 |
| It's time for Bernie to stop Running and start running. |
The news came as a stunning surprise to Bernie Sanders and his supporters, all of whom share a charming naivete about how primary elections, the Clintons, the media, and the Democratic Machine work. There's even reasonably compelling evidence that the AP story was created in collusion with Hillary's campaign machine days earlier and specifically released just before the California primary to do the greatest possible amount of damage to the morale of Bernie's coterie of socialist sycophants.
Frankly, from day one Bernie's supporters had a smaller chance of having their votes legitimately counted than the Americans under fire in Benghazi had a chance of Hillary sending troops to their rescue. In Hillary's world, the inconvenient are cannon fodder - and anyone standing between her and the White House is very inconvenient indeed.
There now appears to be little question that Hillary has made the necessary backroom arrangements to take Bernie out of the running (and if he gives up soon, his odds of not becoming room temperature will skyrocket).
Which frankly makes us think that it's Joe Biden's secret service detail which now needs to be on their toes. Hillary's current best bet to avoid indictment is to assure that the Democrat party will have no "plan B" waiting in the wings.
And if that thought doesn't have Biden wearing kevlar BVDs, he's even more clueless than we thought.
BONUS: LAWN ORDER
 |
| Ipso meet Facto. |
Despite the fact that the judge was born in Indiana (making him exactly as American and Hoosier as your faithful author), and despite the fact that Trump swears that Hispanics love him, he has declared the judge (descended from two Mexican parents) to be a Mexican himself, and therefore incapable of giving a fair trial to Trump.
By The Donald's logic, this means that in the future all defendants should have a judge who shares their own race, ethnicity, and beliefs. In other words, Trump would like to see segregated law - including, we assume, Shariah Law for any Muslims he doesn't throw out of the country.
Hope n' Change will never, ever vote for Hillary Clinton. But if Trump wants our vote in November, he needs to STFU right now and keep his moronically offensive ideas to himself until election day.
Using your logic then Obama who is alledged to have been born in the USA shares the smae values of any American born in the USA.
ReplyDeleteOr to put it another way the SCOTUS just mandated a black murderer be given a new trial because he was tried in front of an all white jury so a hispanic judge cannot hope to try a white man fairly. SCOTUS has said so.
We're on different sides of the street here my friend. Get familiar with the case and get back to me. The judge has consistently made questionable rulings against Trump. CONSISTENTLY. He's a racist. He's openly supported LaRaza. The law firms that were choose for the complainants have donated 100s of 1,000s of dollars to the dems. It's a bullshit case meant solely to embarrass Trump.
ReplyDeleteYour PC is showing-it's not pretty. Trump will have no part of it. If that doesn't warm your heart, I don't know what will.
MM
"If he has a lawn mower he must be a Mexican." That has to be "Trump-logic." Kind of like that old joke about logic that leads to the conclusion that if you have a weed-whacker you must be gay.
ReplyDeleteThe Donald will NEVER get my vote, and neither will the wicked witch of the Ozarks. The American electorate has reached a level entitled stupidity that makes them (notice I left myself out) eligible for stupid-human-tricks on a late-night variety show. The fact that the GOP has come this far that a candidate like Trump is appealing to the great unwashed masses leaves me no choice but to abdicate my position in said GOP.
It's over folks. Life as we knew it will never be the same.
Trump has drawn a hanging judge on this who is politically motivated to hang Trump. He is as likely to get a fair trial as a gun owner would in front of judge judy, sotomayor or ginsberg.
ReplyDeleteLa Raza is all for the race nothing for those outside the race and any judge who belong to such a group can not be considered impartial.
An I am not yet that big of a trump fan.
Trump's comments were to insulate him from the upcoming KANGAROO COURT/Mex-Am.Judge with LA RAZA all over his affiliations, and hand picked by Hussein 0Bamalamdingdong. Follow the money.All Clinton connected. These vermin never let up. No Trump? Well write in your self aggrandizing worthless vote or go full fascist with HillDawg. Get your haughty nose out of the air..this is a time for brass knuckles.
