Until now, the mediaâ€™s questioning of Democratic Party presidential hopefuls has often been expectedly obsequious and misleading. Questions typically come in two forms: 1) â€œJust how evilÂ isÂ Donald Trump?â€ or 2) A policy question larded with euphemisms and framed in a way that makes it little more than an in-kind contribution to the campaign.
These are just some of the questions they should be asking instead.
Many Democrats in states like New York and Virginia support laws that strip virtually any obstacle to obtaining an abortion up until the moment of birth. According toÂ studies, the majority of women who seek these abortions do not do so for reasons of fetal anomaly or life endangerment. Do you believe that a mother should have the right to obtain an abortion of a viable baby up until theÂ moment of birthÂ if the mother claims emotional stress?
Do you believe babies who survive botched abortion procedures should be, through the purposeful neglect of doctors, allowed to die if that is the motherâ€™s wish? Do you believe doctors who allow infants to die should be afforded special protections by the law?
Specifically, what limits, if any, do you believe should be placed on abortion?
A number ofÂ presidential hopefuls, including Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, JuliÃ¡n Castro, and Beto Oâ€™Rourke, have expressed support for the â€œGreen New Deal.â€ Do you also support it?
The â€œGreen New Dealâ€ calls for eliminating all fossil fuel energy production, which includes not only oil but natural gas, one of the cheapest sources of American energy, and one of the reasons the United States has been ableÂ to lead the worldÂ in carbon-emissions reduction. How do you propose eliminating nearly 90 percent of American energy usage in 11 years? If not in 11 years, how many years do you propose reaching this goal?
The â€œGreen New Dealâ€ also calls for eliminating all nuclear power within 11 years. This move would purgeÂ around 20 percentÂ of American energy production â€” far more than other inefficient â€œgreenâ€ energy sources (solar power, for example, although heavily subsidized and mandated by government, only produces 1.3 percent). Do you support this policy?
Eliminating fossil fuels production would effectively be a tax of trillions of dollars on American consumers through spiking costs and massive infrastructure changes. Every car in America, for example, would have to be retrofitted to run on electricity. Should the government pay for the costs to families? How will we pay for it?
The U.S. oil and gas industry supports more thanÂ 10 million jobsÂ in the United States. Will you retrain millions of people to work in far more expensive energy fields that produce far less efficient energy? How will people whose industry has been shuttered by government policy find new jobs, pensions, and health care?
Good questions all, and he has plenty more of ’em too, covering a wide variety of topics and issues. But like I said, anybody waiting for the Enemedia to put ’em will be waiting a long, long time. They’re the propaganda arm of the Democrat-Socialist Party, after all; it’s not in their own interest to see their masters and collaborators forced to toe an honest line, and would be harmful to the agenda they jointly support.