“Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt.” —Samuel Adams (1749)
IN TODAY’S DIGEST
The 10 people who were killed Monday were young and old alike, but loved and missed.
We deliberately waited to comment on the mass murder in Boulder, Colorado, Monday because such things are often initially misreported and then the political narratives take off. Our Douglas Andrews offers thoughts on the killer, while Thomas Gallatin takes on the grotesque Democrat political agenda that they trot out with nearly every mass shooting. The focus here is on the victims and what we’ve all lost because they’re gone.
Rikki Olds was just 25, but she was a manager at King Soopers, the store where the murders took place. She was a student at Front Range Community College, where she was working toward a career in nursing.
Denny Stong, also a King Soopers employee, was even younger at age 20. His social media profile contained the phrase “I can’t stay home. I am a Grocery Store Worker.” He was training to be a pilot, and he encouraged friends to honor his recent birthday by donating to the National Foundation for Gun Rights.
Teri Leiker was a third employee who lost her life. Age 51, she had been working at the store for 30 years and was dating a coworker.
Neven Stanisic was a 23-year-old refugee from Bosnia and a parishioner at St. John the Baptist Serbian Orthodox Church in Lakewood. According to his pastor, he was “a very good, shy, hardworking boy,” and he was at the store to fix a Starbucks coffee machine.
Lynn Murray, 62, was at the store working to fill an Instacart order, but she had previously worked for Cosmopolitan, Marie Claire, and Glamour magazines.
Kevin Mahoney, 61, had not long ago walked his daughter down the aisle in her wedding. “I am now pregnant,” she said. “I know he wants me to be strong for his granddaughter.”
Suzanne Fountain was a 59-year-old local actress in shows around town, as well as the manager of a music venue.
Tralona Bartkowiak owned Umba Love, a small clothing shop. She was 49, and a friend described her as “the kindest and sweetest lady you ever did know.”
Jody Waters, 65, was a beloved family woman who worked at a leather goods store called Embrazio.
Eric Talley is particularly noteworthy as a law enforcement officer who responded to shots fired. The 51-year-old married and homeschooling father of seven gave his life in service to his fellow citizens. But Talley wasn’t your average cop. He left a six-figure post in IT a decade ago to join the Boulder Police Department because he felt a higher calling after a friend’s DUI death. As his father, Homer, put it, “Above all else he loved his family and his Lord Jesus Christ.”
These regular Americans are the ones who deserve the attention this week. Their families are suffering immense grief, and they should receive genuine compassion from all of us.
Ilhan Omar and her ilk seemed deeply concerned with the race of the Boulder killer — until they weren’t.
When we had nothing more to go on than the video footage of the suspect being led away shirtless and in handcuffs, Democrat Representative Ilhan Omar and her race-obsessed ilk were quick to pounce on the color of his skin.
“The shooter’s race or ethnicity seems front and center when they aren’t white,” she complained. “Otherwise, it’s just a mentally ill young man having a bad day.”
When it was later revealed, however, that the killer was 21-year-old Ahmad Al Aliwi Alissa, a Trump-hating Syrian-born Muslim, Omar probably wished she’d simply said something less incendiary and less accusatory. Perhaps something like she said about the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks: “Some people did something.”
Or perhaps something like these remarkable before and after tweets from a more anonymous race-baiter.
Translation: The killer is white! Oh, wait, he’s Muslim? [Cue crickets.]
To be clear, this wasn’t a mere slip of the tongue for Omar. She’d said much the same thing a week earlier in the wake of the Atlanta spa murders, which were perpetrated by a man who happens to be white: “It isn’t hard,” she tweeted, “to understand why it’s so normalized for law enforcement to protect the humanity of white mass murderers and their willingness to continually make excuses [sic] them.”
As for the Boulder killer, it’s already clear that he’s a very sick young man, just as the Atlanta killer is. As the Associated Press reports, “A law enforcement official briefed on the shooting said the suspect’s family told investigators they believed Alissa was suffering some type of mental illness, including delusions. Relatives described times when Alissa told them people were following or chasing him, which they said may have contributed to the violence.”
A former high school wrestling teammate said Alissa would act strangely sometimes, turning around suddenly or glancing over his shoulder. “He would say, ‘Did you see that? Did you see that?’ We wouldn’t see anything. We always thought he was messing with us.”
