Pro-life, black Republican candidate will “drive Democrats to drink”
by Carder
The last thing Democrats want on the national stage is a black conservative Republican, anti-abortion, successful single mom who worked her way through college to achieve her American dream (without seeking government for answers).
They do not want another non-victim-minded black elected official out there touting traditional values, preaching that the rewards of hard work and self-reliance are self-respect and dignity.
It would drive Democrats to drink.
~ Tea Party activist Lloyd Marcus, anticipating the Democrats’ predictable reaction to up-and-coming African-American Republican candidate Katrina Pierson (pictured above right) from Texas, American Thinker, February 20
[Photo Credit: Katrina for Congress]
Feb.21, 2014 6:00 am |
Uncategorized |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
And to top it all off Sarah Palin just endorsed Katrina.
(Those aren’t champaign corks – that’s libs heads popping.)
Will probably send Boehner to drink as well…like he needs an excuse.
With Pelosi you couldn’t tell if she had been drinking anyway.
Go Katrina!
“Without seeking government for answers”?? Then why run for public office? Why accept that fat government paycheck if you get elected?
I’m sure some democrats will just rename her a puppet, but they’ll still need that drink.
Why don’t conservatives consider running a woman for president in 2016?
Wow!! She is going to have “libs heads popping”, you are so right Chris. And she is gorgeous to boot they are going to go ballistic. Are they going to come after her? As Sarah P. would say “you betcha”. They are going to come after her to destroy her, I will be praying for her, that she is grounded, has an excellent support system and church family.
“Why seek public office?” To keep pro-abortion, culture of death, child-sacrificing, immoral, progressives like you from taking over the nation and the world.
“If the foundations be destroyed, what shall the righteous do?”
There is still hope because there are still a remnant like this beautiful,young woman who have not bowed their knees to worship at the altar of government control, immorality, death and child sacrifice.
I look forward to the day when strong, family-minded women are more than just political symbols. I want to see women of the pro-life generation become the Establishment!
It’s time to ditch our current paradigm of “liberal” and “conservative,” and start doing government as if families really matter. THE BUSINESS OF AMERICA IS FAMILY BUSINESS!
BlueVelvet says:
February 21, 2014 at 9:57 am
“Without seeking government for answers”?? Then why run for public office? Why accept that fat government paycheck if you get elected?
Are you educable?
I’m sure some democrats will just rename her a puppet, but they’ll still need that drink.
Judging on what the black woman from Utah who ran for Congress was called (her name escapes me now), she will be called a ‘ho, a white man’s n*gger, a self-hater, a wench, sell-out, house Negro, biotch, Uncle Tom, handkerchief head, and even worse. I am sure that some will even comment on her light skin color. I hope she is strong enough to withstand the storm. I have waited for YEARS for a black prolife woman to be elected to Congress and I wish her the best.
P.S. – I don’t like to comment on peoples’ looks, but she is very pretty.
Hi phillymiss,
She’s beautiful! That is going to PO the feminists even more! BTW the lady in Utah was Mia Love, the child of Haitian refugees. As for those vile names, that’s liberal enlightenment and tolerance at its best.
Hi phillymiss. How are you?
I am in total agreement with you phillymiss, Mary and Del. “Let the name-calling begin”.
I’ve got to say that as an Illinoisan I am so jealous of Texas right now. In the land of Lincoln the Black leadership has such a dependence mentality no wonder blacks don’t make any significant strides here. Here’s hoping Ms. Pierson is contagious across state lines.
Del, what state are you running in? You’ve got my vote!
Yeah, the Democrats may as well throw in the towel, just as Alan Keyes basically destroyed the Democratic Party. ; )
Pro-life, black Republican candidate will “drive Democrats to drink”
Well, a designated driver ain’t all bad….
The implications of a Black and independent woman running for a Republican spot are much more than you give it credit Doug. Appeal is the key here. I will tell you that Ms. Pierson has that appeal. Look beyond your nose Doug….
LifeJoy: Why don’t conservatives consider running a woman for president in 2016?
The bad taste in their mouth from Sarah Palin and the zany, madcap adventures of Michelle Bachmann.
http://imageshack.com/a/img855/4349/c1bl.png
Thomas R., I think you’re wrong. What do we actually have so far, other than some people pretending about how Democrats will react?
Do you remember Mia Love? You could have predicted the same kind of thing. No huge deal, in the end.
If they are really for fiscal conservatism, then I say more power to them.
I’ve seen failures and I’ve witnessed surprises from even the most unseemly candidates. Its all about appeal.
I’ve got to say that as an Illinoisan I am so jealous of Texas right now.
Well, no place is Shangri-la, but the big blue states in the Northeast and Midwest (PA, MA, NJ, NY and IL) are losing population while many of the dreaded “backwards” red states (FL, GA, NC, TX) are gaining. I can’t stand living here. It’s stagnant, the same old same old. When I am vested in my pension next year, I am out!
And to top it all off Sarah Palin just endorsed Katrina.
