RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://issuesinsights.com/2022/03/21/ii-tipp-poll-are-you-better-off-today-than-a-year-ago-by-4-to-1-americans-say-no/

Are you better off today under President Joe Biden than you were a year earlier? And are you financially prepared for a downturn in the economy or a job loss? The March I&I/TIPP Poll suggests most Americans would answer “no” to both of those questions.

The poll asked: “Generally speaking, is your family better off today than it was one year ago, worse off than it was one year ago, or about the same as it was a year ago?”

Fewer than one in five (20%) said they were “better off.” while more than twice that number — 42% — said they were “worse off.” Another 36% said they were “about the same.”

https://issuesinsights.com/2022/03/22/how-is-boofed-pronounced-and-other-vital-questions-ketanji-brown-jackson-must-answer/

By all evidence, Ketanji Brown Jackson’s nomination to the Supreme Court will be a shoo-in. Not because she’s supremely qualified, but because her nomination — as the press reminds us in every headline — is “historic.” Yes, there are and have been black justices and women justices, but never, ever a black woman justice! Who would dare stand in the way of history?

President Joe Biden assumed that by checking all the correct woke boxes his candidate could escape the sort of vicious scrutiny, rumormongering, character-destroying attacks visited upon Republican nominees – apparently forgetting that Democratic nominees always get a free pass from the media, and from genteel Republicans.

Nevertheless, if Democrats want to at least give the appearance of fairness, they should ask Jackson the same questions they asked the last two Republican nominees to the court.

We’re not talking about those silly questions that might reveal her judicial philosophy. Although there is plenty there worthy of careful scrutiny. Joel Pollak over at Breitbart News put together a handy list of such questions, ranging from: Do you believe current penalties for sex offenders are too harsh? What do you think of Biden’s decision only to select a black woman as a nominee? Do you support critical race theory? Do you agree with the “1619 Project” that America was founded on slavery? Do you support court-packing? Can we have rule of law with an open border?

Democrats have already labeled such questions as racist.

https://www.city-journal.org/gas-prices-higher-in-democratic-leaning-states

The average price of one gallon of regular gasoline in the United States rose by a dollar, to $3.31, during Joe Biden’s first year in the White House. Now, supercharged by war in Ukraine, the price has soared to $4.27 per gallon. That average, though, is misleading. The actual price of gas at the pump varies widely by state, with nearly a $2-per-gallon difference between the costliest and the least expensive states. While some of those differences have to do with geographic factors that affect distribution costs, state policies—including taxes and regulations—also play a significant role in the vastly different burden consumers face around the country.

The highest gas prices are found disproportionately in high-tax, heavily regulated Democratic states, while the lowest gas prices show up in so-called red or purple states. California leads the way at a whopping $5.78 per gallon, followed by Nevada, Washington, Oregon, Arizona, Illinois, Connecticut, and New York among the lower 48 states (Hawaiian and Alaskan geography make any comparisons with the rest of the country difficult). At the bottom sits Kansas, at $3.81 per gallon, followed by Missouri, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, and Iowa.

The price of a barrel of oil accounts for about 56 percent of the cost of this gas. Taxes on average compose about 15 percent of the price, and distribution and marketing costs amount to the rest. State gas taxes are an obvious culprit, but extraordinary fuel standards beyond the national level force up prices, too—as do regulatory constraints on building pipelines and refineries, which inflate distribution costs.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/huntergate-putin-danger-propaganda-liz-peek

What do liberal elites in our country have in common with Vladimir Putin?

People like Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, Alphabet chief Sundar Pichai and New York TimesExecutive Editor Dean Baquet know that knowledge is power. They understand that managing the flow of information, silencing critics and providing false narratives is every bit as effective in taking control as armored columns and hypersonic missiles.

This column was meant to be about Vladimir Putin’s hideously effective misinformation campaign, and how we should combat it. He has destroyed Russia’s independent press, sabotaged internet access and consequently hidden the truth about his unprovoked attack on Ukraine from the Russian people.

Hunter Biden’s laptop got in the way.

It is impossible to rail about Putin’s egregious lies to his countrymen without acknowledging that in our own purportedly free nation, we have witnessed the very same tactic. This is not hyperbole, as Joe Biden might say; this is true.

https://amgreatness.com/2022/03/20/conspirators-in-their-own-words/

For the last five years, the Left—defined as the fusion of the mainstream media, Silicon Valley, the radical new Democratic Party, and the vestigial Hillary Clinton machine—has crafted all sorts of conspiracies to destroy their perceived conservative enemies. 

Their method has focused on one major projection: alleging conspiracy on the part of others, which is a kind of confirmation of their own conspiracies to destroy their opponents in general, and Donald Trump in particular. 

Now they have been caught admitting to such nefariousness. Apparently, they still are exuberant about their slick shamelessness and simply can’t keep quiet. Or they believe radically changed conditions, such as the implosion of the Biden Administration, prompt necessary admissions. 

Hillary’s the One 

For nearly five years anyone who objected that the partisan Christopher Steele and his “dossier” were fraudulent, that Glenn Simpson’s Fusion GPS was a paid opposition hit team, and their joint birthing of “Trump-Russia collusion” was a myth, was smeared as a denialist or conspiracist. 

But examine what has transpired since 2016. Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s 22-month investigation found nothing. Mueller in congressional testimony was either addled or disingenuous. He even claimed he knew nothing of Fusion GPS or the dossier, the twin catalysts for his own investigation. 

The more Mueller meandered, the more it was clear that his henchman, partisan lawyer Andrew Weissmann, had hijacked the left-wing “All-Star” and “Dream Team” of lawyers and was running the charade. The more the Left boasted of the legal eagles set to tear apart Trump, the more glaring their failure to find any such evidence supporting their conspiracies. 

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-right-reason-to-oppose-judge-jackson/

As I’ve separately contended, some of the arguments being made against President Biden’s nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson are unworthy. Nevertheless, though it seems certain that she will be confirmed, her progressive judicial philosophy is a meritorious basis to vote against her, for the reasons outlined by Ed Whelan last week.

I could not disagree more with the assertion of a moderate Republican group of Judge Jackson’s supporters that “the question for the Senators is not whether this is a nomination that they would make, but whether the President has put forward a nominee well qualified to serve on the Supreme Court.” (See the letter in Ed’s post, linked above.)

That is more analogous to the question for senators with regard to nominees the president puts forward for executive-branch positions. While such positions involve critical duties, the executive appointee’s task is to carry out the elected president’s policies; thus, the principal confirmation issue is whether the nominee has the intellect, competence, and character that befits the position of trust, not whether we agree with the nominee’s politics or would ourselves have chosen the nominee.

Lifetime judicial appointments are very different, and those to Supreme Court seats are obviously significant — I hesitate to say “the most” significant because I believe a bad district judge, who is a court of one, can do more damage than a bad Supreme Court justice, who deals with many fewer cases and whose meanderings will rarely be decisive.