…with a bodacious gaffe. He went on Stephen Colbert’s show and the host asked him about his gaffes. The Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate, in answering, insisted
I don’t get wrong things like, you know, we should lock kids up in cages at the border.
It was his BFF and mentor, ex-President Barack Obama (D) who started locking children in wire cages away from their parents. All while Biden sat meekly by, uttering not a peep in protest.
You’d think these terms wouldn’t be alternatives to each other, rather, one would describe a single attribute of the other having reached a requisite age and citizenship.
But no.
Jason Riley described, in his Tuesday The Wall Street Journal op-ed, how the New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio administration has chosen to work hard to eliminate all standards for entry into what used to be the city’s elite schools, schools that especially benefitted the city’s poorest students, most of whom happen to be minority children.
Riley closed his piece with this plaintive question:
You’d think that the main objective of the inequality-obsessed would be to help more minorities meet high academic standards, but Mr de Blasio and his fellow progressives would rather eliminate the standards altogether. I’d call that giving up on minority kids. What would you call it?
I call it what it is. Those kids aren’t human beings in the eyes of the Progressive-Democrats, they’re only a crop of newly-sown votes to be kept and nurtured in the welfare cage hot house until they’ve ripened and become ready for harvesting.
…and there’s BDS. As Antonia Tamplin wondered in her Letter to the Editor of The Wall Street Journal,
Regarding Jillian Kay Melchior’s “Dissent Against Beijing Is Becoming a Firing Offense” (op-ed, 19 Aug): Where is the international BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) movement against China?
What she said.
Deutsche Welle‘s Loveday Wright wondered about the Amazon forest fires in northern Brazil: Can international pressure help put them out?
Not when the Brazilian government, for good or ill, exposes them to fire by allowing clear-cutting in favor of agriculture.
But more importantly, not when climatistas openly lie about the extent and level of destruction of the fires.
Several of the most widely shared images aren’t actually from this month’s fires.
Some are old photographs of the Amazon, and some aren’t even from the area at all.
For instance:
Although [a fire image] shows a fire in the Amazon, it’s actually a stock photo taken in the 1980s by a photographer from National Geographic….
And
An image of a burned rabbit has been shared over 1000 times, but is actually from fires in Malibu, California.
One of those who shared it also posted a picture of a monkey crying over her sick baby, which is actually from Jalabur in India in 2018, by Avinash Lodhi.
And not when national politicians celebrating trading on their celebrity openly repeat the lies.
French president Emmanuel Macron and Leonardo DiCaprio were among those to share a photograph showing a wall of flame rising up from a swathe of rainforest.
Although it shows a fire in the Amazon, it’s actually a stock photo taken in the 1980s by a photographer from National Geographic….
While there are legitimate images of the real fires in the Brazilian Amazon, the lies and manufactured hysteria about climate! climate! climate! eliminate all credibility about global warming, and they hinder legitimate efforts to deal with the legitimate fires and other local ecological problems and their actual causes.
In an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal ironically headlined We Liberals Need Self-Criticism, Ioannis Gatsiounis, a writer who reports on race and politics, called for an end to Progressive-Democrats’ (whom he thinks are “liberal”) practice of identity:
[S]top obsessing over identity.
But in the very next sentence, he went right back to identity politics:
We can and should support policies that benefit disadvantaged groups, from criminal-justice reform to a higher minimum wage and affordable health care.
Pick one: either liberals Progressive-Democrats should stop obsessing over identity—stop singling out some groups of Americans for special treatment—or they should continue singling out some groups of Americans for special treatment—continue their identity politics.
Unfortunately, the 21st century segregation of identity politics is at the core of the Progressive-Democratic Party’s ideology.