Keith Ellison is running for the open DNC Chair

It makes sense. They both don't like Jews.

 

Louis Farrakhan confirmed DNC Deputy Chair Keith Ellison was in the Nation of Islam
There is a video but I couldnt get it to embed

 

Of course in the modern Democratic Party, that's a plus.

 

From his Sunday sermon/keynote speech. Not too much media coverage --

“Jews were responsible for all of this filth and degenerate behavior that Hollywood is putting out, turning men into women and women into men.”

“White folks are going down. And Satan is going down. And Farrakhan, by God’s grace, has pulled a cover off of that Satanic Jew, and I’m here to say your time is up, your world is through...”​

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/l...my-white-folks-are-going-down/article/2650297

 

And though I rarely defend Jake Tapper, he is correct. The difference between the alt-Right and the Nation of Islam (and Keith Ellison) is that the NOI and those who hold similar views are given legitimacy by the media and by the Left. Accordingly, they have a pretty large following that politicians actively and publicly court. The alt-Right is treated as illegitimate monsters by the media and have few followers, and few politicians actively embrace them.

 

Maybe you could suggest integration and busing to assuage your white guilt.

 

Old Louis maybe right. The MSM, which largely shapes public opinion, doesn't give a flip about the possible white genocide that is looming in South Africa or if colleges don't protect the rights of white students equally or if black racists, like Ellison gain high public office. They don't care if companies like YouTube are only hiring minority's. They only care if it's white on black racism, then that's all you hear about for weeks.​

 

There seem to be plenty in the US who would love to do the same here right now if they thought they could get away with it
And they get no pushback from media or pols

 

Ever wonder why they havent tried it yet?

Spoiler

It's happening all over, from South Africa to Indo --
"Indonesian Christians flogged outside of mosque for violating sharia law..."
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2018/0...-outside-mosque-for-violating-sharia-law.html

 

To further illustrate bias against whites for the non-believers.

http://dailycaller.com/2018/03/05/schumer-white-men/

 

Diversity of background and thought on the judiciary is NOT in fact a desirable goal, particularly if the diversity involves how or whether you should follow the law.

 

The whole diversity canard was cooked up by the left to put more people in power who they believe, based on the color of their skin or their sexual orientation or what-have-you, will vote for Democrats.

 

And it's a valid point that having diversity in a group that's writing and debating legislation makes for (usually) better legislation. (Or it grinds legislation to a halt, which is not necessarily a bad thing.) But that's not what the judiciary is for, and having a group of people in the judiciary that have wide ranges of opinion on that matter leads to inconsistency, injustice, and an inability to truly understand how a law impacts the citizenry.

 

Justice Sotomayor's "wise Latina" comment was illustrative of everything that's wrong with the Left's ideal of jurisprudence, and it should have been disqualifying. It's not about what the written law says. It's about the personal views and experiences (often in accordance with what are supposed to be arbitrary characteristics like race, ethnicity, gender, etc.) of the judge. To them, that should be paramount, and if you believe in that, then you don't believe in the rule of law. And yes, it really is that simple.

That doesn't mean that laws that have ambiguous language aren't subject to interpretation. They are. However, when the written law loses its supremacy to other priorities, then you are no longer governed by the written law but by the whims of the judges, and when we're talking about life tenured federal judges, that means you are governed by people who do not account to you.

 

I still hope Ellison wins the Dem nom

 

By "admitted" he means that Mulvaney said "Yeah, we got that done last week. Cool, right???"

 

Surely that's a joke, right? Is he really making an issue of frosted glass?

 

As much as people are absolutely destroying him on Twitter for it (and unbelievably, a few in the feed actually agreed with it), I don't see him clarifying or backing off it, so I assume he's serious.

God help this country.

 

That's incredibly petty. Also, I've been in the offices of a few US Senators and members of Congress. None had office suites in which the member's office was at all visible from the lobby area, and none had glass walls. They had windows, of course, but they faced the outside.

 

There is plenty to criticize Mulvaney for but this is not one of them. This could be exhibit A in why Ellison was not selected as DNC Chair.

 

Oooo....ooo...ooo...using Twitter to show hypocritical statements. I love this game. I see your Keith Ellison and raise you Trump criticizes Trump. There is an alternate twitter criticism from Trump for nearly every action he's taken in office. It's awesome!

 

CNN: a comparison

Rob Porter -- CNN dedicated over 26 hours to the domestic abuse allegations against Porter in the first two days of that story breaking

Keith Ellison (Deputy Chair of DNC) -- CNN allowed less than 5 minutes of discussion on the domestic abuse allegations against Ellison in the first two days of that story breaking