Thursday, April 30, 2015

Does Josh Earnest really think we're too stupid to understand what he tried to do with this question?

Is there any better example of evasiveness, misdirection, and just plain failing to respond to the question asked? Josh Earnest just answered a question that was not asked, but failed to address the question that WAS asked. And he did it with an expression on his face that any mother would recognize..."Mom, I just told you a lie."

Liberals, are you too dim to recognize Earnest's dishonest answers. He pulls this stuff in every press conference. Can't you see it? Really?

Monday, April 27, 2015

Why Did They Come?

According to some estimates we have about 20,000,000 people in our country illegally. That includes children. Think about what that means!

What that means is that there are up to 20,000,000 people who entered the USA without filling out the paperwork that other immigrants have to fill out. That's unfair to those who fill out the paperwork. If it is OK for that 20,000,000 to come, why isn't it OK for Europeans, Middle Easterners, Africans, Asian or Australians to come as well?

Why did 20,000,000 come to the USA? Is it because their countries are poor and regressive? Is it because their countries are political hot spots? Is it because they lack the guts to fight for freedom and economic advancement in their own country?

20,000,000 people could surely have a strong influence in the way their countries are run, even if you spread 20,000,000 among all of Central America, South America and Mexico. Why don't they work. fight and die for their countries like we did for ours? 

My sense is that they find it much easier and more convenient to just "sneak" across the southern border of the USA and receive the benefits provided by the other 300,000,000 Americans who were already here. 

It is true that some of them are willing to work hard for their families. But they could work hard in their own countries. If there are no jobs back there, why don't they work for economic freedom in their own countries? Why do they continue to allow their countries to adopt economic policies that do lend themselves to economic growth, freedom and the ability to make a profit in a business?

If they come here because education opportunities are here, why don't they fight for education opportunities in their own countries? We did it here. Are they somehow inferior as human beings to us?

I suppose the real question is not "Why did they come?" but, "Why do we let them come?" Are we so bent on being enablers that we refuse to do anything about our immigration problem? Could it be that the issue is about political power, as the Party that gives them their benefits is certain they will get their votes, thus staying in power?

You betcha!

Friday, April 24, 2015

When is Enough Enough?

According to the New York Times, while she was Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton gave the Russians special consideration in at least one uranium deal in exchange for enormous amounts of cash.

"After their purchase of a major Canadian mining company with world-wide holdings and dealings, the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton."

It turns out that Hillary Clinton’s uranium scandal is much bigger than Whitewater or Hillary’s emailgate or any of her other crimes and unethical behaviors. It is, in fact, so egregious that, if proven in a court of law, would be worthy of extended jail time, that is: her dealings were 100% illegal. 

They also have dealt a stunning blow to national security. Major donors to the Clintons sold half of America’s uranium to Russia. Uranium used for nuclear weapons.

And liberals want her to be the next president.

That figures.

"We are the one we've been waiting for." Barack Obama

Thursday, April 23, 2015

Chaos in the World

It was an interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews broadcast on the network Tuesday evening. President BO (the amateur president) said "there's a lot of tumult and chaos around the world right now."

To which Chris Matthews responded, "Another area I know you care about, I certainly do, is Africa and on your feelings about watching those refugees, 950 people drowning, just trying to find a life. And then also Kenya, a country we all care about, very moderate country, pro-Western, getting terrorized as college kids, who are the hope of their families, getting killed because they're Christians."

"Look, it's a heartbreaking situation," President Obama said. "There's a lot of tumult and chaos around the world right now. And part of our goal, as the world's leading superpower, is to work with partner countries, to try to resolve conflicts, to be ruthless in going after terrorism, but we're not going to do that by ourselves and we're not going to do it just by deploying more Marines in every country that has these problems."

"We're seeing some success; in other areas, we're still having problems," Obama said. "Somalia is actually improving from where it was 20 years ago. But it's still not where it needs to be and it still has these hotbeds of terrorist activity that spill over into Kenya."

What I like best is "ruthless...but..." There are some areas in which we will be "ruth," not "ruthless." 

As liberals always do, let's just change the meaning of  "ruthless."

The Merriam Webster dictionary defines RUTHLESS thushaving no pity: Merciless, cruel.
That definition is pretty strong. Either President BO (the amateur president) does not know the meaning of the word or he changed its definition to fit what he intends to do: NOT MUCH.

Wednesday, April 22, 2015

How to Dodge a Question and Look Stupid Doing It

NBC News reporter: “…How do you win this time? What’s your strategy?”

Hillary Clinton: “I’m havin’ a great time. Can’t look forward to any more than I am. Thank you.”

So, if I understand Ms. Clinton correctly, she will win by having a great time. Wow! That’s related to strategy isn't it?

And she’s looking forward, but not to any more than she is.

If you’re a liberal, that probably makes sense. To the rest of us, it is gibberish.

“Thank you.” At least that part is close to coherent, if somewhat unrelated to strategy.

Yep. This is the woman we want as president. She fits right into the Obama narrative…right?

Watch her here.

Monday, April 20, 2015

Didn't I Tell You?

A new study conducted at Harvard University shows that in America, Liberals have a significantly lower IQ than Conservatives. The study was conducted on 100,000 registered voters in 40 different states over the last twelve years, and has concluded its results.

The first part of the study lists the correlation between political beliefs and intelligence. Subjects of the study were chosen at random and requested to come to an unmarked van to take a test and answer some questions for a reasonable amount of money.

