Is Jim McGovern the Chinese Communist Party's useful idiot

Based on this article, I think we've found a successor to Eric Swalwell's role as useful idiot to the Chinese Communist Party, aka the CCP. As you might expect, Swalwell's replacement is another Democrat. This time, the Democrat is Jim McGovern of Massachusetts. He' a real peach when it comes to fixing the U.S. military.

On the subject of the military, Rep. McGovern said "I cannot quite understand what they are thinking when they believe it is appropriate to try to balance the budget on the backs of those people, the vulnerable in our country, but we can’t touch tax cuts for billionaires, we can’t touch military spending." Here's a hint, Jim. We need additional military spending because of this enemy that wants to destroy the U.S. over the next 5-25 years. That nation's name is China. We're already lightyears behind China on the military front that it's frightening.

To useful idiots like McGovern, it isn't a priority for us to defend ourselves against China, aka the CCP. Democrats think that the CCP is an adversary. To people like Mike Gallagher, the CCP is closer to being an enemy than just an adversary. Gallagher sees things clearly. He sees that the CCP is shipping in precursers to Mexico to manufacture poison, aka fentanyl. Chairman Gallagher sees that the CCP is waging assymetric warfare in the South China Sea. Here's what Chairman Gallagher said when the Select Committee on China was created:

There's room for a little horse-trading in this:
"You mean to tell me you can’t find one penny of savings in the Pentagon budget, that that is somehow sacrosanct, off limits? We can’t look there? But instead we have to look at programs that help poor people?" McGovern asked. "I mean, you know, I think it tells you all you need to know about who is running the House of Representatives right now," McGovern said.
To Rep. McGovern, here's my proposition. If you agree that able-bodied adults who don't have dependents must attempt to work in exchange for government benefits like SNAP or MediCaid, I'm more than willing to go over the Pentagon's budget with a fine-tooth comb. Hell, I'm willing, to steal a line from Newt Gingrich, to trim the Pentagon down to a triangle. The savings from the Pentagon's budget, though, must go into rebuilding the military. There's a difference between rebuilding the military and rebuilding the Pentagon. China is still a legitimate national security threat.

The Pentagon has too high of a ratio of pseudo-politicians-to-war-winning-warriors. If Democrats had shown interest in such a negotiation, I'd bet Speaker McCarthy would've said yes to that type of negotiation in a heartbeat.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tim Walz's Confederate Flag Fiasco

Image
After Minnesota's Democrats shoved the most controversial progressive legislation down Minnesotans' throats, gossip started popping up about Gov. Walz being interested in running for president . That's died off but Gov. Walz is still making headlines, this time for all the wrong reasons. First, Gov. Walz isn't the brightest bulb in the chandelier. Still, Gov. Walz is fighting against Minnesota's history. This Alpha News article quotes David Hann, the chairman of Minnesota's Republican Party, as saying " The flag the DFL has eliminated was a version of the historic flag our regiments fought under during the Civil War. Minnesota was the first state to offer troops to the Union cause in 1861 , beginning a long tradition of leading the nation in confronting injustice. The DFL quest to erase our history is repugnant and should be rejected." Gov. Walz, though, sees things differently. He's quoted as saying "Minnesota is a diverse state, it continue
Read more

What is Kamala Harris afraid of?

Image
Apparently, Kamala Harris suddenly loves debating. Let me rephrase that. Harris loves debating as long as the moderators are partisan hacks. She wants nothing to do with a debate moderated by Fox's Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum. She's afraid of Bret and Martha because a) they'll either fact-check both her and Trump or they won't fact-check either of them and b) Bret and Martha aren't afraid of asking follow-up questions. To a candidate whose answers are scripted and who isn't quick on her feet, the last thing you want is a follow-up question. Kamala fears follow-up questions like vampires hate wooden stakes, sunlight and holy water. Why has Kamala Harris avoided Fox News like the plague? The moderators/propagandists fact-checked Donald Trump aggressively but didn't fact-check Harris . Why didn't David Muir and Linsey Davis fact-check both candidates equally? Is it because Harris doesn't like fair fights? Perhaps she's just afraid of getting exp
Read more

Why is Joe Biden letting Hamas off the hook?

Image
It isn't disputable whether Joe Biden's administration is letting Hamas off the hook. That issue was settled months ago, when a spineless Joe Biden caved to activists interested in saving Hamas and thwarting the Israelis' attempt to defend themselves. Gerard Baker's op-ed highlights what's at stake for the U.S. if the terrorists are permitted to survive. In his op-ed, Baker wrote "If, under the pressure of internal Democratic politics and global public opinion, the Biden administration forces a 'cease-fire' that leaves our closest ally in the region short of victory over an enemy that seeks to destroy it, sooner or later we shall all pay the price." It's time to revisit George W. Bush's speech to a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, 2001. It's required that we remind ourselves of one of its most important paragraphs. In talking about who committed the atrocities of 9/11, President Bush identified al-Qa'ida as "a collectio
Read more