Tag Archives: political parties

Contemptible Average Americans

Posted on by
Reply

It’s well-known that the Left and its political organ, the Progressive-Democratic Party, have nothing but contempt for the rest of us, from the NLMSM referring to Tea Partiers as tea baggers, through Barack Obama’s dismissal of Middle Americans as Bible- and gun-clingers (bitter ones, at that), through Hillary Clinton’s irredeemable and deplorable slur.  We also get House Progressive-Democrats loudly questioning the integrity of House Republicans who don’t agree with them on impeachment.  The list is interminable.

Here’s one of the latest, this one from Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate and Senator (D, MA) Elizabeth Warren:

[T]he Republicans in Congress have turned into fawning, spineless defenders of his [President Donald Trump] crimes.

So, because Republicans disagree with her, they’re contemptible.  And—which she knows she’s doing, words being her stock in trade—she’s slandering all of us Americans who support this or that Republican or the Republican Party in general.

Oh, and Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate Joe Biden told his New Hampshire audience that there are some really decent Republicans that are out there still.

Right.  Biden harkened back to a “compliment” with which persons of his (and my) generation are well familiar: those Republicans are a credit to their…party.

This is the arrogance of the Left, and the contempt for us average Americans in which the Left and its Progressive-Democratic Party politicians hold us.

Remember this in the fall.

Only Progressive-Democrats

Posted on by
Reply

“Iowa nice:” what Iowans have a reputation for doing—being willing to go out of their way to help a struggling neighbor, a visitor, or a stranded motorist.  It’s a practice for which Iowa citizens have a deserved reputation. And so do the citizens of Texas, Utah, all across the South; indeed, in most regions of the US. We Americans, in the main, just try to help each other.

Yet, this, during the runup to the Progressive-Democratic Party primary campaign Iowa caucus:

As [Progressive-]Democratic presidential candidates crisscross this state ahead of the Feb 3 caucuses that start the nomination process, they are trying to balance distinguishing themselves from each other with respecting that Iowa tradition.

Only Progressive-Democrats would consider Iowa nice and candidate distinctions to be competing interests requiring “balance.”

Hmm….

Countering Interference

Posted on by
Reply

The Republic of China has passed a law aimed at blocking the People’s Republic of China’s efforts at interfering with the RoC’s elections, which will occur 11 Jan.

Passage gained urgency after RoC opposition parties—especially the KMT—nominated candidates who openly and enthusiastically support “reunification” with the PRC and after the PRC’s influence over RoC media companies became overt.  The PRC has been

providing campaign funds and even mobilized support on social media for candidates from the main opposition Nationalist Party (KMT)….

These elections, with President Tsai Ing-wen expected to be reelected despite PRC interference, make this an especially fragile time for the nation.

It would be good if the rest of us openly supported the RoC’s efforts at maintaining its freedom: talking freely in support of the RoC, sailing navy flotillas through the Taiwan Strait with port calls along the way, increasing economic ties and restoring diplomatic ties, sailing close to and overflying PRC-occupied islands in the South China Sea, and on and on.

Wage Growth

Posted on by
Reply

It’s been almost entirely missed by Progressive-Democrats and almost entirely ignored by the Left and its NLMSM.

Rank-and-file workers are getting bigger raises this year—at least in percentage terms—than bosses.
Wages for the typical worker—nonsupervisory employees who account for 82% of the workforce—are rising at the fastest rate in more than a decade, a sign that the labor market has tightened sufficiently to convey bigger pay increases to lower-paid employees.

Of course, it’s understandable that Progressive-Democrats have missed this. They’ve trained their fire on the Evil Rich and demands that those folks should give up their wealth for redistribution to the…middle class.  All along, Progressive-Democrats have ignored the bottom of the employed and want-to-be-employed spectrum.  Other than, of course, those worthies’ virtue-signaling and anti-employment minimum wage increase demands.

It’s also understandable that the Left and its NLMSM have done their best to ignore this wage increase development.  After all, it comes on the heels of the slowest post-recession (let alone post-Panic) reemployment development since WWII, and it comes so quickly after wages for the typical worker stagnated, and real wages actually declined, during the Obama administration’s post-Panic pseudo-recovery.

Progressive-Democrats also want to talk about the evils of income inequality, while carefully ignoring the opportunity inequalities that would result—have resulted—from their policies.  See, for instance, the results of their mandated minimum wages: net lower income for those still employed low-skill workers and the lower employment rates in thin-margin businesses, second-job family seekers, teenagers looking for their first jobs.  Here are a couple of graphs depicting income inequality.How terrible are these inequalities?

“Rolling Impeachment”

Posted on by
Reply

That’s how Kimberly Strassel characterized House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D, CA) refusal to formally deliver her caucus’ Articles of Impeachment under the fiction that if she does not, the Senate cannot hold the trial. (It’s not entirely fictive under current Senate rules, but the Senate can straightforwardly change its rules.)

However, not one of the outcomes Strassel listed in her As long as the Senate doesn’t hold a trial… sequence are goals of the Progressive-Democratic Party.

They’re just intermediate steps along the way to the Progressive-Democrats’ true goal: the preemption of the 2020 elections and the denial of American voters our choice for President. They don’t expect actually to remove President Donald Trump from office, as Strassel noted. They do hope to so poison the election with the smears represented by those no trial machinations that our choice is denied by making one of them preemptively unelectable.