And from Not the Babylon Bee – AOC

AOC is such an ordinary Democrat — oblivious, fixated, ignorant, hateful . . .

In spite of the distracting all-too-programmed facial expressions, gestures, body bounces — good rhetoric still depends on the veracity of what you have to say.  On that fundamental basis AOC is such a shallow twit as evidenced in this take apart of a resent speech she gave regarding overturning Roe. It is from the site Not the Babylon Bee.

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

Babylon Bee — Jock Lucifer comments on overturning Roe

“The Coach” loses one . . . but he and his are certainly certainly not out of the game

The Babylon Bee takes on the vapidity of sports commentators and the underpinnings of the abortion culture in one great piece.  Hat tip to Ted Cruz for promoting the insightful satire.

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

Agitators are lying about Roe and Dobbs decisions

  • Their minions are ignorant, delusional or evil fellow travelers i.e. Democrats

This will start a group of irregular posts /reposts commentaries of note regarding the Friday’s Dobbs decision overturning the Roe /Doe/ Casey jurisprudence.  We will endeavor to pick and link some of the best on point that we come across and of course welcome referrals from readers as well. Other subjects will of course be addressed. This one is from a Twitchy post.  The title is a bit optimistic as the proaborts are very imaginative.

Straight-FIRE thread absolutely SHREDS every single Lefty talking point about abortion and Roe

Straight-FIRE thread absolutely SHREDS every single Lefty talking point about abortion and Roe

twitchy.comJun 27, 2022, 03:00 PM

Once again we are proud to bring you a thread we don’t have to say much about. ‘Trader Jill’ does an exceptional job of debunking the Left’s talking points and narrative around abortion and Roe … not that they’ll take the time to read her thread and learn a thing or two from it.

But at least you can take this info with you, dear reader, and combat the stupid out there.

Take a gander.

They’re just absolutely uninformed about what overturning Roe really does.

And no, most Americans do not support abortion up to the moment of birth.

15 weeks was too LIMITING for an abortion clinic.

Think about that for a minute.

THEY started it.

Gosh, all of those little talking points are just getting nuked.

Lots and lots of deflection and distractions out there. The ones insisting overturning Roe will keep women going through an ectopic pregnancy from getting care are some of the most obnoxious.

Yeah, pro-aborts keep screeching about the Catholic Church when in reality, there are lots and lots and lots of people who are pro-life simply because they are humane.

Amen amen and another amen.

And no, hater who might be reading this just to hate, we’re not being religious.

Ok, maybe a little. HALLELUJAH.

***

 

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

Trump should honor America with magnanimity by pushing the most electable candidate

  • OK — Trump and many conservatives can arguably contend that the “most electable” candidate is Trump. Certainly the turnout at Trump led rallies is impressive. Indeed they must be heady events for the guy on stage if he perceives the attendance and enthusiasm as personal adulation.

    Oh to be sure there is a lot of that and deservedly so directed at Trump.  But I look at the rallies as something more akin to a cause not a man and that is the reason for the attendance. I think most of those in attendance would agree, although Trumps rock star status is a huge draw. It needs to be internalized that MAGA is not about Trump and it is doomed to be a flash of American history if it is largely dependent on him or his personalty, rock star that it is.

    We in Iowa have to be more discerning than that.  We are first in the nation for the Republican caucus/primary system and discerning/comparing the leadership, policy  and communication traits of the contenders, starting now frankly, is an important contribution to the body politic.

    Why is it too much to expect a MAGA candidate to be bold in policy (radical as in returning to roots), to surround himself (herself) with good people, to take the fight to the enemy,  to be clever (as wise as the serpents), able to avoid unnecessary drama and animosity (humor is good in a Reaganesque mode), to lead with authority and articulation while making the effort always about America.

    Trump had a good track record and deserves great appreciation for doing what he said he would do. In one very important matter to a fault –  pushing an experimental vaccine.

    In spite of shortcomings one can point to instances of great merit in all of the categories but also serious predictable unnecessary problematic instances. Personnel judgement is a big one — being rather easily flattered, not knowing well enough people he brought in to key positions, not understanding the nature of the swamp.  Overdoing superficial friends and family. We can recognize Don Jr as a serious asset. Ivanka and Jarred not so much, and if he had to bring them in for some reason well that is an issue.