ReplyDeleteAsking Trump to STFU is like asking the sun not to rise in the East. Never happen. He's just as narcissistic as the current president and just as self aggrandizing with no real platform on any issues. As Jim Irre said "life as we knew it will never be the same" whichever one of these losers win the election.
ReplyDeleteAs I saw in a comments section somewhere in the last couple of days:
ReplyDelete"I have doubts about Trump, but I have no doubts about Hillary".
If for no other reason than Supreme Court nominations, Hillary simply must not win. That is the bottom line.
And by the way if the judge in question has La Raza affiliation, then he is by definition racist. What would be said about a white judge who was a member of The Race?
So now we must judge judges by their race? Insanity.
ReplyDelete@ Judi King
ReplyDeleteNo one is judging him by his race, sheepish lady, learn to read. He is being judged by his political affiliations.
Lord, some people.
And to the F wad above that says Trump will NEVER get his vote, who fucking cares? FOAD, you're a loser who obviously isn't interested in 2A.
MM
TRUMP judged him by his race Zardoz the sheepish. Some people indeed. And, in this country, people still have the right to vote or not vote as they choose according to their own conscience.
ReplyDeleteI think Trump was very smart in this. The judge MAY be fair, but given all his associations AND ethnicity perhaps not..Trump just spiked his guns ENSURING his fairness, why waste money on an appeal when you can force his hand at the gate..the charges are BS to begin with...Remember too Sotomeyer, the "wise Latina" got seated BECAUSE she would bring the Hispanic "perspective", seems we have another bit of PC hypocrisy here and Donald doesn't DO PC and neither should the rest of us.
ReplyDeleteThat Trump panel is damn funny. And Sotomayor summed it up with her racist statement about wise Latinas...
ReplyDeleteI hope Trump picks Attila for Veep only to piss off the twisted knickers crowd.
I bet Mickey Mouse, as a write-in candidate, has his best run in history this time around.
ReplyDeleteMight as well elect Mickey Mouse. Goofy is in the WH now, Daffy is soon to be indicted and Bozo is flapping his jaws at everything!
ReplyDeleteSo far Mickey is the best qualified
ReplyDelete@Anonymous- First off, my logic (and I'm not often accused of having such) doesn't in any way suggest that all Americans share the same values. Why the heck would I have this blog if I thought that? But rather, I am saying that whether we like it or not, all natural born Americans are equally American.
ReplyDeleteI'll readily acknowledge that SCOTUS is making the same argument that Trump is about who should adjudicate legal cases - but that strikes me as a nightmare in the making. Every black defendant deserves the OJ jury? Hispanics should have trials conducted solely in Spanish? Muslims should have Shariah courts? I'm going to fight these ideas tooth and nail.
@Zardoz the Magnificent- I have to grin at the idea that "my PC is showing." Yeah, that's me alright. If Trump wants to make an argument that the judge's rulings are questionable and can tie that to the judge's political affiliations and actions (as you did) I'm 100% fine with it - but that's not what he did. He just said that the judge is a Mexican, which is factually untrue, and cited that as the reason the judge needs to recuse himself. That's bullshit logic; do we really want every trial in memory to be overturned if the judge's ethnicity didn't match that of the defendant?
@Jim Irre- I'm not in the #NeverTrump camp, but every time he opens his yap it makes it harder for me to imagine voting for him.
@REM1875- I'm not disputing what you say. If Trump wants to make those points, then let him. It's absolutely fair game to contest people's legal impartiality based on their politics, public statements, public and private affiliations, and so on. But reducing your argument to rejecting someone because they're black, white, hispanic, asian, male, or female is "identity politics" pure and simple: it's dear to Democrats but should be anathema to those on the Right.
@JoeDaddy- Are there any Hispanic judges who could give Trump a fair trial? If so, then Trump's blanket characterization is an insult to those judges. And if not, then our legal system is irreparably broken.
@Judi King- In fairness, Trump doesn't have to STFU. He just needs to stop sounding like a moron with such regularity.
@TrickyRicky- In order to vote for Trump, I've set the bar unbelievably low: all he has to do is convince me that he'd be better than Hillary, whom I loathe with every fiber of my being and whose presidency would be a national nightmare. He hasn't done that yet.
ReplyDelete@Judi King- Exactly. Personally, if I needed legal assistance I'd be pretty damn happy to have Clarence Thomas on my side instead of writing him off because he's black and can't relate to a caucasian.
@Zardoz the Magnificent- Again, "judging the judge" by his political affiliations is legitimate, and it's what Trump's supporters are doing. Simply declaring that he's "a Mexican" and implying that all Mexicans share a single mindset is not legitimate. I'm already weary of the army of Trump supporters who have full time jobs explaining the nuances of what Trump "meant" rather than what he said. Do we really want a president whose every utterance becomes a political Rorschach test?
@Judi King- You bring up an interesting question. In Trump's world, should people be allowed to vote against someone not of their race or sex? Are we not being self-appointed judges when we go to the polls? By Trumpian logic, I should recuse myself from voting for The Donald because, as a male, I can't be fair to Hillary.
@Richard Simon- Trump might very well have made this accusation to force the judge to be fair...which would be a smart play if Trump wasn't ALSO running for president right now. If Trump is playing a game here, he's taking his eye off the bigger prize.
@Ed G. Mann- I'll note that I raised plenty of stink here about the "wise Latina" crack. It was inappropriate and racist. It would be hypocritical of me to condemn her statement and not condemn Trump's.
@Geoff, Anonymous, & Judy- I would prefer that Mickey Mouse continue his reign over Disneyworld, so I'll have someplace nice to escape to after the election.
If the walls inside "Trump University" have drywall on them, shouldn't that buy SOME kind of advantage for "the Donald". Landscaping, concrete... c'mon folks... Donald is single-handedly financing all the Mexicans invading this country... shouldn't he be cut some slack for THAT?
ReplyDelete@Stilton,
ReplyDelete"...all he has to do is convince me that he'd be better than Hillary, whom I loathe with every fiber of my being and whose presidency would be a national nightmare. He hasn't done that yet."
Trump was certainly not my first pick from the GOP lineup. However, I can not find a single negative of his that I can't also ascribe to Hillary. By a similar token, I can find negatives for Hillary that I can't ascribe to Trump. Therefore he has already convinced me that "he'd be better than Hillary."
Don't expect me to get excited about him, but I do hope he gets elected and that he proves to be more Conservative than we expect.
What txGreg said... although I cringe at 'hope.' That didn't turn out so well the last time a 'hope' candidate got elected.
ReplyDelete@Bruce Bleu- You make a good, albeit weird, point.
ReplyDelete@txGreg- I can think of several failings Trump has that I wouldn't associate with Hillary, among them his wild unpredictability and seeming inability to grasp nuance (and I don't just mean rhetorically; I mean when it comes to analysis of complex issues).
I would be delighted to discover, if he wins, that he would be a great president - allowing me to vote enthusiastically for a second term. But currently I feel like I'm in the back seat of a speeding car and have to choose between a bad driver (Hillary) and a drunken driver (Trump).
@CenTexTim- I've had the "Hope" beaten right out of me by this administration. I can still use the word, but I can't feel the emotion. I cannot embrace Trump out of either hope nor faith. I'm anxiously awaiting anything at all that seems like substance from him.
"He's Mexican" isn't OK 'cause he was born in the states. But it's OK to refer to someone as being Irish or Italian even though his family has been here for a number of generations. That's a frickin' disconnect.
ReplyDelete@Dan- You're missing the point and there's no disconnect. The problem isn't so much the word "Mexican" as the fact that Trump used the word to confer the idea that the judge is a racial stereotype incapable of independent thought or action.
ReplyDeleteTo use your own examples, it's not a problem to refer to someone as Irish or Italian. It IS a problem if you say "I don't trust that guy, he's Irish" or "I'd never give a job to an Italian."
I'll also point out that in the case I'm referring to, Trump didn't say that the Judge was Mexican...he said that the judge was "a Mexican" which is different - and untrue.
