Democrats Disavow Their Own US Senate Candidate

By Bob Ellis

Mark Clayton (original, unmodified photo from his campaign website)

This is hilarious. A conservative in Tennessee entered the U.S. Senate race legitimately as a Democrat, and then won the primary. Now the Democrats have officially disavowed their own party’s nominee.

From the Daily Caller:

The Tennessee Democratic Party disavowed its own U.S. Senate nominee Friday, announcing that he is “associated with a known hate group” — in this case, a conservative advocacy organization.

Mark Clayton won Tuesday’s Democratic primary with 30 percent of the vote in a field of seven candidates.

By disavowing their own primary winner, are Democrats telling us that (gasp) they aren’t really as open-minded and inclusive as they lead us to believe? I know that’s hard to believe, but the conclusion is hard to escape. (wink, wink)

Of course, any time you listen to anything said by a Leftist, you need to whip out the Lexicon of Leftist Language to be able to convert it to reality. According to the American Clarion Guide to LiberalSpeak, “hate” in the language of the Left means:

to tell the truth about or criticize, esp. the truth about immoral behavior. Can be considered “negative campaigning” (see definition) if employed against a liberal candidate;

Any person or group who exposes the truth about the Left’s dark, immoral agenda is a “hater.” In fact, the liberal hate group Southern Poverty Law Center recently labeled American Clarion’s predecessor, Dakota Voice, as a “hate group” because some of our writers had for some time been exposing their Leftist, anti-American, anti-Christian, immoral agenda. It’s a classic Leftist tactic to engage in projection and blame others for precisely what they are themselves doing (just like the homofascists who were so hateful toward Chick-fil-A for admitting what every human civilization throughout history has realized).

Turns out that Clayton’s group is (like the Family Research Council, the Constitution Party, Mass Resistance, Oath Keepers, Dakota Voice, and many others) everything that what typical “hate” groups pass for on the Left. His organization stands for “hateful” things like:

• Defending marriage from counterfeiters
• Allowing children to pray in school
• Allowing Americans to exercise their religious freedom as guaranteed by the First Amendment
• Protecting innocent human life
• Promoting Boy Scouts
• Opposes high taxes and wasteful spending
• Equality under the law
• Taxpayer funding or endorsement of pornography and obscenity

My, what a horrible, “hate”ful agenda! It’s no wonder the peace-loving, tolerant Democrat Party wanted to disavow a representative of this nauseating agenda!

So now the Tennessee Democrats are on record disavowing marriage, school prayer, religious freedom, protecting innocent human life, the Boy Scouts, low taxes, responsible spending, equality under the law, and are cool with taxpayer funding and/or endorsement of pornography and/or obscenity. Wonderful. We seldom get this kind of honesty about their “values” out of Democrats.

If I wasn’t so well-known to the Left in South Dakota, I might consider running as a Democrat, just to have some fun. After all, if Democrats can run as “Republicans” in South Dakota, why couldn’t I run as a Democrat in South Dakota? Democrats seem to think it’s fine and wonderful for liberals who obviously don’t share the GOP’s values to run for office as “Republicans;” therefore, they should be very pleased to have a conservative who doesn’t share their liberal values run for office as a “Democrat.” I could just see Leftists like Cory Heidelberger and Bill Fleming applauding my candidacy in the name of diversity, inclusion, tolerance, not walking in lockstep, open-mindedness, differing viewpoints, and all that other wonderful drivel. Who knows, they might even send me a contribution check or two out of the magnanimity of their liberal hearts.

Now that I think about it, if the Democrats in Tennessee have the guts to disavow a candidate who obviously isn’t committed to their party’s Leftist values, why is the South Dakota GOP so gutless as to allow liberals who don’t share the Republican Party’s conservative values to run for office and sit in office (and caucus)?

Do Democrats actually have more integrity than Republicans? While I would normally roll on the floor laughing at such a contention, it appears that at least with regard to the integrity of their party values in Tennessee, they do.