Share This Article with a Friend!


Assault on America, Day 322: Fifth Democrat debate: impeachment, taxation & Pete Buttigieg

Atlanta Democrat Debate
No one ever enters politics or a presidential race hoping not to do well, yet to the ambitious, the higher you climb on the success ladder the more difficult it becomes to enjoy the journey. Such is the case for South Bend, Indiana Democrat Mayor Pete Buttigieg. “Mayor Pete” as he likes to be called (probably because his hard to pronounce last name would otherwise end up the butt of jokes), has slowly improved his standing in the party presidential race, which naturally draws attention to his midwestern boyish looks, homey gentle personality and unique background.

Buttigieg will join nine other liberal party dreamers (former Vice President Joe Biden; New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker; Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard; California Sen. Kamala Harris; Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar; Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders; billionaire businessman and activist Tom Steyer; Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren; and entrepreneur Andrew Yang) on stage tonight in Atlanta for the party’s fifth “debate”.

According to NPR the program will air on “MSNBC from 9 to 11 p.m. ET and will be co-hosted by The Washington Post. Four female journalists are set to moderate: MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, NBC News chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell, NBC News White House correspondent Kristen Welker and Washington Post White House reporter Ashley Parker.”

Not surprisingly, all are liberals. In other words, tonight’s Democrat slug-fest will have a heavy female overtone which will most certainly be reflected in the moderators’ questions to the candidates. The eternally race and gender conscious Democrats won’t ever stop dwelling on a person’s all-important surface characteristics (what about content of character?), so naturally the candidates’ age, skin color, sexual orientation (at least in Buttigieg’s case, he’s openly homosexual and “married” to a man) and depth of allegiance to the PC cultural forces will fall under the judgmental liberals’ watchful eyes.

The individual competitors will no doubt spend a healthy portion of their allotted time answering queries on the impeachment proceedings in Washington. What they’ll say couldn’t possibly differ much from what’s already been said by the group in the past several months about President Trump’s legitimacy in office, but perhaps on this occasion Joe Biden will be pressed to explain in a little greater detail what his son Hunter was up to in Ukraine.

The former Obama veep’s resurgent and persistent national polling lead makes him the central target once again (after he’d kind of lost the spotlight for a month or so to Elizabeth “Pocahontas” Warren) -- and who knows, the others might just be feeling desperate enough to start probing for real responses from good ‘ol back slappin’ and hair sniffin’ Joe about his fondness for helping his wayward son’s career and financial well-being. The prospects for embarrassing the corrupted abusers of power are too enticing to ignore for long -- and we all know how angry Biden gets whenever his degeneracy is exposed.

In war (the way it used to be), the closer you are to the front lines the heavier the fire you’re subjected to. The same is true in politics, as the sleaze infested media couldn’t care less about the candidates lower down on the totem pole, saving their special concentration for those whose names instantly draw interested eyes to view and read reports.

Buttigieg is one of those attention-grabbers now, especially since several recent Iowa polls put him at or near the top in the state. The mayor’s rapid rise is drawing critics from within the party, too, particularly from the ultra-left wing. Seth McLaughlin reported at The Washington Times, “Moving to stunt Pete Buttigieg’s rise in the 2020 presidential race, the far-left of the Democratic Party is sharpening its attacks against the South Bend, Indiana, mayor — casting him as a calculated, silver-tongued politician who has shown he will not be a warrior for their causes.

“Allies of Sens. Bernard Sanders and Elizabeth Warren say Mr. Buttigieg has flip-flopped on ‘Medicare for All’ — a charge his campaign dismisses as a clear attempt to distort his views.

“Waleed Shahid, spokesman for Justice Democrats, the group that helped launch Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez into political stardom, is warning that ‘Buttigieg was for Medicare for All before he was against it.’ ‘He realized he was never going to beat Warren and Sanders as a progressive,’ Mr. Shahid wrote in an email blast [last week]. ‘He got scared of the fight. He realized he could raise tons of cash from corporate executives in the pharmaceutical and insurance industry.’”

To insinuate that a leading male member of the LGBTQ community is less than masculine -- and that he’s “scared” of a fight -- would be interpreted harshly if the remark stemmed from a conservative or Republican… or maybe even Joe Biden. Who would dare utter such deprecating language to the lone homosexual in the Democrat contest? The guy (Buttigieg) served in the military, for Pete’s sake. Don’t ask/don’t tell? Sheesh!

Besides, Buttigieg is every bit as liberal and transformational (in a destructive way) as the rest of ‘em. Let’s just be fair. His campaign stance on healthcare is “Medicare for all who want it,” which is clearly meant to pander to the Democrat union vote. The union heads who supposedly represent working stiffs with hard hats and brawny arms are turned off by the socialists’ talk of ditching their chief negotiating bargaining chip (a.k.a., Cadillac private health insurance plans). So yes, even some Democrats don’t want government run healthcare! Imagine that!

Besides, “Mayor Pete’s” “Medicare if you want it” proposal automatically dredges up bad memories of Barack Obama’s infamous promise, “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.” Lie! No one ever asks Grampa Joe Biden about that whopper of a campaign promise. No shocker there. The media grants more importance to the sincerity of the fib than it does the substance of the argument. And the facts.

Not that I’m defending “Pocahontas” Warren’s and “The Bern” Sanders’ “Medicare for All,” but what’s the practical difference between their ideas and Buttigieg’s? If “Medicare” is available for any schlep who wants it, isn’t this akin to universal government-provided/controlled healthcare? It certainly would encompass everyone who’s currently on Medicaid in addition to anyone who thinks paying x amount of dollars from their paycheck for private insurance is too expensive (which is probably everyone except the extravagantly wealthy and union members).

Getting down to the nitty gritty, what the heck would the 37-year-old mayor of a medium sized midwestern city (South Bend’s population is listed at 102,245 (in 2017), which isn’t exactly a big slice of the 330+million United States inhabitants) know about the monster that is the federal healthcare administration system? You know, the massive entitlement program that’s purportedly heading towards bankruptcy in the next decade. Does anyone with an ounce of common sense feel good about turning the keys to the federal treasury over to someone whose only experience comes from governing a population the size of a few urban square miles?

The 2020 Democrats’ fortunes depend on a number of factors, one of which is convincing American voters that they can handle further tinkering with the federal entitlements without capsizing the entire federal budget. Several have proposed some form of wealth tax to act as a down payment to their big government socialistic schemes but even assuming these ideas could be pushed through Congress, they would prove unworkable in the non-fantasy world. The Democrat debates thus far have mostly involved the mixture of candidates arguing over micro details in their impossible designs with media personalities basically allowing them to fly off the proverbial handle unchallenged.

Here’s thinking they’ll be given another shot tonight at trying to explain the distinction in their healthcare proposals, throw out a ton of numbers, gesticulate wildly with their hands, act a little angry if necessary and generally fail to sway anyone to their side in the so-called “moderates” versus socialists battle. How far has the nation come when a couple decades ago the notion of a single-payer healthcare system was considered taboo to talk about? But then again, same-sex “marriage” wasn’t really on the radar back then either.

And now we have a major Democrat candidate “married” to a guy.

Needless to say the Democrats won’t be devoting much energy to talking about the near-record low unemployment rate, which according to the FED chairman, might go even lower. Nihal Krishan reported at The Washington Examiner, “Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell said that the unemployment rate, already at a 50-year low, could drop further without necessarily causing inflation to rise.

“’The data is not sending any signal that the labor market is so hot or that inflation is moving up,’ Powell said during a hearing at the congressional Joint Economic Committee. ‘What we have learned ... is that the U.S. economy can operate at a much lower level of unemployment than many thought.’

“The chairman also said that wages were rising.”

What, good news? Don’t expect tonight’s Democrat gripe-fest to give any credence to Powell’s words. Here’s what you’ll hear from the candidates, some version of “Only the rich are benefitting, while the poor slobs at the bottom of the spectrum are working twenty to thirty jobs each to even put food on the table. Meanwhile, the wealthy are seeing their fortunes explode through the roof and Donald Trump just sits by, watches the suffering and stuffs another cheeseburger in his mouth while laughing hysterically.”

Then, if given the opportunity by the moderators, they can further discuss welfare benefits (including healthcare) for illegal aliens, slavery reparations, gun confiscation, oppressive taxation, codifying abortion on demand up until (and after) the moment of birth, abolishing ICE, more stuff on impeachment and completely eliminating home schooling or any semblance of school choice (nod to the teachers unions). Did I leave anything out?

The best thing is tonight’s forum will apparently only last a couple hours (as opposed to three).

The Democrats aren’t making any headway on impeachment, their various “plans” are ridiculous and impractical and their catastrophic warnings about global warming and “climate change” won’t be well received by the shivering country enduring a heinous cold spell. But they have to fill a couple hours, don’t they?

Share this