Screeching liberal voices once again went off the rails in critiques of white woman, whom they blamed most for the lack of a true “blue wave” victory in the midterm elections on Tuesday.
Despite the onslaught of free campaign publicity for Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-Texas), such as appearing at concerts with Willie and on the Ellen show, not to mention the millions that poured in from outside of Texas to try and buy the election, Cruz, a Hispanic was able to hold his seat. Although the House of Representatives fell under the control of the Democrats, many were disappointed at the lack of greater electoral successes.
Author’s Barbie, found and rescued off the beach at Nags Head following hurricane Sandy.
On social media, leftists saw this and the deflation of the “blue wave” as evidence that white women were not pulling their weight at the polling booth.
Liberal activist Marisa Kabas tweeted, “white women uphold white supremacy through their vote. they have no qualms about hurting women of color, and that’s an objective truth.”
“Black women voted 95% for Beto. White women did what white women do,” said comedian and writer Travon Free. I guess he meant they voted for a minority candidate instead of a white bread, rich preppie that runs away from crime scenes?
Does the left not see the irony of blaming white women for voting for a Hispanic candidate, simply because he’s Republican?
“59% of white women voted for Ted Cruz,” said white female comedian Chelsea Handler. “I don’t know what it is going to take for us to be sisters to other women, but we have to do better than this. We need to vote for the best interests of others, and stop thinking only about ourselves.”
It gets better, and more stupid.
“White women are a Republican constituency, and in many states, they again voted as if patriarchy would protect them,” said frequent MSNBC guest Jamil White. “50 percent or more for DeSantis, Cruz, and Kemp. I am unsure when they will understand the damage that they do, and not just to themselves.”
“Really, truly embarrassed that 76% of white women in Georgia voted for Kemp. It’s shameful. Humiliating,” said New York Magazine writer Hillary Kelly.
“Thinking about driving my ass down there next election and personally talking to as many of these fools as possible.”
“We have to do better, white women. Doing f**king SOMETHING would be a g***amn start,” tweeted liberal writer Courtney Enlow. “Have the awkward conversations, take the emotional labor off the backs of women who have more on their g***amn plate than we ever will. Do. Better.”
Yes. Let’s do better. Indeed.
On the map of the United States, those who self-identify as “liberals,” whatever on earth that term is meant to mean, outside of someone with a foul mouth attached to a completely empty head, occupy not much territory, at all.
But where they are, on the east coast and on the west coast, places like New York City, for example, they are there in numbers, numbers that far outstrip the numbers in the rest of the state, and so, they have considerable political clout, putting into statewide and national office those who share their liberal values, and thus, their voices get heard, while the voices of those of us outside of these liberal bastions are generally not heard.
And so here we are in here, hearing a lot of liberal screeching in condemnation of white women in America who are not liberals, nor do they share liberal values, which they consider morally weak, as if these women were somehow selling out the liberal women in America, which charge the non-liberal women I know would call pure bull****.
It is a thing of a lack of respect, as I understand it.
Take this Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, for example.
I have found no woman up this way who considers little “party girl” Chrissy Blasey, who grew up into the emotionally-damaged Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who the Senate Democrats then turned into a freak show in the eyes of the world when they put her on display on national TV as an emotional basket case as a result of her loose moral upbringing in a failed effort to tarnish the reputation of Brett Kavanaugh, to be sympathetic.
“She brought it on herself,” they say, and they don’t care what these women who self-identify as liberal think about it, which is something these women who self-identify as liberal cannot understand.
They seem to believe that they are the acme of womanhood here in America with their liberal values, and any woman who does not wish to join them is beneath them.
And they are so wrong, it isn’t funny.
But in their arrogance, they will likely never know that, but really, who cares?
And should we really be at all surprised in any way that since his loss to Ted Cruz, the Democrats are now touting liberal heartthrob Beto O’Rourke as having sufficient superstar power with liberal women to be the next Democrat president of the United States, that according to an article in The Hill entitled “Beto 2020 calls multiply among Dems” by Amie Parnes on 11/11/18, as follows:
Democrats are seeing a silver lining to Rep. Beto O’Rourke’s loss in Texas to Sen. Ted Cruz (R).
It means O’Rourke, who emerged in the midterms as a progressive star, is free to run for president.
end quotes
See what I am saying here, people?
There it is in black and white – O’Rourke is now a progressive star in America, and if it wasn’t true, The Hill could not say it!
Which takes us back to The Hill, as follows:
Democrats across the country say that if O’Rourke wants to run for president, he has the potential to take the primary by storm.
“If he wants to run, he should do it,” said Democratic strategist Maria Cardona.
“He now has name recognition, a widely successful fundraising operation, a young fresh face with a sprinkling of woke, a cool persona, a new perspective, he speaks Spanish and would be an exciting and upbeat candidate,” she said.
end quotes
A young fresh face with a sprinkling of woke and a cool persona!
Yes, people, to the liberal women of America, that is all it takes to be presidential material in America today – if you have that sprinkling of woke and a cool persona, it doesn’t matter to the liberal women if you have an empty head – with them, you are in like Flynn!
