“The great principles of right and wrong are legible to every reader; to pursue them requires not the aid of many counselors.” —Thomas Jefferson (1775)
IN TODAY’S DIGEST
It’s a consolation prize, and we get the feeling Merrick Garland knows it.
Joe Biden’s 68-year-old attorney general nominee was, just five years ago, nominated by Barack Obama to replace the late Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court — an appointment that would’ve swung the High Court’s then-delicate 5-4 balance from right to left. Thankfully, then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell had other ideas. He refused to hold hearings for Garland prior to the 2016 presidential election, and his bold gamble paid off: Donald Trump won the election and ultimately tabbed Neil Gorsuch to replace Scalia.
Because of this, and because at 68 his chances of ever being appointed to the Supreme Court have all but vanished, we can understand if the man feels some bitterness toward McConnell and his fellow Republicans. And this might help explain Judge Garland’s apparent zeal when he responded to a question about the January 6 Capitol riot. As The Wall Street Journal reports, Garland “promised to combat the threat of domestic extremism, saying that a sprawling federal investigation … would be his first priority if confirmed for the job.”
“‘I think this was the most heinous attack on the democratic processes that I’ve ever seen, and one that I never expected to see in my lifetime,’ Judge Garland told the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday. He added that the current investigation into the riot by former President Donald Trump’s supporters — which has led to around 250 people facing criminal charges to date — appeared to be ‘extremely aggressive and perfectly appropriate.’”
Setting aside the strong likelihood of a rigged investigation, we wonder: When was the last time an attorney general nominee — or any sitting judge, for that matter — used the terms “extremely aggressive” and “perfectly appropriate” in the same sentence?
Missouri Republican Senator Josh Hawley tried to drill down into Garland’s definition of domestic extremism. “Let me ask you about assaults on federal property in places other than Washington, DC — Portland, for instance, Seattle. Do you regard assaults on federal courthouses or other federal property as acts of domestic extremism, domestic terrorism?”
Credit to Matt Margolis at PJ Media for capturing the, uh, nuance in Garland’s response: “An attack on a courthouse while in operation — trying to prevent judges from actually deciding cases — that plainly is domestic uh uh um um uh uh extremism uh uh um um uh uh um domestic terrorism. An attack simply on government property at night, or under any other kind of circumstances, is a clear crime and a serious one, and should be punished.”
Then came the equivocation: “I don’t mean — I don’t know enough of the facts of the example you were talking about, but that’s where I draw the line. One is, uh, both are criminal, um uh uh, but one is, uh, a core attack on our democratic institutions.”
So when a 60-year-old Trump supporter with no priors puts his foot on a desk in Nancy Pelosi’s office as a tit-for-tat show of disrespect for her having torn up President Trump’s State of the Union speech, let’s deny him bail and hold him in a federal prison 1,000 miles from home. But when antifa thugs try to burn down a federal courthouse in Portland, well, that’s not “a core attack on our democratic institutions.”
“It is disturbing,” writes Miranda Devine in the New York Post, “that Garland is embracing the rancid lie that the Capitol riot was racially motivated, an uprising by white supremacists’ which rivaled the Islamist terror attack of 9/11 in which 3,000 people were slaughtered. This is Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s narrative, which she has driven with escalating hyperbole until it no longer resembles anything that happened on January 6.”
Too bad Ms. Devine wasn’t able to question Judge Garland. Maybe she’d have grilled him about our two-tier justice system — one for the Left and one for the Right. Maybe she’d have asked him why almost everyone arrested for their role in the January 6 riot remains in jail — even nonviolent offenders, even those without criminal records, even those with stable jobs, even retirees and mother-son duos.
Everyone. Still in jail. More than six weeks after the riot. Everyone, that is, except an anti-Trump leftist named John Sullivan, “who prosecutors say encouraged the violence that day” yet who “was rewarded with $75,000 by CNN and NBC for his video footage.”
