Tuesday, November 29, 2016

Mayors of Sanctuary Cities Who Disregard Federal Law Should Be Arrested!

Canada Free Press ^ | 11/29/16 | Katy Grimes 

This illegal stance on Sanctuary Cities, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel, Sacramento Mayor-elect Darrell Steinberg are favoring criminal illegal aliens over the safety of law-abiding citizens. Should pay the ultimate price for not upholding the of law

The United States is either a nation of people ruled by laws and Constitution, or we are a nation ruled by ideological tyrants. One example of this is the illegal protecting by “Sanctuary cities” of convicted criminals.
“It is time to start locking up local officials like Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel for interfering with the enforcement of federal immigration law,” Matthew Vadum of Canada Free Press recently wrote.

10 Reasons Left-Wingers Cut Trump Voters From Their Lives

Townhall.com ^ | November 29, 2016 | Dennis Prager 

Many Hillary Clinton voters have ceased communicating with friends, and even family members, who voted for Donald Trump. It is so common that The New York Times published a front-page article on the subject headlined, "Political Divide Splits Relationships -- and Thanksgiving, Too."
The article begins with three stories:
"Matthew Horn, a software engineer from Boulder, Colo., canceled Christmas plans with his family in Texas. Nancy Sundin, a social worker in Spokane, Wash., has called off Thanksgiving with her mother and brother. Ruth Dorancy, a software designer in Chicago, decided to move her wedding so that her fiancé's grandmother and aunt, strong Trump supporters from Florida, could not attend."
The Times acknowledges that this phenomenon is one-sided, saying, "Democrats have dug in their heels, and in some cases are refusing to sit across the table from relatives who voted for President-elect Donald J. Trump."
A number of people who voted for Trump called my show to tell me that their daughters had informed them that they would no longer allow their parents to see their grandchildren. And one man sent me an email reporting that his brother-in-law's mother told him that she "no longer had a son."
All of this raises an obvious question: Why is this phenomenon of cutting off contact with friends and relatives so one-sided? Why don't we hear about conservatives shunning friends and relatives who supported Hillary Clinton? After all, almost every conservative considered Clinton to be ethically and morally challenged. And most believed that another four years of left-wing rule would complete what Barack Obama promised he would do in 2008 if he were elected president -- "fundamentally (transform) the United States of America."
In other words, conservatives were not one whit less fearful of Clinton and the Democrats than Democrats were of Trump and Republicans.
Yet virtually no conservatives cut off contact with friends, let alone parents, who supported Clinton.
Here are 10 reasons left-wingers cut Trump voters from their lives.
1. Just like our universities shut out conservative ideas and speakers, more and more individuals on the left now shut out conservative friends and relatives as well as conservative ideas.
2. Many, if not most, leftists have been indoctrinated with leftism their entire lives.
This is easily shown.
There are far more conservatives who read articles, listen to and watch broadcasts of the left and have studied under left-wing teachers than there are people on the left who have read, listened to or watched anything of the right or taken classes with conservative instructors.
As a result, those on the left really believe that those on the right are all SIXHIRB: sexist, intolerant, xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic, racist and bigoted. Not to mention misogynistic and transphobic.
3. Most left-wing positions are emotion-based. That's a major reason people who hold leftist views will sever relations with people they previously cared for or even loved. Their emotions (in this case, irrational fear and hatred) simply overwhelm them.
4. Since Karl Marx, leftists have loved ideas more than people. All Trump voters who have been cut off by children, in-laws and lifelong friends now know how true that is.
5. People on the right think that most people on the left are wrong; people on the left think that most people on the right are evil. Decades of labeling conservative positions as "hateful" and labeling conservative individuals as "sexist," "intolerant," "xenophobic," "homophobic," "racist" and "bigoted" have had their desired effect.
6. The left associates human decency not so much with personal integrity as with having correct -- i.e. progressive -- political positions. Therefore, if you don't hold progressive positions, you lack decency. Ask your left-wing friends if they'd rather their high school son or daughter cheat on tests or support Trump.
7. Most individuals on the left are irreligious, so the commandment "Honor your father and your mother" means nothing to those who have cut off relations with parents because they voted for Trump.
8. Unlike conservatives, politics gives most leftists' lives meaning. Climate change is a good example. For leftists, fighting carbon emissions means saving human existence on Earth. Now, how often does anyone get a chance to literally save the world? Therefore, to most leftists, if you voted for Trump, you have both negated their reason for living and are literally destroying planet Earth. Why would they have Thanksgiving or Christmas with such a person?
9. The left tends toward the totalitarian. And every totalitarian ideology seeks to weaken the bonds between children and parents. The left seeks to dilute parental authority and replace it with school authority and government authority. So when your children sever their bond with you because you voted for Trump, they are acting like the good totalitarians the left has molded.
10. While there are kind and mean individuals on both sides of the political spectrum, as a result of all of the above, there are more mean people on the left than on the right. What other word than "mean" would anyone use to describe a daughter who banished her parents from their grandchildren's lives because of their vote?
I wish none of this were true. But there is a way to prove me wrong: Re-friend your friends and relatives who voted for Trump, and tell everyone who has ended relations with family members -- especially with parents -- to reach out to them and welcome them back into their lives.


http://grasstopsusa.com ^ | 11/29/2016 | Don Feder 

Fidel Castro was a monster who tortured and murdered his people for over half-a-century. He was Stalin with a beard, Hitler with a stogie. His passing will be celebrated by freedom-loving people everywhere and mourned only by the evil and the credulous.
I was in Cuba in 1997, not on a Beyonce/Jay-Z celebrity tour, but as a journalist who met ordinary Cubans.
I've never been to a sadder place, or one more beautiful in a decaying way. Like North Korea, Cuba is a family business. In the former, the scepter was passed from Kim Il-sung (Glorious Leader) to Kim Jong-il (Dear Leader) to Kim Jong-un (Outstanding Leader). Since Fidel's retirement in 2008, his baby brother Raul – age 86 (Decrepit Leader) – has ruled.
Castro entered Havana on January 8, 1959, after overthrowing the comic-opera regime of Fulgenico Batista. Cubans are still waiting for the free elections the Comandante promised – a fact his legion of Western admirers conveniently overlooks.
Thor Halvorssen, president of the Human Rights Foundation, notes: "Fidel Castro leaves behind a nation awash with tears and blood from thousands of executions, tens of thousands of political prisoners, concentration camps for gay men, labor camps for those who thought differently, listened to jazz or even have long hair." On its human rights index, Freedom House gives Cuba a rating of 6.5 – with 1 being the most free and 7 the most repressive.
The oppression I witnessed was far more prosaic.
The doorman at my hotel told me he was a civil engineer. "Aren't you wasting your talent?" I asked. His answer: "I can earn $20 a month as an engineer or $20 a day as a doorman." Such is the genius of socialism; it takes engineers and turns them into doormen.
My first day in Havana, I met a man on the Malecon. We were deep in conversation, when I invited him back to my hotel for lunch. "I can't go in your hotel," he told me. Only tourists, officials of the regime and hotel employees are permitted on the premises. Sixty years after the Cuban revolution, and the proletariat are barred from tourist hotels, built on their backs.
The liberal Brookings Institution notes: "The Cuban economy has been mired in stagnation for more than two decades." Churchill said it best: "The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings. The inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of misery."
In Cuba, I saw people so miserably poor that existence was a daily struggle. I saw a man sitting at a card table on a street refilling disposable BIC lighters. A country with a gentle climate and fertile soil imports 80% of its food. While its people starve, it exports 95% of its citrus crop. It also exports repression. Under Hugo Chavez, Venezuela sent oil to Cuba and Havana sent security agents (skilled in the art of interrogation) to Caracas, to show the Chavez regime how to deal with dissent.
After one of Fidel's famous 6-hour harangues (talk about a captive audience), I met a school teacher on the veranda of a hotel. "What did El Presidente say last night?" I teased. She leaned close to me and uttered a four-letter word. Then she whispered in my ear: "I would like to kill him."
The night before I left Havana, I met a young man selling post cards on the street. Fluent in several languages, including English, he was an unofficial guide when there was work and sold post cards when there wasn't. He asked me if I could introduce him to an American woman he could marry to get out. "Why not," I replied, "You're young, intelligent and good looking. I bet there are a lot of young women who'd marry you."
"I wouldn't care if she was 90," he replied. "I'd do anything to get out of here." With his chin, he pointed to middle-aged people shuffling along the street, looking dejected. "If I stay here any longer, I'll end up like them – a zombie."
Everywhere I went, ordinary Cubans urged me to "tell the American people what it's like here." For the American left, that would be a waste of breath. Castro is part of its pantheon. From the Fair Play for Cuba Committee (Lee Harvey Oswald was a member) to the latest saccharine pronouncements of the mainstream media on Cuba's alleged achievements in education and medicine, the left has had a long-running love affair with the house that Fidel built.
Those rioting against democracy in our streets secretly envy the Cuban regime. On the island gulag, rulers are self-selected, not elected. The official media is the only media. The masses don't have to be persuaded, just told what to do. Socialism has been realized with a vengeance. Counterrevolutionary elements are rehabilitated by long prison terms.
Of course, if that happened here, most of today's agitators would be tomorrow's political prisoners, along with college professors, artists, entertainers and journalists who gaze longingly at Cuba. The cast of "Hamilton" could try to lecture their guards on diversity and respect for civil liberties.
Reaction to Castro's death is a litmus test for political correctness. President-elect Donald Trump commented, "Today, the world marked the passing of a brutal dictator." While President Barack Obama noted, "History will recall and judge the enormous impact of this singular figure on the people and world around him."
But he wasn't a singular figure. His counterparts have existed throughout the ages – from the pagan priests who made human sacrifices to the brown-shirted goons who goose-stepped through Weimar Germany. His impact on Cuba has been the same as Ebola's on West Africa. History will judge him the worst 20th century dictator in the Western hemisphere, far surpassing all of the caudillos and juntas combined.
It's estimated that 58% of Cuban-Americans voted for Trump – two points higher that his share of the white vote. It figures.

