When I was challenged to name a woman I would feel comfortable seeing elected President and stated that there were none, two of my less-than-completely deranged progressive female associates pronounced their approval of Amy Klobuchar, proving my point. During the 2019 and 2020 candidates debates and in many settings before and since, Klobuchar had proven herself a pandering, dissembling light-weight, and her statement today on MSNBC was just another example. Behold:
“We just did something about climate change for the first time in decades. That’s why we have to win this as that hurricane bears down on Florida. We have to win in the midterms.”
How stupid does she think the public is (to be fair, MSNBC viewers are special), or, in the alternative, how stupid is she? The Democrats have done nothing “about” climate change, or taken a single step that will affect the global climate one iota, just spent a large amount of money as climate change virtue-signalling. In focusing on hurricanes Klobuchar has chosen a perfect example of the weakness of climate science: we have been told for many years that man-made climate change would lead to a dramatic increase in deadly hurricanes, and it simply hasn’t happened. Why? Because science isn’t as good at predicting the long-term results of global warming as climate hysterics, hucksters and patsies claim.
Klobuchar’s statement is signature significance for someone who shouldn’t be allowed to advance beyond the Senate.
15 thoughts on “Confirmed: Sen. Klobuchar Is An Untrustworthy Hack”
Did anyone tell her there were no named storms in August. A first in over 50 years.
I am waiting for one of these gaslighters say that because the nights are getting longer it is evidence of an impending existential climate catastrophe.
I usually am just an avid lurker here, but on around July 22 I heard a CNN commentator make this astonishing statement while reporting…..so astonishing that I recorded it on Google Keep lest I forget:
Re: St. Louis flooding July 28 2022
“latest disaster due to climate crisis”
Rather than trying to spell: res ipsa loquitur, I will just say Wow.
Actually, the nights are getting shorter.
Well that would actually depend on WHERE you are. Here in the Northern Hemisphere they are indeed getting longer until roughly Dec 21-22.
Maybe I’m recalling a different discussion, but to me, the issue about female presidential candidates a short while back was the assertion that no woman is qualified and competent to be president.
I saw a tinge of misogyny, and I expected that for any woman proposed as a potential candidate, some disqualifying flaw could and would be cited.
But, why just make that assertion about women? Isn’t it likewise true that for any male proposed as a presidential candidate, a disqualifying flaw could be found?
Here, Klobuchar is being dishonest with the public, and that is cited as signature significance and proof she is not qualified and competent to be president.
Well, who among all of the male presidents and contenders, past and present, does not have a flaw of signature significance? Unless such a man can be put forward and defended, the assertion that only women are unqualified and incompetent must be seen as sexist and a bit misogynistic.
I don’t believe that was exactly the assertion. It wasn’t that a woman could not be qualified or competent to be president. It was more that the major parties have yet to put forward a woman who is qualified and competent. It was more of a lament that no one had yet to come forth.
Look at who has been nominated to date — Geraldine Ferraro, Sarah Palin, Hilary Clinton, Kamala Harris (am I missing someone? Please let me know). Who else has come close recently or been thrust at us? Klobuchar, Elizabeth Warren, AOC….really? Tulsi Gabbard is probably the best I’ve heard from that side of the aisle. I actually think there are some Republicans who are a lot better, including Nikki Haley and Kristi Noem. Personally I think Condoleeza Rice would have been a much better choice than either McCain or Romney, but she suffered from a fatal lack of desire.
There were some other names mentioned that I don’t recall. The point of the discussion was not that a women couldn’t aspire to be president, it was that the actual examples we had to vote for didn’t pass muster.
Your point is well taken; the assertion did state ‘at this time’ or words to that effect. But, my point then was and still is that the same could be said of all the male candidates. To say it only of women just doesn’t sit right with me.
I think I made that point at the time: Jack would likely (and probably did) find all of the male candidates unfit, as well.
It might be easier to simply put Jack on the spot to name the last candidate who, as a candidate, seemed fit for the role. Or even just the nominees?
As there is absolutely no female candidates who would make a good President, I would like to see a list of males who would make a good President. Or aren’t there any?
Klobuchar also implied that voting for anyone who has a (D) will stop these global climatic events. Voting for any with an (R) will increase the frequency of these global climatic events. meanwhile, there is a historic typhoon over the Philippines where there is neither (D)’s or (R)’s. As Desi Arnez said o Lucy
(thank you Jack for directing us to that great piece of comedy in your previous post, She and others have some “splaining to do.”
Amy exposed herself when she condescended to Brett Kavanaugh in his Senate hearing, treating him as if he were an alcoholic in denial. She’s despicable and absolutely beneath contempt. But she is Minnesota nice and well above average.
Senator Harris from California was at least as condescending towards Brett Kavanaugh. I didn’t take roll call, but Klobuchar was not alone in implying that Kavanaugh was a blackout drunk. I prefer Minnesota Nice to laughing heartily at things that aren’t funny at times that are ill-suited to levity.
Does Tulsi still consider herself a Democrat? I have a recollection of Gabbard guest-hosting Tucker Carlson’s show.
Isn’t it illegal for a Hawaiian to be a Republican?
I have something to send you, Jack, and I don’t know if it’s pertinent to the discussion. Is there a separate email address that I can use?
Always: ProEthics, 2707 Westminster Place, Alexandria, VA, 22305!