hotair--2020-02-17--US evacuates Americans off coronavirus cruise ship quarantine

US evacuates Americans off coronavirus cruise ship quarantine -- and they're not happy about it

Meet the new quarantine , same as the old quarantine .
Two charter flights from Japan took hundreds of Americans from the cruise ship Diamond Princess to California and Texas , but not all of them are happy to be back in the good ol ’ US .
The evacuation comes from an “ about face ” on the US policy on coronavirus , CNN reports , and leaves all of the Americans stuck in limbo for at least two weeks longer than they first thought .
“ I ’ ve lost a month of my life , ” one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the US changed its mind about relying on the Japanese quarantine process : Not everyone chose to get evacuated , but they ’ re stuck either way .
The US will require those who remain to commit to another quarantine after the Diamond Princess is allowed to disembark in Yokohama later this week .
That ’ s what has some of the quarantined Americans hopping mad today , even if they are coming home : Thousands of people have been stuck in their cabins under mandatory quarantine aboard the Diamond Princess , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Yokohama , since February 3 .
With 356 confirmed cases of coronavirus on board , 70 of which were announced Sunday , the ship has the largest concentration of novel coronavirus cases outside mainland China .
On February 19 , the controversial quarantine period was set to finally end .
Until Saturday , the US government seemed on board with that plan .
The consensus among government agencies , which had been communicated to the more than 400 Americans aboard , was that remaining on the ship for the quarantine period was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ On Saturday afternoon , the US Embassy in Tokyo sent a notice to Americans on board the Diamond Princess laying out plans to evacuate nearly 400 Americans back home .
Once there , another 14 days of mandatory quarantine would begin .
Anyone who chose not to get on the flight would have to wait another 14 days in Japan to ensure they were symptom-free before returning to the US .
That decision has prompted anger among the American passengers , with many demanding answers to two simple questions about the US response @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so long to make the about-face decision ?
What prompted such a dramatic shift in US policy ?
The news didn ’ t get any better once they got to the airport , either .
Tests performed earlier confirmed that two dozen more Americans in the evacuation group had COVID-19 , and had to be separated on the plane : In a statement , the U.S. State Department spokesperson said Monday that American evacuees were all deemed asymptomatic and fit to fly before being processed for evacuation .
But during the evacuation process @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and gone to the airport , U.S. officials received notice that 14 passengers , who had been tested two to three days earlier , had tested positive for COVID-19 , the disease caused by the novel coronavirus .
“ These individuals were moved in the most expeditious and safe manner to a specialized containment area on the evacuation aircraft to isolate them in accordance with standard protocols , ” the State Department ’ s spokesperson said in the statement .
The spokesperson said the State Department made the decision to allow the 14 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ separated from other passengers and continued to be asymptomatic , to remain on the aircraft to complete the evacuation process after a consultation with health officials .
This is likely what drove the Trump administration ’ s decision to evacuate the Americans off the Diamond Princess overnight .
The number of positive cases had begun to spike , with 70 new cases identified in the past couple of days , suggesting that the quarantine within the ship wasn ’ t effective at containing the spread .
One CDC official told the New York @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and longer-lasting , which required a change in approach : While the letter did not explicitly give a reason for the change , an official with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention suggested on Friday that the authorities had re-evaluated the ship ’ s conditions .
“ The data coming out of Japan suggests there ’ s a higher risk among the people on the ship , ” the official , Dr. Nancy Messonnier , said during a news briefing .
Sixty-seven new cases were announced aboard the ship on Saturday , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the quarantine began .
In retrospect , the decision to leave people on the ship seems curious at best .
Cruise ships are known for their ability to transmit illnesses rapidly , thanks to the close quarters and constant universal access to food and facilities .
It would have been better to order an immediate evacuation under quarantine to prevent the spread of the virus to healthy individuals , something that experts had suggested at least a week ago .
In fact , evidence had already emerged that the quarantine was not being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Under those circumstances , the US had little choice but to get its citizens off the ship and into an effective quarantine .
That means another two weeks lost for these passengers , but unfortunately , there ’ s not any other way around this .
Hopefully the facilities in the US will be more comfortable than on the plane .

Meet the new quarantine, same as the old quarantine. Two charter flights from Japan took hundreds of Americans from the cruise ship Diamond Princess to California and Texas, but not all of them are happy to be back in the good ol’ US. The evacuation comes from an “about face” on the US policy on coronavirus, CNN reports, and leaves all of the Americans stuck in limbo for at least two weeks longer than they first thought.
“I’ve lost a month of my life,” one American woman says after finding out that the US changed its mind about relying on the Japanese quarantine process:
Take an inside look into the journey of the Americans evacuated from the Diamond Princess, a quarantined cruise ship off the coast of Japan. @willripleyCNN reports.https://t.co/U1T2xlfmzF pic.twitter.com/UztRO8Kg7h — New Day (@NewDay) February 17, 2020
Not everyone chose to get evacuated, but they’re stuck either way. The US will require those who remain to commit to another quarantine after the Diamond Princess is allowed to disembark in Yokohama later this week. That’s what has some of the quarantined Americans hopping mad today, even if they are coming home:
Thousands of people have been stuck in their cabins under mandatory quarantine aboard the Diamond Princess, which is docked off the Japanese port city of Yokohama, since February 3. With 356 confirmed cases of coronavirus on board, 70 of which were announced Sunday, the ship has the largest concentration of novel coronavirus cases outside mainland China. On February 19, the controversial quarantine period was set to finally end. Until Saturday, the US government seemed on board with that plan. The consensus among government agencies, which had been communicated to the more than 400 Americans aboard, was that remaining on the ship for the quarantine period was the best course of action. … On Saturday afternoon, the US Embassy in Tokyo sent a notice to Americans on board the Diamond Princess laying out plans to evacuate nearly 400 Americans back home. Once there, another 14 days of mandatory quarantine would begin. Anyone who chose not to get on the flight would have to wait another 14 days in Japan to ensure they were symptom-free before returning to the US. That decision has prompted anger among the American passengers, with many demanding answers to two simple questions about the US response: Why did the American government wait so long to make the about-face decision? What prompted such a dramatic shift in US policy?
The news didn’t get any better once they got to the airport, either. Tests performed earlier confirmed that two dozen more Americans in the evacuation group had COVID-19, and had to be separated on the plane:
In a statement, the U.S. State Department spokesperson said Monday that American evacuees were all deemed asymptomatic and fit to fly before being processed for evacuation. But during the evacuation process, after passengers had left the ship and gone to the airport, U.S. officials received notice that 14 passengers, who had been tested two to three days earlier, had tested positive for COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus. “These individuals were moved in the most expeditious and safe manner to a specialized containment area on the evacuation aircraft to isolate them in accordance with standard protocols,” the State Department’s spokesperson said in the statement. The spokesperson said the State Department made the decision to allow the 14 individuals, who were in isolation, separated from other passengers and continued to be asymptomatic, to remain on the aircraft to complete the evacuation process after a consultation with health officials.
This is likely what drove the Trump administration’s decision to evacuate the Americans off the Diamond Princess overnight. The number of positive cases had begun to spike, with 70 new cases identified in the past couple of days, suggesting that the quarantine within the ship wasn’t effective at containing the spread. One CDC official told the New York Times that the risk was both higher and longer-lasting, which required a change in approach:
While the letter did not explicitly give a reason for the change, an official with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention suggested on Friday that the authorities had re-evaluated the ship’s conditions. “The data coming out of Japan suggests there’s a higher risk among the people on the ship,” the official, Dr. Nancy Messonnier, said during a news briefing. Sixty-seven new cases were announced aboard the ship on Saturday, the most in a single day since the quarantine began.
In retrospect, the decision to leave people on the ship seems curious at best. Cruise ships are known for their ability to transmit illnesses rapidly, thanks to the close quarters and constant universal access to food and facilities. It would have been better to order an immediate evacuation under quarantine to prevent the spread of the virus to healthy individuals, something that experts had suggested at least a week ago. In fact, evidence had already emerged that the quarantine was not being strictly observed, as CNN reports:
The abrupt change in US policy led some to believe that Washington lost faith in the effectiveness of the Japanese response. Earlier this week, it emerged that some 1,000 crew on board the ship had not been kept in quarantine, eating meals together with masks off and working side by side.
Under those circumstances, the US had little choice but to get its citizens off the ship and into an effective quarantine. That means another two weeks lost for these passengers, but unfortunately, there’s not any other way around this. Hopefully the facilities in the US will be more comfortable than on the plane.


hotair--2020-02-17--Historic: Trump takes a lap at Daytona 500, media outrage ensues