Presidential vote

Presidential vote by religious affiliation and race

Sheila Jackson Lee beclowns herself on the Ohio State terror attack (thinks he used a gun)

Am Thinker ^ | Nov 29, 2016 | Thomas Lifson 

Texas Democrat Representative Sheila Jackson Lee has a lot of fixed ideas, and manages to fit news events into a framework that reinforces her politics. As a left wing Democrat and member of the Congressional Black Caucus, there are certain givens that must not be contradicted.
Thus, when a Somali “refugee” decided to maim or kill as many Americans as he could by driving his car into a crowd, following the instructions ISIS recently gave to Muslims seeking vengeance, Representative Lee followed the ready – fire - aim protocol of the stupid, issuing this tweet:

Taken literally, the hero of the incident, Ohio State University Police Officer Alan Horujko is guilty of a “senseless shooting.”
It is possible that Representative Lee thinks that any use of firearms by a police officer is “senseless.” And Officer Horjujko is really, really white, isn't he? He shot a Muslim, so in some circles that could be regarded as "senseless."
My guess is that Representative of Texas’s 18th District was just sloppy, and assumed that any attack involves a shooter. After all, guns are the root of violence in the Democrats’ worldview.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...

Trump is right about the flag. Do NOT disrespect it in public!

News and Twitter | 29 November 2016 | Mene Mene Tekel Upharsin 

Seem Mr. Trump correctly pointed out that folks in this country who feel the need to disrespect our flag in any form or fashion need to refrain from doing so, at least publicly. He is correct.
Countries garner respect for defending their territory, their culture and their language, all of which make a country a country. We seem to be failing on all counts. In Mexico, if you trash their flag in public, you will be beaten and/or killed by the public who sees you doing so BEFORE the police can even get there. Or, in Thailand, do something to publicly defame or embarrass the king (it is a constitutional monarchy, but a democracy as a base) and see what happens to you. Go to France and start insisting that people speak English. Better yet, go to the Middle East and stomp on a symbol of islam.
If a nation allows people to disrespect icons of the culture or the culture itself, then in the very next action, the one doing the disrespecting will turn on the people of the nation itself. That is what is happening in the United States. We have foolishly allowed ourselves on the pretense of "Freedom of Expression" to become the victims of a complete and total assault on our entire national identity and subsequently our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Someone has to turn this all around. Either become loyal to the United States or face severe consequences, or better yet, get out. The KLBJ radio station in Austin had a talk show this morning discussing disrespect toward the American flag. When a caller tried to mention how Mexico deals with people who disrespect their flag, the caller was cut off. The media is becoming part of the PROBLEM. The men and women who run the media need to get the message that the people are NOT going to allow our nation and culture to be disrespected in their drive for more advertising dollars.

Why does Hillary really want to participate in the Stein recount?

