davidl on July 7th, 2016

Clinton_Hillary_pretty_in_orangeAfter James Comey’s brutal treatment of Mrs. Clinton, I have a better sense of how Mr. Clinton felt.   Comey demonstrated that ever point Mrs Clinton used to defend her use of her private email to conduct the public’s business was a lie, video:

It has long been known that both Mr. and Mrs. Clinton are habitual liars. We now have the FBI on record confirming such.

Mrs. Clinton is trying to impune Donald “Little Donny” Trumps none too stellar business record. Little Donny multiple bankruptcies make him a poor choice in whom to trust your investment funds. However, your dollar in Little Donny’s hands is still safer than a national security secret in the hands of Mrs. Clinton and her minions.

Eric Florack on July 6th, 2016

?Pointing a finger at the FBI for not charging Hillary Clinton is only getting part of the story. Who does the FBI work for?

Eric Florack on July 5th, 2016

So Hillary Clinton got off scot-free despite several plans being listed by the FBI director. Gee I wonder who her attorney general is going to be?

Look… This was never going to go down any other way.
And here’s the thing. Absent the totally unacceptable candidate being put forward by the GOP (trump), the landslide against the clintons would have been laughable for the next several Generations. As it is, however, she’s still got a shot at this thing.

Addendum:  (DavidL)

Spin mode on,  the Director of the FBI, James Comey, accused the presumptive Democrat Party, nominee for President, Mrs. William Clinton, of Gross Negligence.    A person who was grossly negligent as Secretary of State is not competent to President.   Say it loud, clear and often.

Eric Florack on July 4th, 2016

Trump supporters will tell you they’re against globalism. But examine the orange man’s history.

Back in 2013, when Donald Trump was, allegedly, mulling a run for the White House as a Republican, he wrote this in an op-ed for CNN on the global financial crisis:

“We are now closer to having an economic community in the best sense of the term — we work with each other for the benefit of all.
I think we’ve all become aware of the fact that our cultures and economics are intertwined. It’s a complex mosaic that cannot be approached with a simple formula for the correct pattern to emerge. In many ways, we are in unchartered waters.
The good news, in one respect, is that what is done affects us all. There won’t be any winners or losers as this is not a competition. It’s a time for working together for the best of all involved. Never before has the phrase “we’re all in this together” had more resonance or relevance….
“We will have to leave borders behind and go for global unity when it comes to financial stability”.

So, in his own words, a mere three years ago, Donald Trump held the same fairly conventional views of internationalism and open borders as Hillary Clinton and George Soros.

Has he changed his mind? Probably not. You can’t change your mind when you don’t really believe in anything to begin with, other than Globalism….

Eric Florack on July 4th, 2016

?If there’s anything that amazes me about the 4th of July, it’s how many people here in America haven’t a bloody clue as to what it is we’re celebrating.

davidl on July 3rd, 2016

One Gersh Kuntzman is offended by the song God Bless America, from New York Daily News:

It’s time for God to stop blessing America during the seventh-inning stretch.

Welcome to the July 4 holiday weekend — when once again, baseball fans will be assaulted by the saccharine-sweet non-anthem “God Bless America” at stadia all over this great land.

Mr. Kuntzman, if you don’t like God Bless America, then don’t sing it. If you don’t like standing for the song, then don’t stand. Such is your right.

Is Mr. Kuntzman afraid that their is a god and  that he will indeed bless America?     If Mr. Kuntzman were secure in his belief that their is no god, he would not care if any asked, or did not ask for his blessing.

Reference:   Washington Examiner.

 

davidl on July 1st, 2016

Gee weren’t we told that certain behaviors had to accepted because the actors were born that way?   Now social justice warriors have deemed some so-called born traits to be evil, but others born traits to be a matter of pride, from New York Post:

An elite Manhattan school is teaching white students as young as 6 that they’re born racist and should feel guilty benefiting from “white privilege,” while heaping praise and cupcakes on their black peers.

Administrators at the Bank Street School for Children on the Upper West Side claim it’s a novel approach to fighting discrimination, and that several other private New York schools are doing it, but even liberal parents aren’t buying it.

They complain the K-8 school of 430 kids is separating whites in classes where they’re made to feel awful about their “whiteness,” and all the “kids of color” in other rooms where they’re taught to feel proud about their race and are rewarded with treats and other privileges.

From the same rag:

BIRMINGHAM, Ala. — Born in the ashes of the smoldering South after the Civil War, the Ku Klux Klan died and was reborn before losing the fight against civil rights in the 1960s. Membership dwindled, a unified group fractured, and one-time members went to prison for a string of murderous attacks against blacks. Many assumed the group was dead, a white-robed ghost of hate and violence.

Yet today, the KKK is still alive and dreams of restoring itself to what it once was: an invisible empire spreading its tentacles throughout society. As it marks 150 years of existence, the Klan is trying to reshape itself for a new era.

I doubt that any social justice warrior is smart enough to see the connection.

davidl on June 30th, 2016

Charles Blow in the New York Times:

We can’t even agree on how much to talk about race relations, as the discussion itself becomes a political football for the two major parties in this country. According to the report:

Ok, I agree. We, as a society, do not discuss race in public. Why? Because it is pointless. To wit, Blow provides the answer in his very next paragraph.

Finally, we continue to be deceived about the enormous and epidemic nature of often-invisible institutional racism, preferring instead to direct our ire at the more easily identified and vilified interpersonal racism. The report puts it this way:

You can not have a rational discussion of race with a person who believes in an all powerful, but somehow totally invisible force, to wit institutional racism. Individuals, such a Blow, can be and often are racist. A phantom force, no so much. Institutional racism is the hockey stick of the race warrior. You can not solve a problem that has not been defined.

If you want to improve racial outcome, get over the theory institutional racism.

davidl on June 27th, 2016

Clinton_Hillary_pretty_in_orangeDemocrats on House Benghazi Select Committee issue a prebuttal in an attempt to white wash Mrs. Clinton, from Julian Hattem, Hill:

In their report on Monday, Democrats claimed that nothing uncovered by the Select Committee on Benghazi altered the underlying narrative about the events of Sept 11, 2012.

“Although the select committee obtained additional details that provide context and granularity, these details do not fundamentally alter the previous conclusions,” they wrote.

Among the 21 published findings, the Democrats claimed that security ahead of the violence was “woefully inadequate,” but that the Defense Department could not have done anything differently on the night of the attack.

No one in the military issued a “stand down” order, they claimed, countering allegations otherwise.

The report also exonerates Clinton, who Democrats said never personally denied security requests ahead of time and was heavily involved during the attacks.

“Secretary Clinton was active and engaged on the night of the attacks and in the days that followed,” the report alleged.

followed,” the report alleged.

Items ‘rats claim Benghazi security was “woefully inadequate”, that Mrs. Clinton never “personally” denied security request, but yet somehow active and engaged on the night of the attacks.

How could Mrs. Clinton who lived by email personally respond to an email request for adequate security when nobody in Benghazi were even told her email address? Sure Mrs. Clinton was active and engaged for one night, the night of the attacks, but she was so active and engaged to see that her consulate had adequate security in the first place.

davidl on June 27th, 2016

Robert Post is the dean and a professor of law at Yale Law School, and a disgrace to both his school and profession, from Washington Post:

Global warming is perhaps the single most significant threat facing the future of humanity on this planet. It is likely to wreak havoc on the economy, including, most especially, on the stocks of companies that sell hydrocarbon energy products. If large oil companies have deliberately misinformed investors about their knowledge of global warming, they may have committed serious commercial fraud.

[…]

The obvious point, which remarkably bears repeating, is that there are circumstances when scientific theories must remain open and subject to challenge, and there are circumstances when the government must act to protect the integrity of the market, even if it requires determining the truth or falsity of those theories. Public debate must be protected, but fraud must also be suppressed. Fraud is especially egregious because it is committed when a seller does not himself believe the hokum he foists on an unwitting public.

A lie repeated is still a lie. A theory is a theoretical explanation. While a theory can be disproved, it can never be proved. If a theory were ever to be proven, it would no longer be theory, put rather a fact. Post postulates his theory of anthropogenic global warming but wants his theory treated as if it were a fact.

