web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > socialism

Climate Protester Climbs on Top of an Airplane and Does Not Help the Cause.

Westlake Legal Group plane-300x153 Climate Protester Climbs on Top of an Airplane and Does Not Help the Cause. white house washington D.C. The Guardian socialism Social Media Social Justice Satire progressives Patriotism Morning Briefing Media London Greta Thunberg Government Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Extinction Rebellion Entertainment democrats Culture crime corruption Conservatives communism comedy Capitalism Campaigns Allow Media Exception Academia Abuse of Power 2019

(AP Photo/Mary Altaffer)

You have to hand it to these climate protestors: They pull these stunts that they think will bring attention to their cause (they do) and also bring sympathy (they DO NOT) and gain them recruits.

Nope.

A really fun group called Extinction Rebellion has been staging protests in England and specifically around London. Last week, they decided to gum up the airport and try to delay people from getting to and from the terminals to make a point. One individual even decided to climb on top of an airplane to see if he could hold on at around 500 MPH at 33,000 feet.

According to The Guardian

More than 1,100 people have been arrested since the start of Extinction Rebellion’s protests this week in London, including 50 who were detained at City airport on Thursday.

Those arrested at the airport included James Brown, a partially-sighted former Paralympian who climbed on top of a British Airways aircraft, while another man, who boarded a flight to Dublin and stood up to speak about the effects of the climate crisis, was held for failing to comply with the orders of a captain. On Thursday night the Metropolitan police said there had been 1,112 arrests in
connection with the protests across London.

While the bulk of activists failed to penetrate security and get inside airport terminals, as they had hoped, protests were staged at the airport’s Docklands Light Railway station, outside its main entrance and on roads leading to the site.

Personally, I think if they want to climb on top of an airplane for a protest, let them. Have the crew inside the cabin take bets to see how long this Einstein can hold on and then pay off in free drinks to the winner.

Whatever happened to dying for the cause, lads?

Unfortunately, now that Greta Thunberg has lost the Nobel Peace Prize and the Oscar nominations have not yet come out, these protests are likely to continue, being as these folks ACTUALLY think the world is ending in 12 years.

As I pointed out in my article yesterday here at Red State [READ] CLIMATE FLASHBACK: In 1978 Mr. Spock Told Us Another Ice Age Would Be Here By Now, if Mr. Spock got this wrong 40 years ago, you most likely got it wrong also.

Let’s face it — if you really thought the world was ending you would stop paying off your student loans, stop working and probably just hang out at a park drinking booze and coming up with whacky ideas like sitting on top of a plane.

Oh crap.

Nevermind.

Check out my other posts here on Red State and my podcast Bourbon On The Rocks plus like Bourbon On The Rocks on Facebook and follow me on the twitters at IRISHDUKE2 

The post Climate Protester Climbs on Top of an Airplane and Does Not Help the Cause. appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group plane-300x153 Climate Protester Climbs on Top of an Airplane and Does Not Help the Cause. white house washington D.C. The Guardian socialism Social Media Social Justice Satire progressives Patriotism Morning Briefing Media London Greta Thunberg Government Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Extinction Rebellion Entertainment democrats Culture crime corruption Conservatives communism comedy Capitalism Campaigns Allow Media Exception Academia Abuse of Power 2019   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Say What? Bernie Sanders Says Elizabeth Warren Is a Capitalist As a Diss

Westlake Legal Group AP_17256721660377-300x162 Say What? Bernie Sanders Says Elizabeth Warren Is a Capitalist As a Diss white house washington D.C. socialism Politics jon karl Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post environment Elizabeth Warren donald trump Conservatives communism Capitalism biden Bernie Sanders Allow Media Exception Academia Abuse of Power ABC News 2019

(AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

 

Bernis is back.

Kinda.

He is READY TO RUMBLE.

Maybe.

Sanders in a new interview with ABC’s Jon Karl says that the big difference between him and his female counterpart who is also white, rich and boring is that she is…..GASP…A CAPITALIST.

From The Hill

In an interview airing Sunday with ABC’s Jon Karl, Sanders struck a stronger tone in distancing himself from Warren’s views on economic policy than he has in previous months, and again asserted that he was the strongest candidate to take on entrenched, powerful corporations and special interest groups in Washington.

“There are differences between Elizabeth and myself,” Sanders said, referring to Warren. “Elizabeth, I think, as you know, has said that she is a capitalist through her bones. I’m not.”

Ohhhhh can you feel the BERRRRRNNNNNNNNNNNN?

How pathetic.

In case you had forgotten Bernie while you have been taking it easy since the ticker attack, you have a net worth of around 2.5 to 3 million dollars according to Business Insider and Warren is worth around 10 million. So she is a better capitalist than you. et you still made money selling books from a company that makes big profits selling books.

Color thy hypocrisy green. As in money.

This is obviously an attempt to stem the inevitable bleed off of his support after his recent health episode. When a 78-year-old guy has any sort of heart event they shut them down for months. Running for President is not the shutdown type of activity that most doctors would recommend.

So he goes after Liz, the New York Times goes after Biden and hopefully by the time Iowa and New Hampshire come around he is strong enough to mimic Biden’s campaign schedule which is one or two appearances a week. Maybe.

This will not work and the time is ticking before he will have to drop out. I do appreciate the effort though.

One last thing.

Capitalism is the most perfect of all the imperfect systems of economics. That the democratic party has a candidate that says this as a diss and he is not roundly booed shows that the fringe left in this country is becoming more delusional by the day. I know that might infuriate at some of you while you are reading this in a Starbucks on your i phone 11 but I promise you that you will survive.

Unlike Bernie’s campaign.

Viva la CAPITALISM!!!

Check out my other posts here on Red State and my podcast Bourbon On The Rocks plus like Bourbon On The Rocks on Facebook and follow me on the twitters at IRISHDUKE2 

The post Say What? Bernie Sanders Says Elizabeth Warren Is a Capitalist As a Diss appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group AP_17256721660377-300x162 Say What? Bernie Sanders Says Elizabeth Warren Is a Capitalist As a Diss white house washington D.C. socialism Politics jon karl Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post environment Elizabeth Warren donald trump Conservatives communism Capitalism biden Bernie Sanders Allow Media Exception Academia Abuse of Power ABC News 2019   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

AOC On Verge of Tears: ‘Dream of Motherhood is Bittersweet’ Because We Are On Brink of ‘Extinction’

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-10-13-at-9.34.24-AM AOC On Verge of Tears: ‘Dream of Motherhood is Bittersweet’ Because We Are On Brink of ‘Extinction’ socialism Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post democrats Congress Climate Change Climate AOC Allow Media Exception

Screenshot from this video

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) took her climate show on the road on Friday, when she was in Copenhagen where she spoke at the C40 World Mayors Summit.

