Tag Archives: Nancy Pelosi

What demorats can do for a city: San Francisco’s homeless crisis and opioid epidemic

Maybe it’s not so much what demorats can DO for a city..it’s what they CAN’T do to solve problems.

Because if taxpayer money solved the problem, it would have been solved decades ago.

See also: Seattle is Dying

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Democrats file legislation to force all Americans to accept the LGBTQ agenda

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi March 13 introduced the so-called Equality Act, a bill that would add “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” as protected classes under federal civil rights law.

The legislation, known as the Equality Act would specifically include all LGBTQ definitions and would penalize everyday Americans for their beliefs about marriage and biological sex. Similar sexual orientation and gender identity laws at the state and local level have already been used in this way.

While liberal Democrats and some liberal Republicans in the House of Representatives are lauding the proposed legislation, some conservatives are calling it a “frontal assault on religious liberty.”

If the Equality Act becomes law, it would impact essentially every part of American life. It would force employers and workers to conform to new sexual norms or else lose their businesses and jobs. It would force hospitals and insurers to provide and pay for these therapies against any moral or medical objections. It would force parents to provide sexual reassignment treatments for their children who are confused about their sexual identity. It would force religious institutions that provide adoptions to permit same sex couples to adopt children, and the list goes on.

Monica Burke, a research assistant in the DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society at The Heritage Foundation, in a critique of the proposed legislation noted that most Americans “don’t want a nationwide bathroom requirement, health care mandate, or “preferred pronoun” law based on gender identity, but congressional Democrats seem to think it’s time to impose them.”

Burke’s critique in The Daily Signal:

Nancy Pelosi delivered . . . on her promise to introduce the so-called Equality Act, which would elevate sexual orientation and gender identity to protected classes in federal anti-discrimination law.

Although that may sound nice in theory, in practice sexual orientation and gender identity policies at the state and local level have caused profound harms to Americans from all walks of life.

How might a sexual orientation and gender identity law on the federal level, as introduced in the House and Senate, affect you and your community? Here are seven ways:

1.   It would penalize Americans who don’t affirm new sexual norms or gender ideology.

Jack Phillips’ case went all the way to the Supreme Court after the Colorado Civil Rights Commission accused the bakery owner of discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation when the self-described cake artist declined to create a custom cake to celebrate a same-sex wedding.

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, but left the law in question, the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, intact. Until last week, Phillips was in court again defending himself against the same agency under the same law.

The day after the Supreme Court ruled in Phillips’ case, Autumn Scardina, a lawyer who identifies as transgender, requested that he create a “gender transition cake.” After Phillips declined, the state Civil Rights Commission found probable cause under the law that the baker had discriminated on the basis of gender identity.

Thankfully, the commission dropped the case, and Phillips agreed to drop his own lawsuit accusing the state agency of harassing him for his Christian beliefs.

Phillips is just one of many Americans who have lost income because of their belief that marriage is between one man and one woman. Others cases involve florists, bakers, photographers, wedding venue owners, videographers, web designers, calligraphers, and public servants.

These cases are just the beginning. The same policies used to silence disagreement over marriage can be used to silence disagreement over the biological reality of sex.

2.  It would compel speech.

Virginia high school teacher Peter Vlaming lost his job for something he did not say.

A county school board voted unanimously to fire the veteran teacher over the objections of his students after he refused to comply with administrators’ orders to use masculine pronouns in referring to a female student who identifies as transgender.

Vlaming did his best to accommodate the student without violating his religious belief that God created human beings male and female, using the student’s new name and simply refraining from using pronouns altogether.

Unfortunately, the school still considered this a violation of its anti-discrimination policy.

Incidents like these would increase under federal policy proposed in the Equality Act. Both federal and private employers could face costly lawsuits if they fail to implement strict preferred pronoun policies. Employees could be disciplined if they fail to comply, regardless of their scientific or moral objections.

3 . It could shut down charities.

Foster care and adoption agencies, drug rehabilitation centers, and homeless centers already face challenges under state and local policies on sexual orientation and gender identity.

In Philadelphia, just days after the city put out an urgent call for 300 additional families to foster children, the city halted child placements by Catholic Social Services because of the organization’s belief that every child deserves both a mother and a father.

