Are the Democrats coming to
their senses? While the party leadership does not seem to be doing so
rank and file member may just be signaling their disgust. Here's what
one life long Democrat said during a recent town hall on CBS: "Regardless of who was behind it, they confirmed that Hillary Clinton and the Democratic establishment are liars and that they had this thumb on the scale for Hillary Clinton – well, what are they basically saying? If we hadn’t been caught lying, we’d be running the country right now.” http://www.usapoliticstoday.com/epic-backfire-democrats-said-cbs-town-hall-just-sentenced-dnc-death/
Failing cities which do not
abide by the law and bash the police to boot do not deserve a bail-out
from the FBI. City citizens these leaders are suppose to serve suffer
the consequences. That is not right. Nor in most cases it is the fault
of the police. It is the city leaders who make the laws and
direct/control the actions of city police. Quote: "Federal help to
these dangerous cities is a stopgap measure. The FBI has its own
investigative duties, and local communities should be righting their own
law enforcement ships. They need to invest in enough cops – and invest
in their training, leaders, equipment, tools and tactics. Cities are
failing because their leaders have failed to do this. Combatting surging
violent crime in Baltimore and Chicago and New Orleans is not about
“Officer Friendly” community engagement. Limited federal resources
aren’t designed for that. This is about real law enforcement that gets
violent criminals off the streets, limits the next wave of victims and
turns desperate communities back to the good people who live in them.
President Trump and his attorney general understand that." Not all
but a large percentage of the cities with the worse crime rates have
made policing next to impossible with ridiculous pampering of criminal
behavior. Their problem is therefore their fault. And, most if not all
the large cities are long time bastions of failed/failing Democrat
leadership.
You will note that this is the
same liberal crowd that riots and protests any speech by a
conservative. But they feel free to issue unspecified threats if a
pro-sharia law advocate is interfered with. These are the self
appointed "tolerant" ones. By their own behavior tolerance is obviously
not part of their character. http://www.libertyheadlines.com/dems-silent-dnc-vice-chair-defends-pro-sharia-organizer/?
If Democrats do not denounce this hypocrisy, you will know where their
heads and hearts are. And be assured that will mean they are not with
most American citizens.
Comedian Jimmy Kimmel recently
went public with details of his newborn son's health problems. It was
heart wrenching to be sure but took on a political slant. He used it to
plead for keeping Obamacare in place. He used emotion not facts to
make his case and if he was knowingly deceptive he pulled a typical
liberal/progressive stunt. This piece breaks down the facts that in no
case does his tragic situation support keeping a horrible Obamacare
program in place for average Americans. Here are five facts that prove
Kimmel's appeal has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with or in any way
justify keeping Obamacare should remain in place. http://www.dailywire.com/news/15993/5-things-you-need-know-about-hospital-where-jimmy-aaron-bandler?
If he knowingly used his situation to try to convince people that
Obamacare is providing the medical care his son needs he is worse than a
liar.
Democrats beware. This item
reveals just what your party leadership thinks of you. Quote: "The
Democratic National Committee is currently defending the tactics it used
last year to rig the presidential primary against Sen. Bernie Sanders
in a class-action lawsuit, brazenly telling voters in a court of law
that the party is not obligated to run a fair and impartial primary
election. Outraged by how the DNC unfairly boosted former Secretary of
State Hillary Clinton’s candidacy and cleared the way for her primary
victory, supporters of Sanders and Democratic donors sued the DNC in
June 2016 alleging it defrauded its constituents." http://www.wnd.com/2017/05/dnc-we-rigged-primaries-so-what/
In today's upside down world, who can one trust? This item explores that question. Quote: "The
looming threat of World War III, a potential extermination event for
the human species, is made more likely because the world’s public can’t
count on supposedly objective experts to ascertain and evaluate facts.
Instead, careerism is the order of the day among journalists,
intelligence analysts and international monitors – meaning that almost
no one who might normally be relied on to tell the truth can be
trusted. The
dangerous reality is that this careerism, which often is expressed by a
smug certainty about whatever the prevailing groupthink is, pervades
not just the political world, where lies seem to be the common currency,
but also the worlds of journalism, intelligence and international
oversight, including United Nations agencies that are often granted
greater credibility because they are perceived as less beholden to
specific governments but in reality have become deeply corrupted, too. In
other words, many professionals who are counted on for digging out the
facts and speaking truth to power have sold themselves to those same
powerful interests in order to keep high-paying jobs and to not get
tossed out onto the street. Many of these self-aggrandizing
professionals – caught up in the many accouterments of success – don’t
even seem to recognize how far they’ve drifted from principled
professionalism." And, "But the
mainstream media stars didn’t like it when Trump began throwing the
“fake news” slur back at them. Thus, the First Amendment lapel pins and
the standing ovation for Jeff Mason’s repudiation of the “fake news”
label. Yet,
as the glitzy White House Correspondents Dinner demonstrated,
mainstream journalists get the goodies of prestige and money while the
real truth-tellers are almost always outspent, outgunned and cast out of
the mainstream. Indeed, this dwindling band of honest people who are
both knowledgeable and in position to expose unpleasant truths is often
under mainstream attack, sometimes for unrelated personal failings and
other times just for rubbing the powers-that-be the wrong way." http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/05/01/existential-question-who-trust.html
Courts subordinate to the
Supreme Court have no authority to rule on federal although they have
been doing so for some time and have gotten away with it. But should
they? This piece explains. Quote: "A district judge has as much power
to “strike down” a national policy or statute and have it take effect
outside his district as much as Congress has the power to adjudicate an
individual bankruptcy case. That is to say, they have no such power at
all." And, "Additionally, Trump has shown some signs of warming to
elements of judicial reform. He said earlier this week that he’d support the effort to divide up the Ninth Circuit. However, this act alone, while limiting the scope of jurisdiction to California,
could still undermine his national policy. Even a Ninth Circuit limited
to California could still place a nationwide injunction on his
immigration policies. This is why Congress must also clarify through
the Rules Enabling Act that lower courts have no power to issue
injunctions outside their respective jurisdictions. This would be
applied evenly to all administrations and regarding all types of
policies. Will this create a patchwork of precedent? Sure. But I’d
rather live under a divided patchwork." https://www.conservativereview.com/articles/constitutional-fact-district-judges-cant-strike-trumps-orders
Lest we forget this is a reminder that investigations into Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation are ongoing. http://mailchi.mp/nationalrepublicantrust/you-made-a-big-difference-767153?e=f39097a4e4 Even now more evidence of wrong doing is emerging. http://www.libertyheadlines.com/unclassified-emails-discovered-hillarys-unsecure-system/? There seems to be no end to the lies she has told.
Given the people who are
praising the latest government funding bill it must be really bad. Any
time these politicians praise spending more than we take in it is sure
to be a bad deal for tax payers. Their lies are intolerable. "You can
tell whether a spending agreement is good or bad based on who is
smiling: the swamp dwellers, or those who want to drain the swamp. This
budget made the swamp dwellers very happy. Shortly after announcing a
$1.1 trillion — with a "t" — spending deal to fund the federal
government's domestic and military programs for the next five months,
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called it a "very good deal for the
American people." http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/with-this-budget-deal-the-swamp-wins/ Seems to me that both the Republicans and Trump caved. I am not happy.
No comments:
Post a Comment