In her speech, she was near tears and railed against climate change, saying that our world was at the crossroads of “extinction” and that there could be no “middle road” in response.

From Daily Wire:

“The climate crisis is already here,” Ocasio-Cortez claimed. “On this note I speak to you not as an elected official or public figure, but I speak to you as a human being – a woman whose dreams of motherhood now taste bittersweet because of what I know about our children’s future, and that our actions are responsible for bringing their most dire possibilities into focus. I speak to you as a daughter and descendant of colonized peoples who have already begun to suffer.”

She blamed Hurricane Maria’s destruction in Puerto Rico in 2017 on climate change saying her own grandfather died “in the aftermath.”

Ocasio-Cortez claimed that the disaster was “all because they were living under colonial rule, which contributed to the dire conditions.” She claimed that this was happening to people who had already suffered so much because of “imperialism.”

On the contrary, as the facts have revealed, local corruption and the failure of the local government have badly affected the island for years, despite billions poured in by the federal government. Governor Richard Rosello even had to step down after massive protests by the people because of unhappiness over his response in part.

She then claimed that media coverage of such disasters fails to mention climate change as a cause when in fact, they often do even if there’s no factual basis to support it.

“It is not a coincidence that the truth is controversial,” Ocasio-Cortez continued. “None of this is a coincidence because climate change is not a coincidence or a scientific anomaly. Climate change is a consequence. It is a consequence of our unsustainable way of life.”

She spoke of fact and consensus but then claimed it was a fact that all three airports in New York would be flooded by 2080. She said if she had a child, “he, she or they,” would have to deal with a situation where their most critical infrastructure was underwater.

She decried the “runaway pursuit of profit” and argued that the only way to address climate change was to “change “society” and control the economy, on a level that had never been done before, to mobilize the change they desired.

But really it’s the other way around. The left and socialists need climate change to justify the radical desire to control the economy and completely change the system. That’s the real aim.

Here are a few facts from meteorologist Joe Bastardi for the non-scientist AOC.

The post AOC On Verge of Tears: ‘Dream of Motherhood is Bittersweet’ Because We Are On Brink of ‘Extinction’ appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-10-13-at-9.34.24-AM-300x173 AOC On Verge of Tears: ‘Dream of Motherhood is Bittersweet’ Because We Are On Brink of ‘Extinction’ socialism Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post democrats Congress Climate Change Climate AOC Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

AOC Angrily Plays the Woman Card after News Reports About an Expensive Salon Visit. There’s Just One Problem.

Westlake Legal Group AOCAPimage-620x317 AOC Angrily Plays the Woman Card after News Reports About an Expensive Salon Visit. There’s Just One Problem. socialism Social Media Politics North Carolina New York Melania Trump Media journalism Front Page Stories Front Page Feminism Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Culture Congress AOC Allow Media Exception Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., questions FBI Assistant Director of the Counterterrorism Division Michael McGarrity, during a House Oversight and Reform Civil Rights and Civil Liberties subcommittee hearing, June 4, 2019, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

The Washington Times reported earlier this week about a recent visit Squad leader and admitted socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) made to a DC salon that ended up being pricey:

The self-declared socialist, who regularly rails against the rich and complains about the cost of living inside the Beltway, spent nearly $300 on her hairdo at a pricey salon she frequents in downtown Washington, The Washington Times has learned.

The New York Democrat ventured into Last Tangle Salon on 19th Street Northwest last month and shelled out $80 for a haircut and $180 for lowlights, according to sources familiar with the salon.

A 20% tip would have added $52 to the bill.

The article also noted less expensive places she could have chosen to have her hair done.

There was a predictable debate on social media as to whether or not this was even newsworthy. But given her “spread the wealth” philosophy, her frequent rants against “privileged” people, and how often she complains about DC living expenses and paying off her student loan debt, I think the story was totally worth covering:

“AOC is the Eva Peron of American politics. She preaches socialism while living the life of the privileged,” said Richard Manning, president of Americans for Limited Government, referencing the former first lady of Argentina who was known for dressing in designer gowns and jewels while advocating a socialist agenda.

“There is nothing wrong with spending money to make yourself look better, especially as a personality who depends upon visual mediums for her power. But it is a bad look to spend hundreds of dollars to get your hair done to make a video decrying income inequality,” Mr. Manning said.

Mr. Manning made excellent points, but as you might have guessed already, AOC didn’t feel the same way.

She ranted about it on her Twitter feed Thursday morning and Thursday night for good measure.

Here are the two responses that stood out to me:

First things first: Ocasio-Cortez’s quip about how “they’re just mad we look good doing it” is laughable for a number of reasons, some of which I mentioned above (because it’s not really about a haircut). It’s also hilarious considering she had a mini-meltdown over the “glamour shot” photo the New York Times used in an article they did about former White House communications director Hope Hicks a few months ago.

Yet just days after her Hope Hicks tweets, the freshman Congresswoman hypocritically complained about how women’s looks are sometimes used against them in order to belittle them (though AOC is totally not against using a woman’s looks against her when it suits her political purposes).

In her second tweet Thursday about HaircutGate, she said “I wonder if Republicans care about corruption as much as they care about a woman’s cut & color”, because playing the woman card is one of the things AOC does best when she has no good defense.

Guess she didn’t notice that the very same Washington Times article she railed against for daring to write “about a woman’s cut and color” also mentioned other notorious instances where the haircuts of male and female politicians made the news:

The 2016 Democratic presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton, splurged $600 on a hairdo during the campaign, prompting Vanity Fair to ask in a headline: “Is $600 too much for a haircut?”

