RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.wsj.com/articles/david-malpasss-lesson-for-gop-candidates-world-bank-al-gore-climate-change-gotcha-question-republicans-scientist-11664214207?mod=opinion_lead_pos10

World Bank President David Malpass committed a horrible environmental crime last Tuesday. When asked about his views on climate change, he said, “I’m not a scientist.”

The saga began earlier when Al Gore called Mr. Malpass a “climate denier” and urged President Biden to fire him. It isn’t clear why Mr. Gore was so incensed by Mr. Malpass. Whatever his personal beliefs, the World Bank under Mr. Malpass’s leadership has given a record $31.7 billion in fiscal 2022 to “climate-related” initiatives.

When a reporter prodded Mr. Malpass about the comment hours later, he said it was “very odd” and declined to discuss his climate views with his words about not being a scientist.

This seeming nonevent developed into front-page news at the New York Times. Calls for Mr. Malpass’s resignation began, including from the White House, despite Mr. Malpass subsequently clarifying that he does believe greenhouse gases cause warming. One wonders where this outrage was when Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson declined to define the word “woman” in her confirmation hearings, pleading, “I’m not a biologist.”

Mr. Malpass has refused to resign, and why should he? He spoke the truth. He isn’t a scientist. He’s an economist, hence his appointment to the World Bank by President Trump. What he said about greenhouse gases is also true, and probably the one thing all sides can agree on in the climate debate. It’s also the end of what science clearly says about global warming. Anything else you hear is guesswork, if not fear-mongering.

But the hysterical reaction to Mr. Malpass’s statement is also an important lesson for Republican candidates. They’re likely to get this sort of “gotcha” question on climate and “I am not a scientist” and similar disavowals of expertise, knowledge and opinion aren’t good answers, true as they may be. They instantly make one sound defensive and don’t defuse the situation.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-permitting-bills-poison-pill-joe-manchin-federal-energy-regulatory-commission-senate-11664226775?mod=opinion_lead_pos1

The Senate may vote as early as Tuesday on Joe Manchin’s permitting reform bill, and the West Virginian says Republicans should accept incremental progress rather than nothing. But the main problem isn’t that his changes are too modest, though they are. Some of them would do tangible harm to U.S. energy security and constitutional federalism.

Though it’s received little attention, one section would rewrite how transmission lines are permitted, and not for the better. The 1935 Federal Power Act preserved state authority over transmission-line permits while the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) decides how to allocate costs.

A transmission line that crosses a state affects its utility planning. Yet states may disagree over whose citizens should pay for it. FERC today apportions the costs by economic and reliability benefits. If a line reduces electricity prices in Michigan, its citizens shoulder some of the cost. The Manchin bill would disrupt this delicate federal-state balance.

It gives FERC the power to permit an interstate transmission line if the Energy Secretary says it promotes “national energy policy” or the ability of “intermittent energy to connect to the electric grid.” FERC could override states and approve a line merely because it reduces CO2 emissions or encourages renewable power.

www.swtotd.blogspot.com

Accusations of “threats to democracy,” are being tossed around with the abandon of rolls being thrown at a Drones Club dinner. This has especially been true from the “anointed” left toward their conservative opponents. They see a fascist behind every Republican. “With…democracy itself in the balance…” wrote Sara Burnett and John Hanna of the Associated Press in a recent article on Governor’s races taking on new prominence. CNN’s S.E. (Sarah Elizabeth) Cupp recently wrote of the ascendancy of right wing nationalism and “in some cases fascism,” in which she grouped Donald Trump with Jair Bolsonaro and Viktor Orban, and Liz Truss with Marine Le Pen. Hillary Clinton recently compared a Trump campaign event in Ohio to a Nazi rally, I guess “deplorables” wasn’t strong enough.

Catchy slogans are ubiquitous in politics. Most, unsurprisingly, have a positive slant: “Why not the best?” – Carter in ’76; “Morning in America!” – Reagan in ’80. A few carry an accusatory tone: “It’s the economy, stupid!” – Clinton in ‘92. Others are egotistical: “We are the ones we have been waiting for!” – Obama in 2008. And then there was Trump’s upbeat slogan in 2016, “Make America great again,” which Democrats, using the acronym “MAGA,” have turned into a pejorative in 2022.

