The reality of the democrat party.......

[2aguy]

Kevin D. Williamson breaks down what he democrat party really is....

What Is the Democratic Party?

Here is one possibility: The Democratic party in reality is the cartoon version of the Republican party stood on its head, with cold-eyed self-serving economic interests using the so-called social issues to stir up the rubes while they go about seeing to their own paydays and pensions.


The economic interests attached to the Democratic party are fairly easy to identify: people who work for government at all levels.


You may come across the occasional Ron Swanson in the wild, but when it comes to the teachers’ unions — which are the biggest spender in U.S. politics — or the AFSCME gang or the vast majority of people receiving a taxpayer-funded paycheck, the politics of the public sector is almost exclusively Democratic.


And what they care about isn’t social justice or inequality or diversity or peace or whether little Johnny can use the ladies’ room if his heart tells him to — they care about getting paid.

Here’s an interesting point of comparison. When Barack Obama was running for president in 2008, he opposed gay marriage. So did Hillary Rodham Clinton, but Obama’s opposition was especially interesting in that he cited religious doctrine in support of his position: “My faith teaches me . . . that marriage is a union between a man and a woman. For me, as a Christian, it is also a sacred union — God’s in the mix.”

George W. Bush, who was derided as a fundamentalist bigot by lifestyle liberals, never said anything like that. (Dick Cheney was well to the left of the Democrats on the question.) But there was barely a murmur of opposition to Obama’s staking out this ground “on the wrong side of history.” Social issues are for the naïfs.


During the 2008 Democratic primary, Obama gave an off-the-record speech to a group of Wall Street financial executives in which he shared his frustration with the sclerotic and bureaucratic state of American education, and declared that he was close to publicly endorsing a nationwide school-choice program. (This is according to one of those in attendance.)

The moneymen were enthused by this, but nothing ever came of it. In fact, Obama went hard in the opposite direction, working to gut the school-choice program in Washington, D.C., a popular program, which benefited urban black families almost exclusively.

You don’t have to be a hard-boiled cynic to suspect that this has to do with the manpower and money-power of the teachers’ unions, who could have done a great deal more than they did to elevate Hillary Rodham Clinton over Barack Obama that year.

Read more at: What Is the Democratic Party?

 

[Fenton Lum]

One american political party down, one to go.

 

[Pogo]

Said it before, say it again --- political parties should be chartered to exist for no more than twenty years. After that time is up they cease to exist, whether they've accomplished anything or not, period. This Duopoly is way too old.

A political party usually organizes around some kind of ideology but as soon as it gets established that fades and it becomes all about self-perpetuation. There's no point in that.

 

[Omiyaru]

The Democratic party is not a cartoon, we want to help people progress, not digress to old ideals that defied equality, human rights and morals.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk

 

[DGS49]

Democrats have since at least the 1930's, always been about socialism. The only thing that changes is the way it's presented. Most younger Americans don't even know that UNIONS are, by definition, a socialist institution. Everybody does the same work; everybody gets the same pay...that's SOCIALISM.

Because socialists have little ambition, they have always gravitated toward public sector employment, where there are few demands, nobody ever gets fired, and you can retire early. Before unions came along, government employment was low-pay and marginal benefits (other than early retirement). But once the socialists took over and brought in unions, they entered into a permanent "arrangement" with democrat elected officials and have now reached the point where government employment is one of the best gigs available in our entire society.

All this talk about "income inequality," "equality" and "progress" is just more socialist claptrap. Democrats/Leftists/Socialists won't be satisfied until everyone and everything is EQUAL - just like in North Korea and Cuba.

Think about the very concept of "Inequality." To believe that "inequality" is a problem, you must believe that some people have too little, and some people have too much. Think about that. Where did that come from? It is the most un-American thing I've ever heard of, and yet people use the expression all the time as though it were a legitimate public policy position. It necessarily implies that one of the roles of Government is to take wealth (or income) from the people who have "too much," and give it to the people who don't have "enough."

Where have I heard that before? The Communist Manifesto?

If money or wealth is stolen or acquired by fraud, then we have laws to rectify that. But simply to believe that some people have TOO MUCH, so some of their wealth should be confiscated is insanity. And certainly is in no way connected with the Constitution of the U.S.

But I digress...

 

[Pogo]

Democrats have since at least the 1930's, always been about socialism. The only thing that changes is the way it's presented. Most younger Americans don't even know that UNIONS are, by definition, a socialist institution. Everybody does the same work; everybody gets the same pay...that's SOCIALISM.

Because socialists have little ambition, they have always gravitated toward public sector employment, where there are few demands, nobody ever gets fired, and you can retire early. Before unions came along, government employment was low-pay and marginal benefits (other than early retirement). But once the socialists took over and brought in unions, they entered into a permanent "arrangement" with democrat elected officials and have now reached the point where government employment is one of the best gigs available in our entire society.
th
All this talk about "income inequality," "equality" and "progress" is just more socialist claptrap. Democrats/Leftists/Socialists won't be satisfied until everyone and everything is EQUAL - just like in North Korea and Cuba.

Think about the very concept of "Inequality." To believe that "inequality" is a problem, you must believe that some people have too little, and some people have too much. Think about that. Where did that come from? It is the most un-American thing I've ever heard of, and yet people use the expression all the time as though it were a legitimate public policy position. It necessarily implies that one of the roles of Government is to take wealth (or income) from the people who have "too much," and give it to the people who don't have "enough."

Where have I heard that before? The Communist Manifesto?

If money or wealth is stolen or acquired by fraud, then we have laws to rectify that. But simply to believe that some people have TOO MUCH, so some of their wealth should be confiscated is insanity. And certainly is in no way connected with the Constitution of the U.S.

But I digress...

Eh --- not quite.

Around the turn of that century (19th > 20th), the Democratic Party absorbed the Populist movement/party, at the same time the Republican Party gravitated toward the elites -- the wealthy and the corporations. That brought the working class, and with it the union constituency, into the DP--- as well as the immigrants, the minorities of Catholics, Jews, blacks, etc. The "commoners". That's how the black vote shifted, in the 1930s, from predominantly Republican to predominantly Democratic. Part of the same class population.

Unions were a natural part of that but hardly the only one, and certainly not the originator of it.

 

[easyt65]

The election campaign, the election aftermath, and Berkeley has exposed Democrats for what they TRULY are:

The campaign taught us:
- Liberals are racist, sexist, anti-Catholic/religion, homophobic Anti-Semites (Thanks to their own personal leaked e-mails)

- Liberals seek power so much that they are willing to do and say anything to win (As shown by the 'All-In' 'Fake News' Media ... by Liberals / the Hillary campaign vandalizing and firebombing GOP HQs ... By the Hillary campaign paying groups to intimidate, beat, and bloody Trump supporters ... by the DNC rigging their Primary, giving Hillary debate questions in advance, and engaging in voter fraud during the Primaries to help Hillary beat Bernie sanders...

The election aftermath taught us:
Despite declaring challenging the election results to be an attempt to undermine our democracy, Liberals have done nothing BUT do that ever since the election ended, proving again that winning - staying in power - is the only thing that matters.

Berkeley taught us:
That Liberals seek to eliminate the voice / freedom of speech of anyone who disagrees with them and / or has a different opinion, to the point that in order to succeed they are willing to engage in violence, arson, looting, vandalism, destruction of property, physical assault, etc...

In the last year the Democratic Party has resembled a terrorist group more than a Political Party, a definite THREAT to this country / citizens.

 

[Pogo]

Kevin D. Williamson breaks down what he democrat party really is....

What Is the Democratic Party?

Here is one possibility: The Democratic party in reality is the cartoon version of the Republican party stood on its head, with cold-eyed self-serving economic interests using the so-called social issues to stir up the rubes while they go about seeing to their own paydays and pensions.


The economic interests attached to the Democratic party are fairly easy to identify: people who work for government at all levels.


You may come across the occasional Ron Swanson in the wild, but when it comes to the teachers’ unions — which are the biggest spender in U.S. politics — or the AFSCME gang or the vast majority of people receiving a taxpayer-funded paycheck, the politics of the public sector is almost exclusively Democratic.


And what they care about isn’t social justice or inequality or diversity or peace or whether little Johnny can use the ladies’ room if his heart tells him to — they care about getting paid.

Here’s an interesting point of comparison. When Barack Obama was running for president in 2008, he opposed gay marriage. So did Hillary Rodham Clinton, but Obama’s opposition was especially interesting in that he cited religious doctrine in support of his position: “My faith teaches me . . . that marriage is a union between a man and a woman. For me, as a Christian, it is also a sacred union — God’s in the mix.”

George W. Bush, who was derided as a fundamentalist bigot by lifestyle liberals, never said anything like that. (Dick Cheney was well to the left of the Democrats on the question.) But there was barely a murmur of opposition to Obama’s staking out this ground “on the wrong side of history.” Social issues are for the naïfs.


During the 2008 Democratic primary, Obama gave an off-the-record speech to a group of Wall Street financial executives in which he shared his frustration with the sclerotic and bureaucratic state of American education, and declared that he was close to publicly endorsing a nationwide school-choice program. (This is according to one of those in attendance.)

The moneymen were enthused by this, but nothing ever came of it. In fact, Obama went hard in the opposite direction, working to gut the school-choice program in Washington, D.C., a popular program, which benefited urban black families almost exclusively.

You don’t have to be a hard-boiled cynic to suspect that this has to do with the manpower and money-power of the teachers’ unions, who could have done a great deal more than they did to elevate Hillary Rodham Clinton over Barack Obama that year.

Read more at: What Is the Democratic Party?

How come you still can't get a proper name right --- even when your own OP article spells it out for you?

 

[Pogo]

The election campaign, the election aftermath, and Berkeley has exposed Democrats for what they TRULY are:

The campaign taught us:
- Liberals are racist, sexist, anti-Catholic/religion, homophobic Anti-Semites (Thanks to their own personal leaked e-mails)

- Liberals seek power so much that they are willing to do and say anything to win (As shown by the 'All-In' 'Fake News' Media ... by Liberals / the Hillary campaign vandalizing and firebombing GOP HQs ... By the Hillary campaign paying groups to intimidate, beat, and bloody Trump supporters ... by the DNC rigging their Primary, giving Hillary debate questions in advance, and engaging in voter fraud during the Primaries to help Hillary beat Bernie sanders...

The election aftermath taught us:
Despite declaring challenging the election results to be an attempt to undermine our democracy, Liberals have done nothing BUT do that ever since the election ended, proving again that winning - staying in power - is the only thing that matters.

Berkeley taught us:
That Liberals seek to eliminate the voice / freedom of speech of anyone who disagrees with them and / or has a different opinion, to the point that in order to succeed they are willing to engage in violence, arson, looting, vandalism, destruction of property, physical assault, etc...

In the last year the Democratic Party has resembled a terrorist group more than a Political Party, a definite THREAT to this country / citizens.

Liberals are racist, sexist, anti-Catholic/religion, homophobic Anti-Semites

Impossible. That's an oxymoron.

"Democrats" and "Liberals" are two different things, Dumbass. PICK one.

 

[2aguy]

The election campaign, the election aftermath, and Berkeley has exposed Democrats for what they TRULY are:

The campaign taught us:
- Liberals are racist, sexist, anti-Catholic/religion, homophobic Anti-Semites (Thanks to their own personal leaked e-mails)

- Liberals seek power so much that they are willing to do and say anything to win (As shown by the 'All-In' 'Fake News' Media ... by Liberals / the Hillary campaign vandalizing and firebombing GOP HQs ... By the Hillary campaign paying groups to intimidate, beat, and bloody Trump supporters ... by the DNC rigging their Primary, giving Hillary debate questions in advance, and engaging in voter fraud during the Primaries to help Hillary beat Bernie sanders...

