More proof that cops are the super heroes. Ma’Khia Bryant’s Intended Victim Speaks Out After Near Stabbing. In Columbus Ohio we saw a real super hero in action. A policeman saved the life of a teenager from an aggressive head case. We have more here.
The teenage girl, whose name has not been released, was filmed walking away from the scene of the confrontation.
“She f*cking came at me with a knife,” the girl said. She can be seen in the video wearing a pink jacket and carrying a small dog.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1384954065331838977
Neighbors who witnessed the scene also showed support for the police officer who shot Bryant to stop her from attacking — later identified as Columbus police officer Nicholas Reardon.
Donovan Brinson, who lives across the street from the foster home, told The Columbus Dispatch that he had initially just thought it was “a girl fight” until he heard shots fired.
“If the officer hadn’t done what he did, I think we’d have two girls dead. It was violent and all just happened so fast,” Brinson added.
Another neighbor who lives down the street, Ira Graham III, told the Dispatch that he had heard the gunshots and came down the street to find officers giving Bryant CPR.
“I believe in truth and facts. Video doesn’t lie,” Graham said after viewing the body cam footage of the confrontation. “She was in full attack mode. She needed to be stopped at that point. That young lady’s life was at stake.”
Initial media reports of the shooting that took Bryant’s life claimed that she was unarmed and suggested there could be a racial motivation involved.
Reprint. Ben Sasse to Dems: How come the filibuster wasn’t “racist” when you used it to block Tim Scott’s police reform bill? How about Kamala signing a letter asking that the filibuster remain why then and not now? Tim Scott’s not house broke, that’s why.
A good speech, worth watching in full if you can spare the time but certainly at least five minutes’ worth from the point where I’ve cued up the clip below. “The filibuster is racist” is a common talking point of late among Senate Democrats, a caucus that just wrapped four years of using that same racist implement to obstruct the Republican agenda. But the man who took the argument fully mainstream was Barack Obama, a former filibusterer himself in the Senate, who used the occasion of John Lewis’s funeral last summer to remind his party that the procedure had been used to block civil-rights legislation. Our first black president was looking ahead to a possible Biden presidency, remembering how successful McConnell had been in thwarting Hopenchange and signaling to his party that they should feel free to demagogue centrist Dems inclined to let that degree of obstruction recur.
Believe the filibuster is worth preserving? Then you’re the son and heir of Jim Crow.
The Democratic answer to Sasse’s question of why it wasn’t racist to filibuster Scott’s bill or some Trump initiative but is racist now is that H.R. 1 is different. That’s their voting-rights mega-bill, their top legislative priority, which they believe will all but guarantee a permanent Democratic majority if it passes. And the only way it can pass is if Joe Manchin crumbles on the filibuster. The “racism” talking point is designed to link obstruction of H.R. 1 to obstruction of civil-rights bills during segregation, believing that any Democrat at risk of wearing the scarlet “R” will decide to capitulate in the end instead.
An important asymmetry between the two parties on the filibuster which others have noted but which Sasse does not is the fact that the Democratic legislative agenda is much more ambitious than the GOP’s. The sort of thing McConnell has in mind if Republicans get to pass bills with 50 votes is reciprocal concealed-carry. The sort of thing Schumer has in mind is a massive overhaul of U.S. elections — and a far-reaching immigration amnesty, and potentially Medicare for All and the Green New Deal and college debt forgiveness, and on and on.
His inability to tell the truth about the COVID-19 vaccine, the economic rebound already underway, or the border crisis. Biden won’t tell the truth about the first two because he’d have to credit President Donald Trump. And he won’t tell the truth about the border crisis because he himself is entirely to blame for it.
Biden has repeatedly claimed that when he got to the White House, there was no plan in place to distribute the vaccine and that the credit for the widespread distribution all belongs to him. In his prime-time address earlier this month, for example, Biden said that “I have as president of the United States put us on a war footing to get the job done. Sounds like hyperbole, but I mean it, a war footing. Thank God we’re making some real progress now.”
But the former head of Operation Warp Speed, the program created by Trump to speed development and production of COVID-19 vaccines, told NBC’s “Face the Nation” over the weekend that “90% of what is happening now is the plan that we had.”
How about how all the economists support his 1.9 trillion fiasco?
Like GregMankiw, chief economic adviser to President George W. Bush. And Olivier Blanchard, former chief economist of the IMF. Michael Strain of the American Enterprise Institute. David Henderson and John Cochrane of the Hoover Institution. Constance Hunter, chief economist at KPMG, and the vast majority of business economists. Tyler Cowen of George Mason University. Nobel laureate Eugene Fama. Even Jason Furman, former chairman of President Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers, while saying he would support the plan on a ‘yes or no’ vote, warned that it risked triggering inflation and should be better designed.
