westernjournal--2020-02-20--School District Sued for Instructing Staff To Lie to Parents About ‘Trans’ Kids

As the transgender agenda continues to be pushed into the lives of children across the United States , some parents are pushing back .
Fourteen Wisconsin parents are suing the Madison Metropolitan School District for a policy they say not only allows children to “ socially transition to a different gender identity at school without parental notice or consent ” and but also encourages teachers to lie to parents about that .
“ These policies violate Plaintiffs ’ rights as parents , ” says the lawsuit , filed Tuesday on behalf of the parents by the Wisconsin Institute for Law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The MMSD policy allows children of any age to change their gender identity and instructs teachers and staff to conceal such changes from parents if they deem it appropriate to do so .
“ Madison schools have adopted policies that violate constitutionally recognized parental rights , ” Rick Esenberg , WILL ’ s president and general counsel , said in a statement .
“ A public school district should not , and can not , make decisions reserved for parents.
” TRENDING : Even Gutfeld Groans at Epic Moment Jesse Watters Rips @ @ @ @ @ @ @ TV The law institute is representing eight families in the school district .
Lawsuit Against MMSD by The Western Journal on Scribd The challenged policy , implemented in 2018 , allows children to use a different name or gender identity without the notification of their legal guardians .
Additionally , the school district encourages its employees to use the child ’ s real name in front of their families with the intent to deceive them .
“ Students identified as transgender , non-binary , and gender-expansive may have not come out to their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ MMSD says in its “ Inclusive Classroom ” guide .
“ Disclosing a student ’ s personal information such as gender identity or sexual orientation can pose imminent safety risks , such as losing family support and housing .
“ All staff correspondence and communication to families in regard to students shall reflect the name and gender documented in [ the district ’ s database ] unless the student has specifically given permission to do otherwise .
“ This might involve using the student ’ s affirmed name and pronouns in the school @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pronouns with family.
” District employees are not permitted to discuss the possibility of gender dysphoria with parents without the child ’ s consent , regardless of the age of the minor .
RELATED : Left-Wing Activists Try To Take Away 700 Scholarships from Children Gender dysphoria is a recognized mental illness that can be accompanied by psychological distress and requires treatment from a mental health professional .
This school policy prevents parents from seeking urgent support for the child and denies them the right to make major health decisions for them .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ raise their children in accordance with their beliefs .
MMSD spokesman Tim LeMonds told WMTV-TV in Madison on Tuesday morning that the district had not yet been served with the lawsuit .
However , he said , “ MMSD prioritizes working in collaboration with families to support our students , and it is always our preferred method of support .
MMSD must also prioritize the safety and well-being of every individual student who walks through its doors each day.
” LeMonds said the district stands by its policies in support of transgender students @ @ @ @ @ @ @ argue that their right to be informed about their children ’ s care is being violated .
“ These issues are of fundamental importance and their improper handling could have long-lasting negative ramifications on a child ’ s physical , mental , and spiritual well-being , ” the lawsuit says .
The parents are right : Schools cross a line when they blatantly deceive families about their children ’ s gender and mental health issues .
There can be no “ collaboration ” with families if they are not informed about what is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the most important and influential people in a child ’ s life and never should be replaced by teachers or school officials .
Families ’ rights to protect their kids should not disappear on the whim of a 5-year-old who decides to change his gender .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

As the transgender agenda continues to be pushed into the lives of children across the United States, some parents are pushing back.
Fourteen Wisconsin parents are suing the Madison Metropolitan School District for a policy they say not only allows children to “socially transition to a different gender identity at school without parental notice or consent” and but also encourages teachers to lie to parents about that.
“These policies violate Plaintiffs’ rights as parents,” says the lawsuit, filed Tuesday on behalf of the parents by the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty in Dane County Circuit Court.
The MMSD policy allows children of any age to change their gender identity and instructs teachers and staff to conceal such changes from parents if they deem it appropriate to do so.
“Madison schools have adopted policies that violate constitutionally recognized parental rights,” Rick Esenberg, WILL’s president and general counsel, said in a statement. “A public school district should not, and cannot, make decisions reserved for parents.”
The law institute is representing eight families in the school district.
Lawsuit Against MMSD by The Western Journal on Scribd
The challenged policy, implemented in 2018, allows children to use a different name or gender identity without the notification of their legal guardians.
Should parents be informed if their child wants to change his or her name and gender? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 100% (71 Votes) No: 0% (0 Votes)
Additionally, the school district encourages its employees to use the child’s real name in front of their families with the intent to deceive them.
“Students identified as transgender, non-binary, and gender-expansive may have not come out to their families regarding their gender identity,” MMSD says in its “Inclusive Classroom” guide. “Disclosing a student’s personal information such as gender identity or sexual orientation can pose imminent safety risks, such as losing family support and housing.
“All staff correspondence and communication to families in regard to students shall reflect the name and gender documented in [the district’s database] unless the student has specifically given permission to do otherwise.
“This might involve using the student’s affirmed name and pronouns in the school setting, and their legal name and pronouns with family.”
District employees are not permitted to discuss the possibility of gender dysphoria with parents without the child’s consent, regardless of the age of the minor.
Gender dysphoria is a recognized mental illness that can be accompanied by psychological distress and requires treatment from a mental health professional.
This school policy prevents parents from seeking urgent support for the child and denies them the right to make major health decisions for them.
It also denies parents the right to raise their children in accordance with their beliefs.
MMSD spokesman Tim LeMonds told WMTV-TV in Madison on Tuesday morning that the district had not yet been served with the lawsuit.
However, he said, “MMSD prioritizes working in collaboration with families to support our students, and it is always our preferred method of support. MMSD must also prioritize the safety and well-being of every individual student who walks through its doors each day.”
LeMonds said the district stands by its policies in support of transgender students.
In the lawsuit, the parents argue that their right to be informed about their children’s care is being violated.
“These issues are of fundamental importance and their improper handling could have long-lasting negative ramifications on a child’s physical, mental, and spiritual well-being,” the lawsuit says.
The parents are right: Schools cross a line when they blatantly deceive families about their children’s gender and mental health issues.
There can be no “collaboration” with families if they are not informed about what is happening during school hours.
Parents are the most important and influential people in a child’s life and never should be replaced by teachers or school officials.
Families’ rights to protect their kids should not disappear on the whim of a 5-year-old who decides to change his gender.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-20--88-Year-Old Beloved Crossing Guard Dies Saving Lives of Two Children

An 88-year-old retired U.S. Coast Guard veteran who worked as a school crossing guard died Tuesday while protecting two children from an oncoming speeding vehicle .
For the past five years , Bob Nill has been the crossing guard near Christ the King Parish School in Kansas City , Kansas .
He died after being hit by a car early Tuesday while working at his crossing duty at the school .
According to WDAF-TV , witnesses told police that Nill pushed two children out of the way of the oncoming vehicle before he was struck and killed .
TRENDING : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Him with Outright Lie About Warren Comment The school community is left saddened and grateful that Nill had been so vigilant .
The children liked Nill , giving him gifts on Valentine ’ s Day just last week , Christ the King Parish School principal Cathy Fithian said .
“ We teach our students at Christ the King to know that we are here to protect them and they need to listen , ” Fithian told The Kansas City Star .
“ We ’ re just so blessed that he was there.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and went on to a career in banking , his family told WDAF .
After retirement , he was not content to simply sit around .
Nill enjoyed staying busy , and decided to become a crossing guard to help children and stay active .
RELATED : 5-Year-Old Carries Sister Out of Burning Home Before Going Back To Help Save 7 Family Members “ This was something I think he felt like he could help children and help himself feel good about what he was doing , ” Randy Nill , Bob ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ took his job seriously , enough so to sacrifice his own life to ensure child safety .
“ What my Uncle Bob did for just getting little kids across the street seemed probably trivial to some people , but for him , it was a really important job , and now , we really know how important it was .
He maybe saved some lives , ” Randy Nill said .
Kansas City Mayor David Alvey released a statement about Nill ’ s death , offering condolences to Nill ’ s family and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my deepest sympathies to the family of the crossing guard , and I offer our gratitude on behalf of our residents for his selfless sacrifice in protecting our children , ” Alvey said .
“ The Unified Government staff extends their heartfelt thoughts and prayers to the employee ’ s family , friends , and those affected by this tragedy.
” WDAF reported the driver of the vehicle did remain at the scene and was taken to the hospital .
Officers are investigating the situation , and it was unclear if the driver @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

