24 thoughts on “News/Politics 2-5-21

  1. Figures from the fevered dreams of NTers and leftists.

    https://thefederalist.com/2021/02/04/the-qanon-takeover-of-the-gop-is-a-fantasy-of-corporate-media-and-democrats/

    “The QAnon Takeover Of The GOP Is A Fantasy Of Corporate Media And Democrats

    There is indeed a fight underway for the future of the Republican Party, but it’s not about QAnon conspiracy theories or crackpot lawmakers.”

    “There’s a big push right now among corporate media, Democrats, and NeverTrumpers to establish a narrative that the Republican Party is being torn apart in a bitter civil war between its establishment wing and its supposed QAnon wing. It’s about as true as your garden-variety QAnon conspiracy theory, but it’s politically useful, which is why you’re seeing it crop up all over the media right now.

    According to this narrative, dangerous right-wing conspiracy theorists and QAnon acolytes make up a sizable portion of the GOP electorate and enjoy broad acceptance among many Republican elected officials and right-of-center media outlets. These people believe all the “lies” and “conspiracy theories” that Trump peddled after the November election—so much so that they launched an “armed insurrection” at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 in a failed attempt to overturn the election results and maybe even kidnap Vice President Mike Pence or murder Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

    This “wing” of the GOP is so dangerous, we’re told, we need a 9/11-style commission to investigate what happened on Jan. 6, we might need a new domestic terrorism law, and we’re definitely going to have to figure out how to “de-radicalize” Trump supporters. Half the country has lost its mind, you see, which is why so many legacy media outlets have been publishing very serious essays on “MAGA extremism.” If we don’t address this now then MAGA white supremacist militias will terrorize America—like al-Qaeda, only worse.

    Tune into NPR or CNN, browse the pages of The New York Times or The Washington Post, and you’ll hear all of this discussed in detail, ad nauseum. But it’s pure fantasy, almost a kind of conspiracy theory of its own, akin to the years-long conspiracy theories about Trump’s collusion with Russia in the 2016 election, which Democrats and the press still cling to despite zero evidence after years of investigations.

    Indeed, the notoriety QAnon now enjoys has more to do with the media building it up than Republicans flocking to its banner. According to Pew Research, last spring during the Democratic primaries, more Democrats had heard about QAnon conspiracy theories than Republicans had (28 to 18 percent, respectively) and by the fall, that disparity had grown, with 55 percent of Democrats saying they’d heard of QAnon compared to less than 40 percent of Republicans. Notably, those most likely to say they had heard about it also reported that they got their news mainly from The New York Times, MSNBC, and NPR.

    The reason Democrats and the media want to build up QAnon in the minds of Americans is fairly obvious: to tar all Republicans as crazy conspiracy theorists. That’s an explicit strategy among Democratic leadership in the House right now.

    As Politico reported this week, Democratic TV ads launched this week spotlight supporters of QAnon: “It is the first step in a larger plan, orchestrated by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s new chair, Sean Patrick Maloney of New York, to exploit the growing friction between Trump hard-liners and establishment Republicans in the GOP base, which Maloney sees as a major weak point for the party.”

    No, Marjorie Taylor Greene Is Not A Rising GOP Star

    The point of all this is to make all Republican candidates answer for the outlandish ideas of a small sliver of the GOP electorate and exactly one newly elected Republican member of the House, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, a now-famous (thanks to the media) QAnon conspiracy theorist and generally kooky lady that the people of northwest Georgia made the mistake of electing to Congress in November.

    Corporate media is now presenting Greene as a rising star in the Republican Party and a major figure on the right—the GOP equivalent of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. In reality, she’s a political nobody who’s been repudiated by nearly everyone in her own party, and unlike AOC hasn’t been plastered on the cover of fashion magazines and treated like a superstar by the media. Sure, Trump might have once called Greene a rising star at a rally, but the idea that she is somehow representative of a substantial portion of the GOP, or that she holds any real sway over the party or the Republican electorate as a whole, is frankly ridiculous.

    (By contrast, AOC, an actual star of the Democratic Party and the top Democratic fundraiser in the House, was roundly mocked on Twitter Wednesday for lying about how much danger she was in during the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol. She was in an adjacent office building.)