    Some might argue that Trump purposely created diversions with his “mean tweets” and necessarily used them to get around leftist media going directly and frequently to the people. One might examine the content with that in mind but there are diversions and then there are diversions. There are workarounds and then there are workarounds.

    Frankly I think a DeSantis is a better candidate going forward  from what I have seen in those categories and there are others as well — Cruz has largely redeemed himself with me (if I can forgive a flyer from Trump I can do so for him as well). More in coming posts.

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

Trump vs ??? who would bring the right kind of drama?

  • The thing is election 2024 for President should not be about Trump.  It should be about MAGA and Trump neither invented that sentiment nor does it depend on him. It can be argued he is a drag on it in some ways.
  • But can the country as fifty united states, survive until then?
  • A plausible but problematic or unlikely scenario to end the Biden residency ASAP after a sea-change in Congress via the 2022 midterms 

Writing at Townhall Kurt Schlichter’s column yesterday was the part one of his  analysis regarding who the GOP should nominate for the 2024 presidential race. He uses a pro and con analysis centered on Trump.  The first commentary was the pro-Trump one with the “not Trump” to follow Thursday.  We commend the article to you: The Case for Donald Trump 2024.   We also embellish it with this insightful video presentation by a Brit pointing to certain virtues of Trump.

The video commentary above is compelling. We would only offer that while Trump is a unique personality a conservative alternative who quickly demonstrates assertivness can produce the same reluctance in malcontents.

The parameters of my comments on this question include that it is likely that the Democrats will not be able to field a comparative strong candidate because Biden is making “Democrat” a bad name (it always was here at V’PAC).  That assumption on my part is important to the calculus of getting the best conservative able to achieve the most in one term to undo the damage the Biden residency is causing. The gist of  my contention is that Trump is not likely the only Republican able to beat a Democrat and indeed he might be the biggest problem should he win the nomination. That depends on women voters in the general a majority of whom still may be anybody but Trump, so give them that but one who shares MAGA policies.

Some might argue that Trump’s personality apart from his assertive MAGA policies which are at least quasi-populist, drives his support. Maybe for some, but I find much of it can be fatiguing and unnecessarily distracting.  All of us prefer his so called mean tweets to Democrat disastrous policies, actual culture rot and diminution of the country, but is that trip necessary, his way that is, when aggressive, clearer on point, in your face communications are possible from other politicians?  A major concern I have with Trump is that I do not think he has gotten his personnel picking problems solved, reflected in a number of his endorsement picks in the midterm primaries.  The extent of his serious mistakes in that regard resulted in much of the problems he faced.

Any alternative to Trump needs to support a rooted out federal bureaucracy and support a Justice Department that will prosecute identifiable election fraud of 2020. A new Republican House can take the lead in uncovering by hearings and pursuing prompt changes rectifying Democrat policy atrocities and installing preventatives for future congresses and administrations including proposing power limiting Constitutional Amendments as appropriate.  Electing Trump the third time in 2024 is not the only way to vindicate election 2020. Drama can be good — the inspirational effective/affective non-distracting kind.

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

Iowa Supreme Court redeems itself

On Friday the Iowa Supreme Court reversed its relatively recent abortion-anytime-for -any-reason ruling as a fundamental right

This being Black History Month – we hope more Black babies (Brown, White  and rainbow as well) will have more history as a result of the Iowa Supreme Court decision

The legislative implications of the decision are still indeterminate –  but clearly abortion regulation can no longer be facially challenged. In overturning a previous extravagantly pro-abortion analysis of the Iowa Constitution the court has corrected itself to instill that what has been the case since Iowa’s statehood (and before as a territory) that there is not a fundamental right to abortion at any time for any reason in Iowa.  Pro-abortion state judges will not to be able to  get away with  strict scrutiny analysis presuming abortion as a fundamental right thus bar any meaningful regulation.  That is a glorious improvement. However — what remains to be seen is what is the approved analysis as regards abortion regulation — “undue burden” or “rational basis”

The later should be the controlling analysis and with the underpinning that the state has a rational basis for protecting unborn children. Properly understood the undue burden analysis (a generally undependable jurisprudence) because it cannot rely now on a fundamental right to destroy one’s offspring in utero, ought to also allow for legislation protective of the unborn and women’s health.

