Connect with us

Democrats

3 reasons every Republican should have voted against the so-called ‘anti-hate’ resolution

Published

on

3 reasons every Republican should have voted against the so-called anti-hate resolution

Yesterday, 23 Republicans in the House of Representatives voted against a supposed “anti-hate” resolution. As anticipated, these Republicans are now getting called out in mainstream media for supporting hate because by voting against the bill, that must mean they’re in support of antisemitism and the smorgasbord of other forms of bigotry tossed into the bill.

In reality, these 23 members should be commended for not tolerating the sham of a resolution that was placed before them. Here are the members of Congress who deserve kudos for their efforts:

  • Andy Biggs (Ariz.)
  • Mo Brooks (Ala.)
  • Ken Buck (Colo.)
  • Ted Budd (N.C.)
  • Michael Burgess (Texas)
  • Liz Cheney (Wyo.)
  • Chris Collins (N.Y.)
  • Mike Conaway (Texas)
  • Rick Crawford (Ark.)
  • Jeff Duncan (S.C.).
  • Louie Gohmert (Texas)
  • Paul Gosar (Ariz.)
  • Tom Graves (Ga.)
  • Pete King (N.Y.)
  • Doug LaMalfa (Calif.)
  • Thomas Massie (Ky.)
  • Steven Palazzo (Miss.)
  • Mike Rogers (Ala.)
  • Chip Roy (Texas)
  • Greg Steube (Fla.)
  • Mark Walker (N.C.)
  • Ted Yoho (Fla.)
  • Lee Zeldin (N.Y.)

Here are three reasons why they deserve credit instead of the bashing they’re getting in the media:

Representative Ilhan Omar was painted as a hero instead of a bigot

For those with extremely short memories, Representative Ilhan Omar (D-MN) was the reason this issue was brought to the House of Representatives in the first place. She didn’t speak out against hatred or righteously condemn wrongdoings among her peers. Instead, she did what she’s been doing for years: attack Israel and those who support the Jewish state. As our best ally in the Middle East and the region’s only true Democracy, it is anti-American to make baseless accusations against them or the people in DC who support them.

It’s one thing to have an open dialogue about specific disagreements one might have with the government of Israel or the influence they have in American politics. That’s not only acceptable but in many ways righteous. But that’s not what Omar has been doing. Not even close.

Nevertheless, this resolution doesn’t include her name nor the specific bigotry she engaged in while Tweeting to the public. She went from the root cause of the scandal to “she who shall not be named” in less than a week. Over time, she will be credited by mainstream media as the person who was brave enough to speak out and bring bigotry to light, forcing a resolution in Congress to condemn hate. She’ll be painted as the hero. This is 1984-level doublespeak at its finest.

Meaningless resolutions are meaningless

When the initial proposed resolution was to call out antisemitism, it had meaning. It declared Jews in America, who were the victims in 58% of religious hate crimes in 2018 despite accounting for less than 2% of the population, should be protected. It would also declare that speaking out in hatred against Jews was not okay, even for Muslims.

They could and probably should have also had a separate resolution for anti-Muslim hatred. Though they are not persecuted nearly as much as Jews in America, there is still enough anti-Muslim sentiment to make a resolution acceptable as long as it was done separately from the antisemitic resolution.

By throwing in every possible protected group based on religion, race, and sexual orientation, they took a solid resolution against antisemitism and turned it into a worthless resolution against nothing. It would have been easier to simply point out who wasn’t protected. The resolution could have been called the “Only Hate Against Straight Caucasian Males is Acceptable” bill and it would have had the same effect.

Democrats get to wiggle out of another fine mess they’d gotten themselves into

There is a schism in the Democratic Party. At least there was before yesterday. Now, their infighting will be swept under the rug like the scandal that was hitting Virginia Democrats before the media got bored with it.

By having only 23 Republicans vote for the bill, they’ll get singled out as hatemongers. Had the entire Republican caucus voted against it, we could continue the discussion about why the resolution was unacceptable based on its lack of merits and the presence of multiple demerits.

Instead, Kevin McCarthy and the rest of the Republicans retreated once again from the high ground they had been given, enabling the Democrats to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. It was their responsibility to take control of the narrative by voting against the bill and explaining why they did so. Instead, they left the principled members of their caucus out to dry.

We’ve all seen our fair share of hate hoaxes over the past couple of years. This may be the first time we got to see an anti-hate hoax in play. The fact that it came from Capitol Hill would be hilarious if it weren’t so infuriating and sad.

Is the nation ready to revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Facebook Comments
Advertisement
1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. Janice Levan

    March 8, 2019 at 1:31 pm

    I see there were only 23 people in the room that found a serious problem with this bill.

