July 30-31, 2016
Jul 30 02:44 Tim Kaine's initial stumbles Jul 30 08:43 Democrats abandon miners, unions Jul 30 23:40 When will Merkel get booted? Jul 31 02:17 Kevin Sorbo's justified diatribe Jul 31 12:30 Hillary's Benghazi dilemma
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Tim Kaine's initial stumbles
Polite people are saying that Tim Kaine is a perfect running mate for Hillary, then adding that he's definitely qualified to be president if, God forbid, anything happened to Hillary. After reading t his article , it's painfully obvious that he's nothing more than a mouthpiece who reads spin-script well but couldn't think his way out of a wet paper bag.
Friday morning, Mike Pence appeared on Hugh Hewitt's show. During the interview, Pence said "The speech last night was nothing new. It was just more of the same, more government, more of the same failed foreign policy" before adding "I mean, you've got to hand it to Hillary Clinton last night. She doubled down on their big government, liberal agenda, on a weak foreign policy on the world stage."
Tim Kaine wouldn't hear any of that, saying "The thing I thought was great is it set such a contrast with what we saw in Cleveland last week. The Cleveland convention was dark and depressing, and she said it was kind of midnight in America. And her speech was morning in America. It was about the everyday struggles that people have, but the fact that we don't have a single issue in this country that our people can't tackle, because we have the greatest pool of just human resources, human capital, human talent that any nation has ever had."
First, to hear a Democrat say that "we don't have a single issue in this country that our people can't tackle" is more than a little bizarre after what we heard 4 years ago in Virginia:
Second, saying that Hillary's speech was "morning in America" is proof that Democrats haven't told the truth. ISIS is killing people in France, California and Orlando. Sen. Kaine, does that sound like "morning in America"? Police officers are getting shot in Dallas and Baton Rouge. Does that sound like morning in America, Sen. Kaine? The governor of Minnesota, who addressed the Convention, accused police officers of racism , saying that Philando Castile would probably still be alive if he was white. Sen. Kaine, is it morning in America when governors accuse Hispanic police officers of racism?
Terrorist attacks are happening in western Europe at a faster rate than ever before. Ditto within the United States, though not at as fast a rate as in western Europe. What part of that sounds like morning in America, Sen. Kaine?
Democrats might settle for that, saying that it's the new normal. Conservatives reject that foolishness because we can do dramatically better with the right leadership. Stephen Miller nailed it with this statement :
Hillary Clinton says America is stronger together. But in Hillary Clinton's America, millions of people are left out in the cold. She only stands together with the donors and special interests who've bankrolled her entire life. Excluded from Hillary Clinton's America are the suffering people living in our inner cities, or the victims of open borders and drug cartels, or the people who've lost their jobs because of the Clintons' trade deals, or any hardworking person who doesn't have enough money to get a seat at Hillary Clinton's table.
Simply put, Hillary Clinton is an elitist and a snob. Imagine the thinking that went into her statement on national TV that she and Bill left the White House "dead broke":
I get it that Hillary thinks it's morning in America. I get it that Sen. Kaine does, too. They're both living around the Capitol, where everything is going beautifully. Living near DC, which hasn't experienced the Obama economy, it's easy to believe that life is fine. Beyond the Potomac, something that Mrs. Clinton and Sen. Kaine aren't familiar with, things aren't going nearly that well. Living near the White House explains why they think it's morning in America. We don't need a president that's unfamiliar with flyover country's hardships. We need someone who understands what people living in the Heartland are dealing with.
Posted Saturday, July 30, 2016 2:44 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 31-Jul-16 08:55 AM
"Polite people are saying . . .".
I am impolite. He's a Republican. Even further right than Clinton. Awful.
Democrats abandon miners, unions
The Democratic Party's platform doesn't mince words when it comes to energy. The Democratic Party's platform calls for the elimination of all fossil fuels by 2050 . That means that Hillary's statement in May that she'll try to put coal workers out of work isn't just campaign trail happy talk. It's the stated goal of the Democratic Party.
