Once again, the political world has erupted in response to Republican President-elect Donald Trump. Now less than a week out from inauguration, the battle between the White House and Democrats in Congress is heating up. Democrats are already signaling the relationship will be tense with talk of boycotting the inauguration and disrespecting the office currently held for a few more days by their own partisan politician.
Now Congressman John Lewis, the Democratic career politician and Civil Rights leader, has stepped up the battle by attacking President-elect Trump as an “illegitimate” President.
At that point, the incoming Republican President responded and that was considered by many wrong. Since when is defending yourself from an attack wrong?
The problem with the entire Congressman Lewis issue is the way the left shelters him from criticism. Any scrutinizing of the politician is considered a thought-crime because of his past history. Is his leadership towards equal rights a noble legacy? Absolutely and we as a society should further embrace human rights for all human beings.
But does a past legacy of doing good things exempt a politician and elected official from criticism?
President-elect Trump responded by calling the Democratic Congressman “all talk.” The problem with Congressman Lewis’s talk is it is deeply partisan and severely misguided. He has been an advocate for partisan discord and an opponent of due process.
Back in June, House Democrats alongside Congressman Lewis led a demonstration on the House Chamber floor, sitting in and grumbling about wanting to eliminate due process. His logic at the time was that if someone is on a government watchlist, they should be deprived of constitutional rights protected by the Bill of Rights. Note that government watchlists are compiled by bureaucrats and individuals appearing on said list have not been found guilty in a court of law.
This is disturbing because many use guns for protection and those seeking self-defense are not always in the majority at the time. Martin Luther King Jr. is a great example of someone who carried a gun for protection at a time when he was being oppressed. The law was against King and society was resisting change. He was facing death threats and a racist opposition.
The second amendment however allowed for him to carry firearms and protect himself from threats. It would have at least, had King himself not appeared on an FBI watchlist.
Congressman Lewis’s position is that King should have been disarmed, because anyone suspected of a crime should be deprived of their constitutional rights. Somehow, he still remains a hero for freedom and is apparently exempted from criticism.
The outrage in defense of Congressman John Lewis is ridiculous. He slammed another human being and one under attack has a right to respond. Isn’t the Congressman a supposed leader for freedom? The problem here is that Democratic partisans still are unable to handle President-elect Donald Trump in a calm manner. The paranoia and hysteria is driving individuals like the Democratic Congressman to make offensive comments and then leading others to say he shouldn’t take head for that.
Congressman Lewis himself may have been a Civil Rights leader, but as a Congressman his record has some issues. Among these is his call to end due process, which would have hurt people like fellow Civil Rights leader Martin Luther King Jr.