Saturday, November 19, 2016

Trump Releases His Plan for 2nd Amendment… Leaves Millions Furious

Conservative Tribune ^ 

One common criticism of billionaire businessman and President-elect Donald Trump is that he far too often speaks in vague generalities and rarely offers specifics about where he stands on the issues.
That is no longer the case, at least regarding his stance on gun rights and the Second Amendment, after Trump released his official policy position on his campaign website.

“The Second Amendment to our Constitution is clear. The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed upon. Period,” the position paper began.
Trump went on to explain that the right to keep and bear arms is a right that pre-exists both the government and the Constitution, noting that government didn’t create the right, nor can it take it away.
He also rightly denoted the Second Amendment as “America’s first freedom,” pointing out that it helps protect all of the other rights we hold dear.
In order to protect and defend that right, Trump proposed tougher enforcement of laws that are already on the books, rather than adding new gun control laws.
Citing a successful program in Richmond, Virginia, that sentenced gun criminals to mandatory minimum five-year sentences in federal prison, Trump noted that crime rates will fall dramatically when criminals are taken off the streets for lengthy periods of time.
Trump also proposed strengthening and expanding laws allowing law-abiding gun owners to defend themselves from criminals using their own guns, without fear of repercussion from the government.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Steve Bannon Interviewed: "It's About Americans Not Getting F—ed Over"

Zero Hedge ^ | 11-21-2016 | Tyler Durden 

Moments ago, the Hollywood Reporter released the much anticipated Michael Wolff interview with Steve Bannon, the controversial president-elect's chief strategist. As a preface, Wolff reveals that Bannon - unlike virtually anyone else in the "credible" media.

In late summer when I went up to see Steve Bannon, recently named CEO of the Donald Trump presidential campaign, in his office at Trump Tower in New York, he outlined a preposterous-sounding scenario. Trump, he said, would do surprisingly well among women, Hispanics and African-Americans, in addition to working men, and hence take Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan — and therefore the election. On Nov. 15, when I went back to Trump Tower, Bannon, promoted by the president-elect to chief strategist for the incoming administration, and by the media as the official symbol of all things hateful and virulent about the coming Trump presidency, said, as matter-of-factly as when he first sketched it out for me, “I told you so.”
Perhaps Trump naming Bannon "chief strategist" is not a bad idea.
Below we picked a few of the most notable excerpts from the interview, starting with Wolff's description of what he saw on the day he visited Trump. He writes "the New York Times, in a widely circulated article, will describe this day at Trump Tower as a scene of “disarray” for the transition team." It appears the NYT was being a source of fake news again:
"In fact, it’s all hands on: Mike Pence, the vice president-elect and transition chief, and Reince Priebus, the new chief of staff, shuttling between full conference rooms; Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and by many accounts his closest advisor, conferring in the halls; Sen. Jeff Sessions in and out of meetings on the transition team floor; Rudy Giuliani upstairs with Trump...

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Hamilton's Precious Little SNowflake moment

 by cvolkay

The cast of the play Hamilton took it upon themselves to school the vice-president elect on the joys of diversity.

Thomas Sowell wrote, "Can you cite one speck of hard evidence of the benefits of diversity that we have heard gushed about for years?

Evidence of its harm can be seen-written in blood-from Iraq to India, From Serbia to Sudan, from Fiji to the Philippines. It is scary how easily so many people can be brainwashed by sheer repetition of a word."

 Of course he's exactly right. The august and brainy cast of Hamilton said they were having a conversation with Pence. No you were not, you are self-deluded liars. Standing on a stage above someone, holding the stage and then pontificating downward is not a conversation, it is a lecture. A lecture only the poor brainwashed precious snowflakes want to hear. It was harassment on the cast's part. Of course they lack the class and intelligence to apologize for their stupidity, but whether they do or not, they revealed themselves as the clowns they are.

