Jefferson’s wisdom

“Whenever the words of a law will bear two meanings, one of which will give effect to the law, and the other will defeat it, the former must be supposed to have been intended by the Legislature, because they could not intend that meaning, which would defeat their intention, in passing that law; and in a statute, as in a will, the intention of the party is to be sought after.”

1–Thomas Jefferson to Albert Gallatin, 1808. ME 12:110

“When an instrument admits two constructions, the one safe, the other dangerous, the one precise, the other indefinite, I prefer that which is safe and precise. I had rather ask an enlargement of power from the nation, where it is found necessary, than to assume it by a construction which would make our powers boundless.”

2–Thomas Jefferson to Wilson Nicholas, 1803. ME 10:418

“Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything or nothing at pleasure.”

3–Thomas Jefferson to William Johnson, 1823. ME 15:450

Source: http://famguardian.org/subjects/politics/thomasjefferson/jeff1020.htm

Maxine sees scumbags everywhere

Democrat Maxine Waters Calls Trump Cabinet Picks: “A Bunch of Scumbags” (VIDEO)

Jim Hoft | Feb 22nd, 2017 | Gateway-P

Maxine Waters: I just think the American people need to know what is going on. This is a bunch of scumbags. That’s what they are. They’re all organized around making money.

H/T Gateway Pundit

Boycotting America: the infertile resistance breeds

The week of hypocrisy and double standards, and here we go.

The hearings were one thing, emphasis on race and Russia – not necessarily in that order — but dialogue and media are another which got progressively worse, right on script.

We finished the week by having the self-anointed civil rights leader, John Lewis call Trump’s election and his presidency illegitimate. Anyone NOT see that coming? These people certainly are predictable, if nothing else.

“I don’t see this President-elect as a legitimate president,” Lewis told NBC News Friday. “I think the Russians participated in helping this man get elected. And they helped destroy the candidacy of Hillary Clinton.” – NBC

No, unfortunately, Lewis was not a lone voice. Predictable. He did it intentionally on Friday before MLK Day — which I guess is now ensconced as the day of hate.

Now you would think that Lewis making this statement would be like a bomb going off, and the shock of it from a sitting senior Congressman would outrage people. You would think immediately people would distance themselves from his remarks, en masse. The condemnation would be fierce. And you would think a media outcry would demand every single Democrat condemn his remarks or be condemned. Nope.

Actually, Michelle Obama kicked it off on Oprah saying “we’re feeling what not having hope feels like.” She was praised for saying we have no hope. They cheered her on.

One Democrat pundit said on Sunday, “this is the resistance; this is just what it looks like now.” Ah, “what it looks like now” is short for this is the way it’s going to be. No, it’s actually going to be worse. They know it and so do we. And then their shadow Obama government will be adding to the resistance.

What you would think should be a normal response, in their racist political correctness, now is reversed. Rather than blanket condemnation, the praises for John Lewis came from everywhere: media, Congress, the black community, the public. Hard to find anyone who does condemn his statements.

Remember Joe Wilson, the SOTUS “heckler”? He had the audacity to make a public disagreement with Obama. He got a good talking to from the Republican leadership. And Mitch McConnell, all he said was that job #1 was to make Obama a one-term president. Democrats turned that into a giant insult and classic racism. Justice Alito shook his head. People were called racists for asking questions about Obama’s birth certificate or records — since he really had no trail. Just questioning Obama was blatant racism.

So it was way more than Obama ever received, even before Trump takes office. Now resistance is celebrated. Calls for obstruction ring from every corner of the Left. Respect is out, Resistance is in.(lockstep of course) In fact, the Left even says, proudly, it is following the model that worked so well for Republicans. (choke, gag) Get that, they even blame us for their radical resistance. They blame Russia for the election results. And they blame Trump for the condition of America which preceded any thought of his to run. Now they are trying to even make us own Obamacare.

Well, the total fallout of John Lewis is wide agreement with him. In fact, 23 members of Congress are boycotting the inauguration. It’s the cool thing now to join the resistance. They will institutionalize it, celebrate it, take it into schools and claim it as righteous.

All this deception won’t work. The people have been awakened and are not going to take their eyes off this, We survived their decade of decadence and aren’t happy. Sorry, Dems, don’t even try to out anger us. It ain’t happening. The blame projection won’t work. But they have the towers of media carrying their water, and soon will have every one of their shadow operatives opposing Trump. Exactly the way they did in the general election. Almost as if the election never happened because, to them, it didn’t.

Protests are highly overrated. Respectful protests were fashionable toward Obama, disrespectful protests toward Trump are now in. When Tea Party protests were born, the IRS and media assailed “speaking truth to power” using their big-gov firehouses, under a black president. It was Democrats in the sixties who opposed Lewis and their ‘civil rights’ agenda. Now they blame Republicans but no one is supposed to know the truth.

Now their resistance stuff is all the rage. Resisting what? – doesn’t matter. On the IRS Tea Party scandal, blacks and Democrats stood on the side of big government fire hoses. They stood up and walked out. Eric Holder was in contempt and they stood up for him, who was standing up for Obama. But now they see illegitimacy as the cause de jure.

So the answer, my friend, ain’t blowing in the wind. No, their answer to nothing is to boycott Trump and whatever he does. Take that Mitch McConnell. He let them beat him up for eight years for a benign statement. Then people bent over backwards for Obama. Republicans stood there like deer in the headlights, as radicals ruled the White House and administration. That really worked?

The boycott of Trump takes full shape before the parade or swearing in. What will they do when he’s in office? I think we know. (whatever was not done to Obama) Can’t you smell what the boycott is cooking? It means de facto protesting America and what it stands for, the rule of law. So civil rights or justice are excuses, the real boycott is against America.

And happy MLK Day, for what that’s worth.

RightRing | Bullright

Little people’s info doesn’t matter

This is to all the people who have had their personal information hacked, stolen, pilfered or used by foreign state hackers. My sympathies to you. (including anyone who worked for the federal government.) You’ve been used and abused in more than one way.

Now we know the real truth. Your privacy, security and personal information mean nothing to Obama’s administration or even Congress. Let’s be honest, you are not Hillary Clinton, John Podesta, or the DNC. Your shit doesn’t matter — only theirs does.

They proved this with the hacking narrative they and the media have elevated to the top national security issue. Obama called for an investigation of Russia on the election.

When did they call for an investigation, let alone consequences, for those who did the hacking of all that government and personal information? Where is that national debate and outrage? Where is all the media coverage about it? Where are the demands to do something? They didn’t want to acknowledge the story or comment on it when the hacks happened. Where is the CIA and FBI reports, and 17 intelligence agencies? — MIA

RightRing | Bullright

Graham – McCain: touring tag team

2008-02-12t001902z_01_rmd07_rtridsp_0_usa-politics-mccain

James Woods fires off at Graham, McCain for doubling down with Dems

December 30, 2016 | Warner Todd Huston | BizPac Review

Actor James Woods, who recently rejoined Twitter with his conservative posts, slammed Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham for joining Barack Obama in his desire to punish Russia with further sanctions over unproven allegations that Russian hackers interfered in the U.S. elections.

Referring to a story by The Hill newspaper, Woods criticized GOP Senators McCain and Graham for joining Obama and a list of Democrats who want even tougher sanctions on Russia.

More http://www.bizpacreview.com/2016/12/30/james-woods-fires-off-sens-graham-mccain-doubling-dems-429946/

Coming to the Sunday circuit near you. Hasn’t their 15 minutes expired? Good idea, they could be so happy in Demland. They can never criticize the Soros crew — that is taboo. Fexibility, cold war jokes and resets out, sanctions are in. Just trying to keep up.

Congressional Review Act, Thanks Harry

Law backed by Harry Reid will haunt Dems in 2017

By Susan Crabtree | 12/16/16

One of outgoing Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s greatest legislative achievements will come back to haunt Democrats early next year.

President-elect Trump has promised to repeal two federal regulations for every new one issued, and the Congressional Review Act, which Reid co-sponsored in 1996, will give him a running start.

The law gives Congress the power to rescind any unwelcome late, so-called “midnight” regulations from an outgoing president through a simple majority vote in both chambers of Congress.

Since its passage as part of House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s Contract with America in 1996, it has only been successfully used once, but Republicans are promising to leverage its full power in January to kill rules the Obama administration has issued in its last months in office.

In his 77-minute farewell address on the Senate floor last week, Reid included the Congressional Review Act as one of his top accomplishments in the Senate, along with passage of Obamacare, the 2009 stimulus bill, a taxpayer bill of rights and several other measures

Republicans, with the help of the Congressional Research Service, have compiled a list of roughly 50 regulations they could go after early next year.

“I know some of my Democrat colleagues say, ‘Why did you do that?'” Reid said during his final speech on the Senate floor. “Here’s what I did. I worked with Republican Sen. Don Nickles from Oklahoma … Don and I talked about this. We knew that the administrations would change and it would affect every president, Democrat and Republican.”

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/law-backed-by-harry-reid-will-haunt-dems-in-2017/article/2609786

Good old Harry left something worth something.

The Pundit’s Paradox: Matt Lewis’ dangerous allegory

Normally, I reserve my tit for tat arguments for political elites. In this case, I’ll make an exception. It started with a Matt Lewis article that is getting lots of play on CNN and the lamestream express.

Oh, remember the days of Matt Lewis on Townhall and conservative circles? Anyway, he writes a Moonbat-bait piece and Libs compliment his intellectual acumen for daring to raise all the pertinent questions. They love that.

