Search
Archives

You are currently browsing the blog archives.

Categories

Regular readers of LFR undoubtedly have noticed that I haven’t posted in a while. That’s because I’ve been diagnosed with an arthritic hip, which will be getting replaced in the next couple months. The hip gets so painful that I can’t sit in my computer chair very long.

Please keep me in your prayers.

The question that will determine next year’s House races is a simple one. Will Democrats finally stand up to Nancy Pelosi, especially on the border barrier? Throughout the campaign, we were told that Democrats had recruited a bunch of moderates to challenge Republicans. Thus far, we haven’t seen proof that they recruited moderates. Thus far, nobody has challenged Nancy Pelosi.

Thus far, Steny Hoyer and Jim Clyburn have voiced their opinions that they don’t object to funding President Trump’s wall. Thus far, they haven’t led a rebellion against Ms. Pelosi.

Byron York quotes a Republican this way:

“This is not a negotiation between Republicans and Democrats,” said one GOP lawmaker who is keeping close tabs on the process. “This is a negotiation between rank-and-file Democrats and Nancy Pelosi.”

Then there’s this:

“That is unmistakably true,” added a Republican who is taking part in the talks. “There are many reasonable voices within the Democratic conference who want to see a positive resolution here.” The speaker of the House’s “emboldened stance” — her decision to refuse to consider any funds for a border barrier — has been “very hurtful to the process,” the lawmaker added.

If so-called moderates won’t stand up to Ms. Pelosi, then they worthless.

It’s stunning to think that Democrats actually think this but a group of Democrats are imploring Speaker Pelosi to cut funding to DHS:

As Congress seeks to reach a deal on border security that President Trump will sign, a group of freshman progressive House members want their colleagues to reduce funding for the Department of Homeland Security.

Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., and Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., are poised to their urge their colleagues to “cut” funding to DHS as Trump calls for $5.7 billion to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Wow! As yet another caravan approaches the US-Mexican border, these Democrat nitwits are asking Nancy Pelosi to make the US less safe. How stupid can these Democrats get? (I’m reminded of the old saying that there’s no sense in making something idiot-proof; they’ll just build a better idiot.) Check out this letter:

In the third paragraph, it says “Cut, do not increase funding. A Republican-controlled Congress has already sharply increased DHS spending without clear justification. We have seen rampant spending on detention facilities for young children – reports indicate DHS is paying for-profit companies $700 a day in inhumane facilities.”

Simply put, thanks to these women and Gov. Northam and Speaker Pelosi, the Democratic Party is quickly becoming the ‘Party of Haters’. They simply aren’t showing the ability to be compassionate or thoughtful. The Democrats’ majority in the House is in jeopardy.g

During the partial government shutdown, we were told that the economy was getting hurt. It’s possible that might still be the case but this morning’s jobs report didn’t provide proof of that:

Job growth in January shattered expectations, with nonfarm payrolls surging by 304,000 despite a partial government shutdown that was the longest in history, the Labor Department reported Friday.

The unemployment rate ticked higher to 4 percent, a level where it had last been in June, a likely effect of the shutdown, according to the department. However, officials said federal workers generally were counted as employed during the period because they received pay during the survey week of Jan. 12. On balance, federal government employment actually rose by 1,000. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones had expected payrolls to rise by 170,000 and the unemployment rate to hold steady at 3.9 percent.

Simply put, the doom and gloom that was forecast by Democrats didn’t materialize. Instead, Larry Kudlow’s prediction that the economy would remain strong proved true.

This is why politicians shouldn’t talk about the economy:


Now Sen. Schumer will be able to dine on a major helping of crow at next Tuesday’s SOTU Address. Earlier this week, Sen. Schumer told President Trump to stay out of the negotiations and leave the governing to the Senate. After this jobs report, which blew away the expectations by 140,000 jobs (304,000 actual vs. 165,000 forecast), Sen. Schumer should stick to what he does best — whining while wearing bad-fitting glasses.

