Skip to main content

Blumenthal And Harris, No Enemies To Their Left


Blumenthal and Harris

Kamala Harris, Joe Biden’s choice as Vice President, is no moderate. Her voting record in the US Senate places her one notch below Democrat Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, who on her best day manages to sound like an inflamed librarian scolding a student for returning late a borrowed book.

Harris’ social policies place her on a par with U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal. Both have endorsed Alexandra Ocassio Cortez’s de-energizing Green New Deal. At times, both have favored Medicare for all, a mask for universal health care, and the consequent destruction of Connecticut’s still vibrant insurance industry. Asked during the Democrat primary debate who favored abolishing private health care to assure a government run plan, Harris raised her hand in assent, along with socialist Sanders, but later backtracked and in July rolled out a plan that largely left private insurance intact. Both favor the repeal of tax cuts that juiced the national economy and made it possible for President Donald Trump to boast, before the advent of Coronavirus, that Republican tax cuts had, in President John Kennedy’s words, “lifted all the boats,” including the economic aspirations of Blacks and Hispanics.  Both Blumenthal and Harris regard favorably a backdoor religious litmus test for Catholic judicial nominees.

Of course there are some differences. Blumenthal, for two decades Connecticut’s Attorney General, is by marriage a privileged white millionaire, and Harris is a privileged black female former California Attorney General.

Both are radical pro-abortionists. Harris, according to a recent piece in a conservative Washington DC  publication, thinks the federal government should treat pro-lifers as though they were segregationists and, though silent on ANTIFA, she has called the Knights of Columbus “extremists.”

Blumenthal, the Connecticut Attorney General who for two decades lavished restrictions on businesses in his state, believes there should be no restrictions at all on abortion, however reasonable, which demonstrates how far he is out of sync with a clear majority of the US public, 70 percent of whom would allow some restrictions.  Members of the Knights of Columbus account for only a miniscule portion of the 70 percent cited.

It was only a few years ago, during the Clinton administration, that a Democrat president proclaimed the end of welfare as we know it and assured the nation that abortion, if permitted and reasonably restrained by enlightened legislators, would be safe – not, alas, for the unborn – legal and rare. The misnamed Planned Parenthood Empire is financed in great part through abortions. The butchering of fetuses and the selling of baby parts to doctors would have been considered improbably extreme during the Clinton administration.

One Washington DC publication reminds us in an editorial, “Kamala Harris, the cancel culture cop”, that Attorney General Harris “prosecuted and persecuted pro-life undercover filmmaker David Daleiden for his work exposing Planned Parenthood’s trade in fetal remains. She seized his recordings while pursuing the abortion lobby’s endorsement for Senate. She was also the first prosecutor ever to use California’s eavesdropping laws against a journalist, all after secret consultations with the abortion provider.”

On the whole, Harris has compiled a sterling record as a pro-abortion extremist. Blumenthal must be jealous.

There are, no doubt, some Democrats who recall with affection a time when their party was properly described as “liberal.” That day has passed. The Democrat Party of Jack Kennedy has now been supplanted by progressive leftists listing unapologetically towards socialism. It is as if Jonah had swallowed the whale. The present Democrat convention platform indicates the outsized influence the far left has had on what used to be called “the vital center” in American politics.

The seamless progressive-socialist robe is on full display in a Democrat Party platform that Democrats are willing to discuss only in general terms. Socialist Bernie Sanders’ campaign director, Jeff Weaver, tells us that he has no problem with the present platform. Weaver was “deeply involved in the intraparty negotiations both this time and four years ago” according to a story in the LA Times. The way Biden's camp “reached out and worked” to forge agreements with Sanders on much of the party platform, Weaver said, leaves him with “no concerns.” Among leaders within the new model Democrat Party, there are no longer any enemies to the left. The progressive-socialist camel is resting comfortably within the Democrat Party tent, and the further left the party of Jack Kennedy has moved, the more illiberal it has become.

That is why, despite a recent Supreme Court ruling that relieves The Little Sisters of Poor of the necessity of violating Catholic precepts and a Christian conscience by distributing birth control pills to its staff, Democrats, almost to a man, are insisting that the court will, under a progressive-socialist regime reverse this opinion, even if, given a majority in both houses of Congress, they must pack the court to achieve their aim. That effort, they hope, will be led by their new “Catholic” President Biden who, only recently, pledged to repeal the Hatch Act, which prevents the federal funding of abortion and pinches the profits of Planned Parenthood.

There are political roads taken that will not admit of retreat; such is the turn from liberalism to progressivism to socialism. Three quarters of a century after Friedrich Hayek published The Road to Serfdom, the socialist road still leads to serfdom.

To take the ideological temperature of the reformed Democrat Party, one only has to ask politicians such as Blumenthal and Harris to produce current denunciations of ANTIFA, a violent Marxist organization that has hijacked protestors marching under the banner of “Black Lives Matter.” Counting the media releases from Blumenthal’s office denouncing ANTIFA, how many would turn up?

The party of Jack Kennedy and Bill Clinton has become a viper’s nest that provides safe spaces for odious, undemocratic and violent brown-shirts and bullies.

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

Powell, the JI, And Economic literacy

Powell, Pesci Substack The Journal Inquirer (JI), one of the last independent newspapers in Connecticut, is now a part of the Hearst Media chain. Hearst has been growing by leaps and bounds in the state during the last decade. At the same time, many newspapers in Connecticut have shrunk in size, the result, some people seem to think, of ad revenue smaller newspapers have lost to internet sites and a declining newspaper reading public. Surviving papers are now seeking to recover the lost revenue by erecting “pay walls.” Like most besieged businesses, newspapers also are attempting to recoup lost revenue through staff reductions, reductions in the size of the product – both candy bars and newspapers are much smaller than they had been in the past – and sell-offs to larger chains that operate according to the social Darwinian principles of monopolistic “red in tooth and claw” giant corporations. The first principle of the successful mega-firm is: Buy out your predator before he swallows

Down The Rabbit Hole, A Book Review

Down the Rabbit Hole How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime by Brent McCall & Michael Liebowitz Available at Amazon Price: $12.95/softcover, 337 pages   “ Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime ,” a penological eye-opener, is written by two Connecticut prisoners, Brent McCall and Michael Liebowitz. Their book is an analytical work, not merely a page-turner prison drama, and it provides serious answers to the question: Why is reoffending a more likely outcome than rehabilitation in the wake of a prison sentence? The multiple answers to this central question are not at all obvious. Before picking up the book, the reader would be well advised to shed his preconceptions and also slough off the highly misleading claims of prison officials concerning the efficacy of programs developed by dusty old experts who have never had an honest discussion with a real convict. Some of the experts are more convincing cons than the cons, p