He fought in World War II. He died in 2014. And he just registered to vote in Va.
The FBI and local police are investigating how at least 19 dead Virginians were recently re-registered to vote in this critical swing state.
The FBI and local police MUST BE LYING cause we are told repeatedly that voter fraud is a myth! We NEED to support same day registration, IDless voting, 30 day voting, "motor voter laws", honor system voting, etc. cause RACISM!
All of the forms had been submitted by a private group that was working to register voters on the campus of James Madison University, according to the Harrisonburg registrar’s office. The group was not identified. No charges have been filed.
Why was the "private group" not identified? Why have no charges been filed? Could it be that Democrats approve of and support this type of activity?
House Minority Leader David J. Toscano (D-Charlottesville) said the case was not proof of voter fraud because no one had actually managed to cast a vote in the names of the dead.
“First of all, there was no voter fraud — they caught him,” Toscano said. “Nobody cast a vote. . . . There’s still no evidence of that going on in the state. But there is evidence every time you turn around that the Republicans are trying to make it more difficult for citizens to vote in elections.”
They caught him? Him who? The dead guy?
So by dumb luck these 19 dead citizens were found out. That [in Toscano's mind] indicates that there is no voter fraud and no problem.
19 more dead people removed from voter rolls, Hillary Clinton hardest hit...
Friday, September 30, 2016
Logic bomb #2
a) Leonardo DiCaprio cares so much for the environment and believes that climate change "is real, it is happening right now".
b) Al Gore cares greatly about the environment. He has even said: "The warnings about global warming have been extremely clear for a long time. We are facing a global climate crisis. It is deepening. We are entering a period of consequences."
c) At least 190 nations care so much for climate change that representatives from those countries traveled to Paris, France in 2015 for a climate summit and UN talks.
If climate change is such a pressing problem that something "must be done RIGHT NOW regardless of the costs", why do all of these dignitaries and famous people travel all over the world promoting their cause? Have they not heard of Skype or Facetime?
If they care so much for the climate, why don't they act like they do?
One could almost be forgiven for thinking that maybe all of these climate folks care more about seeming to care about the climate than actually caring, no? This could be the case so as to enable them to get invited to all the right parties, enable them to feel sufficiently smug about themselves (cause they care you know), and / or (in the case of the former VP) make tons and tons of money off of other gullible folks and governments. It sure seems that those that cry loudest about the climate actually behave like it is no big deal. Or am I being too cynical?
Update (via Instapundit):
b) Al Gore cares greatly about the environment. He has even said: "The warnings about global warming have been extremely clear for a long time. We are facing a global climate crisis. It is deepening. We are entering a period of consequences."
c) At least 190 nations care so much for climate change that representatives from those countries traveled to Paris, France in 2015 for a climate summit and UN talks.
If climate change is such a pressing problem that something "must be done RIGHT NOW regardless of the costs", why do all of these dignitaries and famous people travel all over the world promoting their cause? Have they not heard of Skype or Facetime?
If they care so much for the climate, why don't they act like they do?
One could almost be forgiven for thinking that maybe all of these climate folks care more about seeming to care about the climate than actually caring, no? This could be the case so as to enable them to get invited to all the right parties, enable them to feel sufficiently smug about themselves (cause they care you know), and / or (in the case of the former VP) make tons and tons of money off of other gullible folks and governments. It sure seems that those that cry loudest about the climate actually behave like it is no big deal. Or am I being too cynical?
Update (via Instapundit):
Thursday, September 29, 2016
Voter fraud example #25
Washington Mall Terrorist Cetin Wasn’t U.S. Citizen, Still Voted Three Times
...Cetin was not a U.S. citizen, meaning legally he cannot vote. However, state records show Cetin registered to vote in 2014 and participated in three election cycles, including the May presidential primary.
Impossible! Democrats and liberals tell us constantly that voter fraud DOES NOT HAPPEN, PERIOD.
The Government's voting records MUST BE LYING!
...Washington state doesn’t require proof of citizenship. Therefore elections officials say the state’s elections system operates, more or less, under an honor system.
Another fraudulent voter stopped, Hillary Clinton hardest hit...
...Cetin was not a U.S. citizen, meaning legally he cannot vote. However, state records show Cetin registered to vote in 2014 and participated in three election cycles, including the May presidential primary.
Impossible! Democrats and liberals tell us constantly that voter fraud DOES NOT HAPPEN, PERIOD.
The Government's voting records MUST BE LYING!
...Washington state doesn’t require proof of citizenship. Therefore elections officials say the state’s elections system operates, more or less, under an honor system.
Another fraudulent voter stopped, Hillary Clinton hardest hit...
Monday, September 26, 2016
Voter fraud example #24
CBS4 Investigation Finds Dead Voters Casting Ballots In Colorado
How can this be? We are repeatedly told that voter fraud DOES NOT HAPPEN and anyone wishing to improve the integrity of the voting system is racist. Who would have thought that CBS4 in Colorado was so racist!
Following the CBS4 investigation, the Colorado Secretary of State’s office reviewed the CBS4 findings and confirmed at least 78 dead voters remained eligible to vote. Lynn Bartels, a spokesperson for the Secretary of State’s office, said county clerks were notified and told to immediately remove those 78 names from voter rolls. Bartels said “It’s not clear why” those dead citizens were still being listed as eligible voters.
More dead people removed from voter rolls in Colorado ensuring they will no longer be able to vote, Hillary Clinton hardest hit...
How can this be? We are repeatedly told that voter fraud DOES NOT HAPPEN and anyone wishing to improve the integrity of the voting system is racist. Who would have thought that CBS4 in Colorado was so racist!
Following the CBS4 investigation, the Colorado Secretary of State’s office reviewed the CBS4 findings and confirmed at least 78 dead voters remained eligible to vote. Lynn Bartels, a spokesperson for the Secretary of State’s office, said county clerks were notified and told to immediately remove those 78 names from voter rolls. Bartels said “It’s not clear why” those dead citizens were still being listed as eligible voters.
More dead people removed from voter rolls in Colorado ensuring they will no longer be able to vote, Hillary Clinton hardest hit...
MacGyver reboot
So the "media" has decided that they are all out of decent original show ideas, all out of crappy original show ideas, all out of reasonable relaunches/reboots of old successful shows and have started picking at the corpses of old, bad show ideas.
In this case, they are planning a relaunch of MacGyver. I will admit that I used to watch MacGyver in the late 80s and found it enjoyable, until it wasn't. It was [generally] about a fellow that used his imagination and innovative skills to "make do" with whatever was laying round, to fix stuff, break stuff, solve problems, save lives, etc.
Maybe I was naive about the show's under-currents either due to my youth or my "innocence". At the time it never struck me as overly political. I stopped watching the series before it ended and I stopped watching rather abruptly. I still remember "the" episode that caused me to stop. As was typical for each episode in that MacGyver found himself and a couple of others "in harms way" and having to protect themselves from "bad guys".
One of the key elements of that show, for me, at the time was how he used the "stuff" he found in efficient ways to accomplish goals. Use the best tools you have to do the best you can and think outside of the box.
Well in this particular episode, MacGyver, some man and [I believe] a woman were being chased by bad guys with guns. The three or four "bad guys" had automatic weapons. They were in an industrial area. MacGyver confronts one of the "thugs" and manages to subdue him. The other two or three are "right around the corner" and closing fast. So what does the savvy and skilled MacGyer do? He picks up the unconscious thug's fully functional and loaded automatic weapon which is good and expected. Does MaGyver then take up a defensive position with his associates in order to engage the on-coming attackers? No. Does he try to make a controlled escape using suppressive fire? No. MacGyver, the MacGyver of "make efficient use of your tools" fame takes a perfectly fine, perfectly functional self-defense weapon and uses it as a fire-hydrant wench in order to pressurize a fire hose with which to attach two or three heavily armed assailants.
Are you FRIGGEN KIDDING ME! I actually yelled something similar to that at the television when he did that.
Pause for a moment...
Let us explore the feasibility of this action, shall we? I do not recall the make/model of the weapons that the thugs were using but they were smallish automatic weapons. AK-47s or Uzis or some such. Typical Hollywood automatic-weapons. With all the general knowledge that MacGyver demonstrated in every episode, he should have been familiar with the operation and characteristics [in general] of automatic weapons, even if only from a theoretical perspective. He should have known that the receiver of an automatic weapon is not so much of a high strength area such that the receiver could actually be used as a hydrant wrench. The main purpose of the receiver is to serve as control surfaces for and containment of the carrier/bolt group. The pressure from firing bullets is absorbed by the bolt face and the breach of the barrel. The bolt face has some number of "lugs" that lock into the breach face creating a high pressure container with only one [forward] exit. As a round is fired, hot gases propel the bullet down the barrel where some of the gas is vented rearward through a gas tube, providing thrust used to push the bolt rearward, causing the bolt-face to unlock from the breach, travel rearward, pull out the empty brass shell, and eject it, pick up a new round [if available], load it into the breach, and lock-up the bolt face into the breach so that the next round can be fired. Truth be told not all automatic weapons work this exact way but the general process is the same. The bolt face takes the brunt of the rearward pressure of fired rounds and the receiver helps hold it all together. Point being the receiver is a hollow metal box with at least one opening on the side (for spent shells to exit). It is generally not very thick or heavy. Not made of the "best" materials and it is laughable that an AK-47 or Usi or any other generally available automatic weapon receiver could be used as a hydrant wrench. To even suggest doing such a thing to anyone that is at all familiar with these items would result in ridicule. Typical wrenches are solid metal claws that securely fit the nuts they are sized for. Hydrant nuts are big, solid items that snugly fit on top of hydrants and are used to control valves for releasing high pressure water.
