Connect with us

Democrats

Three terrible decisions this week exemplify why Democrats keep failing

Published

on

Three terrible decisions this week exemplify why Democrats keep failing

Keep in mind, it’s only Tuesday. We still have three awful decisions by Democrats to discuss. In fact, “awful” or “terrible” just aren’t strong enough to describe how bad these decisions were.

It’s been my contention that since the mid-90s, Democrats have been trending away from sensibility and towards unhinged lunacy. At the time we thought the Clinton administration was going too far, but let’s be fair. Outside of his sexual deviations, they weren’t pushing the crazy ideas of today’s Democratic Party. Socialism wasn’t even a consideration. The 2nd Amendment was relatively safe, Brady bill aside. Economic growth was strong (in large part because of the internet). Crime was low.

No, I’m not defending Bill Clinton’s presidency. I’m simply suggesting we thought it was so far to the left at that moment, but his actions were clearly moderate compared to the far-left lurch we’re seeing today.

It isn’t just the policy shifts. Their styles of campaigning and governing have gone completely bonkers ever since Barack Obama took office. Since Sunday, we’ve seen three glaring examples of extremely poor decisions that are indicators of two undeniable truths.

They are lost in their leftist lunacy and they don’t even know it.

Here are the decisions that exemplify the path of today’s Democratic Party.

Sunday: 60 Minutes “interview” is a bickering battle

There’s one thing leftist mainstream media hasn’t learned for some reason. If they let the President answer questions, as they did during the 2016 primary season, he will say things that either don’t match reality or that paint him into a corner. It seems like every set of questions, whether at a press conference or interview, turns into an attempt by the “journalist” to debate the President rather than let him answer the question.

Lesley Stahl on 60 Minutes Sunday was no exception. If anything, it was a shining example of how the press handles the President. Not a question went by where she didn’t interrupt his answer or challenge him in some way. It was a stark contrast to the first time President Obama took was interviewed in the Oval Office.

There’s one glaring difference between 60 Minutes’ interviews with Presidents Obama and Trump

http://noqreport.com/2018/10/14/theres-one-glaring-difference-60-minutes-interviews-presidents-obama-trump/“Journalist” Lesley Stahl spoke over the President multiple times. If you watch the entire interview, you’ll see that this happened throughout. She would ask a question, most of which were attempts at “gotcha” responses, then would interrupt the President any time he didn’t give the answer she was wanting.

Now, compare that to the interview in the early days of the Obama administration.

Some may attempt to argue that mainstream media is not part of the Democratic Party. To this, I eloquently reply, “LOLOLOLOLOLOL.”

Monday: Someone told Elizabeth Warren releasing her DNA test was a good idea

It started off as a real winner for the Democrats when headlines started popping up that Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) had released a DNA test conducted by an award-winning scientist that demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that she had substantial Native American heritage. Mainstream media started pushing the story immediately. Leftists cheered.

Then, things started coming to light. First, the initial report required a correction because their math was off. This highlighted the possibility that she is only 1/1024th Native American, which is actually below the national average. Then, it was revealed that the test couldn’t confirm actual Native American heritage, but that the results could have revealed a distant ancestor from South America.

Things were looking pretty bad as social media started taking her bold declaration and mocking it profusely.

Elizabeth Warren releases DNA proof that she’s at least 1/1024th Native American. Twitter responds appropriately.

http://noqreport.com/2018/10/15/elizabeth-warren-releases-dna-proof-shes-least-11024th-native-american-twitter-responds-appropriately/The test shows she is at most 1/32nd Native American if she is six generations from her Native American ancestor. That’s her best-case scenario. At worst, her ancestor was as far back as ten generations which would make her 1/1024th Native American. To put that into perspective, if she were to honor her heritage by engaging in 1/1024th of a four-hour Native American Sweat, she’d be in and out of the lodge in 14 seconds.

Okay, so it may not have been a great idea to release the results. Instead of backing her claims in the past that she’s part Native American, they seemed to refute them. Democrats started pointing in other directions, including the President’s promise to give $1,000,000 to a charity of her choice if she could prove she had Native American ancestors.

It was a good ploy, but then the hammer dropped on the whole thing.

Cherokee Nation responds to Senator Warren’s DNA test

https://www.cherokee.org/News/Stories/20181015_Cherokee-Nation-responds-to-Senator-Warrens-DNA-test“A DNA test is useless to determine tribal citizenship. Current DNA tests do not even distinguish whether a person’s ancestors were indigenous to North or South America,” Cherokee Nation Secretary of State Chuck Hoskin Jr. said. “Sovereign tribal nations set their own legal requirements for citizenship, and while DNA tests can be used to determine lineage, such as paternity to an individual, it is not evidence for tribal affiliation. Using a DNA test to lay claim to any connection to the Cherokee Nation or any tribal nation, even vaguely, is inappropriate and wrong. It makes a mockery out of DNA tests and its legitimate uses while also dishonoring legitimate tribal governments and their citizens, whose ancestors are well documented and whose heritage is proven. Senator Warren is undermining tribal interests with her continued claims of tribal heritage.”

Someone gave Warren really bad advice by telling her this will get her in the spotlight and help her launch her presidential campaign. Whoever it was should probably give up on being an adviser. This was a bad idea that could be seen from a mile away.

Tuesday: Heidi Heitkamp outs sexual assault victims in an ad without getting their permission

The singular purpose of an ad placed in the Bismarck Tribune was to showcase that Senator Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND) was sensitive to victims of domestic violence, sexual abuse and rape. Moreover, it was intended to show that her competitor, Kevin Cramer, was not.

Her campaign wanted it to appear they had reached out and were assisting these 127 survivors of abuse. The problem is they weren’t helping these survivors and they didn’t reach out to many of them. Some went to social media to voice their outrage of being outed by a United States Senator to the public. A few claimed they weren’t even victims. At least one said she’d never heard from Heitkamp nor did she support the Senator.

This should have been extremely easy. Do what you claim by reaching out, getting feedback, and offering support to women. 127 is a lot of people to contact, but it must be done if that’s what your ad claims you’re doing. Instead, the campaign failed to do the most basic tasks of actually contacting the people they claimed they contacted. It’s turned into a major debacle.

Heidi Heitkamp just blew her reelection hopes to smithereens

http://noqreport.com/2018/10/16/heidi-heitkamp-just-blew-reelection-hopes-smithereens/“Sexual assault is a serious crime – and one that too many North Dakota women have experienced,” Heitkamp said. “In an attempt to bring awareness to this issue and push back against dismissive comments toward sexual assault survivors by Kevin Cramer, our campaign worked with victim advocates to identify women who would be willing sign the letter or share their story.”

This should be the end of her campaign. In a sane world, you can’t do something like that and still keep your job. This is the political world where sanity is not required, but hopefully the people of North Dakota will hear about this and be rightly disgusted.

Her chances of reelection were slipping away, but now they should be essentially zilch.

Today’s Democratic Party

It’s only Tuesday. There are plenty of days left in the week to make a bigger mockery of the party of failure.

My biggest concern isn’t that the party keeps failing. That’s actually a good thing, especially considering how far to the left their ideologies have become in recent years. The real concern here is that they’re becoming more of a wounded dog than a fighter, which means their activists are becoming more and more likely to engage in extreme measures to make their points heard.

When their leaders continuously fail them, the leftist activists will have no choice but to become more vocal, more defiant, and more violent. Party leadership can’t get anything done, so the far left in the trenches are becoming more of a threat than ever before. If they can’t legislate their agenda, they’ll attempt to force it upon us. That’s troubling.

The modern machinations of the Democratic Party are marked by mistake after mistake. They seem like a party without a cause other than trying to stop the President. Even in this singular goal, they’re failing miserably.

Image via The Nation.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Democrats

Kevin McCarthy: GOP can investigate Democrats, but Democrats can’t investigate Trump

Published

on

Kevin McCarthy GOP can investigate Democrats but Democrats cant investigate Trump

When my friend and fellow talk-show host Shannon Joy refers to the Republican and Democrat duopoly in Washington as the #UNIBROW, she does so to show how there is no difference between the two parties when it comes to their agendas.

Another trait they have in common is their obvious display of hypocrisy when it comes to manipulating the rule of law to protect political parties for partisan purposes, especially if you’re a member of the party that was soundly defeated recently, placing you in the minority.

The latest example of what this looks like comes to us courtesy of the new GOP leader in the House, Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), in his latest defense of Donald Trump. In a recent interview with Trump Pravda (FOX News), McCarthy mentioned that he thinks it’s time for the Democrats to surrender their subpoena power to investigate the president.

“It looks like what [Democrats will] focus on is just more investigations. I think America is too great a nation to have such a small agenda.

“I think there are other problems out there that we really should be focused on. And my belief is, let’s see where we can work together. Let’s move America forward.”

