Archive for the ‘Democrats’ Category

Isn’t it a coincidence that this article just happened to pop up right after Jerry Nadler’s impeachment inquiry fizzled, again. It seems like the fiftieth time on that. It feels like the fiftieth time that Democrats have brought forth unsubstantiated accusations against Brett Kavanaugh.

Democrats have put together another ‘scandal’ involving Justice Brett Kavanaugh. This time, a significant portion of the Democrats’ presidential candidates insist that Justice Kavanaugh be impeached. According to this article, “Top 2020 Democratic contenders Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Beto O’Rourke, Cory Booker and Julian Castro announced on Sunday that Supreme Court Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh ‘must be impeached,’ after a new, uncorroborated and disputed allegation of sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh surfaced in a weekend New York Times piece.”

Apparently, Democrats don’t care if they destroy Justice Kavanaugh’s family, including his beautiful daughters. Remember this moment from Justice Kavanaugh’s hearing?

That’s a moment I’ll never forget. Conversely, I wish I could forget the torture that Democrats inflicted on Justice Kavanaugh’s family. I wish I didn’t have to know this BS:

The Times piece by Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly, adapted from their forthcoming book, asserted that a Kavanaugh classmate, Clinton-connected nonprofit CEO Max Stier, “saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student.”

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.”

Then there’s this:

But, the Times’ article also conspicuously did not mention that Pogrebin and Kelly’s book found that the female student in question had denied any knowledge of the alleged episode. “The book notes, quietly, that the woman Max Stier named as having been supposedly victimized by Kavanaugh and friends denies any memory of the alleged event,” observed The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway. “Seems, I don’t know, significant.”

The book reads: “[Tracy] Harmon, whose surname is now Harmon Joyce, has also refused to discuss the incident, though several of her friends said she does not recall it.”

It isn’t a coincidence that Ms. Blasey-Ford’s attorney, Debra Katz, just admitted in a speech that Dr. Blasey-Ford had political motivations for testifying:

This is frightening:

The Times went on to note in the article that it had “corroborated the story with two officials who have communicated with Mr. Stier,” but the article apparently meant only that the Times had corroborated that Stier made his claim to the FBI. No first-hand corroboration of the alleged episode was apparently obtained.

In other words, the NYTimes’ article is just about worthless. This story is just as corroborate as Ms. Blasey-Ford’s initial accusation. This is just as frightening:

Nevertheless, Democrats announced a new effort to topple Kavanaugh. Hawaii Democratic Sen. Mazie Hirono, who infamously said last year that Kavanaugh did not deserve a fair hearing because he might be pro-life, said the Senate Judiciary Committee should begin an impeachment inquiry to determine whether Kavanaugh lied to Congress.

Sen. Hirono should take a civics class from Dean Urdahl. Impeachment doesn’t start in the Senate. Impeachment investigations start in the House because the House is the only body authorized by the Constitution to start articles of Impeachment.

These Do-Nothing Democrats haven’t contributed a thing to make the United States better. That’s why Democrats should be run out of Dodge, proverbially speaking.

I felt sick reading John Hinderaker’s article, partially because of the violence visited upon the young man in the video but mostly because it’s just a matter of time before that sort of thing hits St. Cloud.

Forgive my pessimism. I’m usually an optimist. After watching St. Cloud deteriorate the last 5 years, it’s difficult to maintain a positive attitude. Next Wednesday, St. Cloud’s Police Chief will participate in a propagandist’s dream event to tell everyone just how wonderful St. Cloud would be if it wasn’t for those awful hate-filled Christians antagonizing those pure-as-the-driven-snow CAIR activists.

People are leaving St. Cloud. Some are moving to southern states but most are leaving for Sartell, Sauk Rapids St. Augusta and St. Joe. They’re leaving because they’re disgusted with spineless politicians, rising crime in core neighborhoods, a city council that thinks that the First Amendment is optional and a school board that thinks that sneaking a bonding referendum for a $100,000,000+ Tech HS should be voted on by only those in the ‘education community’. (That’s why the school board kept everything hush until the Times accidentally ruined the School Board’s plans.) But I digress.