There were plenty of other uncomfortable moments for Judge Garland yesterday; plenty of moments like the one where Hawley asked him about whether illegal border crossings should remain, well, illegal. “I haven’t thought about that question. I just haven’t thought about that question,” Garland said. “The president has made clear that we are a nation with borders, with national security. I don’t know of a proposal to decriminalize but still make it unlawful to answer. I just haven’t thought about it.”
Garland also dodged questions about John Durham’s probe, the Hunter Biden probe, and whether biological males should be allowed to compete against our daughters in sports — among many other things.
Unfortunately for us, there are a lot of important things that Merrick Garland just hasn’t thought about.
America marked a sad milestone yesterday: 500,000 COVID deaths. The surge that began in the fall brought more than half of the deaths since the coronavirus pandemic began — 100,000 in the last five weeks alone. The victims have been our loved ones and our neighbors, and all of us will remember the impact for the rest of our lives.
In a press conference and ceremony yesterday to mark the milestone, President Joe Biden aimed for somber reflection on the pain Americans have endured in losing loved ones, even speaking of his own tragic family losses of his wife and daughter (which he has disgracefully lied about) and then later his son (whom he disgracefully used in another lie). He once again spoke of the need to “fight this together” as the “United States of America.”
The problem is that his speech was badly written and delivered worse, and his administration and the Democrat-controlled Congress have done nothing to unify the country. They have only politicized COVID deaths, first using them to hang around the neck of Donald Trump and now to spend gargantuan amounts of money on their favored constituents.
Indeed, what Biden was really doing was setting up the passage of the Democrats’ latest larded-up “COVID relief” bill. Earlier in the day, Biden took a totally different tone, noting, “My critics say the [$1.9 trillion bill] is too big. Let me ask them a rhetorical question: What would you have me cut? What would you have me leave out?” Well, for starters, how about the $1.075 trillion that isn’t related to the pandemic at all?
Stiff Republicans opposition is due both to the deficit spending itself and to a huge factor that Biden didn’t mention at all: The trajectory of COVID is on a major downward swing. Cases are plummeting, deaths (a lagging indicator) are declining, and millions upon millions of Americans have received one of the vaccines.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell declared that the Dems’ package “looks like something you’d pass to blunt another year of shutdowns, not to help guide a smart and proactive recovery.”
But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, almost literally espousing the same “We’re from the government and we’re here to help” tone of the president, said, “Members of Congress join Americans in prayer for the lives lost or devastated by this vicious virus. As we pray, we must act swiftly to put an end to this pandemic and to stem the suffering felt by so many millions. With the passage of President Biden’s American Rescue Plan this week, the American people will know that help is on the way.”
Help is on the way, courtesy of former President Trump’s Operation Warp Speed that delivered multiple vaccines in record time. Some say COVID cases are dropping too quickly to be attributable to the vaccines. But daily cases reached an all-time high of nearly 300,000 on January 8 and dropped to less than 65,000 yesterday. Over that same span, we’ve gone from eight million vaccines to more than 64 million. If it’s not causation yet, it’s one heck of a correlation.
Even better news on the vaccines comes from The Dispatch: “One study found that Pfizer’s two-dose vaccine is up to 85 percent effective after a single jab, and that it doesn’t actually need to be stored in burdensome, ultra-cold freezers as previously believed.” And another study found it “to be 89.4 percent effective at preventing infections, meaning the vaccine limits most asymptomatic transmission of the virus as well.”
By the end of March, Pfizer and Moderna are likely to have distributed 220 million doses, with another 20 million coming from the new Johnson & Johnson vaccine. Between these vaccines and natural antibodies, one Johns Hopkins professor thinks we’ll reach herd immunity by April.
But by all means, Democrats absolutely must spend another $2 trillion, and they’ll use whatever milestones and emotions necessary to do it.
A quick search on Amazon’s website for the popular 2018 book by Ryan T. Anderson, When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment, will turn up no such title. Instead, one will be presented with the horribly unscientific rebuttal book Let Harry Become Sally: Responding to the Anti-Transgender Moment. This was not the case before last Sunday, when Anderson’s book was trending on Amazon as a bestseller on “transgender” issues. Then suddenly and without any explanation, Anderson’s book was memory-holed, as if it had never been available on Amazon in the first place. It’s yet another instance of Big Tech censorship.
When the abusive censorship practices of Big Tech are repeatedly exposed, the response often raised is dismissive: Why does this matter, since there are other book stores? Well, as The Washington Free Beacon reports, “The removal of Anderson’s book also calls attention to Amazon’s oversized impact on book sales. In a 2019 letter to the House Antitrust Subcommittee, three major publishing associations wrote that Amazon controls 50 percent or more of the print book market, although some estimates put the number closer to 80 percent. Analyst Ben Evans estimates Amazon controls over 75 percent of the e-book market.”
If Amazon didn’t control huge swaths of the book market, then “the other stores” dismissal might be merited. However, with Amazon fast gaining near monopolistic control of the market, increasing censorship concerns are not merely cries over spilt milk. Making matters worse is the fact that many Democrats have jumped aboard the censorship train, demanding that Big Tech move faster and harder in efforts to squelch conservative views.
As the Wall Street Journal editorial board observes, “Corporate media censorship, such as Amazon’s scrubbing of a heretical book, is accelerating. And government is right alongside, pushing for censorship with increasing force.”
What’s especially striking about this latest incident of Big Tech censorship is that it came with absolutely no warning or explanation. Anderson said that he was only alerted to Amazon’s removal of his book after someone who sought to buy it contacted him and told him it was unavailable on the platform. It’s clear that since his book challenges the Left’s “transgender” dogma, Anderson has essentially been deemed a “heretic.” Therefore, his work must be expunged lest it gives the American public license to question the dubious claims of the Rainbow Mafia’s heterophobic gender deniers.
Oh, and a hat tip once again to The Babylon Bee for this headline: “Amazon Introduces ‘Kindle Bonfire’ Feature That Lets You Burn Digital Books.”
Redlining is a little-understood term with a sorry history in this country. According to Wikipedia, it involves “the systematic denial of various services or goods … either directly or through the selective raising of prices.”
So when you think “traditional redlining,” think “keeping blacks out of certain neighborhoods by denying them mortgages or home improvement loans.”
But when you think “political redlining,” think “keeping conservatives from expressing themselves in the marketplace of ideas by denying them access to social media platforms and financial services.”
Our Mark Alexander wrote about this modern-day form of redlining last month, but few others, even in conservative circles, have picked up on it. That’s a mistake, because it’s a powerful weapon being used for the worst of purposes — the denial of our right to speak freely.
“When Americans are targeted because of their constitutionally protected political and/or religious views,” Alexander writes, “leading to coordinated efforts to deplatform and then defund those individuals and businesses when financial institutions selectively refuse services, it constitutes a new form of ‘redlining’ in violation of their most fundamental civil rights. Without a Republican gauntlet, there will be a considerable surge in the systemic redline suppression of fundamental civil rights.”
And we’re mistaken if we think political redlining begins and ends with free speech. There’s another civil right — the right to defend oneself — that’s also being targeted by the Left. The Biden administration is planning to revive Barack Obama’s infamous Operation Choke Point, a 2013 scheme by which the Department of Justice investigated U.S. banks and the business they did with firearm dealers and other inconvenient businesses, ostensibly because they were believed to be at a high risk for fraud and money laundering. Essentially, the Obama administration was trying to deny several legal industries even basic access to the banking system.
As the American Enterprise Institute’s Benjamin Zycher writes, “That is why Choke Point and similar gameplaying in the capital market is ideal for the political left: No formal rule is being violated, the banks are in no position to resist, and the borrowers have no recourse. Equality under the law is thrown out the window because the left fundamentally believes in nothing as much as its own political power, while the bureaucracy — much ignored in the reality that it is an important interest group — is left to enhance its own powers at the expense of market forces.”
“Restriction of free thought and free speech,” said liberal Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, “is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us.”
Douglas, an FDR appointee, served for 36 years on the High Court. And he served back in an era when the term “liberal” was used in the classical sense; when it stood for the protection of civil liberties and limitations on central government power. Where, you ask, are today’s classical liberals? They’re called constitutional conservatives.