The 62nd running of the Daytona 500 was held on Sunday .
The race is NASCAR ’ s season opener and considered the most prestigious and important race in NASCAR .
It is called America ’ s Race .
President Trump and First Lady Melania made history at the event and their critics are not happy .
President Trump served as the Grand Marshal of the Daytona 500 this year .
He is the second president to do so – George W. Bush did it in 2004 during his re-election campaign .
What made Trump ’ s trip to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the track that he and Melania took in The Beast , the presidential limo .
The sold-out event seats 100,000 racing fans and they were excited , to say the least .
The media covering the event ?
Not so much .
One White House correspondent wanted to make sure everyone knew that the taxpayers were paying for that lap around the track .
A reporter for the New York Times chimed in , citing Trump ’ s use of “ government apparatus ” and calling it “ a political event ” .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ tweet .
Others pointed out that Presidents often participate in sporting events – they throw out the first pitch on baseball ’ s opening day or attend Olympic events .
Some attend the Super Bowl or other championship games .
In other words , it ’ s not unusual .
This is President Trump we are talking about , though , so outrage from the left is pretty much guaranteed .
Trump called the event “ pure American glory ” .
He admitted in an interview that he ’ d like to drive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Daytona 500 is the legendary display of roaring engines , soaring spirits and the American skill , speed and power that we ’ ve been hearing about for so many years , ” Trump told the crowd before the race began .
He called the tens of thousands of fans present at the racetrack “ patriots , ” adding that “ NASCAR fans never forget that no matter who wins the race , what matters most is God , family and country.
” In an interview from the track , Trump told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not able to drive his own car as president , he was tempted to get behind the wheel of one of the race cars .
“ Right now , if I can , I ’ m gon na hop into one of these cars and I ’ m gon na get into this race , if possible , ” he joked .
While AP reporters were busy mocking tailgate celebrations and food consumed by regular people at the event , the crowd was thrilled to have the president and Melania there .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ food at the White House during the government shutdown , you know .
The AP writers also included impeachment into the story , because of course they did .
News of Trump ’ s public appearances are , of course , incomplete without mention of the “ I ” word .
The AP writers crossed that one off their list in the first paragraph : “ Stroll through the Daytona infield and fans can grab a seat next to President Donald Trump and get a sweet taste of impeachment .
“ Debi Ringhaver @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who stop in their tracks at the sight of her lifesize mannequin of Trump , chilling on a lawn chair , holding a book titled ‘ The Truth Behind Trump ’ and wearing a red ‘ Donald Trump 2020 ’ baseball cap .
“ Hundreds have stopped by her RV this week for a selfie or a chat or a sip of ‘ The Impeachment , ’ a blend of peach vodka , champagne and peach nectar .
The ‘ Subpoena Colada ’ also is in the blender , but Ringhaver concedes ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with a better name.
’ ” The Guardian was busy telling readers that NASCAR fans are just a bunch of old white Republicans .
The truth is that NASCAR ’ s audience is changing and includes people from all walks of life .
To assume all race car fans are Republicans is wrong , though conservatives make up a big part of the fan base .
NASCAR CEO Brian France endorsed Trump in 2016 .
You ’ d think Trump was the first president to understand the value of supporting NASCAR to read @ @ @ @ @ @ @ media .
President Obama invited NASCAR winners to the White House – I wonder if he served food .
President Reagan was the first sitting president to attend a NASCAR race .
He attended what was then called the Firecracker 400 in Daytona in 1984 .
George W. Bush also served as the grand marshal of the Pepsi 400 in July 2000 .
The crowd appreciated the special attention of Trump and chanted “ Four more years ” as he made his remarks .
Let ’ s be honest – the presence of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the feel-good moment of the weekend , combining a national pastime and politics .
Trump is a master marketer and regular Americans want to know that they are appreciated .
Trump is good about reaching out to all people and yes , it ’ s a good move for his re-election campaign .
Eighteen-year-old Hailie Deegan , the second woman to win a NASCAR race and the first woman to win the NASCAR K & N Pro Series West posted this : Sorry haters , the people loved it .
The president and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the media scowled .
That ’ s 2020 in a nutshell .

The 62nd running of the Daytona 500 was held on Sunday. The race is NASCAR’s season opener and considered the most prestigious and important race in NASCAR. It is called America’s Race. President Trump and First Lady Melania made history at the event and their critics are not happy.
President Trump served as the Grand Marshal of the Daytona 500 this year. He is the second president to do so – George W. Bush did it in 2004 during his re-election campaign. What made Trump’s trip to the racing event historic was the lap around the track that he and Melania took in The Beast, the presidential limo. The sold-out event seats 100,000 racing fans and they were excited, to say the least. The media covering the event? Not so much. One White House correspondent wanted to make sure everyone knew that the taxpayers were paying for that lap around the track.
This was an official White House event therefore paid by taxpayers as @realDonaldTrump @FLOTUS attended Daytona 500 today and “The Beast” limo ran a pace car lap around the track. pic.twitter.com/xb0QdBYEEI — Kelly O'Donnell (@KellyO) February 16, 2020
A reporter for the New York Times chimed in, citing Trump’s use of “government apparatus” and calling it “a political event”.
Using the official apparatus of government for what appears to be a political event https://t.co/GWNm8io8O1 — Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) February 16, 2020
Haberman took some heat for her ham-handed tweet.
I'm sorry, but this is just an absurd characterization of what's actually happening here and describing it this way betrays a real bias. https://t.co/V4D7iQDcq4 — Mark Hemingway (@Heminator) February 16, 2020
Others pointed out that Presidents often participate in sporting events – they throw out the first pitch on baseball’s opening day or attend Olympic events. Some attend the Super Bowl or other championship games. In other words, it’s not unusual. This is President Trump we are talking about, though, so outrage from the left is pretty much guaranteed.
Trump called the event “pure American glory”. He admitted in an interview that he’d like to drive one of the cars himself.
“The Daytona 500 is the legendary display of roaring engines, soaring spirits and the American skill, speed and power that we’ve been hearing about for so many years,” Trump told the crowd before the race began. He called the tens of thousands of fans present at the racetrack “patriots,” adding that “NASCAR fans never forget that no matter who wins the race, what matters most is God, family and country.” In an interview from the track, Trump told Fox Sports that while he’s not able to drive his own car as president, he was tempted to get behind the wheel of one of the race cars. “Right now, if I can, I’m gonna hop into one of these cars and I’m gonna get into this race, if possible,” he joked.
While AP reporters were busy mocking tailgate celebrations and food consumed by regular people at the event, the crowd was thrilled to have the president and Melania there. The president served a college team some fast food at the White House during the government shutdown, you know.
AP also dinged Trump: “The tailgating feast at one stop was fit for a president who served fast food at the White House to college football champions: deep fried honey buns and deep fried Oreos were on the dessert menu — or maybe it was dinner? — and cheap domestic beers easily slipped into NASCAR koozies.”
The AP writers also included impeachment into the story, because of course they did.
News of Trump’s public appearances are, of course, incomplete without mention of the “I” word. The AP writers crossed that one off their list in the first paragraph: “Stroll through the Daytona infield and fans can grab a seat next to President Donald Trump and get a sweet taste of impeachment. “Debi Ringhaver is mixing cocktails for curious NASCAR fans who stop in their tracks at the sight of her lifesize mannequin of Trump, chilling on a lawn chair, holding a book titled ‘The Truth Behind Trump’ and wearing a red ‘Donald Trump 2020’ baseball cap. “Hundreds have stopped by her RV this week for a selfie or a chat or a sip of ‘The Impeachment,’ a blend of peach vodka, champagne and peach nectar. The ‘Subpoena Colada’ also is in the blender, but Ringhaver concedes ‘it’s just a pina colada with a better name.’ ”
The Guardian was busy telling readers that NASCAR fans are just a bunch of old white Republicans. The truth is that NASCAR’s audience is changing and includes people from all walks of life. To assume all race car fans are Republicans is wrong, though conservatives make up a big part of the fan base. NASCAR CEO Brian France endorsed Trump in 2016.
Not going to lie, I had no idea what to expect. The man walked in shook all our hands, took selfies, and whatever we asked of him. I judge people on how they treat me and others I’m with, and that’s why I really appreciated meeting @POTUS. thanks for coming to #DAYTONA500 pic.twitter.com/Ih0DVaTLAr — Clint Bowyer (@ClintBowyer) February 16, 2020
Hell, while we’re telling the truth. I may have enjoyed this pic even more. 😜 pic.twitter.com/I9iBWapMA3 — Clint Bowyer (@ClintBowyer) February 16, 2020
You’d think Trump was the first president to understand the value of supporting NASCAR to read the left’s reaction in social media. President Obama invited NASCAR winners to the White House – I wonder if he served food. President Reagan was the first sitting president to attend a NASCAR race. He attended what was then called the Firecracker 400 in Daytona in 1984. George W. Bush also served as the grand marshal of the Pepsi 400 in July 2000. The crowd appreciated the special attention of Trump and chanted “Four more years” as he made his remarks.
Let’s be honest – the presence of President Trump and First Lady Melania was the feel-good moment of the weekend, combining a national pastime and politics. Trump is a master marketer and regular Americans want to know that they are appreciated. Trump is good about reaching out to all people and yes, it’s a good move for his re-election campaign.
Eighteen-year-old Hailie Deegan, the second woman to win a NASCAR race and the first woman to win the NASCAR K&N Pro Series West posted this:
Sorry haters, the people loved it. The president and first lady got the crowd revved-up and the media scowled. That’s 2020 in a nutshell.


hotair--2020-02-17--Liberals: The citizenship question was bad. Not asking it is just as bad.

As we all prepare to fill out our decennial census forms this year ( or most of us , anyway ) , Boston Globe columnist Renée Graham has a reminder for everyone .
Donald Trump ’ s efforts to include the citizenship question on this year ’ s short-form were racist , xenophobic and bad .
But even after the Supreme Court somehow saw fit to drop the question , it ’ s still going to be doing grave damage to our republic… or something .
You see , the “ sinister goal ” of the Bad Orange Man will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of color will still be afraid to fill out the forms .
The 2020 Census will not have a citizenship question .
Yet it may still achieve its sinister goal — keeping immigrants from participating .
When the Supreme Court last summer prevented the Trump administration from asking census respondents whether they are American citizens , some were quick to declare victory .
In reality , it was akin to a small win in a raging war with multiple shifting fronts .
Whether or not the question was allowed , its mere evocation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on vulnerable portions of the population .
“ It ’ s about creating a culture of fear , and when you create a culture of fear , it neutralizes people , it paralyzes people , ” LaTosha Brown , cofounder of Black Voters Matter , a grass-roots organization dedicated to protecting voter rights , increasing registration , and fighting voter suppression in communities of color , said in an interview .
The lack of logic on display here is nearly as stunning as the faulty assumptions on which it ’ s based .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the “ expert ” activists she quotes both take the usual path of conflating the word “ immigrants ” with illegal immigrants .
Then , just for good measure , they toss in “ communities of color , ” which is completely irrelevant to the subject at hand .
There is only one “ community ” that could hypothetically have some credible fear about filling out a citizenship question on the census and that would be the tens of millions of illegal aliens currently residing in our country .
If you are an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now either a naturalized citizen or legal permanent resident with a visa , green card or other valid documents , you have absolutely nothing to fear in declaring your citizenship status .
Similarly , your race is completely irrelevant to your citizenship status .
We have tens of millions of citizens and legal alien residents of every race you can name .
There are also illegal aliens of all stripes .
This race-baiting and fearmongering is sadly typical of liberal media outlets , while also being so pervasive that it ’ s almost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the only people with a hypothetical reason to fear filling it out are illegal aliens .
And whether you like it or not , they should be afraid .
They are in the country in violation of the law and subject to detention and removal at any time if they are detected .
That ’ s how the rule of law works , folks .
On top of that , as I mentioned repeatedly , this is only a hypothetical scenario .
Even if the citizenship question had been added , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kept all of the census data from immigration enforcement officials .
There were never going to be any new raids on illegal aliens based on what was entered on the forms .
Graham also ignores the fact that the citizenship question has been asked on the long-form in every census in the modern era with one exception .
That form goes out to literally tens of millions of people across all communities .
But you ’ ll notice that nobody complained about it for all those decades .
It was only when the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expanding it to the short form that it became “ sinister.
” Graham is correct about one thing , however .
There is most certainly a “ culture of fear ” being created surrounding this issue .
But it ’ s the author and her liberal enablers who are doing it .
By spreading malarkey like this ( hat tip to Uncle Joe ) around in minority communities , they are creating the false impression that the government is up to something and providing an incentive for Black and Hispanic citizens and legal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trash .
That ’ s not just illegal , but it also produces precisely the effect that Graham is decrying .
It will result in an undercount of minorities and dilute both their representation in Congress and federal funds allocated to their communities .
Great job publishing this , Boston Globe .
You ’ re guilty of precisely what you falsely accuse the President of attempting .

As we all prepare to fill out our decennial census forms this year (or most of us, anyway), Boston Globe columnist Renée Graham has a reminder for everyone. Donald Trump’s efforts to include the citizenship question on this year’s short-form were racist, xenophobic and bad. But even after the Supreme Court somehow saw fit to drop the question, it’s still going to be doing grave damage to our republic… or something. You see, the “sinister goal” of the Bad Orange Man will still be achieved because immigrants and communities of color will still be afraid to fill out the forms.
The 2020 Census will not have a citizenship question. Yet it may still achieve its sinister goal — keeping immigrants from participating. When the Supreme Court last summer prevented the Trump administration from asking census respondents whether they are American citizens, some were quick to declare victory. In reality, it was akin to a small win in a raging war with multiple shifting fronts. Whether or not the question was allowed, its mere evocation was designed to have a chilling effect on vulnerable portions of the population. “It’s about creating a culture of fear, and when you create a culture of fear, it neutralizes people, it paralyzes people,” LaTosha Brown, cofounder of Black Voters Matter, a grass-roots organization dedicated to protecting voter rights, increasing registration, and fighting voter suppression in communities of color, said in an interview.
The lack of logic on display here is nearly as stunning as the faulty assumptions on which it’s based. First of all, the author and the “expert” activists she quotes both take the usual path of conflating the word “immigrants” with illegal immigrants. Then, just for good measure, they toss in “communities of color,” which is completely irrelevant to the subject at hand.
There is only one “community” that could hypothetically have some credible fear about filling out a citizenship question on the census and that would be the tens of millions of illegal aliens currently residing in our country. If you are an immigrant who came here legally and is now either a naturalized citizen or legal permanent resident with a visa, green card or other valid documents, you have absolutely nothing to fear in declaring your citizenship status.
Similarly, your race is completely irrelevant to your citizenship status. We have tens of millions of citizens and legal alien residents of every race you can name. There are also illegal aliens of all stripes. This race-baiting and fearmongering is sadly typical of liberal media outlets, while also being so pervasive that it’s almost taken for granted.
As I said, the only people with a hypothetical reason to fear filling it out are illegal aliens. And whether you like it or not, they should be afraid. They are in the country in violation of the law and subject to detention and removal at any time if they are detected. That’s how the rule of law works, folks.
On top of that, as I mentioned repeatedly, this is only a hypothetical scenario. Even if the citizenship question had been added, it was being done in a way that kept all of the census data from immigration enforcement officials. There were never going to be any new raids on illegal aliens based on what was entered on the forms.
Graham also ignores the fact that the citizenship question has been asked on the long-form in every census in the modern era with one exception. That form goes out to literally tens of millions of people across all communities. But you’ll notice that nobody complained about it for all those decades. It was only when the Bad Orange Man was in favor of expanding it to the short form that it became “sinister.”
Graham is correct about one thing, however. There is most certainly a “culture of fear” being created surrounding this issue. But it’s the author and her liberal enablers who are doing it. By spreading malarkey like this (hat tip to Uncle Joe) around in minority communities, they are creating the false impression that the government is up to something and providing an incentive for Black and Hispanic citizens and legal residents to toss their forms in the trash. That’s not just illegal, but it also produces precisely the effect that Graham is decrying. It will result in an undercount of minorities and dilute both their representation in Congress and federal funds allocated to their communities.
Great job publishing this, Boston Globe. You’re guilty of precisely what you falsely accuse the President of attempting.


hotair--2020-02-17--<span class='red'>Breaking: Dems lose assault-weapons ban vote in Virginia; Update: "I think it will

Breaking: Dems lose assault-weapons ban vote in Virginia; Update: "I think it will die"

An epic faceplant by Virginia Democrats and Ralph Northam , who assumed that a narrow majority meant a mandate for progressive politics .
After the state House passed an assault-weapons ban last week , the centerpiece of Northam ’ s agenda for this legislative year , the state Senate was expected to follow suit .
Instead , four Democrats defected and killed the bill for at least this year : Virginia Gov .
Ralph Northam ’ s push to ban the sale of assault weapons has failed after members of his own party balked at the proposal .
Senators voted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and ask the state crime commission to study the issue , an outcome that drew cheers from a committee room packed with gun advocates .
Four moderate Democrats joined Republicans in Monday ’ s committee vote , rejecting legislation that would have prohibited the sale of certain semiautomatic firearms , including popular AR-15 style rifles , and banned the possession of magazines that hold more than 12 rounds .
The bill was a top priority for Northam , a Democrat who has campaigned heavily for a broad package of gun-control measures .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , at least outside of Northern Virginia where Democrats have come to dominate .
Some counties declared that they would become “ sanctuaries ” in the same sense as the immigration sanctuary-city movement by not enforcing the new law .
Discussion even arose among some counties of seceding and joining West Virginia in protest .
Gun owners used an annual demonstration in support of the Second Amendment to protest against the bill , which the media rushed — unjustly — to characterize as a racist and potentially violent clash .
And now all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ damage it did to Virginia won ’ t be nothing , however .
The fight over the bill intensified the political and cultural split between Northern Virginia ( NoVA ) and the rest of the state ( RoVA ) , a divide that has been developing over the last few decades as Washington DC ’ s influence expands in the former .
That cultural divide will breed even more resentment after this stunt , especially with the sneering from the NoVA media and political elite over the opposition ’ s protests against the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a disaster for Democrats , and not just in Virginia , although the damage there will be bad enough .
Progressives will be irate over the failure of the party to fulfill its pledge .
Ralph Northam wanted to use gun control to get back into the Left ’ s good graces after his blackface scandal , and now he has an egg-face problem instead .
Republicans will have a new political argument in the next election , and perhaps an opportunity to leverage this to regain its legislative majorities , thanks to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ push .
The bill ’ s failure in Virginia , where Democrats had full control over the government , will speak loudly to Democrats ’ push for similar legislation in Congress and in other purple-to-blue states .
That doesn ’ t mean Virginia Democrats have given up their gun-control agenda entirely .
They have other bills in the works , including a limitation on handgun purchases to one a month and a red-flag bill , which will also energize their opposition .
However , this was the crown jewel , and Democrats fumbled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It ’ s going to be tough to get swing-district votes in either chamber to remain whipped into support after this .
Update : Were these “ moderate Democrats , ” as the AP calls them ?
Hans Bader writes to say no .
“ These ‘ moderate ’ Democrats all voted for the ‘ Virginia Values Act , ' ” Bader e-mails me , “ which will give Virginia some of the nation ’ s most left-wing employment laws , and the $ 15 minimum wage , which will wipe out 100,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hans ’ analysis from last week about the demise of the “ moderate Democrat ” at Liberty Unyielding for more context .
Update : Some Democrats are pledging to try again in 2021 , but Sheriff Scott Jenkins thinks otherwise .
“ I think it will die , ” the Culpepper County sheriff said in reaction to the vote : Don ’ t forget that 2021 is an election year in Virginia , one of two states ( New Jersey being the other ) that conducts its state elections in off years .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ year would be political suicide for Democrats .

