Tag Archives: political parties

“My Word as a Biden”

Posted on by
Reply

That was then-Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate Joe Biden’s go-to phrase whenever he wanted to emphasize his seriousness in making a claim.

Here’s one of those serious statements:

If you’re ever working with me and I hear you treat another colleague with disrespect, talk down to someone, I promise I will fire you on the spot. On the spot, no ifs, ands, or buts[.]

When White House Deputy Press Secretary TJ Ducklo was abusive to a Politico reporter, he was suspended for a week without pay and barred from interacting with Politico reporters.

That’s an example of the worthlessness of the now-President’s word as a Biden.

Unless he’s going to stand on the technicality that he didn’t personally hear Ducklo’s abuse, or that Ducklo wasn’t directly working with him at the time of Ducklo’s abuse.

In which case that quibble would be a separate demonstration of the worthlessness of the now-President’s word as a Biden.

In the end, Ducklo was allowed to resign and slink away. Biden, choosing not to fire him, has pretty conclusively shown the worthlessness of his word as a Biden.

A Treasury Climate Czar

Posted on by
Reply

That’s what new Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen wants to set up. That’s not necessarily a bad idea.

A climate risk office inside Treasury actually could be useful—were its purpose properly targeted.

The risks that are worth assessing and which realizations worth planning for, though, are political and economic, not climatic.

The political risk is from government overreacting with laws and regulations to the overhyping of climate.

The economic risk is from businesses overreacting in anticipation of such political overreactions.

Somehow, though, I doubt that’s Yellen’s intention for her new office.

What’re You Going to Do, Joe?

Posted on by
Reply

Iran has begun accumulating the immediate precursor to weapons grade uranium metal.

…report was given by UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency to its members and states Iran had on Monday produced a small amount of uranium metal, after importing new equipment into a nuclear facility that is under IAEA inspection[.]

To be sure,

The material produced was a small amount of natural uranium metal…meaning it wasn’t enriched. To use uranium metal for a nuclear weapon’s core, Iran would need around half a kilogram, or slightly more than one pound, of highly enriched uranium metal….

However. There’s always a however.

This is the big step, in difficulty right below getting uranium out of the yellow cake in the first place. Now it’s a simple, if tedious, matter of combining the uranium metal with fluorine to get a gaseous salt, and passing the gas through several centrifuge cycles to get to a weapons grade level of enrichment.

It’s your move, President Biden. Israel’s existence is in the balance. As are those of cities across Europe and the US. We’re waiting.

A High School Debate

Posted on by
Reply

The impeachment charge against former President Donald Trump that is before the Senate is one of incitement and causing the riotous invasion of the Capital Building.

The argument led by main House impeachment manager Jamie Raskin (D, MD) is centered on Trump’s claims of election fraud. This has nothing to do with the actual charge, and the change of subject is something that any high school debater would recognize and not be suckered by.

Alan Dershowitz, who is no high school debater, but who is a tremendously successful—because he’s tremendously effective—lawyer, also recognized Raskin’s and his colleagues’ trick, and he has warned Trump’s Senate impeachment trial lawyers—who aren’t as good as a high school debater if their Tuesday afternoon performance is any indication—not to fall for that weak trick.

There are two reasons for Raskin’s move. One is that he and his fellow Progressive-Democrats think that we ordinary Americans—their real audience—are slack-jawed, drooling idiots and will fall for this shenanigan. He also thinks Trump’s lawyers are just as stupid and incompetent.

The other reason is that Raskin and his fellows know they have no case; there was nothing in Trump’s rhetoric that would have caused anyone to riot. (Raskin, et al., also are insulting the intelligence and initiative of the rioters, but that’s for another time.) Lacking a case, they’re bent on raising a smokescreen with misdirection and obfuscation.

Trump’s lawyers need to stick to the subject at hand—the actual charge in the article of impeachment—and show the foolishness of the Progressive-Democrats’ case. They must raise themselves above the cheap tricks of teenage argument.

A Clue Bat

Posted on by
Reply

…just struck. Colorado’s Progressive-Democrats want to censure their US Senator John Hickenlooper (D, CO) for the crime of voting to keep illegal aliens from receiving Wuhan Virus situation stimulus checks.

(Apparently, censure is becoming a thing as, just in the last month or so, Republicans moved to censure Congresswoman Liz Cheney (R, WY), Senator Ben Sasse (R, NE), and a brief low key effort was made to substitute censure for impeachment regarding ex-President Donald Trump.)

That’s not the item of interest here, though. The real clue to Progressive-Democrat intentions with their no-border, no-vetting, come-one-come-all immigration policy is this statement regarding censuring Hickenlooper by State Senator Julie Gonzales (D):

Usually politicians don’t slam the door shut on Latino voters so abruptly[.]

And a confirming clue:

Background below. The party platform opposes laws that make immigrants ineligible for assistance. https://t.co/kysMhSRxNi— Justin Wingerter (@JustinWingerter) February 8, 2021

Illegal aliens are immigrants—and these same illegal aliens are voters.

Be very heads up.