Today’s Big Tech censors and their speech-suppressing brethren on the Left would do well to consider Justice Douglas’s warning. Where free speech is concerned, we’re heading off a cliff.
As Brendan O’Neill writes in the UK publication Spiked, “It is undeniable that we live in a society where freedom of expression is in crisis. Whether we are being censored by the state, by self-styled guardians of correct-thinking, by mobs or by ourselves, we are being censored. And this matters. It matters because, at both the individual level and the social level, freedom of speech is essential to human flourishing. Freedom of speech gives real power to the individual. It liberates us not only to express our own views — which is of course incredibly important — but also to listen to the views of everyone else and to use our mental and moral muscles to decide for ourselves if what they are saying is right or wrong. … Censorship, by contrast, infantilizes us, weakening our mental and moral muscles by inviting us to rely instead on the judgments of our superiors.”
Big Tech and the Left are indeed weakening our mental and moral muscles — by way of censorship, deplatforming, and political redlining. The question is: Do good and decent people across the political spectrum have the guts to say Enough! before it’s too late?
If this is how Unity™ is going to be, we’ll take a hard pass.
Democrat Texas Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee recently submitted HR 40, a bill that would advance the dubious reparations racket that the woke Left has been ballyhooing about for years. Couching her language in tiresome leftist tropes, Jackson Lee asserted, “We believe in determination, and we believe in overcoming the many bad balls that we have been thrown; we’ve caught them, and we’ve kept on going. That is not the point of H.R. 40. Now more than ever, the facts and circumstances facing our nation demonstrate the importance of H.R. 40 and the necessity of placing our nation on the path to reparative justice.”
If HR 40 were to be passed, it would open the door for the eventual payment of race-based reparations by funding a study of “slavery and discrimination in the colonies and the United States from 1619 to the present and recommend appropriate remedies.” (Hmm, 1619 … where have we heard that date before?) Efforts to have Congress fund a “study” of slavery and discrimination have been ongoing for over three decades, but Congress has never taken up a vote on the obviously racist and divisive issue.
Even now while offering tepid support for the reparations movement, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said, “[Joe Biden] supported a study of reparations, which I believe is what is being discussed and studying the continued impacts of slavery, which is being discussed in this hearing.” But as to whether Biden would actually back a reparations bill, she hedged, “We will see what happens through the legislative process.” In other words, Biden is content to wait and lead from behind.
Republicans, meanwhile, have been quick to accurately blast HR 40 as “divisive.” Representative Burgess Owens (R-UT), who is himself black, declared, “Reparations are not the way to right our country’s wrong. It is impractical and a nonstarter for the United States government to pay reparations. It is also unfair and heartless to give black Americans the hope that this is a reality.”
Owens further observed, “The reality is that black American history is not one of a hapless, hopeless race oppressed by a more powerful white race.” Rather, it is “a history of millions of middle and wealthy class black Americans throughout the early 20th century achieving the American dream.” It also effectively erases the history of impressive racial progress in the U.S. over the generations since the end of slavery and Jim Crow.
“You can’t demand or beg for respect,” Owens noted. “You can only command respect through meritocracy.” He later asserted that politics is really behind the Democrats’ reparations push, arguing, “Reparations are not about helping the black community, it’s about getting votes. Want to help the black community (& everyone else)? Let us get back to work, let our kids go back to school, let our parents decide which school, and get Planned Parenthood out of our inner cities!”
Those are wise words, and blacks exploited by Democrats for generations would be wise to heed them.
There’s a disturbing cluelessness among a lot of Republican and conservative leaders in the pundit and political class. We see outlets like National Review asking whether Donald Trump fans have lost faith in institutions and democracy. That’s really the wrong question. The right one is, “Who wouldn’t lose faith after the track record the establishment has posted?”
Here’s one case in point: We rebutted David French (formerly of National Review) in January over his claims that many who advocated electing and reelecting President Trump were lying about left-wing hatred for grassroots Patriots and the stakes involving our First Amendment rights. Since that two-part fact-check, something even more disturbing emerged.
On February 18, The Root published an article in which several national security “experts” compared the Republican Party to a terrorist cell. In a quote later “clarified” (with a note about the clarification at the bottom of the article), Kyle Bibby said, “If they were in Afghanistan, we would’ve hit them. Either a raid, drop a bomb on them, whatever it is.” Bibby went on to say that outlets like Fox News, Breitbart, OANN, and the Republican Party would be sanctioned. The article also quoted Malcolm Nance, a frequent MSNBC contributor, and Pam Keith, a failed congressional candidate who sought professional retaliation against those who were backing President Trump’s legal efforts in the wake of the 2020 election.
The silence from so-called “Never-Trump” types has been deafening. So is that of the Republican/conservative establishment. While National Review’s Dan McLaughlin did call it out on Twitter, outside of Breitbart News, there was precious little coverage. The big conservative names responding to this were Dinesh D’Souza, Nick Searcy, and Kurt Schlichter.
The weasel-worded clarification that The Root hastily added doesn’t hide the fact that a good-sized portion of the Left has viewed Republicans as the next incarnation of the Nazis — and did so long before Trump ran. It was being said during the 2016 campaign as well, but there is a lengthy history of such rhetoric from the Left, including:
Given that pattern of rhetoric and abuse, many grassroots Patriots in 2016 came to rightfully fear what Hillary Clinton would do, and their votes for Trump were aimed at stopping Hillary — with any policy gains seen as gravy. In 2020, it was about putting a check on an administrative state and stopping a Democrat Party that was increasingly embracing totalitarian tactics. Lest you think this sounds paranoid, remember: The “national security experts” consulted by The Root were fine with dropping bombs on the Republican Party they freely likened to al-Qaida. Compared to that, what’s Silicon Valley censorship, IRS targeting, leaning on financial service companies to boycott the NRA, or sending out a flood of mail-in ballots while dismantling any of the guardrails to ensure the integrity of the vote?
The failure over the years to push back meaningfully against this rhetoric had consequences, as Dennis Prager and a certain Time magazine article illustrate. Furthermore, since challenging the irregularities of the 2020 election was “fundamentally wicked,” might the Left resort to further abuses of power against those it views as evil? Yet too many in the establishment treat these genuinely concerned grassroots Patriots as being crazy for simply believing leftists when they are telling us what they would do if they had the power.
Worse, when the track record of lying has apparently motivated abuses, the establishment has failed to act. Loyalty cannot be a one-way street. Political leaders — whether pundits or politicians — owe loyalty to those whose support they accepted, and part of that is defending their supporters when they are unfairly maligned or abused. Failure to do so is a justifiable reason for those at the grassroots level to lose faith in the establishment.
By contrast, Trump has shown that sort of loyalty and earned the support of many grassroots Patriots, for good or ill. Will establishment folks listen, learn, and do the work to regain as much of that faith as possible, or will they drive grassroots Patriots to seek another Trump?
I recently had a conversation with one of my teachers about how mass access to social media and technology allows for the corruption of truth. One of the main points this teacher made was that years ago there were only a few resources for news. Today, thousands of news outlets can post their interpretation of the news and, instantly, hundreds of thousands of people can see it. But there are a few major well-funded Leftmedia platforms — print media like The New York Times and The Washington Post, and cable media like CNN and MSNBC — and their perspective is propagated by thousands of news outlets downstream.
Many “Fake News” lies are spread through social media, where they are picked up and believed by many of my peers, and those lies shape their own beliefs. Sites like TikTok, Twitter, and Instagram are filled with information that vilifies and dehumanizes conservatives. And our ability to rebut those perspectives is increasingly restricted or banned by the Big Tech First Amendment suppressors.
Young conservative activists, articulate protagonists like Candace Owens and The Patriot Post’s Patrick Hampton, as well as other conservative influencers, have had their views suppressed and their social media accounts suspended. This also happens to those of us sharing our grassroots perspective, as happened to one of my peers.
A few weeks ago as I was scrolling through Instagram, I came across a few posts on a friend’s profile that discussed the importance of free speech as expressed by Candace Owens. Ironically, my friend was banned from using the app for 24 hours due to his posts about First Amendment freedom of speech.
As young conservatives, we’re both discouraged and worried about what this means for our generation. Social media plays a large part in many young people’s lives, influencing what we think and stand for — and the Left knows that. With the censorship of conservative thought and the outpouring of leftist ideas, it’s becoming increasingly difficult for my generation to differentiate between real and fake news, and to know what to believe in.
On February 23, 1945, six Marines with the 5th Division raised the American flag atop Mount Suribachi during the Battle of Iwo Jima. Three of them, Sergeant Michael Strank, Corporal Harlon Block, and Private First Class Franklin Sousley, were killed in action before the battle was over.
Joe Rosenthal’s iconic image was the inspiration for the Marine Corps War Memorial outside the Ord-Weitzel Gate to Arlington National Cemetery. That flag can now be seen in the National Museum of the Marine Corps near MCB Quantico.
The major conflicts against 20th-century tyrants cost 616,124 American lives and 1,120,283 wounded in bloody theaters of warfare — one battle at a time. Too many have no idea what has been sacrificed for their Liberty — for the freedom many arrogantly squander today. Ignorance is bliss — until it is not…
As Winston Churchill once said, “Never was so much owed by so many to so few.”
- Supreme Court refuses to hear GOP election case from Pennsylvania (LA Times)
- Supreme Court to review “public charge” rule (Reuters)
Government & Politics
- AG nominee Merrick Garland may hide John Durham report from the public (The Federalist)
- Dominion Voting Systems files defamation suit against Mike Lindell and MyPillow (Dominionvoting.com)
Around the Nation
- California approves $600 stimulus payments for 5.7 million people (Fox News)
- San Francisco school board puts hold on renaming its 44 schools (KGO)
Annals of the “Social Justice” Caliphate
- Chief of Cherokee Nation says “it’s time” for Jeep to stop using name (Car and Driver)
- College offers free tuition — for black and American Indian students (RedState)
- Seattle-backed homeless shelter provides heroin how-to guide and paraphernalia (PJ Media)
- University professor fired for class illustration deemed “transphobic” (Disrn)
Odds & Ends
- Daily COVID deaths fall to 1,235 — the lowest since before the holiday season (Daily Mail)
- Canada laudably joins the U.S. by declaring China’s treatment of Uighurs “genocide” (UPI)
- Mom of Capitol Officer Brian Sicknick believes he died of a stroke (Daily Mail)
- States set for clash with Biden administration over transgender athletes (Examiner)
- Illinois becomes first state to fecklessly eliminate cash bail (NPR)
- Kelly Loeffler starts Georgia voter group to rival Stacey Abrams (NY Post)
We’re Shocked — Shocked!
- Wife of “El Chapo” arrested in the U.S. … on drug charges (NPR)
- Policy: Democrats are setting up a massive immigration crisis (The Federalist)
- Policy: Before rejoining UN Human Rights Council, U.S. should commit to authentic human rights (Daily Signal)
- Humor: Coca-Cola now requiring employees to “be less white” by wearing blackface (Genesius Times)
For more of today’s editors’ choice headlines, visit Headline Report.
The Patriot Post is a certified ad-free news service, unlike third-party commercial news sites linked on this page, which may also require a paid subscription.
Editor’s Note: Each week we receive hundreds of comments and correspondences — and we read every one of them. What follows are a few though-provoking comments about specific articles. The views expressed herein don’t necessarily reflect those of The Patriot Post.