    Admittedly, Greene, like AOC, believes and says crazy things, yet she was elected to Congress by a couple hundred thousand Georgians. But so was Democratic Rep. Hank Johnson, who represents Georgia’s Fourth Congressional District in Atlanta’s eastern suburbs. Johnson, who was reelected in November to an eighth term, once compared Jewish Israeli settlers to termites and, in a bizarre 2010 exchange in the House Armed Services Committee, speculated about the possibility that Guam might tip over and capsize from the weight of too many U.S. Marines deployed there.

    Before Johnson, that seat was held by six-term Democrat Rep. Cynthia McKinney, a 9/11 conspiracy theorist who in an April 2002 radio interview claimed the Bush administration received numerous warnings before the attacks, and that the Bush family might have even allowed them to happen for profit. Before that, McKinney claimed there had been widespread voter fraud in Florida during the 2000 presidential election and that Al Gore had really won. She joined a handful of other House Democrats in objecting to the certification of the Electoral College vote, and did so again four years later, objecting to the electoral votes from Ohio.

    But McKinney never faced Republican calls to be stripped of her committee assignments or be expelled from Congress, as Greene now faces from House Democrats for views she held prior to being elected. Instead, McKinney was primaried by another Democrat in 2002, punished not by the media or by the opposing party, but by voters in her own district. (She challenged her primary loss in court, claiming thousands of Republicans had voted in the Democratic primary, but presented no evidence of voter fraud and lost the case. Amazingly, she was reelected in 2004.)

    Sometimes crackpots get elected to Congress. But the proper remedy is for their constituents to vote them out of office, not for their fellow lawmakers to do an end-run around voters.

    The GOP Civil War Is Between Populists and the Establishment”

    ——

    And the rubes believe it all……..

    Liked by 2 people

  2. BS.

    Once again Dems seek to purge anyone who doesn’t think like they do.

    If they had their way our military would consist of 3 dozen soy boys and a couple of
    transvestites.

    —-

    Once again, this is just the fevered dreams of leftist who are too cowardly to defend their country or military.

    “Pentagon orders pause across military to address extremism in its ranks
    The Pentagon acknowledges it is still uncertain how to tackle the problem.”

    Translation: We’re just making @#$% up as we go.

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/pentagon-orders-pause-across-military-address-extremism-its-ranks-n1256678

    “The Pentagon on Wednesday said it was still uncertain how to grapple with the problem of extremism in its ranks and announced a military-wide pause to allow troops and commanders a chance to focus on the issue.

    Lloyd Austin, the first Black secretary of defense who recently took over at the Pentagon, ordered each branch of the military to stand-down at some point over the next 60 days to discuss the threat posed by white supremacy and similar extremism, said Pentagon press secretary John Kirby.

    The Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol, when a pro-Trump mob stormed the building and attacked police, was “a wake-up call” for the Department of Defense, Kirby said. Current and former members of the military took part in the siege, and the Pentagon is under scrutiny over how it vets recruits and tracks extremism within the ranks.”

    Like

  3. A continuation of the conversation about CRT from yesterday.

    Bad idea.

    https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/02/whats-being-taught-on-campuses-is-that-the-most-important-thing-is-the-color-of-your-skin/

    ““what’s being taught on campuses is that the … most important thing … is the color of your skin””

    “TUCKER: Well, many colleges and universities now teach something called critical race theory. Now, according to critical race theory, some races are inherently better than other races. This isn’t an assault on racism. It is racism and it’s spreading. Bewilderingly the deepest possible betrayal of the promise of this country of every Martin Luther King speech ever given. And yet it’s in your kid’s school. One law professor started a website called critical race.org. Once again, that’s critical race dot, or you can use that site to track the spread of these diseased ideas in schools and seeing if they’ve infected the schools that your children go to. Bill Jacobson is a professor at Cornell law school. He started this. He joins us tonight. Professor, thanks so much for coming on. You’re a brave man, even to criticize this highly fashionable, deeply poisonous idea, but you’re actually tracking it. Why are you doing this? What have you found?