The Fall of House Clinton

NRO ^ | 19 Nov 2016 | Jonah Goldberg 

Last night was the traditional National Review smoker on our splendid post-election cruise. This is an ancient tradition, the origins of which stretch back into the mists before time and the stories of a young solo sailor by the name of William F. Buckley Jr. — sweat, sea water, and shark blood glistening off his chest — who settled in to enjoy a relaxing cigar after killing the great white beast with his bare hands. I bring this up for two reasons. First, to alert the reader that I am feeling a bit hungover from both smoke and spirit alike (so please, stop reading so loudly!); second, because I think I must say goodbye to another great white beast: Bill Clinton — and his remora bride, Hillary. This is a good time to do it. The feeding frenzy atmosphere around the Trump transition is bananas given that there’s so little to say about it. My position on Trump remains unchanged from last week’s G-File: Like Bill Clinton after taking a blood test, I am entirely in wait-and-see mode. Meanwhile, if I wait too long to give the Clintons a send-off, it will seem not only gratuitous — which would be fine, that’s what I’m going for — but also stale. The bad taste of the Clintons lingers on enough, though — like the acidic after-burp from my lunch in Mexico yesterday — that it still seems a bit relevant.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Here's why Jeff Sessions is the perfect pick for attorney general

FOX ^ | 11-18-16 | Hans A. von Spakovsky 

President-elect Donald Trump has picked Sen. Jeff Sessions to serve as the 84th Attorney General of the United States—and he couldn’t have made a better choice. Throughout his career, Sessions has demonstrated unshakable commitment and fidelity to the Constitution, the rule of law, and protecting the freedom and liberty that is our birthright as Americans.
He has almost the perfect professional background to be the attorney general. As the former U.S. Attorney of the Southern District of Alabama under President Ronald Reagan, he gained practical experience in the most important prosecutorial work that the Justice Department is supposed to do every day: enforce the criminal and civil statutes of the United States.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Ted Nugent's Speech

The time has come for the “Suck it up, Buttercup” bill

Hot ^ | November 19, 2016 | JAZZ SHAW 

EDIT: Owing to too little sleep, I’m sad to report that I misread this report and the bill is in the Iowa state legislature, not Congress. We can only dream I suppose. Hey… could anyone in D.C. work on a matching version? The article has been edited to reflect this.(Jazz)

We’ve long since grown used to stories coming from the nation’s college campuses where “safe spaces” are set up for everything from Halloween costumes to the results of the presidential election. But some universities have taken it a step further, setting up special counseling sessions for “grieving” students and additional classes, much of it on the taxpayer dime. The Ivy League schools have gone so far as to consider making themselves miniature “sanctuary cities” to protect illegal immigrants on campus from anticipated increases in law enforcement efforts.
One GOP member of the Iowa state legislature decided earlier this week that the madness needs to stop and has introduced a bill being very appropriately nicknamed the Suck It Up, Buttercup Act.
Bobby Kaufmann, a Republican, plans to introduce a bill that echoes the eye-rolling frustration expressed by many who think colleges are “coddling”their students.
He’s referring to the piece of legislation as the “suck it up, buttercup” bill and he hopes to introduce it when the legislature resumes in January, the Des Moines Register reported.
The bill would take aim at state universities that offer election-related sit-ins and grief counseling beyond the resources normally available to students. Those colleges that use taxpayer dollars to fund these extra programs would be subject to a budget cut for double the amount they spend.
There’s more to this legislation than meets the eye. The top line item is the obvious one, providing for cuts to funding for schools which could add up to double what they spend on all of this safe space and hand wringing activity. That seems like a measured response which would keep an eye on the taxpayers’ money. Unlike the sanctuary city plan, which I’ve already stated should result in full cuts of federal funding, setting up some grief counseling sessions doesn’t strike me as a serious enough matter to slash their cash flow entirely.
But a second feature of this bill will, I’m guessing, garner a lot more popular support. It proposes to impose additional criminal penalties on people who intentionally block the highways as part of their “protests and free speech.”
The legislation would also create new criminal penalties for protesters who shut down highways, Kaufmann told the Des Moines Register.
I’m still looking for the final language in this bill, but this is something which has deserved attention for a long time now. We’ve seen this from Occupy Wall Street, Black Lives Matter and a host of other liberal initiatives which result in masses of people taking to the streets. Now it’s happening with those unable to come to grips with the idea that they lost an election. When people turn their “protest” into an organized effort to such down streets and highways without a permit, they are shutting off the nation’s infrastructure. There is also the ever present possibility that there will be an ambulance in that traffic jam trying to make it to an emergency room or any number of other critical scenarios. That’s not free speech… it’s a crime, and it deserves to be treated as such.
If Kaufmann is serious about getting this bill passed, it’s the road closure aspect that he and GOP legislators should be hammering on. The funding for schools is interesting but isn’t as likely to get people up in arms. But what percentage of the population do you think is going to be in favor of having protesters force them to sit in their cars for hours on end even if they’re simply trying to get home from work? I think this bill could be wildly popular and the Democrats are going to metaphorically slash their own political wrists if they go out on record opposing it.
Crying supporters of Hillary Clinton

Trump Win Exposes Media's Smug Failures

Hollywood Reporter ^ | 09 November 2016 | Michael Wolff 

Ads don’t work, polls don’t work, celebrities don’t work, media endorsements don’t work and ground games don’t work.

