|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 16, 2019 14:08:09 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/49549/walsh-member-aocs-squad-just-made-outrageously-matt-walsh?ampRep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), now known as the Ringo Starr of the so-called "Squad," is, like the other members of her far-left girl group, a raging bigot. While they go into spasms of outrage over President Trump's stupid tweet, we must bear in mind that, when it comes to denouncing bigotry, none of these four have a leg to stand on — especially Pressley, who now proudly owns one of the most absurdly bigoted statements we've heard from an American politician in decades. Speaking at a progressive political convention a few days ago, Pressley launched into a diatribe that would surely end her career if she belonged to a different political party or political movement. To the sound of exuberant applause, the new Ringo declared: “We don’t need any more brown faces that don’t want to be a brown voice. We don’t need black faces that don’t want to be a black voice. We don’t need Muslims that don’t want to be a Muslim voice. We don’t need queers that don’t want to be a queer voice.” Someone who is not well acquainted with liberal-speak may be more confused than horrified by these comments. What is a brown voice? What is a black voice? Do voices have colors? What she means is that a brown or black person should have opinions that are properly representative of their racial communities. And what she means by properly representative of their racial communities is that their opinions should be resoundingly liberal. Put more simply, Pressley is telling brown, black, Muslim, and gay people to keep their traps shut if they aren't going to conform to her ideological expectations. "You're not needed," she emphasizes. Leftists like Pressley feel perfectly entitled to issue directives of this sort, authoritatively instructing the plebes as to what they may and may not say and think based on the demographic and identity groups to which they belong. Her talk of "brown voices" is telling. She doesn't see brown, black, Muslim, and "queer" people as distinct individuals with their own opinions and perspectives. Rather, she, like any modern leftist, sees racial and ethnic groups as monoliths — and every member is a mindless, faceless "representative" of that whole. And the whole, Pressley has decided, must vote Democrat, support things like affirmative action, universal health care, and abortion, and affirm every last leftist doctrine without exception. Any member who falls outside of the box Pressley and her ilk have created is anathema. At best, useless. At worst, a heretic who should be burned at the stake (or bludgeoned with a crowbar, as is Antifa's preferred method). An ordinary bigot may simply feel that his race or ethnicity tends to be superior to other races and ethnicities. That is a stupid and harmful view, to be sure, but it's child's play compared to the sort of bigotry Pressley has promoted. She wishes to erase the individual and live in a world consisting only of homogenous, amorphic "identities," where every person is but a mere mouthpiece for an ethnic hive mind. It is a bigotry far more insidious and horrifying than the sort of bigotry she constantly (and often fallaciously) finds in the hearts of others.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 16, 2019 14:13:45 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/49558/cbp-chief-democrat-rhetoric-responsible-fueling-ryan-saavedraActing Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Commissioner Mark Morgan directly pointed to the rhetoric coming from the Democratic Party as being responsible for Saturday's far-left terrorist attack on an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility in Tacoma, Washington. Morgan appeared on Fox News' "The Ingraham Angle" with host Laura Ingraham, who highlighted the rhetoric that was used in the attack. "[The attacker's] manifesto repeatedly referred to ICE and the holding centers as 'concentration camps,' a comparison pushed by AOC," Ingraham said. "Not one 2020 Dem or mainstream media organization thought to mention that link, that same verbiage, none of it." Ingraham later noted that she was not specifically saying that Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) was responsible for the attack but highlighted the media's double standard on the issue.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 16, 2019 15:46:47 GMT -6
Republican Congressman Doug Collins (GA) challenged Speaker Pelosi on Tuesday as she spoke in favor of condemning Trump’s “racist” tweets from the House floor.
Rep. Collins demanded that Pelosi’s remarks be “taken down,” in an extraordinary rebuke of the House Speaker Tuesday afternoon.
Rep. Collins’ challenge to Pelosi was bold and was the first of its kind in decades — his rebuke of the Speaker could actually result in Pelosi being barred from speaking on the House floor for the rest of the day.
“There is no place anywhere for the president’s words, which are not only divisive, but dangerous and have legitimized and increased fear and hatred of new Americans and people of color,” Pelosi said. “It’s so sad because you would think that there would be a given that we would universally, in this body, just say, ‘Of course. Of course.'”
“There’s no excuse for any response to those words but a swift and strong unified condemnation. Every single member of this institution, Democratic and Republican, should join us in condemning the president’s racist tweets. To do anything less would be a shocking rejection of our values, and a shameful abdication of our oath of office to protect the American people. I urge a unanimous vote, and yield back the balance of my time,” Pelosi added.
Congressman Collins stood up and asked if Speaker Pelosi wanted to “rephrase that comment.”
“I have cleared my remarks with the parliamentarian before I read them,” Pelosi retorted as she walked away from the lectern.
“Can I ask the words be taken down? I make a point of order that the gentlewoman’s words are unparliamentary and be taken down,” Rep. Collins said.
Collins once again asked if to strike Pelosi’s comments.
Speaker Pelosi then left the House floor which is another violation of House Rules themselves when someone’s words are taken down, Fox News Congress reporter Chad Pergram said.
