Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand(D-NY) has decided which views are acceptable and which ones aren’t. Good to know.
Gillibrand has decided that religious “litmus tests” for judges are fine and that advocating for the rights of the unborn is similar to arguing for Jim Crow laws.
At least that’s what she’s saying right now. Give her a minute and a glance at the polls and she might change her mind.
The virtue signaling of Democratic Presidential hopeful Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand knows no bounds.
From the moment of her awkward 2020 announcement on Colbert’s show to this very moment that you are reading this, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand’s campaign has been The Perfect Sh!tstorm of Pandering.
New York’s “mini-Hillary” is constantly pandering to every voter demographic except one — pro-life, religious conservatives. Fair enough, no conservative of any stripe would vote for Gillibrand with her (current) ridiculously leftist policies.
But, recall, she used to be a moderate on both guns and immigration. According to CNN, in 2006, when she ran for her seat in the House, she attacked her Republican opponent from the right by touting her A-rating with the NRA and said that securing the border was a “national security priority.” (Of course, this could have been just more pandering in the 2-1 Republican district in upstate New York.)
She’s also implied that her sons don’t have a place in the future because they’re not female or intersectional. #Feminism
What a great mom, amirite?
Our future is:
Powered by our belief in one another.
And we’re just getting started.
— Kirsten Gillibrand (@SenGillibrand) December 5, 2018
It’s Pride month (which comes just after Envy month and right before Sloth month) so she had to do her little cringe-y Pride tweet:
Kirsten Gillibrand relaxes after working a gay bar in Iowa pic.twitter.com/JYiU3c0Oc9
— 2020 behind the scenes (@Behind2020) June 8, 2019
She posted this today to show that she’s still a feminist:
Here's an idea: If you win 13-0—the most goals for a single game in World Cup history—you should be paid at least equally to the men's team.
— Kirsten Gillibrand (@SenGillibrand) June 11, 2019
And this pandering video:
✅ LGBTQ rights
✅ Climate change
✅ Game of Thrones
✅ Women's rights
✅ And one curse word. https://t.co/AuburxVUuq
— Kirsten Gillibrand (@SenGillibrand) June 12, 2019
She calls herself a “unifier” in the above video. I guess it’s “unifying” to disregard the views of the vast majority of Americans in favor of the fringe leftists when you’re running for President.
But this… this is extreme even for her. She’s saying that there is no acceptable view outside of support for abortion on demand. This isn’t even in the era of “safe, legal, and rare,” this is the era “government-funded, on demand, and without apology.” If you disagree that killing babies for convenience is wrong, then your views are immoral and akin to bigotry because you want to deny people their “fundamental right” to abortion.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government got itself in hot water over forcing pro-abortion views in Canada. They had added a pro-abortion attestation box onto forms that organizations would have to check in order to qualify for Summer Job funding. Many of the organizations were faith-based charities and they were vocal about their opposition to the litmus test for government grants. The government reluctantly removed the attestation box while continuing to denounce anyone that is “anti-choice.” This is Canada where abortion remains unregulated like it is in China and North Korea because it is considered political suicide to go anywhere near a discussion on the personhood of the unborn.
Because abortion is so hotly debated in the United States, with most people’s views falling somewhere in the middle — that it should be restricted at some point — Democrats who favor the barbaric practice are careful to not alienate large segments of the electorate by demonizing the opposition to abortion completely. Democratic candidates generally just complain that the pro-life position is “extreme” and assert that abortion is “healthcare.” Most just say that it’s “between a woman and her doctor” and refuse to say anything other than the Roe v Wade decision has left the matter settled.
But Gillibrand decides to jump the shark and say that pro-life views are unacceptable.
When queried by the Des Moines Register about abortion and judicial appointments, Gillibrand made the stunning remarks.
GILLIBRAND: I think it’s wrong to deny women basic reproductive freedom and basic human rights.
INTERVIEWER: You’ve said you’re worried about judicial independence, but imposing a litmus test on your nominees has long been seen as an encroachment on judicial independence.
GILLIBRAND: I think there’s some issues that have such moral clarity that we have as a society decided that the other side is not acceptable. Imagine saying that it’s okay to appoint a judge who’s racist or anti-Semitic or homophobic. Asking someone to appoint someone who takes away basic human rights of any group of people in America — I don’t think those are political issues anymore. And we believe in this country in the separation of church and state, and I respect the rights of every American to hold their religious beliefs true to themselves, but our country and our Constitution has always demanded that we have a separation of church and state. And all these efforts by President Trump and all these other ultra-radical conservative judges and justices to impose their faith on Americans is contrary to our Constitution and that’s what this is. And so I believe that for all of these issues, they are not issues that there is a fair “other side.” There is no moral equivalency when you come to racism, and I do not believe there is a moral equivalency when it comes to changing laws that deny women reproductive freedom.
There is only one correct answer to that clip:
Note that Gillibrand talks about “taking away rights” as a bad thing and cites the Constitution as a document to which we are to look to for our rights. Does that include the Second Amendment which she now opposes? Also, she says that the Constitution “demanded that we have a separation of church and state” — really? That’s weird. I can’t seem to find that anywhere in there.
Let’s not forget that Sen. Gillibrand has played fast and loose with rights in the past. The First Amendment is great when supporting the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement to protest Israel… BUT… it’s not ok when Citizens United wants to advertise their anti-Hillary film. Gillibrand, along with other Democrats, supported a constitutional amendment proposed in 2014 seeking to regulate campaign contributions and spending.
Gillibrand has no hope to win the nomination she’s currently at 1 percent in the primary race with no hope of recovering unless all 23 other candidates suddenly drop dead. (Just to be clear, I’m not advocating that any harm befall the Democratic candidates. It’s 2019, so I have to be careful.)
Maybe she’s just looking for a book deal. My guess is that she’s still in this thing to become the running mate. Unfortunately, she’s just not intersectional enough. She should really throw her support behind Sen. Kamala Harris.
After all, she did say that’s where the future is, right?
Get Doug Giles’ new book:
Rules For Radical Christians is not a survival devotional designed to help the young Christian adult limp through life. Rather, it is a road-tested, dominion blueprint that will equip the young adult with leadership skills and sufficient motivation to rise to a place of influence in an overtly non-Christian culture. Rules For Radical Christians gives the reader the keys to become strategically equipped to move into an anti-theistic environment and effectively influence it for the glory of God.
By the way, since Facebook has unpublished ClashDaily’s page, your best bet to keep in the loop is to Subscribe to our ClashDaily Newsletter right here:
We’ve moved to a new social media platform, MeWe. It’s like Facebook without the data breaches and censorship.
Sign up and you can still get all the ClashDaily goodness by joining our MeWe group.
Do you love what we’re doing at Clash?
Do you want to kick in to our ‘war chest’ so that we Happy Warriors can maximize the size of the footprint we leave on Leftism’s backside? Here’s a link for ya to do just that.