For a moment, let us ignore all of that and assume that these are "special" automatic weapons with especially strong and hard receivers that could, in a pinch be used as a hydrant wrench. To do that to a fully functional weapon as the first option, no hesitation, is simply ludicrous. As a fall-back option, after all of the bullets have been used, maybe. As your initial go to? Insane.
As expected, the misuse of the automatic weapon worked out for MacGyver and the fire hose subdued the remaining thugs. He "saved the day" and lost another viewer permanently due to his blatant political pandering.
I suspect that the reboot will be even more anti-gun with a great big extra helping of global warming clap-trap thrown in for good measure. I make this assessment based on the evolution of Hollywood since the late 80s to today. Thank you but no. I think I will pass...
P.S. As one of the commentators here at this actual (sort of) review of one of the initial episodes, mentions another show called Burn Notice, I really, really liked that show. For an industry that can produce Burn Notice or Elementary or even FireFly, why or why do you end those shows and produce crap like this?
In this case, they are planning a relaunch of MacGyver. I will admit that I used to watch MacGyver in the late 80s and found it enjoyable, until it wasn't. It was [generally] about a fellow that used his imagination and innovative skills to "make do" with whatever was laying round, to fix stuff, break stuff, solve problems, save lives, etc.
Maybe I was naive about the show's under-currents either due to my youth or my "innocence". At the time it never struck me as overly political. I stopped watching the series before it ended and I stopped watching rather abruptly. I still remember "the" episode that caused me to stop. As was typical for each episode in that MacGyver found himself and a couple of others "in harms way" and having to protect themselves from "bad guys".
One of the key elements of that show, for me, at the time was how he used the "stuff" he found in efficient ways to accomplish goals. Use the best tools you have to do the best you can and think outside of the box.
Well in this particular episode, MacGyver, some man and [I believe] a woman were being chased by bad guys with guns. The three or four "bad guys" had automatic weapons. They were in an industrial area. MacGyver confronts one of the "thugs" and manages to subdue him. The other two or three are "right around the corner" and closing fast. So what does the savvy and skilled MacGyer do? He picks up the unconscious thug's fully functional and loaded automatic weapon which is good and expected. Does MaGyver then take up a defensive position with his associates in order to engage the on-coming attackers? No. Does he try to make a controlled escape using suppressive fire? No. MacGyver, the MacGyver of "make efficient use of your tools" fame takes a perfectly fine, perfectly functional self-defense weapon and uses it as a fire-hydrant wench in order to pressurize a fire hose with which to attach two or three heavily armed assailants.
Are you FRIGGEN KIDDING ME! I actually yelled something similar to that at the television when he did that.
Pause for a moment...
Let us explore the feasibility of this action, shall we? I do not recall the make/model of the weapons that the thugs were using but they were smallish automatic weapons. AK-47s or Uzis or some such. Typical Hollywood automatic-weapons. With all the general knowledge that MacGyver demonstrated in every episode, he should have been familiar with the operation and characteristics [in general] of automatic weapons, even if only from a theoretical perspective. He should have known that the receiver of an automatic weapon is not so much of a high strength area such that the receiver could actually be used as a hydrant wrench. The main purpose of the receiver is to serve as control surfaces for and containment of the carrier/bolt group. The pressure from firing bullets is absorbed by the bolt face and the breach of the barrel. The bolt face has some number of "lugs" that lock into the breach face creating a high pressure container with only one [forward] exit. As a round is fired, hot gases propel the bullet down the barrel where some of the gas is vented rearward through a gas tube, providing thrust used to push the bolt rearward, causing the bolt-face to unlock from the breach, travel rearward, pull out the empty brass shell, and eject it, pick up a new round [if available], load it into the breach, and lock-up the bolt face into the breach so that the next round can be fired. Truth be told not all automatic weapons work this exact way but the general process is the same. The bolt face takes the brunt of the rearward pressure of fired rounds and the receiver helps hold it all together. Point being the receiver is a hollow metal box with at least one opening on the side (for spent shells to exit). It is generally not very thick or heavy. Not made of the "best" materials and it is laughable that an AK-47 or Usi or any other generally available automatic weapon receiver could be used as a hydrant wrench. To even suggest doing such a thing to anyone that is at all familiar with these items would result in ridicule. Typical wrenches are solid metal claws that securely fit the nuts they are sized for. Hydrant nuts are big, solid items that snugly fit on top of hydrants and are used to control valves for releasing high pressure water.
For a moment, let us ignore all of that and assume that these are "special" automatic weapons with especially strong and hard receivers that could, in a pinch be used as a hydrant wrench. To do that to a fully functional weapon as the first option, no hesitation, is simply ludicrous. As a fall-back option, after all of the bullets have been used, maybe. As your initial go to? Insane.
As expected, the misuse of the automatic weapon worked out for MacGyver and the fire hose subdued the remaining thugs. He "saved the day" and lost another viewer permanently due to his blatant political pandering.
I suspect that the reboot will be even more anti-gun with a great big extra helping of global warming clap-trap thrown in for good measure. I make this assessment based on the evolution of Hollywood since the late 80s to today. Thank you but no. I think I will pass...
P.S. As one of the commentators here at this actual (sort of) review of one of the initial episodes, mentions another show called Burn Notice, I really, really liked that show. For an industry that can produce Burn Notice or Elementary or even FireFly, why or why do you end those shows and produce crap like this?
Bad network show ideas, #1
Here is a bad network show idea, a Courtship of Eddie's Father reboot/relaunch except in this version Eddie's father is gay and as a result every episode is Eddie trying to setup his father with an available guy. Hijinks and hilarity ensue, cue laugh-track.
An alternate (for the more modern age) would have Eddie's father actually be his mother and [of course] she is gay. Same premise as above. Working title "Eddie's mom needs a wife".
P.S. This idea is copyright protected and may not be used in whole or part without my expressed written permission...
An alternate (for the more modern age) would have Eddie's father actually be his mother and [of course] she is gay. Same premise as above. Working title "Eddie's mom needs a wife".
P.S. This idea is copyright protected and may not be used in whole or part without my expressed written permission...
Monday, September 19, 2016
Hillary campaign steals from "poor little old ladies"
Wells Fargo fraud department inundated with calls from low-income Clinton supporters reporting repeated unauthorized charge
Hillary Clinton’s campaign is stealing from her poorest supporters by purposefully and repeatedly overcharging them after they make what’s supposed to be a one-time small donation through her official campaign website, multiple sources tell the Observer.
...
One elderly Clinton donor, who has been a victim of this fraud scheme, has filed a complaint with her state’s attorney general and a representative from the office told her that they had forwarded her case to the Federal Election Commission.
...
“We don’t investigate fraudulent charges unless they are over $100,” the fraud specialist explained. “The Clinton campaign knows this, that’s why we don’t see any charges over the $100 amount, they’ll stop the charges just below $100. We’ll see her campaign overcharge donors by $20, $40 or $60 but never more than $100.”
...
The source said he’s apolitical but noted that the bank’s fraud department is yet to receive one call from a Donald Trump supporter claiming to have been overcharged by Trump’s campaign. “I’m only talking to you because what Hillary’s doing is so messed up, she’s stealing from her poorest supporters.”
...
Carol Mahre, an 81-year-old grandmother of seven from Minnesota, is one of the victims of Clinton’s campaign donor fraud scandal. In March, Mahre said she made a one-time $25 donation via Clinton’s official campaign website. However, when she received her U.S. Bank card statement, she noticed multiple $25 charges were made.
Apparently this is not a new "trick" for Hillary...
The New York Times reported in 2007 that Clinton’s first presidential campaign had to refund and subtract hundreds of thousands of dollars from its first-quarter total often because donors’ credit cards were charged twice. Additionally, it was reported that Clinton had to refund a stunning $2.8 million in donations, three times more than the $900K President Barack Obama’s campaign refunded.
...
A Clinton campaign worker named Kathy Callahan, who worked on Clinton’s presidential campaign in 2008, claimed in a blog post that Clinton fraudulently overcharged her by several thousand dollars. She wrote that she voluntarily left the campaign’s finance committee after she discovered $3,000 in unauthorized charges made by Clinton’s campaign to her Visa card. Callahan said the unauthorized charges caused $400 in overdraft and bank charges and put Callahan over the legal donor limit. Callahan said that after a month of “begging and pleading,” she wasn’t able to get her money back until she threatened to go to authorities. However, when she was finally refunded her money the Clinton campaign refused to compensate her for the $400 in overdraft and bank charges.
And it is not just campaign money...
