We are the drain the swamp people

This blog will be most useful or informative to those with the following predilections including being conservative, otherwise we are not on the same page: 

Democrat Party policies and their leadership are pretty much evil, economically disastrous, counter productive, other than constitutional, America debilitating . . . Their candidates must be electorally opposed in an effective way.

At this stage of the American electoral process (20 months from the general election) is it not reasonable to presume that being on the ballot is key to winning the presidency, people, patterns and voting logistics being what they are?

On a national level, a write-in candidate can only prevent a win (and not necessarily the desired target) and is overwhelmingly unlikely to elect someone unless handicapping one to help another is the desired goal.

There is no organized political party alternative to the Republican Party for conservatives (or the Democrat party) at this stage of the game with a ballot position in enough states (or prospects of achieving it by 2024) that would appeal to a sufficient number of conservatives/conservative-populists that could garner sufficient electoral college victories to propel a candidate past either the Republican or Democrat nominee.

There is a lot of difference between the Republican Party, generally speaking its candidates, and the Democrat Party and its candidates.  If you really do not see that overall, no need to read further.

A Republican winning against the Democrat is generally better than having a Democrat elected.  Yes sometimes individual races should be seen as contributing to the whole and so when voting it is sometimes a matter of hold your nose and vote.  Applying some charity and appreciation of human foibles, that is not generally the case with Republican candidates but there are exceptions that can be “sat out” at little risk to the republic.  The presidential election in most states is not one of them for conservatives as a wave is useful to sustain national policy improvements.

Do we accept that four more years of any Democrat on the political horizon as President is not to be desired — that the idea of letting it get worse because one’s favorite candidate did not get the Republican nomination, to make some point, is dangerous as it may only get worse and therefore that much harder to recover from.

That if enough people do not see the writing on the wall now, four more years of “progressive” Democrat is not any more likely to create dramatic change afterwards.  That it is at least as likely that people will clamor for more Big Government solutions (minor retrenchments notwithstanding) because of the dependency mindset further ingrained in the populace. Is western Europe not an example?

Do you accept that the nominee of the Republican Party is likely to be more inclined to spend less, attempt financial sustainability, be inclined toward judges who respect the Constitution, more culturally conservative, more pro-life, more for border control, supportive of parental rights, more for law and order . . .

That in 2020 (and 2022) there was substantial election altering cheating by Democrats. That Trump arguably won the electoral college in 2020 however for most people the election is not about that. The 2024 Republican Presidential process  is about who best to beat the Democrat nominee in 2024 because the Republican nominee given the state of the party today will be comparatively superior in policy to any Democrat once elected.

NO candidate is perfect and each candidate does, and even has to, make political compromises to garner support that seems inconsistent.

Each candidate for the Republican nomination should pledge to support the nominee of the Party for the general election, to turn the fight away from the internecine to focus on unified opposition to the Democrat candidates and what they stand for.

That rejecting these without sound reasoning given our country’s condition is an indication of something other than political maturity or wisdom.

With support of these (we are open to refinement and will apply them) we are on the same page.  If not this blog will likely irritate you for the next 15 to 20 months.

Arguably more peripheral or subjective:

Age is a factor for a lot of voters looking to prominent candidates in 2024 — undisposed toward Biden and possibly Trump on that basis. Trump would be 78 and the actuarial tables indicate a more significant chance of declining health or event. Many people do not vote policy. Personality factors apart from policy, from arguably serious to relative quirkiness is a factor in elections for a lot of people. Voting can be very strange and against interests on superficial factors.

Who would have the broadest appeal in purple and even blue states is important.

Who is least likely to eat a live rat on stage?

0

0

• Updated!
• Handicapping this is more exciting than NCAA March madness
• Random points like my bracket picks

They have nothing but a trumped up case that will not survive appeal. Devastating analysis by  J. Turly ,  —  Andrew McCarthy

The charges against Trump are legally bogus, but that of course makes no difference as to why the Dems are making noise about it.

Biden’s legal problems (a zillion times more damning)

They also can reasonably predict that Trump will say something stupid or ‘play to type’ — a ‘type” that they have with some success, painted him.

Trump vociferously calling for protests in an un-nuanced tweet, is stupid for the above reason. Who thinks it was the best tack?

Trump is not going to go to jail or be held over this. Even if that were to be the case he should pull the specter of physical protests — the piñata the media wants — and communicate something like ~~ watch this unfold and contemplate the implications —  and if he were to be held even overnight — a Letter from Birmingham Jail sort of thing has far more pathos and shows how small the Democrats are.

Raising the specter of Trumps womanizing (exaggerated or not) is not helpful to Trump. Anything to give people a reason to not vote for him against interests compared to Biden. Hell lies and Trump’s personality are all they have.

It could backfire, but Trump is not helping it backfire by calling for people to protest willy nilly and without planning and preparation.

It might not happen: Not So Fast on That Trump Indictment – It’s Not a Done Deal Yet

Doesn’t have to now — Trump has flubbed it enough that he is doing the damage they wanted to inflict.

Many would like to see Trump in shackles but just raising the specter works for them, until it doesn’t, and they might be reevaluating that

If they do use the DA to drop the dime,  the DA is a sacrificial lamb at worst.  They (Dem op center) do not care that he is in for an ultimately embarrassing legal shellacking on appeal. They will provide his sinecure for playing the game.