Although same-sex couples have the opportunity to foster children through the state or every other agency in Philadelphia, the city canceled its contract with Catholic Social Services. The agency’s approved foster homes remain available while children languish on the waiting list.

A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law would make this situation a national phenomenon, which would spell disaster for the 437,500 children in foster care nationwide.

Other charities would be affected, too.

In Anchorage, Alaska, a biological male born Timothy Paul Coyle goes by the name of Samantha Amanda Coyle. On two occasions, Coyle tried to gain access to the city’s Downtown Soup Kitchen Hope Center, a shelter for homeless, abused, and trafficked women.

In one attempt, authorities said, Coyle was inebriated and had gotten into a fight with a staffer at another shelter, so Hope Center staff paid Coyle’s fare to the emergency room to receive medical attention. Coyle sued the center for “gender identity discrimination.”

A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law could force any social service organization to open up private facilities—including single-sex bathrooms, showers, and sleeping areas—to members of the opposite sex.

4.  It would allow more biological males to defeat girls in sports.

Two biological males who identify and compete as women easily defeated all of their female competitors in an event at the Connecticut State Track Championships. Transgender athlete Terry Miller broke the state record in the girls’100-meter dash. Andraya Yearwood, also transgender, took second place.

Selina Soule, a female runner, not only lost to the biological males in the championships but also lost out on valuable opportunities to be seen by college coaches and chosen for scholarships.

Soule said about the 100-meter event: “We all know the outcome of the race before it even starts; it’s demoralizing.”

A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law would defeat the purpose of Title IX of the Civil Rights Act, which is supposed to guarantee women equal educational and athletic opportunities.

Under radical gender identity policies, female athletes have sustained gruesome injuries at the hands of male competitors. In high school wrestling, female athletes have forfeited rather than compete against transgender athletes on testosterone.

A federal law could set girls’ and women’s sports back permanently at every level.

5.  It could be used to coerce medical professionals.

Under state sexual orientation and gender identity laws, individuals who identify as transgender have sued Catholic hospitals in California and New Jersey for declining to perform hysterectomies on otherwise healthy women who wanted to pursue gender transition.

If these lawsuits succeed, medical professionals would be pressured to treat patients according to ideology rather than their best medical judgment.

The Obama administration tried to coerce medical professionals into offering transition-affirming therapies through a regulation in the Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare.

That move was stopped in the 11th hour by a federal judge. However, that could all be set back in motion if a national law imposes a nationwide health care mandate regarding gender identity.

6.  It could lead to more parents losing custody of their children.

The politicization of medicine according to gender ideology will create more conflicts among parents, doctors, and the government. A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law would jeopardize parental rights nationwide.

In fact, the current issue of the American Journal of Bioethics includes an article arguing that the state should overrule the parents of transgender children who do not consent to give them puberty-blocking drugs.

This has already happened. In Ohio, a judge removed a biological girl from her parents’ custody after they declined to help her “transition” to male with testosterone supplements.

After the Cincinnati Children’s Hospital’s Transgender Health Clinic recommended these treatments for the girl’s gender dysphoria, the parents wanted to pursue counseling instead. Then the county’s family services agency charged the parents with abuse and neglect, and the judge terminated their custody.

Similar cases are proceeding through the courts with children as young as 6 years old.

Meanwhile, studies show that 80 to 95 percent of children no longer experience gender dysphoria after puberty. Politicizing medicine could have serious consequences for children who are exposed to the unnecessary medical risks of drastic therapies.

A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law would make these cases more common.

7.  It would enable sexual assault.

A complaint under investigation by federal education officials alleges that a boy who identifies as “gender fluid” at Oakhurst Elementary School in Decatur, Georgia, sexually assaulted Pascha Thomas’ 5-year-old daughter in a girls’ restroom. The boy had access to the girls’ restroom because of Decatur City Schools’ transgender restroom policy.

School authorities refused to change the policy even after Thomas reported the assault. Eventually, she decided to remove her daughter from school for the girl’s emotional well-being and physical safety.

A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law would give male sexual predators who self-identify as females access to private facilities, increasing the likelihood of these tragic incidents.

It could also make victims less likely to report sexual misconduct and police less likely to get involved, for fear of being accused of discrimination.

The proposed Equality Act could impose a nationwide bathroom policy that would leave women and children in particular vulnerable to predators. It actually would promote inequality by elevating the ideologies of special-interest groups to the level of protected groups in civil rights law.

This extreme and dangerous legislation would create unprecedented harms to businesses, charities, medical professionals, women and children, and entire families.

Texas fights back

Meanwhile, as congressional Democrats are advocating for the hamstringing of religious belief, Texas is pushing forward with new legislation that, if passed, will ultimately protect religious freedom—in Texas, at least. From Christian Ellis, CBN News, March 25:

The Republican-controlled state senate in Texas is considering SB 17. The bill would allow state license holders like lawyers, health care professionals, and counselors to serve clients based on their religious beliefs without any adverse actions from licensing boards.

Texas Lt. Gov Dan Patrick (R) announced the bill as one of his top priorities for the 2019 Legislative Session. The bill was designated a priority as “a result of requests and recommendations from senators and the people of Texas.”

“They strengthen our support for life, liberty and Texas values, increase protections for taxpayers,” wrote Patrick.

SB 17’s section on religious freedom reads:

“State agency that issues a license or otherwise regulates a business, occupation, or profession may not adopt any rule, regulation, or policy or impose a penalty that:

(1) limits an applicant’s ability to obtain, maintain, or renew a license based on a sincerely held religious belief of the applicant; or

(2) burdens an applicant’s or a license holder’s:

(A) free exercise of religion, regardless of whether the burden is the result of a rule generally applicable to all applicants or license holders;

(B) freedom of speech regarding a sincerely held religious belief; or

(C) membership in any religious organization.”

Conservatives across the state expect the bill to pass as the Republican party has control over the state’s House, Senate, and governorship. However, opponents like the National Association of Social Workers Texas have stated they will argue against the bill in the hearing, calling it “discriminatory”.

The organization states the bill runs “counter to the NASW Code of Ethics for all professionals, and will deny services to already marginalized persons in the LGBTQ community or women seeking access to reproductive care and services.”

SB 17 comes at a crucial time when religious freedom faces ongoing threats across the country, and as a new threat emerges in the Democrat-controlled US House of Representatives. This month, Democrats introduced an updated version of their Equality Act that elevates protections for sexual orientation over protections for religious liberty. The bill could threaten ministries with legal consequences if they denied an LGBTQ individual from working for their institution.

“Every American should be treated with dignity and respect, but our laws need to protect the constitutionally guaranteed rights that we have,” Greg Baylor from the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) told CBN News.

“Now under the Equality Act we will have a nationwide law,” continued Baylor. “We will see a proliferation of instances where Christians and others are being coerced to violate their beliefs in order to comply with such a law.”

While Democrats are indicating the Equality Act is a big part of their agenda, they do not currently control the US Senate, so the measure is not expected to pass unless they gain control of both houses of Congress in the 2020 election.

While Democrat liberals are planning an assault on religion, Texas is pushing forward with new legislation that, if passed, will ultimately protect religious freedom.

The Republican-controlled state senate in Texas is considering SB 17. The bill would allow state license holders like lawyers, health care professionals, and counselors to serve clients based on their religious beliefs without any adverse actions from licensing boards.

Texas Lt. Gov Dan Patrick (R) announced the bill as one of his top priorities for the 2019 Legislative Session. The bill was designated a priority as “a result of requests and recommendations from senators and the people of Texas.”

~ Grif

Note from Eowyn: H.R. 5 – Equality Act was introduced by Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) on March 13, 2019. See also “Coming to America: Canadian man fined $55,000 for ‘misgendering’ a ‘transgender’“.

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

New Pentagon transgender rule to set limit on troops transitioning; must serve as their birth gender

From Fox News: The Defense Department has approved a new policy that will largely bar transgender troops and military recruits from transitioning to another sex, and require most individuals to serve in their birth gender.

The memo outlining the new policy was obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press, and it comes after a lengthy and complicated legal battle. It falls short of the all-out transgender ban that was initially ordered by President Donald Trump. But it will likely force the military to eventually discharge transgender individuals who need hormone treatments or surgery and can’t or won’t serve in their birth gender.

The order says the military services must implement the new policy in 30 days, giving some individuals a short window of time to qualify for gender transition if needed. And it allows service secretaries to waive the policy on a case-by-case basis.

Under the new rules, currently serving transgender troops and anyone who has signed an enlistment contract by April 12 may continue with plans for hormone treatments and gender transition if they have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria.

