republicans believe that by completing one’s education, working hard, avoiding the self-inflicted hardships of drug abuse, teenage pregnancy, and other personal pitfalls, it’s possible to be successful in life with virtually no help from the government.  I guess this could be described as a modification of John Smith’s credo of “He who works, eats”.

On the other hand, it seems that many Democrats believe that no matter how hard one tries, the deck is just stacked against them and they simply can’t make it through life without continual government assistance.  This philosophy is reflected in the collectivist viewpoint outlined in the book “It takes a village” by Hillary Clinton

So, it’s not “wrong vs evil” but more a difference of philosophical viewpoint…  Do you favor a John Smith or prefer a Hillary Clinton?

I am unapologetically a Republican.  And if you like John Smith, maybe you’re one too…

Republican infiltration…

Republican infiltration…

Looks like a coterie of cunning conservatives infiltrated the Democrat Party and covertly created a liberal message so far to the left that it may well be impossible for most independents – and many Democrats! – to vote against Trump. Pretty darn slick if you ask me…

For instance, this clandestine committee craftily coerced candidates Warren and Sanders to advocate for the elimination of private health insurance in favor of “Medicare For All” (1,2) even though recent polls reflect that 90% of registered voters do not wish to abolish private health programs. (3) You go guys…

And then these cagey confederates conned candidates competing in the second debate into supporting decriminalizing illegal border crossings (4,5,6) which, of course, is not in keeping with the vast majority of Americans – including most democrats – who do not favor so-called open borders. (7) I wonder how they did it? Hypnotism? Put something in their water? Bribe them?

Lastly, they calculatingly convinced Sanders, Warren, and Harris of the “existential threat of climate change” thereby causing them to demand expensive and devastating changes to our lifestyle (8,9) despite that, to many, global warming is highly over-rated (10,11,12) with whole climate issue ranking near the bottom of voter concerns and well below the economy, immigration, women’s issues, gun policy, and Russian election tampering. (13) Those canny conservatives strike again…

In fact, having coaxed such extreme positions from these lefty-liberal contenders, they may have managed to make Joe Biden look like a rational and reasonable candidate.

Which took some doing…


Footnotes….

1. Sen. Elizabeth Warren used Wednesday night’s Democratic debate to come out unequivocally for a “Medicare for All” plan that would abolish private health insurers. https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/26/warren-private-insurance-medicare-1558522

2, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders returned to his signature policy theme in a major speech Wednesday: a single-payer, “Medicare for All” health insurance system. https://www.npr.org/2019/07/17/742723399/facing-pressure-in-campaign-sanders-defends-his-signature-health-care-plan

3. A new poll finds that about only one in 10 registered voters want the equivalent of Medicare for all if it means abolishing private health insurance plans.https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/428958-poll-voters-want-the-government-to-provide-healthcare-for

4. Later in the debate, all but one of the candidates again raised their hands, this time to signal they would decriminalize border crossings. https://dailycaller.com/2019/06/28/democrats-immigration-open-borders-second-debate/

5. 2020 Democrats all have the same immigration position: Open borders https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/2020-democrats-all-have-the-same-immigration-position-open-borders

6. All 10 candidates — Biden, Sanders, Buttigieg, Harris, Gillibrand, Bennet, Swalwell, Hickenlooper, Yang, Williamson — raised their hands in approval. That moment was perhaps the Democratic Party’s most significant step yet toward embracing a policy of open borders. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/byron-york-in-debates-democrats-move-toward-open-borders

7. In fact, the vast majority of Americans—including most Democrats—don’t believe in so-called “open borders.” That’s not to say that no one believes in open borders. Certainly, there are people who do. But most don’t. https://medium.com/s/story/few-americans-want-open-borders-democrats-included-dba12884c133

8. Climate change, Kamala Harris said during the Democratic debate Thursday night, “represents an existential threat to us as a species.” Fellow presidential candidates Jay Inslee and Elizabeth Warren have used the phrase as well. https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/6/13/18660548/climate-change-human-civilization-existential-risk

9. Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez introduced a resolution Tuesday asking Congress to declare that global warming is an emergency demanding a massive mobilization of resources to protect the U.S. economy, society and national security. https://insideclimatenews.org/news/09072019/sanders-aoc-ocasio-cortez-climate-change-emergency-declaration-congress-washington-flooding

10. Climate Alarmists Foiled: No U.S. Warming Since 2005 https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2019/08/23/climate_alarmists_foiled_no_us_warming_since_2005_110470.html

11. The anthropogenic responsibility for climate change observed in the last century is therefore UNJUSTIFIABLY EXAGGERATED and catastrophic predictions ARE NOT REALISTIC. https://notrickszone.com/2019/07/04/90-leading-italian-scientists-sign-petition-co2-impact-on-climate-unjustifiably-exaggerated-catastrophic-predictions-not-realistic/