Pergram also reported that “Things have gotten really weird on the House floor Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO) was presiding over the House. And then he told the House he was trying to make a fair ruling about Pelosi but people weren’t cooperating so Cleaver then just said “I abandon the chair” and LEFT!”
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 16, 2019 15:49:27 GMT -6
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer blasted Pelosi as he presided over the 15-minute vote to strike her comments from the record.
“The words should not be used in debate,” Hoyer said scolding Pelosi for accusing Trump of racism.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 16, 2019 15:55:11 GMT -6
Also: www.startribune.com/new-documents-revisit-questions-about-rep-ilhan-omar-s-marriage/511681362/?refresh=trueAsked about using campaign money to take political trips, Omar said they were always approved by the Minnesota House, but then placed responsibility on her staff: “They always gave me an opinion that said, sure, this looks fine. Or at least that was my understanding that that’s what my staff was doing before they would commit me to doing anything.” Carla Kjellberg, an attorney and political adviser during the crisis period, paints a different picture of Omar’s engagement level with details: “I did nothing, I want to make that clear, without Representative Omar’s authority. And she was in these meetings where those things were decided upon and I was directed to do that,” Kjellberg said during her own deposition. Kjellberg declined to comment. Campaign e-mails disclosed by the campaign finance board also show a concerted effort to quash the Elmi story. An August 2016 internal e-mail written by campaign spokesman Ben Goldfarb, a veteran DFL operative, suggested reaching out to political newsletter writer Blois Olson “and shut it down with him as we do with the Strib.” The Star Tribune wrote about the controversy the next day under the headline, “Marriage discrepancy clouds Ilhan Omar’s historic primary victory.” Omar expressed frustration over the controversy again last October, telling the Star Tribune in an interview that like many refugees without birth certificates, “anybody can accuse me of whatever they want and I don’t have a way to defend myself.” ...... pjmedia.com/davidsteinberg/official-school-records-support-claims-that-rep-ilhan-omar-d-mn-married-her-brother/According to official student enrollment records archived by St. Paul Public Schools and the state of Minnesota, an “Ahmed N. Elmi” was enrolled as a senior in the Class of 2003 at Arlington Senior High School in St. Paul, MN, from September 6, 2002, until June 10, 2003. He graduated and received a diploma. The enrollment record states that “Ahmed N. Elmi” was born on April 4, 1985. Both Ilhan Omar’s 2009 marriage documents and her 2017 divorce proceedings state that Ahmed Nur Said Elmi was born on April 4, 1985. After an extensive background search, I have not been able to find any other person named “Ahmed Nur Said Elmi,” “Ahmed N. Elmi,” or even “Ahmed Elmi” with the birthdate April 4, 1985. The man Ilhan Omar married and the 17- to 18-year-old who attended Arlington Senior High School in St. Paul, MN, in 2002-2003 are one and the same.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 16, 2019 16:07:37 GMT -6
www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-07-16/trump-fueling-tribal-war-nancys-houseAuthored by Patrick Buchanan via Buchanan.org, buchanan.org/blog/trump-fuels-a-tribal-war-in-nancys-house-137314President Donald Trump’s playground taunt Sunday that “the Squad” of four new radical liberal House Democrats, all women of color, should “go back and help fix the totally broken and crime-infested places from which they came,” dominated Monday morning’s headlines. Yet those headlines smothered the deeper story. The Democrats are today using language to describe their own leaders that is similar to the language of the 1960s radicals who denounced Democratic segregationist governors like Ross Barnett and George Wallace. Consider what the four women have been saying. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has accused Speaker Nancy Pelosi of attacking “newly elected women of color.” Was she calling Pelosi a “racist”? “No!” protested AOC. But it sure sounded like it. AOC’s chief of staff Saikat Chakrabarti attacked Native American Rep. Sharice Davids for her vote on a Pelosi-backed bill that sent $4.6 billion in aid to the border but lacked the restrictions on Trump policies progressives had demanded. Chakrabarti described Davids’ vote as “showing her … enable a racist system,” adding that some Democrats “seem hell bent to do to black and brown people what the old Southern Democrats did in the ’40s.” The House Democratic Caucus ripped Chakrabarti, “Who is this guy and why is he explicitly singling out a Native American woman of color?” At a Netroots Nation conference this weekend, African American Rep. Ayanna Pressley declared: “We don’t need any more brown faces that don’t want to be a brown voice. … We don’t need any more black faces that don’t want to be a black voice.” This comes close to calling members of the Black Caucus “Uncle Toms.” Monday, the president doubled down, tweeting: “We all know that AOC and this crowd are a bunch of Communists, they hate Israel, they hate our own Country, they’re calling the guards along our Border (the Border Patrol Agents) Concentration Camp Guards, they accuse people who support Israel as doing it for the Benjamin’s” The “Benjamins” recalls the accusation of Somali-born Ilhan Omar of Minnesota that the Israel Lobby buys the votes of members of Congress. “It’s all about the Benjamins baby.” Rashida Tlaib of Michigan is the other congresswoman in Trump’s sights. Together, the four have achieved a prominence that almost exceeds that of Majority Leader Steny Hoyer or Majority Whip James Clyburn. The four — AOC, Tlaib, Pressley, Omar — have no clout in the Democratic caucus. But because of the confrontations they have caused and the controversy they have created, they have a massive media following. Paradoxically, their interests in winning cheers as the fighting arm of the Democratic Party coincide with the interests of Donald Trump. He entertains and energizes his base by answering in kind their attacks on him and by adopting incendiary