An epic faceplant by Virginia Democrats and Ralph Northam, who assumed that a narrow majority meant a mandate for progressive politics. After the state House passed an assault-weapons ban last week, the centerpiece of Northam’s agenda for this legislative year, the state Senate was expected to follow suit. Instead, four Democrats defected and killed the bill for at least this year:
Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam’s push to ban the sale of assault weapons has failed after members of his own party balked at the proposal. Senators voted to shelve the bill for the year and ask the state crime commission to study the issue, an outcome that drew cheers from a committee room packed with gun advocates. Four moderate Democrats joined Republicans in Monday’s committee vote, rejecting legislation that would have prohibited the sale of certain semiautomatic firearms, including popular AR-15 style rifles, and banned the possession of magazines that hold more than 12 rounds. The bill was a top priority for Northam, a Democrat who has campaigned heavily for a broad package of gun-control measures.
This bill created a fierce pushback in Virginia, at least outside of Northern Virginia where Democrats have come to dominate. Some counties declared that they would become “sanctuaries” in the same sense as the immigration sanctuary-city movement by not enforcing the new law. Discussion even arose among some counties of seceding and joining West Virginia in protest. Gun owners used an annual demonstration in support of the Second Amendment to protest against the bill, which the media rushed — unjustly — to characterize as a racist and potentially violent clash.
And now all of that was for nothing. The damage it did to Virginia won’t be nothing, however. The fight over the bill intensified the political and cultural split between Northern Virginia (NoVA) and the rest of the state (RoVA), a divide that has been developing over the last few decades as Washington DC’s influence expands in the former. That cultural divide will breed even more resentment after this stunt, especially with the sneering from the NoVA media and political elite over the opposition’s protests against the bill.
Politically, it’s a disaster for Democrats, and not just in Virginia, although the damage there will be bad enough. Progressives will be irate over the failure of the party to fulfill its pledge. Ralph Northam wanted to use gun control to get back into the Left’s good graces after his blackface scandal, and now he has an egg-face problem instead. Republicans will have a new political argument in the next election, and perhaps an opportunity to leverage this to regain its legislative majorities, thanks to the mask-dropping that took place in this push. The bill’s failure in Virginia, where Democrats had full control over the government, will speak loudly to Democrats’ push for similar legislation in Congress and in other purple-to-blue states.
That doesn’t mean Virginia Democrats have given up their gun-control agenda entirely. They have other bills in the works, including a limitation on handgun purchases to one a month and a red-flag bill, which will also energize their opposition. However, this was the crown jewel, and Democrats fumbled it into their own bathtub drain. It’s going to be tough to get swing-district votes in either chamber to remain whipped into support after this.
Update: Were these “moderate Democrats,” as the AP calls them? Hans Bader writes to say no. “These ‘moderate’ Democrats all voted for the ‘Virginia Values Act,'” Bader e-mails me, “which will give Virginia some of the nation’s most left-wing employment laws, and the $15 minimum wage, which will wipe out 100,000 plus jobs.” Be sure to read Hans’ analysis from last week about the demise of the “moderate Democrat” at Liberty Unyielding for more context.
Update: Some Democrats are pledging to try again in 2021, but Sheriff Scott Jenkins thinks otherwise. “I think it will die,” the Culpepper County sheriff said in reaction to the vote:
Don’t forget that 2021 is an election year in Virginia, one of two states (New Jersey being the other) that conducts its state elections in off years. Bringing up this bill in a legislative-election year would be political suicide for Democrats.


hotair--2020-02-17--The South Carolina debate qualification rules are really... something

We don ’ t even have Nevada out of the way yet , but the DNC is hard at work getting ready for South Carolina .
There will be another debate on Feb. 25 in Charleston , hosted by CBS News and the Congressional Black Caucus Institute .
The question on everyone ’ s minds , of course , is who is going to qualify .
According to Politico , you will see some of the familiar faces we had at the last debate , but due to some tweaking of the rules , Mike Bloomberg might make it in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very ) slim chance that Tom Steyer could as well .
The Democratic National Committee on Saturday rolled out the qualification rules for its presidential debate later this month in South Carolina — criteria that leave the door open for two billionaires , Mike Bloomberg and Tom Steyer , to join the top five candidates who emerged from Iowa and New Hampshire .
To qualify for the Feb. 25 debate in Charleston , S.C. , candidates need to hit 10 percent in four polls approved by the Democratic National Committee ( or 12 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ win at least one delegate to the Democratic National Convention from one of the three preceding early states : Iowa , New Hampshire or Nevada .
Polls must be released between Feb. 4 ( the day after the Iowa caucuses ) and Feb. 24 .
We ’ re getting close enough to Super Tuesday that these rules don ’ t strike me as being particularly onerous .
By this stage of the game , we don ’ t need two dozen candidates spread over two nights , each only getting five minutes to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve been campaigning for this long and you still can ’ t manage to crack double digits in at least a few polls , odds are that the base has kind of written you off .
The one tweak to the rules that I mentioned above is the removal of the donor threshold .
That ’ s being done as an apparent gift to Bloomberg since he doesn ’ t accept campaign contributions .
( And he ’ d have a lot of gall to go around asking for money , don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ m expecting the other candidates to howl about this anyway and we ’ ll probably hear about how the DNC is helping Mike buy the election .
We also have a debate in Nevada coming up on Wednesday .
So far only Biden , Sanders , Buttigieg , Warren and Klobuchar have qualified for both Nevada and South Carolina .
Tom Steyer hasn ’ t qualified for either thus far and he ’ s not expected to .
But Mike Bloomberg is on the cusp in Nevada .
He only needs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to make it onto the stage .
The catch is that the poll has to hit by Tuesday .
Steyer doesn ’ t stand a chance at Nevada and would have to show some seriously dramatic movement to get in on South Carolina .
Given all the damage that Bloomberg has been taking from oppo research showing up in the press for the past week or more , does he really want to be on the stage in either place ?
Everyone is attacking him right and left , bringing up everything he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ frisk , as well as accusations that he should have been featured in the whole # MeToo thing for his crappy treatment of women .
If he shows up on the stage , the others may declare some sort of truce and just pile on Mike to see if they can drive him out of the race before he gains any more traction .

We don’t even have Nevada out of the way yet, but the DNC is hard at work getting ready for South Carolina. There will be another debate on Feb. 25 in Charleston, hosted by CBS News and the Congressional Black Caucus Institute. The question on everyone’s minds, of course, is who is going to qualify. According to Politico, you will see some of the familiar faces we had at the last debate, but due to some tweaking of the rules, Mike Bloomberg might make it in. There’s also a (very) slim chance that Tom Steyer could as well.
The Democratic National Committee on Saturday rolled out the qualification rules for its presidential debate later this month in South Carolina — criteria that leave the door open for two billionaires, Mike Bloomberg and Tom Steyer, to join the top five candidates who emerged from Iowa and New Hampshire. To qualify for the Feb. 25 debate in Charleston, S.C., candidates need to hit 10 percent in four polls approved by the Democratic National Committee (or 12 percent in South Carolina-specific polls) or win at least one delegate to the Democratic National Convention from one of the three preceding early states: Iowa, New Hampshire or Nevada. Polls must be released between Feb. 4 (the day after the Iowa caucuses) and Feb. 24.
We’re getting close enough to Super Tuesday that these rules don’t strike me as being particularly onerous. By this stage of the game, we don’t need two dozen candidates spread over two nights, each only getting five minutes to speak. And really, if you’ve been campaigning for this long and you still can’t manage to crack double digits in at least a few polls, odds are that the base has kind of written you off.
The one tweak to the rules that I mentioned above is the removal of the donor threshold. That’s being done as an apparent gift to Bloomberg since he doesn’t accept campaign contributions. (And he’d have a lot of gall to go around asking for money, don’t you think?) But I’m expecting the other candidates to howl about this anyway and we’ll probably hear about how the DNC is helping Mike buy the election.
We also have a debate in Nevada coming up on Wednesday. So far only Biden, Sanders, Buttigieg, Warren and Klobuchar have qualified for both Nevada and South Carolina. Tom Steyer hasn’t qualified for either thus far and he’s not expected to. But Mike Bloomberg is on the cusp in Nevada. He only needs one more approved poll above ten percent to make it onto the stage. The catch is that the poll has to hit by Tuesday. Steyer doesn’t stand a chance at Nevada and would have to show some seriously dramatic movement to get in on South Carolina.
Given all the damage that Bloomberg has been taking from oppo research showing up in the press for the past week or more, does he really want to be on the stage in either place? Everyone is attacking him right and left, bringing up everything he’s ever said about stop and frisk, as well as accusations that he should have been featured in the whole #MeToo thing for his crappy treatment of women. If he shows up on the stage, the others may declare some sort of truce and just pile on Mike to see if they can drive him out of the race before he gains any more traction.


hotair--2020-02-17--Florida's "red flag" law has led to massive gun confiscation numbers

Florida enacted its red flag law in the spring of 2018 and they didn ’ t lose any time in putting it to use .
And I mean a lot of use .
But as this report from the Associated Press indicates , use of the law is not consistent from county to county and there are serious questions remaining as to how fairly it ’ s being applied .
The law , supported by legislators of both parties , has been applied more than 3,500 times since , with the pace accelerating during the last half of 2019 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the law showed its use is inconsistent , with some counties and cities using it rarely and others not at all .
Advocates of Florida ’ s red flag measure say before it existed , it was often difficult to remove firearms from those making threats or suffering severe mental breakdowns .
Investigators did not act on reports that the Parkland shooter was threatening to carry out a school massacre .
But even if they had , it is likely he would have been allowed to keep his guns because he had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mental commitments , they say .
The first thing I would point out here is that the AP article was edited to have a rather disingenuous title .
It reads “ In 2 years , Florida ‘ red flag ’ law removes hundreds of guns.
” While that ’ s technically true , the actual number is more than 3,500 , so “ thousands of guns ” would have been a more accurate description .
Most of the coverage that Florida ’ s red flag law has received has focused on the most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ start off talking about someone who posted on Facebook about a desire to go on a “ shooting spree.
” There was also a couple who shot up their own apartment while binging on cocaine and another person who pointed a rifle at a motorcyclist .
I ’ m not here to argue with those sorts of cases .
If you are dumb , stoned or reckless enough to do those sorts of things you probably need to be put in time-out for a little while and have your firearms removed .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As the report reveals , there are two counties in the panhandle where authorities have only issued one red flag order for every 100,000 residents .
Nine other , mostly rural counties , have issued none at all since the law took effect .
But at the other end of the scale , multiple counties have issued one for every 5,500 residents .
One other ( Highlands County ) issued one for every 850 people living there .
That ’ s got to be a significant portion of the guns in the county @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that some of those counties are chock full of crazy people while others have no issues at all ?
Or could it be that some counties have judges and/or sheriffs that are far more likely to approve gun confiscations than others ?
The sheriff in the top gun-grabbing county , Paul Blackman , told the AP that he has “ no idea ” why his county is number one but noted that his deputies receive frequent calls about mental health crisis situations .
Here ’ s one other hole in the state ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people concerned .
These red flag hearings are not considered criminal proceedings so you aren ’ t entitled to a lawyer assigned by the court .
If you ’ re too poor to afford a good attorney , your chances of prevailing at the hearing go way down .
With all that in mind , how many of these “ success ” stories about gun confiscations were actually brought by people with an ax to grind against their neighbor or angry ex-wives and girlfriends ?
Once the judge makes the decision to confiscate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much it .
You ’ re allowed to appeal , but again , if you don ’ t have a good lawyer what chance do you have ?
I ’ ve been on the fence about these red flag laws since they first started cropping up .
In extreme cases like the ones I mentioned at the top , I can definitely see firearms removal as being justifiable .
But the system is also open to abuse and there appear to be few safeguards in place for the wrongly accused .

