‘CHUCKIE’ SCHUMER: LIAR, HYPOCRITE, HACK, AND, OF COURSE, DEMOCRAT…

Schumer 07

At the risk of being accused of beating a dead horse here, I have to say that I really get tired of hearing about how it’s the Democrats who always operate above the political fray.  And it was once again that, just this past Sunday, we had Chuckie Schumer doing his best to portray his Democrat Party as somehow being the ardent defenders of the Constitution while it’s the Republicans who seek only to undermine it, when, actually, it’s just the opposite that’s so very true. During a Sunday morning appearance on ABC’s “This Week,” with George ‘Stephy’ Stephanopoulos, Schumer decried the intent of many Senate Republicans to prevent Barry “Almighty” from appointing the successor to the recently deceased Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

It was after hearing him spew his ideological drivel that I was left wondering if the good senator, from New York, might actually be suffering from, perhaps, what would be at least a mild case of Dementia since it was less than a decade ago that we heard from this the very same Democrat an advocating for doing exactly the same thing he’s now accusing the Republicans of planning.  That if any additional Supreme Court vacancies opened under former then President George W. Bush, none should be confirmed.  Now of course ‘Little Stephy’ Stephanopoulos, former Clinton hack and wannabe journalist, can always be counted on not to question Democrats regarding any of their previous statements.  Schumer knew ‘Stephy’ wouldn’t confront him, so he once again lambasted the Republicans.

It was almost immediately after Justice Scalia’s death was announced this past Saturday evening that Republican lawmakers and presidential candidates began arguing how it is that the appointment of his successor should be left to the next president.  And about how for the last 80 years, or so, it has essentially been political precedent that during an election year a decision of such paramount importance as the naming of someone to what is essentially a lifetime appointment, should not be done by a lame-duck president.  But as we all know, Barry has never been one to abide by past precedent, only in setting new precedent. And Schumer, of course, supports Barry and lamented the Republican outlook as nothing but obstructionism, pure and simple.

Schumer said, “You know, the kind of obstructionism that Mitch McConnell ‘s talking about, he’s hearkening back to his old days.”  Then this sleazy hack went on to say, “In 2010, right after the election or right during the election, he said, ‘My number-one job is to defeat Barack Obama,’ without even knowing what Barack Obama was going to propose. Here, he doesn’t even know who the president’s going to propose and he said, ‘No, we’re not having hearings; we’re not going to go forward to leave the Supreme Court vacant at 300 days in a divided time.’”  Chuckie added, “When you go right off the bat and say, ‘I don’t care who he nominates, I am going to oppose him,’ that’s not going to fly.”  But McConnell is doing nothing more than to take Schumer’s own advice.

I say that because what McConnell is proposing is virtually no different than what Schumer himself proposed not so long ago.  And as we roll the tape we can see how it was, back in 2007 and while George W. Bush was still president, that Schumer can be heard advocating the exact same approach McConnell is now planning to pursue. During a speech at a convention of the American Constitution Society (a group that claims its mission is to “promote the vitality of the U.S. Constitution and the fundamental values it expresses: individual rights and liberties, genuine equality, access to justice, democracy and the rule of law), Schumer said that if any new Supreme Court vacancies opened up, Democrats should not allow Bush the chance to fill it “except in extraordinary circumstances.”

And it was also back at that same time that Schumer was also heard to say, “We should reverse the presumption of confirmation.” Adding, “The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Justice Stevens replaced by another Roberts, or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito.”  And it might also be worth noting here that it was during this same speech that Schumer would go on to lament the fact that he hadn’t managed to block Bush’s prior Supreme Court nominations.  And you know, about McConnell saying that his number-one job was to defeat Barack Obama, hasn’t Schumer seen his job as being doing all that he could to bring about the defeat of every Republican president who had held office during his tenure in Congress?  Seems that way to me!

And I think it also worth noting that when Schumer made his remarks in 2007, then President Bush still had about seven more months remaining in his presidential term than Barry “Almighty’ now has remaining in his.  Much like Republicans today, Schumer’s sentiment was clearly based on a fear that another Bush appointment would radically shift the overall makeup of the Court’s ideology.  Of course, Schumer’s attitude back then provoked a response from Republicans very similar to the one Democrats are making now.  Bush’s Press Secretary Dana Perino argued at the time that Schumer’s statements showed “a tremendous disrespect for the Constitution” and amounted to “blind obstructionism.”  My only point here is that it’s rather hypocritical to say Democrats don’t engage in such activities.

And as it just so happened, Schumer’s suggested obstruction never came to pass, as no more vacancies opened during Bush’s presidency.  But that does nothing to alter the fact that had such an opportunity presented itself there should be very little doubt regarding what would have ensued because we know how things would have played out.  And I’m also quite sure that when the Democrats regain control of the Senate after this year’s election, and Schumer replaces ‘Dirty Harry’ Reid not only as leader of the Senate Democrats but of the Senate as well, we will be about to count on the fact that Schumer will play politics, and to the greatest extent possible, with judicial appointments should it be a Republican who wins the White house, however unlikely that may be.

So look, as you can see it becomes pretty clear, pretty quickly, that the Republicans are not to be afforded the luxury of being able to play by the same rules that the Democrats get to play by.  But at least part of the blame for that rests solely upon our limp-wristed Republican leadership in Congress.  Because once you are perceived as being a pushover that’s pretty much how you will then continue to be treated.  And until we have Republican leaders who possess the requisite balls to dish it out to the Democrats instead of simply bending over and spreading ‘em, this kind of belligerence on the part of Democrats will continue.  This is yet another reason why people are so pissed off and why Trump remains the Republican frontrunner.  No one trusts the Republicans to stand up for those who put them into office!

Advertisements

SCUMBAG DEMOCRATS PLAY POLITICS WITH BAD IRAN DEAL…

Schumer 01

Barry’s hopes of preserving his cherished nuclear ‘deal’ between Iran and world powers is said to have been dealt a setback this past Thursday when Chuckie Schumer, one of the top Democrats in the Senate said, after deep study, careful thought and considerable soul-searching, he simply could not bring himself to support the agreement.  But I think we all knew this was coming.   After all, Chuckie’s up for re-election next year even though he’s a shoe in, he was most likely been given permission to vote against it so as to have something to brag about next year.  But his action does not mean that Barry’s ‘deal’ is in any real danger of being killed.

Chuckie’s supposed opposition, announced in a lengthy statement, could, however unlikely, pave the way for more of Barry’s fellow Democrats to come out against the nuclear pact announced on July 1 between the United States, five other world powers and Iran.  Chuckie is said to be among the most influential Jewish lawmakers in the United States.  He was the first Senate Democrat to announce his opposition to the agreement.  But 12 more Democrats would be needed to successfully override Barry’s threatened veto, which means another 11 Democrats can still safely vote against it.  So we should look for that to happen and not be surprised when it does.

Another supposedly ‘influential’ Jewish lawmaker is Rep. Eliot Engel who happens to be the top Democrat on the House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee and also said on Thursday that he too would oppose Barry’s nuclear pact.  Mr. Engel would also be one of those Democrats for whom there is likely an ulterior motive for coming out against this very bad deal.  You see, he too is up for re-election and has therefore likely been given permission to vote against this deal for purely political purposes.  Granted, he too may be a sure bet to win re-election but why take any unnecessary chances while at the same time being able to claim to be a defender of Israel.

Barry has been engaged in his own lobbying effort, including a combative speech on Wednesday in which he said abandoning the agreement would open up the prospect of war.  And in making quite clear his preference for operating out of the gutter, Barry attempted to shore up his increasingly unpopular “deal” with Iran which many say hands them nuclear weapons “on a silver platter.”  Barry gave what was billed as a “major” policy speech on the accord that Americans now have come to oppose by a 2-to-1 margin.  But all that matters very little to our ‘Dear Beloved Leader,’ Barry “Almighty”.  It’s all about him and his supposed legacy, or lack of.

It was in that speech that we saw an obviously desperate Barry make some despicable comments, going so far as to compare the terror-sponsoring Iranian Mullahs to Republicans.  It was in reference to anti-American sentiments that Barry said, “I recognize the resorting to force may be tempting in the face of rhetoric and behavior that emanates from some parts of Iran.”  And added, “It is offensive. It is incendiary. We do take it seriously. But superpowers should not act impulsively in response to taunts.”  And he went on to say, “Just because Iranian hardliners chant ‘Death to America’ does not mean that’s what all Iranians believe.”

And then in what has become typical behavior for this our least presidential of all American presidents, Barry proceeded to sink to what I think would be an all new low, even for him.  Because Barry would then say, “In fact, it’s those those hardliners who are most comfortable with the status quo. It’s those hardliners chanting ‘Death to America’ who have been most opposed to the deal. They are making a common cause with the Republican caucus.”  Really?  I mean, what is it that he was hoping to accomplish by making such a polarizing, arrogant and more than a little reckless statement?  Was he trying to bully those who oppose his deal into supporting it?

And then, of course, we have our imbecilic secretary of state, John Kerry-Heinz, the genius who ‘negotiated’, and I use that term very loosely, the deal on the U.S. side.  Kerry-Heinz said during a news conference on a visit to, of all places, the Vietnamese capital Hanoi that he respected Chuckie and Engel but added that “rejection is not a policy for the future.”  Kerry-Heinz said, “It does not offer any alternative and many people in arms control and others have actually pointed that out. While I completely respect everybody’s individual right to make a choice, I obviously disagree with the choice made.”  What a buffoon this guy is.  It’s amazing.

Chuckie did his best to convince us that he was not influenced by party or politics and had not been pressured, like any of us would view that as being anything other than a bunch of political bullshit.  He said, “Advocates on both sides have strong cases for their point of view that cannot simply be dismissed. This has made evaluating the agreement a difficult and deliberate endeavor, and after deep study, careful thought and considerable soul-searching, I have decided I must oppose the agreement and will vote yes on a motion of disapproval.”   Frankly I was surprised that he was actually able to get through his entire spiel and all with a straight face.

Barry has promised, no make that threatened, a veto if the resolution is passed by the House and Senate.  Now in order for the Republicans to shove that threat right up Barry’s ass, they would need at least 13 Democrats in the Senate and 44 in the House to join them in voting against Barry.  The have to be able to muster a two-thirds majority in both chambers needed in order to override a Barry veto.  So, while Thursday’s announcements can, in a sense, be described as being a blow, albeit a minor one, to Barry, opponents of this deal still face a pretty steep uphill battle to enact a disapproval resolution.

Chuckie said lawmakers would have to come to their own conclusions but he would try to persuade other senators to vote against the Iran deal. Now that may be true, but Chuckie has a history of being a little less than honest.  Keep in mind that Chuckie is currently the number three Democrat in the Senate and is in line to succeed ‘Dingy Harry’ Reid as the party’s leader in the chamber when ‘Dingy’ finally retires in early 2017.  Meanwhile, a congressional aide said Engel would vote for a resolution of disapproval and also vote to override a Barry veto if the resolution passed Congress.  However, Engel did not say he would lobby against the deal among other lawmakers.

Chuckie said he opposed the nuclear deal because he believed Iran would not change and that the deal would let it eliminate sanctions while retaining “nuclear and non-nuclear power.”  He said, “Better to keep U.S. sanctions in place, strengthen them, enforce secondary sanctions on other nations, and pursue the hard-trodden path of diplomacy once more, difficult as it may be.”  The White House had no immediate comment on Chuckie’s announcement.  MoveOn.org said its 8 million members would organize a “donor strike” to withhold campaign contributions from “any Democratic candidate who succeeds in undermining the president’s diplomacy with Iran.”

Look, we will likely hear a lot more noise from what will likely be a growing number of Democrats regarding their displeasure with this ‘deal’, but that’s all it’s likely to be, noise.  It will only be for show as there is simply no way that there will be 13 Democrats willing to sign on to any veto override.  That being, of course, because the Democrat Party, Chuckie included, possesses a level of hatred for this country that runs so deep they could never choose sides against Barry and his Muslim brothers.  The very same Muslims who share with the Democrats that same intense hatred of America.  And by siding with Barry they are choosing to stand against this country.