The Coach's Team ^ | 11/29/16 | Doug Book 

The following article was published by the Washington Post on November 26th.
“Clinton campaign will participate in Wisconsin recount, with an eye on ‘outside interference,’ lawyer says”
By Matt Zapotosky

The first two paragraphs below are excerpts from the Zapotosky article.
“In a Medium post, Clinton campaign lawyer Marc Elias said that the campaign had received ‘hundreds of messages, emails, and calls urging us to do something, anything, to investigate claims that the election results were hacked and altered in a way to disadvantage Secretary Clinton,’ especially in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, where the ‘combined margin of victory for Donald Trump was merely 107,000 votes.’”
“Elias said the campaign had ‘not uncovered any actionable evidence of hacking or outside attempts to alter the voting technology.’ But because of the margin of victory — and because of the degree of apparent foreign interference during the campaign — Elias said that Clinton officials had “quietly taken a number of steps in the last two weeks to rule in or out any possibility of outside interference in the vote tally in these critical battleground states.”
So there is no evidence that anything is amiss with the November 8th vote. BUT, because a whole lot of people want Hillary to “do something, anything” to end their suffering...
(Excerpt) Read more at thecoachsteam.com ...

Stein: We want recounts because the polls said Hillary would win (WTF?)

Hot Air ^ | 29 Nov 2016 | Larry O'Connor 

In a revealing interview on The Alan Colmes Show Monday afternoon, failed Green Party candidate Jill Stein conceded (perhaps inadvertently) that the reason she’s calling for a recount in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania is, in part, because Hillary Clinton was expected to win those states.
Listen to the whole interview here, but I have pulled out the key statement:
The three states that we chose including Michigan that only just now declared its winner. This was not a partisan choice, this was zooming in on the states that have the markings of being most vulnerable to hacking because they had thin margins. They went the opposite way of what was expected and they had some kind of voting system vulnerability.
Hidden inside the baseless suggestion that the voting systems had been hacked (“some kind of voting system vulnerability”) was that key phrase “they went the opposite way of what was expected.”
Hidden inside the baseless suggestion that the voting systems had been hacked (“some kind of voting system vulnerability”) was that key phrase “they went the opposite way of what was expected.”
Sadly, Mr. Colmes did not follow up on that revealing statement and pull on the thread a bit. Is Dr. Stein suggesting that because polls and pundits had predicted that Secretary Clinton would win those three states something suspicious must be going on? Is she suggesting that a telephone poll conducted by a media outlet should be considered more predictive of an outcome than the actual, physical votes and the final tally?
If late polls had predicted a slim win by Trump in these states, would Stein still be asking for this useless recount?
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...

Walking Away


Just Pretend!




A beautiful sight!


His Legacy!




I can't get a job!


The faces!


What do we want?


Here's what I think...


For Hillary?