Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-CA) could not have been plainer. Standing in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota – where rioting has broken out over the police shooting of Daunte Wright, a young black male stopped for a traffic violation – Waters said this when askedMore
Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-CA) could not have been plainer. Standing in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota – where rioting has broken out over the police shooting of Daunte Wright, a young black male stopped for a traffic violation – Waters said this when asked about the trial of Derek Chauvin, the latter the Minneapolis police officer accused of murdering George Floyd (bold print for emphasis supplied):
“We’ve got to stay on the street and we’ve got to get more active, we’ve got to get more confrontational. We’ve got to make sure that they know that we mean business.”
She also urged rioters to “stay in the streets.”
This as Minneapolis, braced for the Chauvin verdict, is described as a powder keg, city stores and buildings, including the courthouse where the trial is being held and the paper’s liberal paper the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, boarded up or encased in multiple layers of fences and razor wire, with the National Guard on the scene.
Got that? In a city that has already been wracked by violence and arrests, Waters was not asking for calm but instead inciting more violence. Insurrection.
Here’s the report from Brooklyn Center per Fox News:
“An emergency curfew was imposed by police Friday night as rioting escalated outside police headquarters, FOX 9 of Minneapolis reported. As of early Saturday, Public Safety Commission John Harrington estimated about 100 people had been arrested.
…Around 9:30 p.m., rioters breached a barrier surrounding the building, drawing a police response of flash bangs and pepper spray, the station reported. The gathering – which also included objects hurled at police – was declared an unlawful assembly soon after, according to FOX 9.”
Recall that in 2020 Minneapolis was the target of rioting that cost $350 million in damages, damaged or looted some 1300 private businesses or properties, destroying almost 100 of them. The adjoining city of St. Paul, which is also the state capital of Minnesota, had $82 million in damages, over 300 damaged buildings with over 30 destroyed outright when not seriously damaged. The record shows that by the beginning of June 2020 there had been 2 deaths, 604 arrests, and more than $500 million in damage to 1,500 properties.
None of this counts the death, destruction and damages inflicted on other major American cities both in 2020 and right this minute in 2021. As this is written Portland, Oregon is yet again ablaze, a Friday night riot resulting in buildings set on fire and windows of private businesses smashed.
On and on goes this orgy of violence. And what does this sitting Member of Congress have to say? In a visit to one of these war zones she demands the rioters be “more confrontational” and to “stay in the streets.”
Let’s cut to the chase. What Maxine Waters is doing is urging insurrection. She is deliberately, willfully inciting the mobs to violence.
So where is House Speaker Nancy Pelosi? At first, Pelosi was silent. Then Pelosi, the self-same Speaker who said President Trump’s January 6th speech urging peaceful and patriotic protest “incited an armed rebellion against our common country” – and therefore Trump “had to go” – made a point of backing Waters and her comments.
By Pelosi’s own standards, Waters’ is out there inciting violence and insurrection, or, to use Pelosi’s own words, Congresswoman Maxine Waters has “incited an armed rebellion against our common country.”
House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy got it. On Monday he tweeted, as headlined and reported in The Washington Examiner:
McCarthy warns Pelosi to take action on Maxine Waters ‘inciting violence in Minneapolis,’ or he will
McCarthy’s tweet said this:
“Maxine Waters is inciting violence in Minneapolis — just as she has incited it in the past. If Speaker Pelosi doesn’t act against this dangerous rhetoric, I will bring action this week.”
Not long after that tweet, Pelosi responded, telling CNN in answer to a question of whether Waters owes an apology:
“No, she doesn’t. Absolutely not.”
In a blink, McCarthy acted. In an exclusive with Breitbart McCarthy’s reaction was headlined this way:
Exclusive – Kevin McCarthy Moves to Formally Censure Maxine Waters
‘Broke the Law,’ ‘Incited Violence’
Said McCarthy in his statement:
“This weekend in Minnesota, Maxine Waters broke the law by violating curfew and then incited violence. Increased unrest has already led to violence against law enforcement and her comments intentionally poured fuel on the fire. We’ve heard this type of violent rhetoric from Waters before, and the United States Congress must clearly and without reservation reprimand this behavior before more people get hurt. But Speaker Pelosi is ignoring Waters’ behavior. That’s why I am introducing a resolution to censure Rep. Waters for these dangerous comments, and I hope that all my colleagues – both Republican and Democrat – will stand up for peace on America’s streets.”
Added Texas Senator Ted Cruz:
“Democrats actively encouraging riots & violence. They want to tear us apart.”
The question now should be: Is it time to censure not only Waters – but Pelosi herself?
Well of course liberal Hollywood elites would do this. Here’s the headline from the Hollywood trade paper Variety:
Hollywood Stars, Entertainment Companies Sign Open Letter Condemning Georgia Voting Restrictions
Among the stars listed as signing, says Variety, are:
“The hundreds of signatories included the likes of Netflix, Amazon, ViacomCBS, Starbucks, Facebook and UTA, as well as celebrities such as Rooney Mara, George Clooney, Mark Ruffalo, Larry David, Josh Gad, Lee Daniels, George Lucas, Lin-Manuel Miranda, Leonardo Dicaprio, Demi Lovato, Shonda Rhimes, Samuel L. Jackson, Orlando Bloom and Naomi Campbell. Business titans such as Michael Bloomberg, Scooter Braun, J.J. Abrams, David Geffen and Warren Buffett also signed the note.”
One has to ask: Have they even read the law?
Over there at Real Clear Politics a number of leaders in the black community had another view altogether. The headline:
Why We Black Leaders Support Voter ID Laws
The column said, in part, this, bold print for emphasis supplied:
“America is a country of over 300 million people. We are comprised of every shape, size, nationality, and opinion. This diversity has proven to be one of our greatest strengths.
However, if you listened to largely white liberal media personalities and elite CEOs, you wouldn’t know this. According to liberal orthodoxy, all Blacks think alike, and all Blacks support Black Lives Matter, and all Blacks oppose the recently enacted Georgia Election Integrity Act.
…These elites are totally oblivious to the real Black leaders, such as civil rights legend Robert Woodson and Richard Finley; younger leaders like Wall Street wizard John Burnett; National Black Chamber of Commerce founders Harry and Kay Alford; Michael Murphy, political operative extraordinaire from Georgia; business and football legend Herschel Walker; Texas state Rep. James White; 21-year-old West Virginia state Rep. Caleb Hanna; former Florida Lt. Gov. Jennifer S. Carroll; former ambassador to the U.N. Human Rights Commission Ken Blackwell; and U.S. Congressmen Byron Donalds and Burgess Owens, to name a few.
What do all these people have in common? They are all Republican, therefore white liberal elites don’t deem them to be Black because they come from a conservative perspective.
…To add insult to this patronizing injury, the very same liberal elites who blast voter ID laws that most Blacks support run corporations that practice similar ID policies. If every other ethnicity is required to show an ID to vote, why is the Black race considered incapable of doing so.
This notion is absolutely insulting.
You can’t board a plane without an ID. You can’t pick up a package from a UPS distribution center without an ID. You can’t buy alcohol without an ID. And you definitely can’t visit President Biden in the White House without an ID. Is that racist? Of course it isn’t.”
Got that? These liberal Hollywood elites are attacking ID to vote in Georgia – in spite of the fact that black leaders aplenty in and out of Georgia do in fact support the law. (As noted in this space right here with Georgia black clergy standing up for the law.)
As a matter of fact, when it comes to ID in Hollywood? Take a look at just one major Hollywood studio – Warner Brothers. The studio runs tours. And if you are visiting Hollywood and want to take the Warner studio tour you will learn this from the studio web site:
“A form of legal photo identification is required to be shown during check-in.”
It doesn’t get more hypocritical than that.
But hey, this is Hollywood.
Uh-oh. Former Vice President Joe Biden, briefly out of his basement, has just landed himself in hot water – with his own leftist activist base. Biden’s sin? Here’s the headline from Mediaite:
Joe Biden Says Confederate Monuments Should Come Down, But ‘Protect’ Columbus and George Washington
The story says:
“2020 Democratic presidential candidate and former Vice President Joe Biden expressed support for the removal of Confederate statues on Tuesday, though added that statues of Christopher Columbus, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson should be protected by the government.”
