Before I go into two recent examples—one large and one small—that illustrate why I left the Democratic Party over 20 years ago, let me emphasize that I am far from a party person.
I don’t vote for candidates because they are from one party or another and hope I never will.
It may sound corny, but I vote on a man or woman based entirely on their policies and my best guess of whether they would carry them out.
As an example, I am pretty certain former President Donald Trump would act on his policies because he already has.
At the same time, I haven’t voted for a Democrat in this century but could well vote for Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for president, depending on his opponent. Kennedy has opened serious discussion on many subjects, from healthcare to our intelligence agencies, that have long been suppressed or obscured by our legacy media.
Moreover, there are several Republicans running I could never vote for, no matter their opponent. I’d just sit it out.
I don’t take special pride in this, it just seems like the obvious sensible way to go—voting for the person, not the party. I recommend it to others.
But on to those two examples.
The first, the large one, will probably not surprise you. I was appalled at the unilateral, lemming-like behavior of House Democrats opposing the censure of Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.).
Surrounding the Californian as if he were the last of an endangered species, the Democrats formed what amounted to a cordon sanitaire around a man who is not only a serial liar (not the first in politics) but a deeply immoral human being who constantly promulgated untruths from the privileged position of chairman or ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee.
He was therefore assumed to be privy to the nation’s highest secrets, giving extraordinary weight to his repeated, almost daily, allegations he had proof of Trump-Russia collusion that he acknowledged only privately, during “in camera” testimony when placed under oath, never existed.
He deliberately misled the country for years. It’s hard to think of anyone who has done remotely the same as consistently as Schiff.
How could the Democrats rally virtually unanimously around such a person? It makes you wonder about immorality in a party that already seems to believe the ends justify the means to an extent that would win the approval of Lenin and Mao.
Some Democrats complained that Schiff’s treatment was not equal to that of Republican Rep. George Santos (R-N.Y.), a useless prevaricator who should indeed be removed from the House. Let’s hope that it happens.
But to compare back-bencher Santos to Intelligence Committee Chair Schiff is like comparing an AWOL buck private to General Rommel. In a word: absurd.
It was, in all, a monumentally repellent display on the part of the Democrats.
The other much smaller event is interesting in that it smacks of deliberate ignorance (aka willful blindness), if not projection.
What I saw was quite the reverse, invariably respectful audiences who were very interested in what this obviously highly intelligent man had to say and asked many serious questions in sessions that often went on for hours.
The only hecklers—and they were rare—were lefties.
Tweeting out this cartoon, Ramaswamy said “It’s sad how the MSM views Republicans.” True enough though I’m not sure the Quad-City Times constitutes the peak of the MSM.
Nevertheless, The Washington Post, USA Today, and so forth would do much the same. They just have access to more sophisticated cartoonists.
One thing is increasingly clear: The American left has little idea of what the right is really like and what they really think or who they really are. It’s all projection.