John’s post is about the young man who got brutalized in Minneapolis just outside Target Field. This is one of the videos of this disgusting event:

Day after day, week after week, month after month, Democrats hint that law enforcement is the problem. That puts police officers in the impossible position of having to do a difficult job without the full support of the communities they’re protecting.

Authorities admit that violent crime is up in Minneapolis, although they surround that admission with happy talk, which won’t be believed by anyone who actually ventures into the city at night. (The story is the same in urban St. Paul. One night last week, the St. Paul police lacked the manpower to respond to three shootings that happened more or less simultaneously in different parts of the city.)

Minneapolis’s mayor is a young man who worked briefly in my law firm and is obviously not up to the task. Members of the City Council are ridiculously left-wing and totally ineffective. In both Minneapolis and St. Paul, civic authorities are convinced that policemen are the gravest threat to “communities of color,” and therefore law enforcement should be scaled back, or only grudgingly reinforced in response to events like the one you see in the video above.

Then John notes what someone reminds him of:

A reader reminds me that I should have mentioned this: “Some Minneapolis candidates say they can envision a city without police.”

Seven City Council hopefuls and two mayoral candidates say in a local voter guide that they can envision a future Minneapolis with no police. Asked, “Do you believe that we could ever have a city without police?” two mayoral candidates and two incumbents and five serious challengers running for City Council answered “yes.”

The idiots on St. Cloud’s City Council aren’t that stupid but nobody’s mistaking them for Einstein’s relatives, either.

What St. Cloud needs is its version of Rudy Giuliani. If we don’t find that person fast, I hate thinking what depths St. Cloud will descend into.

Salena Zito’s latest column highlights what I think will be one of the biggest issues of the 2020 election cycle, in both the presidential election and in congressional races. The title of Ms. Zito’s column is “The crackers and frackers could hold the keys to 2020”. I’ve said for awhile that I think they will be one of the biggest issues in the race.

Democrats are in a difficult position. If Democrats side with Tom Steyer and AOC, they’ll lose the people who used to be the heart and soul of the Democratic Party, the industrial unions like the Pipefitters, the UAW, the USW and other major unions. If Democrats side with these unions, Tom Steyer stops writing checks for their campaigns.

Republicans don’t have such conflicts. They can support fracking without hurting their standing with other interest groups that support the GOP. The great news is that Republicans can boast how they support great-paying blue collar jobs that are helping rebuild close-knit communities in major battleground states like Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan.

All Darrin Kelly wanted for the energy workers in Western Pennsylvania was that the Democratic presidential hopefuls would talk to them before going to war against shale. That opportunity slipped away last Friday when Elizabeth Warren joined Bernie Sanders in calling for a total fracking ban. “On my first day as president, I will sign an executive order that puts a total moratorium on all new fossil-fuel leases for drilling offshore and on public lands. And I will ban fracking — everywhere,” Warren tweeted.

“It is disappointing that any national candidate would not come in here and want to talk to the men and women of this area first before unilaterally making that decision,” said Kelly, a charismatic Pittsburgh firefighter who is also the head of the powerful and influential Allegheny Fayette Labor Council. They represent workers stretching from Pittsburgh to the borders of Maryland and West Virginia.

It isn’t just Bernie and Warren that’ve abandoned blue collar America. Joe Biden ditched them, too:

Biden denied the donor’s association to the fossil fuel industry before calling the young woman “kiddo” and taking her hand. He said, “I want you to look at my eyes. I guarantee you. I guarantee you. We’re going to end fossil fuel.

“There you have it. Blue Collar Joe just said that he’ll stop the fossil fuel industry. Then there’s this:

Trump’s magic came in rural and post-industrial counties such as Luzerne and Erie, but most importantly in the populous counties around Pittsburgh, where shale is king and fracking is seen as the second coming of the steel industry.

