Democrat Cities: Fourth-World Scourges -
JUST LOOK AT DIANNE FEINSTEIN, NANCY PELOSI, KAMLA HARRIS' CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO!
San Francisco is the nation’s leader in property crime. Burglary,
larceny, shoplifting, and vandalism are included under this ugly
umbrella. The rate of car break-ins is particularly striking: in 2017
over 30,000 reports were filed, and the current average is 51 per
day. Other low-level offenses, including drug dealing, street
harassment, encampments, indecent exposure, public intoxication,
simple assault, and disorderly conduct are also rampant.
Migrant enclaves already are at the top of
the U.S. lists for bad places to live - 10 of
the 50 worst places in America to live
according to this list are in California, and
all of them are famous for their illegal
populations. MONICA SHOWALTER
When the terrorists become bored and cease terrorizing, when the flames are extinguished, when those who died in the riots are buried and cremated, when the shards of glass from storefronts are disposed of, and when livelihoods are permanently lost, Democrats will still run the vast majority of the deadliest and most dangerous cities in the U.S.
Death and destruction always follow Democrat policies and culture. Stagnant local economies. Unsafe streets for children. Gun crime. Failing schools. Breathtaking corruption. Problems with the police. Property crime. Poverty. Poor public health. Single- or no-parent homes. All are found in abundance in Democrat-run cities, and found overwhelmingly in majority-black neighborhoods.
So who are the true "racists"? By every objective measure and metric, Democrat-run cities are the unequivocal worst places in America to live.
Here's a rundown of how long Democrats have monopolized many of our culturally historic cities. Numbers cited are consecutive days and are slightly rounded up or down.
San Francisco: only Democrat mayors and super-majority Democrat; Boards of Supervisors, 14,000; all 11 current supervisors are Democrats;
Baltimore: only Democrat mayors and only Democrat city councils, 19,000;
Oakland: only Democrat mayors and majority Democrat city councils, 15,000; all eight current councilmen are Democrats;
St. Louis: only Democrat mayors and super-majority Democrat Boards of Aldermen, 24,500; all current aldermen are Democrats;
Milwaukee: only Democrat mayors and majority Democrat city councils, 22,000; in the 20th century, three socialist mayors were elected before the 22,000 consecutive days of only Democrat mayors; the city currently has 15 councilmen — all but one are verified Democrats or were endorsed by the Milwaukee County Democratic Party;
Philadelphia: only Democrat mayors and super-majority Democrat city councils, 25,000; if Philadelphia didn't have the Home Rule Charter (requiring a few city council seats to be the "minority party"), which was approved by voters in 1951, it's likely that the city would have been solely Democrat for even longer than Baltimore;
Detroit: only Democrat mayors and super-majority Democrat city councils,
21,000; all nine current councilmen are Democrats;
Minneapolis, where all the nationwide George Floyd–related
rioting and looting terrorism originated from: only Democrat mayors, 15,000; unknown on city council; current council has 13 members — 12 are Democrats, and the other is Green Party;
New Orleans: city council data for the Big Easy is not easily found; council has been super-majority Democrat for 15,000, with only Democrat mayors for 54,000; all seven current councilmen are Democrats. As a comparison, the U.S. has existed for 89,000 consecutive days (I am basing this number on the year 1776, not 1783, when the Treaty of Paris was signed between the U.S. and Great Britain);
Chicago: only Democrat mayors and super-majority Democrat city councils
for at least 32,000; of the current 50 councilmen, 46 are Democrats, and four are "independents," although I suspect that none of the four is an admirer of Adamsian federalism.
Cleveland: all 17 current city councilmen are Democrats; only Democrat mayors, 11,000;
Akron (hometown of LeBron James): only Democrat mayors, 13,000; all 14 current councilmen are Democrats;
Newark: only Democrat mayors, 24,000; unknown how long Democrats have been the majority or super-majority party on the city council; all nine current councilmen are Democrats;
New York: only Democrat mayors, 6,500 (I'm counting Michael Bloomberg in this total, even though he was a "Republican" during his first term); unknown how long Democrats have been the majority or super-majority party on the city council; 48 of the current 51 councilmen are Democrats; Democrats outnumber Republicans 7 to 1 in voter registration;
Austin, in the supposed "red state" of Texas: only Democrat mayors, 10,500; unknown how long Democrats have been the majority or super-majority party on the city council; all 11 of the current councilmen are Democrats;
Seattle: only Democrat mayors, 18,000; unknown how long Democrats have been the majority or super-majority party on the city council; of the nine current councilmen, eight are Democrats and one is a socialist;
Portland, Ore.: only Democrat mayors and super-majority Democrat city
councils, 14,000; all three current councilmen are Democrats.
To put in perspective just how long Democrats have had strangleholds on American big cities, compare their reigns of terror and dominance to the below:
The Castros, in Cuba, have been in power for 22,000 consecutive days;
Stalin ruled the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics for 11,000 consecutive days;
The USSR herself was in existence for 25,000 consecutive days;
The Kim dynasty has been in place for 26,000 consecutive days;
Slavery was legal in the U.S. for 32,500 consecutive days.
