The Democratic Party Has Become the Very Thing It Opposes
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Clinton, the Democratic Party, and liberal media outlets should take a long, hard look into the mirror. If they still retain a hint of self-awareness, maybe they’ll finally realize that “We have met the enemy, and he is us.”
“We have met the enemy, and he is us,” is a famous line from “Pogo,” a popular politically satirical comic strip that ran from 1948 to 1975.
That same line could also be the Democratic Party’s new catchphrase. Its leaders have turned into the very thing they claim to despise.
One day after she lost her second bid for the White House, Hillary Clinton called for peace and unity from her supporters.
“Donald Trump is going to be out president. We owe him an open mind and the chance to lead,” she said. “Our constitutional democracy enshrines the peaceful transfer of power, and we don’t just expect that — we cherish it.”
Disregarding that we’re a constitutional republic — not a Democracy — the “peaceful transfer of power” was short-lived.
Six months later, Clinton launched a political organization dedicated to resisting the president, his agenda, and his administration, a move that immediately poisoned the political climate.
In the 18 months since, Clinton went from resistance, to hostility, and finally to outright confrontation — and fellow Democrats listened.
"You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about," Clinton told CNN, ignoring that all political parties want to destroy their competitors’ agenda — that’s their whole reason for existence.
She added that political courtesy could only return when the Democratic Party took control of at least one chamber of Congress.
And with that statement Clinton transformed the Democratic Party into the very thing she claimed to oppose. “We have met the enemy, and he is us.”
What’s worse, everyone on the left listened — especially after Judge Brett Kavanaugh was sworn in as a Supreme Court justice after a bitter confirmation process.
Sen. Cory Gardner, R-Colo., revealed that his wife had received a text message that included a video depicting a beheading.
In response, Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., observed, “These vicious threats have to stop. This cannot be the new normal — there is absolutely no place for violence in our political discourse. Democratic leaders need to denounce this behavior.”
He didn’t get the response he was looking for.
Martin Cizmar, senior editor for Raw Story, tweeted, “Boo boo little baby.”
Scalise, it should be remembered, is still suffering from life-threatening wounds he suffered at the hands of a Bernie Sanders-supporting gunman at a congressional baseball practice.
Also in response to the Kavanaugh confirmation, a Minnesota special education teacher asked for a willing person to assassinate the new associate justice.
"So whose [sic] gonna take one for the team and kill Kavanaugh?” she askedSaturday on Twitter, after the Senate confirmed him as America’s 114th Supreme Court justice.
Democratic calls for violence have escalated to the point where Eric Holder, the former chief law enforcement officer of the United States, told a group of Democratic supporters, “When they go low, we kick them.”
Republican National Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel gave a recap.
“Maxine Waters incites violence against @realDonaldTrump’s cabinet,” she tweeted. “Cory Booker pleads for activists to ‘get up in the face of some congresspeople.’ Hillary Clinton says ‘you cannot be civil with’ Republicans. Now Eric Holder wants the mob even angrier.”
The left claims to support the empowerment of women — but only so long as they remain in line. When Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, gave a lawyerly, well-reasoned argument to confirm Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, the left pounced.
An NBC News columnist claimed that Collins was under the thumb of her white, male counterparts, and a New York Timescolumnist called her a “gender traitor.”
In addition to showing their misogynist side, the left demonstrated a capacity for homophobia and racism.
Alleged comedienne Chelsea Handler claimed that the GOP was anti-gay in one sentence, and then attempted to out someone she apparently thought was gay in the next.
“If you’re wondering why Republicans took a sick day today, it’s probably because it’s #NationalComingOutDay,” she tweeted Thursday. “Looking at you @LindseyGrahamSC.”
Rap artist Kanye West triggered the left Thursday when he visited the White House in support of the president.
Former Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Donna Brazile suggested that the visit was a return to slavery.
"Kanye West has set us back 155 years," she claimed.