Of the 100,000 people, there were people from many doctrines, from conservative to liberal to Marxist to fascist. 

Socialists came out on bottom, with an average IQ of 87. 

The second worst were Liberals and then Marxists, with 88 and 89 respectively. 

Conservatives received an average score of 110, which is significantly above average. However, the conservatives did not score the highest. 

The holder of second place were Communists with an average I.Q of 115, and the first place was apolitical people who did not follow any specific doctrine, who received a whopping score on average of 135. (You are not required to read or accept this part of the report.)

Other parts of the study included the daily activities of the various people based on their doctrines. 

Apparently, Liberals are five times more likely to commit a crime, steal or cheat on a test than anybody else except for Socialists, 52% of which have committed a major felony while being watched. 
Conservatives not only did not commit any crimes, but they actually prevented them, as the few events where a Conservative was threatened by a thief or mugger was hindered by a concealed handgun.  
Also, Communists are the most likely to commit rape or sexual assault, second to socialists.
The study was conducted in other countries as well, where 81% of Muslim Extremists admitted to following the Liberal doctrine and idolizing President Barack Obama. 
The study was conducted by a group of roughly 900 different scientists across the country over the past twelve years, each one taking on a little over a hundred people per person.

Sunday, April 19, 2015

Friday, April 17, 2015

How Much Today Looks Like Yesterday Said It Would

50 years ago, people would stop what they were doing, turn their attention to the radio to hear one particular commentator. His programs were short and to the point. He presented his commentary as though it were a story, using word pictures and other literary devices. His voice was distinct. People trusted him and he was trustworthy.

Here is a prediction he made way back in 1965. Some of you weren't even born then. But even you can understand how eerily accurate his prediction was.

His name was Paul Harvey. He is worth a listen.

Thursday, April 16, 2015

What Drives Her to Lie Unnecessarily?

Hillary keeps her distance
while pretending to care
It was on her "Scooby" tour. Hillary said:

“We are turning down people who really want to work. I mean they are here to work and a lot of them now have children who are American citizens, and they are doing the best they can to try to make a good life for themselves and their families.

“And you know, I think if we were to just go around this room, there are a lot of immigrant stories. All my grandparents, you know, came over here and you know my grandfather went to work in lace mill in Scranton, Pennsylvania and worked there until he retired at 65. He started there when he was a teenager and just kept going.

“So I sit here and I think well you’re talking about the second, third generation. That’s me, that’s you.

“And we are saying to all these other people who want the same dreams and the same aspirations and the willingness to work hard just like our families did that no, we’re not going to make it easy for you, we’re not going to make it legal for you. And I just think that’s such a short term, unfortunate outcome for us and well as for them.

Here's the way Buzzfeed characterized it: 

Speaking in Iowa Wednesday, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that all her grandparents had immigrated to the United States, a story that conflicts with public census and other records related to her maternal and paternal grandparents.
The story of her grandmother specifically immigrating is one Clinton has told before. Clinton’s sole foreign-born grandparent, Hugh Rodham Sr., immigrated as a child.

“Her grandparents always spoke about the immigrant experience and, as a result she has always thought of them as immigrants,” a Clinton spokesman told BuzzFeed News. “As has been correctly pointed out, while her grandfather was an immigrant, it appears that Hillary’s grandmother was born shortly after her parents and siblings arrived in the U.S. in the early 1880s.”
Hillary has some driving force that requires her to try to fit in to whatever audience she's confronted with. She seems to be unsatisfied with who she really is and needs to justify her own being.

Either that or she's just a compulsive liar.

Wednesday, April 15, 2015

Democrats Believe We Need a President Who

Lies as much as can be gotten away with

Refuses to shake hands with potential voters during a "listening tour" stop at a Chipotle's restaurant in Ohio

Is a hub of the Democrat-K Street (revolving-door lobbyists) axis.

Has total resistance to transparency

Falsifies bullet-dodging adventures in Kosovo

Uses personal Email for government work

Lies about how many electronic devices are used

Determines which Emails should be subject to investigation

Ignores Congressional subpoenas and letters regarding personal electronic servers

Served dishonorably as Secretary of State for the U.S.

Lies about what is known about American embassies

Knowingly and deliberately blames a meaningless video for the death of Ambassador Christopher Stevens

Was one of the three Obama aides most responsible for the illegal "preemptive" war in Libya.

Pretends to identify with certain cultures to fit a given circumstance (Like speaking "southern" in the south and "ghetto" in black communities)

Fails miserably at the job of enhancing diplomatic relations with Russia (think: Russian ‘re-set’)

Was almost universally hated by subordinates

Behaves viciously toward family members

Labels opponents with disparaging names

Defends family members sordid indiscretions

Is unable to get landmark legislation passed

Kept FBI files on adversaries

Engages in “insider trading” in cattle futures

Was named in connection with the failing of Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan in connection with the Whitewater incident.

Was a partner in the Rose Law Firm and did a great deal of work for the firm while representing Jim McDougal in cases involving his Madison Guaranty and Castle enterprises.

Was a central figure in the ethics controversy centered on the 1993 White House travel office dismissals that resulted from a climate of fear.

Was implicated as having been directly or indirectly involved in the so-called suicide of deputy White House counsel, Vincent W. Foster.

Yes, indeed!

We need a person who does all of those things and more!

We need none other than:

Hillary Rodham Clinton!

The face of honesty and integrity

(For those of you educated in government schools, this post is the essence of sarcasm. For more of this see Fredd)