In 2001, the Clintons were accused of attempting to steal items donated to the White House during Bill’s presidency as he exited office. There was $190,000 worth of gifts in question that the Clintons shipped to their then new estate in Chappaqua, New York. Multiple donors said that they had understood that the items they had donated during Clinton’s presidency were to stay in the White House as part of the 1993 White House redecoration project. Initially, the Clintons claimed that the items in question were given to them prior to President Clinton taking office; however, government records proved otherwise. Facing strong criticism, the Clintons decided to return several items including $28,500 in furnishings and they paid $86,000 for other gifts.
This is the person that President Three-Putt said was the most qualified person ever to be President. "There has never been a man or woman, not me, not Bill, nobody more qualified than Hillary Clinton to serve as President of the United States of America," He said "Hillary was in the room" when global crisis occur". What was she doing? Stealing pens?
I would not hold my breath to see any of this on the nightly MSM, would you?
Hillary Clinton’s campaign is stealing from her poorest supporters by purposefully and repeatedly overcharging them after they make what’s supposed to be a one-time small donation through her official campaign website, multiple sources tell the Observer.
...
One elderly Clinton donor, who has been a victim of this fraud scheme, has filed a complaint with her state’s attorney general and a representative from the office told her that they had forwarded her case to the Federal Election Commission.
...
“We don’t investigate fraudulent charges unless they are over $100,” the fraud specialist explained. “The Clinton campaign knows this, that’s why we don’t see any charges over the $100 amount, they’ll stop the charges just below $100. We’ll see her campaign overcharge donors by $20, $40 or $60 but never more than $100.”
...
The source said he’s apolitical but noted that the bank’s fraud department is yet to receive one call from a Donald Trump supporter claiming to have been overcharged by Trump’s campaign. “I’m only talking to you because what Hillary’s doing is so messed up, she’s stealing from her poorest supporters.”
...
Carol Mahre, an 81-year-old grandmother of seven from Minnesota, is one of the victims of Clinton’s campaign donor fraud scandal. In March, Mahre said she made a one-time $25 donation via Clinton’s official campaign website. However, when she received her U.S. Bank card statement, she noticed multiple $25 charges were made.
Apparently this is not a new "trick" for Hillary...
The New York Times reported in 2007 that Clinton’s first presidential campaign had to refund and subtract hundreds of thousands of dollars from its first-quarter total often because donors’ credit cards were charged twice. Additionally, it was reported that Clinton had to refund a stunning $2.8 million in donations, three times more than the $900K President Barack Obama’s campaign refunded.
...
A Clinton campaign worker named Kathy Callahan, who worked on Clinton’s presidential campaign in 2008, claimed in a blog post that Clinton fraudulently overcharged her by several thousand dollars. She wrote that she voluntarily left the campaign’s finance committee after she discovered $3,000 in unauthorized charges made by Clinton’s campaign to her Visa card. Callahan said the unauthorized charges caused $400 in overdraft and bank charges and put Callahan over the legal donor limit. Callahan said that after a month of “begging and pleading,” she wasn’t able to get her money back until she threatened to go to authorities. However, when she was finally refunded her money the Clinton campaign refused to compensate her for the $400 in overdraft and bank charges.
And it is not just campaign money...
In 2001, the Clintons were accused of attempting to steal items donated to the White House during Bill’s presidency as he exited office. There was $190,000 worth of gifts in question that the Clintons shipped to their then new estate in Chappaqua, New York. Multiple donors said that they had understood that the items they had donated during Clinton’s presidency were to stay in the White House as part of the 1993 White House redecoration project. Initially, the Clintons claimed that the items in question were given to them prior to President Clinton taking office; however, government records proved otherwise. Facing strong criticism, the Clintons decided to return several items including $28,500 in furnishings and they paid $86,000 for other gifts.
This is the person that President Three-Putt said was the most qualified person ever to be President. "There has never been a man or woman, not me, not Bill, nobody more qualified than Hillary Clinton to serve as President of the United States of America," He said "Hillary was in the room" when global crisis occur". What was she doing? Stealing pens?
I would not hold my breath to see any of this on the nightly MSM, would you?
Wednesday, September 14, 2016
DNC has ID-10-T problem
DNC finds out / realizes that their email server was hacked and has been penetrated so they change the access password (good) and email it to everyone using the very email system that was hacked (very bad).
You can't make up stuff like this. If you tried, you would be told it was too absurd to be true.
Tuesday, September 13, 2016
Hillary: over 47% of Trump supporters are "Basket of deplorables"
The other day, Hillary made the mistake of actually being honest...
you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? [Laughter/applause]. The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic — you name it.
If Hillary is forced to drop out of the race either before she takes office or just after (due to health or scandal) and Tim Kaine (her VP pick) takes over, it would not be much better:
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) said Saturday his running mate Hillary Clinton doesn’t need to apologize for her “basket of deplorables” comment about supporters of Donald Trump.
and
"Hillary Clinton’s campaign defended the Democratic presidential nominee on Monday, following criticism of her comment that half of Donald Trump’s supporters are in a “basket of deplorables.”
So, that is what Hillary, Tim, and the DNC think of 25% of the country.
Because you are worried about taxes and the economy, unlike Hillary who became a multi-millionaire while working in civil service drawing a salary of just a couple hundred thousand a year, that means you need to "check your privilege".
Because you are worried about gangs and crime and don't have the luxury of an armed escort and guards with guns everywhere you go, you are racist.
Because you think that it would be a mistake to bring in thousands and thousands of foreigners that don't believe in the American values of freedom and our bill of rights, want to impose Shari law on the land, and can't be properly vetted to ensure that they are not terrorists, you are Islamophobic.
Because you feel that only women (i.e. no male genitalia) should be allowed in women's locker rooms and bathrooms, you are sexist.
Though I am still not a fan of Trump, his reply to Hillary was spot on and he should build the rest of his campaign on it:
I was . . . deeply shocked and alarmed this Friday to hear my opponent attack, slander, smear and demean these wonderful, amazing people who are supporting our campaign.
Our support comes from every part of America, and every walk of life. We have the support of cops and soldiers, carpenters and welders, the young and the old, and millions of working class families who just want a better future.
These were the people Hillary Clinton so viciously demonized. These were among the countless Americans that Hillary Clinton called deplorable, irredeemable and un-American. She called these patriotic men and women every vile name in the book – she called them racist, sexist, xenophobic, and Islamaphobic.
She called them a “basket of deplorables” in both a speech and an interview. She divides people into baskets as though they were objects, not human beings.
...
While Hillary Clinton lives a sequestered life behind gates and walls and guards, she mocks and demeans hardworking Americans who only want their own families to enjoy a fraction of the security enjoyed by our politicians.
...
To this day, she still won’t take accountability for her role in unleashing ISIS across the Middle East – or for putting Iran on the path to a nuclear weapon.
Hillary Clinton believes she is above the law, that she is above accountability, and that she is above each and every one of you.
Read the whole thing. This ad is a good start, he needs to continue.
I don't feel that there is a "great" option for President this year (and have felt that way for a good number of recent elections) and the argument could be made that Trump is not the "right man at the right time" but for all of his faults and flaws, he has one really great thing going for him, he is NOT Hillary Clinton and we already know what she has done to this country as First Lady and as SOS. I am not sure if we can afford to see what she would do as POTUS.
you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? [Laughter/applause]. The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic — you name it.
If Hillary is forced to drop out of the race either before she takes office or just after (due to health or scandal) and Tim Kaine (her VP pick) takes over, it would not be much better:
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) said Saturday his running mate Hillary Clinton doesn’t need to apologize for her “basket of deplorables” comment about supporters of Donald Trump.
and
"Hillary Clinton’s campaign defended the Democratic presidential nominee on Monday, following criticism of her comment that half of Donald Trump’s supporters are in a “basket of deplorables.”
So, that is what Hillary, Tim, and the DNC think of 25% of the country.
Because you are worried about taxes and the economy, unlike Hillary who became a multi-millionaire while working in civil service drawing a salary of just a couple hundred thousand a year, that means you need to "check your privilege".
Because you are worried about gangs and crime and don't have the luxury of an armed escort and guards with guns everywhere you go, you are racist.
Because you think that it would be a mistake to bring in thousands and thousands of foreigners that don't believe in the American values of freedom and our bill of rights, want to impose Shari law on the land, and can't be properly vetted to ensure that they are not terrorists, you are Islamophobic.
Because you feel that only women (i.e. no male genitalia) should be allowed in women's locker rooms and bathrooms, you are sexist.
Though I am still not a fan of Trump, his reply to Hillary was spot on and he should build the rest of his campaign on it:
I was . . . deeply shocked and alarmed this Friday to hear my opponent attack, slander, smear and demean these wonderful, amazing people who are supporting our campaign.
Our support comes from every part of America, and every walk of life. We have the support of cops and soldiers, carpenters and welders, the young and the old, and millions of working class families who just want a better future.
These were the people Hillary Clinton so viciously demonized. These were among the countless Americans that Hillary Clinton called deplorable, irredeemable and un-American. She called these patriotic men and women every vile name in the book – she called them racist, sexist, xenophobic, and Islamaphobic.
She called them a “basket of deplorables” in both a speech and an interview. She divides people into baskets as though they were objects, not human beings.
...
While Hillary Clinton lives a sequestered life behind gates and walls and guards, she mocks and demeans hardworking Americans who only want their own families to enjoy a fraction of the security enjoyed by our politicians.
...
To this day, she still won’t take accountability for her role in unleashing ISIS across the Middle East – or for putting Iran on the path to a nuclear weapon.
Hillary Clinton believes she is above the law, that she is above accountability, and that she is above each and every one of you.
Read the whole thing. This ad is a good start, he needs to continue.
I don't feel that there is a "great" option for President this year (and have felt that way for a good number of recent elections) and the argument could be made that Trump is not the "right man at the right time" but for all of his faults and flaws, he has one really great thing going for him, he is NOT Hillary Clinton and we already know what she has done to this country as First Lady and as SOS. I am not sure if we can afford to see what she would do as POTUS.
Monday, September 12, 2016
Why the news sucks, example #60183
Seriously, what sort of moron do news agencies hire these days that can manage to do their jobs so poorly but still hold on to their job? Is the pool of applicants so shallow that anyone will do?
This example comes from USAToday. The headline is: Teen who impregnates teacher gets $6M from district
The story is credited to Micheal Harthorne, Newser Staff. I believe that after reading this story (what there is of it) you will agree that the headline and initial paragraph are a "miscarriage of justice".
If you don't have time to read it, the gist is "a former student who impregnated a California high-school teacher received a $6 million settlement from the school district". The male student was 17 at the time that he was raped by his teacher and she wound up getting pregnant. A more appropriate heading might have been "Known child rapist get pregnant by latest victim, school district settles with victim for $6M".
Why is it in these types of stories (female teacher/student sex) the news tries to mitigate what the teacher has done? Does anyone think that they would be so "understanding" if the sexes of those involved were reversed?
Though they did not draw attention to it, at least they include enough information for the reader to understand that this teacher is a repeat offender. Story doesn't say if she will lose her teaching license.
This example comes from USAToday. The headline is: Teen who impregnates teacher gets $6M from district
The story is credited to Micheal Harthorne, Newser Staff. I believe that after reading this story (what there is of it) you will agree that the headline and initial paragraph are a "miscarriage of justice".
If you don't have time to read it, the gist is "a former student who impregnated a California high-school teacher received a $6 million settlement from the school district". The male student was 17 at the time that he was raped by his teacher and she wound up getting pregnant. A more appropriate heading might have been "Known child rapist get pregnant by latest victim, school district settles with victim for $6M".
Why is it in these types of stories (female teacher/student sex) the news tries to mitigate what the teacher has done? Does anyone think that they would be so "understanding" if the sexes of those involved were reversed?
Though they did not draw attention to it, at least they include enough information for the reader to understand that this teacher is a repeat offender. Story doesn't say if she will lose her teaching license.
Won't you please just leave her alone?
Why oh why won't the DNC and Pres. Bill Clinton leave Hillary alone? Why must they continue to push her into running this long, exhausting campaign for the presidency? It has been clear to anyone that looks at the situation objectively that this is all become too much for Hillary.
Between trying to answer/address historic issues (emails, email server, Benghazi, the foundation, etc.) and trying to maintain a hectic campaign schedule, Hillary is simply exhausted. She is even too tired to hold regular press conferences.
She is still overcoming recent health issues; the concussion / brain injury she suffered a couple of years ago, that recent coughing incident while she was on stage, her passing out at the 9/11 ceremony and having to be carried into her van, and now we hear she might even have pneumonia.
It is all just too much. Hillary is clearly trying to be a real trooper here and not let the DNC or her family down but at some point, you have giving all you can and those around her should understand that she just doesn't have any more to give.
Can't we as a nation agree to just let her retire in peace?
And lets be honest, don't you think she looks tired?
Between trying to answer/address historic issues (emails, email server, Benghazi, the foundation, etc.) and trying to maintain a hectic campaign schedule, Hillary is simply exhausted. She is even too tired to hold regular press conferences.
She is still overcoming recent health issues; the concussion / brain injury she suffered a couple of years ago, that recent coughing incident while she was on stage, her passing out at the 9/11 ceremony and having to be carried into her van, and now we hear she might even have pneumonia.
It is all just too much. Hillary is clearly trying to be a real trooper here and not let the DNC or her family down but at some point, you have giving all you can and those around her should understand that she just doesn't have any more to give.
Can't we as a nation agree to just let her retire in peace?
And lets be honest, don't you think she looks tired?
Wednesday, September 7, 2016
Benghazi hearing emails
So, those worthless, no-story-here, move along Benghazi hearing were actually pre-arranged/coordinated some between Hillary's people and the Democratic chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to give that impression.
"We wired it that Menendez would provide an opportunity to address two topics we needed to debunk (her actions/whereabouts on 9/11 and these emails from Chris Stevens about moving locations)," Reines wrote on the email, which was obtained by Citizens United.
The new email is significant because Clinton repeatedly pointed to previous congressional inquiries into Benghazi — including the foreign relations committee hearing — in her attempts to delegitimize the House Select Committee on Benghazi's findings earlier this year.
So, like nearly everything Clinton, the fix was in before it even got started.
I guess for some that have no care for the rule of law, as a famous politician once said: "What difference, at this point, does it make?"
P.S. Don't you think she looks tired?
"We wired it that Menendez would provide an opportunity to address two topics we needed to debunk (her actions/whereabouts on 9/11 and these emails from Chris Stevens about moving locations)," Reines wrote on the email, which was obtained by Citizens United.
The new email is significant because Clinton repeatedly pointed to previous congressional inquiries into Benghazi — including the foreign relations committee hearing — in her attempts to delegitimize the House Select Committee on Benghazi's findings earlier this year.
So, like nearly everything Clinton, the fix was in before it even got started.
I guess for some that have no care for the rule of law, as a famous politician once said: "What difference, at this point, does it make?"
P.S. Don't you think she looks tired?
Friday, September 2, 2016
Why is she not in prison (part 2)?
This post is a continuation of the previous (part 1 post)...
A May 25, 2016 report issued by the State Office of Inspector general (OIG) stated that, during Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, the State Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) required day-to-day operations at State be conducted using an authorized information system. The OIG stated it found "no evidence" that Clinton sought approval to conduct State business via her personal e-mail account or private servers, despite her obligation to do so. (page 10)
So, it was "in writing" that Hillary needed to obtain approval to use her make-shift system which she did not do but [we are told] it was "just like" what Powell did. BS!
Investigation determined Clinton did not have a computer in her state office, which was located in a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) on the seventh floor of State headquarters, in an area often referred to as "Mahogany Row". State Diplomatic Security Service (DS) instructed Clinton that because her office was in a SCIF, the use of mobile devices in her office was prohibited. Interviews of three former DS agents revealed Clinton stored her personal BlackBerry in a desk drawer in DS "Post 1", which was located within the SCIF. According to Abedin, Clinton primarily used her personal blackberry or personal iPad for checking e-mails, and she left the SCIF to do so, often visiting State's eighth floor balcony. (page 12)
So Hillary took her personal devices (with an 'S' but she had to use her own BlackBerry cause she could not figure out how to use more than one device) into a secure area, didn't have a computer in her office, and would go out onto the balcony to check her email cause it was on a private server that she accessed using her private BlackBerry.
Clinton stated to the FBI that she requested a secure BlackBerry while at State after hearing President Obama had one, but she could not recall the reasons why State was unable to fulfill this request. (page 12-13)
I can answer that one! It was not fulfilled because State would not hook it up to Hillary's private e-mail server! And sorry but I really doubt she requested one because that would have also meant that she would have had to use the State email system instead of her private e-mail server.
The rest of that section discussed issues she was having because she could not check her e-mail from within SCIF and alternates were discussed but none were ever implemented. This also shows she knew she was operating outside of the lines. If the SCIF won't let her access her e-mail but everyone else can access theirs, she (Hillary) must have realized she was not the norm. If she didn't realize she was not doing e-mail in the normal way after all of that, she is too stupid to be President. If she did know then she is too crooked. Which is it? Dumb or criminal?
Investigation determined Clinton had access to a number of State-authorized secure means of telephonic communications in her residence and in her office at State. At the start of Clinton's tenure, State installed a SCIF and secure communications equipment, {redacted} in her residences in Washington, D.C. (Whitehaven residence) and Chappaqua. (page 13)
Again, State went through all of the trouble to provide her with proper equipment but she preferred to use her own devices and e-mail system [I think] to avoid FOIA exposure.
In addition to sending Clinton messages they wrote, Abedin, Mills, and Sullivan reviewed e-mails they received from other State employees, USG contacts, and foreign government contacts, and if deemed appropriate they then forwarded the information to Clinton. (page 13/14)
Still reading but this might be part of the answer to a question that has been bothering me about this entire thing. The State system is supposed to be "air gapped" such that you can't get there from here. If so, how did Clinton send and receive sensitive e-mails? Who moved them from the secure State network to the internet to send to Clinton? Was it these three? If so, why are they not in jail?
Why is Hillary not in jail?
More coming...
A May 25, 2016 report issued by the State Office of Inspector general (OIG) stated that, during Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, the State Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) required day-to-day operations at State be conducted using an authorized information system. The OIG stated it found "no evidence" that Clinton sought approval to conduct State business via her personal e-mail account or private servers, despite her obligation to do so. (page 10)
So, it was "in writing" that Hillary needed to obtain approval to use her make-shift system which she did not do but [we are told] it was "just like" what Powell did. BS!