Diversity? What diversity? There is a guarantee inherent in Democrat policies: they are guaranteed to fail. Don't let your city devolve into a Democrat-run municipality. Irrespective of the party of the president, Congress, governor, or state Legislature, the same problems have befallen almost every Democrat-monopolized city. Their true victims are the youths who are born into abject squalor and localized war zones.
Are the causes coincidental, due to incompetence, or intentional? Impossible that it's coincidental or due to incompetence. Both are statistically — dare I say, scientifically — impossible.
There are no coincidences in politics.
Rich Logis is author of the upcoming book 10 Warning Signs Your Child Is Becoming a Democrat: How to Make America Grown-Up Again. He can be found on Twitter at @RichLogis.
LEGALS FLEE THE LA RAZA WELFARE
STATE!
MEXIFORNIA: The Globalist Democrat
Party’s Vision of America
Migrant enclaves already
are at the top of the U.S. lists for bad places to live - 10 of the
50 worst places in America to live according to this list are in California, and all of
them are famous for their illegal populations. MONICA SHOWALTER
California—not Mississippi, New
Mexico, or West Virginia—has the highest poverty rate in the United States.
According to the Census Bureau’s Supplemental Poverty Measure—which accounts
for the cost of housing, food, utilities, and clothing, and which includes
noncash government assistance as a form of income—nearly one out of four
Californians is poor. Kerry Jackson
*
California’s de facto
status as a one-party state lies at the heart of its poverty problem. With a
permanent majority in the state senate and the assembly, a prolonged dominance
in the executive branch, and a weak opposition, California Democrats have long
been free to indulge blue-state ideology while paying little or no political
price. The state’s poverty problem is unlikely to improve while policymakers
remain unwilling to unleash the engines of economic prosperity that drove
California to its golden years. Kerry Jackson
*
As Breitbart News reported, if chain
migration is not ended — as President Donald Trump has demanded — the U.S.
electorate will forever be changed, with between seven to eight million new
foreign-born individuals being eligible to vote because of chain migration, and
overall, an additional 15 million new foreign-born voters.
*
Missouri Senator Claire McCaskillhas identified California Senator
Kamala Harris as the party leader on issues of immigration and race. Harris
wants a moratorium on construction of
new immigration-detention facilities in favor of the old “catch and release” policy for illegal aliens, and has
urged a shutdown of the government rather than compromise on mass amnesty.
*
No Justice for Taxpaying
Americans
By Howie Carr
But the real double standard kicks in when the undocumented Democrat gets to the courtroom. A taxpaying American can only dream of the kid-gloves treatment these Third World fiends get.
By Howie Carr
But the real double standard kicks in when the undocumented Democrat gets to the courtroom. A taxpaying American can only dream of the kid-gloves treatment these Third World fiends get.
*
Illegal
aliens continue overwhelming the state, draining California’s already depleted
public services while endangering our lives, the rule of law, and public safety
for all citizens. Arthur Schaper
*
*
The Federation for American Immigration Reform estimates that California
spends $22 billion on government services for illegal aliens, including
welfare, education, Medicaid, and criminal justice system costs. STEVEN BALDWIN
*
Heather Mac Donald of the Manhattan Institute has testified before a
Congressional committee that in 2004, 95% of all outstanding warrants for murder
in Los Angeles were for illegal aliens; in 2000, 23% of all Los Angeles County
jail inmates were illegal aliens and that in 1995, 60% of Los Angeles’s largest
street gang, the 18th Street gang, were illegal aliens.
ALL BILLIONAIRES ARE DEMOCRATS. ALL BILLIONAIRES WANT OPEN
BORDERS FOR MORE CHEAP LABOR AND NO CAPS ON IMPORTING CHINESE AND INDIANS TO
WORK OUR TECH JOBS CHEAP.
Obama’s State of Delusion ... OR JUST ANOTHER "Hope &
Change" HOAX?
”The delusional character of Obama’s State of the Union
address on Tuesday—presenting an America of rising living
standards and a booming economy, capped by his declaration
that the “shadow of crisis has passed”—is perhaps matched
only in its presentation by the media and supporters of the
Democratic Party.”
“The general tone was set by the New York Times in its lead
editorial on Wednesday, which described the speech as a “simple, dramatic
message about economic fairness, about the fact that the well-off—the top
earners, the big banks, Silicon Valley—have done just great, while middle and
working classes remain dead in the water.”
OBAMANOMICS:
The report observes that while the wealth of the world’s 80
richest people doubled between 2009 and 2014, the wealth of the poorest half of
the world’s population (3.5 billion people) was lower in 2014 than it was in
2009.
In 2010, it took 388 billionaires to match the wealth of the
bottom half of the earth’s population; by 2013, the figure had fallen to just
92 billionaires. It fell to 80 in 2014.
THE OBAMA ASSAULT ON THE AMERICAN MIDDLE-CLASS
“The goal of the Obama administration, working with the
Republicans and local governments, is to roll back the living conditions of the
vast majority of the population to levels not seen since the 19th century,
prior to the advent of the eight-hour day, child labor laws, comprehensive
public education, pensions, health benefits, workplace health and safety
regulations, etc.”
“In response to the ruthless assault of the financial oligarchy,
spearheaded by Obama, the working class must advance, no less ruthlessly, its
own policy.”