See the article hereShould You be Afraid of President Trump?

For the first time in my lifetime, however, people seem to be wondering if the system is self-destructing.

This debate was on full display today on Morning Joe when Anand Giridharadas squared off against Joe Scarborough. In case you haven’t been paying attention, Donald Trump’s election and subsequent rhetoric (his baseless suggestion that voter fraud cost him the popular vote, his attacks on media figures and outlets, and his recent suggestion that the penalty for flag burning should be jail or loss of citizenship) has alarmed people like Giridharadas who worry he has the kind of authoritarian tendencies that might flout the rule of law. /…

In the past, there have essentially been two things stopping American leaders from dictatorial powers: Character and the system. Ideally, we would elect the kind of people who would, like Washington, serve two terms and then (voluntarily) go back to the farm. But in the event this did not occur, our system would prevent the seizure of power (anyone who tried would fail miserably—and go down in history as an ignominious figure). It’s worth considering whether (A) Donald Trump’s character or (B) the ability of the system to contain him are adequate safeguards?

Lewis goes on in his intellectual quandary. Though I grant his questions may be real ones, his manner of handling, or explaining, the paradox is not. What I mean is he references Joe Scarborough who intimated ‘checks and balances’ should be enough to deter Trump — or anyone for that matter. Understandable. But Matt fears that may not be enough.

That is the beauty of our whole system; or at least it always was until Barack Obama blew it up and proved otherwise. (…he had a little help) Lewis adds:

These fears are not entirely irrational. According to a study reported in today’s New York Times, “signs of democratic deconsolidation in the United States and many other liberal democracies are now similar to those in Venezuela before its crisis.” For example, “researchers found that the share of Americans who say that army rule would be a ‘good’ or ‘very good’ thing had risen to 1 in 6 in 2014, compared with 1 in 16 in 1995.”

More sanguine observers, such as Joe Scarborough, assure us that the American system (with its balance of powers, federalism, and checks and balances) pits ambition against ambition, thus containing the ambitions of any one strongman.

See, Lewis’ problem predates Trump the politician. But in some ways Trump is made to order for our predicament. Like Joe, Libs refer to checks and balances. (Cue those cartoons for the filibuster.) What about checks to the power? We are lectured on the three branches of government. Matt worries about how anyone can hold Trump accountable? But that is the same problem we already have, unaccountable power.

How have these 3 divided branches or checks dealt with the abuse of power thus far? Now therein is the problem. We finally got down to the ‘who gives a damn?‘ stage in our self-government evolution. We proved that we can allow abuses to go on, in some cases without a whimper of protest. We have the first unimpeachable president in history.

Then we showed Obama that Congress would stand as no opposition to him. The Court did basically the same. Should we rerack the tape of the High Court rewriting and passing Obamacare? Where were all the fretful liberals and nail biters then…or abusees?

The point is profound: we the people found there was no check and balance to Obama. Our greatest hope or guarantee was the two-term limit as the sole check and balance. And we can’t say Republicans did not have a majority to do anything, They did. The one time we stood up to face a government shutdown, we blinked and basically gave Obama what he wanted anyway. And Obama was adept at using those circumstances to his benefit.

To Lewis’ assertion on military power, respect, or possible coupe: well, what would you expect? I mean look what we’ve been through. The trust of the Congress is MIA. This is not the people’s fault. We tried every other means to rein in the power. In fact, it was widely accepted that this was our last chance to right the ship, at the ballot box.

So the fact that Military or police — which he claims are both associated with the right — are considered more credible with the people than our government is not so out of the ordinary. Note that the press/media is on the discredited list as well.

Then came Trump who is no fix-it man. However, he is the best disrupter we could have. The first step to correction must be to break this symbiotic relationship that has avoided any accountability thus far. They worry about accountability now? Where were these people? “Trust and verify,” they say? Nothing with Obama was verified… except that he lied to us often. (Obamacare) After we all knew it, still it meant nothing.

It was not working; people were not held accountable, no one was fired, no one went to jail. We had no active checks and balances to out of control power. At least with the military there are some repercussions for actions. Police have accountability. So the point is this system was busted from we the people’s perspective. We don’t see that in the military.

And it was not a case of party politics. That played a role but is not the enabler. We had institutional breakdown. IRS ran amok in politics and abused its power to target political enemies. No one stopped it or held them accountable. The checks and balances went unchecked and unbalanced. Dep of Justice operated as the Injustice Department.

Now I have no fear that Trump would be granted the same latitude Obama had. That’s not going to happen. Press will not do latrine detail for Trump as they did for Obama. So this is better than what we had. But we got something more, even better. We now have someone who voices the concerns of people. Someone who is on the side of the people — a fighter. (he carried their message through the election) Someone as fed up as they are with status quo. We didn’t have that before. The people had no voice. That matters.

