Report: Congressional Black Caucus Questioning Nonblack Members Of Congress Who Haven’t Defended Maxine Waters…

Weasel Zippers

"Yes, please, all Dems must listen to the CBC and publicly support Mad Max.

"Via Buzzfeed:

Top Democrats and lawmakers of the Congressional Black Caucus are questioning nonblack members of the House Democratic caucus who haven’t stepped up to publicly defend Maxine Waters.

They are also stewing behind the scenes over public rebukes from House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, according to three sources familiar with internal conversations.

In particular, at least two black lawmakers were said to be angered by Pelosi’s usage of the phrase “make America beautiful again” in her tweet on the subject.

Late last month, Waters encouraged people to confront and protest members of the Trump administration while speaking a rally against family separations at the border. “Let’s make sure we show up wherever we have to show up. And if you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd,” she said. “And you push back on them. And you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere.”

 Politicians currently signing up in support of Maxine Waters:

Politico

As Obama turned America into a third-world nation; the liberals have made us a silly nation

Rich Terrell

Papa John's founder forced to resign for saying someone else used the 'N-word'  . . . "The context?  It was during a conference, where Schnatter claimed that Colonel Sanders allegedly called blacks the "N-word."

"In other words, Schnatter had to resign not for calling a black person the N-word, not for even using the N-word to describe blacks around white people, but merely saying that someone else used the N-word.  As of this writing, there was no context that showed that Schnatter approved of Sanders's alleged use of the word, a word that is commonly used to this day by some black people.

"But apparently, it is now a crime for white people to use the N-word to recount that someone else used the N-word." . . .

Starbucks, guilty over environment, introduces sippy cups to replace straws  . . . "So, instead of imposing drippy sippy cups on fastidious coffee-drinkers, Starbucks should make Asia's turtles, sharks, and other watery creatures safer by donating to waste management plants in the offending Asian countries." . . .

Yale Law School Students and Alums: “People Will Die” if Kavanaugh is Confirmed  . . . "Remember when repealing Net Neutrality meant everyone would die? Do you recall the same thing being said about repealing Obamacare, and pulling out of the Paris climate agreement? That same argument is being employed here." . . .


Administrators at Cal Poly are pursuing a variety of "Diversity Action Initiatives" designed to reduce the percentage of white students on campus.

University of Wyoming profs protest ‘Cowboys’ slogan  
"Several professors are urging the University of Wyoming to "shelve" its new marketing slogan, "The World Needs More Cowboys," because they feel it evokes the image of a "white, heterosexual male.' "

Feckless Obama, Iran's Green Revolution, and a second chance for the West to do the right thing under Trump

2011; Pamela Geller: Why Obama Betrayed the Iranian People  . . . "In 2009, demonstrators filled the streets of Iran, denouncing the regime and crying out for freedom.  It was a glorious opportunity for the leader of the free world to demonstrate his support for free people everywhere and strike a decisive blow against the bloody regime that had considered itself at war with the United States for three decades.

"But Barack Obama didn't help them.  Quite the contrary.  The leader of the free world was too busy extending his hand to those same mullahs.

"It was monstrous when Obama stood by and did nothing during the abortive Iranian revolution; instead, he bought ice cream and posed for photo ops on the golf course while the only revolution against Islamic rule in a Muslim country was taking flight in Iran." . . .

Why Obama Let Iran's Green Revolution Fail
"The president wanted a nuclear deal, not regime change."

Looking for help from America; abandoned by Obama

Amil Imani:  Iran Is Ripe for Regime Change

. . . "Let me re-emphasize that the current protests in Iran are just as much against the Islamic Republic as they are about Shi’a Islam. In fact, much of it is against Islam itself. People have experienced what a primitive and defective system of belief Islam is and aim to abandon it for good. Many will still hang on to it for some time.

"Time has arrived to end the Mullahs’ reign of terror. We Iranians and Iranian-Americans -- in spirit free people of the world -- greatly cherish individual liberty and freedom, where the mind is imbued with enlightenment, and every individual by virtue of being born human is afforded measured freedom. It is within the open expanse of liberty that each and every person can be at his or her best. And when the individual person is at his best, humanity is as well." 

