Entries in Democrat Party (6)

Wednesday
Jul252018

Summer Reading: Important columns you must read.

In an effort to understand the state of America at this moment, we’ve been perusing columns by writers from across the political spectrum.  Glenn Greenwald is a left-of-center journalist and reformer of outstanding integrity.  Peter Heck is a cultural and religious conservative who writes for The Resurgent, a blog edited by Erick Erickson.  More will follow.

Glenn Greenwald… The Intercept (July 8, 2018)

MSNBC Does Not Merely Permit Fabrications Against Democratic Party Critics. It Encourages and Rewards Them.

During the 2016 primary and general election campaigns, various MSNBC hosts were openly campaigning for Hillary Clinton. One of the network’s programs featured Malcolm Nance (pictured above), whose background is quite sketchy but is presented by the cable network (and now by NBC News) as an “intelligence expert” and former intelligence officer for the U.S. Navy.

On August 20, 2016, weekend host Joy Reid asked Nance about the supposed “affinity” for Russia harbored by Jill Stein supporters. In response, Nance told MSNBC viewers: “Jill Stein has a show on Russia Today.” You can still watch the video of this claim here on MSNBC’s own website or see it here…

Whatever your views might be about Stein and her third-party candidacy, there is no disputing the fact that Nance’s statement was a falsehood, a fabrication, a lie. Stein did not have a show on RT, nor did she ever host a show on RT. What Nance said was made up out of whole cloth — fabricated — in order to encourage MSNBC viewers to believe that Stein, one of the candidates running against Clinton, was a paid agent of the Kremlin and employee of RT.

Reid allowed Nance’s lie to stand. Perhaps she did not realize at the time that it was a lie. But subsequently, a campaign was launched to urge MSNBC to correct the lie it broadcast, based on the assumption that MSNBC — which is part of NBC News — was a normal news outlet that functions in accordance with basic journalistic principles and would, of course, correct a false statement once that was brought to its attention…

Read the entire column here: 

https://theintercept.com/2018/07/08/msnbc-does-not-merely-permit-fabrications-against-democratic-party-critics-it-encourages-and-rewards-them/

Peter Heck… The Resurgent (July 24, 2018)

Slouching Towards Pedophilia

Some very provocative and alarming words were spoken recently in Germany. And we better start addressing the issue now.

So by now, most everyone culturally engaged knows about Guardians of the Galaxy director and outspoken President Trump critic James Gunn being fired by Disney for past social media posts. And the exchange of outrage, some hypocritical, predictably emerged from both sides of the political spectrum.

Just to be clear, many of Gunn’s offending posts were indeed gross:

Among the tweets that forced Disney and Marvel’s hand were: “I like when little boys touch me in my silly place.” Another: “The best thing about being raped is when you’re done being raped and it’s like ‘whew this feels great, not being raped!’”

Like I said, gross.

But while everyone is commenting on Gunn’s firing, far fewer people are talking about a much more provocative take on pedophilia that emerged recently at a TedX Talk in Germany. Given the axiom that where Europe is today, the United States will follow within 10 years, maybe it would be more productive to address the merits of what was said there than the jokes of some creepy Hollywood director.

If you missed this story, here are the basics:

Controversy erupted recently over a TEDx talk featuring a German medical student who exclaimed that "pedophilia is an unchangeable sexual orientation, just like … heterosexuality."

The student, Mirjam Heine, gave the talk at the University of Würtzberg in Germany this past May under the title "Why our perception of pedophilia has to change." During her talk, Heine said that people need to recognize that pedophilia is a natural force.

"Anyone could be born a pedophile," she told the audience, citing it as just an "unchangeable sexual orientation just like, for example, heterosexuality."

Read the entire column here: 

https://www.themaven.net/theresurgent/contributors/slouching-towards-pedophilia

Tuesday
Jul032018

New Jersey GOP: Don’t be afraid to be Republicans.

By Rubashov

A weekend before the NJGOP held its Leadership Summit in Atlantic City, New Jersey, two contributors to this website attended a gathering of conservative academics and writers and journalists, hosted by an organization founded by the late William F. Buckley Jr.  The 500 present where in Philadelphia to enjoy a nice dinner and listen to a lecture by a writer named Rod Dreher.

Rod Dreher is the senior editor of the national magazine and website, The American Conservative.  This is the publication that predicted the fall of the Bush dynasty and the rise of Donald Trump.  They wrote about the populist shift in GOP politics when most Washington-based journalists were confidently predicting that Paul Ryan was the next big thing.

Dreher wrote a book last year that set the academic world talking.  It was debated in all those places that thoughtful Republicans go to figure out what the world is, and how they – and what they believe – fit into it.  Conservative journalists and think tanks debated the vision Dreher presented – and the book was a popular success, a “New York Times Bestseller”, in fact.

The book is called The Benedict Option (A Strategy for Christians in a Post-Christian Nation).  It calls for Christian conservatives to reassess their relationships with the outside world – with institutions like the Republican Party and corporate America. 

Once upon a time, conservatives gave their votes to “pro-business” corporatists and in exchange received their “protection” on policies impacting traditional values.  The battle over same-sex marriage ended all that, exposing the business community as cheerleaders for the materialistic “sex and shopping” culture that sustains their short-term profits.  

In response to this and other betrayals, Dreher suggests that believers prepare themselves for a hard time, for a period not unlike that suffered by eastern Christianity during the Communist occupation of their nations and cultures.  The idea is to hold oneself apart, become stronger in belief and in practice, and build new institutions outside the hubbub and the madness.

David Brooks of the New York Times wrote that The Benedict Option was the most important and discussed book in a decade.  Russell Moore, of the Southern Baptist Convention, called the book prophetic and something every Christian should read.  Many have.  And they are starting to look at things differently, and beginning to reassess.

It's not only conservative Christians who are recoiling from a betrayal by the Establishment of which they once thought themselves a part.  Working class Americans of all ethnicities, creeds, and genders have given up on a Democratic Party obsessed with global capitalism and a Labor movement that threw them over for an immigration agenda that bloats the gray economy and threatens their jobs.  In his book, The Unwinding, An Inner History of the New America (2013), George Packer extended this loss of connection and idea of betrayal to the broader American middle class.  Meanwhile, libertarians are aghast at the growing regulatory police state and endless “war” economy.  While the election of Donald Trump has left many old-time, business-centric Republicans wondering who is who and what is what. 

Since Rod Dreher's lecture, there have been two regional meetings to discuss the practical implications of The Benedict Option on a state by state, party by party basis.  In each case, an individual reassessment is being made.  One political party organization that appears disconnected to its natural electorate is the Republican Party in New Jersey.  Indeed, it is such to the point of it being said not to possess an electorate at all, but rather a collection of voters who still notionally respond to the word “Republican”.

In arriving at this assessment, the discussion focused on what is a political party and how does it devolve the further it gets from its center.  In other words, everyone knows what it means to be a Republican and this reflects the generalizations held about the party nationally or globally.  But the further away you get from the center the greater the opportunity is for that message or "brand" to be corrupted, and its meaning lost. 

So what is the Republican Party – once we get down to the state level or county level – in a place like New Jersey?

(1) Is it the sum of the beliefs and aspirations of its members, as expressed every four years in a party platform?

(2) Or is it the network of profitable business interests of those who occupy leadership positions within the party?

This isn't a gibe at the leadership of the New Jersey GOP but rather a basic philosophical question.  Those engaged in this discussion are strongly influenced by Edmund Burke, who wrote:  "The principles of true politics are those of morality enlarged."

Burke considered politics to be a branch of ethics.  This separated him from Machiavelli and the modern political tradition which holds that "power" is supreme.

In light of this, the question above is posed.

So, will the NJGOP be guided by morality and ethics – and a written set of principles – or will it merely be a vehicle for men seeking power and the financial opportunities that flow from it?

Once upon a time, a certain Assemblyman – as Chairman of the NJGOP – came in for some very rough criticism because he would not formally endorse (or allow the Republican State Committee to endorse) the platform of the Republican National Committee, which had been debated and democratically approved in the summer of 2008.  

He was criticized for the part he played in leaving the New Jersey Republican Party without a set of written principles, but after he was removed as State Chairman by Governor Chris Christie, there was a new platform, adopted in the summer of 2012, debated and democratically approved as was the one before.  Sure enough, the NJGOP didn't adopt it either.  A new chairman, installed by Governor Christie, ignored the new set of party principles as had been the old.

And now there's been another platform, debated and voted on in the summer of 2016, by delegates from all across America.  And it too, has suffered the same fate as the others.  It has not been endorsed by the NJGOP – leaving the Republican Party in New Jersey without a set principles, a road map by which to judge its success or failure. 

