Debt Relief
Biden keeps promising debt relief but he's only talking about student loans while the country wallows in massive national debt ... which he hopes to increase by offering ... debt relief.
Politics as Usual
Trump made the news again when he urged the GOP to back off their "Save the lives of the unborn" stance in favor of "Let states decide" in order to win this November. The Bee, of course, couldn't let that go without comment. In one story they said his position on aborion is "whichever one will get him elected" and in another they suggested the unborn are now considering "third party candidates." I can see that.
Whose Side Are They On?
The Vatican released a document that describes current gender theory, along with other concepts like abortion, euthanasia, and surrogate parenthood, as a threat to human dignity. The Bee reported that the Vatican "reluctantly sides with God on gender theory." The White House, at the direction of a "Catholic" president, disagreed with the pope, demonstrating clearly that Biden et al. certainly believe themselves to be above the pope (God's mouthpiece for Catholics) in their Catholicism. But we knew that already, didn't we?
Did God Say ...?
A Georgia woman apparently went on a shooting rampage in Florida, wounding two drivers. She claims God told her to do it ... because of the solar eclipse. Now, if we have God's Word to tell us what God says, we'd definitely rule that out, but if we're just going to say, "The Holy Spirit talks to whomever He wants and changes His tune whenever He wishes," then I suppose we'll have to let her off ... right?
How Did We Get Here?
The Arizona Supreme Court reinstated an 1864 law that banned all abortions except if a mother's life is threatened. Wait ... can they do that? Is it legal to defend life to that extreme? Doesn't "I want to have sex with whom I please without consequences" override life? I don't get it. And in a typical moment of clarity, Trump said the Arizona Supreme Court "went too far" in protecting life ... and then assured us "it's all about states' rights." Well ... is it or isn't it? (Oh, and don't worry, I don't think any state can retain this position for long in our current sexular society where sex, not right, rules. They'll repeal this quickly ... and, yes, I'm talking about the GOP as well as the Dems.) Of course, Kamala Harris sees it as a campaign feature. She's traveling to Arizona to urge voters to throw out a government that defends life because everyone knows that's just stupid.
Ceasefire?
Negotiations are in trouble in the Israeli/Hamas conflict. Israel wants 40 hostages returned but Hamas says they don't have enough Israeli hostages to comply. (Does that mean they've already killed most of them?) They counter that they'd be willing to stop shooting if Israel will withdraw from Palestine. That last, of course, is the Bee's take, but it's not far off the truth.
Interesting "Campaign"
There is a report out that the Democratic National Committee paid more than $1.5 million in legal bills for Biden's defense in his retention of classified information investigation ... from donations for Biden's presidential campaign. Now, I can see that clearing the man (from the same charges that Trump faced) might be seen as "presidential campaign," but I find it hard to believe it's actually legal to do it and I find it equally hard to believe that donors for a campaign would want their campaign donations to be spent on legal defense of their candidate. And you know if Trump's folks did that there would be more legal wrangling to take Trump down. But, of course, "fair and balanced" is no longer in our vocabulary while "double standard," also not in our vocabulary, seems to be "business as usual" these days.
________
(Postscript: In case you didn't notice, I opted to sprinkle the Babylon Bee stuff in with the stories to which they related. No need to look down here for them.)
9 comments:
And he'll get away with it in the eyes of voters because they're apparently too stupid to realize that the debt isn't actually forgiven, but it's repaid by the very same voters that put him there.
The Bee is absolutely correct on Trump's abortion position, "whichever will get me votes". Made clear by his denunciation of Arizona and Florida, which last time I checked were states making their choices.
It seems like this latest papal document was written by someone other than the Pope. He's been sliding left so much recently, it was surprising to see him revert to a more traditional position. As for those that believe that their personal beliefs shouldn't effect their political positions, then you don't actually believe that personal belief.
She admits to doing it, and has the guns in her car, and the reporting still has to say "allegedly". It is so sad that we can't call a spade a spade anymore.
Even "prolife" Kari Lake is opposed to the Arizona law. At what point do we hold our politicians accountable for their lies. You can't say you're prolife and then turn around and say you're prochoice and still expect people to believe you're prolife. She just talked herself out of her campaign. She's not going to convince anyone that want going to vote for her on the abortion issue, and has now alienated those that were with her before.
This insanity of calling for a ceasefire when one side's stated goal is the total extermination of the other has got to stop. At this point, who knows if there are any hostages left at all. I doubt they're out there giving proof of life, since even Hamas doesn't know how many they have left. At this point, any "hostages" they might release would just be Palestinians that they claim they took.
Another example of the Democrats not actually caring about the law. Of course, it seems like fewer and fewer Republicans do either.
I like the mix of The Bee throughout your news stories today; it made for good comic relief, while also causing me to read the News Weakly stories a bit more carefully this time to discern between satire and non-satire; it is amazing how well the two blended today (and I know it took skill on your part to make that happen so seamlessly)!
While Trump's new abortion stance might make sense from a purely political standpoint, I don't see how it can be considered pro-life in any meaningful way. Personally, I'm not sure he'll add that many votes, and will probably break even after losing some pro-life votes. I get that Trump is more pro-life than Biden, but one wonders if he'll moderate on any other issues in search of more votes.
FYI, Trump's position on abortion is roughly the same as two candidates the Trump folks aren't fond of, McCain and Romney. It certainly worked well for them.
It's strange that he waited until after he had sewn up the primaries to announce this change, it's almost like he knew that the change would hurt him in the primaries, with the base.
I agree with his position from a legal/political perspective. Repealing Roe was always only going to send the issue back to the states, where it probably should be. It's certainly possible Trump can hold onto the pro-life voters (lesser evil) and pick up a few more along the way.
I can't imagine anyone being on the fence between Biden and Trump, and the less radical position on abortion being something that pushes people that want abortion in any form to side with Trump. If you're for abortion, I don't know if any incentives to side with Trump who appears to waver in the issue, as opposed to Biden that is fully for it.
This is what Trump said as of April 8, 2024 on his campaign website:
"Like Ronald Reagan, I am strongly in favor of exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother."
He goes on to say that since Dobbs, it's up to the people of individual states "to do the right thing". I would imagine that means, to allow for those exceptions while seeking to prohibit all others. This is a common compromise for most pro-lifers and I don't see why he's taking heat for trying to balance this position against the consequences of the Dobbs ruling. Clearly it's because of how badly so many need to give him heat, and this issue is perfect for that purpose.
I'm not giving Trump heat; I'm offering it to everyone who claims "pro-life" but says, "Well, of course, it's okay to kill that baby if the mom was raped." That's not "pro-life." And that's not aimed at Trump as Trump. It's anyone who holds that position. I frankly can't fathom anyone who suggests, "Go ahead and kill the other victim of this rape."
The heat Trump is receiving is from him saying one day, "let the states decide" and then the other day saying "that state decided wrong". Anyone that says we should let the states decide and then condemn the state for deciding is going to receive heat, and rightfully so. Flak is also going at Kari Lake because she claims to be pro-life but wants to let women have a choice. You know who else says that? Joe Biden. "I wouldn't choose it for myself, but everyone should be free to choose for themselves."
David,
I agree that this step by Trump to a more pro-choice position is going to sway pro-choice voters as much as it will alienate pro-life voters.
" I would imagine that means, to allow for those exceptions while seeking to prohibit all others"
The problem is that his "let the states decide", includes all possible decisions as being acceptable. The fact that he chose to attack FL and AZ for their pro-life laws, while ignoring states which have much more liberal laws doesn't really help him. I get it, it's simply political pandering (although it's legally correct), it's a shameless attempt to get votes. It's just strange that his choice to get votes is to appear more pro-choice. The problem is that you don't actually know what he means (I imagine). I suspect that this is exactly his strategy, to avoid being clear so that he can try to keep the abolitionists in the fold, while attracting some of the less rabid pro-choice folx.
As I've said elsewhere, I agree (politically) with his position. I agree that we should (politically) offer bills in every possible state with only those three exceptions as a means to graphically illustrate the reality that the pro-choice folx are lying when they focus on those exceptions. To demonstrate how radical they truly are. But, to an abolitionist, that's a pro-choice position. It's political calculus, and there is a risk to his choice. As Stan illustrates.
David's point that trump's position is now essentially the "If you don;t want and abortion, don't have one." pro-choice slogan.
It's a difficult conversation because the pro-life argument is essentially a moral argument (All innocent life has value), but the only real way to make progress is through the political process which involves compromise.
Post a Comment