It’s Official. Democrats Have Learned Nothing From Donald Trump’s Win




In 2000, Democrats told us that a vote for the GOP was a vote for racism. Their evidence was George W. Bush, who refused to pass hate crimes legislation in Texas.

In 2004, Democrats said the same thing, but had different reasons now. Now, the GOP was Islamophobic and reducing Americans to skin color caricatures.

In 2006, the same.

In 2008, if you didn’t vote for Barack Obama, you were racist and probably a fascist because John McCain was a war hero bigot.

In 2010, the tea party was racist and the proof was the union protestors who dressed up as Nazis to smear the tea party groups.

In 2012, Mitt Romney was a Mormon and everyone is supposed to know Mormons are bigots , racists, and creepy. Oh, and he is a Republican and Republicans are racist.



In 2014, the same.

In 2016, Donald Trump is a racist. Never mind that he did better than Romney with both Hispanic and black voters.

Now?

Howard Dean says if you vote Republican, you are a racist.

In 2017, a number of Democrats have begun admitting that they cried wolf for years and years. They inappropriately labeled other Republicans racist and fascist and in 2016 no one believed them about Trump.

Looks like they really learned nothing at all.

It is worth pointing out that the Tea Party, not the GOP establishment, pushed the election of Nikki Haley, Tim Scott, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Allen West, and others. Before them, the progenitors of the tea party rallied to a guy like Bobby Jindal.

But, of course, we should concede that the white nationalists and the President’s bungling of Charlottesville make this all easier for Dean to say and the media to repeat. It just does not make it true and is further evidence the Democrats learned nothing from 2016.

Left and Right Agree: Ossoff’s Free Beacon Ban is Stupid, and Howard Dean is an Idiot

After taking his two-hour jaunt from Democrat Jon Ossoff’s love shack to the district he’s running to represent, Washington Free Beacon reporter Bret Scher was rewarded by the Ossoff campaign for his effort.

That’s right, they tossed him out of their campaign event.

Asked why the Free Beacon was being restricted from covering the event, Haworth said, “Thank you very much for your interest in covering our race.” Asked why the Free Beacon wasn’t being allowed to cover the race despite its interest, Haworth said, “Thank you very much for your interest in covering our race.”

This singular act of idiocy was widely condemned by media from the left and the right. Senior HuffPo editor Sam Stein tweeted:

Sopan Deb, who covers culture for the New York Times, joined in solidarity with his fellow reporter.

Not to be out-shouted, idiot clown Howard Dean replied to Stein with this.

To which Jeet Heer from The New Republic slapped Dean like a transgender MMA diva.

Dean is wrong. Much of the conservative press is terrible but the Free Beacon is far superior to propagandist fare like The Daily Caller. Unlike other comparable conservative websites, the Free Beaconmakes an effort to do original reporting. Its commitment to journalism should be welcomed by liberals.

As Mother Jones noted in 2015, “In its short history, the Free Beacon’s tiny staff of fewer than two dozen journalists has pulled off an almost unprecedented feat: Amid a conservative movement that has often evinced something between disinterest and disdain for the work of investigative reporters, it has built genuine muckraking success.”

This judgment still stands. And given the problems of disinformation and propaganda in the Trump era, liberals would do well to encourage any effort to improve conservative journalism.

I mean, even Mother Jones realizes that WFB is a real news outlet. And the Daily Caller was founded by Tucker Carlson, of Fox News. I guess Fox News isn’t legit either. Hey Howard, 2009 is calling–that’s the last time the White House, under Obama, took on Fox News and lost.

Excluding WFB is petty and stupid, just like Howard Dean. It won’t change anything in the election results (probably), but if Ossoff loses by a single vote, he deserves it for this stunt.

(Given the bad weather, I think he’ll probably lose anyway. But it’s definitely too close to call.)

Nobody at the Ossoff campaign knows why Scher was excluded from the campaign event. Or at least they’re not saying.

For someone who’s running against Donald Trump, Ossoff is certainly acting like him.

Cheers for Bernie Sanders, Jeers for Howard Dean

Lest anyone get the wrong idea from the headline of this article, make no mistake:  I think Bernie Sanders is a nut.  This is the same man, remember, who so loved the Soviet Union that he actually spent his honeymoon there.  He’s also a self-avowed socialist whose policy prescriptions lie somewhere between Angela Davis and Che Guevara on the political spectrum, and seems to have invented Fifty Shades fan fiction long before there was a Fifty Shades.