Deeply disturbed or not, there seems to be a clear double standard on the Left when it comes to covering these mass killers. “If the shooter is a white supremacist,” tweeted columnist David Harsanyi yesterday, “the event is an indictment of all white people and America. If the shooter is an Islamist, it is a completely individual act that has nothing to do with ideology.”
Conservative author Dinesh D’Souza put it this way: “If six out of eight Asian American victims in Atlanta automatically made that murder spree a hate crime, what can we conclude now that we know all 10 of the Boulder shooter’s victims were white?”
Here’s a thought for those on the Left: Mass killers of innocent people are by definition profoundly and deeply disturbed. Unless there’s clear-cut evidence that race played a role in the killer’s motives — as it did with, say, Dylann Roof — let’s just mourn the dead and stick to the relevant facts.
He calls for banning “assault weapons,” while Senate Dems ponder eliminating the filibuster in order to get it done.
Not that long ago, politicians on both sides of the aisle and members of the media would castigate those who dared politicize an atrocity such as what happened in Boulder, Colorado, on Monday. Unfortunately, those days are long gone, and we must now endure the immediate politicization of nearly every murderous attack. Democrats from Joe Biden on down blame the Second Amendment, disgracefully scapegoating a fundamental constitutional right that the vast majority of law-abiding American citizens legally engage in and depend upon.
“I don’t need to wait another minute, let alone an hour, to take commonsense steps that will save lives in the future and to urge my colleagues in the House and Senate to act,” Biden obtusely asserted Tuesday. “We can ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines in this country once again.”
By “once again,” Biden was referencing Bill Clinton’s failed 1994 Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, which banned rifles with certain cosmetic features (mislabeled “assault weapons”) and did nothing to end or even curb “gun violence,” another bogus leftist term. The truth is that semiautomatic rifles were only ever used in the tiniest fraction of crimes, and that remains true to this day. In fact, following the expiration of Clinton’s gun ban, the number of crimes committed with so-called “assault weapons” actually decreased.
Like so many anti-Second Amendment activists, Biden peddles a myth when he suggests that a return to the Clinton-era “assault weapons ban” is a “commonsense” step that will “save lives.” If anything, it will likely lead to an increase in “gun violence.”
But Biden isn’t content to wait on Congress. “We are considering a range of levers,” explained White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki, “including executive actions to address, obviously, not just gun safety measures but violence in communities.” We’ll be waiting to see how badly he infringes on the Second Amendment.
One of those ways looks to be what Psaki last week framed as “repealing gun manufacturers’ liability shields.” That would be basic liability protections that all other industries are currently afforded. By falsely implying that firearms manufacturers bear some special liability, Biden is in fact singling out and intentionally vilifying the firearms industry, as if these companies have escaped justifiable legal culpability. Nothing could be further from the truth. In reality, Biden and the anti-gun lobby are looking for ways to eradicate the firearms industry by removing protections from frivolous and meritless lawsuits.
Meanwhile, some Democrats are calling for exploiting the recent murderous attacks in Atlanta and Boulder to push for the elimination of the Senate filibuster. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) blatantly stated, “Things won’t get better until Democrats get rid of the filibuster and finally pass gun safety legislation that a huge majority of Americans support. What are we waiting for — another tragedy?”
Finally, the Biden administration is using the Boulder attack to distract from a calamity of Biden’s own creation — the border crisis. On the one hand, Biden is attacking Americans’ fundamental right to bear arms, while on the other hand he refuses to defend and protect the nation’s borders from those seeking to illegally infiltrate and exploit our economy and citizenry. It’s almost as if Biden holds Americans in contempt for wanting to protect and hold on to our Liberty.
The losing Democrat appealed to the House majority to overturn the vote in her favor.
One can’t help but wonder: If we had an honest, accurate, and unbiased media, would Democrats be less brazen and more embarrassed at their endless hypocrisy and lies?
After claiming President Donald Trump was a danger to the very fabric of the American republic because he highlighted and demanded accountability for election fraud and/or malfeasance, Democrats are brazenly attempting to steal another election — Iowa’s 2nd Congressional District seat.
In that race, Republican Mariannette Miller-Meeks led Democrat Rita Hart by 282 votes on election night, a lead that shrunk to 47 votes after all mail-in ballots were counted (Iowa law allows ballots postmarked by Election Day). When the recount was completed and all things accounted for, Miller-Meeks had won by a mere six votes.