But after April 12, no one with gender dysphoria who is taking hormones or has transitioned to another gender will be allowed to enlist. And any currently serving troops diagnosed with gender dysphoria after April 12 will have to serve in their birth gender and will be barred from taking hormones or getting transition surgery.

The memo lays out guidelines for discharging service members based on the new policy. It says a service member can be discharged based on a diagnosis of gender dysphoria if he or she is “unable or unwilling to adhere to all applicable standards, including the standards associated with his or her biological sex, or seeks transition to another gender.”

It adds that troops must be formally counseled and given a chance to change their decision before the discharge is finalized.

In a statement Tuesday night, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the ban “cowardly.”

“The President’s revival of his bigoted, disgusting ban on transgender servicemembers is a stunning attack on the patriots who keep us safe and on the most fundamental ideals of our nation,” the California Democrat said. “The President’s years-long insistence on his cowardly ban makes clear that prejudice, not patriotism, guides his decisions.”

Palm Center, a California research institute, protested the new policy Tuesday. Director Aaron Belkin said, “The Trump administration is determined to bring back ‘don’t ask, don’t tell,’ a policy that forced service members to choose between serving their country and telling the truth about who they were.”

The final legal injunction blocking the new policy was lifted last week, allowing the Pentagon to move forward. But restrictions on transgender troops are likely to face ongoing legal challenges and have been slammed by members of Congress as discriminatory and self-defeating.

The memo was signed by David L. Norquist, who is currently serving as the deputy defense secretary.

Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Calif., said in February that barring service by transgender individuals “would cost us recruits at a time when so few Americans are willing to serve.” She spoke at a hearing in which transgender troops testified that transitioning to another sex made them stronger and more effective members of the military.

Until a few years ago service members could be discharged from the military for being transgender, but that changed under the Obama administration. Then-Defense Secretary Ash Carter announced in 2016 that transgender people already serving in the military would be allowed to serve openly. And the military set July 1, 2017, as the date when transgender individuals would be allowed to enlist.

After Trump took office, however, his administration delayed the enlistment date and called for additional study to determine if allowing transgender individuals to serve would affect military readiness or effectiveness.

A few weeks later, Trump caught military leaders by surprise, tweeting that the government won’t accept or allow transgender individuals to serve “in any capacity” in the military. “Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail,” he wrote.

His demand for a ban triggered a legal and moral quagmire, as the Pentagon faced the prospect of throwing out service members who had willingly come forward as transgender after being promised they would be protected and allowed to serve. And as legal battles blocked the ban from taking effect, the Obama-era policy continued and transgender individuals were allowed to begin enlisting in the military a little more than a year ago.

An estimated 14,700 troops on active duty and in the Reserves identify as transgender, but not all seek treatment. Since July 2016, more than 1,500 service members were diagnosed with gender dysphoria; as of Feb. 1, there were 1,071 currently serving. According to the Pentagon, the department has spent about $8 million on transgender care since 2016. The military’s annual health care budget tops $50 billion.

Last year, all four service chiefs told Congress that they had seen no discipline, morale or unit readiness problems with transgender troops serving openly in the military. But they also acknowledged that some commanders were spending a lot of time with transgender individuals who were working through medical requirements and other transition issues.

The five transgender troops who testified in February said their medical transitions took anywhere from four weeks to four months and they did most of it on their own time. All said they were fit to return to deploying afterward.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Trump administration sets new federal rule prohibiting abortion referrals to tax-payer funded clinics

Baby killers Planned Parenthood hardest hit.

From OregonLive: The Trump administration on Friday set up new obstacles for women seeking abortions, barring taxpayer-funded family planning clinics from making abortion referrals. The new policy is certain to be challenged in court.

The final rule released Friday by the Health and Human Services Department also would prohibit federally funded family planning clinics from being housed in the same locations as abortion providers, and require stricter financial separation.

Clinic staff would still be permitted to discuss abortion with clients, along with other options. However, that would no longer be required.

The move, decried by women’s groups and praised by religious conservatives, is the latest in a series of Trump administration efforts to remake government policy on reproductive health. But it could be some time before women served by the federal family program feel the full impact.

Women’s groups, organizations representing the clinics, and Democratic-led states are expected to sue to block the policy from going into effect. Administration officials told abortion opponents on a call Friday that they expect legal action, according to a participant.

