Liberal Hypocrisy

Betsy Ross flag now decried by 2020 Dems, pundits was flown during Obama’s 2nd inauguration

While Democrats and media pundits pounce to decry the Betsy Ross flag as racially problematic — with one even likening the symbol to Nazi swastikas — the very same flag flew prominently during then-President Barack Obama’s second inauguration ceremony in 2013. The reminder that the flag was displayed during Obama’s inauguration came amid the controversy from Nike halting the release of shoes bearing the flag, which flew during the Revolutionary War. The company worried that the flag could “unintentionally offend” people, after controversial football player Colin Kaepernick expressed concern over the design, claiming it recalled the slavery era and has been appropriated by white nationalists. The controversy quickly worked its way into the national political bloodstream, with some Democratic presidential candidates siding with Nike. President Trump’s campaign fired back by noting the flag’s otherwise broad appeal. “Democrats running for president have officially lost it. Beto & Castro strongly imply that the Betsy Ross flag is a symbol of hatred. Do the rest of the Dems agree? Pictured here, of course, is the notorious flag prominently featured at President Obama’s 2nd inauguration,” tweeted Tim Murtaugh, director of communications for Trump’s 2020 re-election campaign. Donald Trump Jr., the president’s son, also mocked those suddenly criticizing the flag, tweeting that “weird that no one had a problem with The Betsy Ross Flag when it flew over Obama’s inauguration.” Liberal pundits and 2020 presidential candidates alike jumped on the controversy, with former HUD Secretary Julián Castro saying he was “glad to see” Nike removed the shoes over the “painful” symbol that he compared to the Confederate flag. “There are a lot of things in our history that are still very painful,” Castro told CBS News. As an example, he cited “the Confederate flag that still flies in some places and is used as a symbol.” Former Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke, meanwhile, also gave thumbs up for Nike’s decision, noting that “white nationalist groups” have “appropriated” the Betsy Ross flag, without providing evidence.

One thing we love to do here at The Daily Buzz is to show the brazen hypocrisy of the left.  This story is an example of that.  Colin K., and all of these Dems never had any problem with the so-called “Betsy Ross” American flag when it hung behind then-President Obama at his 2nd inaugural in two prominent positions.  in fact, it’s never been an issue at all!  But, when Trump became President, suddenly it became a symbol of slavery and white supremacy; both of which are factually, historically inaccurate and  simply ridiculous.  Then again, the left isn’t interested in facts or history.  They’re just interested in dividing America, and history revisionism to serve their liberal, anti-America agenda.

Sen. Cory Booker’s 1992 column detailing ‘groping’ of high school friend resurfaces

A 1992 column by now-Sen. Cory Booker detailing his “groping” of a high school friend has resurfaced as he pushes to delay Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings over a sexual assault allegation. In the 1992 column for The Stanford Daily, then-Stanford University grad student Mr. Booker wrote about the New Year’s Eve incident in 1984 that he will “never forget.” In the column, titled, “So much for stealing second,” Mr. Booker said he was 15 when he fondled an intoxicated female friend. “With the ‘Top Gun’ slogan ringing in my head, I slowly reached for her breast,” he wrote. “After having my hand pushed away once, I reached my ‘mark.’ Our groping ended soon and while no ‘relationship’ ensued, a friendship did. You see, the next week in school she told me that she was drunk that night and didn’t really know what she was doing.” Mr. Booker said he was conditioned to believe that sex was “a game,” and that hooking up was best achieved through “luck, guile, strategy or coercion,” and lots of alcohol. He wrote about how his attitude toward sex dramatically changed after just a couple years at Stanford, and how his work as a peer counselor listening to the “raw truth from men and women discussing rape” was a real “wake-up call” for the future senator. “I now see the crowds, no, not the spectators, but the thousands, the millions who are rarely seen or heard,” he said of sexual assault victims. Mr. Booker, who said this week that it would be “irresponsible” for him to not consider a 2020 presidential run, has been recently ridiculed by conservatives after he appeared to dub himself “Spartacus” by revealing confidential records during the Judge Kavanaugh hearing. The senator now wants the FBI to investigate a claim by a woman who accused Judge Kavanaugh of trying to rape her more than 35 years ago before the hearings continue.

Wow..  Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) is a breathtaking hypocrite!  This is a story you will NOT see on MSNBC or CNN.  The nerve of this self-righteous, sanctimonious blow-hard is unreal!

 

Timpf: How Ocasio-Cortez Makes the Case against Socialism

On Wednesday, it was reported that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign had spent $4,000 on Uber rides — despite the fact that the self-described Democratic socialist herself had previously decried the company on Twitter: “NYC’s fourth driver suicide. Yellow cab drivers are in financial ruin due to the unregulated expansion of Uber. What was a living wage job now pays under minimum.” This is, of course, nothing short of hypocrisy. If you really thought a company was so bad, you’d probably make sure your campaign didn’t use it. If you really thought something was a problem, you probably wouldn’t give that problem $4,000. What’s more, if you were really concerned about the plight of NYC taxi drivers, you might, you know, give them some business, instead of giving your business to the very company you’d criticized for ruining them. What we have with this revelation is just another example of how Ocasio-Cortez’s time in the spotlight has made an argument against socialism, instead of for it. Her words may say that the heavily regulated taxi companies are better, but her actions say that she prefers Uber — a service that is only possible because of the thing she stands most opposed to: capitalism. Now, this is not the first time that something like this has happened. As Investor’s Business Daily notes, Ocasio-Cortez seemed to make an argument against herself again last week when she expressed her sadness over the closing of a restaurant where she used to work. In her post about the good times that she’d had there, she failed to mention that the reason it was closing was because it could not comply with New York City’s soon-to-be-implemented $15 per hour minimum wage. Perhaps unknowingly, she had expressed regret over something that had been caused by the very sort of policy she supports. Then there is, of course, the repeated and complete breakdown of her positions whenever they are evaluated through the lens of reality and facts. On August 7, she stated flatly that the “upper-middle class does not exist anymore in America” — undoubtedly an argument for a socialist-style redistribution of wealth — when the reality is that the upper-middle class has actually grown under our capitalist system in the last few decades. The very next day, she claimed that “Medicare for all is actually much more, is actually much cheaper than the current system that we pay right now,” when the reality is that her plan would actually “raise government expenditures by $32.6 trillion over 10 years,” according to a fact check of her comments by the Washington Post. What’s more, her recent interview with Trevor Noah proved that many of her positions come from a foundation of a complete misunderstanding of the facts. As my colleague Charles Cooke notes, that interview “revealed that she does not know the difference between a one-year and a ten-year budget; confused the recent increase in defense spending with the entire annual cost of the military; implied that the population of the United States was around 800 million strong; and, having been asked to defend her coveted $15 minimum wage, launched into a rambling and inscrutable diatribe about ‘private equity’ firms that would have been a touch too harsh as a parody on South Park.” Many people might be tempted to see the rise of Ocasio-Cortez, and particularly her popularity in the media, to be some sort of sign that her version of socialism might actually be viable in this country. Anyone who is actually paying attention, however, would see that the opposite is true. At almost every turn, the spotlight on Ocasio-Cortez’s socialist ideals has shown how completely infeasible they are, and how often they are rooted in false information and misunderstanding. No one should know this better than Ocasio-Cortez herself. After all, if you look at her actions instead of her words, it seems that even she herself understands the benefits of capitalism — and her campaign has the Uber bill to prove it.

Alexandria is such a spectacular hypocrite…  But, hey..  She makes for fun tv because she’s a complete idiot.  And, she’s too scared to debate people like Ben Shapiro and others who would mop the floor with her.  Thanks to millennial reporter Katherine “Kat” Timpf for sharing this piece with us.

Anti-Gun CA Lt Gov, Newsom, Spends Taxpayer Millions on Armed Guards

California Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom (D) wants to lead a fight against gun ownership–yet has spent millions of taxpayer dollars to surround himself with armed security. Breibart News previously reported Newsom’s belief that the Paris attacks would have been worse if citizens had been armed for self-defense. He told HBO’s Bill Maher that the whole idea of a good guy with a gun stopping a bad guy is “mythology.” Newsom’s exact words on Maher’s show, Real Time, were: “I just simply, this sort of mythology, the guy with the gun that’s going to come save the day, I mean, so right out of the movies, sort of this gun-slinging fantasy. The reality is, it’s most likely to create more harm, more damage, more lost lives in those circumstances.” Rewind a few years to Newsom’s tenure as Mayor of San Francisco. He was mayor from 2004 to 2011, and toward the end of that time–on July 7, 2009–reports emerged that Newsom had spent “millions” surrounding himself with armed security. Moreover, those “millions” came out of city funds–otherwise know as taxpayer monies–which paid for the police detail from which protective services were rendered. NBC Bay Area reported Newsom’s security spending as follows: How much does it cost to protect the mayor of a major metropolitan city? In Los Angeles, about $450,000 a year. In Houston, about $339,00 a year. In San Francisco, anywhere between $1 and $72 million. [On July 7, 2009] SF Appeal revealed…the budget for Newsom’s personal police bodyguards comes out of the San Francisco Police Department’s Investigations Detail, which boasts a $72.9 million budget. So, depending on how you look at it, Newsom’s protective detail cost at least seven figures–money few average citizens would have for personal self-defense. Then Newsom was elected to the position of Lt. Governor in 2010, and assumed that office in 2011. And the very next year, in July 2012, the Los Angles Times reported that the cost for providing security for Lt Governor Newsom was up nearly $30,000 above what it had been for his predecessor. According to the Times: The state spent $93,379 through May in the just-completed fiscal year on CHP protection for Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, who took office at the start of 2011. The amount is up from the $65,954 spent in the previous fiscal year, the first half protecting Lt. Gov. Abel Maldonado, and the second half protecting Newsom. The Times inquired whether the elevated price for armed security was the result of Newsom taking “a CHP officer…to the taping of his weekly hour-long talk show, ‘The Gavin Newsome Show,’” but Newsom’s spokesman said they do not discuss details related to security. Here is the bottom line: Newsom does not think allowing average Americans to be armed for self-defense does any good. In fact, he thinks “it’s most likely to create more harm, more damage, more lost lives in those circumstances.” But he had no problem spending millions to surround himself with armed security as mayor and to increase expenditures for armed security by $30,000 once he became Lt. Governor. Maybe it is time for Newsom to live up the standards he wants to force onto average Americans and forgo the confidence derived by having guns around for self-defense. Talk is cheap–perhaps Newsom can lead by example, disarming his security detail and going through a few days thinking about how citizens feel when state and local governments disarm them via myriad gun control scenarios.

Gavin is your typical, self-righteous, sanctimonious, anti-gun, extreme, limousine liberal who is spectacularly hypocritical.  He doesn’t want you or me to be able to protect ourselves with our Second Amendment rights.  BUT, he’ll spend MILLIONS of our hard-earned taxes for HIS personal protection and his ARMED guards.  Then, he’ll go on some late night show and say he’s not carrying any guns.  What a brazen hypocrite.  It truly is breathtaking.  But hey folks..  This is what these liberal elitists are like.  They have NO shame.  What a tool..