Why?  Any poll will show you that most registered Republicans in New Jersey uniformly support the platform of the Republican Party.  So what makes it so difficult for the members of the New Jersey Republican State Committee to simply say, yes, we are Republicans and we support the democratically approved principles of our party as set down in the Republican Party Platform of 2016?

Well, in most cases, those state committee members are selected by Republican County chairmen in counties that have what is called a "party line".  This is s thumb on the scale at elections that enables a county machine to note who the "official" candidates of the party are. 

It is a system not unlike that practiced in less democratic nations and is thoroughly disreputable.  If New Jersey was a third world country organizing its first elections and it proposed such a thing, the United Nations would be bound to declare those elections rigged and undemocratic.  But New Jersey is part of the West and was established before the founding of the U.N.  So the political parties here are fortunate in that they do not fall under the scrutiny of international law. 

Most New Jersey Republicans are unaware that their state and local party organizations do not operate under a set of principles – or indeed any moral or ethical guide at all.  99 percent have no idea that the national Republican Party platform isn't used as a guide when recruiting potential Republican nominees for public office.

You see, most registered Republicans in New Jersey assume that there is one long chain of command leading from the White House of Donald Trump all the way down to the county committee level.  Republican voters believe that when the county party says that so and so is the "official" party candidate, they are hearing the word of the Republican National Committee.

Of course, this is not true.  That’s why there is so much confusion when state and local Republican leaders in New Jersey fail to match the rhetoric coming out of Washington, DC.  There is no direct line from the White House to the office of the local party boss.  And without a set of principles – a written standard by which to judge good from bad, success from failure – local party organizations are left with nothing but the will and wishes of a controlling party boss or cadre.

The employment and economic interests of many state and local Republican leaders tends to complicate things further.  Many county chairmen function as lobbyists or hold business connections and loyalties that are very much at variance with those principles of the Republican Party and the aspirations of ordinary Republicans.  This leads some party organizations to operate as for-profit mutual benefit societies or in some cases, sole proprietorships.  While some operate as entrepreneurs, others are more like placemen – granted patronage jobs or vendors contracts or some gift of status with which to do business. 

This is a surprise to many ordinary Republican voters in New Jersey, who still believe that their local party stands for the Republican platform.  In reality, when they vote Republican, they are not voting for who they think they are, but rather they are voting for the candidates put forward by what could be described as  independent operators, with agendas often at odds with the Republican Party platform. 

A review of the candidacies put forward by New Jersey Republicans in the last decade clearly shows that the Republican Party platform plays no role in the selection process.  What that means for average Republican voters is that instead of being a members of a party of ideas, of values, of right and wrong -- they are merely facilitators of what are often independent operators, who at times conduct themselves in ways that are more along the lines of an entrepreneur than an ideologue. 

A person’s vote is a very valuable thing.  Voters generally don’t treat it so, but it is.

Recently, Princeton University concluded a study that confirmed what many already feared – America is not a democracy.  How can we be?  Our precious votes are artificially funneled into two silos: Democratic or Republican.  If you want to look past those two, the media, academic, legal, and political powers of the Establishment won’t provide you with much.  “Pick one,” they tell us. 

We pledge our collective votes to one of two political parties with the understanding that we are going to get something in return.  That even if they try and fail, at the very least, they are going to stay somewhat true to what they say they are.  After all, we are voting for a national “brand” and we expect the candidates we vote for to reflect that.  We do not want to buy a new Ford only to learn that in New Jersey, a “Ford” is an aging Datsun.

If average voters think they are voting for a national Ford but instead get a local Datsun, then there really isn’t anything in it for the average Republican voter.  All they are doing is giving away their collective votes so that some local boss can harvest them to use to make money.  They think they are voting for people who believe in the platform of the Republican Party – of that thing they read about every four years and that largely reflects their values.  But it turns out to be just an illusion.  Someone has captured the Republican "brand" and monetized it. 

So voters turn-off, tune-out, and fail to turn-out to vote.

Voters are told how important it is to vote… by the guys who get jobs and contracts and status by monetizing other people’s collective votes. As for the average voter… maybe he or she loses a day’s wages by getting hauled up for jury duty (a delightful by-product of registering to vote).

And if you question how a new Ford is really an old Datsun… well then they call you names.  The true-believer is told he or she is some kind of freak for believing in the party platform.  What is wrong with you for thinking it was on-the-level?  Why would you ever believe that we actually believed in what we said we believed in?  Are you some kind of arsehole?

At the NJGOP Leadership Summit in Atlantic City, it was evident that very few could articulate what the Republican Party stood for.  The talk was all about the new technology available to communicate a message, rather than what that message is.  People who get paid to win campaigns in New Jersey were there to explain tactics and polling but not how to define and sell what we are burdened with… that word “Republican.”

The leadership of the NJGOP is now faced with the task of reconnecting a party with its voters.  To convince the one percent who profit from politics – and who control the levers of power – to allow a space for the 99 percent who simply want to vote for people they believe represent the values and principles of the Republican Party.

This will require patience and understanding – and will be made more difficult by the attitudes of some who use polling to determine political positions, rather than as a means to test arguments with which to convince.  The Democrats are in a position of hegemony because they invited in their true believers, gave them a seat at the table, and reaped financial benefits and grassroots activism by doing so.  They refused to follow public opinion. Choosing instead to make it

The career of Garden State Equality’s Steven Goldstein should be studied by every aspiring Republican activist.  At the start of his long march, when confronted with disheartening and frankly abysmal polling data, he did not jettison his principles, he shifted the conversation.  He used polling – not as a revelation to tell him what to believe – but as a tool for convincing others.

Remember that no more than 1 percent of those who vote are there to make money off the system.  99 percent show up to vote because they believe Republican means Republican principles and ideas and policies and the platform.  They are not in on the deal.  They get no cut.  So let's build institutions that these people can trust and that – more importantly – earn their trust.

So... which will it be?  A party based on ethics and morality – with a set of principles by which to judge its success or failure?  Or every man for himself, the pursuit of power, the worship of greed?  It is a time for choosing. 

The Republican Party in New Jersey can choose to open itself up to ideas and nail its colors to the mast and say "this is who we are and this is what we stand for!"  Ideas have brought the national Republican Party far – so why are they resisted in New Jersey?  Instead of avoiding issues, embrace them, use them, figure out ways in which to explain them and do so artfully to win the debate. 

For New Jersey Republicans, it is time to remember who you are.

Wednesday
Feb072018

Labor must stand up to Murphy to protect job creation

"Once you get to Wall Street, no matter how you got here, you give up your right to say you are a man of the people." (BBC:  The Last Days Of Lehman Brothers)

Does Phil Murphy have any empathy with New Jersey's working class at all?

During the campaign, his professional spinmeisters made much of his college job washing dishes but let's not confuse that with having a perspective that understands the needs and wants of the working class majority of the state he now leads.  Murphy spent decades in board rooms dedicated to increasing profits at the expense of working men and women.  Murphy fully embraced the globalist philosophy that places profits before all else.

Conservatives -- traditional conservatives -- are conservatives of place.  As President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's great advisor Arthur E. Morgan wrote, the small community is the foundation of democratic life and the source of civilization.  The preservation of the small community -- whether a town or a neighborhood -- and the families and individuals within it, is the highest duty of public policy.  This stands in stark contrast to the Darwinian view taken by Phil Murphy.

In Murphy's world there are winners and losers -- and somebody must lose so that people like him can grow monstrously rich.  Murphy views government as an agency by which those in power can choose winners and losers.  It's called crony capitalism.  Murphy doesn't see communities, he just sees consumers -- individuals to be categorized and placed into silos -- the better to market to and to control. 

Like most modern Democrats, Phil Murphy elevates social distinctions above economic ones.  Seeking to divide the working class majority, Murphy and the Democrats focus on such things as the color of your skin, or who you sleep with, and they try to convince you that this is more important than having a job or keeping your home out of foreclosure. 

When a police officer is sent into a community to enforce a law made by the Democrat-controlled Legislature -- and someone is shot during the enforcement of that law -- people like Murphy tell you that it is the fault of the blue collar police officer, not the white collar Legislature.  They tell you it is about race, so that working class black people will distrust working class white people.  Getting people with the same economic interests to distrust each other is a trick that has been used to govern many times over.

From his years at Goldman Sachs -- and especially from his time in Hong Kong, at Goldman Sachs Asia -- Phil Murphy understands the uses of cheap, often illegal, labor to drive down costs and drive up profits.  The fact that these practices destroy small communities and cause economic migration means nothing to someone with homes in Germany and Italy, as well as New Jersey.  Phil Murphy is a citizen of the world, not a person of place. 

