Democrats Leaders: Just Different Degrees of Socialists

Last week a number Democrats took center stage, and a number exited the stage as they exited the race to become the Democrats’ nominee for POTUS. As the leaders of the “Democratic” Party consolidate their power, Americans look on in awe at what is now a two-man race within the Party to officially nominate them as their choice for POTUS. It is wise to put this into serious perspective regarding the 2020 election. And despite all the illusions of elusive rhetoric and the stale Party propaganda, the choice the Democrat Party is pushing upon the citizens for their “ideal candidate” for president is between two, old white men.

One of the old white men seems senile and the other one could never grow beyond the fantasies of a Socialist utopia

One of the old white men seems senile and the other one could never grow beyond the fantasies of a Socialist utopia. In reality, the Democrats are currently devolving, and Americans who are paying attention, are witnessing a “Regressive Party”-- not a “Progressive” Party, if there were ever such a reality. An additional perspective and one that is often lost within the murk and mire of the D.C. political swamp are the outrageous antics of other Democrat leaders. Last week, the Democrat’s Senate Minority Leader, Senator Schumer stood on the front steps of the Supreme Court and in a protest favoring pro-choice, pro-abortion he shouted out threats against the two Supreme Court Justices that President Trump had appointed: "I want to tell you, Gorsuch; I want to tell you, Kavanaugh: You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price… You won't know what hit, if you go forward with these awful decisions." This would be considered intent if anything ever happened to either of these two judges. If Schumer had made such threats before Justice Scalia died quite suddenly, the speculation that it was not an accident would have turned into an investigation, and Schumer would have been one of the suspects in a murder case. Of course, neither Joe Biden, nor Bernie Sanders, condemned such an overt act as dangerous. How many of the former Democrat candidates for POTUS condemned such an overt act against members of another branch of the federal government? Where were the remarks of disgust from former Presidents Obama, Clinton, or Carter? Where were the shocking news reports from the mainstream media that condemned Schumer’s obvious disrespect, as well as outright threats to sitting justices? At least the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts, called Schumer out on such threats only hours afterward. The Chief Justice stated Schumer's words were: "not only inappropriate; they are dangerous." That is because they were dangerous. Yet, Democrat leaders were primarily silent.

---

Democrat “stunts” were performed based upon accusations, lies, and raw emotional messaging and street theater

Other senators are now calling for Schumer's censure, which actually seems only appropriate since his words can be considered verbal assault. If anyone else made such threats in public, they may have been detained by the authorities pending an interrogation. But all of this makes a strong case against the majority of the Democrat leadership. Certainly, it is noteworthy that either Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders did not demonstrate strong leadership over their party to condemn such antics. In reality, it does not matter to Sanders because he is a Communist and the law is secondary to Party commands in Communist countries. And, Joe Biden cannot even keep track of what he is saying, let alone what some other Democrat leader is saying these days. Another “stunt” was performed by Nancy Pelosi capturing the attention of the American people by ripping up President Trump’s SOTU speech with millions of people watching the “sour grapes” type of childish antics. Of course, once the act was performed, there was the attempt to smooth over the overly obvious disrespect. It is almost as if the Democrat leaders are attempting to push the level of disrespect and disdain of their political opponents to the very edge of civility to test just how much they can get away with in our “civil society.” Truly, Pelosi and Chuck Schumer are more dangerous than they appear. It was not long ago that Chuck Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, and other core leaders drew battle lines at the confirmation hearings of Judge Kavanaugh. In that time, other Democrat “stunts” were performed based upon accusations, lies, and raw emotional messaging and street theater. Such strategy and implementation represented a serious appeal to the Democrat base, which seems to be devolving daily into a mob-like movement resembling the Jacobins during the time of the French Revolution.

---

Support Canada Free Press

---

The Jacobins and the Society of the Friends of the Constitution

The Jacobins were a political party in the late 1700s that also cleverly portrayed the illusion that they supported the newly created French Constitutional Monarchy by shamelessly utilizing the name of the “Society of the Friends of the Constitution.” History shows that their genuine intent was to destroy the newly created French Constitution under the guise or illusion of helping to support the Constitution. And ultimately, anyone who opposed the revolution would be labeled an enemy of the revolution. The Jacobins would make *sure that such people would be accosted or harassed in public, accused before the notorious “Committee for Public Safety” for one reason or another, and ultimately accused as "counter-revolutionaries" (like the "deplorables" in America). The kangaroo courts of the “Committee for Public Safety” tried those accused of such “crimes,” and when found guilty, such “counter-revolutionaries” were publicly guillotined. This seems a bit of a stretch in a Constitutional Republic, and there may seem to be little common territory between the Jacobins and the current Democrat leadership. Nevertheless, the Socialist historians for centuries idolized the French Revolution and viewed it as a precursor to the Russian Revolution that transformed Russia into the Soviet Union. How long did that take? From the French Revolution to Vladimir Lenin’s successful October Revolution in 1917 it was 128 years. Once the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was established there was a serious consolidation of power and a central school to train “favorite son” revolutionaries like Ho Chi Minh who was first a socialist in Lenin’s Communist International in France, and then became a founding member of the French Communist Party.

---

Lenin’s Communist International, or the Comintern

Lenin’s Communist International, or the “Comintern,” also trained more notable “favorite son” revolutionaries like Mao Zedong of China, Kim Il Sung of North Korea, and Fidel Castro of Cuba, who in turn trained other home-grown revolutionaries in their regions. So, what does this all have to do with the Democrats? Ever wonder who the “favorite son” revolutionaries are in the United States? If Americans do not wake up and see reality for what it is, the future of this nation may be in the hands of leaders that Comrade Sanders is training today. He would not say anything against what Chuck Schumer said because he is not truly a friend of the American Constitution. And, the old guard leaders like Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Dianne Feinstein, Hillary Clinton, and Joe Biden, will eventually die out. As Sanders recently stated, “Joe Biden is a friend of mine.” But, Americans are witnessing the transition from the old leadership who denied they were Socialists to the new leadership who are unafraid of coming out of the closet. It seems, that in order to remain relevant to the “revolution,” the old leaders need to display their “stunts” to the younger generation of young Progressive-Socialist-Communists. But, the leaders that Bernie Sanders is training, and inspiring, have less respect for the Constitution than Democrats of the old guard leaders like Schumer and Pelosi. The “Democratic” Party, since the days of Community-Organizer-in-Chief Barack Obama, is morphing into Jacobins, into Bolsheviks. The clear-minded, clear-thinking individuals who understand history can see the proverbial “writing on the wall.” The recent embrace of Socialism and the rise of Socialism in the United States is not a joke despite how much fun one pokes at Bernie Sanders.

---

---

Differences between the old Socialists and the new Socialists are only a matter of intensity and style

Chuck Schumer is in the sun these days, and he is attempting to demonstrate just how truly “dangerous” he is, but like Joe Biden, he one day will be struggling to articulate his words clearly, or fumbling to present more than one coherent thought after another. Today, the Democrat leaders strut around and say whatever they feel like saying without impunity. They challenge good people to defy their caustic, toxic words or their outrageous public “stunts.” But, despite appearances, the differences between the old Socialists and the new Socialists are only a matter of intensity and style. They are not “friends of the Constitution.” They disrespect the position of the POTUS, of the SCOTUS, and the concept of three separate branches of the federal government. Each version of the current Democrat leadership wants to destroy the Republic as it stands. If the average citizen used to wonder why it always seemed that the choice in an election was a choice between two evils, this year the Democrats have outdone themselves -- they offer the American public two versions of evil, but both political puppets. The main difference between a Schumer and a Sanders is that Sanders appears more like a harmless, kindly old man, while Schumer seems like a ranting radical - which he is. The only difference between a Biden and a Sanders is that Biden will ride wherever the bus takes him, and he will be okay when the Party lets him off at the last stop. Sanders is trying to take over the vehicle, and he would throw his old friend Joe Biden under the bus to become POTUS as his Party is even more ruthless than the Democrat Party.