It is so obviously a trumped up charge that DeSantis ought to have in some way call it that.

Not withstanding this: Trump’s Ex-Lawyer Defends DeSantis Silence on Possible Manhattan Indictment.   Politically it could not harm him to point out the legal nonsense going on.

Problem with the calls for him to not enforce an extradition is that it would require him to be judge and jury on the case and that is not tenable. We are told he could delay it  for 60 days and that he could offer to Trump.

Ron DeSantis is staying silent amid a push from MAGAworld for him to say or do something about a possible Trump indictment

UPDATE DeSantis commented on the possibility of a Trump indictment over the hush money accounting situation today — decrying the politicalization of the Manhattan Attorney office under Bragg.

The Trump team responded to DeSantis’ hug with a bit of stiletto with a dull knife pull. I think DeSantis’ comments were good enough as to the substance of the persecution and the Trump machine cannot properly expect more given their pettiness toward DeSantis. Sure DeSantis “happened” to mention the antecedent event of hush money to a hooker  but then that is the sort of thing Trump would do is it not?

DeSantis can play hardball with a little more alacrity than Trump’s gonzo ball. Trump people have previously and repeated in response to todays comments from Desantis bandied about accusations about DeSantis and alcohol at a party with underage girls present 20 years ago (ever been at a party with adults and underages were present  — how about most picnics where non-teetotaler parents are present?).

Read more about the back and forth between the two and how DeSantis is constrained from doing much other than decry the bias and unfairness in the talk of charges against Trump. DeSantis attacks Manhattan ‘Soros-funded’ prosecutor in first comments on possible Trump indictment.

0

0

• if Senator Ernst demurs from McConnell’s characterizations about the Tucker Carlson release of Jan 6 footage in any meaningful way she owes it to posterity to say that louder than her presence with McConnell spoke 

Grassley, Ernst dispute media claims they criticized Carlson’s Jan. 6 footage

The Iowa Standard (TIS) asked Senators Ernst and Grassley about their statements regarding the Tucker Carlson show releasing previously unseen video of the Jan 6 mostly peaceful demonstrations. As noticed by Carlson, and as we also pointed out, Ernst was on camera next to Senator McConnell when he voiced support for a condemnation of Carlson’s portrayal of the video made by the Capitol Police chief.  The video as presented by Carlson questioned and was objectively  exculpatory as to the guilt and especially the sentencing of demonstrators arrested and charged with various crimes that day. Other implications about police performance can be drawn from Carlson’s presentation.

Why couldn’t Ernst (and Grassley) say something to that effect?

Instead Ernst wanted it to be known that she thought editing 40K hours of tapes was somehow in general wrong. We are not aware of a similar statement by her criticizing the Jan 6 prosecutors treatment of the tapes, withholding the bulk of the tape from defense council, selectively editing it,  serving to railroad convictions and lengthy sentences, denying exculpatory evidence.  Indeed Senator Ernst, how are people to view 40 THOUSAND hours of tapes?

Evidence is in the tapes not Ernst or Grassley’s narrower perspective.

With any sense of comparative balance “equity” the charges against most of the Jan 6 protestors arrested should have been dismissed or charged as misdemeanors rating a fine and minimal sentences when compared to “direct action’ perpetrated by the likes of Antifa and BLM, (that is when the police ever got around to arresting them in various jurisdictions).

TIS asked Ernst and Grassley to respond to Tucker Carlson identifying each of them as supportive of McConnells views and to hold forth on these open ended questions:

Any statement on Tucker Carlson’s decision to air the footage.
Any statement regarding Jan. 6 following the release of the footage.
Any statement on whether they believe Ashli Babbitt’s murder was justified.
Any statement on the continued detention of protestors from Jan. 6.

The response from each senator to TIS was vague and failed to answer the questions posed to them. The responses according to TIS were as follows with Ernst essentially forwarding the comments she made to the publication Axios after standing next to McConnell and hearing him saddle up with the Capitol Police to condemn Carlson’s revelations to the public — revelations withheld by prosecutors from defense lawyers of those accused of trumped up crimes that day.

“[They] should be widely available to everyone and not just select people. And it should not be selectively edited. There’s a lot of different sides that will be presented and that’s OK. We need to have that discussion, but it needs to be an open, honest conversation. I can tell you from where I stood in the Senate chamber, it was a very uncomfortable feeling. And the people that were out in the halls, they were not friendly. Let’s put it like that. They were not being peaceful. I had two women staffers, early 20s, that were clinging onto me for dear life and crying. They were terrified by those people.”

Grassley was quoted by Rolling Stone as saying, “what happened that day shouldn’t have happened” in response to Tucker’s airing of the footage. But without knowing how the question was posed, that’s hardly a condemnation of Carlson.

. . .

Ernst’s office obviously replied with her response to Axios, but hasn’t responded to the other things we asked about. Grassley’s office responded, asking what we were referring to as well. We shared with them the story from Slate, as well as informed them Carlson pointed to Grassley as one of his critics during last Wednesday’s episode.

Grassley’s office said the comment reported by the media that what happened that day shouldn’t have happened was a “general observation” about the Capitol breach.

“When asked about making the video footage public, he’s said he believes it’s a matter of public interest and should be made available in full. He never commented about Mr. Carlson’s coverage.”