In the end, Matt Lewis postulates that he personally believes democracy is preciously fragile enough that one must presume it could be lost. Well, it doesn’t hurt to be vigilant but it requires action, not hyperbole and inaction. In other words, deeds matter more than theory which is exactly why we elected Trump.

Trump is no savior, but at least he is willing and able to do what others wouldn’t or couldn’t. Yet the critics, overwhelmed by fear, are more worried about what he will do than the cause that brought him to bear and made him essential to our cause.

(Note: Lewis’ book Too Dumb to Fail: How the GOP Betrayed the Reagan Revolution to Win Elections (and How It Can Reclaim Its Conservative Roots) was published in January 2016)

RightRing | Bullright

What are Democrats to do? “Resistance” everything

So guess what the minority party in Congress wants to do?

Here’s what the resistance looks like: We block f’n EVERYTHING

Nov 29, 2016 1 — Daily Kos

We are the opposition, we are the resistance. The 2009 through present-era Republicans have written the new rules, and they are: OPPOSE EVERYTHING—even if they might otherwise agree.

So it’s up to Democrats to do NOTHING to legitimize the loser of the popular vote. Absolutely nothing. They oppose, they block, they filibuster, they delay.

Read more

So the people who claim to speak for a majority in America are actually the minority party. Wait, someone is not reading the tea leaves here!.

In other Demonrat news, the party doubled down on Pelosi — or is it tripled down?

(ABC) Pelosi was challenged by Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio), who has argued that younger members with a vision for expanding the party’s economic message and geographical outreach is key to future electoral and legislative success. After the vote, Ryan said the Democratic caucus needs to come together.

The party’s new leadership was chosen today in a private meeting using secret ballots.

Now see what Dems do with their valuable popular vote? I rest my case.

United States of Divert, Deny and Lie

It’s mourning again in America, and Hillary has avoided one more obstacle in her grand anointing process. Welcome to the Department of Injustice.

Comey punted and claimed “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case”. Ouch, take that America. Those laws and justice that you value are not even a speed bump to the privileged elite ruling-class who operate above the law. (actually, it is beneath the law but who is arguing.) Cleanup in isle two!

Two people are now relieved, Hillary and Loretta Lynch. Well, Bill Clinton is three.

I thought “extremely careless” was being negligent.

While all the attention now shifts to the bombshell that FBI director is recommending no charges be filed, it diverts the emphasis off of the whole ordeal. It seems Comey was talking about a narrow statute dealing with classified information, but that was not the genesis of the scandal.

Long before the classified was sent or received, she set up an email system to obfuscate accountability and divert from archives and the FOIA system. If that is not willful intent going to all that trouble to set this up, I don’t know what is. So they gave immunity to the techie, then, for what?

It was not just a matter of some classified emails, which she lied about. It is the whole thing from the time she entered office to the time she left. But nothing is chargeable. It seemed all they wanted to look at in their FBI investigation was the classified emails. And how else would she correspond with Syd Blumenthal, out of the loop of State, if not on that server?

So, Hillary got her way when she claimed this was a security review. In effect, that is what it became. But there is a good article on the miscarriage of justice issue this is in Reason Magazine by Judge Andrew Napolitano. What about the Inspector General’s report that was just released?

Inspector General’s Report Refutes All of Hillary Clinton’s Defenses For Using Private Email Server

The Democratic frontrunner is painted as stubborn, self-isolated, and unaccountable in IG’s report.

Andrew Napolitano | June 2, 2016 | Reason.com

Late last week, the inspector general of the State Department completed a year-long investigation into the use by Hillary Clinton of a private email server for all of her official government email as secretary of state. The investigation was launched when information technology officials at the State Department under Secretary of State John Kerry learned that Clinton paid an aide to migrate her public and secret State Department email streams away from their secured government venues and onto her own, non-secure server, which was stored in her home.

The migration of the secret email stream most likely constituted the crime of espionage — the failure to secure and preserve the secrecy of confidential, secret or top-secret materials.

The inspector general interviewed Clinton’s three immediate predecessors — Madeleine Albright, Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice — and their former aides about their email practices. He learned that none of them used emails as extensively as Clinton, none used a private server and, though Powell and Rice occasionally replied to government emails using private accounts, none used a private account when dealing with state secrets.

Clinton and her former aides declined to cooperate with the inspector general, notwithstanding her oft-stated claim that she “can’t wait” to meet with officials and clear the air about her emails.

The inspector general’s report is damning to Clinton. It refutes every defense she has offered to the allegation that she mishandled state secrets. It revealed an email that hadn’t been publicly made known showing Clinton’s state of mind. And it paints a picture of a self-isolated secretary of state stubbornly refusing to comply with federal law for venal reasons; she simply did not want to be held accountable for her official behavior.

