Home » conservative politics » Booker’s Bloviations and Democratic Group Identity Politics

Booker’s Bloviations and Democratic Group Identity Politics


The advent of a new presidential administration sees the incoming President nominate individuals for cabinet secretaries and other executive positions.  As part of its Article 2 constitutional responsibilities, the U.S. Senate holds confirmation hearings to “advise and consent” and, in some cases, reject the President’s nominations.  This process has been going on a few days and will continue for a few weeks.

The confirmation hearings on Jeff Sessions nomination to be Attorney General are a revelatory example of how group identity politics from the Democrats have poisoned and continue poisoning our political debate.  Sessions is a superbly qualified individual serving as Alabama’s Senator for two decades and having extensive law experience.  He is a stalwart conservative and defender of the ideal of equal justice for all regardless of their race or gender.  Into this process steps New Jersey Senator Cory Booker.  Many of the Democratic luminaries see Booker with the dewy eyed sentimentality Democrats saw in Barack Obama in 2008.  At one time, Booker and Sessions appeared to enjoy a cordial relationship with Booker praising Sessions for his support for legislation granting an award to Civil Rights pioneer Rosa Parks.

However, the roots of group identity politics run deep in the political DNA of congressional Democrats of all races.  Booker made an exceptionally lame attempt to torpedo Sessions confirmation prospects by testifying against Sessions in yesterday’s Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing.  Booker, the failed former Mayor of crime-ridden Newark and an imaginary friend named T-Bone claimed that Sessions refusal to submit to the perpetual victim mentality of leftist politics (particularly on racial issues) made him unfit to be Attorney General.  Booker is so intent on maintaining his constituents dependence on government that he seeks to excuse criminal behavior as being worthy of adulation instead of condemnation.  He is uninterested in materially and morally improving the lives of his constituents so long as he can enjoy the material benefits of political power and leftist ideological posturing.

Booker was joined on the Judiciary Committee witness stand by two fellow partners in group identity political agitprop.  New Orleans Rep. Cedric Richmond was so full of himself that he expressed displeasure that he had to wait until the second day of the hearings to express his opposition to Sessions even though Senate Judiciary Committee rules provided for an extra day for hearing witnesses to express their views.  Instead, the insufferably arrogant Richmond spouted that his having to wait until the second day was the equivalent of putting him at the back of the bus.  Another leftist fixture testifying against Sessions was Georgia Rep. John Lewis.  Lewis was sadly beaten by white supremacist thugs during the Civil Rights era in the 1960s.  He is often portrayed as a “patron saint” of civil rights when, in reality, he is a race hustling blowhard who has done nothing to improve the lives of his constituents or the quality of national life.  Instead he has coasted on his image as the media created “conscience” of the civil rights movement for five decades.

The presence of leftist group identify politics also seeped into today’s Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on James Mattis’ nomination to be Secretary of Defense.  Normal Senators took advantage of the opportunity to ask Mattis real questions about U.S. military forces and strategic challenges facing the U.S.  Unfortunately, New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand was more concerned with preserving the social engineering policies of the Obama Administration which have weakened military readiness.  Social justice warrior Gillibrand asked Mattis whether the “gains” of GLBT military members would be protected under the Trump Administration.  Mattis gave her a polite answer, but he should have told her that the purpose of  the military is to kill people and destroy things which threaten the security of our country and its people.  The military is not intended as a tool for social experimentation or diversity promotion.

We can expect a doubling down on group identity politics by the Democrats as the Trump Administration commences.  Trump and his compatriots must resist this poisonous drivel and rhetoric with all of their energy if they are to implement the reforms this country urgently needs after the toxic debacle of the Obama Administration.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: