Archive for the ‘Democrat’ Category

A Pro-Life Democrat Explains What That Means, Exactly – Refinery29

What is the position women are in? In many cases, women seek abortions because they dont feel they have a choice. Socioeconomic reasons are the number one reason, also fears that theyll lose their current relationship, fears about completing school, being able to compete in society in any meaningful way. I think its totally fine if you want to live your life without children. I dont have children; Im not demonizing that choice. But women who do have children, we know, are at an economic disadvantage. Its much harder to compete in our male-dominated, patriarchal society if you have quote-unquote burdens like that.

So if were addressing the horror of abortion, we need to address the situations that make a woman feel like abortion is the only way shell be able to continue on. As Democrats, we want to give them every opportunity to thrive, inform them of their Title IX rights, and provide for women just like we want to provide for every human being in this country.

And so your goal would be to make abortion Unthinkable.

Would you say youre zero-tolerance? There are certainly situations where the majority of pro-lifers think abortion is permissible, and those are if the mothers life is in danger and in cases of rape, for reasons of bodily autonomy. Because if a woman didnt even consent to the sexual situation that [got her pregnant and] put another persons life at risk, while it is a tragedy to potentially lose that life, we feel that is justifiable. Otherwise, it would be in a womans best efforts to avoid the situation that causes pregnancy in the first place.

Theres no room, in that view, to trust a womans making the best choice for her life? No, allowing it to be just the womans choice based just on how she feels about it, we dont feel that thats ethical, either. And then in the case of rape, would you have a review board? How would women access a justifiable abortion?I dont have all the answers of how the entire society would work out, but in general if a woman says that shes raped, I think our best efforts should be made to believe her, and to take it from there. Have you ever voted Republican or considered moving parties because of Democrats' stance on choice? I have voted Republican before, but ultimately I believe social justice can only be achieved through a more socialist-style system. I think the Democrats are better positioned to address a range of issues related to inequality. Id rather work within that framework to end abortion rather than work in a conservative framework trying to end racism, sexism, classism, xenophobia, homophobia, and so forth.

I oppose the death penalty; I oppose unjust war; all kinds of things that I think Republicans are willing to sacrifice human lives for, so thats just not consistent with my beliefs. Seeing Republican legislators who claim to be for life, that say, We dont want to have paid maternity leave, thats absolutely ridiculous. We need things that will put women at a less disadvantaged position. So thats kind of the crux of why youre a Democrat, supporting social programs that address inequality.The crux of why Im a Democrat is that I believe in the dignity of every human being. I believe that every human person should have a chance, should not be a victim of violence, should not have their lives taken from them prematurely. And this is why I oppose police brutality any type of inequality and abortion is just one of those things that contribute to inequality.

Link:
A Pro-Life Democrat Explains What That Means, Exactly - Refinery29

Any Democrat Who Votes for Jeff Sessions Should Be Excommunicated from the Party – Esquire.com

I agree with the headline of Jonathan Bernstein's column in Bloomberg today. I don't think Senator Professor Warren is "weak" for supporting the nomination of Ben Carson, a space alien, to head the Department of Housing and Urban Development. I just think she's mistaken because Carson has no more business running that agency than he does flying the space shuttle. But I can't go along with the general thrust of the piece, that a general opposition to the president*'s shoddy imitation of forming a government is wrongheaded because the Republicans will simply vote these people into the jobs anyway. From Bloomberg:

The reality is quite simple: The 48 Democratic senators cannot defeat Trump's cabinet picks. It takes a majority to do that, and so far at least Republicans appear ready to support whoever Trump picks. In all cases in which they do, Democrats aren't choosing between confirming and not confirming.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

This, I would point out, is an argument that only Democrats ever have. Republicans don't have this sort of philosophical crisis. (Look how quickly people like Young Marco Rubio folded on Rex Tillerson.) Even Bernstein's basic formulation agrees that Republican support for even the most egregious nominees will be automatic and unanimous.

In the face of that, why shouldn't Democrats simply vote against these people? How will that make anything worse?

The former seems to be the case for liberals such as Elizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown, who are voting for secretary of Housing and Urban Development nominee Ben Carson. Indeed, Warren has explained that "in his written responses to me, he made good, detailed promises, on everything from protecting anti-homelessness programs to enforcing fair housing laws." If Democrats were simply knee-jerk opponents of all of Trump's nominees, Carson would have had no incentive to give Democrats any commitments at all. Of course (as Warren acknowledges) such promises aren't fully binding. But even if Carson only keeps some of his commitments, Democrats will have gained far more than an automatic symbolic "no" vote.

Ben Carson: bureaucratic rebel? Please to be stopping pulling my leg.

Jeff Sessions' Hearing Was an Ahistorical Farce

Nevertheless, it's a legitimate debate to have, even though it's the kind of debate that happens only among Democrats and liberals. Personally, I'd vote (maybe) for Mattis and (maybe) for Zinke, but I would vote against every other one of these nominees because I still haven't seen a good reason not to do so. I will concede that opinions may differ.

There is only one exception at this point. Any Democratic senator who votes to confirm Jefferson Beauregard Sessions as Attorney General should immediately be rendered dead to the party and to every Democratic voter in the country. The context of the immediate moment makes this imperative.

Getty

If it isn't clear by now, there's a powerful new campaign of voter suppression coming down the road. It doesn't matter whether the sudden amplification of the "voter fraud" meme is due to the fact that the president* is delusional on the subject, or due to the fact that he needed a diversion from the stories about Russian ratfcking that were beginning to pile up on the South Lawn, or simply due to the fact that Republicans suppress votes because they're Republicans.

It could be for one of those reasons. It could be for all three of them. The motive isn't the point. The point is that we soon likely will be in the middle of the greatest political brawl over the franchise since 1965.

The Next Attorney General Is Coming for Your Weed

At a moment like this one, it simply will not do to have someone in the attorney general's office who was deemed too racist to be a federal judge 30 years ago. It will not do to have someone in the attorney general's office who launched a dirty-tricks prosecution of voting-rights activists when he was a U.S. Attorney in Alabama. It will not do to have someone in the attorney general's office who greeted the gutting of the Voting Rights Act in 2013 by noting that it was "good for the South."

Jefferson Beauregard Sessions simply will not do.

It doesn't matter if the next nominee is worse. Beat that person, too. It doesn't matter how tough this may make your next re-election campaign; you didn't get elected to get re-elected. The issue of voting rights is too important to the countryand, god knows, to the partyfor it to yield to any other consideration. It is an existential issue, for the republic and for the Democrats. There is no room for compromise or horse-trading. The Democratic Party should stand for the expansion of the franchise and for a greater ease in exercising it. Neither of these goals has a chance with Jefferson Beauregard Sessions running the Department of Justice.

Getty

In the 1960s, the Democrats abandoned their Southern core leadership and threw its support behind the Civil Rights movement and the Voting Rights Act. This sea change fundamentally transformed American politics and, no matter what you may hear from conservatives trying to change the subject, it reversed forever the position of the two parties on the place of African-American citizens in the republic, an arrangement that had persisted, in fits and starts, since the election of Abraham Lincoln. From this rearrangement came the Southern Strategy and the modern conservative movement.

Any Democrat who votes for Sessions is voting against this history and is voting in such a way as to make all the political sacrifice therein a waste of time. Therefore, resistance to the Sessions nomination is a bright line in the sand beyond which should be found nothing but exile. Period, as prominent hostage Sean Spicer would say.

Respond to this post on the Esquire Politics Facebook page.

Read this article:
Any Democrat Who Votes for Jeff Sessions Should Be Excommunicated from the Party - Esquire.com

Phillips switches from Democrat to independent in WV House – Charleston Gazette-Mail (subscription)

Delegate Rupie Phillips, I-Logan

Delegate Rupie Phillips, one of West Virginias most conservative Democratic lawmakers, is switching his political affiliation to independent, arguing that the national Democratic Party hasnt done a good job of being pro-coal, pro-gun, pro-life and pro-jobs.

