Mayor Pete Hopes to Set Himself Apart From the Pack by Veering Hard Left

There were some softening on South Bend, Indiana mayor and Democratic presidential hopeful, Pete Buttigieg.

He’s a moderate, they said.

He’s a Christian, they said.

Let’s forget how he openly lives a lifestyle that is in direct opposition of God’s Word on marriage, and that for the sake of politics, he’s also attacked, unwarranted, Vice President Mike Pence.

Now, I’m no fan of VP Reek. I find him weak, and unnervingly subservient to Trump.

That being said, my only issue with his professed faith is that he, like far too many other American evangelicals, seems more than happy to bend any Christian principles in ignoring Donald Trump and his abusive, profane ways.

Ok. He’s kind of creepy, with this total Stepford vibe, but, again, I think Buttigieg is ridiculously transparent with his attacks on Pence.

Besides, Pence is low hanging fruit. If Mayer Pete wants to set himself apart from the ever-growing pack of Democratic contenders, he’s going to have to come up with something better than what he’s been doing.

OR he could do what he’s apparently chosen to do and lurch so far left that he makes the others seem moderate, by comparison.

That’s what he’s done, unveiling on Thursday the first of his policy positions.

And let me tell ya – they’re special.

Axios covered the litany of liberal bad ideas conjured up by the mayor of a struggling community.

So he’s listening his cockamamie notions under three headings: “Freedom,” “Security,” and “Democracy.”

To take a cursory look, his first foray into policy reads like text book socialism and massive government overreach.

Oh, great. Something new and different for Democrats.

*Insert massive eyeroll*

Apparently, he’s seen the sharp, leftward lurch of the party and he doesn’t want to be left behind.

None of these points feel particularly original. He’s apparently hoping that his delivery of the same destructive policies will be enough to fool voters into believing he’s different than the rest.

Let’s examine the lunacy.

Under the banner of “Freedom” Axios covers three stated ideas.

First up, “Medicare for all.”

Imagine: rationed healthcare, just like the socialist hellholes liberals tend to fantasize about.

You get the worst possible care for the highest possible price, and the government is intimately involved in all our medical decisions.

Is that “freedom”?

Hard pass.

Then these gems:

Racial equality: Create a commission to propose reparations policies for Black Americans and close the racial wealth gap

Yes, making half the population pay for the sins of their fathers through increased taxes is a wonderful way to move forward. I mean, it would close the “racial wealth gap” by making working class Americans increasingly poorer. And of course, if you think race relations were strained before, wait until you attempt to implement something designed to punish people for something they never did.

LGBTQ rights: Pass the Equality Act; reverse the ban on transgender military service; enforce the nondiscrimination provisions of the Affordable Care Act and key federal civil rights laws.

All things designed specifically to make us weaker and less effective.

His “Security” platform is no less ill-advised.

Climate change: Implement a Green New Deal with all available tools including a carbon tax-and-dividend for Americans, and major direct investment to build a 100% clean energy society

Gun control: Raise the standard of gun protection and ownership to make all Americans safer

Extremism: Increase federal resources for countering domestic terrorism and white supremacist violence

So, he’s worrying about the climate and domestic terrorism, but he’s offering little else to combat the threats that face us outside of our borders.

This is a problem with Democrats. They’re all so convinced that every other place and peoples in the world are better than us, that they refuse to recognize dangers to our way of life from bad actors on the outside.

Finally, his “Democracy” gimmick.

Gerrymandering: Establish independent, statewide redistricting commissions

Electoral college: A national popular vote to replace the Electoral College

Political representation: True political representation for the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico

Maybe not so oddly enough, when Democrats talk gerrymandering and redistricting, it always seems to be to their benefit.

As for the electoral college, it has been explained over and over that we have an electoral college for a reason. Mainly, it’s because places like New York and California shouldn’t be the final word for Americans from less densely populated areas. The electoral college allows for each area of the nation to be represented.

There is more to Mayor Pete’s attempts to play super-liberal, but that’s enough for one sitting.

We’ll see if the strategy pays off. He’s only got to get past a couple dozen or so others, all with ideas as wretched as his.