The election aftermath taught us:
Despite declaring challenging the election results to be an attempt to undermine our democracy, Liberals have done nothing BUT do that ever since the election ended, proving again that winning - staying in power - is the only thing that matters.

Berkeley taught us:
That Liberals seek to eliminate the voice / freedom of speech of anyone who disagrees with them and / or has a different opinion, to the point that in order to succeed they are willing to engage in violence, arson, looting, vandalism, destruction of property, physical assault, etc...

In the last year the Democratic Party has resembled a terrorist group more than a Political Party, a definite THREAT to this country / citizens.

Liberals are racist, sexist, anti-Catholic/religion, homophobic Anti-Semites

Impossible. That's an oxymoron.

"Democrats" and "Liberals" are two different things, Dumbass. PICK one.

Nope....the left hijacked the word "liberal" in order to hide their left wing, big government statism....there is nothing in common to day with the modern liberal and the actual meaning of the word.

 

[2aguy]

Kevin D. Williamson breaks down what he democrat party really is....

What Is the Democratic Party?

Here is one possibility: The Democratic party in reality is the cartoon version of the Republican party stood on its head, with cold-eyed self-serving economic interests using the so-called social issues to stir up the rubes while they go about seeing to their own paydays and pensions.


The economic interests attached to the Democratic party are fairly easy to identify: people who work for government at all levels.


You may come across the occasional Ron Swanson in the wild, but when it comes to the teachers’ unions — which are the biggest spender in U.S. politics — or the AFSCME gang or the vast majority of people receiving a taxpayer-funded paycheck, the politics of the public sector is almost exclusively Democratic.


And what they care about isn’t social justice or inequality or diversity or peace or whether little Johnny can use the ladies’ room if his heart tells him to — they care about getting paid.

Here’s an interesting point of comparison. When Barack Obama was running for president in 2008, he opposed gay marriage. So did Hillary Rodham Clinton, but Obama’s opposition was especially interesting in that he cited religious doctrine in support of his position: “My faith teaches me . . . that marriage is a union between a man and a woman. For me, as a Christian, it is also a sacred union — God’s in the mix.”

George W. Bush, who was derided as a fundamentalist bigot by lifestyle liberals, never said anything like that. (Dick Cheney was well to the left of the Democrats on the question.) But there was barely a murmur of opposition to Obama’s staking out this ground “on the wrong side of history.” Social issues are for the naïfs.


During the 2008 Democratic primary, Obama gave an off-the-record speech to a group of Wall Street financial executives in which he shared his frustration with the sclerotic and bureaucratic state of American education, and declared that he was close to publicly endorsing a nationwide school-choice program. (This is according to one of those in attendance.)

The moneymen were enthused by this, but nothing ever came of it. In fact, Obama went hard in the opposite direction, working to gut the school-choice program in Washington, D.C., a popular program, which benefited urban black families almost exclusively.

You don’t have to be a hard-boiled cynic to suspect that this has to do with the manpower and money-power of the teachers’ unions, who could have done a great deal more than they did to elevate Hillary Rodham Clinton over Barack Obama that year.

Read more at: What Is the Democratic Party?

How come you still can't get a proper name right --- even when your own OP article spells it out for you?

As we saw during the election, the democrat party is not democratic in any way shape or form....they rigged the election for hilary...and tried to rig the election against Trump....democratic is not something the democrats stand for....

 

[Pogo]

The election campaign, the election aftermath, and Berkeley has exposed Democrats for what they TRULY are:

The campaign taught us:
- Liberals are racist, sexist, anti-Catholic/religion, homophobic Anti-Semites (Thanks to their own personal leaked e-mails)

- Liberals seek power so much that they are willing to do and say anything to win (As shown by the 'All-In' 'Fake News' Media ... by Liberals / the Hillary campaign vandalizing and firebombing GOP HQs ... By the Hillary campaign paying groups to intimidate, beat, and bloody Trump supporters ... by the DNC rigging their Primary, giving Hillary debate questions in advance, and engaging in voter fraud during the Primaries to help Hillary beat Bernie sanders...

The election aftermath taught us:
Despite declaring challenging the election results to be an attempt to undermine our democracy, Liberals have done nothing BUT do that ever since the election ended, proving again that winning - staying in power - is the only thing that matters.

Berkeley taught us:
That Liberals seek to eliminate the voice / freedom of speech of anyone who disagrees with them and / or has a different opinion, to the point that in order to succeed they are willing to engage in violence, arson, looting, vandalism, destruction of property, physical assault, etc...

In the last year the Democratic Party has resembled a terrorist group more than a Political Party, a definite THREAT to this country / citizens.

Liberals are racist, sexist, anti-Catholic/religion, homophobic Anti-Semites

Impossible. That's an oxymoron.

"Democrats" and "Liberals" are two different things, Dumbass. PICK one.

Nope....the left hijacked the word "liberal" in order to hide their left wing, big government statism....there is nothing in common to day with the modern liberal and the actual meaning of the word.

Nope. If anything the far-right McCarthyites did that in the 1940s.

A word can't mean two different things which are at odds with each other. Think about it. And once you've done that, quit misusing the damn term.

 

[Pogo]

Kevin D. Williamson breaks down what he democrat party really is....

What Is the Democratic Party?

Here is one possibility: The Democratic party in reality is the cartoon version of the Republican party stood on its head, with cold-eyed self-serving economic interests using the so-called social issues to stir up the rubes while they go about seeing to their own paydays and pensions.


The economic interests attached to the Democratic party are fairly easy to identify: people who work for government at all levels.


You may come across the occasional Ron Swanson in the wild, but when it comes to the teachers’ unions — which are the biggest spender in U.S. politics — or the AFSCME gang or the vast majority of people receiving a taxpayer-funded paycheck, the politics of the public sector is almost exclusively Democratic.


And what they care about isn’t social justice or inequality or diversity or peace or whether little Johnny can use the ladies’ room if his heart tells him to — they care about getting paid.

Here’s an interesting point of comparison. When Barack Obama was running for president in 2008, he opposed gay marriage. So did Hillary Rodham Clinton, but Obama’s opposition was especially interesting in that he cited religious doctrine in support of his position: “My faith teaches me . . . that marriage is a union between a man and a woman. For me, as a Christian, it is also a sacred union — God’s in the mix.”

George W. Bush, who was derided as a fundamentalist bigot by lifestyle liberals, never said anything like that. (Dick Cheney was well to the left of the Democrats on the question.) But there was barely a murmur of opposition to Obama’s staking out this ground “on the wrong side of history.” Social issues are for the naïfs.


During the 2008 Democratic primary, Obama gave an off-the-record speech to a group of Wall Street financial executives in which he shared his frustration with the sclerotic and bureaucratic state of American education, and declared that he was close to publicly endorsing a nationwide school-choice program. (This is according to one of those in attendance.)

The moneymen were enthused by this, but nothing ever came of it. In fact, Obama went hard in the opposite direction, working to gut the school-choice program in Washington, D.C., a popular program, which benefited urban black families almost exclusively.

You don’t have to be a hard-boiled cynic to suspect that this has to do with the manpower and money-power of the teachers’ unions, who could have done a great deal more than they did to elevate Hillary Rodham Clinton over Barack Obama that year.

Read more at: What Is the Democratic Party?

How come you still can't get a proper name right --- even when your own OP article spells it out for you?

As we saw during the election, the democrat party is not democratic in any way shape or form....they rigged the election for hilary...and tried to rig the election against Trump....democratic is not something the democrats stand for....

Doesn't matter. It's their proper name. Learn the difference between "noun" and "adjective".

 

[2aguy]

The election campaign, the election aftermath, and Berkeley has exposed Democrats for what they TRULY are:

The campaign taught us:
- Liberals are racist, sexist, anti-Catholic/religion, homophobic Anti-Semites (Thanks to their own personal leaked e-mails)

- Liberals seek power so much that they are willing to do and say anything to win (As shown by the 'All-In' 'Fake News' Media ... by Liberals / the Hillary campaign vandalizing and firebombing GOP HQs ... By the Hillary campaign paying groups to intimidate, beat, and bloody Trump supporters ... by the DNC rigging their Primary, giving Hillary debate questions in advance, and engaging in voter fraud during the Primaries to help Hillary beat Bernie sanders...

The election aftermath taught us:
Despite declaring challenging the election results to be an attempt to undermine our democracy, Liberals have done nothing BUT do that ever since the election ended, proving again that winning - staying in power - is the only thing that matters.

Berkeley taught us:
That Liberals seek to eliminate the voice / freedom of speech of anyone who disagrees with them and / or has a different opinion, to the point that in order to succeed they are willing to engage in violence, arson, looting, vandalism, destruction of property, physical assault, etc...

In the last year the Democratic Party has resembled a terrorist group more than a Political Party, a definite THREAT to this country / citizens.

Liberals are racist, sexist, anti-Catholic/religion, homophobic Anti-Semites

Impossible. That's an oxymoron.

"Democrats" and "Liberals" are two different things, Dumbass. PICK one.

Nope....the left hijacked the word "liberal" in order to hide their left wing, big government statism....there is nothing in common to day with the modern liberal and the actual meaning of the word.

Nope. If anything the far-right McCarthyites did that in the 1940s.

A word can't mean two different things which are at odds with each other. Think about it. And once you've done that, quit misusing the damn term.

I am accurate.....democrats are not democratic at all....

 

[jknowgood]

The Democratic party is not a cartoon, we want to help people progress, not digress to old ideals that defied equality, human rights and morals.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk

You want men in girls locker rooms. You are a cartoon.

 

[bendog]

Said it before, say it again --- political parties should be chartered to exist for no more than twenty years. After that time is up they cease to exist, whether they've accomplished anything or not, period. This Duopoly is way too old.

A political party usually organizes around some kind of ideology but as soon as it gets established that fades and it becomes all about self-perpetuation. There's no point in that.

Well I agree, but the irony is the OP chastises the Dems for ... changing. But the current potus is one who ran against the party of the gop.

It's always about change. Since 1932 to 1980 it was about preserving workers wages. The gop broke through twice, with Ike and Nixon, both of whom were good with middle class entitlements but won on foreign policy. When Obama got elected, pundits were saying the age of Reagan is over, but Trump is the one who is really driving a stake through his heart. And if Trump is a one termer, it won't be because of that. It'll be because of his boorishness and the likelihood of him really fucking up overseas.

 

[bendog]

The election campaign, the election aftermath, and Berkeley has exposed Democrats for what they TRULY are:

The campaign taught us:
- Liberals are racist, sexist, anti-Catholic/religion, homophobic Anti-Semites (Thanks to their own personal leaked e-mails)

- Liberals seek power so much that they are willing to do and say anything to win (As shown by the 'All-In' 'Fake News' Media ... by Liberals / the Hillary campaign vandalizing and firebombing GOP HQs ... By the Hillary campaign paying groups to intimidate, beat, and bloody Trump supporters ... by the DNC rigging their Primary, giving Hillary debate questions in advance, and engaging in voter fraud during the Primaries to help Hillary beat Bernie sanders...

The election aftermath taught us:
Despite declaring challenging the election results to be an attempt to undermine our democracy, Liberals have done nothing BUT do that ever since the election ended, proving again that winning - staying in power - is the only thing that matters.

Berkeley taught us:
That Liberals seek to eliminate the voice / freedom of speech of anyone who disagrees with them and / or has a different opinion, to the point that in order to succeed they are willing to engage in violence, arson, looting, vandalism, destruction of property, physical assault, etc...

In the last year the Democratic Party has resembled a terrorist group more than a Political Party, a definite THREAT to this country / citizens.

Liberals are racist, sexist, anti-Catholic/religion, homophobic Anti-Semites

Impossible. That's an oxymoron.

"Democrats" and "Liberals" are two different things, Dumbass. PICK one.

Nope....the left hijacked the word "liberal" in order to hide their left wing, big government statism....there is nothing in common to day with the modern liberal and the actual meaning of the word.

Nope. If anything the far-right McCarthyites did that in the 1940s.

A word can't mean two different things which are at odds with each other. Think about it. And once you've done that, quit misusing the damn term.

I am accurate.....democrats are not democratic at all....

Well yah, but it's like me telling Trumpbots they're not gopers. They are calling people Rinos, when in fact they have no fucking clue what a republican is. It may be that Trump converts the whole party, and McCain McConnell and Ryan all become Keynesian protectionists. At which time I'll need a new party. LOL

I'm really not sure what the dems are at this time. I voted for Slick in 96 because he was essentially Eisenhower on economics. In 2008, I thought the DLC was done, but then y'all ran Hillary.

 

[Omiyaru]

Does anyone remember Andrew Johnson and Nixon, Trump is essentially a combo of the two

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk

 

[easyt65]

"Democrats" and "Liberals" are two different things, Dumbass. PICK one.

Progressive Liberals took over the Democratic Party.

In 2016 the Democratic Party ran a Communist Party Member as a candidate for their Presidential Nomination...and without help from the DNC that Communist Party member most probably would have won the Democratic Party's nomination.

Who else has become representatives / a symbol of the Democratic Party? The violent Berkeley Anti-Speech Left:

The University itself opposed free-speech by being against allowing a Conservative speech to be given, but the rioters have become the real face of the violent criminal acts being called a 'protest'. Among them were "the Black Bloc anarchists and so-called “Antifa” (anti-fascist) activists, who exemplify the very fascism they supposedly want to resist.

These groups openly and explicitly declare their intention to disrupt public gatherings where conservatives — or, really, anyone they do not like for whatever reason — are scheduled to appear. They not only celebrate violence, but they come armed, masked, and prepared to fight and vandalize. The groups that showed up Wednesday seem to exist to prevent others from exercising their civil and constitutional rights of free speech and assembly."

In the name of the Democratic Party presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton, Democrats - Liberals - vandalized and FIREBOMBED GOP HQs, intimidated / beat / bloodied Trump supporters AT TRUMP EVENTS (which meant they came LOOKING for a fight / with the intent of engaging in violence), intimidated and threatened Electoral College voters that states had to provide security escorts for them before - and after - they cast their votes, liberals have threatened and called for the assassination of Trump, and have even called for a Military coup (ONE of those was an Ex-Obama official)!

THIS has become the NEW Democratic Party!


BONUS ARTICLE:
"After Berkeley, Treat the Violent, Anti-Speech Left Like the KKK"

"It is time to treat them the way that the Southern Poverty Law Center — before it busied itself with suppressing conservative opinion — took on the Ku Klux Klan. It filed a civil suit against the KKK under a theory of agency, wherein the organization was held collectively responsible for any and all of the crimes and civil rights violations its members committed in furtherance of its aims.

In this case, that would mean holding radical left-wing groups collectively accountable for damage and civil rights violations by individuals at any particular protest — whether of Milo in Berkeley or Gavin McInnes in New York."

This would mean holding GROUPS responsible for actions taken by individuals in their (the groups') name!
--- THAT would mean holding BLM accountable when one of their members engages in violence, calls for the death of all whites / policemen, or declares 'we need to start killing' / 'kill the WH'!

--- THAT would mean holding Hillary Clinton / the DNC accountable when it is discovered Hillary's campaign financed agencies / groups that hired thugs to beat up and bloody Trump Supporters ... or firebombed a GOP HQ!

If they are going to start acting like the KKK or TERRORISTS then it is time to start TREATING them like the KKK or TERRORISTS!

 

[2aguy]

the democrat party........the party of racism, hate, violence and crime....