    Did it even mention for Jewish people, who are targeted every day in America and around the world by Muslims. I don’t think the cutting off of heads are something to ignore.
    Not to mention the persecution of Christians. It should have been a bill that targeted the subject and not trying to add names of groups. We are all against this kind of behavior for ALL people.

    Shameful bill!

Leave a Reply

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

Democrats

AOC says 2/3rds of Democrats have ‘social intelligence of a sea sponge’ for believing her 12-year apocalyptic claims

Published

on

AOC says 23rds of Democrats have social intelligence of a sea sponge for believing her 12-year apoca

On May 12, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said anyone who took her literally about the world ending in 12 years over climate change would “have to have the social intelligence of a sea sponge.” A new survey by Rasmussen indicates most Democrats have such social intelligence. They took her literally, and therefore they all possess sea-sponge-intellects, according to their young cult leader.

67% of Democrats believe the United States has only 12 years to aggressively fight climate change or else there will be disastrous and irreparable damage to the country and the world.

This is the problem with radical progressive politicians like AOC. She mixes hyperbole with her actual feelings and doesn’t give indications as to when she’s being literal and when she’s using “dry humor + sarcasm.” But if you listen to one of the many instances where she makes the claim about 12-years-until-apocalypse, she seems deadly serious.

She’s not the biggest problem, though. The real problems are the millions of sheep who follow here without question, who believe everything she says and support everything she does. The left often argues that President Trump’s most passionate followers are like a cult, but even the President’s supporters aren’t as dedicated when it comes to taking him literally as AOC’s cult following is with her claims. The response to Trump’s actions and statements are supported but measured. Moreover, I’ve seen (and participated in) plenty of pushback against some of his policies from tariffs to firearm restrictions to dealing with North Korea.

We hear fairly regularly about pushback from prominent conservatives, and oftentimes the President takes this pushback into account when making decisions. But with AOC, the only occasional pushback comes from the Democratic establishment as Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi or other old school Democrats jab at AOC a bit. Otherwise, she’s unabated in her rhetoric and unchecked in her actions.

Here’s the sad part. If you were to tell AOC’s followers they were sea sponges for taking her literally, they’d scream at you. But if you showed them that SHE called them sea sponges, they’d nod and say, “Oh, if AOC said it, I must be a sea sponge.”

Facebook Comments
Continue Reading

Democrats

Lindsey Graham makes two great points about the Democrats’ impeachment hysteria

Published

on

Lindsey Graham makes two great points about the Democrats impeachment hysteria

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) went on Fox News with Sean Hannity today to discuss how many Democratic lawmakers and candidates for president have gone into full-blown impeachment hysteria. He made a pair of excellent points.

First, he noted that the Democrats are doing so at their own peril. It’s difficult for them to justify pushing forward following failed investigations and realizations that their narrative about President Trump colluding with the Russians was patently false. The American people have and well continue to see through their attacks as nothing more than unhinged anti-Trump rhetoric designed to distract voters from their own shortcomings. Nevertheless, they’re forced into this line of thinking by the hyper-leftist base that is essentially telling them to take the impeachment way or the highway.

But he noted something else equally important. He said, “The public’s going to kick the Democrats out of power and they’re going to reelect the President if he stays focused on doing the job for the American people.” [emphasis mine]

This is extremely important to understand because the President is known as a fighter. Ever since Attorney General William Barr released his summary of the Mueller Report, the President has Tweeted and talked about it almost non-stop. As recently as this morning, he focused again on the Democrats coming after him.

Graham is correct. If the President keeps doing what he’s been doing in the Oval Office and refrains from being drawn into the Democrats’ petty battles with him, the people will appreciate it. If he goes low with them, there could be challenges.

Facebook Comments
Continue Reading

Conservatism

The complete fraud that is National Socialist Healthcare

Published

on

By

The complete fraud that is National Socialist Healthcare

The home state of Mr. ‘Medifail for All’ tried National Socialist healthcare and it didn’t work. What is the point of ever trying it again?

One would think that the operation of a socialist health care system in the home of Bernie ‘Medifail for all’ Sanders would be touted until the bovines hit the barn. Well, one would be wrong in that assumption since it never worked as advertised.

The Washington Post recently profiled the rise and spectacular fall of ‘Green Mountain Care’ from the fantastic promises at its inception to its inevitable crash as is the case with every socialist system. The Vermont rendition of single payer – a state version of National Socialist Healthcare – came onto the scene with great promise and fanfare. The problem is that states are forbidden to counterfeit [oops! ‘print’] currency, so they quickly ran out of other people’s money and the whole rotten edifice collapsed.

Why Vermont’s single-payer effort failed and what Democrats can learn from it
Three and a half years after then-Gov. Peter Shumlin of Vermont signed into law a vision for the nation’s first single-payer health system, his small team was still struggling to find a way to pay for it.

Two days later, on Dec. 17, 2014, Shumlin, a Democrat who had swept into office promising a health-care system that left no one uninsured, announced he was giving up.

The trajectory of Green Mountain Care, as Vermont’s health system was to be known — from the euphoric spring of 2011 to its crash landing in late 2014 — offers sobering lessons for the current crop of Democrats running for president, including Vermont’s own Sen. Bernie Sanders (I), most of whom embrace Medicare-for-all or other aspirations for universal insurance coverage.

[Our Emphasis]
Oddly enough, the local socialist Senator rarely mentions this when trying to sell everyone else on this statist snake oil. Those with a modicum of intelligence tend to learn from the colossal mistakes of others, implementing what works while rejecting that which does not. Then there are those on the Left who insanely insist on repeating those mistakes, hoping for a counterintuitive outcome.

This is no academic exercise, born of the Platonic dialogs from 2,400 years ago on the ‘Ideal state’. This is a deadly serious matter with millions of people’s lives at stake. Not to mention that as reported by the Associated-Press that ‘Medicare for all’ was projected to cost $32.6 trillion.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Sen. Bernie Sanders’ “Medicare for all” plan would boost government health spending by $32.6 trillion over 10 years, requiring historic tax hikes, says a study released Monday by a university-based libertarian policy center.

That’s trillion with a “T.”

Optimal conditions – and single payer still failed

One couldn’t ask for better conditions for this failed experiment in state socialist health care. The same report from the Washington post on this failed experiment noted that:

It has some of the nation’s healthiest residents, with some of the lowest rates of uninsured. It is small and homogeneous. It shares a border with Canada, putting an existing single-payer system within sight. And it has just one main insurer, the nonprofit Blue Cross Blue Shield of Vermont, repeatedly ranked the most efficient Blue Cross Blue Shield plan in the nation.

It was supposed to lower costs, insure more people while eliminating waste, fraud and abuse [Stop us if you’ve heard this joke before]. Unsurprisingly, it failed to do this. Nevertheless, the hometown senator of this communist catastrophe still touts the same ‘features’ in trying to sell his $32.6 trillion pipe dream.

Unfortunately for the purveyors of these plans presumably fueled by pixie dust and allusions to brand new ‘rights’ conjured up out of thin air the author of the piece failed to offer a solution aside from ‘controlling costs’ [read: death panels] or counterfeiting.. er.. ‘printing’ more money to endlessly throw into the bottomless pit that is the government.

It ran into all manner of problems, including what to do with people coming in over the border for all the free goodies [Stop us if you’ve also heard this one before]. Ever increasing tax rates hobbling the economy, ending with the fact that the costs of a bloated bureaucracy would mean less coverage that what the people already had.

Ironically enough, when the whole system died an inglorious death, Bernie Sanders was in Iowa testing the presidential waters, never mentioning the failure of single payer in his home state, the very idea that he incessantly touts. Why bother with facts and logic when one can just invoke counterfeit civil rights, paid for with other people’s money?

Meanwhile, the ‘objective’ media cheerleads for socialistic slavery

Still, this hasn’t stopped the ever ‘objective’ national socialist media from writing ‘News’ stories on the subject, such as this sickening saccharine piece from the Associated-Press ‘Medicare for All’s’ rich benefits ‘leapfrog’ other nations.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Generous benefits. No copays. No need for private policies. The “Medicare for All” plan advocated by leading 2020 Democrats appears more lavish than what’s offered in other advanced countries, compounding the cost but also potentially broadening its popular appeal.

Reading that infomercial for socialism, one can almost imagine the rise of a superhero in the guise of a later-day superman. The virtual embodiment of every wonderful feature of ‘Medifail for all’ vanquishing every cost overrun, taking down the ever evil private health insurance monster, providing free healthcare for all while dispensing Mocha Lattes on the side.

Faster than a speeding cost overrun. More powerful than free enterprise. Able to heap benefits to all in a single bound.

Look! Up in the sky! It’s a bird. It’s a plane It’s Single payer socialism! Here to save the day…. Until it implodes the economy.

After which, no one is helped.  How is that compassion?

Single payer can never work

Sadly, the author of the Washington post piece failed to cite how to get the bloated edifice off the ground. This is because there is no way to get it to fly.

The proper way to address this problem is to try a different direction, away from authoritarian socialism and towards economic Liberty. Conjuring up new civil rights does little to pay for all the freebies. As way experienced with a single payer experiment under ideal conditions, the end result was worse than what already existed.

There is no point in trying something that is doomed to failure, single payer [or whatever it’s called] can never work as advertised.

The Takeaway

It should be obvious that a governmental solution to the problem does not exist. Thus, it only makes sense to try a different approach. This won’t empower the Socialist-Left, but they claim to only have everyone’s best interests at heart. Let them show that is the case with a system based on economic Liberty instead of socialistic slavery.

Facebook Comments
Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending