Cory Booker

20
Aug
2019
Democrats Were Asked To Condemn Antifa. Here’s What They Said

Democrats Were Asked To Condemn Antifa. Here’s What They Said

Journalist Andy Ngo has extensively documented left-wing violence. He’s also experienced it: Ngo was beaten by Antifa members in June, causing a brain hemorrhage. He was also doused with milkshakes that Portland police say contained quick drying cement. The incident wasn’t unique.

A Portland man was punched in the back of the head for holding an American flag; he had to be hospitalized for a concussion. Two Marines were jumped in Philadelphia by a dozen Antifa members. In Berkeley, an Antifa supporting college professor bashed a man over the head with a bike lock. And it doesn’t stop there.

On July 13, Antifa member Willem Van Spronsen attacked an ICE center in Tacoma. Armed with a rifle and what law enforcement called “incendiary devices,” he managed to set a car on fire before being fatally shot. Van Spronsen prepared a manifesto in which he referred to detention facilities as “concentration camps.”

Given how these are a just a few examples of Antifa brutality, you might think condemning the group would be an easy decision. If so, then that’s probably because you aren’t a Democrat who’s running for president.

Turning Point USA has released footage of twelve presidential contenders being asked if they would condemn Antifa. The answers weren’t encouraging

Only two condemned the organization specifically. Gov. Jay Inslee initially seemed confused about what Antifa is, but he did ultimately denounce it by name. So did Rep. Tulsi Gabbard. That was as good as it got.

Former Vice President Joe Biden said, "I denounce all hate groups." Andrew Yang and Rep. John Delaney offered similar statements.

In contrast, Mayor Bill de Blasio, Sen. Bernie Sanders, and Sen. Cory Booker ignored the question, while Rep. Julian Castro laughed at it. Gov. Steve Bullock replied with criticism of President Trump. Marianne Williamson said she wouldn't condemn anyone. Sen. Kristen Gillibrand simply plead ignorance, saying, "I don't know what Antifa is." Unfortunately, none of this is surprising.

Following the Tacoma ICE center attack, "Squad" members AOC, Ilhan Omar, and Ayanna Pressley were asked if they would condemn it. Omar and Pressley refused, while AOC pledged to release a statement at a later time.

Meanwhile, CNN's Chris Cuomo has compared Antifa members to WWII vets:

Thankfully, most people don't see the resemblance; neither does our president. This week, he threatened to name Antifa as "an organization of terror." While it's not clear what practical effect such designation would have, it is a sign that he takes the problem seriously.

Someone has to.

What do you think? Leave a comment below.

Posted by Adam Peters in Antifa, Campaign 2020, 0 comments
25
Jun
2019
Cory Booker Attacks Conservatives But Wouldn’t Rule Out Meeting Farrakhan

Cory Booker Attacks Conservatives But Wouldn’t Rule Out Meeting Farrakhan

When it comes to bigotry, Sen. Cory Booker has strong feelings. He claims to have cried “tears of rage” upon hearing that President Trump allegedly made negative comments about certain countries. During Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s confirmation hearings, Booker grilled the nominee over his Christian beliefs and demanded to know what he thought about gays and Muslims. Obviously the New Jersey Democrat simply won’t stand for racism or intolerance.

Unless it’s from Louis Farrakhan.

At a summer event, Booker indicated that he’s “very familiar” with Farrakhan and wouldn’t rule out meeting with him, stating, “I’ve heard Minister Farrakhan’s speeches for a lot of my life.” However, Booker didn’t specify which speeches he listened to. Was it the speech in which Farrakhan castigated whites for being “devils” who “oppose the teachings of God?” Or the sermons that damned Jews as “wicked,” “Satanic,” and “my enemy?” How about the one that compared them to “termites? Perhaps it was when he praised Hitler as “a very great man.”

RELATED NEWS: Biden Says China “Is Not Competition For Us.” The Facts Say Otherwise

If he did meet with Farrakhan, Booker would hardly be the first Democrat to do so. Barack Obama posed for a picture with Farrakhan and Maxine Waters has physically embraced him.

But the connections don't stop there: he told Ilhan Omar not to apologize for anti-Semitic comments while fellow representative Rashida Tlaib once wrote for a publication owned by the Nation of Islam. She also subscribed to an Instagram account that compared Jews to rats. 

RELATED NEWS: Nobody Needs An AR-15? These Folks Did

Of course, Farrakhan isn't the only hate-figure to have a prominent role in Democratic politics; Al Sharpton is another. In 1995, Sharpton organized protests against the Jewish-owned Freddy’s Fashion Mart, pledging to “make that cracker suffer” and condemning the proprietors as “white interlopers.” The protests stopped only stopped when one of Sharpton's followers killed seven people and burned the store down. Still, that hasn't stopped Democrats from seeking his approval. Here's Beto O’Rourke speaking next to him:

One of the questions Booker asked of Mike Pompeo was whether he believed being gay is a "perversion." He doesn't need to ask how Louis Farrakhan feels about homosexuality--the Nation of Islam leader has made his thoughts clear. What isn't clear?

Why anyone should take Cory Booker seriously.

What do you think? Leave a comment below.

Posted by Adam Peters in Campaign 2020, Racism, 0 comments
17
May
2019
Gun Control Doesn’t Save Lives. Here’s What Does

Gun Control Doesn’t Save Lives. Here’s What Does

Have an AR-15? Cory Booker wants it. Standard capacity magazines? He wants those too. And there’s something else he’ll take: your name and address.

Sen. Booker is running for president, and he’s making your guns a key issue. Specifically, he’s promising to ban “assault weapons” and “high capacity magazines,” restrict the number of guns an individual can purchase, and force every gun owner to obtain a license. Booker laid out his plans earlier this year, and he clearly has a lot of emotion behind them. What he doesn’t have are facts.

Booker says guns are a “very personal” issue for him “because I’m a black man, and black males are 6 percent of the nation’s population. But they make up the majority of homicide victims in this country.” Now, it’s certainly true that homicide takes a massive toll on the African American community, but it’s not due to a surplus of guns: the percentage of blacks who own a firearm is around one third lower than it is among whites. What’s more, restrictive laws haven’t helped the problem.

RELATED NEWS: Texans Who Carry Have A Lower Murder Rate Than Brits

Booker’s home state of New Jersey has has them, including a so-called assault weapon ban, a limitation on magazine size, and an onerous licensing system that makes it difficult to acquire guns legally. Still, they didn’t prevent one of Booker’s friends from getting murdered with a semi-automatic rifle. They also didn’t prevent Camden and Newark from becoming two of the most dangerous cities in America (Booker was mayor of Newark for over a decade). So what do those rules prevent?

Victims from defending themselves.

Carol Browne discovered that. Browne got a restraining order and applied for a handgun permit after being stalked by an abusive boyfriend. While applications are supposed to approved or denied within thirty days, that rarely happens; Brown had been waiting for a month and a half when she was stabbed to death.


RELATED NEWS: Have a CCW Permit? Bob Menendez Thinks You Belong in Jail.

Browne was wise to seek out a gun. After all, the efficacy of a firearm depends of its user’s skill—not her size or strength. Having one was probably the only way that she could have defended herself against a large man armed with a knife. It’s how a single mother in Oklahoma stopped a knife wielding attacker:

But thanks to New Jersey’s bureaucratic licensing system, Carol Browne wasn’t able to do the same. What’s more, Booker’s proposed ban on semi-automatic rifles and standard capacity magazines wouldn’t have much impact on the murder rate: of the over fifteen thousand murders committed in 2017, the FBI reports that only four hundred and three involved rifles of any kind. However, a ban would make it harder for people to defend themselves from multiple armed attackers:

RELATED NEWS: Nobody Needs An AR-15? These Folks Did

So if going after law abiding people doesn’t reduce crime, what does? Simple: going after criminals.

A big chunk of murders are committed by people with prior felony convictions. The good news? Those felons are already prohibited from purchasing or possessing firearms, and locking them up produces results. That was demonstrated in the late 1990s through Project Exile–-a program in Richmond that took armed felons off the street with long federal sentences, causing the city’s murder rate to plummet. It was expanded nationwide under President Bush as Project Safe Neighborhoods, and while the Obama administration wasn’t enthusiastic about it, the current one is.

Armed felons aren’t hard to find: many of them get turned away from gun stores after failing a background check. Historically, only a tiny fraction were ever prosecuted, but the Trump DOJ is changing that.

Sen. Booker says he’s “tired of going to funerals where parents are burying their children.” If that’s the case, then there are ways he can help stop it from happening. Enforcing laws is one, and making it easier for people to defend themselves is another. Because going after criminals saves lives; disarming their victims doesn’t.

What do you think? Leave a comment below.

Posted by Adam Peters in Guns, 0 comments