The report rejects Clinton’s argument that her use of a private server “was allowed.” The report makes clear that it was not allowed, nor did she seek permission to use it. She did not inform the FBI, which had tutored her on the lawful handling of state secrets, and she did not inform her own State Department IT folks.

The report also makes clear that had she sought permission to use her own server as the instrument through which all of her email traffic passed, such a request would have been flatly denied.

Read more: http://reason.com/archives/2016/06/02/hillary-clinton-email-defenses-refuted

Well, America, if you were not disgusted before, then this was another thumb in the eye to remind you how repulsive this whole process has been. Hillary operated for four years on an island of her own creation Then, when questioned, she lied, lied, lied. And that is beside what she did in Benghazi which is what set off all the red flares . She set the stage to get four Americans killed, and abandoned them both before and after their slaughter.

Comey covered his ass and preserved his job under a possible Hillary presidency. To say politics, and who the Clintons are, had nothing to do with it is ludicrous. This whole thing was loaded with politics. It would take Loretta Lynch bucking that recommendation to bring charges. Then it would be her own decision to do that, which she won’t do. To borrow a Bill Clinton phrase, “this whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen.”

The very day after we celebrated the 240th 4th of July, James Comey came out to deliver the recommendation of no charges. Loretta Lynch had been caught a week before in a private meeting with Bill Clinton. Now, as Comey spoke Obama amd Hillary were preparing to board AF-1 for a campaign rally in North Carolina for Hillary.

What a photo op, while she is escaping a major leg of suspicion about her future, she is hitting the trail with the President, as his Director in the Justice department is basically unindicting her. That beats a corsage While Comey claimed politics or influences have nothing to do with it, clearly they were on full display.

Then arriving in NC, with the President campaigning at her side, Hillary comes on stage with her “this is my fight song” music playing. That is an insult to the legacy of Benghazi. She’s been fighting against the damning Benghazi facts since the attack, amid another campaign for Obama’s reelection. From one political campaign to another — all politics.

    This is my fight song
    Take back my life song
    Prove I’m alright song
    My power’s turned on
    Starting right now I’ll be strong
    I’ll play my fight song
    And I don’t really care if nobody else believes
    ‘Cause I’ve still got a lot of fight left in me

    — Rachel Platten, “Fight Song”

They never mentioned escaping the FBI intent to prosecute. Though she did refer to Obama’s birth certificate aimed at Trump. Was she comparing the two?

Her first words were, “I feel very privileged” to be with Obama, a friend she stood with, talking about their “memorable experiences” she and Obama had together, joking and mocking Trump. Well, Benghazi might be a memorable one too, if it weren’t for all their denial from the beginning. Strange irony that Hillary says Trump is unqualified and temperamentally unfit for the office. She is the heiress of unqualified.

Finally, Obama lectured, “when a crisis hits” what do you do he asks? “You got to make the tough calls,” he said. So when a crisis hits they lie, lie and lie some more. Then divert, deny, distract and obstruct the truth finding… that’s what they do. He’s ready to pass the baton to Hillary. Well, that is after our government collectively passed the opportunity to hold Hillary or Obama accountable for their boatload of scandals.

But these are strange days when a tweet is more important than a national security, felony scandal. And what Trump says about it is more important than what Hillary did.

RightRing | Bullright

Realated: It takes a village to elect a crook

What did Charlie Daniels say?

I saw this article from November, 2013 and I was mostly through it cheering before I realized it was written by Charlie Daniels. Normally I’m aware of his writings when I read them. But at least you will know in advance who wrote it. It is all the more true now. A few selected excerpts:

The government that was founded to serve the people has turned the equation around and now they believe that the people are supposed to serve the government. That we should be willing to put up with whatever taxes they choose to levy, to abide by every ridiculous rule or regulation their bureaucratic little minds can conceive and allow them to regulate every facet of our lives…while they live above the law out of the clutches of Obamacare and shrinking retirement plans.

They pass out billions of dollars in contracts to their political allies and subsidize companies that have no hope of succeeding while they exempt those they choose from the programs they’re forcing the rest of the country into.

They can hire thousands of agents to enforce their will on the public.

They can forsake Americans in the Foreign Service – leave them to die without even attempting to rescue them.

They can look into a television camera and lie with a straight face.

Amidst all this passivity, however, there is great frustration, a smoldering, white-hot anger that only awaits a rallying point to ignite and become the most motivated political force in this nation.

If there has ever been a time in the history of this country for a true leader to step forth, it is now.

Read at: http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/charlie-daniels/what-has-happened-america

This was worth going back to read, in the context of when it was written of course. But since then, even more has been exposed about this cauldron of corruption going on.

Is it any wonder now, a few years later, the way the election process has unfolded?

More of his articles: http://www.cnsnews.com/author/charlie-daniels

Hey hey, ho ho…DJT has got to go

What do you know, another hollow Hollywoody has an epiphany involving Trump and feels the need to tell, warn us. It’s tied to slavery, surprise. This one demanded the entirety of the piece just to reply to the hubris.

John Legend: Trump Supporters are Like People Who Allowed Slavery to Happen in 19th Century

by Daniel Nussbaum – 15 Jun 2016 | Breitbart

Musician John Legend attempted to put Donald Trump’s popularity in historical perspective in an interview Tuesday, appearing to compare those who support the presumptive GOP presidential nominee to people in the 19th century who allowed slavery to continue without realizing it was an evil practice.

“We’re in a moment now where we have a major candidate for office that is being very racist and divisive,” Legend told Variety at the publication’s TV Summit in Beverly Hills on Tuesday. “I feel the need to call that out all the time because I don’t want us to feel like it’s impossible for our nation to go back to another dark place.”

The ten-time Grammy Award winner, a staunch backer of Democratic presumptive nominee Hillary Clinton, was at the event to discuss the WGN television series Underground, which centers on a group of slaves who escape a Georgia plantation via the Underground Railroad. Legend is an executive producer on the series.

“We, as a nation, can’t go back to a dark place, and it could happen if we let the wrong person into office and impose the wrong regime on this country,” Legend told Variety. “I’m sure people in the 1800s didn’t think they were evil people, but they allowed an evil institution to last for quite a long time.”

“We, as people who believe in equality and diversity and believe that every human being in this life matters, we need to be vigilant in making sure that we don’t elect leaders who are contradicting that belief,” he added.

Legend, a big fan and personal friend of President Obama, has repeatedly attacked Trump this election season with charges of racism. The musician rarely shies away from expressing his political opinions; most recently, he called on the Democrat Party to end its use of the superdelegate system in party primary elections.

Earlier this month, the singer joined Christina Aguilera and Stevie Wonder in Los Angeles for an all-star concert fundraiser for Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2016/06/15/john-legend-trump-supporters-people-allowed-slavery-happen-19th-century/

 

Is that rich, considering he gushes support for Hillary Clinton?

“We’re in a moment now where we have a major candidate for office that is being very racist and divisive”
— and Clinton is not too divisive for you? We’re having a moment.

“I feel the need to call that out all the time because I don’t want us to feel like it’s impossible for our nation to go back to another dark place.” — Hillary taking us back to that dark corrupt place doesn’t scare you? All the corrupt scandal baggage has you begging and voting for more? I “feel” the need to point out your absurd stupidity.

“We, as a nation, can’t go back to a dark place, and it could happen if we let the wrong person into office and impose the wrong regime on this country.”— Funny those are exactly the reasons why not to support Hillary.  I do like the words “imposing the wrong regime” with all we’ve been through the last 8 years under unilateral, executive action because he could not ram it through Congress. Hillary now wants the wheel.

“We, as people who believe in equality and diversity, and believe that every human being in this life matters, we need to be vigilant in making sure that we don’t elect leaders who are contradicting that belief.”

Wow that’s the gold label of bullshit. Equality, with who they pander  to? Diversity again, no diversity allowed.  Every human being in this life… while there is only one Party that stands for life now – preserving or protecting the sanctity thereof. Abortion has racked up 59 million and he is supporting the favorite candidate of the abortion industry.  Talk about leaders and politicians who contradict that life belief.

So fall back on the Trump is racist canard. Racism is the preferred freebase attack for Dems — no proof needed. When in reality if you don’t belong to a special interest group, then you don’t really exist. So they have categories for African Americans, LGBTQ, Latinos, Hiapanics, Muslims, BLM, unions, environmentalists, professional educators and provocateurs et al. If you don’t fit, you must not count. No “none of the above.”
(Oh, and stay in your lane)

Hillary doesn’t care about every human being either. She abandoned 4 Americans in Benghazi when their lives depended on it. She caused the situation they were in, then she pulled the rug out like leading sheep to slaughter. She pushed Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. She’s an Ambassador for death and destruction, gladly taking money from merchants of evil. Trump is Legend’s boogieman — Trump is the Boogieman legend.

Obama’s historic achievement: escaping accountability

The liberal-Marxist Left told us how historical Obama’s election was. Four years later they pumped out the same BS. I have a perspective about it all. It may be early yet.

After January 23rd, we will pass the opportunity to impeach or try him for treason. And he’ll have escaped that accountability, in tact. Done. Truth is they were not going to do that, and Obama anticipated as much. It was one thing fixed in Congress they would not do no matter. They were never going to hold Obama accountable.

Given Obama’s massive malfeasance record, if it did happen, imagine what that mountain of case would have been like? And imagine the cost and the time and resources it would take? Look how long it took with Eric Holder, on the IRS commissioner, with Hillary’s emails, or with the Benghazi investigation.

