Democrats destroy what you stand for, what you care about

Michael James

Vote these egocentric and small-minded Democratic monsters out on November 6 – because they are so perfectly willing to destroy what you and I stand for, what you and I care about.

1856: pro-slavery Democrat canes anti-slavery Republican in Congress

"If Hillary Clinton could think, she would possibly notice the inbred self-mockery of her own deplorable statements.  You probably read her latest shot at the Republican Party; quoth the craven, "you cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about."

"Fifty years ago, a Democratic president created the modern welfare state.  Lyndon B. Johnson publicly promised to end poverty and supposedly swore privately that "I'll have those n------ voting Democratic for a hundred years." 

"I believe in true family values, and my Republican Party believes in true family values, but long ago the Democratic Party destroyed what we stand for, what we care about.  Democrats tested monetary alchemy on black families and tore those families to shreds.  If you teach in a school of predominantly black students, seven out of ten of those children live in fatherless homes.  Hillary, your political party maliciously destroyed the family, something our party stands for, something we care about.

"Forty years ago, the democratic liberals among us decided that coed dorms were a brilliant solution to some problem that didn't exist.  Republicans believed that college studies were too important to be mixed with late teenage hormones in close proximity.  Democrats got their way, and the result has been young men denied equal protection from false rape accusation and immature girls wearing mattresses to lectures.  Republicans cared about and wanted to protect their sons and daughters from situations that could become sexually overwhelming; Republicans cared enough to desire a gradual progression into adult responsibilities and choices.  The Democrats didn't give a hoot about what we stood for, what we cared about." . . .

Left Turns on Hillary After ‘Tone-Deaf’ Comments on Lewinsky

This can happen when your vocation is to do no more than talk, talk, talk. TD

Legal Insurrection

Feminist support for Hillary is “feminism for entitled, privileged woman; other kinds of women were dispensable.”

"I may be in the minority, but I don’t want failed Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to shut up because the more she talks, the more people shed her.

"Hillary may have put the final nail in her coffin on Sunday when she said her husband’s affair with Monica Lewinsky was not an abuse of power or a reason to resign.

"Those comments shocked many, but now the left has turned on her. Publications like Think Progress, The Guardian, and Vanity Fair published scathing articles taking Hillary to town over her comments.

"Professor Jacobson wrote about Hillary’s comments, which she made during an interview with CBS:

Hillary Clinton says that her husband was right not to resign from the presidency in the wake of the Monica Lewinsky scandal, she told CBS’ “Sunday Morning.” As first lady, she stood by his side as President Bill Clinton was impeached after lying about his affair with Lewinsky, a White House intern.

The former secretary of state said she disagrees with those who now say he should have stepped down.

“In retrospect, do you think Bill should’ve resigned in the wake of the Monica Lewinsky scandal?” correspondent Tony Dokoupil asked.

“Absolutely not,” Clinton said.

“It wasn’t an abuse of power?”

“No. No.”

"Let’s not forget that four other women [have] accused Bill of sexual assault while Juanita Broaddrick has accused him of raping her.

"ThinkProgress described Hillary’s comments as “tone deaf in any moment, but they feel particularly inappropriate in this one, with the #MeToo movement raging.”

"The article also mentioned the other instances that put Hillary at odds with the #MeToo movement like when she protected adviser Burns Strider who faced sexual harassment accusations during the 2008 campaign.

"Then there’s David Axelrod:" . . .

The Origins of Progressive Agony

Victor Davis Hanson
In the wake of Obama, the Democratic party was a shipwreck, to be saved only by Hillary and the Supreme Court . . .

Protesters gather in front of the doors of the Supreme Court as Brett Kavanaugh is sworn in, October 6, 2018.

"What has transformed the Democratic party into an anguished progressive movement that incorporates the tactics of the street, embraces maenadism, reverts to Sixties carnival barking, and is radicalized by a new young socialist movement? Even party chairman Tom Perez concedes that there are “no moderate Democrats left,” and lately the rantings of Cory Booker, Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder, and Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez confirm that diagnosis. 

"Obama, the Fallen God 

"Paradoxically, Barack Obama won the presidency in 2008 and 2012 and yet helped to erode the old Democratic party in the process. He ended up in opulent retirement while ceding state legislatures, governorships, the House, the Senate, the presidency, and the Supreme Court to conservative Republicans. 

"Obama had promised leftists — in his prior brief tenure in the Senate he had compiled the most partisan record of his 99 colleagues — that his social-justice methods and agendas would lead to a proverbial “permanent Democratic majority.” Do we remember the February 2009 Newsweek obsequious cover story “We Are All Socialists Now”?