They may look like ordinary construction cranes to someone unfamiliar with the history of this region. But if you’re from here, they look like something different. Building the ethane cracker plant, each of these cranes looks like a new colossus rising from the ashes of yesterday’s despair.

Building the plant has brought in 6,000 good-paying jobs, with more to come. Ultimately, there will be 600 permanent jobs at the plant, with industry analysts predicting triple that amount in supporting industries.

Jobs postings are everywhere touting opportunities, no matter the skill level — high school education, trade school certificate, chemists, engineers, IT, labor. If you reliably turn up for work, there is likely a career for you in the oil and gas industry.

Let’s remember this: In 2016, then-candidate Trump promised he wouldn’t forget their communities. In 2020, he’ll return with the campaign slogan of promises made, promises kept.

The rebuilding isn’t complete but it’s been started, thanks to President Trump’s policies. President Trump identified the Obama administration’s anti-coal regulations as one of the things killing the energy industry. Thanks to the Republicans’ use of the Congressional Review Act, which they used 16 times, and the Trump/GOP tax cuts, communities are rebuilding. Under Obama/Biden, those communities were forgotten.

Last week, the Democrats, both those running for president and those activists in the MSM, repeatedly talked about the looming recession. At last night’s third Democrat presidential debate, hardly a word was said about the economy. Chief Washington Examiner Politics Correspondent Byron York notice that the subject of the economy didn’t make an appearance at the Democrats’ third presidential debate. Amazingly, ABC moderators didn’t ask a single question about the economy, either.

How can you have a 3-hour-long debate and not talk about the topic that most people want to talk about? That’s journalistic malpractice. In his article, York wrote “at the Democratic Party’s first one-night presidential debate, the first opportunity to showcase the party’s ten leading candidates, what role did the nation’s widespread economic anxieties play? Almost none. The candidates simply didn’t talk about it. (Nor did the ABC News moderators ask.) The word “recession” was uttered just once in the entire debate. (By Julian Castro, who noted the poll’s finding of recession fears.) Nor was the word “unemployment” ever spoken. Nor was there a discussion of job creation. Nor was there much of a discussion of wages.”

It’s almost as if ABC got the word from their boss (in this instance, DNC Chair Tom Perez) to not talk about the subject. I’m not accusing Chairman Perez of that. I’m merely stating that it’s as if Perez did that. It isn’t like Clintonista George Stephanopoulos was ever accused of rigging a debate by his former bosses. Oh wait. He has:

BRZEZINSKI:Jonathan Capehart, help me understand, tell me if I’m going down the wrong path here. It appears the Clinton campaign wants to do either a debate that no one will see, or a debate with a moderator that might not be completely fair towards Bernie Sanders. What do you think of the concept of a GMA debate with George Stephanopoulos.

Democrats understand that it’s virtually impossible to convince people that are spending extra money at Walmart because their take-home pay has increased thanks to the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act and because pay has increased by 3% over the past year. It’s easier to talk about ‘Democrat’ issues like health care and gun confiscation. DNC Chairman Tom Perez, in an attempt to spin what happened, said that health care is an economic issue:

Sorry, Tom, but creating jobs, tax policy, regulatory policy and rebuilding communities through a solid, comprehensive economic package qualifies as a discussion on the economy.

Just minutes ago, Democrat Sen. Ed Markey posted a picture through his Twitter feed. The message he conveyed was simple and utterly dishonest. Sen. Markey tweeted “If Donald Trump and the fossil fuel industry get their way and devastate the Arctic Refuge with drilling, we will never get this pristine wilderness back. The Senate needs to build off this House vote and pass our new legislation that will permanently ban all drilling there.” Here’s Sen. Markey’s dishonest tweet in its entirety:


I replied to Sen. Markey’s tweet with my own statement. Here’s that tweet:


A friend of mine is a retired engineer who worked for a company formerly known as AGAS, aka Alaska Gas & Oil. We’ve frequently talked about Section 1002. My friend told me that the area where the actual drilling would happen is hardly picturesque. I found this picture of a small portion of where the drilling will happen:

My picture hardly looks like Sen. Markey’s picture. In fact, I’d say that my picture looks like an oversized swamp whereas Sen. Markey’s is intentionally misleading. Back in the day, I remember how the Sierra Club predicted that building the pipeline would destroy the migration route of the Barrows Caribou, adding “and for what? Another 4-5 years worth of oil?” That grim statement was made in the mid-1970s. The pipeline was opened in 1978. It’s still transporting oil to tankers in Valdez, AK.