Google “ Columbus was…” and there are entries with headlines like this one from the left-wing Vox:
9 reasons Christopher Columbus was a murderer, tyrant, and scoundrel
Why do we even celebrate Columbus Day?
Or this from The Philadelphia Tribune just last October, The Tribune being “the nation’s oldest and continuously published newspaper reflecting the African American experience.”
Five facts proving Columbus was one of history’s worst monsters
This 2019 jewel begins:
“Monday, Oct. 14 is Columbus Day this year. If you celebrate Christopher Columbus (born Cristofor Colombo) on that day or any other day, you are a celebrator of racist genocide, massive land robbery, barbaric slavery, child/adult serial rape, and systemic torture.”
The kind of stories that say these things have now moved to the next, seriously violent steps. Here are some of the current headlines:
Newsflash? These attacks are not the result of anti-Biden conservatives or intoxicated country club Republicans. These attacks are the latest – and decidedly violent – a manifestation of leftist rage. And these kind of people are going to sit back and quietly vote for Joe Biden – who is now out there saying this?
“For example, taking down, toppling Christopher Columbus statues or George Washington statues, et cetera, I think that is something that the government has an opportunity and responsibility to protect from happening.”
Let’s be clear. This “movement” is no longer about race. It’s about open sabotage of everything American, which quite specifically includes the destruction of American history and culture. And, yes, the sabotage of the Democratic Party as it is now constituted and led by Joe Biden.
These activists are out to take over the Democratic Party and get rid of leaders like Joe Biden – beginning with Joe Biden himself. There is nothing Biden can do – and he is surely going to try – to appease these self-imagined revolutionaries. He will bob and weave, duck and cover and try and find the middle ground. In this instance the Biden “solution” is “Confederate statues bad” but “Columbus deserves government protection.”
It isn’t going to work. These activists are not about compromise or moderation. Appeasement does not work with revolutionaries.
Which is to say, Joe Biden’s monument problem is monumental.
In the midst of all the statue pulling-downs, with Speaker Nancy Pelosi removing portraits of her predecessors as Speaker and demanding that various statues lining the halls of the US Capitol be removed, it is clearly the moment to ask:
Is it time to disband the Democrats? To abolish the Democratic Party outright?
After all, the portraits Pelosi removed were all Democrats. So too are those depicted in the statues she wants ousted. And, but of course, there was a reason.
Way back there in the ancient days of 2008, I took a detailed look at the Democratic Party’s record on race. It ran in The American Spectator with the title Democrats: The Missing Years. The Wall Street Journal picked up the piece as well.
I wrote the piece because as the Democratic Convention that nominated Senator Barack Obama was gathering, the Democratic National Committee had dedicated a portion of their website to recounting the party’s history. Except, well, the DNC’s account was missing – a lot. Not to mention was it deliberately and decidedly falsely trying to cast the Democrats as the party of civil rights. Clearly it was time to set the record straight, which I did. Here are a few excerpts:
“So what’s missing?
• There is no reference to the number of Democratic Party platforms supporting slavery. There were 6 from 1840-1860.
• There is no reference to the number of Democratic presidents who owned slaves. There were 7 from 1800-1861
• There is no reference to the number of Democratic Party platforms that either supported segregation outright or were silent on the subject. There were 20, from 1868-1948.
• There is no reference to “Jim Crow” as in “Jim Crow laws,” nor is there reference to the role Democrats played in creating them. These were the post-Civil War laws passed enthusiastically by Democrats in that pesky 52-year part of the DNC’s missing years. These laws segregated public schools, public transportation, restaurants, restrooms, and public places in general (everything from water coolers to beaches). The reason Civil Rights heroine Rosa Parks became famous is that she sat in the front of a “whites only” bus, the “whites only” designation the direct result of Democrats.
• There is no reference to the formation of the Ku Klux Klan, which, according to Columbia University historian Eric Foner became “a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party.” Nor is there reference to the University of North Carolina historian Allen Trelease’s description of the Klan as the “terrorist arm of the Democratic Party.”
• There is no reference to the fact Democrats opposed the Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution. The Thirteenth banned slavery. The Fourteenth effectively overturned the infamous 1857 Supreme Court Dred Scott decision (made by Democrat pro-slavery Supreme Court justices) by guaranteeing due process and equal protection to former slaves. The Fifteenth gave black Americans the right to vote.
• There is no reference to the fact Democrats opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1866. It was passed by the Republican Congress over the veto of Democratic President Andrew Johnson. The law was designed to provide blacks with the right to own private property, sign contracts, sue and serve as witnesses in a legal proceeding.
• There is no reference to the Democrats’ opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1875. It was passed by a Republican Congress and signed into law by President Ulysses Grant. The law prohibited racial discrimination in public places and public accommodations.
• There is no reference to the Democrats’ 1904 platform, which devotes a section to “Sectional and Racial Agitation,” claiming the GOP’s protests against segregation and the denial of voting rights to blacks sought to “revive the dead and hateful race and sectional animosities in any part of our common country,” which in turn “means confusion, the distraction of business, and the reopening of wounds now happily healed.”
• There is no reference to four Democrat platforms, 1908-1920, that are silent on blacks, segregation, lynching, and voting rights as racial problems in the country mount. By contrast, the GOP platforms of those years specifically address “Rights of the Negro” (1908), oppose lynchings (in 1912, 1920, 1924, 1928) and, as the New Deal kicks in, speak out about the dangers of making blacks “wards of the state.”
• There is no reference to the DNC-sponsored Democrat Convention of 1924, known to history as the “Klanbake.” The 103-ballot convention was held in Madison Square Garden. Hundreds of delegates were members of the Ku Klux Klan, the Klan so powerful that a plank condemning Klan violence was defeated outright. To celebrate the Klan staged a rally with 10,000 hooded Klansmen in a field in New Jersey directly across the Hudson from the site of the Convention. Attended by hundreds of cheering Convention delegates, the rally featured burning crosses and calls for violence against African Americans and Catholics.
• There is no reference to the fact that it was Democrats who segregated the federal government of the United States, specifically at the direction of President Woodrow Wilson upon taking office in 1913. There is a reference to the fact that President Harry Truman integrated the military after World War II.
• There is a reference to the fact that Democrats created the Federal Reserve Board, passed a labor and child welfare laws, and created Social Security with Wilson’s New Freedom and FDR’s New Deal. There is no reference these programs were created as the result of an agreement to ignore segregation and the lynching of blacks. Neither is there a reference to the thousands of local officials, state legislators, state governors, U.S. Congressmen and U.S. Senators who were elected as supporters of slavery and then segregation between 1800 and 1965. Nor is there reference to the deal with the devil that left segregation and lynching as a way of life in return for election support for three post-Civil War Democrat presidents, Grover Cleveland, Woodrow Wilson, and Franklin Roosevelt.
• There is no reference that three-fourths of the opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Bill in the U.S. House came from Democrats, or that 80 percent of the nay vote on the bill in the Senate came from the Democrats. Certainly, there is no reference to the fact that the opposition included future Democratic Senate Leader Robert Byrd of West Virginia (a former Klan member) and Tennessee Senator Albert Gore, Sr., father of future Vice President Al Gore.
• Last, but certainly not least, there is no reference to the fact that Birmingham, Alabama Public Safety Commissioner Bull Connor, who infamously unleashed dogs and fire hoses on civil rights protestors, was in fact — yes indeed — both a member of the Democratic National Committee and the Ku Klux Klan.”
Now, of course, all of this history of judging – and punishing – by skin color has now morphed into so-called “identity politics” – the son of segregation and grandson of slavery. The Democrats – past and very much present – are the Party of Race.
Pelosi’s removal of portraits of four of her predecessors, not to mention various statues, is a quiet admission that all of them were, yes indeed, leaders of the Democratic Party. The move by Princeton University to remove President Woodrow Wilson’s name from the university’s public policy school is a quiet admission that Wilson, a former Princeton president elected as the Democrat governor of New Jersey and who, as the leader of the progressive movement that was at the core of the Democratic Party, was indeed a serious racist. Which is exactly why Wilson was so at home as both prominent member and leader of the Democratic Party.
So as the statues come down and the portraits of Democrats are removed the obvious question.
Isn’t time – perhaps past time? – to disband and abolish the Democratic Party? And start over?
Return with me now to days of yesteryear. In this case, the summer of 1984.
President Ronald Reagan was running for re-election, and the Republican National Convention was set to convene in Dallas, Texas on August 20th. In the day, I was a young (OK, I’m still young, but I was younger!) Reagan campaign staffer. Specifically, I was the chief of staff to Reagan co-chair Drew Lewis, Reagan’s first Secretary of Transportation (famous in the day for getting striking air traffic controllers fired.) Drew had gone back into the private sector as the CEO of what became the predecessor company to today’s Time-Warner. His task in the campaign that summer? Represent the President in the writing of the 1984 GOP Platform – a platform that had to represent the policies of the Reagan administration.
We had come late to the task. In fact, the White House Counselor Ed Meese was tasked with this. But Meese had been nominated to be Attorney General, immediately removing himself from this political task. Alas, the platform task sat there in the White House and fell through the cracks, allowing it to be taken up totally by the congressional and other staffers at the Republican National Committee who were already drafting the platform on the authority of the platform chairman, then Mississippi Congressman Trent Lott.
Now on board as representing the President in the process, I was instructed by my boss to do the obvious: get a copy of the platform as then drafted. Easy, right?
I went about doing so – and learned that the person I needed to get it from was the platform committee’s chief of staff. His name: John Bolton. I called, brought him up to date, and asked for a copy so we could plug in the White House – that would mean the President and senior staff – so they would know what was in it.
And John said…no.
I confess I was startled. To be clear, I repeated what I thought was obvious. This is the platform that the President will run on for re-election. It has to reflect the President’s views. Yes, it represents the larger Republican Party, but this was an incumbent administration with actual government policy in place that had to be reflected. Answer? No again.
The long and short is that we had to have a small four-person lunch in the US House dining room hosted by Congressman Lott, with Drew Lewis, myself, and John Bolton to clear the air. All was well after that in terms of cooperation.
Move ahead to the Trump era and my first thought was that John Bolton would do well as the national security adviser dealing with the Kim Jung Un’s of the world.
Bolton seems not to understand is that when all the media hoo-ha has gone away, and he dines out on his book profits, he has effectively torpedoed his own historical reputation.
But the real problem here is that, alas, what had been an uncooperative, power-move in 1984 had, I have realized in recent days, evolved into the attitude that can be all too frequent in any White House. Which is to say, there are always members of a White House staff so taken with their own job and themselves that they forget there is only one person in the entire building who put his name on the ballot for the right to sit behind the big desk in the Oval Office. In this case, that person was Donald J. Trump – not John Bolton.
To the point, here is the news that former Trump White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders has her own new book about to come out. And here is a brief reveal as reported by Fox News. The headline:
Sarah Sanders slams Bolton as man ‘drunk on power,’ in her forthcoming book
The story opens by reporting this:
“Former White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders slams former National Security Adviser John Bolton as a man “drunk on power” in her forthcoming book expected to be released later this year.
Sanders, a Fox News contributor, shared a scathing passage pertaining to Bolton — who has made waves with his own memoir skewering President Trump — in a lengthy Twitter thread Monday morning.
“Full excerpt from my forthcoming book ‘Speaking for Myself,’ about John Bolton, a man drunk on power who ultimately betrayed America when he didn’t get his way,” Sanders tweeted.
The excerpt claimed Bolton on many foreign trips “had a separate agenda and often arrived and departed on a different plane because he didn’t want to travel on Air Force One with the rest of us.”
Sarah goes on, but the point to me is evident. The John Bolton who had resisted the Reagan White House in 1984 had become some sort of self-viewed version of the Incredible Hulk. Nominally he worked for President Trump. But in reality he was all about his own power and prestige, and when he was angered by X he would become the big green, rampaging monster.
This is an eye-rolling yet typical Washington story, albeit on steroids. Leaving Bolton’s former colleagues who don’t behave in this fashion simultaneously seething at his self-aggrandizement and appalled at his methodical sell-out of a president who gave him the much sought-after position he wanted so desperately that he lobbied relentlessly for the job.
What John Bolton seems not to understand is that when all the media hoo-ha has gone away, and he dines out on his book profits, he has effectively torpedoed his own historical reputation.