For Democrats Like Kirsten Gillibrand, Everything is ‘Infrastructure’

Ok, so, Keystone XL is not ‘infrastructure’ in the minds of the depraved Democrats, but this stuff is? – NY Senator and miserably failed presidential candidate Kirsten Gillibrand got the award for most ridiculous tweet of the day on Wednesday with this little gem:

Paid leave is infrastructure.
Child care is infrastructure.
Caregiving is infrastructure.

Holy crap. You just can’t make this stuff up, folks.

The idiotic tweet naturally attracted an array of pithy responses, but this one is the best:

Perfect.

All pithiness aside, though, it is important to understand exactly what Gillibrand and other Democrats who are offering language to include all manner of social spending priorities of the Democrat party in an “infrastructure” bill that will eventually be moved in congress are doing here: Trying to attach unpopular spending on unpopular programs to a bill whose concept polls well with the public.

Not that paid leave and child care and caregiving aren’t important in our society: The problem with the federal government spending billions of dollars on those things is that they do not poll well. As a result, grasping clowns like Sen. Gillibrand can never get their billions of dollars for vote-buying pork barrel spending approved for such things in a stand-alone bill. The legislative trick they deploy is to attempt to attach language for their unpopular priorities onto bills that are ostensibly focused on popular priorities.

Boom: Child care is suddenly ‘infrastructure.’ See how that works?

As I wrote last week, the ‘infrastructure’ plan submitted by the Biden handlers last week is already less than 25% focused on spending on things we have traditionally defined as ‘infrastructure’ spending. Most of the remainder of the bill is simply massive payoffs to Democrat Party funders in the fake green lobby. By the time any such plan makes its way through both houses of congress it will undoubtedly morph into just another ominbus spending bill with a more popular name.

See, Democrats like to talk about real ‘infrastructure’ spending, but they don’t like to actually spend money on real ‘infrastructure’ projects. Why? Because real ‘infrastructure’ spending doesn’t end up buying them many votes. We have to remember that the ability to spend other people’s money in order to buy votes for their next re-election campaign is the life’s blood of any Democrat politician. It dominates their entire mindset, and devising ways to do it occupies their every waking hour.

Real ‘infrastructure’ projects involve improving and repairing the nation’s dilapidated roads, bridges and other transportation infrastructure, projects in which real people who work at real jobs to make a real living participate. Such people are no longer a significant constituency of the Democrat Party, thanks in large part to the 2016 candidacy of Donald J. Trump. This is why not a single Democrat politician batted a fake eyelash when our Sock Puppet-in-Chief cancelled the Keystone XL pipeline and its 10,000 jobs on his first day in office: Those are blue-collar workers, and the Democrats have written them off in favor of importing a larger, new bloc of future voters from Central America.

Think about it: Why would Democrats want to spend billions on actual, real infrastructure projects and the blue collar jobs associated with them when they can allocate that same money to Green New Deal boondoggles and social spending targeting the suburban white mothers who have become their prized potential voter bloc in red states like Texas?

That’s what Sen. Gillibrand’s idiotic tweet is all about. This is how the Democrat mind really works, and if you think she isn’t serious about what she tweeted, you are in for a very big and expensive surprise.

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever before. Whatfinger.com is the only real conservative alternative to Drudge. It’s the tool I use to help keep up with all the day’s events, and it should be your tool, too.

5 1 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

5 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Daniel Silvan

Someone buy Gillibrand a dictionary. And help her comprehend it too.

Acid Queen

In the end, how much will go towards “infrastructure?”

Most likely, less than 10%, while the media, which champions anything the Democratic party does will call the bill “bold,” “in the best interests of the American people,” and “the way to get things done after Donald Trump.”

Any many American voters will fall for it. Again. ..and again..(which is what the Dems count on).

Daniel Silvan

You are correct. It was under 7% initially, but has now been lowered to just over 5% that will be spent on infrastructure.

Silas

Orwellian is what is. This is 1984 writ large. And half of the citizens of this nation never read it as the public schools quit teaching and started brainwashing in the early 80s.

Jared Nelson

I thought that might be a new talking point, as I just watched Maria Bartiromo interview Rep Debbie Dingel, who said the exact same thing. Even had the nerve to quote the DICTIONARY, which gives the abstract meaning of “infrastructure” instead of the very specific meaning intended in this conversation!

Scroll to top
5
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x