An 88-year-old retired U.S. Coast Guard veteran who worked as a school crossing guard died Tuesday while protecting two children from an oncoming speeding vehicle.
For the past five years, Bob Nill has been the crossing guard near Christ the King Parish School in Kansas City, Kansas.
He died after being hit by a car early Tuesday while working at his crossing duty at the school.
According to WDAF-TV, witnesses told police that Nill pushed two children out of the way of the oncoming vehicle before he was struck and killed.
HERO: An 88-year-old school crossing guard saw a speeding car approaching and pushed two children out of the way in the crosswalk before he was struck and killed. Rest in peace, sir. https://t.co/pCF640WGDB — FOX 35 Orlando (@fox35orlando) February 19, 2020
The school community is left saddened and grateful that Nill had been so vigilant.
The children liked Nill, giving him gifts on Valentine’s Day just last week, Christ the King Parish School principal Cathy Fithian said.
“We teach our students at Christ the King to know that we are here to protect them and they need to listen,” Fithian told The Kansas City Star.
“We’re just so blessed that he was there.”
Nill served in the U.S. Coast Guard and went on to a career in banking, his family told WDAF.
After retirement, he was not content to simply sit around.
Nill enjoyed staying busy, and decided to become a crossing guard to help children and stay active.
“This was something I think he felt like he could help children and help himself feel good about what he was doing,” Randy Nill, Bob’s nephew, told WDAF.
Nill took his job seriously, enough so to sacrifice his own life to ensure child safety.
“What my Uncle Bob did for just getting little kids across the street seemed probably trivial to some people, but for him, it was a really important job, and now, we really know how important it was. He maybe saved some lives,” Randy Nill said.
Kansas City Mayor David Alvey released a statement about Nill’s death, offering condolences to Nill’s family and his greater community.
“I offer my deepest sympathies to the family of the crossing guard, and I offer our gratitude on behalf of our residents for his selfless sacrifice in protecting our children,” Alvey said.
“The Unified Government staff extends their heartfelt thoughts and prayers to the employee’s family, friends, and those affected by this tragedy.”
WDAF reported the driver of the vehicle did remain at the scene and was taken to the hospital.
Officers are investigating the situation, and it was unclear if the driver will face charges.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-20--Socialism or Freedom? GOP Rep Destroys Dems Over 2020’s Most ‘Clear Choice’

A Republican member of Congress came down hard Wednesday on Democrats who tried for months to remove President Donald Trump from office , adding that the 2020 election presents a “ clear choice ” between socialism and freedom .
Rep. Debbie Lesko of Arizona has been one of the most impassioned congressional voices against the impeachment effort , which ended with Trump ’ s acquittal in the Senate on charges of “ abuse of power ” and “ obstruction of Congress.
” In an interview with The Western Journal at Trump ’ s “ Keep America Great ” rally in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” badly on impeachment .
“ It backfired on the Democrats , ” she said of the impeachment effort .
“ They miscalculated this.
” According to the RealClearPolitics polling average , after dipping to 41.6 percent in late October , Trump ’ s approval rating has steadily increased to 46 percent as of Wednesday .
TRENDING : Dean Cain Threatens Lawsuit After Media Smears Him with Outright Lie About Warren Comment Likewise , his disapproval rating fell from 55 percent to 50.9 percent over that same period of time .
“ That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , rigged impeachment process in the history of the United States , and they still couldn ’ t take him out , ” Lesko added .
“ And so President Trump is stronger , and he ’ s going to re-win in 2020.
” In her interview with The Western Journal , Lesko also said that in the 2020 election , Americans will be faced with a clear choice between whether they want freedom or socialism .
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders , a self-described democratic socialist , is currently seen as the front-runner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s at 27.8 percent support in the RealClearPolitics national polling average , 10 points ahead of his closest competitor , former Vice President Joe Biden .
Sanders advocates for such policies as eliminating private health insurance , forgiving all federal student loan debt and abolishing U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement .
“ It ’ s a clear choice ” in 2020 , Lesko said .
“ You either want socialism , or you want freedom , and I ’ ll take freedom any day of the week.
” According to a recent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Americans agree .
RELATED : Matt Gaetz Hammers Joy Behar Over 'Death of the Political Left ' in His First Seconds on 'The View' Sixty-seven percent of registered voters surveyed said they would have “ some reservations ” ( 21 percent ) or would be “ very uncomfortable ” ( 46 percent ) with a “ socialist ” presidential candidate .
Seven percent said they would be “ enthusiastic ” with a “ socialist ” candidate , and 21 percent said they would be “ comfortable ” with one .
At the rally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lesko ’ s regarding the Democrats ’ priorities .
“ Impeachment has been one of the funniest pieces of news that I ’ ve seen in a long time , ” rally attendee P.J.
, who said he was a Marine Corps combat veteran , told The Western Journal .
“ It ’ s just been really funny to see them try.
” Democrats “ attacking every good thing he does , I think it motivated me to get more involved , ” added P.J.
, who joined Arizona State University ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Another Trump supporter , Patrick Salazar , noted that he hasn ’ t always been a reliably Republican voter , having cast his ballot for then-Massachusetts Gov .
Michael Dukakis in 1988 and independent businessman Ross Perot in 1992 .
But he said he was having none of the socialist tendencies seen in today ’ s Democratic Party , even going so far to refer to Sanders as “ Bolshevik Bernie.
” Lesko , meanwhile , summed up the attitude at the rally in one sentence : “ Arizona loves President Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

A Republican member of Congress came down hard Wednesday on Democrats who tried for months to remove President Donald Trump from office, adding that the 2020 election presents a “clear choice” between socialism and freedom.
Rep. Debbie Lesko of Arizona has been one of the most impassioned congressional voices against the impeachment effort, which ended with Trump’s acquittal in the Senate on charges of “abuse of power” and “obstruction of Congress.”
In an interview with The Western Journal at Trump’s “Keep America Great” rally in Phoenix, Lesko said Democrats “miscalculated” badly on impeachment.
“It backfired on the Democrats,” she said of the impeachment effort. “They miscalculated this.”
According to the RealClearPolitics polling average, after dipping to 41.6 percent in late October, Trump’s approval rating has steadily increased to 46 percent as of Wednesday.
Likewise, his disapproval rating fell from 55 percent to 50.9 percent over that same period of time.
“That was the most corrupt, politically biased, rigged impeachment process in the history of the United States, and they still couldn’t take him out,” Lesko added.
“And so President Trump is stronger, and he’s going to re-win in 2020.”
In her interview with The Western Journal, Lesko also said that in the 2020 election, Americans will be faced with a clear choice between whether they want freedom or socialism.
Do you think President Trump will win re-election in 2020? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 99% (331 Votes) No: 1% (2 Votes)
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, a self-described democratic socialist, is currently seen as the front-runner in the Democratic primary race.
He’s at 27.8 percent support in the RealClearPolitics national polling average, 10 points ahead of his closest competitor, former Vice President Joe Biden.
Sanders advocates for such policies as eliminating private health insurance, forgiving all federal student loan debt and abolishing U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement.
“It’s a clear choice” in 2020, Lesko said. “You either want socialism, or you want freedom, and I’ll take freedom any day of the week.”
According to a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, many Americans agree.
Sixty-seven percent of registered voters surveyed said they would have “some reservations” (21 percent) or would be “very uncomfortable” (46 percent) with a “socialist” presidential candidate.
Seven percent said they would be “enthusiastic” with a “socialist” candidate, and 21 percent said they would be “comfortable” with one.
At the rally, Trump supporters expressed similar sentiments to Lesko’s regarding the Democrats’ priorities.
“Impeachment has been one of the funniest pieces of news that I’ve seen in a long time,” rally attendee P.J., who said he was a Marine Corps combat veteran, told The Western Journal. “It’s just been really funny to see them try.”
Democrats “attacking every good thing he does, I think it motivated me to get more involved,” added P.J., who joined Arizona State University’s chapter of the Students for Trump organization.
Another Trump supporter, Patrick Salazar, noted that he hasn’t always been a reliably Republican voter, having cast his ballot for then-Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis in 1988 and independent businessman Ross Perot in 1992.
But he said he was having none of the socialist tendencies seen in today’s Democratic Party, even going so far to refer to Sanders as “Bolshevik Bernie.”
Lesko, meanwhile, summed up the attitude at the rally in one sentence: “Arizona loves President Trump, and President Trump loves Arizona.”
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-20--NFL Owners and Players Closing In On Deal for Lengthened Regular Season, Expanded Playoff Format

The NFL ’ s labor committee met Thursday morning before presenting to the owners the current state of ongoing negotiations with the players ’ union on a new labor agreement .
With the league eager to reach a collective bargaining agreement with the players in the next few weeks — the current deal runs out in March 2021 — team representatives were summoned to New York to discuss the NFL ’ s proposal .
Among the items in that proposal , according to several people familiar with the negotiations but speaking anonymously because they are not authorized to release such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which always has been a stumbling block in talks with the NFL Players Association .
More roster spots per team would be a must for the players .
TRENDING : Dean Cain Threatens Lawsuit After Media Smears Him with Outright Lie About Warren Comment — A higher share of revenues for the players ; the current number is 47 percent .
— Even an expansion of the playoffs , something the NFL has been seeking for years .
Indeed , Commissioner Roger Goodell suggested back in 2015 that increasing the postseason field to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the works .
The owners could unilaterally add a wild-card team in the AFC and the NFC , but are willing to make such a move part of a new CBA .
Also being considered is a second bye week to go with a 17th game , although almost certainly not for the 2020 season .
The expansion of the playoffs easily could occur this year , however .
The current CBA was reached in 2011 after a 4-1/2 month lockout of the players .
Agreeing to a new one before the league @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 18 could lead to several provisions being activated for the upcoming season .
A 17th game would preferably be played at neutral sites , which one of the people familiar with the talks said could include non-NFL U.S. venues as well as Europe , Mexico and Brazil .
The Associated Press contributed to this report .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