In Oregon, Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum said Friday she would sue the Trump administration, saying, “Medical providers, no matter what kind of service they perform, must be able to have candid conversations with patients about all options for care, and without fear that if they say the word ‘abortion’ their clinic could lose federal funds.”

Abortion is a legal medical procedure, but federal laws prohibit the use of taxpayer funds to pay for abortions except in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the woman.

Planned Parenthood, whose affiliates are major providers of family planning services as well as abortions, said the administration is trying to impose a “gag rule,” and launched a full campaign to block it. Congressional supporters of the organization said it receives about $60 million a year from the federal program.

“I want our patients to know this — we will fight through every avenue so this illegal, unethical rule never goes into effect,” said Planned Parenthood’s president, Dr. Leana Wen.

She said the new policy would prevent doctors from referring women for abortions “even if your life depended on it.”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., declared: “Republicans must end their relentless assault on women’s health care and rights.”

It’s a gag rule “for all intents and purposes,” said the American Medical Association.

“The patient-physician relationship relies on trust, open conversation and informed decision making and the government should not be telling physicians what they can and cannot say to their patients,” the AMA said in a statement.

Planned Parenthood and other groups representing the clinics say the new requirements for physical separation of facilities would be costly and all but impossible to fulfill. Planned Parenthood said the administration is making another attempt to drive it out of business, after efforts to deny funding failed in Congress.

White House counselor Kellyanne Conway scoffed at that argument. “They’ve been saying for years they don’t co-mingle their funds, so this should be easy for them,” she told reporters at the White House. “Physically separate and financially separate.”

Religious conservatives see the administration’s action as a way to break down what they call an indirect taxpayer subsidy of abortion providers.

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, called it “a major step toward the ultimate goal of ending taxpayers’ forced partnership with the abortion industry.”

Read the rest of the story here.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Saturday funnies, the Nancy Pelosi grounded edition!

DCG

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Vote for the Wall!

A new “caravan” of hundreds of Hondurans are heading toward the U.S.-Mexico border.

TV footage yesterday showed 600-800 people in the violent city of San Pedro Sula, Honduras, huddled together and waving Honduran flags as they began a journey that will likely take weeks or even months to reach the U.S.-Mexico border. (Reuters)

Notwithstanding the new “caravan” of invaders, the news this morning from the alphabet Hate-America TV networks is that a new national poll conducted by Connecticut’s Quinnipiac University found that:

  • A majority of American voters (55% vs. 43%) are opposed to a wall on the Mexican border, and reject every argument for the Wall.
  • An even larger majority (63% vs. 30%) favor a Democratic proposal to reopen parts of the federal government that do not involve border security while negotiating funding for the Wall.

Of course, this is the same Quinnipiac University polling that, in March 2014, claimed Fauxcahontas Elizabeth Warren, 69, to be the “hottest” U.S. politician whom Americans rated the most favorable. Hillary Clinton came in second. (See DCG’s post, “Sen. Elizabeth Warren is ‘hottest’ U.S. politicians: poll“.)

Congressman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) is calling on Americans to vote for the Wall:

  • Call 1-800-344-8082
  • Press 1, to vote for the Wall.

Go Vote!!!

Meanwhile, independent journalist Laura Loomer exposed “no border wall” Demonrat House Speaker  Nancy Pelosi’s utter hypocrisy.

Gateway Pundit reports that yesterday, Loomer brought a group of illegal immigrants from Guatemala and Mexico to Pelosi’s mansion in Napa Valley, CA, and set up a “sanctuary camp” on the lawn, with photos of Americans — including Kate Steinle — who were killed by illegal aliens.

Police were called, and evicted, i.e., deported, the group of illegals.

The next destination of Loomer and the “caravan” of illegals is the home of new California governor Gavin Newsom. LOL

See also “Nancy Pelosi’s San Francisco home has a border wall”.

H/t CSM

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Friday funnies!

DCG

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

The Left devour their own: MSNBC mocks Pelosi-Schumer rebuttal to Trump’s border speech

MSNBC is part of the MSM or Hate America Media.

So it is of some interest that MSNBC made fun of the response by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Senate Minority Leader Chucky Schumer (D-NY) to President Trump’s national address on border security last evening.