Hillary Clinton, in her typical honest forthrightness told the press her Iranian advisors recommended the US not act. One such advisor was Trita Parsi, Referred to by Ms. Geller as the "president of the George Soros-funded National Iranian American Council (NIAC), a" powerful Iranian lobbying group in Washington.  Arash Irandoost of the Pro-Democracy Movement of Iran calls Parsi "an intellectually dishonest regime apologist and an unofficial and unregistered lobbyist for the Iranian regime.' " 

"While millions of Iranians were in the streets opposing the regime, Obama ignored this historic moment and continued his outreach to the Iranian rulers.  His appeasing attitude was a signal that the US is so eager to reach a nuclear deal and befriend the regime that it would tolerate Mullahs’ brutal repression in Iran and hegemonic policies across the region." June 3, 2015  Iranian American Forum

An Open Letter from Yale Law Students Illustrates the Decline of the Radical Legal Mind

David French at National Review

Progressives’ anti-Kavanaugh hysteria is already in full bloom.

. . . " To the extent that any conservative can be a part of the elite academic club, Brett Kavanaugh belongs. He’s a double Yale graduate (college and law school) and a former Harvard Law School professor. How did he get there? Allow the Boston Globe to tell the story:

When Elena Kagan was dean of Harvard Law School, she was in search of rising conservative legal stars. The traditionally liberal campus, the thinking went, could use a little ideological diversity with more robust debate and the challenge of different viewpoints.

Among Kagan’s hires, as a visiting professor, was a newly appointed federal appeals-court judge from Washington named Brett Kavanaugh.

Yes, that’s right. Justice Kagan hired Brett Kavanaugh at Harvard Law. He’s no radical. He’s a serious conservative legal mind, and it is entirely right and proper for a school that enrolls conservative students and even (on occasion) hires conservative professors to put out a simple press release celebrating the elevation of one of its own to the highest court in the land.

. . . "At this point, a radical reader might nod along and say, “Yes, any originalist nominee will cost lives.” But if you look at the Yale letter, it fails to make its case. It’s a long screed claiming that, among other things, Kavanaugh is insufficiently protective of the administrative state (I wonder if any of the signatories are also demanding that Congress “abolish ICE”), overly protective of religious liberty, and lacking in sympathy for favored plaintiffs. It doesn’t contain an ounce of serious legal analysis." . . .

These are the "skulls full of mush"

Ann Coulter: Kavanaugh Threatens The Left's Right to Cheat

Ann Coulter

The fact that the media responded to the nomination of a Supreme Court justice by obsessively covering Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, Russia and NATO proves that Trump has checkmated them with Brett Kavanaugh. 

"Liberals know they can't stop Kavanaugh's confirmation, so they'd just as soon not hear any news about it at all. Please cheer us up with stories about Paul Manafort's solitary confinement! 

"But there was one very peculiar reaction to the nomination. The nut wing of the Democratic Party instantly denounced Kavanaugh by claiming that his elevation to the high court would threaten all sorts of "rights."

"Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., tweeted: "Our next justice should be a champion for protecting & advancing rights, not rolling them back -- but Kavanaugh has a long history of demonstrating hostility toward defending the rights of everyday Americans."

"Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., tweeted: "If Brett Kavanaugh is confirmed to the Supreme Court it will have a profoundly negative effect on workers' rights, women's rights and voting rights for decades to come. We must do everything we can to stop this nomination."

"If only these guys could get themselves elected to some sort of legislative body, they could pass laws protecting these rights!

"Wait, I'm sorry. These are elected United States senators. Of all people, why are they carrying on about "rights"? If senators can't protect these alleged "rights," it can only be because most Americans do not agree that they should be "rights."

"That's exactly why the left is so hysterical about the Supreme Court. They run to the courts to win their most unpopular policy ideas, gift-wrapped and handed to them as "constitutional rights."

"What liberals call "rights" are legislative proposals that they can't pass through normal democratic processes -- at least outside of the states they've already flipped with immigration, like California.

"Realizing how widely reviled their ideas are, several decades ago the left figured out a procedural scam to give them whatever they wanted without ever having to pass a law. Hey! You can't review a Supreme Court decision! " . . .

Coulter concludes:

So when you hear liberals carrying on about all the "rights" threatened by Kavanaugh, remember that by "rights," they mean "policy ideas so unpopular that we can't pass a law creating such rights."  

Lawsuit Aims To Remove Measure To Divide California Into Three States From Ballot

Weasel Zippers

"Democrats want to keep the plantation of dependency intact.

