Kshama Sawant is an admitted Socialist who sits on the Seattle City council.
From the Seattle Times:
The Seattle City Council member, you may recall, spent the last six months protesting not Trump, but Hillary Clinton. Sawant held a rally in Philadelphia — the biggest city in a crucial state — urging people not to vote for Clinton. She called Clinton a warmonger and a tool of Wall Street. She wrote a column in The Nation, the national house organ for the progressive left, urging liberals not to “waste your vote on the corporate agenda” — by which she meant Clinton.
“Progressives should not support Clinton,” she said, calling the election a “false choice between a corporate Democrat and a yet more horrifying Republican.”
What she said about Clinton is probably true but it turns out she seriously miscalculated in trying to bring Hillary down. And so now from the same article:
The other day she led two rallies against Trump’s shocking election. She said she was so horrified at Trump’s “racist agenda” that she was calling for a national protest in Washington, D.C., in January to shut down the inauguration.
“I think it is our moral and political and historic duty to call for peaceful and powerful protest against Trump’s agenda,” she said.
Hmmm…. so didn’t she think this through? She just likes having things to complain about? No matter how things turn out she will never be happy with the results? She has mental issues? All of the above?
My advice is to never compromise with a socialist thinking it will stop their whining. It doesn’t work that way. It only encourages them.
Never compromise with a socialist because they are merely patient commies who want to take all of your property for the glory of their god, The State.
what fred said. she is a socialist, and probably a marxist-leninist. they are not like you and me. get comfy with the idea. you are going to need to understand some day.
she is a marxit. just like in europe, where they kill people. kapish.
Calling for people to “shut down the innauguration”, isn’t that inciting insurrection? https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2383
Stopping the inauguration to prevent the legitimate transition of power can only be interpreted as insurrection in my book. So, she should be arrested. Of course this administration is only interested in the rule of man, and not the rule of law, so I doubt it would happen.
Of course this lawless group would use it as pretext for martial law.
“…compliance with the … Constitution” — no, you’re missing something that most people miss. The Constitution is not a constraint on ordinary people, so you and I are not at all involved in compliance with the Constitution, or lack of it. The Constitution is a constraint on politicians and other government officials; it is they who are required to obey it (and are required to swear an oath to do so).
It’s all full of win for her. Hillary loses, forcing a contest for control of the Democrat Party, which she expects to win. This is happening. Trump wins, activating the left against the State. This is happening. What she expects: Trump will (be made to) fail. Crisis ensues. The Progressive Left are the last ones standing. Democratic Socialism to the rescue! Professors Cloward and Piven could not be reached for comment.
What? A socialist not thinking through the consequences of her actions?
Say it isn’t so! I’m shocked! Positively gob-smacked! My aback is taken, my over is whelmed, and my mouth is agape…. Well, maybe not.
Of course, it’s easy to say something was stupid with hindsight. But the basic fact that she doesn’t like democracy should not be overlooked. She just wants power, like all socialists.
The song Rag Momma Rag suddenly pops into my head.