Meanwhile, Nancy Pelosi issued this statement:

The January jobs report holds some encouraging news, but it belies the lasting financial damage that the Trump Shutdown has inflicted on hundreds of thousands of Americans across the nation. Federal workers, many of them veterans, saw their financial security shaken, their credit ratings harmed, and their lives upended by the longest shutdown in history. And now, with families still hurting, President Trump refuses to take a second senseless shutdown off the table.

Meanwhile, House Republicans overwhelmingly voted against a pay raise for federal civilian workers, refusing to respect the perseverance and patriotism of the men and women who were just furloughed or forced to work without pay. This consistently callous GOP attitude disrespects workers, dishonors our values and damages our economy.

House Democrats are working For The People, moving forward with our bold agenda to lower health costs, raise workers’ wages, and restore integrity to government. We must keep government open, and keep working to deliver an economy that works for every American, not just the wealthy and well-connected few.

What financial damage? I don’t see it. Next, getting told that Democrats “are working For The People” is a little like being told that arsonists are assisting firefighters. There just isn’t a ring of truth to it. Finally, saying that the “GOP attitude” is damaging the economy is BS. The economy isn’t damaged.

Let’s be blunt about what Virginia Democrats are trying to do. Virginia Democrats are pushing to become the nation’s first political party associated with infanticide. Of course, their defenders are saying otherwise:

Gov. Ralph Northam added gas to the fire Wednesday by describing a hypothetical situation in a radio interview where an infant who is severely deformed or unable to survive after birth could be left to die. That prompted accusations from prominent Republicans that he supports infanticide.

Democrats said their views were being deliberately mischaracterized by the GOP for political gain. “Republicans in Virginia and across the country are trying to play politics with women’s health, and that is exactly why these decisions belong between a woman and her physician, not legislators, most of whom are men,” Northam spokeswoman Ofirah Yheskel said in a statement.

The story’s language says otherwise:

Northam said that if a woman were to desire an abortion as she’s going into labor, the baby would be “resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue” between doctors and the mother, leaving open what would happen next.

The mother of what? The mother of an unviable tissue mass? (That’s what NARAL and NOW used to call unborn babies.) It’s clear that Gov. Northam is referring to the mother of a fully born baby. This woman (Monica Klein) is clearly a propagandist who isn’t interested in the truth:

Check this out:

The interview began with Carlson asking Klein for her thoughts on comments made by Virginia’s Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam, a pediatric neurologist, that calls to reduce restrictions on late-term abortions. Klein accused Carlson of wanting to go back to a time when women resorted to back-alley abortions and used “coat hangers.”

“I think that right now, reproductive healthcare is under attack by the Republican Party. Seventy-two percent of Americans support right to choose,” Klein said. “We have [President Donald] Trump and sexual predator [Supreme Court Justice Brett] Kavanaugh trying to repeal Roe v. Wade and trying to take away control over our bodies. This isn’t about babies. This is about you attempting to control women’s bodies.”

Sexual predator Kavanaugh? Seriously? This Klein woman is nuttier than a peanut farm. Sen. Ben Sasse issued this response:

This is morally repugnant. In just a few years pro-abortion zealots went from ‘safe, legal, and rare’ to ‘keep the newborns comfortable while the doctor debates infanticide.’ I don’t care what party you’re from — if you can’t say that it’s wrong to leave babies to die after birth, get the hell out of public office.

I couldn’t agree more. This isn’t a matter of Roe v. Wade. It’s a matter of endorsing infanticide.

In 1996, when the Senate debated whether to override President Clinton’s veto of a bill that would’ve banned partial-birth abortion, Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, (D-NY), said this:

“It is as close to infanticide as anything I have come upon.”

It should be noted that Sen. Moynihan was staunchly pro-choice. Still, he was intellectually honest enough to call it what he thought it was. Sen. Moynihan died in 2002 or thereabouts. Moynihan’s Democratic Party died shortly thereafter.

Anyone that thinks that President Trump won’t get the wall built are either kidding themselves or they haven’t studied the tools at President Trump’s disposal. One guy who gets it is Bill O’Reilly. Check out this video and you’ll understand why I say this:

There’s a reason why President Trump doesn’t think they’ll reach a compromise. Actually, there’s multiple reasons why. The biggest reason in Ms. Pelosi. The next biggest reason are the Democrats negotiating on the conference committee. Any conference committee that’s got Dick Durbin, Pat Leahy, Nita Lowey and Barbara Lee (the only member in Congress to vote against the war right after 9/11) is far left and then some.

