Archive for the ‘Klobuchar’ Category

On the day voting happens in Vermont, we still don’t have the final vote totals from Iowa. That’s because the Sanders campaign and Buttigieg campaign have each asked for partial recanvasses of the results. At this rate, we might have Iowa’s totals verified before the Convention in Milwaukee. I’m not betting the ranch on that but it might happen.

With that crisis still unresolved, Democrats are facing a somewhat similar crisis in Nevada:

Frustrated. Concerned. Nervous. Those are some of the words aides are using to describe the mood within some of the top Democratic presidential campaigns in Nevada with only five days until early voting is set to begin for the state’s first in the West presidential caucus and still no details on how exactly it’s supposed to work.
Campaigns here in the Silver State have been told that the Nevada State Democratic Party won’t be using the same app and vendor that were in part responsible for bungling the results of Iowa’s caucus last week, that the party won’t be using any app at all, and that what the party does plan to use is best described as a “tool” or “calculator.” Beyond that, aides aren’t really sure what’s in store for the state’s Feb. 22 Democratic caucus.

Have Democrats run anything beyond a lemonade stand? Here in Minnesota, examples of DFL competence in running things are rarities. MNLARS will (hopefully) be a distant memory soon after being a nightmare for 2+ years. MNsure was a disaster for a year. The Minnesota Human Services fiascoes happened over a period of years before being discovered. People remember the disaster that Healthcare.gov was.

“It’s a little bit of a damper for our volunteers who are more hesitant to step up and say, ‘Yes, I will confirm I will be precinct leadership on Feb. 22,’ when they don’t feel entirely certain about what’s going to happen,” one aide said. “Never mind the campaign, but with four days until early voting begins, the people who are going to participate feel like they need to have a credible explanation of how the early voting and caucus process are going to work.”

Here we go again? Only a Democrat could turn simple arithmetic into this convoluted mess. This isn’t how this should work. The only top-tier Democrats who’ve run anything are Pete Buttigieg and Mike Bloomberg. Everyone else is a senator. They talk for a living.

Both mayors are far outside the mainstream on the issues, which is why few people outside the Democratic Party take either of them seriously. Meanwhile, the nation keeps humming along under President Trump’s leadership. He’s actually run something and holds mainstream views. The economy is strong. We’re safer than we were under President Obama. Emergencies are handled efficiently.

That’s quite the contrast from the Party that can’t even do basic math, aka the Democrats. Bernie hasn’t run anything. Ditto with Biden, Klobuchar, Warren or what’s his name that still hasn’t dropped out (Michael Bennet).

Things are running well. People are making money. Income inequality is shrinking. People’s 401(k)s are getting healthier. If it isn’t broke, don’t tinker with it. That’s what Democrats did with the Iowa Caucuses. How’d that turn out? This is how that worked:

The KISS method (Keep It Simple Stupid) still works best. I’m a huge fan of trailing edge technology. I love things that work and that have worked for years. There’s nothing wrong with the Iowa Caucuses that a little uncomplicating can’t fix.

On a national scale, the lesson to be learned is that Democrats don’t run things. It isn’t part of their DNA. Bill Clinton is the lone exception. Berniecrats think that he’s too conservative. I guess they didn’t like the prosperity.

This week’s events have produced a multitude of winners and some distinct losers. Let’s start with the losers.

Mitt Romney- Mitt Romney sided with Chuck Schumer, Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi when he voted to convict President Trump on Impeachment Article 1. Mitt’s constituents in Utah want him censured.
Nancy Pelosi- In a planned attack, Pelosi ripped up her personal copy of President Trump’s SOTU Address. In ripping up her copy, Pelosi played into President Trump’s hand by looking like a petulant school child. Here’s the scene:

Iowa Democratic Party- We’re almost a week removed from the Iowa Caucuses and we still don’t know who won the Caucuses. The chairman of the party apologized on Tuesday. The chairman of the DNC called for a recanvas of the results. That’s the personification of humiliation.
Biden, Klobuchar and Warren- This trio is essentially a trio of zombie candidates. Biden isn’t attracting any positive attention. What he’s missing in positive attention, he’s making up for in negative attention. According to her allies, Klobuchar keeps gaining ground on the leaders. Unfortunately, she finished in 5th place in Iowa and looks likely to repeat that performance in New Hampshire. Back-to-back 5th place finishes will seal Sen. Klobuchar’s fate. Warren finished third in Iowa, which is decent enough but she’s got race relations problems. Stick a fork in her. She’s finished.

