McCain, Graham, Rubio – Traitors, Termites?

McCain continues to energize and highlight himself in the news by making absurd accusations and demands as though he himself was a self-proclaimed demi-god. A wolf in republican clothing, his wealthy wife has empowered him with the notion that he can say and do anything without retribution, tact, dignity or honor. Given he was once a man of the military and these values were inherent in every military man, he has sullied the very essence of the character and bravery befitting a man of this uniform!  He is doing a dis-service – to The Service!

His most recent tirade was to scream at Rand Paul claiming he is working for Vladamir Putin because Paul objected to a unanimous consent motion to advance a bill pushing Montenegro approval to join NATO and usher in a fast track to EU membership. In essence, the expansion of NATO into Eastern Europe is viewed as nothing less than a parallel to Russia’s annexation of Crimea. They are one and the same.

Montenegro is largely a Serbian Muslim nation. Its historical involvement in the Bosnian Serbian war in the 1990’s has left horrific marks on Croatia given the systematic torture and brutal executions perpetrated. In 2015, their President and Prime Minister were named “Person of The Year in Organized Crime” by an investigative journalist network. The organization, OCCRP, has been involved in numerous anti-corruption investigations including the Panama Paper Caper.

So what is the point in fast tracking a corrupt regime into the EU that is predominantly Muslim?  It serves to divide the EU into further chaos and civil war as thru the incorporation of a radical Socialist/Communist state.

The powers that be are nervous.  Their plan upended and their agenda destabilized, they are like hyenas fighting for a carcass.  Ramping up their time-table has become critical.  And McCain, Graham and Rubio are spokespersons for this Swamp.

There are other anti-administrative ‘Republicans’ hard at work to dismantle, disrupt and discredit. Rubio is attempting to recreate lost fame by discrediting Trump’s record thus far despite the fact that his service has encompassed exactly 8 weeks. So what did Rubio actually accomplish?

Well in looking at his top five laudings, it would appear that his accomplishments were actually his opinions and not a true ‘actionable accomplishment’; defending freedom, tackling education challenges, attempting to reform the tax code, talking about human rights, and ‘fighting for conservative ideas’ … whopppeeee…

In other words – his ‘DID’ – nothing worthy of mention. But he is quite vocal in his deriding of Trump – after eight weeks in office.

Lindsey Graham. Another vocal opponent of our current administration albeit more from the standpoint of ‘good cop’. Graham continues to focus on things the public just doesn’t give a flying fluke about – Trump’s taxes? Trump’s allegations of wire tapping? Why doesn’t Graham actually produce a solution, something concrete, something that addresses the American People? Because there is another agenda.

What these three and a host of other Republicans strive to do is undermine our current administration. Why? What do these three and others all have in common? An affiliation with George Soros.

Who are they?

They are a brotherhood aligned in ‘The Swamp”.

They reiterate the same Liberal agenda that defines Hillary – open borders, bring in unlimited refugees and immigrants, and legalize everyone automatically. They believe that climate change is man-made and our greatest threat. While Graham makes statements as to his supposed beliefs, his actions would seem to contradict his words. It is as though these men run based on a false reality of who they are, in order to covertly obtain votes based on their party status rather than their values.

Hence these men are not sheep or shepherds, they are the wolves, the hyenas, the predators who lure and destroy.

McCain is repeatedly photographed buddying up to Soros. Rubio’s biggest backer, Paul Singer, was a Open Society-George Soros backer as well. When a Republican mimics the policies and social agenda of Soros, it is a relatively easy to assert that they have potential connections through either funding, or through power structures. When their alignments are counter to those outside the swamp, it is an easy speculation that their rule is about to be attacked and they are aligned in their fight to preserve – The Swamp.

In other words, it’s basic math; when a Republican spouts the ideals of Hillary or Obama, they aren’t a Republican. A Republican would be someone who supported their candidate, his agenda, his design for a nation, free, independent, and market savvy.  They are not offering a solution – they are tearing down, destructive ‘Termites’.

If that reveals our friends are our enemies, and our enemies our friends – Drain The Swamp!

Presidential Debate – RIGGED!

Are the Debate Questions Leaked Or What??

I’m sorry, but Hillary can in no way speak off the cuff on an issue the way she appeared to in the debate. She looked to be reading her lines from a script in front of her. Which would only be possible if she already knew the question.

