Connect with us

Democrats

‘Grandstanding idiot’ award goes to Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner

Published

on

This is really beyond me.

Houston is a liberal city, for the most part, as Texas goes at least. It tends to vote heavily Democrat. and in keeping with that, Sylvester Turner is the latest in a long line of Democrats to run the city. (In fact, there are no living Republican former mayors, the last one being Jim McConn in 1982.)

In a disaster, there’s no need for politicking. There’s more than enough need for leading and managing a city of nearly 7 million. Yet Turner’s highest priority is promising “to personally defend undocumented immigrants who may be hesitant to seek help in the aftermath of Harvey over fears of being deported.”

“There is absolutely no reason why anyone should not call. And I and others will be the first ones to stand up with you,” Turner, an attorney, told reporters on Monday. “If someone comes and they require help and then for some reason [someone] tries to deport them, I will represent them myself.”

I’m sorry for Houstonians, because this is truly idiotic. Who in the U.S. government is running around looking at papers of people needing rescue? Who would even think this way?

It’s not like Turner has to worry about an election–he just took office. There’s no Republicans running around threatening to deport illegals in the midst of the flood. His statement is nothing but grandstanding.

I could even stomach grandstanding if Turner hadn’t been so ineffective and political about his city’s preparation and response to the storm.

Read streiff’s RedState report on exactly how Turner reacted to sound advice from the state’s governor, Greg Abbott. Abbott, a Republican, didn’t grandstand. He went with the scientific and expert evidence and advised people in certain parts of Houston to leave before the storm.

But Turner didn’t want a “Rita” evacuation mess on his hands, so he told people to stay put.

To quote the salient part of streiff’s piece:

Let me make an observation here. Usually local official know Jack Sh** about anything during a major disaster. Local governments aren’t equipped or staffed or trained to deal with a cataclysmic event like a Cat 4 Hurricane. Local officials don’t have access to the same information as available to state and federal emergency management organizations. By and large the caliber of people that you find congregating to the higher levels of emergency management in local governments isn’t that which you’d want to make calls about risk involving potential loss of life. There is documentary evidence to prove this guy’s f***ing incompetence and hubris on any television screen.

Only now, days after landfall, with the predicted massive flooding and follow-on cresting of reservoirs happening, is Turner reacting.

But don’t worry, politics is always at the top of Turner’s list.

Turner, a Democrat, addressed the city’s immigrant community in a press conference on Monday morning, urging residents to put Texas’ Senate Bill 4 — which outlaws sanctuary cities — “on the shelf“ as emergency workers focus on rescue and recovery missions in the flood-torn city.

The whole “false rumor” of illegal aliens being checked was concocted as a political stunt.

This is the mayor who has to rely on the New York Times and CNN to defend his non-evacuation decision. He is very, very fortunate that citizens from all over Texas and Louisiana responded to personally rescue those who were trapped. He’s very, very fortunate that the storm stalled in the Gulf of Mexico and didn’t turn north or east faster so that this army (and Cajun Navy) of citizen heroes could swing into action.

Turner dodged a bullet by nature’s fickle fate or God’s grace. The death toll could have been much, much higher due to his negligence and rejection of sound advice.

But don’t worry, Senate Bill 4 is on the back burner and illegal aliens can get free legal advice from the award-winning “grandstanding idiot” of Texas.

[Note: To be fair, Turner was asked by a reporter about the “rumor.” But the press is ever-liberal and ever-ready to supply an opportunity. Contrast this with how they treat Ted Cruz.]

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Democrats

Stacey Abrams doesn’t concede in her non-concession speech

Published

on

Stacey Abrams doesn't concede in her non-concession speech

Republican Brian Kemp will be the next governor of Georgia. He defeated Democrat Stacey Abrams by receiving 50.2% of the vote, negating the possibility of a runoff election.

Abrams isn’t happy about it. She said today she’s unwilling to concede but acknowledged that Kemp would be certified as the winner. In a strange political doublespeak way, she fought back against a system that prevented her from rightfully winning.

Or something.

Bottom line: She lost. She, President Obama, and Oprah Winfrey failed to get her enough voters to win the election. Whether she actually concedes or not is irrelevant.

Continue Reading

Democrats

Kamala Harris pushes fraudulent ‘petition’ to build her 2020 fundraising spam list

Published

on

The worlds of marketing and political campaigning have many things in common. Their intention is to persuade people. They’re both selling something. They employ tested colors, designs, and buzzwords to get people excited. One of the keys to their success is something called “list-building.”

With ballots from the 2018 elections still being counted, Senator Kamala Harris is wasting no time building her 2020 list. To do it, she’s employing a deceptive technique, promoting an online “petition” that’s really nothing more than a way to get people to willingly give her campaign their contact information. These people will be targeted with campaign fundraisers later.

No official announcement has been made about her 2020 presidential run, but it’s hard to believe she’s not running after purchasing 1,100 Facebook ads to promote these “petitions.” A Facebook ad doesn’t have a set cost, but we can assume big money is being put into these list-building ads because of the sheer volume. To put it into perspective, Beto O’Rourke spent around $5 million on Facebook ads for his Senate campaign. Presidential campaigns can easily spend 25 times as much as an expensive Senate campaign.

Unlike a valid petition people often sign to get a candidate or proposition on a ballot, these list-building petitions don’t actually do anything. People are told they’re demanding this action or that, but in the end they’re just giving over information. Some go so far as to ask for everything, including name, address, phone numbers, email, and occasionally even income. These lists grow much more slowly because of the depth of the information requested.

A more common technique is to ask for minimal data to encourage people to fill it out. At the end of the day, all a campaign really needs is an email address they can later use in fundraising campaigns. Here’s an example of an ad Senator Harris’ campaign recently put out:

Kamala Harris Petition

The meta data reveals the page was titled, “Acquisition: 180822 Mueller FB.”

“FB” means it was a Facebook campaign. “Mueller” was the topic. “180822” is the tracking number for A/B testing. “Acquisition” is the goal. Anyone who signed this “petition” has just had their contact information acquired. Mission accomplished. They will soon be receiving emails asking them to donate to the Kamala Harris 2020 presidential election fund.

As for the results of the “petition,” they will go nowhere. There won’t be a Congressional action that is enabled by the thousands of people who “signed” it. You won’t see Kamala Harris standing in front of the White House reading off the names of the people who participated in the “petition.” She couldn’t do that even if she wanted to because the “petition” only asks for a first name. Are there really people out there who believe signing a petition only requires a first name?

Senator Harris is promoting fraudulent petitions with the sole purpose if building her 2020 fundraising spam list. Anyone who “signs” it believing they’re demanding protection for Robert Mueller is a sucker. That’s exactly who she wants to target.

Continue Reading

Democrats

Nancy Pelosi blames misogyny for Democrats opposing her as Speaker

Published

on

Nancy Pelosi blames misogyny for Democrats opposing her as Speaker

Nancy Pelosi believes she’ll be Speaker of the House again. Her caucus controls the vote. She was Speaker before. Most Democrats support her. Most.

A vocal group of 17 (and counting) Democrats in Congress have declared they will not support her for Speaker of the House. Though no official challenge has stepped up, there are speculations that a younger, more progressive Democrat will emerge. Given the state of the party and the shift to the left, it’s very possible her path to the gavel will be bumpy.

Predictably, Pelosi is blaming her challenges on misogyny. It’s the patriarchy WITHIN the Democratic Party that is allegedly keeping her down. Because, well, of course that’s the reason. It’s always the reason.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement Donate to NOQ Report

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report