« Bush Rules! | Home | The Dean Machine… It’s a Bit Rusty »
The Real Dangerous Extremists: Liberals, Leftists, and Democrats
By Matt Margolis | August 30, 2003
Does anyone really believe that the Democrats are really friends of minorities anymore? While African-Americans and other minorities overwhelming support the Democratic ticket, the party they champion continually seeks to bring them down.
Liberals want to have nothing to do with equality. They don’t care about equal rights. Ideology is the only fuel to their activism. Power is the only motivation for their efforts. Deceit is their method to obtain the power the need to force upon America their dangerous ideology.
Minorities who find success without the liberal “civil rights” movement attached at their hips expose this shocking reality: minorities don’t need the Democrats.
Miguel Estrada, long awaiting confirmation by the Senate, has been the target of criticism of Democrats despite his overwhelming qualifications for the job. He is the epitome of the Democrats worst nightmare – an immigrant minority who made it good on his own. Coming to this country from Honduras at 17, speaking little English, he ended up graduating magna cum laude from Columbia College a mere 5 years later and then went on to Harvard Law School.
His impressive qualification since then leave the Democrats no basis for which to deny him a simple confirmation vote in the Senate. However, he is a successful minority. That is the liberals’ worst nightmare. He cripples the liberal’s belief system that minorities can’t make it without their help.
To make matters worse, he’s a conservative. A conservative minority just about the worst thing a liberal can face. As we’ve seen with Estrada, as we see again with Janice Rogers Brown.
A conservative black female judge from California, nominated in July by President Bush to serve on the federal circuit court of appeals in Washington. This has the Idiot Left screaming. The People for the American Way and the NAACP have said it would be disastrous.
Disastrous to the Democrats, perhaps. She’s an anti-affirmative action African American, and a pro-life woman. Liberals generally can’t understand anything or anyone conservative, let alone a minority female conservative.
So what’s the best thing the Idiot Left had to say?
A joint report by People for the American Way and the NAACP said California Supreme Court Justice Janice Rogers Brown is “committed to using her power as a judge” to work against civil and constitutional rights.
Yes, I’m so very convinced that Justice Brown is against civil rights. I suspect that Brown, as an African-American woman, wants to deny voting rights to blacks and women.
So what does the Idiot Left do in a situation like this? They play the Extremist Card. The President of People for the American Way, Ralph G. Neas, called Justice Brown “the far right’s dream judge,” as well as saying that “She embodies Clarence Thomas’s ideological extremism and Antonin Scalia’s abrasiveness and right-wing activism.”
Extremism. Activism.
To the Left, these are labels only applicable when attached to conservatism. Hillary Clinton calls the Supreme Court an activist court for its decision on Bush v. Gore, but attaches no such label to the same court when it ruled favor of affirmative action and gay sodomy.
To the Left, anything that strays from the liberal point of view is extremist, activist, or biased. For instance, Liberal Idiot Al Franken says in his new book that “The mainstream media does not have a liberal bias … ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, the New York Times, The Washington Post, Time, Newsweek and the rest — at least try to be fair.” Meanwhile, media outlets like Fox News, the Washington Times, and the New York Post are all biased and have an agenda.
And of course, the motives of President Bush come into question. The director of the NAACP’s Washington chapter, Hilary Shelton, vocalized her “suspicions” of the Bush Administration, suggesting they are hoping “to get some kind of credit because she is the first African-American woman nominated to the D.C. circuit.”
What they are essentially saying is that they feel Justice Brown isn’t qualified, and this is just a stunt meant to improve the Republican’s image of their record with minorities. They would like people to believe that Brown couldn’t have been nominated on merit, but solely because of her color and gender. Ironic isn’t it? It’s almost like they’re accusing the Bush Administration of practicing something that sounds awfully like affirmative action.
Did Bush nominate her to promote diversity? Was she chosen because of her race? Her gender? Yes or no, it doesn’t particularly matter in this case, because her nomination puts Democrats in the Senate in a tough spot where they have to try to deny another conservative nominee a confirmation vote – because they can’t separate her race and gender from her politics. They can’t filibuster Justice Brown, the conservative - but confirm Justice Brown, the woman, or Justice Brown, the African-American.
John Ashcroft was branded a racist for voting against the confirmation on one liberal black judge named Ronnie White. Ashcroft obviously was a racist, even though he voted to confirm 26 out of 28 black judges nominated by Bill Clinton. Ashcroft’s issues with Ronnie White had nothing to do with race; it had to do with the fact that White was the only Missouri State Supreme Court Justice to dissent in a death penalty case of a man who murdered three police officers and an officer’s wife.