"Supposedly, changing demography, massive illegal immigration, and identity politics had preordained a permanent 51 percent “Other” whose minority statuses, as defined by gender and race, had now become a majority, given the destined demise of the white working classes. If Obama had not existed, someone like Corey Booker, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, or Kirsten Gillibrand was supposedly foreordained to be president anyway.

" But while Obama sermonized about our predestined “arc of history” and how its moral curve bent this way and that, he managed to lose both his supermajority in the Senate and the House itself by 2011. By 2015, the Senate lost its Democratic majority.

"Ruling by pen-and-phone executive order only took the country more leftward. And it came at the price of stagnating the economy, acerbating social, cultural, and racial differences, raising taxes, and recalibrating foreign policy. " . . .

Updated: Sen. McCaskill Hides Agenda Including “semi-automatic rifle ban” from Moderate Voters . . . More updating at the bottom

. . . "Staffers Reveal in Undercover Video it “could hurt her ability to get elected.”

Project Veritas . . . "
Project Veritas Action Fund has released a third undercover video from campaigns during this 2018 election season. This report exposes how incumbent Senator McCaskill and individuals working on her campaign conceal their liberal views on issues in order to court moderate voters.

"Said James O’Keefe, founder and president of Project Veritas Action:
“This undercover report shows just how broken our political system has become. Senator McCaskill hides her true views from voters because she knows they won’t like them.” 

Claire McCaskill’s Staff Praise Her Ability to Hide Gun Control Support from Missouri Voters  . . . "The undercover video montage begins with an unwitting McCaskill gleefully admitting her support for numerous bans, including one of “high capacity” magazines. She proudly states, “I’ve voted for most of those things before.”

"Next up in the video, a filed organizer named Carson Pope talks of McCaskill’s openness to a “semiautomatic rifle ban.”

"Campaign staffer Nicholas Starost then describes McCaskill’s decision not to have Obama campaign for her: “He’s a very liberal candidate. And like … Claire distancing herself from the party is gonna help her win more votes than it will saying like: ‘Oh here’s Obama, the former president of the United States, to now speak on my behalf.’ Which is unfortunate because I love Obama to pieces, and I’d love to see him come here.”

"The Project Veritas reporter then asked about McCaskill and Obama, saying, “And they essentially have the views on everything?”

"Starost responded, “Yeah, People just can’t know that." . . .

Update: 'People Just Can't Know That': McCaskill, Staff Exposed In Undercover Sting Video

Second update: 1830, CDT:  Another Project Veritas video exposes McCaskill hidden agenda  . . . "In red states like Missouri and North Dakota, incumbent Democrats do their best to hide their party affiliation.  They need Republican votes to win, and cozying up to Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer would be the kiss of death.  A campaign appearance by former President Obama would excite Democrats but lose the candidate more votes than he would gain.

"McCaskill walks a tightrope, trying not to offend Republicans while maintaining contact with her liberal base.  As the Project Veritas video shows, it's a balancing act that, by necessity, involves lying to Missouri voters about her real intentions."

Portland Mayor ‘Supports’ Police Standing Idly By as Mob Envelops Car

Branco

Western Journal  . . . "So why are Portland, Oregon’s streets such a mess with riots and violence? Well, maybe it’s because the mayor condones it.

"Ted Wheeler, mayor of Portland since January of 2017, has been controversial in his post, to say the least. The city has been the scene of multiple immigration protests for which ICE has called him out, his city faces a homeless problem and he’s been a vocal critic of the president.

"As of late, the streets of Portland aren’t fit for average citizens to walk or drive through because they are scenes of violent protests from left wing antifa radicals who oppose the right wing demonstrators. The two just don’t mix and the combination is often combustible.

"Maybe the mayhem has become so prevalent there because the mayor is AWOL when it comes to directing law enforcement officials to stop the demonstrations and protests that are at the heart of the ills there.

"The Washington Times reported Mayor Ted Wheeler standing behind a decision by police to not intervene when riots break out and innocent people are attacked." . . .



The age of the red hats  "Thirty years ago, I found myself on the Kowloon ferry, facing several menacing men carrying four batons.  Avoiding an encounter, I moved as fast as I could, ignoring these young men, who continued their angry rants.

"What I could not forget was their anger and pointed red hats.  These students professed to know better than their own professors.  They were the Red Guards, the self-arrogated defenders of puerile Marxism.  They were intolerant and belligerent.  They also had an edge.  Those who challenged that vision could be imprisoned even without a trial, and families could be forced into harsh labor.

"Now we have the red pointed hats for the 2010s.  Groups such as Black Lives Matter believe that only their will is correct.  The hardcore left has checked off all debate.  It is not as if evidence has been established to reinforce a claim.  Evidence is irrelevant in a commitment to an idea.  Anger is justifying this position; in fact, the Lenins of our time believe it's in the national interest to promote anger." . . .