What good is a debate if you know all the questions and memorize answers? It’s absurd!

It’s boring! What makes a debate exciting is having opponents screw up like normal people and defend their screw up and the next and the next. That’s what creates character. Otherwise, all you know about a candidate is their ability to read… a good quality…BLECH!

Hillary is swaying. But she can definitely pull it together in a split second when she is on camera. We saw it today when she was weakly and meekly trying to navigate the stairs when no sooner did a reporter arrive on the scene and she nearly skipped down the remaining stairs and into her waiting limousine extended SUV thing that could take out the entire continent of Africa if it wanted…

And I’m listening to Trump on Steroids or coke sniffing up a storm, talking crazy fast, and everyone is going – WHHHATTT?

But we aren’t alone:

Hollande – the President of France… : has been embroiled in numerous sex scandals and pushing very personal bills on government payroll, – no one cares.

So what are the boundaries? At what point is a President of a country so perverse that we won’t accept him/her?

Obama was a purported cocaine dealer???

Cameron was connected to supposed underage sex trafficking.

And that’s okay. So what is NOT OKAY?

It would appear that despite each individual effort, this election will make and break friendships. It is so intense, so personal, that each feel a division that is quite new. The legality of speech is such that the manipulation of a sentence is so pronounced, it is just – evil.

How to say something that is completely diverse to your stance and politics is a media manipulation that creates more media manipulation. And now I hear Clinton claim she has a fact checker site that moderates statements. Are you kidding me? There is no bias of course! How ridiculous!

We listen and know that everything we hear is a lie. We listen and know that all the promises – are fake. We listen and know that the manipulation is to recreate the perception of history. To rewrite what actually happened. Isn’t that your biggest fear? Because it should be. How can we know anything if history is rewritten?

Heil Hitler.

Who? Most don’t even know a thing about the man, or even about the events of the era. Most don’t know much of anything because the powers that be don’t choose to make this so. Trump isn’t Hitler. Hillary isn’t Hitler. Even Obama isn’t Hitler. Hitler was unique and specific.

And attacking Trump on his taxes and tax rates and taxable income, right now – I don’t give a dang! That’s not the dominant agenda – and that’s where Hillary looses! We have so many different legitimate issues that give the people angst and anxiety, we need to address those and have the media actually acknowledge that those ARE our issues. I don’t care anymore about you! I care about US.

President Whomever – I don’t give a rocks ass damn about you. I don’t want to hear about YOU! I want to hear about what you will do for the WE PEOPLE!

The candidates for President of the United States are bickering over paint color choices and their individual dinner items, I don’t give a RATS ARSE. Come ON!

Talk like a PRESIDENT.

I hate this political farse. It is so messed up.

Trump vs London’s Muslim Mayor

So the newly elected muslim mayor of London who professes anti-discrimination, tolerance, and equality is bashing Trump.

Despite the fact that Trump made positive and gracious comments about the mayor, he insists on being derogatory and inflammatory. Seems rather hypocritical.

In fact it is borderline fear mongering and seems to be an attempt to interfere in the election process in the US by a UK national. Something the UK despises Obama for doing – right? And Trump’s response is interesting, “Because I think if he does a great job, it will really — you lead by example…”

So what example is Mr Khan displaying? Certainly not one of good faith, of integrity and honor – instead he is exhibiting decisiveness, derision, and arrogance. The same Khan who defended Farrakhan by attempting to lift a UK ban on Farrakhan’s right to enter the country. Farrakhan had been banned from entry due to his highly fanatical and racially charged bigotry. Khan felt that ban violated human rights and attempted to overturn it thereby allowing Farrakhan rightful passage into the UK where he would then be allowed to vocally elicit his hostile and threatening commentary on the Brits.

So whose human rights was Khan actually protecting? The people of the UK? The whites? The Christians? The Jews? No. Human rights are sometimes veiled in atrocity.

Khan’s response, “Even the worst people deserve a legal defense.” In other words he has no ethics, he just did a job as a legal defense attorney. He also defended Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a prominent leader of the Muslim Brotherhood who called Shiites ‘heretics’, considers Jews, Christians and Alawites infidels and believes Hitler was a great man who put Jews in their proper place and was ordered to do so by Allah. Of course Hitler was an Atheist, but that’s another conversation.

These are the characters that Khan felt obligated to defend. A defense he chose – not one that was imposed on him.

This is the man who derides Donald Trump for his desire to limit our borders from extremist muslims stating that Trump just doesn’t understand this religion of peace. Really? Because al-Qaradawi doesn’t follow peaceful ideals – he advocates for suicide bombing and annihilation.

Was the election mired in any fraud? “A mix up of voter registration meant that ‘many’ people could have voted multiple times”. Apparently, due to a computer glitch people were sent two and three polling cards.

In the borough of Barnet, thousands of voters were actually turned away unable to vote because their names were not on the registration despite them holding a registered ballot. No one has released the number of voters turned away of the 250,000 residents. But that was merely the tip – apparently, dozens of boroughs reported electoral fraud.

According to a London newspaper, fears are being privately expressed that there has been “massive postal vote rigging.” The extent of the fraud may well be staggering: out of a total electorate of 46 million, some 7 million voters registered for postal ballots — more than the total number of votes polled by the Liberal Democrats. All of the incidents being investigated have occurred in Muslim Pakistani highly colonised areas, including Lambeth, Westminster, Enfield, Hounslow, Haringey, Brent, Bexleyheath, Camden, Redbridge and Barking and Dagenham.

While Scotland Yard is investigating 28 cases of election fraud, whether the outcome will result in any recount, or true legal action – remains to be seen, but judging from history, it is doubtful.

And so, London is now faced with accepting and absorbing the politics and ideals of a mayor who glorifies the Muslim Brotherhood and it’s ‘peaceful’ endeavors while demonizing Trump. An interesting point of view.

FYI – are all these “Khan’s” descendants of Genghis Khan…who fathered hundreds of children and whose DNA accounts for millions of possible descendants.  The same Khan who purportedly was responsible for the death of 40 million?

Rubio – Was The GOP Debate Rigged?

While the headlines of bloggers evaluate the news that Rubio’s Campaign Press Secretary is the daughter of Fox News VP, Bill Sammon, the crafter of the GOP debate questions, they seem to have missed a point.

While Fox News had a direct conflict of interest – so did Rubio!

With Brooke Sammons tweeting extensively about Rubio’s purported ‘win’ at the debates, and Cruz making the statement that he was being unfairly and unequally attacked by the questions posed to him – Rubio skated. In fact Christie even stated that the questions seemed to be unfairly targeting Cruz while Rubio seemed overly cocky, his answers potentially rehearsed. When responses are too clean, too sharp, too rehearsed, the hairs on my back begin to prickle…

Could Sammon have given the questions to his daughter, Brooke Sammon, so that Rubio could craft answers before the debate?

Definitely a possibility. Sammon has a history and it isn’t all good.

To add fire to the furnace, apparently, the pollster, Frank Luntz, who was asked to air results of the debate immediately afterward is also connected to Rubio. Luntz was hired by Rubio in 2012 to write “100 Innovative Idea’s for Florida’s Future”. Luntz tweeted and tallied and splurged in his raving reviews of Rubio while cashing in on the frenzy. While these relationships should be revealed for their conflict of interest, they weren’t and the silence didn’t just run through Fox News – it ran through Marco Rubio. And that does not bode well for an honest, God driven, man of integrity.

While Fox News purports to be unbiased, this is a rather disingenuous move with one motive – bump up Rubio in the ratings, and attack Cruz and Trump. If it is discovered that Rubio had access to the debate questions beforehand, that could mean the end of his campaign. But the ideal of unbiased is a rock laden road for Sammon who has been caught directing the opinion of his journalists on a number of occasions.

While it is not a media crime to be biased, most stations openly admit their view, others allude to it, and still others are bought out. But Fox’s claim puts each and every journalist into the limelight as they lose credibility with the knowledge that Sammon tells them what to say, what to think, what opinion to have, and who will win in an ‘unbiased format’. It’s like rigging a football game.

Could Rubio and Sammon find themselves in a legal pickle?

There are laws regarding “Ethics” under the US Office of Government Ethics Statute 18 USC; 201 – 209 which detail the code of conduct of all government employees. Conflict of Interest laws require ‘full disclosure’ – Rubio did not comply with that directive.

In addition, Florida has enacted very strict Ethics Laws with respect to past and present government employees and those running for public office. The purpose of these laws is to uphold faith and trust by the People in a government that is not beyond reproach. When that truth is violated, there are consequences in place.