Once upon a time, there was balance in America.  The Republican Party was the party of business and represented the interests of business at the bargaining table that is the Legislature.  Back then, the Democrat Party represented the interests of Labor.  That day is long gone.  The Democrats do not nominate labor leaders to statewide office in New Jersey -- they nominate Wall Street millionaires and white collar professionals.  With its record of electing Democrats to the United States Senate, both Senators could easily be of blue collar vintage, but decidedly, they are not.  

Apart from a few individual legislators in both parties, the working class does not have an advocate in New Jersey.  No party is going to place the interests of class above those of the fashion statements and virtue signaling of the day.  The pussy hat brigade are largely professional women and the wives of professional men.  Check out the hands of all those "resisters" and you will find few with indications of ever having done honest labor.  Bring back the draft and the ANTIFA crowd would scoot off to Canada, for few could face the controlled menace of a drill instructor.  The "revolution" is an inverted one -- of, by, and for the Elite (and, as Phil Murphy said of Wall Street:  "We are the Elite..."). 

That's not to say that there isn't a populist Left.  But it gets stepped on and ignored.  Nobody speaks to its needs.  It says "jobs" and the reply is "more condoms."  And if it doesn't go along with the program of "more condoms" it gets ostracized.   

Labor must pick through the remains of both parties to find people for whom their home town or county still means something.  People who want to see their neighbors and community prosper.  People who understand that charity begins at home and that the false narrative of the "global" community is bullshit marketed to people so that they will welcome the slave labor that will take their jobs.  That narrative destroys two small communities -- that of the migrant willing to work at slave wages and of the neighbor who must agree to work for less to compete. 

As the Democrat Party starts down the path of Governor Goldman Sachs 2.0, it is incumbent upon Labor to hold this phony to account.  Labor can do it.  Labor has been in worse places before and had to fight every inch to gain a place at the bargaining table.  It lost its place by not paying attention.  It is time then, to pay close attention.

The Cause of Labor is the Hope of the World.


Friday
Nov172017

McCann manager attacked McCann's Democrat boss

You couldn't make this stuff up if you tried.  The young fellow running candidate John McCann's effort this year, wrote a very potent attack against McCann's Democrat boss -- Bergen County Sheriff Mike Saudino -- last year, accusing him of siding with groups like Black Lives Matter.  The article appeared as commentary, under McCann's manager's own name, in the Save Jersey blog.

 

In the article, McCann manager Matthew Gilson, took Democrat Saudino (who was paying McCann, a patronage employee in his office, at the time) to task in a rather brutal fashion.  Here is an excerpt from what he wrote:

 

Saudino’s greatest betrayal?  Siding with the Democrats’ police-hating allies

 

Support for America’s local police used to be fairly universal or at least never a partisan issue.  Over the last year, however, Democrats have shown their true colors by siding against law enforcement at every turn. Whether it is supporting indictments for officers doing their job, or outright calling for violence against law enforcement officials, Democrats have been fairly vocal in their refrain: cops are the real criminals.

 

That’s what makes the betrayal of Mike Saudino all the more interesting...

 

One can’t help but marvel at his logic – or lack thereof – as Saudino cites the need to put good law enforcement over politics while siding with those who side with cop killers’ apologists. I can understand Saudino’s self-preservation instinct given the disarray within the Bergen GOP’s rank’s, but the larger message he is sending is one which frankly scares the hell out of me. That somehow Democrats are the party which supports law enforcement, or that campaigning for Bernie Sanders is something all those who support good police work should be doing? 

 

Give me a break, Mr. Sheriff.

 

Do what you want with your career but don’t insult our intelligence.

 

John McCann's manager makes the point that Sheriff Saudino's party -- the Democrats -- are "a party which thinks that Mumia al-Jamal should be freed from prison, and that Joanne Chesimard is a folk hero..."  which begs the question:  What was John McCann thinking when he agreed to take a pay check from these people?


Thursday
Jul272017

In letter, Gottheimer won't say "Islamic terrorism"

In a correspondence sent out using taxpayer money, Democrat Congressman Josh Gottheimer tip-toed around the major cause of terrorism in the world today, willfully ignoring it by calling it by another, politically-correct name.

 

July 26, 2017

As your Representative, I value hearing directly from residents of northern New Jersey about the issues that matter to you.  I want to make sure you know that I will be hosting a live Telephone Town Hall from my office in Washington at 7:30pm tomorrow. We will discuss important updates on legislation to lower taxes, protect our seniors, help our vets, fight lone wolf terrorism, fix our roads and bridges, and stand by our first responders.

###

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.