The media turned itself into the opposition and, accordingly, was voted down as the new political reality emerged: Ads don’t work, polls don’t work, celebrities don’t work, media endorsements don’t work, ground games don’t work.
Not only did the media get almost everything about this presidential election wrong, but it became the central issue, or the stand-in for all those issues, that the great new American Trump Party voted against.
The transmutation of political identities has arguably devolved into two parties: the Trump one, the angry retro people, and the Media Party, representing the smug modern people, each anathema to and uncomprehending of the other. Certainly, there was no moment in the campaign where the Media Party did not see itself as a virtuous and, most often, determinative factor in the race. Given this, the chants of “CNN sucks” at Trump rallies should not have been entirely surprising.
But they were. The media took this as a comment about press freedom rather than its own failure to read the zeitgeist. In fact, it largely failed to tell any story other than its own.
Every anchor and commentator on network and cable news last night underwent a visible transformation from self-satisfied and jolly certainty to wandering in the wilderness. In a situation that only had two possible outcomes, nobody was even able to pretend they had contemplated both. Say this for Brian Williams’ old-fashioned anchor visage, it at least kept him from looking like an astonished fool live on MSNBC. Hang me on the same hook: I woke up this morning to a string of emails from various of the illiterate boobs who had over the past year felt compelled to tell me why they hated Hillary Clinton and about the intensity of their desire to elect Donald Trump. To each, I had said “fat chance.” Now all said, rightly, "I told you so."
It all washed away. Beyonce. The tax returns. The theoretical blue wall. Trump as sexual predator. Putin. His shambolic debate performances. Hispanics. Indeed, every aspect of the media narrative, dust. This narrative not only did not diminish him, it fortified him. The criticism of Trump defined the people who were criticizing him, reliably giving the counter-puncher something to punch. It was a juicy target. The Media Party not only fashioned the takedown narrative and demanded a special sort of allegiance to it — Twitter serving as the orthodoxy echo chamber — but, suspending most ordinary conflict rules, according to the Center for Public Integrity, gave lots of cash to Hillary. The media turned itself into the opposition and, accordingly, was voted down.
It was a failure to understand the power of the currents running for Trump — a failure of intelligence, experience and objectivity, on particularly excruciating display last night in Buzzfeed’s live video feed with its cast of moronic, what-me-worry millennials having their first go at election night and now eager to take over the media.
New Yorker editor David Remnick, as good a representative of media virtue as anybody, before he went to bed last night took a moment to throw off a thousand words or so on the death of the republic, rather than to express much interest — awe might have been in order — at the enormity and meaning of what had happened. Truly, really, a new voice had spoken — but in a pitch so high and a language so obscure that none of us in the media picked it up.