And of course we could write a book on what’s happening on the border.
Biden won’t be held to account for his failure to live up to that bold promise about being a truthteller. The mainstream media has, after all, already decided that Biden is as honest as the day is long, and they aren’t about to let anything like his blatant falsehoods get in the way of that narrative.
Reprint. How Woke Whites Are Turning Minorities Into Republican Voters. I found this very eye opening and so true. Those who will attack this article and deny that it’s true are the folks this article is about. I know this article is based on facts cause I see this hate from the left daily.
In the middle of their legislative orgy of socialistic giveaways and identity politics, Democrats might want to contemplate that their political priorities do not command the support of a majority of American voters. Moreover, the warnings on this front do not come from the right—they come from leftists themselves.
When an editorial columnist from the bastion of liberalism, The New York Times, writes that “Democrats are worried—very worried—about the future of the Hispanic vote,” you know something’s up. As it turns out, the radicalized “woke” among upper-class whites have done a good job alienating both African Americans and Hispanics from the Democratic coalition.
A separate interview with lefty data analyst David Shor reinforced the views in Edsall’s column. Shor argues that political polarization by educational status has in many ways supplanted polarization by race.
While the Democrat vote increased by seven percentage points among white college graduates in 2020, the party’s support among African Americans dropped by one to two percentage points, among Hispanics dropped by eight to nine points (and as much as 14-15 points in areas like South Florida), and among Asian Americans by roughly five points. Shor notes that “I don’t think a lot of people expected Donald Trump’s GOP to have a much more diverse support base than Mitt Romney’s did in 2012. But that’s what happened” (emphasis original).
Shor considers these developments a flashing red light for the left: “Most voters are not liberals. If we polarize the electorate on ideology—or if nationally prominent Democrats raise the salience of issues that polarize the electorate on ideology—we’re going to lose a lot of votes.”
Several of the political analysts Edsall quotes in his column agree with Shor’s contention that a radicalized Democratic Party could alienate many more voters than it attracts:
Democratic consultant Marc Farinella: “As far left activists compete with Democratic Party leaders to define party values and messaging, the centrist voters needed to achieve a durable majority will remain wary about Democratic desires for dominance.”
Harvard professor Ryan Enos: “The question for parties is whether members of their coalition are a liability because they repel other voters from the coalition. For Democrats, this may increasingly be the case with college-educated whites. They are increasingly concentrated into large cities, which mitigates their electoral impact, and they dominate certain institutions, such as universities and the media. The views emanating from these cities and institutions are out of step with a large portion of the electorate.”
Republican pollster Whit Ayres: “When white liberal Democrats start talking about defunding the police, the Green New Deal, and promoting policies that can be described as socialistic, they repel a lot of Hispanic voters. In other words, most Hispanics, like most African Americans, are not ideological liberals.”
Stanford University political scientist Bruce Cain: “Democrats set themselves up for losses if they do not pay attention to the realities of public opinion.”
So much for the oft-repeated leftist mantra about how “demography is destiny,” and the supposedly enduring nature of the Democratic coalition.
What does Shor think Democrats should do about this looming catastrophe? Rather than moderating their policies, Shor thinks the left should use the current Congress to tilt the playing field permanently in its direction—by requiring red states to redraw their congressional districts in a more pro-Democrat manner, and admitting new states that will increase Democratic votes in the Senate:
Since the maps in the House of Representatives are so biased against us, if we don’t pass a redistricting reform, our chance of keeping the House is very low. And then the Senate is even more biased against us than the House. So, it’s also very important that we add as many states as we can.
Currently, even if we have an exceptionally good midterm, the most likely outcome is that we lose one or two Senate seats. And then, going into 2024, we have something like seven or eight Democrats who are in states that are more Republican than the country overall.
Basically, we have this small window right now to pass redistricting reform and create states. And if we don’t use this window, we will almost certainly lose control of the federal government and not be in a position to pass laws again potentially for a decade.
Reprint. OAN. Parallels being drawn between behavior of Biden and Cuomo. Two peas in a pod right? Of course we see similarities. I guess the only difference is that all the women that Biden harassed, none filed charges or pushed it. except for one. And she was dismissed.
Over the years, Biden and Cuomo have admitted they have crossed personal space, not as a means to flirt, but to form connections.
“Of course, our objective, though, here continues to be to get the COVID pandemic under control, and we don’t want any state to be impacted negatively. We will continue to work with a range of governors, including Gov. Cuomo, who I would expect to join the call tomorrow,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki stated. “We’ll leave that up to him.”
206
