By DEXTER DUGGAN
Democrat Party fanatics — some of them babbling members of the Senate Judiciary Committee and some protesters screaming in the audience — quickly whipped up such chaos that two worried young ladies had to leave the hearing where they’d proudly come to see their father take another step to becoming an associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.
Federal Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s daughters, Margaret and Liza, had to exit the turbulent Capitol Hill surroundings on September 4.
The United States had just emerged from a week’s worth of brimming tributes by establishmentarians and left-wing Democrats to the civility and bipartisanship they said were exemplified by the recently deceased “maverick” Sen. John McCain (R., Ariz.).
However, civility and cooperation are only hollow words to this crowd — useful simply as a hammer and cudgel to pound through some agenda.
On August 31, Phoenix talk-radio host Seth Leibsohn (KKNT, 960 AM) accurately predicted that all the chatter praising McCain civility would vanish when the Kavanaugh hearings got under way a few days later. Maybe file this under “Know your enemies.”
Leibsohn recalled the vile attack that the late Sen. Edward Kennedy (D., Mass.) had unleashed against Ronald Reagan’s hapless High Court nominee Robert Bork in 1987.
Kennedy prioritized protecting abortion and scraped the gutter in a way that was to set the style for subsequent Dem strategy.
National commentator Mark Steyn on September 4 said the attack against Kavanaugh “is Bork Two for the Democrats.” Filling in for radio host Rush Limbaugh, Steyn went on later during the program to recall how news media had tried to avoid covering the horrifying homicide trial of busy abortionist Kermit Gosnell in 2013 because it exposed what they favored.
Scaring young Kavanaugh females away from a lofty congressional chamber was just another outrage down through the years, all in the service of promoting massive abortion.
To the abortion goose-steppers, the Kavanaugh hearings were about one thing only, preventing the possibility that the Supreme Court’s unconstitutional, invented “abortion right” of 1973 might someday end.
Democrat senators already had plotted how they would bollix his hearings.
The Washington Free Beacon conservative site reported that Senate Dems interrupted the first day of the Kavanaugh hearings 76 times. Sen. John Cornyn (R., Texas) said this was the first High Court confirmation hearing he’d seen that was conducted “basically according to mob rule.” Screaming demonstrators in the room had to be arrested and dragged away by officers.
Commentator Philip Wegmann posted at the conservative Washington Examiner site on September 4:
“Capitol Police shouldn’t have to wrestle with protesters every time a senator starts talking. They shouldn’t be asked to carry them out of the room by their hands and feet because this isn’t what democracy looks like. This looks like washed-out hippies screaming into the primal void because they are out of political power at the moment.”
Wegmann’s reference to the frenzy not being “what democracy looks like” was his reaction to the claim by pro-abortionist Sen. Dick Durbin (D., Ill.) that the day’s wild disruptions were democracy in action.
If some voters had been thinking they’d choose Democrats this November because they want to rebuke Donald Trump’s loud style, this early September Democrat hysteria and mob action should have been a small reminder of how threateningly that bunch behaves in power.
Christians and pro-lifers soon would be lashed by Dem bullwhips next year while a smirking dominant media glanced away. What California Dems tried to do to Golden State crisis-pregnancy centers would only be a taste of the persecution at hand if Dems ran Congress again.
Back on July 31, USA Today reported that senators already had been provided more than one million pages of documentation on Kavanaugh, far more than produced on any other Supreme Court nominee.
But Democrats still demanded to see more. Why was a mystery. All the Dems on the committee already had declared their firm opposition to him. Surely they weren’t hoping for a surprising new revelation that would convert them into being pro-lifers.
At some time in the future, people will look back at our present with a shiver and amazement at the continuing deranged lust for massive slaughter of defenseless preborn infants by social powerhouses who couldn’t stand to look at the evidence of what they fought for ceaselessly.
If someone were to unwrap a plastic sheet holding the bodies of aborted babies, or even taped up posters with graphic photos of them in the Senate hearing room, these fiery fighters for the slaughter might vomit. They’d certainly snap their eyes shut while screaming their eugenicist fury against those who want them to see the truth.
It’s not as if the sanguinary Aztecs hadn’t been willing to hold the daggers they were about to drive into their victims’ bodies, or French revolutionaries during their Reign of Terror had renounced the untiring guillotines as too bloody.
Three years ago, the abortion worshippers shouted their anger when Center for Medical Progress videos graphically demonstrated the slaughterhouses’ profitable traffic in baby body parts. Viewers saw parts of the infants who were ripped to pieces.
Rather than gulping that maybe their love of permissive abortion had been misplaced, the abortion lovers — including the sleazy propagandists at dominant media including The New York Times — yelled against the facts while reaffirming their determination that the massive carnage against the most innocent must never cease.
Chelsea And Roe
A lot of people have been sucked into this whirlpool, including Chelsea Clinton.
I’d been hopeful for her when she not only married but also had two babies. She in a sense had settled down instead of being the eternal unattached free spirit. And she bore not only one but two infants rather than citing some environmentalist nonsense about protecting the planet against, say, “the burdens of breeding.”
But there Chelsea was at an August 11 event in New York City to “Rise Up for Roe” — that is, to defend and promote the Supreme Court’s invention of permissive abortion throughout pregnancy as beneficial for women and the rest of society.
She plainly linked permissive abortion with being a positive factor for women entering the workforce in a productive way:
“It is not a disconnected fact — to address this t-shirt of 1973 — that American women entering the labor force from 1970 to 2009 added three-and-a-half trillion dollars to our economy. Right?”
Chelsea added: “The net, new entrance of women — that is not disconnected from the fact that Roe became the law of the land in January of 1973.
“So, I think, whatever it is that people say they care about, I think that you can connect to this issue,” she said. “Of course, I would hope that they would care about our equal rights and dignity to make our own choices — but, if that is not sufficiently persuasive, hopefully some of these other arguments that you’re hearing expressed so beautifully will be.”
Chelsea or some of her fans might not have liked the obvious conclusion that her comments would lead to — “beautifully” or not — that permissive abortion is good for the economy.
Perhaps she thought she was just being another good liberal Democrat by lauding Roe, as if this can be done in the abstract, even though it strikes at the heart and soul of motherhood. Just like the chaos at family man Brett Kavanaugh’s opening hearing was the dirty work that Dems feel compelled to do.
It’d be better if they shook themselves awake from this nightmare. But if they won’t, that “arc of the universe bending toward justice” will do it to and for them.
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress