Progressives Should Heed The Warnings of Isaiah

Isaiah 5:20 Woe to you who call evil good, and good evil; who substitute darkness for light, and light for darkness; who exchange bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

Destroying Jobs In Order To Create Jobs?

Hillary Clinton spent several days following her nomination touring Pennsylvania and Ohio bashing Trump over jobs. I would find this particularly amusing if it wasn't so sad. These are rust belt states in large part due to the very same policies espoused by Hillary and the Democrat Party. Hillary wants to shut down coal mining, an industry that employed 2,923 people in Ohio and 7,938 in Pennsylvania [Source: www.nma.org]. She also opposes the petroleum industry which employs 255,100 people in Ohio with an average salary of  $75,792 a year and 339,000 in Pennsylvania with an average salary of $84,353 a year. [Source: www.api.org] Apparently Hillary's plan is to destroy these existing solidly middle-class jobs and replace them with new jobs she will create.

According to its website, Trump International has 22,450 employees. If you discount political positions that pay women less than their male counterparts and "no show" jobs like the one she arranged for Chelsea, how many private sector jobs has Hillary ever created?

If Pennsylvanians and Ohioans vote for Hillary and they lose their jobs, they have no one to blame but themselves; not even Hillary because she told you exactly what she was going to do.

Hillary's Judgment?

Hillary has long claimed she supports and actually helped arrange the Obama Administration's Iranian Nuclear Deal - a deal that virtually guarantees the Iranian mullahs will have nukes within ten years.

Last night during her acceptance speech for the Democrat Party's nomination for president, she said Trump can't be trusted with nuclear weapons. Apparently for her, the "Death to America; Death to Israel" chanting mullahs aren't a problem.

I think this speaks more to her lack of judgment than Trump's!

Trump Out-Democrats The Democrats

The recent uproar over Trump asking the Russians to give back the 30,000 emails that Hillary deleted is actually quite clever. It is particularly satisfying because it uses a typical Democrat tactic against them - introducing a false premise in order to elicit a response from an adversary which connects them to the false premise or causes the opponent to make a damaging mistake.

The result has been that Trump's comments bring Hillary's email scandal back into the spotlight after they had all but fallen off the radar and at a time when Democrats had hoped to have all the focus on their convention. It also implies that, not only is it possible that her emails were hacked by our adversaries as FBI Director Comey suggested, they most likely were. Additionally, it causes the Democrats to make unforced errors by baiting them into responding which is like doing a gymnastic floor routine in a mine field. The responses from the Democrats have made them look ridiculous. In his response, President Obama referred to the Russians as "our adversaries". Congratulations Mr Obama. It only took you four years to realize something Mitt Romney told us back in 2012. Do the 1980s still "want their foreign policy back"? Moreover, it put the Dems in the following position:
Hillary's extremely careless handling of classified material probably allowed the Russians to steal it;
Hillary destroyed government records which is against federal regulations;
Hillary obstructed an FBI investigation, and
Hillary had her server wiped so completely that FBI computer forensics experts couldn't recover the information - pretty extreme for emails that only contained Chelsea's wedding plans and discussions about yoga.
When Trump suggests (probably jokingly) that if the Russians have the emails, they should give them back (They would, after all, be stolen American property.), the Democrats and the crazies in the main stream media say Trump is the traitor. Are you kidding me?

Wouldn't it be something if the Russians did return the emails? It would kinda be like them honoring a FOIA request - something the Democrats never seem to be able to do. How ironic would that be? So Trump out-Democrats the Democrats. Brilliant!

Trump's Patriotic Contribution

If nothing else, one has to give credit to Donald Trump for one thing, he has at least partially distracted the Democrats from their favorite pastime - bashing and undermining America. Here's to 8 more years of distracting subversive, progressive, lefties.

Let's work to build on and improve at great country for all Americans rather than destroy it in order to rebuild it as some mythical socialist utopia.

Tim Kaine VP Candidate or Jack Nicholson From The Shining?

Is it just me or did anyone else expect Tim Kaine to suddenly say "Here's Johnny" during his speech at the Democrat Convention last night?

Theme Song for DNC Convention

I think I have found the perfect analogy for the modern Democrat Party: the island of misfit toys from Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer. That should be their convention theme song. Click below to hear if you need to refresh your memory.
2016 Democrat Convention Theme Song

So Tim Kaine Speaks Spanish

Because lying and pandering to people is much more effective in their native language.

Why The Left Hates Trump

The following link is of a protester at the Republican Convention in Cleveland. It is very revealing of who these people are: the angry, anti-American Left. They hate Trump because he loves America. The obvious conclusion is that the Left which embodies the modern Democrat party hates America. Guilt by association? Maybe but I'm comfortable with that!

 

Masked, Flag Burning Protester of Republican Convention Admits to Hating America

I challenge anyone to find Conservative protesters at the Democrat convention burning the American flag and professing their hatred of America. Good luck with that.

The Real Threat to America: Plagiarism

Everyone is rightly concerned about Melania Trump's convention speech. Thank goodness. I used to be concerned about Hillary's lying and endangering national security by her excessive carelessness handling classified material. Now we can focus on the threat to America that is plagiarism.

Thought On BRexit

Yawn!

Lying And CoverIng Up: 1974 Vesus 2016

We sure have come a long way and not for the better. In 1974, Richard Nixon was forced to resign the presidency because of his lies and cover-up regarding the Watergate break-in. In 2016, Hillary Clinton may become president even though she has done far worse - she has been shown to be a liar and to have covered up her illegal email server and the events surrounding Benghazi. Throw in her excessively careless handling of classified material and perjury and today you are the most qualified Democrat to be president. The true irony is that Hillary started her career working as a staffer investigating Watergate. Apparently what she learned from that experience is that if you are going to lie and cover-up something, "Go big or go home!"

Is that the message? Or perhaps it is that crimes don't matter in 2016 as long as you are a progressive, female, Democrat, nominee for president of the United States.

Here is my bold prediction: Because Hillary has apparently gotten away with her criminal activities once again, she will be emboldened and will do even more egregious criminal acts if elected president. She won't make it through her first term before being impeached and either forced to resign or be convicted by the Senate and be removed from office.

Anyone voting for Clinton this November better be very comfortable with her choice for VP. In 2016 it will really matter!

Hillary's Victory Dance A Bit Premature?

I have to admit I was despondent about the FBI Director's decision not to recommend prosecuting the case against Secretary Clinton for her private email server and mishandling of classified information. When I heard that Director Comey was being called to testify before Congress, I thought, "Why  bother? You (and the People) lost; it's over." What made matters worse was the long list of lies laid out by Comey and his description of Hillary and her staffers' extremely careless handling of classified material and yet neither she nor anyone else would not be held accountable. After Comey's public announcement, Hillary's smug and gloating "victory dance" at a campaign event in North Carolina with President Obama by her side made the decision all the more galling. Then something surprising happened and my spirits began to lift.

Little by little, portions of Comey's testimony made their way to the media and the questions by the members of the House committee began to reveal that there were serious flaws in the FBI's investigation; most notably, investigators never compared their findings against Clinton's sworn statements to Congress. Any inconsistencies would show she either lied to Congress or the FBI. Either way, each one would be a felony and the result would be very big trouble for Ms. Clinton. Just ask Scooter Libby. By the close of business today, the State Department announced it was reopening the probe into Clinton's email scandal.

Perhaps Hillary's celebration was just a bit premature.

The Left's Latest Assault on Free Speech and Thought

The Left are great champions of free speech and free thought - as long as you agree with them. There are many examples of how they try to limit free speech and thought that they don't agree with.

One of their main tools of the language is to label certain arguments with which they disagree, hate speech and thus something that must be silenced. Of course the substance of the argument is irrelevant. Another example is the evolution of the name for global warming. When it became clear that the predictions weren't matching the agenda e.g. unusually cold winters, Leftists morphed the term into climate change to explain both warming and cooling. Convenient, right?

Now as the public has begun to reject the concept of political correctness, the statists on the left needed to create another "intellectual" sounding term they can use to combat speech and thought they don't like but can't mount a convincing argument against. This new term is micro-aggression.
Actually, according to Merrian-Webster.com, "microaggression which refers to a comment or action that is subtly and often unintentionally hostile or demeaning to a member of a minority or marginalized group—has seen a decided increase in usage over the past several years, though the word is at least 45 years old.

A few weeks ago, UNC Chapel Hill, published a guide, "Career Corner: Understanding Microaggressions." The guide was created using taxpayer money of course. Some examples of microaggression according to the guide are "Christmas vacation", suggesting a "golf outing", when someone says to a women, "I love your shoes." or when someone refers to their "boyfriend" or "girlfriend". Wow, how offensive. Don't we all feel much better now?

If controlling what one can and can't say wasn't so insidious, this would just be silly. It's not however because this is a deliberate erosion of your First Amendment rights. This is how these people roll.

Boy, I can't wait for these people to be in charge.

By the way, try finding the UNC guide using Google. It is no longer available. If they were proud of it , don't you think they would want everyone to read it? 

Left, Right and Center: Here's "Why the Anger?"

With Trump, Sanders, and now BRexit, political-types, left, right, and center in America and elsewhere keep asking, "Where is all this anger coming from?" Are you serious? How dense are you people? Here are a few possible reasons in bullet form to make it easy for politicians to follow:

• Passing laws but exempting themselves
• Not enforcing laws they do pass
• Constantly making excuses for their failures
• Blaming others for their failures
• Calling groups of fellow citizens enemies
• Passing laws that large majorities of the public oppose
• Holding hearings but never holding anyone accountable
• Giving politicians a pass on criminal activity that would land ordinary citizens behind bars
• Spending the country into oblivion - $19T in debt
• Decrying greed and income inequality while becoming multi-millionaires in public service
• Showing complete distain for ordinary citizens
• Ignoring rampant waste, fraud, and abuse and then telling taxpayers they aren't paying enough
• Constantly blaming your own country for all the world's ills
• Focusing on trivial matters at the expense of serious issues
• Lying
• Parsing everything you say in lawyer speak so you can weasel out of things
• Not keeping your promises
• Disrespecting our history, culture and traditions
• Giving foreigners rights of citizens while denying actual citizens their rights
• Acting like an Ivy League law degree makes you an expert in everything from astrophysics to neurosurgery
• Rejecting hundreds and even thousands of years of collective experience, wisdom and common sense in favor of newfangled ideas with no evidence of merit
• Ceding our national sovereignty to unelected bodies like the UN, EU, and the World Court 

In short, the People want you to leave them the hell alone!

Readers feel free to comment if I missed any of our grievances in the above bullets.

Loretta Lynch: Recuse, Resign or Be Impeached

I had planned on writing about why so many Americans are completely fed up with our government (and still do) when Attorney General Loretta Lynch provided yet another example to the long list of reasons.

Lynch has a long personal history with the Clintons dating back to the late 1990s. In 1999, she was nominated by President Bill Clinton to serve as the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York.[Woodrow, Stephanie (February 12, 2010). "Meet Loretta E. Lynch". Main Justice. Retrieved March 13, 2011.]  Based on this relationship to the Clintons, she should have recused herself from any involvement in the Justice Department's investigation of Hillary's email scandal. She hasn't  despite government regulations and legal ethics which dictate that it is improper. Specifically, the Code of Federal Regulations (28 CFR 45.2) states:
     § 45.2 Disqualification arising from personal or political relationship.

      (a) Unless authorized under paragraph (b) of this section, no employee shall participate in a criminal investigation or  
            prosecution if he has a personal or political relationship with:

      (1) Any person or organization substantially involved in the conduct that is the subject of the investigation or 
            prosecution; or

      (2) Any person or organization which he knows has a specific and substantial interest that would be directly affected by 
           the outcome of the investigation or prosecution.

Additionally, the Department of Justice (DOJ) Ethics Handbook for On and Off Duty Behavior states:      
     Appearance of Impropriety: An employee shall endeavor to avoid any actions creating the appearance that the 
     employee is violating the law or the ethical standards set forth in this part. 5 CFR 2635.101(b)(14)

Lynch hasn't recused herself because the there was a presumption that she could be impartial. That presumption proved to be a bad one when she met privately, unannounced and uncovered by the press with former President Clinton in her government plane at the Phoenix airport thus violating both federal regulations and legal ethics.

 

Once again, the Clintons and those they associate with show they can't be trusted and lack any ethics.
As a minimum, Lynch should recuse herself from any further involvement with the Hillary email investigation. Better yet, she should resign as Attorney General for behavior that even a layman would recognized as unethical, unprofessional and inappropriate. If she doesn't, she should be impeached.

Enough of political-types feeling like they are above the law!!!