Category: Robyn Dolgin

Fonda Cements Legacy as Hanoi Jane


Jane Fonda resumes her performance as an historical revisionist on a subject that keeps coming back to haunt her: the Vietnam War.

Fonda’s latest foray into her past as a useful propaganda tool for the communists has reared its ugly narrative all over again on the occasion of the thespian accepting a “Lifetime Achievement” award at the Traverse City Film Festival this summer. Michael Moore, the king of propaganda, added to the publicity swirl by heaping accolades on the actress as he bestowed the award.

Jane basked in the glow of her safe audience at the festival — taking advantage of the occasion to screen the sanitized version of her life in the recently released HBO documentary, Jane Fonda in Five Acts.

At the event, gullible liberals made up most of her audience embracing the activist’s “proud” anti-war participation from the 1970s, but not everyone proved to be a fawning fan. Dozens of Vietnam veterans showed up to protest Fonda’s blatantly false wartime assertions including her attempts to delegitimize and demonize American combat soldiers (which has proven posthumously in the case of more than 58,000 veterans). 

Veterans find many of her actions unforgivable, even 46 years later.

In 1973, Fonda called returning American POWs “liars and traitors” for telling the truth about their systematic torture and the killing of their comrades in captivity. Fonda’s cruel reception for returning POWs — many of whom suffered captivity in cages, years in isolation and sadistic beatings — failed to make the final edit in the appropriately named documentary, Five Acts. The point of the project was to romanticize Fonda’s life — and to that end many viewers would never learn of the irreparable harm she has caused to others. Most Americans will never know Fonda earned the moniker, “Hanoi Jane,” because of her self-initiated broadcasts — which included labeling American soldiers “war criminals” — on Radio Hanoi. She succeeded in demoralizing our troops and acting as a “pro-victory” cheerleader for the communists.

“I am proud I went to Vietnam when I did,” says Jane who hasn’t veered much from her script since the early 1970s. She has even becomes philosophical about the war to further solidify her good intentions. “The U.S. loss represented our nation’s chance for redemption,” says Fonda failing to mention redemption was in short supply in the Gulag of reeducation camps established by Ho Chi Minh and his army of mass murderers. 

Worse was yet to come. “And the communist victory symbolizes hope for the planet,” says Jane who has a difficult time floating this theory past the 100,000s tortured and murdered by the communists in the aftermath of war. This includes men, women, and children.

Veterans are appalled at the prospect of a new generation of young Americans learning about their history by peering through a lens carefully crafted by Hollywood.

Their fears are well founded. Owen Gleiberman is one such impressionable reporter who writes a gushing review of Five Acts, in the entertainment publication, Variety. “Then (she) became the rare celebrity entertainer brave enough to disengage from the system to pursue her political passions,” he writes. 

“She was dissed for going to Hanoi, but the meaning of that crusade was debated all over the world — and if that’s not successful activism, I don’t know what is.” He does have a point about Jane making her treasonous presence known — from Hanoi — to the far reaches of the world.

Many outraged veterans refuse to allow Fonda to serve as a filter for their actions and have pushed back against her wave of propaganda, including her self-serving biography, My Life So Far.

Dexter Lehtinen is one of the most qualified veterans to refute Fonda’s attacks on American servicemen as war criminals, having served more than two years in combat in the most treacherous terrain: He was severely wounded in the conflict and continued to serve his country as a U.S. attorney general and Florida state senator.

Lehtinen employs his legal mind to refute the “pseudo apology” offered by Fonda in her multimedia campaign: he points out the futility of her singling out one (repeat one) treacherous action from the multitude of egregious actions committed against soldiers, and now veterans. “She expressed regret for one photograph,” he writes referring to the infamous photo of Jane smiling and sitting behind an anti-aircraft gun in North Vietnam. “But remains proud of her Radio Hanoi broadcasts, her efforts to achieve a communist victory, and her attacks on American servicemen as war criminals” adds Lehtinen in reviewing the biography, My Life So Far. “She never uses the word ‘apology’.”