Yes it does seem fair and valid attachment when 1) the good Senator was standing next to and heard McConnell’s comments and offered no demurral in her time, even to the extent of the typical “I must disagree with my good friend . . .” 2) Senator Ernst was not there absent her history of what amounts to histrionics regarding events that day nor with ample time having passed when plenty of evidence has been revealed apart from the release of the tapes by Carlson demolishing her own falsehoods and over the top characterizations of events that day. Characterizations she has now only subtly modified but earlier ones never apologized for in order to stand corrected — especially regarding her allegations of blame regarding deaths Jan 6th.

Grassley was not standing with McConnell and Ernst that day but then 1) maybe he couldn’t because he has been with McConnell on so much or 2) maybe his instincts are a little better. But like Ernst the same criticism of his uncorrected/unapologized for assertions in line with the DC Party about Jan 6 are still relevant in evaluating his recent statement given the timeliness of these new developments.

TIS has not been remiss in reminding readers about the Iowa delegation’s uniformly pathetic demeanor about events that day but this story was an opportune time to invite them to specifically correct their previous “murdered police” statements and insurrection hyperbole. They might have had they bothered to answer TIS questions but they needed to be pinned down. Perhaps asking “do you stand by your comments two years ago regarding deaths and motivations of Jan 6 protestors?”

Here are Grassley’s and Ernst’s statements issued many days after Jan 6 when enough had been revealed to give them rhetorical pause but which they declined to exercise in keeping with DC Uni-party hyperventilating:

Ernst Statement on Upcoming Impeachment Trial (excerpt)(caps our emphasis)
Jan 25 2021

“As I’ve said, PRESIDENT TRUMP EXHIBITED POOR LEADERSHIP and holds some responsibility for the anarchy that ensued at the heart of our democracy. The individuals who lawlessly stormed the Capitol, MURDERED POLICE, and ATTEMPTED TO PREVENT CONGRESS FROM DOING ITS JOB, should be held accountable to the full extent of the law.
—————————————-
Statement for the Senate Record by Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa
United States Senate On the Senate’s Acquittal of former President Donald Trump February 13, 2021 (excerpt) (caps our emphasis)

“What happened here at the Capitol was completely inexcusable. IT WAS NOT A DEMONSTRATION OF ANY OF OUR PROTECTED, INALIENABLE RIGHTS. IT WAS A DIRECT, VIOLENT ATTACK ON OUR SEAT OF GOVERNMENT. Those who plowed over police barricades, assaulted law enforcement, and desecrated our monument to representative democracy flouted the rule of law and disgraced our nation. SIX PEOPLE, INCLUDING TWO U.S. CAPITOL POLICE OFFICERS, NOW LIE DEAD IN THE WAKE OF THIS ASSAULT. The perpetrators must be brought to justice, and I am glad to see that many such cases are progressing around the country.”

“While the ultimate responsibility for this attack rests upon the shoulders of those who unlawfully entered the Capitol, everyone involved must take responsibility for their destructive actions that day, including the former president. As the leader of the nation, all presidents bear some responsibility for the actions that they inspire — good or bad. UNDOUBTEDLY, THEN-PRESIDENT TRUMP DISPLAYED POOR LEADERSHIP IN HIS WORDS AND ACTIONS. I DO NOT DEFEND THOSE ACTIONS AND MY VOTE SHOULD NOT BE READ AS A DEFENSE OF THOSE ACTIONS.”
————————————————

The “murdered police” and “dead police” statements are lies and were lies then. As they should know well by now referenced deaths were either unrelated or at the hands of police. Their general statements about the motivations regarding “what happened being completely inexcusable” and blaming of Trump are just plain pathetic. Not every avenue is appropriate but wanting to be heard, standing against “no standing” regarding evidence of a stolen election prior to it being ratified and clamoring for Congress to DO ITS JOB as in seriously explore the evidence prior to rubber-stamping as if Congress’ job was no more than ministerial, RATHER THAN the accusation from Ernst and Grassley that protestors were standing against their doing their job. It is not a subtle distinction. Failing to acknowledge that shows how out of touch those two can be.

By far most of the people even inside the Capitol, however overwrought some were, were there to be heard not to vandalize even if to cry out from the galleries. But Grassley and Ernst blaming Trump who asked people to be peaceful and patriotic that day is calumny against him and the spoken word.  As we said previously, if Senator Ernst demurs from McDonnell’s characterizations in any meaningful way she owes it to posterity to say that louder than her presence with McConnell spoke.

Aside:

I am not sure what Trump’s endorsement of Grassley in the 2022 Senate Republican primary  indicated (one of the unimpressive primary and general wins Trump credits himself with). It seems more about Trump’s hope to have Grassley’s endorsement in the Iowa caucuses. But alas supposedly that is not going to happen. Grassley for now is demurring although perhaps his operatives will be full throttle.

Nevertheless, Trump, we suspect, will continue to let Grassley’s (and Ernst’s) comments blaming Jan 6 on him pass, hoping not to rile them.  They should worry about not riling Trump supporters.

There are valid criticisms of Trump including especially who has the best public perception to win the 2024 general election.  It is about winning not rewarding someone, or pursuit of retribution especially if that pursuit results in a negative perception and is counterproductive to an actual win.