It is clear to me that the citizens of my district want a true Independent voice in Charleston, Phillips said in a news release. I have been and will continue to be that voice. The people have also been more important than party affiliation to me, and I hope this action sends a message to everyone that the people of Southern West Virginia want and deserve change.

Phillips decision to leave the Democratic Party, the news release says, was partly driven by the reaction to the Presidential Inauguration. The day after Republican Donald Trump was sworn in, hundreds of thousands of people protested as part of the womens marches that were organized in state capitals and major cities throughout the country.

He also cited the War on Coal, a now well-known phrase that has often been used in political campaign ads to attack former President Barack Obama for advancing rules to reduce water and air pollution from mines and coal-fired power plants.

The Logan County lawmaker has voted with Republicans in the Statehouse on many issues in past years and, during the 2016 presidential election, he was an outspoken supporter of Trump. Phillips was seen waiting in line to attend a Trump rally in Charleston in May. His campaign vehicle, with its political advertisements on the back, was parked outside the Charleston Civic Center, where the presidential candidate donned a hard hat and feigned shoveling coal.

Phillips, who was elected to office for the first time in 2010, voted for a bill that now allows people to carry a concealed weapon without a permit, which police agencies came out against. He has voted for a bill that banned certain abortion procedures in West Virginia, over the veto of Democratic Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin.

And he cast a vote for the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which opponents believe would have allowed open discrimination against members of the LGBTQ community.

During his time in the Statehouse, Phillips has often caught attention for his comments and theatrics.

When staff members from the U.S. Office of Surface Mining held a public hearing in Charleston to review a proposed stream protection rule, Phillips took the stage at the Charleston Civic Center to yell at the federal employees.

When the power grid fails and the heat goes off, I hope you freeze yall asses off, Phillips said.

During the 2016 legislative session, Phillips handed out small tubes of sunscreen to his fellow lawmakers to highlight that he doesnt believe in human-induced climate change, which has led to the past three years becoming the hottest on record, according to NASA.

At the time Phillips passed out his sunscreen, much of West Virginia had just been hit by a major snowstorm. Phillips was trying to suggest that one major snowfall was proof that the world wasnt warming something that has been debunked by scientific research that is supported by almost everyone in the scientific community.

I worry about you. Youve got global warming going on, he told his colleagues. Its not cold outside. Its in your mind.

Phillips decision to ditch the Democratic label immediately elicited responses from the Republican and Democratic parties in West Virginia. Democrats denounced the decision. Republicans suggested it represents a continuing shift toward Republican-dominated politics in West Virginia.

Delegate Phillips said he didnt want to play politics, yet this is nothing but political posturing for his own aspirations and media attention, said Belinda Biafore, the West Virginia Democratic Party chairwoman. He said so himself that his district is full of lifelong Democrats, a lot of them conservative Democrats that need a voice in Charleston, yet he chose to abandon them for media attention.

His comments on the partys stance on coal and guns was also untrue and it shows by the volume of conservative Democrats that we represent, Biafore added. We have said time and time again that West Virginia Democrats are a big tent because we represent real people.

Biafore isnt the first state Democratic Party leader to publicly emphasize that West Virginia Democrats arent the same as many of the partys national leaders.

Since Trumps election, Sen. Joe Manchin, West Virginias lone Democratic member of Congress, has emphasized that he is a moderate Democrat, as he has voiced support for Trumps Cabinet picks and proposed policies.

Jim Justices, West Virginias new Democratic governor, said during a campaign debate last year that he was interested in supporting good, down-home West Virginia Democrats. The new governor also argued with his Republican opponent, former Senate President Bill Cole, over who was better friends with Trump.

Our thoughts are with Delegate Phillips as he today makes the choice thousands of West Virginians have made in the last decade, said Conrad Lucas, the states Republican Party chairman. Liberal Democrats in Washington and Charleston have ruined the once dominant party in West Virginia. We welcome them all to join Trump Team, and Make West Virginia Great Again.

Reach Andrew Brown at andrew.brown@wvgazettemail.com, 304-348-4814 or follow @Andy_Ed_Brown on Twitter.

Go here to see the original:
Phillips switches from Democrat to independent in WV House - Charleston Gazette-Mail (subscription)

Democrats Teaching How to Talk to ‘Real Americans’ – Breitbart News

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

Democrats may be understanding that they lost the capacity to talk to Americans who live outside afew large cities situated mostly on Americas coasts. As Politico reports, Democrats are meeting to hear from a list of speakers who hope to convince the party that they knowthe way back to power.

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

While some of the speakers scheduled to appear at the retreat in Sheperdstown, West Virginia, will offer up the same old liberal ideas, others will be speaking to renew efforts to talk to real Americans.

According to reports, several of the programs will urge Democrats to consider changing their message. Moderate Democrat and West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin, for instance, will moderate a panel designated as a discussion with Trump voters in an effort to reach out to the voters the party lost to President Trump.

Another program on the subject of speaking to those who feel invisible in rural America will feature Steve Beshear, a former Democrat Kentucky Governor, along with Democrats Michael Bennet, from Colorado, and North Dakotan Heidi Heitkamp.

Other seminars include, Listening to those feel unheard and Rising America They feel unheard too.

These topics may be a hard sell to a party contemplating hiring a new party chairperson from among candidates trying to outdo each other with far left talking points.

Candidates for the Party Chair include Minnesota Congressman Keith Ellison who is closely connected to anti-Semite and anti-American Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan. At a recent candidates forum, Ellison claimed blacks face mass incarceration and then made the false claim that Trayvon Martin was executed.

Another candidate for the chair, Pete Buttigieg, the white mayor of South Bend, Indiana, far outdidEllison by claiming he personally fills half a dozen minority slots. Im a walking intersectionality. Im a left-handed, Maltese-American, Episcopalian, gay war veteran, he claimed during thecandidates forum.

Even worse is Idaho Democratic Party Executive Director Sally Boynton Brown, who appears to be working in exactly the opposite direction as those speakers hoping to convince party leaders to reach out to lost white voters. In her bid to win the chairmanship, Brown insisted that she would see her job as chair to shut down white people and to tell whites to shut their mouths.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston or email the author at igcolonel@hotmail.com.

Originally posted here:
Democrats Teaching How to Talk to 'Real Americans' - Breitbart News

Democrat Congressman Compares Trump to Hitler Over Immigration – The New American

Less than a week into his presidency, Donald Trump has so upset the liberal applecart that many Democrats just dont know how to cope. But in a classic case of Reductio ad Hitlerum, at least one Democrat in Congress has found his safe place. In response to Trumps immediate actions to keep his campaign promise to secure the border between the United States and Mexico, Gerald Edward Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) took to Twitter with a comparison to Hitler.

Godwins Law states, As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Hitler approaches 1." In other words, if an online discussion regardless of the topic goes on long enough, someone will compare someone or something else to Hitler. Usually, it takes a long time and many participants for the conversation to become heated enough for someone to pull the Hitler card. In this instance, Connolly is to be congratulated. He was able to pull it off in less than a week of ranting about Trump. And he did it all by himself.

Since the inauguration of Trump on Friday, January 20, Connolly (shown on left) has tweeted 40 times as of this writing. The majority of those tweets are aimed at President Trump and his policies, with many of them naming him directly. He has tweeted about everything from the inauguration which he says he boycotted to climate change to abortion to his claim that HRC won electoral vote to immigration.

While most of his tweets were the typical low-brow snark of a man who exemplifies the childish ramblings of a poor loser, it wasnt until he got to immigration that Godwins Law kicked in. In his 29th and 30th tweets since Donald Trump became president, Connolly wrote:

DJT initiates plans for promised wall and immigration restrictions while squelching speech within the federal government. (1/2)

And:

Maybe his enablers will rouse themselves when the Brownshirts come for them. I, for one, will resist. (2/2)

Well, that escalated quickly. Not only did Connolly manage to achieve Reductio ad Hitlerum in a mere 30 tweets, he did so as the only participant in the conversation. That may not be a record, but it's noteworthy.

To be fair, Trump compared the intelligence community to Nazi Germany. But that was after the intelligence community added a fake dossier alleging all manner of salacious and outrageous claims to an official report and allowed it to leak to the media for the purpose of delegitimizing his presidency.

