Search
Archives

You are currently browsing the archives for the Pelosi category.

Categories

Archive for the ‘Pelosi’ Category

It isn’t shocking that ‘San Fran Nan’, aka Nancy Pelosi, wants to return to the bad old days of the Obama economic policies. That’s to be expected. It isn’t that surprising that she isn’t worried about innocent bystanders getting hurt during the campaign. What’s disgusting is how cavalierly she talks about “collateral damage” in this video:

‘San Fran Nan’ apparently couldn’t care less about people getting hurt by Soros-financed leftist goons. This isn’t about policies for her. It’s about ideology with her. If some Republican candidates have to suffer concussions for her to regain her speakership, that’s fine with her.

She’s power-crazed. That description fits most Democrat activists. BTW, don’t buy the Democrats’ spinmeisters spin on this. We keep hearing about this or that moderate. That’s usually after a Republican highlights how another Republican has gotten attacked. We’re told that there are lots of moderates in the Democratic Party. To that, I emphatically say BS.

If there were lots of principled moderates in the Democratic Party, they would’ve forged a compromise on DACA and funding the wall. They don’t exist. I’ve been saying since 2010 that there aren’t any principled moderate Democrats left. I stand by that statement.

Yesterday, Nancy Pelosi made one of the most tone-deaf statements she’s ever made. That’s saying something, considering the amount of tone-deaf statements she’s made in her lifetime. With a new raft of illegal immigrants heading towards the US-Mexico border, she said “It happens to be like a manhood issue for the president, building a wall, and I’m not interested in that.”

Further, she said “We can’t allow him to say we’re not interested in protecting the border,” Pelosi said, adding that the wall is “probably the worst way to protect the border.”

That’s a lie. Just ask Israel if their wall has stopped terrorist attacks. (It’s stopped them cold.) For that matter, ask many limousine liberals who live in gated communities if walls work. Democrats know that walls work. Democrats just oppose walls because they prefer open borders. To be specific, one of their funders, George Soros, demands open borders.

Newt Gingrich brings the hammer down during this interview:

Newt’s right. This isn’t just about border security or Trump. This, in Newt’s words, is “about jobs vs. mobs”, too.

I’ve said this for months. Democrats are nuts beyond belief. Check out this article, then tell me that Democrats just want to represent people who work hard and play by the rules. Simply put, Democrats want to push their extremist agenda.

They had a chance to do something constructive. They had a chance to make deal with President Trump on DACA in exchange for funding the wall. Instead of Democrats saying yes, we got the #SchumerShutdown. Republicans should think about that before the election. Democrats picked shutting down the government over making a reasonable compromise.

Staying home is like voting for a radical Democrat. It’s that simple. If that’s what you want, stay home. If you’d prefer a continuation of this prosperity, you’d better get to your local polling station and vote Republican. Period.

During this campaign, Democrats have distanced themselves from Nancy Pelosi. If they retake the majority on Nov. 6, they’ll re-elect her to be their speaker. That’s the game Democrats are playing. It’s a game we should immediately opt out of.

It isn’t that Nancy Pelosi isn’t tone-deaf. She is. It’s that other Democrats are just as bad. A vote for a so-called Democrat moderate is a vote for another Democrat lunatic. Does anyone seriously think that there’s any moderates in the Democrats’ leadership team?

This is a game. It’s the Democrats’ attempt to use a shiny object (Pelosi) to distract attention away from the Democrats inadequacies (think identity politics, income inequality, comprehensive immigration reform). Democrats don’t want to talk about immigration.

Further, I’d highlight the fact that Democrats are turning increasingly violent. John Hinderaker’s post highlights the fact that this violence isn’t just happening in Portland, OR and NYC. It’s happening in Minnesota, too.

BTW, it’s impossible to picture Keith Ellison pursuing charges against the hooligans in Hinderaker’s post. He’d side with the DFL. Either that or he’d pretend that it didn’t happen.

Once the election is behind them, does anyone think that Pelosi won’t twist these new Democrats’ arms until she’s speaker again? Of course she will. What’s worse is that she presided over the House until the U.S. economy tanked. We don’t want that all over again.

The reality is that, under Democrat governance, we’ll have more crime and less economic growth. That’s been proven before.

