Party Politics and Arguments about Border Security
The top story on Fox News this morning “Cuellar sounds off on AOC remarks, Biden admin’s disregard for border security ahead of midterms” was written by Kyle Morris and is about a Democratic candidate for the House of Representatives Henry Cuellar speaking out about being pro-life and taking umbrage against AOC’s recent statements that Democrats should reconsider allowing pro-life candidates as members of the party. The article claims that she wants to make the abortion issue a deal breaker for the party line. Cuellar speaks as a moderate member of the Democratic party about being criticized by the progressive left and suggests that they are not progressive, but unreasonably require total agreement.
It goes on to chronicle the main issues that Henry Cuellar sees as dominating his district: border safety and immigration issues. Conservatives argue that the border is a top priority and view immigration as a national security threat. Why? What do they see as the measurable impact? Isn’t there a kind of unspoken double standard when it comes to immigration bias and labor policies? Who is more unrealistic about how the world works? About systems that are beneficial to human happiness and productivity? Fox news is focused on the border.
It is interesting that a conservative news site had a story about a moderate Democrat as their top story. In some ways, it was really using him to target AOC, with whom he was in debate. AOC is a member of “the squad” a far-left group of progressives pushing for change within the government. Why is this the top story? What purpose is it serving? It is highlighting the following important topics: the midterm elections, border security, far-left progressivism, and internal party politics. The left is being portrayed as out of touch with reality, as advocating for lawlessness, as being agents of chaos who are just going to make a big mess for other people.
Henry Cuellar is a moderate Democrat who sides with conservatives on two key issues that are making him a center of attention as we approach the midterm elections this November: pro-life party politics and border security. Henry Cuellar agrees more with the moderate conservatives on these issues than the progressive left, begging the question: is Henry Cuellar a traitor to his party or is the radical left wrongheaded in going after its moderate members?
International Agreement on Putin’s Aggressions
“We’re watching Russia wither before our eyes,” former US defense chief says
CNN’s top story this morning is about former Secretary of Defense James Mattis speaking at a global conference in Seoul about the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and Vladimir Putin’s impossibly stupid mission. He is placing the blame for this catastrophe in the hands of one man: Putin.
Why is CNN focusing on the war in Ukraine? It is obviously a topic of major importance, but it seems like domestic problems are at an all-time importance. The war in Ukraine seems to be somewhat noncontroversial, however. It is being portrayed by and large as the actions of an out of touch dictator whose greatest strength is his paranoia. The top story this morning on CNN has nothing to do with either political party. It is about one of our government officials’ opinions about a global conflict.
Redirecting the Rhetoric
The J6 Show Trial is Lying About Election Fraud
The Federalist has a counter to the January 6th Committee hearings as the top story, today. The tone of this article is polemic to put it mildly. The author accuses the committee of having a “Show Hearing” and says that this is common in authoritarian regimes to punish political opponents. If you can look past the passive aggressive framing of our country as under the hostile rule of an authoritarian regime, it does bring up a good question, which is: what is the purpose of this hearing?
Why is this the focus of anyone’s attention right now? With all the problems that are facing us and the people who need help it seems challenging to find the right sized response to these actions. Are there going to be legal consequences because of this hearing or is it just for show? That is a good question, but the article goes on to suggest that the hidden motive for the “Show Hearing” is to coverup the crimes of a fraudulent election.
This indirection makes little sense, however, considering they are bringing attention to the thing that they are supposed to be hiding. If there was an election fraud, wouldn’t they just let the whole thing go and focus on other things? How does revealing the details of the January 6th event help either side? Isn’t it more about a desperate attempt to prevent Donald Trump from participating further in politics and claiming that the election was rigged also a desperate attempt to get him back into the political game?
They are trying by any means necessary to get something to stick to Teflon Don, but this article shows why it is not as easy as you might think. Mollie Hemingway authored this article, and it falls in line with the premise of her book Rigged. She spends the bulk of the article outlining her case for voter fraud, ignoring everything the Jan 6 trial is about. She essentially redirects attention where she thinks it belongs, on the election, not the response to it.
California Leading: States Role in Progressive Politics
For The Nation, Sasha Abramsky writes in an article entitled “The Biden Administration Needs to Act Like a Blue State” that California has become the leader in social and environmental issues due to the lack of leadership at the federal level. It is an indictment of the failures of the federal government to respond to the Roe v Wade overturn decision written by Justice Alito and by a federal rejection of EPA standards. The tone of this article is angry and somewhat ironic. In this instance the far left and the right have in common their critique of Joe Biden albeit for different reasons. It is somewhat ironic that the left is looking to the states for leadership. California is a cultural superpower leading the left in many important debates about the future of the United States.
State Battles City over Abortion Rights: Missouri Versus Kansas City
The main story on NPR today was about a statement by the Missouri Attorney General declaring their intention to sue cities that aid in abortion, particularly Kansas City. What we see here is a battle between city and state playing out with the Kansas City mayor taking bold action to defend women’s rights to reproductive healthcare.
The City of Kansas City made funds available to its employees to travel out of state in the case of needing an abortion. The State in response to this action is threatening to sue. The City is not backing down and accuses the State of wasting time and money by attacking its own local governments. The blue versus red culture war seems to be heating up on many fronts and in states where the cities and the state governments are not in accord, there are going to be serious conflicts.