Florida enacted its red flag law in the spring of 2018 and they didn’t lose any time in putting it to use. And I mean a lot of use. But as this report from the Associated Press indicates, use of the law is not consistent from county to county and there are serious questions remaining as to how fairly it’s being applied.
The law, supported by legislators of both parties , has been applied more than 3,500 times since, with the pace accelerating during the last half of 2019. Even so, an Associated Press analysis of the law showed its use is inconsistent, with some counties and cities using it rarely and others not at all. Advocates of Florida’s red flag measure say before it existed, it was often difficult to remove firearms from those making threats or suffering severe mental breakdowns. Investigators did not act on reports that the Parkland shooter was threatening to carry out a school massacre. But even if they had, it is likely he would have been allowed to keep his guns because he had no felony convictions or involuntary, long-term mental commitments, they say.
The first thing I would point out here is that the AP article was edited to have a rather disingenuous title. It reads “In 2 years, Florida ‘red flag’ law removes hundreds of guns.” While that’s technically true, the actual number is more than 3,500, so “thousands of guns” would have been a more accurate description.
Most of the coverage that Florida’s red flag law has received has focused on the most dramatic and probably justifiable cases. They start off talking about someone who posted on Facebook about a desire to go on a “shooting spree.” There was also a couple who shot up their own apartment while binging on cocaine and another person who pointed a rifle at a motorcyclist. I’m not here to argue with those sorts of cases. If you are dumb, stoned or reckless enough to do those sorts of things you probably need to be put in time-out for a little while and have your firearms removed.
But what about the more marginal cases? As the report reveals, there are two counties in the panhandle where authorities have only issued one red flag order for every 100,000 residents. Nine other, mostly rural counties, have issued none at all since the law took effect. But at the other end of the scale, multiple counties have issued one for every 5,500 residents. One other (Highlands County) issued one for every 850 people living there. That’s got to be a significant portion of the guns in the county.
Are we honestly supposed to believe that some of those counties are chock full of crazy people while others have no issues at all? Or could it be that some counties have judges and/or sheriffs that are far more likely to approve gun confiscations than others? The sheriff in the top gun-grabbing county, Paul Blackman, told the AP that he has “no idea” why his county is number one but noted that his deputies receive frequent calls about mental health crisis situations.
Here’s one other hole in the state’s red flag law that has many people concerned. These red flag hearings are not considered criminal proceedings so you aren’t entitled to a lawyer assigned by the court. If you’re too poor to afford a good attorney, your chances of prevailing at the hearing go way down. With all that in mind, how many of these “success” stories about gun confiscations were actually brought by people with an ax to grind against their neighbor or angry ex-wives and girlfriends? Once the judge makes the decision to confiscate your weapons, that’s pretty much it. You’re allowed to appeal, but again, if you don’t have a good lawyer what chance do you have?
I’ve been on the fence about these red flag laws since they first started cropping up. In extreme cases like the ones I mentioned at the top, I can definitely see firearms removal as being justifiable. But the system is also open to abuse and there appear to be few safeguards in place for the wrongly accused.


hotair--2020-02-17--Stacey Abrams: Of course I want to be vice president

The best thing about the left ’ s Abrams fascination is that it ’ s destined to collide with their AOC fascination in the 2024 or 2028 primary .
Can ’ t wait .
As for VP this year , it ’ s hard to see how she ’ d be a good fit for any of the remaining Democratic candidates but it ’ s smart of her to push her interest in the position .
If she ’ s silent about it and someone else ends up being chosen , well , no big deal .
Politicians get passed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Whereas if she ’ s vocal about wanting it and gets passed over , that ’ ll feel a bit more like a snub .
And since she ’ s already a bogus voter-suppression cause celebre among Democrats after her near-miss in the Georgia governor ’ s race two years ago , a snub would be a bad look for the nominee .
But as I say , she ’ d be an awkward match for the five candidates left with any real shot at the nomination .
( No , that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) Ideally , for reasons of ideological and demographic “ balance , ” Abrams would be an intriguing pairing with a Bill Clinton or Al Gore type — a standard middle-aged center-left white guy in need of some youth , racial and gender diversity , and a bit of lefty cred to hold progressives ’ interest .
There are no such people viable this year .
The closest thing is Amy Klobuchar , the least likely of the five remaining contenders to actually win .
Klobuchar ’ s relative youth would ease fears @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , leaving a 46-year-old who ’ s never won a federal or statewide race to inherit the most powerful job in the world .
The question is whether Klobuchar would want an all-female ticket against Trump .
My guess is she ’ d lean against the idea but not rule it out altogether .
Sanders , Biden , and Bloomberg all run into a massive age problem .
With each of them 77 or older , it ’ s perfectly possible that they wouldn ’ t survive their term .
Abrams ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign , especially given Bernie ’ s heart trouble and Biden ’ s periods of … sub-optimal coherence , let us say .
Bloomberg is probably the most likely of the three to add her to the ticket because he ’ ll have enough baggage with black and women voters by the time all the oppo on him is dumped that he ’ ll need to show conciliation somehow .
Abrams ’ s progressive politics might soften up a few lefty voters for him too .
They ’ d be an odd pairing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the young lefty star , but he ’ s pragmatic .
If he thinks he gains more by making her VP than he loses by dint of her age , hey .
And Mayor Pete , he ’ s just too young and green for a young and green VP .
Youth tickets are nice but his and Abrams ’ s *combined ages* are only a few years beyond what Biden , Bernie , and Bloomy have notched on their own .
I think Buttigieg would be stuck following Obama ’ s example @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the ticket to reassure voters that he ’ ll have experienced people at the highest levels advising him as he learns the ropes in his first elected office grander than mayor of a small city .
Whatever happens this summer , the “ Abrams vs. Tucker Carlson ” election four years from now will be amazing .

The best thing about the left’s Abrams fascination is that it’s destined to collide with their AOC fascination in the 2024 or 2028 primary. Can’t wait.
As for VP this year, it’s hard to see how she’d be a good fit for any of the remaining Democratic candidates but it’s smart of her to push her interest in the position. If she’s silent about it and someone else ends up being chosen, well, no big deal. Politicians get passed over for that job all the time.
Whereas if she’s vocal about wanting it and gets passed over, that’ll feel a bit more like a snub. And since she’s already a bogus voter-suppression cause celebre among Democrats after her near-miss in the Georgia governor’s race two years ago, a snub would be a bad look for the nominee.
But as I say, she’d be an awkward match for the five candidates left with any real shot at the nomination. (No, that doesn’t include Elizabeth Warren.) Ideally, for reasons of ideological and demographic “balance,” Abrams would be an intriguing pairing with a Bill Clinton or Al Gore type — a standard middle-aged center-left white guy in need of some youth, racial and gender diversity, and a bit of lefty cred to hold progressives’ interest. There are no such people viable this year. The closest thing is Amy Klobuchar, the least likely of the five remaining contenders to actually win. Klobuchar’s relative youth would ease fears that the nominee will die in office, leaving a 46-year-old who’s never won a federal or statewide race to inherit the most powerful job in the world. The question is whether Klobuchar would want an all-female ticket against Trump. My guess is she’d lean against the idea but not rule it out altogether.
Sanders, Biden, and Bloomberg all run into a massive age problem. With each of them 77 or older, it’s perfectly possible that they wouldn’t survive their term. Abrams’s inexperience would become an issue in the campaign, especially given Bernie’s heart trouble and Biden’s periods of … sub-optimal coherence, let us say. Bloomberg is probably the most likely of the three to add her to the ticket because he’ll have enough baggage with black and women voters by the time all the oppo on him is dumped that he’ll need to show conciliation somehow. Abrams’s progressive politics might soften up a few lefty voters for him too. They’d be an odd pairing, the old Wall Street tycoon and the young lefty star, but he’s pragmatic. If he thinks he gains more by making her VP than he loses by dint of her age, hey.
And Mayor Pete, he’s just too young and green for a young and green VP. Youth tickets are nice but his and Abrams’s *combined ages* are only a few years beyond what Biden, Bernie, and Bloomy have notched on their own. I think Buttigieg would be stuck following Obama’s example from 2008 and adding an old hand to the ticket to reassure voters that he’ll have experienced people at the highest levels advising him as he learns the ropes in his first elected office grander than mayor of a small city.
Whatever happens this summer, the “Abrams vs. Tucker Carlson” election four years from now will be amazing.


hotair--2020-02-17--Democratic super PAC: Trump is a 'caudillo' like socialists Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro

Democrats have a serious problem .
Nearly a third of Latino voters support Trump despite his support for a tough stance on illegal immigration .
Priorities USA , the largest Democratic super PAC , has a plan to try to limit Latino support for Trump .
The Miami Herald reports the group has launched a new ad aimed at making the case Trump acts like a “ caudillo ” and comparing him to socialist dictators Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro .
The largest Democratic Super PAC in the U.S. is launching a new series of attack ads starring a group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ oppressive governments in their home countries , featuring footage of President Donald Trump alongside images of Fidel Castro , Nicolás Maduro and Augusto Pinochet… The digital commercials will begin to publish on social media platforms on Monday with the hashtag “ # CaudilloDay , ” a nod to the Presidents ’ Day holiday .
“ What is a caudillo ?
An authoritarian .
A demagogue .
A dictator , ” the campaign ’ s introduction ad says in bold white letters on a black backdrop while suspenseful music plays in the background .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a president .
He acts like a caudillo .
( It ’ s not a compliment ) .
” Many Democrats seem eager to nominate a Democratic Socialist as their candidate for president , but the pitch to Latinos is that Trump is too much like Chavez and Castro .
That seems counter-intuitive to say the least .
There is only one person in the presidential race who has praised the Castro regime and his name is Bernie Sanders : But if all of this seems a bit desperate , it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happening .
A former spokesman for the Congressional Hispanic Caucus says Democrats should be very worried about Trump ’ s consistent support from about a third of Latino voters .
President Donald Trump has done almost everything he can to anger Latino voters .
And yet , his support among this crucial portion of the electorate remains surprisingly consistent .
After the 2016 election , exit polls analyzed by the Pew Research Center showed that 28 percent of Latino voters supported Trump ; today , 30 percent support him… Democrats lost the 2016 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Latino vote .
Today 65 percent of registered Latino voters who are Democrats have a positive view of the party ’ s presidential candidates .
Based on exit polling from the past three election cycles , I estimate that Democrats need about 70 percent of this vote to take back the White House… In an election that will likely come down to the smallest margins of victory , the consistent support for Trump from a small , but vocal , subset of Latino voters is a real threat to Democrats .
If unchanged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Latinos , and for the country as a whole .
As for why Trump has a solid hold on these voters , the author raises a couple of points .
First , America has a strong economy under Trump , which is why most Latinos came here in the first place .
Second , the author alludes to strong support from Latinos who fled communist states such as Cuba : Being able to provide for one ’ s family is one of the main reasons many people—from any country—immigrate to the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s rhetoric on a growing economy has found an audience is not surprising .
In Florida , for example , a poll by Equis Research showed that 57 percent of Latinos supported the way the president handled the economy .
If you look at only Cuban voters from the state , that number jumps to 71 percent .
Suggesting billionaire capitalist Trump is the person who will put us on a path to a socialist dictatorship like the ones in Cuba and Venezuela doesn ’ t make much sense .
In fact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ad is being put out there by moderates in the party as a kind of desperate cry to avoid nominating Bernie Sanders .
Sure , the ad is attacking Trump , but it ’ s also implicitly attacking socialism after all .
It ’ s going to backfire if the party picks Sanders because he clearly has a lot more in common with Castro and Chavez than Donald Trump does .

Democrats have a serious problem. Nearly a third of Latino voters support Trump despite his support for a tough stance on illegal immigration. Priorities USA, the largest Democratic super PAC, has a plan to try to limit Latino support for Trump. The Miami Herald reports the group has launched a new ad aimed at making the case Trump acts like a “caudillo” and comparing him to socialist dictators Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro.
The largest Democratic Super PAC in the U.S. is launching a new series of attack ads starring a group of Florida Latinos who’ve fled oppressive governments in their home countries, featuring footage of President Donald Trump alongside images of Fidel Castro, Nicolás Maduro and Augusto Pinochet… The digital commercials will begin to publish on social media platforms on Monday with the hashtag “#CaudilloDay,” a nod to the Presidents’ Day holiday. “What is a caudillo? An authoritarian. A demagogue. A dictator,” the campaign’s introduction ad says in bold white letters on a black backdrop while suspenseful music plays in the background. “Donald Trump does not act like a president. He acts like a caudillo. (It’s not a compliment).”
Here’s the first clip:
Donald Trump vilifies the press. He threatens his opponents. He says he wants to run for a third term. That sounds more like an authoritarian dictator than a U.S. president. So today, we must ask ourselves: Is it #PresidentsDay or #CaudilloDay? pic.twitter.com/iX59KNFQj3 — Priorities Florida (@PrioritiesFL) February 17, 2020
Many Democrats seem eager to nominate a Democratic Socialist as their candidate for president, but the pitch to Latinos is that Trump is too much like Chavez and Castro. That seems counter-intuitive to say the least. There is only one person in the presidential race who has praised the Castro regime and his name is Bernie Sanders.
🚨Uncovered video🚨@BernieSanders in 1985 praising the Communist Castro regime in Cuba and admitting on camera that he traveled to Nicaragua to advise the Ortega regime on how to successfully fight the United States. pic.twitter.com/qYtpvbVvCS — Reagan Battalion (@ReaganBattalion) February 20, 2019
But if all of this seems a bit desperate, it’s not hard to understand why it is happening. A former spokesman for the Congressional Hispanic Caucus says Democrats should be very worried about Trump’s consistent support from about a third of Latino voters.
President Donald Trump has done almost everything he can to anger Latino voters. And yet, his support among this crucial portion of the electorate remains surprisingly consistent. After the 2016 election, exit polls analyzed by the Pew Research Center showed that 28 percent of Latino voters supported Trump; today, 30 percent support him… Democrats lost the 2016 election with about 66 percent of the Latino vote. Today 65 percent of registered Latino voters who are Democrats have a positive view of the party’s presidential candidates. Based on exit polling from the past three election cycles, I estimate that Democrats need about 70 percent of this vote to take back the White House… In an election that will likely come down to the smallest margins of victory, the consistent support for Trump from a small, but vocal, subset of Latino voters is a real threat to Democrats. If unchanged, this dynamic could have devastating repercussions for Latinos, and for the country as a whole.
As for why Trump has a solid hold on these voters, the author raises a couple of points. First, America has a strong economy under Trump, which is why most Latinos came here in the first place. Second, the author alludes to strong support from Latinos who fled communist states such as Cuba:
Being able to provide for one’s family is one of the main reasons many people—from any country—immigrate to the United States, so the fact that Trump’s rhetoric on a growing economy has found an audience is not surprising. In Florida, for example, a poll by Equis Research showed that 57 percent of Latinos supported the way the president handled the economy. If you look at only Cuban voters from the state, that number jumps to 71 percent.
Suggesting billionaire capitalist Trump is the person who will put us on a path to a socialist dictatorship like the ones in Cuba and Venezuela doesn’t make much sense. In fact, you have to wonder if this ad is being put out there by moderates in the party as a kind of desperate cry to avoid nominating Bernie Sanders. Sure, the ad is attacking Trump, but it’s also implicitly attacking socialism after all. It’s going to backfire if the party picks Sanders because he clearly has a lot more in common with Castro and Chavez than Donald Trump does.


hotair--2020-02-17--Five days to go: Nevada Dems still worried that caucus night will be another Iowa-style debacle

A week ago after writing this post I thought , “ C ’ mon , they ’ re not going to blow it again .
They were caught flat-footed by the fiasco in Iowa but now they ’ ll throw everything they ’ ve got at averting a second disaster .
If worse comes to worst they can always use old-fashioned paper tabulations and phone in the results to HQ.
” But I don ’ t know .
Stories like this keep appearing .
At this point would you bet on the competence of any American institution , even with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I feel like the only result on Saturday night that they ’ ll be able to confirm for sure is that Elizabeth Warren finished last .
Read this post to reacquaint yourself with how things are supposed to work .
Initially Nevada was going to use two apps developed by the , er , same company that developed the infamous app used in Iowa .
That plan was quickly scrapped and Nevada turned instead to something simpler : Google Forms , pre-loaded onto iPads and provided to each of the state ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ first alignment ” and “ final alignment ” on caucus night ( the same 15-percent viability rules from Iowa apply here ) will be entered on those iPads , where they can be viewed remotely by HQ .
A phone call from each precinct to state party headquarters confirming the numbers will provide extra security .
A wrinkle in this otherwise straightforward process is that Nevada is also allowing early voting this year , via ranked-choice ballots .
The party will tabulate those results for each precinct and pre-load the results onto @ @ @ @ @ @ @ means on caucus night , in theory , it ’ s a simple matter of adding the early results at the precinct to the caucus-night results to see who won .
In practice ?
Well , it ’ s always trickier in practice .
One volunteer who has worked on past caucuses in Nevada said the Google form that will be used to input vote totals wasn ’ t even mentioned during a training session for precinct chairs late last week .
“ We weren ’ t told at all about it , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weren ’ t discussed until more than halfway through the presentation , the volunteer said , when someone asked how early vote totals would be added to the totals compiled live at each precinct .
The person leading the training said not to worry because the iPads would do the math for them .
“ There were old ladies looking at me like , ‘ Oh , we ’ re going to have iPads , ’ ” the volunteer told POLITICO .
After sitting through the two-hour training session , the person predicted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disaster.
” It ’ s not that they don ’ t have a plan , in other words .
They do .
It ’ s just that they ’ ve thrown it together on the fly and are forced to outsource implementation to thousands of older volunteers , many of whom would struggle to use an iPad even in low-stakes , no-time-pressure scenarios .
They ’ ve already had a problem with the tech during early voting , in fact .
The Nevada Independent reports that the check-in process on Saturday was supposed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first used to confirm that a voter was registered and the second used to complete the check-in process on Google Forms .
The process was so interminably slow that the party decided to abandon it after a few hours , sticking with the first iPad to check the voter rolls but switching to paper for the second .
Right now you ’ re thinking , “ Why don ’ t they just make the whole process paper-only ?
” Good question .
Good question .
Normally this is where some key player in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everyone that things are going smoothly and the caucus will run like clockwork on Saturday .
Instead , the candidates ’ own campaigns are whispering to WaPo that they ’ re nervous too : Campaigns said they still have not gotten the party to offer even a basic explanation of how key parts of the process will work .
Volunteers are reporting problems with the technology that ’ s been deployed at the last minute to make the vote count smoother .
And experts are raising serious questions about a tool the party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one scrapped after the meltdown in Iowa .
“ It feels like the [ state party is ] making it up as they go along , ” said one Democratic presidential aide , who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the process .
“ That ’ s not how we need to be running an election.
” … One campaign aide , speaking on condition of anonymity to avoid souring relations between the campaign and the state party , likened the calls to phoning into a “ call center where the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that they use.
” The Nevada Democrats ’ staff , joined on the call by their attorney , offered vague answers that seemed to have been scripted by a legal team to offer as little substance as possible , the aide said .
Never a good sign when the state party is lawyering up in advance of the big night .
Multiple campaigns told WaPo that they ’ ve asked the DNC for clarity on how things will work but have gotten little feedback , with one complaining that they ’ re finding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than they are from their own party leaders .
Things would need to go really , really wrong for this end to up a bigger sh*tshow than Iowa .
But the Trump era is full of new and unlikely possibilities in American politics , my friends .
Politico goes on to note that there are other logistical problems lurking potentially .
One is as simple as how to transmit the data to HQ on caucus night .
Should the party provide its own WiFi or use the native WiFi at the precinct site @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the moment they ’ re claiming they ’ ll use 4G for the most part , although if there ’ s a problem with that the WiFi issue will reemerge .
Not all of the potential snafus are tech-related either .
The NYT published a bombshell analysis 10 days ago claiming that the precinct results in Iowa were chock full of errors — not because of the app that was used but because volunteers running the caucus were confused by the complicated rules governing the first and final “ alignments.
” Nevada ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Politico notes , citing guidance given to volunteers that leaves it unclear whether supporters of a candidate who ’ s not viable on the first alignment will be forced to choose among the viable ones or whether they can switch to another non-viable candidate to get that person over the 15 percent threshold on the final alignment .
Rules like that were confusing enough to volunteers in Iowa that some precincts ended up showing viable candidates *losing* support between the first and final alignment even though that ’ s supposed to be impossible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s viable on the first vote are required to stick with that candidate on the second vote . )
Imagine Nevada trying to pull off the same thing but also having to incorporate ranked-choice early voting by thousands of people into the tallying in a pinch .
Thank God they ’ re holding this caucus on a Saturday night , when we can all get good and drunk beforehand to watch the returns come in .

