Okay. Seriously. Crooked, mendacious, low energy Hillary, the liar who once claimed that her mom named her after legendary Mount Everest climber Sir Edmund Hillary (six years before his conquest, see), doesn't need to climb a mountain or Trump Tower to prove that she's in top physical shape for the presidency. But opening pickle jars on late night shows is not going to cut it. To dispel self-caused doubts that she lacks (for whatever reason) the energy, stamina and strength to handle the rigors of the world's most difficult job (without suffering chronic     fatigue*) she'll need to demonstrate some real, strong convincing athleticism and physical endurance before election day-and I don't mean yoga, some swimming and light weight lifting which she's known to do.
*Chronic fatigue affects concentration and
If she's fit for command all she need do to give the electorate proof is run in a marathon and last thirty minutes; or run around a city block nonstop ten times; she could swim across the East River from Manhattan to Welfare Island where she launched her campaign; or she can do 15 laps in her swimming pool at Chappaqua then bench press 100 pounds several times.
DEM 2016 Clinton
If Hillary would do any one of these things it would create a sensation and impress the nation with many declaring, "Man, this is one strong healthy bitch who's got the right stuff for the presidency;" and her health concerns would go away making Trump and guys like me look foolish.
But as long as Hillary jokes about her health with left-wing comics, suspicions will persist and grow until election day about a cover up costing her votes and possibly the presidency.
After opening an open jar
Hillary gets into a car with the help of a stool.
Or did the stool come before the jar?
Thanx Sabastian

Trump is Fit


Let's see Hillary carry boxes of supplies to people.
Let's see Hillary unload a truck - of supplies her foundation paid for!  




 In Phone Interview, Clinton Brushes Off Lack of Press Conferences: ‘I’m Talking to You Right Now’ | Mediaite

Hillary Clinton’s run-out-the-clock strategy - POLITICO 

Rumor has it that Hillary and Bill are spending millions desperately searching the world for the legendary alchemical elixer of life to renew Hillary's health before her first debate with Donald Trump in September./sarc
It's hilarious. A phone interview with CNN's Anderson Cooper for Clinton is now the equivalent of a real, full-blown, challenging press conference where the nation could see her struggling poorly with  reporters and lying to them about her emails, the pay to play corruption scandal and worsening health. Is that what she'd do as president? Do phone conferences with the White House press corps from the comfort of the Oval Office as if it were a hospital room? Some one said that the multiple of Trump's press conferences vs. Hillary's is 20 to 30 times as many. If she were to match Trump it would be a PR disaster and cost her tons of votes as most of her pressers would be as bad as THIS



Every so often when husband Bill is asked about Hillary's stamina and health he will pull from his hat last year's Benghazi hearing and glowingly say how she coolly and masterfully withstood 11 grueling hours of hard Republican questioning. But that's not what exactly happened. Forget about her five days missing in action prior to the hearing where she rested up conserving her energies while Bernie Sanders was campaigning his butt off; and forget that the questioning totaled 8 hours at most not 11 as there were three one hour breaks; truth is, the hearing was not the feat Bill Clinton makes it out to be; roughly half of the hearing was a love fest with fellow Democrats soft balling her; while the hard questions came mostly from three Republicans: Gowdy, Jordan and Pompeo.

But that was nine months ago when Hillary was vastly out polling Bernie Sanders and had done little campaigning herself; since then her exertions have clearly taken a toll on her health and is wearing her out-everyone but her blindest followers know it. This was evident from her DNC acceptance speech (one of the worst ever given) which was so insipid, unmoving, ineffective and dull that it embarrassingly put husband Bill to sleep.

Truth is if Hillary were to do as many press conferences and campaign as vigorous and hard as dauntless, dynamic, indefatigable Donald Trump she would collapse from extreme fatigue within a week. Think I'm exaggerating? As I wrote HERE in 2010 Hillary complained in an interview with Esquire that her job as Secretary of State was too exhausting, and that she couldn't and wouldn't continue in office another four years. If she had a second term at State, or just two more exhausting years, instead of "lying, crooked, low energy Hillary" we'd probably be calling her "no energy Hill."

Hillary giving a speech on national security in Virginia and looking like hell.

But the presidency is far more difficult and demanding than heading the State Department. If Hillary lacked the energy, strength and stamina for State how could she have it for the presidency? And how will  she have it for the make or break debates with Donald Trump? Will she be running on empty by then and crash and burn physically and emotionally? Trump is a force of nature, a category four hurricane; Hillary is a spent liberal force in slow declining health that's becoming more apparent and difficult to hide. America will see the stark difference in late September when Trump and Hillary go one on one in New York. Mark my words, in that debate Trump will look like a strong, confident, forceful executive and leader; while Hillary (with worsening health) will look like Trump's weak, flabby, passive, barely competent personal secretary.

So the question, "Will Hillary's health crash before the September debate?" depends on the race tightening between now and then. If that should happen (and Trump is working like hell to make it happen) it will force Hillary to push herself harder and campaign more fiercely than is good for her health. 

Does the Clinton campaign logo ominously anticipate Hillary being hospitalized for extreme exhaustion, or some illness before election day?
This event in Atlantic City happened last month. But Hillary is always harping on Trump's four corporate bankruptcies as if he's the only billionaire to have them. Warren Buffet one of history's greatest investment geniuses has made bad investments that cost him and his company Birkshire Hawthaway billions (see). When you come down to it if Donald Trump had run his company like Hillary the State Department he'd be in the poor house today.
say about Donald Trump having an evil, self-centered, "black [uncompassionate] soul?" He apparently was a donor to the Clinton Foundation. If true, is that what "black souls" do?  LOL!!!
BTW, If Donald Trump is a "racist bigot" like Hillary claims then why doesn't she return the $100,000 donation that he made to her foundation? Isn't that filthy, immoral racist money? By keeping Trump's money what does that say about the Clintons-who accept donations from the racist, misogynistic, Islamofascist Saudis and other bigoted, intolerant Moslem leaders? It would be hard to find bigger hypocrites than the Clintons, no?



You've got to feel compassion for these people. They mean so well in wanting to save us from ourselves, but just can't catch a break from Nature.
I've got very bad news for the nearly bankrupt, catastrophic, save-the-earth-from-industrial-capitalism, warmunist left: that ungrateful bitch Mother Nature (aka God) will not be reversing course and rejoining your jihad on "polluting," man-caused CO2 emissions anytime soon. Maybe your not screaming loud enough and She can't hear you? Or maybe She's sick to death of your whining  and chosen to ignore you for at least another decade or two? But ignoring you She is; and this your failing movement with its shrinking numbers can't afford. For these last 18 dreadful years of what scientists call "the pause," where global temperatures defying expert predictions of dangerously soaring to record heights of two to four degrees, have stayed relatively flat
(despite rising CO2 emissions) making you look like wolf crying fools; and worse still "the [great] pause" may be greatly prolonged continuing for another 12 years-or more. That is what a distinguished "consensus" professor of climatology at the University of Washington is predicting. And he sounds alarmingly convincing-alarming for you.
Professor Tung
global ocean currents
Currents in the Atlantic could be responsible for a slowdown in temperature
In a peer-reviewed study published 21 months ago Prof. Ka Kit Tung predicted that the 18 year "pause" in the rapid rise of global temperatures-where they've greatly slowed down, stagnated or dropped (depending on how it's calculated)-will be around for at least another 12 years-or, even worse, possibly, but less likely, for another 52 years (see). This is not what you messianic doomsters want to hear. For it greatly adds to the difficulty of making your case that we need to spend trillions fighting climate change; that more important than the War on Terror is transitioning humanity ASAP from dirty fossil fuel running economies to clean, green windmills, solar power and electric cars.
Tung's study of the Atlantic Ocean has discovered that the current persistent "pause" is part of a recurring cycle of short global cooling trends of 30 years duration or more that go back to the pre-industrial age when humanity was significantly poorer but safe (the good old days); that these cycles are caused by the Atlantic Ocean sucking heat from the atmosphere and slightly cooling down the "imperiled" Earth.
Tung claims that the last 30 year cooling cycle was from 1945-1975 (where global temperatures slightly dropped raising fears among scientists of a coming ice age); and before then was the cooling period of 1880-1910. And now since 1998, which set the record for being the warmest global year on record since 1880 (when global temps were first recorded) temperatures have slightly fallen. This defied IPPC (UN) projections which predicted that global temps would surpass the 1998 high and keep on perilously rising until heat trapping CO2 emissions were substantially cut. But since then a dirty huffing and puffing industrializing third world (led by China and India) has been vastly increasing CO2  output; but temperatures relative to 1998 have fallen going nowhere near the 1998 high (caused by the Super El Nino not by human behavior)*. 
*If we measure the last 18 years relative to global temps from 1975 (the end of the last 30 year cooling cycle) we find slight increases of 0.06 degrees Celsius (0.11 degrees Fahrenheit) a value close to zero.
Global warming 22nd of the 23 top national issues in Pew poll.
From Obama on down these last 18 years have greatly damaged the credibility of your movement to such a degree that of the top 23 important national issues global warming ranks a low 22. For predictions of soaring world temps causing snowless winters, iceless arctic summers, devastating coastal floods displacing millions, droughts, famines, plagues killing millions, etc haven't materialized. And if 18 years has politically caused you alarmists so much harm what will the next 12 do-or possibly another 52? For Prof. Tung has depressingly discovered that some past cooling cycles though rare have extended for up to 70 years-and this cycle could be one of them.
Desperate warmunist sets himself on fire  

protesting CO2  pollution  and becomes a  CO2  polluter./sarc

What if that happens. What will you do? Go on a rampage vandalizing SUVs?  Set yourselves on fire? Go terrorist and assassinate Big Oil execs to draw attention to your     collapsincause? Or sinking into utter despair join nihilistic alarmists like Guy McPherson declaring all is lost (see). That we've reached the tipping point of no return on carbon emissions. That the climate is spinning out of control beyond our power to stop. That because we're not deindustrializing we're going to die. What are you going to do?


Son of an economics teacher with a B.A. in the subject John Maynard Kaine is shown here in 2014 presenting his paper at the Clinton Foundation on his revolutionary idea, "Spiritual Regeneration Through Higher Taxation." Why won't he make this speech public?  What is he hiding?/sarc
that it would be good and beneficial for me for government to raise my taxes and take more of my wealth and money then it follows that the more in taxes it takes from me the "better off" and happier I'll be. Meaning that for our runaway tax and spend government to benefit me to the highest possible degree (giving me the biggest boost and bang for my bucks) it must take all of my money, wealth and property-every dime that I have and cent that I make from now till my dying day.
In other words, according to the new economic theory of Tim Kaine (could it be he's the new John Maynard Keynes?) in taking 100% of my wealth and everything I own (whether I'm rich, poor or middle class) the government by completely impoverishing me (stripping me of all my wealth and possessions down to the clothes on my back) will benefit me tremendously with blessings far outweighing in value the wealth that I had before reducing me to penury.

Senator Kaine praying to God for guidance in developing his revolutionary taxation ideas.  
In other words, in some new way that Tim Kaine has yet to explain (I'm waiting for the publication of his General Theory) I will be better off and richer than I was before- having nothing but my life and naked shivering self as if I were a world renouncing cave dwelling ascetic.
Now either Kaine is speaking economic nonsense,  or I'm just too dumb to fathom his meaning. Assuming that the latter is the case and, like John Maynard Keynes, Tim Kaine is a genius, let's try and figure out what he means by the term "better off."
Now if higher taxation will make me happier and "better off," and the more I'm taxed the happier and "better off" I'll be, then by "better off" Kaine can't mean greater material wealth-more riches than I had before government made me penniless. No matter how much government takes from me and gives to some one else, or invest in whatever projects or programs, it's not going to increase my wealth or make me happier or better off in the material sense than before. Then what in God's name can "better off" mean to Tim Kaine?
Perhaps Kaine's faith will provide a clue. A devout Roman Catholic and graduate from a Jesuit High School Kaine believes in a God, a moral law, an immortal soul and an after life of heaven, hell and purgatory. So if, as Kaine believes, the government can benefit me by taxing me more, and can benefit me optimally by taxing and taking away all of my wealth, then "better off" can only mean one thing:  benefiting me spiritually-or bettering my soul. It can only mean that Tim Kaine has discovered a new, revolutionary way to spiritual betterment, enrichment and inner wealth:  
In other words, Tim Kaine seems to believe that if government taxes me into poverty and takes everything I own God will benefit, bless me and greatly enrich my immortal soul. What else can Kaine mean? We've seen that taking my wealth from me and giving it to another (redistributing it) makes me poorer and doesn't materially benefit me at all. Indeed, the Bible (which Kaine says he reads and believes in) teaches that "man doesn't live by bread alone," and "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God."
Okay then. So when Kaine says that raising my taxes will make me "better off" it's likely he had these two verses of scripture in mind.  In other words, by taking the clothes off my back and the bread from my mouth government will set me free-liberate me from the dead weight, corruption and chains of owning material things; indeed, it will renew me morally and spiritually and make it easier for me to pass through the needles eye into heaven when I die. 
So by making me "better off" through what appears to be punishing taxation John Maynard Kaine means spiritual regeneration. There is no other possible explanation. When government raises our taxes it's not the state who'll reward us with material blessings, but God Himself with the riches of the spirit. In other words, for Kaine, God loves government above all earthly things; and He loves people more when government is taxing them to death and the rich are made poor. What else can Kaine mean by the words "better off?" Nothing else makes sense.


  Hillary Clinton stands with George McGovern before speaking at the Johnson County Democrats' annual barbecue, Oct. 6, 2007, in Iowa City. | AP Photo
Democrat George McGovern senator of South Dakota ran for the presidency in 1972 against incumbent President Richard M. Nixon and was crushed in a landslide election winning only 1 state out of 50 and Washington DC. Bill Clinton and then girlfriend Hillary Rodham worked for the McGovern campaign in Texas where Bill was in charge of organizing the state for the senator. During the 2008 primaries McGovern endorsed his good friend Hillary against Barack Obama, then urged her to back out when her candidacy seemed hopeless (see).
 Bill Clinton and McGovern in 1972.
On October 21, 2012, during the waning days of the presidential campaign that would reelect Obama to a predictably disastrous second term, George McGovern died at age 90. Five days later on October 26th McGovern was laid to rest in Sioux Falls, So. Dakota* (see). That very day Hillary Clinton (who did not attend the funeral) celebrated her 65th birthday (see). 
*It was at Sioux Falls in 1971 that McGovern announced his run for the presidency (see).
George McGovern's funeral.
Now here is where it gets profound. Hillary who celebrated her 65th birthday on the 26th day of October 2012 (when failed 1972 presidential candidate George McGovern was interred) was formally and historically nominated at the DNC on the 26th day of July 2016 as her party's presidential candidate. Needing 2380 delegates to win, the state during that put Hillary over the top (during the roll call) was none other than South Dakota, the home state of George McGovern (see and see). In fact, before Ann Tornberg*, head of the SD Democrat Party announced the 15 delegates Hillary would receive to secure her nomination she mentioned that her state was "the home of 1972 presidential candidate George McGovern (see)."
*It is interesting to note that Ann Tornberg is running as a pro-life, pro-family Democrat for the SD state senate (see).
Ann Tornberg
Oddly from George McGovern's funeral on Hillary's 65th birthday to her nomination on July 26th was exactly 45 months-giving us the number of the next sitting president (see). Linking the significant election year number 45 to 1972 loser George McGovern looks ominous for Hillary. 
New York State Republican Party Chairman Edward Cox with the Trump family at the RNC.
Even more fascinating and perhaps meaningful in an oracular sense is that on July 19th, seven  days before Hillary won the Democratic nomination with George McGovern's state putting her over the top, Donald Trump won his party's nomination in Cleveland. Astonishingly, and you can't make this stuff up, July 19th coincided with the 95th anniversary of George McGovern's birth (see).
But there's more. By design it was The Donald's home state of New York with its 89 delegates that put him over the top on the delegate count. Now as this day was George McGovern's 95th birthday (the loser of the 1972 election to Nixon) incredibly the first to speak for the New York State delegation (before Donald Trump Jr. cast the delegate vote) was Edward F. Cox. Who is this man? The head of the New York State Republican Party, and son-in-law of none other than President Richard M. Nixon  (see and see) .
But there's more. As I pointed out HERE the year of Donald Trump's birth, 1946, was politically auspicious for four US presidents: two of our 44 presidents, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, were born in 1946; and two other presidents, John Kennedy and Richard Nixon, began their political careers in that year. Now by providence or chance it just so happens that Edward F. Cox (son-in-law of Richard Nixon (who defeated George McGovern) also was born in 1946 (see). Could this be a sign that the 1946 born Donald Trump will surmount all of this blunders and setbacks and become the first New Yorker since Franklin Roosevelt to become president?  Roosevelt won the presidency on November 8, 1932; November 8, 2016 is the 84th anniversary of his victory. 
Does the presidential race of 1972 when George McGovern was badly defeated by Richard Nixon foreshadow Hillary Clinton losing to underdog Donald Trump in November?
When McGovern was laid to rest on Hillary's 65th birthday he was 90 years, 3 months  and 7 days old. This translates into 32,972 days, a five digit number that ends in "72" an abbreviation for the year 1972 (see).
Moreover, McGovern was defeated on November 7, 1972; from then to November 8, 2016 is exactly 44 years and 1 day. This translates into 16,072 days, giving us another five digit number ending in "72." (see)
Could these be providential signs that the American people will do to Hillary Clinton on election day what they did to George McGovern in 1972, and deny her the 45th presidency? Of course, no one but God has anyway of knowing. But it is very odd that when McGovern was defeated on November 7, 1972 Hillary was 25 years and 13 days old. What is odd about this?  25 years and 13 days translates into 9145 days of calendar time, a four digit number ending in 45 (see).
By the way, you will notice above that when George McGovern was laid to rest on Hillary's 65th birthday he was 90 years old. 90 is a multiple of 45 twice.  Will election day be the burial of tired, old, crooked Hillary's dream of being the 45th President of the United State?  Hopefully it will.


The Patriarch Abraham about to sacrifice son Isaac to God.
You've heard it said by David Horowitz over at Frontpage that "Inside every liberal there's a totalitarian screaming to get out." Well it's also true, as you will see below, that INSIDE EVERY LIBERAL THERE'S AN "ISLAMOPHOBIC BIGOT" THEY'RE TRYING TO KEEP IN. Indeed, I have found that in my debates with liberals (who mindlessly bleed for Moslems believing they're the most oppressed and discriminated group of victims on Earth) that if you scratch them hard enough you'll  find a hypocrite underneath with contempt for the faith and its millions of normative, mainstream devout believers-75% of which, as studies show, are unreformed, anti-modern, anti-liberal, backward, reactionary, medieval fundamentalists hostile to democracy, freedom and western civilization (see).
Sharia fundamentalist Khizr Khan.
Lately I've been disputing on Disqus with a leftist warrior named Peter Johnson. We've been arguing back and forth about Khirz Khan, Islam, jihadists and Syrian refugees. Khirz Khan as you know is the American Moslem Gold Star parent from Pakistan who lost a heroic son, Captain Humayun Khan, in the Iraq War to an al Qaida suicide bomber who blew him up as he was protecting fellow soldiers. As you know Khan used his son's death in a vicious partisan political attack at the DNC to smear and lie about Donald Trump-inferring that he was a black souled anti-Moslem bigot (ignorant of the US Constitution) for wanting to temporarily halt the flow of Syrian refugees into this country until the vetting process in rooting out terrorists was perfected.
At one point in his crazy, unhinged anti-Trump tirade Khan asked the billionaire candidate what sacrifices he had made in his life as he himself had made in losing his heroic son in Iraq. Of course, his son's death was a painful personal loss for Khan, but not, strictly speaking, a personal sacrifice. For it was the son who sacrificed his life to save some fellow soldiers not the father sacrificing his son to do that or anything else. In fact, the father who perhaps was opposed to the Iraq War (most American Moslems were) was against his son joining the army to fight Moslems abroad. Indeed, if Khirz Khan knowing what he knows today could go back in time it is likely he'd do everything in his power to stop his son from sacrificing his life that day; even if that meant the soldiers that he saved from death, dying instead.
But Johnson stubbornly insisted that this Moslem man (who in attacking Trump was dragging his son's memory through the mud of partisan politics) had made a very painful personal sacrifice that Trump had never made--when, in fact, Trump's loss of his father, brother, a grandmother and uncle while he's been alive were just as personally painful to him. Truth is, strictly speaking, a personal sacrifice means "giving up something of value that you want to keep especially in order to get or do something else or help someone (see)."  What personal sacrifice is not is the simple, common, everyday loss of a loved one to death which most people suffer in their lives.  
In searching for an instructive analogy to clarify the meaning of sacrifice  for Johnson I then asked him to think of the very moving and beautiful biblical story of the patriarch Abraham who was ordered by God to sacrificially kill his beloved son Isaac in order to prove his righteousness, faith and love. And then Johnson, the so-called progressive compassionate leftist friend and lover of all true Moslems (not jihadists or murdering terrorists who he considers unIslamic) stepped in it big time making a complete fool of himself, and showing his ignorance of the faith. His is what he said:
"Yes Abraham was ready to kill his own son in order to obey God?---something that if he claimed today, would quickly and correctly cause his case to be filed under the mental illness records of the local psych ward. Other than that, I don't get your analogy?......"
Now this Peter Johnson in prior posts arrogantly and condescendingly treated me as if I were a blind, bigoted, hate driven ignoramus about Islam; and that my use of such terms as "Islamic terrorism," "radical Islamic jihadism," "Islamic supremacism" or "Islamonazism" was, he said "offensive and insulting to most Muslims" who were peace-loving souls; and that this was evidence of my hatred, ignorance and insensitivity. And laughably this arrogant fool was going to set me straight and be my mentor enlightening me about the true nature of Islam so that I could approach it in a more positive, civilized and inoffensive (politically correct) way.  But, as you'll see from my reply, it turned out that Johnson hadn't even read the Koran; that what he knows about Islam is from left wing web sites; and that he's at the kindergarten level of learning about the faith. My reply was as follows:
Prophet Mohammed descendant of Abraham.
"OMG. For a leftist Islamophile who goes out of his way not to offend Moslems, and to praise their faith as a harmless, civilized and even beneficial "religion of peace," you're being brutally offensive to Islamic sensibilities, values and culture. Do you realize what you said? Are you that ignorant of Islam and its core beliefs that you called Abraham, of all people, a "mental case" for obeying the will of Allah and his command to sacrifice the life of his beloved Isaac to test  his loyalty, righteousness and faith? And do you have any idea  what would happen to you if you stated that publicly (defaming Abraham) in most if not all Moslem countries? You'd be arrested for blasphemy and legally put to death; or if you're lucky you'd have your tongue cut out or be brutally flogged receiving hundreds of lashes for your crime.
And do you know why what you said is blasphemous to devout, normal, mainstream, traditional Moslems (including Khirz Khan who believes in the supremacy of Sharia law and literal truth of the Koran)? Because the Prophet Mohammed regarded Abraham as his biological ancestor, and, most importantly, the TRUE FOUNDER OF ISLAM-the real, true, authentic, God certified monotheistic faith.
Apparently you're ignorant that the Prophet Mohammed taught that Allah revealed Islam to Abraham in MECCA the holiest site of Islam where he allegedly lived. Apparently you're ignorant that the near, sick, "psycho" sacrifice of his son Isaac took place there. Apparently you're ignorant that when devout sharia Moslems like Khirz Khan turn toward Mecca and pray five times a day they ask Allah to send His blessings upon the "mentally ill" patriarch. Apparently you're ignorant that Abraham, the Founder, Father and First Prophet of Islam is regarded by Moslems as the moral and spiritual model of faith, sacrifice, commitment, patience, obedience and friendship with God.
The Quran sums up the view of the Prophet Abraham among Muslims: "Who can be better in religion than one who submits his whole self to Allah, does good, and follows the way of Abraham the true in Faith? For Allah did take Abraham for a friend" (Quran 4:125).
You utter crazy ignorant confused leftist ideological fool. Saying that Abraham was a "mentally ill psycho " for obeying the Almighty is equivalent of saying that the Prophet Mohammed-who by divine revelation rediscovered and restored the Islam of Abraham (allegedly perverted by Christians and Jews)-was himself a deranged "mental case" unfit to govern, command or lead. It's the equivalent of saying that Islam (an Abrahamic faith) is a religion of the insane; and that the hundreds and millions of faithful Moslems (like Khirz Khan and his family) who include Abraham in their daily prayers are praying for a religious lunatic and are collectively deranged.
Now taking Abraham's intended sacrifice of Isaac as Islam's model of a father sacrificing his son how then is Captain Khan's heroic self-sacrifice in Iraq a sacrificial death made by his dad? As Khirz Khan was opposed to his son joining the army and putting his life at risk in fighting Moslems how then was his death a personal sacrifice? From the Islamic viewpoint, using Abraham's intended sacrifice of Isaac as a model, your assertion that Khan losing his son in Iraq was a personal sacrifice makes neither moral nor Islamic sense.
Perhaps a better analogy would be a Moslem honor killing of a child-widely practiced across the Islamic world (see). This is where a Moslem father or mother kills a disobedient child for sinning against Allah and bringing shame upon Him, them and their family. Indeed, Moslem parents who are shamed by a sinful son that they love but need to kill draw courage and strength from Abraham's example to go through with it. In other words, honor killings (horrible as the practice is) is a real sacrifice of a child for a higher moral good: restoring family honor and its good standing with God. In short, what the Khans suffered in the death of their hero son was a painful personal loss, not a personal sacrifice of any kind-such as would have been the case had Khan killed his son to stop him from joining the US army believing that killing fellow Moslems was a grievous sin that would have damned his soul to hell.      
Hopefully I've clarified for you the meaning of the term personal sacrifice as it's understood by most Moslems. And before I go I strongly urge that you stop getting your info about Islam from left-wing websites and buy a copy of the Koran and study it so you can begin your real education in Islam." 
 To summarize the above, in taking Johnson's assertion that Abraham (the true founder of Islam) was a "mentally ill psycho" to its logical conclusion it means that all fundamentalist Moslems (75% of them) are potentially dangerous mental cases or ticking time bombs. It means that the Islamic world community (umma) is one vast insane asylum of religious nuts and lunatics. In other words, by his own yardstick, in calling Abraham a "mental case" for dutifully and Islamically obeying God, Peter Johnson exposed himself as an offensive, bigoted, hypocritical, anti-Moslem Islamophobe who inwardly regards most Moslems (as he likely does all fundamentalists) contemptuously as dangerous mentally deranged psychos.
But the wonder of it all is that from Barack Obama on down the Peter Johnsons of this country want to open the floodgates of Islamic immigration and add to the millions of Abraham emulating,
unreformed, anti-liberal, freedom hating, reactionary, regressive medieval fundamentalist Moslem psychos already here. It's mind-boggling. But then liberalism is itself a mental disorder.








SHOCK: Hillary Clinton just got some very BAD news from this very BLUE ...

It was to the National Home Builders Association. It was measured, subdued, thoughtful, honest, funny. Gone were the bombast and outrageous statements. Gone was anything controversial that could be negatively spun. And incredibly, he did it without a teleprompter keeping him on message. What is alarming is that I didn't think he was capable of this. What is alarming is that if he continues looking so competent, presidential and unscary til November there's a very real danger he'll make it to the White House.








,,View image on Twitter




she'll be in serious danger of being targeted by millions of angry right-wing gun owners who'll load their assault weapons with the lethal Constitution and take deadly aim at her head.





Hey, remember this full length motion picture about the assassination of George W. Bush?



(thanx Sue2)

In 2008 race against Obama Clinton made these statements. "Asked if her continuing fight for the nomination against Senator Obama hurts the Democratic party, Sen. Hillary Clinton replied, "I don't. Because again, I've been around long enough. You know, my husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. You know, I just don't understand it. You know, there's lots of speculation about why it is. “


"So in 2008 Hillary actually said that she remained in the race as there was a chance that her opponent would be assassinated."


Exactly, Sue. Trump said nothing as inflammatory as that comment.


MARCH 3, 2016

AUGUST 8, 2016
If 121 GOP national security experts with an open letter issued in March couldn't stop Donald Trump from seizing their party's presidential nomination what do 50 of them hope to achieve now? How can fewer succeed when 71 more of them had failed? Anyway you analyze this letter it's politically and policy wise laughable in the extreme. This is what they're saying:
After Obama and Hillary blew up American foreign policy and turned the Middle East into one vast strife-torn killing field with hundreds and thousands dead that Trump is going to blow it up some more, make it worse causing more death, destruction and mayhem. That is what they're warning. But the question is what will President Hillary do differently from her disastrous, incompetent, crooked reign at the State Department? Hillary (as Rumsfeld would say) is a known known. She's been in politics for decades. Trump is a known unknown and is new to the game. We know what Obama and Hillary did: Iraq, Libya, Syria, Egypt, the Islamic State, Yemen, Iran, Crimea, the China Sea, etc; and we know what Hillary intends to do as president as she has said it often enough: stay the course and continue what she and Obama accomplished together in the world.
But Trump the nonideological known unknown  has a realistic view of the Obama-Clinton foreign policy mess and wants to clean it up. For Trump US foreign policy falls way short of where it should and could be and was not too long ago after the fall of the Soviet Union when we were indisputably numero uno. Indeed, Trump has learned from the disastrous foreign policy decisions of the Bush and Obama/Clinton years and vows not to repeat them, and he won't as his focus will be on rebuilding the economy which is in decline with massive debt and is our overarching national security threat. That's not recklessness. It's wisdom.
Hillary who apparently has learned nothing from her blunders at State and insists that she was a great historic success with a splendid record of achievements (like traveling millions of miles wearing herself out and enriching the coffers of the Clinton Foundation) has vowed to stay the same disastrous course insisting that more of the same is needed, not radical Trump change.
Tired, old, miserable looking Hillary Clinton (this campaign is slowing draining her strength and energy) complained in a 2010 Esquire interview that her job as Secretary of State was wearing her out and that she couldn't endure a second term of it. But isn't the presidency far more demanding, stressful and exhausting than Secretary of State (see)?
In other words, we need more Arab Springs to destabilize the Middle East; we need to precipitously pull our troops from Afghanistan, like we did from Iraq, so that al-Qaida and the Taliban can prevail and return to power again; we need to send billions more to the terror masters of Iran so they can more effectively spread their brand of radical Shiite Islam and become the regional hegemon. In short, we need more insanity hoping to get a better result. And Donald Trump is the crazy, reckless, dangerous one?
These 50 Republicans like their ineffective 121 predecessors have lost their minds. They're no different from Ford, Kissinger, GHW Bush and the other establishment Republicans who tried to stop Ronald Reagan saying his strong anti-communism made him one of history's most dangerous men, and that he couldn't be trusted with the nuclear codes as he might cause Nuclear Armageddon. It was Reagan's predecessor JImmy Carter who blew up America's foreign policy then. And now we have 50 Republican experts who want to give Carterism another chance after three terribly destructive terms. Who in heaven's name is being reckless here?





Back in May of last year I posted a piece on this site called "Is George Zimmerman A Sign The Six Baltimore Cops Will Be Acquitted Of Any Crime In The Death Of Freddie Gray (see)? In it I noted two extraordinary coincidences which I believed at the time might prophetically anticipate the racially mixed Baltimore Six being acquitted of all crimes in the death of Freddie Gray-just as racially mixed George Zimmerman was rightly acquitted of murdering Trayvon Martin by a jury of six.
In the piece I noted that Freddie Gray's arrest (which led to his death) on April 12, 2015 fell squarely on the 3rd anniversary of Florida judge Mark Herr's ruling that prosecutor Angela Corey's politicized affidavit accusing Zimmerman of murder sufficiently established probable cause. I also noted that just 23 days after Gray's death* Zimmerman was in the news again as the target of a shooting where a bullet was fired into his car shattering a window and injuring him with flying glass (see).
*Gray died on April 19, 2015.
What do Eric Garner, Freddie Gray, Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown have in common, besides being canonized as saintly martyrs in the cause of racial justice? If they had been decent, good, law-abiding citizens they'd all be alive today.
Judge Barry Williams
Then it happened: On July 27th (67 weeks after Freddie Gray's fatal arrest) to the dismay of Black Lives Matter and the race obsessed, lynch mob left (which rioted over Gray) a Judge Barry Williams (a black man) struck down all charges on the Baltimore Six; and crazy, out of control, lynch mob prosecutor Marilyn Mosby was excoriated by her peers and in the press. And just as Freddie Gray's death was followed by Zimmerman making the news, incredibly it happened again. For just ten days after the last three defendants of the Baltimore Six were acquitted it was reported that Zimmerman was the alleged victim of an assault in a Sanford, Florida restaurant for talking about killing Trayvon Martin (see). You can't make this stuff up.
But just as fascinating and incredible is that just as Freddie Gray's arrest fell on the third anniversary of Judge Herr's rulling in the George Zimmerman case so July 27th (when the nightmare was finally over for the remaining Six) landed on the third day of the Democrat Convention. What is fascinating is that the day before on the 26th is when eight black mothers (including Trayvon Martin's mom) of the "Mothers of the Movement" endorsed Hillary Clinton for president; and the following day on the 28th (the day of Hillary's acceptance speech) Dallas Sheriff Lupe Valdez was booed by despicable, cop hating, Black Lives Matter fascists when she asked for a moment of silence to honor fallen cops.
BLM booed Sheriff Valdez.
Also incredible is that April 12, 2015, the day of Freddie Gray's arrest (67 weeks before the exoneration of the Six), was the day that 67 year old Hillary Clinton (formerly the 67th Secretary of State) launched her second presidential campaign.
Could it be that Hillary Clinton starting her run for the White House on the day of Freddie Grey's fatal arrest, and the Baltimore Six being finally acquitted during the convention that would nominate her president, are signs of the imminent demise for the radical fringe Black Lives Matter movement? And that it reached its political apogee at the convention and now will wane and disappear going the way of Occupy Wall Street? Or could it signal that more BLM inspired racial strife, violence and cop killings are ahead? And that this will help Donald Trump (the pro-cop law and order candidate) defeat Hillary Clinton in November? We shall see.
 Image and video hosting by TinyPic 


Trump Says He's 'Afraid' Election Is 'About to Be Rigged' - NBC News


POLLS: Donald Trump's feud with the Khan family was very damaging - AOL

It was deja vu all over again. Last week the normally super-confident "winners never quit" Donald Trump very certain of being elected 45th president, in a moment of uncharacteristic doubt told supporters in Ohio that he feared "the election will be rigged" against him, and that he could lose in November. This triggered a frenzy across anti-Trump media land speculating that with Hillary "surging" in post-convention polls that Trump was turning negative and pessimistic about his election prospects; that seeing a dimming  light at the end of the tunnel for taking the White House he was playing the "rigged card" to delegitimize the outcome of a Clinton victory; and that the election if he should lose would be unfairly and criminally stolen from him.
But as I said, it was "deja vu all over again." For Trump during the primaries had said practically the same thing about the GOP primary process. In early April after losing to Ted Cruz in Wisconsin, and with Cruz and Kasich afterwards forming a stop Trump alliance, Trump fearing that he could lose and be "cheated" out of the nomination in a contested convention said in mid April, "It's a rigged system. It's a crooked system. It's a 100 percent totally rigged and broken system (see).
But then came April 26th and Trump's super Tuesday landslide sweep of five northeastern states which all but clinched the nomination for him. And when the primaries were over for both parties the results for Trump and the GOP were astounding, as it hopefully will be in November.
Trump with his 13 million plus primary votes (eliminating 16 rivals)     set a GOP record out doing both McCain and Romney by 3.5 million votes, and George W. Bush in 2000 by 1.5 million votes. Moreover, Republicans overall outdid Democrats by 750,000 votes as they gained a total of more than 8 million votes over 2008 (28 million vs. 20 million); while Dems (moving in the opposite direction) lost 8 million votes (35 million vs. 27 million). Another disappointment for Dems was Hillary Clinton under performing from 2008 by a huge 2,052,365 votes-gathering 15,805,136 vs. 17,857,501 votes eight years ago. 
But on top of the above bad numbers for Dems (showing a far more motivated Republican party), where they are really hurting is with the vitally important independents. Indeed, according to a July 25th CNN poll Trump is crushing Clinton with independents by a whopping 18 point margin 46% to 28% (see).  And though the Gold Star parents blowup occurred shortly after this poll was taken there is evidence from a more recent poll that Trump's support with independents is flourishing like never before and continues to grow.
This is what I mean:
Amazingly, as Rasmussen reported two days ago (despite Khizr Khans vicious unwarranted partisan attack on Trump and his "insensitive" replies) independent support for him has been surging. Indeed, from just a week ago Hillary who enjoyed a 5 point post-convention lead over Trump with independents has precipitiously   dropped an astonishing 17 points with Trump now leading her by a commanding 41% to 29% (see).
So now we have two major credible quality polls (one center-left the other center right) showing an overwhelming double-digit gap between Trump and Clinton on independents-exceeding what Romney achieved in 2012. Indeed, Romney beat Obama with independents nationally by just 5 points 50% to 45%. But this time it looks like independents by double-digit majorities are with Trump; and if Trump can just sustain that margin to election day its inconceivable that he would lose.
As for those who challenge the value of independents in this or in any national election and say "it's importance is overblown" they are ignoring that there are more indies today than ever before as noted in 2014-when Republicans won back the Senate from Dems (see). It is two years later and as disenchantment with Washington is far stronger now than it was then there is certainly more indies fed up with the status quo looking for a leader of Herculean strength to clean out the Augean stables of DC and Wall Street corruption.
Moreover, as astute Washington Post reporter Robert Costa told Charlie Rose (I heard this on Rush) there seems to be a new class of voters in the multi-millions who he calls "the previously disengaged." These are a silent ANYONE BUT THE ESTABLISHMENT voting block that sat out the last two elections and are roaringly for Donald Trump the ultimate establishment bashing nonpolitical outsider (see five minutes into the interview).
The center right FOX News poll which sent MSM into ecstasy this week showing Hillary Clinton with a ten point post-convention lead over Trump (five less than Carter over Reagan in the August 1980 Gallup poll) was taken from a sample of 1022 registered voters. Not a very large group. On the other hand, the center left USC/LA Times Daybreak (daily rolling) poll (taken from a larger group of 3000 registered voters) showing Clinton (like all other major polls) with a good post-convention bounce (and sliding numbers for Trump) have them at a virtual dead heat at 44%, and is holding steady with Clinton unable to rise any further.  Based on the number of participants (3000 vs. 1022) which of these two quality polls seems more credible?
As you can see from the above the doomsayers are very wrong: the Trump campaign is anything but imploding. Typical of this anti-gravity impossible candidate when he seems to stumble and fall and it looks like the end is near he defies conventional wisdom    
and stumbles and falls upwards.






Is Khirz's Khan's ideal of an "empathetic leader" the Prophet Mohammed who ethnically cleansed Medina of Jews, and savagely ordered the beheading of up to 900 Jewish men in front of their horrified wives and kids  because they wouldn't renounce their Judaism and bow down to him as God's final messenger and prophet with the ultimate revelation of truth to mankind? In other words, does Mr. Khan believe that if Trump modeled himself on the Prophet Mohammed it would save his "black soul" from the sin and darkness of cruelty and inhumanity?      




ApolloSpeaks    Tex

Simple Definition of the term "sacrifice."

