It’s Wednesday, January 23rd, 2019…but before we begin, here’s a must-see video we received from our middle son Mike which hits on the theme of the Monday edition:
As the video suggests, especially in this time of Fake News and computer-generated imagery, take everything you hear or view with a grain of salt… particularly if it’s promulgated by those determined to take down The Donald. Remember, this is coming from a source not enamored of Trump.
It’s as James wrote in Chapter 1, Verse 9 of his Epistle, “be swift to hear, slow to speak”. True wisdom is timeless.
Unfortunately, as this article from Medium.com forwarded by Mark Tapscott confirms, some among the staff at one of our favorite sources of commentary inexplicably forgot James’ admonition:
“National Review may have just irreparably damaged their reputation. Their response to Covington Catholic — where innocent kids were framed, doxed, and then threatened with mob violence — is a total mess.
National Review brands itself as the moral arbiter for Republicans. For instance, their editor in chief, Rich Lowry, wrote that the primary reasons for opposing Trump included his “character” and “temperament” while their senior editor, Jonah Goldberg, explained he would never vote for Trump because he is intent on “keeping a clear conscience.”
This makes their response to Covington Catholic especially shocking…”
“Irreparably damaged”? Only time will tell, but we doubt it. “Especially shocking”? Most definitely indeed! And their non-apology only somewhat less so, particularly as it didn’t come directly from either Lowry, Goldberg or Frankovich.
Sorry, NRO; when you write or forward it, you own it; which makes any requisite retraction and/or apology your personal responsibility as well.
Now, here’s The Gouge!
First up, courtesy of said NRO, John Fund reveals…
“Lots of people are wondering just why Democrats rejected President Trump’s plan to reopen government agencies even before he announced the plan. House speaker Nancy Pelosi called it a “non-starter,” and Senate Democratic whip Dick Durbin rejected it even though, as the Daily Caller noted, Trump’s proposal to protect immigrant “Dreamers” from being deported “included everything” that Durbin had asked for “just over two years ago.”
The Washington Post editorial page, normally one of Trump’s harshest critics, was puzzled by the Democratic intransigence:
To refuse even to talk until the government reopens does no favors to sidelined federal workers and contractors…A measure of statesmanship for a member of Congress now is the ability to accept some disappointments, and shrug off the inevitable attacks from purists, if it means rescuing the lives of thousands of deserving people living among us.
So why are Democrats so dug in? GOP congressman Peter King, who is frequently critical of Trump, says it’s because the issue of a border wall is secondary to their hatred of Trump. “The fear is, among the Democratic leadership, if they make any agreement with President Trump, it’s like compromising with the devil,” he told New York radio station AM970.
In other words, when Democrats now hear talk of “border security,” they think only of Trump and want to make sure that their base won’t see them as surrendering to him in any way.Forget the factthat Democrats have voted for a border barrier in the past and that the $5.7 billion Trump wants is meant only for stretches that U.S. Border Patrol officials have identified as needing barriers to interdict illegal entrants and drugs.
…Polls show that President Trump has been hurt more politically than the Democrats by the government shutdown, but I suspect the longer it drags on, with Democrats unwilling to even negotiate seriously about Trump’s proposal, the worse the Left will look to voters…”
Which, if it truly takes that long, only causes us to further question the judgement of many American voters.
In a related item also courtesy of NRO, Conrad Black offers his blueprint for…
“…It is indicative of the supreme insolence of the Democrats — not just the leadership, but their whole congressional delegation — that they thought Speaker Pelosi, House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff, and the rest could disinvite the president from the State of the Union address in the Capitol and then embark on a week’s official tourism and nuisance-affliction on the American forces in Afghanistan and Iraq. This was the same contagion of impertinence that caused all 238 Democratic members of the House of Representatives to ignore a presidential invitation to lunch at the White House. The idea that the House speaker imagined that this was the time for her to go on a congressional junket to the Middle East must fill a great many reasonably nonpartisan Americans with the disturbing notion that the unofficial leader of the Democratic party, and second in line after the vice president to be president, is completely foolish and totally unqualified for high national office.
It is puzzling to consider what the source is of the Democratic leadership’s mad egotism. They were certain Hillary Clinton would be elected president. They appeared to believe that this president would be impeached and convicted and removed, largely on the basis of “evidence” furnished by a work of malicious fiction commissioned and paid for by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. They imagine that they can perpetuate the regime of hundreds of thousands of illiterate peasants pouring illegally into the United States annually, along with a Mississippi River of lethal drugs and many violent gang member-outlaws; that the great cities of the country will all order their police forces to ignore federal immigration laws; and that federal census-takers carrying out their constitutional duty to establish the number of Americans in each state to determine their congressional and Electoral College delegations can be prohibited from asking the nationality of American residents. A reasonable person, who recognizes the historical attainments of the Democratic party and has often been a Democratic supporter, must ask what unutterable lunacy of cynicism, appetite, rabid partisanship, sclerosis, and good old-fashioned donkey stupidity must be informing the antics of that party’s leaders now.
