• Pragerisms

    For a more comprehensive list of Pragerisms visit
    Dennis Prager Wisdom.

    • "The left is far more interested in gaining power than in creating wealth."
    • "Without wisdom, goodness is worthless."
    • "I prefer clarity to agreement."
    • "First tell the truth, then state your opinion."
    • "Being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry."
    • "If you don't fight evil, you fight gobal warming."
    • "There are things that are so dumb, you have to learn them."
  • Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins

    • Sexism
    • Intolerance
    • Xenophobia
    • Racism
    • Islamophobia
    • Bigotry
    • Homophobia

    A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.

  • Glenn’s Reading List for Die-Hard Pragerites

    • Bolton, John - Surrender is not an Option
    • Bruce, Tammy - The Thought Police; The New American Revolution; The Death of Right and Wrong
    • Charen, Mona - DoGooders:How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help
    • Coulter, Ann - If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans; Slander
    • Dalrymple, Theodore - In Praise of Prejudice; Our Culture, What's Left of It
    • Doyle, William - Inside the Oval Office
    • Elder, Larry - Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose
    • Frankl, Victor - Man's Search for Meaning
    • Flynn, Daniel - Intellectual Morons
    • Fund, John - Stealing Elections
    • Friedman, George - America's Secret War
    • Goldberg, Bernard - Bias; Arrogance
    • Goldberg, Jonah - Liberal Fascism
    • Herson, James - Tales from the Left Coast
    • Horowitz, David - Left Illusions; The Professors
    • Klein, Edward - The Truth about Hillary
    • Mnookin, Seth - Hard News: Twenty-one Brutal Months at The New York Times and How They Changed the American Media
    • Morris, Dick - Because He Could; Rewriting History
    • O'Beirne, Kate - Women Who Make the World Worse
    • Olson, Barbara - The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House
    • O'Neill, John - Unfit For Command
    • Piereson, James - Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism
    • Prager, Dennis - Think A Second Time
    • Sharansky, Natan - The Case for Democracy
    • Stein, Ben - Can America Survive? The Rage of the Left, the Truth, and What to Do About It
    • Steyn, Mark - America Alone
    • Stephanopolous, George - All Too Human
    • Thomas, Clarence - My Grandfather's Son
    • Timmerman, Kenneth - Shadow Warriors
    • Williams, Juan - Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It
    • Wright, Lawrence - The Looming Tower

Remember The Second “Degree” OF OUR AMERICAN PRESIDENCY!!??

And then there were eight: Another one of Kamala’s staff quits

KAREN TOWNSEND Feb 04, 2022 at HotMail:

 Share  Tweet  

AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin

Another day, another resignation from the office of Kamala Harris. The resignation of a speechwriter, Kate Childs Graham, makes resignation number eight.

Kate Childs Graham is Kamala’s head speechwriter, her director of speechwriting. The White House announced that Graham .“is leaving the office, but not the family.” Harris is “grateful for her service to the administration.“ Then a familiar statement – “We are excited for her next step.” That line has been used in announcements of other resignations from Kamala’s office. No word if Graham wrote it or not for Kamala. Perhaps working for the vice-president is looked upon as a springboard into career advancement in Washington, D.C. With her polling numbers at historical lows for a vice-president, though, I’m not sure how much of an advantage it is on a resume.

It’s not like Kamala is failing in her job on her own. Her staff plays a role. Granted, there are leaks coming from her office that she doesn’t bother to read the briefing reports from her staff before traveling or attending big events, and that isn’t their fault. She’s lazy and thinks she already knows everything. Kamala is still more into the role of a political operative than in her role as vice-president. She is clearly not up to the job of being a heartbeat away from the presidency. Kamala’s speeches and remarks have been criticized and that would be the responsibility of her speechwriters.

Kamala’s speeches and remarks often are criticized by conservatives because of the wrong-headed thinking coming through in them. For example, she compared the riot on January 6 to the attack on Pearl Harbor. Who wrote those remarks? The head speechwriter would have to sign off on them if she didn’t write them herself.

Last month, Harris compared the Jan. 6 Capitol riot to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 and the Sept. 11 attacks on New York and Washington by al Qaeda terrorists.

Critics slammed the veep’s language, accusing her of a hyperbolic lack of historical perspective.

In October, in a speech marking Columbus Day/Indigenous People’s Day, Harris said that the US “must not shy away” from the “shameful past” of how the first European explorers “ushered in a wave of devastation for tribal nations.”

Democrats criticize Kamala’s remarks, too, especially when the progressive wing of the party doesn’t think she sounds crazy enough for them.

In June, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) ripped Harris for urging potential migrants from Guatemala to “not come” to the US-Mexico border, calling the advice “disappointing.”

“First, seeking asylum at any US border is a 100% legal method of arrival,” she said, according to Business Insider. “Second, the US spent decades contributing to regime change and destabilization in Latin America. We can’t help set someone’s house on fire and then blame them for fleeing.”

Graham is leaving at the end of the month. We’ve been writing about all the resignations coming from Kamala’s staff for several months. Her office is leaking like a sieve and it ain’t good. Kamala’s former aides have described her as a bully and unable to manage her office. Her office is supposed to be in reset mode. She and Biden are said to be ramping up travel outside of Washington to promote their administration’s agenda and boast of any successes they imagine they have had in Biden’s first year as the midterm elections approach. That means whomever replaces Graham will need to hit the ground running.

Herbie Ziskend, deputy communications director to the vice president, paid tribute to his departing colleague on Twitter.

‘Kate is committed, hard-working, hilarious – a great colleague and friend,’ he said.

‘I’ll miss working with her every day, but excited for her next adventure.’

So far, Kamala’s hires for the reset have raised questions.

We know that when chief spokesperson Symone Sanders left Kamala’s office, she parlayed that experience into a gig with MSNBC. Another staffer left to work for the Congressional Black Caucus. Others have left to pursue other opportunities. Kamala’s job is also iffy, if rumors of the possibility that she may be replaced as Biden’s running mate in 2024 are true. Biden denies it, as he recently did when he marked the anniversary of his inauguration.

In a press conference on the eve of the anniversary of his inauguration, President Biden said unambiguously that Harris would be his running mate for re-election in 2024.

“She is going to be my running mate – number one. And number two, I did put her in charge. I think she’s doing a good job,” Biden said.

Biden’s remarks were meant to assure his supporters that he will run for re-election in 2024. I’m still not convinced he will. He has the ego and desire for power but I’m not so sure he’ll be able to run with his clear mental decline being presented to voters on a regular basis and he looks physically frail. He’ll be the oldest president to run for re-election. The latest polling numbers from FiveThirtyEight shows Kamala’s at 42 percent approval. We’ll see if the reset in her office bears fruit for her.

The Noise Of Our America’s LOONY TUNE!

February 4, 2022

Biden’s heinous, dishonest speech attacking the Second Amendment

By Andrea Widburg at American Thinker:

Currently, the single most important thing separating America from most of the world’s other so-called free countries is our Second Amendment. Most countries pay lip service to the rights of free speech or free assembly; none acknowledge an inherent, Creator-given right to bear arms. Joe Biden would like us to be more like them. And as part of that effort, he appeared in New York on Thursday and gave something resembling a speech (he stumbled through words in a binder, interrupting his text with bizarre statements) that was a rare mixture of nonsense and lies about the Second Amendment.

The Second Amendment is the single most important part of the Constitution because without it none of the other rights matter. As we’ve seen across the world, in country after country with a charter or constitution that ostensibly gives the citizens the right to bodily integrity, free speech, assembly, etc., those countries have no compunction about ignoring such rights. (I’m looking at you, Australia, Canada, Austria, Italy, etc., etc.) The governments know that their citizens have no recourse whatsoever. They are helpless.

Please understand that I am most emphatically not advocating an armed rebellion. What I am pointing out is that there is always in the back of our government’s collective mind the tiny frisson of fear that, with a lawfully armed populace, if the government goes too far, bad things might happen. It’s that fear that restrains the government from going too far.

The Second Amendment also encourages independence from the government. People who can protect themselves against enemies foreign and domestic, ward off criminals, and hunt for food are freer people than those who must look to the government to protect them in all matters.

Joe Biden and his handlers hate these facts. They hate that they can only push the American people so far and they hate that, outside of Democrat cities that have so much gun control only criminals have guns, the American people can live somewhat independently of the grotesquely large American government.

On Thursday, Joe Biden went to New York and argued aggressively to limit the Second Amendment. Well, he didn’t really argue. He lied through his teeth, making up all sorts of fantastical things and regurgitating old lies that even leftist outlets had rebutted. Here are some excerpts—and as you watch and listen to Biden, please take note of the fact that he’s not even pretending to do anything other than reading his speech, except when he erupts with nonsense from his own addled mind:

BIDEN: A Glock with a 40 round magazine is a “weapon of war.”

“Habitual Liar” Biden….”What a Brave Commander-In-Chief He Is!”

February 4, 2022

Brave Biden kills terrorist, women and children hardest hit

By Pete McArdle at American Thinker:

Joe Biden may be an accomplished grifter, habitual liar, and at least three cans shy of a six-pack mentally, but what a brave commander-in-chief he is!

Take last August, when, thanks to White House incompetence, thirteen U.S. servicemen and scores of Afghans were blown to bits outside Kabul airport.  The Brandon administration angrily vowed to punish those responsible.  And not a month later, Sleepy Joe droned an ISIS-K terrorist, then crowed to the world about justice served and America’s amazing over-the-horizon military capability.

Noted “white rage” expert General Mark Milley called the retaliatory strike “correct” and “righteous.”  A bristling Biden further warned ISIS-K, “We’re not done with you!”  No joke, folks.

Well, President Biden may not have been joking, but the ISIS-K baddies were surely laughing their butts off.  For they knew immediately what the Brandon administration and its fake-news minions tried unsuccessfully to cover up.

Our senile commander-in-chief and his bumbling, woke general had in fact killed an innocent Afghan aid worker and his family, including seven children.

“Wagging the dog,” ordering a military operation to distract from lousy poll numbers, is the oldest presidential game in the book.  Yet Biden, who’s been in Washington for half a century, and the thoroughly anti-racist Milley managed to blow it.  Big time.

Old Joe’s poll numbers remained in the crapper.

More recently, as inflation and COVID case numbers have soared along with the president’s disapproval numbers, whoever pulls our puppet president’s strings apparently decided to wag the dog once more.

And so, we are now treated to the wonderful and brave news that our president has taken out a terrorist mastermind, Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Qurayshi.  Twelve others were also killed in the raid, including three women and six children.

Forget whether or not a vowel-rich terrorist was actually offed; this latest military misstep brings the number of defenseless children killed by Biden’s dog-wagging to thirteen.

Based on the many documented instances of Joe Biden kissing, fondling, and sniffing small kids, I honestly thought he liked them!  Seems he doesn’t, or else he’s OK with killing a bunch of them if it serves him, or his puppet masters, politically.

Folks, Joe Biden is failing, so fast and in so many ways, that he’s unlikely to finish out his term, much less win another.

So please, should they contact you, simply lie to the pollsters.

Tell them Joe Biden’s great, and you just love what he’s done to the country.  Tell ’em you enjoy serial vaccinations, wearing useless paper masks, and showing papers to successfully enter McDonald’s.  Stress that, like General Milley, you’re down with CRT, BLM, LGBT, and any other left-wing acronyms currently in vogue.  Explain to the pollsters how inflation is actually good for us and besides, it’s not the president’s fault.

We’ve simply got to stop the president’s ongoing decline in the polls before Sleepy Joe’s forced to kill again.

Do it for the kids.

That “UNIQUE” Governor Huckabee!

Banyan Hill Publishing

Republican Governor Discovers Why Some Folks End Up With A Cushy Retirement “Nest Egg” — And So Many Others Don’t

Looking at former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee’s life…

You might think he embodied the classic rags-to-riches story.

But it was never that simple.

As Gov. Huckabee freely admits in a recent candid interview

When it came to knowing how to make his money grow, it seemed like he’d been stumbling around in the dark.

Luckily, he gained a new friend — considered the No. 1 expert in this particular financial field — who offered him some valuable guidance.

And that’s how Gov. Huckabee discovered the simple secret that explains why some folks get their fair share of America’s prosperity — but so many others lose out.

You see, far too many well-meaning people invest money like they’re playing the lottery.

Or put all their trust in poor advice from so-called financial “advisers.”

Only to see their hard-earned “nest egg” slip through their hands.

The secret you’ll find in Gov. Huckabee’s recent interview has nothing to do with your income level, your education or even your current bank balance.

What’s more, it’s something you or any other adult can do. And it only takes you 10 to 15 minutes per month!