According to liberals, conservatives can’t be objective. It’s nothing new. It’s nothing out of the ordinary. Conservatives can’t support minorities without being accused of “trying to score points,” and they can’t oppose minorities without being accused of “racism.”
So, what happens when qualified conservative minorities get nominated? Out of fear, Democrats go for the filibuster.
Of course, the Democrats have made a complete 180 on the issue of using filibusters to block judicial nominees.
In 1995, Tom Daschle opposed nominee filibusters of Clinton’s nominees, calling it a an issue “one of fairness.”
Back in 1999, Senator Patrick Leahy, who I’ve written about before when he recommended unconstitutionally that Bush consult with ranking Democrats on his judicial nominees to prevent more filibusters, said he opposed filibusters to hold up nominees, and believed the Senate “should have an vote up or down.” Barbara Boxer said nominee filibusters disgusted her.
This is the Democrats’ vision of fairness. They’re struggling to remain the mainstream, and they continually find themselves losing their grip on America to the Right. Their subversive attacks on Bush and his nominees have nothing to do with fairness, they have to do with discrediting Bush by whatever means possible. They have to do with furthering their own agenda, and not the will of the people.
A poll back in June of 2001 showed that the majority of Americans trusted Bush to make the right choice in judicial nominees. What liberals, (and Senate Democrats in particular) are essentially saying is that they don’t care about the will of the people, that their agenda is more important than the will of the people. The Democrats’ only constituency is themselves. Their filibusters in the Senate show they are more than willing to hijack Democracy.
Liberals, leftists, and Democrats are the real extremists. They have been trying to take America hostage to their ideology. They are the enemies within.
Topics: The Right Idea |
Related Posts:
August 31st, 2003 at 3:21 pm
For too long have libs, lefties, and dems played the race card. But as Matt has pointed out they only care for minorities in as much as they further the insane leftist agenda. But this is all coming to an end. Minorities, African-Americans and Latino’s in particular, are becoming more educated, and more successful (socially and financially). This spells certain doom for the Dems. You see Democrats need all minorities to stay poor and uneducated. They need them to believe that they are really quite incapable of doing anything on their own. They have to be given directions and hand outs because they are simpletons who are incapable of overcoming life’s difficulties. With this, liberals inspire within minorities a self-defeatist culture that automatically labels anyone who does succeed as an “Uncle Tom”. So the leftist argument goes like this: We want to pave the way for all minorities by doing everything for them, because they can’t do it themselves, but any succeed (especially w/o us) we have to label them as “sell-outs”. But as we have already stated the minorities are defecting as they realise that the conservative moral values that they cherish are being attacked by the libs (I can think of no greater disgrace at any time in the history of this country than homosexuals comparing their so-called plight with the struggle for equality that African-Americans endured). Furthermore, as minorities become wealthier (due to their own efforts) they will want to keep more of there money, which will make them jump off the failing liberal bandwagon all the faster. The real racists are on the left. They only pay lip service to minorities so that they can use them as weapons to obtain their idealistic goals. For conservatives, the time to offer minorities an open door has never been more obvious, as we seek to create a free, just, strong and unified nation under God.
God save the United States of America!
August 31st, 2003 at 5:47 pm
Go Check Out Matt!
According to liberals, conservatives can’t be objective. It’s nothing new. It’s nothing out of the ordinary. Conservatives can’t support minorities without being accused of “trying to score points,” and they can’t oppose minorities without being accuse…
August 31st, 2003 at 8:45 pm
HILLARY IS GOING TO RUN FOR, AND WIN, THE PRESIDENCY!
Hillary is running with Dr. Howard Dean in 2004. I know. You would know too if you weren’t so busy zeig-heiling the flag and shooting off guns at minorities.
THIS IS THE PERFECT COMBO! Dr. Dean will perfect the complete socialization of health care. This will free up Hillary to put all the racists in jail, get rid of all the guns and put the military in Africa for what it’s intended: to feed people, to learn their culture and prevent racism instead of stealing oil.
NOTHING WILL STOP US! Not your right-wing news media; not your fascist guns; and certainly not the insatiable racism of the right!
August 31st, 2003 at 8:59 pm
H, your comment has nothing to do with this blog entry. If you wish to make comments, say something relevant to the blog entry.
September 1st, 2003 at 3:39 pm
Only an extremist would refer to fellow Americans as “the enemy.” Your post explicitly demonstrates that right wingers have no tolerance for disagreement and disent.
Sorry, Matt, just because we disagree with your politics doesn’t make us “the enemy.”
September 1st, 2003 at 4:08 pm
Cole, that is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.
Cole, you know damn well that I don’t consider people an enemy for merely disagreeing with me. The Democrats in the Senate have (in their detestable hypocrisy) given Bush’s nominees a “fair chance” at a simple confirmation vote.
What Daschle said a few years back was an issue of fairness is suddenly an issue of partisan politics.
Only an idiot would assume that a fellow American can’t be an enemy.
September 1st, 2003 at 4:16 pm
Matt- if you are going to write that Democrats, without any other qualification, are the “enemy within” you are stating that roughly half of the voting public are the enemy within. Additionally, you used to chastise for using the word “idiot” when referring to other posters. Shame on you, Matt.
September 1st, 2003 at 4:46 pm
“You can’t take the heat in the kitchen, stay away from the cook.” -Archie Bunker
September 1st, 2003 at 6:26 pm
Cole has a pair on him, doesn’t he, Matt? Cole, you do understand that his page, and the bandwidth which allows you yo see it belong to Matt, right? Thus he pays for the forum, and can say whatever he likes on it.
And only an idiot would call someone ‘an extremist’ on their own website, and not expect some kind of reply.
If you don’t like it here, Cole, you can always leave.
September 1st, 2003 at 10:05 pm
Isn’t it always typical of wacko libs that they simply just can’t address the real issues? Liberals have no rational, viable intellectual stance upon which to stand. They are fanatical and can’t see through their fantasises.
September 1st, 2003 at 10:21 pm
Well, considering that the “liberals’” very name is stolen… A liberal, in the classical sense of the word, is the supporter of laissez faire capitalism, individual rights and limited government. Our contemporary so-called “liberals” have about as much to do with liberty as Josef “Sugar Daddy” Stalin….
September 1st, 2003 at 10:51 pm
Conservatives are fucking morons enough said, Go check out Full-Auto or Conservative Underground if you dont believe me. Fucking drooling Troglodyte mouth breathers,The average Liberal is at least 10 to 25 times smarter than the Average Cheap-Labor Conservative.
September 1st, 2003 at 11:18 pm
Ha! One has to just walk around the campus of my beloved college to see the tards calling themselves “liberal” (not a Math or Physics major among them, either!)… Like I said before, these helpless pampered brats have no bloody clue what liberty is, nor do they have a bloody clue what they want or how to achieve it. And if we are going to compare idiots– Democratic Underground is full of them as well. They think they are sooo nonconformist– while they all look alike and pout alike,pumping their little scrawny fists to the sounds of “Rage Against My Allowance”, and being angry at reality. Quite sad, really.
September 2nd, 2003 at 12:04 am
Dear Matt,
Please join us and bloggers around the world in defense of the Iranian people against a brutal fanatic dictatorship - unite at BLOG-IRAN! - if this sounds like something you want to be a part of do visit http://www.activistchat.com/blogiran/
Best to you and yours -
In Unity,
Haleh
September 2nd, 2003 at 12:08 am
Sutcliffe…. still stupid, still gutless. Don’t worry, Mmm Bop, I am sur ethta Matt will put your real email addy on your spewage soon enough.
And, yes I am a cheap food, cheap clothes, cheap homes, and cheap durable goods conservative.
I am surprised you are not cheering the Mexi-Nazi Bustamante’ on. They want to ‘collectivize’ everything in ‘Atzlan’, just like good little National Socia..er Democrats. Like your little buddy, Howard ‘I want to curtail Civil Rights’ Dean.
September 2nd, 2003 at 10:49 am
Back during the pre-clinton era, there were policies, ensconced by tradition, called blue slips. Under the Kennedy and Biden judicial committees, they provided that both senators from a state where a judge was nominated from could hold that judges appointment, no questons asked. In fact, in 1994, when Clinton was in office but the GOP regained control of the Senate, Orin Hatch changed this policy such that a single senator from a state could block a nominee. Jesse Helms, for example, used this rule to block every Clinton nominee from NC.
In 2000, Bush was sworn in as the president of the United States. Hatch attempted to change the rule back to the Kennedy/Biden era both senators required to block regime. He failed, however, when Jeffords crossed party lines.
When the GOP took control of the senate, what was the first thing Orin Hatch did? Removed the rule requiring home-state senator approval completly.
In addition, the Democratic-led senate of 2000 confirmed more Bush appointees in a single day then the Republican majority allowed to be confirmed in the entire 1996 session.
Regardless of where you stand on the blue-slip issue, to accuse one side of playing partisan politics with judicial nominations without even mentioning the other is as partisan as the accusation itself.
September 2nd, 2003 at 11:01 am
Sivula I live in New York and really dont give a fuck about the fiasco in California. Im sick of idiot Conservaitves calling Liberals the traitorous radicals when they are the ones who want to dismantle the whole entire friggin government and get us involved in an endless war.
