Interesting, If True

Like many a denizen of a MAGA Red Trump State, I’ve been apprehensive about the hordes of Californicators, Noo Yokkers and similar refugees from their respective hellholes pouring into Texas.  It seems, however, that my fears (and that of others of my ilk) of Bluestaters turning our state purple if not Blue may be a little too pessimistic.  Here are some numbers:

The results of the 2020 census are in, and the Democrats are looking very nervous. It turns out that red states are growing and blue states are shrinking. Red States are gaining three congressional seats while blue states are losing three. In fact, California will lose a seat for the first time ever. Legislative and Electoral College power is shifting in favor of the Republicans.
But the propaganda ministry is trying to convince us that this is all good news for the crime family that calls itself the Democrats. The narrative is that liberals are moving from blue states to red states and will eventually turn them blue. But as we’ve learned, if the talking heads are talking, they’re most likely lying. So, let’s examine what they’re saying.

He looks at his (new) home state of Idaho:

Between 2013 and 2019, the percentage of voters who registered as Republican went from 32.4% to 50.8%.  Democrats added 52,300 voters to their rolls, but Republicans added a whopping 200,000 to theirs!  Idahoans are becoming more engaged in politics, and their political proclivity is clearly conservative.

His conclusion?

The reality is that conservative states are becoming more conservative, and they are gaining political clout at the same time.  The people moving about the country aren’t missionaries going forth to spread socialism, any more than those fleeing Cuba in the last century were trying to bring communism to Florida.  They’re escaping the blue states in search of the America of their youth.

To paraphrase the title of this post:  I sure damn hope it’s true, and all this isn’t wishful thinking.

From another American Thinker article, here’s what happened in Texas recently:

Back on Election Day 2020, the Democrats were convinced that it was their year.  After all, didn’t Beto O’Rourke break the ice when he got 48% against Senator Cruz?  On the Friday before the election, a poll had Biden up and Senator John Cornyn in a tie.  As you know, President Trump carried Texas, and Senator Cornyn had a landslide re-election.  Wonder if anyone asked for a refund from that pollster?
It was going to be their year until they counted the votes.  Then suddenly it was good old Red Texas all over again.  The Democrats went 0-10 in congressional districts despite putting lots of resources and TV ads into tying every candidate to President Trump.  In the end, the TV ads tying Democrats to “defund the police” turned out to be more persuasive.

And:

First, the Democrats are finding out that a growing Hispanic population does not necessarily mean more Democrats elected.  President Trump did well in South Texas in large part because Hispanics like a strong economy and do not believe that the border should be open.  After all, most of those Hispanics were born here or respected the law to come in.  They don’t understand why other people cannot do the same thing.
Second, the Democrats have a San Francisco message that does not play well in Texas.  From “abortion on demand” to gun control, the Democrat message is not turning on voters.  The abortion issue (the new heartbeat law) will be a problem for Democrats with Hispanic women.  As a Hispanic lady said to me: “How can you abort a heart beating?”  My guess is that most Hispanic women agree with that.
So what do you do when your voters don’t turn out or your jingle doesn’t get clicks?  You blame the other side for “suppressing” the vote.

I’m not so sure that the Socialists are going to do that well with their precious Black voters, either.  At least, if this guy is at all representative.  (Loud, epic video)

And if you don’t break out in giggles like a ticklish schoolgirl, I don’t wanna talk to you no more.

Explanation

Via Insty, I read this:

Stephen Collinson is well-known among conservatives as the most hackneyed of the hacks at CNN. The CNN Politics Twitter account promoted his latest online essay with the words “President Biden to showcase his moderate radicalism in his big congressional address.”
“Moderate radicalism”? Doesn’t that make about as much sense as “quiet loudness”?

Well, no.  Basically, “moderate radicalism” is when radical ideas and positions (i.e. extreme leftwing, in this case) are talked about and explored, but there are no actions associated with the activity.  Here’s an example:

“Racial equity is going to be our social goal and policy”  —  moderate radicalism.  Then there’s this:

“Racial equity is going to be our social goal and policy, and anyone not supporting it will be sent to reeducation camps”  — that’s pure (immoderate) radicalism.

Just don’t kid yourself that the latter is an impossibility in these here United States.

Never forget that socialists, of whatever variant, are utterly convinced of the rightness and purity of their ideas, and that opponents thereof are evil and should be suppressed, by force if necessary.

Deceit And Coverup

Via Insty comes this latest bastardy, in Eureka MO just west of St. Louis:

Faced with complaints from parents about the indoctrination of children, an official in Rockwood School District, Missouri, instructed teachers to create two sets of curriculum: a false one to share with parents, and then the real set of curriculum, focused on topics like activism and privilege.

I should point out that the foul “educator” who sent out this loathsome message is, like First Lady Jill Biden, a Doctor in Education (EdD).

And the next time someone tells me that homeschooling is wrong for children, I’m going to punch them in the face.

Simple Definition

Reader Mike S. sends me this article:

Even Texas Has Communists
May Day is commie day. A bunch of them gathered in a downtown park in the rain in Austin, Texas.
Not a lot of them, but more than there should be. They got very wet. Some of them tried to take over a public street and got arrested.

…with the question:  “I thought ya’ll had an open season on varmints?”

Simple answer:  Austin isn’t part of Texas.  Once you understand that, everything falls into place.  There’s a reason that it’s called “Moscow-On-The-Colorado-River” or more simply, “Moscow” by actual Texans.

Blindingly Obvious

It’s not often that I feel the need to chide Insty, but he asks a silly question of a Michael Barone article.  Barone states:

When public policies have produced disastrous results and when alternative policies have resulted in immediate, seemingly miraculous improvement, why would anyone want to go back to the earlier policies? Is there any reason to suppose that this time will be different?

We know where such policies led before. Is there any reason this time will be different?

Whereupon Insty states, correctly:

The explanation is that Democrats don’t care about the downsides to these policies, because they feel like the upsides offset them.

But he then falls into the standard trap of the intelligent person by asking:

So what are the upsides that they see?

Silly rabbit.  The upside to any policy proposal or implementation by the Left (Marxists) is that it makes them feel virtuous.  (The only other significant upside is if said policy increases the Left’s grip on power.)  In the face of those two features, downsides pale into insignificance.

I will now quote again the late-and-very-much-missed Acidman:

“I could tolerate leftists if they had any coherent ideas for a better way to do things.  But they don’t.  They cling stubbornly to failed brain-fart dreams that have been attempted over and over again with disastrous results, but they never learn.  When better ideas come along, they simply screech and holler at them, then fling feces like the monkeys they are.”

The reason they do that is because better ideas underline their (many) failures.  And that gives them Teh Sadz.