However, my objective analysis is that if either were interested in helping Trump they would correct their untrue and hyperbolic statements surrounding Jan 6 which targeted Trump and by implication the sentiment of so many of his supporters. I do not see that happening and so never-Trumperies can actually use Grassley and Ernst’s statements against Trump and Trump supporters will be less enamored with them.

Related reading by Kurt Schlichter at Townhall:

Stop calling it an insurrection.   (excerpt)

Nor was this incident some sort of “attack on Our Democracy where our freedom hung on by a thread.” The drama queenery might play on MSNBCNN, but it just makes the base despise the Republican Party even more – which is hard – when that crap comes from our own people. You are not downplaying what actually happened by characterizing it accurately and without the kind of breathless exaggeration the Democrat demagogues delight in. The Democrats’ cat’s paws spent six months burning down the cities and this overwrought handwringing only draws attention to the discrepancy in elite caring between when the pols were vaguely threatened and when the proles were losing everything. . . .

GOP pols, listen up. You are not defending the buffoons of January 6 by accurately characterizing their actions. Stop playing along with the false narrative that unjustly trashes your own people. Stop minimizing what happened in the murderous Democrat-abetted riots in LA in 1991 and throughout our country in 2020 by not just lumping this incident in with them but by pretending it was a zillion times worse.

Previous posts at V’pac 

Standing with the Protocols of the “Insurrectionists” of Jan.6

Bait, incite, coverup, stonewall, Shanghai re January 6

Will Senators Grassley and Ernst apologize for parroting lies and spin about Jan 6th

Sen. Ernst issued an ahistorical near hysterical screed in response to Jan. 6 mostly peaceful demonstration

0

0

And there was our Senator Joni Ernst standing with McConnell who said “With regard to the presentation on Fox News last night, I want to associate myself entirely with the opinion of the chief of the Capitol police about what happened on Jan. 6,”  McConnell told reporters Tuesday, holding up a copy of the police chief’s statement. 

The letter McConnell was holding was written by the new Capitol Police Chief J Thomas Manger who McConnell scrupulously avoids mentioning was not on the seen or part of the Capitol Police or DC Police that day.  He had been retired  from active law enforcement for about two years when he was invited to take over the department plagued “by a flood of departures” after Jan 6. So Manger’s personal authority is a bit suspect, as is McConnell’s ,as is Ernst’s as to an objective overview unless they have reviewed 40K hours of tapes.

The bulk of the large group on the Capitol steps that day were noisy but not interested in entering the buildings. That was not their purpose. But they wanted to be heard.

Some of the huge throng that heard Trump’s speech made its way to the Capitol perhaps to ‘rage against the system’ but that is all, the likes of McConnell contributing to that. Most dissipated after Trump’s speech. Clashes with police may have been aggravated by elements of the police. By far most of those that entered the Capitol building, a small percentage of the attendees overall, many clearly ushered in by police — most of those were intent on more noise — running up and down the halls or something.

Some particularly overwrought were willing to vandalize in some stupid show of intensity but similar to what we  remarked earlier, noise and even obsteperous behavior from unarmed protesters does not constitute an insurrection as McConnell characterized that day, going so far as to blame Trump even though Trump’s closing admonition was for peaceful patriotic protest.

And Ernst is willing to associate herself with McConnell at every turn on the matter.  See this picture of her with McConnell when he made the pathetic, ridiculous pearl-clutching ‘insurrection” charge and blamed Trump.

Manger’s letter, endorsed by McConnell and Ernst takes great umbrage alleging what was as easily characterized as a largely peaceful protest overall was  a ‘siege’. Such ridiculous exaggeration is beyond historic, it is hysteric. The newly released tapes seem to reveal that many of the charges relate to what in perspective was a noisy sit-in.  As far as the accusation of ‘cherry-picking calmer moments’ — the American public has been inundated, propagandized with cherry-picked clips of bad behavior but without any context. As Carlson points out video exists that was exculpatory and withheld and McConnell and Ernst have associated themselves with the propaganda behind it all of which is the essence of lies.  If Senator Ernst demurs from McDonnell’s characterizations in any meaningful way she owes it to posterity to say that louder than her presence with McConnell speaks.

0

0

Have you been reading about it or listening to Tucker Carlson’s expose of the extensive exculpatory video withheld from the judges, juries and the American people regarding the mostly peaceful protest on January 6 2021, where Donald Trump told everyone to be peaceful and patriotic, but some overwrought protestors did vandalize and mix it up with police however many of whom seemed nonplussed by much of the protest, another day in good old DC?

As the full video evidence released by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy through Carlson shows, (in conjunctions with video of the throngs  listening to Trumps speech and the words of the speech itself)  a small percentage of the assembled were overwrought in what they thought they could accomplish by their Antifa/BLM type demonstration. It is mythology to refer to their actions as an insurrection. If you want to call some of them rioters fine but from the videos most who entered did so hardly impeded and left upon feeling they made their point or out of embarrassment.

It was unarmed un-organized pathos against what they strongly felt was a corrupted election and no available system of redress. They felt they were standing against “no-standing” and insisted on being heard – something they felt somehow would help. Any insinuation toward all the people who attended Trump’s speech as a mob is calumny as is any characteristic of the speech as inciting anything other than peaceful patriotic protest — the right to redress grievances.