Well, the media thrashed this story out until they got something better to talk about. The new story to thrash about is the historic victory of a womyn for the omination. It would mean something if it were a real woman who made it on her own, a la Carly Fiorina. Riding coattails like Chairman Mao's better half sorta takes the historical wonder of it down several notches IMO.
ReplyDeleteI'm growing so weary of Trump vs NeverTrump. All the arguments are out there so now it's just a boring recital of them. Trump got the nom because he was not afraid to speak out against the left's chokehold called political correctness. We have to do something different. The same old same old is gonna send this country right off the cliff.
After Cruz dropped out, I promised myself that I would give Trump six months to convince me he could/would be someone who is conservative, sane and sober. So far, he has swerved back and forth. When he brought out his list of potential SCOTUS nominees, I started to inch toward supporting him. After his latest rants, he just pushed me back several feet. I would never, while alive, vote for a liberal/progressive/socialist/communist running under the democrat banner, but it will take a lot of convincing to get me to vote for an apparently egotistical, paranoid, thin-skinned megalomaniac. (But I'll still give him until November to earn my vote.)
ReplyDeleteYou've got to be one of the most humorous individuals I've come across in my 76 years. Hell,
ReplyDeleteI'm not old, just aged, as anything fine would be! Dead and at room temperature is old!
Keep on keepin' on with the wit. However, know that if you should bump your head and lose all sense of direction and vote for Hillary the Harlot, know I will cancel your vote with mine for Trump. He's not the prettiest puppy, he's the only one that will bite and bark later. :-))
@Shelly- I'm already rolling my eyes about the historical significance of a woman (gasp!) finally running for president...or even becoming president. For those who aren't paying attention (ie, most voters) there are currently 22 heads of state (Presidents and Prime Ministers) who are women. Germany, Argentina, Brazil, Norway, South Korea, and the list goes on and on. Plus, I remember women like Indira Gandhi, Golda Meir, and Margaret Thatcher. So excuuuuuse me if I fail to see Hillary's nomination as much of an event.
ReplyDelete@NVRick- Sounds like we're on the same page. I will NEVER vote for Hillary or anyone of her ilk. But for me to actively cast a vote for Trump, I need to feel like I'm not tossing a hand grenade into a daycare center. I think it's safe to say that I will never have enthusiasm for the man, but I won't make up my mind to withhold my vote until the last minute of the last possible day.
@Walter1694cir- Thank you, sir! Pretty much everyone considers me a wit; the debate is whether whole or half. And rest assured that there is NO circumstance that could have me cast a vote for Hillary.
I'm a long way from being convinced to vote for Trump. Like you Stilton, I really just need to know he won't be worse than Hillary. So far, I am still unconvinced.
ReplyDeleteThe fact he called the judge "A Mexican" sets off dog whistles all over the place and gives the Left tons of ammo against him. If he had said the judge couldn't preside fairly because he has an agenda and is being guided by his affiliation with La Raza he would have been perfectly right. Instead, he says the judge is "A Mexican" and everyone that is convinced he is a racist stands up and makes the noise from the 70's version of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers". *Imagine Donald Sutherland pointing at his TV with Trump on it*
*Somewhat related rant*
La Raza is a ridiculously racist organization and I completely agree that the Judge being a member of it should be enough for him to step aside. For the love of Pete, the name is "THE RACE" which evokes images of "THE MASTER RACE" or "THE ONLY REAL RACE". I find their very existence insulting.
But we live in America and I am a grown man, so I can understand there are racists and buttheads in the world. I just shout back when I hear chants of "Si se puede!" :)
If Trump wants to be president, he needs to be smart enough not to get trapped by his big mouth.
Well, as many of us have known it since 2008, it's now official: Hillary Clinton has been assigned as our next President. Whether this was bought-and-paid-for by the Clintons or that Clintons were bought-and-paid-for is a "chicken or the egg" kind of debate, but it was always inevitable. Bernie's kids put on a good show, trying to convince Democrats that there actually was a choice to be had, but it was always just a show.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, Trump again tests the theoretical barrier of what it's possible to publicly say and yet still remain viable. I'm not sure any of it matters anymore.
Because when all is said and done, it will be Hillary that is sworn in next year. Why? Because Hillary is the only candidate that honestly represents the status quo.
It's been popular for a generation now to say that "Washington doesn't work", with an assumption that this is a universal truth. But it's not. Washington is working just fine for a large number of Americans, and non-Americans alike. As I've said here many times before, we've long since passed a point-of-no-return where 51% of Americans are economically dependent on a check or favor from Washington. If there's any one candidate that represents that continuing as it has, it's Hillary. And we also know that through the Clinton Foundation, America is now working great for people who don't even live here.
So if you already are a government dependent, or have bought a line of communication through the Clinton Foundation, Washington will continue to work for you just fine. The rest of us really don't have much hope.
As the general consensus here is "I am voting for Trump so that Clinton doesn't win", our nation is doomed. My only remaining hope is that enough people wake up to cause a civil war in which we take our country back by force.
ReplyDeleteThe odds of that are extremely low, just like the odds of actually electing a president or members of congress that actually give a shit about anything but themselves is almost non-existant.
May the USA rest in peace and always be remembered.
Geoff King Wasn't the only valid reason they could come up with to vote for mittens was tto try and keep Obama from re-election? How is this different?
ReplyDeleteObama could always declare Martial Law and suspend the elections for a plan "B"
ReplyDeleteStilton, shrillary's running for presidunce shouldn't be an "event" because she's a BROAD, but because she's the first candidate running who should be incarcerated for multiple FELONIES. Look how quickly we have degraded from a demimonde who played "hide the chorizo" with multiple "chickie-poos", to the first "affirmative-action" dimwit, to now a possible death-row harridan, (sorry, I mean "virago"), who has as much to offer this nation as a eunuch at a sperm bank!
ReplyDeleteWell; congratulations to the 'presumptive' post menopausal democratic nominee, this being a first for the USA. Not just the first 'woman' to be the 'presumptive' nominee, but also the first accessory to murder under Federal investigation to be a 'presumptive' nominee. Stop taking the drugs, America, and wake the heck up.
ReplyDeleteOh, and out here in Dumbed-down Demofornia; Arnold Schnitzengruben actually voted for John 'Twitchy' Kasich in the 6-7 primaries. Way to go Arnold, your vote was almost(a very close second) as rewarding as your governorship of Liberalfornia. Yes, I know we all have the right to choose, but I just felt the need to punk someone 'Trump Style'. I'm better now Nurse Ratched; put the syringe away.
ReplyDeleteshirly u jest!?
ReplyDeleteknow thee not, to be "American" one must denounce all allegiance, to other than the US Constitution? so when trump said he's mexican, he was, in readers digest version, or, business mode, making the point! like sodajerk & the other wich anointed to the Supreme Court, his loyalty is NOT to the USofA! his track record, his bff, his loyalties, are fact. he was also anointed by rnode, the gubernator of the klan kennedy! so now we have 2 'justices' (just us) illegally anointed to the Supreme Court! by an illegal alien! how kool is that? this rabbit hole is provided as a result of working with a suicide intervention/prevention hot line - lies kill, truth can save lives, and encourage greater lives. unfortunately, it seems, most all we get on the "news" is the lies, parroted, and promoted, but, "TA - DA!" they is sum like yer own self, wut make funny, and with a cup of caffeine, or 2, Good Lord willing and algore's interweb providing,& the creek don't rise, (algore et al not given credit... we all know they's Christ haters and deniers..) i nevr could make a point in 25 words, or 30 sec/elevator speech.... trump has. how cool is that? not that i agree with evrything... dare him to come visit me... or you! (seriously, my Dad survived wut shudda kilt him, oblivouslu, i'm hear ... u perspire me... okydoky... ifn u kin get the albumin - er, the yoke... bear it ligthly... my friend, and with fivolity... GOD has a sense of humor.... "we" do need it now, eh?
Anyone know where to get anything close to reasonable & real evening news on TV now? The 3 majors are so obviously in the can for Hillary etal it's disgusting; I can barely watch & listen to the talking heads on FOX either. By the time they get to the pharmaceutical commercials I might need some of that stuff. BBC is sometimes not bad when on topic, but they're, you know: foreigners.