Monday afternoon, Sen. Casey, (D-PA), removed his despicable campaign ad. This didn’t happen because Sen. Casey is a man of integrity. It happened because he isn’t a man of integrity.

First, it’s important to know what’s in the ad. According to the article, the “ad accuses Mr. Barletta of voting to let insurers refuse coverage for people with pre-existing medical conditions. It features a woman, Stacie Ritter of Lancaster County, whose twin daughters were diagnosed with cancer saying, ‘if Lou Barletta has his way, kids like mine could be denied the care they need.'”

It isn’t difficult to figure out why Rep. Barletta, (R-PA), got upset with the ad. Rep. Barletta put this letter together to criticize his opponent:

Here’s a partial transcript of Rep. Barletta’s video:

What Bob Casey did with that commercial is one of the most hurtful, insensitive things I’ve ever experienced in my political career. Bob Casey knew that my 18-month-old grandson, who is a twin, has cancer. I told him and his wife a month ago. They knew what we were going through.”

In pulling his ad, Sen. Casey, (D-PA), published a statement that implies that the ad “involving children stricken with cancer were unintentional” and that “he takes Mr. Barletta at his word about the impact it had on his family.”

What’s interesting is that “the Democrat’s campaign is still running the ad in the rest of the state.” That’s the definition of a dirtbag. Sen. Casey’s ad implies that Rep. Barletta would advocate for policies that would hurt his 18-month-old grandson. Why would anyone think that pulling the ad in a small section of Pennsylvania will eliminate the Barlettas’ pain?

If I didn’t know better, I’d bet that Sen. Casey is just as tone-deaf as Hillary Clinton or Nancy Pelosi. It takes some effort to reach that ‘level’ of insensitivity.

Frequent readers of LFR have heard me use the quote about Yasser Arafat where others said he “never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.” Further, I’ve said that the quote fits the Democrats perfectly.

Apparently, Bret Stephens thinks the same thing about Democrats. That’s the only conclusion you can reach when you read his article say “Michael Kelly, the legendary journalist who died covering the invasion of Iraq in 2003, once wrote that the ‘animating impulse’ of modern liberalism was to ‘marginalize itself and then enjoy its own company. And to make itself as unattractive to as many as possible. If it were a person,’ he added, ‘it would pierce its tongue.'”

There’s no disputing the fact that Democrats have recruited some good fits for the districts they’re running in. Similarly, there’s no disputing that the Democrats are having a gigantic fight within itself to determine who will control the Party. Right now, the angry mob wing of the Party appears to be winning.

While the Democrats might’ve recruited some moderates, there’s no disputing that House Democrats’ leadership is still far from moderate. Further, while Democrats can point to a bunch of their candidates saying that they won’t vote for Nancy Pelosi to be the next Speaker, few people believe that.

It pierced its tongue last week when New York’s Representative Jerrold Nadler pledged to use a Democratic House majority to open an investigation into Kavanaugh’s alleged perjury and the “whitewash” investigation by the F.B.I. A party that can’t change its mind and won’t change the subject meets the classic definition of a fanatic.

Democrats, much like Chairman Arafat, can’t avoid missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

This election shouldn’t be that close because Democrats aren’t the moderates that their spinmeisters tell America that they are. Remember the #SchumerShutdown? I certainly can’t forget it. That’s when Sen. Schumer was presented with a totally reasonable option of getting protection for DACA recipients in exchange for funding President Trump’s border wall. Instead of protecting DACA recipients, Sen. Schumer chose to shut the government down.

In 2009, Democrats decided to try and stuff cap and trade down our throats. At the time, Colin Peterson chaired the House Agriculture Committee. He stated that he wouldn’t hold hearings on the proposed bill so they sent it to a different committee. Eventually, it came up for a floor vote. Nancy Pelosi needed Peterson’s vote. Badly. So she forced Peterson to vote for Cap and Trade in exchange for a couple minor concessions.

As proof of their ‘moderation’, Democrats don’t just want Obamacare. They want single-payer health care. That’s where the government tells you what coverages you must have, where tax increases are required annually to bail out a system that’s unsustainable and that drives businesses from the United States.

Remember this oldie but goodie?

It’s important to remember that the Democrats’ tax policies gave the US the weakest economic recovery since the Great Depression. GDP during the Democrats’ time in control was 1.5% most years. Right now, it’s 4% or higher. Consumer confidence and small business confidence is sky high. Business investment is skyrocketing.