The Real Reason for the Anti-Trump Demonstrations

Intellectual Takeout ^ | 11-16-16 | Martin Cothran 

The anti-Trump demonstrations we now see in the streets are not just examples of the immaturity of many modern secular liberals, who seem to think that everyone else is somehow obligated to agree with them. They’re also a symptom of the distorted influence politics now exercises over our culture.
But in addition to being a symptom of our culture, the dominance of politics in every aspect of life is also a consequence of liberalism itself.
The tendency of liberalism has always been to politicize everything. Thanks to liberalism, we have a politicized media that has abandoned journalistic standards in a misguided attempt to engineer who gets elected; a politicized education system in which whole disciplines—English, history, and even science—have been enrolled in the service of ideological goals; and even a government that, in addition to the politics already inherent in it, has been made subservient to special-interest politics.
Russell Kirk, the father of modern conservatism, had a name for it: ideology. Although we often use the word in a generic sense to refer to someone's specific political orientation, Kirk's definition was more specific (and useful).
An ideology, as Kirk defines it, is a political religion.
Ideology takes politics from its more natural subordinate position in cultural life and exalts it to the highest position. It redefines truth as political manipulation, it turns ethics into political utility, and it re-imagines political success as earthly salvation—and political failure as apocalypse.
The political philosopher Eric Voegelin called it "immanentizing the Eschaton," an exotic expression which, when properly parsed, just means viewing this world as all there is, and, therefore, the ultimate thing.
Liberals have always accused social conservatives of bringing religion into politics, but liberals have done something far worse, and far more radical: They have made politics their religion.
In this respect liberals have much in common with Muslims, who also conflate politics and religion. What they really want is liberal Sharia law, a secular theocracy.
The minimum wage, gender equality, nationalized health care, and global warming—whatever their practical virtues—are not just expedient policy prescriptions. They are essential aspects of the liberal fatwa. Feminism, deconstruction, and gender theory are not just academic abstractions up for discussion among liberal academics: They are articles of their religious creed. Question them and you are not just wrong—you are a heretic.
You wonder why the left is having a nervous breakdown in the wake of Trump's election? It is because, for them, politics is the means to secular salvation. This means that, to them, political failure is not just a setback on the road to a more stable society—it is a blow to their very worldview. Opposition to their program is not just wrong-headed, but evil.
This is why all of the excesses of these demonstrations—death threats, looting, violence—can be excused by CNN and MSNBC: They are the necessary extreme measures, justified in light of the threat to their ideology.
The challenge for conservatives is to avoid the kind of radicalism seen on the left, and to articulate a politics that is truly secular; that is to say, that does not usurp the place of religious faith. What is needed is a politics that takes religion into account in the practical dealings of life, but that does not make politics an idol.
Conservatives need to be clear about what they are fighting against: A political ideology that threatens our politics by worshiping it.

Judge dashes Merrick Garland’s final hopes for a SCOTUS seat

Hot ^ | November 19 | JAZZ SHAW 

Anybody remember Merrick Garland? Yeah… he was that guy nominated by Barack Obama to fill the empty Supreme Court seat. You may have thought that the issue was dead in the water, particularly with a Republican president on the way in, but there was actually a court case pending which sought to force the Senate to vote on his confirmation. As it turns out, that was met with the same level of success as Hillary Clinton’s presidential bid. (Washington Post)
Merrick Garland’s last, long-shot chance at being confirmed as a Supreme Court justice has now vanished: A federal judge on Thursday dismissed a case that sought to force the Senate to take up his nomination.
Garland, the chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, has languished without Senate action since March, when President Obama nominated him to succeed the late Justice Antonin Scalia. A New Mexico lawyer filed suit in August, seeking to force Republican leaders in the Senate to act on the nomination, arguing that they had “created a constitutional crisis that threatens the balance and separation of power among our three branches of government.”
As is so often the case in politically motivated lawsuits, the Judge – Rudolph Contreras – didn’t dismiss the suit brought by Steve Michel because it was an improper request, unconstitutional or just plain stupid. It was shot down because Michel didn’t have standing to make the claim of having suffered an individualized injury from the Senate’s refusal to confirm the nominee. In the end, the judge saw it as yet another political spat which didn’t belong on the courts.
“This alleged diminution of his vote for United States Senators is the type of undifferentiated harm common to all citizens that is appropriate for redress in the political sphere: his claim is not that he has been unable to cast votes for Senators, but that his home-state Senators have been frustrated by the rules and leadership of the United States Senate. This is far from the type of direct, individualized harm that warrants judicial review,” Contreras wrote.
This suit never had a ghost of a chance from the beginning. The only way Garland was going to make it to Scalia’s seat was if the Senate confirmed him and the GOP made it clear from the beginning that there would be no action taken until after the election. Now we’ve reached the point where even if the Senate did agree to give him a look, the confirmation hearings alone would eat up far more of the calendar than the lame ducks have left this year.
The better question is who they will be considering in January as one of their first orders of business. The Daily Caller recently narrowed it down to five people who are likely to be the favorites. The names include Raymond Kethledge, William Pryor, Don Willett, Diane Sykes and Ted Cruz. Going by some of Trump’s previous comments on the subject it won’t be surprising if Willett is the pick, but Sykes and Cruz are both highly interesting. Sykes sits on the Seventh Circuit bench, carrying a reputation for strict originalism and not being too tightly caught up in stare decisis as binding her course of action. Cruz would, of course, drive the Democrats insane and likely prompt an immediate need to nuke the filibuster, but holds a few advantages for Trump. As some of us were discussing on social media the day his name popped up anew, his qualifications on paper for such an appointment are pretty much beyond question. But at the same time, he might carry another advantage for Trump. If the first four years are rocky, Cruz could turn out to be a thorn in Trump’s side and a possible primary challenger in 2020. Dumping him onto the Supreme Court could solve a couple of problems with one stroke of the pen.
Still, as with the rest of the appointments to be made, I’ll take Trump at his word. He’s the only one who knows who the finalists really are and we’re just playing parlor games until he comes out and makes it official.
Merrick Garland

Is Hypocrisy a Character Trait of the Left?