Winners
Mitch McConnell- Despite what CNN, MSDNC and the Washington Post say, he’s the true DC master tactician. Pelosi isn’t the master tactician.
Devin Nunes- The Democrats’ impeachment trial showed that Devin Nunes got virtually everything right on the FBI scandal and with FISA abuse. Everything he got right, Schiff got wrong. Literally.
Iain Lanphier and Charles McGee- Iain was mentioned in President Trump’s State of the Union Address this way:

Iain has always dreamed of going to space. He was the first in his class and among the youngest at an aviation academy. He aspires to go to the Air Force Academy and then he has his eye on the Space Force. As Iain says, “Most people look up at space. I want to look down on the world.”

President Trump then told the rest of the story:

But sitting behind Iain tonight is his greatest hero of them all, Charles McGee, who was born in Cleveland Ohio, one century ago. Charles is one of the last surviving Tuskegee airman, the first black fighter pilots and he also happens to be Ian’s great grandfather. On December 7th Charles celebrated his 100th birthday. A few weeks ago, I signed a bill promoting Charles McGee to Brigadier General. And earlier today I pinned the stars on his shoulders in the Oval Office. General McGee, our nation salutes you. Thank you sir.

That’s what I call a history lesson!
Jenaya Davis- “The next step forward and building an inclusive society is making sure that every young American gets a great education and the opportunity to achieve the American dream. Yet, for too long, countless American children have been trapped in failing government schools. To rescue these students 18 States have created school choice in the form of opportunity scholarships. The programs are so popular that tens of thousands of students remain on a waiting list. One of those students is Jenaya Davis, a fourth grader from Philadelphia, Jenaya. Jenaya’s mom Stephanie is a single parent. She would do anything to give her daughter a better future, but last year that future was put further out of reach when Pennsylvania’s governor vetoed legislation to expand school choice to 50,000 children. Jenaya and Stephanie are in the gallery. Stephanie, thank you so much for being here with your beautiful daughter. Thank you very much. But Jenaya I have some good news for you because I am pleased to inform you that your long wait is over. I can proudly announced tonight that an opportunity scholarship has become available. It’s going to you and you will soon be heading to the school of your choice. Now I call on Congress to give one million American children the same opportunity, Jenaya has just received. Pass the Education Freedom Scholarships and Opportunity Act because no parents should be forced to send their child to a failing government school.”

President Trump reminded the politicians in the House chamber what it’s all about when he said “Members of Congress we must never forget that the only victories that matter in Washington are victories that deliver for the American people.”

Delivering for the American people has become President Trump’s legacy. That’s what makes him this week’s biggest winner. Despite all of the unrighteous fights he’s had to fight, despite all of the criticism he’s taken, despite the lies that’ve gotten told about him (Think Adam Schiff’s parody), President Trump kept his eyes on what’s important. He’s rebuilt the military. He’s killed the nastiest of terrorists. He’s built the strongest economy. He’s put young people like Iain and Jenaya first.

That’s the definition of a winner. He isn’t perfect but his priorities are fantastic.

Finally, there’s some results from Iowa. Whether they’re accurate is still in question. Last night, when it became clear that the Iowa Democratic Party’s app wouldn’t work, the Klobuchar, Biden, Buttigieg, Warren and Yang campaigns delivered rah-rah speeches to fire up their supporters even though they didn’t have any results.

Later, the Sanders campaign “took it on itself to release numbers it collected from nearly 40 percent of precincts, tabulated by its campaign organizers. The Sanders campaign reports it received 29.7 percent of the vote, closely followed by former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg at 24.6 percent. Sen. Elizabeth Warren came in at 21.2 percent, and former Vice President Joe Biden in fourth at 12.4 percent. Sanders put those numbers out shortly after Buttigieg finished his own, seemingly triumphant speech in Iowa. The party said it would release official results Tuesday.”

Relying on a campaign’s campaign figures isn’t the smartest thing. Campaigns have been known to cherry-pick information that most favors them and omit the information that isn’t flattering to them. Still, it’s the closest thing to actual data that we’ve seen thus far.