But, when it comes to matters of free speech, Crazy Bernie actually has his noggin screwed on straight.  Speaking with the Huffington Post, he weighed in on the controversy surrounding Ann Coulter and her upcoming speech at Berkeley, which the university had wanted to reschedule to a time better suited to late-nite informercials because they had “concerns” about “security”.  To his credit, Bernie was having none of it, and said that free speech shouldn’t be subject to a rioter’s veto:

I don’t like this. I don’t like it.  Obviously Ann Coulter’s outrageous ― to my mind, off the wall. But you know, people have a right to give their two cents-worth, give a speech, without fear of violence and intimidation.

Let’s set aside the notion that Bernie Sanders calling anyone “off the wall” is a lot like Anthony Weiner telling Kim Kardashian that she might be sharing a bit too much on Instragram.  We give praise here when praise is due, and in this observation Bernie is absolutely correct.  Moreover, given the kind of climate we’re in, for him to take such a stand is brave and commendable.

To me, it’s a sign of intellectual weakness.  If you can’t ask Ann Coulter in a polite way questions which expose the weakness of her arguments, if all you can do is boo, or shut her down, or prevent her from coming, what does that tell the world?

 

What are you afraid of ― her ideas?  Ask her the hard questions.  Confront her intellectually.  Booing people down, or intimidating people, or shutting down events, I don’t think that that works in any way.

Can I get an amen?  Well said, Bernie!  Have you ever considered going on tour with Mark Steyn?

Anyway, even though he doesn’t understand the first thing about economics, Bernie seems to have a pretty decent grasp of the First Amendment (at least until you get him going about Citizens United–but that’s an argument for another day).  Contrast that with serial bloviator Howard Dean, who decided to dish on Ann Coulter and proved yet again that it’s better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one’s mouth and remove all doubt:

 

Hey, Howard–I guess this means they should have hauled you away that time you said, “I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for.”  Let me know if need any money for bail, pal.

Luckily for Dean, I don’t think he needs to worry about Donald Trump sending the goon squad to collect him, because–unlike Bernie Sanders–he is spectacularly wrong about what the First Amendment protects.  That includes the stuff he doesn’t like, such as when Ann Coulter says something incendiary, and the stuff he does, like when he suggested that George W.Bush might have known about the 9/11 attacks in advance.

Or, as a wise editor at the Danish paper Jyllands-Posten once wrote, “Free speech is free speech is free speech.  There is no but.”

Thanks, for defending it, Bernie.  Howard, you can go away now.

Cuomo’s Hypocritical Declaration of Love and Inclusion

Governor Andrew Cuomo D-NY is really no different than your standard run of the mill Democrat. He’s not considered to be a big thinker, and is certainly not considered to have statesmen gravitas, or even to be particularly honest. He has basically built his career on the reputation of his father. Having said that, he’s really no better of worse than most. He’s just common.

Which is to say, he’s a liberal who is not afraid to be obviously hypocritical if it serves his needs. Evidently Monday was a day in which intellectual honesty wasn’t a consideration for His Honor. As The Blaze reports, Cuomo was in Manhattan on Monday and his remarks got some attention on Twitter: (The Blaze)

“New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) was in Manhattan on Monday speaking about the importance of the “Raise the Age” initiative, a movement seeking to abolish laws in New York and North Carolina that require any minor who is 16 or 17 to be charged as an adult in criminal cases. During his speech, Cuomo’s official Twitter account tweeted some of the quotes from his speech. One particular quote, however, got some unwanted attention. “The answer is unity. The answer is love. The answer is compassion. That’s what made New York, New York,” Cuomo’s account tweeted.”

As The Blaze reports, “The line was highlighting the importance of equality in the criminal justice system and that New Yorkers should be united in love and compassion. But the tone was quite a bit different from what he’s previously said, especially when talking about conservatives.”

The problem? The Blaze explains:

“In 2014, Cuomo said that conservatives who are “extreme” by being pro-life, pro-Second Amendment or against same-sex marriage “have no place in the state of New York,” according to the Washington Times. So naturally,”

This de facto expulsion of Americans still concerned and convinced of the righteousness of the pro-life position, the constitutional soundness of the second amendment, and the moral value of traditional marriage, is now the Democrat standard. Howard Dean, former Democratic Party Chairman was quoted recently while speaking to this exact issue: (Wash Times)

During a March 2 segment of the program, MSNBC anchor Joe Scarborough observed, “Those were guys that you just couldn’t beat in the South when you weren’t running too far left on guns, on God, on abortion, on all of these other social issues. Can the Democratic Party ever have a big enough tent to have people who were progressive on economic issues and conservative on social issues in their party again?  He asked Mr. Dean.

Mr Dean’s answer is eerily similar to Gov. Cuomo’s answer:

“No. Because the young generation isn’t that way,” Mr. Dean, a former Vermont governor replied. “I think the old left/right is an anachronism. It exists in Washington. It exists in the media. Young people don’t think that way. “They are not ideological,” Mr. Dean added. “They are extremely interested in social justice, so we are never going back to maybe making compromises on abortion.”