Apparently, Jim Clyburn didn’t get the memo:

I applaud the president’s reopening of the federal government and appreciate his recognition of the need for a “smart wall,” which I have defined as one that uses drones, scanners, and sensors to create a technological barrier too high to climb over, too wide to go around, and too deep to burrow under. Traditional walls are primitive and ineffective. They are expensive to build and to maintain. And throughout history—from the Wall of Jericho to the Great Wall of China to the Berlin Wall—they have ultimately failed to achieve their goals.

What a liar! The Berlin Wall kept Germans from experiencing freedom for almost 30 years. The wall in Israel has kept terrorists from killing Israelites for over a decade.

Further, if anyone thinks that smart walls stop caravans, then they’re either too stupid or too dishonest to serve in Congress.

Based on this op-ed, I’d argue that Clyburn’s statements to Chris Wallace this past Sunday were exceptionally slippery:

WALLACE: Yes, so, I just want to make sure bottom line, are you saying no negotiations until the president reopens the government, and are you saying, as Speaker Pelosi does, under no circumstances, no money — new money for the wall?
CLYBURN: No, I’m not saying that. I’m saying yes to the first part. To the second part, it seemed as if the president started talking about barriers in a statement yesterday. And as you realize, I have been talking about barriers for a long time. A smart wall will be a barrier. A smart wall would be using drones, using sensors, using X-ray equipment to be an effective wall.
Not just something that would be a monument to one’s existence, but to be a deterrent at the border and to be an effective barrier for people who are trying to come in illegally. And while we’re doing that

This indicates that President Trump will have to use the Emergency Powers Act to get his wall. It’s clear that Pelosi won’t spend a dime.

After reading this article, the obvious question is whether Nancy Pelosi will accept this offer or if she’ll simple ignore these women. I’m betting that she’ll ignore them, even if they appear in the First Lady’s box during the SOTU Address.

A group of women whose husbands work as Border Patrol officers are inviting Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to come to McAllen, Texas, to see what’s taking place at the U.S.-Mexico border. “We would like to show you around!” Jill Demanski wrote in a Facebook post to Pelosi last Thursday, which marked the 34th day of the government shutdown. “You don’t need to bring any security detail. Our husbands/boyfriends/fiancés/wives/significant others are actually very good at their jobs, thank goodness! And since you see no threat here, I’m sure you can just make a quick flight down here alone.”

During the shutdown, I wrote President Trump with the suggestion that he include some of the Angel families in the FLOTUS box, as well as border patrol agents. I also suggested that President Trump blister Ms. Pelosi in the opening of his speech. With her sitting right behind him, its a golden opportunity to highlight the fact that she flew to Hawaii for Christmas while President Trump cancelled his Christmas plans. If he thinks that’s too harsh, he can dial it back a notch or 2.

Democrats might want to consider this:

The government shutdown is over — for now — but the political ramifications are still being sorted out. The media has been chortling that Donald Trump “caved,” and he may well have lost this battle with congressional Democrats. Their “victory,” such as it is, is to notify American voters that they are so opposed to a wall and a secure border that they were willing to keep the government shut down for four weeks to ensure it doesn’t happen.

Trump has thus exposed the Pelosi-Schumer Democrats as being hopelessly soft on illegal immigration. Some Democrats are starting to wonder whether they have dug their own political grave for 2020. This is why in recent days congressional Democrats are screaming from the rafters that they are for border security — just not the way Trump wants to do it.

The reality is far from this spin. At the start of the shutdown, the Pelosi crowd was saying that “there is no border crisis” and that “a wall is immoral.” But actions speak louder than words, and every response to illegal immigration over the past decade proves they don’t want it stopped. Democrats have instead openly encouraged illegal immigration.

There’s only one vote that matters on this or any other issue. That vote belongs to Nancy Pelosi. Democrats, including Chuck Schumer, don’t matter. That’s why I agree with President Trump that a deal won’t get reached. Pelosi is too dug in to let President Trump get credit for an important victory.