This secret has already helped thousands of people.

Like Jeanie from Michigan, who reported:

“I felt lost and in the dark,” conceding she didn’t have a clue how to succeed when it came to growing her money.

Yet, after she discovered this secret, she praised it as the answer to her problems.

John S. happily reported that it only took him 14 months to nearly double his money after following a few simple recommendations.

And it’s all because of what Governor Huckabee now calls the “Miracle on Main Street”…

He feels truly blessed by God.

That’s why he wants to share what he discovered with you and other folks all across America.

It doesn’t matter whether you’ve had past financial failures.

Your political beliefs don’t matter.

Even the wild ups and downs of the market don’t matter.

All you need is a burning desire to take control of your financial future once and for all.

And the longing to sleep peacefully at night, free from worries about your retirement.

See the financial secret Governor Huckabee discovered in this shockingly frank interview.

SO, Should Both Be In Jail?

Was Hillary Clinton Paying Michael Avenatti?

As the creepy porn lawyer faces fines and jail time, questions about his operation—and who was financing it—linger.

By Mark Judge at American Greatness:

February 3, 2022

Did Hillary Clinton or the Democratic National Committee ever pay Michael Avenatti?

The question isn’t exactly new. It was at least hinted at as early as May 10, 2018. That day, Mark Penn, a former advisor to President Bill Clinton, published an op-ed in The Hill newspaper. At the time, the news was filled with the rantings of Avenatti, who gained his fame and notoriety representing former porn star Stormy Daniels. Daniels was claiming she was paid to cover up an affair with Donald Trump before he was elected president.

Penn’s column raised several good questions. They have become even more relevant now that Avenatti, on trial for allegedly stealing money from Daniels, is back in the news. 

Penn asked:

So exactly who is paying Michael Avenatti? And is he a lawyer, an opposition researcher, a journalist, or a campaign operative?

He wants to make the discussion all about where Michael Cohen, President Trump’s personal attorney, got his money but, to have clean hands, Avenatti needs to come forward with exactly who is financing his operation, who his sources were for detailed banking information, and whether he really is an attorney solely representing Stormy Daniels or just using her as cover to wage a political operation.

From the beginning, this has been fishy. Daniels’s previous lawyer advised her to stick to her agreements. In contrast, Avenatti okayed her violating with impunity her non-disclosure agreement on ‘60 Minutes’ despite a binding arbitration judgment against her. She acknowledged on Twitter that she is not paying for her lawyer. So who is? And did he indemnify her against all multimillion-dollar penalties?

Finally, Penn ended with this haymaker:

It took a long time and even a court battle to find out that the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee paid for the Fusion GPS dossier, a fact that was disclosed only after the damage was done, as former British spy and the dossier’s compiler, Christopher Steele, had already created a vast echo chamber as though the material he was peddling had been verified in some way, which of course, it never was. Now Avenatti is being allowed to repeat this same process, mixing truths with half truths and evading accountability.

Avenatti has been given a free, unfettered media perch on TV to spread his stuff without the networks forcing him to meet any disclosure requirements, saying that he is Daniels’s attorney when someone else entirely is paying for this operation is not true disclosure that allows the viewer to evaluate the source and potential conflicts. He is now being given deference as though he is a journalist interested in protecting unverified sources while he makes headline-grabbing pronouncements. Lawyers need to disclose the source of their evidence.

I have some personal experience with Avenatti, the man Tucker Carlson calls “the creepy porn lawyer.” In fall 2018, the political Left and the media tried to destroy Brett Kavanaugh, a high school friend of mine. Central to their effort was Michael John Avenatti. 

The creepy porn lawyer lived on television (he was interviewed 147 times in one week alone), and was fawned over by journalists who claim to possess street smarts, yet couldn’t find their way out of their own bathrooms without help. 

Fueled by opposition researchextortion threats and an attempted honey trap, politicians and the media climbed aboard the S.S. Avenatti, the direct lineal descendant of the Titanic. 

In the fall of 2018, a woman named Christine Blasey Ford accused Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her in 1982 when we were all in high school. Ford claimed that I was in the room when the incident allegedly happened. Ford, who had every intention of going public, was a bad actor, in both senses of the term. 