The NFL’s labor committee met Thursday morning before presenting to the owners the current state of ongoing negotiations with the players’ union on a new labor agreement.
With the league eager to reach a collective bargaining agreement with the players in the next few weeks — the current deal runs out in March 2021 — team representatives were summoned to New York to discuss the NFL’s proposal.
Among the items in that proposal, according to several people familiar with the negotiations but speaking anonymously because they are not authorized to release such information:
— A 17-game schedule, which always has been a stumbling block in talks with the NFL Players Association. More roster spots per team would be a must for the players.
— A reduction of the preseason.
— A higher share of revenues for the players; the current number is 47 percent.
— Even an expansion of the playoffs, something the NFL has been seeking for years.
Indeed, Commissioner Roger Goodell suggested back in 2015 that increasing the postseason field to seven teams in each conference was in the works.
Do you think the NFL should make its season longer? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 35% (59 Votes) No: 65% (110 Votes)
The owners could unilaterally add a wild-card team in the AFC and the NFC, but are willing to make such a move part of a new CBA.
Also being considered is a second bye week to go with a 17th game, although almost certainly not for the 2020 season.
The expansion of the playoffs easily could occur this year, however.
The current CBA was reached in 2011 after a 4-1/2 month lockout of the players.
Today: NFL owners vote to accept terms of the proposed CBA. Tomorrow: 32 player reps could vote on the same deal. If it passes by a 2/3 majority, it’d go to the players for a final vote, though that’d only require a simple majority. Closer and closer to 10 years of labor peace. — Tom Pelissero (@TomPelissero) February 20, 2020
Agreeing to a new one before the league’s business year begins on March 18 could lead to several provisions being activated for the upcoming season.
Seems like a savvily worded statement from #NFL in that players would be portrayed as bad guys if they rejected the deal. Maybe it doesn’t matter, as it has seemed for a long time that a deal would get done. pic.twitter.com/31T1vd9Sb6 — Mike Sando (@SandoNFL) February 20, 2020
A 17th game would preferably be played at neutral sites, which one of the people familiar with the talks said could include non-NFL U.S. venues as well as Europe, Mexico and Brazil.
The Western Journal has reviewed this Associated Press story and may have altered it prior to publication to ensure that it meets our editorial standards.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-20--Ralph Benko: Bloomberg Shows That Capitalism Is Cool, Bernie Proves Socialism Lame

Most of the Democratic contenders , following Bernie Sanders ’ lead , talk as if socialism is cool and capitalism is lame .
This is a mere fantasy of the Twitterverse .
And while even Mike Bloomberg talks the progressive talk , he giant-steps the capitalist walk .
As well he should .
Capitalism is great politics .
As William Saletan writing at the left-of-center Slate acknowledges : “ If you hang out with young progressives , you might be under the impression that socialism is popular .
It is , but only on the left .
In the latest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ liberals and Democrats viewed socialism favorably , but Americans as a whole rejected it , 57 percent to 39 percent .
In the same poll , respondents viewed capitalism favorably , 60 percent to 35 percent .
… Polls taken in May by the Pew Research Center , in March for the libertarian Cato Institute , and in December for Fox News yielded similar results .
In every survey , socialism scores well among progressives but gets trounced , among voters as a whole , in a showdown with capitalism.
” Still , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that , in the immortal words of AOC , we , too , get used to slaying lewks .
Well underway !
In the Nov. 4 issue of The New Yorker , reporter Carina Chocano delightfully inventories the makeover of capitalism now in process : TRENDING : Dean Cain Threatens Lawsuit After Media Smears Him with Outright Lie About Warren Comment “ Recently , Alan Murray , the president of Fortune , wrote about a ‘ fundamental and profound ’ change in the way that American C.E.O.s speak about their roles .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when Bill Gates introduced the idea of ‘ creative capitalism ’ at Davos .
During the next few years , Murray wrote , ‘ Harvard Business School professor Michael Porter began pushing what he called “ shared value ” capitalism , and Whole Foods cofounder John Mackey propounded “ conscious capitalism.
” Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff wrote a book on “ compassionate capitalism ” ; Lynn Forester de Rothschild , CEO of family investment company E.L. Rothschild , started organizing for “ inclusive capitalism ” ; and the free-enterprise-championing Conference Board research group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” ‘ Lofton told me , ‘ We ’ ve heard all sorts of new arguments for “ compassionate capitalism ” and “ spiritual capitalism , ” because we ’ re trying to explain how capitalism can still be a moral good.
’ “ Batiz ’ s guide to navigating contemporary capitalism is her mentor , Gay Hendricks , who is a psychologist , a writer , and a personal-growth guru .
About two decades ago , Hendricks and his colleague Kate Ludeman published a book called ‘ The Corporate Mystic , ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many tech luminaries draw on mystical principles .
‘ Basically , the premise of the book is that you ’ ll find more actual spiritual principles being practiced in a corporation oftentimes than you will in a monastery , ’ Hendricks told me.
” George Gilder , author of the million-selling bible of Reaganomics , Wealth and Poverty , and the most-quoted living author by President Reagan , identifies the essence of capitalism as that of discovery , not of incentive .
Writing in his Daily Prophecy newsletter : “ I share my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Knowledge and Power .
“ You see , ‘ many free market advocates view capitalism as a system as dominated by incentives , with economic agents treated as inhabitants of a Skinner box driven by rewards and punishments.
’ “ But , in fact , capitalism is an information and learning system governed by information as entrepreneurial surprise .
“ Wealth is knowledge ; growth is learning ; money is real and reflects the abiding scarcity of time.
” We celebrate this shift in business leaders ’ ways to talk about capitalism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exaltation of human creativity .
Socialists vilify capitalism .
But theirs is a false consciousness .
As the UK ’ s The Spectator wrote toward the beginning of this decade : RELATED : Op-Ed : For Democrats Lamenting Socialism , It 's About Power - Not Principle “ In 1990 , the UN announced Millennium Development Goals , the first of which was to halve the number of people in extreme poverty by 2015 .
It emerged this year that the target was met in 2008 .
Yet the achievement did not merit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was not achieved by any government scheme but by the pace of global capitalism .
Buying cheap plastic toys made in China really is helping to make poverty history .
And global inequality ?
This , too , is lower now than any point in modern times .
Globalisation means the world ’ s not just getting richer , but fairer too.
” Working to eradicate poverty was “ not achieved by any government scheme but by the pace of global capitalism.
” And , where the principles of capitalism have been honored @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2017 , not so much ) it ’ s gotten even better since then .
We ’ re OK with that .
That said , we at The Capitalist League ( whose handbook is The Capitalist Manifesto , available from Amazon and by e-book at the League ’ s online shop ) prefer , simply : “ capitalist.
” And a word to our socialist adversaries ?
The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Most of the Democratic contenders, following Bernie Sanders’ lead, talk as if socialism is cool and capitalism is lame. This is a mere fantasy of the Twitterverse. And while even Mike Bloomberg talks the progressive talk, he giant-steps the capitalist walk. As well he should. Capitalism is great politics.
As William Saletan writing at the left-of-center Slate acknowledges:
“If you hang out with young progressives, you might be under the impression that socialism is popular. It is, but only on the left. In the latest Gallup poll, taken in September, liberals and Democrats viewed socialism favorably, but Americans as a whole rejected it, 57 percent to 39 percent. In the same poll, respondents viewed capitalism favorably, 60 percent to 35 percent. … Polls taken in May by the Pew Research Center, in March for the libertarian Cato Institute, and in December for Fox News yielded similar results. In every survey, socialism scores well among progressives but gets trounced, among voters as a whole, in a showdown with capitalism.”
Still, we capitalists are upping our style so that, in the immortal words of AOC, we, too, get used to slaying lewks. Well underway!
In the Nov. 4 issue of The New Yorker, reporter Carina Chocano delightfully inventories the makeover of capitalism now in process:
“Recently, Alan Murray, the president of Fortune, wrote about a ‘fundamental and profound’ change in the way that American C.E.O.s speak about their roles. He first noticed the shift in 2008, when Bill Gates introduced the idea of ‘creative capitalism’ at Davos. During the next few years, Murray wrote, ‘Harvard Business School professor Michael Porter began pushing what he called “shared value” capitalism, and Whole Foods cofounder John Mackey propounded “conscious capitalism.” Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff wrote a book on “compassionate capitalism”; Lynn Forester de Rothschild, CEO of family investment company E.L. Rothschild, started organizing for “inclusive capitalism”; and the free-enterprise-championing Conference Board research group sounded a call for “sustaining capitalism.”‘ Lofton told me, ‘We’ve heard all sorts of new arguments for “compassionate capitalism” and “spiritual capitalism,” because we’re trying to explain how capitalism can still be a moral good.’
“Batiz’s guide to navigating contemporary capitalism is her mentor, Gay Hendricks, who is a psychologist, a writer, and a personal-growth guru. About two decades ago, Hendricks and his colleague Kate Ludeman published a book called ‘The Corporate Mystic,’ inspired by Hendricks’s observation that many tech luminaries draw on mystical principles. ‘Basically, the premise of the book is that you’ll find more actual spiritual principles being practiced in a corporation oftentimes than you will in a monastery,’ Hendricks told me.”
George Gilder, author of the million-selling bible of Reaganomics, Wealth and Poverty, and the most-quoted living author by President Reagan, identifies the essence of capitalism as that of discovery, not of incentive. Writing in his Daily Prophecy newsletter:
“I share my paradigm-shifting theory of capitalism in my book, Knowledge and Power.
“You see, ‘many free market advocates view capitalism as a system as dominated by incentives, with economic agents treated as inhabitants of a Skinner box driven by rewards and punishments.’
“But, in fact, capitalism is an information and learning system governed by information as entrepreneurial surprise.
“Wealth is knowledge; growth is learning; money is real and reflects the abiding scarcity of time.”
We celebrate this shift in business leaders’ ways to talk about capitalism up from what sounds like utilitarianism toward exaltation of human creativity.
Socialists vilify capitalism. But theirs is a false consciousness. As the UK’s The Spectator wrote toward the beginning of this decade:
“In 1990, the UN announced Millennium Development Goals, the first of which was to halve the number of people in extreme poverty by 2015. It emerged this year that the target was met in 2008. Yet the achievement did not merit an official announcement, presumably because it was not achieved by any government scheme but by the pace of global capitalism. Buying cheap plastic toys made in China really is helping to make poverty history. And global inequality? This, too, is lower now than any point in modern times. Globalisation means the world’s not just getting richer, but fairer too.”
Working to eradicate poverty was “not achieved by any government scheme but by the pace of global capitalism.” And, where the principles of capitalism have been honored (in the USA from 2012 to 2017, not so much) it’s gotten even better since then.
Call us “Corporate Mystics.”
We’re OK with that.
That said, we at The Capitalist League (whose handbook is The Capitalist Manifesto, available from Amazon and by e-book at the League’s online shop) prefer, simply: “capitalist.”
And a word to our socialist adversaries?
Capitalism is hip. Socialism is lame.
Watch us slay lewks.
The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website. If you are interested in contributing an Op-Ed to The Western Journal, you can learn about our submission guidelines and process here.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-20--2020 Democrat Tom Steyer: Trump Won Wednesday’s Debate

One 2020 Democratic presidential candidate who did not qualify for Wednesday ’ s debate in Las Vegas declared President Donald Trump the winner .
Tom Steyer fell short of the Democratic National Committees threshold for the debate Wednesday night by failing to hit 10 percent in four approved polls or winning a delegate out of Iowa or New Hampshire , according to Politico .
However , the billionaire declared Trump the winner of the debate in an appearance Thursday morning on CNN .
“ I saw the person who won the debate last night whose name is Donald Trump .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ d say , ” Steyer said .
“ Because I saw so much bickering between Democratic candidates , tearing each other down and going after each other and forgetting the fact that what really counts is beating Donald Trump in November of 2020 .
TRENDING : Even Gutfeld Groans at Epic Moment Jesse Watters Rips Up Donna Brazile 's Notes on Live TV “ I saw people going after each other ’ s personality and records instead of remembering that , in fact , the Democratic Party needs to win in November @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pointed out , the six Democrats who appeared on stage Wednesday night clashed in a fiery debate .
Former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg said the Democratic Party needed to wake up because the current front-runners , Sanders and Bloomberg , were the “ two most polarizing figures on this stage.
” Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar and Buttigieg fought over who has the qualifications to be president , with Klobuchar saying that the former South Bend mayor lacked experience because he has not “ been in the arena.
” Former @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attacked for his treatment of women and the stop-and-frisk policy he supported as mayor .
“ Democrats are not going to win if we have a nominee who has a history of hiding his tax returns , of harassing women and of supporting racist policies like redlining and stop-and-frisk , ” Sen. Elizabeth Warren said of Bloomberg .
Steyer even joined in on the attacks on Bloomberg , tweeting , “ One lesson from tonight — looks like Mike Bloomberg might be running in the wrong primary.
” RELATED : Bernie Sanders ' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Worth Well Over $ 500,000 “ He has to understand that Democrats represent the vast bulk of working people in this country and that means black people , and brown people , and Asian Americans and Native Americans as well as white people , and that ’ s his responsibility , ” Steyer told CNN .
Steyer said that the question remains “ who can unite the Democratic Party ” and beat Trump .
“ We have a diverse party representing the wonderfully diverse population of the United States of America .
Fantastic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

One 2020 Democratic presidential candidate who did not qualify for Wednesday’s debate in Las Vegas declared President Donald Trump the winner.
Tom Steyer fell short of the Democratic National Committees threshold for the debate Wednesday night by failing to hit 10 percent in four approved polls or winning a delegate out of Iowa or New Hampshire, according to Politico.
However, the billionaire declared Trump the winner of the debate in an appearance Thursday morning on CNN.
“I saw the person who won the debate last night whose name is Donald Trump. That’s the first thing I’d say,” Steyer said.
“Because I saw so much bickering between Democratic candidates, tearing each other down and going after each other and forgetting the fact that what really counts is beating Donald Trump in November of 2020.
“I saw people going after each other’s personality and records instead of remembering that, in fact, the Democratic Party needs to win in November,” he said.
As Steyer pointed out, the six Democrats who appeared on stage Wednesday night clashed in a fiery debate.
Former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg said the Democratic Party needed to wake up because the current front-runners, Sanders and Bloomberg, were the “two most polarizing figures on this stage.”
Do you agree Trump won Wednesday's debate? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 100% (587 Votes) No: 0% (1 Votes)
Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar and Buttigieg fought over who has the qualifications to be president, with Klobuchar saying that the former South Bend mayor lacked experience because he has not “been in the arena.”
Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg was attacked for his treatment of women and the stop-and-frisk policy he supported as mayor.
“Democrats are not going to win if we have a nominee who has a history of hiding his tax returns, of harassing women and of supporting racist policies like redlining and stop-and-frisk,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren said of Bloomberg.
Steyer even joined in on the attacks on Bloomberg, tweeting, “One lesson from tonight — looks like Mike Bloomberg might be running in the wrong primary.”
One lesson from tonight — looks like Mike Bloomberg might be running in the wrong primary. — Tom Steyer (@TomSteyer) February 20, 2020
“He has to understand that Democrats represent the vast bulk of working people in this country and that means black people, and brown people, and Asian Americans and Native Americans as well as white people, and that’s his responsibility,” Steyer told CNN.
Steyer said that the question remains “who can unite the Democratic Party” and beat Trump.
“We have a diverse party representing the wonderfully diverse population of the United States of America. Fantastic. Prove it,” he said.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-20--Tommy Hicks: Last Night Showed Arizonans Want Four More Years of President Trump

Last night , thousands of Arizonans gathered in Phoenix to display their support for President Donald Trump and the policies that have benefited their great state because of this administration .
As President Trump filled yet another venue with his message to “ Keep America Great , ” it was a reminder of just how far Arizona has come the last three years , and where President Trump is leading the nation for years to come .
As 2020 Democrats tout radical proposals that would raise taxes and hurt hardworking Americans , and politicians like Kyrsten Sinema , Mark Kelly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kirkpatrick support the Democrats ’ partisan impeachment sham , Arizonans see a stark contrast in President Trump .
This president has spent his time in office fighting for the American people , and Arizonans are reaping the benefits of his leadership .
Whether it ’ s securing our borders , fighting for fairer trade agreements , or providing massive tax breaks to working parents , President Trump has delivered across-the-board and is pushing full steam ahead for the Grand Canyon State .
TRENDING : Dean Cain Threatens Lawsuit After Media Smears Him with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrats support open borders , President Trump has addressed our border crisis head-on and achieved real results .
Border arrests dropped to 51,000 in August , down more than 60 percent since May and in September , arrests dropped further to 40,000 .
And under President Trump ’ s leadership , fairer trade deals like the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement and Phase One of the China trade deal are leveling the playing field for American workers and businesses in another promise made and promise kept .
The USMCA trade deal will now raise wages @ @ @ @ @ @ @ overall economic growth .
Arizonans have already experienced the economic boom as a result of President Trump ’ s policies — including hundreds of thousands of new jobs added the last three years .
And because of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act , the average family in Arizona received a tax cut of over $ 1,300 and more than 4,000 new jobs were created in 2018 .
Further , the opportunity zones created in the TCJA are helping to develop new areas and bring about affordable housing and more new jobs , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our local communities thrive .
With all these huge successes for the Grand Canyon State , it ’ s clear why tens of thousands of Arizonans came out to show their support for President Trump , and why Democrats will suffer at the ballot box this November .
Arizona Democrats like Sinema , Kelly , O ’ Halleran and Kirkpatrick have solidified their status as part of the Do-Nothing Democrats .
They ’ ve sold out their constituents in favor of impeachment and are dead-set on reversing and obstructing President Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that agenda is working for them and they ’ ll reject Sinema , Kelly , O ’ Halleran and Kirkpatrick in favor of the GOP ’ s progress and results .
As President Trump visited Phoenix , those Democrats saw the fierce enthusiasm from his supporters in the state .
That enthusiasm is a direct result of Arizonans feeling that they are better off now than they were four years ago — and that enthusiasm will carry them all the way to November , when they will elect this president and Republicans up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ progress continues .
With four more years of President Trump , Arizonans know the best is yet to come .
The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Last night, thousands of Arizonans gathered in Phoenix to display their support for President Donald Trump and the policies that have benefited their great state because of this administration.
As President Trump filled yet another venue with his message to “Keep America Great,” it was a reminder of just how far Arizona has come the last three years, and where President Trump is leading the nation for years to come.
As 2020 Democrats tout radical proposals that would raise taxes and hurt hardworking Americans, and politicians like Kyrsten Sinema, Mark Kelly, Tom O’Halleran and Ann Kirkpatrick support the Democrats’ partisan impeachment sham, Arizonans see a stark contrast in President Trump.
This president has spent his time in office fighting for the American people, and Arizonans are reaping the benefits of his leadership.
Whether it’s securing our borders, fighting for fairer trade agreements, or providing massive tax breaks to working parents, President Trump has delivered across-the-board and is pushing full steam ahead for the Grand Canyon State.
While 2020 Democrats support open borders, President Trump has addressed our border crisis head-on and achieved real results.
Border arrests dropped to 51,000 in August, down more than 60 percent since May and in September, arrests dropped further to 40,000.
And under President Trump’s leadership, fairer trade deals like the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement and Phase One of the China trade deal are leveling the playing field for American workers and businesses in another promise made and promise kept. The USMCA trade deal will now raise wages, create thousands of jobs and promote overall economic growth.
Arizonans have already experienced the economic boom as a result of President Trump’s policies — including hundreds of thousands of new jobs added the last three years.
Do you think Donald Trump will win Arizona again in 2020? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 100% (202 Votes) No: 0% (1 Votes)
And because of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the average family in Arizona received a tax cut of over $1,300 and more than 4,000 new jobs were created in 2018.
Further, the opportunity zones created in the TCJA are helping to develop new areas and bring about affordable housing and more new jobs, and offer new local services to ensure our local communities thrive.
With all these huge successes for the Grand Canyon State, it’s clear why tens of thousands of Arizonans came out to show their support for President Trump, and why Democrats will suffer at the ballot box this November.
Arizona Democrats like Sinema, Kelly, O’Halleran and Kirkpatrick have solidified their status as part of the Do-Nothing Democrats. They’ve sold out their constituents in favor of impeachment and are dead-set on reversing and obstructing President Trump’s agenda at any cost.
Arizonans know that agenda is working for them and they’ll reject Sinema, Kelly, O’Halleran and Kirkpatrick in favor of the GOP’s progress and results.
As President Trump visited Phoenix, those Democrats saw the fierce enthusiasm from his supporters in the state.
That enthusiasm is a direct result of Arizonans feeling that they are better off now than they were four years ago — and that enthusiasm will carry them all the way to November, when they will elect this president and Republicans up and down the ballot to ensure the progress continues.
With four more years of President Trump, Arizonans know the best is yet to come.
The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website. If you are interested in contributing an Op-Ed to The Western Journal, you can learn about our submission guidelines and process here.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-20--Judge Hands Down Roger Stone Sentence: 40 Months in Jail