The Democrats’ new face of anti-Semitism is Rep. Ilhan Omar. According to this article, Rep. Omar once said of ISIS terrorists “The best deterrent to fanaticism is a system of compassion. We must alter our attitude and approach; if we truly want to effect change, we should refocus our efforts on inclusion and rehabilitation.” Right. I’m sure that the minute we show compassion towards these terrorists that they’ll return to a life of running their small businesses and volunteering to help with the Boy Scouts.

One of the men in particular, Abdirahman Yasin Daud, was facing over 30 years in prison for trying to join the terrorist group. He admitted in court that he wasn’t trying to enter Syria on humanitarian grounds, but rather to participate in the activities of ISIS.

“I was not going there to pass out medical kits or food. I was going strictly to fight and kill on behalf of the Islamic State,” he said.

Showing compassion to confessed terrorists isn’t just not compassionate. It’s downright stupid. What’s worse is that Rep. Omar was just put on the House Foreign Relations Committee. What’s worst is her anti-Semitic tweet:


When President Trump ended the shutdown, Democrats crowed that Pelosi had stood up to the bully and defeated him. I won’t pretend that she didn’t defeat him in this round. I’m with Kevin McCullough, though, who insists that Democrats have a long-term problem:

To see leftwing activists so eagerly cheer the defeat (even temporarily) of some of the most broad-based (and in many instances—Democrat initiated) objectives as it pertains to common sense border security was disheartening.

Why Congressional and Senate Democrats would refuse the opportunity to take partial credit of creating an orderly border process is mystifying. Especially so when 78%-90% of Americans seek tougher border measures. Most of whom also believe that a border barrier is a key component to the multi-lateral security strategy.

Democrats have a spine problem. They don’t have one when it comes to standing up to Pelosi. Democrats insist that they elected a bunch of moderates in 2018. That’s BS. They’re moderates when Pelosi doesn’t need their votes. If she needs their votes, then they’re as far left as she needs them to be.

Why didn’t Seth Moulton or Tim Ryan challenge Pelosi? A: They’re spineless. My point is simple. Until Democrats stand up to Ms. Pelosi, they’ll be a far left party. I don’t care how many so-called moderates they elect. With her at the top, they’re a far left party.

The hard left has such hooks into the party’s base that they have literally forced leadership to completely abandon policy that they supported under President Obama. Remember in 2013 Senator Schumer got the entire Democrat caucus to vote in lock step approval for a $40 billion border security package that included upwards of $8 billion in building additional miles of barriers

Democrats worry more about what Tom Steyer says than what their constituents say or what’s best for America. They should be punished for that in 2020.

Is It Important For Chancellor Devinder Malhotra To Have Followers On Twitter?
by Silence Dogood

Last December, SCSU President Robbyn R. Wacker posted her support to “unleashfollowers” to encourage faculty and staff to follow Chancellor Devinder Malhotra on Twitter. This was posted to SCSU Announce by Jeffrey C. Wood in University Communications:

I don’t care about following anyone on Twitter especially when the you consider the best ‘worst example’ of Twitter use comes from the current U.S. President. However, the idea that the Chancellor will “love us if we help push him over the 1,000 mark” is just plain silly. Hopefully, the Chancellor is not that much of a ‘diva.’ But, today who knows?

The idea that counting the numbers of Twitter followers as some measure of importance is probably one of dumbest things I have ever heard. If it were true, then one of Chancellor Malhotra’s faculty members in the Minnesota State University System at Mankato with 17,400 followers must be truly brilliant and deserving of a pay raise! And it didn’t take a plug from a university president or PR staffer for Dr. Sprankle to get his followers.

SCSU is facing serious problems from declining enrollment. It’s truly sad that a university president and PR subordinate think it’s worth their time to pitch increasing the number of the Chancellor’s Twitter followers. Unless, of course, the object is to distract people from important issues.

P.S. It worked! Chancellor Devinder Malhotra has blasted past 1,000 Twitter followers!

At this rate it will only take 136 years to catch Professor Sprankle.