And such is American politics today, as we see from this following from that Hill article, to wit:
Another strategist was even more enthusiastic.
“I hate to say this because it would piss off a lot of Democrats, but the fact is we have so many people and we really have nobody that’s thrilling, nobody that would send a thrill up Chris Matthews’s leg except for Beto,” the strategist said, referencing the MSNBC “Hardball” host, who expressed such excitement about hearing former President Obama speak.
“You know how I know?”
“I had friends calling me to ask about him.”
“I would overhear conversations about him.”
“He’s generating the kind of buzz we haven’t seen since ‘hope and change’,” the strategist added.
end quotes
So sending a thrill up Chris Matthews’s leg is a necessary qualification for a liberal Democrat presidential contender!
Isn’t that just so sweet?
But that’s the way you have to do it to be a liberal Democrat presidential contender in America today and score the liberal women’s vote in America, and there we are, people, Beto for 2020!
He was able to raise an enormous act of money, afterall, and he has a bit of a star quality to him, and people in Texas, especially liberal women, were mesmerized and moved by him.
“He has to think hard about it because moments like this don’t come around often in politics and they tend to be fleeting,” said Democratic strategist David Wade, who served as a senior aide to John Kerry.
Wade compared O’Rourke’s moment with the time Obama captured Democrats’ imagination when he gave the keynote address at the 2004 Democratic National Convention.
“Imagine if Barack Obama has deferred his instant connection from the 2004 convention and waited for a safer cycle to run for president,” Wade said.
“You can’t guarantee that these moments last forever.”
“Moments change.”
“Political demand signals change.”
Big news from NBC News today, to wit: Kyrsten Sinema makes history as first bisexual member of U.S. Senate
Now, why is that at all relevant to anything a United States Senator is supposed to be doing?
How come these Democrats feel it is necessary for us to have to know their sexual predilections when they run for public office?
“United we stand, Divided we fall.”
What was supposed to be a warning was used by the left as a template for destruction and they are doing a bang up job of dividing us.
Ban the hyphen.
E Pluribus Unum.
We are becoming a parody of a nation like Rome in the days of Caligula and Valeria Messalina.
Our United States Senate is supposed to exist to protect the interests of the state.
So why did NBC News have to tell us that Kyrsten Sinema made history as first bisexual member of U.S. Senate?
What kind of history was that, exactly?
And how does NBC News know she is bi-sexual?
Because she told them?
And if she did, why is a candidate for the supposedly high office of United States Senator telling the press about her sexual habits?
Because like releasing your tax returns, it has become mandatory when running for high office in America to tell people how it is you have sex, and with whom, or what?
It is the last thing I could imagine having a conversation with a United States Senator about – “getting much lately on either side?”
I mean seriously, Mike – WTF?
How does NBC News think that that is news?
Kind of salacious, isn’t it?
But then, that is what makes it news for NBC today – that headline will get them noticed for being in tune with the times.
As to the purpose of the United States Senate in the constitutional scheme laid out in the Federalist Papers, in FEDERALIST No. 59, specifically, entitled “Concerning the Power of Congress to Regulate the Election of Members” from the New York Packet to the People of the State of New York by Alexander Hamilton on Friday, February 22, 1788, spake thusly on the subject, to wit:
The interest of each State, it may be added, to maintain its representation in the national councils, would be a complete security against an abuse of the trust.
end quotes
The representation the states have in the national councils is the United States Senate.
So how does somebody being bi-sexual enter into the equation there?
Is bi-sexuality now a requirement to be a United States Senator from Arizona?
And how is that at all constitutional?
Getting back to FEDERALIST No. 59, Hamilton reinforces that as follows:
So far as that construction may expose the Union to the possibility of injury from the State legislatures, it is an evil; but it is an evil which could not have been avoided without excluding the States, in their political capacities, wholly from a place in the organization of the national government.
If this had been done, it would doubtless have been interpreted into an entire dereliction of the federal principle; and would certainly have deprived the State governments of that absolute safeguard which they will enjoy under this provision.
end quotes
I wonder what Alexander Hamilton would think if he was reading the NBC News headline above that Kyrsten Sinema makes history as first bisexual member of U.S. Senate.
Probably something like we are becoming a parody of a nation like Rome in the days of Caligula and Valeria Messalina.
American’s quest for youth has turned into a refusal to mature. Serious issues get denied, so that we may speak of trivialities.
If only we had the wisdom of a wise Latina, maybe we’d better understand.
Alea iacta est. We had a good run.
That first sentence is so spot on, Mike!
Reminds me of the Eloi in “The Time Machine.”
An endless life of pleasure with no purpose to it.
Look what that lifestyle did to poor emotionally-damaged Dr. Christine Blasey Ford who the Senate Democrats so recently made a national spectacle out of as they shamelessly exploited her emotional damage for partisan political gain in the mid-term elections.
“How come these Democrats feel it is necessary for us to have to know their sexual predilections when they run for public office?’
So they know exactly how to screw you.
Is this click bait?