Media Editors: “House Speaker Nancy Pulosi said in an interview that she opposes moving to impeach President Trump even though she believes he is ‘unfit’ for office,” The Washington Post reports. The Post infers that “Pulosi is well aware of the political risks of impeachment and how pursuit of the president could energize Republicans voters ahead of the 2020 election.” But National Review’s Charles C. W. Cooke speculates that Pulosi is privy to certain information related to the dirty cop-Robert Mueller probe.
{dailycaller.com} ~ Democratic New York Rep. commie-Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said that “where we are” as Americans amounts to “garbage”... during an appearance at the South By Southwest Conference & Festivals (SXSW). commie-Ocasio-Cortez sat down with The Intercept’s senior politics editor Briahna Gray to talk about the progressive left’s next move. “What’s really hard for people to sometimes see is that we are on this path of a slow erosion, and a slow slow slow just like — move away from what we’ve always been,” commie-Ocasio-Cortez began by explaining how she feels that America has moved away from what it should be. “You won’t even realize that you’ve drifted a hundred miles.” She then appeared to suggest that her Democratic Socialist policies represent core American values, arguing that we had just strayed so far from them that we couldn’t recognize them anymore. “So when someone’s talking about ‘our core,’ they’re like, ‘oh, this is radical,’ but it isn’t radical. This is what we’ve always been,” she said. “I think all of these things sound radical compared to where we are,” she concluded, “but where we are is not a good thing. And this idea of like, ten percent better than garbage, it shouldn’t be what we settle for.”... commie-AOC is totally off her rocker and is wrong.
Thomas Gallatin: The Democrat-controlled House passed bill HR 1 Friday — the dubiously named “For the People Act.” The purpose of the bill, according to Democrats, is to “expand Americans’ access to the ballot box, reduce the influence of big money in politics, and strengthen ethics rules for public servants.” However, far from “expanding Americans’ access to the ballot box,” the bill instead runs roughshod over Americans’ constitutional rights and states’ rights, diminishing the power of citizens’ votes by failing to prohibit noncitizen voting.
Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) noted the irony of a bill ostensibly crafted to expand and protect the voting rights of Americans but doing the exact opposite: “It sounds like I’m making it up. What kind of government would cancel the vote of its own citizens, and replace it with noncitizens?” Crenshaw added, “Today I offered a motion to recommit #HR1 reaffirming that only US citizens should have the right to vote. Dems rejected it. Next time you go to the ballot box, keep that in mind. The future of their party is in cities like San Fran, where illegals can vote. Let that sink in.”
The bill makes an absolute mockery of federalism, as it would establish greater centralized control over elections by Washington bureaucrats. In other words, this bill is little more than a federal power grab that National Review’s editors criticize for “creating a chilling effect on political communications through sheer uncertainty and confusion.” NR’s editors further note, “Democrats seem to believe that political speech is just too dangerous to be unrestrained. It has to be micromanaged, regulated by technocrats until it is directed into its government-approved lanes. This is of course exactly what incumbent politicians tend to prefer. They want predictable debates, reliable funding streams, and (above all) power — including the power to punish their opponents.”
In fact, HR 1 is so bad that even the leftist American Civil Liberties Union opposes it, writing in a 13-page letter that the bill would “unconstitutionally impinge on the free speech rights of American citizens and public interest organizations.” And the chairman of the Institute for Free Speech, Bradley Smith, observes that the Democrats’ “goal seems to be to limit discussion of candidates to the candidates and parties themselves, at the expense of the public at large. However, even candidates are likely to find their speech severely restricted were H.R. 1 to become law.”
The Heritage Foundation’s Hans von Spakovsky astutely argues, “All legislation proposed by Congress should be necessary, constitutional, and good policy. H.R. 1 is none of these things. It is unnecessary, unconstitutional, and bad policy. It does nothing to protect voters or to help election officials administer a fair and secure voter registration and election process. Put bluntly, it imposes federal micromanagement on the states, reversing the local oversight of the election process that our Founders believed was essential to preserving liberty and freedom in America.”
This is nothing but a bald-face attempt by Democrats to further direct and control the outcome of America’s national elections. It is anything but constitutional or democratic for that matter. Legislation like this, coupled with the attempt by several Democrat-controlled states to subvert the Electoral College, is yet more evidence of the extreme Left’s near-complete takeover of the Democrat Party. And for all intents and purposes, the current Democrat Party has more in common with one-party Marxism than the U.S. Constitution. ~ The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/61680?mailing_id=4126&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4126&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body
Comments
Bonnie
I am afraid to say some are willing to be controlled by others. Young adults want that, free everything.
yes that is true what kind of govt does that THE KIND THAT WANTS TOTAL POWER AND CONTROL OVER YOU. WHO THE HELL WANTS THAT