Back in 2011, thousands of dirty (literally) Communists called themselves Occupy Wall Street and began squatting in their own filth in public parks in major cities all over the country. From there, they committed a long litany of crimes, including destruction of public and private property, rioting, looting, assault, rape and murder.
ABC Breaking News | Latest News Videos
And Democrats loved them.
![]() |
| Source: CNN |
Describing the protests as “serious” and “encouraging,” Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) praised the sentiment motivating Occupy Wall Street and called for Congress to take heed. “It’s got a clear message, and that is frustration with the way that business is being done, the way that wealth is tilting towards the high end and the middle class is shrinking. And that message needs to be given,” Welch, a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, told me on Wednesday. What’s more he added, “it’s a real grassroots, citizens-led initiative. It’s not a top-down effort, it’s bottom up. In that sense, I think it’s very similar to the tea party.”
Other progressive Democrats are even more enthusiastic. “I’m so proud to see the Occupy Wall Street movement standing up to this rampant corporate greed and peacefully participating in our democracy,” said Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY). The co-chairs of the Progressive Caucus, Reps. Keith Ellison and Raul Grijalva, issued a joint statement to express “solidarity” with the movement, describing themselves as inspired by the mass movement. “We join the calls for corporate accountability and expanded middle-class opportunity,” they wrote. “The silent masses aren’t so silent anymore. They are fighting to give voice to the struggles that everyday Americans are going through,” added Rep. John Larson in his own statement supporting Occupy Wall Street.
Even Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, the second-ranking House Democrat, agreed that there were similarities between the protesters’ message and Democratic priorities. “Certainly, there is an overlap in terms of jobs and economic opportunity, which they want and we want,” Hoyer told me. Though he didn’t go so far as his Democratic colleagues in embracing the movement wholeheartedly, he said that one “positive aspect” of the protests is that they’re “raising issues and raising concerns and asking policymakers to focus on it.”Democrat presidential candidate, Bernie Sanders, praised Occupy Wall Street.
Sanders is a decades-long Communist apologist who thinks so highly of Communism that he spent his honeymoon in the Soviet Union (clearly a romantic vacation spot), praised Communist Fidel Castro and the Communist Sandinistas in Nicaragua, and to this day states on his Senate website that...
These days, the American dream is more apt to be realized in South America, in places such as Ecuador, Venezuela and Argentina, where incomes are actually more equal today than they are in the land of Horatio Alger.Sure, incomes are more equal in Venezuela. They're so equally bad that people are starving. The exception, is, of course, Venezuela's Socialist leadership, whose income is dong just fine. I took a screen shot, just in case he removes that travesty, but so far he seems quite proud of it.
Communism is the most murderous ideology in history. Communists murdered over 100 million people in the 20th Century alone, and the body count continues in North Korea, Cuba, China and Venezuela.
Communists are just as evil as Nazis, and their body count dwarfs that of the Nazis, so imagine if American politicians embraced and praised "protesters" who wore Hitler tee shirts...
| Source |
... or described himself as "proud" of a movement that called for "real Nazism"...
| Source |
... or if American politicians expressed "solidarity" with violent Nazi "protesters"...
![]() |
| Source |
Would American politicians who expressed "solidarity" with violent Nazis ever be elected?
What if an American politician loved Nazism so much that he spent his honeymoon in Nazi Germany while the US was at war with Nazi Germany? Would such a politician take second place in a major party's presidential primary?
I'm not trying to change any politician's mind here. Politicians are - for the most part - cynical, amoral opportunists. Instead, I'd like to address those who voted for the politicians who praised violent Communist "protesters".
Would it be morally reprehensible to vote for a politician who praised violent Nazi "protesters"? If so, then why is it morally acceptable to vote for politicians who praised violent Communist "protesters"?
Let me make this as clear as I can for my "liberal" friends. By rewarding (with your vote) politicians who praised violent Communists back in 2011-12, you helped normalize political violence in the US. You're part of the problem.
Now, we've had riots at the presidential inauguration. That's now the norm.
Thanks to you, violence against political opponents is now the norm.
Political violence on college campuses is now the norm.
Violently shutting down speech with which "liberals" disagree is now the norm.
As Stanger, [Charles] Murray and a college administrator left McCullough Student Center last evening following [Murray’s speech] they were “physically and violently confronted by a group of protestors,” according to Bill Burger, the college’s vice president for communications and marketing.
Burger said college public safety officers managed to get Stanger and Murray into the administrator’s car.
“The protestors then violently set upon the car, rocking it, pounding on it, jumping on and try to prevent it from leaving campus,” he said. “At one point a large traffic sign was thrown in front of the car. Public Safety officers were able, finally, to clear the way to allow the vehicle to leave campus.
“During this confrontation outside McCullough, one of the demonstrators pulled Prof. Stanger’s hair and twisted her neck,” Burger continued. “She was attended to at Porter Hospital later and (on Friday) is wearing a neck brace.”You threw out the old rules of civil discourse, "liberals". You passively stood by - or even applauded - while violent Leftists shut down free speech on college campuses and political rallies, rioted, looted, vandalized and burned. Then you rewarded politicians who praised the violent mobs by voting for them.
What you don't seem to understand is that the old rules were there to protect you just as much as everyone else, and that others can - and will - follow the new rules you created. And when they do, you won't like it.



No comments:
Post a Comment