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?

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!

SUNDAY RESPITE-In the Presence of Jehovah-Brooklyn Tabernacle Choir

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

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 thus: having 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.

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.