“Sloppy” doesn’t begin to describe the corporate-Left’s reporting about the claims against Kavanaugh and me. Vanity Fair had to issue a correction admitting that a woman who’d said we went to college together in fact had attended a different school. The Washington Post withheld exonerating evidence presented by a witness they excluded from their explosive first story about Ford’s allegations. Reporters used as sources people who had never so much as laid eyes on Kavanaugh or me.

Then came Avenatti. On September 24, 2018, I got a nasty message on my phone from someone saying, “You like [expletive] with people? I like [expletive] with people, too. Give me a call.” I still don’t know who the call was from, but I did give the number to the FBI. 

Words I had learned as a kid watching “The Exorcist” came back to me: “Do not talk to the demon. The demon is a liar.”

Later that same day, Avenatti went on TV where he appeared apoplectic and said my name 13 times within a span of two minutes. He was flustered. Extortion wasn’t working, as it would fail with Nike. Avenatti had figured out that I was too street smart to hand him the shiv to plant into my back. I was not about to give into the mob

Then the creepy porn lawyer produced a woman named Julie Swetnick. Swetnick claimed that Brett and I had attended 10 parties in high school where girls were drugged and gang raped. She claimed that she herself was the victim of a gang rape.

The story was too good to check. In a move that would have gotten an intern fired, NBC’s Kate Snow not only put Swetnick on air without any vetting, she also withheld information that would have damaged Avenatti. 

During the first week of October, when Kavanaugh still had not been confirmed, Avenatti claimed he had a woman who would corroborate Swetnick’s claims. It was a lie. 

From NBC News: 

Reached by phone independently from Avenatti on Oct. 3, the woman said she only ‘skimmed’ the declaration [Avenatti had written for her]. After reviewing the statement, she wrote in a text on Oct. 4 to NBC News: ‘It is incorrect that I saw Brett spike the punch. I didn’t see anyone spike the punch . . . I was very clear with Michael Avenatti from day one.’

There was more: “I would not ever allow anyone to be abusive in my presence. Male or female,” the woman told NBC. “I will definitely talk to you again and no longer Avenatti. I do not like that he twisted my words,” she wrote.

Rather than report this news at the time, which would have helped Judge Kavanaugh, NBC sat on the story for several weeks. From Fox News on October 26, 2018: 

NBC News is under fire for sitting on information that would have cast serious doubt on wild claims about now-Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh just when the unsubstantiated allegations were rocking the judge’s confirmation to the high court.

Controversial attorney Michael Avenatti and client Julie Swetnick claimed last month Kavanaugh took part in high school gang rapes just as Kavanaugh was defending himself against a separate, uncorroborated claim. Avenatti connected NBC News with an anonymous woman he claimed could corroborate Swetnick’s allegations, but instead accused the lawyer of ‘twisting’ her words. Still, NBC went with Swetnick’s story without disclosing the exculpatory reporting.

On Thursday, nearly three weeks after Kavanaugh’s confirmation, NBC News published an article headlined, ‘New questions raised about Avenatti claims regarding Kavanaugh,’ that detailed ‘inconsistencies’ with Swetnick’s claims. In the article, NBC News admitted the unidentified woman repudiated the sworn statement Avenatti provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee on her behalf to corroborate Swetnick’s claims.

Kavanaugh’s polarizing confirmation proceedings ended on Oct. 6, when the Senate voted 50-48 to confirm him to the high court.

Swetnick had once been represented by attorney Debra Katz, who also represented Christine Blasey Ford. From the CNN website on September 26, 2018: 

Two sources told CNN that Swetnick filed a sexual harassment complaint against a former employer a decade ago and was represented in the matter by a lawyer from Katz’s firm. Swetnick is currently represented by attorney Michael Avenatti, who rose to prominence earlier this year for representing Stormy Daniels. A source familiar with the matter confirmed that a lawyer at Katz’s firm did represent Swetnick, but that it was not Katz herself. The source said Katz never represented Swetnick and that the firm did not refer Swetnick to Avenatti for representation.

I guess that settles that.

The scam of 2018 was an opposition research dump made up of an unholy trinity. It was journalists working with lawyers and opposition researchers, who in turn were working with the lawyers and politicians. The whole thing was one reckless, self-perpetuating, toxic scrum. The Left cast a net over the Washington metropolitan area (it included my high school yearbook). Anything they dragged up was used against us. I was called a drunk, a racist, a misogynist—even a fan of Benny Hill.