Hillary Clinton says Bill's sex assault allegations are 'different,' and the accuser speaks up

Russia Today

"Hillary Clinton got called out for hypocrisy after she argued that sexual harassment allegations against her husband, Bill Clinton, were different from those faced by high-profile Republicans, as they were thoroughly investigated.

"In an interview to CNN's Christiane Amanpour on Tuesday, the former Democratic presidential nominee rejected parallels between allegations of sexual misconduct against her husband and the ones that have been leveled against President Donald Trump, and those that marred the confirmation process of Justice Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

There is a very significant difference. That is the intense, long-lasting, partisan investigation that was conducted in the 90s.

"The former secretary of state added that "if the Republicans, starting with President Trump on down want a comparison, they should welcome such an investigation themselves."

"Kavanaugh, who was sworn in on Monday after weeks of bitter partisan bickering, has faced allegations of sexual misconduct from several women, including claims he took part in gang-rape parties and was involved in sexual assault during his high-school years. The most prominent accuser, Dr Christine Blasey Ford, testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Following her testimony and that of Kavanaugh, which both held Americans glued to their television screens for hours, the White House ordered a new FBI probe into Kavanaugh, who had previously undergone six background investigations as part of the George W. Bush administration and as a judge on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals.

Clinton's words did not go down well with Juanita Broaddrick, one of Bill Clinton's most famous accusers. In 1999, she alleged in an interview with Dateline NBC that Clinton raped her in 1978 when he was serving as the attorney general of Arkansas.

"The ex-President himself has never addressed the allegations, referring them to his legal representative. His lawyer, David Kendall, denied the allegations at the time. Broaddrick's story resurfaced during the 2016 presidential election campaign in light of the growing popularity of the #MeToo movement, which encourages victims of sexual assault to come forward.

"As tensions around Kavanaugh's confirmation were gaining momentum, Broaddrick demanded an FBI investigation into her own allegations against Clinton, accusing Democrats, who called for a thorough FBI probe into Kavanaugh, of opportunism and "double standards."

" 'It's not politically advantageous for them to circle around me and support me," she told Fox News in September.

"Responding to Clinton's fresh interview, Broaddrick did not mince her words, calling the former senator a "lying hypocrite."

" 'My case was never litigated," she wrote on Twitter, reiterating her call for an investigation into the allegations." . . .

Juanita Broaddrick‏ @atensnut @atensnutMore

Juanita Broaddrick Retweeted The Daily Caller

YOU LYING HYPOCRITE @HillaryClinton My case was NEVER litigated!!That’s why I’m calling for an investigation now. IF I CAN GET 100k signatures, the WORLD will KNOW IT, Hillary. THEN where will you hide?

"Broaddrick has launched a Change.org petition, asking for a criminal investigation into “Bill Clinton's sex crimes.” The petition has so far garnered over 34,000 signatures. It requires 100,000 to earn a White House response.

"Hillary Clinton has found herself in hot water in the past for standing by her top staffer Burns 

"She also drew widespread criticism when she claimed that her loss had contributed to the rise of the ”Me Too” movement, saying that "although it was a wave that was building," her election debacle "probably accelerated that wave" in April.

"Clinton's record as a paragon of women's rights has also been repeatedly tested by her close ties to disgraced Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein. The Hollywood mogul donated to Clinton's campaign and even hosted several fundraisers for her."

Twitter slams Hillary’s ‘bombastic laugh’ in reaction to Kavanaugh’s ‘revenge’ claim

Tony Branco

Carter Page Sues DNC And Its Law Firm Over The Steele Dossier

iOTWreport  "DC: Former Trump campaign associate Carter Page filed a defamation lawsuit Monday against the Democratic National Committee and its law firm, which commissioned the infamous Steele dossier.

"Page filed the suit in federal court in Oklahoma against the DNC, the law firm, Perkins Coie, and two of its partners, Marc Elias and Michael Sussmann.

"Perkins Coie, which also represented the Hillary Clinton campaign, is the firm that hired Fusion GPS, the opposition researcher that investigated Donald Trump’s links to Russia.

"Elias was Perkins Coie’s main contact to Fusion GPS, which was founded by three former Wall Street Journal reporters.

"As part of the $1 million project, Fusion GPS hired former British spy Christopher Steele to conduct the investigation. The result was a 35-page dossier full of allegations that the Kremlin is blackmailing Trump and that the Trump campaign conspired with Russian operatives to influence the election. (RELATED: Here Is How Much The DNC And Clinton Campaign Paid For The Trump Dossier)

"Page, an energy consultant, features prominently in the dossier, though he vehemently denies its allegations.