Hart could have gone to court to contest the Republican victory by providing evidence of fraud or counting errors, but instead she waited two months until the Democrat-controlled House had been seated. She has now petitioned House Democrats to overrule Iowa’s recount, evict Republican Miller-Meeks, and seat her instead.
Hart’s justification is that she objects to the fact that different Iowa counties used different recount standards, yet Hart herself pushed machine recounts in Republican-run counties while calling for hand recounts in Democrat-run counties (not at all suspicious).
The Democrat hypocrisy is so glaring that even a few Democrats are grumbling about it.
Democrats ridiculed every effort by President Trump to ensure election integrity. They called his accusations of fraud a danger to American democracy and condemned the dozens of lawsuits filed by Trump and the Republican Party to contest the legality of votes cast where Democrat governors, secretaries of state, and unelected judges unilaterally rewrote election law under the guise of accommodating COVID restrictions.
And though far too late to make a difference, courts are now ruling that Democrats did indeed violate the law and the limits of their constitutional authority.
Apparently, claims of fraud, election rigging conspiracy theories, questioning the legitimacy of elections, and working to overturn election results are only bad when done by Republicans.
Unfortunately, as National Review’s Dan McLaughlin points out, “If misbehaving Republican politicians often embarrass the party’s intellectuals, misbehaving Democrats have their side’s scholars and pundits whispering in their ears like Iago, urging them to ever-more-radical steps.”
He’s referencing in particular a recent California Law Review article by Harvard Law School professor Nicholas Stephanopoulos calling on Democrats to take insanely radical steps to permanently rig elections in their favor. In support, he pulls from the recent writings of former Stanford Law School professor Pamela Karlan, who now serves as the deputy attorney general for the Civil Rights Division of Joe Biden’s (Social) Justice Department.
Stephanopoulos calls for Democrats to do what they have already threatened to do — end the Senate filibuster, stack the Supreme Court, grant statehood to DC and Puerto Rico, enact the National Popular Vote scheme, etc.
What makes Stephanopoulos’s rantings so dangerous is that he calls on Democrats to give their naked power grab the patina of legitimacy by using constitutional authority in ways never considered or authorized before.
For example, Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution grants Congress the power to “be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members.” Stephanopoulos wants the Democrat-controlled House and Senate to evict Republican members who win under Republican-written state election laws.
Additionally, Article IV, Section 4 grants the president emergency powers under the Guarantee Clause, which ensures every state has “a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion…”
Stephanopoulous calls on Biden to use this power to dictate the terms of state election laws by executive order, invalidating any elections not conforming to his demands. And not just to federal elections, but elections and policies down to the local level.
He openly acknowledges his attempt to short-circuit constitutional checks and balances, contemptuously arguing, “Desperate times call for desperate measures.”
And what has brought about these “desperate times”? According to Stephanopoulous, “American democracy is in real peril thanks to the malapportioned Senate, the obsolete Electoral College, voter suppression, gerrymandering, and so on…” The first two are written into the Constitution, and his definition of voter suppression includes requiring photo ID.
And why these specific recommendations? Because they have the advantage of bypassing constitutional checks and balances, giving Democrats “tools that can be blunted by neither a Senate filibuster nor a hostile Court.”
When discussing his proposed weaponization of the Guarantee Clause, Stephanopoulos says, “The President [as] head of the executive branch … could take whatever steps she thinks are necessary to prevent states from lapsing into nonrepublicanism or to remedy antirepublican abuses. The only limits on the President’s discretion are that exigent circumstances must exist and that Congress must be unwilling or unable to act.”
Congress’s refusal to act, to be a rubber stamp for a dictatorial president, is the exact same justification Barack Obama used when he unilaterally and unconstitutionally used his “pen and phone” to create law.
Make no mistake: The Democrats’ endeavor in Iowa is not just part of a power grab. It is one skirmish in an all-out assault on America’s republican, federalist form of government. It is an effort to destroy checks and balances on power and usher in a permanent Democrat rule. It is an assault on the very concept of Liberty and self-government.
It must be stopped.
The Democrats’ HR 1 is a naked and undemocratic power grab — in addition to being utterly unworkable.
