|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
“What we are seeing right now is the all-out assault on democracy,” Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold claimed in 2021.
“Everything we do every single day to ensure the American people can elect, freely choose their election officials,” the chair of the Democratic Association of Secretaries of State held forth in 2022. “We believe that democracy literally is on the ballot.”
In 2023, democracy is no longer on the ballot in Colorado because Griswold, who had spent every single year warning about an “assault on democracy”, launched an actual assault on democracy to ensure that people in Colorado would not be able to freely vote in elections.
After Colorado’s Democrat justices ruled that, on their say-so, former President Trump couldn’t appear on the ballot in Colorado, the state’s GOP proposed to move to a caucus system.
And Griswold responded by warning that the Colorado GOP couldn’t change its own primary so that voters can’t actually vote for the candidate they choose, only those that Democrats choose.
But as the Mills Brothers sang, “you always hurt the one you love.” And sometimes you love democracy so much that you have to kill it to save democracy from itself.
Some Democrats define any opposition as an attack on democracy. And when they end democracy, they’re really “upholding democracy” so high up so that the voters can’t get their grubby fingers on it.
Secretary of State Griswold had previously described Republican bans on ballot harvesting as an “assault on democracy”, challenging election results as a plot to “destroy American democracy” and questioning the behavior of hyper-partisan election officials like herself as an “all-out assault on democracy.”
Everything she doesn’t like, according to Griswold, is an attack on democracy.
She claimed that candidates asking for recounts is an attack on democracy because it makes life harder for her. And “we have to make election administration work for election officials. Part of the attack on democracy is making it so that good people step down.”
Democracy has to work for Democrat election officials. Not so much the voters.
Griswold claimed that a lawsuit by Judicial Watch alleging that she had failed to comply with the National Voter Registration Act was, you guessed it, an “attack on democracy.”
So what is actually ending democracy in Colorado? Obviously it’s defending democracy.
“A group of Colorado voters is pushing back against Donald Trump’s assault on democracy – arguing he should be banned from the state’s ballot,” is how MSNBC framed her interview.
Secretary of State Griswold told the leftist cable news network that, “we are in the middle of the worst attack on democracy that our nation has seen in recent times”, by which she did not mean her own actions, but new House Speaker Mike Johnson: “a known election denier that tried to thwart Americans’ vote in choosing their next president of the United States.”
This was coming from a woman who was on MSNBC to discuss her own efforts to “thwart Americans’ vote in choosing their next president of the United States.”
If Irony isn’t dead, it’s probably also guilty of an assault on democracy.
Over in California’s war on democracy for democracy, Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis urged officials to “explore every legal option to remove former President Donald Trump from California’s 2024 presidential primary ballot” as part of “protecting the fundamental pillars of democracy.”
The fundamental pillars of democracy can be summed up as not letting Americans vote.
After 8 years of hysterical claims that democracy was at risk, the democracy shouters have begun openly undoing the most public form of democracy at the ballot box. Unsatisfied with rigging elections behind the scenes, tainting voter rolls, incentivizing mass voter fraud and illegal voting by changing election rules, suing over every race they didn’t win while criminalizing election challenges to those they did win, they’ve moved on to banning the opposition.
It’s not just Trump.
In Oregon, Democrats have barred much of of the Republican State Senate delegation from running for reelection using the union and billionaire donor backed Measure 113 which they hailed as an effort to stop the “subversion of democracy”.
When the opposition is defined as the enemies of democracy, ending elections also ends the “subversion of democracy” and then democracy goes smoothly without any actual opposition.
The war on democracy in the name of democracy is in full swing.
The States United Democracy Center promises that it is “holding democracy violators accountable” by disbarring lawyers who engage in election challenges.
Free Speech For People has been arguing that Democrat state election officials should bar not only Trump, but “any other elected officials who helped facilitate or otherwise engaged in the insurrection” and they define that as those who “aided or gave comfort to the insurrectionists.”
There have already been specific proposals to remove two elected House members from Congress, but it’s a wide net that could easily encompass much of the Republican Party.
After the Chinese Communists suppressed the “insurrection” by Christians, liberals, conservatives and other non-Communist Hong Kong citizens, they disenfranchised much of the population, replacing open elections with “patriot only elections” in which only regime lackeys are allowed to run for office. Most people in Hong Kong no longer bother to vote.
Some Democrats seem intent on doing the same thing in the United States.
The lovers of democracy really like the idea of democracy in the abstract. The only part of democracy they have a problem with is that the people they disagree with can also play. They believe that democracy could really reach its potential if there were no Republicans in the race.
The trouble with democracy is that after the speeches, there are elections. Get rid of the elections and democracy will, like a Saturday Night Live political skit or a John Oliver monologue, become a safe space in which they have nothing to fear from the outcome.
The war on free and fair elections is being waged in the name of democracy against democracy.
But it’s all in how you define democracy.
“Blocking Trump from the ballot isn’t an affront to democracy. It’s the essence of it,” an editorial argues. ”Blocking Trump from the presidency is precisely what democracy demands, and failure to do so would be a grave betrayal of democratic values.”
Democratic values and the essence of democracy, as opposed to the practice of it, are very different things. The things that leftists claim to value invariably collide with their values.
When they are in the opposition, they claim to value free speech, a free press and the rights of the minority, but as they gain power, the things they value clash with their values of having unrestricted power to be able to remake the nation and society in line with their politics.
They claim to value processes, but when push comes to shove all they really value is power.
Democracy rests on free and fair elections, but that’s incompatible with democratic values which is what Democrats actually want to accomplish. Democracy becomes an abstraction. It has values and an essence, it even “demands” things which are the same things they demand.
Eventually democratic values demand that democracy cease to operate to protect their power.
Anyone who opposes that is an “enemy of democracy” who is carrying out an “assault on democracy” and the only way to protect democracy is to end democracy.
But sometimes you have to destroy democracy to save democracy.
Thanks Daniel! How true, yet how clever, witty, and timely.
The Democrats all want to be Emperors and rule for life then have their sons take over when they Die
I’d like to know the democretin‘s definition of morality, because democracy seems to have replaced morality. Democracy is no longer a guiding principle based on morality. It is a word used to manipulate the masses, call it a verbal wmd. No longer “In God We Trust”.
It’s “In Democracy We Trust”.
It’s “In False Manipulative Assumptions We Trust”.
Time for a republican state to ban a democrat who is funded by Soros, or Gates, or Fuckerberg, or any member of the WEF.
This is how crime families operate – by eliminating the opposition
Crime families have two rules.
1st Rule – There are no rules;
2nd Rule — You can’t change the 1st Rule.
Nice touch, using a form of Peter Arnett’s famous misquote “We had to destroy a village in order to save it.”
All these leftist fools (like Arnett) habitually set themselves up for failure and/or sounding stupider than Sleepy Joe.
In Peter Arnett’s case he fell hook, line, & sinker for the “Baby Milk Factory” trick during the 1st Gulf War, and the “Operation Tailwind” hoax story.
Either of those displays of gullible idiocy should’ve ended his career, but it was his herculean suck-up to Saddam Hussein as we initiated the 2nd Gulf War that finally got that propagandist fired from NBC.
Excellent article. What demands an answer from the Left is how “democracy” is defined. Let us take note that term is never defined by the Left. So, does “democracy” for the Left mean “Constitutional republic” (doubtful), as the Founders conceived, or “democracy,” as in the “German Democratic Republic,” former East Germany, or something like that? Arguably, the lack of precise definition is deafening…and speaks volumes.
In the Wonderland where Democ-rats live, saving democracy means removing from the ballot any opposing politician that Democ-rats can’t out-poll. Banana republic? Of course not; it’s fact-checked Democ-rat democracy. If you can’t see the virtue in that, then you need glasses. Here’s the eye test: Can you see that Claudine Gay, Harvard’s butchy quota queen, is actually a beauty queen? No? Then you’re blind to Wonderland truth.
It’s all crazy. It’s up to Republicans now to come up with a crazy response of their own to save democracy from the Democrats who want to destroy democracy to save democracy. Either way, it’s the death of democracy.
We are witnessing the rising of the 4th Reich this time in America. Isnt this what the brownshirts did for Hitler? Read the book Hitlers First 100 Days, Peter Fritzsche. History is repeating itself unless it is stopped.
Even though Sinclair Lewis wrote “It Can’t Happen Here,” nearly a century ago, it seems like it “can!”
Reminded me, that the Democrats took control of California via a judicial coup, against the will of the electorate, by having judges overturn the results of the elections.
MEXICO WILL ELECT ALL FUTURE PRESIDENTS AND THEY WILL DO IT WITH NO ID TO VOTE AND MAIL IN
Open Borders – Why Not Just Invite the Entire World to the U.S.?
By Brian C. Joondeph
America’s southern, and perhaps northern, border is open for business, lined with welcome mats, neon lights, and a sign flashing, “come one, come all.”
To even call the physical boundary of the United States “a border” is a miscarriage of language.
At the rate we are going, soon the entire world may migrate to America for free food, shelter, education, health care, and even voting rights. The latter perk is the real reason Democrats want open borders as Americans won’t vote for their nonsensical proposals and candidates.
On his “New Discourses” website, the great James Lindsay explains the Left’s definition of “democracy” as follows: “In Critical Social Justice, as with all Marxism, democracy is an organizational principle for society that exists only when all citizens are equal, i.e., under Communism.” The Democrats are Leftists and many are Marxists. They are trying to bring about a society in which all citizens are materially equal. Therefore, in their mind, anything they do to bring about this end is “pro-democracy” while anything the right does to obstruct their plans is, ipso facto, anti-democracy. They use the same words but not the same dictionary. Also, they have no morals and election cheating via the big city Democratic machines has been a feature of our elections for over a hundred years and the subject of comedy (e.g., joking about who got the “cemetery vote”) for decades. Them talking about being pro-democracy should cause them to spontaneously combust.
