Retired Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman’s attempt to own Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert (R) on Twitter backfired in spectacular fashion as users let him know what they thought of his expert-class take.
“Stand back, everyone–he’s a political scientist!”
Selectively touting his credentials from academia while ignoring his vast experience as a shill for the Democratic Party, Vindman couldn’t help but critique the congresswoman after she appeared on “The Charlie Kirk Show” denouncing the impact leftist teachers’ unions were having on government-run schools.
Boebert had been reacting to a clip of AFT president Randi Weingarten when she exclaimed Kirk, “We’re not a democracy! So quit with that. Maybe that’s where you’re getting it wrong is saying we’re a democracy. We’re a constitutional republic.”
Steeped with condescension, Vindman posted his reaction with a pseudo-endorsement of Adam Frisch, a Democratic challenger to her seat, and wrote, “Political scientist here: A constitutional republic IS a democracy. What Bobo want is an anti-democratic state governed by a minority. We should all be troubled that a sitting member of Congress is preaching for an anti-American form of government. Follow @AdamforColorado.”
Political scientist here: A constitutional republic IS a democracy. What Bobo want is an anti-democratic state governed by a minority.
We should all be troubled that a sitting member of Congress is preaching for an anti-American form of government. Follow @AdamForColorado https://t.co/uQhvwNqqXv
— Alexander S. Vindman (@AVindman) April 15, 2023
Positions like that may go unchallenged on the university echo chamber circuit and among revisionist historian peddling “The 1619 Project,” but in the real world the distinction between a full-blown democracy and democratically electing representatives was not so readily dismissed.
“It’s not,” one person succinctly replied while another called out Vindman for having a motive and wrote, “No, tis not. You’re pushing your propaganda to get the result that you are accusing her of wanting. Democracy is anti-American per the constitution.”
— Pam (@ReingruberPam1) April 16, 2023
No, tis not. You’re pushing your propaganda to get the result that you are accusing her of wanting. Democracy is anti-American per the constitution.
— Lifting Libertarian (@LiftingLiberty1) April 16, 2023
Having had sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution, many might expect Vindman to have a firmer grasp on what it was he was expected to defend. Then again, quite a few made sure to point out that the retired Lt. Col. didn’t exactly have the best track record when it came to that.
You’re a traitor.
— The Real Johnald (@SavageDystrophy) April 15, 2023
He is a sellout. Ukraine has been nothing but a laundry mat to siphon off public "Aid" money into the pockets of people like Mr. Vindman. Why else would he get so upset when Trump starting sniffing around about the corruption going on there?
— Ron Johnson (@Salvorhardin77) April 16, 2023
You literally admitted to lying and leaking documents to the House Intelligence Committee….
— Joe Local (@JoeLocalSoCal) April 16, 2023
Of course, some couldn’t help but mock Vindman for beginning his claim by promoting his service record and Ivy League education that ultimately left him no better off than a teenager following propaganda pushed by the scores of White House-hired TikTok influencers endeavoring to sway the next crop of voters to the Democratic Party’s progressive agenda.
A constitutional republic, is a Republic! I’d think that a “political scientist” would know that
— CarrieLWebb (@webb_carrie) April 16, 2023
Stand back, everyone—he’s a political scientist!
— DrM (@DrMagnolias) April 16, 2023
As a political scientist, you might ask for a refund
— Melanie (@takestoolong2) April 16, 2023
For better or worse, his wife, Rachel Vindman, came to his support and commented on the post, “Not for nothing, but she’s a moron. I’d bet my house (our house, that is) she couldn’t define democracy much less any other form of government.”
But even those who didn’t like Boebert were calling out the obvious inaccuracy stemming from the Vindman household. “I’m not a Lauren Boebert fan,” one wrote, “but she is, strictly speaking, fundamentally correct. A democracy is ‘rule of the majority’ — A federation of 50 states, with powers split between states and federal government, can never be a democracy in the literal definition of the word.”
Not for nothing, but she’s a moron. I’d bet my house (our house, that is) she couldn’t define democracy much less any other form of government.
— Rachel Vindman (@natsechobbyist) April 15, 2023
I’m not a Lauren Boebert fan, but she is, strictly speaking, fundamentally correct. A democracy is “rule of the majority”
A federation of 50 states, with powers split between states and federal government, can never be a democracy in the literal definition of the word.
— ZalinskySilverworks (@ZalinskyS) April 16, 2023
DONATE TO AMERICAN WIRE
If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to American Wire News to help us fight them.
- Trans actor Elliot Page: ‘I knew when I was four years old … I understood that I wasn’t a girl’ - June 7, 2023
- Maryland Dem: Gender ideology puts ‘some Muslim families on the same side of an issue as white supremacists’ - June 7, 2023
- Students may soon be learning ‘reparations math’ thanks to 1619 Project Education Network - June 7, 2023
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.