Socialist/Fascist Lunatics in America’s Politics, Academia, and now on its Border

DB Daily Update ^ | David Blackmon

[EyesOfTX]

Today’s Campaign Update (Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Hey, when the Braying Buffoon is right, she’s right.: In an MSNBC interview with the anti-gay bigot Joy Reid, Mad Maxine Waters stumbled across the truth when the fake host asked if she was surprised that Chuck Schumer denounced her efforts to incite violence against Trump Administration officials and their supporters.

In an extraordinarily rare moment of semi-cogent thought, the California Congresswoman responded thusly:

“Well, I’m surprised that Chuck Schumer, you know, reached into the other house (of Congress) to do that. I’ve not quite seen that done before, but one of the things I recognize, being an elected official, is in the final analysis, leadership like Chuck Schumer will do anything that they think is necessary to protect their leadership.”

Yes. Exactly. Schumer did not sincerely mean his condemnation of Waters’ un-American remarks, even when he said they were un-American. He was simply attempting to protect his leadership position by trying to contain the damage. Because that’s what congressional leaders in both parties do, sadly.

Reality can be a real b*tch, huh? – It isn’t just Maxine Waters – it turns out that Democrats were stumbling across reality all over the place on Sunday. Appearing with the insipid Jake Tapper on CNN’s “State of the Union” Sunday morning, Illinois Senator Tammy Duckworth demonstrated a rare understanding about socialism’s ability to sell out here in what members of her party like to call Flyover Country.

When the preening peacock fake host asked her if she thinks 28 year-old Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s upset win over incumbent Joseph Crowley in New York’s Democrat primary last week means that socialism is the future of her Party (which it obviously is), Duckworth responded by correctly saying “I think it’s the future of the party in the Bronx, where she is. I think that you can’t win the White House without the Midwest and I don’t think you can go too far to the left and still win the Midwest.”

Well, yes, that’s all true, but that reality sure isn’t keeping the Obama-era Democrat Party from showing its true socialist/fascist face all over the place. Democrat politicians are like addicted smokers: they see all this polling data, know their support from and of socialist/fascist fanatics is killing them, and yet, like a smoker opening up that next pack of cigs, they just keep opening up that next violent demonstration and electing that next 28 year-old ignoramus fanatic to be the new face of their party.

Speaking of electing socialist/fascist ignoramus fanatics, the people of Mexico did exactly that on Sunday, elevating the Castro/Chavez/Maduro clone Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO) to the presidency, which he will assume on January 1. While it is certainly hard to blame the people of Mexico wanting a new direction for their country, given the utter fecklessness of the current and past regimes in dealing with the drug gangs who effectively run half of the country, if AMLO governs based on his largely Marxist campaign promises, America will soon have another Venezuelan-style fascist disaster right on its southern border.

Isn’t that a lovely prospect?

The threat represented by AMLO, of course, makes building the wall along our border with Mexico all that more urgent. And guess what? In spite of the fake reporting from our national news media, that project is currently underway in three separate locations.

Using funds included in March’s Omnibus Budget Act, the Department of Homeland Security is currently building a 14 mile section of border wall in San Diego, a 2-mile section in Calexico, CA, and a 20-mile section in Santa Teresa, New Mexico. The total cost of these three projects is projected to eat up less than 1/3rd of the $1.6 billion of wall funding included in the Omnibus bill, so we can expect to see similar wall projects targeted at drug-running and human-smuggling border hot spots to be kicked off in the months to come.

And speaking of socialist/fascist ignoramus fanatics, they aren’t all Democrat politicians. Even more of them are professors at our nation’s universities, and now many of this particular breed of socialist/fascist fanatics have taken to advocating that Democrats, if they ever manage to assume control of both the presidency and congress again, pack the Supreme Court with an additional 6 justices.

The germinating event to this latest bit of leftist lunacy is, of course, last week’s retirement by “swing justice” Anthony Kennedy, who kept so many awful bits of leftwing jurisprudence alive during his 31 years on the court. The prospect of indefensible decisions like Roe v. Wade possibly being reversed when Kennedy is replaced by a justice who adheres to intellectual and constitutional honesty has thrown the leftist world into a panic, and their response is to give voters even more reasons than they already had to vote for Republicans.

Think of how brainless it is to launch an obviously-coordinated campaign advocating this particular idea when Republicans control every lever of political power in the nation’s capital, and are likely to continue to do so after the November elections. Why, a creative thinker like President Donald Trump might look at the fact that liberal professors are advocating to expand the number of justices on the nation’s highest court not as a threat, but as an opportunity.

And hey, why not? It may come as a surprise to many that there is no constitutional requirement for the Supreme Court to consist of its current 9 justices. That number is determined by acts of congress. In fact, the Court originally consisted of 6 members, a Chief Justice and 5 associate justices. A sixth associate was added in 1807, a seventh and eighth in 1837, and a ninth in 1863. In 1869, congress recognized the problem with having an even total number of justices on the Court, and passed a law reducing the number of associate justices to the current eight.

The idea of packing the court with additional members to facilitate collectivist political goals is not new. When a Court made up mostly of members over the age of 70 rejected several of his socialist “great society” programs in 1935, Franklin Roosevelt waited to be re-elected in 1936, and then, in 1937 proposed a law that would allow him to create an additional associate justice for every current member over the age of 70, arguing that a court made up of such elderly people could not possibly reflect the values of American society.

Given that pretty much every current “leader” of the Democrat Party today is over the age of 70, this is probably not the rationale they would prefer to put forward. Just a guess.

Just another day in the Democrat Party is going cray-cray in its old age America.

That is all.

Follow me on Twitter at @GDBlackmon

[aces]

starving desperate folks will believe anything, socialism will kill mass folks in Mexico, more than ever before