:the act of giving up something that you want to keep especially in order to get or do something else or help someone.

: an act of killing a person or animal in a religious ceremony as an offering or sacrifice to please a god.  


Do you now understand the universally accepted meaning of the word "sacrifice?" And how it's completely and dishonestly distorted by Khirz Khan in his slanderous, politicized, demonizing of Donald Trump  as a self-centered, anti-Moslem bigot ignorant of the Constitution? Do you understand that like Trump Khan never in his life personally put himself at risk to save the lives of others like his heroic, self-sacrificing son did in Iraq? And that he Khan is no more sacrificing or self-sacrificing or heroically selfless then is Donald Trump or most human beings?  Truth is if Khan losing a son (hero or not) was a sacrifice for him then Trump is just as sacrificing having lost a father, brother, grandmother and uncle while he's been alive.

Tex  ApolloSpeaks 

No. However I do understand how a soulless, vapid Trump apologist might try to define the word and try to rationalize Trump's total lack of empathy.

Sacrifice is to give up something valuable for the GREATER GOOD. Soldiers do this. Builders do not (nor do their elder parents, or siblings), and this is especially true of builders who had the opportunity to serve their country and "got out of it" by designs, by deferments, and by getting a doctor's note: "Donald cannot join you in VietNam, his foot hurts."

ApolloSpeaks    Tex 

Tell little adorable Megan Nichols, crippled from birth with brittle bone disease, that Donald Trump is a heartless, soulless, vapid man totally lacking in empathy, compassion and love and she'd think you were mad.

As Maury Povich says in the video, "Donald Trump is one of the most generous men that I know." And indeed he is "most generous" as he can probably multiply his act of kindness to this little unfortunate girl thousands of times. So much for Khizr Kahn's filthy, disgusting, black lie denigrating Trump as having a "black soul" as if he were an evil creature of darkness like the prophet Mohammed who he reveres.         As far as Megan Nichols is concerned her great her great, good, humane benefactor Donald Trump has a HEART OF GOLD.

If Donald Trump's legal avoidance of the draft during the Vietnam War era disqualifies him from becoming President then what about Bill Clinton whose avoidance is legendary?


Now that you know Clinton's history of avoiding the draft and becoming a soldier to "give up something valuable for the GREATER GOOD" was it right, in your view, that he served as president for eight years? And should he be allowed back into the White House as First Gentleman?

Tex  ApolloSpeaks

If you're going to be promoting Trump as a "saint", perhaps you should contact him and urge him to release his tax returns so we can ALL see what a generous and feeling fellow he is.


As to "avoiding the draft", I draw a sharp distinction between those who ADVOCATE war and killing, and those who look at it as a terrible last resort, to be avoided if possible. Trump is the former, Clinton the latter. 


ApolloSpeaks   Tex 


There are no saints in politics.


If Trump weren't a generous, feeling, good-natured soul why would he help little crippled Megan Nichols? And why would Maury Povich a good, honest, charitable man testify publicly that Trump "is one of the most generous men I know" if he wasn't a witness to other acts of Trump's kindness? 


Several years ago the very generous Donald offered to donate $5 million dollars to Barack Obama's charity of choice if he released his college transcripts. Obama, however, refused, and in doing so deprived perhaps hundreds of needy children like Megan Nichols of that money. Shame on him.




Moreover, since he started his campaign Trump hasn't promoted or proposed any wars other than taking a more aggressive approach to the one we're fighting against ISIS.



Wow, that's sad. You have to go back 16 years to have Trump give a girl a cheque. The mother was not floored, and did not break into tears, so it wasn't anything life changing. Man, you're desperate.




Megan Nichols is emblematic of Trump's great generosity and giving soul. As Maury Povich says in the video: "Donald Trump is one of the most generous men that I know." Meaning that there were many other Megan Nichols-before and since; but done quietly and humbly as long time friend Mayor Giuliani recently said (see).


Trump's soul is so unfeeling, inhumane and black that apparently he contributed $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation.

Donald Trump appears to have donated $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation - AOL







classicalmusiclover  ApolloSpeaks  


Your condemnation of the Khans as immoral politically driven hypocrites is sick and twisted..


It's Donald Trump who has no moral compass, and neither do you nor anyone who supports him.


ApolloSpeaks   classicalmusiclover


What moral compass were the Khans using when they politicized and demeaned their patriotic son's heroic death and used it to vilify and lie about Trump being  an anti-Moslem racist bigot who is ignorantly violating the Constitution? What political compass were the Democrats using when they put the Khans up to this charade?


classicalmusiclover  Plutarchus 


There was nothing immoral about their attack on Trump. 


He has indeed sacrificed nothing comparable to losing a son on the battlefield, as he demonstrated in his fumbling interview with Stephanopoulos. He actually tried to peddle job creation as a "sacrifice." This was completely an unforced error on Trump's part.


And if his policies were in place when Mr. Khan immigrated from Pakistan, he would indeed have been blocked from doing so.


I guess you also missed Khan's later statement (in the interview on The Last Word, where he called on Republican leaders to repudiate Trump.

There is no evidence other than giving him a speaking slot that the DNC "put them up to" anything.


Your doubling down on Trump's criticism of the Khans  


is more evidence that you are a vile and twisted solipsist. Denying that the Khans have a moral compass is purely vile on your part.


ApolloSpeaks   classicalmusiclover


Khizr Khan's moral compass was immorally pointed downward toward   the darkness of deceit and lies about Donald Trump, not upward toward the light of truth. That Khan was on the high moral ground in attacking Trump is completely laughable as his charges of anti-Moslem bigotry and shredding the constitution  have no basis in reality or morality.


Indeed, if Captain Khan's death was such a tragic heartbreaking loss in Khizr Kahn's life then where was  his condemnation of the Iraq War (the "wrong war" as Democrats believe) that killed him? And where was

his outrage at George W. Bush who sent his son into the wrong war to die? Moreover, where was his moral outrage at Hillary

Clinton whose vote for the Iraq War Resolution

authorized Bush to go to war. And who reauthorized funding for it 21 times over a four year period?


As Captain Khan would be alive today if there were no

Iraq War Hillary then deserves more of Khan's anger and outrage than does Trump who opposed the war before Hillary did and simply wants to prevent ISIS terrorists from entering this country through poorly vetted Moslem refugees.


Hillary in part is morally responsible for

sending Captain Khan to his death, and dying for nothing in a war that  Trump had nothing to do with it.  So again I ask the question: what was the moral basis for Khizr Khan viciously attacking Donald Trump who (unlike Killery) did him and his wife and children no harm?


BTW, your claim that the Khans made a sacrifice when they lost their son in the Bush/Clinton War is preposterous. The Khans in fact sacrificed nothing. They lost a son who volunteered for military service in wartime knowing the risks; and then in  performing his duties heroically sacrificed himself to save others.  It was the son who did the sacrificing, his parents sacrificed nothing. 


Khan self-righteously asking Trump "what did you ever sacrifice in your life" when he lost his father, brother and other loved one's is an insincere duplicitous partisan political attack disguised as moral outrage and shouldn't be taken seriously. 


The DNC vetted Khan's anti-Trump speech and approved it  which is normal in a convention.



More typical dodging, weaving, and hand-flapping from ApolloSpeaks, the dishonest solipsist.


Donald Trump supported the war at the time of the War Resolution; there is no record that he did not, and he made statements in interviews supporting it. Just because he didn't vote, doesn't mean he didn't support it.


Calling Hillary "in part morally responsible for sending their son to his death" is ridiculous, because you know and I know that the actual invasion of Iraq was based on bad intelligence, which was pushed by the Bush administration over objections of their own intelligence officers.


You also miss the basic point (I believe deliberately): Trump's proposed Muslim ban, had it been in effect when Mr. Khan immigrated, would have blocked his immigration. Trump has stopped shy of making a distinction between "Islamic extremism" and Muslims who love this country. This has been read consistently by his followers--including you--as casting suspicion on the entire Muslim community. It is the Muslim ban and the trumping up of anti-Muslim sentiment that do harm.


As for claiming that the parents have sacrificed nothing when their son died, that is pure sociopathy on your part, and you know it. I believe it is because you believe that Muslims are a lower life form than Apollo the Clown. 


Plutarchus  classicalmusiclover 


In 2002 Trump weakly (half heartedly, unenthusiastically) supported the idea of going to war in Iraq telling Howard Stern "Yeah. I guess I'm for it." While at the time both Clintons were gung ho war hawks hell-bent on going to war based MOSTLY (not exclusively) on the wmd intel Bush inherited from the Saddamophobic Clinton administration   

-the new bad Bush intel confirmed the old bad Clinton intell.








In January 2003 Trump on Neil Cavuto voiced skepticism about the war indicating that the economy was more important than going to war, and that perhaps Bush should focus on the economy.





Five days into Operation Iraqi Freedom (March 25, 2003) Trump feeling very uneasy and uncertain about the war told a Hollywood reporter "It's a mess."




In July 2004 Trump ripping into Bush in an Esquire interview came out in full-throated opposition to the war saying it was a mistake and was destabilizing the Middle East. At the time the Clintons still fully supported it. In fact it wasn't until November 2005 (16 months later) that Hillary Clinton turned against the war and said it was a mistake. But Hillary's voting for refunding the war hypocritically continued until May 2007 when she joined with Barack Obama in opposing a $124 billion Iraq War spending bill.




Now while Donald Trump certainly lied about being against the war before it started so did Slick (wiley) Willy




If Khizr Khan was blocked from entering the US and remained in Pakistan it's highly probable that some other brave soldier would have done what his son did and sacrificed himself that day.


Only a liar or a fool would say that Trump and Hillary are equally responsible for the deaths of 3000 Americans. Hillary, not Trump, has drops of Capt Khan's blood on her hands and every other dead soldier in that war.


And lastly define for me the term "sacrifice" then show me how it applies to the Khans in their loss of a courageous patriotic SELF-SACRIFICING son in a war.


This should help you




Now that you know the standard, universally accepted definition of the term "sacrifice" for you to say (as you did) that the Khans SACRIFICED their brave, wonderful,  heroic SELF-SACRIFICING son is illogical and stupid, right?





Does being a Gold Star parent give one the licence to slander a presidential candidate? 



When has Hillary Clinton ever heroically risked her life to save the lives of other human beings? When has Barack Obama ever done that? Better still when has Khizr Khan or his wife committed any heroic act in their lives comparable to their son's on the deadly battlefield of iraq? How can the Khans fault Donald Trump for never heroically placing his life at risk to save others when neither they nor the Clintons nor most human beings have ever done that? Self-sacrificng heroes like Captain Khan are rare.

The Khans are typical partisan Democrat hypocrites redefining and distorting the universally accepted meaning of the word "sacrifice" to suit their jihad to politically destroy Donald Trump for his views on national security. This is intellectually dishonest, morally shameful, and will fail with anyone who owns a dictionary.

(See DEBATES below for more on this subject.) 


Khizri Khan, Democratic National Convention


Moreover, weren't the Khans grossly and immorally dishonoring the memory of their son's heroic death by politicizing it during a Democrat convention, dragging his brave, life saving deed through the muck and mud of election year politics? It is completely reprehensible that the Democrats put the Khans up to this; and that they let themselves be used as political attack dogs against Trump as if it were he who killed their good, noble, patriotic son and not radical, murdering, Islamofascist terrorists-which they never once mentioned.




Furthermore, what is unconstitutional about the President of the United States banning certain groups of people for national security reasons from migrating to this country when Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton did just that in 2011? Apparently they didn't know and weren't told that Obama and Hillary placed a temporary ban on Iraqi Moslem  refugees from entering this country because Islamic terrorists infiltrated their ranks-which ISIS says it's doing with Syrian refugees. Apparently it's Khizr Khan not Donald Trump who desperately needs lessons in constitutional law.





And lastly, if the Iraq War was a wrong war that should never have been fought (as Hillary now says) doesn't she then bear some blame for Captain Khan's death because of her vote authorizing the war and 21 subsequent votes to reauthorize its funding? Why do the Khans feel moral outrage at Donald Trump and none for Hillary and her war vote which helped send their son to his untimely death?

While Trump's done nothing to hurt the Khans Hillary has done so indirectly with her hawkish, gung ho support of the Iraq war from her vote on the Iraq War Resolution in 2002 to November 2005 when she said the war was a mistake-but hypocritically voted to continue funding it until May 2007. Hillary can't escape the fact that she has drops of Captain Khan's blood on her hands (and that of 3000 other dead US soldiers killed in Iraq). The Khans outrage at Donlad Trump with none for Hillary is unjustified, trumped up political bullsh*t with no moral basis.






Trump has spent a lifetime enriching himself through the use of his daddy's money and his daddy's political connections and his daddy's business connections.

He has earned the scorn of employees, contractors, lenders, and customers. He has bullied them, threatened them with legal action, and left them holding the bag on multiple occasions.

Great people don't need to constantly tell you how great they are.



What does your ignorant critique of Trump have to do with the Khan's immoral politicization of his son's death? His lying about Trump violating the US Constitution? And his faulting Trump for never having risked his life to save others when Hillary has never acted heroically herself?

Also, was JFK's political career invalid because he relied on his criminal, bootlegger, mob tied father and his wealth to run for Congress, the Senate and the Presidency?


And if Trump is such a horrible boss and unfairly stiffs  his employees, and if he screws contractors and lenders, then how do you explain the tens and thousands of happy employees who work for him? And how do you explain the contractors the world over working on his projects? Moreover, why does Trump have no problem obtaining loans for his projects if he screws lenders? How come his credit so good?

And lastly, there's no such thing as businessmen who aren't in business to enrich themselves. Or could it be that you're an anti-business nut who thinks that "profits" are immoral?




Jay Thompson


"Khans like Trump sacrificed nothing. They lost a son who heroically sacrificed himself. It wasn't their sacrifice, it was his"..
Are you friggin kidding us?
It's not a parents sacrifice when they lose a child in service of their country!?
That's about the worst thing i have ever heard in defence of a political position.
You need to really think about that statement you made and if you do and you feel no shame for saying it, I really feel sorry for anyone in your condition.
And if youre an American and a human you might want to apologize.




No need to apologize.The Khans lost a son who heroically sacrificed himself. If they made the decision for the son to risk his life sending him to his death to save others then it would be their sacrifice-they would own it and participate in the glory of his heroism. If you chose to risk your life to save another and die doing so it is your sacrifice and yours alone-not your parents', not your wife's. not your childrens', not your friends'. No one but you are the self-sacrificing hero.





 I'm glad for ANY AND ALL attacks on this Gold Star couple coming from the right, and especially from Donald. It makes you look hateful and small. And scared and petty and mean spirited. I LOVE it!



Now only if these misogynistic Moslem terrorists can restrain themselves till after election day from launching more mass murder attacks here and in Europe they might get their wish of having a "weak" woman in the White House over a strong, aggressive alpha male who wants to "bomb the hell out of them."






ApolloSpeaks says, "Khans like Trump sacrificed nothing."

Message: "Losing a child to the defense of this nation is NOT a sacrifice. Ditto losing a spouse, or any loved one. No sacrifice there. Cop's wives wailing about their husbands shot dead in the line of duty? No sacrifice. Suck it up, you babies. You didn't lose anything, you didn't risk anything."


It would have been helpful to you to have looked up the meaning of u the term "sacrifice" before going off on an emotional tangent and misusing it to mean the loss or death of a loved one: parents, children, spouse, relatives, friends.


In using the term "sacrifice" in the ridiculous, unheard of, mistaken way that you do Donald Trump would then know more about making personal sacrifices in his life than do the Khans. The Khans we know lost a son; however, Trump we know lost his dad, his grandmother Liz, his uncle John and brother Fred. That's four Trump sacrifices to Khan's one. Next time remember to be less emotional and more careful in your use of terms so you don't embarrass yourself again.



"Politicizing" is when you don't like it. 




So the reason for Captain Khan's heroic death wasn't to save the lives of fellow soldiers from anti-American al Qaida suicide terrorists, but to smear, trash and lie about a Republican presidential candidate, and benefit his Democrat opponent? That was the ultimate, overarching reason for Captain Khan's sacrificial life saving death? To replace the al-Qaida terrorists that killed him with Donald Trump as the real enemy as if Trump was the one who blew him up?





DONALD TRUMP says it’s obvious Hillary Clinton’s speechwriters wrote that BS convention speech for the Paki Muslim - BareNakedIslam




When David Axelrod on CNN said last night that Hillary's speech on the historic occasion of her nomination "wasn't a great speech" he was grossly understating just how bad, low energy, unelectric, ineffective, platitudinous and mendacious it was. It was so bland, so boring, so lacking in fire, passion, conviction and strength that it couldn't keep tired, old, feeble husband Bill awake. No doubt about it! Bill Clinton shut his eyes and dozed off into dreamland last night-with Tim Kaine leaning forward to block the cameras from picking up the embarrassing shot. You can't make this stuff up.

This is the man Hillary wants to put in charge to revive Obama's weak, pathetic, high debt, trickle growth, bad job's economy-that grew last quarter a mere 1.4%. Just as Bill dozed off during Hillary's speech he could just as easily do that at the wheel of the economy and drive it over the cliff-just like he nearly did with his reckless subprime housing program to quickly turn millions of low-income borrowers into middle class folks (SEE).
Trump is a force of nature. Hillary is a spent liberal force. 
Towards the end of President Obama's speech - Hilary could not keep her eyes open and began to look like she had fallen asleep
Worn out from her travels as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton falls asleep at historic event.
It runs in the family. If Hillary fell asleep at such an important event when Secretary of State what will she do as President? By her own words this low energy, tired,   oldeasily fatigued woman limited her term at State to four years because the job (which is far less grueling, stressful and demanding than the presidency) was wearing her out- weakening her immune system and very possibly making her sick. It is possible that another term at State would have completely shattered Hillary's health. Just think then what the presidency (the hardest job in the world)      could do to her?
Again I say with Donald Trump that Hillary lacks the energy, stamina and strength for the presidency-her lack of endurance when Secretary of State (a job she hated and couldn't wait to end) proves it.  
Hillary told Jimmy Kimmel at her great pickle jar opening feat      that "Donald Trump is as healthy as a horse." And so he is-and so she ain't.


Hillary Clinton could have an enormous problem tonight and it's not just the indefatigable, larger than life, Napoleonic 
Donald Trump who spending peanuts on his campaign is pulling ahead of her in the polls nationally and in key battle ground states. The problem is the unrealistic expectations foolishly and stupidly raised by her husband, the Obamas, Joe Biden, Tim Kaine, Cory Booker and others who said of her in idealistic terms that she's a women of true, exceptional greatness and worth more qualified to be president than her husband and Obama (laughter) and Donald J. Trump. The bar that's been set for her tonight is way too high and beyond her reach. Hillary lacks the charisma and communication skills of Obama and her husband which they seem to have forgotten when they praised her so effusively as more qualified for the office then them. 
I swear to God Hillary is more qualified to be president than I ever was.
Indeed, it is unrealistic to assume or hope that Hillary will do on the biggest, most important night of her life what Trump accomplished with his blockbuster speech at the Republican convention last week: outshine every other speaker. Giuliani, Christi, Cruz, Gingrich, Pence, all of them were overshadowed by Trump's impassioned speech. With the exception of Cruz (because of his betrayal) I barely remember their speeches as good as they were. No speech made so great an impression and was seared so deeply into me than Donald Trump's forceful speech.  Last Thursday when Trump accepted his party's nomination he made the night and the convention his own stamping his name all over it and winning the enthusiastic applause of an astonishing 75% of 35 million viewers.
What difference does it make that I'm a tired old woman who could take no more than four years as secretary of state?
But Hillary lacks the stuff for doing that. After tonight's speech the country most likely will better remember Obama, his wife and Hillary's feeble husband with his charming stories and embellished tales. Tonight we will see at best a mediocre performance by a mediocre woman straining and struggling to rise to a standard of greatness transcending her powers. Indeed, Hillary is under enormous pressure to deliver what's impossible for her: an inspiring historic world-class memorable speech like Trump gave in Cleveland last week. Because she's been idealized into a greatest of great souls on the world stage the reality of her speech tonight will likely disappoint many and dampen the enthusiasm that Obama brought to fever pitch yesterday.
But how badly she'll do depends on her energy level-which over the last few months of battling both Bernie and Trump has often been low to the point of exhaustion (as CNN's Chris Cuomo noted on one occasion HERE). Indeed, as Hillary's stamina is very poor (made that way from aging and globe trotting when secretary of state*) the worry and stressfulness of the unrealistic performance that's expected of her tonight could very well be wearing her down as I write.
Hillary's wanted so badly to be the first woman president and to that end plotted, schemed, lied and cheated for years to get to this moment of moments; and now with the nation and world watching if Hillary is anything less than her mediocre best it will be seen as a mini or major disaster like the first Obama-Romney debate-where Obama bombed out for lack of strength. And when her speech ends (if it's as bad as it could get) Trump will be gleefully tweeting to the world, 'You see folks, like I've been saying from the start Hillary doesn't have the energy, stamina and strength for the president's job.'
In an interview with Esquire in 2010 Hillary complained that her job as secretary of state was wearing her out; and that she could not take a second term of it.  If she found that job so taxing how could she handle the presidency with its greater responsibilities and demands? When Trump says that Hillary lacks the stamina and strength for the presidency he's not smearing her or being sexist.



Two articles ago I noted that the 2016 race for the 45th presidency of the United States is extraordinary not only because of political novice Donald Trump's gravity defying triumph in winning big the GOP nomination, and Hillary Clinton being the first female nominee of any major political party, but because these two historic figures are from the same state. This has rarely occurred in US presidential politics. In fact, of the 57 prior presidential contests same state candidates only happened a mere three times in 1860, 1920 and 1944.

Indeed, in 1860 former Republican Congressman Abe Lincoln of Illinois battled Illinois Senator Stephen Douglas for the 16th presidency. In 1920 Ohio Republican Senator Warren Harding fought Ohio Democratic Governor James Cox (FDR was his running mate) for the 29th presidency. And in 1944 New York Republican Governor Thomas Dewey challenged the 32nd president New York's Franklin Roosevelt for the White House.

 Now though Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump like Roosevelt and Dewey are New Yorkers this year's same state race is more like the 1860 and 1920 races.  For Hillary and Trump, like Lincoln, Douglas, Harding and Cox weren't incumbent presidents running for reelection. Whereas in 1944 FDR was the incumbent running to stay in office for an unprecedented fourth term. In fact, like Republican  Donald Trump Lincoln and Harding were agents of change promising a new direction for the nation from the  policies and unpopular presidencies of Democrats James Buchanan and Woodrow Wilson. Indeed, Lincoln ran and won on the Republican platform of stopping the expansion of slavery (which he achieved as president and much, much more); and Harding ran and won on the platform of ending the depression that engulfed the nation after World War I and restoring a robustly growing jobs creating economy-which he achieved as President by slashing taxes, federal spending and crushing regulations. However, though Governor Dewey ran as the change candidate against FDR's New Deal wanting to cut taxes, regulations and shrink the size of government (like Harding campaigned for after World War I) America was at war in Europe and the Pacific; and because a sick and ailing FDR was leading the nation to victory, voters wanting to stay the course reelected him for the third time.

Indeed, this year's same state race is more like 1920 than 1860 or 1944. Though in 1860 we were a terribly divided nation about to plunge into a Civil War over the issue of slavery, and there are growing racial divisions and tensions today with cops shooting blacks and visa versa;  and though in 1944 we were in a world war like we are today but on a far smaller scale with Islamonazi enemies, the nation now as in 1920 is similar in that the central issue is jobs and economic distress. Though the economy isn't depressed as in 1920 it's clearly in a state of decline headed toward a crisis due to massive debt, runaway spending, high taxes and crushing anti-business regulations (the main reasons for the 1920 depression).  

The Forgotten Depression

Moreover, 1920 is similar to 2016, and distinct from 1860 and 1944, in that like this election year the incumbent president Barack Obama (a former college professor) is in his second and last term; this too was the case with two term president Woodrow Wilson who, by the way, like Obama was a college professor. And one last similarity to the present race is that Donald Trump's running mate (Mike Pence) like Warren Harding's (Calvin Coolidge*) was the governor of a state.

*Cool Cal was governor of Massachusetts.

So the big question is this: will history repeat itself? Of the three past same state presidential races Republicans won the first two and lost the third. It's two to one in favor of Republicans; and of the three races the Republican year of 1920 is closer to 2016 than the other two years. However, one thing is clear: the 45th President of the United States will be the 7th from New York State after FDR. And by an astonishing and perhaps meaningful or prophetic coincidence if number 7 is Donald Trump instead of Hillary, when he's sworn into office on January 20, 2017 he will be exactly, precisely, amazingly 70 years, 7 months and 7 days old (see).







Last night Michelle Obama gave the best, most effective and inspiring speech of the evening and perhaps of her life Saying that "America is [still] the greatest nation on earth," and that those who work hard with the will to succeed could make a good life for themselves she then called on the nation to elect as the next president someone who'd "make America even better for our kids." But unluckily Michelle Obama is the wife of a failed two term president whose destructive left wing domestic agenda and incoherent, blundering, incompetent foreign policy has made America and the world a worst place for her kids and ours, and perhaps for generations to come. Indeed, the economic and national security impact of her husband's bad judgment and terrible leadership has raised up tens and millions of angry, fearful, unhappy Americans as shown by the rise of Bernie Sanders on the Left and Donald Trump on the Right. Never before in our history has there been two strong politically opposite populist movements emerge in the same election year crying "ENOUGH!" and calling for a radical change of direction. The closest analogy to this election year is 1968 when the political Left turned violent over the Vietnam War, racial injustice issues and assassinations; and a frightened nation wanting law, order, stability and peace turned to Richard Nixon.
Ironically, Obama whose presiding over a weakening economy, growing racial strife, terrorist violence and a rudderless foreign policy in utter dangerous disarray was the first US president born in the tumultuous 1960s. And Donald Trump (born 1946) was born in the year Richard Nixon began his political career running for Congress.
But returning to Michelle Obama's uplifting "America is great" speech no sooner did it end than the rest of the evening went downhill going from bad to worse. For Michelle was followed by a dark, negative, blistering indictment of her husband's America by Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. Indeed, these two social justice warriors painted a bleak, depressing picture of a country in extreme peril and decline badly suffering from a multitude of economic, social, racial and environmental ills."
Warren and Sanders angrily complained about a dying, eroding, disappearing middle class; 47 million people living in poverty with more joining them daily; millions of unemployed or underemployed workers lacking healthcare benefits with low paying "starvation" jobs; millions of immigrants without legal status facing deportation; job killing free trade agreements destroying America's manufacturing base by shipping US plants overseas; a rigged Wall Street economy (and manipulated stock market) where 85% of newly created wealth goes to the top 1% at everyone else's expense; excessive burning of fossil fuels causing droughts, flooding and hurricanes driving catastrophic world destroying climate change; a broken criminal justice system with too many in jail; an America with too many young people unable to afford college; an America with too many guns on the street (though violent crime is down); too many cops killing blacks(most of whom are violent criminals); too many homeless, too many this too many that-and the litany of ills and grievances went on and on ad nauseam. 
Though he was effusively praised by Warren and Sanders Obama obviously has miserably failed his own agenda to transform America into an economy that works for all-meaning a cradle to grave free stuff utopia paid for by the rich whose wealth is imagined to be unlimited with enough to provide for the needs of all (socialism in a nutshell).
With a government $19 trillion in debt and growing, and over $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities that's crushing innovation, growth and opportunities in the worst recovery since the Great Depression-the message of Warren, Sanders and the Dems is insanely clear: the government isn't big enough, doesn't tax enough, doesn't borrow, spend and print (money) enough, doesn't regulate and control our lives enough. Until government is more "compassionate," loving and caring, until its mighty arms are holding all of us in one great big hug (the message of Cory Booker), until it's more activist, centralized and planning our lives, it is unjust, unfair and barely civilized; it falls short of the ideal of a truly good, great and just society of redistributed wealth.
Indeed, though Obama's been in office eight years getting an  $800 billion stimulus to fix a trickle growth economy (which hasn't worked), healthcare reform to insure the uninsured (millions are still uninsured) and Dodd-Frank to protect consumers from predatory lenders (its making big banks bigger and killing small ones); though Obama's pulled our troops from Iraq (they're still fighting there), killed bin Laden (after seven months of dithering) and is closing Gitmo as promised (releasing terrorists to kill again); though he got same-sex marriage and repeal of "Don't Ask Don't Tell" (demoralizing the military), after listening to Warren and Sanders last night you'd think that zero has been accomplished; that nothing's been done; that Obama's America differs little from the Bush years; that the status quo still reigns. Despite all the praise and accolades that Warren and Sanders showed on Obama they weren't being sincere-they couldn't have been. For they lead millions of mostly middle class voters who are angrily up in arms with what's happening in their lives. And who are Warren and Sanders turning to for the "Hope and Change" salvation that's eluded the country for eight years? Crooked, corrupt, low energy Hillary, the "Queen of the Status Quo," the "ultimate insider," the darling of greedy, cut throat, too big to fail, 1% run Wall Street. The establishment has defeated the socialist revolution, and Bernie and Liz have lost their souls throwing themselves under the Clinton bus.



Could it be? Is it possible that Vladimir Putin is covertly intervening in US politics and aiding Donald Trump (most likely without his knowledge) in his quest for the presidency by doing what he can to undercut and stop Hillary Clinton? Only a fool would deny the possibility. After all, something similar happened in 1983 when Ted Kennedy on behalf of the Dems colluded with the Soviets in trying to defeat Ronald Reagan and elect Walter Mondale-who promised to restore detante and unilaterally freeze the production of nuclear weapons. This was a clear act of treason which Kennedy should have been held accountable for (see).

However, it is certain that Putin prefers Trump in the White House (who he flattered by calling him a "genius") over Hillary who he loathes like Obama. If Hillary is elected it's practically certain she'd be more difficult than Trump to deal with on the lifting of EU and US sanctions which were imposed after Russia annexed Crimea in March 2014. These sanctions, which are hurting Russia in the billions, include restrictions on major Russian state banks and corporations; and the blacklisting of dozens of Russian officials and firms accused of undermining Ukrainian sovereignty. It is practically certain that a Clinton presidency would make the lifting of sanctions contingent on Russia withdrawing its remaining troops from Ukraine, stop supplying anti-Ukrainian rebel separatists with money, training and arms; and lastly returning Crimea to Ukraine. And that would happen in stages. 


But with Trump as president there's no telling what he'd be willing to do as he is unpredictable at this point. He did say confidently that he'd get on better with the Russian leader than Obama is doing; but that's about it. From Putin's viewpoint it's preferable for Russia to have a known unknown like Trump as president than a known known like Clinton (as Rumsfeld would say). 

But last Friday on the 21st during his impassioned acceptance speech in Cleveland, Trump, as he was listing Hillary's foreign policy failures made one glaring and perhaps telling omission: Russia.  Iraq, Libya, Syria, Iran, ISIS, and Clinton's overall disaster in the Middle East, were scathingly mentioned. But not a peep about her failure at Russian Reset, or blaming her for Russia's conflict with Ukraine and annexing of Crimea. Russian analysts could not have failed to notice this omission and probably took it as a sign, despite Ukraine and Crimea, of Trump's good will toward their country and its leader. Putin is certainly hoping that a Trump presidency would recognize Russia's ownership of the Crimean Peninsula and lift all sanctions in exchange for withdrawing its remaining troops from Ukraine, and cutting all aid to pro-Russian Ukrainian separatists.

Indeed, it was after Trump's speech on the following day (the 22nd) that Wikileaks posted the 20,000 DNC hacked emails that have thrown the Dems into pre-convention chaos, and forced Debby W. to resign as DNC chairperson, over evidence of their rigged pro-Clinton primary process.  Coincidence? I'll let you be the judge of that. But one thing is clear: Putin does not want a third term of Barack Obama, and he'll do whatever he can to prevent it.  





Those who are claiming that the hacked DNC emails came from Russia and ultimately from Putin (and this includes the FBI) are lying. It is very probable that professional Russian hackers working with the Kremlin were behind the job for the reasons stated above; but being that these were highly skilled professionals they erase all traces of their hacking so that it can't be traced back to them. In other words, when they exit the server they leave no footprints behind and become invisible. In other words, until the hackers reveal who they are and admit to the deed their identities are unknowable and a matter of speculation.


(Robinson: "It Was An Angry Speech For Angry People")

Clinton to call on Black Lives Matter at Dem convention | TheHill



of the 35 million Americans tuned into Donald Trump's historic 75 minute, double barn burner acceptance speech Thursday a whopping 75% were supportive of him. So much for GOP disunity. In other words, at least 26 million Americans are dark, divisive, mad-as-hell, "crude, racist, xenophobic, fascist" anti-establishment Donald Trumps wanting to take back America from the spinelss pc appeasers, America last globalists and self-serving special interests. Apparently, 75% share Trump's fear and pessimism that Obama's America sucks big time; that it's losing its greatness and is working against them; that Obama's nation with its rigged, booming, middle class hurting stock market and financial system overwhelmingly favoring the rich is in economic, military and geopolitical decline; and that it's losing the War on Islamic Terror in a world that is spinning out of control and is falling apart due to the absence of strong US leadership.  There is much to be angry about-righteously angry.



Obviously these 26 million reject as delusional the sunny, bright, optimistic, rainbows and unicorn Obamunism that things are much better than they seem; that though growing fossil fuel use is dooming the planet (a complete pseudo-scientific lie), and there's an epidemic of murderous gun violence (this is only true in our lawless, anarchical black inner cities) that the nation and world, nevertheless, are more peaceful, less violent and prosperous today than at any time in history; that America is greater, stronger and more respected now than ever  (does any of this make sense?); that the public is being deceived by MSM, Fox, Hannity,  Limbaugh and Trump; that all the wonderful, uplifting, good news of Obama's stellar historic achievements-from ending two wars (when we're still fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan), to the millions getting health insurance (at a huge cost to jobs and a dying middle class), to saving the economy from depression (which was done by George Bush with TARP)-are being drowned out and obfuscated by all the bad sensationalist news of a few random cop killings, some isolated, unconnected, lone wolf "religion of peace"  terror attacks, and a weakening economy of under 2% growth ("the fault of a global slowdown," not of trillions in debt, high taxes, massive anti-business regulations and poor demoralizing economic leadership). 

Under George Bush polls showing that the US was on the wrong track reached a high of 67% in 2008. Under Obama it's exceeded that reaching 73% in September 2011. Today it's at 70% up from 65% a few short months ago (see) .

Now if these 26 million angry Americans-part of the 224 million (or 70%) that see Obama and Washington leading us in the wrong direction-don't want to trash all the great, good, transformational change that Obama has made these last eight years (in building "A More Perfect [Dependency] Union" of increasing poverty and hardship for millions) they must stay the course with progressive, hopeful, "stronger together," low energy, weak, establishment Hillary-who made such a mess of US foreign policy. 

Indeed, Hillary promises to continue Obama's good work and add to his glowing legacy (of ashes and dust) a new, glorious chapter of national greatness for posterity. And to help her write this new chapter she's calling on the race obsessed, anti-cop, capitalist hating Marxist leaders of Black Lives Matter-with their positive, inspiring, unifying vision of a white supremacist America that's oppressing millions of blacks and keeping them in poverty and degradation-trapped in dysfunctional, strife-torn inner city hell holes that worsen by the day as its victims cry out for police and white blood.

Needless to say Obama, Hillary and the Dems are misreading the American people; they've learned nothing from the rise of anti-establishment outsiders Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump; and if present economic, racial, foreign policy and national security trends continue on their downward course they're going to pay a bitter price on Election Day. From now to then the anger and fear over America's decline can only grow, along with the national Trump movement.

And BTW if Eugene Robinson wants to hear a red hot, divisive, angry white man then he should listen to any one of Bernie Sander's scorching, America sucks socialist speeches. Bernie garnered 13 million primary votes; and millions of these are mad-as-hell with Hillary, Kaine and the DNC that plotted to defeat their dear, beloved, crackpot hero for being unelectably too extreme.





That 2016 is perhaps the most unusual presidential election year in American history goes without saying made that way officially Tuesday night with the nomination of billionaire businessman and political novice Donald Trump. But what also makes it unusual is that the two candidates of the major parties are from the state of New York. That has never happened before in American history. And now a New Yorker will be living in the White House which hasn't happened in 71 years when Franklin Roosevelt died in office 71 years ago.
Oddly, on the Democratic side the race for that party's nomination boiled down to Bernie Sanders who was born in Brooklyn, New York and moved to Vermont in his late 20s. And Chicago born Hillary Clinton, who, as First Lady, moved to New York in January 2000 so she could run for US senator of that state. But unlike Bernie and Hillary Donald Trump was born in New York and remains a New Yorker having been one for 70 years.
Now when Hillary as First Lady won the US senate seat from New York it was on November 7, 2000. That was the day that Republican Texas governor George W. Bush defeated vice president Al Gore for the presidency in the closest race in US history. Indeed, the Democrats after two successful terms of Bill Clinton (he left office with a 66% approval rating) amazingly lost the White House when they should have kicked butt. Now Hillary Clinton in 2008 after failing to succeed two terms of Republican Bush is hoping to break the pattern started by Bush and win the White House while a two term president of the same party is in power.
Indeed, Hillary is hoping to become the first presidential candidate since George HW Bush in 1988 to win an election for the incumbent party and continue in the White House. When that happened it fell on a November 8th election date which is the date for this year's contest. However, George HW had the advantage of following the larger than life, very popular Ronald Reagan, a super successful transformational two term Republican President who left office with a 63% Gallop approval rating. The American people loved Reagan and wanted him for a third term in the person of his very loyal VP.
Indeed, unlike today with a weak economy showing signs of deterioration, a world in increasing turmoil and suffering, and domestic Islamic and anti-cop violence and terror on the rise, George H.W. Bush inherited a very unified, prospering and happy nation, and a stable post-Cold War world. Indeed, though two term president Barack Obama (the great anti-Reagan and divider) has been a dismal failure Hillary is lyingly claiming the contrary: that Obama's been a great president with a record of worthy achievements and is vowing to continue his sorry legacy of ashes and dust.
To be sure, the only way Hillary can win in November is by convincing voters that she'd be the lesser of two evils. And that though Trump is offering change which millions desperately want he'd be far worse than Obama-and worse then herself. Or that somehow Trump would return the nation to "disastrous" Republican or Bush era policies that caused the housing crisis and nearly collapsed the economy. However,  that would be an awfully hard case to make since Trump has established himself as radically anti-establishment (GOPe), as well as viciously anti-Bush. With the Bushes having ditched the Convention it will prove nearly impossible for Hillary and the Dems to make a credible case (as was done to McCain and Romney) that Trump will be George W's third term.
When asked about the amount of 
 Dewitt Clinton on a $1000 bill.
I've written about this before (see) and it's worth repeating that Hillary isn't the first US senator from New York with the name Clinton to run for the presidency. In 1812 governor and former US senator Dewitt Clinton from New York ran for the presidency against James Madison on the Federalist Party ticket. He lost in a close race.





As I've previously written, on the 16th day of June 2015 (16 days from the publication of Ann Coulter's book "Adios, America" on illegal immigration, and 16 days before an illegal alien killed Kate Steinle in San Francisco) Donald Trump (16 months from Election Day 2016) announced his run for 1600 Pennsylvania Ave-making illegal immigration and border security the focus of his campaign (see and see).

*Today, July 18th, the start of the RNC when Donald Trump will be nominated the Republican presidential nominee, is 114 days to Election Day or 16 weeks (see).

I also wrote (see) that the important date of April 26th*, when Trump won five northeastern primary states virtually making him the presumptive GOP presidential nominee, fell on the 316th day of his campaign-which oddly was the 116th day or 16th week of the year (see). Moreover, as I  noted, not only was April 26th the 316th day of Trump's historic campaign it was also auspiciously its 45th week-the number of the next President.
* April 26th was  Melania Trump's 46th birthday (see)  .
 The GOP has joined the Hair Club For Real Men.
But it wasn't until the following week with Trump's victory in Indiana (when Cruz and Kasich called it quits) that Trump effectively secured the nomination as announced by Reince Priebus (see). Oddly, Indiana (which ranks 16th in population) was the 19th state to join the Union doing so in 1816, the 16th year of the 19th century. By the way, the next Republican to live in the White House will be the 19th in American history (see).
Is Trump to Clinton what Obama was too McCain eight years ago? The "Hope & Change" candidate? The hope he can stop and reverse Obama's change?
Needless to say the prospering state of Indiana (a conservative economic model for the nation) was politically propitious for Trump; and now auspiciously he's picked its very successful governor Mike Pence as his running mate. Amazingly, on Friday when Trump announced his selection of Pence it was 116 days or 16 weeks to Election Day (see). And when on Saturday at the Hilton Trump and Pence* appeared together publicly for the first time it was the 16th day of July.
*It's also interesting to note that Governor Pence was born on a Sunday and Donald Trump on a Friday. Sunday and Friday are the 1st and 6th days of the week giving us the numbers 1 & 6 (see).
No one but God knows who the next President and VP will be. But could the above numeric patterns of 16s in this 16th year of the 21st century be a providential sign that conservative Republican Mike Pence will prove a big factor in Trump winning the presidency? We can only hope so. But there appear to be other signs suggesting that Pence will  prove to be a valuable asset for Trump in November. These are as follows:
What Trump and FDR have in common (besides being born and raised in New York) is their patriotic nationalism, indomitable strength and the immense drive to win.
Donald Trump is a native of New York a state that has produced 6 of our 44 presidents (see). This means that if elected in November Trump at age 70 would be the 7th New Yorker to be President following Franklin Roosevelt who was the 6th*. Now by chance or providence Mike Pence was born June 7, 1959 or the 6th month and 7th day of 1959 giving us the numbers 6 &7. Moreover, when Pence was born Donald Trump was in his 667th week on this earth (see)**.
*Oddly if Trump wins the presidency he will be sworn into office on the 70th year, 7th month and 7th day of his amazing life (see).
**When Trump began his candidacy on June 16, 2015 it was the 167th day of the year-the 67th number of the 100 series (see).
Furthermore, as I mentioned elsewhere, FDR was elected the 6th New York resident to be President on November 8, 1932. In other words, this November 8th* will be the 84th** anniversary of FDR's landslide victory over Herbert Hoover. And lastly, as the number 16 seems to be politically auspicious for Trump, he's now within striking distance of following FDR into the White House as the 7th President from New York, it just so happens that FDR was the 32nd President of the United States-32 is 16 doubled.
*On Election Day November 8th Donald Trump will be exactly 25,716 days old-a five digit number ending in 16. BTW, 8 is half 16 (see).
*84 years translates into 1008 months of calendar time (84x12=1008). 1008 is a multiple of 16 63 times.
And lastly, underscoring the significance of Indiana for Donald Trump as a possible sign of triumph in November was Hillary Clinton's loss of that state to Bernie Sanders (the populist Donald Trump of the Left) in an upset victory- which I wrote about HERE. Did underdog Bernie's defeat of Hillary in Indiana foreshadow underdog Donald being helped by Indiana's Mike Pence to defeat Hillary in November? As of today with the Baton Rouge and Dallas cop killings, the jihadist massacres in France and Orlando and the weakening of the economy (three straight quarters of GDP decline) things are looking brilliant for "the law and order," give-ISIS-hell, "make America great and safe again" presidential candidate and his terrific running mate.

Pence the Con is a gift for the Dems and will sink Trump and the Republican Party!  Here's why:

Pense's stand on some key issues

Abortion: As governor, Pence signed into law a sweeping bill banning abortion if a fetus has a "genetic abnormality" such as Down syndrome and holding doctors legally liable if they had knowingly performed such procedures. The law also required that aborted fetal tissue be buried or cremated. A federal judge blocked the law from going into effect.

The environment: Pence has frequently expressed skepticism about the reality of climate change and fought back against key environmental acts designed to curb carbon emissions. In 2014, he told NBC's Chuck Todd that he doesn't know if climate change "is a resolved issue in science today." He wrote a letter to President Obama in 2015 saying he wouldn't comply with new Environmental Protection Agency regulations for coal plants.

Guns: Pence has an "A" rating from the NRA, and while in Congress he regularly voted with the gun lobby. That included voting against an assault weapons ban — something Trump has mentioned supporting during this election.

Immigration: In a December tweet, Pence called Trump's ban on Muslims entering the United States "offensive and unconstitutional." He has, though, supported strict immigration measures and opposed the resettlement of Syrian refugees in Indiana.

LGBT rights: Pence helped pass one of the nation's first "religious freedom" laws that protected people and businesses who wanted to refuse service to LGBT people if they cited religious objections. After businesses pulled out of expansion plans into the state, Pence faced immense pressure to roll back the law, which he did. Trump has actually been fairly open when it comes to rights for gay and transgender people.

Trade: Pence has offered support for the Trans Pacific Partnership, which Trump has routinely attacked, going so far as to call it a "rape" of the country. Pence in 2014 said, "Trade means jobs, but trade also means security. The time has come for all of us to urge the swift adoption of the Trans Pacific Partnership."




Pence will sink Trump like GHW Bush sank Reagan: Bush opposed Reaganomics (ridiculing it as "voodoo economics"), was pro-Detente (thought Reagan's anti-communism extreme), voted for the Civil Rights Amendment which Reagan opposed. The American people chose Reagan over Carter and cared nothing about Bush's anti-Reagan positions, and Reagan's alleged racism, because he projected an image of strength promising to restore America's greatness at a time when we were in economic, military and geopolitical decline.

BTW, according to Pew Research of the top 14 national issues gun control ranks 5th, immigration 6th, race relations 10th, global trade 11th, environment (climate change) 12th, abortion 13th, and LBGT issues dead last in 14th place. The top four issues: the economy, terrorism, foreign policy and healthcare (Obamacare is hugely unpopular) favor Trump-Pence over Hillary and the Dems.




On the day that Barack Obama and John Kerry were festively congratulating themselves on the first anniversary of their completely worthless $150 billion nuke deal with Islamo-nazi "Death to America" terrorist Iran terrorism struck Nice, France ruining their day of appeasement, stupidity and infamy. A Moslem suicide terrorist armed with an 18 ton refrigerator truck bearing guns and grenades plowed into a large crowd of pedestrians at full speed walking on a promenade celebrating Bastille Day killing 84 and injuring more.
As yesterday July 14th was France's July 4th (Independence Day) the innocent victims of the Islamist attack were celebrating "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity," the values of the French Revolution and Democracy. But for the mass murdering terrorist, Tunisian born Mohamed Bouhlel, Bastille Day was a godless day that comes from hell hated by God with murderous rage which he became a channel for. 
For "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity" are unIslamic values that conflict with the Koran (Islam's constitution of tyranny)-a declaration of endless war against democracy and infidel humanity until the later are conquered and the former is no more.
This jihadist who went on the rampage was a soldier of Allah in a 1400 year old war unleashed by the Prophet Mohammed to advance the political and religious supremacy of Islam. Not "Liberty" but despotism and slavery. Not "Equality" but the oppression of minorities (women, gays, Christians, Jews, pagans). Not "Fraternity" but US versus THEM division, conflict and hate. That is what Mohammed Bouhlel  was fighting for when he martyred himself after killing liberty loving Frenchmen in droves. And that too is what Iran is fighting for in their jihad against America, Israel and the Democratic West.
Yesterday was the second worst July 14th in human history. The first just one year before was worse as it saw a weak, self-serving, appeasing US president looking to his legacy expanding Iran's capabilities to spread its evil influence and power across the region and world. It also didn't stop them getting the bomb. Go a head 
 and prove me
Oh look! A Jihadist armed with a large speeding 18 ton truck just killed at least 84 people causing the same number of deaths (and injuring more) than the Virginia Tech, Sandy Hook, San Bernardino and Aurora shooters combined. He now holds the world's record  for one single man mass murdering others exceeding the record held by Anders Breivik in Norway by seven deaths. It's horrific what one bloodthirsty Islamic terrorist with a truck can do. I guess those like our befuddled president who reduce mass shootings to a gun control problem need now to restrict who gets truck drivers licenses because truck jihad copy cats are coming.



Obama: "Islam Is A Religion That Preaches Peace" | Video | RealClearPolitics

Obama Administration Imposes Transgenderism Nationwide - Breitbart

Above is a Moslem man cross dressed as a Moslema (Moslem woman). If he's a violent, radical, bloodthirsty jihadist who thinks he's transgender Obama, Clinton and the PC Left would deny that his self-identity as Moslem was valid; but they would validate his self-identity as a female.

If an extremely violent, bloodthirsty, sadistic man who enjoys making people suffer or killing them thinks he's transgender (believes he's a woman trapped in a male body who experiences the world like a female) Obama, Hillary and the PC Left (rejecting the truth that he has a treatable mental obsession, fantasy or disorder    see) would urge us to accept him (violence and all, and despite the gap between his mentality and genetic reality) as really, truly, authentically female.

But if an equally violent man strongly self-identifies as Moslem, and kills in the name of his God and faith, Obama, Hillary and the Left would deny that he's truly, really, authentically Islamic. In other words, no matter how strongly a violent Moslem (jihadist) feels like a Moslem, sees the world and experiences life as a Moslem-no matter if he's a frequent mosque goer and practices all the rituals of the faith-to Obama, Hillary and the Left his religious identity isn't valid, and he's a fake.

Indeed, leftists would have us believe  that a jihadist's self-identity as Moslem was a mental obsession and fantasy out of whack with true Islamic reality; and that he shouldn't be respected as truly Moslem, but stigmatized as a perverter of the faith-no matter how badly we might offend him.



What does transgenderism and liberalism have in common? Both are treatable mental disorders. I should know. I was once a liberal.

In truth, for Obama, Hillary and the Left a Moslem man isn't truly Moslem unless he's a harmless, peace-loving, progressive liberal like themselves. This of course would exclude Mohammed, the warlord founder of the faith, who was a mass murdering terrorist thug; and who (among his many atrocities and crimes) completed the ethnic cleansing of Medina of Jews by ordering the beheading of hundreds of Jewish men in front of their women and children. BTW, the Jewish women and children were sold into slavery; the only Jewish man who survived that "religion of peace" massacre was a convert to Islam (see).




But it gets worse. Adding to the leftist confusion and incoherence of who is truly Moslem Obama rejects as Islamic the violent terrorist Islamic State (ISIS) but accepts as genuinely Islamic violent radical terrorist Iran, which he deferentially refers to as the ISLAMIC REPUBLIC.


In other words, for Obama, Hillary and the Left violent terrorist "Death to America and Israel" Iran practices true "religion of peace" Islam, as if it's an exemplary model of what an Islamic state should be. Is it any wonder why US foreign policy is in such incoherent disarray and is leading America and the world deeper and deeper into peril and tragedy? And who is it that wants to stay the course and continue Obama's legacy in foreign policy?  Hillary Clinton, one of its brilliant authors and architects. And she says Donald Trump is a dangerous man? 





As Commander-in-Chief Donald Trump wants to equal or surpass in brutality and inspiring fear Saddam Hussein when fighting our Islamic terrorist enemies. But Hillary, on the contrary, wants to continue in the way of another Hussein with the first name Barack, a reluctant warrior weak in the use of force when fighting merciless, menacing Islamic jihad. Which of the two candidates is more suitable to lead us in the war against a fanatical enemy hell-bent on our destruction? An enemy every bit as evil, power mad and bloodthirsty as the Nazis and Japanese who we fire bombed and nuked into surrender, submission and defeat?  
Would she have preferred they used the Koran as a guide? 
When Ginsberg was sworn in as a supreme she swore to God  to uphold the Constitution. How could she do that when she doesn't believe in it? And (like Obama) would like to tear it up and replace it with something radically different?




If America the great, good and beautiful is in reality an ugly, evil "White Supremacist Nation" politically, socially and economically rigged to keep blacks in poverty, oppression, degradation and sin then how did   black American Barack Obama become the most powerful black man in all of human history? Isn't Obama's astonishing success in becoming a two term US President proof that "White Supremacist America" is a complete lie? That it only exists in the mind's of racially obsessed America-hating Leftists, grievance spewing race pimps and the low info   ignorant? And that the millions of blacks living in poverty and despair in our depressed, lawless, strife-torn inner cities is largely self-caused-having zero to do with racist cops, racist courts and a so-called "white racist controlled"  political, social and economic system?
Surely if Barack Obama could rise so high in prominence, power and wealth any black person with the will to succeed and surmount what racial difficulties exist (every society has them) can achieve the American Dream and live a good a rewarding life-as many blacks do. 
And as Black Lives Matter is based on the outrageous lie of a White Supremacist America that criminally discriminates against blacks using cops, courts and economic discrimination to kill and massively jail them and keep them down why would Martin Luther King, a man of God with enormous integrity and character who loved the truth and hated lies, favor BLM and march with them? King's Civil Rights Movement was from heaven, BLM is from hell; King (who opposed the Black Panthers in his day, seewouldn't  have legitimized them like Obama has done.
Alveda King niece of MLK.
If Martin Luther King were President instead of Barack Obama he would never have invited "No Justice, No Peace" "Fry Cops Like Bacon"  BLM leaders to the White House like Obama did . It's more than likely he'd have denounced BLM (like he did Huey Newton and the Black Panthers) as a [GODLESS] movement of divisive, mindless, insane race haters just like his niece Minister Alveda King ( speaking authoritatively in her uncle's name) is doing.
"Godless," now? Goodness you are full of yourself. Won't that come as a surprise to the pastors and priests marching in peaceful protest with BLM?
As Alveda King says her great uncle put God (the Divine Author of our Individual Rights and Liberties) at the center of the 1960s Civil Rights Movement and used Him (the Creator and Father of the human race) as a unifying principle to join blacks, whites and everyone else together.
What is BLM's unifying principle? If not God then what? Without such a powerful compelling principle how could BLM hope to succeed? With most Americans hostile to BLM, seeing it as a radical movement of divisive, violent, toxic, anti-white race haters (its public image) how does it expect to succeed like King's inclusive, peaceful, nonviolent, "God is Love" mainstream movement?
MLK's children: MLK III and Minister Bernice King. They talk the talk about BLM, but won't walk the walk and march with them.
How presumptuous of you and O'Reilly. It just so happens that
MLK's son and daughter both say he would have supported BLM. In fact His son said his dad would be "PROUD' of BLM. But, then, surely they don't know their own father as well as you and Bill O'Reilly..
Well, that was embarrassing for you and Billy. 😉
Actions always speak louder than words, friend. Where is the actual, active, passionate support of Bernice King and MLK III for BLM? Since it started three years ago how many BLM meetings, rallies and marches have they attended? How much money have they raised for the cause? Obama invited BLM's leaders to the White House. But when have the King children invited them to their homes? To date the Kings' support for BLM seems more lip (perhaps to appease friends and relatives who support it) than anything real and concrete.
And, BTW, like Alveda King Bernice is a Christian minister and pro-life, pro-family, anti-gay social conservative; and like Alveda she has nothing philosophically in common with the secular progressive, Marxist leaning BLM leadership-and its simplistic reduction of all       black socio-economic problems to the lie of White Racism. Hence, in her interview with Amy Goodman (which you linked) King commends BLM for "bringing attention to the suffering of blacks," and that's it; her praise goes know further; as King understands that underlying the problems and pathologies plaguing black inner cities (poverty, gang violence, drug abuse, illiteracy, broken families and schools)
is a profound crisis of values; and because the solution is spiritual not political or racial what she doesn't say is that BLM has the right answers-which it absolutely doesn't.
So now you see into the minds and hearts of MLK's children, not just MLK?
Goodness, you've tangled yourself up here. I will pray for you.
People should be judged by what they do or fail to do, not by what they say. What's striking is the gulf between the Kings' very few words of support for BLM and their actions in supporting it which to date are non-existent. Compare them to their father and the anti-war movement. MLK not only passionately spoke out against the Vietnam War and in support of the anti-war movement he participated in its marches and rallies (despite the frequent violence) demanding an end to the war.
After three years and dozens and dozens of BLM rallies across the country demanding an end to anti-black police violence the Kings have kept aloof from the cause not going to a single rally. What sensible person based on a few words of support for BLM followed by such glaring inaction would interpret it, as you do, as a sign of resounding support? It would seem that you're grasping at straws and reading too much into their words. Instead of a passionate commitment to BLM their support seems quite less than lukewarm.
In sum, Bill O'Reilly is correct: just as Bernice King and MLK III haven't marched with BLM neither would their father. And if he were President the White House would be off-limits to them-as well as Al Sharpton and every other deranged "racism-is-everywhere" Leftist ideologue.












Newt Gingrich: 'It is more dangerous to be black in America'-USA Today' 



But as statistics overwhelmingly and tragically show blacks have  far more to fear from each other than from whites, or from anyone else in America. Why? Because of the unique nationwide collapse of entire black communities into lawlessness, anarchy and anything goes immorality with black on black murder, rape, theft and violent crime worsening by the year the nightmare of deadly, strife-torn inner city life. Why? It's not anti-black bigotry or cops killing blacks (both of which have greatly declined over the last 50 years) that's causing blacks to violently turn on each other with such vicious animosity. The cause is a cancer inside the black America called welfare liberalism.

Indeed,  this crisis is caused by desperate, bankrupt, scapegoating liberals who demonize white Americans as differing little in their mentalities from old Jim Crow Democrats; and exploit the largely self-caused ills and miseries that plague blacks to keep alive the myth that we're a racist nation of privileged white supremacists that's rigged against blacks and oppress them. This utterly false, groundless, divisive lie (disproved by America making Obama the most powerful black man in human history) is advanced to avoid responsibility for the colossal failure of the liberal welfare state-a corrupt and dehumanizing system that traps millions in generational poverty and a web of social pathologies, hopelessness and racist lies.  

And the solutions proposed by race obsessed liberals and our clueless, divisive, pro-BLM president are what? Not the moral regeneration of black America starting with the individual and personal responsiblity; not teaching young people to become good productive law-abiding citizens with respect for authority; not ending the spiritually corrosive poison of government dependency that destroys character, the work ethic and the incentive to marry and raise kids normally; what they propose are  useless measures that keep the welfare status quo alive such as gun control, reining in police, reforming the criminal justice system and more money for war on poverty programs when trillions have been spent to no avail.

Apart from too few black conservatives in politics, the media, academia and church ministries blacks have no one to lead them out of poverty, illiteracy, drug abuse, crime and the plague of out of wedlock births. As thousands of angry, deluded blacks march across the country protesting the lie of institutional racism and anti-black police violence cops are killed and hurt and the streets of Chicago, Baltimore and South Central LA run red with blood as blacks kill blacks in droves.

The Age of Liberalism is over, bankrupt, finished, done. After 50 years of the War on Poverty moving all the ways to the radical LEFT with catastrophic results blacks have nowhere left to go but RIGHT. Black America is ready for a revolution. In the years ahead you will see an increasing number blacks waking up to the truth about welfare liberalism and joining our ranks realizing that their last best hope for social, economic and spiritual renewal is American Conservatism.





