Category: national politics & policies

Categories
ideological culture national politics & policies partisanship

Unburdened by the Leftism

Kamala Harris, commie, communist, left, progressive

Democrats have effectively sidelined the biggest story of this election year — the assassination attempt upon the candidate the party has sought to destroy since 2015 — with a brazen switcheroo-​coup from presidential candidate Sleepy Joe to the once-​widely disliked Vice President Kamala Harris.

It was all done unceremoniously and undemocratically in a breathtakingly daring backroom duress deal, detailed by Seymour Hersh.

Also itemized last week? The cover-​up of Kamala Harris’s record. In “Kamalaflage: Dems race to expunge the evidence of Harris’ leftist history,” Jim Bovard informs New York Post readers about the media’s memory-holing. 

“In 2019, GovTrack labeled Kamala Harris the ‘most liberal’ senator — further to the left than even Bernie Sanders — but this month deleted the webpage that said so,” explains Mr. Bovard.

So, what’s to the left of a “democratic socialist”?

Maybe the Vice President was channeling her father, a Post Keynesian (far, far left if not exactly Marxist) economist, when she pushed the progressives’ beloved “equity” theory of equality, which she explicitly construed as equality of outcomes. 

If you wonder how far to the left she has gone, consider her work to help BLM-​associated rioters. “In 2020, as looters and arsonists ravaged Minneapolis after the killing of George Floyd, then-​Sen. Harris urged people to donate to the Minnesota Freedom Fund ‘to help post bail for those protesting on the ground in Minnesota.’” 

Bovard says this appeal “effectively exonerated anyone committing violence or other crimes, portraying them as worthy of speedy release from jail — but the bail fund paid to release rapists and child molesters and future murderers, not just looters.”

Now, fittingly, Harris has chosen Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her running mate, the man who in 2020 “allowed rioters to burn down half of Minneapolis.”

Would a Democratic president want to burn down half of America?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
national politics & policies partisanship

Repeal Obamacare

Kamala Harris, Donald Trump, MAGA, socialism, debt, lizard

Oy vey! Given the alternative of Donald Trump on the one hand and — now that Biden has bailed — a bad-​as-​Biden Biden-​substitute on the other, Americans must re-​level their look at the lesser of two evils.

It may be difficult to resist hoping that Trump gets elected this November to allow many of the Democrats’ worst initiatives be left to die on a withering vine. (Examples of the worst: Congress-​bypassing regulations designed to penalize production of gas-​powered cars and outlaw certain freelance or contract work.)

Still, the candidate and his party have many flaws.

We cannot forget that. Indeed, with their abandonment of the tiniest desire to reduce the size of the federal leviathan, remembrance should be easy. 

Shrink government? Radically reduce spending? Reduce debt? No such goal was seriously pursued in the first Trump administration, and no such goal is mentioned in the twenty-​point Trump-​Republican Party platform.

There’s talk of tax cuts, ending inflation (somehow), diverting spending from Democratic projects. Sure. But the platform insists that Social Security and Medicare programs not be modified in any way. 

In any way!

And about Obamacare — the biggest expansion of the medical state in recent years, which Republicans had once pledged to repeal — the platform is mute.

The 2016 platform said that improving healthcare “must start with repeal of the dishonestly named Affordable Care Act of 2010: Obamacare,” a declaration retained in 2020. Now it’s gone. Republicans seem to have succumbed to the strategy of turning Obamacare into yet another supposedly unassailable, supposedly inextirpable entitlement program.

Unfortunately, you don’t recover or expand liberty by accepting every expansion of serfdom.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
election law national politics & policies

Kamala’s Cast on Noncitizens

Kamala Harris, immigration, voting, elections

How did Kamala Harris vote?

The Vice President’s hometown of San Francisco is one of 17 cities that allow noncitizens to vote in local elections. Like 75 percent of those cities (according to verify​.com), the City by the Bay also offers that vote to noncitizens in the country illegally. 

Not included in this list of cities is New York City, as the Big Apple’s measure providing the vote to nearly a million noncitizens is still being battled in court. Or Boston, which only awaits approval by the Massachusetts Legislature. 

Neither are Telluride, Colorado, nor Yellow Springs, Ohio, on the list. Voters in both states, in 2020 and 2022, respectively, passed statewide constitutional amendments to say only U.S. citizens can vote in all state and local elections, canceling those local ordinances. Beginning in 2018, six states have enacted Citizen Only Voting Amendments, and eight more states will vote on them this November. 

Back in 2016, San Franciscans narrowly passed Proposition N giving noncitizen parents and caregivers, legally documented or not, voting rights in school board elections. Harris had been prosecuting attorney in San Fran before becoming California’s attorney general. As AG, Ms. Harris ran for the U.S. Senate and would have gone to vote for herself on Election Day 2016 … and on Prop N. 