Ironically, as Obama’s re-election got underway after the Democrats lost the House in the 2010 midterms, Pelosi sounded a lot like McCarthy concerning the need to work together. Funny how the losing party interprets their defeat as a call for “bipartisanship,” isn’t it?

It’s also ironic how the losing party in these two midterm elections, in large part, lost due to the unpopularity of their representative in the White House after two years of broken promises.

McCarthy’s disingenuous plea for bipartisanship is a different tune than the one he was singing in 2015 during the Benghazi hearings. Not only did he support never-ending investigations of Obama and Hillary, he openly admitted in an interview with Sean Hannity that his primary motivation was finding ways to take down the Democrat nominee.

“What you’re going to see is a conservative speaker, that takes a conservative Congress, that puts a strategy to fight and win. And let me give you one example. Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right?

“But we put together a Benghazi special committee. A select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Because she’s untrustable. But no one would have known that any of that had happened had we not fought to make that happen.”

I wonder whatever happened to that “conservative speaker” and that “conservative Congress.”

In the end, McCarthy is playing the same role in 2018 that Pelosi played in 2010: protect the president and the party instead of America while making partisan demands to serve as fodder for the next election.

Hopefully, true conservatives will see through this masquerade of self-centered scoundrels and reject the reprobate “representatives” dwelling in D.C. from both parties.

And yes … that includes the Democrat with an “R” after his name currently occupying the White House.

Originally posted on StridentConservative.com.

 


David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is distributed by the Salem Radio Network and is heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and Facebook.

Subscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS

Continue Reading

Democrats

Is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez really Jewish?

Published

on

By

Is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez really Jewish

The congresswoman’s Jewish possible ancestors shouldn’t be a problem for anyone. But the idea that her leftist stands are somehow authentically Jewish is troubling.

 At a time when DNA tests are a national craze, as well as source of political controversy, we shouldn’t be surprised about claims of Jewish identity from anyone. But when they come from someone as controversial as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the expressions of joy and dismay about her possible connection to the tribe were predictably partisan and downright foolish.

The incoming member of Congress from Queens, N.Y., made headlines when she told those in attendance at a synagogue Hanukkah party in her district over the weekend that “a very, very long time ago, generations and generations ago, my family consisted of Sephardic Jews.”

As she explained, the people of her native Puerto Rico are descendants of many different strains of immigrants, including those Jews who fled Spain in the 15th century. Within her family’s collective memory is some sense of having been descended at least partly from such Jews.

Those who already liked the young Democratic Socialist, who has become the rock star of her party, were thrilled that she could be claimed as part of the family. On the other hand, Jews who dislike her leftist politics were disgusted. It was a rerun of what happened when House Speaker Paul Ryan found out that his DNA was 3 percent Ashkenazi Jewish during historian Henry Louis Gates’s “Finding Your Roots” PBS TV program. Liberal Jews responded to that item with nasty partisan abuse, as well as declarations that he wasn’t wanted. Ocasio-Cortez’s detractors were quick to use the same sort of invective.

But those who accused her of attempting to steal Jewish identity weren’t being fair. This is unlike the antics of fellow Democrat Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who attempted to back up her claims of Native American identity with a DNA test that showed that, at best, she was 1/64th descended from either the Cherokee or Delaware tribes. Ocasio-Cortez wasn’t pretending to be Jewish or trying to show that DNA was identity, let alone to justify using it for personal advancement as the senator allegedly did when she claimed to be the first “woman of color” to be named a professor at Harvard Law School.

Attacks on her for mentioning her Catholic family’s memories of their partial Jewish past were inappropriate. We know that 20 centuries of post-exile persecution has resulted in many branches falling away from the Jewish ancestral tree, so her story is hardly uncommon. It is also a heartening sign of the times that prominent non-Jews are proud about their Jewish roots, rather than—as would have been the case in the not-so-distant past—feel shame about it.

The tenuous connections between her family, or that of Ryan and any long-lost Jewish ancestors, are merely intellectual curiosities. Still, two aspects of the issue are worth some comment.

One is the danger that someone with some claims to Jewish identity will use it selectively in order to justify taking a stand against Israel. Over the decades, we’ve seen that happen with a number of writers or politicians who have few ties to their Jewish heritage, yet trot it out as a credential that enables them to express anger, embarrassment or outrage about the conflict in the Middle East. The “not in my name” meme in which Jews who know next to nothing about Israel and its geopolitical dilemmas seek to disassociate themselves from Israelis fighting for their lives is despicable. If Ocasio-Cortez were ever to use such a rhetorical device to justify siding with her close allies—incoming House Reps. Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib—who are supporters of the anti-Semitic BDS movement that seeks Israel’s destruction, that would be outrageous.