rhetoric of his own. He is now assuming the old “America! Love it or Leave it!” stance in going after the four women as anti-American ingrates. They, by calling Trump a criminal, racist and fascist for whom impeachment proceedings should have begun months ago, elate and energize the outraged left of their party. Among the presidential candidates, some have begun to side with the four, with Bernie Sanders saying Pelosi has been “a little” too tough on them. On “Meet the Press,” Bernie added: “You cannot ignore the young people of this country who are passionate about economic and racial and social and environmental justice. You’ve got to bring them in, not alienate them.” Trump’s Sunday attack forced Pelosi to stand with her severest critics, and she re-elevated the race issue with this tweet: “When Trump tells four American Congresswomen to go back to their countries, he reaffirms his plan to ‘Make America Great Again’ has always been about making America white again.” Do Democrats believe that refighting the racial battles of the 1960s that were thought to have been resolved is a winning hand in 2020? Does Pelosi think that demeaning white America is going to rally white or minority Americans to Democratic banners? The race issue had already arisen in the first debate when Sen. Kamala Harris called out front-runner Joe Biden for befriending segregationist Senate colleagues in the ’70s and ’80s, and for colluding with them to block court-ordered busing to achieve racial balance in the public schools. Observing the clash between Trump and these women, the rank and file of the Democratic Party are being forced to take sides. Many will inevitably side with the fighters, as Democratic moderates appear timid and tepid. Trump is driving a wedge right through the Democratic Party, between its moderate and militant wings. With his attacks over the last 48 hours, Trump has signaled whom he prefers as his opponent in 2020. It is not Biden; it is “the Squad.” Sunday, Pelosi recited again her mantra, “Diversity is our strength; unity is our power.” It sounded less like a proclamation than a plea. We see the diversity. Where is the unity?
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Jul 16, 2019 16:25:18 GMT -6
www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-07-16/trump-fueling-tribal-war-nancys-houseAuthored by Patrick Buchanan via Buchanan.org, buchanan.org/blog/trump-fuels-a-tribal-war-in-nancys-house-137314President Donald Trump’s playground taunt Sunday that “the Squad” of four new radical liberal House Democrats, all women of color, should “go back and help fix the totally broken and crime-infested places from which they came,” dominated Monday morning’s headlines. Yet those headlines smothered the deeper story. The Democrats are today using language to describe their own leaders that is similar to the language of the 1960s radicals who denounced Democratic segregationist governors like Ross Barnett and George Wallace. Consider what the four women have been saying. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has accused Speaker Nancy Pelosi of attacking “newly elected women of color.” Was she calling Pelosi a “racist”? “No!” protested AOC. But it sure sounded like it. AOC’s chief of staff Saikat Chakrabarti attacked Native American Rep. Sharice Davids for her vote on a Pelosi-backed bill that sent $4.6 billion in aid to the border but lacked the restrictions on Trump policies progressives had demanded. Chakrabarti described Davids’ vote as “showing her … enable a racist system,” adding that some Democrats “seem hell bent to do to black and brown people what the old Southern Democrats did in the ’40s.” The House Democratic Caucus ripped Chakrabarti, “Who is this guy and why is he explicitly singling out a Native American woman of color?” At a Netroots Nation conference this weekend, African American Rep. Ayanna Pressley declared: “We don’t need any more brown faces that don’t want to be a brown voice. … We don’t need any more black faces that don’t want to be a black voice.” This comes close to calling members of the Black Caucus “Uncle Toms.” Monday, the president doubled down, tweeting: “We all know that AOC and this crowd are a bunch of Communists, they hate Israel, they hate our own Country, they’re calling the guards along our Border (the Border Patrol Agents) Concentration Camp Guards, they accuse people who support Israel as doing it for the Benjamin’s” The “Benjamins” recalls the accusation of Somali-born Ilhan Omar of Minnesota that the Israel Lobby buys the votes of members of Congress. “It’s all about the Benjamins baby.” Rashida Tlaib of Michigan is the other congresswoman in Trump’s sights. Together, the four have achieved a prominence that almost exceeds that of Majority Leader Steny Hoyer or Majority Whip James Clyburn. The four — AOC, Tlaib, Pressley, Omar — have no clout in the Democratic caucus. But because of the confrontations they have caused and the controversy they have created, they have a massive media following. Paradoxically, their interests in winning cheers as the fighting arm of the Democratic Party coincide with the interests of Donald Trump. He entertains and energizes his base by answering in kind their attacks on him and by adopting incendiary rhetoric of his own. He is now assuming the old “America! Love it or Leave it!” stance in going after the four women as anti-American ingrates. They, by calling Trump a criminal, racist and fascist for whom impeachment proceedings should have begun months ago, elate and energize the outraged left of their party. Among the presidential candidates, some have begun to side with the four, with Bernie Sanders saying Pelosi has been “a little” too tough on them. On “Meet the Press,” Bernie added: “You cannot ignore the young people of this country who are passionate about economic and racial and social and environmental justice. You’ve got to bring them in, not alienate them.” Trump’s Sunday attack forced Pelosi to stand with her severest critics, and she re-elevated the race issue with this tweet: “When Trump tells four American Congresswomen to go back to their countries, he reaffirms his plan to ‘Make America Great Again’ has always been about making America white again.” Do Democrats believe that refighting the racial battles of the 1960s that were thought to have been resolved is a winning hand in 2020? Does