Political parties' platforms aren't often followed and can be frequently ignored. This time, it's different. When was the last time that Democrats sided with labor over the environmental activists' agenda? Let me know when you get back to the 1980s. BTW, Bill Clinton put millions of acres of federal land off limits for oil exploration. Now his wife is running for office. Anyone that thinks that Hillary isn't as prone to pandering as Bill is kidding themselves. She isn't as subtle or charming about it as Bill was but she's still a world-class panderer. This wasn't one of her finer moments, though:
Hillary talked quite openly about "clean, renewable energy" energy in that speech. It's possible that Hillary thinks that she's just pandering to the environmental activist wing of the Democratic Party. If that's what she's thinking, she didn't do her homework.
This isn't the old Democratic Party. When it comes to today's Democratic Party on energy, these environmental activists are fascists. They aren't interested in walking a mile in someone else's shoes. They're willing to take half-a-loaf but that doesn't mean that they're reasonable. They're totally willing to shut down fossil fuels with a steadfast progress towards eliminating fossil fuels.
Voters in Virginia, Ohio and Pennsylvania need to ask themselves if they're willing to cast a vote for a Democratic candidate who wants to cripple their state's economy and hurt their neighbors or their relatives. That's what's at stake in this election.
During her acceptance speech, Hillary said that "we all do better when we all do better", a phrase first coined by Paul Wellstone. I'd like to hear Hillary's explanation on how this helps miners do better. It's likely that Hillary used that line without meaning it. It's even likely that she doesn't care if everyone does better as long as she's elected.
It's time to reject the Democratic Party's politics of division and their divisive candidate.
Posted Saturday, July 30, 2016 8:43 AM
No comments.
When will Merkel get booted?
If this article is accurate, and the swelling crowds seem to verify its accuracy, German Chancellor Angela Merkel doesn't stand much of a change in the next election. The tip-off, which isn't much of a secret, is the opening paragraph of this article, which says "According to a poll performed by YouGov market research firm, at least 66% of the respondents said they do not agree with the chancellor's policy towards refugees, with only 27% support."
With France getting frequently hit with terrorist attacks and with some terrorist attacks happening in Germany, it won't be long before German voters fire Merkel and replace her with a pro-border control alternative. It's virtually inevitable.
Merkel incited this uprising when she said "[Germany] Will give asylum to those who are politically persecuted and we will give protection to those who flee war and expulsion according to the Geneva Refugee Convention," adding "We can make it." Never has a politician misread her constituents or failed to do what's right in recent history more than Ms. Merkel.
These leaders' statements offer differing perspectives:
Frauke Petry, leader of the Alternative for Germany (AfD), which strongly rejects the refugee inflow into Germany, also criticized Merkel's policy towards migrants. ": Stop repeating 'we'll manage it' and finally admit your mistake," she said. The head of the Green Party Cem Ozdemir said that he feels "ashamed" due to "the failure of the world community, of Europe and above all of Germany" to resolve the refugee crisis.
Mr. Ozdemir sounds like a politician. Petry sounds like a patriot who would do what's right. If the election were held today, I'd bet that Petry would win handily. I'm betting that Germans would pick the true believer in German sovereignty over the politician.
This doesn't bode well for Ms. Merkel :
Bavaria's state premier took aim at Chancellor Angela Merkel's open-door refugee policy on Saturday, rejecting her "we can do this" mantra just two days after she defended the message following Islamist attacks in Germany.
The comments from Horst Seehofer, whose Christian Social Union is the Bavarian sister party of Merkel's conservatives, exacerbate the chancellor's difficulty in standing by a policy that her critics have blamed for the attacks and which risks undermining her popularity ahead of federal elections next year .
Five attacks in Germany since July 18 have left 15 people dead, including four assailants, and dozens injured. Two of the attackers had links to Islamist militancy, officials say. "'We can do this' - I cannot, with the best will, adopt this phrase as my own," Seehofer told reporters after a meeting of his party.
The German people aren't stupid. They've noticed that terrorist attacks are increasing. That won't stop until a new leader is elected.
Posted Saturday, July 30, 2016 11:40 PM
Comment 1 by eric z at 31-Jul-16 12:48 PM
Same Russian outlet:
http://sputniknews.com/politics/20160731/1043807525/trump-crimea-russia-ukraine.html
Trump differs from Bush neocon interventionist policy. The war spending lobby must not like him. Cruz had that panel of neocon advisors, and Trump defeated it, and now his let the Russians do it policy toward Crimea and Syria is unique.
Kevin Sorbo's justified diatribe
Simply put, Kevin Sorbo is my new hero. He's my hero for writing this post that questions why Michael Brown's mother was invited to Hillary's convention and that ridicules the entire Black Lives Matter movement and the hand-up-don't-shoot myth. Considering the fact that he's a Hollywood actor, that took courage.
It must've taken courage for Sorbo to write "Whatever questionable choices were made at the Republican National Convention last week, I didn't hear of a single speaker whose sole accomplishment was raising a delinquent who attacked a cop. But as the country reels from the cold-blooded murder of five policemen in Dallas and three in Baton Rouge, Lezley McSpadden, mother of Mike Brown, America's most famous cop-assaulting criminal, appeared on stage at the Democratic National Convention."
It must've taken courage for Sorbo to write "It would be a lot easier if they were not being targeted for assassination and mass murders by homicidal nuts ginned up by BLM. (Shooting deaths of police are up 78 percent so far this year.) And it would be a lot easier without a group, officially supported by the Democrats, leading marches down city streets, chanting, 'What do we want? DEAD COPS! When do we want it? NOW!' Why does the Democratic platform endorse Black Lives Matter? And, most importantly, why was Mike Brown's mother on stage at the Democratic National Convention?"
That's a great question, Mr. Sorbo. Why was Mike Brown's mother invited to speak at the Democratic National Convention? What did she contribute to the convention other than to gin up the African-American vote? This is an even better question:
However half-heartedly, Hillary claims to oppose cop-killing, so why is she using her convention to promote the biggest lie in the pantheon of anti-cop lies, and to celebrate a man whose most famous act was to violently assault a police officer?
It's obvious that Hillary isn't pro-cop. If she were, she would've told Al Sharpton off for perpetuating the myth of hands-up-don't-shoot. The Democratic Party isn't pro-cop. Gov. Dayton accused a Hispanic police officer of being racist while insisting that Philando Castile would likely still be alive if he was white. Sorbo wasn't done:
Because of the despicable lies put out by BLM agitators, Wilson had to give up his career, move his family and will be forced to live in fear for the rest of his life. The town of Ferguson was destroyed, businesses burned to the ground, police officers attacked, people injured, the National Guard called in, and massive taxpayer money expended to contain the riots. But at the Democratic Convention, Lezley McSpadden (mother of Mike Brown) was wildly cheered.
Sorbo closed by sticking in the dagger, figuratively speaking:
Donald Trump, along with every other Republican ever to run for president, is required to repeatedly 'disavow' David Duke - someone he's never met, never mentioned, never thought of - and certainly didn't invite to speak at his convention.
But Hillary invites to her convention the mother of a man whose criminality destroyed a police officer's life, tore the country apart and gave birth to a murderous cop-hating movement. Will a single reporter ask Hillary to disavow that?
In terms of rhetorical questions, that's one of the smartest I've ever heard. The answer, of course, is that Hillary won't get questioned about inviting the mother of a thug to speak at her convention, much less be asked to disavow that decision.
Posted Sunday, July 31, 2016 2:17 AM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 31-Jul-16 07:35 AM
I've said it before and I'll say it again, the ends justify the means for the democratic socialists, progressives, whatever they are calling themselves these days. They perpetuate lies and believe them to be truths and say they want freedom for their constituents, while they force them into a lifetime of indentured servitude being fed the scrapes of welfare while the party elite gain wealth and power.
Comment 2 by eric z at 31-Jul-16 08:48 AM
Trump University.
Pence.
Comment 3 by JerryE9 at 31-Jul-16 10:40 AM
Rather a dupe who willingly bought what Trump U was selling than being forced into slavery on the Democrat's "we care" plantation.
Comment 4 by Gary Gross at 31-Jul-16 12:54 PM
I won't & I haven't defend the indefensible things Trump has done. That being said, the things that Hillary has done are at least as disgusting, if not more disgusting.
This morning, Mrs. Clinton said there wasn't any ill will from her towards Charles Woods and Patricia Smith. During the interview, she hinted that Smith & Woods didn't recall her statements correctly.
I've proven Mrs. Clinton's statements to be exceptionally dishonest. The truth is that Mrs. Clinton is dishonest.
Comment 5 by Bob J. at 03-Aug-16 01:26 PM
Kevin must have all the money he'll ever need because he sure won't work in Hollywood again after that (wonderful) post.
Neither major party candidate is fit for office. Just that simple.
Hillary's Benghazi dilemma
This morning, Hillary Clinton appeared on Fox News Sunday. During the interview, Chris Wallace asked her about Patricia Smith's statement at the Republican National Convention. That's where Mrs. Smith said "I blame Hillary Clinton -- I blame Hillary Clinton personally for the death of my son. That's personally."
Mrs. Clinton's reply was "As other members of families who lost loved ones have said, that's not what they heard -- I don't hold any ill feeling for someone who in that moment may not fully recall everything that was or wasn't said ."
To provide proper context, Chris Wallace said "She and the father of Tyrone Woods both say that on the day that their sons' bodies were returned to the United States, that you came up to them and you said it was all because of a video, not terrorism . Now, I know some of the other families disagree with this, and I know you deny it."
I won't mince words. Hillary Clinton is a liar. It isn't that Patricia Smith doesn't recall Hillary's statements correctly. It isn't that Tyrone Woods' father recalls Mrs. Clinton's statements incorrectly, either. Days after the attack, Hillary was still pretending that an obscure internet video caused the attack in Benghazi:
It's clear that Mrs. Clinton's mission was to insist that an obscure internet video caused the terrorists' attack. Here's what Mrs. Clinton said days after Christopher Stevens' body had been returned to the United States:
I also want to take a moment to address the video circulating on the internet that has led to these protests in a number of countries. Let me state very clearly, and I hope it is obvious that the United States' government had absolutely nothing to do with this video.
There's no need to rely on Patricia Smith's recollection or Charles Woods' recollection. Hillary's statements have been captured on video and they're quite revealing. So are Susan Rice's statements:
This article highlights Mrs. Clinton's dishonesty. Here's the date on the article:
Updated 5:51 AM ET, Sat September 15, 2012
Here's the opening paragraph of the article:
The remains of U.S. Ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans landed on U.S. soil Friday afternoon in flag-draped caskets.
On Sunday, September 16, 2012, Susan Rice went on all 5 Sunday morning talk shows to deliver a simple message. Here's what she said on CBS's Face the Nation:
Based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is of the present is, in fact, it began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had happened hours before in Cairo, where, as you know, there was a violent protest in front of our embassy, sparked by this hateful video.
The video captured Mrs. Clinton's statements accurately. There's no mistaking that she's lied repeatedly about the internet video being the cause for the terrorist attacks in Benghazi.
Therefore, Mrs. Clinton's statement that she doesn't "hold any ill feeling for someone who in that moment may not recall everything that was said or wasn't said" is insulting. There's nothing wrong with Patricia Smith's or Charles Woods' hearing. What's wrong is Mrs. Clinton's repeated dishonesty.
The video doesn't lie. Unfortunately, Mrs. Clinton and Ms. Rice lied repeatedly. What kind of politician hints that grieving parents are wrong when the politician knows what she's said is utterly dishonest?
Finally, J.C. Watts gave the perfect definition of character during the 1996 Republican Convention when he said that "character is doing the right thing even when nobody's looking." Mrs. Clinton apparently fails that test.
Posted Sunday, July 31, 2016 12:30 PM
Comment 1 by eric z at 01-Aug-16 01:48 PM
The big question remains. What was the coverup for? What was the CIA up to accumulating arms at "the annex?" The insurgents, whoever they were, overran the State site, and followed the evacuees to the annex. The annex was abandoned. Who got the weapons stash, what was it made up of, and where did it end up? The feeb Gowdy committee smokescreen was designed to be a politicized diversionary move, to deflect attention from what was going on. Shortly thereafter, Petraeus is sacked, allegedly for sexual dalliance involving sharing state secrets. But was it for the screwups in Libya?
Nobody is asking what specific war mongering Clinton and the CIA were up to, why, and who ended up with the arms. Pathetic.