If Sanders’ numbers are relatively accurate, Biden and Klobuchar have a reason to worry. Biden had Iowa to himself, with the exception of Buttigieg. If he had a real message, he would’ve put the state away and coasted to victory. He didn’t win with 12.4% of the vote. It was smart for Sen. Klobuchar to make her speech but reality will catch up if she doesn’t get a message fast.

This morning, President Trump weighed in via twitter:


This tweet looks totally foolish at this point:


No results 14 hours after the Caucuses started is transparency? Who knew that they’d lowered the bar that far? Is that like invisible transparency?

Last week, Sen. Klobuchar shared the co-endorsement of the NYTimes with Elizabeth Warren. Later, she won the endorsement of the Quad Cities newspaper in northeast Iowa. Unfortunately for Sen. Klobuchar’s campaign, Sen. Klobuchar didn’t win the endorsement of the only newspaper in Iowa that matters. Instead, Elizabeth Warren won the endorsement of the Des Moines Register.

In their editorial explaining their decision, DMR’s editorial board wrote “The Des Moines Register editorial board endorses Elizabeth Warren in the 2020 Iowa Democratic caucuses as the best leader for these times. The senior U.S. senator from Massachusetts is not the radical some perceive her to be. She was a registered Republican until 1996. She is a capitalist. ‘I love what markets can do,’ she said. ‘They are what make us rich, they are what create opportunity.'”

That’s gotta sting for St. Amy. She’s been running in the Democrats’ moderate lane, where she’s thought she was competing with Joe Biden. Along comes DMR’s editorial board, who says that Elizabeth Warren is the best candidate in the race. Sen. Klobuchar, aka St. Amy of Hennepin County or St. Amy for short, must’ve been blindsided with that headline. This doesn’t help, either:

Warren doesn’t measure the health of the economy by looking at the stock market or an unemployment rate that doesn’t count the longtime jobless or chronically underemployed. She measures it by how working families are doing. Many are not doing well, and Warren seeks major reforms to help them.

A qualification: Some of her ideas for “big, structural change” go too far. This board could not endorse the wholesale overhaul of corporate governance or cumulative levels of taxation she proposes. While the board has long supported single-payer health insurance, it believes a gradual transition is the more realistic approach. But Warren is pushing in the right direction.

It’s difficult to picture Sen. Warren as a moderate, especially after this dispute:

Elizabeth Warren isn’t a moderate. Neither is St. Amy. Joe Biden thinks that we should eliminate fossil fuels so that we’re once again dependent on Middle East oil, especially from Iran. Further, each of those candidates want the US to return to the JCPOA. What part of those policy positions sounds moderate to you?

Finally, it’s thrilling thinking that Sen. Klobuchar will soon be able to spend more time focusing on her day job as Minnesota’s senior senator. Then again, it’s a little frightening thinking of her returning to being Minnesota’s senior senator.

It’s time for Republicans, starting with me, to admit that Susan Collins is a legitimate Senate moderate. This article verifies what I’d already suspected of Sen. Collins. While I disagree with her on a number of issues, I can’t help but respect the fact that she thinks things through.

The thing that first got me rethinking Sen. Collins was the Kavanaugh Hearings. As a result of those hearing, Republicans were forced to take a firm position. That’s what Sen. Collins did. The tide had already started to turn as a result of President Trump refusing to pull Kavanaugh’s appointment. He insisted on fighting for Justice Kavanaugh’s confirmation.

Republicans remember that that’s when Lindsey Graham went from being a total squish to being a fighter in a single speech. Every Republican remembers this speech:

Later in the confirmation process, Sen. Collins delivered this riveting speech from the Senate floor:

Disagree with Sen. Collins’ policy positions if you like. I certainly have. What I appreciate, though, is the research that she does. Look at the research that she did for this speech. There’s a ton of details and tons of information that you only get after doing due diligence.

Compare Sen. Collins’ positions with Amy Klobuchar’s positions. The differences between the 2 ‘moderates’ is stark. Sen. Collins voted for the tax cuts that have this economy humming. Sen. Klobuchar voted against them. Sen. Collins confirmed Justice Kavanaugh and Justice Gorsuch. Sen. Klobuchar voted against these highly-qualified justices.