While as a result of Sammon, Fox News may lose viewers, Rubio stands to lose his very core – his integrity as a Presidential candidate.

GOP Debates – Are We Done Yet?

I don’t know what I hate more watching the debates or listening to everyone peck like chickens at mealtime over every single misused word, phrase, gesture, facial expression, or nuance. I hate listening to the banter about the candidates wives, children, college days, party days, days days. I hate it across the board. I think it is childish and serves no purpose other than venting. And while we are all guilty of the same, I still hate it.

Generally speaking, do debates really sway, or is it the polls and the polling that sways the voters?  I think debates are simply another topic for a bored media.  The only other countries that have rousing debates include Mexico, Taiwan, Iran, Canada, Zambia and Kenya.  Not exactly the comparable we would like to espouse – but the true nature of our tactics.

When you step back and watch the rhetoric it all boils down to – “I am great and everyone else is an idiot”. And as we get closer to the election the commercials become nastier and nastier until I can’t even watch anything but Netflix for fear I might be attacked by the venom of the words that ultimately occupy much of the airtime.

So, in a nutshell within the GOP front-runners; Trump, Cruz and Rubio, where do they disagree on issues:

  1. There are apparently only a couple points on which Rubio and Cruz disagree: immigration and the notion of privitizing social security. Cruz and Trump agree on immigration policies.
  2. Cruz and Rubio vs Trump = 3 points: Trump wants higher taxes on the wealthy, does not support free trade, and wants to avoid foreign entanglements, ie regime change conflicts, coups.

That’s it. So the debate is really about ‘changing our minds’ with respect to these issues, which is for the most part unrealistic.

The Democratic front-runners are an even easier comparison. When viewing the issues, the only point on which Hillary and Bernie disagree is – gun control. There was one point in which Hillary agreed with Cruz and Rubio – foreign entanglements, and one point where she agreed with all GOP candidates – making voter registration easier.

So for all the rhetoric, commercials, and debates – that’s the bottom line. The rest of it is only mud slinging and slander and harsh tongues. Imagine if that was how we actually voted….but then there is the matter of sincerity – and that’s where the popularity contest muddies the Truth. Unfortunately, the media and candidates have yet to figure out that ganging up and bullying are not tactics that the voters appreciate – and in the end we do make the decision, and we do remember.

While the various polls have Trump leading at anywhere from 30% to 36%, and Cruz with 12% to 25%, and Rubio with 11% to 18% – whatever your voting preference, those are the current GOP national numbers. But all the candidates that have to drop out because they will never carry the baton should consider who they want their voters to ultimately support – because they represent upwards of 37% of the votes according to Reuters latest poll – and they could change the game.

Hillary and Bernie are a bit more complicated with Hillary ranging between 48% and 54%, and Bernie with 27% to 41%. The difference is that O’Malley is already referring his backers to Sanders which represents a block of 1% to 10% and the undecided’s remain on the sidelines with 1% to 14%. Some of the undecided’s may jump ship and not vote at all (I know of quite a few) or defer ranks and vote Independent or Republican.

Personally, I think we should limit debates to say – 3, and have candidates who don’t maintain a 10% populace within ten months of the election, defer.

As in – let’s move on.

Trump Trumpets the GOP Debates – and wins…

As it is the GOP debates swoon all of about 14 to 24 million people each time they are broadcast. The voting age at 18+ is estimated to represent about 245 million people. That means the debates target about 5 ½ to 10% of all voters. Not exactly a number that makes one swoon.

Realistically, people like to be entertained, take out the dominant entertainer, Donald the Trump, and the viewing might just plunge.

But perhaps that is the real point the Trump card is posturing and it has less to do with Megyn Kelly than with Trump proving that a Non-Trump Debate is a bore and ratings drop. Reality TV has more viewers than the debates…

Nobody is tuning in to watch Megyn Kelly and Bret Baier. Certainly the Cruz fans and Carson fans and Rubio fans will turn on their sets, but most, myself included, really find the debate an event to ignore at all costs. Moderators are biased, answers are text book, and it is more about who can out schmooze the other than anything of value. It is more about how has a better talk base, who is following the polls to know what their new ideals are, and trying to make mash of your fellow Republican candidates.

Trump, the Reality TV star, will be absent and I imagine advertisers who paid a pretty penny for the multi million audience game, will be pretty growled when they find that der party is over…given the Trump followers will tune out and some of the other candidate ‘s followers as well – simply out of boredom.

By contrast, over 114 million people watched the last Super Bowl. That’s the place to BE! Be seen!

He is a businessman, and I’m sure he knows where the audience is, who is a draw and who isn’t. It’s actually a smart PR move because it generates even more headlines, even more debate than the debate! Everyone is talking about Trump ignoring the debates – which defines even more as the man who won’t bow to politics.

Instead Trump claims he will use that same time to rev up donations for veterans – a worthy cause. Hopefully he will give a thumbs down to the disgraced Wounded Warriors charity for their self seeking, personal entertainment excessive spending.

But the politicians – well they just showed their naiveté because the Trump Trumped – again.

Trump Not Only One to Change Party Affiliation

Was Donald Trump’s party affiliation simply a business decision?

Changing platforms to conform to the lobbying ideals of the then president was possibly an explanation to explain Trump’s party jumping, but upon review didn’t really match up.

He’s not the only one who has changed political parties. Hillary Clinton was a righteous Republican supporting Nixon and Barry Goldwater once upon a time. In the 1970’s she became an avid supporter of McCarthy and changed her affiliation to Democrat. Pat Buchanan was a Republican turned ‘Reformed Party’ candidate, turned Independent, turned Republican. Rick Perry was a Democrat who supported – Al Gore. He switched to the Republican side when Bush was President.

But the most interesting switcheroo was from the potentially new contender, Michael Bloomberg. Bloomberg was a staunch liberal Democrat until he decided to run for office as NY mayor in 2001. Switching to a Republican affiliation, he won the election. However, as a Republican he supported abortion, gun control, same sex marriage and stem cell research, all very Liberal views. Later, he switched again and registered as an Independent before attempting and failing at a presidential run in 2008.

Other switchers include Joe Lieberman – a one time Democrat who became a McCain style NeoRepublican, Elizabeth Warren – a one time Republican, Arianna Huffington – a once Republican who switched to Democrat leaning Independent in order to make a run as governor, and Kerry’s wife who switched to Democrat when Kerry made a presidential bid.

For most, the switch was a political mission to win an election. Trump was a businessman, his affiliations and support of both parties financially was probably more ‘business’ motivated. But his eye on the Presidency has long roots.  In 1999, the same year Trump changed his party affiliation to Independent, he announced his intention of running for President. In 2004, Trump again claimed he would be running, after he had changed parties to that of Democrat. In 2008, he lambasted Bush and intimated he might run as an Independent but instead changed party affiliation to that of Republican.  Two years later he registered as having ‘no party affiliation’ and made a ‘sortof’ bid against Obama.  In 2012, he switched back to Republican and made his White House bid known in 2015.

In politics it would seem that the sway is to be what the perceived position is of the Americn people at the time.  Become the person they think the people want and capitalize on the whim – a chameleon. Use the polls to determine what the people want, and become that person – as in poof!  Unfortunately, such a person doesn’t really have any true grounded ideals, and create instead confusion and distrust from those who do.   Rubio is a great example of “let me wait to respond to that question when the polls tell me what side I’m on” type of political rhetoric.

And while Trump is playing up on the anti-Socialist views of Hillary and Sanders, it is hard to find anything discounting to say about Cruz – so instead he attempts a Canadian birth frenzy which is of course, leaving everyone yawning.

What is the Trump stance? In a nutshell:

  1. Defund Planned Parenthood – pro-life.
  2. Cut the defense budget and eliminate the EPA and Department of Education
  3. Address corporate inversion – bring corporations back to US with incentives
  4. Family values
  5. Animal rights
  6. Diplomacy vs demonizing of other countries
  7. TPP a bad deal – restrict free trade with China
  8. Get rid of Super Pacs funding of candidates
  9. No gun control
  10. Address mental health problems
  11. Replace Obamacare with Health Savings Account
  12. Fix VA Hospitals by using private doctors
  13. Defeat ISIS at all costs
  14. Stop illegal immigration and put a temporary ban on Muslim immigrants
  15. Enforced Border between US and Mexico
  16. Leave minimum wage where it stands
  17. Cut taxes and repeal estate tax
  18. Raise taxes on Hedge Fund Managers
  19. Rebuild infrastructure
  20. Junk our nuclear arsenal – it is outdated

Do these align with Republican views? I would venture everything is on par – with the exception of his proposal to cut the Defense Budget. A major overhaul of fraud and corruption within the defense budget would be more productive.