A federal judge in Washington , D.C. , sentenced Trump ally Roger Stone to 40 months in prison on Thursday .
On Feb. 10 , prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney ’ s Office in Washington recommended that Stone serve between 87 months and 108 months in jail for his crimes .
President Donald Trump responded hours later , saying that the recommendation was “ disgraceful ” and a “ miscarriage of justice.
” The Justice Department signaled through statements to the media that officials at headquarters were also unhappy with the recommendation and that the government would be revising its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Four prosecutors withdrew from Stone ’ s case in protest over the revision .
TRENDING : Dean Cain Threatens Lawsuit After Media Smears Him with Outright Lie About Warren Comment In a new filing on Feb. 11 , the U.S. Attorney ’ s Office recommended that Stone face “ substantial ” jail time but a sentence that was “ far less ” than what was initially recommended .
Attorney General William Barr said in an interview on Feb. 13 that he did not speak with Trump about Stone ’ s case and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ very excessive.
” The 67-year-old Stone had no previous criminal history .
The main difference between the two recommendations hinged on how much additional jail time prosecutors wanted to give Stone for a series of text messages that he sent in 2018 to his longtime associate , Randy Credico .
Prosecutors alleged at Stone ’ s trial that he threatened Credico in order to prevent him from cooperating with the House Intelligence Committee ’ s Russia investigation .
Stone had asserted to the committee and publicly that Credico was a source of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2016 .
Credico , a left-wing comedian and radio show host , vehemently denied it .
During a heated text message exchange on April 9 , 2018 , Stone wrote to Credico , “ Prepare to die , c—sucker.
” He also told Credico that he would “ take that dog from you , ” a reference to Credico ’ s service dog .
Based on federal sentencing guidelines , characterizing Stone ’ s messages as a physical threat would add as much as five years to his prison sentence .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Credico testified that he never felt in physical danger from Stone ’ s text messages .
RELATED : Alan Dershowitz : Obama Asked FBI To Investigate Someone at George Soros ' Request Credico also wrote a letter to Judge Amy Berman Jackson on Jan. 20 asking her to spare Stone of jail time .
A version of this article appeared on The Daily Caller News Foundation website .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

A federal judge in Washington, D.C., sentenced Trump ally Roger Stone to 40 months in prison on Thursday.
On Feb. 10, prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington recommended that Stone serve between 87 months and 108 months in jail for his crimes.
President Donald Trump responded hours later, saying that the recommendation was “disgraceful” and a “miscarriage of justice.”
The Justice Department signaled through statements to the media that officials at headquarters were also unhappy with the recommendation and that the government would be revising its court filing to lower the proposed sentence.
Four prosecutors withdrew from Stone’s case in protest over the revision.
In a new filing on Feb. 11, the U.S. Attorney’s Office recommended that Stone face “substantial” jail time but a sentence that was “far less” than what was initially recommended.
Attorney General William Barr said in an interview on Feb. 13 that he did not speak with Trump about Stone’s case and that he independently believed the sentence was “very excessive.”
The 67-year-old Stone had no previous criminal history.
The main difference between the two recommendations hinged on how much additional jail time prosecutors wanted to give Stone for a series of text messages that he sent in 2018 to his longtime associate, Randy Credico.
Do you think 40 months is a more appropriate sentence for Stone than the original recommendation of 87 to 108 months? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 83% (193 Votes) No: 17% (40 Votes)
Prosecutors alleged at Stone’s trial that he threatened Credico in order to prevent him from cooperating with the House Intelligence Committee’s Russia investigation.
Stone had asserted to the committee and publicly that Credico was a source of information for him regarding WikiLeaks’ activities in 2016. Credico, a left-wing comedian and radio show host, vehemently denied it.
During a heated text message exchange on April 9, 2018, Stone wrote to Credico, “Prepare to die, c—sucker.” He also told Credico that he would “take that dog from you,” a reference to Credico’s service dog.
Based on federal sentencing guidelines, characterizing Stone’s messages as a physical threat would add as much as five years to his prison sentence.
In their revising sentencing recommendation, prosecutors noted that Credico testified that he never felt in physical danger from Stone’s text messages.
Credico also wrote a letter to Judge Amy Berman Jackson on Jan. 20 asking her to spare Stone of jail time.
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
A version of this article appeared on The Daily Caller News Foundation website.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-20--Trump Savages Bloomberg’s Debate Showing: ‘Perhaps the Worst in the History of Debates’

President Donald Trump mocked former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg ’ s debate performance in a late-night Wednesday tweet .
“ Mini Mike Bloomberg ’ s debate performance tonight was perhaps the worst in the history of debates , and there have been some really bad ones , ” Trump tweeted .
“ He was stumbling , bumbling and grossly incompetent .
If this doesn ’ t knock him out of the race , nothing will.
” TRENDING : Dean Cain Threatens Lawsuit After Media Smears Him with Outright Lie About Warren Comment As Trump pointed out , Bloomberg took @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 2020 presidential primary debate stage in Las Vegas on Wednesday night .
Rising in the polls to third place with 16.1 percent support , according to the RealClearPolitics polling average , placed a target on the former mayor ’ s back .
The five other candidates on stage did not hold back in their attacks .
“ I ’ d like to talk about who we ’ re running against : a billionaire who calls women ‘ fat broads ’ and ‘ horse-faced lesbians , ' ” Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not talking about Donald Trump , ” she said .
“ I ’ m talking about Mayor Bloomberg .
Democrats are not going to win if we have a nominee who has a history of hiding his tax returns , of harassing women and supporting racist policies like redlining and stop-and-frisk.
” Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders also criticized the “ stop-and-frisk ” policy Bloomberg implemented as mayor , under which people could be stopped and searched by police without warrants .
In a 2015 speech , Bloomberg defended the policy and acknowledged that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ black and Latino population , according to CBS News .
“ In order to beat Donald Trump , we are going to need the largest voter turnout in the history of the United States , ” Sanders said .
“ Mr .
Bloomberg had policies in New York City of stop-and-frisk , which went after African-American and Latino people in an outrageous way .
That is not a way you ’ re gon na grow voter turnout.
” Bloomberg repeated his apology for the policy , saying it is the “ one thing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about ” from his time in office , CNBC reported .
Former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg accused Bloomberg of being “ a billionaire who thinks money ought to be the root of all power ” and “ wants to buy the party out , ” as shown by the money Bloomberg has spent on his campaign .
RELATED : Trump Campaign Press Sec Rips 2020 Dems : 'The Party of Lincoln Will Defeat the Party of Lenin' Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar renewed her accusation that Bloomberg was hiding behind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ads .
“ I actually welcomed Mayor Bloomberg to the stage .
I thought that he shouldn ’ t be hiding behind his TV ads , and so I was all ready for this big day , ” Klobuchar said , according to New York Post .
Warren also called out the former mayor for his “ who knows how many nondisclosure agreements ” signed by women who worked for his company , Bloomberg LP , stemming from sexual harassment allegations .
“ None of them accuse me of doing anything other than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ joke I told , ” Bloomberg said .
Trump also criticized Bloomberg during his re-election campaign rally in Phoenix , Fox News reported .
“ Now they have a new member of the crew , Mini Mike .
No boxes , we call him ‘ no boxes , ' ” the president said , referring to Bloomberg ’ s denial of Trump ’ s joking statement that the former mayor wanted to stand on a box during the debate .
The president wasn ’ t alone in that assessment .
As Fox News @ @ @ @ @ @ @ declared Bloomberg ’ s debate performance a disaster .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