American Thinker ^ | November 19, 2016 | Patricia McCarthy 

We all think we know what hypocrisy is: claiming to have certain moral and ethical standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform. But given the across the board hysterical response to Donald Trump's presidential win, it seems Octavio Paz's sentiment that hypocrisy can be a character trait applies. "When hypocrisy is a character trait, it also affects one's thinking, because it consists in the negation of all the aspects of reality that one finds disagreeable, irrational or repugnant."
Hypocrisy is indeed a character trait of the American Left. For months, the Left has been predicting that if Trump lost the election, which of course they assumed he would, his supporters would lash out violently. They would rant, rave and riot. Sure. Just as conservatives did when McCain lost and Romney lost? But here we are, a week and a half after the defeat of Hillary Clinton and leftists are still rioting, marching, and weeping. Students on college campuses are behaving like ill-raised toddlers when they do not get what they want at the toy store. Adults who should know better are comparing Trump's victory to 9/11! That is how insane the left is today. This reality, that Trump will be the new president, is apparently a bridge too far. The left simply rejects it out of hand and are behaving badly. They apparently did not realize that elections have consequences, as President Obama instructed us 8 years ago.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Today's woman


2008 vs 2016




2 Republicans and a truck


Real Men


Conservative Safety Pin


Safety Pins


Boys vs Girls


Two Pardons!




Safe in Chicago?


Bigger and Brighter!


Without makeup!


Call it the ‘Trump 10’ (Trump victory forces Libs to become obese)

Boston Globe ^ | 11/19/16 | Teitell 

Come this time of year, it’s usually the holidays that lead to overeating. But now another event has some people packing on the pounds: the election of Donald Trump.
From Massachusetts General Hospital’s Weight Center, to a pilates studio in Belmont, to a South End bakery, some Hillary Clinton supporters have taken to stress eating, bigly.
“The response is similar to what you see after a divorce or a death in the family,” said Fatima Cody Stanford, an obesity-medicine physician at MGH’s Weight Center.
“Numb” and “fearful” patients are backsliding into comfort food, she said, adding that it’s too early to know whether people will lose the Trump weight.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Democrats won't be able to block Trump appointments due to rules they imposed

The Gazette ^ | November 19, 2016 | The Washington Post 

Senate Democrats are not going to be able to block Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions bid to become attorney general. And they can’t do much to stop Kansas Rep. Mike Pompeo from assuming the helm of the CIA.

And they have only themselves to thank for it.

That’s because exactly three years ago, the Democratic Senate majority — led by Harry Reid (Nev.) — rammed through controversial rules fundamentally changing the way the Senate does business. They unleashed in November 2013 what’s called the “nuclear option” allowing senators to approve by a simple majority all presidential appointments to the executive branch and the judiciary, with a big exception for Supreme Court justices.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Video Leaked From Obama’s 2008 Campaign Is Every Trump Hater’s Worst Nightmare

Angry Patriot Movement ^ | 11/18/16 | Angry Patriot Movement 

These days it has most certainly become chic for the modern liberal to throw about accusations of racism. Although this type of race-baiting has been going on for a number of years now, it became more noticeable during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. When these liberals accuse Donald Trump of being racist, they had better be careful for one specific reason:

A leaked video from 2008 shows that during President Obama’s first campaign, he was also concerned about border security, and he even suggested a wall! Now, there is just one dominant question anti-Trump individuals need to digest:
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Hidden Ipsos Poll: Public Strongly Backs Donald Trump’s Plan To ‘Pause’ Legal Immigration

Breitbart ^ | Nov. 18, 2016 | Neil Munro 

A just-released poll shows that Donald Trump’s campaign-trail immigration and labor policies have overwhelming public support, and strong opposition from just one-sixth of voters.
The Ipsos poll shows that only about one-in-six Americans strongly oppose Trump’s policies towards immigrant labor, repatriations, sanctuary cities, Islamic migrants, employer oversight and his ground-breaking proposal to reduce legal immigration.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The True Historical View on What Obama has Done to The World

Candor7 ^ | 19th November 2016 | Candor7 

It has been widely published that Japan Prime Minister Shinzo Abe met with Trump in New York, where the incoming president is working on setting up an administration after his surprise election victory last week "that has injected new uncertainty into old U.S. alliances."

