Tag Archives: Charles Schumer

Please Don‘t Shut Down The Government, Democrats, Because That Would Be Awful (Not), by Kurt Schlichter

Shutting down the government for a while over the “Dreamers” controversy isn’t really going to upset too many Trump voters. From Kurt Schlichter at theburningplatform.com:

What a tragedy it would be if Democrats made good on their threat and decided DACA was so important that they must shut down the federal government over it. Please don’t! Why, I’d be heartbroken if the government did less and a bunch of foreigners didn’t get rewarded for ignoring our laws. I think this is just the right hill for the Democrats to choose to fight to the death on, and I encourage them to do so. Throw us right in that briar patch, because you are smart and savvy and there’s no way a big dummy like Trump could beat you and make you look like fools.

You remember DACA? It’s an acronym that stands for “That Thing Democrats Want To Use To Fill The Voter Rolls With Foreigners And GOP Donors Want To Use To Get More Serfs To Work For Peanuts While Actual Americans Get Shafted And Called ‘Racist’ If They Dare Complain.” The Democrats desperately want DACA because you Normal people have let them down and voted for your own interests rather than in the way Nancy Pelosi instructed you. Bad, bad electorate! You definitely need to be replaced.

The GOP wants it because its big money donors want it because you actual Americans demand to be treated with respect by your employers and, well, paying Americans what they’re worth is bad for business. And the Senate GOP Sissy Caucus of sanctimonious twits wants it because it gives them a chance to pose and preen and pretend to have the moral high ground over those wicked evil bad bad bad Republicans who want to do what actual Republican voters want done instead of being guided by the eccentric moral compass that Jeff Flake keeps inside himself right next to his head.

The “Schumerhole” controversy arose because Donald Trump indicated that giving Big Amnesty everything it wanted, and in return allowing him to totally alienate his base, was a bad deal. “Perhaps creating a controversy wherein a bunch of liberals and simpering Republican Fredocons would go into full fake high-dudgeon mode might coerce Trump into doing something he was not inclined to do,” thought some dummy who had apparently not paid any attention to how Trump operates for a single second in the last two-and-a-half years.

 

Charles Schumer and the “Dog-Whistle” Democrats, by William L. Anderson

The Democrats are playing with fire crawling into bed with the intelligence agencies of which they were once so justifiably skeptical. From William L. Anderson at lewrockwell.com:

In a recent interview with Rachel Maddow on the MSNBC network, Sen. Charles Schumer, who is the Minority Leader in the U.S. Senate, recently hinted darkly that the federal intelligence agencies could decide to harm Donald Trump. He told an approving Maddow:

Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday to get back at you, So, even for a practical, supposedly hard-nosed businessman, he is being really dumb to do this.

The article continues:

Schumer said he didn’t know what agents would or could do to Trump. “But from what I am told, they are very upset with how he has treated them and talked about them,” he said.

The Left often likes to speak of “dog whistles” put out by Republicans when they speak, leftists claiming what is said seems to have one meaning, but actually, is said in order to “signal” other groups covertly about what the politician really believes about a certain subject. For example, if a Republican politician says he believes in “states’ rights,” or a federal system of government in which individual states have delegated powers not given to the federal government, the Left claims he actually is letting white supremacists know that he supports oppression of black people and wants whites to lynch blacks. It doesn’t matter that a federal system which gives state governmental bodies the opportunity to resist federal policies is a bulwark against tyranny. To oppose the federal government is to endorse racist violence, period, according to the Left.

Except when Democrats look to resisting the federal government. Interestingly, the Left is silent now that California and other Democratic-run states are looking to resist federal policies, California having gone as far as to hiring former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to lead the state’s legal resistance. The irony of Democrats now appealing to “states’ rights” is thick, to say the least.

To continue reading: Charles Schumer and the “Dog-Whistle” Democrats

He Said That? 11/26/14

From Chuck Schumer, Democratic Senator from New York:

After passing the stimulus, Democrats should have continued to propose middle class-oriented programs and built on the partial success of the stimulus, but unfortunately Democrats blew the opportunity the American people gave them. We took their mandate and put all of our focus on the wrong problem – health care reform.

The plight of uninsured Americans and the hardships caused by unfair insurance company practices certainly needed to be addressed, but it wasn’t the change we were hired to make. Americans were crying out for an end to the recession, for better wages and more jobs; not for changes in their health care.

http://fusion.net/story/29934/chuck-schumer-plan-democrats-2016-election/

Senator Schumer also pointed out that only 5 percent of registered voters were uninsured in 2010. His remarks have infuriated Democrats, perhaps because the truth stings. Only the most blissfully oblivious of them do not realize that the lies used to sell Obamacare, the extraordinary and dubious maneuvering that were used to get it passed, the split along party lines, and the botched rollout have not been forgotten and motivated many to vote Republican earlier this month. Schumer sees the writing on the wall: with more of Obamacare to be rolled out in the next two years, in part because of Obama’s “amendments” to the law, it is an issue that is not going away, a gift that will keep on giving to the Republicans. Perhaps by acknowledging that perhaps it was not introduced at the most opportune time, politically savvy Schumer is trying to put some distance between himself and the unpopular program. He faces reelection in 2016, and while he has a presumably safe seat, one can never be too careful.