Surely, she didn’t forget to vote on the proposition. Right?

So, how did she cast her ballot: in favor of providing noncitizens here illegally the franchise? Or not?

If she ever does a non-​scripted interview, perhaps an enterprising journalist might pop that question. Or perhaps a voter in swing states such as North Carolina and Wisconsin — where Citizen Only Voting Amendments are on the ballot — will ask Vice President Harris. 

Answer, please. 

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob. 

PDF for printing

Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
First Amendment rights national politics & policies partisanship

The Governor Who Parodied Himself

Political campaigns are hard. Presidential campaigns in which your Selected Candidate is mediocre at best are harder. So wouldn’t it be good to be able to outlaw all things that highlight this mediocrity?

Things like, say, effective parody?

This seems to be the thinking — I hope I’m channeling it accurately — of the governor of California, unhappy with a popular video available at the Mr Reagan YouTube channel.

The video’s maker may have thought he was covering every base by calling it a parody in the very title, an indignity of self-​labeling that Jonathan Swift would never have permitted. People consuming Swift’s satire were left to figure out for themselves that when he proposed that the children of poor people be eaten to render them “beneficial to the publick,” he was engaging in satire.

In contrast, the Kamela Harris campaign ad parody in question is called “Kamala Harris Campaign Ad Parody.” Clear. Unmistakable. 

Like the content.

Still, this video has not escaped the agenda of would-​be censors like Governor Gavin Newsom. The parody uses a “deepfake” AI-​generated voice that sounds like Harris. It’s even got the Harris Cackle. So Newsom wants to outlaw it.

“Manipulating a voice in an ‘ad’ like this one should be illegal,” he says. (Why?) “I’ll be signing a bill … to make sure it is.”

But as Reclaim the Net points out, California has already outlawed certain uses of deepfake media. 

These forbidden uses do not, however, include parody, which is constitutionally protected speech.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
nannyism national politics & policies

President Next

Kamala Harris

I’ve never liked Joe Biden. Not as a U.S. Senator, or Vice-​President, or President. But I’ll be the first to acknowledge that his decision, announced yesterday, to relinquish his party’s presidential nomination, which he was set to formally receive at the Democratic National Convention next month, was the right thing to do. 

Way to go, Joe!

First, however, Democratic Party bigshots decided — most importantly with money — that Mr. Biden was not cognitively up to the mighty arduous task of running for president. This fact became ever clearer to many Democrat representatives and senators the more they envisioned themselves becoming collateral political damage. 

President Biden held out against their calls for his ouster for weeks after that fateful June debate. The subsequent campaign stops and high-​profile interviews designed to showcase his abilities illustrated, instead, that our commander-​in-​chief was frail, feeble, feckless. 

Now the president has endorsed his Vice President Kamala Harris to be the Democrat’s new standard bearer this fall. Still, stay tuned for an interesting DNC convention where Harris may face other challengers for the nomination. 

And, as Detective Columbo used to say, “Just one more thing.” 

There has been no word on whether in the coming days, not weeks, we will see the first female president of these United States, Kamala Harris. 

If Democrats are too scared to have Biden as their leader this fall, should the American people really be okay with Biden sticking around for six months to be ours? Giving national and world leadership a continued go?

Thanks, but no thanks. Hello, President Harris.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
national politics & policies property rights regulation

National Control

Joe Biden, democratic party, money machine

Is federal rent control, just proposed by Commissar Biden, a good idea or bad?

Well, it’s good in one way — great to torpedo the incentives and capital of owners while reducing the supply of rental units and further eroding property rights. 

All of which is bad.

Very bad.

A few details of the economic principles being blithely ignored by Biden and/​or his handlers are explained by The Wall Street Journal (“another classic White House policy contradiction: Subsidize housing, then discourage its development”), Mises​.org, and Breitbart Business, among other places.

What are the chances that this pot shot at the economy will become law in the near future: slim or none?

Slim. 

Not none, unfortunately — we’ve seen too many unthwarted federal attacks on the property rights of landlords and owners, including during the COVID-​19 pandemic.

The chances are considerably more than slim if there’s a Biden Simulacrum 2 administration.

The goal of Biden and/​or his handlers is to make clear to persons who want something for nothing — a goodly percentage of Biden’s constituency — that even a near-​brain-​dead party leader or his puppeteers can come up with scads of new schemes to loot fellow Americans as long as Biden or a Biden-​type is at least nominally in office.

So if you want more pelf, along with an expiring economy with a war of all against all, vote for Biden! 

Or whoever replaces him at the Democratic convention.

If you want freedom, prosperity, respect for property rights and each other, don’t.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts