Hillary’s road trip to hell

Hillary and Kaine, her latest partner in crime, boarded their bus heading west to campaign.

If you believe Hillary gave a great acceptance speech, then I have a bridge to the 21’st century to sell you. And if Bil Clinton ever built such a bridge then it would be needing a major overhaul or demolition by now.

Hillary calls for an intelligence surge abroad and an infrastructure surge here. But how about having an intelligence surge here, before the election, to put a roadblock on her highway to the White House? She should not be allowed near that infrastructure.

But Hillary proves she is just as shovel ready with BS as her comrade Obama has been. She claims she only has a hundred days to sell her brand of BS to the public and just hope they don’t know the difference. She’ll be dining on caviar and serving up shit on a shingle to the masses wherever they go. The stale old BS soup will be plentiful even if events like a stop in Johnstown, Pa will be closed to the public. Don’t let the public upset the apple cart.

These areas where jobs and economies have been hit hard are also where Trump has popularity. So Clinton is more interested in preventing Donald’s success and growth than she is about any real economic conditions. So what do you expect her to say?

Well, start with blaming any problems on George Bush and stretch her finger pointing all the way to 2008. Make sure they get that message. Never mind Obama’s anemic record on the economy. On the upside, maybe she can inform them all how many people she will be putting out of work or how many companies she will be putting out of business? Oh, that would take honesty; and we know her credibility record requires the willing suspension of disbelief. But what difference at this point does it make?

She’s on the highway to ….. don’t stop her.

RightRing | Bullright

Stories R US

I was going to do a post on Obama’s statements and threats. But why give them more attention if we aren’t going to do anything about them anyway? They get plenty.

I thought about doing a post on Hillary’s latest lies. But they are just like all the other lies, and all the other posts. All blend into the septic stew.

I thought about doing one on the real principles Jesus espoused, you know, opposed to lessons liberals harp about. Nah. He drove the money changers from the temple and look where they went.

I thought about doing one of my trademark satires but they end up being too true.

Well, I did notice something weird about this presidential race. Everyone says it’s about the outsiders vs the establishment. It probably is; though this election also seems to be about story lines. Most every Republican candidate has their own story line they are pushing. Not to mention most of them also have a book.

They have constructed or extorted these story lines so that, in turn, it is not an election about a certain individual, it is about the story he/she is promoting. I’m led to think that we are supposed to vote for best story line. It’s not just an outsider story. It’s an outsider, non-politician, neuro-surgeon. It’s about a mega-mogul, celebrity, real estate developer and builder.

So with that background, someone like Cruz has a problem that even his story line is not that big of a deal. Then you have Carly vying for any attention as a woman and business executive turned politician. We’re not asked as much to judge their qualifications as their degree of separation from establishment and their creative story line. Some are naturally better at promoting their story lines than others.

I wonder if we have not now entered the age of the story lines in politics? Is that the natural extension of identity politics? I think it might be. Look on the ither side and you have Hillary running as … are you ready for it…a woman. Then she adds that she would be the ultimate outsider as the first woman. And she already has her own story line which she doesn’t even have to promote. Everyone knows it and does it for her. So the first woman, who was also first lady, married to the serial rapist president doesn’t really work but all the other parts of it are there for the extorting. Now, whether they planned or want it to, this becomes a battle of story lines. That is if you follow the tactics the left uses in politics. Obama was much the same way. The Kenyan, Indonesian black kid rise to president. (we’re still trying to digest that story line and some of us cannot)

Now Trump takes that to the next logical stage. He gave a speech wherein he goes on a rant talking about the details of Ben Carson’s story line — in brief: angry poor black kid to Christian, to top surgeon, to candidate. Media has already gone all-in after Carson’s story. Knocking the candidate’s story is a twofer for the media, it also attacks his trustability polls that are higher than anyone’s. Of course Jeb Bush’s story line that he tries to ignore is the third in line to the Bush dynasty. So instead he promotes his preferred story line, and also tells it in Spanish — a real plus in his case. That includes leaving out the part about Bloomberg’s Foundation promoting abortion around the globe. He tries to make it as attractive as possible.

So we also have Rubio pushing his Cuban ancestry, only in America, story-book story line. Christie pushes his tough guy prosecutor thug image. Trump pushes his anti-P/C story line which allows him the freedom to say just about anything that in some way fits or works in his favor. People seem to like that ballsy approach even if they occasionally blush. Kasich has his own story line, a player all the way. Oh, Carly promotes the ‘woman’ secretary to CEO, to president story. Fill in the others. Cruz may be out-storied.

Is it not about character or ability anymore but about the story line? You can expect that blunt approach from Democrats in the general election.(who are still searching for a black or Hispanic transsexual woman candidate – man doesn’t work) Whoever promotes their story line narrative the best wins. Bernie Sanders has his own story working. He and Hillary are vying for historical firsts. Trump is an expert promoting his. Do people just want a story? Are we bored with positions and policy preferring a narrative instead?

RightRing | Bullright

As Jeb’s world turns…upside down

This requires a Power Flush.

I think Jeb Bush is the Spruce Goose of presidential campaigns.

Cross donors equal opportunists

According to the sources in this article, sixty wealthy players have donated to both Hillary and Jeb — ‘Clinton mega-donors also funding Bush’. I could understand some but when there are 60 of them, what’s that say?

It seems to me a lot of people believe in the end it all comes down to Hillary vs. Jeb and want to be on the winning side, no matter which. And that they know the race is only between Hillary and Jeb anyway. That’s exactly what the people don’t want.

Read at the Daily Beast — the only source on it I’ve seen.

SOS Jeb Bush on the road again

While trying to sound tough, he was only repackaging the same old circular logic.

Jeb Bush on border: Send the kids home

By JONATHAN TOPAZ | 7/24/14 | Politico

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush says in a new op-ed that the vast majority of children who have crossed the border illegally must be sent back home, and he called on House Republicans to take action on immigration reform.

“Now is the time for House Republicans to demonstrate leadership on this issue,” Bush wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed published Wednesday evening that he co-authored with Clint Bolick of the Goldwater Institute. “Congress should not use the present crisis as an excuse to defer comprehensive immigration reform.”

Bush said the influx of 50,000 undocumented children along the U.S.-Mexico border “is the latest consequence of the failure of President [Barack] Obama and Congress to overhaul America’s broken immigration system.”

“The best antidote to illegal immigration is a functioning system of legal immigration,” he wrote.

The potential Republican presidential candidate in 2016 called for “compassion” in the op-ed, harking back to his comments in April that many illegal immigrants come to the U.S. out of an “act of love.”

“Except for those deserving few who may demonstrate true cause for asylum or protection from sex trafficking, these children must be returned to their homes in Central America,” Bush wrote.

hRead more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/jeb-bush-immigration-crisis-children-border-109321.html

Let me try to unpack his statements.

“Now is the time for House Republicans to demonstrate leadership on this issue,”

You don’t get it, do you? This is a crisis of Obama’s making. We have zero trust in him to enforce law. Now you want a new one. Congress cannot even trust him with a new law, much less enforce the ones we have.

“the latest consequence of the failure of President [Barack] Obama and Congress to overhaul America’s broken immigration system.”

Obama took the liberty to change the law already. That’s what caused this crisis.

“The best antidote to illegal immigration is a functioning system of legal immigration.”

Look, Jeb, you seem like a smart guy. You do realize these people ignore and break our law now? Shouldn’t someone be blaming “enforcement” of the law? (lack of)

“Except for those deserving few who may demonstrate true cause for asylum or protection from sex trafficking, these children must be returned to their homes in Central America.”

Sounds like an enforcement problem to me. Or lack thereof. Instead, we’re sending signals of non-enforcement and halting deportations, and the smoke signals have hovered for a few years. They are coming in the hopes of changing the law and receiving amnesty. So the only answer then is changing the law?

Someone please show Jeb to the door. Two people in one family was quite enough. He sounds like Obama, for Pete’s sake, blaming Congress for what Obama did. That’s right, he wants to run alright but he doesn’t want to be stained by the current political environment. He wants the road cleared and paved ahead of him.

RightRing | Bullright

Clintons vs. Obamas — the cold war

Bill Clinton: ‘I Hate that Man Obama’

June 21, 2014 8:12 pm

Obama Nation

Journalist reveals dysfunctional, jealous relationship

(NY Post) – In his new book, “Blood Feud,” journalist Edward Klein gets inside the dysfunctional, jealous relationship between Bill and Hillary Clinton and Barack and Michelle Obama — and how it could explode in 2016.

Outwardly, they put on a show of unity — but privately, the Obamas and Clintons, the two power couples of the Democrat Party, loathe each other.

“I hate that man Obama more than any man I’ve ever met, more than any man who ever lived,” Bill Clinton said to friends on one occasion, adding he would never forgive Obama for suggesting he was a racist during the 2008 campaign.