With the advantage of hindsight, Fonda does extrapolate on her “regret” saying: “That two-minute lapse of sanity will haunt me until I die.”

Fonda’s two-minute timeline for her lapse in judgment has led Lehtinen to write: “Fonda has always lived in a kind of Wonderland — where American POWs are liars and communist tyrants are honorable men,” he writes. “The Vietnam war only shows that, unlike Alice, Jane Fonda has yet to emerge from Wonderland.”

It appears Jane’s non-apology is not accepted.

Jane Fonda resumes her performance as an historical revisionist on a subject that keeps coming back to haunt her: the Vietnam War.

Fonda’s latest foray into her past as a useful propaganda tool for the communists has reared its ugly narrative all over again on the occasion of the thespian accepting a “Lifetime Achievement” award at the Traverse City Film Festival this summer. Michael Moore, the king of propaganda, added to the publicity swirl by heaping accolades on the actress as he bestowed the award.

Jane basked in the glow of her safe audience at the festival — taking advantage of the occasion to screen the sanitized version of her life in the recently released HBO documentary, Jane Fonda in Five Acts.

At the event, gullible liberals made up most of her audience embracing the activist’s “proud” anti-war participation from the 1970s, but not everyone proved to be a fawning fan. Dozens of Vietnam veterans showed up to protest Fonda’s blatantly false wartime assertions including her attempts to delegitimize and demonize American combat soldiers (which has proven posthumously in the case of more than 58,000 veterans). 

Veterans find many of her actions unforgivable, even 46 years later.

In 1973, Fonda called returning American POWs “liars and traitors” for telling the truth about their systematic torture and the killing of their comrades in captivity. Fonda’s cruel reception for returning POWs — many of whom suffered captivity in cages, years in isolation and sadistic beatings — failed to make the final edit in the appropriately named documentary, Five Acts. The point of the project was to romanticize Fonda’s life — and to that end many viewers would never learn of the irreparable harm she has caused to others. Most Americans will never know Fonda earned the moniker, “Hanoi Jane,” because of her self-initiated broadcasts — which included labeling American soldiers “war criminals” — on Radio Hanoi. She succeeded in demoralizing our troops and acting as a “pro-victory” cheerleader for the communists.

“I am proud I went to Vietnam when I did,” says Jane who hasn’t veered much from her script since the early 1970s. She has even becomes philosophical about the war to further solidify her good intentions. “The U.S. loss represented our nation’s chance for redemption,” says Fonda failing to mention redemption was in short supply in the Gulag of reeducation camps established by Ho Chi Minh and his army of mass murderers. 

Worse was yet to come. “And the communist victory symbolizes hope for the planet,” says Jane who has a difficult time floating this theory past the 100,000s tortured and murdered by the communists in the aftermath of war. This includes men, women, and children.

Veterans are appalled at the prospect of a new generation of young Americans learning about their history by peering through a lens carefully crafted by Hollywood.

Their fears are well founded. Owen Gleiberman is one such impressionable reporter who writes a gushing review of Five Acts, in the entertainment publication, Variety. “Then (she) became the rare celebrity entertainer brave enough to disengage from the system to pursue her political passions,” he writes. 

“She was dissed for going to Hanoi, but the meaning of that crusade was debated all over the world — and if that’s not successful activism, I don’t know what is.” He does have a point about Jane making her treasonous presence known — from Hanoi — to the far reaches of the world.

Many outraged veterans refuse to allow Fonda to serve as a filter for their actions and have pushed back against her wave of propaganda, including her self-serving biography, My Life So Far.

Dexter Lehtinen is one of the most qualified veterans to refute Fonda’s attacks on American servicemen as war criminals, having served more than two years in combat in the most treacherous terrain: He was severely wounded in the conflict and continued to serve his country as a U.S. attorney general and Florida state senator.