Re: “The McConnell v. Trump Dustup”
“Exactly right. And many of us who deeply appreciate Donald Trump’s policy achievements (for which Mitch McConnell shares credit) hope he will not let his oversized ego ruin the GOP’s chances in 2022 and 2024. His reprehensible treatment of Mike Pence and now Mitch McConnell does not bode well.” —Kenneth from Illinois
“Very well-reasoned analysis. Like you, I always vote policy, not personality, and fully supported President Trump’s policies. But tragically, DJT was his own worst enemy as a communicator. That, coupled with his narcissism and consequent lack of loyalty to other conservative leaders no matter how much he owed them, helped to cause his downfall. He seems never to have grasped (1) that there were not enough voters in his base to prevail in 2020, and, thus, (2) that when he failed to reach the ‘undecideds’ (almost all of whom vote based on personality and image), he sealed his electoral defeat. This was his failure, not that of Mike Pence, Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, John Kelly, Jim Mattis, or anyone else.” —Robert from Minnesota
“I really enjoy your commentary and find agreement with you much greater than 99% of the time. However, one point on which I feel that you are wrong: It was indeed a witch hunt, and without evidence. The problem is that Trump offered them the excuse, as you point out so well. The impeachment charade was unconstitutional as well, as numerous people including Mark Levin have observed. I think the entire farce was designed to convince and condition uninformed lemmings that kangaroo courts without evidence are perfectly legitimate, further undermining the Rule of Law in favor of the
rule of men.” —Rod from Michigan
Re: “A Fond Farewell to Rush Limbaugh”
“At some point early in the ‘90s I realized that Rush Limbaugh and I had grown up in the ’50s and ’60s less than a hundred miles apart near the Mississippi River, each of us coming of age in modest, middle-class homes. At the same time, I became increasingly aware of those Midwestern values that we shared and that I believe were at the heart of his winsome connection with so many Americans: a simple respect for other people (rarely did Rush put down anyone, including his detractors) coupled with a basic egalitarianism which judged that every person, regardless of status, ‘puts on his pants one leg at a time.’ All people deserve respect; no one is worthy of adulation.” —Gary from Georgia
Re: “Three Lessons Conservatives Can Learn From Rush”
“I loved Rush Limbaugh and consider him one of the more clear minds of our time. I arrived at this country at 52 years old from Cuba and know very well socialism and its consequences. I haven’t found a clearer mind than the one Rush had with regard to the real understanding of the strategy and tactics of communism and the unwavering defense of the American set of values. I am missing him every day and feel his departure as if it was of a close member of my family.” —Lazaro from Florida
Re: “Leftmedia Smears Rush After His Passing”
“The contrast could not be more stark. When Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died, conservatives gave her accolades even though they disagreed with virtually every ruling she made. Some even presented her as entering the joys of Heaven. When Billy Graham and Rush Limbaugh passed away, the Left danced with glee and wished them the miseries of hell. Conservatives can distinguish between moral character and bankrupt philosophies. Even more importantly, most understand that people are created in the image of God and are intrinsically of infinite value. To the Left, character does not matter — only toeing the party line. Leftists have no absolute truth and thus judge others by their own depraved selves. Which side actually spews forth hate?” —David from Arkansas
Re: “Ted’s Not-So-Excellent Adventure”
“Ted Cruz didn’t do anything any one of us wouldn’t have done. Realistically, what was Ted going to do if he stayed in Texas? Go around to all the wind turbines with a Zippo lighter and try to melt the ice? Magically change the grid structure to use more natural gas? Come on folks, this is a media frenzy just because he’s a conservative Republican. Nothing more. When Governor Gavin Newsom pulled a boneheaded move with his cronies in a restaurant, it got 30 seconds of coverage. Governor Andrew Cuomo is likely responsible for the deaths of thousands in nursing homes. So what’s his deal? The media covers him. Cruz is fine, and this nonsense is a smokescreen by the Left.” —Peter from New Jersey
Re: “Saving Keystone From Joe Biden’s Pen”
“Instead of 800,000 barrels of oil flowing harmlessly through the Keystone pipeline, they now must use 4,400 semi-trucks and 1,300 train cars (owned by Warren Buffett) every day to move the oil. Still think this was all about the environment? Both rail and pipelines are quite safe, but pipelines are without a doubt the safest way to transport oil and gas. In every year from 2003 to 2013, pipelines experienced fewer incidents per million barrels of oil equivalent transported than did rail.” —David from California
Re: “Is It Finally Time for a Real Third Party?”
