Brian Fitzpatrick is from Democrat stronghold Lower Bucks County, Levittown, PA. He’s basically a Democrat at heart who had to register Republican to take over his brother Mike’s hard won Bucks County election successes and Mike’s Congressional seat but Brian’s fundamentals show him to be more in line with the enemy. He’s a Trump-hater who claims to be, … well, we don’t know his innermost secrets but his claims are not running parallel to his party. In 2018 Brian barely won over Scott Wallace, 51.9% to 49.1%, 152,461 to 141,577, a difference of 10,884 votes which is a 3.7% difference. That’s a solid enough win in Bucks where Hillary beat Trump 50.4% to 49.6% but his older brother often received 75% of the votes and the Republicans ran Bucks County. Those days seem to be over.
Brian lost in Falls township 7,021 to 6,071, where Steve Santarsiero got 11.5% more votes at 7,828.
Brian lost in Lower Makefield 8,422 to 10,017, lost in Morrisville 2,049 to 1,309, Doylestown Borough 2,886 to 1,741, Bristol Borough, 2,106 to 1,635, Bristol Township 10,155 to 7,648, New Hope 1,013 to 457, Newtown Borough 816 to 614, Newtown Township 5,570 to 4,351, Tullytown 484 to 362, and Yardley Borough 905 to 633. The difference in those 11 districts which are 26% of the total districts show Brian lost by 9779 votes, 56.4% to 43.5%.
Here’s Brian in his own words from his own webspace….October 8, 2016 from @Brianfitz…. “Donald Trump’s comments and actions are offensive and disgusting and they cannot be rationalized or ignored, regardless of context. Like the vast majority of residents in this district, I have been frustrated by this presidential campaign because neither candidate shares our values. This is why, as a former FBI Supervisory Special Agent and Federal Prosecutor, I have refused to endorse either candidate and reached the point that I cannot vote for either candidate.
While Stave Santarsiero has steadfastly refused to show any difference between himself and his party’s nominee – the voters of this district can count on me to demonstrate independence always, regardless of the consequences.
From where comes the idea that riding the fence is the best way to stand up for the principles in which you believe? That’s going to be Brian’s undoing in 2020 where Bucks is going to go against Trump once again and Brian will most likely lose to a principled Democrat unless Brian becomes a Friend of Trump and a real Republican who learns how to fight as a Republican, help Trump at the polls and win with Trump/Republican principles. Can he do that? Can a leopard change it’s spots? No, of course not but Brian is not a leopard and he can change his character which will change his political beliefs. Brian can and should develop a correct moral strategy designed to re-assure people instead of tricking them. Why be half yourself and half something else just to win an election?
Why not let the Democrat change and try to become more Republican so Brian can be a proper Republican, stick to those principles, fight against the Democrats, against Pelosi and Schumer, help the Republicans, help president Trump and win on the basis of Make America Great Again?
It worked for Trump who ran against both the Democrats and the Republicans. That’s the value of having a correct moral code instead of half of one. .
Russia “donated” a Hundred Million Dollars To The Clinton Foundation..Several of Uranium One’s owners were also donors to the Clinton Foundation, giving $145 million to the charitable foundation, and critics have alleged that Clinton greenlighted the sale to appease donors to her family’s charity.
Newly elected bysexual, Democrat, Code Pink Activist, Taliban Sympathizer, Freakazoid Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema refused to be sworn in on a Bible, opting, instead, to place her right hand on a law book that included the U.S Constitution and the Arizona Constitution and without explaining her bisexuality or her views and attitudes against religion. Someone who refuses to touch a bible is outside the bounds of normal people. In fact, no book is needed to take an oath. What’s needed, all that’s needed, is for the oath to be witnessed by a appropriate person. You can put your hands in your pockets when you take an oath.
The U.S. Code Title 28 Part I Chapter 21 § 453 reads: Oaths of justices and judges… Each justice or judge of the United States shall take the following oath or affirmation before performing the duties of his office: “I, ___ ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as ___ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.” No mention of holding one’s hands at all. In fact one could sit and watch tv while reciting the oath and meet all of the requirements.
Oath of Office
Historical Highlight May 21, 1789
The Oath of Office Bill…. A Historic Change in the Oath of Office
“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”. That’s from the U.S. Constitution, Article VI, clause 3
Sinema is only the second member of the Senate to identify as LGBTQ. That’s so unusual that it’s been noted constantly by the media.
She seems prone to getting mixed up. Despite her current claim to love the U.S. Constitution, in her work with left-wing groups in the early 2000s, Sinema was far less solicitous of the law of the land. In fact, she was quoted in 2002 as saying she thought it was acceptable that anarchists and Antifa types perpetrated violence, carried weapons, and destroyed property in pursuit of the extremist goals.
This year it’s Jan 22nd. Last year many Democrats wore African colors to oppose president Trump. Will they show up wearing a hijab this year? Will they even attend? Our Democrats behave exactly like the most racist, intolerant toddlers on the planet, and in our Capitol. It shows the depth of the irrational, child-like hatred of president Trump.
The Democratic Party is today the party of illegal immigrants. That is their core constituency, that is who they represent over and above Americans..