The thing that everyone should remember is that the Democrats’/Environmental activists’ predictions is really more propaganda than prediction. I’ve never seen one of their predictions come true. Most have been off by virtually orders of magnitude. When AOC said we had 12 years left to live because of climate change, I totally dismissed that prediction. It’s a total joke.

After reading Tina Smith’s quote in this article, it isn’t difficult to not trust Democrats when guns are concerned.

When asked if she thinks Congress would pass universal background checks this year or next, Smith is quoted as saying “I’m not optimistic. We’ve seen this cycle over and over again: concerns, promises to take action and then backtracking.”

Then there’s Angie Craig, another Democrat who sounded like an idiot when she said “The fact is most Americans support common-sense gun legislation. The only thing stopping it is the special interests that seem to have control over some politicians in Congress. I’m sick and tired of the NRA.” The article nots that “Craig supports universal background checks and banning what she called ‘military-style assault weapons.'”

What’s appalling is that neither Craig or Smith know the first thing about guns, yet they want to tell gun owners what they can’t do. As for Craig saying “I’m sick and tired of the NRA”, that shows how ignorant of who the NRA is. The NRA are people from all across the United States determined to prevent politicians from gutting the Second Amendment. Before people say that that’s conspiracy theory talk, I’ll show you a trio of Democrats running for president who support firearm confiscation:

Sen. Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.) told reporters in New Hampshire on Friday that mandatory buybacks were “a good idea.”

Presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke, the former congressman from El Paso, spent the final weeks of August demanding mandatory buybacks of millions of assault rifles currently owned by law-abiding Americans. “All of them,” he tweeted defiantly.

Elizabeth Warren is the other Democrat presidential candidate who supports a mandatory confiscation of assault weapons.

Democrats love using the euphemism buyback instead of confiscation for obvious reasons. Confiscation is the right term. It’s impossible to buy something back that wasn’t your property previously. Since the government didn’t own the guns previously, it can’t buy them back. Democrats know this but that won’t prevent them from using that dishonest term repeatedly during this debate.

Here’s something to contemplate: if felons commit crimes, is it logical to violate law-abiding citizens’ Constitutional rights? Here’s another question worth pondering: will any of the Democrats’ solutions stop even 1 mass shooting? Thus far, the answer to that question is an emphatic no.

That’s because the Democrats aren’t looking at what’s caused mass casualties. With the Parkland shooting, the shooter told people that he was going to kill students. Rather than taking him seriously, the people running Marjorie Stoneman Douglas turned a blind eye towards the shooter. That was just a continuation of what they did earlier in his school career:

Cruz’s eighth-grade language arts teacher, Carrie Yon, kept diligent notes on his behavior for Cruz’s “Functional Behavior Analysis”:

Sept. 3: While reviewing [a] homophones worksheet, when another student mentioned the amendment that talks about ‘the right to bear arms’ Nick [sic] lit up when hearing the word that related to guns and shouted out “you mean like guns!” he was overly excited thinking that we were going to talk about guns. Nick later used his pencil as a gun … shooting around the classroom.

Then there’s this:

Yon provided her opinion for the “Functional Behavioral Analysis”:

“I feel strongly that Nikolas is a danger to the students and faculty at this school. I do not feel that he understands the difference between his violent video games and reality. He is constantly showing aggressive behavior and poor judgment. His drawing in class show violent acts (people shooting at each other) or creepy sexual pictures (dogs with large penises) … I would like to see him sent to a facility that is more prepared and has the proper setting to deal with this type of child.”