…President Trump is the repository of several unfortunate traits. But he is the president, and a very successful one.Most of his Democratic opponents are harpies, hacks, and borderline subversives.He must win this battle to reestablish a border for the United States, as he has moved to reduce American dependence on foreign oil, eliminate the exploitation of the United States by foreign exporters, reassert nuclear nonproliferation, recalibrate the alliance system, and withdraw from self-punitive climate agreements and overexposed foreign commitments. The American people, not typecasting studios, choose the president of the United States. This president must win this battle with congressional Democrats over the border security of the United States.The implications of a Pelosi-Schumer victory do not bear thinking about.“
Truer words were never written.
Next up, writing at his Morning Jolt, Jim Geraghty tells you…
Other, than of course, what you likely already knew: the fact she’s a…
…politically and in every other sense of the word.
Sorry, but if you can provide us a better definition of a woman who’d sleep with a significantly older, unattractive married man purely for the purpose of political and pecuniary profit, we’d love to hear it.
Since we’re on the subject of sluts, here’s another reason SNL isn’t nearly as funny as it once was:
“…Before waiting for all the evidence and witness testimony, a Democratic congressman suggested there’s only one solution: Ban the apparel.
Social media users asked if he was serious. He gave no indication he wasn’t.
“The conduct we saw in this video is beyond appalling, but it didn’t happen in a vacuum,” Yarmuth wrote in another tweet. “This is a direct result of the racist hatred displayed daily by the President of the United States who, sadly, some mistake for a role model.”…”
Upon further reflection, we realized Yarmuth came to the right conclusion; he was just off by one…
…President!
And in the Environmental Moment, forwarded today by Jeff Foutch, Watts Up relates She Who Knows So Much Which Just Isn’t So is now a prophet of…
…thus joining other anthropogenic global warming doomsayers who’ve previously given the world an expiration date, including but not limited to Al Gore, the United Nitwits, and the Prince of Wales; and, not to be dissuaded when his previous prediction failed to unfold, Al Gore yet again.
…and the U.N. have both revised their timelines for environmental Armageddon.
But as with every cloud, even this one has a silver lining: as Speed Mach observed, if AOC’s correct in her timing, at least we’ll only have to endure her drivel for twelve more years!
In a related item also courtesy of Jeff Foutch, France24 highlights how deep the elites commitment to combatting “climate change” actually runs…which ain’t very:
“Committed to Improving the State of the World”: THEIR world…not OURS!
Speaking of our favorite Puerto Rican prognosticator, She Who Knows So Much Which Just Isn’t So is the subject of this series of memes sent by G. Trevor:
Which brings us, appropriately enough, to The Lighter Side:
Finally, we’ll call it a wrap with News of the TRULY Bizarre, as FOX News informs us a…
A female EVA Air flight attendant accused a passenger of sexual harassment and has threatened to sue the man after she was allegedly forced to undress him and wipe his behind after he used the bathroom.
The unnamed flight attendant from the Taiwanese airline was working on a flight from Los Angeles to Taipei on Jan. 19 when the alleged incident happened. According to Focus Taiwan, the woman said an overweight man in a wheelchair needed assistance to use the restroom two hours into the nearly 12 hour flight.
The man allegedly asked several female flight attendants – the women claim the airline did not have male flight staff on board – to help him take off his pants and underwear and assist him in the bathroom, claiming he was unable to do so himself because of his disability.“I felt that as a flight attendant, removing a passenger’s underwear was beyond the scope of my responsibilities,” said the deputy cabin service head to Focus Taiwan.
Despite their apprehension, three crew members said they assisted the passenger in disrobing as he needed to use the bathroom. The crew said they tried to keep the door closed while he was inside, but he demanded it remain open as “he couldn’t breathe” if it was closed.(More like he couldn’t fit!) The female staff also said the man exposed his genitals to them. (From the photo above,only if he stood on his head!)
After the man finished using the restroom, the women claim the male passenger refused to leave the restroom until one of them helped wipe him. The crew members initially refused, Focus Taiwain reported, but one female flight attendant eventually assisted the man when he would not leave the restroom. The cabin director who wiped the man’s behind claimed the passenger began to moan and said “deeper” while she was assisting him. (At which point she should have wiped his face!)
The flight attendant, with help from the Taoyuan Flight Attendants Union, has requested EVA Air sue the passenger over the alleged incident. According to the publication, the passenger was involved in another incident on May 2018 with EVA Air when he defecated in his underwear during the flight. The union is also requesting EVA protect its staff by making sure disabled passengers have a caretaker and hire male flight staff.
EVA did not immediately respond to Fox News’ request for comment, but issued a press statement saying flight staff is allowed to refuse passenger’s request if they are uncomfortable. The airline also said male staff were on the flight and they assisted with the disabled passenger.
However, the company also said they would offer assistance to the union to sue the passenger, if needed.
Inquiring minds want to know what makes the union think a male flight attendant would want to wipe some fat guy’s backside anymore than a female?!?
And given this disgusting blob’s history, were we running EVA, we’d ban him from future flights. And if such a ban violated some international air accord, were he again to frequent our friendly skies, we’d advise our flight attendants to greet him thusly at the cabin door:
Loading ...
You must be logged in to post a comment.