Joseph A. Wulfsohn reports for Fox News:

On Tuesday night, an MSNBC panel had some fun at the expense of Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif, and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-NY, for their response to President Donald Trump’s primetime address from the Oval Office.

MSNBC anchor Brian Williams took note of the memes Pelosi and Schumer’s rebuttal birthed with many people comparing the Democratic leaders to angry parents and the classic American Gothic painting.

Brian “lying pays!” Williams also mocked how Pelosi and Schumer shared a “little, tiny, modest, wooden podium.”

Former Democratic strategist James Carville, who is Hollywood central casting for the Creature from the Black Lagoon, said these rebuttals “seldom” work. Chuckling, Carville said:

“I don’t think they [Pelosi and Schumer] wanted to do it. I don’t think they should’ve done it. And I guarantee you at the staff meeting tomorrow morning, somebody is gonna get, you know, chewed out pretty good about this whole thing. I’ve been more excited about colonoscopies than he [Schumer] was giving his speech tonight. He didn’t want to be there!”

Update:

Incredibly, the Washington Post has joined MSNBC.

See WaPo columnist Marc A. Thiessen’s op/ed: “Trump won the night. Schumer and Pelosi lost“.

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Pelosi’s daughter on her mom: “She’ll cut your head off and you won’t even know you’re bleeding”

Scroll ahead to 6:57 mark.

Alexandra Pelosi said this after first starting out her segment by saying that in DC “you need to make friends.”

File this away for the next time the Left complains about “violent rhetoric.”

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!’’

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

The rotten fruits of identity politics: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez declares war on white Democrats

Identity politics is based on the idea that certain racial-ethnic-gender-sexual orientation groups are oppressed, and that one’s identity as a member of those groups makes one peculiarly vulnerable to societal oppression and cultural imperialism.

The Demonrat Party has wielded identity politics to to divide Americans from each other, and to corrupt all institutions in American society — political, economic, educational, and socio-cultural. Now, the party is beginning to reap the rotten harvest of what they themselves have fomented.

Faux socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in a $3,505 designer outfit

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the newly-elected Congresswoman from New York and faux socialist in the $3,505 designer pantsuit, is backing the Justice Democrats — a socialist insurgent group within the Demonrat Party which opposes “Democratic incumbents who are demographically and ideologically out-of-touch with their districts.”

Note: Just as the Left have corrupted the rainbow by appropriating it as an LGBT symbol, they’ve also corrupted the word “justice” by equating it with Marxist socialism, as in “social justice” and “Justice Democrats”.

Ocasio-Cortez signaled her support in a tweet @Ocasio2018 last Saturday, Nov. 17, 2018:

If you’re a strong progressive leader in your community and committed to getting money out of politics, I want you to join me in Congress. I want you to run. To run in 2020 without corporate money, you need to start considering now. Join @justicedems tonight to learn more.

Joel B. Pollak reports for Breitbart, Nov. 18, 2018, that the Justice Democrats had helped Ocasio-Cortez oust veteran Rep. Joe Crowley (D-NY) in a primary in New York’s 14th congressional district earlier this year.

Justice Democrats’ executive director Alexandra Rojas, a Bernie Sanders supporter in 2016, declares in a press release:

We recruited and supported Ocasio-Cortez all the way to a historic victory and now we’re going to repeat the playbook. There’s lots of blue districts in this country where communities want to support a new generation of diverse working-class leaders who fight tirelessly for their voters and build a movement around big solutions to our country’s biggest problems. We’re creating an alternative pathway to Congress for grassroots candidates to become leaders in the Democratic Party.

The #OurTime project is a grassroots candidate recruitment effort asking Democrats and progressives around the country to submit nominees for both potential candidates and districts where an Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez-style campaign might succeed. The organization will prioritize candidates who are women, represent the diversity of communities in their district, and support the major tenets of Justice Democrats platform: rejecting corporate PAC donations, Medicare For All, free college, dismantling mass incarceration and deportations, and a Green New Deal.

Since winning her election Nov. 6, and even though she has not yet taken office, Ocasio-Cortez is already committed to replacing many of her colleagues on the basis of race and ideology. She is challenging the Democratic Party leadership, joining a sit-in protest in the office of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) over climate change policy.

Others backing the #OurTime campaign include Muslim Representative-elect Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), who was born to Palestinian immigrants in Detroit and one of the first two Muslim women elected to Congress.

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0