Well said. Unfortunately, for too many voters wouldn’t recognize Marxism if it took up residence in their house. Nor can they see the roots of tyranny taking over the ground once seeded with Natural Laws to prevent the abuse of power. These Marxist quislings do indeed fall for the deliberate contortion of once commonly understood terms because they lack the confidence to independently reason and, thereby, depend on “experts” to do their thinking for them. (“I’m not a biologist.”) In a way, it appears to be a form of linguistic Lysenkoism being bought hook, line and sinker by the intellectually lazy masses willing to surrender their personal agency if it keeps them from having to get their hands dirty playing the game of politics. It’s a game of semantics and the stupid people are winning,
What people seem to miss is that this legal case is not about elections and determining if Trump can be placed on the State of Colorado’s ballots; it’s about putting on the line the very essence of America’s legal system. That is the presumption of innocence, where one is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
The plaintiffs who brought this case, just claimed they felt Donald Trump’s actions on January 6, 2021 were seditious, therefore he met the requirement of the 14th Amendment to be prohibited from seeking public office in the federal government. Except the plaintiffs entire case was based on ‘we believe’ rather than Trump has been convicted of being an insurrectionist, therefore the 14th Amendment applies. And all the lower court judge did was agree with the plaintiffs that she ‘felt’ Trump’s actions equaled being an insurrectionist. How the appellate and state supreme court upheld such a verdict is beyond me?
That’s like in a divorce court, the wife in order to gain full custody of the kids, accuses her ex-husband of being a drug dealer. The judge in the case just goes along with the wife’s opinion and agrees the ex-husband is a drug dealer and awards full custody to the wife. The problem is the ex-husband has never dealt drugs, has never been charged with being a drug dealer nor has been convicted as a drug dealer in a court of law.
In both cases, Donald Trump’s and the ex-husband’s rights have been violated. The courts applied a legal remedy based on Trump and the ex-husband as if they’d be found guilty and convicted of a prior crime. In Trump’s case, legally he’s innocent of being an insurrectionist, so the courts cannot legally deprived him of running for federal office by applying the remedy of the 14th Amendment. Same with the ex-husband, the courts cannot apply a legal remedy of depriving him custody of his kids based on treating him like a convicted drug dealer, which would throw away his presumption of innocence.
Conservatives are prone to impulsive tangents of blind bigotry.
Who else, of course, is in active opposition to the entitlement, by birthright, of elementary schoolers to explore the wonders of graphic pornography?
En loco parentis determinations, kept from the biological whelpers and whining knuckledraggers who block the spread of proper social awareness, is all that rescues these building blocks for brighter tomorrows from being horse and buggy throwbacks like their idiot parents.
If this country is undergoing a crime wave, it is the crime of impugning the validity of governance. Anonymous accusations are the appropriate prophylactic for protection of democracy, when available as tools for a proper security apparatus.
Thanks for this superb column, Daniel. You always “hit the 10 Ring,” but in this one you hit the “X-ring”–the smallest one, at the very center of the target, “for Experts only.”
I’ve seen, and warned others for the past 4 years, about exactly what you write here, but to no effect whatsoever on the Trump-hating, knee-jerk Democrat loyalists I meet almost every day.
One of them is an otherwise pleasant-natured old lady who practically foams at the mouth with her hatred of DJT every time his name is mentioned; when I asked her why she hates him, she snarled (as they usually do) that he’s a “liar” and a “racist,” and–incredibly, insisted that “he told us to inject ourselves with Clorox bleach against COVID-19!”
I pointed out that Trump had never said any such thing, but that he had, in fact, said that chlorine bleach was an effective disinfectant for smooth, hard surfaces like kitchen counters and doorknobs (one of its long-known best uses). She merely scowled, and refused to reply, then sneered, “That’s a lie!”
[CONTINUED IN NEXT, BELOW, TO MEET WORD-COUNT LIMITS]
[CONTINUED FROM ABOVE:]
Years ago I bought a paperback copy of Alinsky’s toxic, venomous, literally satanic “Rules for Radicals,” just to read what it said. It is literally a blueprint, instructions, and marching orders, for the total destruction of our Constitution, our country, and our way of life.
And the Democrats–now that there are no longer any honorable members of that Party–are following Alinsky’s playbook line, scene, and act to accomplish exactly what he wanted: our utter destruction as a constitutional republic under law; our economic and financial systems; our orderly, decent culture and traditions; and our entire way of life.
These are same Democrats who hysterically warned that “if Trump returns to power, we won’t have any more elections!” but are now (as Alinsky advised) DOING EXACTLY THAT by “lawfare” and corrupt judges to remove DJT from the ballot–not just in Colorado (the first so far with such an outrageous “Ruling”), but in at least a dozen other states too.
God help us. My worry isn’t that He won’t give us what we pray to him for, but that He might, very well, give us what He decides we deserve, for bringing what can only be described as our National Suicide down on our own heads.
I’m not a “Bible-thumper” nor a fan of “The Apocalypse”; but anyone with even a passing familiarity with the Old Testament can’t help remembering that He’s done it before…and, I worry, may be ready to do it — this time to us — again.
Have any democrats ever read the Constitution? The Second Amendment is there to use against those that wish what they wish.