Friends, the anti-white racism of the Left has grown so naked and obscene that even journalists are offended by it. Oh my! Chicago Mayor(ette) Lori Lightfoot recently announced that she will only grant interviews to "BIPOC" (black and brown) reporters. Say what? Increasingly, the Left's answer to "systemic racism" is...more racism, but refusing to talk to journalists only because of the color of their skin is pretty outrageous, even for them. I commend Lightfoot for her honesty, though. If only more Dems wore their searing race-hatred on their sleeves, we could end "progressivism" once and for all!
Here's an article by a leftist about the upcoming Supreme Court case that could result in the overturning of Roe v. Wade. In other words, the so-called "constitutional right to an abortion" could be, well, terminated, and the states would once again be able to restrict abortion as they see fit. As this handwringing Bolshevik points out, this could easily result in the banning of abortion in virtually every Southern state. Presumably, the consequence would be a new industry devoted to ferrying abortion-seekers from the benighted South to the abortion-rich North. In the meantime, the nation would have removed a great miscarriage of constitutional justice: whatever you may think of abortion and women's rights, the fact is that abortion simply isn't in the constitution in the first place! We need to return to a straightforward, commonsensical interpretation of the constitution, and to prohibit judges and Justices from adding their own spin to the intentions of the Founders. I say: let's end Roe v. Wade once and for all!
On the other hand, we on the right should understand that, if SCOTUS obliges us on this issue, feminists will be enraged, and the Left will be roused from its torpor. We could face greater headwinds in 2022 and 2024 if the lefties are baying for blood... Be that as it may, we need the Supreme Court to step up and start defending the constitution as written. That's a principle worth fighting for, and thus I'm willing to accept whatever political blowback it entails.
This is a very interesting poll, which indicates that President Trump has the edge over Kamala Harris in a hypothetical 2024 matchup. That's a big deal. Admittedly, it's just one poll, but if Trump is still electorally viable after all the slings and arrows that the Dems and the establishment have sent his way, then not only is there hope for Trump -- there's hope for America, because it means the elite has much less control over public opinion than the 2020 election might suggest. It also means the "insurrection" narrative has changed exactly ZERO minds.
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/trump-harris-biden-mclaughlin/2021/05/19/id/1021965/
Finally, President Trump is chafing at the announcement of the New York State Attorney General that she has initiated a criminal probe of the Trump Organization. He views this, naturally, as political persecution. That the Left would come for all Trumps, knives out, was a given, but what we don't know is whether any of these legal vendettas will hit paydirt. No doubt the Dems feel that an incarcerated Trump, or even a prosecuted Trump, would be far less likely to pose a danger to whomever tops the Dem ticket in 2024. Maybe. Who's to say Trump couldn't win an election from behind bars? He's broken most other taboos! The other possibility is that the American people will come to agree with Trump that he's been railroaded. Of course, the media will struggle mightily to dispell that impression!
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/new-york-witch-hunt-probe-statement/2021/05/19/id/1021975/
Dr. Waddy from Jack: AOC becomes 35 on Oct. 13, 2024. Fasten your seatbelts; this could get really dicey.
ReplyDeleteJack
DeleteI have heard this before. However, she is not going to get nominated for president at that late date. Of course there is no doubt in my mind that she will try to run later.
JACK,
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of "The Squad" and those of their ilk reminds me of how very much politics and political figures in The United States of America have deteriorated in our short history. Some 170 years ago (a short time in history) we had people like Webster, Clay, and Calhoun, and now look what we have. Come to think of it, I doubt if any of our college students today even know who Webster, Clay and Calhoun were. The damn fools we have in Congress now include people who are Republicans too. We are probably in more serious trouble than we realize.
