According to PJ Media,
Elizabeth Warren was confronted at an Iowa town hall event by a voter who wanted to know if he could get back the money that he paid for his daughter's college education since Warren's running on forgiving student loan debt. "My daughter is in school," he said. "I saved all my money just to pay student loans. Can I have my money back?" Warren replied, "Of course not!"The man walked away in disgust as well he might've. Warren's debt forgiveness "plan" is a fraud. It only applies to current loan debt. Students who borrow money for college in the future will not be covered. In other words, Warren is trying to bribe the current crop of college students into voting for her with a promise to wipe away their debt.
The man continued to push Warren for an explanation for why some people can have a free education while others have to pay. "So you're going to pay for people who didn't save any money and those of us who did the right thing get screwed?" he asked. "My buddy went out and bought a car and went on vacation, but I didn't. I saved my money. He made more than I did. I worked a double shift...so you're laughing at me," he said to Warren, who seemed to be smiling.
She denied laughing but didn't seem to have an answer to the perfectly logical question the voter had. Warren's only response was "I appreciate your time."
The dad asked a very good question, of course, and it's one that goes beyond just college tuition. Legal immigrants to this country are asking the same question of Democrats who want to grant amnesty to those who came here illegally.
How is it fair to those who waited for years and did everything the right way to have others do everything the wrong way and be declared legal? How is it fair to those who are still waiting for their applications to be adjudicated to have people by the thousands jump ahead of them in line, like so many fare-jumpers on the New York subway, and still be let in ahead of those who are waiting?
Why doesn't the media ever ask a Democrat this question?
Speaking of questions the media chooses not to ask, here's another one: Up until this election cycle the Democrats never passed up an opportunity to condemn big money in politics and to criticize the Supreme Court decision, Citizens United, which permits it. Big money was corrupting the political process, they insisted, but that was until Democrat billionaires Tom Steyer and Mike Bloomberg got into the race and began spending their fortunes on ads castigating Donald Trump.
Bloomberg has promised to spend a billion dollars to defeat Trump even if he's not the nominee.
Suddenly, there was total silence about big money in politics from Democrat politicians and the media as their erstwhile criticisms just evaporated like morning fog.
So here's the question: Where are all those principled Dems who argued that it was crucial to the survival of our democracy to get big money out of politics now that big money is being used to help them get elected?
It's a funny sort of principle that only applies in cases where it doesn't harm one's own interests.