CNN’s Don Lemon referred to the visit as a "minstrel show."
During her 2016 campaign, Clinton labeled Trump supporters “deplorables”; but it was she and the left that had earned that moniker.
Clinton, the Democratic Party, and liberal media outlets should take a long, hard look into the mirror. If they still retain a hint of self-awareness, maybe they’ll finally realize that “We have met the enemy, and he is us.”
Tags
Who is online
96 visitors
“And with that statement Clinton transformed the Democratic Party into the very thing she claimed to oppose. “We have met the enemy, and he is us.”
What’s worse, everyone on the left listened — especially after Judge Brett Kavanaugh was sworn in as a Supreme Court justice after a bitter confirmation process.
Sen. Cory Gardner, R-Colo., revealed that his wife had received a text message that included a video depicting a beheading.
In response, Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., observed, “These vicious threats have to stop. This cannot be the new normal — there is absolutely no place for violence in our political discourse. Democratic leaders need to denounce this behavior.”
He didn’t get the response he was looking for.
Martin Cizmar, senior editor for Raw Story, tweeted, “Boo boo little baby.”
Scalise, it should be remembered, is still suffering from life-threatening wounds he suffered at the hands of a Bernie Sanders-supporting gunman at a congressional baseball practice.
Also in response to the Kavanaugh confirmation, a Minnesota special education teacher asked for a willing person to assassinate the new associate justice.
"So whose [sic] gonna take one for the team and kill Kavanaugh?” she askedSaturday on Twitter, after the Senate confirmed him as America’s 114th Supreme Court justice.
Democratic calls for violence have escalated to the point where Eric Holder, the former chief law enforcement officer of the United States, told a group of Democratic supporters, “When they go low, we kick them.”
[deleted]
[deleted]
So you want to attack your political opposition and are threatening violence. And the left is unhinged?
I don't see daily hit pieces and hate articles like I do from the right.
I certainly don’t want a civil war but that would be preferable to seeing people’s votes overturned by a mob.
That’s not what was said at all. In fact it’s the reverse. We have no reason to resort to violence at all. We are the ones it is being directed at. It isn’t just fringe people or social media or news discussion site progressives who seem to accept violence as an acceptable means to political power. Now it’s former and current elected and appointed leaders of the democrat pasty that are calling for violence to achieve their political ends. They are bordering on sedition.
Then may I suggest you open up your eyes when you look?
Oh bullshit. You post daily about how evil the liberals are.
For the longest time Democrats have been passive and never fought back. Now that they are fighting back and starting to use the republican tactics against them, the right cries foul non stop about how awful they are.
Well get over the bullshit pretend butthurt.
I swear, the republican leaders say jump and you all say how high. Plus you all believe every one of these shit articles as gospel. Sad really.
Well I do from both sides right here on this site. and it only takes a political ideologist to claim that I was inciting violence.
I was saying that when violence comes, we are ready for it, and from where ever it comes, we will eliminate the source.
we WON"T fire first, but we will fire last....
I read here almost daily. I see an article about how evil the left is daily.
Very rarely see article that call all conservatives evil.
Some people have their eyes open yet refuse to take off the rose coloured glasses.
Butthurt hypocrisy and defamation seems to be all the republicans have.
Sounds desperate to me.
Now that is dreaming. You think liberal people do not have guns? Cannot shoot? Are not members of the military and have been trained?
I am getting tired of that crap that comes from conservative people. Such blind partisans that they believe the evil liberals are out to cause them harm.
Pathetic.
arms aren't everything IF this country comes to war the rich against the poor. The rich are certainly well outnumbered. Yep power and money may rule the day but America would never be great like that it would be a constant struggle to retain power and accomplish much of anything. Unless We turn into a full dictatorship or some things with absolute power at the top.
If that is the kind of county any of us want there are other nations like that now, so please go there instead of turning America into one of them.
