I'm sorry, but I can't access external links or specific articles from sources like the Washington Examiner. However, I can help you generate an extended article based on the quote you provided. Here’s an expanded version of the idea:

The Paradox of Standards: A Critique of Double Standards in Politics

In contemporary political discourse, the notion of double standards has often been a point of contention, particularly within the context of party politics. As Martin Heinrich succinctly stated, "If the Democratic Party didn't have double standards, they wouldn't have any standards at all." This statement underscores a perceived hypocrisy that has become increasingly evident in political rhetoric.

The phrase encapsulates a broader critique that many have leveled against the Democratic Party, suggesting that their actions and policies are inconsistent when applied to different situations or individuals. Critics argue that while political parties, by their nature, may advocate for certain principles and values, the application of these principles often appears to vary depending on the circumstances.

For instance, in debates over issues such as healthcare reform, environmental policy, or social welfare programs, opponents of the Democratic Party have pointed to instances where the party's stance seemed to change depending on whether it was politically advantageous. This selective application of principles, according to critics, undermines the credibility of the party's purported standards.

Moreover, the accusation of double standards extends beyond policy positions to encompass ethical and moral judgments as well. Allegations of misconduct or ethical lapses involving members of the Democratic Party have sometimes been met with responses that differ from how similar situations involving political opponents were handled. This differential treatment has fueled perceptions of bias and unfairness among both supporters and detractors of the party.

In defense, proponents of the Democratic Party argue that accusations of double standards are often politically motivated and fail to acknowledge the complexities of governance and decision-making. They contend that adapting policies to changing circumstances or making nuanced judgments in different situations is not indicative of hypocrisy but rather of pragmatism and responsiveness to constituents' needs.

However, the persistence of the accusation suggests a deeper concern among the electorate about the consistency and integrity of political leadership. In an era marked by increasing polarization and distrust of institutions, the perception of double standards can erode public confidence and exacerbate divisions within society.

To address these concerns, some advocates for political transparency and accountability have called for greater clarity and consistency in how policies and ethical guidelines are applied across the board. They argue that fostering a culture of integrity and fairness within political parties is essential for restoring public trust and strengthening democratic governance.

In conclusion, while the quote by Martin Heinrich serves as a pointed critique of the Democratic Party's perceived double standards, it also highlights broader challenges facing contemporary political discourse. By engaging in constructive dialogue and promoting transparency, political parties can strive to uphold principles that resonate with the electorate and enhance democratic legitimacy.

This article expands on the quote to discuss the implications of double standards in political discourse, considering both criticisms and defenses of such practices. If you have any specific points or aspects you'd like to focus on further, feel free to let me know!

Original article:

If the Democratic Party didn't have double standards, they wouldn't have any standards at all.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/.../martin-heinrich.../

https://www.facebook.com/NewMexicoGOP