Former Sen. John Edwards, who ran for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination and was the 2004 vice presidential nominee, was known to pay more than $500 to his hairstylist. President Bill Clinton’s $200 haircut in 1993 at Los Angeles International Airport made headlines when two of the airport’s runways had to be shut down for nearly an hour during the procedure.

Let’s also not forget the endless parade of articles on President Trump’s hair. And First Lady Melania Trump’s fashion choices.

As usual, AOC stepped on a rake bigly in a desperate attempt at deflecting a legitimate criticism. Not the first time, and won’t be the last.

——-
— Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter. –

The post AOC Angrily Plays the Woman Card after News Reports About an Expensive Salon Visit. There’s Just One Problem. appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group AOCAPimage-300x153 AOC Angrily Plays the Woman Card after News Reports About an Expensive Salon Visit. There’s Just One Problem. socialism Social Media Politics North Carolina New York Melania Trump Media journalism Front Page Stories Front Page Feminism Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Culture Congress AOC Allow Media Exception Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

AOC got an expensive haircut, let the Twitter outrage begin

Westlake Legal Group AOC AOC got an expensive haircut, let the Twitter outrage begin Washington The Blog socialism nyc Hypocrisy haircut hair salons D.C. AOC Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

This is one of the sillier stories going around, I’ll be the first to admit that. Nonetheless, it does point to the contradictions in our lives as men and women grapple with something as ordinary as a hair cut.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), the story goes, visited an upscale Washington, D.C. hair salon and paid a pretty penny for a hair cut and lowlights. Lowlights, for the uninformed, are “partial or spot hair coloring in which just a few sections of hair are dyed.” She’s young so I’m assuming she isn’t covering gray, just perking up her regular hair color. It’s the hair coloring process that beefs up the final bill.

Alex Swoyer wrote a piece published in The Washington Times documenting AOC’s visit.

The New York Democrat ventured into Last Tangle Salon on 19th Street Northwest last month and shelled out $80 for a haircut and $180 for lowlights, according to sources familiar with the salon.

A 20% tip would have added $52 to the bill.

Swoyer went at the story from the point of view that socialists – especially politicians – are hypocrites. Socialists demand legislation that aggressively taxes the fruits of our labor yet they live quite well in their own lives. For example, the two most prominent Socialists in Washington, D.C. are Bernie Sanders and his disciple, AOC. Bernie, as we all know now, owns three houses, including a beach house. Swoyer’s piece was a legitimate criticism.

AOC is a twenty-nine years old single woman living in Washington, D.C., a city that is listed as number 5 out of the 10 most expensive cities in America in which to live. Her home city, New York City, is number one on the list so she is used to a high cost of living. Frankly, she may well think she got a good deal in that salon, depending on what she pays in NYC.

The problem with the piece arose when a liberal female writer tweeted about the article. She began with: “this would obvs never be a story about a man”

Valenti went at it from the sexist angle – a woman is criticized for her hair care. What Valenti must have missed in the last 30 years, though, is that men, too, have come under fire for hair cuts that seem crazy expensive. Bill Clinton, John Edwards, Mitt Romney were all faulted for spending a lot on their hair. Rick Perry received notice for his preference of $25.00 hair cuts. And so on.

Nevertheless, AOC is in the public spotlight. People will talk whether she spends $25.00 or $600.00. I find it much more acceptable to question the exorbitant prices paid by the men, though, to be honest because there is so much less work involved. As a rule, women have longer hair (AOC has long hair) and the whole coloring thing takes time and requires a skilled hair stylist. It’s no secret – women pay more.

I’m fiscally conservative. I live for a bargain. That isn’t usually possible when it comes to a visit to a hair salon. I’m sure someone recommended this place to AOC and she went. She probably doesn’t have a lot of time to be searching out the best deal. And, as I noted above, it probably isn’t particularly expensive for the area. She is a single, childless professional woman. She makes a salary of $174,000 a year. She can afford a splurge on her hair. At the most, she might go to the salon once a month, but I doubt it is that frequent. Most women go 6 to 8 weeks to keep up with hair color.

Could she do it all cheaper and live a more modest lifestyle? Yes, of course. She lives in an upscale area. The point is she is free to make her own choices. If we were living in her socialist nirvana, her choices would be severely curtailed. That’s the point the liberal virtue-signaling writer missed.

AOC doesn’t have to color her own hair at home like lots of women do because she can afford to visit a hair salon that can remain in business due in part to tax policies. Thanks, President Trump. That business owner’s taxes would be higher if AOC had her way. The cost of living in a large city like D.C. is higher than a less populated place in another part of the country. This is a time when I will stick up for excercising her freedom of choice in hair care. Now, if she starts having her hair done in a plane on a tarmac like Bill Clinton once famously did, all bets are off.

Yes, AOC has responded. It’s an apples and oranges kind of response, but her response nonetheless.

The post AOC got an expensive haircut, let the Twitter outrage begin appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group AOC-300x153 AOC got an expensive haircut, let the Twitter outrage begin Washington The Blog socialism nyc Hypocrisy haircut hair salons D.C. AOC Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump Legal Team Hires Former South Carolina Congressman Trey Gowdy

Westlake Legal Group AP_18170605058019-300x162 Trump Legal Team Hires Former South Carolina Congressman Trey Gowdy white house washington D.C. Supreme Court socialism Social Media republicans progressives President Trump Morning Briefing Media Mainstream Media International Affairs Impeachment of President Trump impeachment Front Page Stories Front Page Foreign Policy Featured Story Featured Post Entertainment donald trump democrats crime corruption Constitution Conservatives Congress collusion Campaigns bill barr biden axios Allow Media Exception Abuse of Power 2019

(AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

President Trump is adding another politician turned pundit onto his legal staff as he heads for a showdown with the Impeachment Posse on Capitol Hill. Former South Carolina Representative Trey Gowdy has agreed to join the fight according to Axios

President Trump has asked former South Carolina Rep. Trey Gowdy to assist him with legal advice from outside the White House and Gowdy has agreed, though details are yet to be finalized, according to people familiar with the situation.

Where it stands: As the president faces an impeachment inquiry, Gowdy can offer Trump another opinion on where legal theory meets political reality, a person familiar told Axios’ Margaret Talev, adding that his Benghazi experience is seen as an asset. Gowdy is expected to advise the White House behind the scenes and appear on TV to advocate on behalf of the president.