Investigation determined Clinton did not have a computer in her state office, which was located in a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) on the seventh floor of State headquarters, in an area often referred to as "Mahogany Row". State Diplomatic Security Service (DS) instructed Clinton that because her office was in a SCIF, the use of mobile devices in her office was prohibited. Interviews of three former DS agents revealed Clinton stored her personal BlackBerry in a desk drawer in DS "Post 1", which was located within the SCIF. According to Abedin, Clinton primarily used her personal blackberry or personal iPad for checking e-mails, and she left the SCIF to do so, often visiting State's eighth floor balcony. (page 12)
So Hillary took her personal devices (with an 'S' but she had to use her own BlackBerry cause she could not figure out how to use more than one device) into a secure area, didn't have a computer in her office, and would go out onto the balcony to check her email cause it was on a private server that she accessed using her private BlackBerry.
Clinton stated to the FBI that she requested a secure BlackBerry while at State after hearing President Obama had one, but she could not recall the reasons why State was unable to fulfill this request. (page 12-13)
I can answer that one! It was not fulfilled because State would not hook it up to Hillary's private e-mail server! And sorry but I really doubt she requested one because that would have also meant that she would have had to use the State email system instead of her private e-mail server.
The rest of that section discussed issues she was having because she could not check her e-mail from within SCIF and alternates were discussed but none were ever implemented. This also shows she knew she was operating outside of the lines. If the SCIF won't let her access her e-mail but everyone else can access theirs, she (Hillary) must have realized she was not the norm. If she didn't realize she was not doing e-mail in the normal way after all of that, she is too stupid to be President. If she did know then she is too crooked. Which is it? Dumb or criminal?
Investigation determined Clinton had access to a number of State-authorized secure means of telephonic communications in her residence and in her office at State. At the start of Clinton's tenure, State installed a SCIF and secure communications equipment, {redacted} in her residences in Washington, D.C. (Whitehaven residence) and Chappaqua. (page 13)
Again, State went through all of the trouble to provide her with proper equipment but she preferred to use her own devices and e-mail system [I think] to avoid FOIA exposure.
In addition to sending Clinton messages they wrote, Abedin, Mills, and Sullivan reviewed e-mails they received from other State employees, USG contacts, and foreign government contacts, and if deemed appropriate they then forwarded the information to Clinton. (page 13/14)
Still reading but this might be part of the answer to a question that has been bothering me about this entire thing. The State system is supposed to be "air gapped" such that you can't get there from here. If so, how did Clinton send and receive sensitive e-mails? Who moved them from the secure State network to the internet to send to Clinton? Was it these three? If so, why are they not in jail?
Why is Hillary not in jail?
More coming...
Why is she not in prison (part 1)?
In response to FBI requests for classification determinations in support of this investigation, US Intelligence Community (USIC) agencies determined that 81 e-mail chains, which FBI investigation determined were transmitted and stored on Clinton's UNCLASSIFIED personal server systems, contained classified information ranging from the CONFIDENTIAL to TOP SECRET/SPECIAL ACCESS PROGRAM levels at the time they were sent between 2009-2013.
USIC agencies determined that 68 of these e-mail chains remain classified.
In addition, the classification determination process administered by the US Department of State (State) in connection with Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation identified approximately 2,000 additional e-mails currently classified CONFIDENTIAL and 1 e-mail classified SECRET, which FBI investigation determined were transmitted and stored on at least two of Clinton's personal server systems.
From page 2 of the just released FBI report.
So, not only did Hillary Clinton have confidential through top secret/special access program information on her PRIVATE, unsecured email system but that system was made up of at least three different servers over time.
Additionally, because the FBI was not given (granted?) access to all of the mobile devices and computer components associated with Clinton's personal e-mail system, the FBI can not say whether or not those systems were hacked.
There is this (also from page 2):
The FBI did find that hostile foreign actors successfully gained access to the personal e-mail accounts of individuals with whom Clinton was in regular contact and, in doing so, obtained e-mails sent to or received by Clinton on her personal account.
Also, it appears that Hillary used at least three different systems (over time) as her "e-mail server".
Apparently the last of the servers used was not encrypted to make it easier to trouble-shoot.
Out of the 8 (yes 8, not one as she said) different mobile devices that Clinton used during her tenure as Secretary of State, she and her lawyers were unable to locate ANY of them to turn over to the FBI per their request (pages 8 and 9 of the report). My guess is that (like the Whitewater billing records) they will turn up shortly after the statute of limitations.
I am just getting into this report so there are likely more "gems" to be found. Based on the above information, why is Hillary not in jail?
USIC agencies determined that 68 of these e-mail chains remain classified.
In addition, the classification determination process administered by the US Department of State (State) in connection with Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation identified approximately 2,000 additional e-mails currently classified CONFIDENTIAL and 1 e-mail classified SECRET, which FBI investigation determined were transmitted and stored on at least two of Clinton's personal server systems.
From page 2 of the just released FBI report.
So, not only did Hillary Clinton have confidential through top secret/special access program information on her PRIVATE, unsecured email system but that system was made up of at least three different servers over time.
Additionally, because the FBI was not given (granted?) access to all of the mobile devices and computer components associated with Clinton's personal e-mail system, the FBI can not say whether or not those systems were hacked.
There is this (also from page 2):
The FBI did find that hostile foreign actors successfully gained access to the personal e-mail accounts of individuals with whom Clinton was in regular contact and, in doing so, obtained e-mails sent to or received by Clinton on her personal account.
Also, it appears that Hillary used at least three different systems (over time) as her "e-mail server".
Apparently the last of the servers used was not encrypted to make it easier to trouble-shoot.
Out of the 8 (yes 8, not one as she said) different mobile devices that Clinton used during her tenure as Secretary of State, she and her lawyers were unable to locate ANY of them to turn over to the FBI per their request (pages 8 and 9 of the report). My guess is that (like the Whitewater billing records) they will turn up shortly after the statute of limitations.
I am just getting into this report so there are likely more "gems" to be found. Based on the above information, why is Hillary not in jail?
Wednesday, August 24, 2016
Wednesday, August 10, 2016
Voter fraud example #23
Hot off of the presses "Alabama court upholds conviction of woman guilty of voter fraud" except this HAS to be a lie as we are constantly told by the media, by Democrats, and numinous liberal organizations that "voter fraud" is a myth made up by those evil republicans to suppress the votes of all of those poor minority voters that just can figure out how to get a valid state ID card.
Let us ignore for a moment that without proper ID you can not:
Let us ignore for a moment that without proper ID you can not:
- purchase beer
- purchase alcohol
- purchase cigarettes
- enter the DNC convention
- apply for food stamps
- apply for welfare
- purchase a cell phone
- pick up a prescription
- enter most government buildings
- pay for something with a check
- open a bank account
- travel by air
- get an SS card
- get a copy of your birth certificate
- in some places, you can't stay in a homeless shelter
but apparently getting one is SO hard, you should not need one to vote...
Wednesday, July 27, 2016
Effective Ad...
This ad is effective because:
- It is true on all points
- Most western men do consider good looking women kissing HOT.
- In Saudi Arabia gays and lesbians are imprisoned or killed.
- Canada oil sand is readily available, locally.
- It gets attention
- Contains humor.
Monday, July 25, 2016
Debbie Wasserman Schultz booed off the stage at FL delegation breakfast
Could not have happened to a nicer lady /sarc
.@DWStweets booed off the stage at her own FL delegation breakfast @NBCNews pic.twitter.com/GMe0g9t1JQ— Andrea Mitchell (@mitchellreports) July 25, 2016
Wednesday, July 20, 2016
Tuesday, July 19, 2016
Wednesday, July 13, 2016
The climate change consensus
Watch this video...
Also what the video does not discuss is that NO ONE denies that the climate is changing. That is what weather does, it changes from day to day. Where the various controversies reside are:
Also what the video does not discuss is that NO ONE denies that the climate is changing. That is what weather does, it changes from day to day. Where the various controversies reside are:
- How much actual influence has man had on the global weather compared to what nature can do on its own (compare say the most recent Mt. St. Helen eruption of air-born particulates and CO2 discharges with that estimated to be caused by man).
- Who is to say what the world's "ideal" weather is? Is it what the weather was like 5000 years ago or tomorrow? Who gets to decide which is best and best for whom?
- If environmentalists were serious about reducing fossil fuel use (to save the planet) they would be promoting more nuclear power, but they are not. If we reduce our usage of fossil fuels, that lost energy must be made up somehow. Wind, solar, etc. will not close that energy gap. Nuclear power is the only way (today) to replace the energy lost by reducing/eliminating the use of fossil fuels. Any environmentalist that is not for nuclear power is not serious.
- If "man made climate change" is really as dire as Al Gore, DiCaprio, and and all of these other "celebrity" environmentalists say it is, why are they NOT doing their part to help? Why are they constantly jet-setting all around the globe instead of appearing by Skype? If they were serious about wanting to save the planet and if things were really so dire, they would never fly by plane again. Al Gore would sell his house that consumes over $30K a year in energy and live more like George Bush.
They don't do that though, in part because they are "better" (i.e. morally superior because they CARE) than you and I. Due to their fight for the planet, they have earned the right (in their minds at least) to have a carbon foot print that is larger than some small towns. As with most socialists and/or fascists, they always think that they will wind up in charge and as George Orwell famously wrote, "Some animals are more equal than other animals".