September 2nd, 2003 at 11:17 am
Truth In Media–My US Gov’t textbook (which was published after ‘96 I think) mentioned that in the senate there was a practice of the home state senators of a judicial nominee having the ability to “block” a potential nomination. I want to say that it was called something like “Judicial Consideration” (I can’t remember the exact terminology).
Either way, I don’t quite agree with that Practice. Granted, I know one (current Federal Justice) whose nomination by Clinton had to wait b/c one of my home state’s senators wasn’t sure about him being nominated (that uncertainty obviously dissapeared).
And for the record, I agree with Um Yeah when he says “[I] dont give a fuck about the fiasco in California”
But Um Yeah–CA law has it written in that a recall is possible. It’s not that laws are being changed or altered, it’s something that’s been there for a while
September 2nd, 2003 at 11:19 am
People like UM Yeah also forget that according ot our constitution, we elect our president based on the Electoral College, not popular vote…
Funny how they always want to ignore the LAW when it doesn’t work in their favor… maybe that is why so many democrats are blood-sucking lawyers.
September 2nd, 2003 at 11:22 am
Um Yeah,
your post has been editted for gratuitous use of objectionable words. The Blog FAQ clearly states that posts may be editted for this reason.
Please refrain from such behavior in the future.
September 2nd, 2003 at 10:21 pm
Can we take your money? um, yeah. Can we brainwash your children? um, yeah. Can we force Us citizens to abandon the very foundations upon which the country was built, i.e. Judeo-Christian values? um, yeah. Can we take away your ability to defend yourself? um, yeah. Can we defend the rights of murders, pedophiles and other sick puppies worthy a swift electric charge right through the brain? um, yeah. Gosh if I keep going I might outline the left wing agenda better than anyone in the last 40 years. The fact is liberals are stuck on things like ‘um, yeah’ becasue it is all there stoned gourds will allow them to say.
September 3rd, 2003 at 4:39 pm
MM *** This Country was not founded as a theocracy *** Cheap-Labor Repukes want to bring us back to the the 1800’s or failing that the Middle Ages.
September 3rd, 2003 at 5:10 pm
Um Yeah, perhaps you should learn to read before making ridiculous statements.
If you would read what Matthew actually wrote, you’ll notice he uses the phrase “Judeo Christian values.” That’s not the same thing as a theocracy.
Not that I’d expect you to understand.
September 3rd, 2003 at 5:40 pm
you better watch out or I’ll have to let loose all the mother jokes i got in store.
September 3rd, 2003 at 5:57 pm
It’s amazing how consistently stupider and stupider Dumb Yeah gets with each successive post. Hey douche bag, that lead paint must be quite delicious - you eat it like potato chips.
September 3rd, 2003 at 9:16 pm
um, yeah thanks for helping me make my point. he, he, he…
September 3rd, 2003 at 10:13 pm
Um Yeah, your comments are inappropriate. This is last warning - show some respect or be banned from this blog.
Your most recent comment will once again be editted. I should not have to do this again.
September 6th, 2003 at 12:02 am
Dumb(Yeah) is as Dumb(yeah) does.
October 23rd, 2003 at 7:38 am
Razorlips—–
Can we take your money>>>> expression of egoism. In other countries people think of it as giving money to help the people who cant help themselves.
Can we brainwash your children>>>> explain please. because it seems to me something the rightwing establishment is doing. afterall they controll the media.
Can we force Us citizens to abandon the very foundations upon which the country was built, i.e. Judeo-Christian values?>>>> what values are we talking about again?
Can we take away your ability to defend yourself? >>>> defend yourself against what? what evil do we have in this country that we need guns that people in other countries don’t need? Guns perhaps?
Can we defend the rights of murders, pedophiles and other sick puppies worthy a swift electric charge right through the brain? >>>> what about fair trial? and do we have the right to execute innocent people as colleteral dammage? doest the constitution forbid cruel and unsusual punnishment? and doesnt the racial element worry you?
Please respond to an untermensch like me my Arian friend. i beg you.
May 22nd, 2006 at 2:53 pm
italian leather furniture [url=http://leather-furniture.buyerliner.com/italian-leather-furniture.html]italian leather furniture[/url]
July 28th, 2006 at 4:37 am
The more Democrats talk, the more religious I become. I understand Satan through them.
I studyed math and physics in college, and resent this theological push on my brain, but Democrats are just plain evil and creepy.
May 28th, 2007 at 3:03 am
I read this when Matt wrote it and thought it was still early to call Liberals and Leftists the enemy within.
Well I no longer think that. I now believe whole heartedly that they are not only enemy collaborators, but full blown traitors and we need to stop them from ripping this country to shreds.