Pelosi think that demeaning white America is going to rally white or minority Americans to Democratic banners? The race issue had already arisen in the first debate when Sen. Kamala Harris called out front-runner Joe Biden for befriending segregationist Senate colleagues in the ’70s and ’80s, and for colluding with them to block court-ordered busing to achieve racial balance in the public schools. Observing the clash between Trump and these women, the rank and file of the Democratic Party are being forced to take sides. Many will inevitably side with the fighters, as Democratic moderates appear timid and tepid. Trump is driving a wedge right through the Democratic Party, between its moderate and militant wings. With his attacks over the last 48 hours, Trump has signaled whom he prefers as his opponent in 2020. It is not Biden; it is “the Squad.” Sunday, Pelosi recited again her mantra, “Diversity is our strength; unity is our power.” It sounded less like a proclamation than a plea. We see the diversity. Where is the unity? I remember almost 40 years ago when Send 'Em Back Pat said we should build a fence around the entire country. The original Crossfire with him and Tom Braden was glorious.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 16, 2019 16:30:01 GMT -6
www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/07/16/bedlam-house-floor-pelosi-storms-amid-boos-members/House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) was booed after attempting to shame lawmakers into supporting the House Democrats’ resolution to condemn what they consider “racist” tweets from President Trump, arguing that anything less would be “a shameful abdication” of their oath of office to “protect the American people.” The speaker railed against Trump during Tuesday’s debate on the House floor, promising that her caucus would continue to respond to the “disrespect” aimed at the fundamental diversity of America. She accused the president of legitimizing and increasing “fear” and “hatred” against people of color and attempted to shame lawmakers who are dismissing the Democrats’ politically fueled resolution. “It’s so sad because you would think that there would be a given that we would universally in this body just say ‘of course, of course,'” Pelosi remarked. “There is no excuse for any response to those words but a swift and strong, unified condemnation.” Every single member of this institution– Democratic and Republican– should join us in condemning the president’s racist tweets,” she continued. “To do anything less would be a shocking rejection of our values and a shameful abdication of our oath of office to protect the American people,” she added, sparking boos from others in the room. Rep. Doug Collins (R-GA) chimed in as Pelosi yielded the remainder of her time and asked if she wanted to rephrase her remarks. “I have cleared my remarks with the parliamentarian before I read them,” Pelosi said flippantly as she walked off. Fox News Congressional reporter Chad Pergram explained further: Collins responded to the controversy on Twitter shortly after. He tweeted: We expect each other to speak fairly, truthfully and respectfully of our fellow members of Congress and of the president—not because we agree with each other at all times, but because of our great respect for the Americans who elected us to represent them. According to Pergram, the vote on condemnation for Trump “will be pushed back now because of the Pelosi contretemps and the parliamentary infighting”:
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 16, 2019 16:33:30 GMT -6
www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/07/16/democrats-find-nancy-pelosi-broke-house-rules-by-calling-trump-racist/Democrats, in a party-line vote, ensured that Pelosi’s words would not be taken down, and that she would not, as required, lose her speaking privileges for the day because she left the chamber during the debate on her violation. The vote on the resolution will proceed anyway. Earlier this year, Pelosi and the Democrats passed a resolution on antisemitism that failed to condemn anti-Jewish hatred specifically, or Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) directly.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 16, 2019 16:34:49 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 16, 2019 16:39:32 GMT -6
Nice way to publicly state: “The rules don’t apply to us” to the American people.
Pelosi is allowed to violate House rules without fear of reprisal as her own caucus puts on a clown show acting like they care about decorum and laws. Pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Jul 16, 2019 17:15:35 GMT -6
I am amazed that do nothing cleaver actually did this.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 16, 2019 18:49:41 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 16, 2019 18:54:19 GMT -6
Speaker Pelosi also attacked President Trump over the new asylum rule: www.speaker.gov/newsroom/71519-2/Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement on the Trump Administration’s new asylum rule, which creates unprecedented and impossible hurdles for families seeking asylum and clearly violates the Immigration and Nationality Act: “The President is devastating lives, dishonoring our values and departing from decades of precedent and law in his haste to destroy the lifeline of asylum in America. This cruel new asylum rule perfectly showcases the Administration’s utter disdain and disregard for immigrant communities and communities of color. “This asylum rule is a clear abdication of American humanitarianism. Since Day One, the Administration has turned its back on generations of Republican and Democratic leadership, which has long recognized that the lifeline of asylum is central to our nation’s values, history and future. As the American Association of Evangelicals has testified, America’s commitment to opening our doors to those in need is the ‘crown jewel of American humanitarianism.’ “The Administration has clearly overreached their authority and violated the law with these restrictions, which will be swiftly and successfully challenged in the courts. The Democratic House will always stand firm against attacks on immigrants, and will continue to call on the White House to join us to support smart, effective immigration policies that honor our values and keep families together and safe.”