Wednesday, July 6, 2016
Two in the heart and one in the head...
the rule of law is officially pronounced dead...
The Supreme Court fatally wounded the "rule of law" in 2012 by claiming a mandate was really a tax, even after the Government swore that it was not.
In a Surprise Ruling, Chief Justice Sides With Liberals to Uphold Insurance Mandate
While on life support, President Three-putt (Obama) continued to abuse the body of the law, while it was in intensive care by routinely exceeding his official powers (cause he has a phone and a pen). He was a teacher of Constitutional law after all, so clearly he knows what the President can and can not do (not that he cared at all - immigration non-enforcement, fast n furious, IRS attacking Tea Party groups, green energy pay-offs, interfering in local criminal matters, etc.) while Congress stood by and watched the abuse.
This week, the "Rule of Law" has now succumb due to a fatal head-shot delivered by the FBI in their finding that though "Crooked" Hillary did "a lot of bad things", it would not recommend indicting her.
After describing clear evidence of extensive mishandling of classified national security information, FBI Director James Comey announced that the FBI will not recommend indicting former secretary of state Hillary Clinton.
Comey acknowledged Clinton sent and received Top Secret emails that “any reasonable person” understands not to discuss on an unclassified system.
Comey also acknowledged her email system was housed on unclassified personal servers that lacked full time security systems. Indeed, nations and groups hostile to the U.S. could have hacked the system. Comey acknowledged “hostile actors” hacked individuals corresponding with Clinton on her unauthorized system. She also used her unsecured personal system outside of the U.S.—in places where sophisticated adversaries could hack her communications.
So, the Government has spent the last 8 years showing all of us that the rule of law means nothing, if you are in power. That those of the "favored" class are exempt from those antiquated words written on a 200 year old piece of paper. OK. Fine. You want to roll that way? Understood.
I wonder what the Government will do when those it governs no longer pay any attention to it or to its rules and laws? When the Government shows time and again that words don't mean what they mean, that "at this point, what difference does it make?". Ye shall reap as ye shall sow.
Update:
Remember, he said all that she did wrong and that there was to be no case BUT someone ELSE doing the same thing should not expect the same treatment...
The Supreme Court fatally wounded the "rule of law" in 2012 by claiming a mandate was really a tax, even after the Government swore that it was not.
In a Surprise Ruling, Chief Justice Sides With Liberals to Uphold Insurance Mandate
While on life support, President Three-putt (Obama) continued to abuse the body of the law, while it was in intensive care by routinely exceeding his official powers (cause he has a phone and a pen). He was a teacher of Constitutional law after all, so clearly he knows what the President can and can not do (not that he cared at all - immigration non-enforcement, fast n furious, IRS attacking Tea Party groups, green energy pay-offs, interfering in local criminal matters, etc.) while Congress stood by and watched the abuse.
This week, the "Rule of Law" has now succumb due to a fatal head-shot delivered by the FBI in their finding that though "Crooked" Hillary did "a lot of bad things", it would not recommend indicting her.
After describing clear evidence of extensive mishandling of classified national security information, FBI Director James Comey announced that the FBI will not recommend indicting former secretary of state Hillary Clinton.
Comey acknowledged Clinton sent and received Top Secret emails that “any reasonable person” understands not to discuss on an unclassified system.
Comey also acknowledged her email system was housed on unclassified personal servers that lacked full time security systems. Indeed, nations and groups hostile to the U.S. could have hacked the system. Comey acknowledged “hostile actors” hacked individuals corresponding with Clinton on her unauthorized system. She also used her unsecured personal system outside of the U.S.—in places where sophisticated adversaries could hack her communications.
So, the Government has spent the last 8 years showing all of us that the rule of law means nothing, if you are in power. That those of the "favored" class are exempt from those antiquated words written on a 200 year old piece of paper. OK. Fine. You want to roll that way? Understood.
I wonder what the Government will do when those it governs no longer pay any attention to it or to its rules and laws? When the Government shows time and again that words don't mean what they mean, that "at this point, what difference does it make?". Ye shall reap as ye shall sow.
Update:
Remember, he said all that she did wrong and that there was to be no case BUT someone ELSE doing the same thing should not expect the same treatment...
Saturday, July 2, 2016
Logic bomb #1
The fact is that more rapes have been prevented / stopped by guns than by all of the "slut walks" ever held. Why don't more feminists support individual gun rights?
Feminists, instead of attending the next scheduled slut walk, why not go to the range, learn how to shoot, and arm yourselves?
Feminists, instead of attending the next scheduled slut walk, why not go to the range, learn how to shoot, and arm yourselves?
Friday, July 1, 2016
Voter fraud example #22
An investigation by CBSLA2 and KCAL9 found that hundreds of deceased persons are still on voter registration rolls in the area, and that many of these names have been voting for years in Los Angeles.
Julita Abutin, died in 2006 but voted in 2008, 2010, 2012, and 2014.
For example, John Cenkner died in 2003, according to Social Security Administration records, yet he voted in the 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, and 2010 elections. His daughter told the station that she was “astounded” and couldn’t “understand how anybody” could get away with this.
But, but, but that JUST CAN'T BE cause the left / democrats keep telling us that there is NO voter fraud problem and that it is just those evil Republicans trying to disenfranchise minorities by wanting to require proper ID before allowing someone to vote.
Another voter, Julita Abutin, died in 2006 but voted in 2008, 2010, 2012, and 2014. According to CBS, the county confirmed they have “signed vote-by-mail envelopes” from Abutin since she passed away.
The mask is slipping and they don't even bother trying to hide their dishonesty any more. They know the media will help cover for them and [today at least] the DOJ is on their side.
Julita Abutin, died in 2006 but voted in 2008, 2010, 2012, and 2014.
For example, John Cenkner died in 2003, according to Social Security Administration records, yet he voted in the 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, and 2010 elections. His daughter told the station that she was “astounded” and couldn’t “understand how anybody” could get away with this.
But, but, but that JUST CAN'T BE cause the left / democrats keep telling us that there is NO voter fraud problem and that it is just those evil Republicans trying to disenfranchise minorities by wanting to require proper ID before allowing someone to vote.
Another voter, Julita Abutin, died in 2006 but voted in 2008, 2010, 2012, and 2014. According to CBS, the county confirmed they have “signed vote-by-mail envelopes” from Abutin since she passed away.
The mask is slipping and they don't even bother trying to hide their dishonesty any more. They know the media will help cover for them and [today at least] the DOJ is on their side.
Thursday, June 30, 2016
Monday, June 27, 2016
Splendiferous Joe Biden
According to the morning news, we should all be so fantastically grateful to the splendiferous [slow] Joe Biden! According to the teaser, we should most definitely, absolutely tune in tonight to learn of all the wondrous things [slow] Joe has done in the short time that "solving" cancer has been his life's calling! Since President Three-putt put Joe on the case, magnificent things have happened "all because of Joe"!
Who would that thought that not a thing of significance has been happening for the last 3 or 4 decades in the field of cancer research. It took [slow] Joe to be assigned to the case to "make things happen".
I just may need to tune in cause I did not know that Joe had a degree in biology or in medical research or cancer research or clinical research or experience running drug trials or worked in the medical chemical area or made strides in designer drugs. I mean he is just THE BEST EVER! Thank the Good Lord he was put on the case!
OK, that was somewhat fun. The reality of course is much simpler. [slow] Joe is following in the foot steps of President Three-putt and leading from FAR behind. There is no lack of attention, efforts, money, and great minds working on various aspects of cancer research. Much effort is spent on finding better treatments and on actual cures. The only thing Joe adds to this is "hot air".
Me thinks [hopes?] that Hillary! will need to drop out before the election and the Democrats plan to slide [slow and gropy] Joe in on the 11th hour hoping to throw Donald off of his messaging and game and allow the Democrats to continue their destruction of the country. This is just another case of the media helping their political friends and work to keep some Democrat in the news in a positive way. Goodness knows there are no end of Democrats in the news lately for negative reasons.
Who would that thought that not a thing of significance has been happening for the last 3 or 4 decades in the field of cancer research. It took [slow] Joe to be assigned to the case to "make things happen".
I just may need to tune in cause I did not know that Joe had a degree in biology or in medical research or cancer research or clinical research or experience running drug trials or worked in the medical chemical area or made strides in designer drugs. I mean he is just THE BEST EVER! Thank the Good Lord he was put on the case!
OK, that was somewhat fun. The reality of course is much simpler. [slow] Joe is following in the foot steps of President Three-putt and leading from FAR behind. There is no lack of attention, efforts, money, and great minds working on various aspects of cancer research. Much effort is spent on finding better treatments and on actual cures. The only thing Joe adds to this is "hot air".
Me thinks [hopes?] that Hillary! will need to drop out before the election and the Democrats plan to slide [slow and gropy] Joe in on the 11th hour hoping to throw Donald off of his messaging and game and allow the Democrats to continue their destruction of the country. This is just another case of the media helping their political friends and work to keep some Democrat in the news in a positive way. Goodness knows there are no end of Democrats in the news lately for negative reasons.
Friday, June 24, 2016
BREXIT passes
Well, it seems that the plebs had the audacity to go against the politicians, the media, the unions, and the foreign dignitaries and voted that they have had enough!
Enough of loosing their sovereignty. Enough of being flooded with immigrants that don't share their values, share their culture or share their desire to live in a free and open society. Enough of being told by others how to run their own affairs.
Good for them!
Now we get to see if the British government abides by the desires of the British people.
Does all of this sound somewhat familiar? I believe our country went through something like that a couple of hundred years ago. As a group, the residents of America decided that they had enough of being messed around with by a bunch of potentates that felt that they knew best for everyone and had a right to tell everyone what to do, how to do it, and how much they owed for the "honor" of being told how to live their lives. Those "Americans" decided to do something about it.
Sound relevant to now, here, in this country?
Seems we are once again awash in folks that believe they are our betters and have a "moral obligation" and right to tell us what to do, how to do it, and how much we owe them for the honor of being told how we may live our lives.
That is what has caused the rise of Trump. The Tea Party was the first wave and the establishment did their best to slap them down. The media tried to brand those groups as raciest, homophobic, and nutters. The force of OUR government was turned against us, the citizens that OWN the government. The IRS, EPA, DOJ, the courts, the legislature, the FBI all directed to "crush" these malcontents that had the audacity to say enough.
Now we have Trump. He is the second wave of a populous that is tired of being mishandled. Is he the "best" answer? Hell no but he is "an" answer. If he loses [and if I am honest, I think he will] and Hillary gets the power, it will be in no small part through her minions in the media and a large dose of voter fraud.
That will likely usher in the third wave. At that point, God help us all for "the people" will have been told and shown that the rule of law means nothing (we are already getting small daily lessons in that). That the Constitution no longer means anything. That the "establishment" with their back room deals and secret lists and payoffs are truly in charge.
At that point, what have "the people" got to lose that they have not already had taken away from them? Ponder that...
Enough of loosing their sovereignty. Enough of being flooded with immigrants that don't share their values, share their culture or share their desire to live in a free and open society. Enough of being told by others how to run their own affairs.
Good for them!
Now we get to see if the British government abides by the desires of the British people.
Does all of this sound somewhat familiar? I believe our country went through something like that a couple of hundred years ago. As a group, the residents of America decided that they had enough of being messed around with by a bunch of potentates that felt that they knew best for everyone and had a right to tell everyone what to do, how to do it, and how much they owed for the "honor" of being told how to live their lives. Those "Americans" decided to do something about it.
Sound relevant to now, here, in this country?
Seems we are once again awash in folks that believe they are our betters and have a "moral obligation" and right to tell us what to do, how to do it, and how much we owe them for the honor of being told how we may live our lives.
That is what has caused the rise of Trump. The Tea Party was the first wave and the establishment did their best to slap them down. The media tried to brand those groups as raciest, homophobic, and nutters. The force of OUR government was turned against us, the citizens that OWN the government. The IRS, EPA, DOJ, the courts, the legislature, the FBI all directed to "crush" these malcontents that had the audacity to say enough.
Now we have Trump. He is the second wave of a populous that is tired of being mishandled. Is he the "best" answer? Hell no but he is "an" answer. If he loses [and if I am honest, I think he will] and Hillary gets the power, it will be in no small part through her minions in the media and a large dose of voter fraud.
That will likely usher in the third wave. At that point, God help us all for "the people" will have been told and shown that the rule of law means nothing (we are already getting small daily lessons in that). That the Constitution no longer means anything. That the "establishment" with their back room deals and secret lists and payoffs are truly in charge.
At that point, what have "the people" got to lose that they have not already had taken away from them? Ponder that...
Wednesday, June 22, 2016
Our moronic representatives
OK, so let me see if I have this right. Some of the duly elected members of congress, elected to represent WE the people and to help uphold our rights, have decided to hold a sit-in. To throw a temper tantrum because other members of congress won't let them vote to further restrict the rights of Americans?
Really?
A friggen sit-in? What is this 1964? What are they 14 years old?
Let us not forget what this sit-in is about. It is about those that have been elected to protect our rights wanting to impost their desires on all Americans. What are those desires? They want to deny an American citizen their God given right to a firearm based on that individual being listed on a secret, government list. A list you would not know you were even on until you tried to take a flight or purchase a gun. A list you would not be told why you were on it, in fact they won't even acknowledge that you are even on this list that is preventing you from buying a gun. There is practically no way for you to get yourself off of this list as in part the government will not admit that you are on it. You broke no laws, you didn't do anything, you are just on this list. You are on this list because some bureaucratic somewhere thought you maybe, might be someone or friends with someone that might be suspicious. Or they checked the wrong box on a form. Or they mis-spelled some actual terrorist's name. Regardless, done, finished, over for you. No due process, no court hearings, nothing. Your ability to fly and your gun rights are just gone.
Do you want that? Here in America?
I don't. WE DON'T DO THAT HERE.
You want to do something? STOP LETTING THESE TERRORISTS ENTER THE COUNTRY! Why not start there? Don't let these vile Imams in. Don't let terrorist sympathizers in. Don't let someone running for President of the U.S.A. accept donations from countries and groups that promote terrorism!
Do all those things first and if we still have issues, we can talk BUT secret lists that strip citizens of their rights is NEVER OK.
This is also yet another reason why we should have a much weaker Federal Government. Such unserious people should not have so strong a say in normal citizen's lives. If an individual state wishes to elect these folks to state office, fine. I don't care. You generally get the government you deserve. But with these folks at the Federal level and with so much power, the rest of the country is forced to suffer for the idiocy of just a few states.
Oh and don't forget:
Really?
A friggen sit-in? What is this 1964? What are they 14 years old?
Let us not forget what this sit-in is about. It is about those that have been elected to protect our rights wanting to impost their desires on all Americans. What are those desires? They want to deny an American citizen their God given right to a firearm based on that individual being listed on a secret, government list. A list you would not know you were even on until you tried to take a flight or purchase a gun. A list you would not be told why you were on it, in fact they won't even acknowledge that you are even on this list that is preventing you from buying a gun. There is practically no way for you to get yourself off of this list as in part the government will not admit that you are on it. You broke no laws, you didn't do anything, you are just on this list. You are on this list because some bureaucratic somewhere thought you maybe, might be someone or friends with someone that might be suspicious. Or they checked the wrong box on a form. Or they mis-spelled some actual terrorist's name. Regardless, done, finished, over for you. No due process, no court hearings, nothing. Your ability to fly and your gun rights are just gone.
Do you want that? Here in America?
I don't. WE DON'T DO THAT HERE.
You want to do something? STOP LETTING THESE TERRORISTS ENTER THE COUNTRY! Why not start there? Don't let these vile Imams in. Don't let terrorist sympathizers in. Don't let someone running for President of the U.S.A. accept donations from countries and groups that promote terrorism!
Do all those things first and if we still have issues, we can talk BUT secret lists that strip citizens of their rights is NEVER OK.
This is also yet another reason why we should have a much weaker Federal Government. Such unserious people should not have so strong a say in normal citizen's lives. If an individual state wishes to elect these folks to state office, fine. I don't care. You generally get the government you deserve. But with these folks at the Federal level and with so much power, the rest of the country is forced to suffer for the idiocy of just a few states.
Oh and don't forget:
Monday, June 20, 2016
Unbelievable! Air Force manhandles vet
A USAF veteran who has for years delivered a stirring “flag-folding speech” at military and civic events was recently forcibly removed from a retirement ceremony.
Follow the link, read the text and watch the videos. Below is the text of the "forbidden" speech.
Our flag is known as the stars and stripes. The union consists of white stars on a blue field, symbolic of a new constellation. Each star represents one individual state and together they stand united indivisible. The stripes represent the original 13 colonies that declared their independence from Great Britain in 1776. The one official, red, is symbolic for the blood of those who have given their lives to defend and protect our great nation from all of her enemies, both foreign and domestic. White represents purity, innocence, and hope. Blue is for vigilance, perseverance, and justice.
But in our hearts our flag stands for many things, evident in the Declaration of Independence where all men are created equal with rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; the right of the people to alter or abolish any form of government that becomes destructive.
Our flag stands for the Constitution of the United States of America. Freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of speech. It provides for security to all of her citizens, it also provides for a fair and swift trial. It abolished slavery and it gives each and every individual of age the right to participate in our voting process—to have a say in his or her’s future. Our flag is a beacon, recognized around the world to represent freedom during times of peace, or during times of war. This is what we live for. This is what we will fight for, and if necessary to touch the head of God in her defense, the charge that we accept as Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines is a noble one for there is no heart stronger than that of a volunteer. Let us pray that God will reflect with admiration the willingness of one nation in her attempt to rid the world of tyranny, oppression, and misery. It is this one nation under God that we call, with honor, the United States of America.
God Bless our flag.
God bless our troops.
God bless America.
{video}
September 2013
Follow the link, read the text and watch the videos. Below is the text of the "forbidden" speech.
Flag-Folding Speech Delivered by Oscar Rodriguez
Transcript
Our flag is known as the stars and stripes. The union consists of white stars on a blue field, symbolic of a new constellation. Each star represents one individual state and together they stand united indivisible. The stripes represent the original 13 colonies that declared their independence from Great Britain in 1776. The one official, red, is symbolic for the blood of those who have given their lives to defend and protect our great nation from all of her enemies, both foreign and domestic. White represents purity, innocence, and hope. Blue is for vigilance, perseverance, and justice.
