Democrats have long anointed themselves to be the compassionate party, the ultimate protector of women, children, and minorities. The media plays right along with this farce, trumpeting the Democrats claims incessantly, as loud as possible. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Democrat core policies are egregiously harmful to all those they are meant to help, and produce an unacceptable level of collateral damage. Unfortunately Democrats have a overwhelmingly large and submissive public relations department. This public relations department, or course, consists of the mainstream media and social media giants.
No Democrat policy is more harmful than abortion, which is championed as an institution to liberate women from the scourge of pregnancy and the unseemly burden of having to raise a cliild. It has been long documented that abortion causes significant emotional and psychological harm to a noteworthy percentage of women who have one. Abortion is most tragically harmful to the unborn child murdered during the procedure.
A generation of children are being brainwashed into believing they are transgender. Then the children are subjected to heinous medical treatments which include breast removal, chemical castration, actual castration, given puberty blockers, and hormones to permanently alter their bodies.
For decades progressive indoctrination has warped the minds of college students so much that half actually believe socialism is superior to capitalism. Now progressives are destroying the minds of high school and grade school students with Critical Race Theory, Emotional and Social Learning, and endless climate change propaganda.
The Democrat strategies to fight the Wuhan Flu were extremely harmful to children. School closures set the educational development of children back years. Mask mandates caused mental and emotional trauma to children. Vaccine mandates have caused far more harm because of the extreme level of side effects produced by them.
Allowing biological boys to compete in girls sports is completely unfair to girls. The vast majority of girls do not want boys in their bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers.
Republicans desperately need to go on the offensive. They need to frame the issues just as I have done in this article. They need to stop being such wooses. Republicans are far too afraid about the mean things the media will say about them.
The foremost political issue in Illinois is crime. And we have plenty of other issues to choose from, including negative population growth and endemic corruption. The election of Kim Foxx as Cook County’s state’s attorney in 2016–her campaign was funded by radical leftist billionaire George Soros–set forth a rise in crime in Chicago and its inner suburbs that accelerated during the COVID-19 lockdowns.
The spirt of Foxx’s catch-and-release philosophy of law enforcement will go statewide, but only worse, on New Year’s Day when the SAFE-T Act goes into effect. In case you missed my last two posts at Da Tech Guy, I cited a Democrat, Will County state’s state’s attorney James Glasgow, who had this to say to Fox Chicago’s Mike Flannery about the SAFE-T Act, “There are forcible felonies that are not detainable: burglary, robbery, arson, kidnapping, second degree murder, intimidation, aggravated battery, aggravated DUI, [and] drug offenses.” Which means these accused felons walk free with the promise of returning for trial. An exception for flight risks, which a former Cook County assistant state’s attorney, John Curran, who is now a Republican state senator, says is almost impossible to use for jailing accused criminals. Curran told John Kass last month in his Chicago Way podcast that the SAFE-T Act passed the state Senate at 5:00am in the morning on the last day of a veto session of the General Assembly. He was given one hour to read the 764-page bill.
Some critics of the SAFE-T Act are calling it “the Purge Bill,” a reference the 2013 movie, The Purge, where crime goes unpunished for a 12-hour span.
As I noted before, Pritzker notoriously claimed that the SAFE-T Act was about “making sure that we’re also addressing the problem of a single mother who shoplifted diapers for her baby, who is put in jail and kept there for six months because she doesn’t have a couple of hundred dollars to pay for bail.” I called on the fact-checkers–even contacting them directly–to vet that statement. I’m considering offering a $1,000 reward to the person who finds Pritzker’s “diapers mom.”
Kass, a former Chicago Tribune journalist who was essentially demoted after his woke colleagues falsely claimed that a column he wrote blowing the whistle on Soros was anti-Semitic, now writes essential articles at John Kass News. He’s been at the forefront of the battle against the SAFE-T Act, and he’s calling for its repeal. Illinois’ Democrat governor, billionaire J.B. Pritzker, is promising unspecific changes to it after next month’s general election. He’s up for reelection, his opponent is state senator Darren Bailey.
Kass says, and I’ve been expressing the same view, that the Democrats are panicking about the SAFE-T Act. As they should, it’s a dangerous law that is a threat to public safety. He’s asking that Pritzker call an immediate special session of the General Assembly, “eat a few platters of steaming hot crow,” and repeal the SAFE-T Act. “J.B. Pritzker has the supermajority,” Bailey told NBC Chicago, which Kass recalled in his column. “Why hasn’t he called the legislature into action? Literally a text or a phone call, we could be demanded to meet in Springfield within a few hours. Why aren’t we meeting tomorrow at 9 o’clock hammering this thing out?” I believe I know the answer to that question. Pritzker wants to run out the clock.
Kass suspects that the SAFE-T Act is a woke exercise in credential building for the governor’s possible run for president. I’ll add my own theory. In addition to minting a badge of honor for himself, Pritzker is prepping himself for receiving a Nobel Peace Prize as the prophet who, at least in Illinois, atoned for the murder of George Floyd. Only the aftermath of an in-force SAFE-T Act will anything but peaceful.
Ads from the People Who Play By The Rules PAC focusing on violence have been very effective, even though at least three Chicago television stations have banned “The Scream.” A more recent ad, even more disturbing than “The Scream,” shows a robbery and a bloody assault that occurred last Sunday on Chicago’s CTA Red Line train. A few hours earlier my daughter was a passenger on the Red Line. One of the perpetrators in this attack has been arrested. He’s now locked up, amazingly, bail was denied to him. But the People Who Play By The Rules PAC has this message for Illinoisans, the attack you’ll below is “a non-detainable offense under Pritzker’s Purge law.”
Bailey, in my opinion, is still a decided underdog in the gubernatorial race, but the downstate farmer is closing his gap with Pritzker according to a recent Fabrizo, Lee, and Associates poll.
Twice last week non-political acquaintances of mine told me, “Hey John, you are wrong about the SAFE-T Act, I read a fact-check about it.” I exposed the phony SAFE-T Act fact-checks in an entry on my own blog a few days ago. Yet once again, and almost certainly not for the last time, I am compelled to point out that fact-checkers are primarily propagandists for various leftist narratives. And if you are told by someone that you are incorrect about the SAFE-T Act and they cite a fact-check as evidence, this needs to be your response: vomit on that person.
Back to Pritzker: If he is really serious about addressing the numerous flaws in the SAFE-T Act, he’ll call for that special session of the General Assembly with the purpose of repealing all of it. His feeble and non-specific calls for changes to the SAFE-T Act are empty promises.
Early voting for the November election in Illinois began last week. One way to block a Pritzker run for president is for voters to evict him from the governor’s mansion. A whole bunch of new state legislators in Springfield is needed as well.
By the way, no Republican legislators voted for the SAFE-T Act.
John Ruberry regularly blogs from suburban Cook County at Marathon Pundit.
Two weeks ago I argued that LGBT voters should be prolife, if nothing else because the prolife movement protects babies from premature abortions based on genetic testing, and it won’t be long before we develop testing good enough to hint that a baby might grow up gay or transgender (despite the fact that genetics don’t always equal outcomes). I’d like to go one step further and say LGBT voters benefit far more from less government and a market economy, especially as a minority.
Let’s start with a real obvious point: government likes people to fall in nice, neat boxes, and those that don’t get treated unfairly. The US government is always primed to pick on minorities. Recent examples include persecution against Japanese-Americans during World War 2, even in Hawaii, or the disproportionate number of black Americans used for drug testing by the CIA. LGBT voters probably feel this right now whenever they travel, get an ID of some kind, or interact with the government in general.
Let’s take ID cards for a second. The government continues to increase the amount of information it demands from people to get an ID. This invasion of privacy hasn’t made a lot of headlines, but the fact that you can basically be denied the ability to fly unless you surrender a lot of information to the government is a bit concerning. Worse though, what if you’re a transgender individual in the middle of hormone treatment? Try explaining that to the “nice” TSA agent, who should be concerned about you carrying a bomb onboard the aircraft, but will instead use their position to hassle you at a checkpoint. Why are you treated like a criminal for non-criminal activities.
Less government equals less interactions equals more freedom to be yourself. Whether you’re a gun-loving firefighter or his transgender wife, you benefit from less government in your life. Unless you’re violating a law, the government doesn’t need to snoop in your affairs.
If the government isn’t sticking its nose where it doesn’t belong, other people are often trying to use it to that end, particularly with hate crime laws and lawsuits. The Masterpiece Cakeshop lawsuits highlighted this weaponization. Despite the fact that there were hundreds of bakeries to get cakes of all shapes and sizes, Charlie Craig and David Mullins went all the way to the Supreme Court, only to lose. The damage was done though, since Masterpiece Cakeshop lost around 40% of its business.
This weaponization isn’t a long term strategy, since it tends to come back around and bite you, because plenty of people will use this tactic to shut down LGBT businesses. We’re far better off with a free market because it automatically promotes an exchange of goods that is inevitably linked to an exchange of ideas. For example, its really hard to say you want to kill all gay people if you regularly interact with the gay owner of a restaurant that has great food. It’s difficult to say you think transgender individuals are all pedophiles when you find out your neighbor is a transgender woman and an upstanding citizen in your community. Just like having a black or Hispanic neighbor makes it harder to hold negative opinions about them (assuming they are good neighbors!), the same goes for interacting with LGBT individuals.
In fact, these regular interactions are far more powerful then any lawsuit. I would argue the Masterpiece lawsuits only further cement the idea that most LGBT individuals want to find ways to punish Christians.
Free association in a market economy and less government interference, by default, makes us all learn to work together. We’re all better served under these models.
This post represents the views of the author and not those of the Department of Defense, Department of the Navy, or any other government agency. Please be sure to purchase something from the author’s collection of books, since Christmas is right around the corner.
Progressives are hell bent on destroying the economy of the United States. They believe that this the only to save the world from the mythical monster known climate change. Their plan is to stop the United States from using fossil fuels and replace them with wind and solar.
For the past couple of decades those on the political left have attempted several schemes to wean the United States off of fossil fuels. The latest was the Green New Deal. Fortunately for the inhabitants of the US, the Democrats have only achieved limited success.
When Progressives are stymied openly, they most often try to achieve their goals through stealth and dishonesty. That is exactly what Environmental Social and Governance is all about.
ESG stands for Environmental Social and Governance, and refers to the three key factors when measuring the sustainability and ethical impact of an investment in a business or company. Most socially responsible investors check companies out using ESG criteria to screen investments.
It is a generic term used in capital markets and commonly used by investors to evaluate the behavior of companies, as well as determining their future financial performance.
The Environmental Social and Governance factors are a subset of non-financial performance indicators which include ethical, sustainable and corporate government issues such as making sure there are systems in place to ensure accountability and managing the corporation’s carbon footprint.
Here are the three main components of Environmental Social and Governance.
Environmental criteria, which examines how a business performs as a steward of our natural environment, focusing on: waste and pollution, resource depletion, greenhouse gas emission, deforestation, climate change
Social criteria, which looks at how the company treats people, and concentrates on: employee relations & diversitym, working conditions, including child labor and slavery, local communities; seeks explicitly to fund projects or institutions that will serve poor and underserved communities globally, health and safety, conflict
Governance criteria, which examines how a corporation polices itself – how the company is governed, and focuses on, tax strategy, executive remuneration, donations and political lobbying, corruption and bribery, board diversity and structure
Interest in investing on what are known as environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors has exploded in recent years. According to Deliote’s Center for Financial Services, professionally managed assets with ESG mandates swelled to $46 trillion globally in 2021, representing nearly 40 percent of all assets under management. The result of this is that it has become incredibly hard to raise funds for expanding fossil fuel production. So even oil prices above $100 a barrel are not attracting capital into the sector.
The nation’s top financial regulators will soon embark on a controversial, first-of-its-kind mission: forcing banks and other industry players to prepare for potential threats to the U.S. financial system from climate change.
All the leading agencies will be headed by progressive regulators who will seek to push the administration’s agenda forward even as President Joe Biden has failed to get broader climate-related legislation through Congress.
Among other moves, regulators are likely to press banks to prepare for the fallout from a warming planet by stepping up scrutiny of fossil fuel financing. They will make the lenders undergo regular tests to measure how their investments could be threatened by flooding, wildfires and other growing risks. And they could rewrite the rules against the discriminatory practice known as redlining to push lenders to put money into disadvantaged communities most vulnerable to climate change.
Biden has tapped Sarah Bloom Raskin, a climate warrior who has called fossil fuels “a terrible investment,” for the Federal Reserve’s top regulatory job. Martin Gruenberg will take over the FDIC after Democrats on the panel rebelled against Chairman Jelena McWilliams, a Trump appointee, prompting her to resign. And the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, a lesser-known but powerful banking agency, is led on an acting basis by Michael Hsu, who has put climate issues front and center.
Chinese tech giant Alibaba is developing a digital “individual carbon footprint tracker” to monitor the actions of the public, the firm’s president announced at the globalist World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland on Tuesday.
Speaking at a “Strategic Outlook: Responsible Consumption” WEF panel in Davos, Alibaba Group President J. Michael Evans said that his company will be introducing more surveillance systems within China in order to usher in a so-called greener future.
Da Techguy's (no longer backup) Blog 