2009: “Paul Jacob says ‘Thank You.’”
2011: “Plymouth’s Great Reform”
2012: “A Rafter of Turkeys”
2013: “Give Thanks for First World Problems”
2016: “Thanksgivings, 1623 A.D.”
2017: “Ingrates of the Fourth Estate”
2018: “My thanksgiving is perpetual.”
2020: “The Saddest Thanksgiving”
2023: “One by One”
The best manure for the land is the foot of the owner.
Quoted by Aristotle, who cites this saying to “The African,” whose words were cribbed by Benjamin Franklin — all explained by Arthur Latham Perry in Principles of Political Economy (1891).
In September 2019, Paul Jacob offered “Chortling Evil,” in which he checked in on a would-be President Kamala Harris in full campaign mode. Now that she is back in that full-chortle mode, let us review:
On her campaign website, Harris assures us that should Congress fail “to send comprehensive gun safety legislation” to her “desk within her first 100 days as president” she would “take executive action to keep our kids and communities safe.”
Included in such a demanded “comprehensive” bill is “universal background checks, an assault weapons ban, and the repeal of the NRA’s corporate gun manufacturer and dealer immunity bill.”
Former Vice President Joe Biden, on last Thursday’s Democratic presidential candidates’ debate stage, challenged the notion of executive orders to ban assault weapons. At issue? Constitutionality. She smiled wide, all teeth and bright eyes, with “Hey, Joe, instead of saying, ‘No, we can’t,’ let’s say, ‘Yes, we can.’”
And she laughed and laughed.
But aside from mocking the idea of abiding within the limits of the Constitution, what else has Kamala Harris supported?
Well, for one she has supported the Democrats’ lashing out at the gig economy, and at freelancers and contract workers in general. She was on the list of opponents of California’s measure to strike down AB5, the Democratic-dominated Assembly law to do just that:
[A]ll the listed opponents of this measure were politicians, including our current Vice President (then Senator) Kamala Harris as well as socialist Bernie Sanders.… Paul Jacob, “The Ultimate Legislature,” September 7, 2021.
Of course, it is not policy that takes center stage any longer, but politics and wild maneuvering. It is not just now, after the June 27th debate debacle and the July 13th assassination on presidential contender Donald Trump. The strange proceedings against Trump in case after case has been called “lawfare” — political warfare under cover of law — and former prosecutor Kamala has boasted that she would be likely to prosecute Trump after she is elected! The vendetta is strong. And the ugliness. Here is a sample from the recent past:
“This Judge,” the former president wrote on his own social media site, “by issuing a vicious ‘Gag Order,’ is wrongfully attempting to deprive me of my First Amendment Right to speak out against the Weaponization of Law Enforcement, including the fact that Crooked Joe Biden, Merrick Garland, and their Hacks and Thugs are tracking and following me all across the Country, obsessively trying to persecute me, while everyone knows I have done nothing wrong!”
To them, Orange Man’s very existence is “wrong,” and the thing they most want is Trump to shut up. So, in the course of a trial upon a subject combining campaign finance regulations with more prurient interests, a judge gagging the defendant from speaking in public about his prosecutors is … well, convenient. For them.
The prosecution is arguably an attempt to silence Trump; gag orders remove doubt. And allow the Empire State to exact the punishment before the trial concludes.
The prosecutors and politicians and major media propagandists who are aghast at Trump’s charges aren’t exactly saying that what Trump says about the judge’s daughter (that she “represents Crooked Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Adam ‘Shifty’ Schiff, and other Radical Liberals”) is false.
They object … because … what he says makes them look bad.
Paul Jacob, “Richly Revealing,” March 28, 2024.
Kamala Harris looks and sounds bad in general, and the substance of her badness will only get more obvious as we approach the Democratic Convention. Will she stay as the Democratic candidate to “beat Trump?” Comedian Dave Smith and outré historian Joseph Farrell are among the many voices that predict she will not be chosen at the convention.
What do you think?
The Obamas just gave Kamala Harris their endorsement. But before you rush to the Babylon Bee to get the taste of it out of your mouth, take a look at when Paul Jacob noticed a past connection between the pols: “Sen. Kamala Harris successfully bears aloft the banner of Barack Obama.” But by “banner” Paul meant “lie”! See “The 79¢ Lie,” October 8, 2019. See also “Why Lie?” May 22, 2019.
While the press does a full-court praisefest for the Vice President, we all pretty much remember that she was originally picked for the rôle not because anyone liked her but because she fit the intersectional boxes as a woman of color. Paul asked the multi-million-dollar question, though: “How important is the color of a person’s skin or their ancestry or the skin color of their spouse to that person’s fitness to be president?” Find out his answer in “Birth of a Twitterstorm,” July 2, 2019.
Speaking of Twitter (now known as X), Kamala Harris once demanded that Donald Trump be thrown off the platform. See “Twitter Abuse,” October 4, 2019. Update: Trump was thrown off Twitter, following the events of January 6, 2021. He is now back on X.
In “Into and Out of the Muck,” August 2, 2019, Paul Jacob wrote of the humiliating takedown of Senator Harris by Representative Tulsi Gabbard. How times have changed, however, now that Democratic Party insiders and the corporate media have anointed Harris as their party’s standard-bearer for the presidency in the general elections next November.
Oh, and don’t forget The Babylon Bee on Barack Obama’s endorsement!
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Illustration created with PicFinder.ai
—
See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
In how many episodes did Captain Kirk demand that Scotty push the warp drives further, or decrease the time required for a task — arbitrarily according to his need, not actual possibility?
And, because television: presto, it was done; just in time for the finale!
We see that in the push for electric vehicles (EVs).
The EV mandates, explains The Epoch Times, “will likely cause a sizable wealth transfer from rural red regions of the United States to urban blue sections, and to wealthy Democrats who reside in them.…”
For while Democrats say they’re trying to “save the planet” from an increase in atmospheric carbon, really, analyst Robert Bryce counters, “it’s a type of class warfare that will prevent low- and middle-income consumers from being able to afford new cars.”
How? The EPA’s new “rules are the strictest in history and will effectively force carmakers to have one-third of new car sales be plug-in EVs by 2027 and more than two-thirds by 2032.” But according to the Texas Public Policy Foundation, “as much as $48,000 of the cost of the average EV sold in the United States is paid not by the owner but in the form of ‘socialized costs’ that are spread out among taxpayers and electricity consumers over a 10-year period.”
So the new rules will reduce the supply of gas-powered vehicles, driving up costs. And the increased number of already-subsidized vehicles will also be paid by taxpayers at large, while the benefits go to … mostly Democrats in the bluest counties of the bluest states, as
In recent years, Democrats have prided themselves that their “blue states” subsidize “red states,” mocking the “rugged individualist” pretensions of the hapless bubbas in flyover country. But now such boasts ring hollow.
This is the far-flung future?
Subsidy and regulation spoil the
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly
—
See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)