While recent polling does suggest attitudinal permissiveness toward gay marriage, it does not reflect that same permissive attitude toward abortion. As a matter of fact, most Americans have opposition to abortion. (Real Clear Politics)

Abortion may be a women’s issue, but not in the way that the media and some politicians would like us to believe. Far from seeing abortion as a sacrosanct right to be defended, the overwhelming majority of women in this country want abortion restricted, and don’t want it funded by tax dollars. A majority also think it is morally wrong and that it causes more harm than good to women in the long run. Such a statement isn’t guesswork, or based on anecdotal evidence. It is a fact, proven by the newly released survey on abortion from The Marist Poll. As it has for past nine years, this annual poll on abortion in America, sponsored by the Knights of Columbus, again shows just how extreme and outside the mainstream that abortion advocacy, and the resistance to restrictions, really is. If politicians really want to show that they trust American women, then they should follow the advice of the overwhelming majority of us and restrict abortion in meaningful ways. This means supporting the president’s action to ban funding of abortion internationally, which is supported by 83 percent of women, and same percentage of all Americans.”

It seems safe to surmise the liberal progressive Socialist Democratic Party now wants to loudly clarify their opinion of those deplorable bitter clingers who are unwelcome inside the big rainbow tent. But, when they need to trot out their love and inclusiveness tripe in order to attempt to achieve yet another liberal agenda, hypocrisy be damned, hey: laissez les bons temps rouler.

What All the Partisanship Narratives Forget

Ron Fournier at National Journal, among others, has been wringing his hands over the latest Pew research on partisanship. The research shows a growing gap between left and right.

Naturally, a lot of scholars and members of the media are blaming conservatives because the scholars and members of the media are more ideologically aligned with the left. Some admit it. Most think that where they’ve planted their flag is called Moderateville and these conservatives are icky, fringe disrupters intent on anarchy and theocracy.

In reading a lot of commentary on the Pew study and pieces like Ron Fournier’s latest, I find a common missing element.

For the hell given toward partisans of both sides, some fair and some not, there is an organized effort on the Republican side, by its activists, to beat its entrenched incumbents. The media typically reports this in terms of ideological purity. Allegedly, conservatives just want someone more pure and less likely to reach across the aisle.

That’s actually flawed thinking, but is indicative of the thinking that comes frequently from inside the Washington bubble where access to power and the need to kiss ass perverts one’s view of what’s happening in fly over country. As a bit of a tangent, look at the shift in conservative media coverage toward Kevin McCarthy.

Once the House GOP rallied, a good many members of the Republican political press in DC, instead of covering the angst and machinations, went straight down on their knees in front of Kevin McCarthy and started writing oppo dumps on any potential challengers, etc. Their tweets changed from chronicling the chaos to championing their new source.

The press in Washington contributes to the problem and also exacerbates the problem in terms of what is covered, how things are covered, and what is not covered. Many members of the press, regardless of politics, pride themselves for their trips outside the bubble. But their outside the bubble coverage reads more like a Dian Fossey study of gorillas in the mist than coverage of actual people the press really relate to.

Away from the tangent and back to the point, what the circle of jerks in Washington sees as a conservative quest for purity, many of those in flyover country see as fighting against out of touch, entrenched elements in their party who’ve grown far too cozy with lobbyists and Wall Street. The conservative fight in Mississippi, Virginia, Texas, and elsewhere is mocked and ridiculed by a left-leaning and establishment oriented press when, in reality, it is overwhelmingly a response to a Washington that has grown out of touch. Yes, the grassroots want more conservative members of Congress, but they want them because they believe the people there are in the pockets of special interests and the politicians have abandoned their core beliefs for cash and connections.

Had Howard Dean and Ned Lamont been successful candidates, the left-leaning elements of the press would probably not be so prone to ridicule these current grassroots efforts. But because conservatives have been far more successful at defeating entrenched interests, the media instead casts it as a quest for purity instead of a demand from the people that Washington must work for them, not billionaire donors, K Street, and Wall Street.

That inability to give a fair hearing to the grassroots on the right only compounds the problem. It is also the nature of the beast and hasn’t changed. The only thing that has changed is Citizens United giving the grassroots the ability to beat the monied interests for the first time. And even that, inside the bubble, is misreported as allowing billionaires never before granted access into politics. In reality, the billionaires have always had the access. After Citizens United the grassroots do now too. And the circle keeps circling while the jerks keep … um …

The post What All the Partisanship Narratives Forget appeared first on RedState.