It was the kind of thing that happens in totalitarian states. The people who set it up may go to jail or go to therapy or return to their high paying media jobs. They will also die without honor.

At his sentencing in 2021, Avenatti wept. “Your honor, I’ve learned that all the fame, notoriety and money in the world is meaningless. TV and Twitter, your honor, mean nothing,” he said. He then mentioned his three children, including two teenage daughters who wrote letters to the judge. “Every father wants their children to be proud of them. I want mine to be ashamed. Because if they are ashamed, it means their moral compass is exactly where it should be.”

A Note From A. L. Luttrell Regarding That DEM Biden World, The Smart and the Stupid!

JOE BIDEN QUOTES…… DOESN’T KNOW STUPID WHEN HE RAISES STUPID!

 A. L. LUTTRELL at The Arlin Report!

RATE THIS

Image
Twitter: Right to bear memes

This is how smart Joe Biden is. The person on the left is Joe’s son Hunter………a stoned crack head but as Joe said, “smartest man I know”. The “man” on the right is a journalist (often working the White House), Peter Doocy. The comment from Biden made came following a question Biden didn’t want to answer, had no answer for or just plain didn’t understand the question (which I doubt). Joe Biden referring to anyone as being stupid comes from his own ignorance.

Does Our Mentally Difficult Biden Know?

February 4, 2022

Biden’s Supreme Court Tradeoff

By Dennis L. Weisman at American Thinker:

President Biden ignited a political firestorm last month when he announced that he would fill the Supreme Court vacancy created by Justice Stephen Breyer’s resignation with a Black woman. This was reportedly the result of a deal (political quid pro quo) that candidate Biden struck with Representative James Clyburn (D-South Carolina) in return for delivering the Black vote in the South Carolina primary.

President Biden did a huge disservice to both the integrity of the selection process in nominating justices to the high court and to the candidate that is ultimately chosen. The fact that Biden would enter into such a pact with Clyburn strongly suggests that these vacancies are for sale. It is worth noting that a former governor of Illinois (Rod Blagojevich) was impeached, convicted, and removed from office by a unanimous vote of the Illinois Senate (59 – 0) and spent considerable time in federal prison for “selling” the Senate seat that was vacated when Barack Obama was elected president. It matters not whether the bribe is denominated in dollars or votes.

The disservice to the potential nominee is that regardless of her qualifications and subsequent performance on the court she will have great difficulty shaking the less-than-complimentary label of the “affirmative-action justice.” The necessary implication is that but for being a Black woman she would never have been nominated to serve on the court. This fact alone can be expected to endogenously and adversely affect the quality of the candidates that are willing to accept the nomination.

President Biden could have avoided the entire controversy by simply allowing the selection process to move forward in a comprehensive and objective manner without preordaining the outcome. He may have ultimately chosen a Black woman as the nominee, at which time he could have explained to the American people his reasoning for doing so. The consensus view may well be that the nominee was likely to be a Black woman, the qualifications of the other candidates notwithstanding, but preserving the integrity of the process (or at least the appearance thereof) is paramount. What is more, the fact that both the race and gender of the nominee were determined by the pact with Clyburn does not attest to Biden’s unwavering commitment to diversity, but to his unbridled (and unprincipled) ambition to be elected president.

Virtually every decision involves tradeoffs of one kind or another and nominees for the high court are no exception. As an example, suppose that there are both objective qualifications and another attribute deemed desirable for Supreme Court justices. The objective qualifications likely include the reputation of the law school from which the nominee graduated, class ranking, quality of judicial decisions, infrequency of decisions being overturned, deference to the Constitution, legal scholarship reflected in law review articles and other writings and American Bar Association ratings. The other attribute may be whether the nominee contributes to diversity on the court, broadly defined. The diversity attribute is multidimensional in the sense that it may transcend race, gender and sexual orientation to include diversity of thought, socio-economic background and various life experiences.

Assume for the sake of argument that President Biden’s nominee ranks first in the pool of candidates in terms of objective qualifications. The overwhelming majority of the American people would likely concur that placing a Black woman on the high court would add an important dimension to the court’s deliberations that it does not have at the present time. In this particular case, there is no tradeoff between objective qualifications and diversity so the choice is seemingly without controversy, at least among fair-minded individuals.