The newly released video contains exculpatory and contra-prosecutorial evidence that was heretofore illegally, indeed evilly withheld violating basic precepts of fair trials for the Jan 6th accused or important to their sentencing. To throw leftist terminology back at the liars and pearl-clutchers — there was no equity in sentencing vis a vi other more destructive and injurious “direct actions” by Antifa and BLM et al towards police.

Stilton Jarlsberg writing at Stiltonsplace.blogspot.com  has captured the irony BS of the January 6 Committee et a with the pictures and commentary we have embedded herein. We highly recommend his site for its humor and insight.

Mainstream media and Democrats in Washington are losing their minds owing to Fox News’s Tucker Carlson, who is sharing the previously restricted videos of what really happened in our nation’s capitol on January 6.

Carlson’s critics point out that he’s deceptively showing deceptive video clips that attempt to deceive viewers by deceptively having nothing in common with the totally accurate (albeit completely unsubstantiated) accusations of the Left and the “January Sixth Committee” which found that violent anarchists burned the capitol to the ground, Washington’s streets ran red with blood, and Donald Trump stood in the center of the carnage firing a machine gun into the air while shouting, “My holocaust is the best holocaust ever! Has there ever been a holocaust as big as mine? I don’t think so! And this is a very, very beautiful one!”

Meanwhile, that lying bastard Tucker Carlson is releasing video like this…

This is a frame grab showing the infamous Q-anon Shaman being escorted into the heart of the capitol building assisted by the police. In this picture, there are 10 officers with weapons, and one guy with an American flag, a buffalo hat, and chafed nipples from his suspenders.

Adam Schiff, Chuck Schumer, and every talking head on the Left has told us that the moment shown above was literally “worse than 9/11,” “worse than Pearl Harbor,” and brought our Democracy to the brink of collapse. Not to mention getting buffalo fur on the nice rugs.

The recently exposed videos also show the so-called Shaman telling other protesters to remain peaceful and just go home as well as offering up a prayer of thanks on behalf of the officers who safely guided him to the capitol floor.

For this, he is now serving four years in prison following his conviction for violating the little-known statute that forbids “shenanigans and malarkey in a goofy costume.” 
Just like the kids above who trusted the crossing guard, he trusted the police who invited him ever deeper into the building. In much the same way that too many Americans still trust the politicians who want you to believe what they say instead of what you can finally see.

Below are comments to Jarlsberg we found compelling:

Jerryskids said…
As I’ve said before, if China knows an unarmed mob of yahoos came within a hair’s breadth of overthrowing the government of the United States they’d send a couple dozen soldiers over here and finish the job. Pathetic that they’d call January 6 the worst insurrection since the Civil War. I’ve had sex rougher than that.
March 13, 2023 at 2:45 AM

Fish Out of Water said…
To paraphrase a quote from the now Ambassador to Japan (Rahem Emmanuel) never let a Reichstag fire go to waste….

March 13, 2023 at 5:32 AM
Bobo the Hobo said…
My general physician wanted to send me to a neurologist for a Tourette’s consult, I told him the symptoms will disappear when Biden leaves office.
March 13, 2023 at 5:38 AM

0

0

• We do not like cheap shots toward Trump or from him or his surrogates.  Patterns of behavior are a different story.

The link below reflects articles by Trumpanistas* looking for, or trying to create, vulnerabilities in good-will toward Governor DeSantis who they fear as a potential entrant into the Republican presidential caucuses and primaries. Related articles appeared in conjunction with breathless triumphalism regarding Trump’s showing in the straw poll conducted at the CPAC event.

DeSantis Would Rather Hang Out With the Caviar Crowd Instead of the Meatloaf Crowd

V’PAC says: Just give it a rest Todd.  You are comparing DeSantis with Mar-a-Lago Trump. Trying to separate DeSantis from the so-called meatloaf crowd is beyond serious criticism given who turned out to vote for him in Florida. Indeed DeSantis will be addressing “meatloaf” Iowans like yours truly at Davenport’s blue-collar mega — the  Rhythm City Casino tomorrow morning.

We were not at the CPAC event but have read some recent commentaries from credible conservative commentators (with no disrespect — as credible as Todd Starns)  people who are knowledgable of CPAC affairs. According to such commenters – CPAC has been loosing its luster in recent years due to allegations regarding administration and that this years event was set to be a Trump show. (for the record we really liked most of Trump’s speech to CPAC). Attendance at February’s event was said to be substantially down from previous years in spite of it being in DC with a politically aware base, lots of potential media and easy accessibility. Word is it is being eclipsed by interest in other conservative gatherings such as Turning Point USA which is decidedly not hostile to Trump.

Rather than speak to the choir DeSantis went to lecture the money people at Club for Growth** telling them in no uncertain terms “I’m not content to just keep taxes low and stay out of anything else,” DeSantis said in a muscular address to the party’s moneymen. “I mean I believe woke ideology is pernicious. … my policies are helping to protect people from having the woke ideology shoved down their throats in institution after institution.” (NY Post report).

CPAC is more so a Trump tied operation this year — the head Matt Schlapp is married to Trump’s former communications director. The CPAC organization is not free of scandal attached to it, the former related to Schlapp who supposedly gets $600,000 a year and other controversy surrounding him, nor conservative consistency. It has supposedly been happy to take dark and tainted money. Perhaps DeSantis is not comfortable enhancing Schlapp’s fiefdom.

Trump attends such events for adulation and gets it there. Aspects of that are his Achilles heal. He loves celebrity and celebrities too much. As good as Trump is and in spite of Todd Starns snark, DeSantis is better grounded in populist conservatism with better staff instincts than the former “Apprentice”‘ star. DeSantis would be an excellent President. May wisdom prevail in defeating the Dems. I will enthusiastically support my party’s choice. Will Trump?

But the questionable idea that seems to prevail in Trump only supporters is that we owe him something. Trump sends the same vibes and it is unbecoming a servant of the people. In the attitudinal world Trump comes from (Apprentice world) I do not owe a thing to someone who asked for the limited term contract, who I gave a chance to despite skeletons and even renewed, but maybe who now (arguably)  unnecessarily puts my “stock” at risk. Trump’s problem in market dominance (outside of CPAC) is not performance per se but in unnecessarily repeatedly handing the competition and undiscerning consumers (voters) the same brand negatives, however superficial. That impinges on stock growth.

But there is one particularly substantive one (beyond his chronic filter problem) we find Trump aggravating repeatedly — the mRNA fiasco he wants credit for. Everything about it to the discerning CEO should have read caution. An untested novel, genetic manipulation non-vaccine (but falsely identified as one) rushed into broad distribution and encouraged by him to this day — regarding a virus dangerous for the most part to the same people susceptible /vulnerable to every other flu.

While he had to do something — what he accepted was so novel (aren’t I clever — what could possibly go wrong) — is now established as complication prone. It is not mere hindsight to say he should have pushed for a traditional vaccine (or treatments other than iatrogenicly dangerous ones like breathing machines ). Hindsight or not, his performance  now regarding it does not deserve the kudos he demands. He was rolled but his ego won’t allow him to admit it.

0

0

In a general election in Scott County there are 60 plus voting locations.  The Davenport Community School District (DCSD) which has a bonding authorization matter on the ballot today encompases perhaps half of them — say 30. The number of locations has been reduced to six.

The conventional wisdom behind that is to save costs during a predictably lower turnout election. Ignoring the possibility probability that the reduction aggravates poor turn-out, we just want to point out that whatever the turn-out the average per voting location might be expected to be one-sixth of the total.  Yours truly voted at about 5:00 PM at one of the  library locations which I would expect to be busier than the average.  The vote count was 208 with three hours left to vote.

That seems very low at that time of day even for a school related election.

Granted the DCSD related vote does not have an increase in property taxes on the table although the current DCSD Board (not up for election today) could rebate property taxes under the terms of the pro-forma kitchen-sink authorization. They of course won’t rebate taxes and everybody knows it and the likely voters are not expecting that they will.

The vote might be a contest between the current boards sycophants and people just interested in sending a message knowing the board will do what it wants under previous authorization because it can.  The very wording says so.

The current DCSD Board is going through the motions, the intent is window dressing while pursuing a vague authorization for what they intend to do anyway — the bulk we suspect will be to cope with previous poor Board choices or lack of attention to basic academics that resulted in the DCSD’s poor academic performance resulting in the decline in enrollment.  People are not beating a path to the DCSD academic mousetrap.

The decline in enrollment is the symptom of the problem, a manifestation,  but the authorization vote if approved, they will claim, sustains their planned treatment of the symptom — which is to excise, consolidate schools and spend to do that,  while the crappy education DCSD administrators and educators deliver goes on, complete with sinecure and continued lack of serious accountability.

So the DCSD vote could be a vote on confidence or not in the DCSD Board, between  sycophants of the current Board and the informed and disgusted. The later may feel it fruitless and not show up because they know the purpose of the vote is window dressing.  We will see how it goes, and perhaps have more comment.

0

0

Sister Ship SS ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE

• School District Bond issues on ballot in Scott County — Polls open 7:00 AM to 8:00PM
• See here for voting locations (much reduced from November general election locations).
• On behalf of our Bettendorf School District tax payers — we say tough love for students — as for the educational apparat — not so much of the love part
• Vote no on the costly Bettendorf School District bond referendum.
• As for the Davenport School Board’s proposed ~~ basically to let them have carte blanche with existing finance authorization (supposedly not an increase in property taxes) — nyet  as well. We are not impressed with your ability to  spend money wisely or anticipate needs
• Make it a no confidence vote, send them back to the drawing board
• Bettendorf and Davenport Boards should show commitment and especially results in academic performance across the student spectrum, not ‘woke’ ideology and make do like everybody else has to in tough economic times

Bettendorf School District Board  wants 67 MILLION dollars for improvements additions to its middle school and high school.  Have you seen Bettendorf High School campus? — it has had major additions out the wazoo  and what has that done for basic student academic performance, contentment? Isn’t that supposed to be the basic goal?   The place has a roof, secure walls and HVAC, a gymnasium and auditorium — most everything else is superfluous in the scheme of things.  If there is genuine student enrollment growth (one wonders why given school choice and Bettendorf’s discipline record) the can-do administrators can tack on a few modular class rooms.