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 16, 2019 18:58:15 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 16, 2019 19:07:46 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 17, 2019 4:00:09 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 17, 2019 4:12:17 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/49570/cnn-tries-convince-gop-women-trump-racist-doesnt-ryan-saavedra?ampCNN's Randi Kaye asked a group of Republican women if they thought President Donald Trump's recent tweets attacking four far-left congresswomen were racist and all eight fired back with a resounding "no." The segment, which aired on Tuesday night on "Anderson Cooper 360°," featured a group of eight Trump supporters in Dallas, Texas. One supporter, Sharon Bolan, said, “I’m a brown-skinned woman. I am a legal immigrant. I agree with him.” Another supporter, Gina O'Briant, said, “I’m glad that the president said what he said because all they are doing is inciting hatred and division. He didn’t say anything about color.” Not satisfied with their answers, Kaye said, “Let me just share with you the definition of ‘racism’ from Merriam Webster dictionary: ‘a belief that race is the primary determinate of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.’” “Based on that definition, do you not think that what the president has been saying—” Kaye continued. Kaye couldn’t even ask the question before the group of women fired back saying no. “Do you think it’s just a coincidence that these four congresswomen that the president is going after none of them are white?” Kaye asked. “I don't think it matters,” Peaches McGuire Coates responded. “It's idiotic, what they're saying, so it doesn't matter if they're black or white.” “Why haven’t they befriended one of their white female congresswoman colleagues and let her join the group?” Dena Miller asked. “They don’t like white people. C’mon, they’re racist.”
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 17, 2019 6:13:35 GMT -6
www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-07-17/trump-slams-aocs-squad-four-horsewomen-apocalypseTwo days after President Trump provoked Democrats to pass a resolution condemning him as a racist by urging the radical left "squad" of freshman House Democrats "if you are not happy here, you can leave", the president is back with another tweet storm guaranteed to send Democrats on Capitol Hill into fits of apoplexy. In a string of tweets, Trump quotes Louisiana Senator John Kennedy, who blasts the members of the "squad" - AOC, Ayanna Pressley, Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib - as "left wing cranks" and "the four horsewomen of the apocalypse." Kennedy blasted the Congresswomen as irredeemably dumb ("they're the reason there are directions on a shampoo bottle") and lamented the fact that Democratic presidential candidates are "falling over themselves to try and agree" with them. Kennedy starts by accusing the four women of believing that America is "wicked in its origins" and that "we are all racist and evil." After the lengthy quote, Trump followed up with a tweet knocking Democrats for getting nothing done on immigration, infrastructure, drug pricing or any other issue because they're too busy "fishing" for dirt on the president with their various investigations into Trump's finances, business interests etc. Fundamentally, Kennedy is right: Left wingers like AOC believe America was founded by evil colonialist racists and has shifted from perpetrating one horrible atrocity to another over the course of its nearly 250-year history.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 17, 2019 7:09:01 GMT -6
www.breitbart.com/clips/2019/07/16/tlaib-to-pelosi-acknowledge-the-fact-that-we-are-women-of-color-so-when-you-do-single-us-out-be-aware-of-that/During an interview with “CBS This Morning” co-host Gayle King, Reps. Alexia Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) spoke about their relationship with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). Ocasio-Cortez said she would “absolutely” meet with her, with Tlaib offering Pelosi pointers on how to deal with her and her colleagues Ocasio-Cortez and Reps. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) and Ilhan Omar (D-MN). She has every right to sit down with her in any moment, in any time, with any of us,” Tlaib said. “She is speaker of the House. She can ask for a meeting to sit down with us for clarification. Acknowledge the fact that we are women of color, so when you do single us out, be aware of that and what you’re doing, especially because some of us are getting death threats, because some of us are being singled out in many ways because of our backgrounds, because of our experiences and so forth.”
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 17, 2019 7:13:43 GMT -6
www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/07/16/list-of-racist-statements-by-members-of-the-squad-so-far/President Donald Trump tweeted Tuesday that “I don’t have a Racist bone in my body!” and challenged his critics to “Get a list of the HORRIBLE things” that the four Democratic congresswomen of the so-called “Squad” have said. It is worth noting that all four — Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), and Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) are members of a group called the “Justice Democrats.” The group is specifically devoted to backing primary candidates against Democratic incumbents seen as being too moderate and too white. Last November, the Justice Democrats launched a campaign called “#OurTime,” aimed at recruiting candidates to challenge “Democratic incumbents who are demographically and ideologically out-of-touch with their districts.” From the start, the “Squad” devoted itself to an explicitly race-based political effort. Then there are their statements. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) From the start, “AOC” used race in her campaign for Congress. As Politico noted in 2018, she challenged incumbent Rep. Joe Crowley (D-NY), who is white, on “ideological, generational and racial grounds, arguing that the 10-term congressman was not in step with his majority-minority district and was too cozy with corporate donors.” AOC also has a record of controversial statements about Israel. She claimed, for example, that Israel had committed a “massacre” of Palestinian protesters at the border fence last year. The vast majority were actually members of Hamas, a terrorist organizations that was using the fake “protest” to launch infiltrations and violent attacks against Israel. In recent weeks, AOC has shown even greater insensitivity to the Jewish community by comparing migrant facilities at the U.S.-Mexico border to “concentration camps.” Attorney Alan Dershowitz, a Democrat and Hillary Clinton supporter, called her claims a form of Holocaust denial. Despite criticism from the U.S. Holocaust Museum, Israel’s Yad Vashem, and others, AOC refused to apologize and rejected an invitation to visit actual concentration camp sites. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) Omar has a long history of anti-Israel statements that have included antisemitic themes, such as suggesting that Jews control the world. In 2012, she tweeted: “Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.” Local Jewish community leaders in Minnesota staged an intervention before she took up her seat in Congress — to no avail; she continued making offensive anti-Israel and antisemitic statements. In February, Omar tweeted, “It’s all about the Benjamins baby,” suggesting (falsely) that a pro-Israel group, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), bribed members of Congress to support Israel. The implication was that Jews were using money to control Congress. Omar apologized for that tweet, but went on, a few weeks later, to claim that pro-Israel members of Congress owed “allegiance to a foreign country.” The chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, a fellow Democrat, called her statement a “vile antisemitic slur,” but she refused to apologize. In an effort to tamp down the controversy, House Democrats passed a resolution condemning antisemitism — but only among other forms of hatred, and without mentioning Omar specifically. After the resolution passed, Omar took a victory lap, claiming (falsely) that it marked the first time Congress had condemned anti-Muslim prejudice. More recently, Omar has supported AOC’s inflammatory claim that the migrant facilities are “concentration camps.” Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) Tlaib believes that the State of Israel has no right to exist and should be dismantled — a stance that lost her the support of the far-left J Street organization, which likes to maintain the pretense of support for a two-state solution. In January, Tlaib posted an antisemitic tweet, declaring that members of Congress who supported Israel “forgot what country they represent.” The American Jewish Committee accused her of using an antisemitic claim of “dual loyalty.” In February, Tlaib called Housing and Urban Development official Lynne Patton, a black woman, a “prop” for appearing in the gallery during a hearing where members of Congress were debating whether Trump was racist. In May, Tlaib made the bizarre statement that she felt “a calming feeling … when I think of the Holocaust.” She explained by making the false claim that Palestinians had offered Jews a “safe haven” from the Holocaust. Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) On Sunday, just hours after the president posted his congressional tweets, Pressley told left-wing bloggers at Netroots Nation: “We don’t need any more black faces that don’t want to be a black voice.” She appeared to assume that the only legitimate “black voice” was leftist; black Americans with other views were legitimate targets of racial attack. Pressley’s bio on her official House of Representatives website — not a personal or campaign page — implies that a white person cannot represent her congressional district: “The Massachusetts 7th is the most diverse and most unequal district in the state, requiring a representative whose experiences are reflective of the people,” it says.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 17, 2019 7:17:50 GMT -6
thefederalist.com/2019/07/17/far-left-prepares-throw-barack-obama-dustbin-history/Far Left Prepares To Throw Barack Obama Into The Dustbin Of History The wing of the Democratic Party that's fixated on race and diversity is sick of America's first black president. By Warren Henry The mood of left-wing Democrats might be neatly summarized by the media coverage of last weekend’s Netroots Nation conference. The progressive left seems poised to consign former President Barack Obama to the dustbin of history. Moreover, supposedly woke agitators do not seem to care how their exercise might affect black voters who comprise a crucial part of their 2020 electoral strategy. According to Vox, “Progressive activists know their enemy in the 2020 Democratic primary: Joe Biden.” As Vox notes, “Some activists at Netroots conceded they would support Biden in a general election if they had no other choice.” Dean Obeidallah of CNN and The Daily Beast finds this concession a sign of a pragmatism that should make President Donald Trump quake with fear, as opposed to the rock-bottom minimum expectation for a group that claims to believe the president is an existential threat to the republic. Not unlike the Hollywood types who take private jets to climate change conferences, the gap between rhetoric and action is considerable. After a Mere Four Years, Obama Nostalgia Is Gone The left’s antipathy is not limited to Biden. At the Washington Post, David Weigel profiles “The Democrats who don’t miss Obama (or Biden).” In his day, Weigel covered any number of Tea Party conferences (often unfairly); if he noticed that Netroots is the left-wing, hall-of-funhouse-mirrors version of those events, he failed to include it in his news “analysis.” Rather, Weigel provided a deadpan account of how “the largest annual gathering of liberal activists, which pulls everyone from electoral data gurus to disability rights activists into one loud space, had no nostalgia at all for a two-term president who, for a while, seemed to redefine the Democratic Party.” In this telling, Obama — and by extension, Biden — “left activists demoralized, reducing Democratic Party power to its lowest levels in 90 years.” That Obama redefined his party as further to the left and that it is in tatters because he pandered to the activist left too much is a possibility simply too terrible for them to contemplate. Yet Weigel, in some obligatory throat-clearing, includes the following concession to political reality: “Although most Democratic voters adore Obama, and although he’s far more popular than other former presidents, the thought of winding the clock back to before the 2016 election does not animate liberals.” Weigel’s use of “liberal” rather than “progressive” or “left-wing” is fairly misleading, given how Democrats tend to identify themselves: Fond memories of Obama may not animate the Netroots, but they do animate rank-and-file Democrats, including those who identify as liberal. Obama nostalgia is at the heart of Biden’s campaign, which is a constant source of angst for the progressive left. Black Voters Matter Moreover, the former vice president’s current lead is based in significant part on his commanding lead among black Democrats, which is the salt rubbed in the far left’s wounds. As Vox reports, the clear favorite at the Netroots conference was Sen. Elizabeth Warren, followed by Sens. Bernie Sanders and Kamala Harris. As with Weigel’s report, there is a key point made only in passing: “Warren’s biggest challenge is still with black voters, whom she is struggling with compared to Sanders, Harris, and Biden. A recent Morning Consult poll showed Warren netting just 7 percent of black voters who said she was their first choice, compared to 21 percent for Sanders and 16 percent for Harris (and Biden in the lead with 38 percent).” The problem does not stop there, either. Presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, was the top fundraiser for the second quarter of 2019, sucking up $24.8 million — three times as much as he raised in the first quarter. In the same Morning Consult poll, he was the first choice of 2 percent of black voters. For a crowd that thrives on accusing America of perpetuating white supremacy, progressives seem to have little fondness for America’s first black president. In a campaign where progressives preach the need to energize voters of color, they seem indifferent to the preferences of black voters. The left prefers a well-known candidate such as Warren (with an almost equally well-known likability problem), who polls in single digits with this crucial constituency, all the while telling themselves they can make people of color like her. If you wrote this as fiction, editors would reject it as unrealistic. Progressives Must Find a Balance Progressives have another argument open to them. Perhaps the smartest observation at Netroots came from Minnesota Attorney General and Democratic National Committee Deputy Chair Keith Ellison, who said, “Biden wasn’t put on the Obama ticket because he and Obama agreed. They put him on because they didn’t. He was a ticket balancer.” The left should embrace Obama instead of shunning him, while painting Biden as the odd man out. This gambit requires some humility from progressives, inasmuch as it would require them to take some responsibility for the decline of the Democratic Party on Obama’s watch. But if the left simply chooses to abandon Obama and his legacy, there is no guarantee the alternatives will fully energize the black voters they need. Also, tossing Biden overboard probably hurts Democrats’ chances with working-class, white voters, which will matter more than they think in the high-turnout presidential election most expect. Progressives can almost taste victory, but the manner in which they dismiss major blocs of the Democratic coalition remains as big an obstacle to their success as their extreme platform.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 17, 2019 8:51:42 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 17, 2019 10:06:30 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 17, 2019 10:12:59 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/49577/conservative-host-shreds-rep-pressleys-racial-amanda-prestigiacomo?ampOn Tuesday, conservative host Jon Miller condemned the “discrimination” embedded in controversial racial comments recently made by freshman lawmaker Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) — one of the four members of the so-called “Squad.” “We don’t need any more brown faces that don’t want to be a brown voice,” Pressley said over the weekend, speaking at a progressive political convention. “We don’t need black faces that don’t want to be a black voice. We don’t need Muslims that don’t want to be a Muslim voice. We don’t need queers that don’t want to be a queer voice.” Jon Miller, host of Blaze TV’s “White House Brief,” exposed Pressely’s not-so-veiled bigotry in a single tweet. “Well by being black, my voice is automatically a black voice. That’s how it works,” he wrote. “What she ACTUALLY means is we don’t need minorities who don’t want to be a progressive voice.” “And that, my friend, is the true definition of discrimination.” She just handed me this one on a platter,” Miller later added. “What an idiot.” Pressley’s comments are essentially a purity test. The elected Democrat is suggesting black, brown, and queer people who don’t think like her — people like Miller — need to shut their mouths; they are of no use to their identity group, but a hindrance, and perhaps traitors. Taking on Pressley’s remarks on Tuesday, The Daily Wire’s Matt Walsh wrote: What is a brown voice? What is a black voice? Do voices have colors? What she means is that a brown or black person should have opinions that are properly representative of their racial communities. And what she means by properly representative of their racial communities is that their opinions should be resoundingly liberal. Put more simply, Pressley is telling brown, black, Muslim, and gay people to keep their traps shut if they aren't going to conform to her ideological expectations. "You're not needed," she emphasizes. Walsh argues that Pressley, like most progressives, “sees racial and ethnic groups as monoliths — and every member is a mindless, faceless ‘representative’ of that whole. And the whole, Pressley has decided, must vote Democrat, support things like affirmative action, universal health care, and abortion, and affirm every last leftist doctrine without exception. Any member who falls outside of the box Pressley and her ilk have created is anathema. At best, useless. At worst, a heretic who should be burned at the stake (or bludgeoned with a crowbar, as is Antifa's preferred method).” Pressley, a radical, flexed her anti-Trump muscles at a press conference on Monday, telling the media that she refuses to acknowledge President Donald Trump as president but, instead, views him as the “occupant” of the White House. “I will always refer to him as the occupant, as he is only occupying space,” she said.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 17, 2019 10:17:41 GMT -6
www.breitbart.com/clips/2019/07/17/omar-on-if-she-regrets-her-antisemitic-remarks-i-do-not/amp/During an interview with “CBS This Morning,” Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) denied having any regrets for remarks she made that were perceived by many to be antisemitic. The freshman Democrat lawmaker told CBS’s Gayle King her comments were not meant to be antisemitic. “Oftentimes there are things that you might say that would not hold weight for you, but to someone else, right, the way we hear and consume information is very different from how the next person might be. Nothing I said was meant for that purpose.” King followed up if she had any regrets for those remarks. “I do not, but I am grateful for the opportunity to really learn how my words have made people feel and take every opportunity I have to make sure people understand that I apologize for it,” Omar added. She said she was “certainly not” antisemitic.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 17, 2019 10:31:43 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 17, 2019 10:43:10 GMT -6
www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/07/17/donald-trump-thanks-vicious-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-for-approval-bump/President Donald Trump thanked Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez after experiencing a four-point approval bump in the latest Rasmussen poll after an uproar over his critical tweets. “Thank you to the vicious young Socialist Congresswomen,” he wrote on Twitter. “America will never buy your act!” Rasmussen showed Trump with a 46 percent approval on Friday followed by a 50 percent rating on Wednesday – a jump of four points. A Reuters/Ipsos poll showed Trump’s approval rating among Republicans jumped five points. Trump commented on the political uproar after he criticized Ocasio-Cortez and other Democrats for their anti-American statements.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 17, 2019 10:46:50 GMT -6
www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/07/17/nolte-gop-support-for-trump-rises-after-tweets-aimed-at-democrat-squad/Excerpt: This Reuters/Ipsos poll is not a great poll to gauge Trump’s approval with because it does not screen for registered or likely voters. It is an “all adults” poll conducted online using 1,113 adults. Nevertheless, the trends are interesting, and this is not the only poll that shows widespread support for Trump’s criticism of The Jew-Hating Squad — which is made up of freshmen Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI). A recent YouGov survey found a whopping 88 percent of Republicans believe Trump tweets were “great,” “good,” or “okay.” Fewer than 15 percent said the tweets were “bad” or “terrible.” Most telling, a majority of Hispanics, 52 percent, said they liked the tweets, while 53 percent of white American agreed. Swing voters were basically split on the tweets, with 48 percent approving and 51 percent disapproving. So now we have two polls basically proving the five-alarm fake news freakout over Trump’s tweets is no different than anything Trump does: the far-left and their palace guards in the media hate it while Republicans rally to his side. Trump’s overall job approval rating in the Real Clear Politics poll of polls shows Trump at a relatively healthy 44.4 percent.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jul 17, 2019 11:32:34 GMT -6
How hilarious would it be if AOC was a one term Congress person? amp.dailycaller.com/2019/07/17/republican-challenger-ocasio-cortezA Republican immigrant businesswoman active in politics launched a campaign Wednesday to run against current Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in 2020. Scherie Murray, an immigrant from Jamaica, is the fifth Republican to file for Ocasio-Cortez’s seat. The other Republicans are former police officer John Cummings, construction contractor Miguel Hernandez, medical journalist Ruth Papzian and entrepreneur Antoine Tucker, Fox reported. “There is a crisis in Queens, and it’s called AOC,” Murray said, according to Fox News. “And instead of focusing on us, she’s focusing on being famous. Mainly rolling back progress and authoring the job-killing Green New Deal and killing the Amazon New York deal.” Murray, 38, confirmed with Fox News that she will be running. The primary will take place in June 2020. The Jamaica-born immigrant moved to the U.S. when she was 9 years old. She grew up in Southeast Queens and worked at a Bus Depot when she was a teenager, according to Fox News. Murray founded The Esemel Group, a television production and advertising company, in 2004. The company helped with employment for minorities, she said according to Fox News. Now a full-time mother, Murray’s campaign video paints her as a “bridge-builder” who has helped minorities find jobs and who cares about the people. The video takes jabs at Ocasio-Cortez’s time in office and paints the current Rep. as more of a celebrity than someone who can make laws. “I think it’s disgusting, to be quite honest,” Murray said of the recent comments Ocasio-Cortez made about President Donald Trump after he tweeted about the congresswoman. “I think we are missing the point of why we’re elected to public office: to legislate on policy, to deliver results to those kitchen table issues that are affecting everyday Americans.” Trump began tweeting Sunday telling the “‘Progressive’ Democrat Congresswomen” to go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how it’s done.” (RELATED: ‘The Squad’ Takes Turns Hitting Back At Trump During Press Conference) The tweets were likely aimed at Democratic Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Ayanna S. Pressley of Massachusetts. No Democrat has announced a campaign against Ocasio-Cortez. New York, a mostly Democratic district, will be a difficult battle for Republicans like Murray, Fox News reported. “A Republican can win the district,” Murray told Fox News. “There is an absolute path to victory when you look at a general election campaign.”
|
|