The Dishonest Political Paradigm

When Trump points to media and calls them the most dishonest people, I have to disagree. The most dishonest people are the Democrats. MSM is only one of their sub groups.

You can count on one thing, whatever Democrats tell you an election is about or what they are running on, it is a lie. They can’t help themselves.

They say they are not running on impeachment. If they won, it would be the first thing on the agenda. Right above removing the tax cuts. Obstruction being the second item.

If Dems tell you that they are now about jobs and the economy, no they aren’t. They’ll claim that is their focus. But the Democrats’ agenda is a cultural cocktail of:

Open borders, pro-illegal immigration, saving sanctuary cities, sexology. turning education into their cauldron of sociology perversion, multiplying biological gender categories, tearing money away from too-rich people, building the socialist state, preserving the murder of humanity’s most innocent lives, redefining America as the Blame Capitol of the world, antisemitism, hating Israel, removing God from society, preserving the Swamp;…

Abolishing ICE, Appeasing terrorists, blaming terrorism on America, undermining and gutting our military defense, abolishing the second amendment, obstructing Trump’s agenda and nominations, stopping free speech of their opponents. protecting cop killers and criminals, using teacher unions and radicalized agendas to control schools, preserving the poor, and pushing their economy-busting regulation and global warming agenda.

Much of which opposes a thriving economy. Including their war on energy, and catering to our economic or technological competitors. Then there is their leftist assault on the Supreme Court as the fail safe defender of the progressive cultural evolution.

Right Ring | Bullright

Advertisements

NY AG gets a lesson in role playing

NY Attorney General issued a statement Monday, in a last ditch explanation.

“In the privacy of intimate relationships, I have engaged in role-playing and other consensual sexual activity. I have not assaulted anyone. I have never engaged in non-consensual sex, which is a line I would not cross.” — Eric Schneiderman

So the public was forced to use the safe word “resign”.
Kind of strange this role-playing thing.

Hours later he resigned.

“It’s been my great honor and privilege to serve as attorney general for the people of the State of New York. In the last several hours, serious allegations, which I strongly contest, have been made against me.

While these allegations are unrelated to my professional conduct or the operations of the office, they will effectively prevent me from leading the office’s work at this critical time. I therefore resign my office, effective at the close of business on May 8, 2018.”

The left launched attacks and conspiracies surrounding the cause of the events.

A nation turns it’s lonely eye

Of course it is editorial time and there is no shortage of material or subjects. Back in the day, was a famous song by Simon and Garfunkel, “Mrs. Robinson.” Kind of folksy. It was popular and stirred emotions of the times. Times that needed little sentiment added.

The lyrics in question referred to the baseball great, “Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio? A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.”

That line spawned by sentiment in an era that yearned for an all-star hero talent.
Today I’d kike to adjust the words a little and borrow the phrase:

A nation turns its lonely eyes from a jaded state to that “shinning city”- longing.

When Trump came in he talked about draining the swamp. It turns out the sludge is very thick in the old bog. But there is no nostalgia to it. No popular interest on the side of preserving the swamp, even as a useful wetland. There is no love lost for this swamp.

One of the few things I keep on my wall, which I am partial to, is a painting by a friend simply titled ‘The Swamp.’ It’s an actual place, and beautiful in its natural way. These days, it is a haunting reminder of the contrasting ugly swamp in DC, and its odor.

I suppose, like they say, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, though I have a tough time thinking anyone sees any beauty in this swamp. Well, except postured Democrats and a few Republicans. It almost screams “clean me up” rather than “leave me alone.” It is an eyesore and embarrassment. If you watch the edge on some days you can almost see it holding its own, certainly not shrinking. One thing about it, we never saw the swamp this exposed before. We have known for years how long the corruption went on, but the ugliness is only now revealed to all.

Yet still we haven’t. The Swamp remains and we keep on complaining about it. Almost any week we get another reminder it does not give up its own without a fight. Swampbusting.

In that famous song were some other lyrics:

    “Sitting on a sofa on a Sunday afternoon
    Going to the candidates debate
    Laugh about it, shout about it
    When you’ve got to choose
    Every way you look at it, you lose.”

We are pretty familiar with that. Poor and bad choices abound. Surely they aren’t perfect, but often no great choices exist. Well, we are trying to change that and some people don’t want it changed. They want us to have limited choices, or options, leaving the same stanky swamp in place with the same oozing swamp gas wafting in the air.

If only we had the same concern about this environmental hazard that they have about global warming, they might be more devoted. Imagine if like earth day we had a National Drain the Swamp Day? Wishful thinking.

We could all be called on to do our part. There could be Drain the Swamp cards and emoticons. Swamp hashtags would trend and a prize would go to the person with the best idea to drain it. Time magazine would have a cover with the Bog Award of the year.

No nostalgia, just a nation turning its lonely eye to the toxic environmental problem.

Right Ring | Bullright

Dysfunctional Resistance is New Normal

Let me try to explain the current family tree of politics. The left’s hallucination now is Mitch McConnell as the divider and culprit of the chaotic, abnormal state we are in.

Yeah, right. Try as they will. It would take a whole lot of wrongjuice to believe or accept that as fact. So here we go, allow me to paraphrase it as colorful as I can:

Abby and Normal eloped in Obama’s first term. Harry Reid officiated the wedding. That is the place where right became wrong and wrong became right, up became down and down became up. Unconstitutional became the rule of law. Dissent became a crime. We became a country governed by a man and political party, instead of the rule of law.

Abby and Norm are still on an extended honeymoon. No hope for annulment and it doesn’t look like a divorce will come anytime soon. Theirs is one marriage I wish would not last. And they seem to have enough distant relatives to make a lot of mischief.

It turns out, all it takes is a radical minority of hell bent miscreants to ruin functionality of the system. They have now perfected it. From the Justice of Peace to justice of chaos.

So even people on the left ask, “when will normal process be coming back?” They ask us? The culprits who encouraged Abby and Norm to hook up now blame their marriage on anyone else. But they cannot deny Abby and Norm are hitched. That fact doesn’t bother them. They incite all the effects and do everything possible to keep them happily together. Nothing is off limits for the Abnormals. The trick is to make everything normal’s fault.

Right Ring | Bullright

Saving Sanity: a noble cause

Is a once a week rant too much to ask or expect for a blog? Yes, as a matter of fact it is. The problem is not the lack of material but rather the sheer volume of it.

That also can lead to things like burnout, exhaustion, even suffocation in a sea of mud. Just saying. So silence is not golden but may at times be the only viable option.

Something has bugged me though ever since I have been doing this blog. It is the amount of humor we use and whether it is appropriate? I mean these are serious times, and does the humor contribute to the coarsening of culture? I’m not sure.

Well, blah blah. I remember a past Bible study over whether humor is bad thing or acceptable? See, there was a belief at one time that Christians should refrain from humor, certainly in Church settings. I think that might have fallen by the wayside, but was once a real issue. The point was humor diminished Christianity.

It took away the seriousness of issues. It was seen to some as an insult. We know some people, for many reasons, do not appreciate humor anyway. But on serious matters it was frowned on. It was thought a type of mockery that didn’t belong in serious debate or dialogue. Using it diminished one’s credibility.

Someone finally wrote a book explaining that humor was not wrong and listed examples of humor in the Old and New Testament. So one cannot ban humor in theory.

My issue with all this is how can you look around today and not have a sense of humor about things? That doesn’t mean you take issues less seriously….or does it? This is where rationality and sanity come in. A rational person is aware of the serious nature yet can still poke fun at the condition of society. It doesn’t diminish one’s sincerity, or an issue itself.

Sometimes humor is the only way — or one of the ways — people can cope or deal with a given situation. It can cover pain, or masque all kinds of personal emotion.

It is similar with some violence these days. You see random murders and people killed for no visible reason. One struggles with trying to understand why? As if we need to know why to make sense of it. Humor is different. Humor makes sense in a funny way. But we are struck at a murder that had no rational reason for it. That it keeps on happening adds to all those questions. We don’t know and may never know. Sometimes even the killer had no reason. This is where rational thought has a problem. We almost need to see why. And some people today are uncomfortable with just calling it evil. It bothers us and it should. We don’t want to lay a blanket excuse over it just to try to explain it. An excuse that may or not be true. And explaining evil may be excusing it.

Humor can punctuate events without tainting them — or at least intending to.

Does using humor on serious issues take away seriousness from them? Maybe it can; though attributing false explanations also takes away from them. We almost expect those. I question fairness in a lot circumstances and think of humor as a great equalizer. Is that wrong? I don’t think so. Sometimes humor points out the absurdity. Sometimes nothing short of a punch line does it justice. (no matter how bad the event) I think we know that doesn’t mean the thing was funny or a joke. We don’t mean it is not serious.

Late night comics in recent years have gone to a whole different level. In fact, their humor has become the absurdity — and maybe even the thing that drives any of their jokes. And less, their jokes don’t seem to be funny anymore but their absurdity is obvious. Then for these intended jokes to be taken as fact or for mainstream political dialogue is another matter. Their absurd humor replaces political thought. It becomes mainstream opinion. This has been validated over and over since Trump took office.

Defamation of character?

They have basically turned Trump, or what he is about, into a joke. I get the joke part and we make jokes about Hillary. But that is different, no one loses sight of the seriousness of the threat she represents. We still understand all her real flaws. Still we use humor to poke fun at or take the edge off the hyper-serious nature — seriousness she imbues on herself. We don’t lose sight of the greater issue. The fears and concern so big that humor can be a coping mechanism because we cannot see or visualize the whole extent. It is beyond simple description — and breaks all past comparisons. So you see there is a difference. Their political objective is to reduce Trump to an absurd caricature

But these days the joke is the entire issue. The left turns the joke into reality, instead of vice versa. Humor is used as ridicule, and the left does ridicule as a political weapon well. In fact, the purpose of it is to bury or lose sight of the truth and reality.

See there is a proper purpose for humor as hyperbole. It is also a tool. It points out the error through exaggeration. Again, that is not to lose sight of the truth. It is not to try to turn hyperbole into literal reality. The Bible uses hyperbole for emphasis. The object is not to make hyperbole a fact. We are also supposed to know and see the difference.

But then when Trump uses hyperbole or exaggerates something, the truth slayers run out to correct any errors. Yet they have accepted their fictional character of Trump as reality. Trump, off the cuff, uses a lot of rhetorical tools. That is why the left likes it, they busy themselves pointing out any perceived inaccuracies. Funny how they don’t “factcheck” themselves or their depiction of Trump and coverage.

We are in an era when reality has no value to the left. Into that void they have put narrative, and perception has become their only reality. So when humor is applied, it is taken as perception — which it is — but then taken as fact or reality. The narrative rules and protecting that narrative becomes their chief mission. Humor is not humor, it is now reality. That narrative drives their politics, even moreso than they drive the narrative.

Right Ring | Bullright

China and the Left

I see a similarity of China and the Left here, aside from the communism ties. It is not a stretch, the political strategies align. You might say birds of the feather.

It is always about the goal with the left, as it is with China. The means are only the vehicle, to be discarded when the goal is achieved. And anything that achieves it is acceptable.

Regarding the trade deficit with China, and recent tariff announcements, Trump said that there may be some pain but in the end we will have a stronger country. That is the first time I heard a leader reference the long game of what we want. (okay maybe not first) A lot of people probably shuttered to hear that.

I bet that got the Chinese’s attention because he is referencing the long game. Something we don’t always stress. It shakes their predictability about us. In other words, that we would be willing to weather some pain to get to the benefit in the end.

See the strategy to Chinese is really as simple as the lefts’ is. Both are focused on the destination not on the means. Whatever the means matters little. The destination is king. That is the same with the Chinese. And If they really believe in their dominant end, and we know they do, then that tells the real story.

To Chinese they want to control or run the world. See if that is their goal then nothing else is important. Do you get it? If that is where they see themselves, at that point there is nothing anyone can do to them about anything — there’s nothing to negotiate. That may seem a fantasy to us, but if they believe it then it gives their strategy away. Once they are in the driver’s seat the game is over.

We, however look at this as a long term game that will continue. It won’t once they reach their destination. They will be the tyrants they want to be and it will be tough to anyone who disagrees. That is what they have in mind. Nothing like our goals or strategy. We want a working relationship, for the long term. They are just thinking as the short term until they get to their destination.They think none of this stuff will matter then.

It is the same type mindset the Left has. They look only at achieving their desired ends. Once that is done, nothing else such as rules apply. It is a king of the hill perspective. They plan on keeping the hill once they get it. That is the way their plans work. Do you see the similarity? Power is rule, and rule is permanent not temporary. At that point, all resources go to preserving and keeping that permanent rule. Sure, it is a scorched earth plan but so what? That is how they play. We are looking at it as a balancing act but they don’t want anything balanced. They want control and once you have it, you run the show. If we do not look at the end game, goals, of those like China, Russia, N Korea, or Iran, then we underestimate the game. The days of just ignoring it are dwindling.