The claim is the middle school needs extensive improvements and is to receive most of the money. The middle school for the most part feeds the high school, one would assume at a one to one basis through to graduation (reality is somewhat lower depending on drop-out rate and departures from the school district offerings due to inferior educational performance). Growth in one largely coincides with the other.

So the middle school is coping now, we say continue to cope.

If there are genuine increases in enrollment, then as we advocate for the high school,  the school board should go back to the drawing board, lower their expectations for permanent buildings and then only after the tax-paying economic situation stabilizes.  Tack on modular classroom additions  commensurate with what enrollment can’t be absorbed.

Given the city’s related amenities we are unimpressed by claims of a need for still more athletic facilities. Few students or parents with their heads screwed on straight have children in an athletic category shopping for schools with the best work-out rooms. Parents with their heads screwed on straight want solid academic performance for their kids and they will inform their charges – you are going where we think you will get an education and be reasonably safe.  If a school system is not delivering those then the problem is about the culture that is being cultivated within the walls, not the size of the walls.

Even if Bettendorf (or Davenport) academic performance was solid, that academic success was achieved without the gold-plated improvements proposed belying the “need.” And by the way, if costly fancy schools (rather than academic performance) increases property values, a contention of supporters of increased taxes in the Bettendorf bond vote, then fancy schools increase taxes on the fixed income and the economically stretched and hurting.  It is the inescapable other side of the coin.

The Davenport Schools Bond Boondoggle proposal is not for an increase in property taxes per se like Bettendorf’s. They want your carte blanche authorization for a kitchen sink wording about the use of state allocations —  no doubt the bulk of which will go to close, consolidate and build up selected schools (see their plan) necessitated because of declining enrollments  which of course has nothing to do with the district’s stellar performance in academic achievement. We cannot get past the impression the community is being played with the wording of this proposal. The last part of the proposal insists your non-agreement does not stop them from spending the money according to their previous no doubt catch all authorization.  We say use the opportunity to vote no as a message of no-confidence.  They will understand the meaning.

The effects of the Bettendorf School District proposal on  property taxpayers in that district are described in this article: See Chart.  Homeowners can expect to pay hundreds of dollars more in taxes for a long time.  As regards commercial property owner taxes The Board’s spokeshole is quoted in the QCT article “Our bond consultant, Piper Sandler, let us know there are (rollback) changes coming to the Iowa commercial tax code,” Curt Pratt, the Bettendorf district’s director of operations, said. “So they’ll actually be paying less property taxes overall.”   What that means is that if the property tax increase succeeds    that commercial property tax payers will see no relief, but should be happy about that or something.

Critics of the Bettendorf proposal have pointed out that many property taxpayers are on fixed income and that for many the increase along with other costs will be a substantial burden taking away any small partial relief they receive from Social Security increases. The critique also applies to the Davenport proposal in that it allows for using the state funds for property tax relief which we highly doubt will be done. So property taxpayers in the Davenport School District will likely be screwed out of relief because the board (and city leadership) is such a failure at attracting students to the city and its schools because of poor academic performance, crime and overall taxes.  Those sorts of people should not be given any kind of approval.

0

0

• And speaking of mutilating people, South Park produced this while ridiculing the transgender psycho-social-medical malpractice phenomenon (emphasis on psycho)
• More of this scathing ridicule is needed

First a bit of a disclaimer:

Episode endorsed by the Babylon Bee creator

To say the least, the animated series South Park is not a show for everyone. But the show has been seen and clips and links forwarded by the millions for decades now as it has been a continuously renewed series since 1997. I have gone years without seeing an episode and have only seen a very few but are aware of the show because of those forwards, usually relevant to a particularly timely controversy.

Lately the show has been in the limelight in particular for its treatment of abortion and transgenderism.

The show’s specialty and appeal is biting satire and ridicule that often takes on the pretensions of celebrities and celebrity/ politically correct causes mostly using cartoon grade-school children as the main actors allowing all the exaggerations of childhood as a vehicle. It is certainly more about the dialogue and absurdist plotting rather than the sophistication of the cartooning.

This from a Wikipedia analysis:

They (children characters) are frequently confused by the contradictory and hypocritical behavior of their parents and other adults, and often perceive them as having distorted views on morality and society.   . . . 

South Park was the first weekly program to be rated TV-MA,[21] and is generally intended for adult audiences.[22][23][24] The boys and most other child characters use strong profanity, with only the most taboo words being bleeped during a typical broadcast.[9] Parker and Stone perceive this as the manner in which real-life small boys speak when they are alone.[25][26]

South Park commonly makes use of carnivalesque and absurdist techniques,[27] numerous running gags,[28][29] violence,[29][30] sexual content,[31][32] offhand pop-cultural references, and satirical portrayal of celebrities.[33]

Early episodes tended to be shock value-oriented and featured more slapstick-style humor.[34] While social satire had been used on the show occasionally earlier on, it became more prevalent a the series progressed, with the show retaining some of its focus on the boys’ fondness of scatological humor in an attempt to remind adult viewers “what it was like to be eight years old.”[10] Parker and Stone also began further developing other characters by giving them larger roles in certain storylines,[10] and began writing plots as parables based on religion, politics, and numerous other topics.[9] This provided the opportunity for the show to spoof both extreme sides of contentious issues,[35] while lampooning both liberal and conservative points of view.[9][17][36] Rebecca Raphael described the show as “an equal opportunity offender”,[16] while Parker and Stone describe their main purpose as to “be funny” and “make people laugh”,[37][38] while stating that no particular topic or group of people be exempt from mockery and satire.[17][33][39][40][41]

Parker and Stone insist that the show is still more about “kids being kids” and “what it’s like to be in [elementary school] in America”,[42] stating that the introduction of a more satirical element to the series was the result of the two adding more of a “moral center” to the show so that it would rely less on simply being crude and shocking in an attempt to maintain an audience.[37][38] While profane, Parker notes that there is still an “underlying sweetness” aspect to the child characters,[35] and Time described the boys as “sometimes cruel but with a core of innocence.”[12] Usually, the boys or other characters pondered over what transpired during an episode and conveyed the important lesson taken from it with a short monologue. During earlier seasons, this speech commonly began with a variation of the phrase “You know, I’ve learned something today…”.[43]

Aspects to the ridicule are sometimes subtle, (even obscure to the more detached from current events) such that you have to be at least “woke aware” to get much of it. The writers of South Park, still mainly the original two creators and developers, try to be as current as possible, writing and finishing an episode in the week prior to putting it out.

While the dialogue is vulgar (imparted to grade-school kids) and the images and story lines often not something for the faint of heart — some of the show’s themes even in their often surreal presentation can reasonably be interpreted as ridicule in defense of normative values or, if not that, then at least willing to skewer the shallowness, hypocrisy and corruption of the left.

We do not mean to put too much of a high literature spin to the reliance on shock and ribald humor in the cartoon series. We are only saying that the plots and sub-plots, undercurrents and obscure messaging at least sometimes reflect what conservatives can appreciate.

About the treatment of abortion and transgender issues in the series

Some of the episodes are remarkably prescient while at first perhaps being interpreted as off the wall. A case in point is the writers’ 2005 presentation of a transgender character, biological male to female, going to an abortion clinic to actually get an abortion, because, well, that is what character presumes every woman does. A right off passage or something. It is of course absurd and meant to convey that. It was no defense of transgender ideology to show how ridiculous their ideology is. The episode anticipated the very arguments we are hearing 18 years later such as “men can have babies.”

In the same episode, the related portrayal of the abortion license, the mocking of callous abortion attitudes, the inclusion of dialogue conveying the grotesqueness also including not so subtle abortion imagery are a potent add-on to the ridicule of transgenderism.

That is extended in the series to include the sale of aborted baby parts.

Abortion is a theme that has come up in a number of the episodes

And there are more — visit https://southpark.cc.com

The transgender theme has also been visited a number of times doubling down on how absurd the ideology is. To be sure the topic is unquestionably relevant to school age children.

In the abortion related episode(s) the character “Cartman”  is usually the antagonist who is totally amoral when he isn’t immoral, jealous and scheming and the generally evil little Beelzebub of the series.  The show is probably most popular with the cynical so as a political motivator in that avenue probably not all that “inspirational”. But ridiculing the motivations, falsities and results of leftist ideology (when they do) to an audience cynical toward conservatives as well reduces antagonisms toward us and the reach of the big-government misanthropes.

If fans of the show (we know you are out there and appreciate you) can help us research the appearance of abortion related and transgender themes and any other of political interest to conservatives by sending us links it would be immensely appreciated. The producers of the show have a Web site that allows some thematic searches found here.

From a New York Post commentary last week which triggered our interest in seeing if the abortion issue had been dealt with in other episodes.

‘South Park’ goes viral for ‘brutally honest take’ on trans rights, abortion
A resurfaced “South Park” clip — featuring a transgender woman demanding an abortion despite not being able to get pregnant — is going viral 18 years after its original air date. Social media watchdogs are heralding its “brutally honest take” on transgender rights and abortion “in this crazy woke world we’re all in.”

The episode titled “Mr. Garrison’s Fancy New Vagina,” which originally aired on March 9, 2005, features fourth grade teacher Herbert/Janet Garrison trying to get an abortion because they have not menstruated.

Later in the episode, Garrison — who was born biologically male — expresses outrage due to the fact that they cannot abort (nor carry) a child, even though they paid for reassignment surgery.

This NewsBusters story on the same matter provides comments from certain influencers many will be familiar with:

Seth Dillon (owner of Babylon Bee)

Here’s South Park mocking the insane idea that men can actually become women. This clip is from 2005.

It’s a brutally honest take on the callous savagery of abortion, too. We need more mockery like this.

Donald Trump, Jr.

South Park nails it!

Natallie Argyle (author at Chicks on the Right)

In one minute and 25 seconds, @SouthPark said all the things we aren’t allowed to say about trans “women” and abortions.

Queen Nat

South Park does it again! This time mocking trans and abortions South Park is needed in this crazy woke world we’re all in, to wake people up to how ridiculous it is!

Visit the South Park site https://southpark.cc.com/topics/nmko4w/abortion/5fujrl

0

0

While we are working on several posts we hope that are still timely (if it doesn’t take too long to get them up) — bear with us, one will be up latter today. So much ends up by the wayside as they are eclipsed by even more current events.  If you have a statement or commentary you would like featured by all means post it here to comments and yours truly will evaluate it for a feature presentation.  If graphics are desired or integral indicate that and I will be in contact to facilitate formatting.

Roger Mall

Editor

0

0