The feeling is mutual. Obama made ­excuses not to talk to Bill, while the first lady privately sniped about Hillary.

On most evenings, Michelle Obama and her trusted adviser, Valerie Jarrett, met in a quiet corner of the White House residence. They’d usually open a bottle of Chardonnay, catch up on news about Sasha and Malia, and gossip about people who gave them heartburn.

Their favorite bête noire was Hillary Clinton, whom they nicknamed “Hildebeest,” after the menacing and shaggy-maned gnu that roams the Serengeti.

‘Michelle could be president’

The animosity came to a head in the run-up to the 2012 election, when Obama’s inner circle insisted he needed the former president’s support to win. Obama finally telephoned Bill Clinton in September 2011 and invited him out for a round of golf.

“I’m not going to enjoy this,” Bill told Hillary when they gathered with a group of friends and political associates at Whitehaven, their neo-Georgian home on Embassy Row in Washington, DC.

“I’ve had two successors since I left the White House — Bush and Obama — and I’ve heard more from Bush, asking for my advice, than I’ve heard from Obama. I have no relationship with the president — none whatsoever,” Clinton said.

“I really can’t stand the way Obama ­always seems to be hectoring when he talks to me,” Clinton added, according to someone who was present at the gathering and spoke on the condition of anonymity. “Sometimes we just stare at each other. It’s pretty damn awkward. Now we both have favors to ask each other, and it’s going to be very unpleasant. But I’ve got to get this guy to owe me and to be on our side.”

During the golf game, Clinton didn’t waste any time reminding Obama that as president he had presided over eight years of prosperity, while Obama had been unable to dig the country out of the longest financial ­doldrums since the Great Depression.

“Bill got into it right away,” said a Clinton family friend. “He told Obama, ‘Hillary and I are gearing up for a run in 2016.’ He said Hillary would be ‘the most qualified, most experienced candidate, perhaps in history.’ His reference to Hillary’s experience made Obama wince, since it was clearly a shot at his lack of experience when he ran for president.

“And so Bill continued to talk about Hillary’s qualifications . . . and the coming campaign in 2016. But Barack didn’t bite. He changed the subject several times. Then suddenly, Barack said something that took Bill by complete surprise. He said, ‘You know, Michelle would make a great presidential candidate, too.’

“Bill was speechless. Was Barack comparing Michelle’s qualifications to Hillary’s? Bill said that if he hadn’t been on a mission to strike a deal with Barack, he might have stormed off the golf course then and there.”

[then intentional snubs and Obama’s desire for a mini-me to replace him]

– See more at: http://www.teaparty.org/bill-clinton-hate-man-obama-45132/

Original Ref: http://nypost.com/2014/06/21/inside-the-jealous-feud-between-the-obamas-and-hildebeest-clintons/

That’s why Bill Clinton’s infamous line is so extraordinary: “This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen.” There is a lot more implied with “fairy tale” than Hillary’s vote supporting military action in Iraq — that was never the whole context for Bill’s quote, and most of us knew that. To believe that explanation one has to be in the la-la land of make believe. (which by nature most Obama supporters were and still are)

The thought of all Barry Soetoro and Michele have been is bad enough, but the idea he gets to choose his replacement is repulsive and sickening. That is the psychosis we have slithering in the White House. We all thought Clintons, and all their problems, were bad enough. Well, in a twist of ironic fate we finally have someone even the Clintons find revolting. So you have to figure Clintons still have a finger on Democrats’ pulse. But where else is it, who’s talking? It seems to be MIA.

Hillary lays out anti-gun platform

Hillary Clinton: U.S. needs to ‘rein in’ proliferation of guns

Posted by
CNN’s Dan Merica | 5/6/2014

National Harbor, Maryland (CNN) – Hillary Clinton told an audience of mental health professionals on Tuesday that the United States needs to rein in its gun culture or risk a world where insignificant disagreements could lead to shootings.

Asked about the mental health aspects of guns, Clinton said “I think we’ve got to rein in what has become a almost article faith that anybody can have a gun, anywhere, anytime. I don’t believe that is in the best interest of the vast majority of people.”

“We really have got to get our arms around it because at the rate we are going, we are going to have so many people with guns everywhere fully licensed, fully validated,” Clinton said, painting a picture of a country where small annoyances could lead to shootings.

Clinton, whose comments came during the question and answer portion at the end of her appearance, said because “we are living at a time when there is so much external stimulation and some much internal confusion in certain people,” it would be a bad idea to let people “go to bars with guns, let them go to schools with guns, let them go to church with guns.”

Referencing a shooting earlier this year where a 71-year old retired police officer shot a 43-year old man texting in a movie theater, Clinton said people thinking they “have the right to defend themselves against the gum chewer and the cell phone user by shooting the person” is reminiscent of countries she visited “with no rule of law and self control.”

But Clinton also gave an olive branch to gun owners, adding “I think you can say that and still support the right of people to own guns.” […/]

More http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/05/06/hillary-clinton-u-s-needs-to-rein-in-proliferation-of-guns/

The small annoyances she referred to were chewing gum or talking on a cell phone while at the theater. Out comes the straw men. She contends these incidents will happen on a wide scale. But what does happen on a hourly scale are drive-by’s and shootings in Chicago, a gun free zone. That never enters into her straw man arguments.

So somehow gun ownership translates to less self control and rule of law, to Hilary. But she doesn’t offer to explain how that works. With her premise, evidently less guns equals more self control and greater rule of law. Again, the murder rate in Chicago could disprove that.

RightRing | Bullright

Memo to self on 2016

So Jeb Bush wants to run. “Wants” to, because he busted open the door and yelled, “I’ll make a decision by the end of the year”. I didn’t see a ground swell inviting him.

Great, another so-called Republican with a grudge against the conservative base wants to run. We already have Christie with a huge chip on his shoulder, he tells conservatives at every opportunity. Now Jeb tells us illegals break our borders out of an “act of love”. And what pray tell is his motivation? Wait, don’t tell me, “compassionate conservatism”.

What we could really use is a Republican/conservative with a chip on his shoulder against the Republican establishment. It’s not just the Washington establishment that is the problem; it’s the RNC establishment. After all, they’ve been a problem for about ten years and deserve our ire. Why should they get sympathy as a victim? Right, they have to attack the big bad conservative base – that elaborate power center. (sarcasm off)

Here’s an act of love to Jeb Bush, stay home.

RightRing | Bullright

Clinton vs. Christie

A snapshot glimpse from a Quinnipiac poll in Pennsylvania.
Look at the difference from Liberal to Conservative.

                                                              POLITICAL PHILSPHY
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Lib    Mod    Con

Clinton              44%     8%    88%    31%    36%    51%    82%    48%    19%
Christie             43     83      7     47     51     36     11     40     67
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       2      1      -      3      2      2      -      2      2
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      3      4      1      5      4      3      2      2      6
DK/NA                 7      4      4     14      7      7      5      9      6

What did Hillary ever do? They all think this is what its going to be.
Why not do away with primaries? 19% of conservatives would support Hillary?

I can see the promotion now, “Hillary VS. Christie: steel cage match-up”

On a related matter, what would anyone want the 2016 election to be about?
What issue, issues should be front and center?

RightRing | Bullright

Survey says….

Wonders never cease. Last night one of those polling outfits called me. One can always refuse but why? Sometimes the questions reveal a lot. I know, it’s all so mundane.

So, out of all the questions one stood out. Actually, it was many questions with one common denominator. When it came to 2016, the only Democrat they used was Hillary. Gee, I wonder why? There was a long list on the Republican side, but only Hillary as the Democrat. They did ask how you felt about Joe Biden? But other than that, I guess the only candidate worth polling on is Hillary. (lucky for her)

I just like the finger pointing thing.

Photo credit

Hillary: “pollsters must love me.”

So have a little 2016 with your Hillary.
Here’s to candidates who suck all the oxygen out of the room.