A powerful opinion in many ways Iowa’s Supreme Court in its 5 to 2 decision (6 to 1 on some aspects) issued Friday has also devastated pro-abortion arguments about the history of abortion regulation in Iowa and provided compelling arguments about the matter of stare decisis that pro-aborts have used to protect the  Roe /Doe /Casey jurisprudence.

This article at National Right to Life News by long-time pro-life journalist Dave Andrusko provides a good initial summary of what the Iowa Supreme Court determined.  We will have more to say in coming posts about what legislative regulations might and ought to be allowed assuming SCOTUS takes Roe down in coming days.

Iowa Supreme Court says no right to abortion in state constitution, reversing its own 2018 decision

By Dave Andrusko

In a 182 page opinion, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled this morning  “that the state’s constitution does not include a ‘fundamental right’ to abortion, reviving a law requiring women to wait 24 hours after an initial appointment before getting an abortion,” Reuters reported.

Writing the majority opinion, Justice Edward M. Mansfield said the previous ruling that established a constitutional right to an abortion “insufficiently recognizes that future human lives are at stake and we must disagree with the views of today’s dissent that ‘[t]he state does not have a legitimate interest in protecting potential life before viability’.

In the 2018 ruling, written by Chief Justice Mark Cady and overturned by the Iowa Supreme Court today, the court said that “autonomy and dominion over one’s body go to the very heart of what it means to be free.”

In 2020 Iowa’s pro-life Gov. Kim Reynolds signed the 24-hour waiting period.  As the Iowa Supreme Court noted, “On June 23, 2020, before HF594 was actually signed into law, Planned Parenthood of the Heartland and its medical director, Dr. Jill Meadows, filed a petition in Johnson County District Court challenging the 24-hour waiting period.”

Justice Mansfield observed, in explaining why stare decisis principles don’t weigh heavily in favor of retaining the 2018 ruling,  that

PPH II [the 2018 decision] was overtly based on the notion of a “living” constitution…. To the extent PPH II viewed constitutional interpretation as an evolutionary process rather than a search for fixed meaning, it is hard now to argue that the evolutionary process had to end as soon as PPH II was decided. Does the Iowa Constitution get to “live” until 2018, at which point it must stop living?

For her part, Gov. Reynolds applauded the court’s decision.

“Today’s ruling is a significant victory in our fight to protect the unborn,” she said. “The Iowa Supreme Court reversed its earlier 2018 decision, which made Iowa the most abortion-friendly state in the country. Every life is sacred and should be protected, and as long as I’m governor that is exactly what I will do.”

The Iowa justices said they “are not blind to the fact that an important abortion case is now pending in the United States Supreme Court,” a reference to Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

“While we zealously guard our ability to interpret the Iowa Constitution independently of the Supreme Court’s interpretations of the Federal Constitution, the opinion (or opinions) in that case may provide insights that we are currently lacking,” today’s ruling said. “Hence, all we hold today is that the Iowa Constitution is not the source of a fundamental right to an abortion necessitating a strict scrutiny standard of review for regulations affecting that right.”

With today’s ruling, the waiting period case was returned to the district court.

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

When the goofy carrying of the wrong flag is a felony

Excuse me officer, we’re here as part of the “siege”

Check out these photos from the usual biased media sources used to illustrate their story about the felony conviction of two people parading in the halls of the Capitol on Jan.6, 2021.  Do you see what we see?

 

At the mostly peaceful and patriotic January 6 2021 rally for election integrity a small percentage of protestors regrettably did what a category of Democrats do all the time — made spectacles of themselves with some goofy and destructive antics — and maybe some even got pushy in response to some of the  police (other police may have been accommodating if not rather blase’ as in “another DC protest , different day, different group” and no more a serious threat even to the extent – “that would be down the hall to your right”.

The Jan. 6 protestors were not like another frequent category of leftist protestors who engage in widespread looting, extensive hateful damage  to property, who fire bomb and carry weapons going into houses of democracy aka protest sites.

According to the left, sauntering is besieging or something. By the way is that a guard under the portrait frozen in fear by the very presence of such a flag.

Nothing more was apparently on the agenda for even the most aggressive than has been attempted by countless leftist cause adherents protesting in the Capitol galleries or at other venues trying to disrupt proceedings at least for a time. Yes some arguably wanted to disrupt, but that is not insurrection – an armed takeover of government.  It is absurd to refer to those inside the Capitol and steps and walks that day as such. Most of the January 6 protestors who were arrested limited themselves to making noise on the steps or in the halls. Yet they have been subjected to gross violations of their rights. No one has been accused of bringing a gun or a bomb into the Capitol to shoot members of congress or bomb the place.  That is what insurrections do.

The only ones with definitive weapons in the Capitol that day were police, one of whom used his to kill an unarmed diminutive woman of no threat to him while he hazarded others in the line of fire. No other police with similar or closer vantage point felt any threat necessitating lethal force from that woman.  Although there were maybe the few cops who may have ganged up on another woman outside and beat her when she lay dying,  such an obvious threat presented.

One question, if it were a rainbow flag would there have been a felony conviction?

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

Two Great Ones From American Greatness

The first article Trump Needs to Alter His Message on COVID is sorely needed if he wants any enthusiasm from this quarter towards a primary run. Just stop it Donald — do you know who your base is really .  Your support at this stage is a lot of desperation in the face of Biden. As it stands now I hope DeSantis runs.  He is a good candidate and a better politician (in the good sense of the word).  I would go further than the article.  I think Trump needs to decry that he was mislead and that he endorses investigation into the unethical aspects to the whole tragedy/fiasco/scam and that he would make a lot of changes were h to be elected the third time.

The same advice in the article should be sent to Chuck Grassley by the way. Being a “me too” in support of the public health creeps endorsing the vaccine and masking is not a compelling message even if he is opposed to mandates (so is Trump). The admonition for the general public to take the jab as a great public health benefit (it is not) feeds the surreptitious control freaks and their methodologies in government and thesupposedly private sector. Advocate real vaccines and treatments rather than experimental problematic manipulations.

The second article They Are Not Sending Their Best is smack on.  There definitely needs to be a better evidenced understanding of American freedoms and their origin and purpose especially from the “elite” immigrants who apparently come here for the money more than anything. Their prescriptions will turn this country into the hell holes they left.  The common laborer sort of immigrant probably has a more authentic appreciation of American freedoms and rights than the elites mentioned in the article.

By the way — We will have some comments regarding the RPI State Convention Saturday after the finished platform and sources for insightful comments by attendees are checked.

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

RPI State Convention today – generally good platform with glaring deficiencies

  • See comments regarding two compelling issues not directly addressed in the proposed platform below

As this is written the 2020 Republican Party of Iowa (RPI) state convention is about to convene. I was without delegate status this year because I chaired a precinct caucus not my own at the request of the local Chair due to the shortage of operatives. So while I attended the caucuses I was in effect disqualified from delegate status (I really presume it was a misunderstanding and not the intent) because I was not in my own caucus even though the tables were in the same room.  So be it, rules are rules.

I attended the county and district conventions as an observer and facilitated platform resolutions going into the caucuses (see V’PAC postings from the period) including a  successful amendment to the platform at the later by circulating the appropriate paperwork and arguments.  That is how I know at least one of the matters I refer to herein was addressed downstream. Making the trip to Des Moines with Biden gas costs, food costs in part driven by farm acreage devoted to inefficient ethanol production, the ugliness of wind farms along the way and other factors — weighed more heavily than the practicality of helping organize appropriate amendments (to a pretty could state platform) in the face of the frustrating by design amendment process.

With todays technology and appropriate discipline there is no reason the platforms with amendments (including district conventions) could not be essentially settled (with improved timeliness) as to content prior to the conventions.  The conventions could then be  more reliably structured as to time allowing more for presentations by candidates for party office and winners of the concluded primaries. The overall process should still be representative and disciplined.

Platform development is what makes the caucus system unique, truly grassroots. Without that feature the caucuses are just a clumsy primary in Presidential years because the other feature, election of county central committee is actually emphasized as a perfunctory function of electioneering activities focused on the general election — volunteer efforts from people who could volunteer anyway.

Hopefully others a little more conveniently positioned will take up the cause this morning on these and any other appropriate amendments.  Here are a couple of things I think heavy on the minds of the rank and file that should be addressed.

  • There ought to be a resolution calling for investigation into what most Republicans believe (in increasing numbers due to the documentary 2000 mules) was the fraud of the 2020 election.
  • There ought to be a resolution better emphasizing the scandal of Zuckerberg money in Iowa
  • I find it hard to believe that something akin to these did not come up through the process.
  • Obscure or unpointed “going forward”  resolutions do not do justice to the harm caused or the guilty  or censurable regarding the above matters.
  • The platform is replete with matters actually already past business so that is not an excuse.  The matters deserve attention.