This is why we, meaning media and talking heads, are concerned about a trade war. It’s a perpetual real war to China, and they plan on winning. So the state of a trade war does not matter to China at all. This is also why intellectual property is a major issue to us and not to them. Their end doesn’t see a problem with private intellectual property.

It is sort of the same thing as CNN or MSM worrying about so-called Russia collusion. while the rest of the country is concerned about trade. The two are not on the same wave lengths, like two different orbits. Which one matters?

Right Ring | Bullright

Leave it to left to define Roseanne

After throwing his own family under the bus, as the typical Trump -supporting, racist-type family, this NYT columnist says about Roseanne’s show and Trump-supporters:

Read here.

“The dark underbelly of the white, working-class, the intolerance that permeates so much of their lives, is completely absent, and that absence can serve a dangerous purpose: to reinforce the delusion that they’re actually supporting somebody like Donald Trump for honorable reasons.”

But this deserves commentary. It seems so easy for them to try to shove (no pound) Trump supporters into some stereotype but it doesn’t work. That’s probably what frustrates them. It is a delusion, he says, and nothing about their support is honorable.

Rather their view is some distilled elite, deceptive, liberal projection of people that no one in the world should like. Or that is the hope. ‘Who could like these despicable people?’

Maybe he should look in the mirror and face the kind of world view he and his Liberal ilk represents. It is they who are so far off the mainstream of any political alignment with reality, much less the electorate — and proudly bigoted about it.

In truth, as Sterling might say in Twilight Zone, “he seems to have turned into a caricature of himself.” And speaking of dysfunction, how functional could these Leftists be in their families or community? It is also a ruling-class elitist mindset that asserts only they know better how to fix or run your lives. If you only follow their plantation politics.

Maybe I will do a satire on the kind of people Liberals would like to see portrayed to represent their politically correct, leftist view of how a typical family should be and live.

So says the misinformed Lefty antagonist. Trumpism, whatever you term that to be, is not an ideology. You sure missed every lesson offered in 2016.

Motivegate: evil personified

It seems a lot of people are disturbed about the questions of motives, or lack of, surrounding the last 3 or so terror-styled events. I call them that because there are questions about calling them terrorism. I.e. Parkland, Las Vegas, Austin.

The second question has to be does it kelp to know the motive? I’m not sure it does. But I can see where motive matters legally when prosecuting criminals. There is still the matter of what they did, not just why.

Concentrating on motive can take our eye off of what they did. We have a need, it seems, to explain why. That can also create lots of conspiracy theories.

In Las Vegas, it leaves room for all kinds of speculation or theories. And there is a niche for conspiracies in this country. There may not be as many motive questions about Parkland since some vengeance or mental characteristics appear to apply. Austin is unique, at least so far, on motives. We don’t know yet or may not know.

But this not knowing seems unsettling to a lot of people. Again, does it change the events, or what happened? I don’t think so.

Another question is: was motive a major consideration to the perpetrator in these cases? I’m not sure, or don’t see it. And if there is no political motive, officials are reluctant to call it terrorism. Yet perps still do these things to instill fear in people by the act itself.

I am coming to the conclusion that maybe the why doesn’t matter all that much. I have to be content that we may never know for sure. Or it could be that they wanted their 15 minutes of fame. I am willing to accept not knowing, though it would be nice to know.

The conclusion though is what if — other than vain fame — there is no clear motive? What if they just did it because they could and because they wanted to? Obviously they could not talk themselves out of it. So it would have been up to someone or something else to intervene to stop it. Two of them had a suicidal pact in the end, Las Vegas and Austin. So they would not really be held accountable.

I am convinced that some people do things just because they can, or because they are fascinated by it. Or maybe it is fantasy they want to carry out? Never mind that it effects so many other lives of innocent people. They overlook that or don’t care.

In the end, I have to be comfortable with not knowing. There is another possibility the person wanted it to be a mystery that everyone is left to solve. Sort of a ha ha, figure it out. To me that can be dangerous. I don’t have to play that game. Then again, maybe these madman killers just want events to speak for themselves? Maybe that is the point.

On the other hand, people sometimes do what they do simply because they can. Maybe there is a void conscience, whatever. I can look at it that they simply had enough drive or ambition to commit the atrocities. Maybe they want to find out if they are really capable of carrying it out in some twisted plan? One possibility is as bad as the next.

Closure should not require knowing a motive. That can be a game. We know what they did.

When asked about the Austin bomber, the family said they could not believe it. “He was a nice kid.” The brother of the Las Vegas shooter said he was a caring guy, it was a total shock — that could be a motive itself. It is a symptom of terrorism. In the Parkland case, you could say it looked like a foregone conclusion that too many people ignored. Seems it is either beyond belief that the person did it or completely predictable.

What about pure evil? I think that is an explanation in itself. People who do evil acts are evil. The acts define thems. Maybe they don’t need a reason? It is self-definition.

We are left to dig through all the evidence and clues to make some theory plausible. Some people get hung up on the why as if there is, or must be, some explanation. Still the rest of us just sit disturbed and offended by the events.

However, these events do raise collateral questions about law enforcement or botched warnings, missed clues. Many more questions than there are answers.

Right Ring | Bullright

Old theories on Dems validated

This requires some contextual background. Conservatives have tossed out various psycho-theories about the left and what drives Democrats. I have considered them dysfunctionally deficient, making reasoning impossible. You could have a formal debate with numbers and statistics but it would mean nothing. They can ignore inconvenient facts as easily as they ignore the results. It does frustrate people.

Take a major issue as an example. The wall and border security, not even going into the entire problems. If you sat down to reason or convince Democrats, it wouldn’t work. So if the left has such aversion to a wall, numbers or facts don’t work. What is it, you might wonder why? If it were economics, you could make that argument. But you would be wasting your time and sincere efforts.

That is because it is philosophical to them. They are philosophically opposed, no matter what the facts or what you say. They will invent excuses, just make things up, call you names, or twist whatever you say. You see how vehemently they are opposed. It also includes ideology and emotion. Don’t expect them to care about the consequences of not building a wall either. They don’t care. They can’t be forced to care about something they have already made up their mind is not important.

They only care about other things much more: like sanctuary cities, illegal immigrants, amnesty, stopping ICE from doing its job, protecting illegals. Almost anything else. They’ll give you the state’s rights argument. They don’t care about that. They’ve been fighting against state’s rights for years and opposing the will of the people.

So how else can one explain it? What is behind it. If it is a mental deficiency, what is it? Well, I found something interesting to help explain it. Just consider the source.

Sooner or later you will come across this story, if you haven’t already — because it is being shoveled out especially by media. I took the time to read it. I will link the article, not as a personal endorsement, but this was my takeaway nugget from it.

“I wanted to know why the Lib Dems sucked at winning elections when they used to run the country up to the end of the 19th century,” Wylie explains. “And I began looking at consumer and demographic data to see what united Lib Dem voters, because apart from bits of Wales and the Shetlands it’s weird, disparate regions. And what I found is there were no strong correlations. There was no signal in the data.

“And then I came across a paper about how personality traits could be a precursor to political behaviour, and it suddenly made sense. Liberalism is correlated with high openness and low conscientiousness, and when you think of Lib Dems they’re absent-minded professors and hippies. They’re the early adopters… they’re highly open to new ideas. And it just clicked all of a sudden.”

Now some of this data is from varied places. But it still would apply across borders.

This high openness, to belief and apparently progressive ideas would help explain it. Couple that with low conscientiousness and you have a volatile cocktail. A vehicle. I knew they were conscience-challenged but there it is. Do you think they would care about turning on a dime, contradicting themselves or hypocrisy? No, all that only matters if they care.

That’s why they beat conservatives over the head about double standards of hypocrisy. That works. To the left there are no double standards, only the now standard. Past is not prologue, it becomes irrelevant. All the matters is the immediate situation and need — whatever it takes.

Now that makes sense too, because they don’t care about the future, really, or the consequences of what they do. And it’s also why they continually apply the same failing policies. So there is a plausible, real validation that is measurable.

Explains a lot about Obama, Clintons and the DNC. So if you have people open to a radical agenda and ideas, with low conscientious objections, you have a pretty influential bunch that can be led (molded). Throw some white guilt on that bonfire. And all this, linked to the established plantation and identity politics, is an incorrigible force with only one uniting thing, ideology and control. Add in the anti-God agenda and what do you expect?

Right Ring | Bullright

Ideals meet politics

GK Chesterson wrote:

“They said that I should lose my ideals and begin to believe in the methods of practical politicians. Now, I have not lost my ideals in the least; my faith in fundamentals is exactly what it always was. What I have lost is my old childlike faith in practical politics.” – from The Ethics of Elfland

I should have posted this quote alone, but I could not do it. It occurs to me this is part of what is wrong today. The opposite of this quote rings too true for culture. I don’t think Chesterson is even taught in schools anymore, someone who contributed so much.

There’s a movement by the Catholic Church to sanctify him. Chesterson honored God in what he did. All the more reason he is marginalized from society.

So if they are not teaching him, you can say par for the times of ours. However, if this all continues, at some point they may not know how to teach it — being too impractical.

Conditioning

You can see it in this shooting. To take the general view that people forego principles and morality to accept culture as just the way it is, then it alters what we do. It lowers the standard. It rationalizes morality away. It becomes a state of these are the circumstances we live with now. We act accordingly and presume to be excused because of it all.

We can/do teach that in schools: these are just the conditions we are dealt. Teach that shootings are now normalcy. Just accept that is the way it is.

Chesterson was making a point to say that you don’t have to take that view, or concede your fundamental beliefs and principles. That is much the reason we got to this state.

Right Ring | Bullright

Google does “gun” control

Look how Google does gun control, like they do everything. Add it to the mix.

Google tried censoring ‘gun’ shopping searches. It backfired

Philip Wegmann | Feb 27, 2018 | Washington Examiner

In the wake of the Florida school shooting, Google decided to take a stand. The gatekeeper of the Internet decided to filter shopping searches that included the term “gun.” It didn’t go so well.

Early Tuesday morning, Internet shoppers started noticing and documenting the digital gaffes. Users received error notices when they searched for glue guns and water guns, toy guns and airsoft guns, nail guns and nerf guns. The algorithm is apparently so strict that even the color “burgundy” triggered an error because it includes “gun” in the spelling.

This set off something of a parlor game on social media. Turns out, adults don’t like it when faceless bureaucrats try enforcing arbitrary restrictions — federal, corporate, or otherwise.

Casey “Stable Genius” Smith found that Google now censors “Laguna Beach.”

Technousayt observed that the beloved Tom Cruise film about beach volleyball, “Top Gun,” also could not be found.

Read more at: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/google-tried-censoring-gun-shopping-searches-it-backfired/article/2650230

So it got interesting in all kinds of ways. But it does show how active Google is about monitoring political debate. How many other filters are they now applying?

Follow the trail

It’s nothing new for creatively radical leftists. For instance, the media developed a new trend for pushing gun control. Fox already reported media pushing Florida teen survivors as ambassadors for gun control. Laura Ingraham asked who out there wants to take political advice from students? No one.

But that doesn’t stop MSM like CNN and MSNBC from using the teens as experts on all things guns. Great, they know so much about everything else, don’t they? So they put kids against pols as gun control advocates. It doesn’t stop there.

Another media trend: in a half hour segment on the Fla shooting, CNN put up a pundit from Brussels and then one from London to tell us what our gun laws should be. Of course they exploited the chance to tell us. CNN never said why their opinion was important.

Shame maybe? That’s it, they want to guilt us into gun control the same way media guilted the country into electing Obama — and then unable to throw him out like trash.

On a similar note, Tucker Carlson had a DACA advocate for illegal immigration who lectured about sanctuary cities and laws. Now illegals are telling us what our immigration law should be. He didn’t like Tucker saying he was not an American because he wasn’t a citizen. Yet bozo started every sentence saying “we” should… do this or that.

The arrogance knows no boundaries. We must heed the advice of non-citizens on our own country? Next they will try to lecture us on who to elect, vote for, and draft our laws. Illlegals already demand they will decide who immigrates here via chain migration.

See a trend? Have the outsiders, or those who are part of the problem, be policy experts. How about asking MS 13 gang members what we should do on gang violence? Let’s have inmates run parole boards. Ask children and minors to develop our drug laws.

Though supporting Brexit like Nigel Farage is smeared as illegitimate. So when you want your country back, you are labeled an extremist on the outside fringe — despite polls.

But we need to bring in outsiders to set our laws and policies … or get students to do it.
The new rule must be that citizens are overruled and irrelevant. The coup of America.

Right Ring | Bullright

I have a dream

I have a dream that this nightmare ends.

That is an end to this: chain immigration game, the illegal invasion, denials about criminal behavior, apologists for Sanctuary Cities and Sanctuary Crimes, rejection of the wall; and demands from illegal immigrants, their hostage siege and blackmail of our government, defiance of law and order, lies about numbers, amnesty and control of legal immigration by illegal immigrants. And finally, to dumbing down the electorate by the media and advocates for illegal immigration and corruption.

I have a dream that the system actually works; truth prevails; that rule of law is enforced; that corruption is penalized not promoted; that elections do matter; that commons sense is common; that creating an investigation of a president is not job security or an exemption from accountability. I have a dream that winners actually win not suffer the consequences, that losers do not determine the agenda, and that winners act like winners not losers.

Right Ring | Bullright

CNN doling out marriage advice

Really now, taking advice on marriage from CNN is probably about the last thing most sane people would think of. And yes, it is every bit as bad as it sounds.

Dailywire

CNN, the network known for providing hard-hitting, always-truthful stories about the current political climate, took a day off from combing the White House halls for anonymous sources Thursday to issue a bit of marital advice. And as expected, it’s just as fantastic as their reporting.

According to CNN, perhaps the best thing to do for your relationship is to let your partner sleep with another person.

Read at Daily Wire

Wow, the things they can put out when the Fake News cycle gets a little slow behind the curtain. Looks like they are trying to make an apple out of a pineapple.

CNN could sponsor the next internet site launched to connect people. Ad campaign: “Hey couples, if your marriage is not already totally destroyed, there’s hope. You could consider this and give it the parting shot it needs.” – NADA; National Ass. of Divorce Advocates.

Anyway, you might scratch CNN off your list for marriage advice. (if it was ever on it)

Power to the Radicals

A few things happened this week. Nothing out of the ordinary, I assure you. Just the typical, normal routine government stuff. Boring. Well, normal for these days.

With the publicity about the House memo put out by Devin Nunes, all the Democrats are livid.(triggered) They were all asked to go and see the very classified information for themselves but most Democrats declined the invitation. Nyet! [no in Russian]

But the FBI complained that they need to review and sign off on the information. Gee, the same FBI who stonewalled release of documents. By the way, most of the information came from them. FBI has control over what Congress can do now? That is new.

Then the DOJ said it would be “unprecedented and reckless” to release the information. “Danger, Will Robinson.” Is that a loud “nyet”? Oh, so they get veto power over what Congress, who has oversight, can release to the public. They already made Congress go to court to get the documents members of Congress demanded.

Dems and media claimed #Release The Memo is being promoted by Russian bots. I’d say Russia might figure by now that government is doing enough damage by itself.

Mueller wants to interview Trump. Okay, the guy Trump interviewed to run FBI just before being anointed Special Counsel needs to interview Trump. Every time there is good news for Trump, Mueller strategically leaks something to carry the media- driven, anti-Trump narrative. Conveniently, just as Trump leaves for Davos, Switzerland.

The awaited doctor exam did not work out well at all for team resistance. Trump is healthy and not slobbering in his soup. Media says how can that be?

Five months of communication records went missing from key investigators of Clinton’s and Trump’s case. No worry, says the FBI, ‘normal’ glitches with new phone updates. Remember Lois Lerner had normal problems with those emails, too? But she was first in line to run to the court to seal her testimony “records” So it’s just a snafu, you lose.

A glitch causes a 5-month screw up? Maybe they switched to Hillary’s IT vendor. Oh, that’s right, he’s wandering around in hiding somewhere. Or didn’t they all get immunity? But I bet there is a real good reason – other than misconfiguration issues. They would never keep them from us.

Wait, Democrats and their media allies attack Republicans and Trump for questioning the FBI leadership. Crazy. Now being offended at corrupt leadership is sacrilegious. Dems immediately said we are attacking the entire FBI. No, the leadership sucks, just like some of the DOJ. Conflicts and corruption are everywhere.

You have to hand it to Trump, since he came in it’s being exposed daily. Wouldn’t you think rank and file FBI are offended? Dems say just leave it alone, they are doing fine.

Speaking of FBI, it seems word went out to Director Wray to fire McCabe. He supposedly refused and then threatened to resign if DOJ continued that dialogue. If so, I didn’t know they make all personnel decisions on FBI Island, where even the AG cannot override them. Okay, so who is in charge here? FBI has a veto too?

We already know about the Schumer Shutdown. He demands what is put on the agenda. And now Schumner seems to think he has a veto over the wall. What’s up, Chuck?

Sanctuary cities? Oh some in California are going to arrest officials cooperating with ICE. While they are at it, they are going to write immigration law too. (which ICE should follow) Then they demand Feds can’t touch anything they issued a law on. A veto? Usurpation of law is now a Constitutional right. That’s in the 10th amendment now.

How bad is it? I saw the writing on the wall… and even the wall was crying.

Can we find anything else crazy in the news? See what radicals, with the help of Deep State, can do given opportunity and 8 years of a corrupt administration? Sky’s the limit.

Right Ring | Bullright

PP-Hood’s leader to resign

On the pro-death front, Planned Parenthood’s CEO to resign.

Washington Times reports:

By Bradford Richardson – Wednesday, January 24, 2018

Cecile Richards is stepping down as president of the Planned Parenthood after more than a decade at the head of the nation’s largest abortion provider.

BuzzFeed News first reported the story, citing two sources familiar with the matter.

In a statement, Planned Parenthood said Ms. Richards, 60, “plans to discuss 2018 and the next steps for Planned Parenthood’s future at the upcoming board meeting” next week.

Pro-life activists reacting to the news said Ms. Richards‘ legacy will be one of “death and destruction.”

I suppose she wants to discuss 2018 in view of the mid-term elections and future of Planned Parenthood. Why is it such a political player?

Brilliant Deductions

Since it is the end of the year, it is time to recognize the most influential people of the year. My nomination of year has been finalized. It must be the Deep State, even over Trump.

If you thought the Deep State was a conspiracy ruse, then you must have noticed they removed all doubt. Seems Trump has exposed that for the cabal it is. There was so much evidence this year, no one can rationally deny it exists.