At least one reporter from the New York Times is not buying this until POTUS 45 tweets about it

The president has yet to tweet about hiring Gowdy.

Gowdy is often effective on the T.V. side of things which is the main reason Trump inc probably wanted to hire him. Personally, I tuned him out after the Benghazi hearings when the GOP had control of the House of Representatives and nothing was done to anyone in the Obama administration for the awful debacle. Great speeches were made but nothing else.

This is another sign though that the White House is gearing up for an impeachment battle after the past week. ( READ: BREAKING: Trump Tells Democrats In Congress, Not Cooperating With Your Impeachment Inquiry.

Let’s see if they can get this circus done before CHRISTmas to make sure these aggrieved Democrats can make it home to panhandle off this debacle.

Check out my other posts here on Red State and my podcast Bourbon On The Rocks plus like Bourbon On The Rocks on Facebook and follow me on the twitters at IRISHDUKE2 

The post Trump Legal Team Hires Former South Carolina Congressman Trey Gowdy appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group AP_18170605058019-300x162 Trump Legal Team Hires Former South Carolina Congressman Trey Gowdy white house washington D.C. Supreme Court socialism Social Media republicans progressives President Trump Morning Briefing Media Mainstream Media International Affairs Impeachment of President Trump impeachment Front Page Stories Front Page Foreign Policy Featured Story Featured Post Entertainment donald trump democrats crime corruption Constitution Conservatives Congress collusion Campaigns bill barr biden axios Allow Media Exception Abuse of Power 2019   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Neil O’Brien: Fifty shades of conservatism

Neil O’Brien is MP for Market Harborough.

You might say socialism and liberalism are ideologies, while Conservatism is more like a character trait. But that’s not quite right. Socialism and liberalism are ideologies about maximising one thing, be it equality or freedom. In contrast, Conservatives believe in a wider variety of ideals.

So what kind of conservative are you?

Since the classic Liberal party gave way to Labour, we’ve been the party of the free market and sound money, even more so since the Thatcher/Reagan era. The free market is a such huge part of what we are about, it tends to dominate, but there’s much more to conservatism.

Perhaps you are a law and order Conservative: patron saint Thomas Hobbes, who, inspired by his experience of the civil war, observed that without strong authority and law and order, life tends to be “nasty, brutish and short.”

But in a nice example of how conservative ideas fit together, a strong law and order policy is also a One Nation policy: because who suffers when there is crime and disorder? Those who live in the most deprived fifth of neighbourhoods are 50 per cent more likely to be victims of crime than those in the richest fifth.

Or perhaps you are a constitutional conservative. Do you believe in keeping the Monarchy? A House of Lords that isn’t elected? Do you believe in keeping first past post elections, and an unwritten constitution? Do you believe in the common law and rule of law? Those ideas are more important now Labour believes in expropriation of your pension, your shares, your house, and anything else that isn’t screwed down.

Perhaps you’re a conservative because you believe in Liberty. Habeas Corpus. Limits on Government. Legal protection of personal and family life. Liberty always raises contentious issues like hunting or drugs. Or think of recent cases like the gay marriage cake. I thought the courts got it right: a business can’t refuse to serve gay people, but people can’t be made to promote political views they don’t hold, even if I disagree with those views.

What do we think about the growing deployment of live facial recognition technology in public places? Liberty lovers might want to ban it. Law and order fans might want to allow it.

Liberty-loving conservatism can also clash with another ideal – social conservatism. Are you worried about family breakdown? What do you think about transgender issues? What do you think about full facial veils? That question pits liberty against traditional pattern of our society. France banned them, we allow them.

Do you think what you get out of the welfare system should be linked to what you put in? And how should we make choices about immigration: do we just think about migrants’ skills and earnings, or how easily they will integrate into our culture? I incline to the latter view.

One big idea that I think fits under social conservatism is the idea of the nation state. National self-determination and the lack of a shared European demos powers the idea of Brexit, but it also explains why we are prepared to make compromises to try and keep the United Kingdom together.

Zooming down from the nation to the individual, conservatism is about individual self-reliance. That’s why we strongly support individual home ownership. Mrs Thatcher expressed this well. She said that people: “are casting their problems at society. And, you know, there’s no such thing as society. There are individual men and women and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look after themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then, also, to look after our neighbours.”

Things like the doubling of the Income Tax Personal Allowance and the National Living Wage – and also welfare reforms – are about self reliance. George Osborne was onto something when he talked about a “higher wage, lower tax, lower welfare spending” society. Personally, I believe tax should be based on the ability to pay, and so we should bring back the higher tax allowances for children Labour abolished in the 1970s.

But conservatives don’t just believe in individualism. We are the society party. Civic conservatives know that many problems can’t be solved by either the free market or the state. David Cameron said: “There is such a thing as society, it’s just not the same as the state.” When we think about problems like loneliness in an ageing society, we can only solve them by catalysing and helping voluntary groups and family life. The Big Society may have been a good idea, badly timed. But the ideal of voluntary action remains very attractive, I find particularly to younger conservatives.

Conservatism is also about gradualism. Burke attacked the French revolution as a huge, risky, leap-in-the-dark.
Gradualism is behind all our biggest policy successes. Welfare reforms started under Peter Lilley, continued under New Labour, and then under another Conservative government – and now have the record employment. The academy schools programme also spanned governments: from Kenneth Baker to Gavin Williamson.

In contrast, Socialists believe in utopian leaps. In the USSR and under China’s Great Leap Forward millions died, yet John McDonell still says, “I am a Marxist”. In contrast we should be proud gradualists. What do we want? More use of evidence. When do we want it? After randomised control trials.

As well as gradualism, Conservatism is about pluralism and decentralisation. Environmentalists have shown us why it is dangerous to have a monoculture of anything, because if things then go wrong, they do so on a huge scale. Think about the Irish potato famine.

Take a more recent policy example: during the heyday of disastrous progressive teaching methods, they swept all before them. But independent schools and grammar schools were a bastion for traditional methods (like phonics), which could then make a comeback after trendy methods failed.

Devolution allows experimentation. In the US they say the states are “laboratories of democracy”. Ideas like welfare reform or zero tolerance policing were tried locally and taken up nationally when they worked. Conservatives also believe in pluralism in a deeper way. People have different ideas of the good life.

That’s one reason I think we should keep the honours system – to recognise those who are motivated by something other than money, whether they want to serve their country on the battlefield, or help their community by running a youth club. That should inform our thoughts on things like childcare. Do we just focus on maximising employment or education? Or let people choose if they want to be stay at home parents?

I’m sure readers will point out things I’ve missed. But those are some of the main elements of Conservatism.
Law and order. The Constitution. Liberty. Social Conservatism. Civic Conservatism. Individual-self reliance.
Gradualism. Pluralism. Ideas that are sometimes in tension, but which fit together.

Conservatism is a bit like the roof of parliament’s Westminster Hall: which is held up by a lot of huge, ancient beams all resting on each other. Likewise, the elements of conservatism fit together, and have also made something really strong and enduring.

This article is based on a contribution by the author to a Centre for Policy Studies event, “Free Exchange: The case for conservatism”, at last week’s Conservative Party Conference.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

News Summary from the Week that Was (29 September – 5 October)

Westlake Legal Group censored-620x331-copy News Summary from the Week that Was (29 September – 5 October) Uncategorized Ukrainian collusion in 2016 election Ukraine investigation into 2016 election interference Ukraine socialism religion Media Hillary Clinton Email Scandal Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Featured Story Economy donald trump democrats Culture & Faith Crooked Hillary Clinton corruption Corrupt Democrats climate alarmism cia scandal Catholic Church bill barr biden Abuse of Power

Here is some of the news from last week that the legacy media buried or obfuscated because the stories don’t fit their “Republicans bad, Democrats good” narrative.

1. This is a great way to get the ball rolling this week! There are a TON of culpable criminals who enabled Shrillary during her tour as secretary of state. She’s always been guilty of mishandling TS/SCI information, too.

[T]he Washington Post reported State Department officials informed up to 130 Clinton aides that they were found to be “culpable” of handling information that was classified lower than they should have been when transmitted through the private server. Although some former Obama administration officials have attempted to discredit the investigation by accusing the Trump administration of targeting them, one official retorted that “the process is set up in a manner to completely avoid any appearance of political bias.”

A Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) investigation into Clinton’s server found at least 100 emails containing classified information, including 65 emails declared “Secret” and 22 regarded as “Top Secret.” Additionally, the State Department retroactively classified 2,093 emails that were not initially marked as such. Some experts charge Clinton broke multiple laws, including 18 U.S. Code § 1924, which forbids “unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material.”

Read the rest here. I’m one of those experts noted in the article based on over 45 years as a national security professional (albeit have never been interviewed and quoted formally). There is no statute of limitations on mishandling classified information (especially of the TS/SCI variety!).

2. Next, Peter Schweizer provides the goods on the Bidens’ corruption that the legacy media continues to hide:

[Peter] Schweizer told host Mark Levin that the former vice president’s son was being paid by Ukraine despite not having expertise in the energy sector while Joe Biden was the “point-person” on former President Barack Obama’s administration in dealing with Ukraine. “The key question here that nobody seems to want to ask in the media is: What was he being paid for? He wasn’t being paid for his expertise. What was he being paid for? And what were the Ukrainians expecting to get in return?” Schweizer stated. “I think when you overlay the financial payments with the fact that Joe Biden as point person on Obama administration policy to Ukraine was steering billions of dollars of Western money to Ukraine it becomes crystal clear exactly why they were paying him money. They wanted access and they wanted to influence Joe Biden. And Joe Biden has been around a long time here, and he had to know exactly why his son was being paid.”

Source. It’s only a matter of time until the stalking horse for Shrillary is forced to retire from the Democrats’ Star Wars bar scene field of wannabes.

3. CNN and MSNBC are infested with former Obama national security and intelligence community political hacks who rail against POTUS, but they won’t touch this story with a 10-foot pole:

Former CIA officer John Kiriakou explained why he feels President Donald Trump should ask the Senate to investigate the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Appearing on Monday night’s edition of “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” Kiriakou described the difference between an instance during his own employment where he filed a whistleblower complaint, and the highly published complaint regarding Trump’s July 25 phone call to the president of Ukraine. The former CIA officer described his 1996 complaint, then the current one that “went through layers of editing and coordinating and lawyers were involved and managers were involved.”

“It looks like a legal document,” he said. “It doesn’t look like a whistleblower complaint, and that leads me to believe that this whistleblower that we’re talking about is just a face of an entire group that’s at the CIA that’s pushing this forward.” Kiriakou speculated that the complaint likely went “through the chain of command” to CIA Director Gina Haspel herself before landing at the office of the DNI.

Read the rest here. The experienced among us know that is was a set-up and political hit-job yet again, folks. Period.

4. Joe Biden is running scared on the Ukraine issue. He’s trying to squelch political free speech by using his campaign to pressure networks to not interview Rudy Giuliani:

Joe Biden’s presidential campaign demanded on Sunday that news networks stop booking Rudy Giuliani for interviews, handing President Donald Trump and his allies a new talking point against the former vice president. Biden’s campaign sent a letter to executives and anchors at ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox News, and NBC, according to the NYT, which first obtained the letter. In it, Biden campaign officials Anita Dunn and Kate Bedingfield call interviews with Giuliani “a disservice to journalism.”

“We are writing today with grave concern that you continue to book Rudy Giuliani on your air to spread false, debunked conspiracy theories on behalf of Donald Trump,” the letter begins. “While you often fact check his statements in real time during your discussions, that is no longer enough. By giving him your air time, you are allowing him to introduce increasingly unhinged, unfounded and desperate lies into the national conversation.”

Read the rest here. Biden’s toast. That video of him bragging that he forced the Ukrainian president to fire the prosecutor investigating his son Hunter and Burisma Holdings sounded his political death knell. It’s just a matter of time until he’s gone.

5. More on Ukraine that the anti-Trump media and Democrats are ignoring – but it’s going to bite them all BIGLY where the sun don’t shine!

[T]he president never spoke with Attorney General William Barr “about having Ukraine investigate anything relating to former Vice President Biden or his son” or asked him to contact Ukraine “on this or any other matter,” and that the attorney general has not communicated at all with Ukraine. It also contains the following morsel: “A Department of Justice team led by U.S. Attorney John Durham is separately exploring the extent to which a number of countries, including Ukraine, played a role in the counterintelligence investigation directed at the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.

