Winsome Sears
Winsome Sears

Left-Wing Celebs Freak Out As Virginia Elects Winsome Sears As First African-American Female Lt. Gov.

Leave it to Breitbart to catch up with all the celebrity tweets freaking out at the Glenn Youngkin victory in Virginia -and that of his running mate, Winsome Sears.

There they are, one famous Hollywood or TV personality,  one name after another, foaming and fuming about GOP fascists and racists threatening America. The Breitbart list includes “Rosie O’Donnell, Cher, Amber Tamblyn, Jeffrey Wright, Sophia Bush, Bradley Whitford, and Rosanna Arquette.”

Samples of their tweeted rage:

But perhaps the best takedown of this nonsense came when ex-ESPN sports commentator Jemele Hill tweeted that “This country simply loves white supremacy.” Hill was quickly answered by no less than Virginia’s new Lieutenant Governor Winsome Sears. Sears is the first African-American woman to be elected in Virginia history.

Said Sears in a posting with a photo of herself holding an AR-15: “We beg to differ.”

Sears has no hesitation calling out liberals for the racism they show to blacks who don’t fit the liberal idea of a black person. In one interview she said this:

“The Democrats have been successful in instilling fear in people who look like me. I have had white liberals talk down to me — talk down to me, and as if I didn’t exist — simply because I’m a Republican. I mean, how dare you? Who told you you could talk to me that way? Because I’m not the right kind of black? Is that how this works?”

Sears is spot on. In point of fact when any African-American is a Republican or conservative the left will turn on them with a vengeance.

This became obvious when Clarence Thomas was nominated by President George H.W.Bush for the Supreme Court. The vacant seat was caused by the retirement of the Court’s first black justice, Thurgood Marshall retired. Democrats said this was the “black seat” on the Court and demanded Bush nominate a black – and he obliged by nominating then-Judge Thomas. With that the Left’s assault on Thomas began, with Thomas memorably saying this of the massive attacks from the Left in his confirmation hearing:

“And from my standpoint as a black American, as far as I’m concerned, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you. You will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the U.S. — U.S. Senate, rather than hung from a tree.”

Time after time African-Americans who are not on the Left are attacked for leaving the decidedly racist liberal plantation where all black people are supposed to think alike because of their skin color. It could be Thomas, Dr. Ben Carson, South Carolina Senator Tim Scott or California Republican gubernatorial candidate Larry Elder and the scenario never changes. Dr. Carson put his finger on the problem exactly when he said of white liberals:

“Well, they’re the most racist people there are. You know, they put you in a little category, a little box — you have to think this way. How could you dare come off the plantation?”

What all these celebrities shrieking that it was racist to elect an African-American woman to be Lieutenant Governor are really all about is being the masters of the liberal plantation – and they will say whatever they need to say to try and intimidate conservative blacks into not leaving the plantation.

Leave it to Cher to insist that the electorate that elected Sears meant that it was voting for a “whites-only club.” Really, Cher? Really? By the way, you live, I believe, in California? Why do I suspect you voted for white guy Gavin Newsom of the “whites only” club instead of the black Larry Elder? Maybe you’re the one into the “whites only” club?

The hard fact of the matter here is that Democrats, whose party was founded by slave owners, run by segregationists and is now deeply into the son of segregation known as identity politics has a political culture that is centered on race. Which means that anyone who disagrees with them is automatically a racist.

As the Virginia election has just shown with the election of Winsome Sears, that dog won’t hunt.

But you can be sure they will keep saying it. Because it’s who they are.

Larry Elder
Larry Elder

Larry Elder Campaign To Replace Newsom Raises $4.5 Million In 19 Days

Longtime conservative radio host Larry Elder has raised almost $4.5 million in the first 19 days of his campaign to replace Democrat California Governor Gavin Newsom in a special recall election on September 14.

“The fundraising numbers are tallied from July 12, 2021, the day Elder announced his candidacy, to July 31, 2021, the end of the latest reporting period,” Elder’s campaign said in a statement. “Some 46,000 donors contributed, making the average daily donation over $235,000, and the average donation $84.00. This reflects the overwhelming grassroots support for Elder, the commonsense candidate now leading in the recall polls.”

“The numbers announced by my campaign today solidify my candidacy to defeat Gavin Newsom in the upcoming recall election,” Elder said. “Californians have shown up and believe in our mission to recall Newsom and elect me in his place. Newsom can raise an unlimited amount of funds for this election; therefore, every single donation to my campaign counts, whether small or large.”

“In mere weeks, his total eclipsed what fellow Republicans had raised in months, and daily filings show Elder has pulled in another $440,000 in the first few days of August,” Politico reported.

Recent polls show Elder leading among the 40 candidates on the ballot to replace Newsom with 23% support, according to polls from Survey USA and Emerson Polling. At the same time, support for recalling Newsom has continued to gain traction with an increase of 40% in March to 43% in mid-July, and an equivalent increase to 46% two weeks later, according to polls from Emerson College and Nexstar Media’s “Inside California Politics.” Another Survey USA poll drew an even worse picture for Newsom, with support for his recall at 51%

Karoline Leavitt
Karoline Leavitt

23-Year-Old Former Trump Asst Press Secretary Announces New Hampshire Congressional Bid

23-year-old former assistant press secretary in the Trump administration has announced her congressional bid in New Hampshire on Monday. If elected, Karoline Leavitt would be the youngest woman elected to Congress in American history.

Most recently, Leavitt was the communications director for Republican powerhouse New York Representative Elise Stefanik. Leavitt is running in New Hampshire’s 1st congressional district against Democratic Representative Chris Pappas.

In her announcement, Leavitt released a video stating, “In D.C., I watched in disgust as President Biden and the radical Democrats completely dismantled the progress we made under President Trump in just six months. The radical Left has one goal: stealing more power for themselves and taking our freedoms to do it, even if it means destroying our country along the way.”

Leavitt also was one of the many silenced conservative voices on Twitter, although Twitter claimed temporarily suspending her account was a mistake. “Everywhere you look, conservatives – myself included – are being censored and silenced. And our freedoms to speak freely, think independently, go to church and operate our own businesses are being infringed by radical Democrats.”

Leavitt will be the fourth Republican to enter the race to unseat Pappas who has been in the congressional seat since 2018. In an interview with New Hampshire’s WMUR, Leavitt discussed her personal upbringing and connection in the state.

“It’s not just about me. It’s about conservatives in New Hampshire and across our country who truly feel like their voices are not being heard…Getting into this race for me truly is personal because I love this sate so much.”

“I think it’s incredibly important that our elected officials can resonate with voters because they understand the voters because they were raised here and truly adhere to New Hampshire values in their own lives” she added.

Supreme Court of the USA
Supreme Court of the USA

Supreme Court Upholds Arizona Election Security Laws

The Supreme Court ruled that two election security laws in Arizona do not violate the Voter Rights Act of 1965, stating that a “disparity in impact does necessarily mean a system is not equally open,” and “very small differences should not be artificially magnified.”

“The case involves a 2016 Arizona law that made it a crime to provide another person’s completed early ballot to election officials, with the exception of family members or caregivers. Community activists sometimes engage in ballot collection to facilitate voting and increase voter turnout. Ballot collection is legal in most states, with varying limitations. Republican critics call the practice ‘ballot harvesting,’” Reuters reported.

“The 6-3 ruling, with the court’s conservative justices in the majority, held that the restrictions on early ballot collection by third parties and where absentee ballots may be cast did not violate the Voting Rights Act, a landmark 1965 federal law that prohibits racial discrimination in voting,”

In her dissent, far-left Justice Elena Kagan called the ruling “tragic,” and wrote, “So the court decides this Voting Rights Act case at a perilous moment for the nation’s commitment to equal citizenship. It decides this case in an era of voting-rights retrenchment – when too many states and localities are restricting access to voting in ways that will predictably deprive members of minority groups of equal access to the ballot box.”

While Kagan’s claim in her dissent that “too many states and localities” are putting laws in place that “deprive members of minority groups” suggests there are a number of “states and localities” that she believes should be putting those types of laws in place, the Court found that the election security laws in question do “not result in minorities having unequal access to the political process.”

The Court’s decision noted, “The percentage of ballots invalidated under this policy was very small (0.15% of all ballots cast in 2016) and decreasing, and while the percentages were slightly higher for members of minority groups, the court found that this disparity ‘does not result in minorities having unequal access to the political process.’”

The Court stated, “But the mere fact there is some disparity in impact does not necessarily mean that a system is not equally open or that it does not give everyone an equal opportunity to vote. The size of any disparity matters. And in assessing the size of any disparity, a meaningful comparison is essential. What are at bottom very small differences should not be artificially magnified.”

PA Voter

Supreme Court Upholds Arizona Voter Laws: ‘Does not Violate’ Voting Rights Act

The Supreme Court of the United States upheld two provisions of Arizona voting law. One is of restricting the practice of ballot-harvesting and the other of requiring ballots cast at the wrong precinct on election day be discarded.

The majority decision from the highest court is a blow to Democrats’ vigorous hunger to “count every vote” regardless of fraudulent circumstances. Judge Alito wrote in the Court’s majority opinion that there was not enough evidence to prove that either of the provisions caused discrimination.

[adsanity_group num_ads=”1″ align=”aligncenter” num_columns=”1″ group_ids=”2381″/]

Democrats alleged that the Arizona law discriminates against minority voters. However, “The plaintiffs were unable to provide statistical evidence showing that,” wrote Alito. The ballot-harvesting restriction “had a disparate impact on minority voters” the opinion added.

“The modest evidence of racially disparate burdens caused by [the law], in light of the State’s justifications, leads us to the conclusion that the law does not violate” the Voting Rights Act, states the opinion.

Ballot harvesting is when a third party collects ballots from registered voters during an election to attempt to get as many voters’ ballots as possible. Arizona law prohibits ballot harvesting unless the person collecting a ballot is a family member, caregiver, or election official.

Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich defended the state’s voting laws in place in the days leading up to the Court ruling. “There is no more sacred duty for a public servant than preserving both the people’s right to vote and their confidence in the election process,” Brnovich said in a released statement.

“Arizona’s ballot box safeguards are shared by many states, were recommended by a bipartisan commission, and are constitutional because they equally protect us all” added Brnovich.

1 2 3 31