Like the Left’s call for net-zero-emissions (which in reality is a regressive tax), the words “Republicans represent a threat to democracy” serve as a red herring, to detract from real issues, like inflation, the economy, immigration, jobs, crime, school choice, and the student mental health crisis. Yet democracy is fragile, so should be watched and handled with care. Our Constitution provides for a government based on the rule of law, with checks and balances cast in three co-equal branches: executive, legislative, and judicial. The purpose – to make it difficult for any individual to wrest control. As early as September 1787, Benjamin Franklin allegedly responded to a query about the new government, that it was “a Republic, if you can keep it.”  In the same year, in “Federalist 26,” Alexander Hamilton addressed the debate between legislative power and individual liberty. In the 1830s, Alexis de Tocqueville saw the threat of tyranny from unchecked demands of individuals and groups. A Civil War was fought in the early 1860s to combat slavery, but also to preserve the union. The American political system is not supposed to be efficient. It is designed for debate and collaboration, aimed at reaching a consensus. While advocacy is expected from political parties, constraints on government are critical for continued individual liberty.

https://amgreatness.com/2022/09/26/cover-up-artists-for-undercover-operatives/

Hot off falsely claiming Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick was bludgeoned to death by “insurrectionists” on January 6, 2021, Representative Mondaire Jones (D-N.Y.) last week identified another faux victim of Trump supporters: Ray Epps.

The infamous red-hatted man seen on video numerous times urging people to “go into the Capitol” remains free despite engaging in conduct far more disruptive than many who face charges for their behavior that day. Jones, however, describes Epps as a “scapegoat” and “bogeyman” of his Republican colleagues; commended Epps for turning himself into the FBI (as did many protesters later charged with crimes); and claimed Epps tried to calm the crowd as the chaos unfolded. 

“There is nothing unusual about a guy who didn’t actually go into the Capitol on January 6 and who did not actually incite violence not being indicted,” Jones said during last week’s House Judiciary Committee meeting to debate a bill demanding that the Department of Justice turn over all records related to Epps. “Mr. Epps and his wife have had their lives threatened. And they’ve had to go into hiding because of this latest conspiracy theory by MAGA Republicans to distract from the existential threat that Donald Trump and the Republican Party pose to our democracy.”

Jones was the latest member of Congress to come to Epps’ rescue, an inexplicable defense of someone who took part in what the Biden regime considers an act of terror comparable to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 that left nearly 3,000 people dead. Despite promises by the January 6 select committee that Epps’ sworn interview would be released to the public, his testimony remains under wraps nearly nine months later. 

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), a member of the committee, called unanswered questions about Epps a “conspiracy theory” and begged Republicans to leave Epps alone. “He’s just trying to survive and he’s on your side!” Raskin yelled during the same House Judiciary committee meeting. Claiming without evidence that Republicans “don’t have many voters left,” Raskin suggested Republicans should stop “vilifying” Epps, an alleged Trump supporter.

So everyone else is an insurrectionist and terrorist but Ray Epps is just a “schmuck?” 

Weird.

https://issuesinsights.com/2022/09/27/bidens-student-loan-bailout-is-just-the-beginning-as-other-debtors-line-up-for-relief/

Nobody has yet come up with a definitive estimate of the full taxpayer cost of President Joe Biden’s student loan bailout, but the numbers are already staggering. And as budget-busting as this one is, it’s only whetted the Left’s appetite for more loan bailouts.

The Congressional Budget Office released a cost estimate for Biden’s loan cancellation executive order. He plans to forgive $10,000 in federal student loans for borrowers who earn less than $125,000 a year. Low-income Pell Grant borrowers are eligible for an additional $10,000 cut. The CBO figures this will cost $400 billion over the next decade. Plus another $20 billion in costs by the extension of Biden’s “emergency” payment suspension through the end of this year – a suspension allegedly in response to COVID, which Biden himself says is no longer a pandemic.

That is close to the estimate that the Wharton school produced in late August. It pegged the 10-year cancellation cost between $469 billion and $519 billion.

But that’s only a small part of the taxpayers’ largesse Biden wants to shower on college students.

As the CBO notes “The estimates presented here do not include any effects of the actions affecting income-driven repayment plans.”

If anything, that will cost taxpayers more than the cancellations. Biden wants to vastly expand this escape valve for student loans. As it stands, students have the option of capping their loan payments at 10% of their income, and any debt left over after 20 years will be forgiven.

https://amgreatness.com/2022/09/25/remembering-hate-speech/

It has been a canard of the Left that “words matter.” We are lectured that “hate speech” leads inevitably to street violence.

So how ironic that the Left defames nearly half of America as dangerous “semi-fascist” extremists, white-raged and privileged, ultra MAGA, and guilty of all sorts of thought crimes from secession to civil insurrection? And what is the result?

Does this constant demonization matter? And what are the bitter fruits of such labors? After all, what did Barack Obama long ago mean by “clingers” or once Hillary Clinton by “deplorables”  and “irredeemables”?

What did Joe Biden imply by “dregs” and “chumps” and “semi-fascists”? Or what did the FBI lovebirds really mean by smelly Walmart goers and “hillbillies”? After a point, did not America get this monotonous message?

And what does Joe Biden really mean when he recycles his academic advisors’ tired tropes of right-wing insurrectionists threatening the republic?

MAGA Republicans do not respect the Constitution. They do not believe in the rule of law. They do not recognize the will of the people. . . . MAGA forces are determined to take this country backwards—backwards to an America where there is no right to choose, no right to privacy, no right to contraception, no right to marry who you love . . . They promote authoritarian leaders, and they fan the flames of political violence that are a threat to our personal rights, to the pursuit of justice, to the rule of law, to the very soul of this country . . . MAGA Republicans have made their choice. They embrace anger. They thrive on chaos. They live not in the light of truth but in the shadow of lies.

When the president fuels the now familiar old narrative by claiming that 75 million who voted for Donald Trump do not live in the “light of truth” but in the “shadow of lies,” and they do not follow “the rule of law,” some questions naturally arise.

First, what evidence does the president adduce to prove that 75 million Morlocks in the shadows are liars and avoid the “light of truth” of the Eloi? By what criteria does he use to judge them “semi-fascists”?

Is his proof the 120 days of violent looting, arson, violence, and death in the summer of 2020—virtually green-lighted by mayors, the media, and, yes, the current vice president? Who “fanned the flames of political violence” and were a “threat to the rule of law”?

Does Biden mean half the country is not respecting the Constitution by its systematic attack on our long-standing constitutional precepts, from the Electoral College and the rights of states to set voting laws? Are the “semi-fascists” trying to pack the Supreme Court? End the filibuster? Bring in two states solely to elect four left-wing senators?

https://americanmind.org/salvo/slow-motion-trans-wreck/

The ghastly fad of genital mutilation will end when the lawsuits begin.

In January of 2022, the San Francisco-based law firm Girard Sharp, which specializes in class action lawsuits, announced its investigation into the adverse effects of puberty blockers on transgender-identified children. These adverse effects can include low bone density, psychological problems, and potentially, per a July 2022 FDA warning label, pseudotumor cerebri, a condition which can cause brain swelling, headaches, nausea, double vision, and permanent loss of vision.

Across the Atlantic, as of August 2022, the U.K.’s Tavistock Centre, a gender transition clinic, is expecting a class-action lawsuit from at least 1,000 families of children who were prescribed puberty blockers. Meanwhile, Sweden’s National Board of Health and Welfare released in February of 2022 new guidelines on transgender medicine, recommending that doctors not prescribe puberty blockers outside of “exceptional cases,” as their use is built on “uncertain science.” The reality that so-called “gender-affirming” medicine is not safe is now becoming too obvious to deny, and its implications could not be clearer: we are entering the long-overdue lawsuit phase of the transgender movement, and it is in lawsuits that this movement ends. 

That we have reached a turning point on the issue of gender ideology is beyond question, especially seeing the increasing numbers of detransitioners—those formerly identified as transgender who have now returned to identifying with their sex—publicly speak out against the medical repercussions of gender ideology and transgender healthcare. Chloe Cole was put on puberty blockers when she was just 13 years old after identifying as transgender when she was 12. At 15 she was given a double mastectomy; at 16, she became filled with regret. “I was failed by the system,” she told the New York Post in June of 2022. “I literally lost organs.” In 2019, there were over 5,000 members on the subreddit r/detrans; today, in 2022, there are over 37,000, nearly an eightfold increase in just three years. 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/democracy-by-and-for-the-elites-biden-wilson-jefferson-democratist-popular-rule-threat-america-tocqueville-11664114737?mod=opinion_lead_pos5

President Biden’s Sept. 1 speech in Philadelphia on “unity” is a poignant example of the confusion surrounding the concept of democracy. Mr. Biden declared that MAGA Republicans threaten “the very foundations of our republic.” The phrase a “threat to American democracy” is so commonplace these days that it hardly carries any meaning—except that it encapsulates the reigning ideology of our time, an ideology so pervasive that it almost goes unnoticed. It is like the air we breathe.

I call it democratism. It is an imaginative and idealistic understanding of popular rule that disdains ordinary people and looks to a cadre of so-called experts to operate the levers of power. Under this ideology, “democracy” and “the people” are rhetorical cover for the will of the elites. Think of social media’s censorship of misinformation in the name of “supporting democracy” and “upholding free expression.” How is it that censorship passes as upholding free expression?

“War is peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength” from Orwell’s “1984” comes to mind, but there is a long tradition in the West of this paradoxical interpretation of democracy. Enlightenment-era thinking, and arguably even Plato, puts forth the thought that an ahistorical ideal of justice ought to act as the primary guide to politics. Jean-Jacques Rousseau applied this idea in “The Social Contract.” The general will, Rousseau says, is what the popular will ought to be, even if it isn’t expressed by actual living people. The general will conveniently requires the translation of a wise legislator for its instantiation.

Many of the most vocal champions of democracy, from Thomas Jefferson to our own day, have been advocates of this Rousseauean inversion, using the word “democracy” as justification for what would otherwise be naked authoritarianism.

https://victorhanson.com/thoughts-on-the-cultural-revolution-in-our-midst-part-one/

We are in the middle of a grand effort to create an equality-of-result, race-based, radical Jacobin society. It is by design entirely antithetical to the Founders’ constitutional republic. And the revolutionary agenda is overseen by an exempt bicoastal oligarchy.

The enforced equality of result will, of course, be mandated by elites not subject to their own demands upon the citizenry: no charter schools for hoi polloi, prep schools for the Guardians; Teslas for the anointed, buses for the masses; walls never work, except to protect Martha’s Vineyard, Napa, and Malibu; high rises are green for you, fourth homes are necessary for them; take light rail and save the planet, fly private to ensure that others do not.

We see these disconnects most shamefully with the outrage from the Left about the bussing of illegal aliens (in small numbers no less) into their elite enclaves.

The Obamas and their Martha Vineyard socialites did not care whether 10,000 swarmed onto the sidewalks of a border Hispanic town, destroying social services, overwhelming their schools, and spiking crime. And they care even less when the Biden administration flew thousands under cover of night into red-state communities. But they do not want anyone loitering on the streets in their own downtowns.

Yet for the Leftist pundit, sending a poor immigrant into Martha’s Vineyard becomes the work of the “Holocaust.” What a sick parallel to compare the systematic murder of six million Jews to an illegal entrant getting a free jet ride to one of the safest, richest, and most picturesque beach towns in the world.

Yet none in the Vineyard, not one, will offer his now empty vacation mansion and expansive grounds to the dispossessed. Instead, for a few hours the blessed virtue signaled their concern—and then bussed out the “welcome” in less than a day.