53percenter's Blog

Is there something in the water in New York City? Or maybe it’s the kombucha? Whatever it is, it seems to be turning the city’s Democrats into minor-key Marxists.

Of course there’s Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a former member of the Democratic Socialists of America who doesn’t shirk the S-word. And then there’s Bill de Blasio, the city’s mayor. While he presides over one of the Western Hemisphere’s great centers of capitalism, he doesn’t seem to be particularly enamored of the system itself.

Nowhere was that contradiction more evident than during a Friday appearance on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” where the Democrat declined to endorse capitalism and instead called himself a “social Democrat” and “New Deal Democrat.”

In the exchange, de Blasio was pressured by Republican strategist Susan Del Percio to say, once and for all, that he “believe(d) in the capitalist system.”

“I believe in — I’m a social Democrat,” de Blasio said. “I believe that we’re living in a capitalist system that has strengths and weaknesses and we have to address it with a strong role of government. And right now, that’s not happening sufficiently.

TRENDING: Poetic Justice: Tucker Digs Up Media Matters President’s Past of Staggeringly ‘Bigoted’ Writing

“Here’s the bottom line: We look at a country where the federal government has substantially, consistently put wealth in the hands of the 1 percent,” he continued.

“That’s why I say very clearly — we have an opportunity to, this year, out loud say our national government, from Ronald Reagan to present, has continued to empower the 1 percent through the policies of the federal government. Working people have created all that wealth in this country, they have not benefited.

“So I say there is plenty of money in this world, and there’s plenty of money in this country, but it’s in the wrong hands. And we have to have policies that give people a chance again by redistributing some of that money back to working people.”

“So do you consider yourself a capitalist?” Del Percio asked.

“I consider myself a social Democrat,” de Blasio responded. He said that while “we are living in a capitalist society,” he “philosophically identifies” with the social Democrat label. He would also refer to himself as a “New Deal Democrat,” although he sounded a bit more like Huey Long to this viewer.

Oh, and he also said during his appearance that he could have worked things out with Amazon so that it would build its second headquarters in New York City. I mean, he may not be willing to say he’s a capitalist, but he certainly knows where his bread doth be buttered.

Nevertheless, words like these have a tendency to become actions, and de Blasio remains a rising star among the Democrats. At least at the moment, as the mayor of New York City, he doesn’t exactly have the capacity to redistribute much wealth to what he would consider the “right hands.”

However, what you saw on “Morning Joe” is what you’re seeing from more and more Democrats. They believe that the capitalist system — which has given most Americans a quality of life few on earth could have dreamed of even half a century ago — is inherently flawed because some people have a lot of money and that money could be in someone else’s hands.

RELATED: Americans Give Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez a Tough Reality Check in New Poll

Notice, too, that he believes “working people have created all that wealth in this country,” as if entrepreneurs who took risks and created jobs just sat back and let the money flow into their bank accounts. I’m curious what the wealthier denizens of his city, many of whom fall into this category, have to say about this.

You would think, given the implications of this exchange and the fact that he didn’t come off so well, that the mayor would be trying to play it down. If the Twitter account of his communications director is any indication, however, that’s not the case:

hell yeah https://t.co/JJjkrh9l3k

— mike casca (@cascamike) March 15, 2019

Kinda-sorta-socialism: Hell yeah.

Can we please get some sort of check on that water in New York City? Ocasio-Cortez was bad enough, but now we even have the mayor sounding like her.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

Please don’t get me wrong. I like kittens. Cats, well, maybe not so much; I don’t see why you would keep and feed something that won’t even come when you call it and whose only trick is the ability to go to the bathroom in a pile of sand.

But kittens, they’re adorable. I think we can all agree on that.

I think we can also agree on the fact that kittens are less important than babies. No matter how cute the kitten, no matter how meme-worthy it is, human babies take precedence.

So, why is it that Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon introduced a bill that would save the lives of kittens used in research less than a month after helping Democrats successfully block legislation that would protect babies born alive during abortions?

According to NBC News, Merkley’s law was designed “to prevent the Department of Agriculture from continuing deadly experiments on kittens.”

TRENDING: Poetic Justice: Tucker Digs Up Media Matters President’s Past of Staggeringly ‘Bigoted’ Writing

“The agency has been breeding kittens in Beltsville, Maryland, and infecting them with a parasite that can cause toxoplasmosis, a foodborne illness. Scientists harvest the parasites from their stool for two to three weeks, and then euthanize and incinerate the cats,” they reported.

“The USDA’s decision to slaughter kittens after they are used in research is an archaic practice and horrific treatment, and we need to end it,” Merkley said in a statement.

There were plenty of great soundbites from advocates of the bill, including one individual from a watchdog group who called it “taxpayer-funded kitten slaughter.” (If there’s some sort of award for political blurb of the year, I would urge the judges to please consider that one seriously.)

“The USDA’s archaic kitten experiments are out of step with 21st-century research practices and animal welfare recommendations,” Hannah Shaw, founder of animal advocacy group Kitten Lady, said.

“Continuing to breed and kill perfectly healthy kittens for toxoplasmosis research is unethical and unnecessary, and I’m grateful to Senator Merkley for introducing the KITTEN Act to stop it once and for all.”

When it comes to animal welfare, however, Merkley is a bit less concerned about Homo sapiens.

The Oregon senator, as TheBlaze noted, was just one of the Democrats who blocked the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. The bill would have extended protections for babies born alive during an abortion procedure, something that’s increasingly important now that we’ve seen states such as New York and Vermont pass bills which allows greater latitude when it comes to late-term abortions. (Oh, and there was that whole Ralph Northam kerfuffle we’ve all seemingly forgot about, too.)

In a statement, Family Research Council president Tony Perkins discussed the cruel paradox in Merkley’s votes.

“What do cats have that newborn babies don’t? Democrats’ support,” he wrote.

“In one of the sickest ironies no one is talking about, Senate liberals picked this moment — 17 days after they voted to kill America’s perfectly healthy infants — to fight for the humane treatment of kittens. Maybe the DNC’s strategists are out to lunch, or maybe the Left really is this shameless, but I can’t wait to see some of these politicians standing on debate platforms next year telling the American people that when it comes to protecting living things: We chose cats over kids.”

RELATED: Mike Huckabee Uses Brilliant Meme To Ruthlessly Call Out Dems’ ‘Obsession With Baby-Killing’

“‘The KITTEN Act will protect these innocent animals from being needlessly euthanized in government testing,’ Merkley told reporters, ‘and make sure that they can be adopted by loving families instead.’ Does he even hear himself? They should be treated and adopted? That’s exactly what Americans have requested for living, breathing babies. Democrats said no. Killing a child is a ‘personal decision,’ they said, and Congress shouldn’t get in the way.”

But then, the Democrats have decided to plant their flag upon abortion rights: Any sort of restriction upon the ability of a woman to get an abortion on demand and for the baby to be killed — no matter what — is automatically an interference in a decision that should only be made by a woman and her doctor.

Felines, however, are another story. They need protection. So goes the modern, tone-deaf Democrat Party, unwilling to protect babies born alive during an abortion but ready to expend political capital upon kittens.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.