President Donald Trump mocked former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s debate performance in a late-night Wednesday tweet.
“Mini Mike Bloomberg’s debate performance tonight was perhaps the worst in the history of debates, and there have been some really bad ones,” Trump tweeted.
“He was stumbling, bumbling and grossly incompetent. If this doesn’t knock him out of the race, nothing will.”
Mini Mike Bloomberg’s debate performance tonight was perhaps the worst in the history of debates, and there have been some really bad ones. He was stumbling, bumbling and grossly incompetent. If this doesn’t knock him out of the race, nothing will. Not so easy to do what I did! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 20, 2020
As Trump pointed out, Bloomberg took a beating from his fellow Democrats on the 2020 presidential primary debate stage in Las Vegas on Wednesday night. Rising in the polls to third place with 16.1 percent support, according to the RealClearPolitics polling average, placed a target on the former mayor’s back.
The five other candidates on stage did not hold back in their attacks.
“I’d like to talk about who we’re running against: a billionaire who calls women ‘fat broads’ and ‘horse-faced lesbians,'” Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren said.
“No, I’m not talking about Donald Trump,” she said. “I’m talking about Mayor Bloomberg. Democrats are not going to win if we have a nominee who has a history of hiding his tax returns, of harassing women and supporting racist policies like redlining and stop-and-frisk.”
Do you agree with President Trump that Michael Bloomberg's debate performance was one of the worst ever? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 98% (659 Votes) No: 2% (12 Votes)
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders also criticized the “stop-and-frisk” policy Bloomberg implemented as mayor, under which people could be stopped and searched by police without warrants. In a 2015 speech, Bloomberg defended the policy and acknowledged that it disproportionately targeted the city’s black and Latino population, according to CBS News.
“In order to beat Donald Trump, we are going to need the largest voter turnout in the history of the United States,” Sanders said.
“Mr. Bloomberg had policies in New York City of stop-and-frisk, which went after African-American and Latino people in an outrageous way. That is not a way you’re gonna grow voter turnout.”
Bloomberg repeated his apology for the policy, saying it is the “one thing I am really worried about, embarrassed about” from his time in office, CNBC reported.
Former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg accused Bloomberg of being “a billionaire who thinks money ought to be the root of all power” and “wants to buy the party out,” as shown by the money Bloomberg has spent on his campaign.
Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar renewed her accusation that Bloomberg was hiding behind his millions of dollars spent on campaign ads.
“I actually welcomed Mayor Bloomberg to the stage. I thought that he shouldn’t be hiding behind his TV ads, and so I was all ready for this big day,” Klobuchar said, according to New York Post.
Warren also called out the former mayor for his “who knows how many nondisclosure agreements” signed by women who worked for his company, Bloomberg LP, stemming from sexual harassment allegations.
“None of them accuse me of doing anything other than maybe they didn’t like a joke I told,” Bloomberg said.
Trump also criticized Bloomberg during his re-election campaign rally in Phoenix, Fox News reported.
“Now they have a new member of the crew, Mini Mike. No boxes, we call him ‘no boxes,'” the president said, referring to Bloomberg’s denial of Trump’s joking statement that the former mayor wanted to stand on a box during the debate.
“I hear he’s getting pounded tonight,” Trump told the crowd.
The president wasn’t alone in that assessment. As Fox News reported Thursday, even many liberal pundits declared Bloomberg’s debate performance a disaster.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-20--WaPo Publishes Op-Ed Calling for Giving ‘Elites a Bigger Say in Choosing the President,’ Edits After

WaPo Publishes Op-Ed Calling for Giving ‘Elites a Bigger Say in Choosing the President,’ Edits After Backlash

There is a moment — it ’ s so brief that you really have to watch for it — that those who dissemble for a living in the political world must eventually tell the truth .
And it stays out there , no matter how hard you try to erase it .
Take The Washington Post .
The District ’ s newspaper of record realizes that there ’ s potentially going to be a brokered convention for the presidential nomination — one in which the party elites would decide who ’ ll end up running against Donald Trump in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ delegates to win .
On Tuesday , The Washington Post published an Op-Ed by Marquette University political science professor Julia Azari on preference voting in primaries and how it could help party elites make a decision in such a circumstance .
The subtext was clear : When Bernie Sanders types have the most delegates but are thoroughly undesirable , it helps to know what candidates within the window of acceptability you can get away with picking .
TRENDING : Dean Cain Threatens Lawsuit After Media Smears Him with Outright Lie About Warren Comment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bit of backlash , but what really got backlash was the original title : “ It ’ s time to give the elites a bigger say in choosing the president.
” It didn ’ t take long for that title to be changed — it ’ s now , “ It ’ s time to switch to preference primaries ” — but not after significant backlash .
So , first , let ’ s talk about the objectionable nature of the piece , no matter what the title is .
Azari believes that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ choice , the elites ought to be the ones guiding the process , with the voters “ guiding ” them : “ The current process is clearly flawed , but what would be better ?
” she wrote .
“ Finding an answer means thinking about the purpose of presidential nominations , and about how the existing system falls short .
It will require swimming against the tide of how we ’ ve thought about nominations for decades — as a contest between everyday voters and elites , or as a smaller version @ @ @ @ @ @ @ primary system would empower elites to bargain and make decisions , instructed by voters .
“ One lesson from the 2020 and 2016 election cycles is that a lot of candidates , many of whom are highly qualified and attract substantial followings , will inevitably enter the race .
The system as it works now — with a long informal primary , lots of attention to early contests and sequential primary season that unfolds over several months — is great at testing candidates to see whether they have the skills to run for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ What it ’ s not great at is choosing among the many candidates who clear that bar , or bringing their different ideological factions together , or reconciling competing priorities .
A process in which intermediate representatives — elected delegates who understand the priorities of their constituents — can bargain without being bound to specific candidates might actually produce nominees that better reflect what voters want.
” So , she proposed “ preference primaries ” which would “ allow voters to rank their choices among candidates , as well as to register opinions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might sound labor-intensive and a little risky , but the process is already lengthy and expensive .
Candidates jockey for endorsements and donations for months leading up to the first contests , ” she wrote .
“ Why not invest some resources in finding out what voters really think , and then allow party delegates to figure out how those opinions can translate into a winning ticket ?
” This sounds a lot like ranked voting or instant-runoff voting , except it would have no influence on the primaries themselves .
Instead , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it would allow the elites — Azaris term , not mine — to choose the candidate most acceptable to the elites as well as the voters .
This is a hedge against a Bernie-type candidate : Surely the Bernie bros and the female versions thereof would eventually come up with a grown-up pick somewhere on the ballot .
Then , the adults could gather in the back rooms of the convention and come up with someone who wasn ’ t Bernie — or any kind of insurgent — who everyone could deal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the kind of people like Julia Azari , who inhabit a universe in which its inconceivable where they wouldn ’ t have this power .
I mean , you concede they deserve it , right ?
This didn ’ t go over well with the rabblement , especially when you consider that The Post is owned by the elite of the elite — Jeff Bezos , the richest man in America : So what The Post did was change the title of the piece without an explanation as to why or a note @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the way to engender trust here .
However , let ’ s face facts : They did get the title right the first time .
The point of the piece is that the elites should have more power in picking the nominee .
It ’ s rare that there isn ’ t a consensus candidate going into a convention , but that ought to be a sign that the status quo within a party isn ’ t working .
That ’ s the last time the Sanhedrin of the Democratic Party ought to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not on ranked voting .
This is a cataclysmically poor idea — and yet , so on brand for both The Post and the kind of writer who would pen this .
For the rest of us who cast our ballots and want them to count , perhaps not so much .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