New Federal Reserve report
US
median income has plunged, inequality has grown in Obama “recovery”
The yearly income of a typical US household dropped by a
massive 12 percent, or $6,400, in the six years between 2007 and 2013. This is
just one of the findings of the 2013 Federal Reserve Survey of Consumer
Finances released Thursday, which documents a sharp decline in working class
living standards and a further concentration of wealth in the hands of the rich
and the super-rich.
THE DEMOCRAT PARTY’S
BILLIONAIRES’ GLOBALIST EMPIRE requires someone as ruthlessly dishonest as
Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama to be puppet dictators.
http://hillaryclinton-whitecollarcriminal.blogspot.com/2018/09/google-rigged-it-so-illegals-would-vote.html
1.
Globalism: Google
VP Kent Walker insists that despite its repeated rejection by electorates
around the world, “globalization” is an “incredible force for good.”
2.
Hillary Clinton’s Democratic
party: An executive nearly broke down crying because of the candidate’s loss. Not
a single executive expressed anything but dismay at her defeat.
3. Immigration: Maintaining
liberal immigration in the U.S is the policy that Google’s executives discussed the
most.
Why the rich favor the Democrats
There's little doubt that
today's Democrat Party is the party of the rich. Actually, that's an
understatement. Far more than billionaires are involved. A better
expression of reality would be to say a fundamental core of Democrat coalition
is the managerial class, also known as the elite. These are the
people who run the media, Hollywood and the entertainment industry, the big
corporations, the universities and schools, the investment banks, and Wall
Street. They populate the upper levels of government
bureaucracies. These are the East and West Coasters.
The alliance of the
affluent with the Democrat Party can be seen in the widely disproportionate
share of hefty political donations from the well-to-do going to Democrats and a
bevy of left-wing causes. It's also why forty-one out of the fifty
wealthiest congressional districts are represented by Democrats.
BLOG: DEMS LOVE SOCIALISM
FOR ILLEGALS TO KEEP THEM COMING AND BREEDING ANCHOR BABIES FOR WELFARE AND
SOCIALISM FOR BANKS. TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF IT!
Bernie Sanders is
an exception. But he's an anomaly viewed as dangerous to the party,
which is why he's being crushed by the Democrat establishment.
Why do the wealthy align
with the Democrats? The answer may seem counter-intuitive, but it is
really quite simple. It's surely not ideals or high-minded
principles. Nor is it ignorance. Rather, it boils down to
raw self-interest.
In his book, The Age of
Entitlement: America Since the Sixties, Christopher Caldwell notes
that rich Americans think themselves to be as vulnerable as
blacks. They are a relatively small minority of the
population. They fear being resented for their wealth and power and of
having much of that taken from them. Accordingly, the wealthy seek
to protect what is theirs by preventing strong majorities from forming by using
the divide and conquer principle.
As R.R. Reno writes when reviewing
Caldwell's book: "Therefore, the richest and most
powerful people in America have strong incentives
to support an anti-majoritarian political system." He goes
on: "Wealthy individuals shovel donations into elite institutions that
incubate identity politics, which further fragments the nation and prevents the
formation of majorities."
Some of the rotten
fruit of the wealthy taking this approach include multiculturalism,
massive immigration of diverse people, resistance to encouraging
assimilation, racial strife, trying to turn white males into pariahs,
and the promotion of gender confusion. Through it all, society
is bombarded with the Orwellian mantra that "diversity is
strength," as if repeating it often enough can make it so. It
is also why patriotism and a common American culture are so disparaged
today. Those from the upper strata of society project the idea that
if you're a flag-waving American, you must be some kind of retrograde
mouth-breathing yokel.
The wealthy as a groups
are content to dissolve the glue that holds the U.S. together. And
it is all done to enhance and preserve their power, wealth, and
influence. This is why they so hate Donald
Trump. He strives to unite people and the country, although
you'd never know that that is what the president is doing if you
live in the media bubble. Trump's MAGA agenda is
an anathema to the managerial class.
To quote Reno one final
time:
The next decade will not
be easy. But it will not be about what preoccupied us in the
sixties, and which Caldwell describes so well. Rather than the
perils of discrimination we are increasingly concerned with the problem of
disintegration — or in Charles Murray's terms, the problem of "coming apart."
Trump and the GOP he is
molding are the vehicles to restore and strengthen national
solidarity. Trump said at the Daytona 500,
"No matter who wins, what matters most is God, family, and
country." That is not the Democrat agenda. As
seen in Democrat politicians, their policies, and the behavior of their major
contributors, the aim is to further weaken the social and national bonds in
America. There is a lot at stake here. If solidarity
wins, the Republic can survive and prosper. If the Democrats
and their wealthy cohorts do, then the middle class withers, the Republic
dies, and the rich and their managerial class get to rule the
roost. That is what it comes down to.
ALL BILLIONAIRES ARE DEMOCRATS. ALL BILLIONAIRES WANT WIDER OPEN
BORDERS, AMNESTY AND HELL NO TO E-VERIFY!
In addition, establishment Republicans are no better than
Democrats at stemming the flow of illegal immigration because big
businesses reap the benefits of this cheap labor without incurring any of the
social costs.
Democrats: The Party of Big Labor, Big
Government...and Big Business
There
is a widespread perception that the Democrat Party is the party the working
class and the Republican Party is the party of big business. Even
though Republicans on average received slightly more from corporate employees
prior to 2002, the overall difference between both parties from 1990 to 2020 is
statistically insignificant (Table 1). In fact, Democrat
reliance on big labor gradually shifted toward big business following the
involvement of solidly Democrat corporate giants in 2002, and from 2014 to
2020, Democrats consistently surpassed Republicans in corporate donations
(Tables 1 & 2).
Based
on data compiled by Open Secrets, Soros Fund Management, Fahr LLC (Tom Steyer),
and Bloomberg LP ranked among the top ten for political contributions that gave
over 90% to Democrats. In sharp contrast, the right-leaning Koch
Industries made the top ten only in 2014. In nearly all other years,
Koch ranked well below the top twenty.
Whether
or not this trend is long-term, there is no denying that large corporations on
average no longer lean right. But what does it mean to be "the
party of big business"? Donations are not definitive
evidence. What ultimately matters is what politicians do once they
get elected.
Many
liberals believe that big government is needed to "rein in" big
business and that in the absence of federal intervention, corporations will
"run roughshod" over the average American. Many liberals
also believe that corporations are the main beneficiaries of laissez-faire
economics and that free-market conservatives who want to scale back regulations
are somehow "in the pocket" of big business.
In
reality, the opposite is true: big business and big government
go
hand in hand because government meddling in the economy
for
the lobbyists. This crony capitalism grew exponentially as
during
the 1930s. Establishment politicians and well
connected corporations
are beneficiaries of the myth that big
government
and big business are adversaries because it hides
their
unholy alliance.
In
all fairness, neither party has had a monopoly on the dispensation of corporate
welfare: the TARP funds that propped up financial institutions deemed "too
big to fail" during the Great Recession were released by the Bush
administration. In addition, establishment Republicans are no better than
Democrats at stemming the flow of illegal immigration because big
businesses reap the benefits of this cheap labor
without incurring any of the social costs.
If
both parties are playing this game, what is the basis for labeling the Democrat
party "the party of big business"? What policies from
Republicans support small business?
Free-market
conservatism benefits small businesses because the government does not pick the
winners and losers by means of subsidies, tax breaks, and cumbersome
regulations. You will not see policies like these coming from
Washington in a major way because proposals for shrinking the federal
government rarely see the light of day in Congress.
Based
on data collected by Gallup and Thumbtack, red states far outscore blue states
in small business friendliness (Table 3). This may be why less
affluent Americans are fleeing states that score abysmally like California, Illinois, New York, and Hawaii. This might
also be why small business–owners are more likely to vote Republican.
The
Trump administration has been good for businesses of all sizes mainly due to
the unprecedented rate at which it scaled back stifling regulations. This may be
why some of the president's highest approval ratings now come from
small businesses.
Donald
Trump set himself apart from the ruling class when he latched onto the
third-rail issue of illegal immigration and called out the corporate darling Jeb Bush (AKA
"Low Energy Jeb") for his lack of grassroots support. This
may explain in part why Bain Capital, the firm co-founded by Mitt Romney,
switched teams and contributed solidly Democrat in 2018. In 2012,
Democrats accused Bain Capital of destroying jobs by systematically dismantling
the companies it bought off. Times have changed...
Small
businesses generate well over half of all new jobs. Most
importantly, many are family-owned, have strong ties to their communities, and
provide upward mobility for millions of Americans who never attended
college. The Democrats' undermining of this quintessentially
American institution is shameful and disqualifies it as the "party of the
working class." Contributions from big labor do not count
toward "labor-friendliness" because mega-unions care more about
recruitment than about the welfare of working Americans. This is why the SEIU
supports blanket amnesty for illegal aliens.
Democrats
fed up with the corporate status quo are now choosing their own
anti-establishment candidate, not realizing that socialism is just a more
impoverished version of the crony capitalism they are
rejecting. Many Sanders-supporters are also morally shallow because
they want to harness the power of the state to muscle in on the wealth of
Americans who borrowed responsibly and worked hard to pay their bills.
After
the Constitutional Convention, Benjamin Franklin said, "This Constitution ... is
likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in
despotism ... when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic
government." If Democrats implement the dystopian policies of California
on a national level, their corporate allies will do fine. It is
small business–owners and working-class Americans with nowhere to flee who have
the most to lose. Be careful what you wish for.
To view the tables below, click the links.
*The red lettering highlights a funding
advantage for Republicans. The blue lettering highlights a funding
disadvantage for Republicans.
**Based on a T-test, the difference is
insignificant at P = 0.46
Table 2: Top ten contributors to Democrats and Republicans by category
(union, corporate, and ideological) as compiled by Open Secrets:
*In 2008 Goldman Sachs donated 74% to
Democrats. All other groups in this column donated between 40 and
69% to both parties. This column does not differentiate between
giving equally to both parties and giving 70–79% to Democrats or Republicans.
**This number includes the "City of
New York." Although it is officially listed as
"other" by Open Secrets (not corporate, union, or ideological), I was
personally informed by someone from the organization that Michael Bloomberg was
the main source of this funding.
Table 3: Small business scores states scored by Thumbtack ranked
according to their Democratic advantage by Gallup:
*GPA scores are based on the following
numerical equivalents: A = 4, B = 3, C = 2, D = 1, F = 0, A+ = 4.3, A- = 3.7,
etc.
