Monday Morning Meme Madness
Senator Ossoff's Disgrace: Campaigning with Despicable Lies from the Pulpit on Father's Da...
Reid, White, and Blue: Ex-MSNBC Host Says This Fourth Will Be Joy-Less and...
Awkward White Lady Energy: Spanberger’s Juneteenth Dance Goes Horribly Wrong
Ro Money Ro Problems: Dem Khanna Wants to Confiscate Billions From Elon Musk...
Europeans Taste US Suburbs and Ranch Dressing, Realize They’re Poor — Left Still...
Carpetbagger Conway's Tantrum: Flipping President Trump's Limo the Bird While Begging for...
Ruben Gallego’s Sweet Deal: Campaign Cash for Super Bowl Trips, Disney Vacations &...
NYT Turns Father’s Day Into ‘Trans Dads’ Day — And Proves How Out...
A High Percentage of Filers Got a Cut, House GOP Boasts
Leftist Meltdown: Keith Edwards Accused of Darkening Crockett's Skin After Questioning Her...
Father’s Day Through the Void: Grief, Gratitude, and the Irreplaceable Role of Good...
Sen. Rand Paul Fumes About Healthcare Expense
YIKES: Did Jasmine Crockett Just Tell Democrats to POUND SAND? Because It Sounds...
Marc Elias Tries (and Fails) to Rewrite Mail-In Ballot Voting History

Spartacus Booker finally addresses the scourge of lynchings in this country

In a bold declaration that has all the markings of grandstanding legislation, Cory Booker and Kamala Harris have co-sponsored a bill to make lynching a federal hate crime. It would seem this was a major oversight in the history of the Senate.

Advertisement

Despite a noted lack of a rash of lynchings taking place, many had wild praise for the Senator taking a bold stance against a not-very-prominent problem.

“Have to”. Because the concept of lynching being illegal was unclear to many people?

Needed? Have there been cases recently of people commiting lynchings who have gone free? Uh, nope. It was largely symbolic legislation, to make a statement regarding the past instances. Booker himself attests to this.

Advertisement

“We do know the passage of this bill, even though it cannot reverse irrevocable harm that lynching was used as a terror of suppression, the passage of this bill is a recognition of that dark past.”

If you are confused by the fact that murdering another person is already considered a serious crime you are not alone.

So if it is unneeded, and admittedly a mostly symbolic bill, what was the purpose of bringing this up in the first place? Could it possibly be to see what politicians from the opposition party might vote against it, and use that vote as a political tool? Not just cynics are thinking this way.

Advertisement

Annnnnnnd there it is. Most of the time a new law gets passed to address a serious problem. This one seems at least equally designed to create one. Republican Tim Scott, in a posssible bid to stem that effort, was also a co-sponsor on the toothless bill.

We are eagerly awaiting the next proposal from Booker, making the hijacking of stagecoaches a federal crime.

 

 

 

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement