Sunday, November 22, 2015
By Sylvia Thompson
To the many gullible souls out there who truly think that Barack Obama is "legacy building" in his all-out assault on America, I implore you to bow out of the conversation because you are not seeing clearly.
The term legacy carries positive connotations of something bequeath that is to the receiver's benefit. Everything that Barack Obama does is calculated to destroy America, which he despises. This man no more cares about legacy than he fears being properly prosecuted by the white political leaders whose responsibility it is to remove him from office.
I focus on white leaders, because whites are still in the majority and they fill the majority of political offices. If the majority of political operatives were of some other ethnicity, I would lodge my complaint against that group. Ethnicity is an issue only because Obama is half-black and he uses that fact to intimidate guilt-conflicted white people. Otherwise, he would have been impeached and likely in prison for treason by now.
Barack Obama's sole aim has been, since he first entered politics and continues as he winds down this presidency, the complete destruction of America as it was founded.
It is an insult to the intelligence of all Americans who must listen to elitist pundits on Fox news and elsewhere, and political drones in either party endeavor to make Obama's behavior fit a pattern of normalcy. Attributing his destructive policies to "legacy building" is either self-delusion on the part of the people who make that claim or cowardliness.
This is my take.
Obama's nuclear deal with Iran has nothing to do with legacy but rather to enable a Muslim nation to wage nuclear war with America and Israel – the two nations that he most despises. Does anyone wonder why Russians praise Vladimir Putin despite what the rest of the world might think of him? Putin cares about his country, that's why.
Obama despises the American military because traditionally it has been a mainstay of America's strength, and our strength infuriates him.
Imposition of a polluting homosexual, anti-Christian agenda upon the military ranks destroys unit cohesion and literally terrorizes male members with the prospect of sodomy rape. Such rapes have increased since the forcing of open homosexuality in the ranks, against the will of a majority of members I might add. Couple that with an infiltration of women, for whom all standards of strength must be reduced, and Obama attains his goal of emasculating and demoralizing the forces.
He could not care less about a legacy of making the forces more diverse. Besides, President Truman diversified the military as much as it should be when he integrated it. Obama's objective is its destruction.
Read the entire article from Sylvia Thompson at RenewAmerica.com
Judge Jeanine Pirro's Opening Statement on November 21, 2015.
She Destroys B.H. Obama for putting American Citizens in Danger!
Thursday, November 19, 2015
For years, Republicans (a/k/a conservatives) have been complaining about a biased media that overwhelmingly seems to support Democrats (a/k/a liberals), with just a few exceptions. Fair minded people are well aware of the bias, but if they complained, they would then be scorned and be accused of whining by the very same media they were railing against. So, many conservatives would and have put their tail between their legs, in the past, and stifled their views on the obvious injustice of living with a biased media.
Just recently, during one of the Republican debates, this bias was shown, in all its glory, as the moderators of this debate (NBC personnel and commentators) used questioning techniques that wasn't trying to elicit meaningful information, but to arrogantly try to put the candidates being questioned on the defensive, and in some cases attempt to have them go after their opponents in a negative way. Their attempt backfired this time, as the candidates didn't fall for the bait and actually rebuffed the moderator's for their arrogant type of questioning, much to the delight of the audience who could see what the moderator's were trying to do. Boos could be heard on several occasions from the audience as the moderators tried to offer their inflammatory questions to the candidates. These moderators, representing CNBC (representing a notorious liberal network, under the aegis of NBC), could and should be classified as DEMOCRATS DISGUISED AS JOURNALISTS.
The attempt by NBC to get the candidates off message and to attack each other, sort of backfired on them as even some of the liberal pundits, like Carl Bernstein, called their behavior a disgrace. Of course, other liberal pundits, like Chris Matthews, sided with the conduct of the moderators and criticized the candidates for complaining. Imagine if they did that at a Democrat debate?
During the Republican debate, Sen. Marco Rubio made a very profound statement that the “main stream media” was the Super Pac of the Democrat Party. The audience erupted in applause, as it was quite obviously a valid statement by Marco Rubio. In addition, Sen. Ted Cruz also chimed in to more applause as to his observations as to the “modus operandi” of the moderator's questions to the candidates as being hostile and irrelevant (Mike Huckabee and Chris Christie also called out the moderators for their rude and biased questions). You could say that these rebukes by the candidates sort of toned down the hostile questions for the rest of the debate.
If you contrasted the Republican debate with the Democrat debate, it was like night and day. Very few hostile questions, if any, were asked of the Democrat candidates as it seemed the moderators were throwing “softball” questions at the Democrat candidates, while it was open season on the negative, inciting questions posed to the Republicans.
Of course, it is not just the cable and broadcast networks which exude this liberal bias, the print media is also complicit in this attempt to marginalize the Republicans and to brace up the Democrats.
Here in So. Florida, the 3 major newspapers are practically “in the tank” for the Democrats and with an obvious liberal progressive point of view. It seems that the Republicans can do nothing right and the Democrats can do no wrong. Every once in awhile they do print a positive story on the Republicans, but it seems like an after thought as they are probably trying to ease their guilty conscience. Fair and balanced is a term that seems to be forgotten by these purveyors of liberal bias. It will not get any better in the future as the journalism schools are turning out more liberal replacements for the liberal journalists who retire and die off. It seems that we are left with a “Hopson's Choice” (which is really no choice) and will just have to suffer with this blatant bias from now on into the future.
So, as to the headline, it is obvious from everything I mentioned in this editorial, that the vast majority of the media are really, DEMOCRATS DISGUISED AS JOURNALISTS.
Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann
Sunday, November 15, 2015
What transpired in Paris on Friday is the ramification caused
by the buffoon in the oval office, due to his only strategy
ever set forth; evacuating our troops from Iraq, leaving the
whole area open to Islamic jihadists to create havoc that is
reaching far beyond the middle east.
Even in his statement to the world, he still purported ISIS
is contained. I would be open to know what his interpretation
of containment is. Everyone knew what would happen after the
withdrawal from Iraq, except him. And even after he was briefed
about ISIS in Syria, and on the move, he ignored military advice
to nip them in the bud with air power, while they were in the
open, but he waited until they became well formed and established
in key areas before he was forced to do it, even when the
timeline has become ineffectual.
It is apparent to others that he doesn't know what he is doing,
opening the door to Vladimir Putin and friendly nations to us,
looking for leadership elsewhere.
To the PCP, buffoon is politically correct to describe an ineffectual
Conservative column from George Giftos
Thursday, November 12, 2015
I recently saw that great cartoon that someone sent me.
And then in the weekend's newspaper one of the political cartoonist drew a picture of Dr. Carson in a Burger King whopper outfit. It brought home to me how the media has a double standard. Two incidents - which were not proved untrue - that took place 35 to 50 years ago becomes relevant because Dr. Carson is a black, conservative Republican. But let's take a look at just some of the whoppers told by Mrs. Clinton over the years. And yet the main stream media continues to give her a pass. Here are just a few of the Clinton lies.
- Mrs. Clinton claimed that her daughter Chelsea was jogging around the world during 9/11 when it turned out she was safe at home.
- She claimed that she was "under fire" with bullets flying everywhere when she landed in Bosnia. However, the pilot said there were no bullets anywhere and they would not have departed if there was any danger. In fact, a little girl presented her with flowers after she landed.
- She claimed she never said the riots in Benghazi were caused by a political cartoon of Mohammad despite numerous videos contradicting her.
- She claimed she was named after Sir Edmund Hillary after he climbed Mt. Everest - but she was 6 years old when that happened.
- She claimed it was by reading the Wall St. Journal that she, on her own, turned $1,000 into a $100,000 profit on her one and only foray in the cattle futures market. However, the WSJ did not cover that market at the time.
- She claimed she never received a subpoena concerning her emails and server although the House Committee produced the subpoena.
- She claimed all of her grandparents immigrated to the U.S. However, only one did.
- When she was a lawyer in the Rose law firm she did work for Castle Grande, which turned out to be a fraudulent venture. She claimed she never worked on the project despite the law firm billing records showing she spent at least 30 hours on the project.
I could give many more examples. The question I ask is: when will the main stream media discuss Mrs. Clinton's lies?
I can hear the crickets chirping!
Contributed by James J. Pirretti
Sunday, November 8, 2015
OBAMA: Father knew best!
Balack Hussein Obama’s years of indoctrination in all things Islam, his exposure to radical, anti-American Socialistic hate mongering plus, an inordinately large dose of his Father’s obsession with anti-Colonialism – all these off-the-wall influences have combined to provide him with an outsized quotient of arrogance. He stands alone in his uncanny ignorance that manifests itself whenever he delves into the nether world of micro-managing the military might of the U. S. Armed Forces.
President & Commander-in-Chief: He is so taken with these titles that he is quite comfortable mucking up our military, making irrational decisions about Rules of Engagement policies and other inane strategies that are doomed-to-failure, all in the face of sound advice to the contrary from seasoned Generals with only their decades of directly-related combat experience to support their recommendations.
Obama has never served a single day in a uniform of our Armed Forces and so, his aimless thrashing about in deadly serious military matters is an obscenity. He is so obsessed with his own perceived Pope-like infallibility, that he can equate his time spent honing the corruptive skills of Community Organizing thuggery on the crime-ridden streets of Chicago, with the combined wisdom and combat experience of four-star Generals and Admirals. And so, these top military advisors, each of whom has spent decades at training and leading our all-volunteer military in successful combat against enemy forces, have been shunted aside without a second thought by this self-centered, narcissistic demon who wallows in total denial of his gross inadequacies.
Obama as Commander-in-Chief, is dangerous beyond all belief.
Allen West Mort Kuff Fred Thompson