"Via Washington Times:

Opponents of an initiative to split California into three states asked the state Supreme Court to pull the measure from the ballot, arguing it’s too drastic a change to state government to go through the normal initiative process.   A lawsuit filed Monday by the Planning and Conservation League argues major changes to the state’s government structure require approval from two-thirds of the Legislature before going under consideration by voters or a state constitutional convention.                                   The initiative would break the state into Northern California, California and Southern California.Northern California would comprise the Bay Area, Silicon Valley, Sacramento and counties north of the current state capital. California would be a strip of land along the coast stretching from Los Angeles to Monterey. Southern California would include Fresno and the surrounding farming communities, reaching all the way to San Diego and the Mexican border.Venture capitalist Tim Draper is financing the “Cal 3” initiative in his latest attempt to divide the state. He has spent more than $1.7 million supporting it. The nation’s most populous state has become too difficult to govern because of its size, wealth disparities and geographic diversity, Draper and the initiative’s supporters argue.Draper did not comment on the lawsuit because he had not seen it. A spokeswoman for the initiative also did not comment.The California Supreme Court has tossed initiatives in the past after ruling they went too far in changing government structure.

Keep reading…

Judge Kavanaugh against the leftists in Congress

Rich Terrell

Maybe the left should answer some questions instead of Kavanaugh

"Greg Sargent of the Washington Post, Senator Chuck Schumer, and others on the left are trying to trash President Trump's Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, in as many ways possible. One of their many lines of attack is that Trump knows that Kavanaugh will let Trump off on any potential legal problems, presumably from Special Counsel Robert Mueller.

. . .  "I would then ask Schumer why Obama got off without being charged with any crimes, since we know he illegally spied on thousands, and illegally communicated with Hillary Clinton on a non-secure personal computer. Throughout Obama’s eight years, I didn’t see one ounce of concern about Obama getting off scot-free. I would also ask Democrats why the Justice Department under Obama considered Hillary to be above the law.

"I believe that Schumer, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and other Democrats should ask Kavanaugh if he believes that politicians from sanctuary cities and states should be held to account for refusing to abide by their oath of office to enforce the laws of the land.

"I do have some questions I believe Kavanaugh should be required to answer: Did he get his teaching gig at Harvard Law by pretending he was an Indian because of his grandma’s high cheekbones? . . . "

Naturally I would ask these questions in a pleasant, nice way. TD

Millions Dead, Constitution Destroyed, And Other Ridiculous Predictions About Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh  "Accountability: Even before President Trump announced his pick to replace Justice Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court, predictions of doom and gloom were rampant. They'll only get more dire as Brett Kavanaugh's nomination battle proceeds. Will anyone hold these people accountabl .for their unfounded, irresponsible, uninformed scaremongering claims?" . . .

The left reacts to Kavanaugh  . . . "On a serious note, if we had listened to the advice of the pious #nevertrumper crowd, who apparently are more worried about not being shunned from the Georgetown and Hamptons cocktail circuits than getting the policies enacted and the appointments made that they supposedly wanted, Hillary Clinton would have appointed her second justice last night, swinging the balance of the court from 5-4 conservative to 6-3 liberal. Think about that the next time you hear prominent #nevertrumpers like George Will, Jennifer Rubin, Bret Stephens, or David Brooks spouting off."

Donkey Hotey

Chuck Schumer’s Brazen Fable About Nominees and Supreme Court Precedents  . . . "In other words, Schumer (pictured, right) will demand that Kavanaugh commit, in advance, to deciding future cases as Democrats instruct him." . . .

Kavanaugh Visits Capitol Hill as Durbin Predicts 'Wild West D.C.' If Confirmed  These Democrats are not nice people who mean well. TD


The Nomination of [FILL IN THE BLANK] to the Supreme Court Means [REALLY BAD THINGS]
. . . "Did you know that [FILL IN THE BLANK] believes women should be treated as second-class citizens by denying them access to [LIBERAL AGENDA ITEM]? Did you know that [HE/SHE] doesn't agree that [OPINION ALL MY FRIENDS EXPRESS, WHICH I HAVEN'T REALLY THOUGHT ABOUT, BUT I'D BETTER GO ALONG WITH IT OR THEY MIGHT NOT LIKE ME ANYMORE]? I mean... really? It makes you nostalgic for the good old days of [PREVIOUS REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT, WHO I ALSO CALLED "HITLER" ALL THE TIME], doesn't it?" . . .