But in our hearts our flag stands for many things, evident in the Declaration of Independence where all men are created equal with rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; the right of the people to alter or abolish any form of government that becomes destructive.
Our flag stands for the Constitution of the United States of America. Freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of speech. It provides for security to all of her citizens, it also provides for a fair and swift trial. It abolished slavery and it gives each and every individual of age the right to participate in our voting process—to have a say in his or her’s future. Our flag is a beacon, recognized around the world to represent freedom during times of peace, or during times of war. This is what we live for. This is what we will fight for, and if necessary to touch the head of God in her defense, the charge that we accept as Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines is a noble one for there is no heart stronger than that of a volunteer. Let us pray that God will reflect with admiration the willingness of one nation in her attempt to rid the world of tyranny, oppression, and misery. It is this one nation under God that we call, with honor, the United States of America.
God Bless our flag.
God bless our troops.
God bless America.
{video}
September 2013
Saturday, June 18, 2016
Clinton and classified emails
Hillary has assured us time and time again that she did nothing wrong when she setup a private, insecure, off-the secure network, stand-alone email server for the use of her and her staff while she was Secretary of State.
She has assured us:
Additionally:
The Times does note that “22 (of the emails) have now been classified by the State Department as “top secret,” 65 are classified as “secret”...
...on June 8, security experts told the Associated Press “At least 47 of the (Clinton) emails contain the notation “B3 CIA PERS/ORG,” which indicates the material referred to CIA personnel or matters related to the agency.
The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) in the State Department report released in late May stands as one of recent history’s biggest victories for truth.
Clinton media strategists believe they can minimize the OIG report by doing two things: ignoring it or assuring us it doesn’t matter. In a week or so the strategists will begin employing the “it’s old news” shtick.
The OIG report totally discredits Clinton’s oft made claim that she didn’t do anything different from other former Secretaries of State.
Oh, but the OIG report demonstrates she did.
She has assured us:
- Other Secretary's of State have done this - lie
- That this was not against State Department rules - lie
- That the FBI is only doing a "security check / audit" and not a criminal investigation - lie
- That at no time EVER did any classified or secret information pass through her server - LIE
In fact in yet ANOTHER example of how classified information traveled through her private, insecure server is this story run by Fox News (a good summary of the story can be found here).
The "funny" part of this is what the "Hillary fanboys" are saying about this additional revelation.
- It is being claimed that this email should have never been classified in the first place as it just has to do with scheduling an appointment.
- Sorry but that has NOTHING to do with it. The Secretary of State does not have unilateral power to declassify something that has been classified. She can not "just decide" that some information is "not that important".
- They are also saying that if you read the email, nothing in it looks like any kind of secret so again, no bit deal.
- Wrong AGAIN! Look that the email at the Fox link. Much of it at the bottom (the actual start of the email thread) has been redacted before being released by the Government. If that information was no big deal, it would not have been blanked out.
Hillary setup her own email server so as to allow her the freedom to conduct "business" (notice I did not say Government business) without the worry of FOIA requests or Government information audits. Also, don't forget, when asked for all of her private email server information, she had her lawyers review all of the email information and that which THEY deemed appropriate, was handed over to the Government IN PRINT. They did not even turn over the scrubbed information in electronic format. That would be yet another law she broke by allowing her lawyers (who had not been cleared to see secure Government information) access to that information for the purposes of "scrubbing" it.
Additionally:
The Times does note that “22 (of the emails) have now been classified by the State Department as “top secret,” 65 are classified as “secret”...
...on June 8, security experts told the Associated Press “At least 47 of the (Clinton) emails contain the notation “B3 CIA PERS/ORG,” which indicates the material referred to CIA personnel or matters related to the agency.
The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) in the State Department report released in late May stands as one of recent history’s biggest victories for truth.
Clinton media strategists believe they can minimize the OIG report by doing two things: ignoring it or assuring us it doesn’t matter. In a week or so the strategists will begin employing the “it’s old news” shtick.
The OIG report totally discredits Clinton’s oft made claim that she didn’t do anything different from other former Secretaries of State.
Oh, but the OIG report demonstrates she did.
This is yet additional proof (if any were needed) that she should be kept as far from any Government power as is possible. How anyone can still try to defend her actions is deplorable and an indication of how sick the left in this country has become.
I am not saying that I approve of what Snowden did but he does highlight the hypocrisy of the left and those of the left that are in power. Also (in light of what has happened in Orlando)
P.S. Don't you think she looks tired?
Friday, June 17, 2016
Its all about ME!!!!!!!
This is absolutely ridiculous! At Mizzou, (yes the Mizzou that was in the news for the "Click" incident) during a "vigil" for the people murdered in the Orlando club, some BLM folks "take over" the event and wind up making it all about "THEM" cause it is always about THEM.
Disgusting. Watch:
Oh, and don't you love her "inclusive" opening comments about being nervous to be on the stage due to all of the "white people" in attendance. I suppose if I went on stage at a multi-ethnic gathering and planned to "hijack" the event for my own politics, I might be nervous too.
Disgusting. Watch:
Oh, and don't you love her "inclusive" opening comments about being nervous to be on the stage due to all of the "white people" in attendance. I suppose if I went on stage at a multi-ethnic gathering and planned to "hijack" the event for my own politics, I might be nervous too.
Common sense gun laws
You want some common sense gun laws? OK, here are my ideas for some common sense gun laws:
- Each business and/or legal entity (to include private citizens) are free to declare their "property" to be a "gun free zone" but doing so makes that "group" fully responsible for the protection of all persons on those premises to include being legally and financially libel for failure to protect.
- Any area marked as a "gun free zone" must indicate at least 60 days prior to the "gun free zone" restriction taking affect, the date that the gun free designation will take affect, in a manner consistent with how the "gun free zone" designation will be communicated.
- If an area is marked as a "gun free zone", that designation applies to all persons on the premises, to include the property owners.
- If an area is not clearly and obviously marked as a "gun free zone", it is not.
- No agent of the government is exempt from honoring any properly posted "gun free zone" designation unless they are in the act of responding to an immediate emergency. No exceptions.
- Any government agent or representative found to have violated a designated "gun free zone" will not be shielded from criminal and/or civil penalties.
- Any crime committed within a "gun free zone" that involves a gun will result in a "times 2" multiplier on any incarceration time. This additional time may not be served 'concurrently" with any other time, nor may it be reduced for any reason. It is to be assessed after all other judication has been completed.
- Any gun laws enacted in any state must be applied to all within the state, no exceptions. If no resident is allowed an AR-15 or extended magazines, that would also include the state government and the state guard. This also includes politicians and their security. If the law is worded in such a way as to enact a stepped level of increasing restrictions, the most restrictive level applies to the government (i.e. you can only have a 10 round magazine for target shooting and only a 5 round magazine for hunting - government employees can only have 5 round magazines).
- Any gun laws enacted by the federal government must be applied to all federal workers as well, with no exceptions (on par with the state law above). This includes the FBI, CIA, Homeland Security, etc. The only exception to these "continental" restrictions is the Armed Forces of the United States, when they are operating outside of the United States and its territories.
- Any government agency granting a waiver to any person, organization, or group for any existing gun law, invalidates that law for any/all persons affected/covered by that law.
- Mandatory minimums for violation of an existing gun law regardless of the persons "station" or position.
- Any existing CCW holder at the time that a more restrictive gun law is enacted, is exempt from that law.
- Any existing CCW holder can not have their CCW renewal denied for any reason except the following: deceased, committed to a mental institution (until such time as they are released), incarcerated for a crime (until such time as they are released), or they choose to voluntarily give up their CCW (they are permitted to change their mind and have it reinstated),
- If the CCW has "expired", the holder of the expired CCW is given an open ended period under which to renew. Renewal is for the purposes of having an "up to date" photo and any other relevant personal information and as such, the renewal fee must be reasonable and minimal. The "penalty" for an expired CCW is a fine of 2X the renewal fee.
- Any current or former active duty personal (that has not been dishonorably discharged) is permitted to apply for and be granted a CCW for nominal registration fees.
- Any government agent that wishes to (or is required to - due to the position) carry concealed must first obtain a CCW. The process followed must be "on par" with the process followed by citizens of that jurisdiction.
- Any valid CCW is valid in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and all US territories.
- As it is a "health and safety" issue, firearms sound suppressors will no longer be governed by the BATF and will be legal to be made available where ever firearms are available.
- Whatever local / Federal laws govern the acquisition of a firearm will govern the acquisition of a suppressor.
- A crime committed with a suppressor will carry a "times 2" multiplier on any incarceration time. This additional time may not be served 'concurrently" with any other time, nor may it be reduced for any reason. It is to be assessed after all other judication has been completed.
- The 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act artificial limitation on the civilian market availability of automatic weapons (only those registered on or before the law was signed) is rescinded.
I am sure that I could come up with more but I think these are a good first start. Lets enact these and THEN we can have further discussions on "common sense" gun laws. M'kay?
Thursday, June 16, 2016
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