(Those aren’t champaign corks – that’s libs heads popping.) – yes, with laughter. Poor Katrina, some ‘endorsement’.
Will probably send Boehner to drink as well…like he needs an excuse. – so he can celebrate his new condo in Florida?
Why don’t conservatives consider running a woman for president in 2016? – who would you suggest?
Liberals laugh at their peril, Reality. Deep down, they know that Sarah Palin still commands respect and draws a fiercely motivated crowd — in spite of their persistent effort to insult her reputation.
Sarah ignores the cruel intolerance with magnanimous aplomb. This is what drives the liberal elitists mad. Now…. another smart, beautiful, and young woman is joining Palin, and standing in stark contrast to Wendy Davis. Wendy, who, after all of this time, is still only famous for one thing (which puts her in the class with Sandra Fluke and Monica Lewinski).
Go ahead, Reality-heads — keep on laughing.
Sarah Palin still commands respect and draws a fiercely motivated crowd — of course she does. The same old crowd. Gradually shrinking.
Sarah ignores the cruel intolerance with magnanimous aplomb. – well ignorance is one of her strengths. “cruel intolerance” - such a martyr.
another smart, beautiful, and young woman is joining Palin – smart, beautiful and young she is. ‘joining’ Palin, hm, well sort of. ‘another’ is questionable.
Wendy, who, after all of this time, is still only famous for one thing (which puts her in the class with Sandra Fluke and Monica Lewinski). – mindlessly skewered by extremist conservatives?
Go ahead, Reality-heads — keep on laughing. – OK :-)
Reality ~ The GOP should run Susana Martinez, or Condi Rice – at the very least as VP. But I think they will pick an old white dude, and lose. Sorry folks, I just don’t think they understand how to compete in a game that is about appearances. They have too much faith in voters, that they actually understand or care about real issues.
Perhaps they should, but they won’t, as you say.
I think the gop’s real problem is that they have too much faith in old white dudes, that they actually understand or care about real issues.
So does Rice not count? Why is it a big deal that she’s a woman, and she’s black? Both parties have diversity within them – is this some new concept? I’m confused as to why this is a deal. If she’s good, she’ll win some races – if she’s bad, she won’t.
I wish this Lloyd Marcus guy would have written something thoughtful – this seemed like a waste of space.
The party of Nancy Pelosi and Sheila Jackson Lee, as well as the congressman who thought Guam would tip over….laughs at Palin??
No, ex, I don’t think Rice counts, as she has called herself ‘”mildly pro-choice” (which is why my comment above should come with a giant asterisk). But you’re right. There’s diversity on both sides. It’s a deal because some do not like to acknowledge that fact. It isn’t complementary to their war on women propaganda and so on.
Good point LifeJoy
Anyway, I looked into the 32nd district a bit more, and it looks like we only need to keep an eye on Pierson until early March – when she’ll lose to Sessions in the Primary. Where she goes from there is a big question, so maybe we’ll hear from her down the road.
Del: Liberals laugh at their peril, Reality. Deep down, they know that Sarah Palin still commands respect and draws a fiercely motivated crowd — in spite of their persistent effort to insult her reputation.
Agreed on the fiercely motivated crowd, Del, but it’s not a large enough crowd that I think any “Liberal peril” applies. If the Republicans would offer up a deal to Democrats where “We are running Sarah Palin in 2016,” don’t you think most Democrats would gladly agree?
Palin as McCain’s VP choice was seen by many as a “Hail Mary” move, and it insulted and demoralized many Republicans. McCain’s popularity bounced for 2 or 3 days after the convention, as is the norm, and then it was on a remarkably constant slope downward until the election – a fact which will not be forgotten by Republican strategists.
Good point Doug – for 2016 if I had my choice of people I think most Republicans would accept - I’d put Palin at the top of list. Probably Cruz 2, and Bachmann 3rd.
Two months ago, I felt Christie was going to be the 2016 President – but now it’s a bit more up in the air. I’d say Hillary 70%, the field 30% in the crazy early prediction game.
Thomas R: I’ve seen failures and I’ve witnessed surprises from even the most unseemly candidates. Its all about appeal.
Yes, no doubt. At this point it looks likely to me that Sessions will win, but if Pierson really is a fiscal conservative, then fine with me. However, should she win, I doubt we’d see any impact from her on that score.
I also don’t think it would really alter the huge problem that Republicans have with the demographics of the American population, going forward in time.
“Are you educable?”
Probably not — that’s why I’m still here! ;) But my question was serious: why do so many anti-government types have lofty political ambitions? Wouldn’t that be like joining a club you hate?
BlueVelvet: why do so many anti-government types have lofty political ambitions? Wouldn’t that be like joining a club you hate?
They probably want to change things, to “make a difference.” Sadly, most soon find they like things inside the Beltway well enough, and devote more energy to staying in the “club” and maintaining their position than serving their constituency.
President Eisenhower, who I think was a good and honest man, said, 53 years ago:
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
Well, we’ve got that, in spades. And we’ve had generations of politicians that have engaged in what is basically vote-buying, at the cost of our country’s future.
Our woman or man gets elected, and then they’re 1 of 100 Senators, or 1 of 435 Representatives. They’re new, they’re junior – they don’t have anything like the power or influence of the old-timers, the committee heads, etc. And there’s always the constant pressure of the others, as a whole or as the other members of their party, and that’s a fight that nobody can really overcome, in my opinion.
Liberals laugh at their peril, Reality. Deep down, they know that Sarah Palin still commands respect and draws a fiercely motivated crowd.
Del, I’m going to let you in on a little secret: liberals, by and large, benefit from Sarah Palin’s presence on the political scene. Yes, she has done some damage to liberal causes, as with spewing her garbage about “government death panels.” However, that’s garbage that anyone could have, and would have, spewed to the same effect. What anyone can’t do is mobilize her fiercely motivated crowd to choose unelectable candidates like Christine O’Donnell, Sharron Angle, and Joe Miller in Republican primaries.
The GOP should run Susana Martinez, or Condi Rice – at the very least as VP.
Neither of those women is acceptable to the Republican base. Condi Rice believes that the government should not make women’s health care decisions for them, and Susana Martinez favors expanding access to health care to people who are uninsurable in the private market.
Toast! To Mrs. Katrina Pierson :-)
LisaC: Del, I’m going to let you in on a little secret: liberals, by and large, benefit from Sarah Palin’s presence on the political scene. Yes, she has done some damage to liberal causes, as with spewing her garbage about “government death panels.” However, that’s garbage that anyone could have, and would have, spewed to the same effect.
Palin is such a kook, and in the end the “death panel” silliness has probably ended up a net gain for Democrats, in my opinion. I quote:
Palin specified that she was referring to Section 1233 of bill HR 3200 which would have paid physicians for providing voluntary counseling to Medicare patients about living wills, advance directives, and end-of-life options.
FactCheck had Palin giving one of their “Whoppers,” and PolitiFact gave her “Lie of the Year” honors.
Still, there was enough stuff stirred up that the payments to doctors for providing voluntary counseling to patients was not included in the health care law, as passed.
Wow – just imagine if it had been…
Here is what is really hilarious about Palin’s nutty lack of knowledge about history and her own Republican Party. In 2003, the Medicare prescription drug bill was passed, with the votes of 42 Republican Senators, and 204 Republican Congresspersons.
From the text of that bill: ”The covered services are: evaluating the beneficiary’s need for pain and symptom management, including the individual’s need for hospice care; counseling the beneficiary with respect to end-of-life issues and care options, and advising the beneficiary regarding advanced care planning.”
How ya doin,’ Sarah? :P
You seem not to understand Doug that whatever your thoughts regarding Sarah, Hillary is a larger problem. How? Hillary was privy to classified info from day one and took full advantage of it to elevate her status and image. She did not do us any favors by exclaiming “what difference does it make” either. Did the American people buy this line??? Talk about lack of honesty and integrity. All that education that Hillary possesses did not teach her to be an honest office holder. Making deals with Obama prior to the election, to take the SOS job as the consolation prize is self-evident.
Do you honestly think that given her history, she will uphold the integrity of the presidency?
And lastly do you think that Ms. Katrina Pierson has a very good chance of humiliating Hillary in 2016? No unresolved issues of national concern and no skeletons in her closet - Hillary she ain’t… :)
If you haven’t made any mistakes you haven’t done anything.
There are plenty in the gop who will make Katrina feel humiliated.
Thomas, not sure what all you mean. Sarah Palin isn’t really a problem for Republicans since she ain’t gonna be running for anything big.
Hillary is a larger problem.
For who? Say what you want – she’s going to be tough to beat if she runs. I’ve never really liked her. Many guys I know have what is really a “visceral” reaction to her – not liking her at all, and that’s really it for me.
However, I think Ex-GOP is right – she’s the odds-on favorite right now. Bet on her against the field.
___
do you think that Ms. Katrina Pierson has a very good chance of humiliating Hillary in 2016?
No, I think she has zero chance of that. I do not, of course, have a crystal ball, but that is some farfetched stuff there, TR.
Well Doug, I am going to write to her campaign and whomever I can to promote giving Ms. Pierson as much exposure (appearances and platform) as possible. Maybe then it will not be so farfetched and satisfy your skepticism. :)
Her campaign is greasing the wheels as we speak…
Thomas – she’ll be available in a couple of weeks to start campaigning, because she ain’t gonna make it out of the primary.
I disagree Ex. The reason she is a subject of a thread on this blog is because our side deems her a good candidate to counter the democratic machine. Surprises, as I said, do happen so don’t hold your breath just yet.
I have not missed a beat, yes ;)
Thomas R: Maybe then it will not be so farfetched and satisfy your skepticism.
Could be, Thomas – we will see.
Pierson won’t be driving anybody to drink anytime soon – she lost to Sessions tonight in the primary.