Lehtinen employs his legal mind to refute the “pseudo apology” offered by Fonda in her multimedia campaign: he points out the futility of her singling out one (repeat one) treacherous action from the multitude of egregious actions committed against soldiers, and now veterans. “She expressed regret for one photograph,” he writes referring to the infamous photo of Jane smiling and sitting behind an anti-aircraft gun in North Vietnam. “But remains proud of her Radio Hanoi broadcasts, her efforts to achieve a communist victory, and her attacks on American servicemen as war criminals” adds Lehtinen in reviewing the biography, My Life So Far. “She never uses the word ‘apology’.”

With the advantage of hindsight, Fonda does extrapolate on her “regret” saying: “That two-minute lapse of sanity will haunt me until I die.”

Fonda’s two-minute timeline for her lapse in judgment has led Lehtinen to write: “Fonda has always lived in a kind of Wonderland — where American POWs are liars and communist tyrants are honorable men,” he writes. “The Vietnam war only shows that, unlike Alice, Jane Fonda has yet to emerge from Wonderland.”

It appears Jane’s non-apology is not accepted.



Source link

School Choice: Matt Damon Elevates Hypocrisy to an Art Form


Actor Matt Damon qualifies as the perfect hypocrite for his views on “school choice” for other parents who travel in different circles than celebrities.

The mega-star is now vilifying those nasty conservatives for offering parents a school choice — which (of course) is the very same thing Damon exercised on behalf of his own children. They attend private school — big surprise.

The absurdity of his personal life conflicting with his public stance is beautifully narrated by Damon in the new documentary perversely titled Backpack Full of Cash. Apparently, the desire of parents to seize the opportunity to fast-track their children out of failing schools has earned the disdain of the filmmakers as “harming our most vulnerable children.” Huh? I thought auditoriums filled with parents of color — who were literally praying to the lord above for their child’s name to be called in a lottery draw for a charter school — was rescuing the “most vulnerable children.” Meaning those children stuck in the most vulnerable zip codes. Damon lives in a different universe from these zip codes, having just purchased a $16.4 million penthouse in New York.

The actor has been asked the embarrassing question as to why he sends his own children to private school. His meandering answer was sadly lacking in logic: “I pay for a private education and I’m trying to get the one that most matches the public education that I had,” Damon offered. Does that mean public schools aren’t what they use to be? 

Damon trudges on, talking about the realities of life: “But that kind of progressive education no longer exists in the public system. It’s unfair.” Yes, Mr. Damon, life can be unfair — especially if you’re child confronts the reality of being enrolled in a school better known in the “hood” as a “drop-out factory.” 

Early reviews of the Damon-narrated film indicate the filmmakers have engaged in revisionist history by suggesting the abysmal state of many of our public schools can be laid at the door of “school choice,” pointing the finger at charter schools and voucher programs. This twisted logic may be the making of another possible bestseller: The Audacity of Stupidity.

Mr. Damon fails to delve into the crux of the problem contributing to the dispiriting academic decline of our schools for the last several decades: the teachers’ unions have taken the moral low road in allowing a child’s educational needs to take a back seat to the unrelenting goals of organized labor including: absurdly complicated employment protection guidelines; cushier pension payouts at earlier dates; and regulatory madness contributing to the destruction of the joy of teaching.

Ironically, the film focuses primarily on the School District of Philadelphia, where the taxpayers fail to receive much of a return on their dollar: $12,270.00 per child — many of whom are receiving an inferior education. “The problem isn’t that we need some market-based reform or answer,” says Rhonda Brownstein, of the Education Law Center in the film. “The problem is that we need to invest more in our public schools,” she adds.

Ms. Brownstein must know something the nation’s top education reformer doesn’t know. Michelle Rhee made the cover of Time magazine for her efforts to transform the nation’s lowest academic rated district while acting as Chancellor of Education in D.C. Where does one start in such a quagmire? 

Rhee got more than she bargained for while working many 14-hour days. She discovered incompetent and corrupt administrators who were costing the district literally hundreds of thousands in lawsuits, warehouses with unopened boxes teeming over with brand-new materials (while dedicated teachers were paying for supplies out of pocket); more than 1,000 grossly incompetent teachers at dozens of failing schools (she managed to dismiss more than 1,000 teachers); and an intractable union boss, Randi Weingarten, president of American Federation of Teachers (with whom she refused to meet in the same room after numerous fruitless encounters).

No wonder Time magazine featured Rhee on the cover with a broom in her hands — cleaning up a demoralized school district. The headline read: “How to Fix America’s Schools,” with an illuminating subhead: “Michelle Rhee is the head of Washington D.C. schools. Her battle against bad teachers has earned her admirers and enemies — and could transform public education.” There was hope in the air and fewer incompetents showing up for work in the nation’s capital.

Because this isn’t Hollywood, Ms. Rhee didn’t last long on the job — despite her outstanding performance in dramatically improving the academic level of students at some of the poorest performing schools. Ms. Rhee refused to stay on the job when the unions successfully removed public officials supporting her in her reform efforts, and replacing them with union-backed public politicians. 

Perhaps the unions inspired Rhee in her next professional effort — which garnered national support from many of the nation’s most accomplished philanthropists. She established a non-profit education reform movement with the fitting name, “StudentsFirst.” 

Mr. Damon should be taking copious notes from Ms. Rhee. He might learn that educators like Rhee work to ensure public schools exist to educate our nation’s children, and not to provide unions with runaway cushy perks including unreasonable job protection for grossly incompetent teachers. 

But, then again, Damon works in Hollywood, a place where celebrities adopt liberal scripts that never require fact-checking or being held up to the realities of the light of day. Sadly, Damon has now cast himself in the role of a useful idiot opposing the efforts of conservatives determined to offer children the very same thing Damon provides for his precious children: school choice.

Actor Matt Damon qualifies as the perfect hypocrite for his views on “school choice” for other parents who travel in different circles than celebrities.

The mega-star is now vilifying those nasty conservatives for offering parents a school choice — which (of course) is the very same thing Damon exercised on behalf of his own children. They attend private school — big surprise.

The absurdity of his personal life conflicting with his public stance is beautifully narrated by Damon in the new documentary perversely titled Backpack Full of Cash. Apparently, the desire of parents to seize the opportunity to fast-track their children out of failing schools has earned the disdain of the filmmakers as “harming our most vulnerable children.” Huh? I thought auditoriums filled with parents of color — who were literally praying to the lord above for their child’s name to be called in a lottery draw for a charter school — was rescuing the “most vulnerable children.” Meaning those children stuck in the most vulnerable zip codes. Damon lives in a different universe from these zip codes, having just purchased a $16.4 million penthouse in New York.

The actor has been asked the embarrassing question as to why he sends his own children to private school. His meandering answer was sadly lacking in logic: “I pay for a private education and I’m trying to get the one that most matches the public education that I had,” Damon offered. Does that mean public schools aren’t what they use to be? 

Damon trudges on, talking about the realities of life: “But that kind of progressive education no longer exists in the public system. It’s unfair.” Yes, Mr. Damon, life can be unfair — especially if you’re child confronts the reality of being enrolled in a school better known in the “hood” as a “drop-out factory.” 

Early reviews of the Damon-narrated film indicate the filmmakers have engaged in revisionist history by suggesting the abysmal state of many of our public schools can be laid at the door of “school choice,” pointing the finger at charter schools and voucher programs. This twisted logic may be the making of another possible bestseller: The Audacity of Stupidity.

Mr. Damon fails to delve into the crux of the problem contributing to the dispiriting academic decline of our schools for the last several decades: the teachers’ unions have taken the moral low road in allowing a child’s educational needs to take a back seat to the unrelenting goals of organized labor including: absurdly complicated employment protection guidelines; cushier pension payouts at earlier dates; and regulatory madness contributing to the destruction of the joy of teaching.

Ironically, the film focuses primarily on the School District of Philadelphia, where the taxpayers fail to receive much of a return on their dollar: $12,270.00 per child — many of whom are receiving an inferior education. “The problem isn’t that we need some market-based reform or answer,” says Rhonda Brownstein, of the Education Law Center in the film. “The problem is that we need to invest more in our public schools,” she adds.

Ms. Brownstein must know something the nation’s top education reformer doesn’t know. Michelle Rhee made the cover of Time magazine for her efforts to transform the nation’s lowest academic rated district while acting as Chancellor of Education in D.C. Where does one start in such a quagmire? 

Rhee got more than she bargained for while working many 14-hour days. She discovered incompetent and corrupt administrators who were costing the district literally hundreds of thousands in lawsuits, warehouses with unopened boxes teeming over with brand-new materials (while dedicated teachers were paying for supplies out of pocket); more than 1,000 grossly incompetent teachers at dozens of failing schools (she managed to dismiss more than 1,000 teachers); and an intractable union boss, Randi Weingarten, president of American Federation of Teachers (with whom she refused to meet in the same room after numerous fruitless encounters).

No wonder Time magazine featured Rhee on the cover with a broom in her hands — cleaning up a demoralized school district. The headline read: “How to Fix America’s Schools,” with an illuminating subhead: “Michelle Rhee is the head of Washington D.C. schools. Her battle against bad teachers has earned her admirers and enemies — and could transform public education.” There was hope in the air and fewer incompetents showing up for work in the nation’s capital.

Because this isn’t Hollywood, Ms. Rhee didn’t last long on the job — despite her outstanding performance in dramatically improving the academic level of students at some of the poorest performing schools. Ms. Rhee refused to stay on the job when the unions successfully removed public officials supporting her in her reform efforts, and replacing them with union-backed public politicians. 

Perhaps the unions inspired Rhee in her next professional effort — which garnered national support from many of the nation’s most accomplished philanthropists. She established a non-profit education reform movement with the fitting name, “StudentsFirst.” 

Mr. Damon should be taking copious notes from Ms. Rhee. He might learn that educators like Rhee work to ensure public schools exist to educate our nation’s children, and not to provide unions with runaway cushy perks including unreasonable job protection for grossly incompetent teachers. 

But, then again, Damon works in Hollywood, a place where celebrities adopt liberal scripts that never require fact-checking or being held up to the realities of the light of day. Sadly, Damon has now cast himself in the role of a useful idiot opposing the efforts of conservatives determined to offer children the very same thing Damon provides for his precious children: school choice.



Source link

Maxine Waters: A Gift That Keeps Giving


Congresswoman Maxine Waters failed to anticipate her “destroy Trump” campaign would have an unpleasant boomerang effect on her own political career.

She experienced an unwanted surprise this week when returning to her posh home in Hancock Park after making the media rounds in the so-called impeachment campaign against President Trump. 

Protestors had gathered outside her LA mini-mansion waving placards that read: “Impeach Maxine Waters” and “Do Your Job,” referring to the congresswoman’s 35-year tenure representing the infamous suburb of Compton. “She’s not representing her constituents, especially the black constituents,” complained one of the protestors before the KABC media crew. “She thinks by putting down our president, we’re going to like her more,” complained another protestor. “Every time she talks, she makes me want to throw up.” That can’t be good for her re-election chances.

Not all was doom-and-gloom on the scene. There was even a mariachi band that allowed the gathering to protest in style.

Apparently Waters is too distracted as the new media darling — dubbed “Auntie Maxine” by fawning reporters — to perform her job. Her long history of corruption and abysmal performance in office never seems to make its way into the conversation among her co-conspirators (aka reporters) in the mainstream media.

It is a perverse irony that President Trump works round-the-clock to make inroads to improve the lives of Americans in his few months in office, and Waters with a whopping 35 years on the job continues representing a district where the socioeconomic conditions grow progressively worse.

Perhaps that’s the reason one of the protestors suggested withholding the congresswoman’s salary by waving a sign that read: “No Justice No Paycheck.” Here’s what they are so mad about: Compton is now more than $40 million awash in debt; produces schools dubbed “dropout” factories, has lost accreditation of its community college; and widespread gang violence resulted in the 43rd district being listed as the most dangerous place for homicides in Los Angeles County, according to the Los Angeles Daily News.

To be fair, Compton retains the distinction of being the birthplace to the only bulletproof drive-thru funeral home. (I’m sure the proprietor has his or her reasons.)

No wonder Waters cannot be expected to live in the district she represents. It’s too dangerous. She’s safely ensconced approximately 20 miles away, but everyone knows that a change in Southland zip codes can translate to mean living worlds apart.

As for her history of corruption, Waters will argue to the death — or at least wear you out — that the three-year congressional ethics committee investigating her diversion of bailout money to her husband’s bank, OneUnited, (in which he was a stockholder and board member) was made up of a racist cabal orchestrated by the Red State (given new meaning today). The congresswoman’s influence peddling in real estate finance also caught the attention of the IRS labeling the transactions as a “scam,” according to the agency’s 2006 report. 

All things considered, President Trump could not ask for a better adversary than Waters. She talks a lot about connecting the dots between Putin and Trump through baseless allegations, misstatement of facts and fanning the media-induced smoke in hopes of igniting a fire. Her own words best make her case in which she deserves an additional moniker as the “Queen of Malapropisms.”

“The fact that he (President) is wrapping his arms around Putin,” she alleged at a recent press conference, “While Putin is continuing to advance into Korea.” The congresswoman knew something was off in her statement as she looked somewhat confused, but this did not stop her from repeating the Korea allegation. “Crimea,” whispered a concerned liberal standing behind her. Let’s be clear: Putin invaded the Crimea, and not North or South Korea.

Should we give Auntie Maxine a pass because both words contain the same number of syllables. Then she would earn the same pass for referring to the President’s chief of staff, Reince Priebus, as “Mike Priebus.”

It appears her liberal friends are more forgiving of her mangled messages, but not so understanding of her corruption. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a liberal group supported by George Soros, drew up a list of “the most corrupt members of Congress,” and Auntie Maxine was among the Hall of Shamers. 

These are supposed to be her liberal friends.

Throughout the congresswoman’s 13 terms in office, she has acquired a long history of shameful conduct and baseless allegations dating back to the 1990s: She accused the CIA of deliberately distributing “crack cocaine to young blacks” in the inner cities and paid a courtesy visit to the parents of the black youth who randomly selected a white person (pulled from his truck) to bash his head with a cement block in a LA race riot in 1992. The parents of the innocent truck driver, Reginald Denny, did not receive the same courtesy visit. These acts of violence were dubbed by Waters as “somewhat understandable” at the time. Therefore she said: “So I call it a rebellion.” She’s on to her next “resistance” movement.

Congresswoman Waters is the perfect face, now named as the “Auntie of the Resistance,” to best reflect the shameful character and perverse nature of the campaign to destroy the majority government now in power.

Robyn Dolgin is a feature writer who has written extensively for Copley News Service and City News Service. 

Congresswoman Maxine Waters failed to anticipate her “destroy Trump” campaign would have an unpleasant boomerang effect on her own political career.

She experienced an unwanted surprise this week when returning to her posh home in Hancock Park after making the media rounds in the so-called impeachment campaign against President Trump. 

Protestors had gathered outside her LA mini-mansion waving placards that read: “Impeach Maxine Waters” and “Do Your Job,” referring to the congresswoman’s 35-year tenure representing the infamous suburb of Compton. “She’s not representing her constituents, especially the black constituents,” complained one of the protestors before the KABC media crew. “She thinks by putting down our president, we’re going to like her more,” complained another protestor. “Every time she talks, she makes me want to throw up.” That can’t be good for her re-election chances.

Not all was doom-and-gloom on the scene. There was even a mariachi band that allowed the gathering to protest in style.

Apparently Waters is too distracted as the new media darling — dubbed “Auntie Maxine” by fawning reporters — to perform her job. Her long history of corruption and abysmal performance in office never seems to make its way into the conversation among her co-conspirators (aka reporters) in the mainstream media.

It is a perverse irony that President Trump works round-the-clock to make inroads to improve the lives of Americans in his few months in office, and Waters with a whopping 35 years on the job continues representing a district where the socioeconomic conditions grow progressively worse.

Perhaps that’s the reason one of the protestors suggested withholding the congresswoman’s salary by waving a sign that read: “No Justice No Paycheck.” Here’s what they are so mad about: Compton is now more than $40 million awash in debt; produces schools dubbed “dropout” factories, has lost accreditation of its community college; and widespread gang violence resulted in the 43rd district being listed as the most dangerous place for homicides in Los Angeles County, according to the Los Angeles Daily News.

To be fair, Compton retains the distinction of being the birthplace to the only bulletproof drive-thru funeral home. (I’m sure the proprietor has his or her reasons.)

No wonder Waters cannot be expected to live in the district she represents. It’s too dangerous. She’s safely ensconced approximately 20 miles away, but everyone knows that a change in Southland zip codes can translate to mean living worlds apart.

As for her history of corruption, Waters will argue to the death — or at least wear you out — that the three-year congressional ethics committee investigating her diversion of bailout money to her husband’s bank, OneUnited, (in which he was a stockholder and board member) was made up of a racist cabal orchestrated by the Red State (given new meaning today). The congresswoman’s influence peddling in real estate finance also caught the attention of the IRS labeling the transactions as a “scam,” according to the agency’s 2006 report. 

All things considered, President Trump could not ask for a better adversary than Waters. She talks a lot about connecting the dots between Putin and Trump through baseless allegations, misstatement of facts and fanning the media-induced smoke in hopes of igniting a fire. Her own words best make her case in which she deserves an additional moniker as the “Queen of Malapropisms.”

“The fact that he (President) is wrapping his arms around Putin,” she alleged at a recent press conference, “While Putin is continuing to advance into Korea.” The congresswoman knew something was off in her statement as she looked somewhat confused, but this did not stop her from repeating the Korea allegation. “Crimea,” whispered a concerned liberal standing behind her. Let’s be clear: Putin invaded the Crimea, and not North or South Korea.

Should we give Auntie Maxine a pass because both words contain the same number of syllables. Then she would earn the same pass for referring to the President’s chief of staff, Reince Priebus, as “Mike Priebus.”

It appears her liberal friends are more forgiving of her mangled messages, but not so understanding of her corruption. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a liberal group supported by George Soros, drew up a list of “the most corrupt members of Congress,” and Auntie Maxine was among the Hall of Shamers. 

These are supposed to be her liberal friends.

Throughout the congresswoman’s 13 terms in office, she has acquired a long history of shameful conduct and baseless allegations dating back to the 1990s: She accused the CIA of deliberately distributing “crack cocaine to young blacks” in the inner cities and paid a courtesy visit to the parents of the black youth who randomly selected a white person (pulled from his truck) to bash his head with a cement block in a LA race riot in 1992. The parents of the innocent truck driver, Reginald Denny, did not receive the same courtesy visit. These acts of violence were dubbed by Waters as “somewhat understandable” at the time. Therefore she said: “So I call it a rebellion.” She’s on to her next “resistance” movement.

Congresswoman Waters is the perfect face, now named as the “Auntie of the Resistance,” to best reflect the shameful character and perverse nature of the campaign to destroy the majority government now in power.

Robyn Dolgin is a feature writer who has written extensively for Copley News Service and City News Service. 



Source link