And while we have watched as Trump has taken a few large financial hits as a result of his opinions and stances, Dubai golf course and Scotland wind farm, it could prove just as easy for him to sway again to the business model of whatever works to make him more wealthy.

Trump? Putin? Fans of Truth…

So Putin and Trump are trading compliments and MSNBC is in a tizzy!

How dare Trump say anything complimentary about a President who has been “accused of killing journalists and political rivals, on top of invading neighboring countries.”

WOW – how heinous, our president would never, ever do such an awful thing… Oh wait… well he was a cocaine user and dealer, he has invaded Ukraine and ousted the then elected president, Yanokovich, which resulted in their economy plummeting into oblivion, their land raized by bombs, and their people dead and wounded, and he has offered asylum to peoples who were apparent terrorists resulting in multiple civilian deaths here in the US. Oops.

Let’s not forget the key term used even by MSNBC – alleged and accused – as opposed to verifiable as in our own President. Obviously this MSNBC character hasn’t read the Bible or he’d know that Matthew 7:5 states; “You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”

Putin shared enthusiasm for the Trump stating he sees Trump as ‘bright and talented’ and thinks they would get along fine.

Why?

First, why do people like Trump when all the statistics support his less than stellar attitude and style? I have asked many this question and the resounding answer is always the same – they don’t trust anyone else. No one. Just because a politician can orate circles around another, doesn’t necessarily equate to ‘honesty or integrity or ethics’. We simply need to look at the smiles and rhetoric of Obama’s first campaign to realize this inalienable truth. And while he promised ‘change’, I doubt this is the change most Americans thought their vote would buy.

We end the year 2015 on a somber note of debt – $18.1 trillion to be exact – $8 trillion of which was added under the Obama regime. Sixty seven percent of our debt was added under President Obama. It wouldn’t be so awful if we had something to show for it like – an incredibly well stocked transparent military – authentically budgeted and secure, or an economy that was raging ahead ready to put the screws to that deficit, or an ‘affordable’ Affordable Care Act, or even a charitable powerhouse known throughout the world for our good deeds…. But we don’t have that, we just have – debt.

What Putin did give his country was a nationalism that we envy. He gave them his word and it means ‘his Word’. He gave them his unconditional support, his unconditional authority, a leadership that is powerful and meaningful and when people feel jealous – they attack. Obama doesn’t have Putin’s charisma or tactical intellect. Kerry doesn’t have Lavrov’s incredible leadership and insight and calm.

And while I was reading about the women in Libya, when I looked at their faces, when I read their words, I learned something very powerful – they support their country and have no desire whatsoever of leaving. There are immigrants, refugees, asylum seekers, but if you were to ask, the majority would want their own country – not ours, not yours, but theirs. And when we meddle, and pin prick, and uproot, the result has not EVER proven positive.  So this meddling clause of the US in uprooting governments, coups and such so as to institute a ‘new and improved government’, has worldly, widely – backfired to the nth degree.

It IS NOT working.

The Ukrainians, the people, want ‘their’ country, they don’t want ours. The Syrians want their country. The Yemenis. The Lebanese. The Iranians. And this would seem to be the lesson that MSNBC and it’s followers miss, the media in every other country around the world views ours as pathetic. They view us as idiots for believing the drivel. They view Obama as a puppet and his policies as idiotic and perilous. What countries? It is beyond that and now is ‘continents’, as in: Europe – Asia – South America – the people, not the media as in WE the PEOPLE.

We are so indoctrinated into believing the media and the politicians that we no longer understand – the people.

So when Trump takes the lead and all the intellects are confounded – understand that we have crossed the line, the boundaries, the ethic, the morality – and people are afraid. They are afraid at the ugly, ugly spiral that Obama has created for our Great Country, and the evolution of that chaos is growing uglier with every day.

Guns? That’s protection from the policies of our government. Anger – that’s reaction to the heinous lies of our government.

So next time MSNBC wants to attack Putin – wants to attack Trump – they had better take heed, because Matthew 7:5 is alive!

And we are NOT backing down.

TRUMP -Divide and Conquer

Hypocrisy.

We hear it daily. Sometimes from the media, sometimes from our work, sometimes from our friends and family. It makes it no less cringing who or where it comes from. One of the more popularized comes on the heels of a statement made by Trump regarding his stance of future immigration of Muslims into the US.

Netanyahu responded to Trump’s statement with the most ridiculous, hypocritical statement of all; “Israel respects all religions.” He said this to raise his own ethical commitment while denouncing Trump’s, and shooting a few Palestinians.  Maybe the key in this absurd statement is ‘respect’. What does it mean to respect someone? According to Webster it is – ‘deep admiration and high esteem…honor, high regard, reverence.’ I fail to hear anything remotely likening to reverence in Netanyahu’s vision of Muslims.

Trump made the inflammatory, not-politically-correct statement that if elected he would close the US borders to entry/immigration by Muslims – for a while – until the threat of ISIS could be truly eradicated – as opposed to Obama’s historically infamous, ‘they are contained’.   And surprise a firestorm erupted and the media went wild with more publicity!

Netanyahu take note:  Israel is divided culturally as follows; 75% Jewish, 18% Muslim and 4% Christian – the balance is ‘other’. Of the 75% Jewish, 67% say they are non-religious, secular or atheist. The northern region of Israel has the highest concentration of Arabs, and assimilation is filled with tension and conflict. It is hardly a bedrock of ‘respect’. I think it would be prudent for Netanyahu to remain disassociated. In his attempt to use the comparison of Jewish people being disqualified from admittance is not only hypocritical it is eerily pathological.

Israel vehemently decries fear of Iran despite the fact that Iran has never instigated war. Israel is taking in exactly zero, as in -0-, Syrian refugees. Why?  Because they are potentially terrorist.   Hmmm.

Is Trump’s suggestion even legal?

The rhetoric is that his suggestion is unconstitutional and inflammatory and inciting hate. First, and most importantly, the Constitution applies to US citizens. “We the people of the United States…” It does not apply to peoples from other countries. Constitutional rights are a benefit granted citizens of the US. Anyone who is not a citizen is not abridged of these rights because they have yet to apply.

“Insure domestic tranquility” – meaning we are guaranteed a peaceful and harmonious existence through the protection of our police force.

“Provide for the common defense” – meaning that if a threat is perceived, we have the right to act accordingly to protect ourselves and our nation from a hostile takeover.

When politicians don’t even know the verbiage or language of the Constitution that they are called to uphold, when they have no knowledge of it’s purpose, its mission, and its authority, they, not Trump should be called to the plate. Whether you are for or against Trump, make sure you do not add to the mistakes of mis-speech!

That being said:

Trump has again threatened to convert his stance to that of Independent. Why?  What would this accomplish?

By aligning with the Republican Party, (Trump was a Democrat just a few years ago), he created a following. Converting mid-stream to Independent and taking that following away from the Republican Party creates a wider division and the opportunity for the Democrats to garner a higher percentage of the votes.   In other words, the Democrats would take a win by default as opposed to actual election by a majority of the citizens.  Hillary could be elected despite her corruption, fraud and illegalities.  Or Sanders could be elected in a sweep of Communism disguised as Socialism.

This would be the Soros decoy tactic assuring a liberal win with a much smaller point margin. In 1968, Nixon barely beat out Humphrey after Independent candidate, Wallace took 13.5% of the votes. In 1980, John Anderson, a Republican, jumped ship to run as an Independent taking just 6.6% of the votes. Reagan won by a landslide against Carter whose record was abysmal. And in 1912, Teddy Roosevelt lost as a Republican and created a new party, The Progressive Party, giving the election to Democrat, Woodrow Wilson in a very contentious campaign of mudslinging.

The last time a third party candidate actually won was in 1860 when Abraham Lincoln, whose political affiliation also wavered from Whig to Republican to National Union, with a mere 39% of the votes. It is worth noting that the Republican Party in his era was actually what our Democrat Party is today.   The Whig Party merged into the Republican Party in 1856 due to their shared ideology of ‘liberalism’ and supremacy of Congress. In 1864 the Republicans created a new party, The War Democrats, and Whig Republicans countered with their new name, National Unionists.  Lincoln was actually not terribly popular, but won based on a dispersion of the votes.

The most noteworthy effect a third party candidacy has historically created is division. Dividing the vote so as to allow the party that is strongest to become weakened.

Trump? Is that the Soros agenda?

“Sometimes I wonder if the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it.” ~ Mark Twain

 

2015 Presidential Debate – Tabloid Entertainment

Falling into Alice in Wonderland’s Rabbit Hole, the debate became a reality show for Hollywood:

Uggh – the debates. So many candidates leaves little time for individual shine. Full disclosure, I didn’t want to watch but my husband asked and I relented … for a while.

From the horse’s gate, the style was one that I abhor. The topics were entertainment style, tabloid, petty insults, personal insults, derogatory rhetoric and within minutes I wanted to turn it off, walk away, sit outside and enjoy the evening breeze. But, alas, I didn’t.

When all was said and done, I didn’t much care enough for anyone, for the most part they succumbed to the histrionic attack and the self lauding that really makes me wonder if this will once again be an election in which we vote for the lesser of two evils rather than a true shining warrior winner for the people.

Setting aside my own personal views on the issues, which is very hard, I didn’t learn a whole lot about theirs:

  1. I think they all agreed on a solid wall between Mexico and the US as a starting point to curb illegal immigration.
  2. I think most agreed on defunding Planned Parenthood from a Federal level.
  3. Most agreed that the deal with Iran was messy and wimpy.
  4. Syria and Russia were a point of division – no one seemed to know that the US has already engaged Russia to help with ISIS in Syria… so you can’t exactly vilify and sanction Russia for doing your bidding.
  5. China was also a point of division with some naively stating that snubbing the President of China at the White House dinner was a good policy – albeit immature and childish, while others felt isolating China would be good for the US, given that China is our biggest trade partner and holder of T-bills, that would be a fall on your face political and business short sidedness mess!
  6. Vaccines – I don’t believe they should be a political decision.
  7. Raising Minimum Wage – divided. The worst rhetoric on this front was the candidate who stated that he wanted to raise education levels so no one was working minimum wage… Slight problem, who then is performing those jobs? No one? Script!

The resounding debate seemed more of a self-promotion campaign to tell everyone all your successes, ad nauseum. The “I” statements flew with such force, they were good moments to refresh my cup of coffee. And while I do understand that a candidates track record is of value, most people really don’t care, just look at Obama’s track record… he had none, nothing, zilch. When Trump attacked Carly’s track record and her response, he then defended his own failures with similar points thereby substantiating her points.  High school debate lesson 101; ‘don’t attack someone’s failure with the same challenge that you failed in’ (pardon the preposition).

The overall attempt was to outshine, to find a stage on which the candidate could perform Othello. And while they all have intellect, who among them has wisdom?

The ‘blow them to bits’ mentality of destroying nations has gone way too far. Throwing Russia and China into the mix of hostility would be suicide. Sanctioning Russia and China is a Socialist move, it eliminates competition and hence raises corruption, fraud and ‘prices’. We don’t have the capacity or ability to eliminate China from our markets. Don’t bite the hand that feeds you!

And while I have been a fan of Carly, she is a spot on orator, she was a bit too Hillaryish last night. Angry.  By contrast, Ben Carson and Huckabee didn’t interrupt enough to get air time. Christie was admirable for trying to redirect the animosity away from each other. Trump was Trump. Rand Paul too quiet. Bush too defensive. Kasich elaborated exponentially on self. Rubio was poignant but I don’t care for his politics, Cruz and Walker didn’t offer anything special. I felt I was watching a reality show and began to fantasize that it wasn’t that much different than the portrayal of government in The Hunger Games or some other science fiction flick. But given I don’t watch reality shows, this one had no more appeal to me than any other and I soon flipped the channel to watch Frasier.

Interestingly, even the way in which the media determines winners and losers is remarkably viewed from a perspective of entertainment in evaluating performance rather than substance, in declaring victory for being outspoken without content, in making it a Donald Trump ‘show’, in succumbing to the very childish stance of bullying and victimizing, and in making it a defensive personality show.

I imagine we could have had anyone on stage and they could have performed for the audience – but is that what we need, want and crave? Or do we want someone who is ardently, fervently a defender of our country, of morality, of cohesiveness, and of compassion working in unity to better our economy, our political fraud, our internal government corruption, our budgets and spending fraud, our reputation, someone who truly believes in the words they speak, and we have no doubt will follow to achieve those goals.

Instead we saw our candidates pulled down Alice In Wonderland’s rabbit hole by a media bent on ridiculing the entire party.