The BIG question I have is why have the powers that be sh*t-canned specifically addressing  the fraudulent acts affecting the electoral college in the 2020 election at least calling for investigations and the issue of the influence CTCL  — the Zuckerberg money scandal. Why is the platform so shy on those matters?   OK I think I know why — could it be because Iowa’s Republican federal delegation rubber-stamped the election without even calling for hearings while accepting the Biden residency in spite of extensive evidence, gargantuan anomalies,  and profound questions without raising them whether or not they felt compelled to do the rubber-stamping?  The ruination we are facing started without a whimper or a constitutional fight from them at that key time.

While the Republican chief election officer Paul Pate  has implemented some important election security features (fine, praise him for that) not addressed is that Pate encouraged counties to apply for grants from CTCL  knowing or incredibly indifferent to the pedigree of the grantors. The grants were obviously a Democrat GOTV effort under color of official county activity, amplified by tax money, and freeing up Democrat resources for the worst they could perpetuate.

One quick aside, I believe the platform is generally good, even profound in some areas but the idea of not being more pointed is a weakness, the sort of thing that helps make platforms dismissible as exercises in platitude writing.   The proposal has (actually longstanding over the years as approved) hornbook conservative proscriptions “against distortions  of the free market through subsidies bailouts and mandates” [See Commerce at (1)].  Also one stating , “oppose all government mandates and efforts associated with alleged man-made global warming or climate change” [See Commerce at (4)]  And what do the Republican powers that be in and out of Iowa do about this — propose and vote for mandates for ethanol marketing, tax breaks for E15, tax favors for wind (which according to the main owner of such makes no sense other than for the subsidies and green mandates).

If the platform is not more pointed, more demanding “incentivizing” through the party  process, the party is easily ignored and the “do nothing” disgust held by many toward it sticks.One might at a close reading offer that Government @17 covers “Zuckerberg money” — First of all how pathetic a rendering but even at that if it is intended to cover it, it is mistakingly written. The rendering  “private interference in US elections” ought not be an issue.  People privately, publicly advocating that is not “interference’ that is what elections are about.  Zuckerberg can spend all he wants doing his own thing “interfering” as a PAC or 501 -C-4 or C-3 or however.  It is inducing officials and offices to do his bidding that is the issue. Receiving and executing such grants through neutral public offices is the issue.

This post may be revised or extended as the day goes on

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

Grassley never faced Harkin — now he will

Biggest primary surprise for us — (we thought Democrat primary voters would ignore Finkenauer’s petition problem) was the substantial win by ADMIRAL (oh they will play that to the hilt) Michael (or is it Al) Franken.  You need to take a gander at this guy’s Twitter posts. He is one thoroughly leftist nasty SOB – snide at every turn – like Tom Harkin.  He emphasizes abortion on demand and ending the filibuster, government takeover of medical care, gun control and he is all for LBGTQWTXYZ rights. Oh and did you know he was an Admiral in the Navy (surface ship).

In previous elections all of Chuck Grassley’s Senate opponents in our estimation have pretty much taken it easy on him, —  it was not good politics to denigrate “farmer” Grassley, certainly the senator from Big Ag in an Ag state. Instead they left much of that to their associates while they all played to their constituencies and were trounced.  Grassley’s opponents just didn’t have the issues, the horsepower, the down-home appeal, incumbency, and they all had their far left liberal credentials to haunt them.

Iowa’s other long serving Senator, largely a contemporary of Grassley was Democrat Tom Harkin. He was a vile lying snide creature in reality but never was in an election with good old Chuck. They were colleagues for the good of Iowa don’t you know. And Chuck, the 70% Senator, didn’t seem to help much in the attempts to get him out. Chuck would come back to Iowa, Harkin would go to the Bahamas, but they were both reelected continuously.  Go figure.

Well the Democrats now have a Harkin to go against Grassley. This will not be pretty. Franken has promised so.  To be sure some of Grassley’s factors still pertain and hopefully his faculties. Franken can be exposed as the far leftist he is. It should be a Republican year but never underestimate the power of Republican establishment (and Chuck is all of that)  to misread key things, such as general public resentment over politicians.

More on this later.

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment