Entries in CD5 (4)

Friday
Feb092018

McCann doesn't do primaries but works for Democrats

Every Republican with a pulse knows what happens in a primary.  Two or more candidates duke it out -- sometimes it gets downright nasty -- but after the votes are counted and the dust clears, all sides get together behind the winner of the Republican primary and go and beat up the Democrat and win the election in November. 

That's how it was in 2016, when a lot of good conservatives worked for presidential candidates like Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, and Chris Christie, among others.  They fought for their candidates and against Donald Trump, but then got behind Donald Trump once he became the Republican nominee at the convention. 

Some Republicans, like Lt. Governor Kim Guadagno, said that they couldn't support Donald Trump for President.  But at least they didn't support the Democrat ticket led by Hillary Clinton.   Later, Guadagno would be forgiven by many Republicans, including Mayor Carlos Rendo, who agreed to serve on her ticket in last year's gubernatorial race.

A very few Republicans, like candidate John McCann, continued to serve their Democrat paymasters (in McCann's case, Bergen Sheriff Michael Saudino) while Saudino was running for re-election as a Democrat on Hillary Clinton's ticket.  In our view, this is unconscionable.  Any Republican with a spine and worthy of the name should have campaigned against Michael Saudino in 2016.  He shouldn't have been taking a check from him.

But maybe John McCann doesn't understand the primary process too well because he doesn't vote in Republican primaries too often.  If his voting record is correct, McCann has showed up for one Republican primary in the last decade.  That's pretty darn lame.

For so many reasons, John McCann is a non-starter.  And this being America, we thought that we were free to express our opinion under the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution.  Apparently, there are those who believe these rights should be suppressed by political power.  To this end, the first threats have arrived, from elected officials and those who are employed by elected officials.  We will be collecting them, so please, feel free to keep sending them.

Of course, those who wish to suppress us could send along their thoughts and ideas and join in the discussion that is democracy.  We would be happy to publish their thoughts and ideas if, indeed, they have any thoughts and ideas.

Have a good weekend.

Thursday
Feb082018

McCann campaign caught exaggerating again

The statement from John McCann's campaign reads:  "Dr. Darrell Scott endorses John McCann for Congress."

Who is Darrell Scott? 

His Wikipedia page states:  "As a minor, Scott aspired to be a drug dealer and pimp; Scott sold drugs, used cocaine, stole automobiles and took his father's 9mm pistol to school at age 16 and was expelled for it.  While in his 20's, Scott became a born again Christian after being inspired by his wife who was born again months earlier, after a neighbor had urged her to attend church. 

Scott is the founder and pastor of New Spirit Revival Center, in Cleveland Heights, Ohio.  Scott's non-denominational church operates out of a former Jewish Synagogue built in 1924, a 115k square foot facility, that has a daycare, banquet hall and radio station, with 3,500 members as of 2005.  The radio station broadcasts under call sign WCCD (1000 AM) – branded Radio 1000. WCCD."

In the 2016 presidential election, Darrell Scott became a prominent African-American supporter of Donald Trump.  Speaking of Darrell Scott, candidate John McCann said: "Dr. Scott is an inspirational leader fighting for change in Washington.  I look forward to going to Washington to work with our President and Dr. Scott to revitalize our communities and win for every American."

What does this mean? 

Well, in March of last year, Darrell Scott suggested to the President of the United States that he was in contact with the "top gang thugs" in Chicago and that they would agree to "lower the body count" if the Trump administration would agree to "come and do some social programs."

Yeah, no shit.

There was a huge and damaging (to Trump) outcry over these comments and Darrell Scott had to walk them back.  His excuse was that he was tired when he made the comments.

Here is a video and story from Fox News in Chicago:

http://www.fox32chicago.com/news/local/ohio-pastor-walks-back-comment-chicago-gang-leaders-trump

But what we're interested in is where that title "Doctor" comes from.  As Darrell Scott is a pastor, we are quite content to honor him with the title "Reverend," but "Doctor" indicates that he holds a "Doctorate" in some subject and Wikipedia doesn't list any institution of higher education that he attended. 

So we looked into it a bit, and we discovered that Darrell Scott's "doctorate" is an honorary one, from an unaccredited institution.  Out of respect for Darrell Scott, we will not go into the details, but we suggest to the McCann campaign that they update their statement to read "Rev. Darrell Scott" and leave "Dr." for those who have earned that title.

Friday
Feb022018

Did John McCann lie about his role in ClintonCare?

For months we've been hearing congressional candidate John McCann brag about stopping Hillary Care from happening in the 1990's.  The story goes that as a college intern (or "fellow" as he puts it) John McCann claims to have been responsible for ending Hillary Care... yep, all by himself.  McCann claims to have come up with a graph.  That's right.  A graph.  

First, a graph is just a prop -- a visual aid that a speaker makes come alive.  

McCann has been behaving like a self-important, overblown junior academic.  By pointing to himself, taking credit, he is ignoring all the hard work of all those Senators and Congressman and Rush Limbaugh and talk radio and the medical professionals and all those thousands of conservative activists and all the reams of studies and research and opinion pieces and thousands of graphs of all those conservative and libertarian think tanks -- not to mention the Republican legal staffs of both the House and the Senate.  Nope, not them... it was "me" says McCann. 

Second, it wasn't his graph.  The Senator he was interning for -- liberal Republican Arlen Specter -- gave credit to the graph's creator in a speech on the floor of the Senate.  Her name was mentioned in a Washington Post article.  

C-Span caught the whole thing... and now it is part of history. 

The web link below from C-Span is an 11-hour video of the U.S. Senate Floor on January 27, 1994.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?54084-1/senate-session 

At two hours and thirty minutes (2:30) into it, Senator Specter speaks on the issue and appears with his huge chart.  About six minutes into his speech, he explains that staffer Sharon Helfant was responsible for creating it.  He goes on to explain how the Washington Posthad a story a day earlier mentioning Helfant and her role in developing the chart.  

Yep, C-Span caught the whole thing... and now it is part of history.  That history doesn't jive with the way congressional candidate John McCann has been bragging.

Friday
Jul282017

Gottheimer lies: Try's to take credit for a 2016 Grant

Democrat Congressman Josh Gottheimer put out a press release this week that announced a $102,000 Grant for the Wantage Fire Department.  Gottheimer's announcement, dated July 26, 2017, and released by his taxpayer-funded office, stated:

"Today, Congressman Josh Gottheimer (NJ-5) announced that the Wantage Fire Department will be receiving $102,000 in federal funds for safety and operations as a part of the Department of Homeland Security’s Assistance to Firefighters Grant (AFG) program. AFG awards allow fire departments to purchase or upgrade equipment, vehicles, workplace training, and other firefighting and fire prevention activities."

What Gottheimer doesn't say is that the grant is from 2016 -- when Republican Scott Garrett was the congressman.  In his press release, Gottheimer inadvertently points out that, under the Obama administration, money to towns like Wantage was typically held up -- in contrast with the Bush administration. 

And, once again, Congressman Gottheimer tip-toes around the source of the terrorism we face -- calling it "lone wolf" terrorism.  Willfully ignoring the threat of Islamic terrorism by calling it by another, politically-correct name, is weak-kneed snivelry.

It wasn't "lone wolf" terrorism that necessitated the creation of the Department of Homeland Security and the billions spent since.  The Congressman should not ignore the fact that these have been coordinated attacks and that ISIS, the Taliban, Hezbollah, and such are all strains of the same anti-Western, Jihadist ideology.  They differ -- as Stalin and Mao did -- but remain focused on the destruction of America and Western civilization. 

Congressman Gottheimer still hasn't called out his party's leaders for their support of Linda Sarsour, the co-chair of the Women's March, and a self-proclaimed advocate of "jihad" against the democratically elected American government.