SCOTUS Protests Are as Salty and Ridiculous as We'd Hoped . . . "The Women's March was so excited to get their objections to the pick out there that they released what looks like Mad Libs made in a Bellevue psyche ward as a press release. They didn't even bother filling in Kavanaugh's name, but left in "XX" in their haste. In the second paragraph they remembered to fill in a name, but didn't bother to look up how it was spelled, proving they have no idea who this nominee is and they don't care, either. Trump nominated him so he must be bad." . . .

Noisy Room

Jeffrey Toobin’s Clueless Supreme Court Meltdowns Should Embarrass CNN

Jeffrey Toobin

✔@JeffreyToobin

See the new @USSupremeCourt clearly: Abortion illegal; doctors prosecuted; gay people barred from restaurants, hotels, stores; African-Americans out of elite schools; gun control banned in 50 states; the end of regulatory state. My @NewYorker column.https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/07/09/how-trumps-supreme-court-pick-could-undo-kennedys-legacy …

1:49 PM - Jul 1, 2018

Tony Branco

People will die!

Can Kavanaugh Be Trusted on Obamacare?

The American Spectator

"A much-debated 2011 opinion suggests that he can."

"Even before President Trump chose Brett Kavanaugh to replace Justice Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court, political henchmen and media hacks began rummaging through his record like so many rats in a ripe dumpster. Their sojourn in the slime revealed nothing more sinister than a conscientious jurist who has actually read the Constitution. To their dismay, his most notable opinion as a judge on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals suggests that he’ll vote to strike down Obamacare’s individual mandate, as well as its guaranteed issue and community rating provisions, when Texas v. United States makes its way to SCOTUS.

"Texas v. United States is, of course, the latest challenge to Obamacare’s constitutionality. It was filed by Texas and nineteen additional states not long after Congress reduced the “tax penalty” associated with the health care law’s individual mandate to zero. In 2012 Chief Justice Roberts ruled, in NFIB v. Sebelius, that the individual mandate was constitutional because it was essentially a tax collected by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for purposes of raising revenue for the government. The plaintiffs argue that the elimination of the tax penalty by Congress last year rendered the Roberts ruling both “irrational” and “legally impossible.”

"The case is currently being argued in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas before Judge Reed O’Connor, who is almost certainly going to rule in favor of the plaintiffs. After going through the usual tedious appeals process, it will inevitably end up before SCOTUS. And this is where some conservatives worry about Kavanaugh. Why? " . . .

Consequently, the only question left for SCOTUS to decide, when Texas v. United States arrives on its doorstep, is what possible rationale can be used to uphold the individual mandate? The Court has already rejected the Commerce Clause argument. The Republican Congress eliminated the tax effective January 1. Thus, because Judge Kavanaugh is an originalist, he will look to the Constitution for some other legitimate reason to uphold the mandate. He will, of course, come up dry. And that’s why Brett Kavanaugh can be trusted on Obamacare.

Democrats Don’t Know Anything About Judge Kavanaugh, They Just Know They Don’t Like Him

Legal Insurrection  

"Monday night, Trump announced his second Supreme Court Justice nominee, setting the left’s dumpster of irrational fears ablaze.

"The meltdowns began with Justice Kennedy’s retirement announcement when Democrats and their media outlets began declaring the end of civilization and the beginning of Handmaid’s Tale Armageddon.

"The White House was especially tight-lipped about Trump’s decision to nominate Judge Kavanaugh to the bench. But Democrats (at least lost with the loudest national platforms) aren’t concerned about Kavanaugh’s record or judicial philosophy, they just know they don’t like him or anyone else on Trump’s shortlist." . . .

Alex Pappas

✔@AlexPappas

When you pre-write your press release slamming Trump’s SCOTUS pick but forget to add the name....

The Strange Career of White Privilege

Victor Davis Hanson

Rich whites invent minority pedigrees to gain advantage while they condemn poor and working-class rural whites as racist.

"You hear the phrase “white privilege” nonstop in America these days, as the slogan has transcended the campus and entered popular culture.

"Historically, the term apparently refers to the original European settlers who came to the United States and later equated the protections of the U.S. Constitution solely with their own majority ethnicity and race — a tribal and chauvinistic mindset that still governs politics and immigration the world over, from China and Japan to most African and South American countries.

"Yet the singular transcendent logic of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence was that all people innately were created equal. It took over two centuries on the ground to catch up to such lofty idealism.

"Yet given that immigration by the early 19th century was already bringing in millions of so-called non-white immigrants, in addition to Native and African Americans, America soon was at least evolving into a multiracial democratic nation united under one shared culture — a radical idea and the first such edgy experiment in human history.