A week ago after writing this post I thought, “C’mon, they’re not going to blow it again. They were caught flat-footed by the fiasco in Iowa but now they’ll throw everything they’ve got at averting a second disaster. If worse comes to worst they can always use old-fashioned paper tabulations and phone in the results to HQ.”
But I don’t know. Stories like this keep appearing. At this point would you bet on the competence of any American institution, even with advance warning that a fiasco looms?
I feel like the only result on Saturday night that they’ll be able to confirm for sure is that Elizabeth Warren finished last.
Read this post to reacquaint yourself with how things are supposed to work. Initially Nevada was going to use two apps developed by the, er, same company that developed the infamous app used in Iowa. That plan was quickly scrapped and Nevada turned instead to something simpler: Google Forms, pre-loaded onto iPads and provided to each of the state’s 2,000 precincts. The results of the “first alignment” and “final alignment” on caucus night (the same 15-percent viability rules from Iowa apply here) will be entered on those iPads, where they can be viewed remotely by HQ. A phone call from each precinct to state party headquarters confirming the numbers will provide extra security. A wrinkle in this otherwise straightforward process is that Nevada is also allowing early voting this year, via ranked-choice ballots. The party will tabulate those results for each precinct and pre-load the results onto the precinct’s iPad. That means on caucus night, in theory, it’s a simple matter of adding the early results at the precinct to the caucus-night results to see who won.
In practice? Well, it’s always trickier in practice.
One volunteer who has worked on past caucuses in Nevada said the Google form that will be used to input vote totals wasn’t even mentioned during a training session for precinct chairs late last week. “We weren’t told at all about it,” the person said. The iPads weren’t discussed until more than halfway through the presentation, the volunteer said, when someone asked how early vote totals would be added to the totals compiled live at each precinct. The person leading the training said not to worry because the iPads would do the math for them. “There were old ladies looking at me like, ‘Oh, we’re going to have iPads,’” the volunteer told POLITICO. After sitting through the two-hour training session, the person predicted the caucus would be a “complete disaster.”
It’s not that they don’t have a plan, in other words. They do. It’s just that they’ve thrown it together on the fly and are forced to outsource implementation to thousands of older volunteers, many of whom would struggle to use an iPad even in low-stakes, no-time-pressure scenarios. They’ve already had a problem with the tech during early voting, in fact. The Nevada Independent reports that the check-in process on Saturday was supposed to involve two iPads, with the first used to confirm that a voter was registered and the second used to complete the check-in process on Google Forms. The process was so interminably slow that the party decided to abandon it after a few hours, sticking with the first iPad to check the voter rolls but switching to paper for the second.
Right now you’re thinking, “Why don’t they just make the whole process paper-only?” Good question. Good question.
Normally this is where some key player in this saga would step in to reassure everyone that things are going smoothly and the caucus will run like clockwork on Saturday. Instead, the candidates’ own campaigns are whispering to WaPo that they’re nervous too:
Campaigns said they still have not gotten the party to offer even a basic explanation of how key parts of the process will work. Volunteers are reporting problems with the technology that’s been deployed at the last minute to make the vote count smoother. And experts are raising serious questions about a tool the party has been feverishly assembling to replace the one scrapped after the meltdown in Iowa. “It feels like the [state party is] making it up as they go along,” said one Democratic presidential aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the process. “That’s not how we need to be running an election.”… One campaign aide, speaking on condition of anonymity to avoid souring relations between the campaign and the state party, likened the calls to phoning into a “call center where the customer service person only had three prompts that they use.” The Nevada Democrats’ staff, joined on the call by their attorney, offered vague answers that seemed to have been scripted by a legal team to offer as little substance as possible, the aide said.
Never a good sign when the state party is lawyering up in advance of the big night. Multiple campaigns told WaPo that they’ve asked the DNC for clarity on how things will work but have gotten little feedback, with one complaining that they’re finding out more about it from the press than they are from their own party leaders.
Things would need to go really, really wrong for this end to up a bigger sh*tshow than Iowa. But the Trump era is full of new and unlikely possibilities in American politics, my friends.
Politico goes on to note that there are other logistical problems lurking potentially. One is as simple as how to transmit the data to HQ on caucus night. Should the party provide its own WiFi or use the native WiFi at the precinct site, which might be insecure? At the moment they’re claiming they’ll use 4G for the most part, although if there’s a problem with that the WiFi issue will reemerge.
Not all of the potential snafus are tech-related either. The NYT published a bombshell analysis 10 days ago claiming that the precinct results in Iowa were chock full of errors — not because of the app that was used but because volunteers running the caucus were confused by the complicated rules governing the first and final “alignments.” Nevada’s running into that problem too, Politico notes, citing guidance given to volunteers that leaves it unclear whether supporters of a candidate who’s not viable on the first alignment will be forced to choose among the viable ones or whether they can switch to another non-viable candidate to get that person over the 15 percent threshold on the final alignment.
Rules like that were confusing enough to volunteers in Iowa that some precincts ended up showing viable candidates *losing* support between the first and final alignment even though that’s supposed to be impossible. (Supporters of a candidate who’s viable on the first vote are required to stick with that candidate on the second vote.) Imagine Nevada trying to pull off the same thing but also having to incorporate ranked-choice early voting by thousands of people into the tallying in a pinch. Thank God they’re holding this caucus on a Saturday night, when we can all get good and drunk beforehand to watch the returns come in.


hotair--2020-02-17--Bloomberg: Farmers lack the "grey matter" needed in today's tech world

In a bitterly divided America , it takes a special talent to bring together both sides of the political aisle in criticism of a candidate .
Michael Bloomberg is one such candidate with that talent .
His coastal elitism was on full display when his remarks about farmers at a business school talk in 2016 came back to haunt him last weekend .
Bloomberg was a participant in a Distinguished Speakers Series at the University of Oxford Saïd Business School .
A question posed to Bloomberg about the possibility of uniting people in middle America and coastal Americans produced what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those of us who live in flyover country .
Bloomberg referenced what he sees as an inability of blue-collar workers to adjust to an information economy , even if they are given a subsidized education .
For instance , he thinks farmers are dumb .
He thinks he can teach anyone to farm , even the tech nerds in his audience .
“ The agrarian society lasted 3,000 years and we could teach processes .
I could teach anybody , even people in this room , no offense intended , to be a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It ’ s a process .
You dig a hole , you put a seed in , you put dirt on top , add water , up comes the corn .
You could learn that .
Then we had 300 years of the industrial society .
You put the piece of metal on the lathe , you turn the crank in the direction of the arrow and you can have a job .
And we created a lot of jobs .
At one point , 98 percent of the world worked in agriculture @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the United States.
” He went on to say , “ The skill sets you have to learn are how to think and analyze .
You have to have a different skill set .
You have to have a lot more grey matter.
’ A lot more grey matter .
That is pretty clear – farmers do not possess the brain power for the coming technological take-over of our world .
He speaks to the challenge of educating students for the future while bringing in a weird guillotine reference .
Off with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ information economy and the information economy is fundamentally different because it ’ s built around replacing people with technology and the skill sets that you have to learn are how to think and analyze , and that is a whole degree level different .
You have to have a different skill set , you have to have a lot more gray matter .
It ’ s not clear the teachers can teach or the students can learn , and so the challenge of society of finding jobs for these people , who we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ roof over their head and a meal in their stomach and a cell phone and a car and that sort of thing .
But the thing that is the most important , that will stop them from setting up a guillotine someday , is the dignity of a job ” He ’ s telling farmers to learn to code .
What Bloomberg doesn ’ t realize is that most of them probably already know how , at least to some extent .
It is some breathtaking ignorance being exhibited by Mr. Bloomberg .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ or spoken to a real life farmer ?
No wonder he skipped the Iowa caucuses .
Does he really think all there is to farming is sticking a seed in the ground and , viola , you ’ re a farmer ?
If education is his concern , is he completely unaware of agricultural schools and colleges ?
People across the political spectrum weighed in .
The Bernie Bros spoke to how out-of-touch Bloomberg sounds , and how often it happens .
What Bloomberg fails miserably to understand is that farming is much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ includes chemistry , mathematics , analysis , and botany , as well as technology .
Today ’ s farming is , indeed , high tech and requires both technological skills and critical thinking skills .
The heavy equipment used on farms run on computer software to assist farmers .
Bloomberg referenced corn as a crop that “ comes up ” after planting a seed .
Corn , by the way , is not an easy crop to grow .
Anyone who has ever tried to grow tomatoes or even flowers for that matter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ simple backyard garden than just planting seeds .
When we grew blueberries in southern Louisiana , my husband and I learned about the balance of limestone traces in the soil , among other things .
I ’ m happy to say we were successful .
Every American owes farmers the utmost respect for providing the food on our tables .
I can ’ t imagine the stress they are under year after year to produce a bountiful crop on such grand levels .
Small scale gardens can be frustrating enough , I can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of acres at a time .
Maybe Bloomberg just felt relaxed at such an elite setting as the University of Oxford and was comfortable enough to expose his true feelings about working-class tradespeople .
Apparently , in his mind , they are less than white collar workers .
That says more about Michael Bloomberg ’ s intelligence than that of farmers .
He should think about that the next time he sits down for a meal .

