Barack Obama’s Tiresome Condescension Toward Black Men

...The erosion of support among Black men for Democrats, including Harris, is a real trend. According to polling from NBC News, Black men have voted for the Democratic presidential nominee at lower rates in every general election since 2008, when it peaked at 95 percent. (It fell to 87 percent in 2012, 82 percent in 2016, and 80 percent in 2020.) A recent New York Times–Siena College poll found that only 79 percent of Black voters overall intend to back Harris in November, while Black support for Donald Trump is tracking higher than ever at 14 percent. Maybe most remarkably, a September poll by the NAACP found that 26 percent of Black men under 50 years old said they would support Trump.

Obama’s broadside, which quickly went viral, was further proof of his status as the party’s resident scold. The glaring exception to his 2012 declaration that he was “not the president of Black America” has always been Black men, over whom he is assumed to have special providence. This perception has allowed Obama to exploit stereotypes, blaming underwhelming Democratic performances at the ballot box on “Cousin Pookie,” a mythical layabout who would rather watch football than perform his civic duties. He has also chided Morehouse College graduates — during their 2013 commencement ceremony, of all occasions — for a supposed Black tendency to make “excuses.” What all his lecturing has not occasioned is an honest reckoning among Democratic elites with why some Black men might be souring on them to begin with.

...

Las Vegas Review-Journal endorses Donald Trump for president

The hurricane of history charts a chaotic course. The gales of recent months have left political norms strewn across the landscape. The turbulence has rattled both major parties and left many voters unsettled and apprehensive.

Former President Donald Trump has run his campaign under the specter of various criminal charges, some of which were certainly prosecutorial overreach brought to cripple him politically. He is appealing a guilty verdict in a New York case involving real estate valuations and has a reasonable chance of prevailing. Mr. Trump has also been the victim of two unsuccessful assassination attempts in the past 14 weeks, one at a campaign rally in Pennsylvania, the other at a Florida golf course.

In the meantime, Democrats were thrown into turmoil — at least temporarily — after President Joe Biden’s dismal and sad debate performance in late June. The nationally televised fiasco provided obvious evidence of Mr. Biden’s decline, making it impossible for his party to continue to feed Americans the unadulterated nonsense that the enfeebled president remained “sharp as a tack.” Within a month, Democratic power brokers maneuvered to defenestrate Mr. Biden and anoint his vice president, Kamala Harris, as their new nominee.

Thus began one of the more cynical and ambitious rehabilitation efforts in the history of modern politics. A vapid, unpopular vice president in an unpopular administration who flamed out spectacularly in her 2020 run for the Oval Office was within weeks recast as a purveyor of “joy” and an amalgamation of Abraham Lincoln, George Washington and Mahatma Gandhi.

Ms. Harris next began disavowing a host of her previous policy positions. A San Francisco leftist who sympathized with the defund-police movement, raised the prospect of dismantling Immigration and Customs Enforcement and supported sanctuary cities now passes herself off as a tough-on-crime border hawk. A progressive once named the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate and who favored abolishing the filibuster, packing the Supreme Court and limiting political speech now shape-shifts into a defender of “democracy” and the nation’s institutions. A key component in an administration that openly sought to put fossil fuel providers out of business now claims to be a proponent of fracking. A candidate who cast the tie-breaking vote for the spending package that lit the fuse to rampant inflation, devastating American families, now claims to represent the interests of the middle class. A politician who says she would have done nothing differently over the past four years wants voters to believe she is an agent for “change.”

To advance the swindle, Ms. Harris carefully avoids any unscripted interviews unless a friendly questioner tosses the softballs slowly enough for her to make contact.

We are under no illusions about Donald Trump. His behavior in response to the Jan. 6 mayhem was disappointing and indefensible — although the constitutional guardrails held firm. His penchant for dwelling on past grievances isn’t helpful. His insistence that every election he loses is “rigged” is petulant and fatuous.

But Mr. Trump has a four-year record as president for undecided voters to consider. Let’s note that the Earth didn’t stop spinning while he occupied the Oval Office. Instead, his presidency was marked by relative global stability and a strong American economy. Inflation was an afterthought. With the help of Congress, he lowered federal income taxes for the vast majority of Americans and made inroads at attacking the thicket of federal red tape that cost taxpayers billions every year while dragging down economic growth. Mr. Trump appointed scores of federal judges who respect the Constitution’s limits on government power. He tightened our southern border, pressured our allies to bear more of the financial burden for their own defense and proved a staunch ally to Israel. When the pandemic hit, he paved the way for the rapid development of vaccines.

Contrast that with the four years of the Harris-Biden administration. International chaos abounds as White House efforts at appeasement diplomacy embolden our enemies across the globe. Two major wars rage. The debt has ballooned to $35 trillion. Inflation hit 9 percent, the highest rate in four decades, in large part because Democrats can’t temper their insatiable desire to spend other people’s money. Prices for staples remain stubbornly elevated. Housing costs have soared, including in Las Vegas. High interest rates make it more difficult for new homebuyers and burden families carrying credit card and other debt. If this weren’t destructive enough, Ms. Harris and Mr. Biden turned a blind eye to the border for three years, releasing millions of illegal crossers into the country and causing mayors in blue cities to cry uncle.

Yet Ms. Harris assures Americans she wouldn’t have changed a thing.

Indeed, a Harris presidency, depending upon who controls Congress, will set course for a predictable trajectory. Two-trillion-dollar annual deficits, higher taxes, burdensome regulations, additional subsidies for a variety of favored special-interests, student loan forgiveness, dithering on the border and the continued march toward cementing a culture of dependency that celebrates a reliance on Washington from cradle to grave while undermining personal responsibility and individual agency.

In contrast, Mr. Trump’s instincts on the economy — tariffs aside — reflect the importance of fostering the conditions in which Americans can prosper and improve their fortunes through their own individual initiative. He has a track record of working to secure the border. His position on abortion — that he would veto a federal ban and that the matter should be left up to the states — is more mainstream than Ms. Harris’ belief that the procedure should be legal till the moment of birth. We believe Mr. Trump is also better prepared to handle the myriad foreign policy challenges that will confront the next president.
Many voters are dissatisfied with the choice before them in November. They have a point. But when we weigh the policy results of Mr. Trump’s four years in office against those of Ms. Harris and Mr. Biden, the contrast becomes difficult to ignore. Donald Trump is the better choice.

Top Oregon official put on leave for allegedly prioritizing 'qualified' job candidates over 'gender identity'

The employee faulted her boss for looking 'beyond gender identity' to find the candidate 'most qualified for the job'

A diversity, equity and inclusion expert had her former boss placed on administrative leave for reportedly prioritizing merit over personal identity when hiring new employees, according to a report.

Megan Donecker, who formerly served as the Oregon Department of Forestry’s DEI strategy officer, complained about the agency's management, criticizing her boss Mike Shaw for looking "beyond gender and identity in hiring, seeking only candidates most qualified for the job," OregonLive reported.

Shaw served as the agency's second-in-command under State Forester Cal Mukumoto until he was placed on administrative leave on Aug. 6 after Donecker filed a formal complaint against him, the Daily Mail reported.