That is hardly the same thing as this.

It should also be noted that Connollys comparison of Trumps immigration policy to Hitler misses at least one critical point: Hitlers actions were almost always a violation of existing laws. The laws he did not violate, he changed. Trumps immigration policies are in keeping with the Constitution of the United States. The president has both a responsibility and the authority to protect the border against an illegal alien invasion. He isn't changing anything; he's just doing what his predecessors failed or refused to do to execute existing laws.

Connollys congressional district includes most of Fairfax County, Virgina. In response to his tweets comparing Trumps efforts to protect the border to Hitler, Matt Ames, chairman of the Fairfax County Republican Committee said in a statement:

Yesterday, Congressman Gerry Connolly sent the following tweet: Maybe his enablers will rouse themselves when the Brownshirts come for them. I, for one, will resist. If this doesnt offend you, it should, regardless of your political leanings. This is not run-of-the-mill political invective, but short-sighted and dangerous talk.

After giving a brief primer on the Brownshirts, Ames expressed his opinion that Connolly seems to be confused, writing:

After all, it wasnt masked Trump supporters who were breaking store windows in downtown Washington last week. It wasnt the Tea Party that burned a Muslim limo drivers car. And Republicans have no history of political violence that Im aware of, unless you count the Civil War. Just so were clear, the Fairfax County GOP denounces the first two instances, and we'll stand where our Party stood on that last one.

But I think its safe to say that Gerry had something else in mind, which is why were asking you to contact his office today and demand an apology.

The statement, sent via an e-mail blast, then lists the phone number for Connollys office in Washington, D.C., as well as a link to his e-mail address.

That Connollys tweeted remarks are beyond the pale is without question. While the merits of building a wall along the southern border are open to debate, the invective of Hitler is totally without merit. As Ames wrote:

If Gerry Connolly wants to criticize Donald Trump on policy grounds, thats well within his right. If he wants to make fun of the Presidents hairstyle, thats fine, too; childish, maybe, but certainly within bounds. There are lots of things Gerry can say and do to advance his political agenda, or block the Administrations. But there are lines that must not be crossed, especially by a sitting member of the House of Representatives.

After all, as Ames asserts in his statement, Gerry Connolly has constituents who know what totalitarian governments actually look like, and who have suffered the evil that they do. Ames goes on to write:

Our local Republican Party has members whose families, or who they themselves, left Europe one step ahead of the real Nazis; who left Castros Cuba, where to this day the slightest hint of political dissent is swiftly and viciously punished; who risked their lives to escape Communist Vietnam in the 1970s and 1980s; who gladly left authoritarian China and have since become proud American citizens.

Ames himself claims to know something of the fear of real tyranny, writing in his e-mail statement, I myself grew up in countries where political kidnappings and killings were common, and tanks rolled through residential neighborhoods. The New American asked Ames about that and he replied in a Facebook message, My father was a CIA officer (not Robert and not Aldrich) and I grew up in Latin America in the 60s and 70s.

Given the condition of the political landscape in Latin America especially in the time Ames spent there he certainly has the personal experience to address Connollys inane comparison to Trump as a dictator along the lines of Hitler. With his own personal experience on one hand, and the people he knows whose families, or who they themselves escaped real tyranny in Europe, Cuba, Vietnam, and China, Ames frustration at Connollys cheap political shot in the form of a tweet can easily be understood. As he wrote in his e-mail statement:

Gerrys snarky tweet manages to malign the President, diminish the sacrifice and suffering of millions of Americans who have known real tyranny, and undermine faith in our system of government, all at once. As an act of subversion, its brilliant. As a statement by a sitting member of Congress, its a despicable lie.

Of course, as recent events have shown, politics and polity are not always friends. And judging from the lies and half-truths of the liberal establishment leading up to and in the wake of Trumps electoral victory Connollys protestations duly noted Connolly is just playing by the rules of his particular political persuasion.

Read this article:
Democrat Congressman Compares Trump to Hitler Over Immigration - The New American