Exhibition in Dishonesty

Democrats’ convention — the proper thing to call it — has closed their big show. Lights are down, glitter is trashed and the floors are swept. And a show it was.

Something is missing now though in the media coverage. Normally there have been at least a token one or two conservatives or Republicans. I watch Republicans and they seem like the cat got their tongues. Have they all been defanged? Are they just there for looks? And many of them make cordial, polite comments on Dems’ road show production.

Hillary reintroduced herself editing out the highlights of the last 20years.

She told us that sure, “I sweat the details” on things. Thus if you accuse her of that she will take it. But where was her obsession for details in Benghazi where lives depended on those details? In every area, on details, she sold them out or rendered them irrelevant. So she is a detail freak which mitigates people’s criticism of her. And where’s Heiress’s attention to detail of her own scandalous bio. Or is that Clinton compartmentalization again?

No, we don’t see her focused on any details except self-serving politics. When probed on details, from Benghazi to her server problems, her instinct is to lie. Now her plan seems to be make Donald Trump a scapegoat for her own lack of trust and honesty.

Another note in Hillary’s speech: twice she referred to Bill Clinton as her “Explainer in Chief”. Well, isn’t that special? That illustrates her ‘too cute by half’ campaign. She always blurs the legal lines and then chuckles about the questions that follow. That’s what I mean, just too slick and offensive. So welcome back to the 90’s — or those that missed it — and the evolving definition of “is”. I guess Bill will be very busy.

RightRing | Bullright

Going off script on Hillary

Hillary the Vagina Victim chasing the vagina vote.

Sometimes you have to go rogue, as Sarah Palin puts it. It seems 2016 is one of those times. If that is the secret ingredient, then we need a whole lot of rogue.

I listen to Hillary’s ad where she tells people “you will always have a seat at the table when I’m in the White House.” But what does that really mean? Who is she talking to? She could mean you’ll have a seat alright — a seat at the kids table in the servants quarters….where you are told to hush up.

Another ad she says “We want to write the next chapter in American greatness.” Really, her? But she is exactly the wrong candidate for that. What does SHE mean by greatness:, having a vagina in the Oval Office?

Few times I have seen such great opportunities, I mean to expose and attack an elitist like her. She almost invites it. She is the worst advocate for Hillary.

Then to realize believing anything she says requires the willing suspension of disbelief. She couches everything in vague or code words to Democrats. Talk about Dog Whistles! 68% of people don’t think she is honest or don’t trust her in spite of her experience. And a percentage of untrusting souls would still vote for her. Greatness personified.

The days when she and Bill can sell themselves as the outsiders from Arkansas to a naive public are long, long gone. The victim ticket –no way can they get away with that.

Its pretty bad when even CNN refers to the DNC convention as a coronation of Hillary. Whatever the subtitle themes, coronation is the central one.

The day before the convention she goes on 60 minutes and says ‘I don’t know what their convention was about… except just talking about me.’ She chuckles as if rehearsed. That’s it she is pulling the victim card once again. Let’s see if they have Michael Brown’s family and a Ferguson video? So the other theme is victim-hood, that’s the subject. Call Dems anything you want but you cannot call them victims in 2016. Villains maybe, serial abusers. Call Hillary anything but don’t call her a victim.

She called the Republican candidate and convention divisive. So now talking about the most divisive duo in politics makes you divisive?

“I seem to be the only unifying theme that they had. There was no positive agenda. It was a very dark, divisive campaign. And the people who were speaking were painting a picture of our country that I did not recognize …you know, negative, scapegoating, fear, bigotry, smears. I just was so — I was saddened by it.”

Whoop there it is! “I’m a victim.” It’s hard to claim that from someone skilled at using the power of government levers for her own benefit, and covering her bloody trail.

Was she a victim in Benghazi? But isn’t that basically what her narrative was? That’s because the Clintons always project themselves as victims, it’s what they do. Listen to their voices with that in mind, you can hear it. Defiant victimhood. They are the victims. Except all of us Americans have been victimized by the Clintons and, in their eyes, we aren’t through being battered victims yet — because they aren’t done abusing us.

Being a victim is the basis of Clintons’ shtick. Watch, it’s their entire routine:

“I often feel like there’s the Hillary standard and then there’s the standard for everybody else…. [calling it] unfounded, inaccurate, mean-spirited attacks with no basis in truth… [that] take on a life of their own.”

Well, that looks like it came right from the Comey hearings on emailgate. And guess what, now the DNC has its own email problems. A higher standard for Clintons, really? Don’t make me laugh. See what I mean, a victim theme. Its pretty simple when that is all there is, victimhood narrative. What about four Americans in Benghazi, murdered cops, American victims of Obama and Hillary’s policies?

In fact, if you look back at that political career of Clintons, you’ll see that since the beginning on the national stage, they required and got plenty of forgiveness. The public had to dismiss the snafus from the moment they arrived from Arkansas. Then there was the comeback kid thing propelling Bubba down the winning road. All the tricks it would take. Though they always required us to ignore or not believe the scandals and problems. Portraying themselves as victims is their natural forte.

But now, after all these years, when it still continues and goes on, we are still expected to ignore it while they serve themselves. (that’s what they mean by public service)

Hillary and Kaine practically copied the VP roll out of Trump. Already Kaine has tried to change his strong position supporting TPP.

Hillary wants back in the White House bad. After looking at what they did the first time, you can see why.

Oh, yes, it is time for opposition to Clintons to go rogue because whatever we have done in the past has not worked. Treating them with kid gloves is very unwise.

When the vagina-victim monologue fails, well, then it’s time to “Reintroduce” herself. (as that innocent victim) But she won’t go rogue, there is always a script and choreography.

Last week Hillary mocked Trump’s RNC convention as Wizard of Oz where they pulled back the curtain exposing that little guy. Now we have emails of all the behind the curtain corruption with DNC Debbie. But the Wicked Witch hasn’t started to melt yet. Needs a new reintroduction to voters. But the script goes on, and on, and on.

RightRing | Bullright

DNC transformers

Bidding farewell to the 9/10 mindset, or just another illusion? 


Democrats had their convention party, and it was all about politics as one would expect. I even heard chants of USA. I checked my ears. It seemed a little out of place. But no, it was real.

Joe Biden drove home his brand new slogan: “Osama bin Laden is dead and General Motors is alive.” Every Lib is sure to want a bumper sticker. Proud they are. Considering the food fight over God and Israel, I have to qualify that pride.

Over the years the message of Dems had been much different. Any progress on the War on Terror was questioned by Libs — ‘At what cost?’ So much had been said about it. Then as Obama took office, out came the mantra that it was not a War on Terror after all. It was an overseas contingency. More like the friendlier P/C war. One wonders in retrospect what “contingency” they really mean?

We’ve been lectured ad nausea by the left for using phrases about Islamic radicalism. Words like Islamist were harshly criticized. We were accused of Islamophobia. The left reminded us continually of Timothy McVeigh. Pointing to those with a track record of destruction and terrorism was frowned on. Instead we saw grey-haired ladies in wheelchairs searched or abused. We saw children being fondled. We were repeatedly warned about profiling, something which is an integral part of police detective work. We were reminded that it is offensive when we shout USA, and that our patriotism is bigotry.

And we had Obama doing his world aplology tour – soothing tensions and calming the seas. (sarcasm). They banned the use of “War on Terror” and ridiculed the post 9/11 mentality. They, it appeared, favored the 9/10/01 mindset. So many conservatives had to point that out. They justified their assaults against the right for calling out radical Islamists for what they do. That’s right, they attacked the messenger. But the message was about imposible to ignore – that Islamists hatred of us (and the west) had no limits or borders.

Ah but then Barry came and seemed to sweep all that nonsense about radicals and Islamic terrorists under the rug. Or could he? Try as they might though, they were more fearful of fellow Americans concerned about the problem than they were about the problem. Our “intolerance” was the problem, they said.

How dare Bush act with such arrogance. They even pushed the talking point that this was a war against a religion and peace-lovers. They accused Bush of politicizing 9/11. They mocked the mission of our military in going after a single man, as some symbol. Lets also remember the war crimes mantra the left spewed at every opportunity. There was no shortage of cartoons and effigies of Bush. Then they attacked the Tea Parties with the same vitriol.

Then there was the car bomb attempt in NYC, where Bloomberg came out to portray it as some right-winger who disagreed with ObamaCare. When the facts came out, it was glossed over. Bloomberg returned to his ban agenda, as if nothing happened, to protect people from salt, trans-fats, soda and baby formula.

Fort Hood was attacked and they immediately went on defense about it being a radical Islamist. We had no right to come to make such conclusions.

Just to highlight a few of the memories from the Left. Flash forward(no pun intended), to the DNC “people’s convention” in 2012. If 2001 was known as the year of the terrorist attack, then 2012 must be the year of the never-ending “victory lap”. Or could it be that victory laps are now in vogue? They say if you wait long enough, an item will come back in fashion. Add victory laps to the fashionable category. It’s now kool to play politics with national security, while leaking operational procedures or details whenever necessary. No one cares about our ability to protect allies or compromise their plans.

However, when it comes to doing victory dances or spiking the ball, no one can beat the Democrats. Even Bill Clinton got in the fray victorfying the convention. It was just one big victory party. What pre-9/11 attitude? (who remembers that?) Now its the Party of drones and personal assisinations, the times they have changed. So has the rhetoric.

They must not mention Iran or its threat, but no problem taking another victory lap, or five or six. Rather striking from a campaign wih a motto “Forward”. But no one can do a victory party better than Liberal progressives. I’d say its just another phony ploy for politics, like everything else. Pay no attention to that plan to try terrorists in NYC. Pay no attention to all the objections, including their ‘war on words’ like terrorism and Islamist. But for now they clebrate: eat, drink, and be merry…

Frankenstein does Main Street


Obama gave a convention speech and it was a doozy If you like shock therapy or you dabble in the art of masochism, then this was right up your alley. I’ll try to briefly interpret it.

“Now I won’t pretend the path I’m offering is quick, or easy…I never have.”

I’ll break it down for you people that just don’t understand too well, like my signature ObamaCare.

Moving forward means I don’t have a plan. I did stay at a Holliday Inn though.

Instead, I’ll mention some goals.

That’s right, I’m asking you to “rally around a set of goals”.
Oops then I call the goals [promises] a plan. Follow along people.

So that is the plan, assert what I want. Then tell everyone to rally around that.

Now “the plan” is the goals[promises], which you all are going to be rallying around. Sound like fun? Sound like a plan? He thinks so.

 

Obama said:

“And the truth is, it will take more than a few years for us to solve challenges that have built up over decades. It will require common effort and shared responsibility. And the kind of bold, persistent experimentation that Franklin Roosevelt pursued during the only crisis worse than this one.”

But no “shared responsibility” on his part.

Okay, I get it now…i.e. “let the experimentation begin, or continue.”

So Obama is now Experimenter-in-Chief.

And what’s he been doing for over 3 years? Experimenting. Hello, Solyndra.

This mad scientist, without any experience or a clue, is in the laboratory cooking up… something. It’s “a set of goals”, get it? He can’t even call them promises anymore. They are some of his unfulfilled promises but who will notice?

Well, the real goal is getting reelected. After that the mad scientist develops amnesia because he really has other things on his agenda that he can’t talk about. Remember, he calls it “experimenting”.

Let’s call the experiment “a plan”.

Israel Gap: Dems disconnect on Israel

 

March 17, 2012 (American Thinker)

Gallup: Republicans more sympathetic to Israel than Democrats

Neil Snyder

A Republican Jewish Coalition news release on Friday included some revealing information:

Washington, D.C. (March 16, 2012) — The Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) today released an analysis of support for Israel broken down by political affiliation that reveals a clear “Israel Gap” between the parties. Republican support for Israel is 25 points higher than Democratic support, and according to Gallup, only a bare majority, 53% of Democrats, express sympathy with Israel.

“Democrats are suffering from an ‘Israel Gap’ and it’s gotten worse under President Obama,” said Matthew Brooks, RJC executive director.

Gallup, in a poll released recently, asked American voters, “Are your sympathies more with the Israelis or more with the Palestinians?” An overwhelming 78% of Republicans chose Israel, with 21% choosing the Palestinians or both/neither/no opinion. Among Democrats, a bare majority of 53% chose Israel, with 47% choosing otherwise. Among Independents, support for Israel was 56% with 44% choosing otherwise.

Over the last dozen years of Gallup polling on this question, there has been a clear trend: Republican support for Israel has risen steadily, moving from 60% to a high of 85%, while Democrat support has been relatively flat, at around 50%. Independent support has also moved upward over time, from 42% to a high of 60%.

Gallup’s data over time shows a clear difference between Republicans and Democrats on Israel, with strong and increasing support for the Jewish state among Republicans, and lower and relatively unchanged support among Democrats.

[…/]

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/03/gallup_republicans_more_sympathetic_to_israel_than_democrats.html#ixzz25hnmqp5q 
More: http://www.gallup.com/poll/146408/americans-maintain-broad-support-israel.aspx

Hardly a 2/3rd majority… and their convention vote on Israel and God showed it.
Its more like Dems have a “sympathy for the devil”, as the song says.

Empty chairs and conventions

 
Empty chair ideas…
(warning: satire)


The Dems really went off about Clint Eastwood’s performance. It didn’t make much sense to them. But when they saw how popular that segment was they began to change their (collective) minds.

So they started thinking maybe they could do something like that at their convention. They decided to have an “empty chair” segment too. They can say theirs represents the “aborted child” – baby X. The idea is still evolving but now they are a little concerned about what the dialogue would be.