"In the report, which was provided to numerous journalists and the FBI, Steele alleged that Page was the Trump campaign’s back channel to the Kremlin for the purposes of conspiring to influence the election. Steele cited anonymous sources who claimed that it was Page’s idea to release stolen DNC emails through Wikileaks. The dossier also alleged that Page met secretly with two Kremlin insiders, Igor Sechin and Igor Diveykin, during a trip to Moscow in July 2016. Page has repeatedly denied meeting with either man." 

MORE HERE

Cartoons added by TD

'Red Guards of Austin' Place Severed Pig Heads in Front of Campaign Offices

Now they sit back and enjoy the publicity. Have Bernie Sanders or  Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez commented on this? Check with CNN to see. TD

Referred to as "Antifa" here.  Far Left Watch reported:
"After attacking five separate GOP offices, Antifa has escalated their extremist activities by placing severed pig heads at multiple polling locations and campaign offices in the Austin, TX area.
"This comes directly on the heels of the media accusing Republicans of “seizing” on the “angry mob” mantra in order to generate a better turnout for the midterms.
"The Red Guards Austin recently shared a blog post with their 8,000 Facebook followers in which they commemorated Mao Zedong’s brutal communist revolution that resulted in millions of people being slaughtered. In this blog post, they called for a boycott of the “bourgeois elections” and advocated for organized revolutionary violence."

PJ Media  "Maoist revolutionaries* across the country are demanding violent revolts on Election Day to protest what they call a "bourgeois farce," according to their recent posts on social media. As Far Left Watch reports, the Red Guards of Austin escalated its war against "imperialism" last week by placing severed pig heads at "polling places and campaign offices" in and around the Austin, Texas, area.

"The group is calling for revolutionary violence rather than participation in the “bourgeois elections.” Red Guards LA shared the grotesque photos on Twitter:

Pretty bad when even Robert F. O'Rourke isn't left enough for these kids. Do we have the names of their college instructors?

* AKA ignorant college snowflakes

Elizabeth Warren’s DNA Test Proves She Was Lying

. . . Warren presented a recipe she had published in her cousin’s cookbook as evidence of her background. It was signed “Elizabeth Warren — Cherokee.” Later we learned that even the recipe was taken verbatim from an article in The New York Times five years earlier. It’s  easy to see what’s going on. Warren wants to dull Donald Trump’s “Fauxcahontas” jibes because she is about to run for president. "

The Federalist 

Acting as if the results of the senator's DNA test are a vindication of her initial claims is an assault on reason.

"Why did Sen. Elizabeth Warren spend all these years claiming to be a Native American?

"One plausible answer might be that her family had lied to her, or were also misled about their heritage, and that Warren truly believed she was Cherokee. This happens relatively often, I suppose. Then again, few people exhibit as much certitude, and gain as many benefits, over a claim that’s so obscure and unverifiable.
"The second is that Warren herself lied or exaggerated her heritage, knowing full well that her contention to Cherokee ancestry was likely nothing more than lore. She then latched on to this negligible history to gain traction in an academic field that was searching for more diversity in their candidates.
"We now know that the second option is more probable after the prospective presidential candidate decided to make a huge deal out of taking a DNA test, that, in reality, only proves she is as white as I am. A ludicrously unskeptical Boston Globe story about Warren’s dramatic decision to take the test begins by contending that there’s “strong evidence’’ of Warren’s Native American’s ancestry dating back 6 to 10 generations—which creates the impression that she has Native American family littered over the past 100 years.
"In truth, we learn, it’s possible that Warren’s great-great-great grandmother was partially Native American. This would make her around 1/32nd American Indian, a far cry from any reasonable threshold to embrace minority status for a job. That’s exactly what she did starting in the 1990s, before walking back her claims when it became politically expedient.
"Then again, being 1/32 (and really, the math says 1/64th) Native American is the high-end possibility. It is just as possible that Warren 1/1,024th Native American. (The story initially claimed it was 1/512th.) So maybe her great-great-great-great grandmother was part Cherokee.

"Maybe." . . .
Read more... 
She just won't give it up: FLASHBACK: Elizabeth Warren Says Her Parents Were “Oppressed” Because Her Mom Was “Cherokee Indian”…
Liberals love that word "oppressed".
Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s newly released DNA results show that the Democrat’s Native American ancestry is roughly the same as that of the average white American, and may be less.

Sen. Orrin Hatch trolls

Ian Macfarlane cartoon added

"David Harsanyi is a Senior Editor at The Federalist. He is the author of the new book, First Freedom: A Ride Through America's Enduring History with the Gun, From the Revolution to Today. Follow him on Twitter."