The Democrats loathe the tax reform that kick-started the American economy. They abhor the return of American manufacturing and the bonuses so many companies have doled out to their employees.
It was not so long ago when Obama essentially and wrongly swore: “those jobs are never coming back.” “Crumbs,” billionaire Pelosi called their bonuses. Those were mistakes and helped president Trump throughout 2018.
The left today hates our military. They hate the notion of national security. They oppose the wall. They oppose legal immigration.
The fact that the Democrats in Congress loathe Trump more than they love their country or the American people is a tragedy. They have become a group of chattering children who have nothing but disdain for President Trump and anyone who voted for him, those of us who wisely chose a political novice over a known criminal and liar. Hillary of course belongs in jail. .
Given the many successes of Trump’s first two years (too many to list here), that choice made Trump supporters the really smart people. It follows that the opposition, the Democrats are not only ill-mannered and call our president “the motherf*ker” and it’s them who are out to lunch and out of touch with the constituents they represent….. They are not very bright.
Generally speaking, enmity and rancor do not win over people. Optimism and success for all does. Love of country does. Making America great does.
Trump loves the country and all of its people. That’s the message that will come through loud and clear on Jan 22.,
OTOH, it may be impossible to even hold a 2019 State of the Union address because it will be too dangerous. Hope not.
When will Sacha Baron Cohen interview Olhan about her tailor choices? When will Dumb and Dumber Jim Carrey make a drawing of her? NEVER!
lhan Omar has accused Israel of “evil doings” in Gaza and called Israel an “apartheid state.” It’s no surprise Omar would think this way. She is a hijab-wearing, devout Muslim, and Islamic Jew-hatred is in the Quran. What is shameful about this is that her views are mainstream in the Democrat Party today and celebrated in the New York Times. She should never have been chosen as a candidate for Congress with hateful views of this kind, but this is the way the Democrat leadership, and the Democrat base, thinks. That’s why she won. The left wants candidates like Ilhan Omar, as the New York Times here demonstrates. This is their base today.
“New York Times Orders Readers to ‘Celebrate’ Election of BDS Supporter,” by Ira Stoll, Algemeiner, January 1, 2019:
One of the worst features of the contemporary New York Times is that it has gone beyond merely reporting the news and ventured, instead, into the more treacherous territory of instructing readers which emotions they should have about the news.
One danger of that is that not all Times readers may share the emotions the Times newsroom judges appropriate. And another danger, or perhaps an advantage, is that in ordering up the emotions, the Times exposes biases that it would prefer to have kept hidden.
So it is with the election to Congress of a Democrat from Minnesota, Ilhan Omar, who has emerged after the election as an open supporter of the movement to boycott, divest from and sanction Israel.
A Times article published in print on January 1 titled “Joyful Headlines About Race and Equality … A few stories about race, from the many we published, that are worth celebrating,” by Adeel Hassan, reported, “2018 also held glimmers of hope — if you search hard enough — with stories about racial equality and justice. Here are a few of that we published and that are worth celebrating.” Among these stories that the Times insists are “joyful” and “worth celebrating” was, the paper says, that “Ilhan Omar in Minnesota and Rashida Tlaib in Michigan became the first Muslim women elected to Congress.”
Islam is a religion, not a “race,” so it’s difficult to see why this development fits into the Times -constructed category of “stories about race.” Maybe it’s just something the Times feels like celebrating. The paper, at least in this article, doesn’t even consider the possibility that choosing to boycott the Jewish state might not be an example of “justice” or “hope,” but rather a grave injustice.
It’s the second celebratory Times article in two days about Ilhan Omar. The first one did concede that “Her support for the boycott, divest and sanctions movement to pressure Israel to improve treatment of Palestinians is making Jewish leaders nervous.”
That Times‘ language inaccurately describes the goal of the BDS movement, which is not to “improve treatment of Palestinians,” but rather eradicate Israel and eliminate it as a Jewish state by insisting on a “right of return” to Israel for “7.25 million Palestinian refugees.”
The language in the first Times article appeared to be a bit much even for some staffers at the New York Times itself. An editor and writer on the Times opinion page, Bari Weiss, tweeted of Omar, “The reason Jews are ‘nervous’ about her is because she tweeted: ‘Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.’” A Times columnist, Bret Stephens, retweeted Weiss with the comment, “Anti-Semitism, in other words.”
Lower down, that first Times article reported “Ms. Omar’s careful answer on the 2018 campaign trail to questions about Israel — and her postelection clarification that she does indeed back the boycott, divest and sanctions movement — has left some Jewish leaders feeling betrayed.”
An editor at The Forward, Batya Ungar-Sargon, tweeted, “Yo @nytimes, @IlhanMN is not ‘making Jewish leaders nervous’ bc she supports BDS but bc she made an anti-Semitic comment about Israel and ignored activists and Jewish journalists who tried to ask about it – which your reporter didn’t in this puff piece.” Ungar-Sargon said she’d like to know if the Times journalist asked Omar “the questions we Jewish journos keep trying to ask but getting stonewalled: Why did you lie to constituents? Do you believe Israel has supernatural powers?”… Thanks to Pamela Geller for just about all of the above.