Kevin Cramer, the freshman senator from North Dakota summed things up perfectly:

Susan always does what’s best for her constituents, and then she explains it really well. I’m sure it didn’t hurt her any; I’m sure it helped her. She’s a very courageous Republican.

Thanks to her loyalty to her constituents and Mitch McConnell, Sen. McConnell will have her back this November. I expect her to win re-election in a tight race.

Jim Geraghty’s article on Sen. Klobuchar doesn’t hide the things that the Twin Cities press has ignored for years. In his article, Geraghty writes that “If you squint, you can make the “Klobuchar’s getting hot at the right time” argument, as the latest Monmouth poll has her at 8 percentage points, her second-highest number yet. Except … getting any delegates out of Iowa requires getting 15 percent of the vote. Klobuchar needs to more or less double her current support to walk out of the state with any delegates.”

Then Geraghty cuts to the heart of Sen. Klobuchar’s problem, saying “Klobuchar wasn’t that well-known when the race began; it was a crowded field; her debate performances ranged from okay to easily forgotten; she’s not the choice of the party establishment or the progressive grassroots, she doesn’t have the resources to blanket the airwaves the way Bloomberg and Steyer can … she’s a perfectly fine, almost generic Democratic candidate in a field that was bursting with more exciting options.”

Don’t mistake Sen. Klobuchar’s lack of presence as proof that she’s a moderate Democrat. That’s BS. She thought that Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh were extremists. In fact, she thought that Kavanaugh didn’t deserve the presumption of innocence. On the other hand, she thought that Sonia Sotomayor was a centrist. Klobuchar voted for the ACA, which destroyed Minnesota’s health care system but voted against the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which has produced the strongest economy in the last 20 years. That doesn’t sound too bright, does it?

While she’s been protected by the Twin Cities media, she’s been portrayed as a moderate/centrist. Clearly, that isn’t accurate. While she isn’t as far left as Ilhan Omar or Keith Ellison, her policies are more than a little leftist. On her campaign website, Klobuchar has a page titled a safer world. On the subject of foreign policy, she says:

Amy believes that we need to stand strong, and consistently, with our allies and that we must respect our frontline troops, diplomats and intelligence officers, who are out there every day risking their lives for our country, and deserve better than foreign policy by tweet. She would invest in diplomacy and rebuild the State Department and modernize our military to stay one step ahead of China and Russia, including with serious investments in cybersecurity.

This past week, President Trump has convinced the British, French and Germans to force Iran’s mullahs back into compliance with the JCPOA. Next, President Trump has rebuilt the military the past 3 years, too. Third, President Trump has seen to it that the troops have gotten pay raises the past 2 years. Fourth, rebuilding the State Department, aka the Deep State, is downright stupid. The last thing we need are ‘diplomats’ who think it’s their job to undermine a president they think isn’t qualified. Finally, President Trump, working with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, have significantly upgraded our cybersecurity.

In other words, the things Sen. Klobuchar says she’d do are things that President Trump has already done. This is a perfect example of how the Twin Cities media protect St. Amy of Hennepin County:

Sen. Klobuchar is kinda right in that tensions are rising in Iran. It’s just that the pressure on Iran is increasing. Tuesday was a major breakthrough for US-British diplomacy. Thanks in large part to British Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s behind-the-scenes work, we’re on the verge of getting Iran back to the negotiating table where a proper treaty will get negotiated. When the JCPOA was negotiated, Iran didn’t have a worry in the world. Now, 5 years later, Iran’s mullahs are worried about students protesting, Iran’s economy is in virtual freefall and the international community is exerting maximum pressure on the regime.

Last night’s Democrat presidential debate got stupid fast when the moderators changed the subject to Iran. Democrats didn’t attempt to abandon the DNC’s talking points. From there, things went downhill fast.

Amy Klobuchar and Joe Biden stood out but not in a good way. Sen. Klobuchar said “Because of the actions of Donald Trump, we are in a situation where Iran is starting to enrich uranium again in violation of the original agreement. What I would do is negotiate. I would bring people together just as president Obama did years ago. And I think that we can get this done. But you have to have a president that sees this as a number one goal. I would not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.”

First, it’s stupid to negotiate if the country you’re negotiating with isn’t feeling pain or is frightened of you. When John Kerry negotiated with Iran, Iran wasn’t worried about whether their people would overthrow the regime. The product was an agreement that was so weak that the Obama administration wouldn’t submit it as a treaty for ratification. The agreement was so terrible that most Democrats opposed it.

Next, President Trump’s taking out of Gen. Soleimani triggered an uprising against the Regime, with 5 straight nights of protests against the regime. With Iran’s economy collapsing, unemployment skyrocketing, inflation hitting 50% and students having lots of time to protest, there’s reason for Iran’s regime to worry about getting overthrown.

Third, Sen. Klobuchar should pay attention to events. Yesterday, Boris Johnson announced that the British, French and Germans had taken the first step in dragging Iran back into compliance with the JCPOA:

Britain, France and Germany on Tuesday formally accused Iran of breaking the 2015 agreement that limited its nuclear program, taking the first step toward re-imposing United Nations sanctions.

The European countries started the clock running on what could be some 60 days of negotiations with Iran about coming back into full compliance with the nuclear deal. Under the agreement, if they cannot resolve their dispute, that could revive United Nations sanctions on Iran that had been suspended under the deal, including an arms embargo.

Call me crazy but I’d argue that President Trump’s strategy is working beautifully. Biden sounded almost as incoherent:

“I was part of that deal. It was working,” he said. “It was being held tightly. There was no movement on the part of the Iranian government to get closer to a nuclear weapon. And look what’s happened. We’re now isolated,” he continued. “We’re in a situation where our allies in Europe are making a comparison between the United States and Iran saying both ought to stand down, making a moral equivalence. We have lost our standing in the region; we have lost the support of our allies.

“The next president has to be able to pull those folks back together, reestablish our alliances and insist that Iran go back into the agreement, which I believe with the pressure applied as we put on before we can get done. And quite frankly, I think he’s flat out lied about saying the reason he went after [Soleimani] was because our embassies were about to be bombed,” Biden added.

That’s breathtakingly uninformed, which is dangerous for us. Biden being this uninformed gives credence to his nickname of Sleepy Joe. We can’t afford a president who isn’t paying attention to the world around him.

It’s either that Biden is uninformed or he’s unwilling to admit that President Trump’s strategy is well thought out and working. This information about the British, French and Germans accusing Iran of breaking the JCPOA didn’t happen right before last night’s debate. It was announced during Tuesday morning’s BBC Breakfast Show. That should’ve been part of these candidates’ morning briefing.

In short, the Democrats’ presidential candidates couldn’t admit that a) President Trump’s strategy is working and b) US allies are joining us in increasing pressure on the Iranian regime. This is what the Democrats’ stupidity towards Iran looks like:

God help us if any of these idiots becomes our next commander-in-chief.

If people needed additional proof that today’s Democrats are hate-filled and fact-deprived, they need only check out E.J. Dionne’s latest fact-deprived column. Included in Dionne’s scribbling is this BS, which says “The costs of this approach were underscored this weekend by a New York Times report that offers new corroboration for charges by Deborah Ramirez that Kavanaugh exposed himself to her when both were undergraduates at Yale. In denying the charge, Kavanaugh told the Senate that had it been true, the incident would have been ‘the talk of the campus.’ Times reporters Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly — drawing on their new book, ‘The Education of Brett Kavanaugh: An Investigation’, write tellingly: ‘Our reporting suggests that it was.'”

I’d love hearing Dionne’s explanation for this column after this information came to light:

In a major revision late Sunday, a Times editor’s note added a significant detail — that several friends of the alleged victim said she did not recall the purported sexual assault in question at all. The Times also stated for the first time that the alleged victim had refused to be interviewed and has made no comment about the episode.

“Significant detail”, my arse. That’s a bombshell that just dropped in the middle of the NYTimes’ building. That begs the question of where these ‘authors’ got this information from. Did they make it up? Did a third party spoon-feed them this allegation? Wherever it came from, it certainly isn’t truth-based.

Check this out:

Here is the institutionally devastating part of their story: Ramirez’s legal team gave the FBI a list of “at least 25 individuals who may have had corroborating evidence” of her story. The bureau, the authors report, “interviewed none of them.” Nor did the FBI look into Stier’s account.