There is a moment — it’s so brief that you really have to watch for it — that those who dissemble for a living in the political world must eventually tell the truth.
And it stays out there, no matter how hard you try to erase it.
Take The Washington Post. The District’s newspaper of record realizes that there’s potentially going to be a brokered convention for the presidential nomination — one in which the party elites would decide who’ll end up running against Donald Trump in the 2020 election if no candidate has enough delegates to win.
On Tuesday, The Washington Post published an Op-Ed by Marquette University political science professor Julia Azari on preference voting in primaries and how it could help party elites make a decision in such a circumstance.
The subtext was clear: When Bernie Sanders types have the most delegates but are thoroughly undesirable, it helps to know what candidates within the window of acceptability you can get away with picking.
You can see why this got a bit of backlash, but what really got backlash was the original title: “It’s time to give the elites a bigger say in choosing the president.”
It didn’t take long for that title to be changed — it’s now, “It’s time to switch to preference primaries” — but not after significant backlash.
So, first, let’s talk about the objectionable nature of the piece, no matter what the title is. Azari believes that if there isn’t a clear choice, the elites ought to be the ones guiding the process, with the voters “guiding” them:
“The current process is clearly flawed, but what would be better?” she wrote.
Do you think giving elites a bigger say is a good idea? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 1% (9 Votes) No: 99% (773 Votes)
“Finding an answer means thinking about the purpose of presidential nominations, and about how the existing system falls short. It will require swimming against the tide of how we’ve thought about nominations for decades — as a contest between everyday voters and elites, or as a smaller version of a general election. A better primary system would empower elites to bargain and make decisions, instructed by voters.
“One lesson from the 2020 and 2016 election cycles is that a lot of candidates, many of whom are highly qualified and attract substantial followings, will inevitably enter the race. The system as it works now — with a long informal primary, lots of attention to early contests and sequential primary season that unfolds over several months — is great at testing candidates to see whether they have the skills to run for president,” she continued.
“What it’s not great at is choosing among the many candidates who clear that bar, or bringing their different ideological factions together, or reconciling competing priorities. A process in which intermediate representatives — elected delegates who understand the priorities of their constituents — can bargain without being bound to specific candidates might actually produce nominees that better reflect what voters want.”
So, she proposed “preference primaries” which would “allow voters to rank their choices among candidates, as well as to register opinions about their issue priorities.”
“This might sound labor-intensive and a little risky, but the process is already lengthy and expensive. Candidates jockey for endorsements and donations for months leading up to the first contests,” she wrote.
“Why not invest some resources in finding out what voters really think, and then allow party delegates to figure out how those opinions can translate into a winning ticket?”
This sounds a lot like ranked voting or instant-runoff voting, except it would have no influence on the primaries themselves. Instead, in the case of a brokered convention, it would allow the elites — Azaris term, not mine — to choose the candidate most acceptable to the elites as well as the voters.
This is a hedge against a Bernie-type candidate: Surely the Bernie bros and the female versions thereof would eventually come up with a grown-up pick somewhere on the ballot.
Then, the adults could gather in the back rooms of the convention and come up with someone who wasn’t Bernie — or any kind of insurgent — who everyone could deal with.
And by everyone, read the kind of people like Julia Azari, who inhabit a universe in which its inconceivable where they wouldn’t have this power.
I mean, you concede they deserve it, right?
This didn’t go over well with the rabblement, especially when you consider that The Post is owned by the elite of the elite — Jeff Bezos, the richest man in America:
You can’t make this up: The Washington Post, which is owned by mega-oligarch Jeff Bezos (who has $130 BILLION in wealth) published an oped calling for elites to have an even “bigger say in choosing the president” They already control basically everything!https://t.co/M0nndGRr9g pic.twitter.com/rQ3BxS0PuS — Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) February 19, 2020
Satire dead @kenklippenstein: One of the more mask off headlines I’ve seen in awhile pic.twitter.com/Ci9qp9ZFwq” — John Cusack (@johncusack) February 19, 2020
Party of the people…. https://t.co/ukhTedg4m2 — Curt Schilling (@gehrig38) February 20, 2020
It’s time to give the elites a bigger say in choosing the president says the #WashingtonPost They no longer even try to hide it! https://t.co/crKyByxnTZ — judy morris (@judymorris3) February 20, 2020
Crafty, @washingtonpost. Original headline “let elites decide”, new headline “preference primaries.” URL makes it clear: “fix primaries let elites decide” pic.twitter.com/IDeKh60110 — Doug Henwood (@DougHenwood) February 19, 2020
Hi – this is what you are literally advocating for:https://t.co/nGT0qcVVMY As a political scientist in the 21st century… What you wrote was an expose, affirming that the establishment can find someone to peddle even the most defunct, evil, disenfranchising ideas. Shame. — Борис Бабагануш (@wuddafuq) February 19, 2020
not sure if that elitist tone is the best mode of communicating your point. — Michael Ziadat (@mikeyziadat) February 19, 2020
Yes. (No.) — Lilith Nicole (@coilspinner) February 19, 2020
File this under: “Democracy dies in Darkness” https://t.co/VbD9kvJgWl — Oliver Hidalgo-Wohlleben (@OliverHidWoh) February 19, 2020
So what The Post did was change the title of the piece without an explanation as to why or a note on the piece, which is obviously the way to engender trust here.
However, let’s face facts: They did get the title right the first time.
The point of the piece is that the elites should have more power in picking the nominee.
It’s rare that there isn’t a consensus candidate going into a convention, but that ought to be a sign that the status quo within a party isn’t working.
That’s the last time the Sanhedrin of the Democratic Party ought to be picking the nominee, and certainly not on ranked voting.
This is a cataclysmically poor idea — and yet, so on brand for both The Post and the kind of writer who would pen this.
For the rest of us who cast our ballots and want them to count, perhaps not so much.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-20--Anti-Gun Bloomberg Group Spending Millions in Bid To Turn Texas Anti-2A

It was like a nightmare for firearm owners : As of Wednesday evening , former New York City mayor and Second Amendment scold Michael Bloomberg had risen to third place in the national poll average for the Democratic presidential nomination , right behind the plummeting former Vice President Joe Biden .
He ’ d quickly become the toast of the establishment , the only thing preventing a hard-left socialist from marching to standard-bearer status .
Wednesday evening turned to night and , like an afternoon nap that lasted way too long , we all woke up from the nightmare about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Las Vegas .
If this is Thursday and you ’ re just waking up , having figured another one of these things wasn ’ t worth losing sleep over , I have one word for Bloomberg ’ s performance : Ouch .
The debate ended at 11 p.m. in the East .
I half-expected an 11:05 p.m. EST news conference in which he announced he was suspending his campaign .
There ’ s not enough time to go into what an odious faceplant Hizzoner managed on Wednesday ; I ’ ll merely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” or “ non-disclosure agreement ” for the next few days , the site for the software or a description of the legal document won ’ t be the only things that get returned .
TRENDING : Dean Cain Threatens Lawsuit After Media Smears Him with Outright Lie About Warren Comment Bottom line , a truncated version of how things stand : Short of a miraculous recovery that makes Bill Clinton ’ s 1992 primary performance look pretty eh , Michael Bloomberg won ’ t be our next president .
That doesn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to take your guns , though , at least if you live in Texas .
According to the Washington Examiner , Everytown for Gun Safety — Bloomberg ’ s astroturf gun control group — is planning to use what it believes to be the changing demographics of Texas for a major ad push it hopes will lead to more stringent gun control laws in both the Lone Star State and Washington , D.C. “ We believe that Texas , as it becomes younger and increasingly diverse , can be the next emerging battleground @ @ @ @ @ @ @ point , ” Chris Carr , political director for Everytown , said in a statement .
“ We believe there are opportunities to elect gun sense candidates up and down the ballot , from the statehouse to the U.S. Congress — and potentially even statewide , ” he said .
The group plans an $ 8 million ad blitz followed by an unprecedented $ 60 million to try and influence the 2020 election .
According to the Houston Chronicle , Everytown ’ s plan is straightforward : Flip the Texas statehouse through an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” defend Democrat freshmen in close U.S. House districts and try to win Republican seats in the suburbs the same way Democrats did in the 2018 midterms .
The fact the group is targeting Texas has to do with positive polling numbers for its less-controversial measures .
“ Eighty-seven percent of likely voters in Texas said they support background checks on all gun purchases , while 80 percent support red flag laws , according to a poll commissioned by Everytown and shared with Hearst Newspapers .
It follows a University of Texas/Texas Tribune @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent support background checks for all gun purchases , ” the Chronicle reported .
Beyond the fact that there ’ s little evidence background checks work and red flag laws — which basically eliminate all due process when it comes to seizing firearms from individuals deemed “ dangerous ” — sound great until they ’ re implemented , keep in mind that ’ s not really what Everytown wants .
Everytown for Gun Safety may have a terminally clubfooted name , but it also has an outsized role in American politics .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flip the state legislature , which in turn has led to an attempt to ram through a suite of gun control legislation , including bans on the sale of so-called assault weapons and possession of firearm clips holding over 12 rounds .
( Both blessedly failed in the state Senate , where members were worried about the effects such a seismic shift would have on the vote the next time Virginians go to the ballot box . )
Molly Bursey still thinks this kind of push can work in Texas .
She ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chapter of Moms Demand Action , another Bloomberg anti-gun astroturf-tastic pressure group .
Bursey told the Chronicle that while the red part of the electorate is going to react to this kind of push with a collective conniption , purple and blue voters are “ fired up to get to work ” to reverse a loosening of firearm restrictions enacted in September .
“ People can ’ t really believe that … instead of passing laws that most Texans agree with , they ’ re really just loosening restrictions on who can carry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s not what Texans want , ” she said .
“ I think people have had enough .
They ’ re paying attention.
” Well , certain people , yes .
Certain other groups are paying attention as well .
“ The Texas State Rifle Association sent an email to supporters earlier this month warning of the type of spending Everytown is now planning , ” the Chronicle reported .
“ The rifle association declared an early victory in Fort Bend County when Republican Gary Gates beat Eliz Markowitz , a Democrat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a closely watched special election for state House last month.
” An email from the group said , “ Though gun control advocates and gun-grabbing politicians failed to lay down a marker in this particular contest , the amount of resources they invested in this race demonstrates their commitment to turn Texas ‘ blue ’ and make the Lone Star State their next target after Virginia for passing radical restrictions on our rights.
” To a certain extent , one wonders whether this is exactly the state to pick .
Virginia and Texas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s not the whole story .
Virginia was a swing state that has slowly morphed from red to blue , partially because of demographic change but to a great extent from an influx of career bureaucrats who favor the Northern Virginia suburbs over the District itself .
It wasn ’ t terribly conservative before this .
Since 1990 , Virginia has had two Republican senators .
The first , John Warner , was in office from 1979 to 2009 and pretty much got re-elected on tenure and the advantage of incumbency .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Democrat Mark Warner ( no relation ) , who continues to hold the seat .
The other , George Allen , made it in on George W. Bush ’ s coattails in 2000 .
( It didn ’ t hurt that he was the son of legendary Washington Redskins football coach George Allen . )
Six years later , he was voted out in favor of Democrat Jim Webb , in large part because of an ill-advised comment about a Democratic opposition research member that could charitably be called dumb and uncharitably @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is to say Virginia has been moving in one direction for a long time .
Texas has been moving in another .
The Democrats once had an iron grip on the state , then at least a strong foothold .
Those of us of a certain age and/or who are certifiable political junkies will remember former Texas Gov .
Ann Richards and her famous ( slash-infamous ) keynote speech at the Democratic National Convention in 1988 : “ Poor George [ Bush ] , ” she drawled .
“ He can ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a silver foot in his mouth.
” When she left office in 1993 , Richards was the last Democratic governor of Texas .
That was the same year Texas had its last Democrat senator .
We ’ ve been told that Texas is going to turn blue any cycle now .
The latest proof is that former Rep. Beto O ’ Rourke , with nearly unlimited money and media adulation , almost beat Sen. Ted Cruz in 2018 .
This race was sui generis , however ; Texas GOP Gov .
Greg Abbott @ @ @ @ @ @ @ won a 56-43 victory over his nearest opponent .
So , no , Texas going blue still seems like a bit of a fantasy , as are applying the kind of gun control measures Democrats are behind in Virginia .
That said , Michael Bloomberg isn ’ t a man who gives up easily .
He might still win the White House , but that debate will be difficult to come back from .
As for Everytown ’ s influence in 2020 elections , that ’ s not something we can sleep on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Does that mean it can ’ t go that way ?
Conservatives shouldn ’ t get overconfident ; when Bloomberg doesn ’ t have to take to a debate stage , he can be awfully effective .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