12. New Report: There is No Global Warming | Newsmax.com According to NASA’s own data via Remote Sensing Systems (RSS), the world has warmed a mere .36 degrees Fahrenheit over the last 35 years (they started measuring the data in 1979). Hardly anything to panic about; however, that does mean the world is warmer, right? The problem with that argument is that we experienced the bulk of that warming between 1979 and 1998 . . . since then, we’ve actually had temperatures DROPPING!
https://www.newsmax.com/MKTNews/global-warming-hoax-facts/2014/10/17/id/601458/

13. …economy and immigration top a list of issues that voters consider important to their vote for Congress this year. Other issues that at least seven in 10 voters rate as “extremely” or “very” important include the treatment of women in U.S. society, gun policy and taxes. The investigation into Russian involvement in the 2016 U.S. election and climate change rank at the bottom https://news.gallup.com/poll/244367/top-issues-voters-healthcare-economy-immigration.aspx

The Education Store

The Education Store

My wife and I popped into the education store to shop for our kid’s education and began to browse the offerings on the various shelves.

“Look Jane”, I said.  “Here is a really great package.  It seems to concentrate on what they call “the Three R’s”.  Real subjects instead of the touchy-feely stuff today.”

“Yes, Dick,” she said, And look, the men teachers wear jackets and ties, the women, dresses or suits.  They look like teachers and the students respect them.  Maybe even fear them a little.  Best of all, the students are held accountable.  Looks like they actually fail and re-do the year if they don’t master the subjects.”

“And Jane, did you notice there in the principal’s office?  That little paddle.  It’s called the “Board of Education”.  Betcha they don’t have a discipline problem in this package.  Let’s get it”

“Sorry, but this is obsolete and no longer available,” said the clerk, who appeared out of nowhere.  “It was quite popular and very effective but was discontinued in the fifties as the education system became more preoccupied with providing students with self-esteem without making them work for it.”

“Well how about this one,” Jane said.  “It provides almost the same product with great results.  And it looks like you can put lots of kids into it, thereby reducing the per student cost.  It’s in Japanese.  Do you have one in English?”

“Sorry but it is not available in the US.  It has never been translated because larger class sizes won’t work here.  American kids are too undisciplined, you see.  You need the add-on package of “Responsible Parents” who have already implemented the “Sit Still Shut Up and Listen To The Teacher or I Will Kick Your Butt” package.  Sadly, “Responsible Parent” packages are becoming increasingly rare… Apparently phased out by the “My Kid Would Never Do That” package.”

“Well, here is another,” Jane said.  “And I really like it.  It looks like it minimizes the role of the state in the funding process.”

“Yeah,” I said, looking over shoulder.  “It looks like the parents do not have to send their money to the state and hope some of it comes back to their district.  The money is sort of attached to the kid.  And the parent can then send the kid – and the money – to the school of their choice.”

“Hey, that’s a great idea,” said Jane.  “If the school is good, then it attracts students.  If it is bad, then no one goes to that school.  Schools have to compete for the students – and money.”

“Uh huh, just like, say, a restaurant.  If the food is good, people go there and it prospers.  If it is bad, it fails.  And disappears.  More important, it looks the teachers are held accountable.  And fired, if required.”

“That’s the European model,” said the clerk. “It’s not available here either.    By and large, it seems that the teachers’ unions don’t really like that bit about firing incompetent teachers.”

“Well what about this one.  Great results and it includes religious education and practical instruction in subjects that you need in everyday life.  The curriculum is up to the parents themselves.”

Looking at it, the clerk said, “That one is available but, when you read the fine print, you can see it is the Home School package.  The parents do determine the curriculum because they are, in fact, the teachers.  This is not for everyone, though, because one or both of the parents need to be home to teach.

Well that won’t work for us.  What is available?

“Well,” said the clerk, “The one most often ordered is the public education package.  While it is pretty expensive, it is not very good.  And most of them arrive broken.”

“Huh,” we said together.

“Yes,” she said.  “It is a government monopoly costing thousands of dollars per student who are taught by seniority-based unionized teachers who can’t be fired and who have, over the past 30 years, dragged the American education system down to that of a third-rate banana republic.”

“Wait Honey, Jane yelled excitedly, “Look at this one!  It has everything we want.  And even if it is way over our budget, let’s get it”.

“Sorry”, said the clerk, shaking her head.  “That one is completely full with a really long waiting list.  It’s located in Washington DC and is used almost exclusively for sons and daughters of our politicians.  You know, the ones that are telling us how good our school system is….”

 

Shifting positions

Ever notice how certain democrats tend to shift their positions as political circumstances dictate?

For example, in 2013, then Attorney General Holder, in a spasm of partisan loyalty, claimed he was President Obama’s “Wingman” and was “there with my boy.” (1)  However, fast forward to 2019 and he now sanctimoniously asserts, “The attorney general is the people’s lawyer, not the president’s lawyer,” with a “responsibility to run the Justice Department in a way that is not political.” (2)  Sounds pretty shifty to me… (more…)