** Not scored.
***Mean GPA ± standard error. Based on a
T-test, the difference is significant at P = 0.00001.
Grim Reaper Mitch to Pelosi: I'm
Going to Kill Your Stimulus Plan
House
Speaker Nancy Pelosi just got some bad news from Mitch McConnell. Any talk
about another stimulus isn’t going to happen. She may draft a bill, but it’ll
meet a swift death in the Republican-controlled Senate. Mitch is the
legislative grim reaper for most of what the Democratic House sends his way
(via The Hill):
Senate Majority
Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) hit the brakes Tuesday on Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s
(D-Calif.) plan to move ahead with a fourth stimulus package that would include
major infrastructure spending and other Democratic priorities.
“I think we need
to wait a few days here, a few weeks, and see how things are working out,”
McConnell said on “The Hugh Hewitt Show.”
“Let’s see how
things are going and respond accordingly,” he added. “I’m not going to allow
this to be an opportunity for the Democrats to achieve unrelated policy items
that they would not otherwise be able to pass.”
McConnell's remarks came the same day that President Trump
encouraged Congress to pass a $2 trillion infrastructure bill as the next piece
of coronavirus legislation.
Pelosi
is also mulling a rollback of the SALT taxes, which would be nothing short of a giveaway to
millionaires. And by the
giveaway, it would be something of a $620 billion tax cut for them. Remember,
this is the party of the working people, or so they say, and a part of me hopes
she goes aggressive on this, so we can see Bernie Sanders gum up the Democratic
works for a bit. There is no way a hardcore
lefty would back this nonsense. Yet, there’s another reason why Mitch isn’t
rushing on the House Democrats’ stimulus reloaded plans. They’re off. They
won’t be back to work until April 20. And The Hill added that Mitch hasn’t
forgotten about judges, adding that the Kentucky Republican’s motto is “leave
no vacancy behind.”
THE OBAMA –
BIDEN BANKSTERS CON JOB STARTED BEFORE HIS FIRST DAY IN OFFICE!
GET THIS
BOOK!
Obamanomics:
How Barack Obama Is Bankrupting You and Enriching His Wall Street Friends,
Corporate Lobbyists, and Union Bosses
BY TIMOTHY P
CARNEY
Editorial
Reviews
Obama Is
Making You Poorer—But Who’s Getting Rich?
Goldman Sachs, GE, Pfizer, the United Auto Workers—the same
“special interests” Barack Obama was supposed to chase from the temple—are
profiting handsomely from Obama’s Big Government policies that crush taxpayers,
small businesses, and consumers. In Obamanomics, investigative reporter Timothy
P. Carney digs up the dirt the mainstream media ignores and the White House
wishes you wouldn’t see. Rather than Hope and Change, Obama is delivering
corporate socialism to America, all while claiming he’s battling corporate
America. It’s corporate welfare and regulatory robbery—it’s Obamanomics.
Congressman Ron Paul says, “Every libertarian and free-market
conservative needs to read Obamanomics.” And Johan Goldberg, columnist and
bestselling author says, “Obamanomics is conservative muckraking at its best
and an indispensable field guide to the Obama years.”
If you’ve wondered what’s happening to America, as the
federal government swallows up the financial sector, the auto industry, and
healthcare, and enacts deficit exploding “stimulus packages,” this book makes
it all clear—it’s a big scam. Ultimately, Obamanomics boils down to this: every
time government gets bigger, somebody’s getting rich, and those somebodies are
friends of Barack. This book names the names—and it will make your blood boil.
Investigative reporter Timothy P. Carney digs up the dirt the
mainstream media ignores and the White House wishes you wouldn’t see. Rather
than Hope and Change, Obama is delivering corporate socialism to America, all
while claiming he’s battling corporate America. It’s corporate welfare and
regulatory robbery—it’s Obamanomics. In this explosive book, Carney reveals:
* The Great
Health Care Scam—Obama’s backroom deals with drug companies spell corporate
profits and more government control
* The Global
Warming Hoax—Obama has bought off industries with a pork-filled bill that will
drain your wallet for Al Gore’s agenda
* Obama and
Wall Street—“Change” means more bailouts and a heavy Goldman Sachs presence in
the West Wing (including Rahm Emanuel)
*
Stimulating K Street—The largest spending bill in history gave pork to the
well-connected and created a feeding frenzy for lobbyists
* How the
GOP needs to change its tune—drastically—to battle Obamanomics
Praise
for Obamanomics
“The notion that ‘big business’ is on the side of the free
market is one of progressivism’s most valuable myths. It allows them to
demonize corporations by day and get in bed with them by night. Obamanomics is
conservative muckraking at its best. It reveals how President Obama is
exploiting the big business mythology to undermine the free market and stick it
to entrepreneurs, taxpayers, and consumers. It’s an indispensable field guide
to the Obama years.”
—Jonha Goldberg, LA Times columnist and best-selling author
“‘Every time government gets bigger, somebody’s getting
rich.’ With this astute observation, Tim Carney begins his task of laying bare
the Obama administration’s corporatist governing strategy, hidden behind the
president’s populist veneer. This meticulously researched book is a must-read
for anyone who wants to understand how Washington really works.”
—David Freddoso, best-selling author of The Case Against
Barack Obama
“Every libertarian and free-market conservative who still
believes that large corporations are trusted allies in the battle for economic
liberty needs to read this book, as does every well-meaning liberal who
believes that expansions of the welfare-regulatory state are done to benefit
the common people.”
—Congressman Ron Paul
“It’s understandable for critics to condemn President Obama
for his ‘socialism.’ But as Tim Carney shows, the real situation is at once
more subtle and more sinister. Obamanomics favors big business while
disproportionately punishing everyone else. So-called progressives are too
clueless to notice, as usual, which is why we have Tim Carney and this book.”
—Thomas E. Woods, Jr., best-selling author of Meltdown and
The Politically Incorrect Guide™ to American History
*
• Hardcover: 256 pages
• Publisher: Regnery Press (November 30,
2009)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1596986123
• ISBN-13: 978-1596986121
Homeless
Deaths Rise in San Francisco During Lockdown, But Not Due to Coronavirus
27 May 2020189
2:29
Deaths
have soared among the homeless population in San Francisco during the
coronavirus, but not due to the virus directly.
The San Francisco Chronicle reported Tuesday: “Forty-eight
homeless people — an average of six per week — died in San Francisco between
March 30 and May 24, according to Dr. Barry Zevin, director of the Department
of Public Health’s Street Medicine Team. For comparison, 14 people died in the
same time period last year.”
The causes, pending official confirmation, may have more to do
with the lockdown than the coronavirus itself, as many homeless people had less
access to medical services and other needs.
An even more
important factor may simply have been drug overdoses, as there was an
“explosion of fentanyl on San Francisco’s streets” over the past two years, the Chronicle notes.
San
Francisco, like other cities in California, initially sought to move homeless people
indoors to avoid the coronavirus. But as evidence emerged that the virus was
more easily spread among people sharing space indoors, the city began
encouraging people to stay outside, where they could practice “social
distancing” more easily.
The Chronicle notes: “The
number of tents and makeshift structures throughout the Tenderloin neighborhood
exploded by 285% between January and May, according to city data. The city as a
whole saw a 71% increase in tents and structures during that period.”
In Los
Angeles, officials recently reversed a policy of moving
homeless people indoors to recreation centers in residential areas. The policy
had faced local opposition, especially as it appeared
to conflict with guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
San Francisco
also opened its first
officially-sanctioned homeless camp near City Hall earlier this week, with
tents spaced widely.
Joel B.
Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday
evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). His new book, RED
NOVEMBER, is available for pre-order. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert
Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.
SAN FRANCISCO IN MELTDOWN
THE CITY OF DIANNE FEINSTEIN, KAMALA HARRIS,
GAVIN NEWSOM and NANCY
PELOSI IS NOW ONE OF
AMERICA’S GREATEST DISASTERS COMPARABLE TO
MEXICO’S SECOND
LARGEST CITY OF LOS ANGELES!
May
19, 2019
San Francisco is the nation’s leader in property crime. Burglary,
larceny, shoplifting, and vandalism are included under this
ugly
umbrella. The rate of car break-ins is particularly striking: in
2017
over 30,000 reports were filed, and the current average is 51 per
day. Other low-level offenses, including
drug dealing, street
harassment, encampments, indecent exposure, public
intoxication,
simple assault, and disorderly conduct are also rampant.
Many in law enforcement blame the crime wave on Proposition 47,
which in 2014 downgraded possession of illegal narcotics for personal use and
theft of anything under $950 in value from felonies to misdemeanors.
Anti-incarceration advocates disagree with that argument, but theft is
indisputably booming, and narcotics activity is exploding on sidewalks, parks,
and playgrounds. When compounded with other
troubles for which the city is now infamous (human feces, filth, and homelessness, which
is up 17 percent since 2017), San
Franciscans find themselves surrounded by squalor and disorder.
“A lot of people are ready to leave because the crimes are causing
depression,” says Susan Dyer Reynolds, editor-in-chief of the Marina Times, an independent
community newspaper. “Navigation centers” for the
homeless, says Reynolds, “are not sober
facilities, and people steal and break into cars to feed their habits. Crime
will go up. We know this.”
Property and other supposedly low-level crimes are intensifying
the destruction of the retail market. Landmark Mission District stores are shuttering, citing theft and lack of security. In April, CVS closed two
pharmacies that had been ravaged by constant shoplifting. Mom-and-pop
businesses, wracked by so-called minor losses, find it impossible to survive.
Empty storefronts dot once-vibrant neighborhoods.
“Property and low-level crimes shrink the space for everyday
people and enlarge them for the people committing them,” says Nancy Tung, a
criminal prosecutor for two decades, who is running for district attorney in
the 2019 election. “If we continue down this path, we will see more people
leave San Francisco.” Tung will face a competitive field of opponents, including
Deputy Public Defender Chesa Boudin, a socialist and the son of two convicted
Weather Underground murderers, who wants to reduce criminal sentences. Keeping
people out of jail is the new social-justice battle; in March, U.S. District
Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ruled that San Francisco’s bail policy violates the rights of poor defendants and brings no public benefit.