The spin now is that Trump himself has interjected uncertainties, the left attempting to whistle past its own graveyard of hastily buried corpses.

We need to understand exactly what is happening. This is big picture stuff. Very Important

It was Obama who introduced uncertainty into our traditional alliances, including Japan, not Trump.

In particular all of our allies watched in horror and disbelief when Obama abandoned US allies Libya and Egypt , using various ideological politically correct excuses of disagreement on the internal affairs of those nations.Libya was destroyed by NATO, a travesty.

Trump is repairing that damage and DE-emphasizing the Saudi role in Americas international affairs.The Sods have one last chore to do.Look after the refugees of the Levant.

This author of the Associated Press thread article is far from being up to speed on the issues yet.Lets help the AP and others out, as the attempt to obscure true history:

The EU bent over for Obama, the great Nobel Peace Prize recipient.Obama entered, drank their wine,ate their cheese, denigrated their anti-Muslim crackers,smelled their perfume,breached stuffy protocols, kissed male leaders on the lips, convinced the EU of his moral superiority as Americas first blackish president. They believed their own myth.Japan does not.Japan remembered the utopian fascism of Tojo while Europe all but forgot the utopian-ism of Hitler and Mussolini.

Obama then used Europe to create his Arab Spring, releasing millions of refugees from the Levant, Libya and Africa, all aimed at the heart of Russia,a US betrayal of its allies, Libya and Egypt, an exercise in modern demographic warfare via community organizing.Putin saw Obama coming and seized the Crimea and Eastern Ukraine to prevent Muslim refugees from entering Russia, and aided Syria, and Iran...stopping Obama short for the embarrassing sophomore that he was.

The masses of refugees created by Obama and Clinton streamed into Western Europe, crossing the Mediterranean, sliding into Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia, and beyond. Brussels and the EU played their politically correct cards, accepting the demographic warfare fomented by Obama, who even now continues to hoodwink Europe and the EU, assuring them that their world will not fall apart as the Muslim hordes continue to descend on Germany. Europe is losing itself.

Trump is right, Brexit is right. Its a new world. And Shinzo Abe is right. Obama and his apologia to Islamic nations for Western civilization is now history; a gravidly obtuse and dirty history, obscene and unworthy of America. We will no longer tolerate it quietly.

And we all now see Obama defined as the Utopian liberal fascist that he is, who convinced Europe that he was not just another shuck and jive politician, once again Europe believed in a Utopia, just as they had accepted the Utopias of Hitler and Mussolini. Hoodwinked yet again by an American presidential psychopomp, whose similarities to his European predecessor utopians went completely unnoticed, even when they were complicit in the illegal destruction of Libya , and destroyed the 8th wonder of the world, The Great Man Made River, genocide caused by destroying the water supply of a whole people.You won’t read about that in any liberal progressive rag. The EU should be ashamed of itself.It certainly does not deserve to continue.

If the EU does not take the opportunity afforded by Trump to repudiate Obama, they will become Muslim nations, or become the conquered of Russia. The EU has only a short amount of time to realize its foolishness in the destruction of Libya at the hands of utopian liberal fascism, a whole nation destroyed by the very political correctness which now threatens the destruction of Europe as we know it.

Merkel must go. Lepin must win France. Its all about to begin: the battle for the heart and soul of Europe. Britain is safe,only for the moment.

Brussels is done, but Europe? We shall see.America will yet again attempt to rescue Europe from itself.But there is little enthusiasm for it after what Europe and Obama did to Libya, an act of infamy which will go down in history as one of the most heinous acts ever perpetrated on a third world nation of camel herders by the so called civilized nations of NATO. SHAME!

Obama is running around Europe like a one armed paper hanger as his international grift falls completely apart.Trump and his allies know perfectly well what to do next. The effects of Arab Spring on Europe must be stopped.No more demographic warfare will be allowed.The Saudis will pay for the relocation of the refugees created by Obama, or they will sit by and watch them die. This is the true Obama legacy.

Meanwhile Japan under Shinzo Abe gets it, Europe excluding Britain does not.

The Sheriff is back in town: The United States of America.

A primer:

Barrack Obama: The Quintessential Fascist by Kyle Anne Shiver