When someone serves you a plate of rotten meat, you refuse to eat it because it’s rotten — not because you don’t like the plate on which it was served.
Yet the latter is essentially what the deep-thinking Jessica Huseman at the progressive Daily Beast has done in an article titled “How This Voting Rights Bill Could Turn the Next Election Into a [Charlie Foxtrot].” Indeed, Huseman undressed HR 1, the Democrats’ ridiculously named “For the People Act,” not because it’s a power-grabbing abomination but rather because she thinks it’s technically unworkable.
“The For the People Act is, truthfully, the best piece of legislation proposed to standardize and ensure voting rights for all,” she cluelessly begins. “But the bar is low for voting bills, and this one barely clears it. While the tenets of the bill are laudable [no, they’re not] … it comes packed with deadlines and requirements election administrators cannot possibly meet without throwing their systems into chaos.”
Let’s set aside, for a moment, that fundamentally correct conclusion to remember that HR 1 is, in the words of our Louis DeBroux, “a massive power grab by Democrats that takes the worst aspects of the 2020 elections and puts them into federal law.”
Thus, if you liked the buttery-smooth means by which the 2020 election was conducted — the lawsuits, the recounts, the audits, the allegations of rampant fraud in Democrat-controlled big cities — you’ll love HR 1. As DeBroux continues, “Democrats aim to dictate from Capitol Hill election law for every single state, county, and city. HR 1 intentionally weakens election security, creating the very lawlessness and discord that made the last election such a nightmare and guaranteeing that it’s the norm for all future elections.”
So, what’s not to like?
To listen to the Daily Beaster, HR 1’s flaws are mostly in the means of execution. “Many of the changes the bill demands of election administrators are literally impossible to implement,” Huseman writes. “Others would significantly raise the cost of elections but provide no assured long-term funding. It empowers an agency — the U.S. Elections Assistance Commission — that was criticized less than a year ago for mismanagement and fecklessness by the same Democrats promoting this bill. And, perversely to its purpose, the bill would make elections less secure by forcing states to rush gargantuan changes on deeply unrealistic time frames.”
Again, she’s missing the trees for the forest. HR 1 takes a very bad situation — voters’ lack of confidence in our current electoral system — and proposes to make it much worse.
“There is a reason,” writes veteran political analyst John Fund, “Nancy Pelosi has called her 791-page bill, stuffed as it is with her favorite election-related changes, House of Representatives Bill Number 1 or HR 1. It’s that important to her. She has convinced or pressured every single House Democrat to co-sponsor. … Should the power grab masquerading as HR 1 become law it will represent only the latest distortion of democracy. It will undermine confidence in the system far more than anything Donald Trump attempted.”
For the last word, though, let’s leave it to the folks who’ll be responsible for implementing HR 1: “Listen, I’ll do this — if the law passes, I’ll follow it,” said one state-level Democrat election director in the Southeast who declined to be named. “But I can’t guarantee it’s not going to be a total clusterf—k the first election.”
“I don’t know what they were thinking, honestly,” said the head of an elections nonprofit. “It’s a bad bill. The goals might be admirable, but it’s a f—ing bad bill.”
It’s hard to disagree with this assessment, vulgar though it is. Except for the part about HR 1’s goals being admirable. They’re not. This bill is a naked and undemocratic power grab, and an ill-conceived one at that. And if ever there were a reason to retain the Senate’s filibuster, HR 1 is it.
Several Fortune 500 companies are implementing CRT training that’s expressly racist against white people.
Using the popular buzz words “equity,” “diversity,” and “inclusivity,” businesses across the country have begun embracing the zeitgeist of the woke “anti-racism” movement, all in an apparent effort to ensure they’re standing on the “right” side of history the culture war. Via so-called diversity and inclusion departments, an increasing number of Fortune 500 companies are actively “training” their employees to adhere to the world of woke.
One example comes from America’s largest insurance company, Cigna, which the Washington Examiner reports “allegedly told employees not to hire white men as part of the company’s broader race theory campaign.” Cigna has apparently embraced Critical Race Theory and is seeking to indoctrinate its employees in this new woke dogma and then hold them to it.
Several Cigna employees are ringing alarm bells over the “sensitivity training” they are expected to undergo, which they consider racist and discriminatory — because the training is in fact racist and discriminatory. The sensitivity training counsels employees to work against “microaggressions” attributed to being “white,” “Christian,” or “heterosexual.” The company also recommends leftist “anti-racism” source materials such as Robin DiAngelo’s White Fragility and Ibram X. Kendi’s How to Be an Antiracist.
But Cigna is only one of several major U.S. companies pushing CRT, usually via their aforementioned diversity and inclusivity departments. Both Morgan Stanley and Deloitte are putting their employees through this training, with the former accused of implementing an anti-white quota hiring system while the latter threatens to punish employees for unintentional “microaggressions.” And we’re only scratching the surface in how American Big Business has really gotten woke in recent years.
This culture war is just heating up, and if allowed to continue down its current track, eventually everyone will be forced to capitulate to the woke narrative or risk being canceled — and not just from social media, but from their very jobs and livelihoods.
Democrats sure do have a way of twisting words to hide their true intent.
I’m so thankful for those in Washington, DC, who are concerned about us and want to take care of us. What would we do without them?
Nancy Pelosi is so concerned about us that she came up with HR 1, the “For the People Act.” The question is, just “who” are those people she’s worried about?
If you thought the last presidential election process was the smoothest ever, you’ll love this legislation. The rest of us? Well, not so much. I’ve talked about how words once had meaning. Bills passed by Congress, especially ones crafted by Democrats, are masterpieces of disinformation. Anyone remember Pelosi’s monstrous ObamaCare legislation? “We have to pass it,” Pelosi said, “to find out what’s in it.” How’s that working out?
HR 1 is another huge pile of legislative dung. It’s only 800 pages compared to ObamaCare’s 900-plus pages, which no one read. If any Republican senator votes for this bill, he or she needs to be voted out of office. I can’t go into all of the serious problems it will cause, but I’ll hit some highlights.
This bill will basically mean DC will control all voting law from here on out. It is designed, as I understand it, to override state legislation passed to ensure voting integrity. Democrats have to do this because, well, all you Red State residents are bigots and racists, so leftists will make the right laws for you. No worries!
No voter ID will be required. I could walk into a polling place and say “I’m Alfred E. Newman” (you have to be of a certain age to know who he is) and vote. Apparently anywhere.
The handling of absentee ballots will be so sloppy that there will be no chain of custody and no witnesses of signatures, all while states will make them available to anyone for any reason.
Voter rolls cannot be purged of people who have moved or died. We all know of states where dead people vote every election. Noncitizens would be able to vote with no problems. You don’t have to decide whether or not you want to register to vote — the government will do that for you. This will result in people with multiple registrations. But hey, you can never have too many ballots coming to you, right? Online registrations would be a blessing to hackers and cybercriminals.
HR 1 imposes onerous regulatory restrictions on political speech, including online and policy-related speech by candidates, citizens, civic groups, unions, corporations, and nonprofit organizations. It would authorize the IRS to investigate and consider the political and policy positions on nonprofit organizations when they apply for tax-exempt status. What could possibly go wrong?
It would set up a public funding program for candidates running for Congress. Your tax dollars could go to support candidates the Left chooses to fund. And we’re just barely scratching the surface.
The time of putting our heads in the sand is over. Every conservative Patriot needs to let their senators know what they think of this legislation. Don’t assume you know how they feel about this. It’s amazing how, when push comes to shove, the backbone completely disappears from some politicians.
Doing nothing will mean the Democrats won and we have surrendered our liberties! This legislation is NOT for “We the People.” It’s a leftist gift bag.
Something to think about?
Democrats’ objection to voter ID laws is an objection to common sense.
Democrats have long contended that requiring ID for voting equates to voter suppression, yet they have no problem requiring IDs for just about everything else — including for receiving a COVID-19 vaccine. Veteran political analyst John Fund recently observed this brazen political double standard and how the self-proclaimed “fact-checker” Snopes dubiously sought to cover for Democrat hypocrisy.
Fund notes that requiring an ID for voting is supported by the vast majority of Americans.
The vast majority of Americans agree. In a poll taken last month by Scott Rasmussen, adults opposed — by 64 percent to 30 percent — Democratic attempts in their H.R. 1 election bill to effectively nullify state laws requiring photo ID. Every key demographic group supported photo ID, including African Americans, who split 50 percent to 41 percent in favor. Other polls have shown margins in favor of ID that are equal to or greater than Rasmussen’s numbers.
