Manchin Blasts Biden White House for ‘Inexcusable’ Bullying Tactics on BBB Vote

The abuse that US Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), was subjected to by his own party in the run-up and aftermath of his decision to vote “no” on President Biden’s spendthrift Build Back Better Act bill was unprecedented in American political history.

The Senator blamed members of Mr. Biden’s White House staff for bullying news reports aimed at manipulating his vote. “This is staff. And they drove some things and they put some things out that were absolutely inexcusable,” Manchin said. “And they know what it is. And that’s it.”

While Manchin didn’t specifically cite the White House staff’s abusive leaks to the press, he called them out on their failed attempt to bully him into Democrat lockstep.

“They figured, surely to God we can move one person. We can badger and beat up one person…Surely we get enough protesters to make that person uncomfortable enough,” Manchin told reporters after the vote. “Well, guess what? I’m from West Virginia…I’m not from where they’re from. And they just beat the living crap out of people and think they’ll be submissive, period,” he added.

After Manchin’s announcement, far-Left fascist members of the Democrat party took aim at Manchin with US Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and US Sen. Bernie Sanders (S0VT), calling Manchin’s vote “Bullsh*t.”

In a Monday interview, Democrat Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), called Manchin’s vote an “egregious breach of the trust of the President” and said that Democrats have “every right to be furious with Joe Manchin.”

Why This Is Important

The idea that Manchin was “expected” to vote a certain way is outrageous and perfectly illustrates the weak-willed pack mentality of the modern-day Democrat Party. It also demonstrates that President Washington’s warning in his Farewell Address was a vision of things to come and a warning about how our Republic would approach dying.

In his address, President Washington warned of three specific interrelated dangers that threatened to destroy the Union: regionalism, partisanship, and foreign entanglements. With regard to partisanship (or “factions”), Washington was referring to the establishment of political parties which, although already emerging, were considered by the overwhelming majority of Americans in the early days of the Republic as divisive, disruptive, and the tools of demagogues seeking power.

Washington said, in part:

“Let me now take a more comprehensive view and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally. This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but in those of the popular form it is seen in its greatest rankness and is truly their worst enemy.

“The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation on the ruins of public liberty.

“Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and the duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

“It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

“…[I]n governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged…[a] fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest instead of warming it should consume.”

Today we are witness to the validation of Washington’s fears and a perfect example of the fruition of those fears comes in the bullying of Sen. Machin by his own Party.

No elected representative in government is beholden to any faction but the people he or she represents. It is not a “duty” to vote lockstep with a political party and expecting such fealty is despotic in and of itself. It is for this exact reason that the passage of the 17th Amendment mandating the direct election of US senators was a knife in the heart of our Republic.

Additionally, the dominance of the political party in today’s American political reality subjugates sovereign citizens to the more dominant political party in any location, thus disenfranchising them of representation where their beliefs and preservation of rights as individuals come into play legislatively.

Today, the only two people in Washington, DC, saving the Republic from immediate serfdom are US Sens. Joe Manchin (D-WV), and Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ). Their courage to stand up to the pathetic pack mentality of the now fascist Democrat Party – shepherded by political vipers like Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and the complete ideological ignorance of “The Squad – should be commended by all.

Quite frankly, it would serve as a shot across the bow for every American politician if Manchin and Sinema declared themselves Independents. But then, aren’t all of our elected officials supposed to be independent-minded when serving their constituents?