In despotic Russia, not only is the state not allowed to take your children away from you to be sterilized and mutilated as a treatment for gender dysphoria, but since 2022, under the cruel dictatorship of the inhuman monster Vladimir Putin, sex transition procedures are forbidden. For everyone. As if it were obvious that the way to address a psychological issue is not to sterilize and mutilate the patient.
But Lindsey tells us he is evil, and Lindsey is an honorable man. He says so.
You’ve likely seen the headlines, often wildly inaccurate, on Sen. Lindsey Graham’s (R-SC) legislation to federalize abortion laws. It would prohibit abortions after 15 weeks, which some claim is when a fetus feels pain, except to save the life of the mother.
“Lindsey Graham’s national abortion ban bill makes the midterm stakes very clear,” screamed Vox, a leftist blog site. “Lindsey Graham proposes new national abortion restrictions bill,” proclaimed Axios, a fast-growing leftist news site.
The cake is in the oven and is baking nicely. The cake will serve up a hearty GOP majority in the US House and possibly the US Senate when the election rolls around in almost seven months.
Lots can happen between now and then, of course. But Democrats have shown no proclivity, even interest, in doing anything to soften the coming blow, with weakness abroad, an open southern border, and raging inflation at home “baked in” to voters’ equation. Democrats seem content to lead with their chins. Maybe it’s a “long game” thing, where progressive Democrats think they can purge their non-woke brethren this fall and, while a minority in the 118th Congress, entice voters to pine for their socialist schemes as a harsh and angry GOP majority overplays their “authoritarian” hand.
Perhaps Democrats dream that AOC, who turns the constitutionally required 35 years of age on October 13, 2024, to qualify as President before the Fall election, will ascend from the hearts of Americans to the Capitol’s west front on January 20, 2025. Dr. Jill Biden will guide her doddering husband to their seats to facilitate the transfer of “the football” to the former Brooklyn bartender.
It should have been no surprise that Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell expertly timed a proposal late Wednesday – after the “markets” closed, and more about that later – to go along with a temporary, conditional “deal” to extend our government’s debt limit until December, including a “price tag” just south of $500 billion.
A couple of GOP Senators, Lindsey Graham (R-SC and ranking member of the Budget Committee) and Ted Cruz (R-TX) wasted no time imitating (Senate Democratic Leader) Chuck Schumer and proving that the most dangerous place in America is between them and a microphone. From MSN News:
US Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC) and his colleagues are right to be upset over negotiations with Democrats in the White House and Congress over infrastructure spending. But the Senior Senator from South Carolina’s short-term prescription for playing hardball – denying the Senate a quorum to conduct business – probably isn’t going to work. 
Here’s why. The Senate’s Rule VI outlines the requirement for a quorum. It also says Senators have a responsibility to show up. It gives the remaining Senators the power to order the Sergeant of Arms to arrest and force the attendance of Senators in the Chamber.
Ruth Bader Ginsberg made an interesting remark, referring to Lindsey Graham as one of the women of the Senate:
Returning from giving the keynote address at the annual Mensa International Symposium in Reykjavik, Iceland, I woke up on the third bounce of the Icelandair Boeing 757 on the main gravel runway at LaGuardia.
I nudged my personal sommelier and bodyguard, Vino Diesel, who had consumed 36 liters of Reyka, Iceland’s premier vodka, during our four-day stay, rendering him somewhat less effective as a bodyguard.
(Note: This is the second of a two-part essay, the first part centered on the proposition that the Republican party, through its own self-destructive tendencies, has reduced conservatism itself to little more than an academic exercise.)
The second proposition is as follows:
Donald Trump is less an instrument of political vandalism than of utter and complete exasperation.
Leading up to the US Election in October, the mainstream press were pushing the narrative that Russia was either behind DNC/Podesta leaks or planning a Cyber Attack on Voting infrastructure. All this was assured by The U.S. Intelligence Community in October which NYT, Newsweek and Washington Post jumped upon.
Back 20th September 2016 a declassified DHS report titled ‘Cyber Threats and Vulnerabilities to US Election Infrastructure, Office of Cyber and Infrastructure Analysis‘ concluded the following:
“DHS has no indication that adversaries or criminals are planning cyber operations against US election infrastructure that would change the outcome of the coming US election. Multiple checks and redundancies in US election infrastructure—including diversity of systems, non-Internet connected voting machines, pre-election testing, and processes for media, campaign, and election officials to check, audit, and validate results—make it likely that cyber manipulation of US election systems intended to change the outcome of a national election would be detected.”
Although it seems like Mr. Barack Obama has worked as my president for much longer than seven years, I am thrilled to hear that he is pursuing a new position. You will be very lucky if you can get him to work for you.
As a voter, citizen and taxpayer, I have been in a position to directly oversee Barack’s professional development and in short, I can’t recommend him highly enough. I’m confident you’ll be as shocked by his skill set as I am. As for his leadership qualities, where does one begin? It is difficult to put into words exactly why you should put your trust in Mr. Obama but suffice it to say you will be startled at the quality of his work. By the time he concludes his employment with us I believe there won’t be a man, woman or child in America who isn’t greatly indebted.
At last, Lindsey Graham did the right thing. After months of increasingly irrelevant undercard debates and poll numbers in the naughts, South Carolina’s littlest senator suspended his campaign. He joins far more promising ex-candidates Rick Perry, Scott Walker, and Bobby Jindal who were unable to capitalize on today’s frustrated electorate.
Reviewing the polling this weekend, it’s past time for several others to follow their lead. Trump is still leading most surveys, Cruz has surged into prominence, and then there’s the amorphous lump of everybody else. Said amorphous lump represents a powerful constituency, as it holds a third of GOP primary voters. But divided among several candidates, these voters will lose out unless several of their current choices step aside.
Let’s face facts, George Pataki: You are not going to be the GOP candidate. The same goes for Rand Paul, John Kasich, Carly Fiorina, Mike Huckabee, and Rick Santorum. You cast your lines, but the fish ain’t biting. It’s time for you to “spend more time with your family,” just in time for Christmas.
News broke sometime this morning: Lindsey Graham’s suspending his campaign.
Really, I’m ready for more candidates to start dropping out. After several debates, I think we’re pretty familiar with most of the candidates. Time for the field to narrow so the top few can get more airtime. Notable exception: Rand Paul. I’d like him to stay in it, not because he’s gonna get close to winning, but because he holds positions significantly different than the other candidates, and I think that the intra-party debate helps us, in the long run.
This won’t be another debate recap post. An army of pundits (Please note: Worst. Army. Ever.) has already dissected last night’s proceedings and the emerging consensus seems about right to me: Carly Fiorina dominated, Marco Rubio and Chris Christie both had some pretty good moments, and Donald Trump’s pilot light kept shutting off. Everyone else was basically treading water. In the undercard debate, Bobby Jindal and Lindsey Graham both looked serviceable, but c’mon — it’s not that big of a deal to win the NIT.
So let’s play the story forward: after last night, what dynamics play out over the six weeks until the next GOP debate takes place in Boulder, Colorado? (Seriously, RNC? Boulder? Was George Soros’ penthouse booked that night?) Here are some of the trends I’ll be watching for:
Carly in the Crosshairs
The first GOP debate just wrapped up — not the one with Jeb! and The Donald, but the B-team. These are the seven candidates who didn’t have enough juice in the polls to make the main debate coming at 9 p.m. ET. All of them entered this JV debate hoping to make enough of an impact to enter the top tier the next time around. I wish Fox News had set it up so the winner of this contest immediately reported to the prime time debate, but alas, this is politics, not “Top Chef.”
It is a bit of a misnomer for the RNC to call these proceedings a “debate.” None of the candidates interacted, but rather held a low-energy Q-and-A with two Fox reporters. Questions were asked; each candidate had 60 seconds to respond. So how did they do? Here’s how I rank the performances:
1. Carly Fiorina
Now that Scott Walker’s in the race, with John Kasich on tap for next week, the GOP’s 2016 field soon will total 16 presidential candidates. We can rank them, 1-16. Or go by tiers. Or pick names out of a hat. My choice: divide the field into four brackets, four candidates apiece, which I’ve done in this column over at Forbes.com.
Bracket One — The Non-Conformists
1. Donald Trump
June having dawned, we’re beginning to get a decent sense of what the (enormous) GOP presidential field is going to look like. By my tally, we’re probably going to end up with approximately 15 relatively prominent candidates. That’s four sitting governors — Christie, Kasich, Jindal, and Walker; four former governors — Bush, Huckabee, Pataki, and Perry; four sitting senators — Cruz, Graham, Paul, and Rubio; Santorum, the lone former senator; and the two who’ve never held elected office, Carson and Fiorina. I know everyone’s focused on how you get all these people onto one stage, but I’ve been thinking about another dynamic: there are 14 people in that group who aren’t going to be the Republican nominee. What do they do next? Here are my thoughts for each of these candidates should they fail to win the big prize. Add yours in the comments.
Bush — Make gobs of money? True, there’ll be an open Senate seat in Florida next year with Rubio choosing not to run again, but most former executives don’t relish time in the legislative branch — and it’s not clear how much cachet Bush still has in the state given that he’ll have been out of office for a decade at that point (especially with Florida’s high population turnover). Given his record as governor, Bush probably would’ve been at the top of any Republican president’s list for Secretary of Education — but, given how closely identified with Common Core he’s become, I doubt that’s necessarily true anymore.
Carson — Even in these early days, it’s become clear that Ben Carson probably should not be in this race. His penchant for gaffes and his ability to get tripped up by even rudimentary policy questions likely augurs a campaign that will end in embarrassment — which is a real shame, because Carson is immensely accomplished and has lived a great American life…just not one that needs to culminate in a presidential bid. Given his rise from childhood poverty in Detroit to the commanding heights of the medical field, he provides an incredible example for young African-American men throughout the country. If he placed his focus there — perhaps starting an organization that was a more conservative equivalent of Barack Obama’s My Brother’s Keeper program — he could do an immense amount of good.
The GOP presidential field continues to swell like Elvis’ waistline in the 1970s. Former New York Governor George Pataki jumped into the fray on Thursday, a day after former Pennsylvania Senator and 2012 contender Rick Santorum made his intentions known.
Does either candidate stand a chance of making it all the way to the nomination?
Don’t bet on it. Pataki is the longest of long shots – he cut crime rates and taxes during three terms as head of the Empire State, but he’s also a Roosevelt Republican and social liberal. Santorum was the surprise winner in Iowa the last time caucus-goers voted. But this time around, it’s a far more crowded field.