Meantime, the poor bear the brunt of low-level and property
crimes. “In the Tenderloin we have vulnerable populations—people of color, the
most children, the second-highest concentration of elders, and they are held
hostage by drug dealers and theft, and the city tells them these crimes are not
that bad,” says Tung. “We are failing to protect them. The police do a good
job, because the criminals are caught, only to be released back on the streets
over and over.”
David Young is board president of his building, located in the South
of Market neighborhood. In a recent six-month period, four windows were smashed
by vandals, and replacement costs are huge. “The everyday wear and tear on your
psyche gets to you,” says Young. “When we walk out the door, we know that there
is a 100 percent chance we’ll see someone on drugs, in various states of
undress, blood on sidewalks, and discarded sharps. These are crimes no one in
city hall seems to care about. When you say something about it, you’re called a
fascist.”
Until recently, Young says, San Francisco was an amazing place to
live. “Now people look at the city as an abscess,” he says. “The cost of
housing compared to the quality of life is way off. Everyone is talking about
it. Crime has been ignored for so long, and it’s gotten so huge. Serial repeat
offenders have no problem making bail, especially drug dealers, as they see it
as the cost of doing business.”
Some citizens are attempting to fight back. Frank Noto
cofounded Stop Crime: Neighborhood for Criminal Justice Accountability after an onslaught of break-ins. Neighbors had come together
for an art project, which drew crowds—but also crime rings. First tourists’
cars were hit, then residents’ cars, and then homes. So the group started a
court-watch program. They attended hearings and observed decisions, and they
noted a casual judicial approach to these cases. Their presence didn’t go
unnoticed. Judges know that they’re being scrutinized; one actually recused
himself. “We have to take a stand,” says Noto. “We talked to one guy, an
electrician, who’s been burglarized six times, and all of his tools have been
stolen. All we want is for the DA and judges to take this seriously.”
As for the San Francisco Police, they’re doing their best. “It
looks like hell here, but we are getting those people,” says San Francisco
Police Department Captain Carl Fabbri, who helms the Tenderloin police station.
“In our district, robberies are down 17 percent, burglaries are down 28
percent, and auto break-ins are down 26 percent. These results don’t just
happen. We’re getting the people off the streets even for two days. When
they’re in jail, we see an impact.”
The community benefits when criminals are incapacitated by being
locked up, but Fabbri, like Tung and Noto, thinks that low-level criminals are
released too quickly. “We could be keeping them and be giving services while
they’re in jail,” says Fabbri. “It could really be effective. We need changes
in the law and policies, to amend Proposition 47 and strengthen quality-of-life
laws.” Bail, too, should remain in place. “There is so much support of the
police here, more than you’d think,” says Fabbri. “Social media has turned the
tide. If you follow what we’re doing, you can see the difference we are
making.”
San Francisco’s lure persists. “There are more people from
different parts of the world coming here to build a life all the time,” says
Young. “It’s unquestionably a great place for opportunity, and culturally what
we have is incredible. But we’re not solving our problems when we pretend
low-level crimes aren’t important.” Committed residents are digging in, but if
the city doesn’t start changing its approach, how long will they last?
Erica Sandberg is a widely published
consumer-finance reporter based in San Francisco and the author of Expecting Money: The Essential Financial Plan for New and Growing
Families. As a community advocate, she focuses on homelessness and crime
and safety issues.
Pelosi’s Pacific Heights needs refugees
Pacific
Heights is one of San Francisco’s most expensive neighborhoods. It boasts
dramatic views of the Golden Gate Bridge, the Marin Headlands, and the blue
waters of San Francisco Bay.
Oracle
founder Larry Ellison is one of its more prominent and distinguished residents,
as is House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
For all
its attractiveness as a neighborhood with its boutique shops and upscale
restaurants, Pacific Heights lacks two vital ingredients to make it a truly
great American neighborhood -- economic and cultural diversity.
That’s
why President Donald Trump’s plan to resettle “refugees” in sanctuary cities
should be embraced by Pacific Heights’ residents.
By
inviting the refugees now stranded at the border, Pacific Heights would not
only strengthen the sinew of its community but also contribute to alleviating
the humanitarian crisis at the border.
Our
strength is our diversity, and Pacific Heights lacks that strength. It is
culturally homogenous in a city that is diverse.
In San
Francisco, earning $117,000 a year or less makes you a low-income earner. Placing refugees in Pacific Heights
where housing and other costs are truly astronomical would require the
compassion and economic assistance of its residents. The former they have long
signaled, and the latter they are more than able to do.
Nancy
Pelosi lives in a walled mansion on a large expanse of land with
majestic views. Her mansion could easily house thirty or forty refugee
families, and she is hardly there. The expansive grounds could house dozens of
refugee families in tents.
Imagine
refugee children who survived the arduous and life-threatening journey from
Central America playing on Pelosi’s lawn while breathing the clean and
invigorating air from off the San Francisco coastline. Imagine alleviating
the humanitarian crisis by creating additional tent cities in Pacific Heights’
splendid parks.
Pelosi,
through her holdings in local restaurants and vineyards, is reputed to be one
of the largest employers of illegal labor in Northern California.
Consequently, the people she would compassionately house might be able to find
work in her network of businesses, especially her fabled vineyard on the banks of the Napa River.
Pelosi
also owns a second mansion in the Wine Country north of San Francisco. This too
is walled and could hold dozens of refugee families.