It’s worth noting that “Stier” is a Clinton lawyer:

The Times did not mention Stier’s work as a Clinton defense attorney, or Stier’s legal battles with Kavanaugh during the Whitewater investigation, and simply called him a “respected thought leader.”

Keep that in mind when reading this from E.J. Dionne’s column:

Stier is president of the thoroughly bipartisan and widely respected Partnership for Public Service. From my experience, he is the last person who would want to get into the middle of an ideological fight — unless his conscience required him to.

Let’s speculate a little. It’s possible that Mr. Dionne’s perspective on Stier is shaded by what I’d call Washingtonitis, sometimes known as DCitis. Remember how often the DC media told us that Robert Mueller was a straight shooter and how Jim Comey was a “boy scout”? How many people still think that?

Like the NYTimes, I’m betting that E.J. Dionne is wiping egg off his face. This is pretty much the only thing in Dionne’s article that I agree with:

But it was such a sharply constrained investigation that neither Kavanaugh nor Ford was questioned, and the other allegations against Kavanaugh were ignored. “The process was a sham,” Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), a member of the Judiciary Committee who is seeking her party’s presidential nomination, said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.” She was not being hyperbolic. In the wake of the new revelations, three other Democratic contenders quickly called for Kavanaugh’s impeachment.

There’s no question that the process was a sham. At the last minute, Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats brought forth one unsubstantiated allegation after another. What’s most disgusting is that they’re still bringing forth unsubstantiated hate-filled allegations after Justice Kavanaugh has been confirmed.

Initially, Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats wanted to disqualify then-Judge Kavanaugh the ‘normal way’. When it became apparent that wouldn’t work, Democrats chose the unsubstantiated allegations path. This is a slimy path only used by hate-filled ideologues. Thank God for Lindsey Graham’s speech:

Lindsey Graham laid out the crap that Justice Kavanaugh and his family went through. That’s the real sham. Democrats should be obliterated for their vicious conduct. May E.J. Dionne and Senate Judiciary Democrats rot in hell together.

This weekend, the NYTimes ‘reported’ that “a freshman named Brett Kavanaugh pulled down his pants and thrust his penis at [Deborah Ramirez], prompting her to swat it away and inadvertently touch it.” Here’s how the NYTimes article opens:

Deborah Ramirez had the grades to go to Yale in 1983. But she wasn’t prepared for what she’d find there. A top student in southwestern Connecticut, she studied hard but socialized little. She was raised Catholic and had a sheltered upbringing. In the summers, she worked at Carvel dishing ice cream, commuting in the $500 car she’d bought with babysitting earnings.

At Yale, she encountered students from more worldly backgrounds. Many were affluent and had attended elite private high schools. They also had experience with drinking and sexual behavior that Ms. Ramirez, who had not intended to be intimate with a man until her wedding night, lacked.

During the winter of her freshman year, a drunken dormitory party unsettled her deeply. She and some classmates had been drinking heavily when, she says, a freshman named Brett Kavanaugh pulled down his pants and thrust his penis at her, prompting her to swat it away and inadvertently touch it. Some of the onlookers, who had been passing around a fake penis earlier in the evening, laughed.

After that article ran this weekend, virtually all of the Democrats’ presidential candidates called for Justice Kavanaugh’s impeachment. Sen. Hirono, one of the Democrats who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, insisted that the Senate Judiciary Committee start an impeachment investigation into the matter. This was a big story this weekend.

This morning, “The New York Times suddenly made a major revision to a supposed bombshell piece late Sunday concerning a resurfaced allegation of sexual assault by Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh — hours after virtually all 2020 Democratic presidential candidates had cited the original article as a reason to impeach Kavanaugh.” According to this article, “The update included the significant detail that several friends of the alleged victim said she did not recall the supposed sexual assault in question at all. The Times also stated for the first time that the alleged victim refused to be interviewed, and has made no comment about the episode.”

Suffice it to say that the NYTimes and the Democrat presidential candidates have egg on their face this morning. Ditto with Sen. Hirono. They were so willing to pounce on this story because they saw it as the perfect opportunity to take down Justice Kavanaugh and President Trump with a single story. Now the NYTimes is apologizing:


It said “Also, a tweet that went out from the @NYTOpinion account yesterday was clearly inappropriate and offensive. We apologize for it and are reviewing the decision-making with those involved.”