Dr.Waddy et al from Jack: Ray, is it not necessary merely for the citizen to be 35 on the date of inauguration?If they wanted to empower her the Dems wou!d of course contest this point with their characteristic bigotry and viciousness.Doc Waddy,I remember your having suggested AOC run for the Senate in '22. Idon't see a benefit to her; she may already have the recognition Obama had when he ran for President. But she could do us a huge favor by beating Schumer in the primary and then improbably losing to. . . who? Stefanik? She might go off the deep end in a general election even in benighted NY. But Schumer, if deposed , might well just elbow the Sweetheart of the Junior Class out of the other seat in the next election.What a mess our state is, all becauseof the carbuncle on the Hudson. Oh, I know its a great city and all but for common sense upstate its onerous and imperious domination is an unwanted burden.
ReplyDeleteJACK
DeleteAre you missing the point? It is not just that some MC is from New York or not. The major problem is that the Congress is composed of a lot of damn fools who are elected to represent the constituents of their respective states, then they go to DC and think they are running the rest of the entire country who did not elect them. That's the problem!
Dr. Waddy From Jack: I too very much wish to see a SCOTUS which follows the rule of law. I too see great advantage to our cause in this principle, though it may not always redound to our favor. I think there has been a profusion of unsound decisions with regretable consequences rendered in the last six decades, chief among which is the murderous and disgraceful Roe v Wade. This may be just the SCOTUS to deconstruct much of this infamy!
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy et al from Jack: Ray: Alot of truth in what you are saying. The composition of our formal government does not define the reality of who runs the U. S. and in national representative office we do often see presumptuous national sway (eg. Madame Pelosi from airy San Francisco.) from persons we despise.I know I comp!etely reject any form of "representation" by the likes of her!
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy et al from Jack: I brought up AOC because I think the prosp ect of her candidacy to be a significant factor in considering 2024. Recent events have focused attention on her attitude toward Jews. In an i nterview she sai d,to this effect: why is it always that whe n you criticize Israeli poli cy you are asked, "are you opposed to the continuing existence of Israel? You don't do that when the UK is criticized". Uhh, Israel has faced an unrelenting threat to its political existence and continuing promise of actual annihilation of its population from geographically imposing hate imbued foes, since 1948. Britain faced the same in1940. How would an expression of sympathy for the Nazis then have been regarded by the civilized world?
ReplyDeleteg
Dr.Waddy et al from Jack: Having workedin NY state prisons, I witnessed many times Jew hatred. Sometimes it was directed at me (I have a name and appearance often interpreted as Jewish) and I was verbally denounced as such in VERY physicallyy threatening settings. I see the recent attacks on Jews in NYC as ignorantly Jew hating toughs using the Gaza situation as an excuse for their reflexive thuggish behavior. I doubtthat many of them know anything of the Middle East.
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy fromJack: I regard any criticism of the attacks on NYCJews from AOC to be disingenuous:she has a!ready concern for her national image, I have no doubt.
ReplyDeleteI can't say I have much fear of AOC becoming president...but then I'm sure Democrats and lefties would have said the same thing about Trump any time before November 2016. Life is full of surprises!
ReplyDeleteRay, I think it's important not to look at our history through rose-colored glasses. Sure, we had some past leaders who look like larger-than-life statesmen in retrospect, BUT we also had plenty of corrupt and harebrained politicians too. I daresay the two categories aren't entirely mutually exclusive either.
Jack, I see potential upside for AOC in a run for the Senate: the chance to upstage Schumer, a party stalwart, and to become a Senator! You seem to assume she would lose. I'm not so sure. This is a pretty benighted state!
Dr.Waddy from Jack: Yes, if she beat Schumer and won the election she would surely be a prime Presidential contender. She and Schumer both have their electoral strengths, with, I'd say, a slight edge to Schumer. But she was a giant killerin her first House race and is now a media darling so no, I agree she has a real chance. Her rise does hearken that of Obama. All of this is to our ken a glimpse unto a deluge!
ReplyDeleteDon't discount the possibility that she could edge out Schumer in the primary...and then Schumer would run anyway as an independent. Or vice versa. Oh, the fun we could have!
ReplyDelete