Neither
Pelosi herself nor the community of Pacific Heights can solve the refugee
problem, but they could set a standard that other wealthy and pro-sanctuary
communities could easily emulate.
Just a
few miles away from Pacific Heights, my liberal acquaintances “Ann” and
“Christopher” live in a complex that is more difficult to enter than the
Central Intelligence Agency. They both support the sanctuary status of San
Francisco and think the border wall, but not their complex’s barrier, is
immoral. Ann is a big DACA supporter although she has been seen adroitly
ignoring and bypassing the homeless that proliferate in her neighborhood and
sleep on her streets. Her compassion obviously has its limits.
Their
complex boasts extensive patios between the stacks of apartments. These could
host a dozen or more tents and port-a-potties that could alleviate the cagelike
situations at the border that they lament as deplorable. Although these
facilities would constitute an eyesore and block the light and view Ann and
Christopher currently enjoy, creating a tent community for refugees would
demonstrate the concern and compassion that people like Ann and Christopher
love to remind the rest of us that they possess.
Real
compassion in Western Civilization derives from the Biblical sense of the term
and means to share in the suffering and emotions of others. When Jesus saw his
friends weeping at the grave of Lazarus, He wept with them and acted.
Compassion means to suffer with and to be motivated to take immediate action to
alleviate the suffering of others.
So, let
the virtue-signaling liberals in sanctuary cities who incessantly lecture us on
their commitment to taking in everyone, liberals who find the rest of us
insensitive and heartless, let them manifest in deed the compassion they so
relentlessly embrace in word. Let them fulfill the Biblical imperative to
suffer with and take immediate action.
And they
will be rewarded for this in knowing that their upscale white communities can
find new strength in the economic and cultural diversity that the refugees will
provide. I am looking forward to the sprouting of tent cities in Pacific
Heights and elsewhere in the upscale parts of San Francisco. Diversity is truly
a community’s strength.
Abraham
H. Miller is an emeritus professor of political science, University of
Cincinnati and a distinguished fellow with the Hyam Salomon Center
Pelosi - Illegals - Sunkist - Her investments!
ANYONE KNOW IF THE OL’ BARONESS AND CLOSET REPUBLICAN USES
ILLEGALS AT THER ST. HELENA, NAPA WINERY? SHE’S LOTHE TO PAY LEGALS A LIVING
WAGES. BUT THEN THE CATASTROPHIC NAPA FIRE WAS CAUSED BY ONE OF HER ILLEGALS,
SO PERHAPS HER PLACE BURNED DOWN!
Pelosi's corrupt insider passing of bills that make her rich.
________________________________________
Check for yourself
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's home House District includes
San Francisco.
Star-Kist Tuna's headquarters are in San Francisco, Pelosi's home
district.
Star-Kist is owned by Del Monte Foods and is a major contributor
to Pelosi.
Star-Kist is the major employer in American Samoa employing 75% of
the Samoan workforce.
Paul Pelosi, Nancy's husband, owns $17 million dollars of
Star-Kist stock.
In January, 2007 when the minimum wage was increased from $5.15 to
$7.25, Pelosi had American Samoa exempted from the increase so Del Monte would
not have to pay the higher wage. This would make Del Monte products less
expensive than their competition's.
Last week when the huge bailout bill was passed, Pelosi added an
earmark to the final bill adding $33 million dollars for an "economic
development credit in American Samoa".
Pelosi has called the Bush Administration "corrupt".
Check some more for yourself
San Francisco Homelessness Rises
17% After City Spends $300 Million Annually to Solve Problem
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/timothymeads/2019/05/18/san-francisco-homeless-rises-17-after-city-spends-300-million-annually-to-solve-problem-n2546530
The San Francisco Chronicle reports that homelessness in the Golden City has risen by
17% since 2017 as more and more people live in their vehicles and as the city
spends hundreds of millions of taxpayer money in an attempt to solve the
problem.
The
report released Thursday shows that studies "indicate at least 1,153 more
homeless people are in the streets compared with two years ago, when the
federal tally set the total number at 6,858." The number, 8,011, was
determined using federal guidelines. According to the paper, this number is
actually most likely much lower than the city's own estimation set to be released
in July which uses different standards for homelessness.
Accordingly,
"The number of people living in cars, RVs and other vehicles has risen by
45% since the last one-night count was taken two years ago."
“I’m
really disappointed in these numbers,” said Jeff Kositsky, head of the city
Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing told the Chronicle. “I can
make no excuses. These numbers are bad, and we have to own that.
San
Francisco holds the most homeless people in the state of California, but
overall California has an astonishing 24% of the nation's homeless
population.
San
Francisco Mayor Breed says the answer to the problem, despite spending $300
million each year, is simply more spending. The somewhat recently elected mayor
is calling for help from regional and federal resources. "We need more
resources from the federal and state governments for housing, period, and we need to build housing faster. S.F. can’t do it alone," she told the paper.
“There’s
not just one thing that’s going to fix this,” she added. “I know this count
will discourage a lot of people, but it’s important to remember where we were
last year. Last year you saw a lot of big tent camps — like at 13th Street, and
now we have a beautiful Navigation Center (shelter) there. We’ve helped 1,200
people out of homelessness since I came into office. We have made progress.”
No comments:
Post a Comment