Why on God’s green earth would we want to return to the Obama-era policies that led to a decade of lost economic growth? No thanks.

The biggest difference between Democratic socialism and progressivism is the spelling of the words. According to Wikipedia’s definition of Democratic socialism, Democratic Socialists “hold that capitalism is inherently incompatible with the democratic values of liberty, equality, and solidarity; and that these ideals can only be achieved through the realization of a socialist society.”

By contrast (?), progressives believed “that progress was being stifled by vast economic inequality between the rich and the poor; minimally regulated laissez-faire capitalism with monopolistic corporations; and intense and often violent conflict between workers and capitalists.”

During his prolific life, Milton Friedman vehemently disagreed with both economic philosophies. In fact, he wrote a book about it titled Capitalism & Freedom. In the book, Dr. Friedman argued that “with the means for production under the auspices of the government, it is nearly impossible for real dissent and exchange of ideas to exist.”

In this interview, which I’ve posted often, Friedman schools Phil Donahue on the virtues of capitalism vs. socialism:

The point behind this is that Democrats are trying to pretend that they’re progressives, not socialists. Is there a difference between single-payer health care of Bernie Sanders and the “universal coverage” of Tim Walz? I wouldn’t bet on it. If there is a difference, it’d be miniscule.

The other point I want to make is that the economy is running strong right now. Why screw it up? That’s what a Speaker Pelosi would do. I know that because that’s what she did the first time she was Speaker. It didn’t take long for the economy to shrink. It took only a little longer for President Obama’s Democratic Socialists to implement Obamacare.

Thankfully, the American people came to their senses and got rid of Obama’s and Pelosi’s stupidity. Now, the economy is growing, people are finding the jobs they want and their 401(k)s are growing, especially if they’re invested in the NASDAQ.

This column, which was written by a legal immigrant, makes the point that Democrats aren’t listening to the people on immigration. I’d totally agree, though I’d argue that they aren’t listening on other subjects, either.

This highlights just how crazy Democrats are:

Listening to Democratic Party leaders and their media supporters talk about immigration gives me massive cognitive dissonance. Their argument has a strange up-is-down, black-is-white quality to it:

Uncontrolled illegal immigration is no problem! Border protection is racist and offensive! Arresting and deporting criminal aliens, even those that are violent, is immoral! Enforcing our immigration laws is racist!

And now, of course, it has amped up — several Democratic leaders are openly talking about abolishing the Immigration and Customs Enforcement or ICE.

Democrats used to listen to people. They don’t anymore. They have their ideological checklist, which is what they’re interested in accomplishing. Period.

They don’t represent people. They represent causes. That’s why they’re disconnected from blue collar workers. Whether we’re talking about miners, construction workers or heavy equipment operators, the Democrats lost that vote in 2016.

Similarly, Democrats haven’t listened to the people on immigration. They’ve listened to NCLR, aka La Raza, and other immigration hardliners. If Democrats had been sensible, they could’ve had a deal months ago on DACA recipients in exchange for funding the wall. When that didn’t happen, it said that Democrats didn’t care about DACA recipients, that they cared mostly about open borders.

Does this look like a bunch of reasonable-minded activists protesting Ms. Pelosi?

This won’t end well with Democrats. Immigration, if handled properly, can be a major winning issue for the GOP in 2018 and beyond. Let’s remember how President Trump is playing with Hispanics now that their unemployment rate is the lowest in history. Add in how reasonable President Trump looks in offering protection for DACA recipients in exchange for the wall.

The Democrats have a major problem brewing that really can’t be fixed. Thanks to their divisions, Democrats are fighting over immigration. A significant percentage of Democrats openly want open borders. Another significant percentage are fine with open borders but don’t want to talk about it during the campaign. There’s a tiny fraction of Democrats that are actually sane who want the borders enforced. Doug Schoen is a patriotic member of that tiny fraction. In this op-ed, Schoen makes the argument that advocating for open borders will eliminate opportunities for Democrats.

Specifically, he wrote “Not only is Ellison’s statement in itself completely detached from reality, but it seems to suggest that if we cannot have wide open borders, then we must not have free trade at all. These remarks come just weeks after Ellison wore a T-shirt which read ‘yo no creo en fronteras,’ which in English translates into ‘I do not believe in borders.'”

What’s stunning about that t-shirt is that it gives context to his run for Minnesota’s state Attorney General’s office. It’s clear that Ellison will fight law enforcement (through the courts) whose responsibility it is to protect us from drug cartels, gangs like MS-13 and sex and human traffickers. It’s apparent that his only is to pad DFL voter lists. If he has to ignore the law, he’s shown that he’s willing to do that without hesitation.

Further, Ellison has a history of defending cop-killers in the court of public opinion. He did that with convicted cop-killer Assata Shakur, aka Joanne Chesimard, and with Kathleen Soliah. But I digress.

Concerningly, Ellison’s brash statement on immigration is not far out of line with the Democratic Party as a whole. In fact, a Harvard Harris poll from June states that a striking 36 percent of Democrats support “basically open borders”—an inflammatory policy dangerously out of line with mainstream thinking.

Then there’s this:

With the midterms slowly approaching, regaining the support of Independents and moderate Republicans will be key for Democrats in their fight to take back the House. However, light of contentious issues such as immigration where the party has moved further left than ever before, this will be an increasingly difficult demographic for Democrats to appeal to in November. According to a July Gallup poll, immigration is one of the most important issues for Americans heading into the midterm elections, with 22 percent of respondents saying it was the nation’s most important problem.

The Democrats lead in the generic ballot polling but I don’t think it’s a sturdy lead. That’s because I think the Republicans’ closing arguments will devastate Democrats this fall.

Part of the Republicans’ closing arguments should be this insane blathering from Nancy Pelosi:

Saying that Democrats are better at border security is stupid beyond belief. Republicans should also use this interview of Thomas Homan, the retired acting director of ICE, by Harris Faulkner:

When Homan said that the judge ordered the government to stop doing DNA testing because the ACLU filed a lawsuit on the issue, my heart broke. Homan said that “5%-7% of the kids” weren’t a match with the people who claimed to be their parents. Homan then hinted that this judge might’ve just given these kids to sex traffickers.

If Nancy Pelosi wants to have that fight, Republicans should welcome that fight. Thoughtful people don’t release kids to sex traffickers.

This article introduces a frightening thought to Republicans — “the Maxine Waters brigade.” Actually, conservatives should be happy for such a phenomenon.

This paragraph should explain why. In it, it talks about “Even before the prospect of a conservative SCOTUS majority, progressives were already chasing Republicans out of restaurants. Now that Roe v. Wade is theoretically at risk, what will the Maxine Waters brigade do now—start throwing them out of airplanes?”

As I highlighted in this earlier post, Democrats are losing it. Watch 15 seconds of the videos of Jeffrey Toobin and Chris Matthews losing it and you’ll know what I mean. To use an old cliche, a little paranoia goes a long way. This week especially, Democrats are living proof of that cliche.

Here’s a bigger problem for Democrats:

Yes, that’s turned around a bit in the Trump era, most notably in Alabama where a solidly red seat flipped to blue. But unfortunately for Democrats there are only so many Judge Roy Moore’s to go around. What’s happening this November is that Democrats like Joe Manchin (WV), Joe Donnelly (IN), Heidi Heitkamp (ND), and Claire McCaskill (MO) have to run against quality, non-crazy Republicans in states that Trump carried by double-digits.

And now, thanks to Justice Kennedy’s retirement, those same Democrats have to vote against a conservative Supreme Court nominee…on the eve of an election. It’s like a felon robbing a bank on his way to a parole hearing—it confirms everything they feared about you to begin with.

For people who understand things the game of Cribbage, they know that a hand with all even cards is close to worthless. The old saying is that the only right way to throw such a hand is away. Democrats are looking at the political equivalent of an all even cards Cribbage hand this year.

Think about this: Joe Crowley had hoped to challenge Nancy Pelosi to be Speaker of the House. He was defeated by a socialist who wants to abolish ICE. She’ll win that election but New York Republicans should drape her around the necks of every so-called moderate in New York. I can’t picture that turning out well for Democrats.

Think about this, too. How many voters think that getting rid of ICE is the pathway to a safer, more prosperous America? A: Virtually no one. When closing arguments are made this October and November, expect this to be part of the Republicans’ closing arguments.

Don’t expect the Maxine Waters Brigade to win that fight.