That doesn’t include talking about the other government failures prior to Cruz’s Valentine’s Day massacre. Those things don’t fit into the Democrats’ narrative so they’re ignored. The Democrats’ constant focus is on things that won’t stop these shootings. Democrats only want things that are ineffective or are marginally effective. For instance, the 1994 assault weapons ban didn’t prevent a single mass shooting.

Until Democrats study what’s causing these shootings and become interested in connecting the dots with the people pulling the triggers, I’ll remain skeptical of the Democrats’ gun-grabbing plans.

For months, Democrats insisted that they “could walk and chew gum at the same time.” Democrats insisted that they could investigate the Trump administration while legislating. The facts speak for themselves. The Democrats haven’t gotten a single major bill passed since taking control of the House. That’s because they’ve expended their energy investigating the Trump administration since getting their gavels.

There’s been a crisis at the US’s southern border. Do-Nothing Democrats haven’t lifted a finger to fix that crisis. Vice President Pence stayed at a Trump hotel in Doonbeg. Jerry Nadler and his gang of Do-Nothing Democrats initiate an investigation within hours. There’s an opioid crisis that’s killing people throughout the Rust Belt. Do-Nothing Democrats haven’t written legislation to fix this crisis. William Barr published Robert Mueller’s summary without immediately publishing the Mueller Report. Do-Nothing Democrats call Barr up to Capitol Hill the next week to get to the bottom of this crisis.

The highest-profile investigation is being conducted by the House Judiciary Committee. Chairman Jerrold Nadler says it has reached a key phase in building an impeachment case against the president, but Speaker Nancy Pelosi has yet to give a green light to a formal inquiry. The Judiciary panel plans to vote Thursday on procedures for conducting hearings that could lead to an impeachment resolution.

The Do-Nothing Democrats’ blood-lust for President Trump is getting exposed:

Pivotal hearings are set for this month and into the fall, to follow up on former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s findings and build a case on whether Trump tried to obstruct the probe of Russian interference in the 2016 election. Other potential presidential abuses of power or corruption also will be under scrutiny.

Let’s get serious here. When the Watergate investigation started, there were a series of identifiable crimes that they were investigating. With this witch hunt, Democrats can’t identify a crime that’s been committed. It’s just that they’re certain that President Trump is evil personified. That’s why the Do-No Democrats keep drilling down into a dry well.

It’s time PETA started investigating Chairman Nadler for beating a dead horse. Do-Nothing Democrats have led that dead horse to water but it’s painfully obvious that it can’t swim.

It stands to reason that Stanley Greenberg’s opinions, like the ones in this op-ed, are more than a little tainted. It’s logical considering the fact that his wife is Rosa DeLauro, one of the nuttiest Democrats in Congress.

It’s stunning that he’d take such a partisan perspective on what Republicans did after the TEA Party Wave Election of 2010. Greenberg wrote “The Democrats today are reacting not only to Mr. Trump but to the Tea Party-dominated Republican Party that preceded and prepared the way for him with gridlocked government. After coming to power in the 2010 wave election, the Republicans tried to keep the government from addressing virtually any problem at all. The Tea Party movement was animated by its hostility to Mr. Obama and his activist government. Empowered in the House, it forced an I.M.F.-like budget austerity on the federal government and blocked any new economic stimulus and investment. As a candidate, Mr. Trump built his base among Tea Party Republicans and Evangelicals in order to carry forward the assault on government nationally and in the states. The Democrats watched in frustration as the government was presumed to be impotent to address wage stagnation, surging inequality, climate change, the slaughter from automatic weapons and the flood of dark money into politics.”

To use one of George Will’s favorite lines, “Well.” After Democrats pushed the ACA down Americans’ throats, the first thing that people wanted Republicans to do was stop the Democrats’ leftward lurch on things like Cap & Trade, aka Cap & Tax, and higher taxes, including the creation of a wealth tax that Sen. Warren is proposing.