Yet Democrats continue to push the false narrative that voter ID equals voter suppression specifically targeting black voters.
Eric Holder, President Obama’s attorney general, went so far as to claim in 2012 that “recent studies indicate that 25 percent of African American voting-age citizens, lack a government-issued photo ID.” He vowed that his department wouldn’t allow ID laws to “disenfranchise” voters.
Such a claim is in reality amazingly racist.
It is both preposterous and patronizing to assert that one out of four African Americans lacks a photo ID when such a document is essential for so many things in life — from signing up for Medicare to cashing a check to entering the federal building where Holder used to work.
Also absurd are claims that vaccine access, unlike voting, is not a constitutional right and therefore different. The Supreme Court has ruled that buying a gun is a Second Amendment right, but you need a photo ID to do it. The Supreme Court has ruled that same-sex marriage is a constitutional civil right. But almost every jurisdiction in the country requires those seeking marriage — of whatever kind — to present a valid ID.
The real reason behind the Democrats’ objection to voter ID laws is that they help to thwart voter fraud.
Sometimes Democrats let what they really think slip. Project Veritas, the guerrilla filmmaking group headed by James O’Keefe, has routinely captured Democrats on camera admitting they know about extensive voter fraud.
Fund concludes that objecting to voter ID is in reality an objection to common sense.
As much as Democrats claim that Americans shouldn’t have to show ID as part of voting, reality and common sense keep intruding on their argument. I’m glad that something as valuable as getting a life-saving vaccine required me to show my ID. Why shouldn’t the valuable gold of democracy — ballots — receive at least as much protection?
Read the full article here.
Top of the Fold
- On second thought… Majority of voters now want to finish Trump’s wall as crisis intensifies (Washington Times)
“The Senate Opportunity Fund’s polling now shows 38% opposed and 53% in support of the wall. Much of the change appears to be among those on the left. The Chicago Council poll showed 85% of Democrats opposed to the wall, but the Senate Opportunity Fund found 63% of liberals opposed. On Capitol Hill, some senators who were wary of Mr. Trump’s wall-building plans now say completing the barrier should be part of any border strategy Mr. Biden pursues as he tries to control the surge.”
- President Biden under fire for border wall cash freeze (Politico)
“On his first day in office, Biden hit pause on billions of dollars set to be spent on his predecessor’s long-touted barrier between the U.S. and Mexico while his administration figured out next steps for the money. Now the Government Accountability Office is launching a review to determine whether the new president broke the law by freezing the money in violation of budget rules designed to keep Congress in control of the cash flow, the federal watchdog confirmed this week.”
- Administration expelled just 13% of nearly 13,000 family members in past week (Axios)
- Non compos mentis: Biden still hasn’t nominated commissioner for agency that oversees the border (Examiner)
- Montana governor understandably threatens legal action if feds fly migrants from southern border (Examiner)
- North Korea fires short-range missiles in challenge to Biden (Washington Post) | But administration dismisses the tests (Washington Times)
- Cincinnati professor who called COVID-19 “the Chinese virus” loses job (NY Post)
- Trump Hotels dropped by major luxury travel agency network (Examiner)
Annals of the “Social Justice” Caliphate
- Rainbow Mafia hauls Jack Phillips into court again, this time for refusing to bake a cake celebrating a man’s “transition” (The Federalist)
- BLM anarchists mob store in Rochester, New York, trapping 100 customers inside (Daily Wire)
- Slippery slope fallout: Two Massachusetts towns create legal polyamorous partnerships (Daily Signal)
- Church of England may impose ethnic quota for clergy (Disrn)
- Senate confirms Vivek H. Murthy — who fallaciously thinks “gun violence” is a public health crisis — as surgeon general (Washington Post)
- Selfish Chicago Teachers Union tells members not to reveal that they’ve been vaccinated so they can continue to work from home (Not the Bee)
- Pandemic unemployment benefits fraud could top $200 billion (Fox Business)
- Policy: The everything bubble: How a debt-driven economy creates more frequent crises (Mises Institute)
- Policy: The social cost of carbon and climate sensitivity is model manipulation at its finest (Daily Signal)
- Humor: Neighbors with “Black Lives Matter,” “Asian Lives Matter,” and “Hispanic Lives Matter” yard signs getting awfully close to “All Lives Matter” (Babylon Bee)
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. Click here for a few thought-provoking comments about specific articles. The views expressed therein don’t necessarily reflect those of The Patriot Post.
HR 1 Is Not ‘For the People’ — What the Leftmedia won’t tell you about the so-called “For the People Act.”
Satire: How People Think You Stop Bigotry — This “doctor” knows the only way to stop bigotry is with full isolation from society.
For more of today’s columns, visit Right Opinion.
Insight: “The evils of tyranny are rarely seen but by him who resists it.” —John Hay (1838-1905)
Upright: “Earmarks are useful to presidents or congressional leaders seeking to boost legislation that cannot succeed on its own merits, and they can help vulnerable incumbents win reelection by showing off their ability to bring home the occasional slab of bacon. But neither of those outcomes is in the public interest. A bill that can’t pass on its own merits shouldn’t pass. An incumbent who has lost the support of voters shouldn’t be reelected. Public funds are supposed to be spent on public purposes, not on wink-and-nod deals intended to benefit ‘well-connected businesses, campaign donors, and others who could afford a high-priced lobbyist,” to quote Senator Marco Rubio.’“ —Jeff Jacoby
Re: The Left: “Is there anti-Asian racism in America? Of course. Ethnic bigotry is a tragic part of the human condition. There is no country in which members of different races live that is bereft of ethnic or racial bigotry. Therefore, the only question decent, wise or honest people ask is: How much? And the answer in America is: very, very little. But the left lacks decency, wisdom and honesty. Therefore, it offers continuous reporting about anti-Asian racism, most of which so wildly exaggerates the issue as to constitute a lie.” —Dennis Prager
For the record: “According to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics from September 2019, blacks have committed the greatest percentage of violent crimes against Asian Americans. But the mendacious media do not report that.” —Dennis Prager
Political futures: “Over the weekend, Fox News visited a migrant camp on the Mexican side of the border. It had to go to Mexico because the Biden administration is preventing the media from taking pictures at our border detention facilities. Think about that for a moment. There’s more freedom of the press on the Mexican side of the border than the American side! But what Fox News found in Tijuana is deeply troubling. There are 1,000 migrants in just one of the camps. The flag flying over that camp is not the Mexican flag or even the American flag. No, it’s a huge Biden 2020 flag, and many migrants are wearing clothing with Biden’s campaign logo. … Never forget what the main point is from the progressive point of view: Open borders is just another Democrat voter registration drive. Maybe not next year, but down the road Democrats will guarantee that today’s illegal immigrants become tomorrow’s Democrat voters.” —Gary Bauer
Sad but true: “The media had planned to spend the rest of the week talking about the Boulder shooting but will now have to find something else to talk about since the shooter is a Syrian immigrant…” —Matt Walsh
Observations: “Gun control assumes that government and government bodies won’t use force against their own citizens. It assumes they are trustworthy. And they are anything but.” —Sydney Watson
The bottom line: “Every state is a border state until we secure the southern border.” —Senator Marsha Blackburn
The BIG Lie: “There is a problem at the border, but it is not remotely a ‘crisis.’ It’s an administrative challenge that could be solved easily with more resources and clear policy — not even ranking with, say, the importance of securing loose nuclear material, much less the ongoing global pandemic, or the truly civilization-threatening crisis of climate change. The mainstream media is in effect collaborating with Republicans to stoke unreasoning xenophobic panic. … The most honest criticism of Biden’s immigration record is that he has not reversed Trump’s appalling, illegal practices fast enough.” —The Week’s Ryan Cooper
Grand delusions: “The Biden administration has [the border] under control.” —House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
Race bait: “The battle against D.C. statehood is rooted in anti-Black racism.” —Kyla Sommers in The Washington Post (Actually, as Jeff Jacoby explains, “Article I, Section 8 provides explicitly for a national capital that would not be part of a state nor treated as a state, but rather a unique enclave under the exclusive authority of Congress — a neutral ‘district’ in which representatives of all the states could meet on an equal footing to conduct the nation’s business.”)
And last… “Best argument for DC statehood: The other 50 states could secede from it.” —Jon Gabriel
For more of today’s memes, visit the Memesters Union.
For more of today’s cartoons, visit the Cartoons archive.