ReplyDeleteWhew! Great post and spirited debate here today (not to be confused with debates that make you want to drink spirits).
ReplyDeleteTrickyRicky said it. This is the bottom line, folks; Hillary will appoint at least two maybe three or four SCOTUS judges and odds are her picks will make Darth Vader Ginsberg and Sotamayor seem like ultra right wing, conservative nutjobs. For whatever Trump is, he is not going to pick moonbat judges; I am certain of that.
Yes, he's a boisterous blowhard, but who gives a crap if he is all that stands between us and being the next Greece or Venezuela. And to be honest, I actually do believe he would be really great at revitalizing our economy. The man understands that corporations are leaving the US to escape the huge tax burden, and the jobs are going with them. The only way to get the jobs back is to lure the job providers back with super-attractive tax rates.
And to all those folks who are going to vote third party... I hope you feel really good about that when Hillary comes to take your friggin' guns, money, and what little is left of your freedom. I lean Libertarian too, but I'm also a realist. Johnson or any other candidate but Hillary or Trump are not going to win. Period. Maybe some day, the conservative cause with thrive once again, but a president Hillary will only crush the cause more, and a third party vote only helps her.
@Tots- Actually, the judge Trump is yelling about is not a member of "La Raza" (full name, the "National Council of La Raza"). He's a member of the San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association. A similar name - but not the same group.
ReplyDeleteMind you, the judge's political associations can still be questioned, but between Trump calling him "a Mexican" and Trump's supporters getting bent out of shape about "La Raza," the Left is enjoying a field day.
@John the Econ- Well said, I don't disagree with a single syllable, and this is why I drink.
@Geoff King- I'd like to rebut your conclusion, but haven't thought of a way. Yeah, we're pretty well screwed at the moment. I'm hoping for an unexpected miracle. Or a sale at the liquor store.
@Michael Beaty- I still haven't ruled out a Martial Law scenario. Apparently George Soros just made a number of investments (like buying gold) based on his guess we're about to see economic chaos. What does he know that we don't? And...is he paying for it to happen?
@Bruce Bleu- I'm sick of "historical" presidents. Bill Clinton was the first all-white black president, Obama was the first half-white black president, and Hillary intends to be the first allegedly female president. I say to Hell with all of them. How about a president who makes history by being competent for a change?!
@David in SoCal- I wasn't sure if you were referring to Hillary's Arkansas murders, Washington murders, or Benghazi murders. But in any case - yeah, she's definitely making history.
@Anonymous- While I appreciate your patriotic definition of American, I'm afraid that the actual nuts and bolts definition is a little less choosy (which is how we ended up with Barry in the White House).
And while I appreciate Trump's directness and brevity at times, sometimes details are in order too. I hope we start seeing greater seriousness out of him soon - and until then, I think we ALL need to keep our senses of humor intact!
@Rod- I'm in the same boat when it comes to news. I have no faith in Breitbart, Drudge, or most of Fox (I still like Bret Baier's 5 o'clock roundup). I like the Wall Street Journal, and try to augment with other news sources (including those from overseas).
@Colby Muenster- Good points across the board. The importance of the SCOTUS nominations can't be overstated, and I'd like to believe (gulp) that Trump could be good for jobs and business. I don't think a third party candidate has a prayer.
Trump's SCOTUS list is only "possible" nominations and some of them aren't all that consertive. He's never been definite about this or much of anything. And why is a self promoted "fantastic" businessman, who has failed numerous times, so good for the US? Our so-called government is NOT a business. It produces nothing and only takes and re-distributes what others have produced which is where most of it's income comes from. How does a "businessman" deal with that? We have a lot more problems than the economy and words are cheap, not a solution. We all pretty much know that a third party vote is a vote for the bitch, but there comes a time when some of us must take a stand. None of the candidates will be good for this country. So what difference does it make which one wins?
