Comey guarded, then flushed the toilet

FBI, DOJ roiled by Comey, Lynch decision to let Clinton slide by on emails, says insider

The decision to let Hillary Clinton off the hook for mishandling classified information has roiled the FBI and Department of Justice, with one person closely involved in the year-long probe telling FoxNews.com that career agents and attorneys on the case unanimously believed the Democratic presidential nominee should have been charged.

The source, who spoke to FoxNews.com on the condition of anonymity, said FBI Director James Comey’s dramatic July 5 announcement that he would not recommend to the Attorney General’s office that the former secretary of state be charged left members of the investigative team dismayed and disgusted. More than 100 FBI agents and analysts worked around the clock with six attorneys from the DOJ’s National Security Division, Counter Espionage Section, to investigate the case.

Read more http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/13/fbi-doj-roiled-by-comey-lynch-decision-to-let-clinton-slide-by-on-emails-says-insider.html

The FBI investigators all thought, unanimously, that her security clearance should have been yanked. Thanks, Comey — the ballyhooed ambassador of integrity — you torched FBI’s cred too.

Should’ve, would’ve, could’ve… America lost. Snake eyes.
Take your parlor game with you.

Camp Hillary’s offensive on Trump

Wasting no time after Trump emerged from Indiana as the presumptive nominee, John Podesta realeased a statement of what they think of Donald Trump.

Podesta: Trump is too divisive, risky to be president

By POLITICO Staff | 05/03/16 | Politico

Hillary Clinton’s campaign signaled on Tuesday that it will paint Donald Trump as an unstable, dangerous bully with no interest in helping ordinary Americans, judging from comments made by campaign chairman John Podesta.

Trump is “too divisive” and “lacks the temperament” to be president, Podesta wrote in a statement issued after the real estate mogul won the Indiana Republican presidential primary, knocking Texas Sen. Ted Cruz out of the race and claiming the GOP nomination.

“Fundamentally, our next president will need to do two things: keep our nation safe in a dangerous world and help working families get ahead here at home,” Podesta said. “Donald Trump is not prepared to do either.”

“Throughout this campaign, Donald Trump has demonstrated that he’s too divisive and lacks the temperament to lead our nation and the free world,” he continued. “With so much at stake, Donald Trump is simply too big of a risk.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/podesta-trump-is-too-divisive-risky-to-be-president-222774

Beyond their attempt to define Trump as quickly as possible, they now roll out the terms. Start with unstable, dangerous, bully and move on from there. It’s a Hillary indictment.

But Trump constructed an empire, over years, and successfully managed a corporate business employing thousands, operating internationally. Trump offers much more economically and with domestic policies than Hillary does that would benefit people — all people not just segments of voters. Progs could consider any businessman a bully.

Unstable

What is unstable is having a candidate under possible indictment as the nominee. No one in Hillary’s campaign holds that certainty in their hands. They just don’t know. She’s committed almost every infraction. She breached protocol and disgraced the [public] office she held by violating the rules of conduct that she swore to uphold. Then she makes a mockery of the entire process calling in a security review. She laughs at possible indictment saying that is not going to happen. The convenient ties of contributions to the Clinton Foundation are another issue under pending investigation. She constantly lied.

Clinton could not account for her own whereabouts during the Benghazi attack. Then she pushed the video lie, even to the victims’ grieving family members. She could not explain the lack of response to the ongoing attack. Rather she went home and slept through the 3 AM phone calls. She claimed full responsibility then never took any. Stability… not.

Keep our nation safe

Hillary champions the policy of not calling it radical Islamic terrorism. She was all aboard riding the Mo-Bro train through the Mid East and here at home, even within government. She is all for importing the refugee crisis here without concern for our safety and security. She looked the other way on Obama’s illegal executive amnesty and promised to build on it. She helped to initiate the ‘rotten to the nuclear-core’ Iran deal. She supports sanctuary cities and the other failed policies that devastated our country. Pass on safety.

Risky

What’s riskier than the author of the Benghazi adventure which led to a failed state? Or riskier than their Egypt intervention, or the arms that flowed across Libya’s shores to Syria. The entire Mid East and greater Europe is on fire, thanks to her tenure as Secretary of State. Speaking of “loose cannons.” She advocated the Libyan adventure then deserted our own ambassador who was doing her bidding, and setting up the outpost after every other embassy was fleeing the violence that followed those actions.