Consider these facts. Virtually every top-tier Democrat presidential candidate wants to kill manufacturing jobs with excessive regulations. Virtually all top-tier Democrat presidential candidates want to ban fracking in the name of saving the planet. Virtually all top-tier Democrat presidential candidates want to prevent families, especially single moms, from protecting themselves.

According to Mr. Greenberg, “The 2020 election will be transformative like few in our history. It will end with the death of the Republican Party as we know it, leaving the survivors to begin the struggle to renew the party of Lincoln and make it relevant for our times. It will liberate the Democratic Party from the country’s suffocating polarization and allow it to use government to address the vast array of problems facing the nation.”

With the nation heading in the right direction, it’s inconceivable that voters on a massive scale will vote to change directions. Wave elections happen when the nation is heading in the wrong direction. With unemployment at a 50-year low, with wages rising for unskilled laborers and with take-home pay increasing thanks to the Trump-GOP tax cuts, aka the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act, things seem pretty calm. Wave elections don’t happen when things are calm.

Predicting the “death of the Republican Party” is the same as predicting a massive wave election that helps Democrats. That’s foolish. Nobody is predicting a wave election in either direction.

Further, anyone that thinks that health care will be a winning issue for Democrats in 2020 should think about Medicare-for-All. I’m betting it isn’t a net positive for Democrats. If health care isn’t the big winner in 2020 for Democrats, then it isn’t a stretch to think that the suburban white women won’t be the winning edge for Democrats.

I’m betting, too, that immigration will be a net negative for Democrats. In fact, I’ve heard that it’s a net negative amongst Hispanics in New Mexico. That’s a big deal since Hispanics make up almost half of New Mexico’s population.

What do the shooters who killed people in Odessa, TX, El Paso, TX and Dayton, OH have in common? This isn’t difficult. I’m betting that we’d quickly agree that the 3 shooters are criminals. Considering that fact, isn’t it interesting that the Democrats’ first ‘solution’ is to violate law-abiding citizens’ civil rights?

Stop and think about that in those terms. If you wanted to lower crime, why would your first step be to restrict the civil rights of law-abiding citizens? That’s like a mechanic changing the oil and coolant when the customer told him that the car was having difficulty shifting from reverse to overdrive. In other words, it’s stupid to fix things that aren’t broken instead of fixing what’s broken.

Why wouldn’t Democrats fix the things that are broken rather than tinker with things that aren’t broken? They might if their highest priority was to fix things rather than to acquire power and check things off the Democrats’ ideological check list. The things that Democrats most want are checking items off their ideological checklist and obeying Resist Movement activists.

Most of the criminal gun violence is committed by handguns. Democrats, Republicans and Libertarians alike know this. They’ve known that for a generation or more. Why hasn’t Robert Francis O’Rourke insisted on a mandatory handgun confiscation program like he’s pushing his mandatory assault weapons confiscation plan?

O’Rourke won’t champion such a confiscation program because he knows that the fastest-growing group of people applying for conceal-carry permits are single moms. Taking the guns away from single moms that they use to protect their families is politically stupid. That’s why Robert Francis O’Rourke won’t propose such legislation. Neither will other Democrats.

Instead, it’s easier to propose confiscating scary-looking weapons like this:

The weapon above isn’t any more lethal than a semi-automatic rifle of the same caliber that doesn’t have a pistol grip. That’s just reality. Finally, the assault weapons ban didn’t have an appreciable affect on gun crime because the so-called assault weapons that were banned in the legislation didn’t exist by the time the legislation took effect.

The assault weapons ban outlawed specific brands and models. The minute that the legislation was signed outlawing those guns, the manufacturers changed the model number. Problem solved. As I wrote here, the Heller Decision held:

Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp. 54–56. 3. The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to self-defense) violate the Second Amendment. The District’s total ban on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the lawful purpose of self-defense.

The simple fact is that the Supreme Court has ruled on guns “in common use.” As long as a gun is commonly owned, Congress can’t confiscate it.

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.