RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://pjmedia.com/matt-margolis/2025/06/04/not-even-democrat-experts-cant-defend-nationwide-injunctions-n4940456

During a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing on the abuse of nationwide injunctions yesterday, Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) took direct aim at University of Pennsylvania law professor Kate Shaw, wife of MSNBC’s Chris Hayes. What followed wasn’t just a pointed exchange; it was a complete intellectual beatdown. Of course, that’s what always happens with Kennedy. 

Shaw, invited by Democrats as an expert, quickly found herself exposed as a partisan hack, stammering and backpedaling while Kennedy dismantled her credibility piece by piece.

Kennedy confronted Shaw over her inconsistent views on universal injunctions — condemning them when used against Democrats, then suddenly embracing them under President Trump. He called out her hypocrisy with surgical precision, even mocking her sudden fondness for these rulings as if they now “taste like pumpkin pie.” It was a masterclass in exposing the left’s double standards, and Democrats are probably wishing they’d picked a different witness.

But Kennedy wasn’t the only one who made mincemeat out of Shaw.

Sen. Josh Hawley also took his turn, and it was just as brutal. After Shaw began offering a vague, academic defense of her shifting views, Hawley went straight for the jugular.

“So long as it is a Democrat president in office, then we should have no nationwide injunctions,” Hawley said. “If it’s a Republican president, then this is absolutely fine, warranted, and called for.”

https://www.frontpagemag.com/long-tds/

Trump Derangement Syndrome has riled and roiled our politics for a decade, and its only achievement has been sending Donald Trump back to the White House for a second term, and for now marginalizing the Democrats, whose approval ratings are stuck in the mid-twenties. Worse for the Dems, their loss in November was what Barack Obama called a “shellacking,” only more so.

They lost the popular vote and both houses of Congress, as well as significant numbers of the Democrats’ usually reliable constituencies. Voters also repudiated the Dems’ dangerous “woke” policies that failured to protect the border from invasion; fight crime and prosecute criminals; conduct a foreign policy that put America’s national security and interests first; stop culture-war enormities like biological males colonizing women’s sports and locker rooms; reform their tax-spend-borrow-redistribute economic policies; cease and desist from trans propaganda invading our primary schools, and to arrest, charge, try, and punished privileged protestors in Ivy League schools chanting their support for genocide, assaulting Jews, and other antisemitic offenses.

All those patently preposterous policies are inimical, if not fatal, to our Constitutional, Judeo-Christian, and Greco-Roman traditions, as well as abandoning both reason and common sense––and don’t forget the ridiculous lies they told about both Trump’s “fascism,” and Joe Biden’s cognitive decay.

Given this electoral disaster that followed Trump Derangement Syndrome, you’d think that the Dems and Petainist Rhinos would give up and instead focus on the issues angering and worrying voters, as Trump did. But OC TDS sufferers just can’t help themselves. Their social status, inflated amour propre, and lucrative political establishment are too precious. The Rhinos in particular can never forgive Trump for crashing their political guild party and perks.

A particularly incoherent example appeared last week in the Wall Street Journal. Novelist Mark Helprin’s topic is an important one: the long history of bipartisan assaults on our Constitutional order and its foundational principles. And much of Helprin’s comments comprise bipartisan censures, except when he feels compelled to single out Trump and indulge hoary TDS clichés culled from ten years of anti-Trump invective, and festooned with a specious moral equivalence of the two parties.

https://issuesinsights.com/2025/06/05/the-cbo-isnt-partisan-its-just-incompetent/

When the Congressional Budget Office reported that the Republicans’ “big, beautiful” reconciliation bill would boost deficits and throw millions off insurance rolls, it was treated as gospel truth.

The CBO is, after all, a “non-partisan” agency, staffed by just-the-facts-ma’am budget and economic experts who don’t have any axes to grind.

Maybe that’s true. But it’s not partisan bias that is the problem. It’s the CBO’s terrible track record when it comes to predicting the impact of tax and health care policies.

By the CBO’s accounting, the House reconciliation bill would cut tax revenue by $3.7 trillion and cut spending by $1.3 trillion over the next 10 years, resulting in deficits that are $2.4 trillion larger than they’d otherwise be.

To make matters worse, the proposed Medicaid spending cuts would throw nearly 11 million people off insurance rolls, according to the CBO.

That combination just happens to make for the perfect Democratic talking point – “Republicans want to cut taxes for the rich at the expense of the poor!!” – which is why its new forecasts are front-page news. And when the White House suggested that the CBO’s projections were biased, the mainstream press rushed to the CBO’s defense.

But wait a second. These are 10-year projections. They are based on a raft of assumptions about incredibly complicated systems.

So, the important question is, just how good is the Congressional Budget Office at making such predictions?

The answers are easily found, although you’d never know it based on the media’s total lack of interest.