Hillary and the state department refused to list Boko Haram as a Terrorist group in Africa. She actually increased developmental aid instead. Only years later, after she left State, did we finally designate it a terrorist group. Of course ,with her spurious experience, imagine the divisiveness and risk inherent in her nominating judges, or other nominees.

Dangerous world

Thanks in large part to her and Obama it is a very dangerous world, more so now than when they started. Pull out of Iraq led to Isis, and possibly the fall of Iraq in the near future. But Biden was eager to claim Iraq one of their great successes at the start.

Too divisive and lacks the temperament to lead our nation

Hillary is the most divisive politician, next to Obama. She’s already talked about using executive power and rolling out gun control. Her economic and regulatory, environmental policies are as bad as Obama’s if not worse. Again, her support for sanctuary cities do not unite people. Her temperament has been highly questionable, while her distrust and dishonesty ratings are through the roof even among Democrats. A fickle leader.

Nation at risk

Our nation was never at greater risk than under Hillary’s tenure at State and in Obama’s administration. Now her advocacy for refugees and lack of concern for our border are two of the greatest risks. Then there is the budget and spending which also creates giant risk, as it did with Obama. So we already are a nation at great risk. (er greatest)

I think Hillary mitigates virtually any perceived risk of a Trump administration.

RightRing | Bullright

Hillary’s choices, what difference does it make

Hillary has a new book. Didn’t she have books before? (aka., ‘it takes a village of socialists’; ‘uncomfortable with history’; ‘history on life support’) They act as if its some new insight. It’s called “hard choices”. She really dug deep for a title. Bush had a book called “Decision Points”. Sound similar? It could just as well be called ‘soft choices’, ‘no choices’, or ‘political choices’. Dare I say “wrong choices”? Look at all the fun Libs had attacking Bush’s book.

Ironically, Hillary as an authoritative source “requires the willing suspension of disbelief”, as does Obama. The Left complains about Republicans’ succession of candidates running the next person in line. This is Hillary’s turn. Damn the person who gets in her way.

Her book is only posturing. Except “Hard Choices”? Pulease! Her lack of wanting to make choices….and maybe that’s hard. (Let’s start off with a lie) What she supported she’s against, and what she was against she is really for, for now. It is “the evolution of a candidate.” Maybe that would have suited the title better? One thing Hillary should be noted for, her inability to make hard choices.

Like Jay Rockefeller, she supported the Iraq action it was convenient until it wasn’t. But she was hoodwinked. How abut Benghazi? Why do they like to emphasize what they are not good at? — Obama on foreign policy and budget issues.

She says one major accomplishment was restoring US leadership in the world. I always appreciate Liberals talent for revision. It never stops. Want to know their position on something? After the fact they’ll tell you. That’s leadership. Hillary declares she helped clean up Bush’s mess. But who cleans up Hillary’s messes? Now in her wisdom of reflection, she says:

“The most important thing I did was to help restore America’s leadership in the world. And I think that was a very important accomplishment. We were flat on our back when I walked in there the first time.

We were viewed as being untrustworthy, as violating our moral rules and values, as being economically hobbled. And we had to get out there and once again promote American values and pursue our interests and protect national security. Because of the eight years that preceded us — it was the economic collapse, it was two wars, it was the war on terror that led to some very unfortunate, un-American actions being taken. That was my biggest challenge. It was why the president asked me to be secretary of state.”

Yea, values like abortion, appeasement, and leaving no Islamist behind, spying on angela Merkel’s cell phone, gun running to Mexico, rewriting immigration law from the Oval Office, getting an ambassador and three Americans killed and secretive arms running, lying about it, ignoring security threats in Libya (Obama’s war), supporting terrorists and thugs in Egypt. Values like that.

Now the scary thing is what more tricks she might have learned from Marxist-in-Chief. We’re heading for a trifecta: a combination of Bill Clinton politics, Obama politics, and her own.(triangulation on estrogen) She wants to sell it as a 3rd term for Bill and a continuum of Obama. And throw in some Elizabeth Warren and Al Gore for seasoning.

Obama, now what has not been said about him? Well, now he releases five top Taliban, for one deserter. Make sense? It does to the Liberal mind, which generally runs contrary to all logic. Oh, here’s something that hasn’t been said. Start by remembering the Clintons. Could the Taliban Five be Obama’s bin Laden. I know, he supposedly killed bin Laden. But that’s not the point. These five could be Obama’s bin Laden. Get it now?

Clinton was criticized for failure to get bin Laden. And how about the Cole? Remember the missiles where he just missed him? Everyone asked how he let bin Laden slip away. Yea, now these five are released. What does Zero’s act portend for the future? But Democrats have offered, ‘don’t worry, we can get them, kill them, drone them’. Remember the illusive bin Laden… it wasn’t easy, was it? Barry has no concept of the future or how he will be liable. He can’t even remember the lesson from bin Laden . All that matters to Democrats is the politics of now.

Team Obama finally gets a mastermind of the Benghazi attack, just short of 2 years, and he wasn’t hiding in a cave in Tora Bora. He did as many interviews as Susan Rice. But don’t worry about the Taliban Five, according to Liberals, we can can repeal their right to life on a moment’s notice. It has taken this long to do anything about Benghazi.

Hillary has the same mindset. Election and winning is all that is in her mind. She is practically anointed to begin with. She’s only looking out for anything that might jeopardize that. It’s the same mindset of Obama, “be on the lookout for anything which could destroy you” Self-preservation is job one. Everything else ranks a distant second to that.

Anything that has the potential to bring you down must be attacked, broken, or destroyed. Using Alinsky tactics of course. Show that any criticism flung at you is faulty. And she’s running to be the easy choice for Democrats. The only choice… what choice? She could have written, “How I created the vast right-wing conspiracy”. Foggy Bottom was only dress rehearsal. She could’ve called it “Rewriting History.”

RightRing | Bullright

A lie is a lie is a ______

What do the statements have in common?

“Read my lips, no new taxes” — George H Bush

“I did not have sexual relations with that woman” — BJ Clinton

“”I can say categorically that his investigation indicates that no one on the White House staff, no one in this administration, presently employed, was involved in this very bizarre incident.” Richard Nixon on the Watergate burglary

“Not even a smidgen of corruption” – Barry Soetoro, Barack Hussein Obama

“If you like your plan, you can keep it” – Barack Hussein Obama

“If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.” – BHO

“No matter how we reform health care, I intend to keep this promise: If you like your doctor, you’ll be able to keep your doctor; if you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan.”

“If you like your current plan, you will be able to keep it. Let me repeat that: If you like your plan, you’ll be able to keep it.”

“If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what.” – Barack Obama, June 15, 2010

Fuhgedaboudit! Of course, they would like us to forget these statements… lies. But people don’t tend to forget them, especially when constantly repeated, even by allies.

With respect to the first three, there was at least some accountability for them. Bush lost, the blue dress came out, Cinton was impeached in the House, and Nixon resigned.

Now a few words from Nixon:

“I was not lying. I said things that later on seemed to be untrue.” — President Richard Nixon, reflecting on the Watergate scandal in 1978

What really hurts is if you try to cover it up.” –President Richard Nixon at the beginning of Watergate.

“People have got to know whether or not their President is a crook.”

“I don’t give a s**t what happens. I want you all to stonewall–plead the Fifth Amendment, cover-up, or anything else. If that will save it, save the plan.” – Nixon to his subordinates during Watergate

Obama has his own theory: If you like your lie, you can keep your lie, period!

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

Gosnell no anomaly, more late-term horrors

Undercover video exposes more late-term abortion horrors

By: John Hayward – Human Events
4/29/2013 09:23 AM

“Dr. Kermit Gosnell is not an aberration,” said Lila Rose, the president of Live Action, a group of pro-life undercover filmmakers. She was introducing a new undercover video that shows the horrors described in Gosnell’s trial “are business as usual for the abortion industry in America. Nationwide, it’s just another day at the office.”

While the two videos released thus far in Live Action’s new series “Inhuman: Undercover in America’s Late-Term Abortion Industry” don’t capture any of the sadistic B-movie horror theatrics that made Gosnell’s trial so stomach-churning, they do reveal a callous disregard for children “born alive” during late-term abortion procedures. This is precisely the situation that our abortion-radical president, Barack Obama, insisted should not be addressed through legislation to protect the life of the born-alive child when he was an Illinois state senator. Perhaps that’s why he didn’t have anything to say about the Gosnell trial – the biggest abortion story of the decade – when he became the first sitting President to address Planned Parenthood last week. (Full video and excerpts of Obama’s speech are available here.)

In the first “Inhuman” video, taken undercover at a clinic in the Bronx – where abortion is legal up to 24 weeks – an abortion clinic staffer makes it very clear that she knows she’s talking about the abortion of a fully -formed 6-month baby. Then she talks about drowning a born-alive infant in a jar of solution to make it stop “twitching.” She makes it clear the clinic won’t trouble its prospective customer with sonograms, or any discussion of the procedure’s target as a “child” or “baby.” And if the baby is born alive at home before the late-term abortion procedure can be completed, the staffer cheerfully advises the expectant mother to flush it down the toilet.

“I don’t know why you want to talk about all this,” the clinic staffer says. ”Just do it!”

Another staffer at the same clinic takes the possibility of an infant being born alive, and thus acquiring defensible human rights, much more seriously – but her description of the very fine line between an acceptable clinical “termination” within the mother’s body, and the killing of an infant born alive just a few inches outside the womb, highlights the inherently dehumanizing nature of late-term abortion. She’s very insistent upon use of the word “terminate” instead of “kill” to describe what happens to the target of a legal late-term abortion.

Read more at Human Events

“You’re done!”

———————————————

Part 2 –Then there is NARAL, Huffington Post reported:

NARAL President Ilyse Hogue:

“So let me be loud and clear: Kermit Gosnell is a dangerous predator. He wouldn’t exist, couldn’t exist, without the work of Rep. Duffy and his friends in the anti-choice movement. Opponents of women’s rights have hounded safe, legal health providers halfway out of business and blocked women’s access to the quality care they need.”

He wouldn’t exist if it were not for pro-life folks? Wow there is a stunner. What bullshit. The industry created Kermit Gosnell and those like him…I’m sure she forgot ….to do what they do and take advantage of every loophole or opportunity provided them, and create a few of their own.

Well, we now know exactly what type abortions and procedures he did. (for over 30 years) But of course what she overlooked is he was operating as a licensed doctor in a legal clinic as an abortion provider. Case closed. That he did things she didn’t know or approve of, well, that’s on her and her conscience for supporting the industry he was a part of. But it is the nature of their death business – or business of death.

The above suggests that the problems are wider than one clinic they seem quick to say the doctor was operating illegally. Isn’t it telling that the main reason they raided his place on running a prescription drug operation? NOT the abortions he was doing! As reports and witnesses state, they realized in one look they had a much bigger problem. Thank goodness for us he was running a painkiller racket too.

Hogue condemned Gosnell again on Friday. “The allegations against Gosnell are nothing short of horrific,” she said. “His actions were reprehensible and illegal. What he did in his clinic was reminiscent of the pre-Roe v. Wade days of back-alley abortion. He took advantage of lax state oversight and desperate women whose options were limited by the relentless efforts of anti-choice lawmakers in Pennsylvania.”

She must have missed the part where the reason inspections were terminated were not because of “anti-choice” lawmakers as she claims. It was because the inspection might reduce or cause problems for clinics thereby possibly restricting women from their ability to get an abortion. Inspections might infrinmge on someone’s right of aboriton. So inspections were lifted by “pro-choice” people for pro-choice reasons.

Whoa there Bessy, about the only thing logical here is that his actions were “horrific”.

“Reminiscent of back-alley abortions”? But he was there legally operating a clinic as a licensed Doctor. How reminiscent? Is that not the excuse we hear, legal safe and rare?(= utopia) Yet in his “established” legal practice he was doing this with immunity. And don’t pro-abortion folks say “keep it legal” and it will be safe? This was not safe legal or rare.

Now I know this may be hard for her to swallow the actual details of abortion, namely late-term, but their next assertion is that he is a one off. Well, the above piece describes various other clinics. It is idicative of how they treat the issue of Life and talk to prospects. That’s a nice window into the abortion world, which they told us if it is just legal and widely available it will be safe. Buzzer sound, Wrong!

How in the world can she gleefully try to blame the pro-life people for Gosnell, the way he treated patients, or the procedures that he was doing? Insanity is the only operative explanation. It is up to her and all her colleagues to answer the question — not her opponents — how many of these clinics… or houses of horrors are out there?

Make it a threefer
In front of a large national Planned Parenthood conference on Friday, as the first president to address the organization, he made it clear to the politically aligned crowd:

President Obama declared that “Planned Parenthood is not going anywhere” as the abortion giant continues to take hundreds of millions of our tax dollars.

Obama has been a strong supporter of the pro-choice group, and said that “no matter how fierce the opposition,” the past few years have shown that “Planned Parenthood is not going anywhere. It’s not going anywhere today. It’s not going anywhere tomorrow.