(This piece is about the Clinton/Gingrich Welfare Reform Bill)




(Reposted from November 6, 2015) 


jonah_goldberg.jpgMorgan Freeman, Don Lemon, 
 In his October 30 National Review column Jonah Goldberg invoked the two politicians' family backgrounds to justify his observation that Ben Carson may be "more authentically African-American" than Obama, pointing to the fact that "Obama's mother was white and he was raised in part by his white grandparents," while Carson "grew up in Detroit, the son of a very poor, very hard-working single mother"
When I posted the comment below on Media Matters it sparked a number of  lively debates on racism, welfare, inner city life,  Martin Luther King and much more.
In an interview with NPR to promote his latest film, The 
Magic of Belle Isle, the popular Oscar-winning actor [Morgan Freedman] said that people “conveniently 
forget that Barack had a mama, and she was white — very white American, Kansas, middle of America There was no argument about who he is or what he is. America's first black president hasn't arisen yet. He’s not America’s first black president — he’s America’s first mixed-race president.”

And if someone with Obama's coloration and features were to walk into a room right now, what percentage of Americans, Black or White, would immediately assume that he was a White man? Racism is situational. Glenn Beck said that Obama had "a deep-seated hatred for white people." In our culture, President Obama is defined as Black by those who would not see him as White. That and the fact that he was born in Kenya, according to morons like Donald Trump.


ApolloSpeaks  blessed56 


Even more idiotic than Trump's harmless birtherism is 

our utterly ignorant moron of a president telling comedian Marc Maron the dangerous divisive racist lies that racism is genetic in White America; that Whites are innately anti-black, that it's passed on from generation to generation "through their DNA." If that were true then how does this imbecile account for the fact that our predominantly White "genetically racist" society made him the most powerful black man in human history? With good reason Beck said what he did. Only an anti-White racist could make such a hateful, false statement.




classicalmusiclover  ApolloSpeaks


You do realize that Obama's reference to "in our DNA" was a metaphor, not an assertion that racism is literally genetic, don't you?

It's actually a very common metaphor for "part of our culture and upbringing."

As the old song goes, "you've got to be carefully taught." That's how it is passed on.



So it's only metaphorical that Obama is supporting an overtly black racist movement organized on the proven leftist lie that America is a white supremacist society with cops across the country leading a murderous race war against poor, suffering, innocent, victimized blacks? In other words, we shouldn't take his support literally?


classicalmusiclover  ApolloSpeaks 


There is a lot of potted right-wing ideology and distortion in your comment. And you turn the "Black Lives Matter" movement into such a caricature that it can only be a strawman.


White supremacism runs deep in American history. It is real. That doesn't mean that America is necessarily a white supremacist society, but it does mean that there are unacknowledged anti-black biases that often go unacknowledged and have had a corrosive structural effect. Nowhere is this clearer than in policing and in the disproportionate incarceration rates.


Your literalism will be your undoing; it certainly is your unmasking as an idiot.


calls Obama a “Halfrican-



And it was only metaphorical that Obama sat in the pews of a racist church for 20 years listening to the ravings of his black supremacist mentor (so hateful Oprah couldn't stand him) that God hates the white race? And blacks (God's chosen people) are destined to rule? Oh, that's right, the compulsive liar wasn't there when Wright gave his hateful incendiary sermons.





And it was only metaphorical that Obama supported a violent homophobic black racist gangsta wannabe [Trayvon Martin] who murderously tried to ground and pound an innocent community watchman into unconsciousness and death thinking (as Rachel Jeantel told Piers Morgan) that he was "a gay predator out to rape him"? How despicable, shameful and hypocritical of Obama to say "If I had a son he'd look like Trayvon." Truth is he wouldn't have let his eldest daughter date such a sick, twisted, dangerous kid (see).


And let's not forget that Eric Holder was metaphorically speaking when he said in 2009 that Americans are a "nation of cowards" on racial issues-despite a devastating Civil War claiming 500,000 lives, nationwide support for the 1960s Civil Rights Movement, and a $19 trillion War On (mostly black) Poverty.


BTW, the moral collapse of our inner city ghettos (largely caused by the corrosive social welfare state as FDR warned) disproportionally into the most violent and lawless places in America is what underlie the "disproportionate black incarceration rate." "White Racism" is a scapegoat to hide the catastrophic failure of liberal social welfare policies (with trillions in transferred funds) to end poverty and improve black lives. Instead of the promised conquest of poverty we have more of it and worse than ever as inner city life (once decent, law-abiding communities with strong families and work values) are now progressive created war zones, hell holes and wastelands. The road to hell (and a third world America) is paved with liberal compassion.


NYC, Brooklyn and Queens





Obama said racism is endemic (that is what is meant by the metaphor "in our DNA") to the US, not specifically white people. That is only "patently false" if we ignore...

- slavery

- the Indian Wars

- Native American reservations

- segregation

- Japanese internment camps

- Jim Crow laws

- socioeconomic inequality

- voter suppression efforts

- unequal mandatory sentencing laws

- disparate treatment from law enforcement

- chronic poverty

- housing discrimination

- declaring blacks to be only a fraction of a human being in our Constitution

- the 1790 Naturalization Act barring non-whites from becoming citizens

- discrimination against darker Southern European immigrants in the first part of the 20th century

- the intense concern of Trump supporters with immigrants from Latin America, but not the many undocumented coming from Eastern Europe

- the proliferation of violent white supremacist groups

- lynching

- the KKK

- poll taxes

- prohibitions against interracial marriage

- disparate loan practices from banks

- the fact that many citizens continue to hold discriminatory views toward other ethnic groups

- "Yellow Peril" racism against Chinese immigrants- the Chinese Exclusion Act

- the Alien Land Law restricting what property Asians buy

- the formation of the Native American Party (aka the Know Nothing party) on purely racist grounds

- the National Origins Formula in immigration law, designed to limit immigration from non-Nordic countries

- the Mexican Repatriation program, which forcefully removed US citizens and sent them to Mexico

- racist Tea Party depictions of Obama

- birtherism


So yeah, except for all of that and numerous other incidents I must leave off for the sake of brevity, it is "patently false." If we reduce all of US history to a single day in November, 2008, there is absolutely no racism in this country




Bull! Obama was literally referring to the contemporary genetic racism of white Americans against blacks, and no other group. But do tell me, why did you exclude from your list of white racism the white man created liberal welfare state that traps millions of blacks in poverty, degradation, oppression and sin? That's destroyed inner city communities, families, schools, churches and work values; that's turned black ghetto's into war zones and morally dehumanizing lawless wastelands of crime, violence, drug abuse, illiteracy, one parent homes, disease and death? How could you treat something so provably destructive to millions of black Americans as not being racist?


And where is black racism on your list?


Where's the violent Black (supremicist) Panthers with their insane call for a suicidal race war? Where's Farrakhan and the white hating, anti-semitic Nation of Islam? Where's the Afro-centric racist churches like the sh*t hole Obama sat in for 20 years? Where's your mention of James Cone and his poisonous Black Liberation Theology with its black Christ and white hating God? Where's Black Lives Matter with its bullsh*t race war of cops against blacks that is worsening the nightmare of inner city life as cops are inhibited from doing their jobs in enforcing the law?


And where are race hustlers and grievance pimps like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson on your list? Evil men who thrive on black misery while infecting black minds with the big lie that America is racially rigged against them? Why aren't they on your list?


Consider this post an addition to your one-sided, hate driven, pathetic racist list making it more balanced, rounded, complete and fair.



"Why did you exclude from your list of white racism the white created liberal welfare state that traps millions of blacks in poverty, degradation, oppression and sin?"


Yes...blacks had full equality...full rights...full access...equal opportunity...until the The Great Society created a problem that did not exist...



The remedy for poverty isn't government dependency which FDR warned was "an opiate that corrupts moral character"-creating moral and spiritual poverty and all the social pathologies that spring from it











Learning to distinguish between good and evil, right and wrong, what we ought and out not do. In other words, choosing to be good citizens. It's not anymore complicated than that.









It would mean the moral regeneration of inner city community and family life which has disintegrated into anarchy, lawlessness and violence on a horrific scale never before seen in this country.


 RobRBarron  ApolloSpeaks


...so let's cut federal aid to the inner cities even more...including health care and education...

It's worked so well to date...

lawlessness and violence on a horrific scale never before seen in this country.

You weren't alive in the 60's, eh?




The Wire (2002) Poster



I was very much alive then. And as any old-timer living in our inner city ghettos will tell you community spirit, religious values, the tight-knit two parent family structure and respect for authority (parents, schools, churches, gov't, police, courts) has catastrophically eroded. I strongly recommend that you see the HBO award winning crime drama series "The Wire" for an education into the nightmare of contemporary inner city life. This outstanding series about inner city Baltimore is considered so authentic and authoritative that some major colleges and universities like Harvard use it in sociology courses. It will tear your heart out.



Moreover, welfare should be a temporary measure: a trampoline to a self-reliant and productive life, not a trap and a way of generational life.



There it is! Another one so poorly informed that he repeats the lie about "generational welfare" and "lifelong welfare." What's next a story about the people you have seen pulling into Social Services in their brand new BMW and going home to watch The Price is Right on their 72 inch surround sound TV?

There is a LIFETIME limit of 24 months and in somestates 20 months on the length of time one can receive welfare.

It is possible to receive SNAP and Medicaid benefits for extended periods but most of those are children, the elderly and people who work full time for such generous and benevolent employers as Walmart but aren't paid enough to live on.

Ignorance can be excused if one makes the effort to educate oneself. If the problem is stupidity, well, that just can't be fixed.



Intergenerational Transmission of Welfare Dependency




There is no comparison between disability insurance and welfare, they are completely different things. Nowhere in this country is there more than a 24 month LIFETIME cap on welfare benefits and most who avail themselves of it, AS A LAST RESORT, never use that entire 24 months.

That wasn't even worthy of a "nice try," it was just a pathetic attempt to find something that justifies your desire to feel superior to others. I have never encountered anyone with a need to feel superior who was superior to anyone.




LOL!!! This study (one of many many many) proves beyond doubt that if parents become welfare dependents, the likelihood of their children eventually becoming welfare recipients (creating a destructive, degrading, work ethic eroding, welfare-entitlement mentality) also increases. This study uses DI as emblematic of the greater problem caused by the totality of such programs. Fact is (as the study shows) when parents are awarded just DI, the likelihood that one of their adult children will participate in DI rises by "5 percentage points over the next five years, and 11 percentage points over the next decade." DI combined with other anti-poverty welfare programs has a multiplying effect on these percentages.

FYI the reason for Bill Clinton's "Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996" was to the break the cycle of welfare dependency which creates the intergenerational welfare mentality and culture and its attendant social pathologies that have decimated our inner cities and lost the War on Poverty despite $19 trillion in redistributed wealth over the last 50 years. The liberal welfare state is not just a failure it's going broke and going the way of its European counterparts unsustainably supporting a great and growing mass of unemployed/unproductive recipients many of whom are poorly skilled, uneducated immigrants. 

I just love ropeadoping libs. Here's a few more (racist) studies that you can howl about.




Now who's the poorly informed, stuck on stupid ignoramus?



Why do you hate black people so much? Did one cut you off in the parking lot last week?



Along with my black conservative friends I hate radical






Your mother must be so proud her darling son is so full of hatred.

And tell me more about how your best friend is black



My best black friend doesn't consider himself black. He treats his skin color as the lowest, basest, and least important part of his being, as do all rational blacks and human beings.



So he is a self-hating African-American. Interesting.

Are you a self-hating Jew?




Like Martin Luther King he puts his spiritual humanity above his skin color and race. But maybe you're too much of a leftwing materialist to understand this. 



 AronLump  ApolloSpeaks 


You said he considered his skin color the basest part of his person.


You didn't say it was the factor of least concern.


Words have meaning, you know.


(And FYI, had this been 1968, you would have been one of the people cheering at Dr King's assassination.)



Which is more important to your life and well-being, your skin color or your brain, lungs, heart, kidneys and other vital organs?

In the early 60s I was a teenage admirer of JFK living in New York. In the late 60s I was a radical counterculture lefty destroying myself and trashing New York.




Your question is completely irrelevant.

Your statement is very likely false.



And you're the typical left-wing moral coward. I'll answer the question for you. You're vital organs are more important than your skin color. And going further the soul (spirit) that gives your body life is more important than your vital organs. And by "soul (mental and moral faculties)" is what Dr. King meant by the famous words " the content of our characters." "Character" (which transcends race, ethnicity and gender) for King (and every black conservative) is the very essence of our beings-the most important and highest part of our humanity; what distinguishes us from the animals and beasts. When you die you can't take your skin color, body and vital organs with you to heaven; but you do take your soul, mind, spirit, character.


"Character is destiny" it determines your path in life. Those blacks, whites and others who give supreme value to skin color are lost to their spiritual humanity (the essence of their beings) and are among the worst members of their race. In other words, what you consider "irrelevant" was of the utmost importance to Martin Luther King as it is for all black conservatives. There is a crisis today of character in black America. Way too many blacks are making bad moral choices, becoming bad citizens and ending up dead or in jail. Those who think this is "irrelevant" are useless, worthless, ignorant fools, and are part of the problem.


MLK was no conservative.

But nice try.

Beyond that, tl;dr.





Martin Luther King, the God-loving, Christ worshiping, faith over race Baptist minister, was no traditional morality hating, anything goes, secular progressive. If he were alive today, like his daughter Bernice, he'd be against abortion, gay marriage, pornography, legalization of pot, the Black Panthers, Black Liberation Theology, the Nation of Islam, Afro-centric ministers like Rev. ("God damn America") Wright and the violent, sick,"kill the cops" BLM movement. Moreover, he wouldn't be too keen about America's first black (racially divisive demagogic) president

In other words, for the man who said:

“Bound by the chains of his own sin and finiteness, man needs a Savior…. Man cannot save himself, for man is not the measure of all things and humanityis not God.”

they'd be no place in the secularized (God is government) Democrat Party today.



You are the poster child for the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

Remind me, why was MLK in Nashville when he was shot?

And what's the 'Democrat Party?'




In his last

sermon before he died Martin Luther King said

 "I just want to do God's will."

From a theological and moral perspective what did MLK mean by the term "God"? As King's understanding of God

was the directing principle of

his civil rights activities and life the answer

to  this question is key to understanding

his character (who he truly was). Answer

my question and then I'll answer yours.


AronLump  ApolloSpeaks


Here's a hint: he was in Nashville marching with striking union sanitation workers.


Unlike conservatism, progressives are happy to welcome all comers, from anti-theists to evangelicals.


Do you honestly expect me to answer the question 'what is God?'




Progressives are happy to welcome anyone who embraces the progressive agenda, just as conservatives welcome anyone (gays, atheists, Moslems) who embrace conservatism.



I notice you addressed neither of the other points you mentioned.

And the Republican is explicitly opposed to both atheism and Islam.

What's the matter, coward: afraid to admit why Dr King was in Memphis?




As King himself indicated in his last sermon before his death he was in Memphis because he believed he was doing "God's will." And for no other higher reason.


Atheist Free Market Republicans



Conservative Atheist S.E. Cupp




The pro-Republican Islamic Free Market Institute




Conservative Moslem Republican Dr. Zuhdi Jasser




Every properly informed, clear thinking American, and human beings everywhere (Moslem and non-Moslem) oppose Political Islam/Islamic Supremacism with its oppressive, totalitarian union of mosque and state and endless war against all infidels


"Democrat Party" should read Demo-Rat Party.

Sorry for the confusion.




Sultan Knish: The Death of the American Welfare State



What difference would it make if innocent, cleared of all crimes Hillary weren't President? A great, great deal. Based on her exemplary record as secretary of state judge for yourselves what we the people would be missing.
hillary reset button
After resetting US foreign policy from the disaster of the Bush years this indispensable woman and national treasure is hell-bent on doing for you, me and this great country what she did for US/Russian relations, and the peoples of Georgia, Ukraine and Crimea.
What she did for Ambassador Stevens, his staff and the consulate in lawless, anarchical, unsafe Benghazi.
 What she did for US allies Hosni Mubarak
Colonel Muammar Kaddafy.
What she did for the people of Iran in reining in the radical, expansionist, "Death to America," nuclear, genocidal oppressive mullahs.
What she did in transforming the extremist Moslem Brethren into moderate, freedom loving, pro-Western liberals by hugging and kissing the jihad out of them.
And lastly,
what she did for post-Saddam sectarian-torn Iraq,
pro-US sectarian-torn Yemen,
post-Kaddafy tribal-torn Libya,
and Bashir Assad's "reformed" Alawite Syria (that still hasn't surrendered its chemical weapons).
Violence In The Middle East Stock Photo
And let's not forget what she did for the peace and
stability of the Greater Middle East-
once the cradle (but no more thanks to her) of murderous, unIslamic Moslem terror.
With a record of achievements
so stunning as this how could we as voters in good conscience deny Hillary the White House-so her ever faithful, loving, virtuous husband can turn it into an
 The theme of Hillary's historic campaign shouldn't be 
In conclusion, come November keep in mind that it will take 16 years to reset America from the catastrophe of the Bush years, and finish building Barack Obama's More Perfect Big Government Dependency Union of Moochers and Losers. And that after eight years of shredding the Constitution we're only half way there. 





 Presidents Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and James Monroe

 That our nation’s leaders and destiny are under the watchful eye of God Almighty and His special Providence was Divinely and infallibly revealed to us, as Daniel Webster said (see), when John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, the second and third Presidents (the two Founding Fathers most responsible for the writing and ratification of the Declaration of Independence) died just hours apart in 1826 on the 50th anniversary of Independence Day-the historic, world-changing day that they founded. What has gone unnoticed in this amazing event is the uncanny numerical signs given to us that day especially in the correspondence between the date July 4, 1776, when Congress adopted the Declaration, and the two principle Founder’s (Jefferson and Adams) near simultaneous deaths. What I mean is this:

When the single digits of the date 7-4-1776 are added together it gives us (as you shall see) the profoundly significant number 32, which is the number that signifies America, hence:



1459931=32 (see notes)

 Mere chaotic coincidence? If that was all, perhaps. But there is more, much more. Read on and judge for yourself:

John Adams our 2nd President and Jefferson our 3rd died in reverse order that July 4th day giving us the number 32. In other words, as 3 precedes 2 in the number 32 Jefferson, the greater and more important of the two Founders, was the first to leave this world.

As if foreshadowing the order of their deaths the friendship of Jefferson and Adams began when they first met at the Second Continental Congress in May 1775. Amazingly at the time Jefferson (born April 13, 1743) was 32 years old.

Now as 32 is a number symbolic of the day this great country was founded and is the numerical value of the name America, and as it signifies the order of Jefferson’s and Adams’ death on a July 4th date, remarkably and amazingly the exact number of words comprising the Declaration of Independence (which the 3rd and 2nd Presidents wrote and defended) is 1322, with the number 32 at its center.

Moreover, as the number 32 by addition is reducible to the number 5 (3+2=5) incredibly Jefferson and Adams died approximately 5 hours apart, the one dying around 1 pm and the other at 6:20 pm. Also incredible is that 1 pm to 6:20 pm equals 320 minutes (32 10x). And just as uncanny is the fact Jefferson and Adams died on the 50th celebration of July 4th-50 being a multiple of 5 10x.

Now in keeping with this remarkable pattern of fives (and fives multiples and variations) the date July 4, 1776 fell on a Thursday, the 5th day of the week. Moreover, July 4, 1826, the day Jefferson and Adams died, was the 185th day of the year. Not does 185 end in 5and is divisible by 5 but it’s a variant of the number 5 because it is reducible to 5, hence: 1+8+5=14, 1+4=5.

Furthermore, as mentioned above, Jefferson and Adams first met and became friends at the Second Continental Congress held in May 1775 when Jefferson was 32 years old. May is the 5th month of the year.

Also fascinating is that the only two future Presidents to sign the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams (they were two of the 5 key Founders*), were members of the Committee of FIVE that was appointed to draft the document. The other three members were Ben Franklin, Roger Sherman and Robert Livingston.

*The other three were Washington, Franklin and Madison.

Moreover, the Declaration that Jefferson and Adams composed (the later playing a minor role) is made up of 5 distinct parts: the introduction, the preamble, the body, which can be divided into two sections, and the conclusion.

Other signs of what I believe is God’s supernatural presence and signature effect in the founding of our country, and in the astonishing deaths of Jefferson and Adams, are as follows:

Shortly before he expired a sick and ailing John Adams strangely uttered the mysterious words “Thomas Jefferson survives.” Could it be that Adams’ had a vision of Jefferson’s disembodied spirit and that it seemed so life like and real to him that he spoke these words believing he had seen him in the flesh? Whatever, these words are part of the mystery of Adams’ and Jefferson’s “coincidental” deaths in more ways than one. For in keeping with the significant numbers 3 and 2 Adams’ statement is composed of 23 letters (32 reversed) which exactly corresponds with the numeric value of Jefferson’s birth date, hence:


As Jefferson and Adam’s were the great pen and voice of the Revolution, the one writing the Declaration of Independence and the other defending it with his eloquence, concealed in the date July 4, 1776 is the all important year 1787 when the Constitution was completed and adopted by the 13 states and America became a Constitutional Republic, hence

1776 + 4 + 7 = 1787*

Remarkably, the numbers in the historic year 1787 collapse into the number 23, which is further reducible to 5 hence:

1+7+8+7=23 ,2+3=5

*There were exactly 74 delegates to the Constitutional Convention a number signifying  the month (7) and day (4) of our founding.

It is also important to note that Jefferson and Adams were the 18th and 48th signers of the Declaration respectively. The multiplication of these two numbers gives us a total that’s a multiple of 32, hence:

18x48=864 or 32x27


James Monroe was the third and last President to die on July 4th . What is remarkable about this, and a sign that his death was Providentially arranged and designed like Jefferson’s and Adams’, is that while Adams and Jefferson were the 2nd and 3rd Presidents, numbers that total 5, Monroe himself was the 5th President-2 removed from Jefferson and 3 from Adams. Incredibly, the 5th President died in 1831, exactly 5 years to the date of Jefferson’s and Adams’ deaths on the 55th anniversary of Independence Day-55 is a multiple of 5 11x.

It is fascinating to note that Monroe the Jeffersonian (the student and lifelong friend of Jefferson) was succeeded to the presidency by John Quincy Adams, John Adams’ son. In other words, just as Thomas Jefferson succeeded John Adams to the presidency an Adams succeeded a Jeffersonian President*.

*Just as the addition of 2 (signifying John Adams’ presidency) and 3 (signifying Jefferson’s presidency) equals 5 (signifying Monroe’s presidency), so the multiplying of 2 and 3 equals 6 the presidency number of John Quincy Adams.

St. Augustine, following the ancient Greeks who believed that numbers (the basis of mathematics) rule the world, wrote that “Numbers are a universal language given to us by God for the confirmation of truth”-and, I might add, to justify His ways to us in this mathematically constructed, ordered and harmoniously designed universe. What was Divinely confirmed on July 4, 1826 with the near simultaneous deaths of Jefferson and Adams, and again on July 4, 1831 with the death of James Monroe, is that random, unplanned, chaotic chance had nothing to do with their deaths-nor was it the work of some impossible ingenious human conspiracy. Indeed, the July 4th deaths of these three Presidents confirm the existence of God giving evidence of His necessary being and mysterious and inscrutable governing of the universe and this nation. In other words, it is proof that Jefferson, Adams and Monroe died naturally under supernatural direction with an intelligent unifying principle coordinating their deaths as a sign that our country’s founding moment and Constitutional Republic were DIVINELY ORDAINED, as is our exceptionalism and glorious destiny as the greatest liberating force from tyranny in human history.

In celebration of God, Country and Liberty I wish you all a Happy 4th of July.


The 3rd President Thomas Jefferson was the first to die on July 4th. The 2nd President John Adams was the 2nd President to die on July 4th. The 5th President James Monroe was the 3rd and last President to die on July 4th. This produces the number 325. 325 is a multiple of 13 5x. 13 is the number of colonies turned independent states on July 4, 1776. Moreover, 325 is a factor in the number 17875 a 5 digit number encoded with the year 1787 when America became a Constitutional Republic-325 x 55 = 17875. Isn't it odd that it was on the 55th anniversary of July 4th that James Monroe died.


Thomas Jefferson, the first US President to die on July 4th, was President in 1808 when our nation celebrated its 32nd Independence Day. Amazingly, 7-4-1808 was the 7th year and 4th month (corresponding to July 4th) of Jefferson's two term presidency.


Regal Eagle writes:

Mabye there’s something to this number 5. We’re a nation of 50 states, and our flag has 50 5 pointed stars. Just sayin.

X-MAN replies:

 And Hawaii, the last and 50th state to enter the Union, did so in the late 1950s.

My reply:

Not only did Hawaii (the 50th state) join the Union in the late 1950s but it did so exactly 6555 weeks from July 4, 1776,  hence:

July-4-1776 to August 21, 1959 (Hawaii joins the Union) is 183 years, 1 month and 17 days, that equates to 2197 months, or 66,886 days, or 9555 weeks (see).


The numerological table used in this article is as follows:

1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9



S T U V W X Y Z 





“I will go so far as to say Donald Trump is the ISIS candidate. He inflames the passions of people in the West to perform Islamophobia, to draw recruits to them, to make them say ‘This is what America is.'”
Malcolm Nance




ISIS owes its existence to the catastrophically failed foreign policy of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton as expressed in the above irrefutable equation as I absolutely proved HERE. Why then would ISIS favor the aggressive, tough talking, I'm-going-to-bomb-the-hell-out-of-'em, Patton admiring Trump over Hillary who is pledging to be weak-on-terror, see-no-evil-in-Islam, lead from behind, butt kissing Obama's third term? ISIS no more favors Hillary than the Ayatollah Khomeini and Soviets favored Reagan over Carter in 1980. Just as Obama and Hillary midwifed ISIS and the greatest expansion of jihad influence and terror since 9/11 so did Carter mid wife Iran's Khomeinists regime and the greatest expansion of Soviet influence and power since the start of the Cold War.

In other words (as Donald Rumsfeld would say), why would ISIS favor the known known Hillary (who has put them on the map) over the known unknown Trump (who could be their worst nightmare)? Indeed, on the basis of their Moslem immigration policies alone (Trump wanting a temporary ban to prevent jihadist infiltrators from entering this country, and Hillary recklessly wanting to increase Moslem immigration) ISIS sympathizers in November will be casting their votes for Hillary.

Come to think of it, since jihadists following their manly, macho warrior prophet Mohammed are woman hating chauvinists why would ISIS want an alpha male member of the stronger sex to lead America over a woman? Does that make any sense? Malcolm Nance is a fool.









It is 1984 for Moslems in Japan as it should be for the subversive 1400 year old political religion with unlimited global aspirations that's been at war with unbelievers from the moment Mohammed received his deadly revelations on Islamic supremacism from the pit of hell.



Indeed, indeed, indeed. In the world war with TOTALITARIAN ISLAM

Japan (once the Islamo-fascist-like enemy of the United States) is

leading the way 






Cartoonists DESTROY the Clinton-Lynch Meeting (You'll LOVE It)...

Bill to Loretta:

 "If it weren't for me appointing you to a Federal judgeship you'd be carrying my bags and bringing me coffee. And before you dare indict my wife think very carefully what happened to Vince Foster. Don't try me, Loretta. I'm not golfing around...And by the way, how's the grand kids?"





the reason for America's economic, military, geopolitical and moral decline? With a nation in such turmoil that millions of angry, frightened middle class Americans slipping into poverty and losing the American Dream have turned to Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump for answers? Liberal ideas are triumphing and our nation is going to pot; and that's why millions of us are




< p style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 15px; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-weight: 400; font-style: normal; margin: 0px 0px 15px; line-height: 21px; border: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: center;"> 



During the GOP debates Donald Trump let it be known that he was no fan of George W. Bush. Sounding like a Bush derangement leftist he blamed President Bush for the 9/11 attack when neither Bush nor Bill Clinton had any actionable intel about the plot (see); and then he accused the former President of lying about Saddam Hussein's WMDs when Bush, like Clinton before him (and every other country) was deceived by Saddam into believing he was hiding his still missing stockpile (see).
But apparently one aspect of the Bush administration that Trump esteems and would like to revive is the use of waterboarding, sleep deprivation and other tactics used in Bush's successful counter-terrorism program to extract critical life saving information from top terrorist detainees.
At a recent rally in Ohio when talking about the horrific ISIS suicide bombings in Istanbul that left 40 dead and five times as many injured Trump shouted out to a cheering crowd "What do you think about waterboarding?" And followed up saying, "I like it a lot, but don't think it's tough enough."
In the past Trump has said that as Commander-in-Chief to save American lives he'd use "torture" on captured terrorists. And if that failed he'd then take it to a higher level and threaten the detainee's "families" with either injury or death to force them to cooperate. It is interesting to note that in the 1990s former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, as a last resort, ended a murderous nationwide terrorist campaign that killed 1200 people (he escaped assassination) by radical al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya by going after the terrorists' families (see). "If you continue killing Egyptians your wives, sons and daughters are going to die," warned Mubarak. And after carrying out his threat they stopped their killing spree frightened for the lives of their loved ones.
 Polls show that by a staggering 2:1 margin Americans favor torture as a tactic in the war on terror to keep them, their families and country safe, and had no problem with the Bush program (see).
But strictly speaking Bush's use of water boarding, sleep deprivation, lengthy exposure to ear-splitting music, etc. doesn't qualify as "torture." They were medically supervised Enhanced Interrogation Techniques (EITs) falling short of what torture truly is. Consequently, Barack Obama's DOJ (headed by Eric Holder) could find no prosecutable criminal wrongdoing in Bush's successful program.
What follows is a debate on this issue on Media Matters where my "Bush was a torturing war criminal" opponent didn't fare so well.
iron jihadist will; after which he sang like a canary giving interrogators a treasure trove of info on planned terror attacks in the US and al-Qaida's international operations.
After two intensive investigations Barack Obama's DOJ (headed by Eric Holder) couldn't find the crime of "torture" committed by anyone in the Bush administration.
And all of KSMs "intelligence" turned out to be false. http://content.time.com/time/w...


ApolloSpeaks   B747 

KSM's chief interrogator said otherwise:


If KSM gave interrogators "false info" the waterboarding and sleep deprivation would have continued until he had enough and became cooperative.

B747  ApolloSpeaks 

False confessions: 

The al-Qaeda leader who suffered the harshest interrogations tried to stop his ordeal by giving false information about plots to attack Heathrow Airport and Canary Wharf, according to the Senate report.

Ten days after his capture, he was waterboarded for the first of what became 183 times. Under this relentless pressure, KSM “provided information on the Heathrow Airport and Canary Wharf plotting”. There was no suggestion of even trying to use other methods first, says the report. KSM, the acknowledged mastermind of the September 11 attacks, was then subjected to “facial and abdominal slaps, the facial grab, stress positions, standing sleep deprivation” and “rectal rehydration”. On the same day as KSM’s arrest in Pakistan on 1 March 2003, CIA headquarters authorised the use of “enhanced interrogation techniques”. Within two hours of the capture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed – known as “KSM” – the head of interrogations at CIA “Detention Site Cobalt” sent an email saying “let’s roll with the new guy”.


The cherry picked, politicized Democrat minority senate report on Bush's EITs was thoroughly rebutted and discredited by several former CIA chiefs who put up the web site "CIA SAVED LIVES." The Dem report ignored every piece of info (from 6 million docs) that contradicted its false conclusion that Bush's program was useless in facilitating detainee cooperation and gathering actionable intel to thwart terror attacks and save lives. 

The skewed report was also rebutted by the Republican majority report; and then by Obama's own CIA Chief John Brennen. Why do you think Brennen wasn't fired from his job after issuing his critique or at least rebuked by Obama? Because he told the truth-as did out going DefenseSec Leon Panetta when he said that info extracted from terror detainees using EITs played a role in tracking down bin Laden.



Panetta: ‘Enhanced interrogation’ had role in bin Laden raid - NY Daily News   

Days after the raid in Abbottabad, former Attorney General Michael Mukasey wrote an op-ed titled “The Waterboarding Trail to Bin Laden.” The intelligence that led to the raid, Mukasey asserted,began with a disclosure from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM), who broke like a dam under the pressure of harsh interrogation techniques that included waterboarding. He loosed a torrent of information — including eventually the nickname of a trusted courier of bin Laden.6

It later became apparent that this account was wrong. KSM hadn’t revealed the courier’s alias. According to an American official familiar with KSM’s interrogation, KSM wasn’t asked about al-Kuwaiti until the fall of 2003, months after his waterboarding had concluded.7 KSM reportedly acknowledged having known al-Kuwaiti but told his interrogators al-Kuwaiti was “retired” and of little significance.



That was just a small piece of what KSM is said to have divulged. And as OBL was relatively isolated and impotent and no longer much of a threat killing him was a matter simple justice for what he'd done with no benefits for fighting the war on terror. Unfortunately, in retrospect, OBL's death did nothing to demoralize and stop al Qaida as they subsequently metastasized, grew stronger than ever and spawned ISIS. What a terrible legacy lying "al Qaida is decimated"       weak-on-terror Obama is leaving behind.








(H/T FOB Tycz)


Fact Sheet: Extraordinary Rendition | American Civil Liberties Union 





Pope Francis says Christians should apologize to gay people - CNN.com

 Pope Francis silently praying with gay-hating Moslem clerics toward Mecca the anti-gay capital of the world.

So now we have the mentally deranged progressive leftist head of the once high and holy Roman Catholic Church (no longer the bulwark of Judeo-Christian values) apologizing for the Church's past treatment of gays and futily begging them for forgiveness. Why is it futile? Because most homosexuals will treat this as not going far enough, and remain hostile to the Church until ending its prohibition on same-sex marriage the pope himself officiates a gay wedding at the Vatican.  

After Latino Pope Francis sees religion of peace Islam killing dozens of Latino gays in Orlando he begs gays to forgive the Church  for past mistreatment instead of begging Islam to stop killing and persecuting gays. Today the greatest threat to gays comes from Islam, not Christianity. The Orlando gay massacre was emblematic of that.

But the Church's first Latino pope giving this apology 15 days after dozens of gay Latino men were killed by a gay Moslem jihadist can't be a coincidence. The pope was undoubtedly moved to compassion by the event which is why he made his statement. But in light of Orlando perhaps Francis should issue a second apology to gays for saying that "Islam is a religion of peace," and  for what he did two years ago when visiting Islamist Turkey. For while at a mosque in Istanbul Francis closed his eyes and silently prayed to God. That wouldn't have been so bad except that with the Moslem clerics who were present Francis was facing toward Mecca as if he were a Moslem worshipper. Now that's MECCA as in the ANTI-GAY CAPITAL OF THE WORLD. For Mecca is the holiest city in Islam (the most anti-gay religion in the world); and it's located in Saudi Arabia perhaps the most anti-gay country in the world where homosexuality is considered a crime against God and nature, and gays are flogged, tortured, castrated and jailed, and legally killed in vigilante violence. In other words, in Mecca and across Saudi Arabia Moslems have the right and license to kill gays: to beat, stone or torture them to death with absolute impunity and the blessings of the faith (see).

Now Francis issuing an apology for the Church's past mistreatment of gays in wake of the Orlando shooting and after praying toward Mecca where they're brutally mistreated (like the Church did in the Middle Ages) is utter extreme hypocrisy. If Francis means what he says then  he must  denounce Islam as a religion of war against gays, and apologize that his prayer toward Mecca was a big moral mistake.

Moslems who denounce Islam's brutal treatment of gays must cease praying toward Mecca where anti-gay violence carried out in Allah's name (since Mohammed's day) is the law of the land.


Right-Wing Media Use The Worst Anti-LGBT Massacre In American History To Lecture The LGBT Community-MediaMatters


to ramp up the immigration of LGBT-hating Moslems from Syria-one of the very worst oppressor nations of homosexuals (see). Worse still Obama has reduced the vetting process of these ISIS infiltrated refugees from 18-24 months to just three months. This is to speed up the time to settle as many refugees as possible before Obama leaves office. Why the rush? To impress the UN and show them what a fine job he's done; for he apparently has hopes of becoming its Secretary General when he leaves office. In other words, Obama's Syrian refugee policy is entirely self-serving putting his post-presidential ambitions above the safety and security of the American people. Tell me this isn't recklessly irresponsible and insane? Tell me Obama doesn't deserve to die at the hands of Islamic terrorists for putting Americans at such risk.

 BTW, if Obama could win the Nobel Peace Prize nine months into his presidency with no record as a peacemaker then it's very likely he'll be the next UN chief after making a terrible mess of the world; afterall, his heart was in the right place.


Trump Claims Obama Supports Terrorists, Echoing Breitbart’s Debunked Talking Point · Media Matters  




of Islamo-nazi Khomenist Iran and lied to the American people that it's leaders were "moderate" and "peaceful" while aiding and abetting the Assad regime in the mass slaughter of Syrians How shameful!

BTW, Obama blatantly lied that he shut down every one of Iran's pathways to building the bomb. What he doesn't want you to know is that Iran has an OFFSHORE pathway for going nuclear with one of its terrorist allies. Read the following and see for yourself




Well, it’s about time someone pointed out the elephant in the room. No real religion calls for the kind of violence, terrorism, hatred, and inhumanity that Islam represents and therefore should lose its official designation as a religion in the civilized world. Not surprisingly, designated terrorist group CAIR wants to “re-educate” this lawmaker.


So why should any other nations with hostile Moslem populations? 



Supreme Court strikes down Texas abortion restrictions | TheHill  


and gushing with joy said that this court ruling was a victory for women's rights. REALLY? Was it a victory for unborn female children and their God-given right to life?

It’s Not Just Trump Fans; His Media Supporters Also Call Clinton A “Bitch-"MediaMatters


I'd call Hillary a b*tch all day long.\sarc


Wow that was both incoherent and lame



I know. Hillary is such an ineffective weakling only a lame brain would fear a whack from her powerless broom.





Forget about Donald Trump and his one year old white supremacist, anti-Moslem, "Mexicans are murders and rapists" presidential campaign. America's extreme racism and Islamophobia are much older than Trump's run. They go back deep into our past and are, as   Barack Obama said "Part of our national DNA." Proof that we're supremely racist, Islamophobic and worse is that we've made a black man with Moslem family roots and a Middle Eastern name the most powerful black man in human history./sarc








 Since late May crony, crooked, incompetent Hillary (left) and Princess Lizzie Ticklefeather (right) have been blasting Donald Trump as a heartless cut throat businessman for saying in 2006 that if the housing market should crash he'd make a fortune. Though Trump won't disclose how much a profited he nevertheless owes every cent of it to Bill Clinton whose reckless affordable housing program for the poor underlied the crash.  A great controversy stirring campaign tactic would be for Trump to publicly thank Bill for the crash that added to his wealth.
The credit/housing crash of 2008 that wiped out trillions in wealth for millions of Americans and nearly collapsed our financial system and caused a depression had many moving parts. But the prime mover of the crisis (the fountainhead and ultimate source) who set it in motion was Bill Clinton and his Government/Wall Street Housing Partnership to revitalize the flat housing market he inherited from George H. W. Bush.
Behold the great bubble maker who made Trump richer from the housing crash.
Called the National Homeownership Strategy (see) Clinton sort to quickly and dramatically boost the national home ownership rate from 63% to an astonishing historic 70% in just a few short years. Hoping to reach his ambitious goal by the end of his second term (and go down in history as the Great Home Ownership President) Clinton targeted millions of low-income families who dreamed of being home owners  but couldn't qualify or afford mortgages for lack of good credit or income and savings. So compassionate, big-hearted Bill feeling their pain of wanting the American dream of home ownership but couldn't afford it decided to launch a new economic and financial social justice revolution: to instantaneously lift millions of low-income families out of poverty and into the middle class. It was Clinton's version of the War on Poverty by other means; instead of government handouts and growing the welfare state (which he reformed) costing tax payers billions banks and mortgage firms would issue millions of risky loans to poor folks giving them a short cut to the middle class and American dream; and for many years it worked like a dream, until it predictably became a national    nightmare.
Indeed, Clinton with help from government sponsored mortgage firms (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made mortgages affordable to the poor on a massive scale by democratizing credit and treating them as if they were creditworthy 700 FICA score borrowers: with little or nothing down and a small fee to the lender and wallah, a subprime mortgage for $100,000 plus homes would be theirs (see and see). It was only fair thought progressive compassionate Bill that they should be treated like richer folks; for  
 like most liberals believe all human beings (rich, poor, in between)   have an equal right to home ownership. Now with Fannie and Freddie (headed by compassionate, caring, bleeding heart libs like Bill) massively buying and backing these loans from banks and mortgage firms (removing the risk and hazard of issuing them) Bill Clinton nearly reached his goal making him the greatest HOUSING BUBBLE KING of all. Indeed, when his presidency ended in 2001 the gigantic doomed to burst housing bubble (the homeownership rate) was at 68%-up 5 points when he took office in 93. No wonder the economy was surging during the Clinton years; and despite Monicagate and all the lies Bill left office flying high with a 66% approval rating-just beating Ronald Reagan.
From 1993 to 2006 the home ownership bubble grew from 63% to 69%-5% under Clinton 1% under Bush. This means that Clinton owned 5/6ths of the bubble-the majority of it. 
Indeed, as Bill Clinton brags and boasts today (and Hillary is always reminding us) the country greatly prospered during the 90s, and especially the nation's poor as 7.7 million of them were lifted out of poverty-a historic achievement by any measure. But Clinton avoids like death mentioning his secret on how he achieved such astounding  success: his Affordable Housing Program where recklessly discarding decades of safe, traditional, time-tested lending practices he subprime loaned his way to a housing boom that continued under a desperate, struggling George Bush (he saw a possible crash ahead and tried to prevent it, see) reaching 69% in 2006. Then the tide in home sales declined and two years later disaster struck as the Clinton/Bush bubble went bust with millions losing trillions in wealth and sinking into poverty reversing all the gains of the Clinton/Bush years. Indeed, millions of  people defaulted on their loans and many of the 7.7 million lost their homes along with their middle class rank.
That part of the story the Clintons don't want you to know because Bill's blind, reckless, stupid liberal ambition (his feel your pain compassion to end poverty, share wealth and leave office with a booming economy using risky subprime loans) nearly wrecked the economy for all.  The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and Bill Clinton was one of its most foolish travelers. Let the truth be known.
Hillary who tried and failed to reset US foreign policy (making it worse with her weak and feckless leadership and bad decisions) now promises to reset America after the disaster of the Obama years by continuing his failed policies.
And now with an anemic economy almost flat on its back of under 2% growth, and a disappearing middle class (which accelerated under Obama) Bill Clinton and the Mrs. want to return to the White House using him as her economic czar in charge of revitalizing the economy. God help us all if she beats out Trump this fall. For who knows what crazy reckless screwball schemes Clinton will dream up again.


It looks like my theory about gay Moslem mass murderer Omar Mateen (which I wrote about  HERE) might very well be factually true. An alleged gay lover of Mateen's who calls himelf Miguel has anonymously come forward telling the FBI and Univision that the derranged jihadist was out for revenge against gays when he murdered 49 people and injured 53 at a gay bar in Orlando. I had surmised, and rightly it seems, that Omar's experience with gay sex had turned very ugly deeply wounding him emotionally; and this I believed is what triggered his murderous rampage fueled and reinforced by his Islamic faith.
Omar Mateem killed gays for revenge and his personal salvation.
And sure enough the mysterious Miguel told Univision that after Omar foolishly and recklessly had unprotected sex with two Hispanic men one of them freaked him out and made him unhinged  by telling him he was HIV positive. And everything went down hill from there. After many years of  trying and failing to find true love and happiness in gay relationships it had all come to naught. Believing after so many disappointments that he might be infected with deadly AIDS by an irresponsible and dangerous gay who treated him like worthless dirt (a mere sexual receptical for his sinful lusts) a dehumanized Omar "felt rejected and used by them,"  Miguel told Univision. That was it. That one last bad experience (perhaps the worst as there were surely others) was the last straw for Omar; he had had it with homosexuals and gay bars. Not only did this depravity prove a dead-end for finding happiness in life, it was now like deadly poison to him and something to be expunged. Indeed, when Miguel asked his depressed, disillusioned and angry friend what he was going to do Omar ominously replied, "I'm going to make them pay for what they did to me." Omar was out for blood and wanted revenge; and thus was born the anti-gay jihadist driven by rage and the need for redemption to kill and hurt as many gays possible.
al-Tirmidhi, Sunan 1:152 – [Muhammad said] “Whoever is found conducting himself in the manner of the people of Lot [sodomites], kill the doer who does it and the receiver to whom it is done.”
 As being gay turned into a punishing experience and living hell for him Omar's upbringing in the Moslem faith came into play. Recalling what he'd heard and learned from his radical Moslem gay-hating dad, and from anti-gay imams in his schools and mosques, he must have become deeply guilty and aggrieved that he ignored what he'd heard as they were warnings of what he'd suffer. For he heard from the Prophet Mohammed (God's ultimate messenger of truth) that homosexuality was a cardinal sin and major offense against Allah (a heterosexual god who in Arab lore had fathered three daughters with a goddess); he also heard that gays were barred from heaven being exclusively a place for heterosexual men and women; and that Allah's reward for virtuous Moslem men was an eternity of bliss with dozens of radiant voluptuous never aging virgins giving them pleasure. Recalling these things Omar the miserable depraved sick sinning gay (this is what Islam told him he was) understood that heaven was closed to him upon death.
Islamic heaven is heterosexual.
Indeed, it meant that the hell he was suffering from his sexually deviant life was prelude to infinitely worse in the after life. Omar had defiled himself with ungodly sex; and if he failed to make amends and do what's right his immortal soul would be lost in hell forever in unendurable torment.
and "martyrs.... Enter heaven.." - Surah 3:140-43
Indeed, wanting to save himself from a terrible fate Omar desired to become what Islam demanded that he be: a good, straight Moslem man and atone for his sins earning Allah's love, forgiveness and grace; and redeeming oneself in the faith could be done one of two ways: Omar could stop being gay and simply go straight and live a righteous life devoting himself to his wife and child leaving his sins in the past. But overcoming such sins requires great will power, courage and moral strength which Omar unfortunately seems to have lacked. As he couldn't control his sexual urges no matter how hard he tried (going to mosque three or four times a week, praying to Allah for guidance and strength) Omar came to believe that the conventional Islam of ritual worship wasn't the answer or path; and the only alternative left to him-the only way out to make peace with God and conquer his sins-was violent murderous HOLY JIHAD. Going the way of  ISIS, al Qaida, the Taliban and others (who were killing infidel sinners the world over) Omar would became a warrior for Allah killing gays for his salvation.
As homosexuality in Islam is a grievous, soul-damning sin punishable by death (in all 57 Moslem states gays are oppressed) Omar would redeem and fix his damaged soul by becoming Allah's sword in slaying homosexuals. By killing gays en masse and martyring himself he'd kill forever the gay sinner inside him. Indeed, freeing his soul from sin and  purging it clean of the past Omar would rise from the ashes of his death reborn a pure, good, holy heterosexual Moslem man. And Allah proud of what he'd done in his name and for his fame Omar would enter paradise rewarded with the gift of endless carnal bliss as promised in the Koran.
My prediction that the Baltimore Six would be aquitted like George Zimmerman





An angry John McCain running for reelection in Arizona accused President Obama's premature, reckless, unnecessary withdrawal of US troops from Iraq of midwifing (giving birth to) the radical terrorist Islamic State that gay Moslem killer Omar Mateen swore allegiance to before he martyred himself to death. McCain's exact words were:
"Barack Obama is directly responsible for it [Orlando shooting], because when he pulled everybody out of Iraq, al-Qaida went to Syria, became ISIS, and ISIS is what it is today thanks to Barack Obama's failures, utter failures, by pulling everybody out of Iraq... 

So the responsibility for it lies with President Obama and his failed policies."

Though McCain was to later clarify his statement saying that "Obama's security policies and not him personality was responsible for Orlando (see)" nevertheless McCain on both occasions was disingenuously and self-servingly speaking a half truth. Indeed, the full inconvenient truth which he doesn't want you to know and could hurt is reelection to a fifth term in the Senate is summed up in the following precise demonstrable equation:


Indeed (as I explain HERE and HERE), remove from the equation the disastrous Obama/Clinton decision to intervene militarily in Libya (with a NO FLY ZONE and bombings to assist Libyan rebels in defeating Kaddafy) and the Syrian rebels certain that Obama and NATO would intervene on their behalf wouldn't have risen up against Assad with such destructive and murderous ferocity. In other words, if Obama's Libyan (and Egyptian*) policies hadn't turned relatively peaceful protests for democratic reform into an armed insurrection to topple Assad Syria would be very much at peace today with no massive displacement of Syrians creating a refugee crisis-and very real and deadly threats of refugee terrorism in America and the West.

*Obama's desertion of long time friend and US ally Hosni Mubarak for the radical Moslem Brotherhood then desertion of US ally Kaddafy for Libyan rebels emboldened anti-Baathist forces in Syria to arm and rise up against the anti-US Assad regime


But what hypocritical John McCain doesn't want you to know, or hopes you've forgotten, is that he (and`Lindsey Graham) was gung-ho for regime change in Libya and deposing Kaddafy. As Rand Paul said in his blistering critique McCain (and Graham) supported the Obama/Clinton Libyan War to the hilt; and then representing the anti-Assad rebels, which included al-Qaida (later to become ISIS), he and Graham urged Obama to replicate in Syria what he did in Libya: set up a NO FLY ZONE and bomb Assad to weaken his regime in his war against the rebels. But Obama disappointing the rebels who were certain of US intervention because of Assad's atrocities (which they provoked and committed themselves) would do no such thing*. They were deceived. With Obama wanting a nuke deal with Assad's allies in Iran there was no way he was going to chance jeopardizing that by bringing down Assad; or worse still risk getting into a military conflict with pro-Assad Putin in Russia.

*It was shortly after Obama ominously announced on March 19, 2011 (the eighth anniversary of the Iraq War) that the US and NATO would intervene in Libya  and set up a No Fly Zone that anti-Assad violence broke out in Syria with the burning down of Baath Party headquarters in the city of Daraa  (see and see). 

The sad truth is this: when Obama and Clinton took office there was no ISIS caliphate; and it would have stayed that way had they not gone to war against Kaddafy in Libya; and Obama had used the tremendous leverage he had of $BILLIONS in Iraq Reconstruction Funds to keep US troops in Iraq on US terms (as Leon Panetta said he could have done if he had the will, see). The terrible truth is this: Obama and Clinton were the unwitting parents (father and mother) of evil, murdering, terrorist ISIS; and John McCain to a lesser degree was complicit in its horrible birth (on the Syrian side). And in this way,  by the law of unintended consequences, Obama, Hillary and McCain were indirectly (not directly or personally) responsible for the 49 dead victims of the ISIS inspired Orlando gay nightclub massacre-the worst Islamic terrorist attack since 9/11-almost certainly anticipating worse horrors to come. I think most of you would agree with me when I say that with Obama retiring in January it's time for John McCain to call it quits and join him.










  In a video posted on Facebook early this morning, Seddique Mateen (pictured) said his 29-year-old son, Omar Mateen, shouldn¿t have gone on the killing spree because ¿God himself will punish those involved in homosexuality¿

The lying pro-Taliban father of gay mass murderer Omar Mateen tried to hide his son's radicalization and homosexuality.

Shortly after mass murdering gay jihadist Omar Mateen martyred himself while killing 49 mostly gay Americans at Pulse nightclub in Orlando his father Seddique (a radical pro-Taliban Islamist) told NBC News that his son wasn't a radical Moslem; and that contrary to reports that he was gay he actually hated gays to the point of being enraged by them; and that his murderous anti-gay rampage was triggered by the sight of two gay men kissing (see). 
But subsequently we learned that this wasn't true. For not only did Omar swear allegiance to ISIS, but he was no stranger to seeing gay men hug and kiss as he'd been a patron at the Pulse for many years where that's normally done. In other words, the father blatantly lied obviously to cover up the truth about his son's homosexuality. Why? The most likely reason is that being a devote Moslem who lived by the Koran Seddique was ashamed that Omar was gay-a grievous sin in Islam punishable by death.
al-Tirmidhi, Sunan 1:152 – [Muhammad said] “Whoever is found conducting himself in the manner of the people of Lot [sodomites], kill the doer who does it and the receiver to whom it is done.”
Indeed, Seddique didn't want the truth be known that like weak permissive infidel parents he failed in his duty as a Moslem dad and tolerated Omar's damning, Allah-hating      soul destroying sins; for Islamic law gave him the right and obligation to severely punish him: to beat the homosexuality out of him if reason failed, or even kill him if necessary (allowed by Islamic law) as he was   dishonoring and disgracing his family and Islam. In short, by making his son seem violently anti-gay Seddique was trying to save face with his pro-Taliban family, friends, peers and contacts abroad; and with the vast majority of Moslems worldwide who are strongly anti-gay*. That is the most likely explanation for the lie. But there could be something deeper and more sinister that Seddique was trying to hide: that he or a relative or family friend had a hand in corrupting his son and making him gay.
*Gays are oppressed and discriminated against in all 57 Moslem states (see).
Afghan boy with child abusing pederast.
This theory is not far-fetched. For the Mateens came here in the 1980s as refugees from Afghanistan to escape the brutal war there. But they didn't come alone. They arrived with a group of relatives, friends and acquaintances bringing with them their Afghan values, customs and ideas. But one of those customs (perhaps the worst) was the cultural practice of "bacha bazi" Persian for "boy play," or what we call pederasty: the sexual abuse of young boys (see). Given that this ancient perverse practice is widespread in Afghanistan it is probable that Omar was its victim as a child here in the States; that abused by his father or an uncle or a family friend he was used as a boy toy (sexual play thing) and suffered deep psychological scars. Indeed, Omar's conflicting homosexuality and horrific jihad strike against gays could have ultimately been rooted in bacha bazi, his sexual abuse as a kid.
According to Islamic law (the words of the Prophet Mohammed) for the purification of the soul from the damning sin of homosexuality Mateen in mass slaughtering gays as a blood sacrifice to Allah did exactly the right thing.
What is perfectly clear however is that Omar failed to find happiness in his gay relations (as he failed to find it in his marriage) and quite possibly was deeply and emotionally wounded by the experience. Perhaps his last gay relationship was so painful and horribly bad that it sent him over the edge into an anti-gay rage that drove him to his evil deed.
 The Islamic Center of Fort Pierce in Fort Pierce Florida
 Omar Mateen's mosque in Ft. Pierce where he prayed up to four times a week.
What is also clear is that before he turned violent Omar was trying to peacefully find redemption on the ritual side of Islam. Becoming more religious than he'd ever been Omar's imam said that he was attending mosque three to four times a week praying ardently trying to be a good Moslem and get right with God (see). But apparently it didn't work. Hard as he prayed and humbled himself before Allah, begging him for a sign of forgiveness and grace, nothing happened, nothing came-Allah seemed unresponsive ignoring his pleas and Omar grew frustrated, desperate and enraged.
Indeed, the happiness he missed in gay sex he couldn't find in normative, conventional, mainstream Islam either. Try as he may he couldn't remove the sense of guilt and shame he incurred from defiling himself with sexual acts that brought him grief and were forbidden by his faith. Omar must have come to believe that Allah was profoundly unhappy with him; and finding the way to change that and earn his saving love and grace became a spiritual obsession driving him to dangerous extremes. And thus was born the deadliest American Moslem jihadist in history.
Indeed, unable to find redemption in his mosque Omar turned to unconventional means: to savage bloody murderous jihad (as taught by ISIS, al Awlaki, al-Qaida and    the Taliban) as a last resort and hope to save his hell bound soul. With prefect fanatical faith he believed that jihad was the answer and only path for him; that martyring himself for the faith while killing dozens of sexual sinners like himself (as a blood sacrifice to Allah) would kill the sin inside him, atone for his past and purify his soul making it acceptable to God-and earning him the gift and blessing of paradise. And the more gays he killed the greater the reward, as each life taken would please God the more.  And when his bloody deed was done 49 innocents lie dead making it the deadliest jihadist attack since 9/11. And Omar's soul where is it now? In torment for his horrific crime more lost, wretched and damned than ever.


al-Tirmidhi, Sunan 1:152 – [Muhammad said] “Whoever is found conducting himself in the manner of the people of Lot [sodomites], kill the doer who does it and the receiver to whom it is done.”



In most of the world's 57 Moslem states homosexuality is officially regarded as a crime against God and nature and is legally punishable by imprisonment, torture, mutilation or death. The one big exception though is Turkey where same sex sexual activity has been legally protected and tolerated for more than a 150 years (see postscript below). Turkish gays, lesbians and bisexuals, however, can be legally discriminated against and denied housing, employment and any goods and services based on their sexual orientation. Moreover, harassment and violence against LGBT folks is growing in Turkey as the country becomes increasingly re-Islamized under Islamist President Erdogen (see). In other words, in Turkey if you're gay and want to survive it's best to be very discreet and hide your shame.



  Indeed, repression, violence and economic discrimination against homosexuals in Moslem countries is not radical extremist fundamentalist Islam (a distortion, perversion or hijacking of the faith) like Obama, Clinton and liberals want us to believe; far from it, the "Religion of Peace" and its war against gays is normative, moderate, traditional, common, mainstream everyday Islam based on the words and deeds of the Prophet Mohammed as cited in the above Hadith where he condemns them to death. And practically every Moslem immigrant in this country (like Omar Mateen's homosexual hating dad) comes here with an anti-homosexual mindset: a deep pitiless ingrained cultural hatred and loathing of homosexuals that, inspired by the Prophet's words, could become horribly violent and deadly. Indeed, everyone of Omar Mateen's 49 mostly gay victims (killed for the glory of Allah and Islam) would have suffered death or imprisonment (where few return alive) in war-torn Afghanistan where his pro-Taliban parents came from (see).


 Gay teen stoned to death in Somalia.

 Indeed, moderate Islam = the repression and punishment of homosexuals by either imprisonment (long jail terms), death (by the state or unprosecuted vigilantes) or social and economic discrimination (housing, employment, military service etc). How then is opening the floodgates of Moslem immigration like Obama, Clinton and Dems want to do (especially from Syria one of the world's worst anti-gay states, see) good for the safety, security and well-being of the LGBT community.....as Donald Trump says? 



If libs and LGBT people think it's bad enough that there are tens and millions of anti-homosexual Americans (Christians, Jews and social conservatives like myself) who want to roll back gay marriage and other LGTB gains why would they want to increase their numbers with more homo hating Moslems from abroad? How does that serve their interests and advance their cause? What happened in Orlando should be a rousing wake up call to the LGBT community.  What would serve them (and every unbeliever in this country) is Donald Trump in the White House preëmptively keeping out Moslems like the Mateens.