In a bitterly divided America, it takes a special talent to bring together both sides of the political aisle in criticism of a candidate. Michael Bloomberg is one such candidate with that talent. His coastal elitism was on full display when his remarks about farmers at a business school talk in 2016 came back to haunt him last weekend.
Bloomberg was a participant in a Distinguished Speakers Series at the University of Oxford Saïd Business School. A question posed to Bloomberg about the possibility of uniting people in middle America and coastal Americans produced what can be seen as a slam against those of us who live in flyover country. Bloomberg referenced what he sees as an inability of blue-collar workers to adjust to an information economy, even if they are given a subsidized education. For instance, he thinks farmers are dumb. He thinks he can teach anyone to farm, even the tech nerds in his audience.
“The agrarian society lasted 3,000 years and we could teach processes. I could teach anybody, even people in this room, no offense intended, to be a farmer,” Bloomberg said. “It’s a process. You dig a hole, you put a seed in, you put dirt on top, add water, up comes the corn. You could learn that. Then we had 300 years of the industrial society. You put the piece of metal on the lathe, you turn the crank in the direction of the arrow and you can have a job. And we created a lot of jobs. At one point, 98 percent of the world worked in agriculture, now it’s 2 percent in the United States.”
Bloomberg on why farmers can’t work in information technology MB: “I can teach anyone how to be a farmer 1 dig a hole 2 put a seed in 3 put dirt on top 4 add water 5 up comes the corn” The skill 4information technology is completely different you need more grey matter#farmers pic.twitter.com/HM13tA6goz — Pete (@NYBackpacker) February 15, 2020
He went on to say, “The skill sets you have to learn are how to think and analyze. You have to have a different skill set. You have to have a lot more grey matter.’ A lot more grey matter. That is pretty clear – farmers do not possess the brain power for the coming technological take-over of our world. He speaks to the challenge of educating students for the future while bringing in a weird guillotine reference. Off with their heads?
“Now comes the information economy and the information economy is fundamentally different because it’s built around replacing people with technology and the skill sets that you have to learn are how to think and analyze, and that is a whole degree level different. You have to have a different skill set, you have to have a lot more gray matter. It’s not clear the teachers can teach or the students can learn, and so the challenge of society of finding jobs for these people, who we can take care of giving them a roof over their head and a meal in their stomach and a cell phone and a car and that sort of thing. But the thing that is the most important, that will stop them from setting up a guillotine someday, is the dignity of a job”
He’s telling farmers to learn to code. What Bloomberg doesn’t realize is that most of them probably already know how, at least to some extent.
It is some breathtaking ignorance being exhibited by Mr. Bloomberg. Has he never been on a farm or spoken to a real life farmer? No wonder he skipped the Iowa caucuses. Does he really think all there is to farming is sticking a seed in the ground and, viola, you’re a farmer? If education is his concern, is he completely unaware of agricultural schools and colleges?
People across the political spectrum weighed in. The Bernie Bros spoke to how out-of-touch Bloomberg sounds, and how often it happens.
“Time and again we see Bloomberg insulting the middle class and the working class, union members and not yet union members,” the organization tweeted. “Maybe it’s time for pundits to stop pretending he’s just another candidate. Bloomberg is an oligarch spending his play money to buy the White House.”
What Bloomberg fails miserably to understand is that farming is much more than planting crops. Successful farming includes chemistry, mathematics, analysis, and botany, as well as technology. Today’s farming is, indeed, high tech and requires both technological skills and critical thinking skills. The heavy equipment used on farms run on computer software to assist farmers.
Bloomberg seems to have acquired his knowledge of farming by watching Hee-Haw. https://t.co/cy4sTBSRh8 — Brit Hume (@brithume) February 16, 2020
Bloomberg referenced corn as a crop that “comes up” after planting a seed. Corn, by the way, is not an easy crop to grow. Anyone who has ever tried to grow tomatoes or even flowers for that matter, knows that more goes into a simple backyard garden than just planting seeds. When we grew blueberries in southern Louisiana, my husband and I learned about the balance of limestone traces in the soil, among other things. I’m happy to say we were successful.
Every American owes farmers the utmost respect for providing the food on our tables. I can’t imagine the stress they are under year after year to produce a bountiful crop on such grand levels. Small scale gardens can be frustrating enough, I can’t imagine trying to manage hundreds of acres at a time.
Maybe Bloomberg just felt relaxed at such an elite setting as the University of Oxford and was comfortable enough to expose his true feelings about working-class tradespeople. Apparently, in his mind, they are less than white collar workers. That says more about Michael Bloomberg’s intelligence than that of farmers. He should think about that the next time he sits down for a meal.


hotair--2020-02-18--Iowa man allegedly kidnapped woman and forced her to watch 'Roots' to 'better understand her racism'

At first I was convinced this was something published by the Onion or maybe the Babylon Bee but multiple outlets are reporting it , so apparently this really happened .
Robert Lee Noye was arrested after ( allegedly ) kidnapping a woman and forcing her to watch the 9-hour long mini-series “ Roots.
” His goal was to make her more aware of her own racism , though the NY Post reports the victim ’ s race is not clear at this point : Noye is accused of abducting an unnamed woman of unspecified race , then holding her captive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Second Avenue SW , where she was forced to watch the nine-hour ABC miniseries “ so she could better understand her racism , ” according to a criminal complaint .
When his captive tried to move , Noye ordered her to “ remain seated and watch the movie with him or he would kill her and spread her body parts across Interstate 380 on the way to Chicago , ” per the complaint .
NBC News has more on how the police became involved : On Monday , Cedar Rapids police were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for an open-line 911 call “ with lots of screaming , ” police said in a statement .
Dispatchers and officers were able to locate the home where the call was coming from by using GPS .
When they arrived at the home , an intoxicated male , later identified as Noye , answered the door , police said .
A 37-year-old woman and 12-year-old daughter , who were both upset and crying , were found inside the house , police said .
The Grio has a story up about the arrest which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A Black man in Michigan has been arrested after he took Black History Month a bit too seriously this year and used the movie ‘ Roots ’ to teach a lesson.
” Yes , he graduated from social justice warrior to social justice kidnapper .
By the way , the Grio and this WUSA report describes Noye as a man from Michigan but the Post and NBC say this happened in Cedar Rapids , Iowa .
If it turns out the whole thing was someone ’ s idea of a joke I won @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , multiple outlets seem to agree it really happened and that Noye is now facing charges of false imprisonment and harassment .
Oh what a world .

At first I was convinced this was something published by the Onion or maybe the Babylon Bee but multiple outlets are reporting it, so apparently this really happened. Robert Lee Noye was arrested after (allegedly) kidnapping a woman and forcing her to watch the 9-hour long mini-series “Roots.” His goal was to make her more aware of her own racism, though the NY Post reports the victim’s race is not clear at this point:
Noye is accused of abducting an unnamed woman of unspecified race, then holding her captive at a residence in the 700 block of Second Avenue SW, where she was forced to watch the nine-hour ABC miniseries “so she could better understand her racism,” according to a criminal complaint. When his captive tried to move, Noye ordered her to “remain seated and watch the movie with him or he would kill her and spread her body parts across Interstate 380 on the way to Chicago,” per the complaint.
NBC News has more on how the police became involved:
On Monday, Cedar Rapids police were dispatched to an area in the city for an open-line 911 call “with lots of screaming,” police said in a statement. Dispatchers and officers were able to locate the home where the call was coming from by using GPS. When they arrived at the home, an intoxicated male, later identified as Noye, answered the door, police said. A 37-year-old woman and 12-year-old daughter, who were both upset and crying, were found inside the house, police said.
The Grio has a story up about the arrest which opens with this amusing lede: “A Black man in Michigan has been arrested after he took Black History Month a bit too seriously this year and used the movie ‘Roots’ to teach a lesson.”
Yes, he graduated from social justice warrior to social justice kidnapper.
By the way, the Grio and this WUSA report describes Noye as a man from Michigan but the Post and NBC say this happened in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. If it turns out the whole thing was someone’s idea of a joke I won’t be shocked but, again, multiple outlets seem to agree it really happened and that Noye is now facing charges of false imprisonment and harassment. Oh what a world.