The King has spoken

GOP Reinvigorated After Obama Admin Delays Key Healthcare Provision

By ABBY D. PHILLIP – ABC News
July 3, 2013

The Obama administration’s decision to delay implementation of a key part of the Affordable Care Act has the law’s Republican opponents positively giddy.
“GOP ad makers are busy at work cutting new Obamacare ads,” noted Rick Wiley, former political director at the Republican National Committee.
The Obama administration announced yesterday that it would delay for one year the part of the health care law that requires employers with more than 50 employees to offer health insurance or pay a penalty.
The administration cited a desire to respond to the concerns of small business and give them more time to comply. But the provision has been the subject of complaints by business owners and threats that employers would either cut their full-time workforce to avoid the mandate or increase the number of part-time employees who won’t be guaranteed insurance under the new law.
On the one hand, the administration avoids a series of politically painful stories about negative, unintended consequences of the provision, which they admit is not quite ready for primetime.
Republicans believe, however, that even by pushing the issue into 2015, the Obama administration makes implementation of this part of the law a problem for the Democratic presidential nominee in 2016.
“All the president has done here is, he’s now guaranteed that it’s going to be a huge issue in the 2016 race,” said Matt Mackiowiak, a Republican strategist with Potomac Strategy Group. “I’m not sure it’ll be a gift to Hillary or Biden or whoever the nominee is.”
“There’s going to be a huge amount of turbulence as that provision kicks in and it’s going to create a lot of problems for Dems,” he added.
Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/anti-healthcare-ads-obamacare-delay/story?id=19569465#.UdTB7qwfJ8c

Evidently, the king has spoken. So it will be done. It seems everything is much easier when done by the emperor’s order.(note sarcasm) It makes it much simpler.

Up to this point, all we heard was “its the law” — the law of the land. Now it sounds more like the king’s edict. It can exempt those it wants, it can issue a decree to delay it.

We still don’t know what all is in it. At the same time Dems keep telling us “we are a nation of laws”, even as they scheme to create amnesty.

And is he throwing it back into Hillary’s lap to defend it? (must have more time to get our story straight)

Hillary in the breach

Obama is anointed a second term. Hillary is on her way out. Anyone else get the feeling that no matter what Hillary did she would be the front-runner in 2016? She could have killed Qadhafi herself and drank his blood, then pilfered and burned his palace and the chorus would say, “you go, Hillary!” She could have done anything. People didn’t care and still don’t. “Off with their heads”, Hillary could say, and they’d cheer her on. What a way to rally the low information base.

Heck, she could have ignited world war III and they would still nominate her for the Nobel Peace Prize. I think Democrats set a precedent for that prize. It will now be automatic for any front-runner candidate. It will also be a prerequisite to have at least one scandal under your belt to qualify for nomination, bonus point for each additional one.

Maybe a juicy thing like paying hush money from the campaign is just the thing to capture the public’s admiration for you, if you are a Democrat. Or maybe you lack any experience or an employment history. Not a problem if you are a Democrat. And there’s that media you can always count on to assist your campaign. Remember them swooning over Edwards.

So Hillary should have no trouble at all. But then she must keep her eyes open for the next corrupt Democrat with a scandalous background hungry for a shot at the ‘big house’. She could be challenged. Plus she’s already been vetted, or so they’ll claim. She will be “the most qualified candidate in modern history”.

Best of all, even Democrats cannot believe her. So when she says she will not run, pay no attention whatsoever. She’s lying through her teeth. That is another qualifier, America loves a good liar, one that can tear up at the right moment for a cause. Keep them coming.

Lesson in responsibility – Clinton style

October 16th Clinton explained in an interview “I take responsibility” for Benghazi.

Lima, Peru (CNN) — Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Monday tried to douse a political firestorm over the deadly assault on a U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya, saying she’s responsible for the security of American diplomatic outposts.

“I take responsibility,” Clinton told CNN in an interview while on a visit to Peru. “I’m in charge of the State Department’s 60,000-plus people all over the world, 275 posts. The president and the vice president wouldn’t be knowledgeable about specific decisions that are made by security professionals. They’re the ones who weigh all of the threats and the risks and the needs and make a considered decision.”

But she said an investigation now under way will ultimately determine what happened at the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, where Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed on September 11.

“I take this very personally,” Clinton said. “So we’re going to get to the bottom of it, and then we’re going to do everything we can to work to prevent it from happening again, and then we’re going to work to bring whoever did this to us to justice.”

As luck would have it, she is now indisposed to testify about Benghazi, unfortunately. It seems responsibility has a front door and a back door. And this is the time for the back door.

But it does not come as a big surprise.

On a related note:

MSNBC

Hillary Clinton’s possible 2016 bid for the presidency won one high-profile supporter Tuesday in House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

Pelosi said during an interview with NBC’s Andrea Mitchell that she hoped Clinton – who will retire soon from her job as secretary of state – would make another bid for the presidency in four years.

“Wouldn’t that be exiting?” Pelosi said. “I hope she goes – why wouldn’t she?

“She could be president of the United States, and she would be great,” added Pelosi, who was speaker of the House and stayed neutral during the 2008 primary between Clinton and Barack Obama. “And if she decided to run, I think she would win. She would go into the White House as well prepared, or better prepared, than almost anybody who has served in that office in a very long time.”.