Site icon Helena

Soros Goes Both Ways – in Politics

If banning Muslims from entering the US means they are going to make a beeline for the ISIS recruitment line, then gee, they probably weren’t the best candidates for asylum or refugee status in the first place!

The notion that ‘not giving in’ means they will get mad and kill us instead is the most bizarre logic I have heard yet!  As in, we’ll let you in if you pinky swear not to kill us..  That is acting in fear. That is acting cowardly. That is caving to their ideology. What it is NOT – is guaranteeing the safety and security of this country which is a politician’s job according to our Constitution.

I must have missed the ‘pandering’ clause in our Constitution.

If you have cancer in your body and the doctor says he wants to inject just a few more cancer cells into your bloodstream because he needs to get rid of the cells he has leftover in the vial he has hanging around…is that a cure? Or is it death?

And the notion that we have to take these Syrian immigrants as our fair share, well does that mean we’re going to airlift half the extra 11 million illegals we already have in this country to Europe? Hello? They need to take their fair share…

Yes this country was founded on immigrants, I am a mutt along with most everyone here. But we didn’t come here vowing to destroy this country, we came to find a refuge, a sanctuary where we could be safe from the tyranny of Europe. Australia, have you forgotten your roots? You were shipped out of England from debtor prison so they could be rid of you. The Irish were shipped out as slaves. And our borders have been open to scores! But now we have a problem, and our very existence is at stake, so we need to assure our survival as who we are.  It is that simple.

The agenda is to create an empire so vast, that it consumes Africa, Europe, the US and the Middle East. The toppling of the US was considered a conquest more arrogant, more challenging than any other country. If that could be achieved, then harnessing the world into a One World Order would be possible. Except – for Russia and China. South America has no more world power, their economy in the toilet. Russia was a target, and killing oil was believed to be the answer. But Russia is much more resilient than anticipated, as in – ‘never underestimate your enemy’.  And Soros is flawed…

China is much more complex. Soros attempted to manipulate their markets back in June, only to sell off in August. His efforts were akin to a fly buzzing about annoyingly – swatted and dead.  But we can be sure he has not given up.  I give him that.

Owning the US is complex.  Obama was the beginning, but he lost face and favor.  Hillary was the screaming brat in the background demanding mememememe.  So, she became the frontrunner for the Democrat Party. But then her closest advisor. personal something, Huma Abedin, was caught saying that Hillary is “frequently very confused”.   That will prove to be many miles of posterity in the coming campaign.

So how does Soros stand with the Republican candidates, we know Hillary is his puppet, but Soros swings both ways:

Normally, Soros gets his way, and if he promised Bush the Republican nomination, he lost the gamble with Bush barely holding onto a lousy 2% and spewing hate words at Trump, “Donald Trump is a jerk.” Really? Sounds kindof elementary school to me…or Trumpish, as in nannynannypoopoo.

The only interesting potential of a Bush-Hillary stand-off would be a third party candidate. In my opinion, in that instance, the third party would stand a very good chance of winning. Who-oh-who could that be…?  Well, Trump has lately stated that he would never ever ever in a gazillion years consider a third party candidacy. Unless, he changes his mind.  On the other side, Bernie is fuming and has intimated – he might.

Exit mobile version
Skip to toolbar