“If Mr. Weber wishes to know why a third party will not work, have him contact me. As the former head of the Constitution Party in Ohio, I can explain it to him in spades. President Trump was finding out some of those reasons when he first began to run for president in 2016. I was hoping he would address those, but once he broke through and upset the Republican mainstream, he no longer concerned himself with those roadblocks established by the mainstream two-party system, which is designed to ensure the establishment retains control of the voting process — more so in some states than others. Of course, the Republican mainstream is now working to ensure there are no more Donald Trumps who can upset its applecart again. As to the Democrat mainstream, who put Scranton Joe in the White House?” —Donald from Arizona
The Truth About Bill Gates — Exposing Bill’s environmental hypocrisy. It’s okay when Bill does it.
California Dem Says the Quiet Part About Minimum Wage Out Loud — Ro Khanna says that if a business cannot afford to pay a minimum wage of at least $15 per hour, then they shouldn’t be in business.
For more of today’s columns, visit Right Opinion.
Insight: “Concentrated power is not rendered harmless by the good intentions of those who create it.” —Milton Friedman (1912-2006)
Upright I: “This is some of the most horrific human activity that we have seen since the last century, and the administration has a responsibility … to convince the Chinese Communist Party not to behave in this way [and] to impose costs on them when they don’t. So to pawn this off as just a different norm or a different set of behaviors, that’s what the Chinese Communist Party says. That’s how they talk about this.” — former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo
Upright II: “To hear an American president talk about it in such a way that doesn’t connote all the seriousness with which this must be taken is disheartening, and I hope the administration will take it seriously in the same way that we did when we were in office.” —Mike Pompeo
Canaries in a coal mine: “[Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer] continue to treat the January 6 … criminal riot as an excuse to seize power, to control more power, to step on people’s Second Amendment rights, to take away their First Amendment rights. Now we’re hearing about a domestic war on terror. I mean, what’s that going to be? An excuse to go rifle through the emails and bank statements and personal messages of law-abiding Americans?” —Senator Josh Hawley
For the record: “I was so disgusted that Biden, on the anniversary of my daughter getting murdered, announced they were going to put all these gun control measures in place. [None] of those would have made a difference in my daughter getting murdered in Parkland.” —Andrew Pollack
Friendly fire: “That’s classic Andrew Cuomo. … You know, the bullying is nothing new. I believe Ron Kim and it’s very, very sad. No public servant, no person who’s telling the truth, should be treated that way. But yeah, the threats, the belittling, the demand that someone change their statement right that moment? Many, many times I’ve heard that and I know a lot of other people in this state have heard that.” —Mayor Bill de Blasio
A blind squirrel finds a nut: “I think at some point [Trump] probably will be allowed back on [social media] and probably should be allowed back on.” —Bill Gates
Actually, he dropped the nut: “I am offsetting my carbon emissions by buying clean aviation fuel and funding carbon capture and funding low-cost housing projects to use electricity instead of a natural gas. And so I’ve — I have been able to eliminate it, and it was amazing to me how expensive that was.” —Bill Gates justifying his hypocrisy
Braying jackass: “The bottom line is, Texas thought it could go it alone and built a system that ignored climate change. It was not what’s called resilient, and now Texas is paying the price. I hope they learned a lesson.” —Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer
Non compos mentis: “We don’t want low wage businesses. I think most successful small businesses can pay a fair wage. … I love small businesses — I’m all for it — but I don’t want small businesses that underpay employees.” —Rep. Ro Khanna
Non sequitur: “Some of the comments I’m seeing on social media from lefties who hate Rush, saying they hope the cancer takes him away as fast as possible — it’s revolting to me. As much as we talk about Trump and misinformation, there is a strain of contempt on the left that also worries me. Why can’t people just say, ‘We hope that Rush gets better quickly’?” —CNN’s Brian Stelter a year ago (And who does he think fueled that hate, then and now?)
And last… “Let’s see a conversation between the people insisting ‘teachers just want to be safe!’ and the grocery store clerks who’ve shown up for work without fail for 12 months — including when we thought the pandemic was far deadlier. Ah, but they don’t have powerful Democrat unions.” —Buck Sexton
For more of today’s memes, visit the Memesters Union.
For more of today’s cartoons, visit the Cartoons archive.
“The Patriot Post” (https://patriotpost.us)