It was like a nightmare for firearm owners: As of Wednesday evening, former New York City mayor and Second Amendment scold Michael Bloomberg had risen to third place in the national poll average for the Democratic presidential nomination, right behind the plummeting former Vice President Joe Biden. He’d quickly become the toast of the establishment, the only thing preventing a hard-left socialist from marching to standard-bearer status.
Wednesday evening turned to night and, like an afternoon nap that lasted way too long, we all woke up from the nightmare about five minutes into the Democratic presidential debate in Las Vegas.
If this is Thursday and you’re just waking up, having figured another one of these things wasn’t worth losing sleep over, I have one word for Bloomberg’s performance: Ouch.
The debate ended at 11 p.m. in the East. I half-expected an 11:05 p.m. EST news conference in which he announced he was suspending his campaign.
There’s not enough time to go into what an odious faceplant Hizzoner managed on Wednesday; I’ll merely observe that if you google “TurboTax” or “non-disclosure agreement” for the next few days, the site for the software or a description of the legal document won’t be the only things that get returned.
Bottom line, a truncated version of how things stand: Short of a miraculous recovery that makes Bill Clinton’s 1992 primary performance look pretty eh, Michael Bloomberg won’t be our next president.
That doesn’t mean he doesn’t want to take your guns, though, at least if you live in Texas.
According to the Washington Examiner, Everytown for Gun Safety — Bloomberg’s astroturf gun control group — is planning to use what it believes to be the changing demographics of Texas for a major ad push it hopes will lead to more stringent gun control laws in both the Lone Star State and Washington, D.C.
“We believe that Texas, as it becomes younger and increasingly diverse, can be the next emerging battleground state with gun safety as the tipping point,” Chris Carr, political director for Everytown, said in a statement.
Do you think Texas will ever go blue? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 5% (26 Votes) No: 95% (454 Votes)
“We believe there are opportunities to elect gun sense candidates up and down the ballot, from the statehouse to the U.S. Congress — and potentially even statewide,” he said.
The group plans an $8 million ad blitz followed by an unprecedented $60 million to try and influence the 2020 election.
According to the Houston Chronicle, Everytown’s plan is straightforward: Flip the Texas statehouse through an “unprecedented financial and grassroots effort,” defend Democrat freshmen in close U.S. House districts and try to win Republican seats in the suburbs the same way Democrats did in the 2018 midterms. The fact the group is targeting Texas has to do with positive polling numbers for its less-controversial measures.
“Eighty-seven percent of likely voters in Texas said they support background checks on all gun purchases, while 80 percent support red flag laws, according to a poll commissioned by Everytown and shared with Hearst Newspapers. It follows a University of Texas/Texas Tribune poll released this week that found 79 percent support background checks for all gun purchases,” the Chronicle reported.
Beyond the fact that there’s little evidence background checks work and red flag laws — which basically eliminate all due process when it comes to seizing firearms from individuals deemed “dangerous” — sound great until they’re implemented, keep in mind that’s not really what Everytown wants.
Everytown for Gun Safety may have a terminally clubfooted name, but it also has an outsized role in American politics.
In Virginia, its money and strategy helped flip the state legislature, which in turn has led to an attempt to ram through a suite of gun control legislation, including bans on the sale of so-called assault weapons and possession of firearm clips holding over 12 rounds. (Both blessedly failed in the state Senate, where members were worried about the effects such a seismic shift would have on the vote the next time Virginians go to the ballot box.)
Molly Bursey still thinks this kind of push can work in Texas. She’s the leader of a San Antonio-area chapter of Moms Demand Action, another Bloomberg anti-gun astroturf-tastic pressure group.
Bursey told the Chronicle that while the red part of the electorate is going to react to this kind of push with a collective conniption, purple and blue voters are “fired up to get to work” to reverse a loosening of firearm restrictions enacted in September.
“People can’t really believe that … instead of passing laws that most Texans agree with, they’re really just loosening restrictions on who can carry a gun and where, and that’s not what Texans want,” she said. “I think people have had enough. They’re paying attention.”
Well, certain people, yes. Certain other groups are paying attention as well.
“The Texas State Rifle Association sent an email to supporters earlier this month warning of the type of spending Everytown is now planning,” the Chronicle reported.
“The rifle association declared an early victory in Fort Bend County when Republican Gary Gates beat Eliz Markowitz, a Democrat backed by gun safety groups, in a closely watched special election for state House last month.”
An email from the group said, “Though gun control advocates and gun-grabbing politicians failed to lay down a marker in this particular contest, the amount of resources they invested in this race demonstrates their commitment to turn Texas ‘blue’ and make the Lone Star State their next target after Virginia for passing radical restrictions on our rights.”
To a certain extent, one wonders whether this is exactly the state to pick. Virginia and Texas both have changing demographics, but that’s not the whole story.
Virginia was a swing state that has slowly morphed from red to blue, partially because of demographic change but to a great extent from an influx of career bureaucrats who favor the Northern Virginia suburbs over the District itself. It wasn’t terribly conservative before this.
Since 1990, Virginia has had two Republican senators.
The first, John Warner, was in office from 1979 to 2009 and pretty much got re-elected on tenure and the advantage of incumbency. When he retired, he was replaced by Democrat Mark Warner (no relation), who continues to hold the seat.
The other, George Allen, made it in on George W. Bush’s coattails in 2000. (It didn’t hurt that he was the son of legendary Washington Redskins football coach George Allen.) Six years later, he was voted out in favor of Democrat Jim Webb, in large part because of an ill-advised comment about a Democratic opposition research member that could charitably be called dumb and uncharitably be called racist.
All of which is to say Virginia has been moving in one direction for a long time.
Texas has been moving in another.
The Democrats once had an iron grip on the state, then at least a strong foothold. Those of us of a certain age and/or who are certifiable political junkies will remember former Texas Gov. Ann Richards and her famous (slash-infamous) keynote speech at the Democratic National Convention in 1988: “Poor George [Bush],” she drawled. “He can’t help it. He was born with a silver foot in his mouth.”
When she left office in 1993, Richards was the last Democratic governor of Texas. That was the same year Texas had its last Democrat senator.
We’ve been told that Texas is going to turn blue any cycle now. The latest proof is that former Rep. Beto O’Rourke, with nearly unlimited money and media adulation, almost beat Sen. Ted Cruz in 2018. This race was sui generis, however; Texas GOP Gov. Greg Abbott, arguably a more divisive figure, won a 56-43 victory over his nearest opponent.
So, no, Texas going blue still seems like a bit of a fantasy, as are applying the kind of gun control measures Democrats are behind in Virginia.
That said, Michael Bloomberg isn’t a man who gives up easily. He might still win the White House, but that debate will be difficult to come back from.
As for Everytown’s influence in 2020 elections, that’s not something we can sleep on.
Texas isn’t Virginia. Does that mean it can’t go that way? Conservatives shouldn’t get overconfident; when Bloomberg doesn’t have to take to a debate stage, he can be awfully effective.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.