ReplyDeleteWell, it's official:
ReplyDeleteObama endorses Hillary Clinton for president after Sanders meeting
That means those of you holding their breath for an indictment can give up and start breathing again. Obama wouldn't endorse a candidate that was on her way to the big house. No doubt, James Comey has already told his staff to take summer vacation early.
As for Supreme Court nominees: Well, there's little doubt the kind of justices Hillary will pick. But what makes anyone think that Trump will do substantially better? Will he pick great legal minds like Bork, or more malleable jurists like Kennedy & Roberts?
Or for that matter, what makes anybody believe that Trump is a conservative at all? Hardly two years ago, he was a Democrat. He has a lifetime of endorsing Democrats. So all of a sudden appealing to conservatives on immigration he becomes an actual conservative?
I actually have to agree with the left on this one. There's no way of knowing what he'll do. At least we have a pretty clear picture of what Clinton II will look like, and can act accordingly. (Ready to open your checkbooks to the Clinton Foundation yet?)
My conspiracy friends have long since argued that Trump was a foil for Hillary; to cause chaos with the GOP to keep media focus away from Hillary and the Democrats, who have the honest corruption problem. So now that he's actually made it this far, (to the surprise of everyone, including Trump) will he go totally wack-job to send votes back to Hillary? This whole racist judge nonsense certainly would suggest that. Even Trump had to know that was over the top.
"As much to contribute as a Eunich at a sperm bank" - Gleefully stolen, and reposted...
ReplyDeletePlatypus - proof that God has a sense of humor
Beer - prof that God exists, and wants us to be happy
Stilt, I went around a bit w/ the LaRaza / LaRaza Lawyers thing, and hit on this - KKK vs San Diego Klan Lawyers - why the EFF would they GO there?
If you mentally replace LaRaza w/ "Klan" when you hear it, it begins to make sense
And the distanceing, seems murkey, at best..
http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/06/meet-the-pro-illegal-immigrant-groups-the-la-raza-lawyers-of-san-diego-consider-part-of-their-community/
Face it folks, barring an indictment or a physical/mental collapse, Clinton has already been chosen to be our next (and possibly last) president. Our votes will not matter as we do not get to count them. The establishment has spoken.
ReplyDeleteI therefore put it to you that a vote for Trump is a waste of time as they will never allow him to win, and you may possibly be signing his death warrant by supporting him.
Please consider voting Libertarian, or for Mickey Mouse, or anyone but a candidate that you have no faith in. As it has been suggested, a vote for Trump IS a vote for Clinton.
When this is all over, and our country is systematically destroyed, wouldn't you rather know in your heart that you were not a part of the problem?
Consider this possibility: what if a significent number of voters actually get pissed off enough to ignore the Clinton/Trump fiasco and decide to go with the only other choice on the ballot in all 50 states - Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party, yet he loses by a slim margin because many were afraid to vote for anyone but Trump or Clinton because that is what the establishment conditioning requires?
ReplyDeleteWill you then accept responsibility for the inevitable end of all that we hold sacred and dear in this country?
Gary Johnson has no chance of winning unless he is included in any "debates" and his numbers are included in any polls. Right now he is being totally ignored. I guess the MSM and the poo-bahs don't think they need to prop him up in order to undermine Hillary's opposition like the last time a Clinton was in a three-way..... election race. (I know what you were thinking.)
ReplyDeleteIf, by some miracle Johnson won, he would still be faced with a hostile Congress and the likelihood of getting anything done is less than zero. OTOH, that might be a good thing.
Trump got nominated, which, I'm convinced, was a total surprise for Trump. But now that he is, everything that could possibly be construed or twisted into a something negative will be plastered all over creation in order to damage Trump and promote Hillary. The left wants the Repubs ground into the mud so that they will never cause them anymore trouble. They want the whole country to look like California.
It's not a done deal YET; but if & when the November choice is indeed Clinton or Trump (& I don't foresee the VP positions making much difference), I will vote for Trump. If for no other reason (and there are several good ones like the SCOTUS issue), it's the least I'll be able to do just to thank him for the pure Hell (aka History & Truth) he going to bring down on that inept, crooked, lying bitch and her almost-as-sorry partner. Heck it might help Trump win; and I think AT THE WORST OUTCOME: the least-wasted vote against them. Or, she could die first.
ReplyDeletePete (Detroit), Please repost... I've no copy-write or "ego to feed"... I just want to bring smiles to the people who yearn for happiness in "lamont's America". Here's one for our La Raza fiends [sic], (like "Klan with a Tan" for the new black panthers), maybe "Klan with a LIGHT Tan".
ReplyDeleteStilton, You want a COMPETENT President? I don't doubt that we in Colorado would hear the "gears grind" in D. C. when THAT paradigm shifts!
"William Penn
ReplyDeleteGovernments, like clocks, go from the motion men give them; and as governments are made and moved by men, so by them they are ruined too. Wherefore governments rather depend upon men than men upon governments. Let men be good and the government cannot be bad. . . . But if men be bad, let the government be never so good, they will endeavor to warp and spoil it to their turn. . . .[T]hough good laws do well, good men do better; for good laws may want [lack] good men and be abolished or invaded by ill men; but good men will never want good laws nor suffer [allow] ill ones."
If you chose only between the 2 candidates given to you by the enemies of the Republic, then you are submitting to their rule. Obozo was elected by less than 20% of the eligible voters. Less than 39% eligible voters turned out (not counting zombie voters or 100% districts). If you tell people they have to vote for D or R will get it, Then you are part of the problem.
The +60% may have voted for a third party if they were encouraged to vote. This would lead to the breaking of the Two/Party rule we presently suffer under. You are going to say we must be United against D or R, Why, we can be United against both D and R, letting C,F,G or L win.
Don't limit it to the least possible number of candidates, having just 2 choices is like having One choice, no choice at all.
Kevin St TX
I'm Sure the No Such Agency (k)nowes where to find me. ;{)>
I've heard and read commentary and paraphrases, and declarations of third-party intent all over the web about this... and then I heard an actual sound-bite.
ReplyDeleteHe said the judge was "is Pro-Mexican" ... Which, to me, refers to his political affiliations rather than his ethnicity. anyone can be "Pro-Mexican", and not be an actual immigrant themselves.
I firmly believe that this was a reference to his membership in La Raza, and other similar organizations.
And as far as the question of impartiality... yeah... no. Liberal Democrats cannot be impartial. They're fighting EEEEEE-Vil!!!!
@Richard- There are numerous soundbites out there. The one I was referring to did have Mr. Trump referring to the judge as "a Mexican." Perhaps he was speaking in shorthand, but it represents a serious error in judgement.
ReplyDelete>All latinos hates Trump because he is against illegal immigration!
ReplyDelete>A latino judge willl be 100% objective in a case affecting Trump.
Pick one, wankers.
That jusge is asscoiated with a "latino" racial supremacist group known as La Raza.
So anyone defending him with the Race Card or He´s An American (muh freedumbs!) Fail to the highest degree.
@Anonymous- There are a few errors in your calculation...
ReplyDelete1) Not all Latinos hate Trump or support illegal immigration.
2) Probably no judge can ever be 100% objective about anything, which is why it's appropriate to question objectivity rather than ethnic stereotyping.
3) The judge is not associated with "La Raza." He belongs to a different group that has "La Raza" in its name. In a similar way, you should not confuse Red China with the Redskins football team.
My conclusion stands: the judge is 100% American in the legal sense, and if Trump has a gripe he needs to prove it legitimate methods rather than slurs.
Judge Curiel, as a member of the SD LaRaza lawyers association educational fund board was integral in awarding an ILLEGAL immigrant a college scholarship.
ReplyDeleteThat act ALONE shows a blatant disregard for the Laws of America and that act ALONE should be grounds for removal from the bench.
Furthermore,the SD LaRaza lawyers association, of which Judge Curiel is a member in good standing, put out a position paper advocating the boycott and political attack of Trump businesses.
That act ALONE is proof of his possessing a "pre-determined" mind set and should preclude his adjudication of this case.
I would vote for the very devil himself over Hilary, as Satan doesn't HATE America as much as she does.