Read more at http://global.christianpost.com/news/obamas-blessing-of-planned-parenthood-outrageous-aclj-asserts-94931/#1OwQrhBFKueg6sVH.99

Well, neither are we “going anywhere” or away. For Obama to say that while the Gosnell trial is taking place — while he won’t mention it and yet goes to speak to PP — is the height of insensitivity, disrespect, and lacks the dignity of the office.

A President should stand for life and liberty, he obviously stands for death and the slavery of abortion.

[Again, H/T to Pepp article]

Changing the Dynamics

 

Remember Kerry’s infamous statement, after firing his campaign manager, that he was “changing the dynamics”.

What’s ironic now that Romney won the debate is that Kerry was Obama’s debate coach. Is that hillarious?

All bets are off and apparently those early celebration plans for Obama will be put on hold, with the Kolbe beef order. Everyone can have a bad night. But comparatively how bad? He told us after the attack on our embassador in Libya that they had a “bad day” loosing 4 people. I’ll bet to Obama that day did not compare to his evening in Colorado. What a shame he is probably a lot more concerned about this night than that “day”, enough to change his itinerary a little.

Obama always was a demogogue and idelogue, nothing more. The agent of change is not really the change agent. Surprise. “Mr Obama, you are now entering reality. We will be landing in a few moments. Fasten your seatbelt, you will experience heavy turbulance and a very rough landing.” (you may want to put your head between your knees and brace yourself too)

Even throwing out a life line for 100 thousand new teachers could not save him. I particularly liked Mitt’s use of the phrase “trickle down government”. It was a grand slam for which Obama has no response.

And despite stealing more speaking time than Mitt from early on, about 4 min total, it could not save his defenseless record. All the extra talk could not help. It is unexplainable. Then he threw out a Hail Mary to Bill Clinton who could not protect him. That was a classic example of sophistry. He attempted to claim that merely putting tax rates back to what they were under Clinton would recreate the economic windfall of those years. This is equivilent to telling the patient to click his heels three times and wish himself well.

So trying to recreate the effects of a booming economy will cause one. Gravity will now be reversed. Except for one thing: that was a completely different economy than now, minus a whole lot of our national debt. Clinton had the good fortune of a tech bubble where Obama has a debt bubble, which cannot continue forever. But he’s still blowing it up. If you looked up “specious” in the dictionary, this should be the example.

Still, it made for entertainment. Seeing Obama call out the Hollyweird crowd to campaign for him was a great trailer. Maybe they will soon realize what Obama meant by “all in”. Then they have to get the hang of how it works. When you say “forward” you are supposed to be looking and thinking backward, say toward Clinton…or anywhere except to reality. Just keep repeating the word “forward” while Obama talks about the past. And when Obama talks about saving Medicare he means cutting payments to providers, to plug the giant sucking sound in ObamaCare. Where’s Ross Perot when you really need him?

Diana West’s grand slam

The Misogynist Party and the Stupid Party

Aug 21

Written by: Diana West
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 4:16 AM

Today’s New York Times print edition, front page, lead story headline:

GOP IS PRESSING CANDIDATE TO QUIT OVER RAPE REMARK

How about this, circa 1997, for a headline?

DEMS PRESSING PRESIDENT TO QUIT OVER RAPE

[…]

Read at  http://www.dianawest.net/Home/tabid/36/EntryId/2213/The-Misogynist-Party-and-the-Stupid-Party.aspx

Looking Back Forward

Interesting how a a guy in the Oval Office keeps talking about moving “forward” when he has to walk backwards so much. My friend, Gene, calls it the Moonwalk. Now Obama desperately tries to tie himself to Bill Clinton. He wants Clinton to nominate him at the convention. He’s been talking so much about Clinton’s record you’d think Clinton was running. And the media keeps tracking the historicalness of Obama. Well, Clinton made history too. He was the only president since Andrew Johnson to be impeached. So maybe Obama will make even more “history” before he’s through.

First La Raza President

…or is it First La Raza resident of the Oval Office?

Okay, so it has come to this fiat law on immigration. Well, I suppose now we can say he’s the first La Raza president, since it’s one chunk of what they’ve been asking for, served up unconstitutionally. Another ornament to hang on the Obama tree.

See, we already had the first African American president, quite literally on that one. We’ve had the first woman president (that’s right, Barack again), we had the first gay president, and first LGBT president, we had the first union president, the first Socialist president and so on.  The list is long and they aren’t finished. By election every one of their favorite demographics will be on it. Or you could say the “first fruit-picker president” too, and that would mean as much as the Nobel Peace Prize he won – not for what he did but what he would do.

So now that we had the first cotton-pickin’ president etc, and everyone accepts it, can we finally move on please? For one thing, where he got the power to do this. He created it from whole cloth, just like so many titles and his Peace Prize. Its all fiction; we’re now living in The Land of Make Believe. Any day now the cloud is going to descend around him and he will declare himself The First President of the Universe. (to Bill Clinton’s objection) But is there any other title he would like? I mean what’s left for the second term he is demanding? Yea, he claims to deserve that despite his record, the same way Mr. Zero-experience deserved to be elected.

Let’s put his alternative reality aside for a moment. He saw Rubio coming up on his flank and said ‘gee, I’m going to create a fiat law and head him off.’ But “this is not politics”, he tells us.  Just like he tried to steal every other idea he thought might be popular – while needing to be the first. Hillary, unfortunately, was just one of many he climbed on the back of and stomped on the way up the ladder. HillaryCare is now “ObamaCare”. Bill Clinton thought he deserved the title of ‘first Black President’, ha ha, until Obama came along and made Billy into a racist. (that should teach him) 

We may have thought George Wshington was the greatest president…until Obama came along. (by his opinion)

So Rubio, look out. It doesn’t matter if you say you aren’t running, king Obama sees you as a threat so watch out. He had Petraeus installed where he could be no threat to the great one. We saw what they did to Sarah Palin. They are foaming at the mouth at Allen West and his popularity, ‘must destroy him’.  They just declared Newark Mayor, Cory Booker “dead” to them because he stepped out of line, off script. And we haven’t even seen the Democrats’ Convention yet. Notices are probably out: “anyone stepping out of line will be burned at the stake. We’ll take no prisoners.”

As he continues his vendetta across the nation, he will preach about civility in politics and changing the way Washington works. You can count on that lecture coming. And let’s not forget the weekly sermons on “fairness”. Did Democrat pols ever think their political futures would hinge on their mandatory support for one “Barack Obama”? Someone should have warned them. The bus is revving up and waiting for the next volunteer or example to the rest. “Stay on the plantation, or suffer the consequences. And no trespassing for Republicans.” He’ll have a tire with your name on it.

So La Raza enjoy your day in the sun, soak in all you can. Did you think this was about your agenda? Come on, really. (…then take a number by all the others) What’s next, maybe the gang vote?

Obama memo to Cory Booker: ‘I see dead people.’

Forward and Downward

 That should be Obama’s new campaign theme.

As compared to “onward and upward”, which is exactly the opposite of Obama.

Obama adopted a campaign theme of “Forward” but actually under his dismal leadership we are headed downward at record speed.

  • Item: leaks, leaks and more leaks about defense and national security operations.
  • Item: foreign policy debacles… rather than the self-ordained expert the left claims.
  • Item: politicizing everything for his campaign — along his never-ending campaign.
  • Item: unemployment remains at stubborn highs especially among many groups.
  • Item: Obama’s war on energy — and in effect part of  his war on the economy.
  • Item: our relationship with Israel
  • Item: his treatment of our allies
  • Item: Obama’s promise to Russia to be more “flexibile” after his “last election”.
    [To Russia, with affectionate love]
  • Item: Fast and Furious coverup, along with the ongoing Dep. of Injustice.
  • Item: the debt denial and his arrogance of shoveling more big-spending on us.
  • Item: Obama’s obsession with “class wafare”.
  • Item: his persistent push to raise taxes.
  • Item: his air assault on the Constitution
  • Item: his attacks on and disdain for the Supreme Court
    (long an ally of  the socialist left)
  • Item: then politicized departments under his divissive, partisan leadership.
  • Item: ObamaCare, hovering like a huge funnel cloud over us.

Then another thing just scratches open an old wound. So many people now hail Bill Clinton for his wisdom. Conservatives are talking about the great politics of Clinton, as opposed to the radicalism of Obama. Do people remember the Clinton days? Oh those good old days between scandals and shell-shocking revelations, here and abroad?

Still, Obama has done something no one would have thought possible, make Bill Clinton look good by any comparison. I for one hate that political tactic, especially from the right. I resent even the thought and I don’t like that argument much better. The same thing applies to Hillary. Would anyone have thought that possible?