    WAJ: Sure. Hi Tucker. Well, the reason I started to follow it was at Cornell university where I teach in law school. They implemented a push over the summer to embed what they call anti-racism ideology into every aspect of the campus. And as you know, and you’ve explained on your show, anti racism does not actually mean what people think it means. It actually is very racist. It’s current discrimination in order to remedy past discrimination is the ideology. So I saw this developing, I started to research it. I was going to write an op-ed or an article about it. And then I realized it was almost everywhere. And so we began to gather the data we’re focused now on higher education, because that’s the source of all this. That’s where the ideology developed and that’s where people are trained. And we’ve created criticalrace.org, which is a database with an interactive map where people can find out what the colleges and universities to, which they may be sending their children or their children who may be going have going on.

    And it really is a full fledged database. You can hover over the map. You can click on your state. You can click on your school. We have 220 universities in the database now, and we’re expecting to expand it to 500 and you can find out what’s going on. Everything is sourced. Everything is linked and the database is actually neutral. It’s just data. You can find out what’s going on in schools. Maybe you like it. Maybe you want your children to be sent to a school where they get indoctrinated, or maybe you’re going to send them to a school where you don’t know what’s going on. And this is a way to find out.

    TUCKER: It’s amazing. What, what it, and what a public service, by the way, I don’t think anyone in good faith could argue against more knowledge. Um, which is what you’re providing. What’s the reaction been to this?

    WAJ: The reaction so far been overwhelmingly favorable. We just rolled it out this week. We have a tip line, a contact form. A lot of people have been submitting information about the universities and colleges. And again, we only use publicly sourced information. This is what the colleges tell themselves. They love to talk about this stuff. They love to pat themselves on the back about this, but it probably doesn’t make it to their admissions brochures. And you can find this out at our website and it’s been overwhelmingly favorable. And I’ll tell you the one big reaction we’ve gotten is when you’re going to do this for K-12, because K-12 is where a lot of the problems are happening. Now. I’m not sure when we’re going to be able to roll out something like that.

    But a lot of parents we’re entering admission season. You’re going to be looking at schools. Don’t just worry about what athletic facilities they have, what the dining room serves, worry about, whether your children are going to have to take mandatory courses and mandatory training in an ideology, which as you’ve indicated is the complete opposite of everything we’ve been taught to believe is good and just, which is to view people based on their inherent worth and their worthiness and not to pay attention to the skin tone color of them. But that’s, what’s being taught on campuses is that the overwhelmingly most important thing in society is the color of your skin and everything derives from that. And you need to know, and we’re trying to empower parents and students.”

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Simple.

    They fear what they can’t control.

    https://nypost.com/2021/02/04/why-are-democrats-so-scared-of-trump-when-they-just-beat-him/

    “Donald Trump is washed up. A has-been. Everyone hates him, and he has no future. That’s what the press is constantly telling us.

    So why are the Democrats still afraid of him?

    According to the press narrative, Trump suffered a crushing electoral defeat. Democrats are firmly in charge of the White House and Congress. America is returning to normalcy, with the reassuring (if sometimes a bit confused) face of President Biden beaming over all of us like a benevolent grandpa. We’re ready to move on.

    That’s the story, but the Democrats’ actions give it the lie.

    In a nation returning to “normalcy,” does Congress cower behind armed troops and 12-foot fences? Does a party securely in control try to enlist tech firms and media to snuff out voices of opposition?

    In a normal America, does a defeated presidential incumbent pose such a threat to the party in power that he must be impeached after leaving office, to ensure he doesn’t win back the White House in four years?

    That’s where we are. The Democrats aren’t acting like a party secure in its position; they’re acting nervous and insecure and lashing out at any perceived threat.

    The Republicans didn’t impeach LBJ or Jimmy Carter after they left office — although in LBJ’s case, at least, there were probably grounds. The Democrats didn’t try to make sure George H.W. Bush was ineligible for future office after he was beaten by Bill Clinton, even though Clinton failed to win a majority of the vote.

    Yet Democrats have made quite plain that the purpose of this after-hours impeachment of a former president is to ensure Trump doesn’t rise from the political grave and run again in four years.

    Are they crazy? Well, maybe not entirely.

    As political pollster Rasmussen tweeted Wednesday, a lot of voters agree with Trump that the election process in America is deeply flawed: “Almost half of ALL VOTERS are concerned about US election integrity: – President Trump left office w/ a job approval of 51%. – 47% of ALL VOTERS believe there was election fraud in Nov 2020. – 45% of ALL VOTERS want a debate on election integrity.”

    (And yes, despite all the media attacks and the hysteria over the Capitol invasion, Trump’s final approval rating in the Rasmussen daily tracking poll was 51 percent. Meanwhile, Biden’s first-day approval rating in the same poll was 48 percent.)

    The political class keeps trying to treat Trump’s complaints about American elections as something beyond the pale, so out of order that simply making those charges constitutes an impeachable offense, and maybe some kind of “incitement.” But nearly half of voters agree with Trump that there’s a problem. “

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Reason #765,876 not to trust Snopes and the other “fact checkers”

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2021/02/05/snopes_and_the_fact-checked_claims_that_werent_really_made.html

    “A fact-checker’s role is to help readers distinguish fact from fiction by analyzing and rating claims. Sometimes, however, fact-checkers seem to create and check claims that no one is making, or, perhaps inadvertently, blame outlets or individuals for false claims that they didn’t make.

    In a fact-check published Jan. 5, Snopes contributor Madison Dapcevich analyzed the claim “Legislation proposed in the New York State Senate in 2021 called for the establishment of COVID-19 ‘detention camps,’” rating this a “Mixture” of truth and falsehood.

    In reality, Dapcevich writes, New York State Assembly Bill A416 “would amend public health laws to allow for the removal of ‘cases, contacts and carriers of communicable diseases who are potentially dangerous to the public health’” should the governor declare a public-health emergency. This would allow for the detaining of anyone who “pose[s] an imminent and significant threat to the public health” until he or she is no longer contagious. Dapcevich adds that the bill is not likely to pass.

    To determine whether the bill would establish COVID-19 “detention camps,” Dapcevich’s fact check rests largely on two details. First, that the bill is not specific to COVID-19, and it would not lead to detention camps, Snopes says. Dapcevich references four tweets in which, she suggests, people claim that it would do so. The problem: None of the tweeters she links to or reprints actually makes this claim. Nor is the summary, as Snopes presents it, a fair representation of any of their tweets. Instead of creating such a claim and pinning it on several conservative commenters, Snopes should have analyzed a verbatim claim that more accurately represents conservative outcry against the bill.

    The first tweet to which Dapcevich links comes from former congressional candidate Liz Joy. “This is straight up detention camp stuff in NY!” she writes. Joy’s tweet is the only one of the four that uses the term “detention camp,” a phrase that features prominently in the Snopes article. Dapcevich claims that the isolation centers proposed in the legislation “are not designated as ‘detention camps,’” but whether they qualify as detention camps is a matter of definition – which neither Dapcevich nor Joy provides – and of opinion, not of fact, and therefore not in need of a fact-check.

    The second tweet referenced comes from Laura Ingraham of Fox News, who urges, “Read the bill that will allow New York to detain problematic state residents during a ‘health emergency.’” The only part of this tweet resembling a claim is her use of the word “problematic,” which again, is a question of opinion and interpretation, not fact.

    The third tweet comes from author David Samadi, a physician, who urges people to read the bill “up for consideration in New York State in regards to COVID-19.” Dapcevich points out that the bill is not specific to COVID-19 but doesn’t dispute that the measure would almost certainly be significant if passed before the pandemic’s end, though again, she concedes that passage is unlikely.

    Beyond the links to all these tweets, Dapcevich focuses on an embedded tweet from conservative podcaster Allie Beth Stuckey, though Stuckey’s claim bears little resemblance to the claim Dapcevich is examining. “So disturbing,” Stuckey wrote. “NY bill allows for the *removal and detention* of anyone who ‘may be a danger to public health.’ Yes, that’s purposely undefined. Yes, it will be used, at least one day, to forcibly remove you or your children from your home for whatever reason the state sees fit.”

    Stuckey’s claim does not use the phrase “detention camp,” and her use of the phrase “removal and detention” does appear in the proposed bill, which states that “the governor or his or her delegee … may order the removal and/or detention of such a person (who is considered a danger to public health).” Stuckey’s characterization of this legislation as “disturbing” is an opinion, as is her hypothesizing as to the intent of the language and its future implications.

    Snopes has effectively made up a claim that is a combination of a number of claims –some of them misleading, others mere opinions – and then “fact-checked” this amalgamated claim (that no one is actually making) instead of fact-checking one of the actual claims.

    On Jan. 4, Snopes used a similar tactic, running a fact-check in response to readers who wanted “verification of online rumors” that recent federal legislation allowed children to receive vaccines without their parents’ consent. Snopes rated the claim “Mostly False.”

    Contributor Bethania Palma explained that anonymous readers had “shared screenshots” with Snopes of a post on a website called Conservative Brief. The post accurately reported the passage of a law in the District of Columbia allowing minors as young as 11 to be vaccinated without parental consent. The image associated with the post on Conservative Brief depicted Dr. Anthony Fauci, the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which “led some readers to believe that a new nationwide law,” rather than a D.C. law, “allows children 11 and older to get vaccinated without their parents’ knowledge or consent.”

    ———

    “The screenshot and its underlined portion appear to suggest that it would be “misleading” to claim that the law allows children to be vaccinated without parental knowledge or consent. Palma’s own report, however, affirms that the D.C. law “allows children as young as 11” to “get vaccines against a range of illnesses” without their parents’ consent, and further affirms that the resulting “vaccination record would be sent to the child’s school, not to their parents, if the parents are using a religious exemption that allows their child to attend school without vaccines against communicable diseases.”

    In other words, there are no factual errors in Conservative Brief’s report, no errors in its post on Facebook, and no errors in the screenshot. The only factual errors came from readers incorrectly inferring that the law was implemented at the federal level, which the text of the report in question never asserted. “

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Liberals, like all commies, love them a Ministry of Truth.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/liberalisms-ministry-of-truth-11612395404

    “The academic establishment and progressive press want you to know two things: First, conservative claims of social-media bias are bogus. As Silicon Valley firms police content, their decisions are, miraculously, wholly uninfluenced by ideological preference.

    Second, there is an urgent need for a much wider crackdown on political speech, perhaps led by the Biden Administration and requiring the creation of new government agencies. In other words, all that conservative suppression that’s, er, not happening? We need more of it.

    New York University’s Stern Center for Business and Human Rights released a brief this week that is being amplified in the press entitled, “False Accusation: The Unfounded Claim that Social Media Companies Censor Conservatives.” It argues that “some conservatives believe their content is suppressed on partisan grounds when, in fact, it’s being singled out because it violates neutral platform rules.”

    That is sometimes true, but the report doesn’t remotely prove that it always is. What about when Twitter and Facebook tried to suppress a New York Post story about Hunter Biden before the 2020 election? Even the report concedes that “the question of whether social media companies harbor an anti-conservative bias can’t be answered conclusively.”

    That doesn’t stop the authors from unabashedly asserting that “the claim of anti-conservative animus is itself a form of disinformation.” It is perpetuated partly because “it appeals to the same conspiratorial mindset that has fostered the QAnon movement.”

    Got it? Anyone who argues social-media moderation has a progressive slant is spreading disinformation, and possibly drawn to a bizarre cult. And remember that disinformation is against the rules—which, once again, are neutral.

    Among the solutions to the non-problem of progressive bias is, naturally, government control. The NYU report recommends that “the federal government . . . press Facebook, Google, and Twitter to improve content policies” and “cooperate with these companies” on enforcement. This political suppression—er, neutral government-backed content policy—“could be enforced by a new Digital Regulatory Agency.””

    Like

  7. Stolen elections have consequences…

    https://www.theepochtimes.com/border-patrol-agents-arrest-11-iranians-in-arizona-who-illegally-entered-us_3685335.html?utm_source=news&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-2021-02-04-3

    “The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) said its agents arrested a group of 11 Iranians who illegally entered the United States.

    According to a news release from the agency, agents saw the group near San Luis, Arizona, on a bridge.

    Border Patrol agents then “determined the group had illegally crossed the international border into the United States. The group was arrested and taken to Yuma Station for processing,” according to the release. “The five females and six males are were [sic] all from Iran, a Special Interest Country.””

    Like

  8. ‘Fact checking,’ I have a feeling that was tongue-in-cheek (and good for Pence), but it is always good to cross-check and see if there are other reputable sources reporting the same thing, not just rely one one source alone without question. And yes, that goes for ‘mainstream’ sources as well.

    We live in a period where news consumers have to really be both wise, often skeptical and wary. A lot of “stuff” flies through the Internet these days.

    Liked by 2 people

  9. The Administration’s (and left’s) ongoing over-reach now that they “control” it all, as dismaying as it is, will likely backfire and could very easily create a bright spot for the 2022 elections. All is not lost.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Kimberley Strassel:

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-gops-first-2021-victory-11612481021

    _________________________

    Joe Biden has decreed quite a few policy wins in recent weeks. But the biggest political win of 2021 so far may go to Republicans, with their vote this week to keep Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney in her House leadership post.

    This was a victory mostly in that it wasn’t much about Ms. Cheney at all. It was instead the party sending a message that it remains a big tent and isn’t going to grant or revoke membership purely on fealty to one politician, Donald Trump. Just as important, it was the party stomping on the new Democratic and media strategy to cast the entire GOP as extremists and kooks.

    Ms. Cheney, chairman of the House Republican Conference, had managed to irk more than a few of her colleagues over the past year, particularly with her decision last spring to back a primary opponent of a House colleague. This frustration boiled over when Ms. Cheney voted with House Democrats to impeach Donald Trump and issued an aggressive statement that even many of her backers felt inflamed the left’s bonfire.

    Mr. McCarthy capped that success with another: the handling of Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. At the Wednesday meeting, Mrs. Greene finally answered questions about, and disavowed, inflammatory comments she’d made and conspiracy theories she’d perpetuated on social media prior to her election last year. She took to the floor on Thursday to express her regret at having been seduced into the social-media vortex and to state that those views “do not represent my district, and they do not represent my values.” Mr. McCarthy issued his own statement to “condemn” QAnon, political violence, anti-Semitism, and everything else the left has associated the right with of late. …

    … The GOP still has a long way to go to unify after its November loss. But this week it passed a first, big test.
    ___________________________

    Liked by 2 people

  11. Like I said, what she did was the easy part.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2021/01/20/liz-cheney-already-has-a-2022-primary-challenger-after-voting-for-trump-impeachment/?sh=4d29382934ad

    “Liz Cheney Already Has A 2022 Primary Challenger After Voting For Trump Impeachment”

    “Cheney will be challenged by fellow Republican Anthony Bouchard, who has served as a Wyoming state senator since 2017.

    Bouchard has been a sharp critic of Cheney since her impeachment vote on Jan. 13, at one point saying on Facebook she should be “run out of town.”

    Cheney was one of just 10 GOP representatives to vote for impeachment, which was enough support to make the impeachment the most bipartisan in terms of House support in American history.

    Cheney was first elected to Wyoming’s at-large House district in 2016, and became chairwoman of the House Republican Conference in 2019.

    CRUCIAL QUOTE
    “Liz Cheney’s long-time opposition to President Trump and her most recent vote for Impeachment shows just how out-of-touch she is with Wyoming,” Bouchard said in a news release.”

    “BIG NUMBER
    70%. That’s how much of the vote Trump won in Wyoming in 2020—the highest level of support he had in any state.”

    ——

    Daddy’s pals was the easy part.

    Like

  12. And why be cowards about it?

    Secret ballot? Own that @#$% you @#$%^% $# #$$^^%$.

    Typical establishment BS.

    https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/03/politics/liz-cheney-house-republican-meeting/index.html

    “House Republicans voted Wednesday night that Rep. Liz Cheney should keep her post in House GOP leadership after she defended her support for impeachment as a vote of conscience during a contentious closed-door GOP conference meeting.

    The secret ballot vote took place after some Republicans argued that Cheney should be removed from leadership following her support for impeaching then-President Donald Trump for inciting an insurrection at the Capitol. In the end, however, Cheney prevailed by a wide margin. The vote was 145 to keep her in her position as House Republican Conference chair, and 61 to remove her, plus one member who voted present, according to several people in the room.
    The outcome leaves the House GOP leadership structure intact and averts a major upheaval within the Republican conference, after weeks of criticism and attacks aimed at Cheney ,including from some of her Republican colleagues and Trump.”

    ———

    Liked by 2 people

  13. Interesting piece

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/majority-minority-america-dont-bet-on-it-11612549609?mod=opinion_lead_pos5

    _____________________________

    OPINION THE WEEKEND INTERVIEW

    ‘Majority Minority’ America? Don’t Bet on It
    How a Census Bureau error led Democrats to assume they were on the right side of inexorable demographic trends.

    Remember the “coalition of the ascendant”? National Journal’s Ronald Brownstein invented the phrase in 2008 to describe the “growing elements of American society” that had elected Barack Obama and given Democrats commanding majorities in both congressional houses: “young people, Hispanics and other minorities, and white upper-middle-class professionals.”

    Republican successes in 2010, 2014 and 2016 called the coalition’s durability into question. But the 2020 election— Joe Biden’s victory notwithstanding—may provide the greatest reason to doubt it. Compared with 2016, President Trump and congressional Republicans improved their standing significantly among Hispanic voters and made smaller strides among other groups, such as Asian-Americans, blacks and Muslims.

    “The majority minority narrative is wrong,” says sociologist Richard Alba, referring to the idea that nonwhite Americans will outnumber whites by 2050 or so. In his recent book, “The Great Demographic Illusion,” Mr. Alba, 78, shows that many “nonwhites” are assimilating into an American mainstream, much as white ethnic groups did before them. Government statistics have failed to account for this complex reality, partly for political reasons, and in doing so they’ve encouraged sloppy thinking about the country’s future.

    “The surge in mixing across ethno-racial lines is one of the most important and unheralded developments of our time,” says Mr. Alba, a professor at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. He rattles off facts and figures: Today, more than 10% of U.S.-born babies have one parent who is nonwhite or Hispanic and one who is white and not Hispanic. That proportion is larger than the number of babies born to two Asian parents and not far behind the number of babies born to two black parents. “We’re entering a new era of mixed backgrounds,” Mr. Alba says.

    It reminds him of the postwar era, when the members of white ethnic groups began to make major socioeconomic gains as well as to intermarry. Mr. Alba, who grew up in the Parkchester neighborhood of the Bronx, is himself a product of this amalgamation: His father was Sicilian, and his mother was Irish. As for his politics, Mr. Alba describes himself as “a liberal with centrist leanings.” He voted for Mr. Biden and favors higher taxes and “more redistribution.” …

    … Mr. Alba expected that his own research would reinforce this conventional wisdom. “I thought I was going to discover how important ethnicity is,” he says. “But as I rummaged through the data, the story that came to me was a story of mixing—the main story was about assimilation.” Americans were marrying each other across ethnic lines and embracing the national culture. The melting pot was churning. …

    … Something similar is happening today. “The rising numbers of people from mixed ethno-racial backgrounds is a sign of growing integration into the mainstream by members of minority groups, especially those of recent immigrant origin, such as Asians and Hispanics,” Mr. Alba says. He foresees a future in which many Americans think of themselves as outside the boxes of traditional Census categories—not as members of discrete racial or ethnic groups but rather as multiracial or multicultural Americans. Mr. Alba cites the example of Tiger Woods, who once described himself as “Cablanasian,” a portmanteau of Caucasian, black and Asian. …

    … In 2000, for example, the Census Bureau estimated that by 2059 nonwhites would outnumber whites in the U.S. population. A few years later, it moved the date up, to 2043.

    Mr. Alba more or less accepted these predictions at first. But about five years ago he spotted an error in how the Census Bureau classifies people by race and ethnicity: “The data are understating the degree to which people were coming from mixed family backgrounds.” …

    … “We’ve allowed ideas about race to loom very large,” says Mr. Alba. “We tend to believe that people can have only one ethno-racial background and that this identity is fixed when in fact it can be quite fluid.” This in turn has corrupted political thinking, especially among Democrats who accept the demography-is-destiny theory—the notion that they need only bide their time and minority voters will put them into a position of unassailable political power. …

    … What America needs now, Mr. Alba believes, is “a new narrative.” The current one is all about conflict and collision between groups and “has polarizing political consequences.” A better one would be “less threatening to the white majority and at the same time would allow minorities to become a part of the mainstream ‘us’ without abandoning their distinctiveness.”

    Maybe this new narrative could hark back to an old American idea, put forward by Walt Whitman in 1855: “I contain multitudes.”
    _________________________________

    Liked by 3 people

  14. “@#$% you @#$%^% $# #$$^^%$” — (5:16)

    Sorry, this totally conjures up an image for me of the dad in The Christmas Story — in that scene when the dogs break into the kitchen and steal the holiday turkey.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.