While the Attorney General has yet to contact Ukraine in connection with this investigation, certain Ukrainians who are not members of the government have volunteered information to Mr. Durham, which he is evaluating.” When you grope through the miasma of Slavic names and follow the daisy chain of related people and entities, it appears that Ukrainian officials who backed the Clinton campaign provided information that generated the investigation of Mr. Manafort—acts that one Ukrainian court has said violated Ukrainian law and “led to interference in the electoral processes of the United States in 2016 and harmed the interests of Ukraine as a state.”

Read the rest here. Bit by bit, the real truth about Ukraine is seeping out – and it AIN’T good for the Democrats.

6. It’s about time the vegans got a little pushback. This is one less thing that the leftist fascists can force down our throats.

A new study states that previous claims of the harm done by eating beef and pork are inaccurate. It was thought for decades that eating too much red meat contributes to heart disease, diabetes, and certain forms of cancer. But the study, published Monday in the Annals of Internal Medicine, concluded that meat was probably only a contributing factor to disease — not decisive — and cutting consumption would only marginally improve risk factors.

Read the rest here. Another long-held leftwing myth is debunked. Who knew?

7. The Democrats are rushing headlong to impeach @POTUS no matter what. It’s not going to work out for them they way they think it will.

Back in 2017, Rep. Adam Schiff was crowing that there was evidence in plain sight that Donald Trump colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election. The intel committee boss never produced the evidence and neither did Robert Mueller with his police-state tactics. Schiff has now turned to improvised dialogue about President Trump pressuring Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden in exchange for military aid. That is a tough act to follow but House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is up to the task.

President Trump is like Paul Newman in Absence of Malice, being set up by someone with no face and no name. The whistleblower is reportedly a CIA employee but the president wants to know who this person is and face his accuser. The accuser is being represented by Andrew Bakaj, a former CIA officer who says the whistleblower “is entitled to anonymity.” Democrats want more of Trump’s phone calls with Vladimir Putin and other world leaders. Adam Schiff wants to see if “the president was also undermining our security in a way that he thought would personally benefit his campaign.” For his part, Trump wants Schiff questioned “at the highest level for Fraud & Treason,” and he wants to know who was spying on him.

Progressives believe they have somehow escaped the repressive conditioning of the masses and are wise enough to usher in the utopian state. This has all been predetermined by history, so if the progressive candidate loses, it can only be due to trickery or theft. Progressive candidates cannot accept that outsider Donald Trump defeated … Hillary Clinton. Democrats are worried that if they don’t impeach Trump he will win again in 2020. Others don’t care about the election and just want him impeached by any means necessary.

President Trump, the most powerful man in the world, could extend deployment of his power to declassify. That could prove interesting, even for someone like POTUS 44, who in 2012 told Russian President Dmitry Medvedev that he would have “more flexibility” to deal with contentious issues like missile defense after the U.S. presidential election. And of course he and Hillary Clinton gave the Russians everything they wanted. They also colluded with Russia to take down candidate and President Trump. Vice President Joe Biden pressured Ukraine to fire a prosecutor investigating a firm whose board included Biden’s son.

Trump thinks Ukraine should investigate, and that was what the call was about. Yet Trump, not Biden, faces the barrage.

Read the rest here. The focus is corruption as it always has been, not the false Democrat spin of quid pro quo.

8. POTUS is not your typical pol (thank God!).

He wasn’t supposed to release the transcripts. Or the whistleblower report.  He was expected to do what any president would have done – what President Obama always did. Hide the evidence. As scripted, the president was intended to (rightly) claim executive privilege and withhold the written notes of his July 25 conversation with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky. That would allow House Democrats to ramp up speculation about what the president was hiding.

In contrast, President Trump did the unthinkable:  he actually waived both executive privilege and attorney-client privilege for the Mueller investigation.  What other president would allow his general counsel to be interviewed for more than 30 hours? Donald Trump does. He should be winning awards for his openness and transparency. We’ve never seen anything like it before.  And it’s messing with the Democrats’ narrative.

Americans are not fooled. By now most of us have heard the message loud and clear. Rep. Al Green told us exactly what it was about when he told MSNBC in May, “I’m concerned that if we don’t impeach this president, he will get re-elected.”

Read the rest here. I’ll take the transparency and responsiveness of @POTUS to the secrecy of the Deep State and Democrats any day of the week!

9. The Catholic Church goes off the deep end on enviro-wacko-ism. Funny, I thought the goal was to save souls, not “the planet.” There’s a lot of work to do on that front; just consider all the elected Democrats who support unrestricted abortion!

[T]he movement is not confined to secular discourse: it coincides with escalating rhetoric from the Vatican about environmentalism. This issue is quickly becoming central to contemporary Catholicism, just as economic justice rose to the fore in the late 19th century. This is not merely a passing phase either. The language the Church uses to discuss environmentalism today will have profound ramifications for how we think about God, humanity, creation, and salvation itself.

Pope Francis’s 2015 encyclical Laudato Si was acclaimed as being for environmental justice what Pope Leo XIII’s landmark work Rerum Novarum was for economic justice in 1891. But the comparison is more aspirational than accurate. But Laudato Si, unlike Rerum Novarum, falls into the trap of adopting secular language to describe what is essentially a spiritual problem. It’s rife with the doomsday language that dominates secular environmentalism. Doomsday language does not lend itself to well-rounded philosophical frameworks or to judicious, practical applications. Instead, it promotes panic, and panic leads to moral compromise.

The unjustified moral panic over the Amazon fires is not unique. The last five decades are full of climate doomsday predictions that have been proven false. Some—like the 1970 proclamation that, by 2000, the world would be gripped in a new Ice Age—are exactly the opposite of current climate panics. For climate change activists, these facts simply don’t matter. What matters is that they see an impending climate disaster—a disaster which they believe justifies distorting the truth. This is exactly the same kind of prevarication Catholics must watch out for.

Because many leaders in the Church—including the Holy Father—have come to believe that there is an impending climate disaster, we shouldn’t be surprised if we see doctrinal distortions as a result. By elevating neo-pagan tribes to the level of moral arbiters and castigating Western Catholics en masse, activists within the Church lose sight of the Church’s primary purpose, which is to affect the salvation of human souls—the bringing of souls into harmony with God—through its preaching and sacramental ministries. All other Church activities must flow from that purpose and not from any other, lest we fall into a trap set by the forces of darkness.

Read the rest here. That article nailed how the Pope and the church hierarchy have gone off the rails, didn’t it? The Devil is hard at work boring from within.

10. A DNC contractor was digging for Trump dirt in Ukraine in 2016, but there is total silence about this in the legacy media.

There is a media narrative that is false. How do we know it’s false? The documents I possess show it’s false. They said there is no evidence that the Ukraine embassy was ever asked for help to help the Democrat national committee. She called that Russia propaganda. I have a statement from the Ukrainian embassy in Washington on the record from their sitting Ambassador in Washington that in fact Alexander Toluca, the DNC contractor came to the Ukraine embassy in spring 2016 and asked for help in finding dirt on Donald Trump in hopes of staging a congressional hearing to hurt Donald Trump. That is the on the record statements.

In addition, they state that he also asked the Ukraine president to visit the United States and spend time with an investigative reporter trying to turn up dirt on Donald Trump and Paul Manafort. What did the embassy do? They say they recognize this request for what it was, and improper efforts to influence the election and they refused to cooperate. That is a very important confirmation of something the rest of the media is calling tinfoil hat, conspiracy.

Watch the video here. Where are the legacy media in following up on this bombshell? Why, running for the hills, of course!

11. Finally, there is more circumstantial evidence that Rod Rosenstein wasn’t a “white hat,” as some have speculated.

Judicial Watch released 145 pages of Rod Rosenstein’s communications that include a one-line email from Rod Rosenstein to Robert Mueller stating, “The boss and his staff do not know about our discussions” and “off the record” emails with major media outlets around the date of Mueller’s appointment.

The time period referred to in this suit is critical. On May 8, 2017, Rosenstein wrote a memo to President Trump recommending that FBI Director James Comey be fired. The next day, President Trump fired Comey. Just three days later, on May 12, Rosenstein sent an email assuring Robert Mueller that “The boss and his staff do not know about our discussions.”

In a May 16, 2017 email, sent the day before Mueller’s appointment, Rosenstein emailed former Bush administration Deputy Attorney General and current Kirkland & Ellis Partner, Mark Filip stating, “I am with Mueller. He shares my views. Duty Calls. Sometimes the moment chooses us.”

Read the rest here. Occam’s razor says that Rosenstein indicted himself with his own words. I’ll wait for definitive proof to the contrary, no speculation.

Here are a couple of honorable mentions from this weeks news:

Here’s the short summary of the items in this weekly news summary:

  • Up to 130 State Dept personnel stand to lose their security clearances as a result of the Shrillary email server debacle. Frankly, it’s not enough; they need to be prosecuted because they knew about it and did nothing.
  • Peter Schweizer exposes the Bidens’ epic corruption.
  • A former CIA officer who submitted a whistleblower compliant opines that the Ukraine complaint reads like it was a legal brief, not a submission by a genuine whistleblower.
  • Joe Biden is pressuring the networks not to interview Rudy Giuliani on their news programs. Sure seems like a desperate move to me (not to mention typical Democrat fascism by attempting to stifle opposing political speech).
  • AG Barr is methodically looking into foreign influence in the 2016 elections. Ukraine is on the menu to the consternation of the Democrats.
  • Red meat isn’t bad for humans after all. I learned “everything in moderation” long ago. Glad to see a return to sanity.
  • Biden did the crime, yet it’s @OTUS who is the focus of Democrat allegations. Yeah, it’s nothing but transference!
  • POTUS upset the Democrats’ impeachment apple cart by releasing the Ukraine phone call transcript summary because he’s not your average brain-dead RINO.
  • The Pope apparently is on the green bandwagon, and saving souls seems to be second fiddle.
  • A DNC contractor was fishing for dirt on Donald Trump in Ukraine in 2016.
  • Looks like Rod Rosenstein was a bad guy after all; he implicates himself with his own words.

The Democrats flawed impeachment gambit (refer to the last bullet in item 12 above) continues to dominate the news. Watching their and their paid media lies, given the phone call transcript, is just amazing. Completely disgraceful! Now they’re shifting to China since that dog won’t hunt. Meanwhile, AG Barr and USA Durham continue their work, making the Democrats more desperate by the day. I love it! And no one has mentioned the DoJ OIG FISA abuse report that’s “under final review” lately. There’s a lot happening, folks; stay tuned!

The end.

The post News Summary from the Week that Was (29 September – 5 October) appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group censored-620x331-copy-300x160 News Summary from the Week that Was (29 September – 5 October) Uncategorized Ukrainian collusion in 2016 election Ukraine investigation into 2016 election interference Ukraine socialism religion Media Hillary Clinton Email Scandal Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Featured Story Economy donald trump democrats Culture & Faith Crooked Hillary Clinton corruption Corrupt Democrats climate alarmism cia scandal Catholic Church bill barr biden Abuse of Power   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Watch: Ocasio-Cortez Proposes New Act that Gives Welfare to Illegal Immigrants

Westlake Legal Group ocasio-cortez_1-620x349 Watch: Ocasio-Cortez Proposes New Act that Gives Welfare to Illegal Immigrants socialism Politics open borders immigration Illegal Immigrants Front Page Stories Featured Story entitlements embrace act democrats Bernie Sanders AOC Allow Media Exception Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Yup, you read that headline correctly. New York Rep. Ocasio-Cortez (D) advocated for handing out entitlements to illegal immigrants.

In a short video, you can see AOC introducing two acts, one of which she calls the “embrace act,” that would essentially grant welfare to immigrants regardless of their citizenship status.

“The Embrace Act, we are doing the same, and we are ending—and it’s a piece if legislation that ends similar discrimination based on documentation status,” Ocasio-Cortez said.

“It’s kind of a next-level piece of legislation, and it is something that people are going to say ‘Why would you do that?’ I believe that we need to acknowledge the contributions that immigrants make in America,” she added. “And if you, if you, contribute to our society, I believe that you should benefit from our society.”

It’s not “open borders,” but it might as well be. Providing welfare and entitlements to people who aren’t even citizens of this country would not only break our system, it would encourage far more people to flood into this country to reap the benefits of simply being alive without having to contribute anything back.

Not even Sen. Bernie Sanders was willing to go that far. In fact, he expressly rejected it under the understanding that we would never be able to support everyone.

“…open the borders, my god, there’s a lot of poverty in this world and you’re going to have people from all over the world, and I don’t think that is something we can do at this point. Can’t do it. So that is not my position,” said Sanders.

Once again, AOC failed to provide any indication as to how she would pay for such a monumental addition to our financial burden as a nation, especially given all the other free things she wants to provide everyone with such as free medical care and free college.

If she’s possibly found the land of money trees, or maybe even has the power to turn objects into gold, then perhaps she could share that knowledge with us and we can get on providing all this free stuff to everyone. Seeing as they’re likely not to exist at all, maybe Ocasio-Cortez should scale back sharing her socialist pipe dreams with us.

The post Watch: Ocasio-Cortez Proposes New Act that Gives Welfare to Illegal Immigrants appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group ocasio-cortez_1-300x169 Watch: Ocasio-Cortez Proposes New Act that Gives Welfare to Illegal Immigrants socialism Politics open borders immigration Illegal Immigrants Front Page Stories Featured Story entitlements embrace act democrats Bernie Sanders AOC Allow Media Exception Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Watch: Dan Crenshaw Wrecks the Left’s “Income Inequality” Narrative

Westlake Legal Group RepDanCrenshaw-620x317 Watch: Dan Crenshaw Wrecks the Left’s “Income Inequality” Narrative socialism republicans Poverty Politics Middle class jobs Income Inequality Front Page Stories Economy Dan Crenshaw Business American Enterprise Institute Allow Media Exception

Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, left, listens as Office of Management and Budget Acting Director Russell Vought testifies before the House Budget Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, March 12, 2019, during a hearing on the fiscal year 2020 budget. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

During a House Committee on the Budget hearing titled “Solutions to Rising Economic Inequality,” Rep. Dan Crenshaw totaled the idea that income inequality is not only a worsening problem in our society, he destroyed the idea that it’s a problem at all.

Speaking to Romesh Ponnuru of the American Enterprise Institute, Crenshaw started off by pointing out the two different ways we tend to look at financial prosperity, opportunities, and the economy which are usually defined by the left and the right’s views on wealth:

So, on the one hand, you have a deep and persistent focus on inequality – it’s defined as the gap between the rich and the poor – and at first glance, that seems pretty reasonable. But in reality, it means you’re dividing your attention. Half your attention is focused on protesting the wealthy – and these days that seems actually where most of the attention is – and that leaves only a small amount of focus on the real issue, which is people in poverty and their ability to move up the economic ladder. This is the kind of backwards thinking that leads to ideas like Andrew Yang’s, where we raise taxes on the rich only to give it right back to them in the form of universal basic income. It’s hard to imagine a more inefficient and ineffective way to reduce poverty.

As a conservative, our approach is different. Instead of creating resentment against success, we focus on who actually needs our help, which is the people who are having trouble moving up the economic ladder. After all, the fact that there’s a much wealthier person down the street from you is not the problem.

Crenshaw then asked Ponnuru whether or not income inequality is worse than ever, especially given all the welfare benefits and inflation. Ponnuru let everyone in the room know that we’ve actually never looked better economically:

No, it does not appear to be true. The Congressional Budget Office’s reports on the distribution of income suggest that income inequality peaked in 2007, that it has been falling since then, and so, we are, I think to some extent, looking at a problem in the rearview mirror. Of course that could change. Maybe next year’s numbers will be different, but the trends over the last decade or so have been toward shrinking inequality.

Crenshaw later dropped some statistics that back up the claim that Americans are more economically prosperous than the left lets on.

“It also turns out that 56% of Americans will at some point in their lives be in the top 10% of earners. 73% of Americans will be in the top 20% of earners in their lifetime. It’s an amazing statistic,” said Crenshaw.

Crenshaw pointed out that this means that the left is right, and the middle class is shrinking, but not because people are becoming impoverished, it’s because they’re moving up in the income brackets. Therefore, the narrative that income inequality is worse than ever is actually wildly inaccurate.

“This is all good news – doesn’t mean we can’t improve – the point is that the rhetoric about inequality is not only inaccurate, but it’s just flat-out unhelpful to the people we are actually trying to help,” said Crenshaw.

Crenshaw’s point was clear. The left gets too preoccupied with income inequality to the point where they actually set up roadblocks for people to become wealthy, or even come up with inane solutions that only make the problem worse like “universal basic income.”

They are effectively relying on socialism, which is a provenly failed method of economic governance, to fix problems that we’re not even having in the first place. At least not on a scale nearly so bad as the left is claiming.

The Daily Wire even backed up Crenshaw’s point by referring to various sources that showed America has been improving for years when it comes to upward economic mobility:

According to AEI’s Mark Perry, using data from the U.S. Census Bureau, from 1967 to 2017, the percentage of high-income households in the United States increased from 9% to 29.2%. Meanwhile, the percentage of low-income households decreased from 37.2% to 29.5%. The share of middle-income households did shrink (from 53.8% to 41.3%), but many moved upward.

A 2018 publication from Pew Research states: “From 1971 to 2011, the share of adults in the middle class fell by 10 percentage points. But that shift was not all down the economic ladder. Indeed, the increase in the share of adults who are upper income was greater than the increase in the share who are lower income over that period, a sign of economic progress overall.”

While Crenshaw is right, and we can always improve, we need to begin looking at ways to use positive solutions for the economy instead of continuously resorting to solutions to “even the playing field.” The goal isn’t to be even, the goal is to get ahead. Onward and upward.

 

The post Watch: Dan Crenshaw Wrecks the Left’s “Income Inequality” Narrative appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group RepDanCrenshaw-300x153 Watch: Dan Crenshaw Wrecks the Left’s “Income Inequality” Narrative socialism republicans Poverty Politics Middle class jobs Income Inequality Front Page Stories Economy Dan Crenshaw Business American Enterprise Institute Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com