Yes, the co-chair of the Women's March actually called for "jihad" against the government of the United States of America.  And Democrats have mostly remained politically-correct silent about it.  Instead, state and local Democrat leaders have praised the Women's March and continue to do so -- lending their support to its leadership while American troops are in the field, engaged in a fight against jihadists.  Why have the Democrats and their candidates refused to comment on these threats of "jihad"?

Earlier this month, Linda Sarsour -- a prominent Democrat Party activist and co-chair of the Women's March -- called for a "jihad" against the American government.  You can catch her act here:

Here's what she said:

"During a speech to the Islamic Society of North America convention in Chicago last weekend, Sarsour, a delegate to the 2016 Democratic National Convention who is an anti-Israel and pro-Sharia activist, made the startling call and also urged against 'assimilation.'

'I hope that we when we stand up to those who oppress our communities that Allah accepts from us that as a form of jihad,' she said. 'That we are struggling against tyrants and rulers not only abroad in the Middle East or in the other side of the world, but here in these United States of America, where you have fascists and white supremacists and Islamophobes reigning in the White House.'

'Our number one and top priority is to protect and defend our community, it is not to assimilate and please any other people and authority,' she said.

'Our obligation is to our young people, is to our women, to make sure our women are protected in our community. Our top priority and even higher than all those other priorities is to please Allah and only Allah,' she said."

Sarsour started off her call for "jihad" by praising Siraj Wahaj, who she described as her "favorite person in the room."  Wahaj is a controversial New York imam who has attracted the attention of American authorities for years.  Federal prosecutors included him on a 3½-page list of people they said "may be alleged as co-conspirators" in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, though he was never charged, the Associated Press reported.

Since the election of Donald Trump as President, some Democrats appear to have gone completely loopy.  We believe that dissent is an American right, but "dissent" isn't "jihad".  When did the democratic concept of a "loyal opposition" morph into "jihad" -- a "holy war" to be waged by all means necessary?  And why are Democrats and their candidates too afraid to talk about it?

And here is another thing that they are afraid to comment on.   It was reported extensively in the media last week that the Women's March "honored" cop-killer Joanne Chesimard (aka Assata Shakur). 

Referring to the notorious cop-killer, who murdered a New Jersey State Trooper in cold blood, as a "revolutionary" whose words "inspire us to keep resisting", the far-left Women' March organization issued a statement "celebrating" Ms. Chesimard's birthday.

 

The Save Jersey blog reported on this:

Joanne Chesimard, the Black Liberation Army member hiding in Cuba after murdering New Jersey State Trooper Werner Foerster on the New Jersey Turnpike in 1973, has long eluded American justice and vexed New Jersey public officials as well as the public at large.

Donald Trump made headlines in June by spiking the Obama-era Cuba deal and citing the case of Chesimard (a/k/a Assata Shakur) as one of the reasons.

Eyebrows were therefore raised on Sunday when the far-left Women’s March’s social media accounts CELEBRATED the notorious cop-killing fugitive’s birthday:

 “I think you guys accidentally left out the part where she shot a police officer in the face, escaped from prison, then fled to Cuba in this post,” responded one Facebook user.

We know where Republicans like Assemblymen Ron Dancer and Parker Space stand on cop-killer Joanne Chesimard (aka Assata Shakur).  They want her extradited back to the United States to face trial for the murder of a police officer.  They backed that up by sponsoring a legislative resolution (AR-111) to urge Congress and the Administration to make that happen.

We haven't heard from Congressman Gottheimer and other Democrats.  Why have they remained silent?

Why don't some Democrats appear to mind associating with radicals calling for "jihad" and cop-killers?  Do they consider these legitimate forms of "dissent"?  We are very interested in hearing what Congressman Gottheimer and other Democrats have to say about a group, that Democrats strongly support, honoring a cop-killer.