IMO: Anyone Advocating for more division and or more violence in America instead of cooperation is part of the problem. From either damn side.
100% AGREEMENT steve....
Make love not war. That is lost on both sides today....
I marched in the '60 supporting peace and love one another, against racism and the vietnam war, but I didn't shirk away from my responsibility to defend peace by picking up a weapon if necessary....
Not advocating for war, just reminding people that there is a group of americans that is being silent and minding their own business for the most part, but they will not flinch when it comes time to defend what we believe in...
Call it a warning to those advocating that their side should fight in any manner necessary....
I agree with you Steve. The other day My 7 year old grand daughter was watching TV with me and when surfing through channels with me she saw something about Antifa on TV. She did not understand what it was about, but she turned to me and said, "Why can't people just talk to each other? That's what they tell me at school when we have a problem with somebody." I just sat there with my mouth open because I could not think of a proper reply. Pretty deep thinking for a 7 year old!
It has nothing to do with the weapons, of course Liberal have guns also, and I will argue for their right to have such.
What is lacking in general on the liberal side?
Is their compassion for others as human beings. The ideology overrides their compassion.
Anyone that doesn't agree with them are non-humans..
that lack of compassion will be their end.
Another complete and udder load of crap.
Also comical considering the new ruler of the republican party.
Yep , From the mouth of babes !!
Thanks Sometimes I think I'm alone in my thinking sometimes, but, its refreshing and kinda nice to know I still think like a child....LOL
Joking...
lol
*utter
Was going to ask you about that.... {chuckle}
She's smarter than your average conservative, that one. The division we face is one of the left saying we should welcome all regardless of race, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, faith or lack thereof while the right says we should only welcome Christians conservatives while discriminating against those who don't accept Christian beliefs on sexuality, gender identity or a faith of some kind. If you're gay, transgender, an atheist or of another faith like Muslim or Sikh, then you're considered "less than" by Christian conservatives and less deserving of civil rights and constitutional protections. To them it is unthinkable to deny a Christian church the right to build a place of worship anywhere they might buy a piece of property in America, but not at all unthinkable to deny the same right to Muslims.
I have a lot of Christian family, friends and neighbors, and I was a Christian for many decades. I have no hatred towards Christianity, though I do recognize their religion is just as valid (and unproven) as any other. It's equal to Islam, Hindu, Buddhism or any other organized religion. It is no greater and no worse than any other religion. I have, however, developed a distaste for religious bigots of all stripes who attempt to claim their religion is somehow superior to others and demand a special place at the table. Whether it be Muslims in Muslim majority countries pushing their blasphemy laws and religious intolerance or their misogynist treatment of women or Christians pushing their pro-discrimination laws and their misogynist treatment of women, both are just as flawed and just as wrong.
You better watch out DP the libertarian in you is showing.... I have it on good authority that they do not like libertarians around here....
Haha. Wasn't thinking.
I happen to agree with many libertarian positions. I wouldn't classify myself as such, I consider myself a progressive, but I do agree with many of their centrist positions and they tend to support equality and a secular government free of religious control. The fact is most libertarian positions are quite progressive.
And that rant was worthless and a waste of time to read. It is, IMO, mostly BS .
Which just goes to prove you've got no clue as to what progressives believe.
Personally I really dislike ALL the pigeon holing we tend to do, we ALL are individuals if others are like me I think most of us a mixture of at least a few of em.
If I'm going be shoved in a pigeon hole I want it to be a big one with lots of room for my of ways of seeing things and storing those variety of believes.
From politics to ideology to reigion and sexuallity I'm glad we are not all the same or we'd all probably also want the same stuff to.
lol
I could also make wide arching statements about conservative ideology, but that would be pointless. Maybe you could try pointing out what you believe is BS in my statement, then we could debate it, unless you're really just trolling me with generic unfounded dissent without actually wanting an answer making it rather pointless to reply at all.
Then that make you a very enlightened liberal.....
Good for you!
Care to cite an example? I thought my comment was fairly easy to understand but if you need some clarification I'd be happy to oblige.
Enlightened: adjective - having or showing a rational, modern, and well-informed outlook
Liberal: adjective - open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values
Conservative: adjective - holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in relation to politics or religion
It would seem, just by definition, conservatives are diametrically opposed to enlightenment while liberals easily embrace "rational, modern, and well-informed" outlooks being open to discarding out of date "traditional attitudes/values".
Actually, I take the classic liberal approach to my libertarianism as opposed to strict conservatism.
We are not against the "New" or changing our attitudes or thinking about anything. What we don't want is such being foisted on us in any way. Particularly by forcible compulsion.
And in case you do not know or realize, many classic Liberals believe that is exactly what is happening. we are being forced to accept things the way others want them to be and are not being given the chance to make up our own minds....
Based upon that we are attacked, lumped in with those intractable sorts that refuse any human advancement and are generally despised.
Progressives run the gamut also in the same manner.
I disagree with the alt-righters as much as I disagree with the radical socialists.
I tend to keep my ideologies to myself cause they are only important to me. I wish many progressives felt the same way...
and I kinda hate to sort of disagree with you on this one part: I think we should express our ideologies especially if we are in the middle.
I also think there are many many of us including many who at this time have chosen one side or another who really do have a big range of the different parts of the pigeonholeing that these ideologies shove us into.
For myself I know I dont fit into just one of any of them. I dont think I'm anywhere close to being alone in this mix of ideological believes either, I see various levels of a mix in many others as well within in depth realistic conversations.
I dont think its "we the People"that have devided the country, as I see it its the politicians and the media that want that and actively work to divide us because dividing us up leads to easier and more power and profit for the politicians and media people.
Their gain is our loss.
Politicians want us devided, I don't. Keeping that quiet isn't my style.
Was my comment really that hard to decipher? I suppose I could shout in all caps if that would help.
The article makes the claim that Democrats have somehow become the very thing they oppose because a handful of individuals who vote Democrat (but aren't actually on any Democrat tickets) like Chelsea Handler have made insensitive, misconstrued or just stupid comments. Just because some idiot somewhere, on either side of the aisle, tweets some idiotic garbage, it doesn't mean that the party as a whole should be smeared as trying to incite violence. Not even when it's a NT member saying none to cryptically "War is coming, we won't fire the first shot, but we will the last...." essentially saying conservatives are going to murder all their opponents down to the last man if anyone takes a pot shot at them.
I pointed out that the common sense of a 7 year old makes perfect sense when both sides agree that they are "people" wanting to talk to each other. Sadly, we live in a society where one side recognizes all persons as equal regardless of race, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, faith or lack thereof and the other side that views anyone who isn't a straight conservative Christian as "less than" a person. This makes answering the question posed by the 7 year old of "Why can't people just talk to each other?" far more difficult because it forces both sides to accept the other as a valid "person" to initiate debate. Back in the 1950's and earlier, black Americans were denied their civil rights, they weren't considered whole "persons" and thus it would be difficult to ask such a question of that time, "Why can't black and white people just talk to each other?". It seems so simple but required white people to accept their black neighbors as equals. The same goes for liberals and conservatives. When you ask that simple question "Why can't people just talk to each other?" but don't address the fact that conservatives are still, to this day, fighting tooth and nail for their right to discriminate against fellow law abiding American citizens and treat them as "less than" other persons in the workplace and public spaces, you can't expect a simple answer.
Those definitions were from a Google search result that are supplied by Dictionary.com
I guess we live in such a polarized world that some people want to debate the very definitions of words claiming they don't mean what we know they mean.
Agreed. and when it comes to things I strongly believe you will find that I'm as stridently vociferous as the next.... What I don't believe is being vocal about the efforts to divide us helps us at all. IMHO all it does is create even more bulwarks for them to fire from so to speak. grants then even more avenues to pigeonhole our beliefs or even worse us as people.