Here’s Elizabeth Warren’s tweet:


The nomination wasn’t rammed through by any stretch of the imagination. What happened was that Democrats brought forth tons of unsubstantiated allegations once they knew Justice Kavanaugh would be confirmed. These allegations weren’t substantiated. Democrats panicked because they were certain that Kavanaugh would be part of the 5-4 ‘Republican majority’ that would overturn Roe v. Wade.

Amy Klobuchar stopped short of calling for impeachment, and instead posted a picture of Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford with the words, “Let us never forget what courage looks like.”

Let’s never forget what dishonesty looks like:

This article asks an important question for the Democrat presidential nominee and the DFL Senator. It’s an article about the Line 3 Pipeline project.

It starts by saying “MINNEAPOLIS — A divisive fight over the future of a crude-oil pipeline across Minnesota is pinning presidential candidates between environmentalists and trade unions in a 2020 battleground state, testing their campaign promises to ease away from fossil fuels.” Then it states something controversial, saying “Progressive candidates Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have condemned a Canadian company’s plan to replace its old and deteriorating Line 3 pipeline, which carries Canadian crude across the forests and wetlands of northern Minnesota and into northern Wisconsin. They’ve sided with environmental and tribal groups that have been trying to stop the project for years, arguing that the oil should stay in the ground. Other candidates, including home-state Sen. Amy Klobuchar and front-runner Joe Biden, have remained largely silent, mindful that such projects are viewed as job creators for some of the working-class voters they may need to win the state next year.”

I must take issue with this statement:

Sen. Amy Klobuchar and front-runner Joe Biden, have remained largely silent, mindful that such projects are viewed as job creators for some of the working-class voters they may need to win the state next year.

Oh really, Joe? Then what did you mean at this campaign event?

Ending fossil fuels necessarily requires being opposed to the Line 3 Pipeline project because the Line 3 Pipeline project carries fossil fuels. Democrats don’t want to admit that because Democrats want to appease both construction workers and environmental activists simultaneously. That’s impossible because those organizations fit together like oil and water. (Pardon the metaphor but I couldn’t resist.)

I’d also reject the notion that Sen. Klobuchar has stayed neutral, as this suggests:

Klobuchar has also avoided taking a position. She has said she wants to ensure a thorough environmental and scientific review to determine if the Line 3 project should move forward. Minnesota regulators signed off on the main environmental review last year, although an appeals court has ordered additional study on the potential impacts to the Lake Superior watershed. But she recently returned $5,600 in donations from an Enbridge project manager after a liberal watchdog group, the Public Accountability Initiative, revealed them.

Sen. Klobuchar knows that that’s BS. The Line 3 has already gone through the entire permitting process, including getting the approval from the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. The only step left is for the lawsuits to get settled. Enbridge played by the rules laid out by the legislature and signed by the governor.

Jason Lewis put things beautifully when he announced his candidacy for the U.S. Senate:

When Republican Jason Lewis launched his U.S. Senate campaign at the Minnesota State Fair, the former congressman said he would focus on greater Minnesota — the mostly rural part outside the Minneapolis-St. Paul area — to make up for Democratic strength in the cities. He highlighted the 8th Congressional District, which covers northeastern Minnesota and has swung from blue to red. Lewis said Trump’s campaign is “dead serious about Minnesota,” and that he expects it to follow the same strategy.

“Greater Minnesota is turning red, deep red. I don’t know how a Democrat’s going to win the 8th District promising to give pink slips to every trade union member on the Iron Range, promising to stop Enbridge, to stop copper mining, to stop logging, to stop people from having jobs on the Iron Range,” Lewis said.

The DFL is almost ceding rural Minnesota legislative districts while becoming more and more metrocentric. If the DFL continues siding with environmental activists and against the construction unions, they won’t win many elections in rural Minnesota. The truth is that the DFL isn’t interested in farmers or laborers, aka the F-L in DFL.

If President Trump highlights the differences between the DFL’s broken promises to farmers and laborers vs. President Trump’s promises made and promises kept on the issue of slapping tariffs on China to prevent steel dumping, he’ll make Minnesota competitive again.