Citizens have the right of free political speech. The state has no legitimate power to suppress free speech simply because she neither accepts the speech nor has the power to refute it. If the theory of anthropgenic global warming were good theory, the hacks shilling it would not have to resort to creating their so-called data out of whole cloth and suppressing their evidence, what ever it might be.

davidl on June 26th, 2016

The regime, in its infinite wisdom, decides to open call combat billets to women.  In turn, as is their wont, the Marine Corps, decided to put would be combat warriors to the test.  The results were not pretty, from Lolita C. Baldor, Associated Press, via Marine Corps Times:

New physical standards established so women can compete for combat posts in the Marine Corps have weeded out many of the female hopefuls. But they’re also disqualifying some men, according to data obtained by The Associated Press.

In the last five months, six out of seven female recruits — and 40 out of about 1,500 male recruits — failed to pass the new regimen of pullups, ammunition-can lifts, a 3-mile run and combat maneuvers required to move on in training for combat jobs, according to the data

[…]

The high failure rate for women, however, raises questions about how well integration can work, including in Marine infantry units where troops routinely slog for miles carrying packs weighed down with artillery shells and ammunition, and at any moment must be able to scale walls, dig in and fight in close combat.

Not to worry, if the Corps Chicks can’t match the men for macho, maybe they can just adopt the Loretta Lynch mantra for warfare, and just love, understand, accept and swarm the enemy to death with kindness.

davidl on June 23rd, 2016

Divided Supreme Court unable to overturn lower court ruling blocking Dumbo’s attempt at amnesty via executive fiat, from Fox News, via Ace:

President Obama says SCOTUS ruling on immigration takes America “further from the country that we aspire to be.”

Who we Paleface?

The ‘rats, Mrs. Pelosi’s caucus in the  House, claim that want to prevent terrorists from being able to buy a gun, see video:

Yet when you take time to examine the ‘rats position, it makes no sense.  Being a terrorist is already illegal.  So the so-called terrorist on the regime’s various lists are real, the Obama administration is letting known terrorist remain free.  If on the other hand, these so-called terrorists, are merely suspected of being terrorist, the ‘rats want to curtail a constitution right based on a government bureaucrat’s mere speculation.  Which one is it?

davidl on June 21st, 2016

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen’s (D – New Hampshire) intelligence, or lack thereof can best measured on the Boxer Scale, from Buzz Feed News:

Democratic New Hampshire Sen. Jeanne Shaheen said certain types of firearms like the AR-15 are the kind of guns that should be banned. She added that people trying to purchase the weapon — which is popular among American gun owners — are “buying it do bad things.”

[…]

“The fact is, the AR-15, the gun that (Omar) Mateen used, that’s a weapon of war; it’s advertised as being able do technologically advances in killing people that previous weapons have been unable to do and somebody who is buying that kind of a weapon isn’t buying it for target shooting,” she said. “They’re not buying it to go out and hunt deer. You don’t need an AK-47 or an AR-15 to hunt deer. They’re buying it to do bad things and we need to recognize that and address it.”

Teen defends younger sister, video:

Oh that evil seven year old in pink, video:

Piss off Senator

davidl on June 17th, 2016

One Pamela Haag seems to suffering under the delusion that the Second Amendment only protects weapons used for recreation, Time:

“The permeable boundary between military and commercial firearms has a long history in our gun culture”

After the Orlando shooting, many Americans are questioning why assault-style weapons are commercially available in the United States.

“Assault weapon” is a political phrase, not a technical one. It refers broadly to rapid-firing semiautomatic weapons, appropriate to military use.

video:

video:

In 18 ,albeit for the wrong reason, the Court placed the right to keep and bear arms at the same category as the right to travel freely, assemble and to speak in public, Scott v. Sandford:

It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, singly or in companies, without pass or passport, and without obstruction, to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased at every hour of the day or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of law for which a white man would be punished; and it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went. And all of this would be done in the face of the subject race of the same color, both free and slaves, and inevitably producing discontent and insubordination among them, and endangering the peace and safety of the State.

From United States v. Miller(1939)

In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession
or use of a “shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches
in length” at this time has some reasonable relationship to the
preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say
that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear
such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that
this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that
its use could contribute to the common defense.

The clear implication, albeit not the ruling, of the Court is that had Jack Miller and Frank Layton been caught carrying a Browning Automatic Rife, a military issue machine gun of the period, is that weapon would have been protected by the Second Amendment.