The fact that libs want to cover up for it, only further validates it is alive and well.

So congrats, Deep State, in my mind you get the person of the year award — collectively.

Class warfare is really in season. Economics of tax cuts are raging. On the left, the politics of tax cuts are surging. The mainstream media and left only care about election politics, not the people affected by them. It’s all politics.

In light of the current economic issues, this quote happened to be on Spurgeons Daily Devotional for December 20th. (an old resource)

“Call thy labourers, and give them their hire.” — Matthew 20:8

Lastly, engaging in sexism is something most conservatives frown on. Especially when they are hyped up charges. Well, it is nuts when conservatives are blamed for being sexist. That doesn’t happen much. However, what we hear are sexism charges leveled against conservative women.

That should not make sense. Yet the sexism police on the left always use sexist attacks on Republican or conservative women. Just think of Sarah Palin, Kellyanne Conway, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Betsy Devos. Or remember Condoleezza Rice? Okay, but they do have favorites and make exemptions for moderate liberal tools, who are useful.

Contrast this with the latest charge of Kirsten Gillibrand and Elizabeth Warren that a tweet from Trump was a sexist attack on her. First ones to squeal “sexism” against Republicans. So why would they be the ones to make sexism attacks on women? Now Susan Collins has the nerve to call the media left sexist over the way she was treated for supporting the tax cuts. Well, this is what happens when you consistently side with the left on issues, they get very agitated when you don’t go along with them. Then they revoke your woman-pass card.

Politico reported the story:

“I believe that the coverage has been unbelievably sexist, and I cannot believe that the press would have treated another senator with 20 years of experience as they have treated me,” she told reporters in the Capitol. “They’ve ignored everything that I’ve gotten and written story after story about how I’m duped. How am I duped when all your amendments get accepted?”

Collins, whom Obamacare supporters earlier this year hailed as a hero for blocking GOP repeal legislation, has faced intense criticism from those same voices for supporting the repeal of the law’s individual mandate as part of the tax bill.

What else would you expect from the radical, fire-breathing left but to try to shame anyone who doesn’t go their way, then weaponize womanhood against her? Par for their course. And do it while calling the right sexist.

Right Ring | Bullright

Open Letter to the Resistance

I know you people are fairly disagreeable by nature but allow me to explain a few things to you. You can accept them or not, at face value, but I really don’t give a shit.

You all seem to be in an even bigger stupor than normal lately as you follow all those sensational headlines that come out, one by one. Did you ever think this could be a tactic of choreography going on? Did you ever think maybe you are the fish falling for the bait, almost every time?

Well, of course you probably didn’t because as soon as that thought entered your gushy head, you succumbed to the “want to believe” doctrine. The same doctrine that led your brain cells over the last 8 years of Obama. Even despite evidence to the contrary, you “want to believe” it all true. And with the left, the law of perception rules supreme. If you want it to be true, it is. You must deny whatever contradicts that belief of yours.

But unlike all your hopes, Donald Trump really is still president and he is not going away. And remember those people who voted for him you claimed were a minority? Well, they are still here. We aren’t going away either. We didn’t change our minds, or make a mistake. We are quite happy and do not have any empathy for your resistance — which if you think about it is actually sedition. We are happy your perverse system is being disrupted.

Worse for you, we will still be here in the coming years and that means through the midterms you are giddy about, all the way to a crescendo of momentum in 2020. You see, you bought into a failing paradigm. We are actually the real “resistance”… to your deeps-state scum that is sucking the blood from our country.

So we are still resisting and bringing correction to this corrupt DC sewer you worshiped at the altar of for at least 8 years. I know, you don’t care about the effects of what you have done, or what your Messiah Obama did. But you should be concerned that it was all destroying the foundation of this country. No. All you care for is your twisted ideology.

Of course you ignored and/or denied that — the ideological dreams of your utopia were more important. It was not a utopia or right but you didn’t want to hear that. Your social justice is really a wet blanket of socialism that doesn’t work no matter how hard you try to ram it down our throats. Again, you don’t care. Your nanny-state desires are more important than life or the preservation of this country. So you actively work to destroy it, which you don’t care about anyway, in order to get what you want.

But your nanny-state also comes with a cost of the sewer sucking the oxygen from society. And it requires fuel. It gave birth to and marinated in corruption, now that your phase of politicization reached its peak. You love the politicization because it was radicalized like you and the leftist base. That feeds the beast. It doesn’t care about the consequences, only the agenda. The fruits of which are as toxic for freedom as it is for the health of the republic itself, though that doesn’t matter to you. In fact, you are willing to cover up all the evidence of corruption or seeds of sedition against America for your own selfish interests, to propel that agenda. And it is not even your noble pipe dreams and illusions you care about.

The real objective is, and always was, power and control of the people you use in your grist mill of politics. The plantation that grows and maintains this manure field is the machine used to propel its political abuse and malfeasance in its lust for power. This plantation utopia can never be satisfied, it isn’t meant to be. Its goal is the evolutionary destruction of the republic into a socialist state. That requires a fair amount of force to accomplish.

What better way to perpetuate that objective, force, than deceptively naming it something like resistance, which is a perversion of the word? If you are actively in a state of resistance against the democratically elected government, it is a state of sedition and insurrection. To be in resistance against the democracy you claim to care about — and rule of law — is to be actively working against America and the Americans who made their choice in the election. Immediately, you went into the persistent state of denial and “resistance” against the government and the people that elected it.

Though we were in dissent with your regime and policies in the last 8 years, we suffered through it. We did not organize all the institutions and embedded radicals against it. Ours was a real resistance not sedition — by any means necessary. Imagine what the press would have looked like over that? And we didn’t try to take power by means other than democratic election. We didn’t try to undermine it or prevent it from taking power. We did not radicalize an insurgency against it. We used the mechanisms of government itself and freedom of speech, peacefully, as the means. Though this was unsuccessful. Our success was in finally stopping that train of abuse in 2016.

Now all of you claim to be under the banner of Resistance, while you are actively opposing America. The fact that you don’t care only proves your loyalty is not to the US or the Constitution, but to an ideology which craves power for its means to success.

Our only option to your craving is to be in resistance ourselves. So once again, we are the real resistance. Without power, your progressive agenda is disrupted. That causes knots in your “by any means necessary” stomach. But the cravings to feed your addiction will not be satisfied in the near future. Your withdrawals will get ugly and violent, but we will not appease your demands. We will not surrender our will or the America you are actively opposing. Your sedition will be opposed. You will not have your way.

Right Ring | Bullright

Double hit and run hypocrite

Call out the guard….Clinton guard that is. Geesh, Clintons seem to be taking fire these days from the strangest places. The logic is just as strange.

Take Kirsten Gillibrand, for instance. Take her away. Miss Goody Two-Shoes threw the big Bubba and the dynastic Clinton duo right under the big yellow bus. The wheels go ’round and ’round, where they stop no one knows.

Roger Waters penned the lyrics of the Pink Floyd song:
“Have a cigar, you’re gonna go far…. We call it riding the gravy train.”

And right away, Gillibrand got pushback from the Clintonistas.

Politico

“Ken Starr spent $70 million on a consensual blowjob. Senate voted to keep POTUS WJC. But not enough for you @SenGillibrand?” Philippe Reines, an adviser to Hillary Clinton during her tenure in the Senate, at the State Department and during last year’s campaign, wrote on Twitter. “Over 20 yrs you took the Clintons’ endorsements, money, and seat. Hypocrite. Interesting strategy for 2020 primaries. Best of luck.”

Let the hits roll, on Gillibrand. Irony of getting Clinton’s seat, taking Clinton money and then throwing Bubba under the bus. But she really can’t get away with that when, as Reines reminded her, she was one of the defenders and took money off the Clinton machine. She acts like a search light in the fog. But the fog of Gillibrand is very dense.

Before you cheer-on Gillibrand, know it’s just part of the liberals’ revision revolution.

Included in Reines’ online post was a link to the Times story, in which Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) said it would have been the “appropriate response” for Bill Clinton to resign in response to revelations that he had a sexual relationship with a White House intern, Lewinsky, while he was president. Gillibrand couched her statement to the Times by saying Clinton’s scandal occurred in a different era and that it would have played out much differently had it happened today.

So there’s that different era thing, again. That’s code for liberals’ evolution theme song, “Move On.” And Dems keep moving and moving along. While moving, though, pay no attention to who has to be thrown under the bus to keep the wheels moving.

No, Gillibrand, you don’t get to do that so easy. You were wrong then on the Clintons and you’re wrong now trying to distance yourself for political gain. Different era never applies to any of the left’s old ideas. It doesn’t even apply to old, stuffy leadership in the DNC. And you, Kirsten, do not represent any new era. Only more revision. It’s the pretend game that it didn’t happen, times were different then. [ctrl+alt+del history]

Actually, the left changed the times and era with the Clintons. You changed politics. But what never changed or evolved over years since was the Clintons. You used them as your benchmark for political accomplishments. You can’t have it both ways. On one hand the left made them the standard, and on the other you now denounce your total dismissal of him. Hillary has the same problems. Yet the left always thinks it can just reinvent itself, revise history to suit. Only reality and history didn’t change. Leftists are all still liars and revisers. You are the people who argued against evidence to the contrary — it didn’t count or apply. Now you are saying that history doesn’t apply now. Times are different.

Let’s be honest, what Gillibrand is really saying is what Clinton did, and what happened then, was okay in that era. But this is a different era with a different reaction. We decide. So all they keep saying now is “times are different now.” Just forget it, Clinton was a bygone era. No, not so easy. You can’t have all the benefits, both ways.

Clintons set the marker: “its a personal indiscretion that doesn’t matter.” Forget all that. The left changed the culture, changed the standard, and lowered the bar. Now you represent the high bar? Now you climb to the top of the hill? So what is different is Kirsten. The other reason to slide Clinton under the bus is so they don’t have to defend him. It ain’t going to work this time. You can’t repeal gravity, and you can’t delete history.

Gillibrand is preparing a run in 2020, but she won’t go far running away from the Clintons.
But have a cigar for a consolation prize.

Right Ring | Bullright

Change of the Guard

The American media is up against a force it doesn’t understand or know how to fight. The two faces of this force are: Donald Trump and the American people.

So the mainstream media flails about because the same old strategies don’t work, which is more the problem.. Why is that?

Before, or up until now, they always had their bucketful of go-to tactics. They seem to be ineffective. That must be depressing for the left. Their media guard has met its match.

Of course there are a lot of reasons for this. But it has to start with who the two faces are that makes them such a formidable opponent for the left: Trump the outsider and the fed up people. Those two make an excellent team we have not seen before. Go down the list of things — political issues — and neither react or respond in a typical way, as the left’s victims normally do. That makes them unpredictable and a problem to the left.

That it only has taken this long for all this to become clear is another problem. Denial.

Everything the media and left say would tell you Trump is a scary person, so controversial, along with the mantra that he’s unfit for office. He doesn’t deserve an ounce of sympathy, the left will tell you. But be careful who and what we do give our sympathy to.

Here is the simplified problem with all this Trump-phobia (and they are phobic to the limit): the answers lie in our present reality and political culture.

This happens to be the turf where I live and breathe, at the intersection of culture and politics — throw religion and Christianity into the culture cocktail. So that is the terrain, my home, where a battle is raging. (though people will tell you its over and we lost) Now within this greater politics, in general, we have things labeled “controversial issues.” That does not surprise anyone. Look what the left calls controversial, as if they define what is controversial — basically anything they disagree with.

Within these issues are the politicians, many functioning as self-serving elitists. Add to that their better than thou attitudes prevalent today in politics. On so-called controversial issues they have focus-grouped, poll-tested solutions.(they call them solutions, I don’t) So they have talking points and politically correct scripts on all these issues — mostly to placate the left. Then this posturing leads them to things like “bipartisan” amnesty. The products are pushed as the gold standard. Then anyone must argue against that ‘standard,’ as if it were a real one. If anything is controversial they are. It’s a perception game.

Back to Trump as a different animal for them. What is different? Everything. You know those talking points about him that he thrives on controversy and all? Well, in business things are done differently, people must solve problems to improve. Businessmen tend to see them as challenges. They are not mere political fodder to bargain with.

Something else about Trump they say is he doesn’t have any political experience, he’s an outsider. Both of those are favorable to the people. Though he has executive business experience. (you know, something Obama did not have) He doesn’t have the experience navigating the swamp. Again, the people see that as a good thing. Yet he does have a toughness and fighting character to break through corruption norms rather than getting sucked into them. Even that is not the whole point.

One thing separates Trump from other politicians more than his resume. He built a campaign based on controversial issues. No, I’ll say that again because it is important: he made a campaign based, almost entirely, on these controversial issues. How unique?

Think of it, when other candidates are running from ‘controversial issues, he enlists them in the foundation of his campaign. Then talks about them. It’s a novel concept, unlike anything we’ve seen. Who would want to do that? No, he faces them and has positions that are not the same old status quo positions. Positions more like what people think about these things. He identifies with the American people.

Now, is it any wonder they would call him controversial? Why they’ve called us controversial if we hold these views. They’ve been marginalizing us. Unlike others, he wants to do something about them. If that makes him controversial, wanting to fix problems, then so be it. It makes us all controversial for supporting him.

Why should we be surprised at Trump being labeled as controversial? But it is not him that creates it all. Then how did it become controversial?

The problem is Trump did not run up the debt, or create the Iran deal or Nafta or trade deals. These are all controversies of Washington’s making. He didn’t create these but ran on fixing them. So why would he get the blame for all these problems? Contrast that with Obama. He came into office and left blaming George Bush for everything, even things he did. He made a career out of excuses. But he didn’t make a career of addressing them. No he mentioned them only as an exemption for himself.

There’s another favorite word of the left. It is distraction. They always point to any criticism of the left as a distraction. So, anything the left doesn’t like is labeled a distraction. Yeah, it’s an inconvenient distraction to their subverted agenda. But recently Chief of Staff Kelly gave an interview and was asked about Mueller’s investigation. He said it was a distraction from what was going on in the White House. Kelly used it in the correct sense. A distraction by design not by excuse. Liberals want it to disrupt Trump or prevent us from getting anything done. That is the point.

But in the left’s use of the term, they labeled everything that didn’t fit in their agenda “a distraction,” and controversial. Remember they also called any investigation into Obama’s administration a “manufactured scandal,” even Benghazi. Now they have manufactured an entire Russia scandal to hang on Trump. It’s laughable.

What is both controversial and a distraction is the left itself. And they see everything only in a political lens. A faulty one at that. Blame Trump for controversy?

Right Ring | Bullright

Thursday Trifecta of Politics

Politics hit the trifecta Thursday. The left thought they were in paradise. But the joke or lesson is really on them — with any analytical thought.

First the details: Chief of Staff General Kelly was compelled to come out to counter the “empty barrel” attack from Congresswoman Wilson(Fla); President Bush’s speech in NYC; and Obama found his angry voice, again, campaigning for progressives in NJ and VA.

That on the heels of McCain delivering his salty attack on Trump, in receiving the Liberty Medal honor. (McCain had to use his honorable moment to attack others)

Kelly’s remarks from the White House were weighted and directed perfectly. Just the fact that he would have to come out to address this issue that media blew into a firestorm is a sign of our times. He complained of the lack of sacred tradition and civility.

Well, home run. But it won’t stop the left in a spiral dive into the gutter. Obama would never be treated this way, under any circumstances. Nor will it stop RINOS.

So Kelley’s remarks were very sincere compared to her diatribe.
But he alluded to the moral decay.

Wilson had even phoned in to “The View” to scream her hatred for Trump, calling the Niger incident Trump’s Benghazi. If she didn’t politicize it before by listening in on a White House call, she went all out on a live TV rant — leaving Megyn McCain almost speechless. She said she told the widow to give her the phone so she could “curse him out.”

One person left the audience with the sincerity of moral high ground. General Kelly.

Bush speech

The health of the democratic spirit itself is at issue. And the renewal of that spirit is the urgent task at hand.

And we know that when we lose sight of our ideals, it is not democracy that has failed. It is the failure of those charged with preserving and protecting democracy.

Freedom is not merely a political menu option, or a foreign policy fad; it should be the defining commitment of our country, and the hope of the world.

They are further complicated by a trend in western countries away from global engagement and democratic confidence. Parts of Europe have developed an identity crisis. We have seen insolvency, economic stagnation, youth unemployment, anger about immigration, resurgent ethno-nationalism, and deep questions about the meaning and durability of the European Union.

America is not immune from these trends. In recent decades, public confidence in our institutions has declined. Our governing class has often been paralyzed in the face of obvious and pressing needs. The American dream of upward mobility seems out of reach for some who feel left behind in a changing economy. Discontent deepened and sharpened partisan conflicts. Bigotry seems emboldened. Our politics seems more vulnerable to conspiracy theories and outright fabrication.

We have seen our discourse degraded by casual cruelty. At times, it can seem like the forces pulling us apart are stronger than the forces binding us together. Argument turns too easily into animosity. Disagreement escalates into dehumanization. Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples while judging ourselves by our best intentions – forgetting the image of God we should see in each other.

We’ve seen nationalism distorted into nativism – forgotten the dynamism that immigration has always brought to America.

We have seen the return of isolationist sentiments – forgetting that American security is directly threatened by the chaos and despair of distant places,….

Clearly directed at Trump, and not just him but the people who elected him. I love how these guys all do drive-bys on the electorate. — especially when they don’t agree with the results of the election.

Demonizing isolation, for a guy who ran against nation building. And yes, loudly he bashes the nationalism, as if it is corrupted somehow. But it was this very nationalism that helped get him elected, not once but twice. (even though many of us questioned his record) Oh nationalism was great when it voted for him. But it’s bad when we saw what direction he was taking us — that not so subtle handoff to globalism, the New World order.

Of course, again a huge swipe at conspiracies. Say nothing about the current conspiracy theories against Trump. No, we know the ‘conspiracies’ he meant were on the right.

Finally, oop there it is: “Our governing class”. Where the hell does that come from? The global elitism people are sickened of, which causes his bitterness at our nationalism.

Obama speech

“What we can’t have is the same old politics of division that we have seen so many times before that dates back centuries,” the former president said.

He implied that some people in power are embracing outdated mindsets when crafting policy.

“Some of the politics we see now, we thought we put that to bed,” Obama said. “That’s folks looking 50 years back. It’s the 21st century, not the 19th century.”

The master of illusion and straw men comes out to remind us everything wrong with him and the past 8 years. He’s like a sideshow magician at the fair doing cheap card tricks to lure your attention, just to be disappointed.

That’s supposed to be a fastball attack on Trump but Obama perfected the art of division. That’s what he ran on. I still remember the drop down lists for all his groupie identities. Then there was the class warfare, anti-Christian diatribes, anti-American crap, attacks on the rich, pitting one group against the other. It’s his specialty. Now he rails against the division he built.Ask Dems, they’ll tell you.

Right Ring | Bullright