Yet there’s another more serious argument to be addressed. It’s the theme sounded in the Forward after the latest Ocasio-Cortez story broke—that the Socialist politician is actually more authentically Jewish because of her politics than conservative or Zionist Jews.

Part of this mindset is the notion that modern American political liberalism and Judaism are interchangeable. It’s more than just an old joke to say that many American Jews conceive of their faith as more or less the Democratic Party platform with holidays thrown in. While it’s an insult to Judaism to conceive of it as nothing more than an elaborate theological justification for partisan politics, it’s also true that many American Jews see their faith as determining their votes. In that sense, there are Jews who see American Jewish conservatives or supporters of the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as representing a point of view that is alien to their conception of what it means to be Jewish.

More troubling is the idea that a loose sense of identity in which a multicultural frame of reference about the world—as opposed to a strictly Jewish one—is more representative of the way young Jews think today. Given the demographic implosion of non-Orthodox Jews in the United States, it is hardly surprising that some Jews think this way, but the consequences in terms of a decline in a sense of Jewish peoplehood are obvious and serious. If we begin to worship inclusion and diversity to the point where Jewish parochialism and nationalism, even in its most benign forms, are rejected as illiberal, then we will be part of a community that stands for nothing and is incapable of sustaining itself.

The real tragedy is that too many young Jews see Jewish observance or Zionism as antithetical to their progressive political views. If we get to the point where Ocasio-Cortez’s sensibilities about Israel or those of others on the left who might falsely regard Zionism as a form of racism because it contradicts their intersectional beliefs are accepted as legitimate Jewish perspectives, that will be a disaster. If such views are seen as more authentically Jewish than that of a typical Israeli or an affiliated Jew, then we will have arrived at a point where Jewish identity in this country for all too many of us will be nothing more than a meaningless percentage on a DNA test.

Jonathan S. Tobin is editor in chief of JNS — Jewish News Syndicate. Follow him on Twitter at: @jonathans_tobin.

Continue Reading

Democrats

Schumer, Pelosi demonstrate why Democrats are right to want new blood in leadership

Published

on

Schumer Pelosi demonstrate why Democrats are right to want new blood in leadership

Today’s episode of Kabuki theater in DC featured Senator Chuck Schumer and Representative Nancy Pelosi playing partisan politics as usual. It was embarrassing for both of them, and while President Trump wasn’t flawless in his counterattacks, his arguments were sound and he left with the upper hand going forward.

Let’s set aside the border wall or government funding debate for a moment and focus on the tired tactics employed by the two leaders of the Democratic Party on Capitol Hill. One would think that by now, they’d know how to handle their White House nemesis, but they don’t. They even handed the President a victory by letting him “take the mantle” of the impending government shutdown. By accepting responsibility for shutting down the government for the sake of border security, the President demonstrated a rare case of rational and unexpected turning of the tables on the Democrats.

Schumer and Pelosi likely see it as a victory, but when it’s spun and respun in the minds of the people, they’ll realize he did what Schumer and his cronies have always failed to do. He took responsibility for his actions. He is taking a stand and noted that during the previous shutdown, which was initiated by Schumer, everybody pointed fingers. Nobody took responsibility. This is going to count for something.

But let’s get back to the need for new blood in Democratic leadership. I am neither a Republican nor Democrat; currently I’m a conservative Independent who believed in the Federalist Party when I co-founded it but have grown disenchanted with the current direction of that party, so I essentially have no horse in this race. I am by no means rooting for Democrats or offering them advice, but as an impartial observer I can say their recent victories in the midterm election will be meaningless if they retain current leadership.

The only thing funnier than watching Schumer fumble about with his attempt at righteous indignation was watching Pelosi handle her own inspired moment with the elegance of an orangutan. Her attempts to chastise the President were forced and fumbled. She seemed completely outwitted and outmatched.

Democrats can do better. I don’t want them to do better; having Chuck and Nancy leading the charge will only embarrass the Democrats more. But it’s still noteworthy after listening to some of the more eloquent members of their caucus that these two are no longer in touch with the people they purportedly represent.

As the party continues to drift further to the left, Schumer and Pelosi are remnants of days past when bipartisanship and brinkmanship could coexist. That’s not the case today and it may never be the case again. They’re part of the same elite their party despises.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement Donate to NOQ Report

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report