Now considering Obama’s track record, I’m not going to list it all. But I have to give these Leftist radicals credit for one thing. When they do something FUBAR, they do it right. They want to make sure it is beyond all repair.

Do we really need proof? They make sure they commit so many atrocities and abuses that it is hardly possible to keep up or deal with them all, by design. That is part of the insurance policy that you cannot deal with them all. If you did, it would suck up all the time and how many congresses would it take? Look at Obamacare, they lie and use whatever means trying to make it irreversible. It’s true to form of Alinsky tactics, overwhelm your opposition. Then blame them.

So to them this is a beautiful thing having all these conditions in their favor. You would not have enough time or manpower, never mind cooperation. The abuses go on daily. It is the closest thing to King George and the founders as we have seen. Just read the list of grievances in the Declaration. It screams a long train of abuses: “fatiguing” legislative bodies, and “obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws.”

The point is Obama has something to be proud of, when he passes that date, and even now, that he will not have been tried, impeached, even censured for his actions. And how long will it take to correct whatever we can? But so much damage is already done.

When they do something FUBAR, they do it right. They go all the way.
Regardless, we can still be sure that nothing will be done.

RightRing | Bullright

Ben Rhodes hearing turns to Iraq debate

Crazier than crazy, this is why Democrats should not have an ounce of credibility from anyone. This took my seething disgust level to a historic high, which is hard to do.

Rhodes Wikipedia Public Domain

Rep Jason Chaffetz held a House hearing about the Ben Rhodes lie doctrine and his lengthy interview with NYT Magazine. But what happens is totally in your American face.

Rhodes for his part refused to go to the hearing, even after laying his whole case out, how the fiction writer describes it, on what the administration did in creating the Iran deal.

Democrats turn it into a hearing about the Iraq war and WMD — remember their most favorite acronym of all time. Who knew that Valerie Plame, Scooter Libby, yellow cake would be a viable defense for the deception and lies of the Iran deal?

Lets forget for a moment that the Iran deal was wrong all the way around. That it was the product of 3+ years of lies and obfuscation to avoid Congress; that it went right by Congress and was mischaracterized as to what it even is. But that is what we’re supposed to do: forget all the Art of Deception and lying Obama and Democrats are engaged in.

They did have John Hannah as one witness. The Democrats spent nearly all their time questioning him about his participation in Dick Cheney’s office in the lead up to Iraq. But never mind that the Iraq issue went through Congress, kept Congress informed, then it even voted on the authorization.

To recap, Democrats got their hearing …. the one on Iraq and WMD. (fundraisers probably going out as I write) Republicans had a hearing — between injections of Scooter Libby, Iraq, WMD, yellow cake, Valerie Plame, Colin Powel and Dick Cheney — on the Ben Rhodes expose about the construction of the Iran deal, hard as it was to fit that in with time constraints and all.

But how many times has that happened where Democrats hijacked the hearing process into something else? As true obfuscators of reality, they continually hide, deceive, and conceal truth from the American people and rely on repeating their talking points.(true or not) Politics is the motive, so some believe. To make the worse worser, the administration did not even want Congress’s oversight in and on the deal.

The only thing you can conclude from Democrats’ convoluted position is that if Iraq and the WMD was such a debacle, then that somehow mitigates what the administration did creating the Iran “art of deception” deal. So there is no rational reason now for looking into the deception and unconstitutional Iran agreement, even if Rhodes has been out boasting about the deceit involved in the Iran deal.

When Rhodes talked about his ‘compadres’ in the press he reaches out to, he reveals something more. This has been a pattern of Democrat WH operatives since the 90’s when Clinton advisers tipped off, directed or redirected reporters on what they should be covering or how. This came out in testimonies of the Clinton scandals.

The Obama administration lied repeatedly to get the deal done. But that is its pattern: lying about Obamacare, lying on Benghazi, then on the Iran deal from the start. And Democrats framed it as a binary choice that it was war on Iran or this deal, when this deal was the most flawed, subversive thing they could ever create even if they tried.

Now Dems can be ecstatic that, in the end, the focus was more on the Iraq decisions 14 years ago than on Iran. At least the opening statements of the witnesses and a few of their questions were related to the Iran agreement, not Iraq.

Sincerely disgusted. I can hardly wait to see what Ben-fiction-Rhodes will be writing about his time in the administration. Will they eat that up?

From the NYT piece that spawned the hoopla over the Iran deal:

He [Rhodes] expressed a deep personal hopelessness about the possibility of open, rational public debate in a brutally partisan climate. But didn’t the country deserve better? I kept asking him.

Must be sort of a self-imposed hopelessness since he didn’t even want to share details with Congress. Dang schedules and executive limitations that disallow such, while they do allow for countless hours of self-gratified elaboration to a reporter on the topic. But apparently Congress is off executive-privilege limits, unfortunately.

RightRing | Bullright

Iran from bad to worse

GOP Failure Theater: the Iran nuclear vote, Cruz-Rubio edition

By: streiff (Diary) — May 8th, 2015 | Red State

Failure Theater. When the GOP talks a good game about opposing Obama’s policies but, in fact, vote to go along with them.

Yesterday the US Senate voted 98-1 to go along with whatever Barack Obama decides to give to Iran. Though the feckless Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) has portrayed it as a successful “bipartisan” bill, part of Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY)‘s erotic dream of “governing”, in fact it is a huge defeat for our Constitution. By turning the treaty process on its head, by giving Obama carte-blanche to do as he will unless Congress can muster the necessary 2/3 vote to abrogate his actions, the GOP has effectively taken the Congress out of any role in shaping US foreign policy.

This bill, thanks to Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY)‘s bipartisanship fetish did not even require the Iran cease supporting terrorist attacks on Americans. Nope, reasoned the addled Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) and the big brain types in the GOP leadership, requiring Iran to forego terrorism before we help them get a nuke was just too much. Obama would never stand for it.

http://www.redstate.com/streiff/2015/05/08/gop-failure-theater-iran-nuclear-vote-cruz-rubio-edition/

So much for strategy. And Obama is running around complaining about the Republicans? Incomprehensible chaos. Maybe Iran could nickname its program “bipartisan”?

Something going on, always

I looked back on a couple highlight posts from last year and it hit me like never before.

Look back at a couple incidents from the past year and see what I mean. That was then this is now. Those incidents were then, there are new ones now. It has just been a cycle, a continuous cycle. We literally go from one crisis to another. Sometimes a new one happens in the middle of a current one.

With our government and pols, it has been one thing after another. Boehner left, Paul Ryan in. Same thing happens. With the takeover of new Congress in 2015, it continues like no change. Terrorist acts, surges of illegals, murders by illegals. criminals caught and released. Pols lie, scandals and no government accountability. 2016 like 2015. Nothing changes.

What I am really wondering about now is what effect this pattern is having on us? Are we just caught up in the minute, are we in survival mode, are we into the fight or flight stage? I think it is serious and bound to have some effect. I mean we can say it is the new way things are but we see it every day and get tired of it. In and out a continued pattern of incidents, threaded and strung together like a chain. Well, that is how it feels when I look back. Then terrorists do what they want to do, terrorize people.

That’s all I’m going to say, people know what I’m talking about. Any ideas or suggestions anyone has, about it or anything, I’d love to hear them.

RightRing | Bullright

What’s that, you’ll vote for neither?

This seething Trump complaint comes from the Senator in Nebraska

I guess anytime someone has to tell me “you are right to be angry” I am suspicious
Okay, I’ll cut to the chase:

At this point in Nebraska discussions, many of you have immediately gotten practical: “Okay, fine, you think there are better choices than Trump. But you would certainly still vote for Trump over Clinton in a general election, right?”

Before I explain why my answer is “Neither of them,” let me correct some nonsense you might have heard on the internet of late. – Ben Sasse

At this point, I could go on about that reasoning and rebutting the philosophy. But that’s his opinion, he’s sticking to it. (I looked to make sure that is his writing, far as I know it is)

And already I have heard this Senator quoted by many Democrats and media.

Prof of gun rant goes to Washington, as Obama’s guest

Check out this university professor in Nebraska who apparently is in love with the “F” bomb but hates guns with a similar passion. In case you wonder English is her subject.

Amanda-Gailey-Rant-Edited

The woman, Amanda Gailey, an English professor, is also the director of a group known as Nebraskans Against Gun Violence, according to her Facebook profile.

Source: http://www.bizpacreview.com/2016/01/14/fk-police-officers-fk-laws-professor-gets-personal-invite-to-meet-obama-after-this-rant-294264?hvid=2ZZYR4

This is why we need a license and background check on the first amendment. Yet this gets a personal invitation to the WH.

Dems have no shame

Controversy is us, Democrat Cory Booker wants to make sure he gets in on the action.

Cory Booker Brings Israel Critic, Muslim Brotherhood Defender to SOTU

BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff
January 12, 2016 | Free Beacon

Sen. Cory Booker’s (D., N.J.) guest of honor at tonight’s State of the Union address is an Islamic-American community leader who has publicly lashed out at Israel and once defended the Muslim Brotherhood organization as “misunderstood,” according to various reports.

Booker has invited as his guest to the annual speech Ahmed Shedeed, president of the Islamic Center of Jersey City, a community center tied to the 1993 World Trade Center bombings.

http://freebeacon.com/issues/cory-booker-brings-israel-critic-muslim-brotherhood-defender-to-sotu/