Suppose now that Biden’s nominee ranks second in terms of objective qualifications and the individual that ranks first is a White (heterosexual) male. The majority of the American people would likely still concur with the president’s choice even though it entails a tradeoff between objective qualifications and diversity. This tradeoff (opportunity cost) represents the price that the American people would be willing to pay for increased diversity in terms of objective qualifications foregone. It is conceivable, although less likely, that the same sentiment would prevail if the President’s nominee ranked third in terms of objective qualifications.

The real controversy arises when the President’s nominee is ranked further down the list because the price that is being paid for diversity in terms of objective qualifications foregone is significantly higher. But note that the president has gone even further. His statement that he would nominate a Black woman to the Supreme Court full stop means that the President is willing to pay any price for increased diversity — a choice that only 23% of those surveyed in a recent ABC New-Ipsos poll agree with.

If we stipulate that diversity among the justices on the Supreme Court is an important consideration, then it necessarily follows that we must also be willing to recognize that the “optimal” nominee for the high court may not be independent of the current composition of the court, ceteris paribus. That is to say, putting a Black woman on the high court would be desirable provided that the price of doing so (as measured in terms of objective qualifications foregone) is not inordinately high. This suggests that the American people value diversity, but unlike the president they are not willing to pay any price, no matter how high, to achieve it.

Image: PxHere

For the “Abraham Accords” President Donald Trump should have received the Nobel Peace Award

“A Lot Has Changed For The Better In The Middle East…”

Cjack…Sentinel on the Gulf…February 2, 2022…

Palestinians: The Ungrateful Middle East Troublemakers—

In 1988 the late King Hussein severed ties with the West Bank leaving the Palestinians responsible for Palestine. Prior to that, in 1970 Hussein had expelled Palestinian fighters from Jordan after they had become a threat to Jordan’s security (an incident known as Black September). The big players in the Arab world took notice but kept their welfare support of the Palestinians for the sake of regional stability in the absence of viable channels for diplomacy to engage Israel on a “two state” initiative. Lamentably, the US did not have a well-defined foreign policy for the region because of worldwide anti-Israel sentiments. Even here in the US there were leftwing Jewish groups lambasting the US and Israel.

It took a much-maligned, anti-establishment, courageous American leader in the White House to finally bring Jews and Arabs to the table.

For the “Abraham Accords” President Donald Trump should have received the Nobel Peace Award. The visionary Orangeman from the Wharton School of Business ‘trumped’ the self-important, Harvard anti-American, closet Muslim Barack Hussein Obama.

Thanks, President Trump. “Shukran, alrayiys tramb.”

Freedom In Canada IS AWAKENING VIA ITS TRUCK INDUSTRY! WILL GOODNESS RETURN TO ITS FAMILIES?

 FEBRUARY 3, 2022 BY JOHN HINDERAKER IN CANADA at PowerLine:

TRUCKERS OF THE WORLD UNITE!

In recent years, we have seen a fundamental realignment in American, and Western, politics. After something like 200 years of purporting to represent the laboring classes, liberalism has been exposed. Most voters now understand that it is Republicans, and by inference conservatives, who speak for the working class. Democrats (liberals) are seen as the party of the would-be elites, who unfortunately aren’t elite at anything useful.

This is the context of Glenn Reynolds’ excellent New York Post column: “Truckers are starting a working-class revolution — and the left hates it.”

So we’re finally seeing a genuine, bottom-up, working-class revolution. In Canada, and increasingly in the United States, truckers and others are refusing to follow government orders, telling the powerful that, in a popular lefty formulation, if there’s no justice, there’s no peace.

Naturally, the left hates it.

For more than a century, lefties have talked about such a revolt. But if you really paid attention, the actual role of the working class in their working-class revolution was not to call the shots — it was to do what it was told by the “intellectual vanguard” of the left.

Which is a problem when your intellectual vanguard is–to be blunt–stupid.

A working-class revolution led by the working class is the left’s worst nightmare because the working class doesn’t want what the left wants. The working class wants jobs, a stable economy, safe streets, low inflation, schools that teach things and a conservative, non-adventurous foreign policy that won’t get a lot of working-class people killed. It’s not excited about gender fluidity, critical race theory, “modern monetary theory,” foreign adventures and defunding police.

That is the self-interest angle. Why should working people vote for politicians whose policies are antithetical to their interests? But the cultural divide may be equally important:

Worse yet, a huge part of the lefty self-image revolves around feeling superior to the working class and openly expressing disdain for it. One need spend only a few minutes tuning into left media like NPR, CNN or MSNBC to hear the disdain for working-class Americans, inhabitants of “flyover country,” people who live in the middle of nowhere.

Or, as Salena Zito rather brilliantly puts it, the middle of somewhere.

The Left’s response to the Canadian truckers’ protest has been laughable:

That’s why, even as they legitimize and valorize outright rioting and violence by leftist groups, lefties vilify every working-class protest movement, going back before the Tea Party. In Canada, the press even tried to pretend that the thousands of truckers driving to the capital city of Ottawa were actually Russian agents. When that failed, it fell back on its old standard, calling them fascists, Nazi sympathizers and white supremacists.

That is painfully dumb, and no one believes it. So why do leftists fall back on these pitiful tropes?

Now that truckers and other working-class people are pushing back against the laptop class’ nonsensical COVID restrictions, they’re a fringe, a minority, a bunch of white supremacists.

But they’re none of these things.

The “white supremacist” bit we can write right off. If white supremacy were a serious thing, leftists — like hate-crime hoaxer Jussie Smollett — wouldn’t have to invent it.

As for a “fringe minority,” as Trudeau called them, well, as Elon Musk noted in a tweet, if the Canadian government’s positions had substantial support, the truckers would have faced significant numbers of counterprotesters. But they did not. The government itself is the fringe minority, with its only support coming from the loyal sycophants of the media.

More at the link. Let’s finish with Glenn’s conclusion:

Once again, Biden’s main source of support is the press, which will always back a Democrat, especially against working-class opposition.

But as Twitter user Greg Price noted: “If truckers quit their jobs, society would immediately collapse. If politicians quit their jobs, the world would become a better place. We need truckers more than anybody else.”

Truckers have figured that out. Right now Justin Trudeau and Joe Biden are worrying about truckers coming out. They should really worry about truckers staying home.

Senator Joe Biden’s Political Career HAS ALWAYS BEEN SHADY! Delaware Barely Exists!

February 3, 2022

Just how frail is Joe Biden?

By Andrea Widburg at AMERICAN THINKER:

I must admit that I was very wrong about Biden. I thought he’d be out of office by June 2021 at the latest.  Instead, technically speaking, he’s still in office.  But looking at a recent, very disturbing little video of Joe Biden being gently led away from the podium by his caretaker/wife, Mrs. Joe Biden, one has to wonder what kind of an empty shell of a man is helming what long was the most powerful nation in the world.

Biden was pulled together enough to read a teleprompter speech in which he once again invoked the usefully dead Beau Biden to declare a new war on cancer.  (While I think it’s a real tragedy that Beau, a father, died young from cancer, I’ve said for a while that, given how much Joe uses Beau for political effect and to shield himself from criticism, if Beau hadn’t died, Biden would have had to kill him.)

Once again, Biden did that weird whispering thing into the microphone.  I don’t know what he thinks he’s doing, but it’s creepy:

Creepy does not mean Biden is too decrepit to handle the demands of his office.  However, there are signs that the Democrats are conning the American people into thinking there’s a sentient being in the Oval Office.

Before I play the next clip, I fully understand that being physically infirm does not mean that Biden is mentally incapable of handling the demands of his office.  However, when you look at how far Biden has declined physically since taking office (and he wasn’t in such great shape back then), and when you consider that his cognitive abilities have been kind of shabby, too, the following clip is disturbing:

Jill functions not as a wife, but as a nursemaid.

J.R. Dunn wrote yesterday about Nancy Pelosi’s plans for a severely curtailed State of the Union address.  His assumption is the same as mine: that the Democrats are not only terrified that the thrice-vaccinated Biden will get sick (making it even harder to sell the vaccine to reluctant Americans), but they also don’t want him in a crowded, busy room considering his diminishing mental state.

One of the recent little political kerfuffles about Biden was that, despite his having spent an inordinate number of weekends at one of his Delaware homes, the White House is refusing to release the visitors’ logs for those weekends.  One theory is that the visitors are nefarious people visiting to make sure that Biden, having been bought via the intermediary of his son Hunter, stays bought.