"During the civil-rights movement of the 1960s, the nation’s racial tensions were mostly still defined as a binary of a dominant white majority and an often discriminated-against African-American minority. 

"Years of past prejudice had sparked the idea of affirmative action, or federal reparatory programs accorded to a historically discriminated-against black minority." . . .

Yet no one quite new how to calibrate all the competing claims of victimhood by race, class, gender, and sexual orientation — as if a white transgendered actor should merit more grievance points than a black impoverished lesbian versus an Egyptian immigrant female CEO or a gay Latino policeman. Such musings are not caricatures, but the logic of the preambles to the usual progressive politicking, when a politico such as Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama did not welcome a crowd as a collective of Americans but ticked off all the various identity-politics groups present, all with claims against the majority.

. . .

 When [Trump voters] channel-surfed cable news, or heard of the antics that took place on college campuses, or saw street-theater demonstrations on television, they boiled at the idea that they had often worked at minimum wage, saw their jobs outsourced, never discriminated against anyone, and yet were being damned by smug youth who in a few years would draw on their college B.A. cattle brand, their parents’ lobbying, and the good-old-boy network of being rich, white, and from the proper zip code to inherit their rightful place in business, investment, politics, entertainment, the media, or the university. 

. . .  Keep reading, please

Jim Jordan Is A Man of Integrity Being Railroaded With Factless Allegations

People like Jim spend a lifetime developing a reputation of honesty and integrity, yet irresponsible media try to destroy that reputation with one misleading story. This is what makes it difficult to attract men and women of character and conviction to political office.  In the case of Jordan, the facts are already telling a different story than the headlines.

The Federalist

"When I read the actual stories under those headlines, my reaction turned from dread to outrage. Jim Jordan isn’t being accused; he’s being railroaded."

 Jim DeMint

. . . "Some of the former wrestlers, including two with criminal pasts, are now accusing Jordan of knowingly turning a blind eye to Strauss’s alleged abusive behavior. One is a serial litigant who has made wild accusations not only against Jordan, but Jordan’s brother and nephews as well, also wrestlers.

"Jordan categorically denies the allegations, stating on Fox News last week: “I never saw, never heard of, never was told about any kind of abuse. If I did I would have dealt with it. A good coach puts the interests of his student-athletes first.”

Former Wrestlers Stand Up for Jim Jordan’s Integrity  

"Amidst the sudden allegations, numerous former OSU wrestlers are coming forward to back Jordan and questioning the motivations for the charges.

“ 'There’s a lot more of us who are standing by (Jordan) than those who are accusing him of not acting,’’ former OSU wrestler Dan George told The Asbury Park Press. “I’m devastated by what I’ve heard. My heart goes out to anyone who was abused in any way. But Jim Jordan is a tremendous human being who has always lived his life beyond reproach. If he had any knowledge of any misconduct, he would deal with it. There’s no question in my mind.' ’’ . . .

A word of encouragement to Rep. Jordan would help him greatly, please:

 Rep. Jordan is 202-225-2676.  TD

What is your position regarding the American Federation of Teachers?

Daily Caller  "Failed 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is planning on appearing at a convention for the American Federation of Teachers this weekend.

"The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports that Clinton will speak on Friday while Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders will speak Saturday and Sunday, respectively.

"Clinton’s appearance at the same conference with Warren and Sanders, two possible Democratic challengers to President Trump in 2020, comes at a curious time." . . .

. . . "In a widely-cited recent column for the New York Post, Michael Goodwin wondered, “Is Hillary Clinton secretly planning to run in 2020?”

"As crazy as the idea may sound, a number of Democratic voters are actually open to it.

"According to a June poll, Clinton is Democratic voters’ second choice to be 2020 nominee behind former Vice President Joe Biden.

"In her book, “What Happened,” she said that she was done being a presidential candidate, however, she also said, “I will speak out on the causes I care about, campaigning for other Democrats, and do whatever I can to build the infrastructure we need to succeed.”

"Clinton has blamed her 2016 loss on a number of things other than just herself. Since the election, she has blamed Bernie Sanders and his “Bernie Bros,” racism, sexism, Joe Biden, “Pizzagate,” Anthony Weiner, and the media for her loss, among other things."

(RELATED: Today Is Blame Someone Else Day — Here Are All The Things Hillary Has Blamed For Her Election Loss.)  #13 is a winner:

13. #Hillary Blames white men and married white women for election loss #NationalBlameSomeoneElseDay