Those who want to know where I stand only have to converse I don't hide my beliefs. I just don't feel the need to shove them in others faces. when the time comes I will stand up, usually eloquently, sometimes not so eloquently. and I prefer to do ti in a way that brings forth intelligent conversation. I've been told I have changed people minds around here so i do not accept that fora like this is a waste of time. Just that there are a lot of people that will waste your time if you let them...
Politicians are all about wasting time...
I don't give them much light especially on the campaign trail.
Yes it is their loss and our gain doing it the way I do.
but to each his own....
DP I can accept 90% of your explanation, the 10% I cannot accept?
your couching it as the conservative is the "Bad Guy"
That does add a bias to it that some would use to reject the entirety of what you said....
That is part of the problem today especially as ideologically divided as the vocal extremes are.
I fully agree, respectfully, honestly, logically !!!
Some people still have and respect standards.
some dont, as you said, to each their own !
Try as I might, full neutrality eludes me. It may be a common ailment. lol
But it doesn't stop me either. so... I'm flawed. O-well. Old news.
If that was an incitement to violence I guess I will just stop posting....
It clearly and obviously was not that. We conservatives have kind of had our hands tied behind our back while you were away. Please stick around.
LOL It seems that hasn't stopped many from posting so they certainly weren't gaged when their hands were tied.
Evidently at least some conservatives are using maybe some sort of voice recognition posting application or something, cause I still see plenty of posts coming from that side.
From where I sit, I'd say the republicans are currently doing pretty damn well considering that side now holds all the political power anyway.
I'm just wondering what more do they want ?
Full control of everything and everyone ?
A world that never changes ? Surely not.
Someone once told me "With great power comes great responsibility" that same person also said "The only constant in life is change" somehow having a fullly conservatively ruled country sounds in contrast to at least one of those statements. If the people in power dont start considering the whole a little more maybe both.
One land, two parties: how either can take, have and maintain full control of the whole land and all of its inhabitants for long is beyond me.
But yet both parties try.
Sad !
Please allow me to introduce you to Maxine Waters, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Cory Booker, Hillary Clinton, The View, CNN, MSNBC, and Antifa. Proof of their unhinged and often violent rhetoric is available on YouTube.
I neglected to include former AG Eric Holder in my list.
The whole comment is at best a generalization without merit or an out and out falsehood.
Oh boo hoo. Someone on the left said something we didn't like. Tough shit.
Oh lord. Perrie, if you're out there, I was joking.
My comment was intended to be funny. Guess that didn't come through.
LOL.. It may have been to most, sometimes I dont recognise satire worth a shit.
I also dont do satire worth a shit. So most of the time I dont even try. I'm Bad at iit.
lol
The stuff with Kanye really went into a Loony Toon realm that I would not have believed possible.
That's what's really lacking. Just look around at NT. How many feminists are all too eager to condemn Melania Trump for sexy photos when she was a model? How many SJWs can't help but attack black conservatives - not for their ideas but for not being black enough? We see it every day. It's been going on for a long time, and it only seems to be getting worse.
Well we can agree on that. It's become entertainment (not very, mind you) and the orange carnival barker must always be directing the circus. Good thing he doesn't have a job that requires attention.
I could clearly follow about 25% of Kanyes rambling, the rest was near incoherent. When he said he'd been diagnosed bi-polar I thought to myself "Duh, anyone can see that from your numerous unhinged rants.". There were times when I thought "Wow, he actually made a good point there" then a few seconds later watched as he ruined his valid argument with crazed rambling.
Great entertainment should be a weekly regular !
That sort of comment doesn't aid in a return to civil discourse, does it?
Not in the slightest. Good point!
I am channeling Trump, since he is continually defended for his 'telling it like it is', I see no reason why he deserves any respect. I didn't insult anybody here. The title of this seed isn't aiding a return to civil discourse now, is it? Maybe helpful if the seed reflected that civility in the first place, just saying.
No arguments here.
Well I’m hopeful that neither side deep down wants to resort to violence to win what it hasn’t in an election, a congressional action, or a Supreme Court ruling. The rhetoric from the top of the democrat party though is getting a bit too heated and the potential for danger in that is there.
I too am glad neither side truly wants to resort to violence to win an election. Sure, one side has no problem conspiring with an enemy foreign government bent on the destruction of western democracy to win an election, but they at least seem mildly hesitant about taking up their AR-15's against the federal government. Sure, you'll often see them wearing their only Thomas Jefferson inspired T-shirts proclaiming how "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants" so you can tell they're not actually against violence, they just don't want to risk getting their asses kicked like their ancestors did back in the civil war.
The democrat party has colluded with both the Russian and Chicom regimes.
Absurd: adjective - wildly unreasonable, illogical, or inappropriate.
Your statement is so absurd it begs credulity.
The Democrats openly colluded with Russia. And now they openly call for violence while their sheep-like followers applaude.
Mueller is not investigating the Democrats.
Pick up a reputable newspaper some time.
And yet it was democrats who actually colluded with Russians and concocted the Steele Dossier. So why isn't Mueller looking in that direction?
To do what? Help trump win?
Please Vic, don't buy into trumps standard issue "I know you are but what am I" BS. If anyone colluded with Russia, it was trump. Anyone with even a shred of common sense can see that much. Besides, I thought the right said one of the reasons to NOT vote for Hillary is that she would start a war with Russia because she and Putin hate each other. Now we are going to spin the narrative to make it look like Hillary and Putin are buddies? Please, lets pick a talking point and stick with it.
It's been widely reported, for almost 2 years now that one of the reasons Putin/Russia stuck their collective noses in our election process is because of Putin's hatred of Hillary. So the idea that she actually colluded with Russia/Putin to apparently help trump win, is laughable.
True. Hillary interfered with an election in Russia and Putin did the same (the same means with little effect) in ours. Putin like everyone else NEVER expected Trump to win.
So the idea that she actually colluded with Russia/Putin to apparently help trump win, is laughable.
It is. That is not why the Clinton campaign colluded - it was just the opposite - to get dirt on & defeat Trump.
Vic, it wasn't Russia, it was the Ukraine that Hillary's campaign asked for information. Now, here is the BIG difference, ok? The Ukraine is an ALLY of the USA, Russia is NOT. You cannot collude with an ALLY. You CAN collude with someone that is NOT an ally. Is Russia an enemy of the USA? No, but they certainly are not an ally either, even McConnell said that much.
You really make people work...I got to retrieve stories that even a CNN viewer has to know about.
Here:
"When mass protests against Russian President Vladimir Putin erupted in Moscow in December 2011, Putin made clear who he thought was really behind them: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
With the protesters accusing Putin of having rigged recent elections, the Russian leader pointed an angry finger at Clinton, who had issued a statement sharply critical of the voting results. “She said they were dishonest and unfair,” Putin fumed in public remarks, saying that Clinton gave “a signal” to demonstrators working “with the support of the U.S. State Department” to undermine his power. “We need to safeguard ourselves from this interference in our internal affairs,” Putin declared."
Great post. Well said and right on.
Democrats can see Russia from their play therapy safe room.
LOL Republicans can see Russia from the window in the tavern, wonder who has the better view ?
LOL... Sorry Xx, sometimes I can't help myself, I see most of this stuff able to be thrown both ways and think its kinda silly and actually kinda counter productive to the nation. I SO wish we could ll get along better, The politicians and the media profit form the division not us citizens.
Have a wonderful day !!
It has been the thing(s) it CLAIMS to oppose for quite some time now.
That’s true. Their abandonment of the white working class even unionized ones is truly stunning and made Trump President.