The Lady Misunderstands

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D, NY) says it’s total BS that the Progressive-Democrat proposed $1 trillion in Federal Wuhan Virus stimulus monies aimed at State and local governments would benefit public sector unions. Whether public sector unions should or should not benefit is a separate matter.

It’s generous, though, to suggest that such an intelligent woman actually misunderstands.

Adding a trillion dollars—or any other amount of money—to a budget means—work with me, now—that budget has those added dollars to spend. Earmark the trillion for specific purposes, or bar it from being used for public unions. Do that by sending the money as cash and tracking serial numbers. That still lets the recipient government move a different [trillion] of dollars from a different part of its budget to benefit its public unions. That’s the fungibility of money. It can be moved around.

Then the Senator said this in all seriousness:

We need to fund government so that we can continue to grow the economy….

Here are the Constitutionally authorized reasons for funding the government:

to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States

Nothing in there about “growing the economy,” not even under that general Welfare part. What is the general Welfare of the United States is explicitly defined by the clauses of the rest of Article I, Section 8.

Indeed, as has been demonstrated over the course of our history and across a broad range of nations, the way to grow the economy is to have a free market, capitalist economy with minimal government involvement.

In fine, the State and local governments don’t need the stimulus money; they need to step back, (in many cases) end the lockdowns, and let the private economy function.

Illegitimacy

One of a President’s duties is to fill vacant seats in his cabinet and in the Federal judiciary—especially the latter. Yet today’s Progressive-Democrats in Congress are actively attempting to block President Donald Trump from fulfilling that duty as it applies to the Supreme Court with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death. Filling that seat is especially important given that those same Progressive-Democrats have committed to challenging the election outcome if it doesn’t give them the proper outcome, and an empty seat on the Court leaves it unable to resolve tie votes on the upcoming election lawsuits.

Not only are they seeking to block the filling of that vacancy, they’re threatening retaliation if they don’t get their way. Beyond that, the Progressive-Democrats’ supporters are threatening outright violence and widespread destruction.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D, NY):

If Senator McConnell [R, KY] and @SenateGOP were to force through a nominee during the lame duck session—before a new Senate and President can take office—then the incoming Senate should immediately move to expand the Supreme Court[.]

Here’s Hillary Clinton’s (D) Presidential campaign press secretary Brian Fallon:

Any Supreme Court with a Trump justice confirmed to Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat at this point in the calendar would be fundamentally illegitimate, and Democrats must be prepared to act accordingly[.].

Here’s ardent Progressive-Democrat supporter Reza Aslan:

If they even TRY to replace RBG we burn the entire f—–g thing down[.]

And in response to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R, KY) vow to hold a vote on President Trump’s nominee:

Over our dead bodies, literally[.]

And fellow ardent Progressive-Democrat supporter Aaron Gouveia:

F–k no. Burn it all down.

And Wisconsin Ethics Commission member (!) Progressive-Democrat Scot Ross directly to Senator Ed Markey (D, MA):

F—–g A, Ed. If you can’t shut it down, burn it down[.]

This has been the drumbeat of the Progressive-Democrats since November 2016. Nothing is “legitimate” unless it’s done by Progressive-Democrats. They’ve been attacking our government, and through that, our nation ever since:

  • in Congress; with their sham investigations and “impeachment”
  • in the courts with their obstructionist lawfare
  • in the streets with their grassroots supporters’ rioting, looting, and street-painted graffiti
  • with one group of supporters in particular threatening that “if this country doesn’t give us what we want, then we will burn down this system and replace it”
  • House Progressive-Democrats threatening to fundamentally alter the Supreme Court if Evil Republicans fill an empty seat with someone and at a time that Progressive-Democrats personally disapprove
  • supporters’ threats “burn Congress down”
  • to mailing ricin-laced letters to the President.

This puts an enormous premium on voting all up and down the ballot in November.

The Evil 1%

…those so hated by the Left, at least publicly, are heavily funding the Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate Joe Biden’s campaign. And those Evil 1% are paying more into the Biden campaign than they are into the Trump campaign.

Biden has raised slightly more money ($187.3 million) than Trump ($183.9 million) among big donors.

That also compares to the amount small donors, those contributing less than $200 each, have contributed to the Biden campaign: $139 million. In sum, big donors have contributed over 57% of the funds donated for Biden.

Meanwhile, stinking rich President Donald Trump’s reelection campaign is being funded largely by small, grassroots donors; they’ve contributed $229.5 million to Trump’s campaign—over 55% of the donations for Trump.

Oh, the irony. The party that pretends to hate the 1% is beholden to the 1%.

Who’s in Charge?

Progressive-Democratic Party Vice Presidential candidate Kamala Harris (D, CA), at a virtual (because, of course) round table with some Arizona small business owners, said that [a] Harris administration, together with Joe Biden as the president of the United States would be friendly to those small businesses.

Hmm….

Of course, she then changed her phrasing: The Biden-Harris administration will provide….

An innocent misspeak by Harris? Or was this a Freudian slip? Or was she projecting?

Or was it something else?

Open New York City for Operation

Open New York City for Operation

The city currently is closed down by order of Da Mare Bill de Blasio (I know, different city. Same guy, though, functionally), and that’s causing a lot of damage, and not just economic.

More than 160 business leaders, including executives at Citigroup Inc, Mastercard Inc, and Nasdaq Inc, have signed a letter to Mayor Bill de Blasio warning of New York City’s deteriorating condition in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic and growing anxiety over public safety, cleanliness, and other quality-of-life issues.

De Blasio’s response? No. Gimme money first.

Let’s be clear: to restore city services and save jobs, we need long term borrowing and a federal stimulus—we need these leaders to join the fight to move the city forward[.]

Here’s a stimulus: open the city—withdraw the restrictions—and watch the sharp and prolonged economic growth provide a ton of stimulus.

And watch the malaise that being closed down and cooped up is causing the residents of the city fade as they’re able to go back to work, go back to shopping, go back to socializing. Able to go back to earning money for their bills—the lack of which is another source of serious angst—and spending some of it on entertainment, another angst reducer.